House Report 110-279 - DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE APPROPRIATIONS BILL, 2008

[House Report 110-279]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]

110th Congress Report
1st Session HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 110-279
_______________________________________________________________________

DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE
APPROPRIATIONS BILL, 2008

__________

R E P O R T

of the

COMMITTEE ON APPROPRIATIONS

[to accompany H.R. 3222]

[GRAPHIC NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]

July 30, 2007.--Committed to the Committee of the Whole House on the
State of the Union and ordered to be printed

C O N T E N T S

----------
Page
Bill Totals...................................................... 1
Committee Budget Review Process.................................. 3
Select Intelligence Oversight Panel.............................. 3
Introduction..................................................... 3
Stability in the Middle East..................................... 7
Fiscal Management................................................ 8
Contracted Services and Acquisition Management................... 11
Member Requests.................................................. 14
Committee Recommendations by Major Category...................... 15
Active and Reserve and National Guard Military Personnel......... 15
Operation and Maintenance.................................... 15
Procurement.................................................. 16
Research, Development, Test and Evaluation................... 17
Classified Programs.......................................... 18
Forces To Be Supported........................................... 18
Department of the Army....................................... 18
Department of the Navy....................................... 20
Department of the Air Force.................................. 21
Defense Health Program....................................... 21
TITLE I. MILITARY PERSONNEL...................................... 23
Military Personnel Overview.................................. 25
Summary of End Strength.................................. 25
Overall Active End Strength.............................. 25
Overall Selected Reserve End Strength.................... 25
Full-Time Support End Strength........................... 26
Guard and Reserve Full-Time End Strength................. 26
Grow-The-Force Initiative................................ 27
Boots-On-The-Ground and Cost of War Reporting............ 27
Reserve Component Budget Submissions..................... 28
Paid Inactive Duty Training (IDT) Travel................. 28
Military Personnel, Army..................................... 29
Military Personnel, Navy..................................... 34
Military Personnel, Marine Corps............................. 39
Military Personnel, Air Force................................ 44
Reserve Personnel, Army...................................... 49
Reserve Personnel, Navy...................................... 53
Reserve Personnel, Marine Corps.............................. 57
Reserve Personnel, Air Force................................. 61
National Guard Personnel, Army............................... 65
National Guard Personnel, Air Force.......................... 69
TITLE II. OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE.............................. 73
Force Structure.......................................... 75
Training Tempo........................................... 75
Recommended Operation and Maintenance Funding Levels..... 75
Operational Training Program Funding..................... 76
Impact of Rebasing....................................... 76
Support to Global Repositioning of Forces................ 76
Perimeter Security Force Protection and Other Facility
Security Improvements.................................. 81
Support to Military Families............................. 81
Family Advocacy Programs................................. 82
Childcare Centers........................................ 83
Department of Defense Dependents Education (DODEA)....... 83
Operation and Maintenance Reprogrammings................. 83
Operation and Maintenance Budget Execution Data.......... 84
Operation and Maintenance, Army.............................. 84
Unjustified Program Growth............................... 94
Status of Resource and Training System................... 94
Fact of Life Adjustments................................. 94
Civilian Personnel Strength.............................. 94
Common Logistics Operating Environment................... 94
Scanning Technology to Accelerate Reset.................. 95
Western Hemisphere Institute for Security Cooperation.... 95
Working Capital Fund Cash Transfer....................... 95
Operation and Maintenance, Navy.............................. 96
Navy Shore Infrastructure Transportation................. 103
NPS Laboratory Modernization............................. 103
Civilian Personnel Strength.............................. 103
Operation and Maintenance, Marine Corps...................... 103
Resource Realignment....................................... 109
Operation and Maintenance, Air Force......................... 109
Portable Illumination System............................. 116
Civilian Personnel Strength.............................. 116
Working Capital Fund Cash Transfer....................... 116
Excess On-Order Inventory................................ 116
Overstatement of Facilities Sustainment, Restoration and
Maintenance Requirements............................... 117
Operation and Maintenance, Defense-Wide...................... 117
Special Operations Command............................... 125
Defense Legal Services Agency (Office of Military
Commissions)........................................... 125
Department of Defense Dependents Education (Exceptional
Family Member Services)................................ 125
Defense Security Cooperation Agency (Global Train and
Equip)................................................. 125
Defense Security Service................................. 126
Office of the Secretary of Defense....................... 126
Office of the Deputy Undersecretary of Defense........... 127
Cadet and Midshipman Social Representation and Diversity
at the Service Academies............................... 128
Department of Defense Energy Security Task Force......... 128
Operation and Maintenance, Army Reserve...................... 128
Operation and Maintenance, Navy Reserve...................... 132
Operation and Maintenance, Marine Corps Reserve.............. 137
Operation and Maintenance, Air Force Reserve................. 141
Operation and Maintenance, Army National Guard............... 145
Process Refinement and Implementation Initiative (PRI)
for National Guard Joint Conus Communications Support
Environment (JCCSE).................................... 151
Operation and Maintenance, Air National Guard................ 151
Overseas Contingency Operations Transfer Account............. 155
United States Court of Appeals for the Armed Forces.......... 155
Environmental Restoration, Army.............................. 155
Environmental Restoration, Navy.............................. 155
Environmental Restoration, Air Force......................... 155
Environmental Restoration, Defense-Wide...................... 156
Environmental Restoration, Formerly Used Defense Sites....... 156
Overseas Humanitarian, Disaster, and Civic Aid............... 156
Former Soviet Union Threat Reduction Account................. 156
Strategic Offensive Arms Elimination (Russia)............ 157
Nuclear Weapons Storage Facility (Russia)................ 157
Chemical Weapons Destruction (Russia).................... 157
WMD Proliferation Prevention (Former Soviet Union)....... 158
New Initiatives.......................................... 158
Unobligated Balances from Prior Years.................... 158
TITLE III. PROCUREMENT........................................... 159
Grow-the-Army and Marine Corps........................... 161
Joint Strike Fighter Production.......................... 161
Acquisition and Management of Unmanned Aerial Systems.... 162
Military Tires........................................... 162
Reset and Modernization.................................. 163
Special Interest Items................................... 163
Reprogramming Guidance for Acquisition Accounts.......... 163
Reprogramming Reporting Requirements..................... 164
Funding Increases........................................ 164
Classified Annex......................................... 164
Aircraft Procurement, Army................................... 164
Armed Reconnaissance Helicopter.......................... 169
Joint Cargo Aircraft..................................... 169
Light Utility Helicopter................................. 169
Missile Procurement, Army.................................... 170
Procurement of Weapons and Tracked Combat Vehicles, Army..... 174
Stryker.................................................. 180
Procurement of Ammunition, Army.............................. 180
Other Procurement, Army...................................... 185
Bridge to Future Networks................................ 202
Joint High Speed Vessel.................................. 202
HMMWV.................................................... 202
Heavy Expanded Mobile Tactical Truck Extended Service
Program................................................ 202
Night Vision Thermal Weapons Sight....................... 203
Tactical Operations Centers.............................. 203
Field Medical Equipment Line............................. 203
Aircraft Procurement, Navy................................... 203
UH-1Y/AH-1Z.............................................. 210
E-2D..................................................... 210
Vertical Take-Off Unmanned Aerial Vehicle................ 210
F-18 Series.............................................. 210
P-3 Series............................................... 211
Spares................................................... 211
Weapons Procurement, Navy.................................... 211
Conventional Trident Modification........................ 216
Advanced Anti-Radiation Guided Missile................... 216
Procurement of Ammunition, Navy and Marine Corps............. 216
Shipbuilding and Conversion, Navy............................ 223
Shipbuilding............................................. 227
Virginia Class Submarine................................. 228
LPD-17................................................... 228
Carrier Replacement...................................... 228
Littoral Combat Ship..................................... 229
DDG-1000 Advance Procurement............................. 229
DDG-1000................................................. 230
Littoral Combat Ship Outfitting.......................... 230
Leasing of Foreign Built Ships........................... 230
Ship Insulation.......................................... 231
Other Procurement, Navy...................................... 231
Integrated Submarine Imaging System...................... 242
Cruiser Modernization Program............................ 242
ASW Enhancements......................................... 242
Littoral Combat Ship Mission Modules..................... 242
Submarine Support Equipment.............................. 243
Q-70 Family of Display Systems........................... 243
Man Overboard Indicator Program.......................... 243
Enhanced Detection Adjunct Processor..................... 244
Procurement, Marine Corps.................................... 244
Range Transrormation Initiative.......................... 255
Aircraft Procurement, Air Force.............................. 255
C-17 Production.......................................... 262
Global Hawk.............................................. 262
B-2 Radar Modernization.................................. 262
Missile Procurement, Air Force............................... 263
Joint Air to Surface Standoff Missile (JASSM)............ 268
Advanced Extremely High Frequency Program................ 268
Procurement of Ammunition, Air Force......................... 268
Flares................................................... 272
Other Procurement, Air Force................................. 272
Procurement, Defense-Wide.................................... 279
National Guard and Reserve Equipment......................... 285
Defense Production Act Purchases............................. 285
Beryllium Supply Industrial Base......................... 286
TITLE IV. RESEARCH, DEVELOPMENT, TEST AND EVALUATION............. 287
Cruise Missile Defense................................... 289
Joint Common Missile/Joint Air-to-Ground Missile......... 289
Small Business Technology Insertion...................... 290
Special Interest Items................................... 291
Reprogramming Guidance for Acquisition Accounts.......... 291
Research, Development, Test and Evaluation, Army............. 291
Future Combat Systems.................................... 319
Tactical Metal Fabrication System (TAC FAB).............. 319
Warfighter Information Network-Tactical.................. 320
Global Combat Support System-Army........................ 320
Hybrid Propellant for Medium and Large Caliber Ammunition 320
Rapid Response System for Active Protection of Ground and
Air Vehicles........................................... 321
Research of Advanced Communications Technologies......... 321
Tactical Wheeled Vehicle Composite Component Weight
Reduction Program...................................... 321
Neurotoxin Exposure Treatment Research Program (NETRP)... 321
Pain and Neuroscience Center Research Program............ 322
Sustaining Support for Ongoing Operations................ 322
Undersea UXO Cleanup..................................... 322
Advanced Affordable Turbine Engine (AATE)................ 322
CVP Design............................................... 323
National Eye Evaluation and Research Network............. 323
Research, Development, Test and Evaluation, Navy............. 323
Bone Marrow Registry..................................... 343
Innovative Methods for Shipbuilding Construction......... 343
System Open Architecture/Small Business Technology
Insertion.............................................. 343
Unique Identification of Tangible Items.................. 344
Research, Development, Test and Evaluation, Air Force........ 344
KC-135 Tanker Replacement................................ 360
Joint Strike Fighter F-136 Engine Development............ 360
Joint Strike Fighter Development......................... 360
Personnel Recovery Systems (CSAR-X)...................... 361
Joint Stars Syers Demonstration.......................... 361
Space Programs........................................... 361
Space Situational Awareness and Operationally Responsive
Space.................................................. 362
Space Radar.............................................. 363
Ballistic Missile Range Safety Technology................ 363
MEDSTARS Integration with the Global Combat Support
System................................................. 364
Wide Area Surveillance Radar Integration on Joint Stars.. 364
Research, Development, Test and Evaluation, Defense-Wide..... 364
Missile Defense Agency................................... 382
Reporting Requirements............................... 382
Block Structure...................................... 382
European Component................................... 382
Space Tracking and Surveillance System (STSS)........ 383
Undefinitized Contracts.............................. 383
Kinetic Energy Interceptor........................... 383
Airborne Laser (ABL)................................. 384
Airborne Laser Lessons Learned....................... 384
Command and Control, Battle Management and
Communications (C2BMC) Program..................... 384
Aegis Ballistic Missile Defense System............... 385
Multiple Kill Vehicle................................ 385
Asymmetric Missile Defense........................... 385
Fissile Material Detection Research.................. 386
Special Operations Command............................... 386
Chemical and Biological Defense Program.................. 386
Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency................ 387
Advance Development Initiative........................... 387
FirstLink--IEE (Technology Transition Line).............. 387
WMD Medical Countermeasures.............................. 387
Operational Test and Evaluation, Defense..................... 388
TITLE V. REVOLVING AND MANAGEMENT FUNDS.......................... 390
Defense Working Capital Funds................................ 390
National Defense Sealift Fund................................ 390
T-AKE Acquisition........................................ 390
Defense Coalition Support Fund............................... 391
TITLE VI. OTHER DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE PROGRAMS................... 393
Defense Health Program....................................... 393
Traumatic Brain Injury (TBI)............................. 398
Post Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD).................... 398
Electronic Health Information Sharing.................... 399
Defense Enrollment Eligibility Reporting System (DEERS).. 400
Diabetes Research........................................ 400
Wounded Warrior Assistance............................... 400
Warriors in Transition................................... 401
Military Treatment Facilities Usage of Red Cross
Volunteer Physicians................................... 402
Orthopedic Injury Research............................... 402
Vision Research.......................................... 402
Preventative Medicine and Surveillance................... 403
Embedded Metal Fragment Registry......................... 403
Limited Access to Military Treatment Facilities in Rural
Areas.................................................. 404
Reduction of Carryover Percentage........................ 404
Review of TRICARE Co-Pays................................ 404
Chemical Agents and Munitions Destruction, Army.............. 404
Drug Interdiction and Counter-Drug Activities, Defense....... 405
Joint Improvised Explosive Device Defeat Fund................ 407
Rapid Acquisition Fund....................................... 409
Office of the Inspector General.............................. 409
TITLE VII. RELATED AGENCIES...................................... 410
National and Military Intelligence Programs.................. 410
Classified Annex......................................... 410
Central Intelligence Agency Retirement and Disability System
Fund....................................................... 410
Intelligence Community Management Account.................... 411
TITLE VIII. GENERAL PROVISIONS................................... 412
HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES REPORTING REQUIREMENTS.................. 419
Changes in the Application of Existing Law................... 419
Appropriations Not Authorized By Law......................... 429
Transfer of Funds............................................ 432
Rescissions.................................................. 432
Compliance With Rule XIII, CL. 3(e) (Ramseyer Rule).......... 433
Statement of General Performance Goals and Objectives........ 433
Constitutional Authority..................................... 433
Comparison with the Budget Resolution........................ 433
Five-Year Outlay Projections................................. 434
Financial Assistance to State and Local Governments.......... 434
Earmarks..................................................... 434

110th Congress Report
HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
1st Session 110-279

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

DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE APPROPRIATIONS BILL, 2008

_______

July 30, 2007.--Committed to the Committee of the Whole House on the
State of the Union and ordered to be printed

_______

Mr. Murtha of Pennsylvania, from the Committee on Appropriations,
submitted the following

R E P O R T

[To accompany H.R. 3222]

The Committee on Appropriations submits the following
report in explanation of the accompanying bill making
appropriations for the Department of Defense, and for other
purposes, for the fiscal year ending September 30, 2008.

Bill Totals

Appropriations for most military functions of the
Department of Defense are provided for in the accompanying bill
for the fiscal year 2008. This bill does not provide
appropriations for military construction, military family
housing, civil defense, and military nuclear warheads, for
which requirements are considered in connection with other
appropriations Acts. This bill again provides appropriations
for Basic Allowance for Housing; the Defense Health Program;
Facilities Sustainment, Restoration, and Modernization (FSRM);
and environmental restoration programs consistent with the
Committee's reorganization at the beginning of the 110th
Congress.
The President's fiscal year 2008 budget request for
activities funded in the Department of Defense Appropriations
Act totals $463,143,300,000 in new budget obligational
authority for the base military bill. The amounts recommended
by the Committee in the accompanying bill total
$459,594,495,000 in new budget authority, a decrease of
$3,548,805,000 below the budget estimate, and $39,722,516,000
above the sums made available for the Department of Defense for
fiscal year 2007, excluding emergency supplemental
appropriations.

[GRAPHIC NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]

The Committee recommendation does not include supplemental
emergency appropriations requested by the President for fiscal
year 2008 contingency operations related to the global war on
terror.
The Committee has deferred consideration of this matter to
a later date. During the Committee's deliberations on the
fiscal year 2008 war supplemental, the following issues will be
considered:
Funding for additional C-17 cargo aircraft
Funding for Mine Resistant Ambush Protected
vehicles
Shortfalls in funding for the Defense Health
Program created by the so-called ``efficiency wedge''
Shortfalls in Basic Allowance for Housing
Funding for additional Blackhawk MEDEVAC
helicopters
Funding for the Department's Global Train
and Equip program
Funding for our strategic reserve's
readiness and equipment reset and recapitalization

Committee Budget Review Process

During its review of the fiscal year 2008 budget request
and execution of appropriations for fiscal year 2007, the
Subcommittee on Defense held a total of 31 budget hearings and
4 formal subcommittee briefings during the period of January to
May 2007. Testimony received by the Subcommittee totaled 3,127
pages of transcript. Hearings were held in open session, except
when the security classification of the material to be
discussed presented no alternative but to conduct those
hearings in executive or closed session.

Select Intelligence Oversight Panel

House Resolution 35 established the Select Intelligence
Oversight Panel (Select Panel). The Select Panel has the goals
of executing greater focus and better oversight on intelligence
programs. The resolution indicates that the Panel shall review
and study on a continuing basis budget requests for and
execution of intelligence activities. In the course of
conducting its review, the Panel has held six hearings to date
totaling over 400 pages of testimony on the major components of
the National and Military Intelligence programs. In addition,
the Panel heard worldwide threat briefings presented by the
Director of National Intelligence and the Director of the
Central Intelligence Agency, and has received periodic
intelligence updates on regional topics.
The Panel's responsibilities include preparing a report to
the Defense Subcommittee on Appropriations on an annual basis
containing budgetary and oversight observations and
recommendations for use in preparation of the classified annex
accompanying the Defense Appropriations bill. This report was
transmitted with classified attachments to the Defense
Appropriations Subcommittee on July 11, 2007. The
recommendations contained therein were used by the Defense
Subcommittee in developing the classified annex accompanying
this bill.

Introduction

Our national conscience is justifiably focused on the wars
in Iraq and Afghanistan. The Committee and the country are
deeply grateful for and inspired by the dedication, service,
and sacrifice of our men and women in uniform, their families,
and those who support them. Yet, we cannot let this
concentrated national focus distract our attention from the
needs of our service members and their families here at home,
and the imperative to prepare our forces for current and future
conflicts. This is the challenge facing the Committee today,
and our Nation for the foreseeable future.
To address that challenge, the Committee's recommendations
achieve a balance between preparing units for near-term
deployments, supporting our military members and their
families, and modernizing our forces to meet future threats.
Highlights of the Committee's recommendations are as follows:
Supporting our Troops and their Families.--First and
foremost, the Committee recommends robust funding for programs
important to the health, well-being, and readiness of our
forces. In addition, the Committee proposes several initiatives
that address issues raised by troops, their families, and
Department of Defense officials in testimony before the
Committee, and discovered through visits to military bases in
the United States and overseas.
Funding of about $2,200,000,000 is recommended to
cover the full cost of a 3.5% military pay raise, as approved
in the House version of the Fiscal Year 2008 National Defense
Authorization bill.
Under their ``Grow-the-Force'' initiatives, the
Army and Marine Corps propose to add 7,000 and 5,000 new
troops, respectively. The personnel costs of these increases
are fully covered in the bill, as are the associated equipping
and outfitting costs. For the Army alone, the equipping costs
amount to more than $4,000,000,000 and for the Marine Corps,
the equipping costs amount to more than $2,000,000,000.
Home-stationing training, optempo, and flying-hour
costs are funded at robust levels. All told, the Committee's
recommendations provide for a 13% increase in funding for these
activities over last year's level.
The military services' force structure and basing
infrastructure are in a state of transition. The Army, in
particular, has been forced to manage significant changes in
force structure (known as Army Modularity), base closures, and
a global repositioning of forces, all while meeting the demands
of war. Based on information provided by the Army, the
Committee recommends an important new initiative to assist the
service in meeting this challenge. The Committee proposes
adding $1,232,400,000 to the Army's facilities sustainment and
restoration budget request to offset the growing infrastructure
costs associated with the global repositioning of its forces.
These funds will be used to fix barracks, improve child care
facilities, and enhance community services at Army bases
throughout the United States, Europe, and Korea. This funding
will only partially cover the Army's needs. As such, the
Committee will address additional infrastructure cost
requirements during consideration of the fiscal year 2008
emergency supplemental request. Further, the Committee intends
to work with all the military services to better understand and
respond to their basing and infrastructure needs during this
time of significant upheaval.
Another initiative proposed by the Committee
directly responds to the needs of our military families. Total
funding of $2,915,800,000 is recommended for the military's
family advocacy programs, childcare centers, and dependent's
education programs. This amount is an increase of $558,400,000
over the Administration's request, with the lion's share of the
increase allocated to DoD's family advocacy programs. This
program provides counseling, education, and support to military
families affected by the demands of war, and episodes of child
or spouse abuse.
The Committee's recommendations continue its long
tradition of supporting the Department's health programs. The
Committee proposes several initiatives and additional funding
to address health care issues raised over the past year,
including improving the Department's health record-keeping and
fostering better coordination between DoD and the Department of
Veterans Affairs, enhancing preventative medicine programs, and
advancing military medical research.
Protecting our forces abroad must be matched with
a commitment to protect our forces and their families here at
home. Thus, the Committee proposes a new initiative to enhance
the security of military bases in the United States. Funding of
$268,100,000 is allocated for perimeter security force
protection and related facility security improvements, an
increase of $141,900,000 over the President's budget request.
These funds will be used to erect better perimeter fencing,
provide more secure entry and exit controls, and improve
situational awareness and response capabilities at military
bases and hospitals.
Preparing for the Future.--In 1796, President George
Washington counseled the Nation to be, ``Taking care always to
keep ourselves by suitable establishments on a respectable
defensive posture.'' The Committee's recommendations abide by
that counsel, providing robust funding for weapons systems
purchases and research programs designed to meet future
threats.
The Committee supports full funding, as requested,
for key weapons procurements, including the F-22 and F-35
tactical fighter aircraft programs.
Increases above the President's request are
allocated for development programs that address ``asymmetric''
threats from weapons of mass destruction and cruise missiles.
Additional funding of $15,000,000 is provided to pursue cruise
missile defense; $25,000,000 for chemical and biological
defense research programs; $26,500,000 for fissile material
detection research and $50,000,000 for the former Soviet Union
Threat Reduction account to counter weapons proliferation.
To support the Army's evolution to a larger, more
lethal, and more rapidly deployable force, the Committee
recommends adding funding of $1,102,000,000 to outfit a new,
eighth Stryker brigade.
Testimony before the Committee revealed that our
National Guard and Reserve forces continue to suffer from
equipment shortfalls. To address this need, the Committee
recommends providing an additional $925,000,000 to purchase
Guard and Reserve equipment. These additional funds will
enhance these forces' ability to meet overseas deployment
demands, as well as to respond to natural disasters here at
home.
Economic Stability.--Fostering economic stability in DoD's
weapons modernization programs has been a consistent theme of
the Committee. Analyses completed in recent years about DoD's
acquisition program all conclude that, without improving
stability in these programs, it's quite likely that the
military will not be able to achieve the numbers of weapons
systems required to equip current force structure at the
estimated costs. As such, the Committee is proposing a series
of recommendations that would help stabilize certain programs
by adding funds and/or adjusting procurement or development
schedules.
The Navy's shipbuilding program has been beset by
planning and resource instability for several years running,
resulting in ever-increasing costs to the American taxpayer.
Clearly, at current production rates and price levels, the Navy
will be unable to meet its force structure requirements in the
future. The Committee has responded by providing funds for an
additional five ships. To purchase these ships, the Committee
recommends adding a total of $3,698,000,000 above the Navy's
request for shipbuilding and sealift.
The success of the Department's Joint Strike
Fighter (F-35) program is critical to our Nation's ability to
field a modern, capable fighter aircraft fleet for decades to
come. To maintain stability in this program--and limit the
potential for cost increases over time--the Committee
recommends an increase of $200,000,000 for F-35 production
enhancements. These funds are to be used to outfit facilities
with the latest in production line equipment and work-flow
technology. In addition, the Committee recommends including
$480,000,000 to continue development of an alternative engine
for this aircraft, thereby ensuring a competitive base for
engine production.
Accountability.--The Committee's fiduciary responsibility
to the American taxpayer requires holding accountable
organizations, officials, and programs that have performed
poorly. Moreover, wasted resources and procedural abuses
ultimately come at the expense of our military men and women.
The Committee focused attention on the following issues:
Fiscal discipline: For some time, the Committee
has raised concerns about the challenges facing the
Department's financial managers. Some argue that fiscal
discipline within the Department has eroded over time, severely
constraining the Department's senior officials and the
Congress' program and financial oversight. Regarding this
matter, the Committee proposes several important initiatives to
improve DoD's fiscal discipline and Congressional oversight.
These initiatives are described later in this report.
Contracting Out: The Committee also has registered
concern about the Department's unabated appetite for
contracting out services and functions once performed by
military members or DoD civilians. Though clearly necessary to
offset reductions in military and civilian personnel levels
that occurred over time, the Committee believes that the
Department has failed to manage adequately and oversee the
growth in, and cost-effectiveness of, contracting out. It is
also clear that the majority of DoD's service contractors has
performed and will continue to perform well. Yet, abuses by
some organizations, coupled with DoD's lack of an effective
contractor management and oversight regime, has cast a pall
over the service contractor community writ large. This must be
reversed. The Committee recommends strong steps to do so. In
another section of this report, the Committee's recommendations
for improving contract oversight are described.
Troubled procurement programs: Several of the
Department's major weapons acquisition programs have
experienced considerable cost growth and/or poor execution. For
each of these programs--including the Navy's Littoral Combat
Ship, the Air Force's combat search and rescue helicopter, and
several unclassified and classified satellite purchases--the
Committee recommends significant adjustments to the Pentagon's
request.
Basic research: In testimony received by the
Committee, and through information provided by the Department
and third-party groups, the Committee learned that the percent
of basic research funding allocated to Department and research
organizations' overhead costs has grown to unwarranted levels.
To reverse this trend and ensure that the Department's basic
research dollars are being used for the purposes intended by
Congress, the Committee recommends a general provision limiting
the percentage of overhead costs that can be covered in basic
research contracts.
Improving military readiness, addressing the toll of war on
our forces, and preparing them for future conflicts require a
national commitment to provide adequate resources for the
Department of Defense and intelligence community now and in the
future. The Committee's efforts reflect its strong commitment
to our men and women in uniform, their families, and those
individuals and organizations working in support of them.

Stability in the Middle East

At this time in our Nation's history, no measure providing
funding for the Department of Defense can be considered outside
the context of the Iraq war. As the Committee has endeavored to
strike a balance between supporting our forces' needs today and
for the future, it also has been mindful that the evolution of
the United States' military presence in the Middle East will
have a significant effect on how our forces are to be
structured, readied and resourced in the years to come.
All would agree that achieving stability in the Middle East
is an enduring U.S. national security goal. Attaining that goal
will require fully employing all elements of U.S. power:
diplomacy, economic support and military might. While much has
been written about the need for the United States to refocus
its diplomatic and economic support activities in and around
Iraq, there apparently has been little thought given to or
explanation of what the long-term U.S. military presence in the
region may be.
The reliance on the U.S. military alone to achieve
``victory'' in Iraq, without a coordinated diplomatic and
economic aid plan, has left our forces weakened and with little
strategic reserve to address other threats to our country.
Moreover, the recent ``surge'' in deployments to Iraq has
exacerbated the demands on our ground forces, with little
evidence thus far that the increased troop numbers in theater
have notably improved the security and stability of that
country. Yet, the strains on our military are clearly evident:
units across-the-board have had their tours of duty extended to
15 months while those back home struggle to meet deployment
deadlines for lack of personnel and equipment; the costs of
recruiting and retaining soldiers continue to spiral upward,
even as standards have been lowered to meet monthly recruiting
goals; and, each appearance before Congress by senior military
and DoD officials brings new and higher estimates of the costs
for rehabilitating our forces once they return home.
Lessening the strains on the military forces can only be
accomplished by relinquishing our overwhelming reliance on them
to stabilize and secure Iraq. But doing so must occur in
conjunction with an understanding of and consensus on the
broader, more strategic interests of the United States in the
Middle East.

Fiscal Management

For some time now, the Committee has expressed considerable
concern over an erosion of DoD's fiscal discipline. That
erosion is reflected primarily in the Department's use of
emergency supplemental funding to cover what were once
considered to be base budget costs, particularly weapons
modernization and force structure costs. In this bill, the
Committee has endeavored to begin restoring traditional funding
criteria to these respective appropriations matters. Thus,
recommendations for this fiscal year 2008 Defense
Appropriations bill focus on non-incremental war costs and
preparing for future threats by funding enduring personnel
benefits, force structure initiatives (such as Army modularity
and ``Grow-the-Force'' programs), infrastructure improvements,
home-station training, and weapons modernization programs. The
Committee's deliberations on the fiscal year 2008 war
supplemental, however, will be tailored to funding those
programs and incremental costs that are arguably related to the
war efforts. Satisfying these criteria requires the shifting of
funds between the base bill and supplemental requests. As such,
the Committee recommends deferring consideration of certain
funding requests made for the base fiscal year 2008 Defense
bill to the emergency supplemental. Conversely, the Committee
recommends that certain programs requested by the
Administration in its fiscal year 2008 Global War on Terror
emergency supplemental receive funding in this legislation as
such items are more appropriately funded in the base budget.
Further, the Committee believes that seeking funding for
weapons modernization programs and enduring force structure
transformations in emergency supplemental requests conveniently
eludes the procedural mechanisms designed to ensure that the
most important priorities are resourced. There can be no doubt
that the Department's financial officers have faced
considerable challenges in managing both the war and base
budgets. Nonetheless, a fiscal ``flabbiness'' has infected the
Defense budgeting process--a situation that must be corrected.
To ensure that sound budgetary and fiscal procedures are re-
invigorated, the Committee recommends a general provision that
requires the Department to include all funding for both non-war
and war-related activities in the President's fiscal year 2009
annual Defense budget request.
Planning, Programming and Budgeting System (PPBS).--For
over 40 years, the Department of Defense followed the Planning,
Programming and Budgeting System (PPBS) as the process for
assessing and prioritizing requirements and allocating
resources. The PPBS process established long-range national
security planning objectives, analyzed the costs and benefits
of alternative programs that would meet those objectives, and
translated programs into budget proposals. The improvements
that PPBS offered over previous budgeting processes were that:
(1) it emphasized objectives, focusing less on changes from the
prior-year budget and more on long-term objectives, and (2) it
linked planning and budgeting. PPBS instilled a process that
clearly defined a procedure for distributing available
resources equitably among competing programs.
Beginning in 2003, the PPBS process has been significantly
altered, splintering planning into two phases and requiring
that the program and budget reviews occur simultaneously. The
process changes were ill-conceived and have had significant and
lasting adverse implications. Today, sequential steps to plan
adequately or refine a plan into budget-level detail do not
exist. Further, conducting a simultaneous program and budget
review eliminate the inherent discipline in the process which
force resource allocation decisions to occur deliberatively,
resulting in unnecessary confusion and wasted effort. The time
and attention required to harmonize simultaneous program and
budget reviews detract from the Department's ability to
scrutinize fully its fiscal requirements. As a result:
--the focus on program objectives has diminished;
--the inextricable link between planning and
budgeting has been severely damaged;
--reliance on funds transfers and reprogrammings
within DoD have grown significantly, often correcting
inadequacies that should have been identified earlier
in the Department's internal review process with the
purpose being to fix holes in key programs originally
created during the DoD budget review;
--supplemental requests and the Department's reliance
on them have grown and increasingly resemble base
budget requests; and lastly,
--Congress is forced to make increasingly difficult
funding decisions in the absence of a rigorous budget
review by the Department.
Accordingly, the Committee recommends that the Secretary of
Defense institute a process for assessing and prioritizing
requirements and allocating resources which is supportive of
thorough, deliberative program and budget review and more fully
utilize the efforts of the dedicated and talented DoD civil
servants. The Committees recommendation includes several
directions to address the budget execution process within the
Department, as discussed below.
Re-baselining.--Generally accepted reprogramming procedures
and those procedures outlined in the Department of Defense
Financial Management Regulation require the approval of
Congress prior to transferring operation and maintenance
funding in excess of $15,000,000 from those levels appropriated
by Congress. However, through a ``rebaselining'' process or
``free move'', the Department has transferred excessive amounts
of funds--a total of $2,500,000,000 in fiscal year 2007--
without the approval of Congress. This re-baselining process,
as it has evolved, vitiates Congressionally approved resource
allocations provided in annual appropriations Acts, impedes the
ability of Congress to perform its oversight responsibilities,
and abrogates Congressional intent. Moreover, the Committee
notes that the Department has failed to comply with certain
reprogramming requirements as they relate to specific
subactivity groups within the Operation and Maintenance
appropriations. These actions reflect a continuing erosion of
fiscal discipline within the Department of Defense.
Accordingly, the Committee directs the Department to cease the
reallocation of funds through a re-baselining procedure, and
further directs the Department to comply fully with the
reprogramming procedures contained in this report. The
Committee remains cognizant of the need for the Department to
re-align certain appropriations and commits to work with the
Department to address these concerns.
Base for Reprogramming Actions.--The Committee notes that
the Department was not able to provide in a timely manner the
Base for Reprogramming Actions report, or DD form 1414, for the
current fiscal year. This report is to be provided to the House
and Senate Committees on Appropriations soon after the
enactment of the annual appropriations Act to establish the
baseline from which the Department is to execute its programs.
The report also serves as the benchmark from which Congress and
the Committee can assess all transfers and reprogrammings.
However, the DD 1414 was not submitted to the Committees on
Appropriations until nearly nine months after the fiscal year
had commenced and after the Department had submitted over
$700,000,000 in reprogramming requests requiring Congressional
approval. When the report was submitted, it was incomplete,
omitting each of the active services' operation and maintenance
accounts. Moreover, it excluded a ``re-baselining'' or
realignment in excess of $2,500,000,000 in operation and
maintenance funds from activities for which they were
originally appropriated. The Committee believes that such funds
management is unacceptable and suggests that the Department
does not execute its programs consistent with Congressional
direction. Accordingly, the Committee has recommended a general
provision that requires the Department to submit the DD 1414
within 60 days after the enactment of the Act. In addition, the
provision prohibits the Department from executing any
reprogramming or transfer of funds for any purpose other than
originally appropriated until the aforementioned report is
submitted to the Committees of Appropriations of the Senate and
the House of Representatives.
Items or subactivities for which funds have been
specifically provided in an appropriations Act (including joint
resolutions providing continuing appropriations), accompanying
reports of the House and Senate Committees on Appropriations,
or accompanying conference reports and joint explanatory
statements of the committee of conference shall be carried in
the Base for Reprogramming Actions (DD form 1414), irrespective
of whether or not the report uses the phrases ``only for'' or
``only to''.
New starts.--The Committee recommends a general provision
that prohibits the initiation of a new start program through a
reprogramming of funds unless such program must be undertaken
immediately in the interest of national security and only after
written notification to the congressional defense committees.
The use of reprogramming authorities to initiate new starts
should be used seldomly, and if at all, only in times of
national emergency. Starting new programs through the use of
reprogramming authorities in the year of execution creates
additional funding requirements in the ensuing budget year, and
rarely does the Administration submit budget amendments to
reallocate its funding requirements reflecting the new fiscal
realities created by the new program starts. As such, the
Committee's ability to review fully the program's cost-
effectiveness and mission utility vis-a-vis other military
programs is denied. The Committee notes that the fiscal year
omnibus 2007 reprogramming includes new starts totaling nearly
$110,000,000. The Committee is not pleased with the
Department's increasing use of its reprogramming authorities to
initiate new program starts, and accordingly, directs the
Department not to use reprogramming authorities provided in
this Act to initiate new programs unless such programs are
emergency requirements.
General transfer authority (GTA).--A provision is
recommended, consistent with previous appropriations Acts,
providing for the transfer of funds for higher priority items,
based on unforeseen military requirements than those for which
originally appropriated. This authority has been included
annually to respond to unanticipated requirements that were not
known at the time the budget was developed and after which time
appropriations were enacted. This authority has grown
significantly over the past several years, from $2,000,000,000
in fiscal years 1997 through 2001, rising precipitously in
fiscal year 2005 to $6,185,000,000. In fiscal year 2007, the
GTA was $4,500,000,000 and the Department has requested
$5,000,000,000 in GTA for fiscal year 2008. While the waging of
war certainly has increased the need for flexibility in
executing the Department's resources, the Committee fears that
the Department has come to rely on reprogramming and transfer
authority in lieu of a thoughtful and deliberative budget
formulation and fiscal management process. In an effort to
restore fiscal management to the Department, while allowing for
the flexibility in executing appropriations for a nation at
war, the Committee recommends for fiscal year 2008 general
transfer authority of $3,200,000,000, the same level as
provided in fiscal year 2004 after adjustments to reflect GTA
as a percent of total appropriations.
Reprogrammings for Operation and Maintenance Accounts.--
Beginning in fiscal year 2008, the Committee imposes new
accountability and reprogramming guidelines for programs,
projects and activities within the Operation and Maintenance
appropriations. The Committee believes that such revisions are
necessary given the unique nature of activities funded within
these appropriations continuing concerns about force readiness,
and recent budget execution within these accounts. The specific
revisions are addressed later in this report in Title II,
Operation and Maintenance.

Contracted Services and Acquisition Management

A year ago, the Committee expressed concern about the
increasing costs of operating our military forces. To gain
better insight about the factors generating an increase in
operation and maintenance costs, the Committee directed, in
House Report 109-504, that the Government Accountability Office
(GAO) prepare a comprehensive analysis of contracting out
services, as well as other factors that may be driving up
costs. GAO found that between the years 2000 to 2005, the cost
of operation and maintenance service contracts increased more
than 73 percent. Over the same period, DoD civilian pay costs
increased 28 percent, and total DoD pay costs went up by 34
percent. However, despite the growing and seemingly
unconstrained reliance on contractors to accomplish DoD's
mission, no system of accountability for contract service cost
or performance has been established.
The Committee is frustrated by the lack of accountability
and management of contracted services. DoD has increasingly
relied on private sector contractors, rather than uniformed or
DoD civilian personnel, to perform operation and maintenance-
related work such as logistics, facilities maintenance, base
operations support; information technology services; and
administrative support. But, responsibility for acquiring
services within DoD is spread among individual military
commands, weapon system program offices, or functional units on
military bases. This decentralized management results in little
visibility at either the DoD or military department level over
the totality of DoD's use of contractors to provide services.
GAO recently found that DoD only had reviewed proposed
acquisitions accounting for less than 3 percent of the funds
obligated for services in fiscal year 2005, and DoD was in a
poor position to regularly identify opportunities to leverage
buying power or otherwise change existing practices.
Focused management attention.--The Committee contends that
DoD is not providing sufficient management oversight to improve
the acquisition and management of contractor services. Tens of
billions of dollars are expended for contract services each
year. Management of contract services should be among DoD's top
priorities. The Committee believes that the Department must
improve management of contract services by instituting clear
accountability mechanisms; instituting unambiguous and short
chains of command to the most-senior decision makers; and
improving the tracking and reporting of contract service costs,
and management of contract service performance.
Increased contractor oversight.--The Committee directs the
Department to provide more robust staffing of contractor
management and oversight personnel. It is clear that DoD
currently lacks the means to provide proper oversight of its
service contracts, in part because of an insufficient number of
contract oversight personnel. While the spending for contracted
services has grown, the size of DoD's workforce, including its
contracting and acquisition workforce, has been decreased
significantly. For example, the Defense Contract Management
Agency's (DCMA) workforce has been reduced by over 50 percent
between the period 2000 to 2005, making it more difficult for
DCMA to provide thorough and meaningful oversight of the
Department's increasing reliance on contracted services.
The Committee recommends adding funds for additional DoD
civilian personnel to provide enhanced contract-service
management and oversight. Further, the Committee added funds
for the temporary assignment of 600 General Services
Administration contract specialists on a reimbursable basis.
The Committee provides the following for contract-service
management and oversight.

[$ in thousands]
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Committee
recommended
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Defense Contract Audit Agency........................ +$12,000,000
Defense Contract Management Agency................... +17,000,000
Defense Inspector General............................ +24,000,000
Reimbursable GSA Assistance.......................... +21,000,000
------------------------------------------------------------------------

Minimum Standards for Contracted Security Service
Personnel.--DoD relies heavily on contracted security, both in
the theaters of operation as well as at home. The Committee is
particularly concerned that the oversight and administration of
contracted security services is woefully inadequate. This lack
of oversight seemingly has resulted in few, if any, operational
standards and rules-of-engagement to which contracted security
organizations and individuals must adhere. As such, the
Committee directs the Secretary of Defense to develop, no later
than 90 days after the passage of this Act, uniform minimum
personnel standards for all contract personnel operating under
contracts, subcontracts or task orders performing work that
includes private security functions. The standards, at a
minimum, must include determinations about contractors using
personnel with criminal histories, must determine the
eligibility of all private contract personnel to possess and
carry firearms, and determine what assessments of medical and
mental fitness of contracted security personnel must be
undertaken. The Secretary of Defense should develop a mechanism
for contract accountability that specifies consequences for
noncompliance with the personnel standards, including fines,
denial of contractual obligations or contract rescission.
Finally, the Secretary is directed to establish a clear set of
rules-of-engagement for all contracted security personnel
operating in the Iraq and Afghanistan theaters of operations.
The Secretary shall submit the prescribed standards to the
congressional defense committees once the 90-day period
referenced above is completed.
Improving the Acquisition Workforce.--The Committee directs
that the Undersecretary of Defense for Acquisition, Technology,
and Logistics submit, within 90 days of enactment of this Act,
a report to the congressional defense committees analyzing the
current acquisition workforce personnel needs and the tools to
recruit and retain a workforce best positioned to provide
appropriate contract management and oversight of contractor
performance. The report should identify the most urgent
shortages in the current acquisition workforce. The report
should also recommend revisions to the Department's Strategic
Human Capital Plan geared to enhancing the Department's ability
to recruit and retain high performing acquisition and
contracting personnel and overcome obstacles to the expedited
hiring of talented acquisition professionals.
Enhancing Access to Small Business.--The Committee is
concerned about the access of small businesses to Department of
Defense contracting and procurement. Moreover, the Committee
recognizes that harvesting mature innovative technologies from
the Small Business Innovative Research (SBIR) programs has
resulted in cost avoidance and savings in Defense Department
acquisition programs. SBIRs have been invaluable in
reintroducing competition and developing better capabilities
for the warfighter. For example, efforts such as open
architecture technologies and improved manufacturing processes
championed by small businesses should reduce acquisition costs
and ensure that the military services can continue to support
weapons systems once they become operational. In order to
facilitate entry into the defense market by small businesses,
the Committee recommends providing a total of $100,000,000 more
than requested for the Department's SBIR program. These funds
are allocated as follows: $25,000,000 is recommended for the
Army's Future Combat System to enhance small business
participation in that program; $25,000,000 is allocated to each
of the Navy's surface ship and submarine research and
development activities for the SBIR program; and, $25,000,000
is provided to enhance small business participation in the
Joint Strike Fighter program.
Further, the Committee directs the Director of the
Department of Defense Office of Small Business Contracting to
submit, no later than June 1, 2008, a report to the
congressional defense committees which identifies the
impediments to small business owners to contracting or
subcontracting with the Department, including, but not limited
to, an analysis of the small business threshold size; small
business contract bundling; distribution of small business
subcontracts between professional service and research and
development; the transition from SBIR II programs to
procurement; the impact of the Departments vendor pay system on
small businesses; and the effectiveness of the mentor-protege
program. The report should identify any impediments to the
successes of businesses that graduate from the small business
qualifications and offer recommendations to support the
transition of small businesses to middle-sized businesses.
Improvements in the management of contract services need
not take years to implement; rather, with intent leadership and
executive attention, considerable efficiencies can be achieved
in the near-term. Accordingly, the Committee recommendations
reduce the Department's funding requests for contracted
services in the operation and maintenance budgets by five
percent, recognizing contract service efficiencies and savings
with enhanced oversight.

Member Requests

Projects.--Congress has made significant reforms in the way
it reviews funding for the Federal government--reforms which
the Committee takes very seriously as it executes its
constitutional authority. Earmarking or directed spending of
Federal dollars does not begin with Congress. It begins with
the Executive Branch. Provided as merely an example, the
following was submitted by the Administration:

------------------------------------------------------------------------
Number of Budget
Installation projects estimate
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Fort Meade.............................. 2 $60,000,000
Fort Sam Houston........................ 1 20,840,000
Norfolk Naval Shipyard.................. 2 26,824,000
Charleston Air Force Base............... 5 26,200,000
------------------------------------------------------------------------

The Administration, in selecting these projects, goes
through a process that is the functional equivalent of
earmarking. These 10 projects, totaling $133,864,000, are
rolled up with thousands of similar projects into a larger
budget activity, essentially hidden within the request.
However, when the Committee reviews the budget request, it goes
through a process of rigorous analysis and may alter or modify
this list to reflect additional priorities.
The Executive Branch also engages in another practice which
steers or directs money to specific entities or purposes
through a process of contracting out various activities and
services. In many important work locations, the number of
people working for contractors exceeds the number of Federal
employees in the same building or location. Many of these, in
fact, are non-competitive or sole-sourced. When added together,
the Executive Branch steers or directs far greater spending to
specific projects or corporations than is directed or earmarked
by Congress. And the practice of non-competitive contracting
has exploded in the past five years. The Committee has
expressed, in no uncertain terms, its opinion of how the
Department of Defense has not properly managed this effort
elsewhere in this report.

Committee Recommendations by Major Category

ACTIVE, RESERVE AND NATIONAL GUARD MILITARY PERSONNEL

In Title I of the bill, the Committee recommends a total of
$105,017,776,000 for active, Reserve and National Guard
military personnel, a decrease of $385,922,000 below the budget
request, and $5,154,899,000 above the fiscal year 2007 enacted
level. The Committee has provided $310,000,000 above the
request to increase basic pay for all military personnel by 3.5
percent, effective January 1, 2008. This represents an increase
of 0.5 percent over the President's request. The Committee also
recommends full funding to support the requested end strength
levels for active duty and Selected Reserve personnel,
including over $1,041,000,000 to increase the end strength of
the Army by 7,000; the Army National Guard by 1,300; and the
Marine Corps by 5,000.
The Committee has transferred $364,000,000 from Research,
Development, Test and Evaluation, Air Force into Military
Personnel, Air Force to address what the Committee believes is
a chronic force structure problem. Also, the Committee has
deferred consideration, without prejudice, of certain special
pays that it believes would be more appropriate to consider
within the fiscal year 2008 Global War on Terror supplemental.

OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE

In Title II of the bill, the Committee recommends a total
of $137,135,127,000 for operation and maintenance support to
the military services and other Department of Defense entities,
a reduction of $5,718,890,000 from the fiscal year 2008 budget
request, and an increase of $9,846,320,000 above the amount
appropriated for fiscal year 2007.
The Committee's recommendation increases funding for
operational training over the level appropriated for peacetime
training and operations in 2007. The additional funding will
robustly fund the operational training programs, supporting an
increased training operating tempo in 2008 for the Army, Navy
and Marine Corps. Funds not needed for home station activities
due to units being deployed for military operations in
Afghanistan and Iraq have been realigned for support of
continuing combat and peacekeeping operations in Afghanistan
and Iraq. Requests for unit and depot level maintenance program
funding have been fully supported.
In addition, the Committee provides additional operating
funds for family advocacy, childcare centers and dependent
education to support military families. The Committee also
supports anti-terrorism force protection by adding funds for
perimeter security to protect DoD installations, facilities,
and personnel. Finally, significant amounts are added to
support the Army's global repositioning and force structure
efforts.

PROCUREMENT

In Title III of the bill, the Committee recommends a total
of $99,608,169,000 for procurement, an increase of
$18,697,413,000 over the amount appropriated for fiscal year
2007.
Major initiatives and modifications include:
$770,751,000, the President's request, for the
procurement of 52 Blackhawk Helicopters, for baseline and Grow-
the-Army requirements.
$569,993,000, the President's request, for
baseline and Grow-the-Army requirements, to procure 2
additional Patriot battalions, plus upgrades for 3 other
battalions.
No procurement funding for the Armed
Reconnaissance Helicopter, instead of $468,259,000 requested in
the President's budget.
$472,907,000, the President's request, for the
procurement of 108 Patriot Advanced Capability 3 (PAC-3)
surface-to-air missiles and 6 Enhanced Launcher Electronic
Systems.
$235,865,000, the President's request, for the
procurement of 57 High Mobility Artillery Rocket Systems,
launchers, trainers, and support equipment.
$1,912,884,000 for the procurement of Stryker
vehicles, including an additional $1,102,000,000 for an eighth
Stryker brigade.
$1,266,010,000 for the procurement of 18 EA-18G
Growler electronic attack aircraft.
$2,042,049,000 for the procurement of 24 F/A-18E/F
Super Hornet tactical aircraft.
$2,410,800,000, the President's request, for the
procurement of 12 F-35 Lightning II Aircraft, 6 Short Take-off
and Vertical Landing variants for the Marine Corps and 6
Conventional variants for the Air Force.
$2,212,500,000, the President's request, for the
procurement of 26 V-22 aircraft, 21 MV-22 variants for the
Marine Corps and 5 CV-22 variants for the Air Force.
$15,303,820,000 in Navy Shipbuilding and
Conversion, $1,647,000,000 above the President's request for
the procurement of 5 Navy ships including 2 LPD-17 Amphibious
Transport Docks, 1 SSN-774 Attack Submarine, 1 CVN-78 Aircraft
Carrier, and 1 Littoral Combat Ship. Additionally, this funding
provides for the second increment of funding for 2 DDG-1000
Guided Missile Destroyers and 1 LHA-6 Amphibious Assault Ship
and for the advance procurement of long lead items for 2 SSN-
774 Attack Submarines.
$1,866,000,000 in the National Defense Sealift
Fund for the procurement of 4 T-AKE Auxiliary Dry Cargo/
Ammunition Ships, $1,410,000,000 above the President's request.
$3,152,700,000, the President's request, for the
procurement of 20 F-22 Raptor aircraft.
$403,005,000 for the procurement of 3 Global Hawk
unmanned aerial vehicles.
$325,183,000, the President's request, for the
procurement of 1 Wideband Gapfiller Communications Satellite.
$1,101,691,000 for the procurement of 4 Evolved
Expendable Launch Vehicles.
$277,999,000, the President's request, for the
procurement of 24 Predator unmanned aerial vehicles.
$58,470,000, the President's request, for the
procurement of 4 Reaper unmanned aerial vehicles.
$125,000,000 for advance procurement of a fourth
advanced EHF communications satellite.
$558,253,000 for Chemical and Biological Defense
Programs, an increase of $41,344,000 from fiscal year 2007
levels and a net increase of $9,500,000 from the budget
request.
$1,818,852,000 for Special Operations Command, an
increase of $202,578,000 from fiscal year 2007 levels and a net
decrease of $2,297,000 from the budget request.

RESEARCH, DEVELOPMENT, TEST AND EVALUATION

In Title IV of the bill, the Committee recommends a total
of $76,231,440,000 for research, development, test and
evaluation, an increase of $1,114,246,000 from the fiscal year
2008 budget request and an increase of $509,836,000 over the
amount appropriated for fiscal year 2007.
Major initiatives and modifications include:
$8,497,934,000 for missile defense programs, a
decrease of $883,416,000 from fiscal year 2007 levels and a net
decrease of $297,992,000 from the budget request; within this
amount, an increase of $57,000,000 above the request is
provided for sea-based mid-course defense to include
$15,000,000 to continue work on asymmetric missile defense
issues, $70,000,000 above the request for missile defense
programs in cooperation with Israel, and $150,000,000 above the
request for Kinetic Energy Interceptor.
$3,157,118,000 for the development of the Future
Combat System, $406,300,000 below the President's request.
$356,296,000, an increase of $134,000,000 above
the President's request, for the development of the Warfighter
Information Network--Tactical system.
$129,310,000, an increase of $47,000,000 above the
President's request, for the Armed Reconnaissance Helicopter
program development.
$3,035,222,000 for the Defense Advance Research
Projects Agency, a decrease of $80,088,000 from fiscal year
2007 levels and a net decrease of $50,395,000 from the budget
request.
$372,146,000, the President's request, for
Patriot/MEADS system development.
$288,220,000, the President's request, for the
development of the Expeditionary Fighting Vehicle.
$808,993,000, the President's request, for the
continued development of the E-2D Advanced Hawkeye aircraft.
$274,699,000 for the continued development of the
EA-18G electronic attack aircraft.
$230,971,000 for the continued development of the
VH-71A Presidential Helicopter.
$630,544,000 for continuing development of the
DDG-1000 Guided Missile Destroyer program.
$4,146,256,000 for the continued development of
the F-35 Lightning Joint Strike Fighter aircraft, $705,000,000
above the President's request.
$603,179,000, the President's request, for the
continued development of the Advanced Extremely High Frequency
communication satellite system.
$963,585,000, the President's request, for the
continued development of the Transformational Satellite
Communication system.
$260,501,000 for the development of the Global
Hawk unmanned aerial vehicles.
$186,000,000 for Space Radar in the Air Force, a
reduction and transfer from the classified budget request for
this program.
$75,877,000 for the Alternative Infrared Satellite
System, a reduction of $155,000,000 from the budget request.
$507,226,000 for the Global Positioning System
III, a reduction of $80,000,000 from the budget request.
$1,133,596,000 for Chemical and Biological Defense
Programs, an increase of $152,412,000 from fiscal year 2007
levels and a net increase of $112,100,000 from the budget
request.
$442,137,000 for Special Operations Command, a
decrease of $111,922,000 from fiscal year 2007 levels and a net
increase of $70,859,000 from the budget request.

CLASSIFIED PROGRAMS

As described elsewhere in this report, the Committee's
budget reviews are published in a separate, detailed and
comprehensive classified annex. Adjustments to the classified
programs are addressed in the classified annex accompanying
this report.

Forces To Be Supported

DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY

The fiscal year 2008 budget request is designed to support
the Army's continuing transformation of its Operating Force to
a Modular Design. By the end of fiscal year 2008, the Active
Component transformed force will include 4 Army Service
Component Command Headquarters, 1 Corps Headquarters, 9
Division Headquarters, 38 Brigade Combat Teams and 34 multi-
functional support brigades. Additionally, the Active Component
will have begun transformation of two more Brigade Combat
Teams. Active Component structure yet to be transformed
includes 2 Army Service Component Command Headquarters, 2 Corps
Headquarters, 1 Division Headquarters, 8 Brigade Combat Teams
and 6 multi-functional support brigades. By the end of fiscal
year 2008, transformed force structure in the Army National
Guard (ARNG) and the U.S. Army Reserve (USAR) will include 6
ARNG Division Headquarters and 54 multi-functional Support
Brigades (44 ARNG and 10 USAR). Additionally, the ARNG will
have begun conversion of 28 Brigade Combat Teams (the first 7
Brigade Combat Teams will complete transformation in fiscal
year 2009). Reserve Component forces yet to be transformed
include 10 multi-functional support brigades (7 ARNG and 3
USAR). These forces are the key elements of the minimum
capabilities needed to execute the National Military Strategy
and to meet enduring defense needs of the Global Force Demand.
By fiscal year 2013, the transformed Army will include 6 Army
Service Component Command Headquarters and 3 Corps Headquarters
in the Active Component, 18 Division Headquarters (10 Active
and 8 ARNG), 76 Brigade Combat Teams (48 Active, 28 ARNG) and
104 multi-functional support brigades (40 Active, 51 ARNG, and
13 USAR). A summary of the major forces follows:

------------------------------------------------------------------------
FY06 FY07 FY08
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Active Component Forces
Headquarters:
Army HQs................................. 4 4 2
Corps HQs................................ 4 4 3
--------------------------
Headquarters Total................... ....... ....... .......

Divisions (Legacy Structure):
Airborne................................. 0 0 0
Air Assault.............................. 0 0 0
Light.................................... 0 0 0
Infantry................................. 0 0 0
Mechanized............................... 1 1 0
Armored.................................. 1 1 1
--------------------------
Divisions Total...................... 2 2 1

Transformed Modular Forces:
Modular Theater Army HQs................. 1 2 4
Modular Corps HQs........................ 0 0 1
Modular Division HQs..................... 8 8 9
Heavy Brigade Combat Team (HBCT)......... * 13 * 14 * 15
Infantry Brigade Combat Team (IBCT)...... 15 17 18
Stryker Brigade Combat Team (SBCT)....... 3 4 5
Theater Aviation Brigade HQ.............. 1 1 1
Combat Aviation Brigade.................. 8 11 11
Sustainment Brigade HQ................... 8 11 13
Fires Brigade............................ 3 5 5
Maneuver Enhancement Brigade HQ.......... 1 1 2
Battle Field Surveillance Brigade........ 1 1 2
--------------------------
Transformed Forces Total............. 62 75 86

Army National Guard (ARNG) Forces

Divisions (Legacy Structure):
Light.................................... 1 0 0
Infantry................................. 0 0 0
Mechanized............................... 3 1 0
Armored.................................. 1 1 0
Medium................................... 0 0 0
--------------------------
Division Total....................... 5 2 0
Non Divisional Combat Units:
Separate Brigades........................ 10 6 0
--------------------------
Non Divisional Combat Units Total.... 10 6 0

Transformed Modular Forces:
Modular Theater Army HQs................. 0 0 0
Modular Division HQs..................... 3 6 8
Heavy Brigade Combat Team (HBCT)......... 0 0 0
Infantry Brigade Combat Team (IBCT)...... 0 0 0
Stryker Brigade Combat Team (SBCT)....... 0 0 0
Theater Aviation Brigade HQ.............. 5 5 5
Combat Aviation Brigade.................. 8 8 8
Sustainment Brigade HQ................... 5 6 9
Fires Brigade............................ 1 2 7
Maneuver Enhancement Brigade HQ.......... 3 4 12
Battle Field Surveillance Brigade........ 0 0 3
--------------------------
Transformed Forces Total............. 25 31 52

U.S. Army Reserve (USAR) Forces
Transformed Modular Forces:
Theater Aviation Brigade HQ.............. 0 0 1
Sustainment Brigade HQ................... 3 4 7
Maneuver Enhancement Brigade HQ.......... 1 0 2
--------------------------
Transformed Forces Total............. 4 4 10
------------------------------------------------------------------------
*HBCT includes armored cavalry regiment.

DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY

The fiscal year 2008 budget request supports battle forces
totaling 286 ships at the end of fiscal year 2008, including 14
fleet ballistic missile submarines; 11 aircraft carriers; 17
Support ships; 11 Reserve ships; 233 other battle forces ships;
1,708 Navy/Marine Corps tactical/ASW aircraft; 743
Undergraduate Training aircraft; 461 Fleet Air Training
aircraft; 285 Fleet Air Support aircraft; 328 Reserve aircraft
and 195 in the pipeline.
A summary of the major forces follows:

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
FY 2006 FY 2007 FY 2008
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Strategic Forces....................................... 14 14 14
Fleet Ballistic Missile Submarines................. 14 14 14
General Purpose........................................ 250 248 255
Aircraft Carriers.................................. 12 11 11
Surface Combatants................................. 101 105 111
Submarines (attack)................................ 54 52 52
Guided Missile (SSGN) Submarines................... 4 4 4
Amphibious Warfare Ships........................... 33 31 32
Combat Logistics Ships............................. 30 31 31
Mine Warfare....................................... 16 14 14
Support Forces......................................... 16 17 17
Support Ships.......................................... 16 17 17
Mobilization Cat. A (Reserve).................. 14 13 11
Note: The reserve ships below are included in
the ship count above
Surface Combatants............................. 9 9 9
Amphibious Warfare Ships....................... 0 0 0
Mine Warfare................................... 5 4 2
Total Ships, Battleforce................... 280 279 286
Prepositioning Ships (O&M, Navy):...................... 17 17 17
Maritime Preposition............................... 16 16 16
USPACOM Ammo Prepo................................. 1 1 1
Surge Ships (National Defense Sealift Fund)*........... 71 67 67
Aviation Logistics Support......................... 2 2 2
Hospital Ships..................................... 2 2 2
Fast Sealift Ships................................. 8 8 8
Ready Reserve Force Ships.......................... 48 44 44
Large Medium-Speed RORO Ships...................... 11 11 11
Naval Aircraft
Primary Authorized (plus Pipe)..................... 4,100 3,750 3,720
Authorized Pipeline................................ 489 193 195
Tactical/ASW Aircraft.............................. 1,786 1,730 1,708
Fleet Air Training................................. 454 460 461
Fleet Air Support.................................. 271 270 285
Training (Undergraduate)........................... 730 736 743
Reserve............................................ 370 361 328
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
* Note: Surge ships are maintained in a Reduced Operating Status (ROS) from four to thirty days. The number of
days indicates the time from ship activation until the ship is available for tasking. Only ROS-4 and ROS-5
ships are considered in the surge capacity below.

DEPARTMENT OF THE AIR FORCE

The fiscal year 2008 Air Force budget request is designed
to support active, guard, and reserve forces, including 75
combat coded fighter and attack squadrons and 9 combat coded
strategic bomber squadrons. The ICBM force maintains 495 launch
facilities/control centers with 450 Minuteman missiles. The
budget also supports our critical airlift mission, including 24
active duty airlift squadrons. To accomplish the Air Force
mission, the 2008 budget supports a total force end strength of
502,800.
A summary of the major forces follows:

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Fiscal year--
--------------------------------------------------------
2006 2007 2008
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Summary of Major Forces:
USAF Fighter and Attack Squadrons (Active, ANG, 87 85 75
AFRC).............................................
Active......................................... 45 45 40
ANG............................................ 37 36 32
AFRC........................................... 5 4 3
Strategic Bomber Squadrons (Active)................ 8 8 8
Strategic Bomber Squadrons (AFRC).................. 1 1 1
Flight Test Units (DT and OT Units with assigned 10 12 12
aircraft).........................................
Fighter........................................ 7 9 9
Bomber......................................... 3 3 3
ICBM Operational Launch Facilities/Control Centers. 550 495 495
ICBM Missile Inventory............................. 500 450 450
USAF Airlift Squadrons (Active):
Strategic Airlift Squadrons........................ 14 15 15
Tactical Airlift Squadrons......................... 9 9 9
--------------------------------------------------------
Total Active Airlift Squadrons......................... 23 24 24
Total Air Force Aircraft Inventory..................... 5,792 5,662 5,688
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Note.--Numbers of squadrons above reflect combat coded units only (i.e., no training or test info except where
noted).

DEFENSE HEALTH PROGRAM

The Commitee recommends a total of $22,957,184,000 for the
Defense Health Program to support worldwide medical and dental
services for active forces and other eligible beneficiaries,
$416,060,000 above the fiscal year 2008 budget request and
$1,740,184,000 above the amount appropriated for fiscal year
2007.
To address the challenges of the Defense Health Program,
the Committee recommends:
$1,905,014,000 to fill the shortfall created
by Congress not having approved the Department's
proposed fee increases, making the Defense Health
Program whole for fiscal year 2008;
$66,000,000 for wounded warrior assistance;
$23,260,000 for preventive medicine and
surveillance;
Fully funds the budget requests for vaccine
research and development and the budget request of
$100,000,000 for avian influenza.
In addition, the Committee:
Directs the Department of Defense to update
the Physical Disability Evaluation System;
Directs the Department of Defense to
establish electronic medical record interoperability
with the Department of Veterans Affairs; and
Directs the review of TRICARE co-pays.
TITLE I

MILITARY PERSONNEL

The fiscal year 2008 budget request for programs funded in
Title I of the Committee bill, Military Personnel, is
$105,403,698,000 in new budget authority, which is an increase
of $5,540,821,000 above the amount appropriated for fiscal year
2007. The accompanying bill recommends $105,017,776,000 for
fiscal year 2008, which is an increase of $5,154,899,000 above
the amount appropriated for fiscal year 2007, and $385,922,000
less than the request for fiscal year 2008. These
appropriations finance basic, incentive and special pays for
active, Reserve and National Guard personnel, and Academy
cadets; retired pay accrual; housing, subsistence and other
allowances; recruitment and retention initiatives; permanent
change of station (PCS) costs; and other military personnel
costs such as survivor, unemployment, and education benefits. A
summary of appropriations provided in Title I, Military
Personnel, follows:

[GRAPHIC NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]

MILITARY PERSONNEL OVERVIEW

The Committee recommendation provides $105,017,776,000 for
Military Personnel accounts and continues to increase funding
for military pay and allowances, recruitment and retention
initiatives, and overall quality of life programs for active
duty, Reserve and National Guard personnel. The budget request
proposes to increase basic pay for all personnel by three
percent. The Committee recommendation provides approximately
$2,200,000,000, or $310,000,000 above the request, to increase
basic pay for all military personnel by 3.5 percent, effective
January 1, 2008. This recommendation also supports fully the
resource requirements needed to achieve the requested end
strength levels for fiscal year 2008. The Committee continues
to support and encourage constructive enhancements to
recruitment and retention programs, bonus and special pay
incentives, and benefit programs for military personnel for
fiscal year 2008. The Committee fully funds the ``Families
First Initiative'', a newly established program that ensures
the Full Replacement Value (FRV) for property lost or damaged
beyond repair in conjunction with a permanent change of station
move. The Committee continues to be supportive of any programs
intended to enhance the morale and quality of life for our
military personnel and their families.

SUMMARY OF END STRENGTH

The fiscal year 2008 budget request includes a decrease of
2,800 in total end strength for the active forces and a
decrease of 9,900 in end strength for the Selected Reserve from
the fiscal year 2007 authorized levels. However, the budget
proposes to increase the Army end strength by 7,000; the Army
National Guard end strength by 1,300; and the Marine Corps end
strength by 5,000. The Committee recommendation fully supports
these increases.
The following tables summarize the Committee
recommendations for end strength levels, both in the aggregate
and for each active and Selected Reserve component.
Explanations of changes from the budget request appear later in
this section.

OVERALL ACTIVE END STRENGTH

Fiscal year 2007 estimate............................. 1,329,200
Fiscal year 2008 budget request....................... 1,326,400
Fiscal year 2008 recommendation....................... 1,326,400
Compared with Fiscal year 2007.................... -2,800
Compared with Fiscal year 2008 budget request..... - - -

OVERALL SELECTED RESERVE END STRENGTH

Fiscal year 2007 estimate............................. 847,800
Fiscal year 2008 budget request....................... 837,900
Fiscal year 2008 recommendation....................... 837,900
Compared with Fiscal year 2007.................... -9,900
Compared with Fiscal year 2008 budget request..... - - -

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Fiscal year 2008
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Change from
FY 2007 estimate Budget request Recommendation request
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Active Forces (end strength):
Army............................ 482,400 489,400 489,400 --
Navy............................ 337,600 328,400 328,400 --
Marine Corps.................... 175,000 180,000 180,000 --
Air Force....................... 334,200 328,600 328,600 --
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Total, Active Forces........ 1,329,200 1,326,400 1,326,400 --
Guard and Reserve Forces (end
strength):
Army Reserve.................... 205,000 205,000 205,000 --
Navy Reserve.................... 71,300 67,800 67,800 --
Marine Corps Reserve............ 39,600 39,600 39,600 --
Air Force Reserve............... 74,900 67,500 67,500 --
Army National Guard............. 350,000 351,300 351,300 --
Air National Guard.............. 107,000 106,700 106,700 --
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Total, Guard and Reserve 847,800 837,900 837,900 --
Forces.....................
===========================================================================
Total, Military Personnel........... 2,177,000 2,164,300 2,164,300 --
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

FULL-TIME SUPPORT END STRENGTH

There are four categories of full-time support in the Guard
and Reserve components: civilian technicians, Active Guard and
Reserve (AGR), non-technician civilians, and active component
personnel.
Full-time support personnel organize, recruit, train,
maintain and administer the Reserve components. Civilian
(Military) technicians directly support units, and are very
important to help units maintain readiness and meet the wartime
mission of the Army and Air Force.
The following table summarizes Guard and Reserve full-time
support end strength:

GUARD AND RESERVE FULL-TIME END STRENGTH

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Fiscal year 2008
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Change from
FY 2007 estimate Budget request Recommendation request
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Army Reserve:
AGR............................. 15,416 15,870 15,870 --
Technicians..................... 8,507 8,844 8,844 --
Navy Reserve:
AR.............................. 12,565 11,579 11,579 --
Marine Corps Reserve:
AR.............................. 2,261 2,261 2,261 --
Air Force Reserve:
AGR............................. 2,707 2,721 2,721 --
Technicians..................... 10,214 9,999 9,999 --
Army National Guard:
AGR............................. 28,216 29,204 29,204 --
Technicians..................... 27,128 28,102 28,102 --
Air National Guard:
AGR............................. 13,206 13,936 13,936 --
Technicians..................... 23,605 22,903 22,903 --
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Totals:
AGR/AR.......................... 73,732 73,595 73,595 --
Technicians..................... 68,670 69,976 69,976 --
===========================================================================
Totals:....................... 142,402 143,571 143,571 --
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

GROW-THE-FORCE INITIATIVE

The Committee recommendation provides approximately
$1,041,000,000 in Military Personnel accounts to support the
first installment of the ``Grow-the-Force'' initiative, fully
funding the requested end strength increase of 7,000 Soldiers;
1,300 Army National Guardsmen; and 5,000 Marines. The Committee
expects that the fiscal year 2009 baseline budget will include
the necessary resources throughout the Pentagon's Future Year
Defense Program to meet end strength and over strength
objectives.
The Committee is concerned, however, about continued
programmed manpower reductions in both the Navy and Air Force,
especially since these services play vital supporting roles in
the conflicts overseas. In hearings before the Committee, both
the Secretary of Defense and the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs
of Staff expressed a need to review these programmed manpower
reductions. The Committee expects the Department to keep the
Committee informed of any change in manpower resulting from
this review.
On the basis of these manpower reductions, the Air Force,
in particular, moved to recapitalize its weapon systems and
aircraft fleet at the expense of its personnel budget. In fact,
the Air Force assumed significant risk in its permanent change
of station (PCS) policy, as reflected in the budget request for
fiscal year 2008. Accession, training, operational, and
rotational travel are essential for quality of life and
professional development, as well as force multipliers for
airmen supporting the war effort. Moreover, mid-level and
command-grade officer retention, force development, and
professional advancement setbacks are likely to intensify as
the Air Force moves from the customary 2 to 3 year rotational
schedule to one of 4 years. The Air Force cannot wait to
address this matter. Therefore, the Committee recommendation
reallocates $364,000,000 into Military Personnel, Air Force,
Budget Activity 5 from Research, Development, Test and
Evaluation, Air Force, and directs the Secretary of the Air
Force to conduct a thorough review of its PCS policy and
provide a report to the Committees on Appropriations of the
House of Representatives and the Senate not later than December
14, 2007, explaining the nature of this shortfall and any
corrective policy or funding actions necessary to address the
issue.

BOOTS-ON-THE-GROUND AND COST OF WAR REPORTING

The Committee believes there is a continuing need for
accurate and timely information on actual/estimated costs and
deployment numbers associated with Operation Iraqi Freedom
(OIF) and Operation Enduring Freedom (OEF). Therefore, not
later than the 10th day of each month following the enactment
of this Act, the Committee directs the Secretary of Defense to
submit to the congressional defense committees a ``Boots-on-
the-Ground'' report providing, for the most recent month for
which data is available, the total number of troops deployed in
support of OIF and OEF, further delineated by service and
component (active, Reserve or National Guard); and a monthly
estimate for the three-month period following the date such
report is submitted, which provides an estimate of the total
number of troops expected to be deployed in support of OIF and
OEF, further delineated by service and component (active,
Reserve or National Guard). This report may be submitted in
classified form.

RESERVE COMPONENT BUDGET SUBMISSIONS

The Committee supports a consolidated budget structure for
the Reserve Components provided that the reporting requirements
as set forth in House Report 109-676 are followed. However, as
the Reserve Components continue their transformation from a
strategic reserve into that of an operational force, the
Committee believes greater transparency is needed over total
costs for National Guard and Reserve servicemembers' cash
compensation, such as basic pay and other allowances; noncash
compensation, such as health care; and deferred compensation
and benefits, such as retirement pay and health care. In a June
2007 report, the Government Accountability Office (GAO) reports
that compensation costs have ``increased 47 percent since 2000,
rising from about $13,900,000,000 in fiscal year 2000 to about
$20,500,000,000 in fiscal year 2006.'' Per capita compensation
costs have nearly doubled, cash compensation has increased 19
percent, and deferred compensation costs have nearly tripled.
The Committee acknowledges the contributions made by each of
the Reserve Components, but a better understanding of the
escalation in these compensation costs is necessary.
The full cost of providing Reserve compensation is
fundamental to determine resource allocation, and the
Department's Reserve compensation costs are presently found
within multiple budgets. No single source currently provides
this information. The compilation of compensation costs for
those reservists who are drilling, serving in the Active Guard
and Reserve, and who are mobilized, into a single source is a
crucial first step toward gaining transparency over those
costs. The Committee supports GAO's findings and directs the
Department to include such detail within the Military Personnel
budget justification material beginning in fiscal year 2009.

PAID INACTIVE DUTY TRAINING (IDT) TRAVEL

As an unintended consequence of the 2005 Base Realignment
and Closure recommendations, some members of the Selected
Reserve face significant out-of-pocket travel expenses to drill
with their home unit. Unlike its active duty counterparts, the
Reserve Component cannot reassign a unit reservist through
Permanent Change of Station (PCS) actions. The Committee
believes that passing these costs to the service member may
have a damaging effect on unit cohesiveness, recruitment, and
the retention of specialty skill sets in the Reserve Component.
Therefore, the Committee directs the Department of Defense to
include in its fiscal year 2009 budget request sufficient
funding to assist members of the Selected Reserve who are
required to perform IDT outside the commuting limits of their
station.

MILITARY PERSONNEL, ARMY

Fiscal year 2007 appropriation........................ $29,813,905,000
Fiscal year 2008 budget request....................... 31,623,865,000
Committee recommendation.............................. 31,346,005,000
Change from budget request............................ -277,860,000

The Committee recommends an appropriation of
$31,346,005,000 for Military Personnel, Army, which is
$1,532,100,000 more than the amount provided in fiscal year
2007 and $277,860,000 less than the request for fiscal year
2008.

Program Recommended

The total amount recommended in the bill will provide the
following program in fiscal year 2008:

[GRAPHICS NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]

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

[GRAPHIC NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]

MILITARY PERSONNEL, NAVY

Fiscal year 2007 appropriation........................ $22,776,232,000
Fiscal year 2008 budget request....................... 23,305,233,000
Committee recommendation.............................. 23,300,801,000
Change from budget request............................ -4,432,000

The Committee recommends an appropriation of
$23,300,801,000 for Military Personnel, Navy, which is
$524,569,000 more than the amount provided in fiscal year 2007
and $4,432,000 less than the request for fiscal year 2008.

Program Recommended

The total amount recommended in the bill will provide the
following program in fiscal year 2008:

[GRAPHIC NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]

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

[GRAPHIC NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]

MILITARY PERSONNEL, MARINE CORPS

Fiscal year 2007 appropriation........................ $9,174,714,000
Fiscal year 2008 budget request....................... 10,278,031,000
Committee recommendation.............................. 10,269,914,000
Change from budget request............................ -8,117,000

The Committee recommends an appropriation of
$10,269,914,000 for Military Personnel, Marine Corps, which is
$1,095,200,000 more than the amount provided in fiscal year
2007 and $8,117,000 less than the request for fiscal year 2008.

Program Recommended

The total amount recommended in the bill will provide the
following program in fiscal year 2008:

[GRAPHIC NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]

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

[GRAPHIC NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]

MILITARY PERSONNEL, AIR FORCE

Fiscal year 2007 appropriation........................ $23,564,706,000
Fiscal year 2008 budget request....................... 24,097,354,000
Committee recommendation.............................. 24,379,214,000
Change from budget request............................ +281,860,000

The Committee recommends an appropriation of
$24,379,214,000 for Military Personnel, Air Force, which is
$814,508,000 more than the amount provided in fiscal year 2007
and $281,860,000 more than the request for fiscal year 2008.

Program Recommended

The total amount recommended in the bill will provide the
following program in fiscal year 2008:

[GRAPHIC NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]

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

[GRAPHIC NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]

RESERVE PERSONNEL, ARMY

Fiscal year 2007 appropriation........................ $3,364,812,000
Fiscal year 2008 budget request....................... 3,734,620,000
Committee recommendation.............................. 3,629,620,000
Change from budget request............................ -105,000,000

The Committee recommends an appropriation of $3,629,620,000
for Reserve Personnel, Army, which is $264,808,000 more than
the amount provided in fiscal year 2007 and $105,000,000 less
than the request for fiscal year 2008.

Program Recommended

The total amount recommended in the bill will provide the
following program in fiscal year 2008:

[GRAPHIC NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]

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

[GRAPHIC NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]

RESERVE PERSONNEL, NAVY

Fiscal year 2007 appropriation........................ $1,755,953,000
Fiscal year 2008 budget request....................... 1,797,685,000
Committee recommendation.............................. 1,776,885,000
Change from budget request............................ -20,800,000

The Committee recommends an appropriation of $1,776,885,000
for Reserve Personnel, Navy, which is $20,932,000 more than the
amount provided in fiscal year 2007 and $20,800,000 less than
the request for fiscal year 2008.

Program Recommended

The total amount recommended in the bill will provide the
following program in fiscal year 2008:

[GRAPHIC NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]

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

[GRAPHIC NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]

RESERVE PERSONNEL, MARINE CORPS

Fiscal year 2007 appropriation........................ $541,768,000
Fiscal year 2008 budget request....................... 594,872,000
Committee recommendation.............................. 513,472,000
Change from budget request............................ -81,400,000

The Committee recommends an appropriation of $513,472,000
for Reserve Personnel, Marine Corps, which is $28,296,000 less
than the amount provided in fiscal year 2007 and $81,400,000
less than the request for fiscal year 2008.

Program Recommended

The total amount recommended in the bill will provide the
following program in fiscal year 2008:

[GRAPHIC NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]

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

[GRAPHIC NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]

RESERVE PERSONNEL, AIR FORCE

Fiscal year 2007 appropriation........................ $1,335,838,000
Fiscal year 2008 budget request....................... 1,370,479,000
Committee recommendation.............................. 1,365,679,000
Change from budget request............................ -4,800,000

The Committee recommends an appropriation of $1,365,679,000
for Reserve Personnel, Air Force, which is $29,841,000 more
than the amount provided in fiscal year 2007 and $4,800,000
less than the request for fiscal year 2008.

Program Recommended

The total amount recommended in the bill will provide the
following program in fiscal year 2008:

[GRAPHIC NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]

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

[GRAPHIC NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]

NATIONAL GUARD PERSONNEL, ARMY

Fiscal year 2007 appropriation........................ $5,209,197,000
Fiscal year 2008 budget request....................... 5,959,149,000
Committee recommendation.............................. 5,815,017,000
Change from budget request............................ -144,132,000

The Committee recommends an appropriation of $5,815,017,000
for National Guard Personnel, Army, which is $605,820,000 more
than the amount provided in fiscal year 2007 and $144,132,000
less than the request for fiscal year 2008.

Program Recommended

The total amount recommended in the bill will provide the
following program in fiscal year 2008:

[GRAPHIC NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]

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

[GRAPHIC NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]

NATIONAL GUARD PERSONNEL, AIR FORCE

Fiscal year 2007 appropriation........................ $2,325,752,000
Fiscal year 2008 budget request....................... 2,642,410,000
Committee recommendation.............................. 2,621,169,000
Change from budget request............................ -21,241,000

The Committee recommends an appropriation of $2,621,169,000
for National Guard Personnel, Air Force, which is $295,417,000
more than the amount provided in fiscal year 2007 and
$21,241,000 less than the request for fiscal year 2008.

Program Recommended

The total amount recommended in the bill will provide the
following program in fiscal year 2008:

[GRAPHIC NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]

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

[GRAPHIC NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]

TITLE II

OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE

The fiscal year 2008 budget request for programs funded in
title II of the Committee bill, Operation and Maintenance, is
$142,854,017,000 in new budget authority. The accompanying bill
recommends $137,135,127,000 for fiscal year 2008, which is an
increase of $9,846,320,000 above the amount appropriated for
fiscal year 2007, and $5,718,890,000 less than the request for
fiscal year 2008. These appropriations finance the costs of
operating and maintaining the Armed Forces, including the
reserve components and related support activities of the
Department of Defense (DoD). Included is pay for civilians,
services for maintenance of equipment and, fuel, supplies, and
spare parts for weapons and equipment. Financial requirements
are influenced by many factors, including force levels such as
the number of aircraft squadrons, Army and Marine Corps
divisions, installations, military personnel strength and
deployments, rates of operational activity, and the quantity,
complexity and age of equipment such as aircraft, ships,
missiles and tanks. The budget request for Operation and
Maintenance includes $5,400,000 in price adjustments and
program growth of nearly $10,000,000,000.
The table below summarizes the Committee's recommendations.

[GRAPHIC NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]

FORCE STRUCTURE

The Army continues to convert to a modular force. Modular
Brigade Combat Teams (BCTs) with enabling support brigades are
more capable, flexible, and deployable than the previous
division-based structure. The Army plans to increase the number
of BCTs by 5, to a total of 69, by the end of 2008 (38 active
and 28 guard). The Army also plans to increase the number of
support brigades by 35 to total of 193 by the end of 2008 (74
active, 67 guard and 52 reserve). The Navy supports a force
structure of 10 active carrier air wings and 1,292 primary
authorized aircraft, 286 battle force ships, including 11
aircraft carriers, 52 nuclear attack submarines and 14 missile
submarines. The Navy's implementation of the Fleet Response
Plan continues in 2008 with the goal of increasing availability
of naval assets for duty worldwide. The Marine Corps plans to
increase military end-strength beginning in 2008 with the goal
of adding three infantry battalions and other support forces
resulting in three balanced Marine Expeditionary Forces (MEFs).
The force structure of the Air Force supports 81 Combat Wing
Equivalents (CWEs). Air Force combat capability is organized
into 38 Strike wings, 29 Mobility wings, and 14 Intelligence,
Surveillance and Reconnaissance (ISR) wings.

TRAINING TEMPO

The unit training that the U.S. military conducts to
support the national military strategy is funded by the
operation and maintenance accounts. Operational readiness is
the state of preparedness of a unit to perform the missions for
which it is organized or designed. The Committee fully supports
the peacetime requirements of the military services for
readiness training.
Army training operating tempo is often expressed in terms
of tank miles driven. The Army's readiness goal is 846 tank
miles per year. The Army plans to drive an average of 600 tank
miles in 2007, to include 428 training miles, and 770 tank
miles in 2008, to include 582 training miles. The Navy's
training tempo is expressed both terms of average number of
steaming days per quarter and average number of flying hours
per crew. The Navy's goal for deployed forces is 51 steaming
days per quarter and an average of 18.8 flying hours per crew
per month. The Navy plans on steaming 36 days per quarter in
2007 and 45 days per quarter in 2008, and plans to fly an
average of 17.5 hours per crew per month in 2007 and 18.7 hours
per crew per month in 2008. The Air Force's operational
community does not set a training tempo goal, believing that
the flying hours reflected in the budget request are adequate
to conduct the training which ensures the needed combat
capability. In 2007, the Air Force plans to execute an average
of 16.5 hours for bombers and 16.7 hours for fighters. In 2008,
the Air Force plans to fly an average of 15.5 hours for bombers
and 14.4 hours for fighters.

RECOMMENDED OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE FUNDING LEVELS

The Committee recommends $7,548,000,000 for peacetime
training and operations in fiscal year 2008, an increase of 13
percent above inflation. The additional funding will robustly
fund the operational training programs, supporting an increased
training operating tempo in fiscal year 2008 for the Army, Navy
and Marine Corps. The Air Force's request included a reduction
to the flying hour program, a level of risk that the Air Force
has determined to be manageable. The following table displays
operational training funding for each of the Services.

OPERATIONAL TRAINING PROGRAM FUNDING
[Dollars in thousands]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
2007 Current 2008 Committee
estimate* recommended Change (percent)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Army................................................... $3,192,000 $3,810,000 +19%
Navy................................................... 1,508,000 1,609,000 +7%
Marine Corps........................................... 465,000 627,000 +35%
Air Force.............................................. 1,540,000 1,502,000 -2%
--------------------------------------------------------
Total.............................................. 6,705,000 7,548,000 +13%
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
* Includes expected 2008 cost growth.

In total, the Committee provides for an increase of
$843,341,000 for operational training program growth,
equivalent to nearly 13 percent growth for the active Services.

IMPACT OF REBASING

The Committee seeks to ensure that the Army adequately
addresses the impact of rebasing activities, particularly as
large numbers of servicemembers are restationed from overseas
bases to bases in the continental United States (CONUS). The
Army is making significant changes in force structure, base
closures, and a global repositioning of forces, all while
meeting the demands of war. The Committee proposes adding
$1,232,400,000 to the Army's facilities sustainment and
restoration budget request to offset the growing infrastructure
costs associated with the global repositioning of its forces.
The Committee is recommending, without modification, the
funding levels and facility projects determined by the
Department of the Army to support global repositioning. These
funds will be used to fix barracks, improve child care
facilities, and enhance community services at Army bases
throughout the United States, Europe and Korea as follows:

SUPPORT TO GLOBAL REPOSITIONING OF FORCES
[Dollars in thousands]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Installation State Project title Amount
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Aberdeen Proving Ground........... MD.................. Right-size Army Community Services. $365
Aberdeen Proving Grounds.......... MD.................. Facility Sustainment, Restoration, 10,156
and Modernization.
Adelphi (EXX)..................... MD.................. Facility Sustainment, Restoration, 476
and Modernization.
AMC............................... VA.................. Family Readiness Support Assistance 40
Ansbach........................... Europe.............. Army Community Services 212
Mobilization/Deployment Support.
Ansbach........................... Europe.............. Facility Sustainment, Restoration, 38,573
and Modernization.
Area I Garrison (K01)............. Korea............... Facility Sustainment, Restoration, 4,038
and Modernization.
Area II Garrison (K02)............ Korea............... Facility Sustainment, Restoration, 5,281
and Modernization.
Area III.......................... Korea............... Right-size Army Community Services. 402
Area III Garrison (K03)........... Korea............... Facility Sustainment, Restoration, 2,151
and Modernization.
Area IV Garrison (K04)............ Korea............... Facility Sustainment, Restoration, 1,658
and Modernization.
ARNG.............................. Multi............... Family Readiness Support Assistance 5,310
Bamberg........................... Europe.............. Army Community Services 212
Mobilization/Deployment Support.
Bamberg........................... Europe.............. Facility Sustainment, Restoration, 1,620
and Modernization.
Baumholder........................ Europe.............. Army Community Services 142
Mobilization/Deployment Support.
BENELUX........................... Europe.............. Army Community Services 71
Mobilization/Deployment Support.
Buchanan.......................... PR.................. Facility Sustainment, Restoration, 7,108
and Modernization.
Camp Shelby....................... MS.................. Facility Sustainment, Restoration, 122
and Modernization.
Camp Zama......................... Japan............... Army Community Services 71
Mobilization/Deployment Support.
Carlisle Barracks (E02)........... PA.................. Facility Sustainment, Restoration, 466
and Modernization.
Chievres (U04).................... Europe.............. Facility Sustainment, Restoration, 1,061
and Modernization.
Dugway............................ UT.................. Right-size Army Community Services. 292
Dugway (O02)...................... UT.................. Facility Sustainment, Restoration, 1,203
and Modernization.
EIGHTH US ARMY.................... Korea............... Family Readiness Support Assistance 1,280
FORSCOM........................... GA.................. Family Readiness Support Assistance 20,550
Fort A P Hill (E14)............... VA.................. Facility Sustainment, Restoration, 630
and Modernization.
Fort Belvoir...................... VA.................. Right-size Army Community Services. 365
Fort Belvoir (E13)................ VA.................. Facility Sustainment, Restoration, 8,272
and Modernization.
Fort Benning...................... GA.................. Right-size Army Community Services. 1,095
Fort Benning...................... GA.................. Army Community Services 496
Mobilization/Deployment Support.
Fort Benning (S01)................ GA.................. Facility Sustainment, Restoration, 114,117
and Modernization.
Fort Bliss........................ TX.................. Right-size Army Community Services. 1,314
Fort Bliss........................ TX.................. Army Community Services 991
Mobilization/Deployment Support.
Fort Bliss (T01).................. TX.................. Facility Sustainment, Restoration, 9,836
and Modernization.
Fort Bragg........................ NC.................. Right-size Army Community Services. 584
Fort Bragg........................ NC.................. Army Community Services 708
Mobilization/Deployment Support.
Fort Bragg (S02).................. NC.................. Facility Sustainment, Restoration, 33,934
and Modernization.
Fort Campbell..................... KY.................. Army Community Services 637
Mobilization/Deployment Support.
Fort Campbell (S04)............... KY.................. Facility Sustainment, Restoration, 9,638
and Modernization.
Fort Carson....................... CO.................. Army Community Services 142
Mobilization/Deployment Support.
Fort Carson (O01)................. CO.................. Facility Sustainment, Restoration, 47,039
and Modernization.
Fort Dix.......................... NJ.................. Army Community Services 142
Mobilization/Deployment Support.
Fort Drum......................... NY.................. Army Community Services 142
Mobilization/Deployment Support.
Fort Drum (E04)................... NY.................. Facility Sustainment, Restoration, 32,149
and Modernization.
Fort Eustis/Story................. VA.................. Army Community Services 496
Mobilization/Deployment Support.
Fort Eustis/Story (E05)........... VA.................. Facility Sustainment, Restoration, 3,331
and Modernization.
Fort Gordon....................... GA.................. Right-size Army Community Services. 657
Fort Gordon....................... GA.................. Army Community Services 283
Mobilization/Deployment Support.
Fort Gordon (S05)................. GA.................. Facility Sustainment, Restoration, 62,743
and Modernization.
Fort Greely (P01)................. AK.................. Facility Sustainment, Restoration, 587
and Modernization.
Fort Hamilton (E16)............... NY.................. Facility Sustainment, Restoration, 388
and Modernization.
Fort Hood......................... TX.................. Right-size Army Community Services. 1,606
Fort Hood......................... TX.................. Army Community Services 850
Mobilization/Deployment Support.
Fort Hood (T02)................... TX.................. Facility Sustainment, Restoration, 41,371
and Modernization.
Fort Huachuca..................... AZ.................. Army Community Services 212
Mobilization/Deployment Support.
Fort Huachuca (T03)............... AZ.................. Facility Sustainment, Restoration, 15,031
and Modernization.
Fort Irwin........................ CA.................. Right-size Army Community Services. 803
Fort Irwin (T04).................. CA.................. Facility Sustainment, Restoration, 9,152
and Modernization.
Fort Jackson...................... SC.................. Right-size Army Community Services. 1,022
Fort Jackson...................... SC.................. Army Community Services 496
Mobilization/Deployment Support.
Fort Jackson (S06)................ SC.................. Facility Sustainment, Restoration, 54,956
and Modernization.
Fort Knox......................... KY.................. Army Community Services 212
Mobilization/Deployment Support.
Fort Knox (S07)................... KY.................. Facility Sustainment, Restoration, 9,956
and Modernization.
Fort L. Wood...................... MO.................. Right-size Army Community Services. 1,022
Fort L. Wood...................... MO.................. Army Community Services 496
Mobilization/Deployment Support.
Fort Leavenworth.................. KS.................. Right-size Army Community Services. 584
Fort Leavenworth.................. KS.................. Army Community Services 283
Mobilization/Deployment Support.
Fort Leavenworth (O03)............ KS.................. Facility Sustainment, Restoration, 1,961
and Modernization.
Fort Lee.......................... VA.................. Right-size Army Community Services. 365
Fort Lee.......................... VA.................. Army Community Services 496
Mobilization/Deployment Support.
Fort Lee (E06).................... VA.................. Facility Sustainment, Restoration, 16,713
and Modernization.
Fort Leonard Wood (O04)........... MO.................. Facility Sustainment, Restoration, 63,663
and Modernization.
Fort Lewis........................ WA.................. Army Community Services 142
Mobilization/Deployment Support.
Fort Lewis (O05).................. WA.................. Facility Sustainment, Restoration, 25,279
and Modernization.
Fort McCoy........................ WI.................. Facility Sustainment, Restoration, 630
and Modernization.
Fort McPherson (S08).............. GA.................. Facility Sustainment, Restoration, 1,245
and Modernization.
Fort Meade (E15).................. MD.................. Facility Sustainment, Restoration, 19,445
and Modernization.
Fort Monmouth (E07)............... NJ.................. Facility Sustainment, Restoration, 1,772
and Modernization.
Fort Monroe/Story (E08)........... VA.................. Facility Sustainment, Restoration, 510
and Modernization.
Fort Myer/McNair (E17)............ VA.................. Facility Sustainment, Restoration, 19,511
and Modernization.
Fort Polk......................... LA.................. Army Community Services 496
Mobilization/Deployment Support.
Fort Polk (T05)................... LA.................. Facility Sustainment, Restoration, 22,814
and Modernization.
Fort Richardson................... AK.................. Army Community Services 283
Mobilization/Deployment Support.
Fort Richardson (P03)............. AK.................. Facility Sustainment, Restoration, 12,052
and Modernization.
Fort Riley........................ KS.................. Army Community Services 425
Mobilization/Deployment Support.
Fort Riley (O06).................. KS.................. Facility Sustainment, Restoration, 11,751
and Modernization.
Fort Rucker....................... AL.................. Army Community Services 354
Mobilization/Deployment Support.
Fort Rucker (S11)................. AL.................. Facility Sustainment, Restoration, 2,319
and Modernization.
Fort S. Houston................... TX.................. Right-size Army Community Services. 730
Fort S. Houston................... TX.................. Army Community Services 283
Mobilization/Deployment Support.
Fort Sam Houston (T07)............ TX.................. Facility Sustainment, Restoration, 9,888
and Modernization.
Fort Shafter (P04)................ HI.................. Facility Sustainment, Restoration, 34,890
and Modernization.
Fort Sill......................... OK.................. Right-size Army Community Services. 1,971
Fort Sill......................... OK.................. Army Community Services 496
Mobilization/Deployment Support.
Fort Sill (T08)................... OK.................. Facility Sustainment, Restoration, 36,117
and Modernization.
Fort Stewart (S12)................ GA.................. Facility Sustainment, Restoration, 22,991
and Modernization.
Fort Stewart/Hunter............... GA.................. Right-size Army Community Services. 292
Fort Stewart/Hunter............... GA.................. Army Community Services 425
Mobilization/Deployment Support.
Fort Wainwright................... AK.................. Army Community Services 283
Mobilization/Deployment Support.
Fort Wainwright................... AK.................. Facility Sustainment, Restoration, 22,323
and Modernization.
Grafenwoehr....................... Europe.............. Right-size Army Community Services. 840
Grafenwoehr....................... Europe.............. Army Community Services 142
Mobilization/Deployment Support.
Grafenwoehr (U06)................. Europe.............. Facility Sustainment, Restoration, 19,129
and Modernization.
Hanau Area (U07).................. Europe.............. Facility Sustainment, Restoration, 10,461
and Modernization.
Heidelberg........................ Europe.............. Right-size Army Community Services. 256
Heidelberg........................ Europe.............. Army Community Services 71
Mobilization/Deployment Support.
Heidelberg (U03).................. Europe.............. Facility Sustainment, Restoration, 62,903
and Modernization.
Hohenfels......................... Europe.............. Right-size Army Community Services. 402
Hohenfels......................... Europe.............. Army Community Services 142
Mobilization/Deployment Support.
HQ FMWRC.......................... VA.................. Army Community Services 425
Mobilization/Deployment Support.
INSCOM............................ VA.................. Family Readiness Support Assistance 970
Japan (P05)....................... Japan............... Facility Sustainment, Restoration, 12,132
and Modernization.
Kaiserslautern.................... Europe.............. Army Community Services 71
Mobilization/Deployment Support.
Lexington......................... KY.................. Right-size Army Community Services. 292
Mannheim.......................... Europe.............. Army Community Services 71
Mobilization/Deployment Support.
McAlester......................... OK.................. Right-size Army Community Services. 292
McAlester AAP (T93)............... OK.................. Facility Sustainment, Restoration, 62
and Modernization.
MEDCOM............................ VA.................. Family Readiness Support Assistance 310
Miami............................. FL.................. Right-size Army Community Services. 438
Miami (S09)....................... FL.................. Facility Sustainment, Restoration, 16
and Modernization.
Natick............................ MA.................. Right-size Army Community Services. 292
Natick (E09)...................... MA.................. Facility Sustainment, Restoration, 391
and Modernization.
NETCOM............................ VA.................. Family Readiness Support Assistance 710
Picatinny......................... NJ.................. Right-size Army Community Services. 365
Picatinny (E10)................... NJ.................. Facility Sustainment, Restoration, 1,865
and Modernization.
Pine Bluff........................ AR.................. Right-size Army Community Services. 292
Pine Bluff Arsenal (T99).......... AK.................. Facility Sustainment, Restoration, 2,016
and Modernization.
Presidio of Monterey.............. CA.................. Army Community Services 71
Mobilization/Deployment Support.
Presidio of Monterey (T06)........ CA.................. Facility Sustainment, Restoration, 8,578
and Modernization.
Red River......................... TX.................. Right-size Army Community Services. 292
Red River Army Depot (T90)........ TX.................. Facility Sustainment, Restoration, 204
and Modernization.
Redstone (S10).................... AL.................. Facility Sustainment, Restoration, 17,257
and Modernization.
Rock Island (O07)................. IL.................. Facility Sustainment, Restoration, 1,746
and Modernization.
Schinnen.......................... Europe.............. Army Community Services 71
Mobilization/Deployment Support.
Schofield Barracks................ HI.................. Right-size Army Community Services. 1,022
Schofield Barracks................ HI.................. Army Community Services 142
Mobilization/Deployment Support.
Schweinfurt....................... Europe.............. Army Community Services 212
Mobilization/Deployment Support.
Schweinfurt....................... Europe.............. Facility Sustainment, Restoration, 5,125
and Modernization.
Selfridge (O08)................... MI.................. Facility Sustainment, Restoration, 1,665
and Modernization.
Sierra............................ CA.................. Right-size Army Community Services. 292
Sierra Army Depot (T96)........... CA.................. Facility Sustainment, Restoration, 1
and Modernization.
Stuttgart......................... Europe.............. Right-size Army Community Services. 657
Stuttgart......................... Europe.............. Army Community Services 142
Mobilization/Deployment Support.
Stuttgart (U01)................... Europe.............. Facility Sustainment, Restoration, 2,224
and Modernization.
THIRD US Army..................... GA.................. Family Readiness Support Assistance 180
Tobyhanna......................... PA.................. Right-size Army Community Services. 365
Tooele............................ UT.................. Right-size Army Community Services. 292
Tooele Army Depot (O90)........... UT.................. Facility Sustainment, Restoration, 2,857
and Modernization.
TRADOC............................ VA.................. Army Community Services 354
Mobilization/Deployment Support.
USAR.............................. Multi............... Family Readiness Support Assistance 3,850
USAREUR........................... Europe.............. Family Readiness Support Assistance 2,470
USARNORTH......................... TX.................. Family Readiness Support Assistance 40
USARPAC........................... Pacific............. Family Readiness Support Assistance 2,350
USARSOUTH......................... TX.................. Family Readiness Support Assistance 40
USASOC............................ NC.................. Family Readiness Support Assistance 2,170
Vicenza Area (U02)................ Europe.............. Facility Sustainment, Restoration, 5,626
and Modernization.
Vicenza/Livorno................... Europe.............. Army Community Services 142
Mobilization/Deployment Support.
Watervliet........................ NY.................. Right-size Army Community Services. 292
Watervliet Arsenal (E99).......... NY.................. Facility Sustainment, Restoration, 10
and Modernization.
West Point (E12).................. NY.................. Facility Sustainment, Restoration, 5,956
and Modernization.
White Sands (T09)................. NM.................. Facility Sustainment, Restoration, 3,433
and Modernization.
Wiesbaden/Mainz................... Europe.............. Army Community Services 71
Mobilization/Deployment Support.
Wuerzburg......................... Europe.............. Right-size Army Community Services. 694
Yuma (T10)........................ AZ.................. Facility Sustainment, Restoration, 1,423
and Modernization.
Army Reserve...................... Multi............... Facility Sustainment............... 23,600
Army National Guard............... AK.................. Facility Sustainment............... 743
Army National Guard............... AL.................. Facility Sustainment............... 1,101
Army National Guard............... AR.................. Facility Sustainment............... 1,428
Army National Guard............... AR.................. Facility Restoration and 20,861
Modernization.
Army National Guard............... AZ.................. Facility Sustainment............... 464
Army National Guard............... CA.................. Facility Sustainment............... 3,424
Army National Guard............... CA.................. Facility Restoration and 1,443
Modernization.
Army National Guard............... CO.................. Facility Sustainment............... 302
Army National Guard............... CO.................. Facility Restoration and 2,153
Modernization.
Army National Guard............... CT.................. Facility Sustainment............... 485
Army National Guard............... CT.................. Facility Restoration and 1,500
Modernization.
Army National Guard............... DC.................. Facility Sustainment............... 309
Army National Guard............... DE.................. Facility Sustainment............... 193
Army National Guard............... FL.................. Facility Sustainment............... 867
Army National Guard............... FL.................. Facility Restoration and 3,102
Modernization.
Army National Guard............... GA.................. Facility Sustainment............... 801
Army National Guard............... GA.................. Facility Restoration and 1,285
Modernization.
Army National Guard............... GU.................. Facility Sustainment............... 108
Army National Guard............... HI.................. Facility Sustainment............... 632
Army National Guard............... IA.................. Facility Sustainment............... 884
Army National Guard............... IA.................. Facility Restoration and 11,855
Modernization.
Army National Guard............... ID.................. Facility Sustainment............... 932
Army National Guard............... ID.................. Facility Restoration and 5,138
Modernization.
Army National Guard............... IL.................. Facility Sustainment............... 1,161
Army National Guard............... IL.................. Facility Restoration and 2,486
Modernization.
Army National Guard............... IN.................. Facility Sustainment............... 1,151
Army National Guard............... KS.................. Facility Sustainment............... 423
Army National Guard............... KY.................. Facility Sustainment............... 530
Army National Guard............... KY.................. Facility Restoration and 340
Modernization.
Army National Guard............... LA.................. Facility Sustainment............... 683
Army National Guard............... LA.................. Facility Restoration and 26,577
Modernization.
Army National Guard............... MA.................. Facility Sustainment............... 1,242
Army National Guard............... MA.................. Facility Restoration and 358
Modernization.
Army National Guard............... MD.................. Facility Sustainment............... 600
Army National Guard............... MD.................. Facility Restoration and 1,400
Modernization.
Army National Guard............... ME.................. Facility Sustainment............... 485
Army National Guard............... MI.................. Facility Sustainment............... 1,752
Army National Guard............... MI.................. Facility Restoration and 1,500
Modernization.
Army National Guard............... MN.................. Facility Sustainment............... 1,780
Army National Guard............... MN.................. Facility Restoration and 14,953
Modernization.
Army National Guard............... MO.................. Facility Sustainment............... 842
Army National Guard............... MS.................. Facility Sustainment............... 1,448
Army National Guard............... MS.................. Facility Restoration and 281
Modernization.
Army National Guard............... MT.................. Facility Sustainment............... 496
Army National Guard............... MT.................. Facility Restoration and 1,920
Modernization.
Army National Guard............... NC.................. Facility Sustainment............... 270
Army National Guard............... NC.................. Facility Restoration and 7,749
Modernization.
Army National Guard............... ND.................. Facility Sustainment............... 540
Army National Guard............... NE.................. Facility Sustainment............... 489
Army National Guard............... NH.................. Facility Sustainment............... 233
Army National Guard............... NJ.................. Facility Sustainment............... 877
Army National Guard............... NJ.................. Facility Restoration and 1,999
Modernization.
Army National Guard............... NM.................. Facility Sustainment............... 290
Army National Guard............... NV.................. Facility Sustainment............... 224
Army National Guard............... NY.................. Facility Sustainment............... 1,359
Army National Guard............... OH.................. Facility Sustainment............... 661
Army National Guard............... OH.................. Facility Restoration and 5,750
Modernization.
Army National Guard............... OK.................. Facility Sustainment............... 699
Army National Guard............... OR.................. Facility Sustainment............... 696
Army National Guard............... OR.................. Facility Restoration and 2,475
Modernization.
Army National Guard............... PA.................. Facility Sustainment............... 1,983
Army National Guard............... PA.................. Facility Restoration and 22,733
Modernization.
Army National Guard............... PR.................. Facility Sustainment............... 663
Army National Guard............... RI.................. Facility Sustainment............... 239
Army National Guard............... SC.................. Facility Sustainment............... 649
Army National Guard............... SD.................. Facility Sustainment............... 371
Army National Guard............... SD.................. Facility Restoration and 2,927
Modernization.
Army National Guard............... TN.................. Facility Sustainment............... 765
Army National Guard............... TN.................. Facility Restoration and 816
Modernization.
Army National Guard............... TX.................. Facility Sustainment............... 1,167
Army National Guard............... TX.................. Facility Restoration and 812
Modernization.
Army National Guard............... UT.................. Facility Sustainment............... 793
Army National Guard............... VA.................. Facility Sustainment............... 1,216
Army National Guard............... VA.................. Facility Restoration and 1,642
Modernization.
Army National Guard............... VI.................. Facility Sustainment............... 63
Army National Guard............... VT.................. Facility Sustainment............... 330
Army National Guard............... WA.................. Facility Sustainment............... 581
Army National Guard............... WA.................. Facility Restoration and 2,931
Modernization.
Army National Guard............... WI.................. Facility Sustainment............... 688
Army National Guard............... WV.................. Facility Sustainment............... 521
Army National Guard............... WV.................. Facility Restoration and 841
Modernization.
Army National Guard............... WY.................. Facility Sustainment............... 368
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

PERIMETER SECURITY FORCE PROTECTION AND OTHER FACILITY SECURITY
IMPROVEMENTS

Perimeter security is the backbone of the anti-terrorism
program designed to protect DoD installations, facilities, and
people. Without a strong and robust perimeter security system,
national security resources and personnel remain vulnerable
targets for terrorists. A combination of perimeter fencing,
entry controls, barriers, and response capabilities form a
cost-efficient and effective layered defense structure to
reduce vulnerability of individuals and property to terrorist
acts. The budget request includes $126,200,000 for perimeter
security. However, the Committee finds that this level does not
sufficiently mitigate danger to, nor improve the safety and
security of, DoD personnel and assets. The Committee recommends
an additional $141,900,000 for perimeter security force
protection for fiscal year 2008. The recommendation includes
security enhancements for rapid, electronic authentication for
the physical and logic access and interoperability with other
Agencies to protect DoD bases, schools, hospitals, base
housing, churches and childcare centers from terrorist attacks.
In addition, the Committee recommendation includes funds to
meet the combatant commanders' anti-terrorism/force protection
requirements that require immediate attention. The Committee
recommendation, by appropriation, is detailed below:

PERIMETER SECURITY FORCE PROTECTION AND OTHER FACILITY SECURITY IMPROVEMENTS
[Dollars in thousands]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Committee
Request Improved security recommendation
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Army................................................... $32,700 +$30,100 $62,800
Navy................................................... 30,500 +29,300 59,800
Marine Corps........................................... 12,200 +12,400 24,600
Air Force.............................................. 3,100 +3,100 6,200
Army Guard............................................. 30,700 +21,900 52,600
Army Reserve........................................... 4,700 +5,300 10,000
Navy Reserve........................................... 0,700 +1,300 2,000
DoD IG................................................. * * 100
Defense-Wide \1\....................................... 8,900 +37,500 46,400
Defense Health Program................................. 2,700 +1,000 3,700
Total.............................................. 126,200 141,900 268,100
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
* less than $100,000.
\1\ Includes funding for perimeter security force protection, Combating Terrorism Readiness Initiative Fund and
Homeland Security Presidential Directive-12.

SUPPORT TO MILITARY FAMILIES

The makeup of the military has changed dramatically since
the advent of the all-volunteer force more than 25 years ago.
Where the Nation's force once was largely comprised of single
men, today nearly half of the men and women in uniform are
fathers and mothers. Family assistance, reliable childcare and
quality education for military dependents has become a military
necessity and directly affects military retention. These
programs are essential to the health and welfare of the
Nation's soldiers and their families, and the communities in
which they live. Accordingly, the Committee recommendation
includes nearly $2,916,000,000 for support for military
families, an increase of $558,413,000 above the budget request.
The Committee recommendation for these programs is displayed as
follows:

MILITARY FAMILY SUPPORT ACTIVITIES
[Dollars in thousands]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Committee
Request Expand service recommendation
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Family Advocacy programs............................... $232,587 +$438,813 $671,400
Army childcare centers................................. 251,400 +46,000 297,400
Navy childcare centers................................. 103,600 +24,000 127,600
Marine Corps childcare centers......................... 21,900 +6,000 27,900
Air Force childcare centers............................ 147,900 +5,600 153,500
Dependents education................................... 1,600,800 +38,000 1,638,000
Total.............................................. 2,358,187 +558,413 2,915,800
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

FAMILY ADVOCACY PROGRAMS

The Committee recommends a total of $671,400,000 for family
advocacy programs in fiscal year 2008. The Committee believes
the additional funding provided will enhance the activities of
family advocacy programs (FAP) and provide for children and
families managing the difficult challenges of military service.
The Committee is cognizant of and concerned about the growing
need for family members to have access to professional
counseling to help alleviate the mental stresses associated
with deployments. FAP programs also provide comprehensive
programs for prevention, identification and treatment of child
and spouse abuse, and provide family assistance for severely-
injured service members and their families.
Currently, there are more than 70,000 school-age children,
5 to 18 years of age, directly affected by the deployment of
Guard or Reserve parents who serve in the Global War on Terror.
The loss of the daily presence of a parent--and parents--in the
home and the worry about the safety of a deployed parent is a
difficult burden for children.
The Committee provides $2,000,000 for Parents as Teachers
Heroes at Home, a parent education and family support program
for young military families. At a time when military families
are increasingly impacted by repeat deployment, demands at home
and the stress of being away, this program brings professional
parenting support and child development information right to
the homes of these young families. The Committee further urges
the Department of allocate up to $4,000,000 to the T.H.A.N.K.S.
USA scholarship program from the additional funds provided for
the family advocacy programs.
The Committee urges the family advocacy program to support
such programs as Our Military Kids, an organization that
provides grants to school-age children (K-12) of deployed and
severely injured National Guard and Reserve personnel to cover
their fees for tutoring, athletic, or fine arts programs, as
well as the Military Child Education Coalition program,
``Living in the Normal''. In addition, the Committee supports
the expansion of ongoing activities that provide counseling,
programs, products and services to help mitigate the disruption
and stress in the military family when a service member is
deployed, killed or seriously-wounded.

CHILDCARE CENTERS

Over the past ten years, the Department has made dramatic
improvements in the management and operation of child
development programs for children aged 6 weeks to 12 years old.
The efforts to improve childcare have been based on the
recognition that those who make up the force are not only
personnel, they are also parents. To perform well under the
stresses of a demanding high operating tempo, service members
should not be preoccupied with the basic well-being of their
families. The stresses of multiple deployments and extended
hours to support longer duty days result in the need for longer
childcare center operating hours. The Committee, therefore,
recommends a total of $606,400,000 for fiscal year 2008, an
increase of $81,600,000 over the budget request, to expand
childcare center operating hours and reduce the number of
children on waiting lists for childcare services.

DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE DEPENDENTS EDUCATION (DODEA)

The Committee believes that DoDEA schools are an important
quality of life issue for military families. Accordingly, the
Committee recommendation for DoDEA provides an increase in
excess of $90,000,000 from comparable fiscal year 2007 program
levels. This significant increase shall support emerging
requirements to replace aging textbooks and consumable
workbooks; reading intervention programs for struggling
readers; special contracts associated with increased student
enrollment resulting from the residential community initiative
at selected bases; teacher development; increased staffing to
support increased enrollment in foreign languages; enhanced
child care programs and child development centers, family
centers and voluntary education centers on the Department's
bases; and temporary classroom construction and outfitting
costs to address the backlog of repair, as well as an increased
need due to troop deployments and school closures.

OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE REPROGRAMMINGS

Beginning in fiscal year 2008, the Committee imposes new
accountability and reprogramming guidelines for programs,
projects and activities within the Operation and Maintenance
appropriations. The Committee believes that such revisions are
necessary given the unique nature of activities funded within
these appropriations, continuing concerns about force
readiness, and recent budget execution within these accounts.
Specifically, the Committee directs:
(1) with respect to service operation and maintenance
accounts, that the Department shall submit prior approval
reprogramming requests to the congressional defense committees
for proposed transfers of funds in excess of $15,000,000, to or
from the levels specified for budget activities. In addition,
the Department should follow prior approval reprogramming
procedures for transfers in excess of $15,000,000 out of the
following budget subactivities:

Army:
Maneuver units
Modular support brigades
Land forces operations support
Force readiness operations support
Land forces depot maintenance
Base operations support
Navy:
Aircraft depot maintenance
Ship depot maintenance
Marine Corps:
Depot maintenance
Air Force:
Primary combat forces
Combat enhancement forces
Combat communications

(2) with respect to Operation and Maintenance, Defense-Wide
(O&M,DW), that proposed transfers of funds to or from the
levels specified for programs, projects or activities in excess
of $10,000,000 or 20 percent, whichever is less, shall be
subject to prior approval reprogramming procedures. For
purposes of the O&M,DW account, a program, project or activity
shall mean any item for which a dollar amount is contained in
an appropriations Act (including joint resolutions providing
continuing appropriations), accompanying reports of the House
and Senate Committees on Appropriations, or accompanying
conference reports and joint explanatory statements of the
committee of conference or specifically identified in the
supplemental material justifying the budget request to the
Committees on Appropriations of the Senate and the House of
Representatives.

OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE BUDGET EXECUTION DATA

The Committee directs the Department of Defense (DoD) to
continue to provide the congressional defense committees with
quarterly budget execution data. Such data should be provided
not later than forty-five days past the close of each quarter
for the fiscal year, and should be provided for each O-1 budget
activity, activity group, and subactivity group for each of the
active, defense-wide, reserve and National Guard components.
For each O-1 budget activity, activity group, and subactivity
group, these reports should include the budget request and
actual obligations; the DoD distribution of unallocated
congressional adjustments to the budget request; all
adjustments made by DoD in establishing Base for Reprogramming
(DD form 1414) report; all adjustments resulting from below
threshold reprogrammings; and all adjustments resulting from
prior approval reprogramming requests. As discussed earlier in
this report, the Committee directs the Department to cease the
reallocation of funds through a re-baselining procedure.

OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE, ARMY

Fiscal year 2007 appropriation........................ $24,208,355,000
Fiscal year 2008 budget request....................... 28,924,973,000
Committee recommendation.............................. 26,404,495,000
Change from budget request............................ -2,520,478,000

The Committee recommends an appropriation of
$26,404,495,000 for Operation and Maintenance, Army. The
recommendation is an increase of $2,196,140,000 above the
amount appropriated for fiscal year 2007 and $2,520,478,000
less than the fiscal year 2008 request.

Program Recommended

The total amount recommended in the bill will provide the
following program in fiscal year 2008:

[GRAPHIC NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]

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

[GRAPHIC NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]

UNJUSTIFIED PROGRAM GROWTH

The Army's re-baselining of funds in fiscal year 2007
resulted in unjustified program growth in its fiscal year 2008
budget request of $1,647,400,000. The Army's fiscal year 2007
budget request for base operating support (BOS) was understated
and did not reflect anticipated costs based on historical
budget execution levels. In order to finance BOS costs in
fiscal year 2007, the Army reduced other O&M programs in 26
subactivity groups and redirected funds to the BOS program via
the ``re-baselining.'' The fiscal year 2008 budget request
reflects funding for BOS based on historical execution levels.
The budget request also increases funding to the 26 subactivity
groups used to finance BOS in fiscal year 2007, but does not
justify or explain the increase from the level executed in
fiscal year 2007. Instead the Congressional justification
material merely notes ``restoral of funds.'' The Army's budget
request is adjusted in those subactivity groups for which there
are not sufficient explanations for funding increases above the
fiscal year 2007 levels.

STATUS OF RESOURCE AND TRAINING SYSTEM

The Committee supports the implementation of the Defense
Readiness Reporting System (DRRS) as the single, capability-
based readiness reporting system for the Department. The DRRS
will be fully operational by October of 2007. The Committee is
concerned that continued use of the Global Status of Resource
and Training System (GSORTS) for unit readiness reporting is
misleading, inaccurate, and inapplicable. Multiple, redundant
readiness systems are both wasteful and undermine the
Department's ability to ensure timely and accurate information.
Furthermore, the Committee believes it is duplicative to expend
funds on other readiness reporting systems that do not meet the
requirements of a capability-based system in light of the many
demands on the resources of the Department.

FACT OF LIFE ADJUSTMENTS

Subsequent to the submission of the fiscal year 2008 budget
request, two Army Prepositioned Sets were provided to support
the increased troop levels in Iraq. The Army will not incur
cost to maintain these sets in 2008. The Committee urges
replenishing the sets as soon as is practicable.

CIVILIAN PERSONNEL STRENGTH

The Army's civilian personnel strength as of April 2007 and
projected through the end of 2008 indicates that the Army's
budget for civilian personnel is overstated by $241,900,000.
The Committee has adjusted funding accordingly.

COMMON LOGISTICS OPERATING ENVIRONMENT

The Committee provides $4,000,000 to implement the Common
Logistics Operating Environment (CLOE) enablers on a Brigade.
This funding will provide capability for ``connecting'' Army
platforms and soldiers to the enterprise and provide the
visibility within the Brigade, thereby providing much needed
situational awareness to the Commander and near real-time
status reporting to the logistician.

SCANNING TECHNOLOGY TO ACCELERATE RESET

The Committee is aware that high OPTEMPO is wearing out
vehicles and aircraft more quickly than expected, and the
Army's organic depots are experiencing a backlog of systems
awaiting reset. The Chief of Staff of the Army has testified
that he is very concerned about the Army's degraded non-
deployed unit readiness. One factor slowing reset efforts is
the frequency of undocumented modifications resulting in slight
differences between vehicles that can add days or weeks to
reset. A program to use laser scanning to determine the exact
composition of each vehicle could potentially reduce reset time
10 to 14 days which will support a 12-month reset turnaround
for each system. The Committee, therefore, has added $2,000,000
for scanning technology to accelerate reset.
While today's military logistics capability is unsurpassed,
it still falls short on delivering the logistics effect of
ensuring the Joint Force Commander's freedom of action. Great
strides have been made in developing, demonstrating, and
fielding effects-based planning and operations capability.
Likewise, significant progress has been made in the logistics
domain in developing condition-based maintenance (CBM+)
concepts and technologies that will lead to a support system
capable of delivering the desired effect. The Committee
recognizes the need to demonstrate a capability integrating
logistics intelligence and operations, and supports $4,000,000
in the Army's Operations and Maintenance account to develop the
common capabilities needed for the conversion of sensor-based
status information with decision support tools necessary to
convert status information to demand messages.

WESTERN HEMISPHERE INSTITUTE FOR SECURITY COOPERATION

The Committee supports the mandate of the Western
Hemisphere Institute for Security Cooperation (the Institute)
to be a transparent and democratic institution. To promote such
transparency and democratic values, the Committee directs the
Institute to release to the public the names of all students
and instructors at the Institute for fiscal years 2005 and
2006. The list shall include all names, including but not
limited to the first, middle, and maternal and paternal
surnames, rank, country of origin, courses taken or taught, and
years of attendance. In all future fiscal years, this same
information shall be made available and provided to the public
no later than 60 days after the end of each fiscal year.

WORKING CAPITAL FUND CASH TRANSFER

The Army Working Capital Fund (AWCF) is a revolving fund
that relies on sales revenue to finance its operations. It is
intended to generate adequate revenue to cover the full costs
of its operations, and to finance the fund's continuing
operations without fiscal year limitation. The AWCF is intended
to operate on a break-even basis over time. Based on an
analysis of cash balance as of May 2007, the AWCF has a cash
balance of $420,000,000 in excess of 10 days of operation. The
Committee, therefore, directs a transfer of $420,000,000 to the
Operation and Maintenance account.

OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE, NAVY

Fiscal year 2007 appropriation........................ $30,954,034,000
Fiscal year 2007 budget request....................... 33,334,690,000
Committee recommendation.............................. 32,851,468,000
Change from budget request............................ -483,222,000
The Committee recommends an appropriation of
$32,851,468,000 for Operation and Maintenance, Navy. The
recommendation is an increase of $1,897,434,000 above the
amount appropriated for fiscal year 2007 and $483,222,000 less
than the fiscal year 2008 request.

Program Recommended

The total amount recommended in the bill will provide the
following program in fiscal year 2008:

[GRAPHICS NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]

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

[GRAPHICS NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]

NAVY SHORE INFRASTRUCTURE TRANSFORMATION

The Committee recommends $4,000,000 to accelerate the Navy
Shore Infrastructure Transformation (NSIT) program. The NSIT
program enables the Navy to identify opportunities to operate
shore installations more effectively and efficiently to support
fleet readiness and surge capability. This funding will allow
promising ideas for improved operations to be tested and
refined in pilot demonstration projects in the Navy Region
Northwest prior to implementing them throughout the Navy.

NPS LABORATORY MODERNIZATION

Modern engineering laboratories are essential to ensure
that the Naval Postgraduate School's (NPS) students can analyze
future warfighting technologies, and gain the education needed
to apply those technologies to meet emerging U.S. defense
requirements. Yet, NPS laboratories are outdated. To address
this issue, the Committee provides an additional $10,000,000
under this heading to modernize NPS's laboratories and related
science and engineering library holdings.

CIVILIAN PERSONNEL STRENGTH

The Navy's civilian personnel strength as of April 2007 and
projected through the end of 2008 indicates that the Navy's
budget for civilian personnel is overstated by $82,000,000.

OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE, MARINE CORPS

Fiscal year 2006 appropriation........................ $3,811,437,000
Fiscal year 2007 budget request....................... 4,961,393,000
Committee recommendation.............................. 4,471,858,000
Change from budget request............................ -489,535,000
The Committee recommends an appropriation of $4,471,858,000
for Operation and Maintenance, Marine Corps. The recommendation
is an increase of $660,421,000 above the amount appropriated
for fiscal year 2007 and $489,535,000 less than the fiscal year
2008 request.

Program Recommended

The total amount recommended in the bill will provide the
following program in fiscal year 2008:

[GRAPHICS NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]

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

[GRAPHICS NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]

RESOURCE REALIGNMENT

The Marine Corps budget request includes $754,335,000 to
support increases in force structure. Based on further analysis
subsequent to the budget submission, the Marine Corps
recommended a realignment of these funds for executablity. The
Committee recommendations reflect that realignment.

OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE, AIR FORCE

Fiscal year 2006 appropriation........................ $30,458,947,000
Fiscal year 2007 budget request....................... 33,655,633,000
Committee recommendation.............................. 31,613,981,000
Change from budget request............................ -2,041,652,000
The Committee recommends an appropriation of
$31,613,981,000 for Operation and Maintenance, Air Force. The
recommendation is an increase of $1,155,034,000 above the
amount appropriated for fiscal year 2007 and $2,041,652,000
less than the fiscal year 2008 request.

Program Recommended

The total amount recommended in the bill will provide the
following program in fiscal year 2008:

[GRAPHICS NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]

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

[GRAPHICS NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]

PORTABLE ILLUMINATION SYSTEM

The Committee notes that ongoing contingency operations
have increased the requirement for illumination systems to
conduct base perimeter security, military police security
lighting, and night vision goggle compatible lighting. Recent
advancements in lighting and battery technology have produced
far more light-weight, effective and affordable alternatives to
the FL-1D floodlight now used by the Air Force to meet these
requirements. Accordingly, the Committee recommends $10,000,000
for the acquisition of portable illumination systems.

CIVILIAN PERSONNEL STRENGTH

The Air Force's civilian personnel strength as of April
2007 and projected through the end of 2008 indicates that the
Air Force's budget request for civilian personnel is overstated
by $163,300,000. The Committee has adjusted funding
accordingly.

WORKING CAPITAL FUND CASH TRANSFER

The Air Force Working Capital Fund (AFWCF) is a revolving
fund that relies on sales revenue to finance its operations. It
is intended to generate adequate revenue to cover the full
costs of its operations, and to finance the fund's continuing
operations without fiscal year limitation. The AFWCF is
intended to operate on a break-even basis over time. Based on
an analysis of cash balance as of May 2007, the AFWCF has a
cash balance of $46,000,000 in excess of 10 days of operation.
The Committee, therefore, directs a transfer $46,000,000 to the
Operation and Maintenance account.

EXCESS ON-ORDER INVENTORY

Recently, the Government Accountability Office reported
that the Air Force could save billions of dollars by
terminating purchases of excess inventory of spare parts on
order. Inventory that is on order is inventory which is not yet
in the government's possession, but for which contracts have
been awarded, or for which funds have been committed. Excess is
inventory that is surplus to customer requirements, safety
levels on hand to cover contract lead-times, and minimum
quantities for essential items. Over the period 2002 to 2005,
the Air Force purchased an average of $1,300,000,000 per year
of excess inventory.

AIR FORCE ON-ORDER INVENTORY IN EXCESS OF REQUIREMENTS
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Fiscal year $ in thousands
------------------------------------------------------------------------
2005................................................. $1,100,000
2004................................................. 1,800,000
2003................................................. 1,500,000
2002................................................. 800,000
------------------------------------------------------------------------

In response to the GAO's findings, the DoD agreed that
opportunities exist to reduce Air Force on-order inventory by
putting measures in place to ensure Air Force inventory
management specialists are following excess on-order
termination procedures. The Committee endorses following excess
on-order termination procedures and reduces funding for the
purchase of inventory in excess of requirements by
$650,000,000.

OVERSTATEMENT OF FACILITIES SUSTAINMENT, RESTORATION AND MAINTENANCE
REQUIREMENTS

The Air Force has overstated Facilities Sustainment,
Restoration and Maintenace (FSRM) requirements by applying
inflation twice; once in revaluing plant replacement value and
a second time when applying OP-32 inflation indices. The
Committee, therefore, reduces the Air Force's request for FSRM
by $108,425,000 to correct for the overstatement.

OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE, DEFENSE-WIDE

Fiscal year 2007 appropriation..................... $20,035,185,000
Fiscal year 2008 budget request.................... 22,574,278,000
Committee recommendation........................... 22,343,180,000
Change from budget request......................... -231,098,000
The Committee recommends an appropriation of
$22,343,180,000, for Operation and Maintenance, Defense-Wide.
The recommendation is a reduction of $231,098,000 from the
budget request, but $2,307,995,000 over the fiscal year 2007
enacted appropriation.

Program Recommended

The total amount recommended in the bill will provide for
the following program in fiscal year 2008:

[GRAPHICS NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]

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

[GRAPHICS NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]

Special Operations Command

The Committee recommendation includes $3,237,640,000 for
the Special Operations Command, Operation and Maintenance
activities, which is $639,901,000 above fiscal year 2007
enacted levels and $40,000,000 below the request. The
reductions include $10,000,000 from Intelligence and
Communications, $10,000,000 from Management and Headquarters
Operations, and a general $20,000,000 reduction based on
previous unobligated balances.

Defense Legal Services Agency

OFFICE OF MILITARY COMMISSIONS

The Committee recommends deferring funding for the Office
of Military Commissions for future consideration. These costs
are solely related to the global war on terror and are more
appropriately considered in that context.

Department of Defense Dependents Education

EXCEPTIONAL FAMILY MEMBER SERVICES

An exceptional family member is a dependent, regardless of
age, who requires medical services for a chronic condition;
receives ongoing services from a specialist; has mental health
concerns, social problems, or psychological needs; or receives
education services provided on an Individual Education Program
or Individual Family Services Plan. In 1995, the Department of
Defense established the Exceptional Family Member Program to
identify and serve those military members with children in need
of special education or medical needs.
At present, over 100,000 children of servicemembers with
some form of disability live on military bases at home and
abroad. Alarmingly over the past several years and just within
the Marine Corps, a several-fold increase in the number of
confirmed cases of autism has occurred. Similar trends in other
conditions, such as attention deficit and hyperactivity
disorders, cerebral palsy and learning disabilities, have
occurred. In any family, these conditions place great stress
and a financial burden on the parents, but in the military
family, the hardship is magnified by separation, deployment and
combat. The Committee, therefore, directs the Secretary to
provide appropriate resource guides and information to military
families, caregivers, education and medical personnel to
improve competency in specialized educational and medical
fields and to improve access to best practices in educational
curricula and programs for special needs dependents.

Defense Security Cooperation Agency

GLOBAL TRAIN AND EQUIP

The Committee has not included $500,000,000 proposed for
the global train and equip program. In authorizing the program
in sections 1206 of the National Defense Act for Fiscal Year
2006 and the John Warner National Defense Authorization Act for
Fiscal Year 2007, the Congress provided the authority to
establish a pilot program, the results of which Congress would
take under advisement when considering or extending training
and equipping authorities in the future. In addition, the
authorization required the President to submit to the Congress
a report on the ability of the Department of State and the
Department of Defense to conduct foreign military assistance
programs. The Congress has not received that report or any
indication when such report will be forthcoming. Accordingly,
since the Administration has failed to comply with existing law
and has deprived the Congress of the full materials needed to
make an informed judgment on the longer-term future of the
proposal, the Committee denies the request for $500,000,000 for
the global train and equip program and defers consideration of
the request until the supplemental.

Defense Security Service

The Committee recommendation includes $422,457,000 for the
Defense Security Service (DSS), an increase of $50,000,000 over
the budget request. The DSS plays a crucial role in
safeguarding our Nation's security by assuring protection of
U.S. and foreign classified information in the possession of
industry. The Committee notes that over the past several years,
DSS experienced significant budget shortfalls, in part due to
insufficient budgeting within the Department, and a six-month
lag between the official budget submission and August rate
adjustments by the Office of Personnel Management (OPM) which
precludes reliable budgeting for the sizable premiums and
surcharges that OPM may charge for each personnel security
investigation. The Committee is not pleased that the Office of
the Secretary underfunded this office's critical baseline
requirements in the fiscal year 2008 budget request, and in
doing so, exacerbated the office's ability to address its
budgetary problems as it has been directed by this Committee in
reports accompanying previous appropriations Acts. To mitigate
the effects of OPM's late notice of charges, the Committee
recommends a provision that provides that DSS shall pay rates
for personnel security investigations in fiscal year 2008 that
are in effect as of August 1, 2006. The additional funds
recommended by the Committee shall be available solely to
address critical funding shortfalls in the DSS baseline that
were unaddressed in the budget request.

Office of the Secretary of Defense

Personnel and Readiness

COMBATANT COMMANDER'S EXERCISE, ENGAGEMENT AND TRAINING TRANSFORMATION
(CE2T2)

As a result of the Quadrennial Defense Review's effort to
realign and consolidate joint exercise programs, the budget
request proposed to create a new program, the combatant
commander's exercise, engagement and training transformation
program within the Office of the Secretary for Defense for
Personnel and Readiness. This consolidation would functionally
transfer funds from existing departmental sources, totaling
$233,641,000, and include the following activities:

Joint National Training Capability
Joint Knowledge Development and Distribution Capability
Joint Assessment and Enabling Capability
Joint Warfighting Center at the U.S. Joint Forces Command
Joint Deployment Training Center
Combatant Command Headquarters Support
Joint Training Information Management System
Joint Training System Specialist Program
Joint Training Facilitator Program

The Committee notes, however, that this proposal does not
fully consolidate all joint training programs. The
consolidation excludes the joint exercise program funded within
the Joint Chiefs of Staff; the services' incremental costs
associated with the joint exercise program; and the services'
joint national training capability. It does contain, however,
the costs associated with the planning of the joint exercise
program by the combatant commanders.
The Committee believes that all joint training programs
should be consolidated to achieve full efficiencies and to
reduce management and administrative costs associated with the
joint training portfolio. Therefore, the Committee fully
consolidates all joint training programs and costs into the
Combatant Commander's Exercise, Engagement and Training
Transformation Program and provides within the Office of the
Secretary of Defense an appropriation of $589,143,000 to be
available solely for these purposes. The Committee's action
reflects the following adjustments:
Budget request........................................ $233,641,000
Recommended transfers:
Joint exercise program, TJS....................... +245,075,000
Services joint national training capability....... +63,600,000
Services joint exercise program incremental costs. +81,827,000
Recommended adjustments:
Anticipated efficiencies and constrained program
growth in............................................
the joint exercise program........................ -35,000,000
TOTAL, CE2T2.......................................... 589,143,000
The Committee directs the Department, in consolidating the
joint training portfolio, not to increase administrative
overhead costs or civilian or military positions associated
with the operation and management of the joint training
portfolio. The Department shall provide to the House and Senate
Committees on Appropriations within 60 days after the enactment
of this Act, an analysis of funds and personnel transferred to
effect the consolidation.

Office of the Deputy Undersecretary of Defense, Comptroller and Chief
Financial Officer

The Committee recommends a total of $41,293,000 for the
Office of the Deputy Undersecretary of Defense, Comptroller and
Chief Financial Officer, an increase of $6,320,000 over fiscal
year 2007 appropriations. The increase provided in this Act
shall be available only for the costs associated with the
recruitment, hiring, training, retention and pay of qualified
professionals in budget execution and formulation, and shall be
expended without regard to internal Department headquarters
personnel ceilings. The Committee notes that the Office has
struggled in fulfilling its mission in budget execution and
fiscal management oversight, and has not been fully responsive
to the Committee. The additional funds provided herein are
intended to address these shortcomings.

Additional Items

CADET AND MIDSHIPMAN SOCIAL REPRESENTATION AND DIVERSITY AT THE SERVICE
ACADEMIES

The Secretary of Defense is directed to conduct a
comprehensive assessment of the recruiting efforts, admissions
policies, graduation rates and career success rates (i.e., the
percentage who graduate from each academy, complete their
initial service obligation, and rank as of the year of the
report) in terms of the social representation, particularly
with regard to race, religion, sex and national origin, at the
service academies. This study should cover the academies'
classes over the last ten years in order to evaluate past
trends and current standings. The Secretary shall provide the
Committee with an action plan detailing ways to improve
diversity and representation among the Nation's service
academies, as appropriate. The report identified herein shall
be submitted to the Committee not later than one year after the
enactment of this Act.

DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE ENERGY SECURITY TASK FORCE

The Committee recognizes the importance of the research and
development of alternative and renewable energy sources within
the Department of Defense (DoD) and believes that the DoD must
make an increased effort to address energy concerns. The
Committee commends the DoD for the establishment of the Defense
Energy Security Task Force and is supportive of the initiatives
that the Task Force has directed the services to undertake.
However, the Committee remains concerned with the overall lack
of support within the DoD to establish aggressive goals and
timelines to achieve increased energy efficiency. The Committee
directs the Defense Energy Security Task Force to provide a
semi-annual report, with the first being delivered no later
than March 1, 2008, to the congressional defense committees on
the initiatives and activities that the DoD has undertaken with
the goal to promote energy savings and energy efficiency across
the Department.

OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE, ARMY RESERVE

Fiscal year 2007 appropriation........................ $2,160,214,000
Fiscal year 2008 budget request....................... 2,508,062,000
Committee recommendation.............................. 2,510,890,000
Change from budget request............................ +2,828,000
The Committee recommends an appropriation of $2,510,890,000
for Operation and Maintenance, Army Reserve. The recommendation
is an increase of $2,828,000 over the budget request and an
increase of $350,676,000 over the fiscal year 2007 enacted
appropriation.

Program Recommended

The total amount recommended in the bill will provide for
the following program in fiscal year 2008:

[GRAPHICS NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]

The adjustments to Operation and Maintenance, Army Reserve,
are shown below:

[GRAPHICS NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]

OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE, NAVY RESERVE

Fiscal year 2007 appropriation........................ $1,275,764,000
Fiscal year 2008 budget request....................... 1,186,883,000
Committee recommendation.............................. 1,144,454,000
Change from budget request............................ -42,429,000
The Committee recommends an appropriation of $1,144,454,000
for Operation and Maintenance, Navy Reserve. The recommendation
is a decrease of $42,429,000 from the budget request and a
decrease of $131,310,000 from the fiscal year 2007 enacted
appropriation.

Program Recommended

The total amount recommended in the bill will provide for
the following program in fiscal year 2008:

[GRAPHICS NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]

The adjustments to Operation and Maintenance, Navy Reserve,
are shown below:

[GRAPHICS NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]

OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE, MARINE CORPS RESERVE

Fiscal year 2007 appropriation........................ $209,036,000
Fiscal year 2008 budget request....................... 208,637,000
Committee recommendation.............................. 207,087,000
Change from budget request............................ -1,550,000
The Committee recommends an appropriation of $207,087,000
for Operation and Maintenance, Marine Corps Reserve. The
recommendation is a decrease of $1,550,000 from the budget
request and a decrease of $1,949,000 from the fiscal year 2007
enacted appropriation.

Program Recommended

The total amount recommended in the bill will provide for
the following program in fiscal year 2008:

[GRAPHICS NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]

The adjustments to Operation and Maintenance, Marine Corps,
Reserve are shown below:

[GRAPHICS NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]

OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE, AIR FORCE RESERVE

Fiscal year 2007 appropriation........................ $2,617,601,000
Fiscal year 2008 budget request....................... 2,692,077,000
Committee recommendation.............................. 2,684,577,000
Change from budget request............................ -7,500,000
The Committee recommends an appropriation of $2,684,577,000
for Operation and Maintenance, Air Force Reserve. The
recommendation is a decrease of $7,500,000 from the budget
request, but $66,976,000 over the fiscal year 2007 enacted
appropriation.

Program Recommended

The total amount recommended in the bill will provide for
the following program in fiscal year 2008:

[GRAPHICS NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]

The adjustments to Operation and Maintenance, Air Force
Reserve, are shown below:

[GRAPHICS NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]

OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE, ARMY NATIONAL GUARD

Fiscal year 2007 appropriation........................ $4,711,362,000
Fiscal year 2008 budget request....................... 5,840,209,000
Committee recommendation.............................. 5,893,843,000
Change from budget request............................ +53,634,000
The Committee recommends an appropriation of $5,893,843,000
for Operation and Maintenance, Army National Guard. The
recommendation is an increase of $53,634,000 from the budget
request and $1,182,481,000 over the fiscal year 2007 enacted
appropriation. The Committee recommendation transfers funds
requested for ``Grow-the-Force'' within the detailed lines as
supported by briefing materials provided during the budget
process and as additional information became available to the
Committee.

Program Recommended

The total amount recommended in the bill will provide for
the following program in fiscal year 2008:

[GRAPHICS NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]

The adjustments to Operation and Maintenance, Army National
Guard, are shown below:

[GRAPHICS NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]

PROCESS REFINEMENT AND IMPLEMENTATION INITIATIVE (PRI)

FOR NATIONAL GUARD JOINT CONUS COMMUNICATIONS

SUPPORT ENVIRONMENT (JCCSE)

The National Guard Bureau has identified Joint CONUS
Communications Support Environment (JCCSE) Communications
Enhancements as one of its top requirements, for which the
Committee recommends $1,600,000. The National Guard Bureau has
stated that funding for furthering the JCCSE Communications
enhancements is essential as it enhances the National Guard's
ability to support and respond under the homeland defense/civil
support mission. The Committee supports the National Guard's
efforts to enhance this technology, including providing an
interface for communications between federal and state agencies
concerning incidents involving homeland defense and disaster
mitigation.

OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE, AIR NATIONAL GUARD

Fiscal year 2007 appropriation........................ $5,009,178,000
Fiscal year 2008 budget request....................... 5,041,965,000
Committee recommendation.............................. 5,021,077,000
Change from budget request............................ -20,888,000
The Committee recommends an appropriation of $5,021,077,000
for Operation and Maintenance, Air National Guard. The
recommendation is a decrease of $20,888,000 below the budget
request, but $11,899,000 over the fiscal year 2007 enacted
appropriation.

Program Recommended

The total amount recommended in the bill will provide for
the following program in fiscal year 2008:

[GRAPHICS NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]

The adjustments to Operation and Maintenance, Air National
Guard, are shown below:

[GRAPHICS NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]

OVERSEAS CONTINGENCY OPERATIONS TRANSFER ACCOUNT

Fiscal year 2007 appropriation........................ - - -
Fiscal year 2008 budget request....................... $5,000,000
Committee recommendation.............................. - - -
Change from budget request............................ -5,000,000
The Committee recommends no funding for the Overseas
Contingency Operations Transfer Account given the account's
unobligated balance. The recommendation is the same as provided
in fiscal year 2007.

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE ARMED FORCES

Fiscal year 2007 appropriation........................ $11,721,000
Fiscal year 2008 budget request....................... 11,971,000
Committee recommendation.............................. 11,971,000
Change from budget request............................ - - -
The Committee recommends an appropriation of $11,971,000
for the United States Court of Appeals for the Armed Forces.
The recommendation is the same level as the budget request and
$250,000 over the fiscal year 2007 enacted appropriation.

ENVIRONMENTAL RESTORATION, ARMY

Fiscal year 2007 appropriation........................ $403,786,000
Fiscal year 2008 budget request....................... 434,879,000
Committee recommendation.............................. 434,879,000
Change from budget request............................ - - -
The Committee recommends an appropriation of $434,879,000
for Environmental Restoration, Army. The recommendation is an
increase of $31,093,000 from the amount appropriated in fiscal
year 2007.

ENVIRONMENTAL RESTORATION, NAVY

Fiscal year 2007 appropriation........................ $302,222,000
Fiscal year 2008 budget request....................... 300,591,000
Committee recommendation.............................. 300,591,000
Change from budget request............................ - - -
The Committee recommends an appropriation of $300,591,000
for Environmental Restoration, Navy. The recommendation is a
decrease of $1,631,000 from the amount appropriated in fiscal
year 2007.

ENVIRONMENTAL RESTORATION, AIR FORCE

Fiscal year 2007 appropriation........................ $402,396,000
Fiscal year 2008 budget request....................... 458,428,000
Committee recommendation.............................. 458,428,000
Change from budget request............................ - - -
The Committee recommends an appropriation of $458,428,000
for Environmental Restoration, Air Force. The recommendation is
an increase of $56,032,000 from the amount appropriated in
fiscal year 2007.

ENVIRONMENTAL RESTORATION, DEFENSE-WIDE

Fiscal year 2007 appropriation........................ $27,885,000
Fiscal year 2008 budget request....................... 12,751,000
Committee recommendation.............................. 12,751,000
Change from budget request............................ - - -
The Committee recommends an appropriation of $12,751,000
for Environmental Restoration, Defense-Wide. The recommendation
is the same level as requested, a decrease of $15,134,000 from
the amount appropriated in fiscal year 2007.

ENVIRONMENTAL RESTORATION, FORMERLY USED DEFENSE SITES

Fiscal year 2007 appropriation........................ $254,352,000
Fiscal year 2008 budget request....................... 250,249,000
Committee recommendation.............................. 268,249,000
Change from budget request............................ +18,000,000
The Committee recommends an appropriation of $268,249,000
for Environmental Restoration, Formerly Used Defense Sites. The
adjustments to the budget for Environmental Restoration,
Formerly Used Defense Sites are shown below:
Restoration of Naval Facility at Centerville Beach.... $3,000,000
Lake Erie/Touissant River Remediation................. 1,000,000
UXO Remediation....................................... 10,000,000
Spring Valley Remediation............................. 4,000,000
OVERSEAS HUMANITARIAN, DISASTER, AND CIVIC AID

Fiscal year 2007 appropriation........................ $63,204,000
Fiscal year 2008 budget request....................... 103,300,000
Committee recommendation.............................. 103,300,000
Change from budget request............................ - - -
The Committee recommends an appropriation of $103,300,000
for Overseas Humanitarian, Disaster, and Civic Aid. The
recommendation is the same as the budget request and is
$40,096,000 over the fiscal year 2007 enacted appropriation.
The recommendation includes $40,000,000 for foreign disaster
relief and emergency response activities, as proposed within
the budget request. However, the Committee recommends that such
funds shall be available until expended and be available solely
for foreign disaster relief and emergency response activities.
The budget request proposed that such funds be available for
two years, the first year of which the funds would be for
emergency response activities, and thereafter for other program
requirements.

FORMER SOVIET UNION THREAT REDUCTION ACCOUNT

Fiscal year 2007 appropriation........................ $372,128,000
Fiscal year 2008 budget request....................... 348,048,000
Committee recommendation.............................. 398,048,000
Change from budget request............................ +50,000,000
The Committee recommendation provides a total of
$398,048,000 for fiscal year 2008, an increase of $50,000,000
over the budget request and $25,920,000 over the fiscal year
2007 enacted appropriation. This program, also referred to as
the Cooperative Threat Reduction Program, is critical to the
national security of the United States and must be a national
priority. The Committee expects that the increased funding
provided in this bill will strengthen and expand existing
cooperative threat reduction programs and enable the Department
to develop new programs and projects.
The following table details the Committee's funding
determinations:
[Dollars in thousands]
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Committee
Major program Budget request recommended
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Strategic offensive arms $77,885 $92,885
elimination (R)..................
Nuclear weapons storage security 22,988 39,640
(R)..............................
Nuclear weapons transportation 37,700 37,700
security (R).....................
Chemical weapons destruction (R).. -- 1,000
Biological threat reduction (FSU). 144,489 144,489
WMD proliferation prevention (FSU) 37,986 47,986
Defense and military contacts 8,000 8,000
(FSU)............................
Other assessments/administrative 19,000 19,348
costs............................
New initiatives................... -- 7,000
-------------------------------------
Total......................... 348,048 398,048
------------------------------------------------------------------------

STRATEGIC OFFENSIVE ARMS ELIMINATION (RUSSIA)

The Committee recommends an additional $15,000,000 over the
budget request for elimination of two Delta III submarines and
associated SS-N-18 missiles in Russia.

NUCLEAR WEAPONS STORAGE FACILITY (RUSSIA)

The Committee recommends a total of $39,640,000 for nuclear
weapons storage facility, an increase of $16,652,000 over the
request to accelerate nuclear warhead security work pursuant to
the Bratislava Agreement. The Russian Ministry of Defense
requested and the United States Government concurred in March
2007 with the expressed need for phase II to the Automated
Inventory Control and Management System. The first phase of the
program was built and fielded under the NWSS-Russia program.
The Department initiated this program in fiscal year 2007 with
direction to complete installation concurrent with completion
of storage site security upgrades. Phase II will install a
capability to automate the warhead and component inventories at
13 additional storage sites, bringing the total number of
storage sites with this capability to 29, and will include
replacing the old computers at the original sites. The
Committee recommendation provides funding to complete the
installation in fiscal year 2008.

CHEMICAL WEAPONS DESTRUCTION (RUSSIA)

Recently, the Department of Defense and the Government of
Russia signed an agreement transferring responsibility for the
completion of the Shchuch'ye chemical weapons destruction
project to the Russia government. This agreement recognizes
that any funding required over the current budget would be
borne by Russia. The Committee notes, however, that minor
related issues remain to be addressed by the parties and that
the Department must maintain a strong commitment to the
project's completion; maintain vigilant oversight of the
project; and report project developments to the relevant
congressional committees. For these remaining activities, the
Committee recommends $1,000,000 in fiscal year 2008.

WMD PROLIFERATION PREVENTION (FORMER SOVIET UNION)

The Committee recommends an additional $10,000,000 for the
Kazakhstan infrastructure project, for which funding
requirements were not known at the time of the budget
preparation.

NEW INITIATIVES

Within the funds provided, the Committee includes
$7,000,000 for new initiatives outside the scope of existing
programs and projects for the cooperative threat reduction
program to increase international security and threat reduction
cooperation, and security and elimination of nuclear and
chemical weapons and weapons-related materials that pose a
threat to United States' national security interests. The
Committee directs the Department to work closely with the
relevant congressional committees in identifying and
determining new avenues to pursue. The Committee recommendation
also includes an additional $348,000 to increase staff
capacity, capabilities and resources associated with the
development of new cooperative threat reduction initiatives.
The funding is allocated within resources provided for other
assessments and administrative costs.

UNOBLIGATED BALANCES FROM PRIOR YEARS

The Committee has learned that the Department continues to
carry balances of no-year appropriations made as far back as
fiscal year 1994. While the Department has plans to execute
some of these balances in fiscal year 2008, the Committee
directs program managers to expend these appropriations
expeditiously on current program requirements or risk a
rescission of those balances.
TITLE III

PROCUREMENT

The fiscal year 2008 Department of Defense procurement
budget request totals $99,623,010,000. The accompanying bill
recommends $99,608,169,000. The total amount recommended is a
decrease of $14,841,000 below the fiscal year 2008 budget
estimate and is $18,697,413,000 above the total provided for
fiscal year 2007. The table below summarizes the budget
estimates and the Committee's recommendations.

[GRAPHICS NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]

GROW-THE-ARMY AND MARINE CORPS

The President's budget request for fiscal year 2008
includes funding for additional personnel and equipment in
recognition of threats to U.S. security beyond the war on
terror in Iraq and Afghanistan. The budget request includes
funds to increase force structure in both the Army and Marine
Corps. Army Active Duty permanent end-strength will grow by
7,000 annually starting in fiscal year 2008, until reaching a
total increase of 65,000 by fiscal year 2012. The number of
Active Army Brigade Combat Teams will increase from 42 to 48 by
fiscal year 2012. Marine Corps end-strength will grow annually
by 5,000 starting in fiscal year 2008 until reaching a total
increase of 27,000 by fiscal year 2011. The budget request for
the Army procurement accounts includes a total of
$4,083,799,000 to support equipment requirements to grow the
new Army structure. The funding was placed in five large
undistributed lines with specific detailed requirements for the
spreading of those funds to other lines provided to the
Committee in various briefing materials. The Marine Corps
funding for incremental equipment requirements totaled
$2,211,625,000, also listed in several large lines in the
initial budget justification documents, with a detailed line
item spread provided later. The Committee transfers funds to
the detailed lines per the Army and Marine Corps briefing
materials provided at the beginning of the budget review
process. Additional changes have been made in various line
items as the budget review process proceeded and additional
information became available to the Committee. Detailed changes
are displayed in the tables for each appropriation account. In
a number of lines, funding appears to have been requested for
the entire Grow-the-Force requirement despite the fact that new
units will be formed over the time frame 2008 to 2012. The
Committee cautions against funding ahead of need and encourages
the Department of Defense to carefully align funding and
procurement of additional equipment with the schedule for
forming and outfitting new units.

JOINT STRIKE FIGHTER PRODUCTION

In the fiscal year 2008 budget request, the Air Force
proposes funding for the procurement of six conventional take-
off and landing (CTOL) aircraft and the Navy requested funding
for procurement of six short take-off and vertical landing
(STOVL) aircraft. The Committee believes that the development
and production of the Joint Strike Fighter is at a critical
period in the program's history. Aircraft AA-1 has completed
the first phase of flight test, production of development
aircraft is ramping up, and all nine of the international
partners have signed production memoranda of understanding. In
addition, the first flight of BF-1, the first of the flight
test short take-off and vertical landing (STOVL) variants, is
scheduled for next year. However, as the program matures,
assembly of the development aircraft continues to slip from
last year's schedule which raises questions about the ability
of the contractor to meet delivery schedules for the subsequent
production lots. The Committee also notes that the first flight
of BF-1 is a major milestone decision tied to the contract
award for the fiscal year 2008 funds. A slip in the first
flight of just a few months could push the contract award into
fiscal year 2009, making the funds requested early-to-need.
While the Committee continues to be concerned about
mounting delays in the production of the development aircraft
and the potential for BF-l first flight to be delayed, the Air
Force and the contractor have made commitments that they will
be able to produce and deliver aircraft on the current
schedule. The Committee expects they will keep these
commitments. At this time, any reductions in procurement
quantities would cause serious perturbations in the program,
with impacts extending into future years. The Committee
believes this is a critical time for the program and in an
effort to provide support and stability, the Committee fully
funds the request for production of these aircraft.

ACQUISITION AND MANAGEMENT OF UNMANNED AERIAL SYSTEMS

The Committee notes that for some time a debate has been
ongoing within the Department of Defense on the acquisition and
management of unmanned aerial systems. The numbers and types of
unmanned aerial systems has risen steadily since the beginning
of the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan with missions expanding
from reconnaissance to logistics, to communications relay, and
to direct attack. Systems have become more capable and have
been better integrated into overall military operations. Part
of the growth in utility and combat effectiveness can be
attributed to the diverse creative talents of the various
military services and defense agencies. Conversely,
opportunities for improved efficiency and interoperability can
be lost in service centric approaches to acquiring and
employing unmanned air systems. The Committee is aware that the
Chief of Staff of the Air Force is seeking designation of the
Department of the Air Force as executive agent for medium- and
high-altitude unmanned aerial systems. The Committee is equally
aware of the unanimous opposition of the other services to the
Air Force proposal. A careful analysis of unmanned aerial
systems acquisition and management by the Office of the Joint
Chiefs of Staff and the Office of the Secretary of Defense is
warranted. The Committee strongly cautions against any changes
in current acquisition and operating arrangements pertaining to
unmanned aerial systems until such time as the analysis is
complete and the congressional defense committees have been
briefed on any proposed changes.

MILITARY TIRES

The Committee understands that the Base Realignment and
Closure Act of 2005 required Commodity Management Privatization
of tires. The initiative would eliminate redundant supply
operations, improve supply system responsiveness, and seek cost
benefits through economies of scale in tire purchases. The
Committee also understands that a single company was awarded
the contract for aircraft tires and that company is on the
winning team for ground vehicle tires. The Committee applauds
well managed efforts by the Department of Defense to reduce
costs and simultaneously improve support to military units in
all branches of the military. The Committee is concerned,
however, that the current contracting arrangement requires a
very carefully crafted set of firewalls to ensure that the
contractor selected to be responsible for day-to-day management
of the military tires programs under the Commodity Management
Privatization initiative will not receive an unfair advantage
in competing for contracts to provide tires to the centrally
managed program. The Committee strongly encourages the
Department of Defense, through its implementing agencies, in
future competitions, to enhance oversight and avoid both unfair
advantages and the appearance of unfair advantages by seeking a
program management contractor who would not be a competitor to
provide tires under the tire privatization initiative.

RESET AND MODERNIZATION

The Committee is concerned with improving accountability
and oversight of funding provided to the military departments
for equipment modernization, reset and recapitalization.
Accordingly, the Committee directs that within 60 days of
enactment of this Act, the Secretary of Defense shall provide
to the congressional defense committees a report outlining the
assumptions underlying the estimates of reset requirements to
repair and replace equipment that is worn out or lost in
combat. The report shall explain how recapitalization and
upgrade requirements are related to war needs rather than
ongoing modernization.

SPECIAL INTEREST ITEMS

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

REPROGRAMMING GUIDANCE FOR ACQUISITION ACCOUNTS

The Committee directs the Department of Defense to continue
to follow the reprogramming guidance specified in the report
accompanying the House version of the fiscal year 2006
Department of Defense Appropriations Bill (H.R. 109-119).
Specifically, the dollar threshold for reprogramming funds will
remain at $20,000,000 for procurement, and $10,000,000 for
research, development, test and evaluation. The Department
shall continue to follow the limitation that prior approval
reprogrammings are set at either the specified dollar threshold
or 20 percent of the procurement or research, development, test
and evaluation line, whichever is less. These thresholds are
cumulative. Therefore, if the combined value of transfers into
or out of a procurement (P-1) or research, development, test
and evaluation (R-1) line exceeds the identified threshold, the
Department of Defense must submit a prior approval
reprogramming to the congressional defense committees. In
addition, guidelines on the application of prior approval
reprogramming procedures for congressional special interest
items are established elsewhere in this report.

REPROGRAMMING REPORTING REQUIREMENTS

The Committee directs the Under Secretary of the Department
of Defense, Comptroller, to continue to provide the
congressional defense committees quarterly, spreadsheet-based
DD 1416 reports for service and defense-wide accounts in titles
III and IV of this Act as required in the statement of the
managers accompanying the Conference report on the Department
of Defense Appropriations Act, 2006.

FUNDING INCREASES

The Committee directs that the funding increases outlined
in these tables shall be provided only for the specific
purposes indicated in the tables.

CLASSIFIED ANNEX

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

AIRCRAFT PROCUREMENT, ARMY

Fiscal year 2007 appropriation........................ $3,502,483,000
Fiscal year 2008 budget request....................... 4,179,848,000
Committee recommendation.............................. 3,891,539,000
Change from budget request............................ -288,309,000
This appropriation finances acquisition of tactical and
utility airplanes and helicopters, including associated
electronics, electronic warfare equipment for in-service
aircraft, ground support equipment, components and parts such
as spare engines, transmission gear boxes, and sensor
equipment. It also funds related training devices such as
combat flight simulators and production base support.
The Committee recommends an appropriation of $3,891,539,000
for Aircraft Procurement, Army, which is $389,056,000 more than
the amount provided in fiscal year 2007 and $288,309,000 less
than the request for fiscal year 2008.

Program Recommended

The total amount recommended in the bill will provide the
following program in fiscal year 2008:

[GRAPHICS NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]

The adjustments to the budget activities for Aircraft
Procurement, Army, are shown below:

[GRAPHICS NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]

ARMED RECONNAISSANCE HELICOPTER

The fiscal year 2008 budget request included $468,259,000
for procurement of 37 Armed Reconnaissance Helicopters (ARH).
On March 21, 2007, the ARH program office released a stop-work
order as a result of an estimated over target baseline greater
than 50 percent development cost growth and low-rate initial
production pricing disagreements. The contractor was given 30
days to submit a plan which describes the strategy to maximize
the contract performance at minimal cost to the Government and
convince the Army it could complete the contract as intended.
Following an Army Systems Acquisition Review Council on May 18,
2007, the Army decided to continue with the current contractor
and the contractor's revised plan. The Army plan included a
program delay of approximately one year with first unit
equipped date slipping from the 4th quarter of fiscal year 2009
to the 4th quarter of fiscal year 2010. The Committee remains
supportive of the Army's effort to field a replacement to the
current armed scout helicopter. However, the Committee cautions
the Army against overly optimistic product-development and
integration assumptions and encourages greater attention to
risk management. The Committee recommendation provides no
additional procurement funds to the Armed Reconnaissance
Helicopter program; transfers $47,000,000 to Research,
Development, Test and Evaluation, Army for the Armed
Reconnaissance Helicopter program; and transfers $31,000,000 to
the OH-58D program for procurement of equipment necessary to
sustain the continued service of the Kiowa Warrior fleet.

JOINT CARGO AIRCRAFT

The Committee recommends $119,443,000 for Joint Cargo
Aircraft instead of $157,043,000 as proposed in the budget
request. The Committee remains fully supportive of the Joint
Cargo Aircraft program but understands that a source selection
award protest has been filed which will delay the program
between six months and one year. The recommended fiscal year
2008 funding will support three aircraft and an orderly ramp-up
in production.

LIGHT UTILITY HELICOPTER

The Committee is concerned that the Army Program Objective
Memorandum (POM) 2008 acquisition schedule does not provide a
stable production profile for the Light Utility Helicopter, and
does not capitalize on the successful performance of this
program. A more rapid and stable procurement plan will fill the
Army's urgent requirement sooner by retiring aging and
expensive H-1s and H-58s sooner and thus making available H-60
Blackhawks for the global war on terror and other contingency
operations sooner. In addition, the Army will realize
operational cost savings. The Committee strongly encourages the
Department of Defense to address the programmatic acquisition
dips in the POM 2008 funding and place the Light Utility
Helicopter program on a more rapid and stable production
profile.

MISSILE PROCUREMENT, ARMY

Fiscal year 2007 appropriation........................ $1,278,967,000
Fiscal year 2008 budget request....................... 1,645,485,000
Committee recommendation.............................. 2,103,102,000
Change from budget request............................ +457,617,000
This appropriation finances the acquisition of surface-to-
air, surface-to-surface, air-to-surface, and anti-tank/assault
missile systems. Also included are major components,
modifications, targets, test equipment and production base
support.
The Committee recommends an appropriation of $2,103,102,000
for Missile Procurement, Army, which is $824,135,000 more than
the amount provided in fiscal year 2007 and $457,617,000 more
than the request for fiscal year 2008.

Program Recommended

The total amount recommended in the bill will provide the
following program in fiscal year 2008:

[GRAPHICS NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]

The adjustments to the budget activities for Missile
Procurement, Army, are shown below:

[GRAPHICS NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]

PROCUREMENT OF WEAPONS AND TRACKED COMBAT VEHICLES, ARMY

Fiscal year 2007 appropriation........................ $1,906,368,000
Fiscal year 2008 budget request....................... 3,089,998,000
Committee recommendation.............................. 4,077,189,000
Change from budget request............................ +987,191,000
This appropriation finances the acquisition of tanks;
personnel and cargo carriers; fighting vehicles; tracked
recovery vehicles; self-propelled and towed howitzers; machine
guns; mortars; modification of in-service equipment, initial
spares; and production base support.
The Committee recommends an appropriation of $4,077,189,000
for Procurement of Weapons and Tracked Combat Vehicles, Army,
which is $2,170,821 more than the amount provided in fiscal
year 2007 and $987,191,000 more than the request for fiscal
year 2008.

Program Recommended

The total amount recommended in the bill will provide the
following program in fiscal year 2008:

[GRAPHICS NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]

The adjustments to the budget activities for Procurement of
Weapons and Tracked Combat Vehicles, Army, are shown below:

[GRAPHICS NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]

STRYKER

The Committee commends the Army for the overall success of
the Stryker program. Strykers have performed well in combat,
demonstrating reliability and survivability. The Committee
understands that the schedule for the Initial Operational Test
and Evaluation for the Stryker Mobile Gun System (MGS) was
delayed from the second quarter of fiscal year 2007 to the
first quarter of fiscal year 2008 due to a change in designated
test units. Full rate production is to begin in the second
quarter of fiscal year 2008. As such, the Committee recommends
$810,884,000 in base line funding for Stryker, a reduction of
$228,100,000 based on the delay in Mobile Gun System testing
and production.
Additionally, the Committee has been informed that
additional Stryker units would greatly benefit the Army's
overall combat power, deployability, flexibility and
sustainability. The Committee notes that one of the Army's
unfunded requirements for fiscal year 2008 is for additional
Strykers for various purposes including for maintenance floats
and for certain missions in non-Stryker units. However, the
Committee believes that the greatest increase in overall Army
readiness can be gained by adding a Stryker brigade to the Army
force structure. Accordingly, the Committee recommends an
additional $1,102,000,000 to procure an Eighth Army Stryker
brigade, less the Mobile Gun Systems. The Committee directs the
Secretary of the Army to provide a report to the congressional
defense committees, not later than December 1, 2007, on the
future force structure of the Army, including the Grow-the-Army
combat and support units, and the allocation of the Eighth
Stryker brigade in the total Army force structure.

PROCUREMENT OF AMMUNITION, ARMY

Fiscal year 2007 appropriation........................ $1,719,879,000
Fiscal year 2008 budget request....................... 2,190,576,000
Committee recommendation.............................. 2,215,976,000
Change from budget request............................ +25,400,000
This appropriation finances the acquisition of ammunition,
modification of in-service stock, and related production base
support including the maintenance, expansion, and modernization
of industrial facilities and equipment.
The Committee recommends an appropriation of $2,215,976,000
for Procurement of Ammunition, Army, which is $496,097,000 more
than the amount provided in fiscal year 2007 and $25,400,000
more than the request for fiscal year 2008.

Program Recommended

The total amount recommended in the bill will provide the
following program in fiscal year 2008:

[GRAPHICS NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]

The adjustments to the budget activities for Procurement of
Ammunition, Army, are shown below:

[GRAPHICS NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]

OTHER PROCUREMENT, ARMY

Fiscal year 2007 appropriation........................ $7,004,914,000
Fiscal year 2008 budget request....................... 12,647,099,000
Committee recommendation.............................. 11,217,945,000
Change from budget request............................ -1,429,154,000
This appropriation finances the acquisition of (a) tactical
and commercial vehicles, including trucks, semi-trailers, and
trailers of all types to provide mobility and utility support
to field forces and the worldwide logistical system; (b)
communications and electronic equipment of all types to provide
fixed, semi-fixed, and mobile strategic and tactical
communications; and (c) other support equipment, generators and
power units, material handling equipment, medical support
equipment, special equipment for user testing, and non-system
training devices. In each of these activities, funds are also
included for the modification of in-service equipment,
investment spares and repair parts, and production base
support.
The Committee recommends an appropriation of
$11,217,945,000 for Other Procurement, Army, which is
$4,213,031,000 more than the amount provided in fiscal year
2007 and $1,429,154,000 less than the request for fiscal year
2008.

Program Recommended

The total amount recommended in the bill will provide the
following program in fiscal year 2008:

[GRAPHICS NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]

The adjustments to the budget activities for Other
Procurement, Army, are shown below:

[GRAPHICS NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]

BRIDGE TO FUTURE NETWORKS

On March 5, 2007, congressional notification was made of a
Nunn-McCurdy cost growth breach for the Warfighter Information
Network--Tactical (WIN-T). On June 5, 2007, the Under Secretary
of Defense for Acquisition, Technology and Logistics provided
to the Congress certification that the WIN-T program satisfied
the requirements for continuation. The WIN-T program was
restructured to absorb the Joint Network Node (JNN) program as
an Acquisition Category 1D Major Defense Acquisition Program.
The restructured WIN-T program consists of four progressively
more capable increments. The budget request for fiscal year
2008 included $433,526,000 for Bridge to Future Networks in the
base request, with an additional $65,562,000 requested for Grow
the Army, for a total request of $499,088,000. The funds were
allocated as follows: $126,742,000 for Area Common User System
modernization; and $372,346,000 for procurement of JNN. The
Army has reevaluated JNN procurement requirements and has
requested that $134,000,000 be transferred to Research,
Development, Test and Evaluation, Army, Line 67, for WIN-T
program stabilization. The Committee supports this transfer and
provides a total of $368,088,000 procurement funding for Bridge
to Future Networks.

JOINT HIGH SPEED VESSEL

The Committee recommends $76,000,000 in procurement funding
for the Joint High Speed Vessel program instead of $210,000,000
as proposed in the budget request. The Committee understands
that the program requires $60,000,000 for detailed design, and
$16,000,000 for long lead items in fiscal year 2008. The
remainder of the funding is not needed until vessel
construction begins in fiscal year 2009.

HMMWV

The Army's base budget request of $596,627,000, plus
$389,782,000 for Grow the Army requirements, totals
$986,409,000 for HMMWVs. Virtually all the HMMWVs requested
will be armored variants. The Committee understands that the
driving characteristics and emergency egress procedures for the
Up-Armored HMMWV are vastly different from an un-armored
vehicle. The Committee strongly encourages the Army to provide
Up-Armored HMMWVs for home station training once the needs of
deployed units have been met. The Committee recommends total
funding for HMMWVs of $987,409,000, which includes an
additional $1,000,000 for Vehicle Emergency Escape Windows.

HEAVY EXPANDED MOBILE TACTICAL TRUCK EXTENDED SERVICE PROGRAM

The Committee recommendation includes $107,499,000 for the
Heavy Expanded Mobile Tactical Truck Extended Service Program,
instead of $197,499,000 as proposed in the budget request. The
Committee believes that additional Heavy Expanded Mobile
Tactical Truck Extended Service Program requirements are more
properly considered as part of the Global War on Terror
supplemental request.

NIGHT VISION THERMAL WEAPONS SIGHT

The Committee recommendation includes $308,024,000 for
Night Vision Thermal Weapons Sights instead of $333,024,000 as
proposed in the base budget request plus Grow-the-Army
requirements. The Committee believes that $25,000,000 of the
$230,607,000 base budget request is more properly considered as
part of the Global War on Terror supplemental request.

TACTICAL OPERATIONS CENTERS

The budget request includes $393,883,000 for Tactical
Operations Centers in the base request. The Committee
recommends funding of $197,883,000, a reduction of
$196,000,000. The Committee notes that an additional
$263,709,000 is included for Tactical Operations Centers in the
global war on terror supplemental request. The Committee
understands that the Army's Command Post Platform program
provides much needed improvements and standardization to the
Army's tactical command posts. The Command Post Platform
fielding will ensure that all tactical Army units share similar
command and control capabilities, are interoperable, and more
easily deployed and supported. The Committee supports the
Army's efforts to field a standardized command post
configuration to the active and reserve components of the Army.
The Committee recommendation will ensure a program which, when
combined with supplemental funds, will ensure prompt fielding
to deploying units and a steady fielding program for non-
deployed units.

FIELD MEDICAL EQUIPMENT LINE

The fiscal year 2008 budget request included $20,000,000 in
Other Procurement, Army for the new combat support hospital
capabilities and field medical systems. The Committee believes
that $20,000,000 for medical field systems is more properly
considered as part of the Global War on Terror supplemental
request.

AIRCRAFT PROCUREMENT, NAVY

Fiscal year 2007 appropriation........................ $10,393,316,000
Fiscal year 2008 budget request....................... 12,747,767,000
Committee recommendation.............................. 12,470,280,000
Change from budget request............................ -277,487,000
This appropriation provides funds for the procurement of
aircraft and related support equipment and programs; flight
simulators; equipment to modify in-service aircraft to extend
their service life, eliminate safety hazards and improve
aircraft operational effectiveness; and spare parts and ground
support equipment for all end items procured by this
appropriation.
The Committee recommends an appropriation of
$12,470,280,000 for Aircraft Procurement, Navy, which is
$2,076,964,000 more than the amount provided in fiscal year
2007 and $277,487,000 less than the request for fiscal year
2008.

Program Recommended

The total amount recommended in the bill will provide the
following program in fiscal year 2008:

[GRAPHICS NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]

The adjustments to the budget activities for Aircraft
Procurement, Navy, are shown below:

[GRAPHICS NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]

UH-1Y/AH-1Z

The UH-1Y/AH-1Z budget request for fiscal year 2008 was
submitted prior to the approval of the fiscal year 2007
supplemental appropriation that approved a ``new build''
strategy and funding for the AH-1Z aircraft. The new build
strategy allows aircraft to remain in the fleet during the
manufacture of the new aircraft vice having to downsize the
fleet during the remanufacture of aircraft. The aircraft in the
fiscal year 2008 budget that would have been inducted into the
remanufacture line can now be left in the fleet until replaced
by new build aircraft in the future, allowing the cost of these
remanufactured aircraft to be allocated towards higher
priorities. Therefore, no funding is provided for the
remanufacture of AH-1Z aircraft, a reduction of $104,000,000. A
total of $414,475,000 remains available for the UH-1Y/AH-1Z
program.

E-2D

The budget request contains $57,275,000 toward the purchase
of advance procurement items for the construction of three
fiscal year 2009 E-2D Advanced Hawkeye aircraft. However,
$4,700,000 of this material can be delivered within the
lifetime of the Aircraft Procurement, Navy appropriation of
thirty-six months, thus being inappropriate to fund with
advance procurement funds. These items should be considered in
the fiscal year 2009 budget review, the full funding year of
these E-2D aircraft. Therefore, the Committee recommendation
provides funding in the amount of $52,575,000 for the
procurement of long lead items for the fiscal year 2009
Advanced Hawkeye aircraft, a decrease of $4,700,000.

VERTICAL TAKE-OFF UNMANNED AERIAL VEHICLE

The Vertical Take-off Unmanned Aerial Vehicle (VTUAV) will
provide real-time Intelligence, Surveillance and Reconnaissance
(ISR) data to tactical users without the use of manned aircraft
or national assets. The VTUAV program will initially satisfy
mission requirements for the Littoral Combat Ship (LCS).
However, the LCS program is experiencing significant program
delays and only three of the six ships appropriated through
fiscal year 2007 will actually be constructed. With this
slowdown in the LCS program, the Committee believes it is
prudent to slow the procurement of LCS-associated equipment and
therefore provides no funding for the three VTUAV aircraft (and
associated support equipment) requested in the budget.

F-18 SERIES

The request includes funding for the procurement of forty
structural life management plan (SLMP) modification kits within
operational safety improvement program (OSIP) number 11-99.
These kits have a 24-month lead time to delivery. Ten of these
kits are being purchased ahead of need as they will not be
installed until fiscal year 2011, which is well beyond the
stated 24-month delivery time. Therefore, the Committee
recommendation provides funding for the 30 modification kits
that will be installed in fiscal year 2010.

P-3 SERIES

The request includes funding for the procurement of twenty-
seven special structural inspection kits (within Operational
Safety Improvement Program number 005-05). The budget request
also contains installation funding in the amount of $20,000,000
for a portion of these kits when the kits themselves will not
deliver until fiscal year 2009. Since the kits cannot be
installed until they actually deliver, this installation
funding is budgeted ahead of need and the Committee
recommendation provides no installation funding for them.

SPARES

The request includes funding in the amount of $85,000,000
for the procurement of spares for the F-35 Joint Strike
Fighter. Fiscal year 2008 marks the initial procurement year
for the Marine Corps variant of the aircraft and hinges on a
flight test currently scheduled to occur late in the fiscal
year. Although spares funding typically is budgeted in lockstep
with the procurement of the aircraft, in this case the
Committee believes procurement of JSF spares is premature due
to the fact that the aircraft procurement contract will not be
awarded until late in the year. Therefore, the Committee
provides no funding for the procurement of F-35 spares.

WEAPONS PROCUREMENT, NAVY

Fiscal year 2007 appropriation........................ $2,573,820,000
Fiscal year 2008 budget request....................... 3,084,387,000
Committee recommendation.............................. 2,928,126,000
Change from budget request............................ -156,261,000
This appropriation provides funds for the procurement of
strategic and tactical missiles, target drones, torpedoes,
guns, associated support equipment, and modification of in-
service missiles, torpedoes, and guns.
The Committee recommends an appropriation of $2,928,126,000
for Weapons Procurement, Navy, which is $354,306,000 more than
the amount provided in fiscal year 2007 and $156,261,000 less
than the request for fiscal year 2008.

Program Recommended

The total amount recommended in the bill will provide the
following program in fiscal year 2008:

[GRAPHICS NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]

The adjustments to the budget activities for Weapons
Procurement, Navy, are shown below:

[GRAPHICS NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]

CONVENTIONAL TRIDENT MODIFICATION

The Conventional Trident Modification (CTM) effort is being
proposed by the Navy and Department of Defense as the quickest
near term solution to the prompt global strike concept. All
told, the Navy is requesting $175,434,000 for the CTM effort,
$36,000,000 of which is funded in Weapons Procurement, Navy for
the procurement of missile hardware, $13,000,000 in Other
Procurement, Navy for the procurement of platform
modifications, and the balance of $126,434,000 in Research,
Development, Test and Evaluation, Navy for development efforts.
The Committee understands that the technologies being developed
for the CTM are in large part transferable to other prompt
global strike initiatives. Therefore, in an effort to explore
all options of prompt global strike in the most efficient
manner, the Department of Defense is directed to create a
prompt global strike program element within the Research,
Development, Test, and Evaluation, Defense-Wide appropriation.
This new program element will be under the cognizance of the
Director, Defense Research and Engineering. The Committee
provides $100,000,000 for this new program element for the
development of such technologies as propulsion and guidance
systems, mission planning, re-entry vehicle design, modeling
and simulation efforts, and launch system infrastructure. These
efforts will further the Department's prompt global strike
initiative while not limiting the Nation to a single option at
this early stage in the concept, but still allowing for the CTM
option or other such options like Advanced Hypersonic Weapon in
the near future. Additionally, the Department of Defense is
directed to submit a report to the Committee that discusses the
technology thrusts and investment objectives and outlines the
allocation of funding towards achieving these objectives. This
report shall be submitted no later than January 31, 2008.

ADVANCED ANTI-RADIATION GUIDED MISSILE

The Advanced Anti-Radiation Guided Missile (AARGM) is being
developed to upgrade the legacy AGM-88 High-speed Anti-
Radiation Missile (HARM) with multi-mode guidance and targeting
capability. The Navy has requested fiscal year 2008 funding for
missiles that will be used in the test program as well as
$41,302,000 for the first run of low rate initial production
(LRIP) missiles. The contract award for the LRIP missiles is
predicated on the successful completion of an aggressive
developmental testing program. This program structure exhibits
the classic program concurrency that the Committee sees all too
often throughout the Department of Defense. To reduce program
concurrency, the Committee provides no funds for the AARGM LRIP
missiles and their associated spares.

PROCUREMENT OF AMMUNITION, NAVY AND MARINE CORPS

Fiscal year 2007 appropriation........................ $767,314,000
Fiscal year 2008 budget request....................... 760,484,000
Committee recommendation.............................. 1,067,484,000
Change from budget request............................ +307,000,000
This appropriation finances the acquisition of ammunition,
ammunition modernization, and ammunition-related material for
the Navy and Marine Corps.
The Committee recommends an appropriation of $1,067,484,000
for Procurement of Ammunition, Navy and Marine Corps, which is
$300,170,000 more than the amount provided in fiscal year 2007
and $307,000,000 more than the request for fiscal year 2008.

Program Recommended

The total amount recommended in the bill will provide the
following program in fiscal year 2008:

[GRAPHICS NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]

The adjustments to the budget activities for Procurement of
Ammunition, Navy and Marine Corps, are shown below:

[GRAPHICS NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]

SHIPBUILDING AND CONVERSION, NAVY

Fiscal year 2007 appropriation........................ $10,579,125,000
Fiscal year 2008 budget request....................... 13,656,120,000
Committee recommendation.............................. 15,303,820,000
Change from budget request............................ +1,647,700,000
This appropriation provides funds for the construction of
new ships and the purchase and conversion of existing ships,
including hull, mechanical and electrical equipment,
electronics, guns, torpedo and missile launching systems, and
communication systems.
The Committee recommends an appropriation of
$15,303,820,000 for Shipbuilding and Conversion, Navy, which is
$4,724,695,000 more than the amount provided in fiscal year
2007 and $1,647,700,000 more than the request for fiscal year
2008.

Program Recommended

The total amount recommended in the bill will provide the
following program in fiscal year 2008:

[GRAPHICS NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]

The adjustments to the budget activities for Shipbuilding
and Conversion, Navy, are shown below:

[GRAPHICS NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]

SHIPBUILDING

The Committee is extremely concerned with the current state
of the Navy shipbuilding program. The Littoral Combat Ship
(LCS), which will comprise nearly twenty percent of the 313
ship Navy, has experienced significant cost growth and delays,
and the Navy has decreased its near term LCS quantities by
three ships, just since the submission of the fiscal year 2008
budget. The Committee is fearful that if the same type of
growth is realized on the DDG-1000 and carrier replacement
programs, the shipbuilding program will be put in greater
peril. The Nation's shipbuilders are continuously challenged to
maintain a viable industrial base given the low ship quantities
that the Navy is ordering. The shipbuilding effort is
desperately in need of stability. The Committee believes that
one of the biggest factors contributing to the current state of
the shipbuilding program is the fact that the Navy encourages
ship construction to begin prior to completing the final ship
design. Additionally, the Navy shows little discipline in
sticking to the design once it is complete or nearly complete
and orders changes and modifications that drive the final cost
of the ship upwards. Various witnesses, both from the
shipbuilding industry and the Navy, in hearings before the
Committee stated that construction stability can be achieved
only if construction is not started until the final design is
complete. Therefore, the Committee directs that future
construction of ships not begin until the final ship design is
complete. The Committee recognizes that this requirement may
appear to increase the time from funding being appropriated
until the delivery of the ship. However, this increase should
not be longer than the schedule delays caused by the disruptive
design changes. Additionally, the probability of completing
ships at or near their budgeted cost will significantly
increase by having a completed design prior to the construction
phase. In an effort to achieve these desired results the
Committee strongly encourages the Navy to suppress its heavy
appetite for changes during construction and accomplish only
those design modifications necessary for the successful
completion of ship construction or due to safety concerns.
Further, the Committee believes that more stability can be
gained in the shipbuilding program by increasing the throughput
of ships with proven design and construction processes.
Therefore, funding is being added to the request for an
additional LPD-17 amphibious transport dock ship, three
additional T-AKE dry cargo/ammunition ships (which will buy out
the requirement for the Maritime Pre-positioned Force
(Future)), and advance procurement for a Virginia Class attack
submarine.
As stated previously, the LCS program has been plagued by
growth and schedule delays. The Committee believes that the
best course of action for the LCS is to allow the program to
stabilize, finalize the design, obtain actual program costs,
and firm up the outyear acquisition strategy. Therefore,
funding for only one ship (to be combined with funding and
material from prior years) is provided for the LCS program.

VIRGINIA CLASS SUBMARINE

The Virginia Class Submarine program is one of the few Navy
shipbuilding programs that appears to be on the right track.
The Committee applauds the teaming relationship between the
Navy and the construction yards. This relationship has resulted
in the successful completion of construction after overcoming
early problems in the program. However, the remaining challenge
in this program is the inability to procure two submarines per
year. From the outset of the program, the industrial base has
been sized to accommodate the construction of two submarines
per year. Largely due to affordability, the funding for a
second submarine has never materialized. However, the Navy
seems firmly committed to provide funding for the procurement
of a second submarine beginning in fiscal year 2012. The
industry portion of the team is also doing its part, by meeting
the cost reduction challenge given it by the Navy. The cost
benchmark of the program is to have a submarine that will cost
$2,000,000,000 (fiscal year 2005 dollars) when the program
begins construction of two submarines per year. Indications are
that the submarine team is on track to meet that benchmark. The
program's second multi-year procurement contract should
initiate in fiscal year 2009 and the Virginia Class budget has
been structured under the assumption that two submarines per
year will become a reality. In an effort to provide the Navy
the opportunity to accelerate the procurement of two submarines
per year, the Committee provides $588,000,000 above the request
for the procurement of submarine nuclear and propulsion
components as well as advance construction items. The Committee
directs the Navy to make provisions during negotiation of the
next multi-year contract to accommodate two submarines per year
prior to fiscal year 2012, in an effort to achieve the best
possible pricing arrangements with industry.

LPD-17

The request includes $1,398,922,000 for the procurement of
the ninth San Antonio Class (LPD-17) Amphibious Transport Dock
Ship. This ship is the final LPD-17 class ship that the Navy
has in the budget. The Committee notes that the 313 ship fleet
that the Navy has stated as a goal requires ten San Antonio
Class ships and that this tenth ship was the highest priority
listed on the Navy's unfunded priority list. In an effort to
achieve stability in the Navy's shipbuilding program by
increasing throughput and helping the Navy meet its stated
requirement for LPD-17 Class ships, the Committee provides an
additional $1,700,000,000 for the procurement of a tenth San
Antonio Class Amphibious Transport Dock Ship.

CARRIER REPLACEMENT

The Ship Self Defense System (SSDS) suite of equipment that
will be installed on board the CVN-78 is a new capability
system that is still under development. The $99,546,000
estimated cost of the system is more than double the cost of
the current version of SSDS that is being installed on CVN-77
and also LHA-6. While the Committee recognizes that an
increased capability is bound to bear an increased cost, it
seems quite unreasonable that an incremental increase in
capability will cost more than twice that of the current
system. Therefore, $79,546,000 is provided for the CVN-78 SSDS,
a decrease of $20,000,000.

LITTORAL COMBAT SHIP

The Littoral Combat Ship (LCS) was conceived as a low cost,
flexible, rapidly fielded platform to counter asymmetric
littoral threats and conduct coastal missions. With a stated
requirement of 55 vessels, the LCS will comprise a significant
portion of the Navy's 313 ship fleet. However, this program has
been plagued by cost growth and schedule delays. Although many
variables have contributed to this growth, the underlying
reason can be attributed to concurrency between ship design and
ship construction. Through fiscal year 2007, the Congress has
appropriated funds for the construction of six LCS vessels. The
Navy has terminated the contract for one of these ships and has
proposed using the funding for two more ships to pay for cost
growth within the program. The end result will be that the
funding originally appropriated for six ships will actually
only procure three vessels. The Committee is disturbed by the
revelation that the recent efforts of the Congress to improve
the Navy's shipbuilding program via the LCS program have not
borne fruit. In light of the recent LCS problems, the Committee
believes that the best course of action is to allow the program
to stabilize, finalize the design, obtain actual program costs,
and firm up the outyear acquisition strategy. Therefore, the
Committee provides $339,482,000 for the procurement of a single
LCS, a reduction of $571,000,000. This funding is to be
combined with the materials purchased in prior years for the
LCS whose contract was terminated, which the Committee
understands to be approximately $120,000,000. This allows the
Navy to have sufficient funding/materials to purchase a ship at
the proposed fiscal year 2008 LCS cost cap value of
$460,000,000.

DDG-1000 ADVANCE PROCUREMENT

The DDG-1000 Guided Missile Destroyer is being designed as
a multi-mission surface combatant that is envisioned to be the
centerpiece of the future Navy fleet. The request includes
funding in the amount of $150,886,000 for advance procurement
for the fiscal year 2009 ship for the purchase of the
Integrated Power System and Communication Suite. Although this
equipment is certainly necessary for the construction of the
fiscal year 2009 ship, it is being requested in fiscal year
2008 for testing to mitigate the risk for the first two ships
in an effort to maintain the Navy's acquisition schedule. The
Department of Defense's own Financial Management Regulation
(FMR) states that ``Long lead-time procurements shall be for
components, parts, and material whose lead times are greater
than the life of the appropriation''. In this case, lead times
are well within the life of the appropriation and the items are
being requested strictly as a risk mitigation effort. The
Committee believes this to be an improper use of advance
procurement funding due to lead times of the requested
equipment. However, since the Committee is already skeptical of
the amount of funding budgeted for the DDG-1000 lead ships
based on the Navy's track record of estimating lead ship costs,
the Committee will allow this use of advance procurement in the
DDG-1000 program in an effort to minimize further perturbations
to the DDG-1000 schedule. The Navy is encouraged to review the
FMR regarding the proper use of advance procurement funding for
future requests.

DDG-1000

The request includes funding for the procurement of
hardware for the new dual band radar for installation on the
first two ships of the class. Although these installations
represent the lead installations for this system, the hardware
is priced at more than $35,000,000 per shipset for the
comparable system being installed on board the CVN-78. In an
effort to reduce this mismatch, the DDG-1000 dual band radar
funding is reduced by $15,000,000 per shipset for the first two
ships for a total of $30,000,000.

LITTORAL COMBAT SHIP OUTFITTING

Outfitting funds are used to acquire on-board repair parts,
equipage and other secondary items to fill the ships initial
allowances. The request includes $4,900,000 in fiscal year 2007
and $4,900,000 in fiscal year 2008 to satisfy outfitting
requirements for LCS-3. Since the construction contract for
LCS-3 was terminated by the Navy, these funds are excess to
requirement. The fiscal year 2007 funds will carry forward and
be used to satisfy fiscal year 2008 requirements for other
ships. Therefore, the fiscal year 2008 outfitting account is
reduced by $9,800,000. Additionally, since the delivery date of
LCS-4 has been delayed, the outfitting account also contains an
excess of $5,000,000 that was appropriated in fiscal year 2007
and can now be used to satisfy other ship requirements.
Therefore, the fiscal year 2008 outfitting program can be
reduced an additional $5,000,000 to account for this delay.

LEASING OF FOREIGN BUILT SHIPS

The Committee is concerned with the Navy practice of
bypassing the intent of the long term capital lease
restrictions in the way several foreign built military sealift
mission ships are leased. Essentially, these ship leases are
entered into on a recurring basis which individually meet the
intent of the leasing restrictions, but when considered
cumulatively would violate the spirit and intent of the 1990
Budget Enforcement Act. The Committee believes this leasing
practice is harming the Nation's shipyards and major ship
component industrial base by indirectly denying our
shipbuilders the opportunity for additional ship construction.
The Committee recognizes that the ships leased by the Navy fill
an important role that must be continued through the near term
and into the future. Due to the long lead time nature of the
shipbuilding industry, ships constructed in the United States
could take several years to fill the void created if these
foreign ships were removed from service by statute or other
means. However, the Committee strongly believes that the
American shipbuilders must take advantage of this opportunity.
Therefore, the Committee directs the Navy to submit a report
that outlines a plan to wean itself off the practice of leasing
foreign built ships to supplement the fleet and institute the
practice of utilizing only American built ships within four
years. The report should contain plans to use only American
built vessels for all the needs of the Navy, including the
necessary budget and funding plans that may be required to
accomplish this. This report should be submitted no later than
March 31, 2008.

SHIP INSULATION

The Committee directs the Department of the Navy, in
consultation with the National Academy of Sciences (NAS), to
assess the health effects of respirable, biopersistent
manufactured vitreous fibers (MVF) in insulation materials
installed on Naval vessels under construction, and to submit a
report on those effects to the Committee no later than January
15, 2008. In a government-funded study pursuant to contracts
with the Department of Defense, NAS, in its ``Review of the
U.S. Navy's Exposure Standard for Manufactured Vitreous
Fibers'' of 2000, analyzed the Navy's MVF exposure standard and
concluded that ``the Navy's documentation does not provide an
adequate assessment of the role of fiber biopersistence in
health effects''. With the installation of alternative
insulation material in Naval vessels, the Committee is very
concerned about the health impacts of respirable, biopersistent
MVF in such insulation material, and specifically directs the
Navy to assess its health effects as advised in the 2000 NAS
study.

OTHER PROCUREMENT, NAVY

Fiscal year 2007 appropriation........................ $4,927,676,000
Fiscal year 2008 budget request....................... 5,470,412,000
Committee recommendation.............................. 5,298,238,000
Change from budget request............................ -172,174,000
This appropriation provides funds for the procurement of
major equipment and weapons other than ships, aircraft,
missiles and torpedoes. Such equipment ranges from the latest
electronic sensors for updates of naval forces, to trucks,
training equipment, and spare parts.
The Committee recommends an appropriation of $5,298,238,000
for Other Procurement, Navy, which is $370,562,000 more than
the amount provided in fiscal year 2007 and $172,174,000 less
than the request for fiscal year 2008.

Program Recommended

The total amount recommended in the bill will provide the
following program in fiscal year 2008:

[GRAPHICS NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]

The adjustments to the budget activities for Other
Procurement, Navy, are shown below:

[GRAPHICS NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]

INTEGRATED SUBMARINE IMAGING SYSTEM

The Integrated Submarine Imaging System (ISIS) provides for
the modernization of submarine imaging systems to improve
imaging capabilities in support of ISR requirements. The
request includes funding in the amount of $56,198,000 for the
procurement of thirteen systems and 3 spares. The Navy
scheduled the installation of 5 of these systems in fiscal year
2009 and 8 in fiscal year 2010. The Navy states that the system
will deliver fourteen months from contract award. With a lead
time of fourteen months, the procurement of the 8 systems
currently scheduled for installation in fiscal year 2010 is
ahead of need and can be shifted to fiscal year 2009.
Therefore, $20,698,000 is provided for the procurement of the
systems and associated spares that will install or be required
in fiscal year 2009.

CRUISER MODERNIZATION PROGRAM

The Cruiser Modernization program provides CG-47 class
cruisers with improved warfighting capabilities and extends the
mission life of the platforms. The request includes funding for
the procurement of equipment to be installed during an
availability period in fiscal year 2011. The specific equipment
(SPQ-9B radar, Cooperative Engagement Capability hardware,
AEGIS Weapons System upgrades, and MK-34 Gun Weapon System
hardware) has a 24 month production lead time. Since the ship
availability in fiscal year 2011 is a scheduled eleven month
availability, the procurement of this equipment in fiscal year
2008 is ahead of need and can be deferred until fiscal year
2009. Therefore, no funding is provided to procure equipment
for the Cruiser Modernization availability scheduled for fiscal
year 2011.

ASW ENHANCEMENTS

The unfunded priority list provided by the Navy contained a
request for Anti-Submarine Warfare (ASW) enhancements to
improve the ASW capability of the fleet as its fourth highest
priority. The Committee recognizes the importance of this
critical warfighting area and strongly supports efforts to
improve capability. To that end, the Committee provides an
additional $29,300,000 for efforts such as accelerating DDG-51
class sonar modernization, accelerating the procurement of
Common Broadband Advanced Sonar System (CBASS) Torpedo
Modification Kits, and increased development efforts for the
Anti-torpedo Torpedo.

LITTORAL COMBAT SHIP MISSION MODULES

The Littoral Combat Ship (LCS) is a small surface combatant
and will operate with the flexibility to be configured with one
of a variety of three different mission modules depending on
the tasking. The Navy plan for mission modules is to procure a
total of 64 LCS modules for the 55 ship class. The request
includes $80,324,000 for the procurement of two mission modules
and associated procurement support as well as $2,900,000 for
spare parts. At the time of the submission, funding had been
appropriated for the procurement of six ships and six mission
modules through fiscal year 2007. Since the submission of the
request, only three of these six ships will actually be
constructed. The Committee believes the six mission modules
purchased in prior years will be more than sufficient to
satisfy near term LCS requirements considering the reduced near
term LCS construction quantity. Therefore, no funding is
provided for the procurement of LCS mission modules and
associated spares.

SUBMARINE SUPPORT EQUIPMENT

The request includes $17,047,000 for the procurement of 7
multi-function modular masts (MMM) for submarines. As a result
of delays in the development program, the fiscal year 2007
units will not actually execute until late in fiscal year 2008.
The program's budget takes this long lead time realized in
fiscal year 2007 and extrapolates it to fiscal year 2008 and
beyond. This will result in the units scheduled for procurement
in fiscal year 2008 not being installed until fiscal year 2011.
In actuality, these fiscal year 2008 units will simply award in
fiscal year 2009 and deliver in time for a fiscal year 2011
installation. Since the MMM units will execute in fiscal year
2009, the Committee believes the funding should be budgeted in
fiscal year 2009. Therefore, no funding is provided for the
procurement of the MMM in fiscal year 2008.

Q-70 FAMILY OF DISPLAY SYSTEMS

In the early 1990s, the Committee began investigating the
Navy's use of proprietary designs and closed architecture in
its display systems. The Committee found this display
architecture to be costly and operationally limiting in that
systems failed to keep up with technology advancements
associated with commercial off the shelf technologies.
Consequently, this Committee (and ultimately Congress) began
funding both research and development and procurement of what
is now known as the Q-70 Family of Display Systems that is
currently in use throughout the fleet on board aircraft,
surface ships and submarines. During the ceremonial delivery of
the 5000th Q-70 system in 2006, the Navy acknowledged that the
Q-70's use of open architecture and commercial off the shelf
technology has saved the taxpayer nearly $1,600,000,000. The
Committee applauds the Navy for its efforts and encourages
future support. In this regard, the Committee provides an
additional $5,000,000 for the procurement and installation of
AN/SPA-25H display system refresh kits to further the Navy's
open architecture system initiatives.

MAN OVERBOARD INDICATOR PROGRAM

The Man OverBoard Indicator (MOBI) program was initiated by
the Congress after being rejected by traditional Navy channels.
Every year, sailors and marines fall from Navy ships resulting
in fatalities, serious injuries and the loss of many
operational hours conducting search and rescue missions. The
MOBI allows reduced reaction time to overboard incidents,
resulting in reduced search and rescue time and increased
recovery rates. The Committee's support has allowed for
installation of MOBI systems on nearly 90 Navy ships and has
been used in the recovery of numerous sailors who were in need
of rescue or recovery. Therefore, the Committee provides
$1,000,000 to continue the MOBI progam.

ENHANCED DETECTION ADJUNCT PROCESSOR

In a July 2003 mission need statement regarding force
protection capability against asymmetric threats, the Navy
states that small boats, recreational watercraft, and unmanned
service vehicles are considered amongst the highest threats to
vulnerable targets. This is primarily due to the difficulty in
detecting these threats in the difficult radar environments
where they typically operate. The Enhanced Detection Adjunct
Processor (EDAP) fulfills the stated Navy requirement to
protect personnel, equipment and facilities in the areas of
surface ship defense and port and harbor security. By improving
the capability of existing surface search radar systems to
operate in moderate to high sea states, EDAP will significantly
improve a ship's ability to prevent small boat attacks by
identifying the threat before an incident occurs. Therefore,
the Committee provides $5,000,000 for the procurement of
Enhanced Detection Adjunct Processors to upgrade existing
surface search radars.

PROCUREMENT, MARINE CORPS

Fiscal year 2007 appropriation........................ $894,571,000
Fiscal year 2008 budget request....................... 2,999,057,000
Committee recommendation.............................. 2,500,882,000
Change from budget request............................ -498,175,000
This appropriation provides funds for the procurement,
production, and modification of equipment, supplies, materials,
and spare parts.
The Committee recommends an appropriation of $2,500,882,000
for Procurement, Marine Corps, which is $1,606,311,000 more
than the amount provided in fiscal year 2007 and $498,175,000
less than the request for fiscal year 2008.

Program Recommended

The total amount recommended in the bill will provide the
following program in fiscal year 2008:

[GRAPHICS NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]

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

[GRAPHICS NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]

Range Transformation Initiative

The Committee recognizes and supports the requirement for a
large-scale urban warfare training facility to ensure our
combat forces conduct realistic training prior to deploying
overseas. The United States Marine Corps is pursuing an
initiative to develop an urban operations training complex of
unprecedented capability. The Committee applauds this effort
and provided funding in fiscal years 2006 and 2007 to
accelerate this initiative. In fiscal year 2008, the Committee
provides funding to acquire supporting capabilities to maximize
the training effectiveness of this large-scale urban warfare
training facility.

AIRCRAFT PROCUREMENT, AIR FORCE

Fiscal year 2007 appropriation........................ $11,643,356,000
Fiscal year 2008 budget request....................... $12,393,270,000
Committee recommendation.............................. $11,690,220,000
Change from budget request............................ -703,050,000
This appropriation provides for the procurement of
aircraft, and for modification of in-service aircraft to
improve safety and enhance operational effectiveness. It also
provides for initial spares and other support equipment to
include aerospace ground equipment and industrial facilities.
In addition, funds are provided for the procurement of flight
training simulators to increase combat readiness and to provide
for more economical training.
The Committee recommends an appropriation of
$11,690,220,000 for Aircraft Procurement, Air Force, which is
$46,864,000 more than the amount provided in fiscal year 2007
and $703,050,000 less than the request for fiscal year 2008.

Program Recommended

The total amount recommended in the bill will provide the
following program in fiscal year 2008:

[GRAPHICS NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]

The adjustments to the budget activities for Aircraft
Procurement, Air Force, are shown below:

[GRAPHICS NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]

C-17 PRODUCTION

The Committee is aware that $2,400,000,000 for procurement
of additional C-17 aircraft has been included in title XV of
the House-passed National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal
Year 2008. This title authorizes supplemental appropriations
for Operation Iraqi Freedom and Operation Enduring Freedom. The
Committee has not addressed these fiscal year 2008 supplemental
funding requirements in this legislation. Rather, the Committee
will consider these funding requirements in a separate measure
at a later time.

GLOBAL HAWK

The budget request includes $514,005,000 for procurement of
five Global Hawk air vehicles, sensor payloads, one Ground
Segment and associated support equipment. The Committee
recommends reducing the request by $111,000,000, including two
air vehicles.
The Committee has long been concerned about delays in
production of Global Hawk. While a highly capable surveillance
platform when in operation, delays in the production of the
more advanced RQ-4B air vehicle continue. In just the last
year, delivery of the first RQ-4B slipped another three months,
which amounts to a fifteen month delay from its initial
estimated delivery date. The program continues to struggle with
supplier manufacturing problems that are significantly
impacting production schedules.
The Committee notes that even if the program were able to
deliver Lot 7 aircraft on the current schedule, which history
indicates is unlikely, one of these aircraft would not deliver
until the very end of fiscal year 2010 and the last aircraft in
the lot would deliver in fiscal year 2011. The Committee has
traditionally eliminated funding for such procurements as
early-to-need and believes that, by reducing the procurement of
air vehicles, it affords the program the opportunity to
demonstrate an ability to meet production timelines.

B-2 RADAR MODERNIZATION

The currently fielded B-2 radar system, including the
radar, defensive management system (DMS) and transponder,
operates within a portion of the electromagnetic spectrum where
the U.S. Government is designated as a secondary user.
Secondary user status means that the B-2 radar system cannot
interfere with primary users. Interference with primary users
by a secondary user invokes statutory penalties. Due to the
planned expansion of primary users in the currently fielded
radar system frequency band, in the near future the B-2 will no
longer be able to operate without high probability of
interference with primary users. In order to ensure the
continued operation of the B-2 weapon system, the B-2 radar
system must be modified to allow operation in another portion
of the spectrum where the U.S. Government is guaranteed primary
user status. The B-2 radar must vacate its current frequency by
a classified, near-term date. A program to develop and field a
new radar system is ongoing.
The budget request includes $270,649,000 for the
procurement of eight production radar units. Due to technical
maturity problems with the radar modernization program's
antenna, the fiscal year 2007 funds for four production units
have been placed on hold and will be used for other unrelated
efforts. Subsequent to the submission of the fiscal year 2008
budget request, the Air Force acknowledged the impact on
production caused by the technical maturity problems and
requested that the funding for the procurement of units
requested in the fiscal year 2008 budget be reduced. In
addition, the Air Force communicated to the Committee a
requirement for additional funds supporting the radar's
development program beyond what was requested in the fiscal
year 2008 budget. Accordingly, the Committee reduces the
procurement request by $100,000,000, including three radar
units. As requested by the Air Force, the Committee provides an
additional $38,000,000 in Line 70, Research, Development, Test
and Evaluation, Air Force, for the ongoing radar development
program.

MISSILE PROCUREMENT, AIR FORCE

Fiscal year 2007 appropriation........................ $3,914,703,000
Fiscal year 2008 budget request....................... 5,131,002,000
Committee recommendation.............................. 4,920,959,000
Change from budget request............................ -210,043,000
This appropriation provides for procurement, installation,
and checkout of strategic ballistic and other missiles,
modification of in-service missiles, and initial spares for
missile systems. It also provides for operational space
systems, boosters, payloads, drones, associated ground
equipment, non-recurring maintenance of industrial facilities,
machine tool modernization, and special program support.
The Committee recommends an appropriation of $4,920,959,000
for Missile Procurement, Air Force, which is $1,006,256,000
more than the amount provided in fiscal year 2007 and
$210,043,000 less than the request for fiscal year 2008.

Program Recommended

The total amount recommended in the bill will provide the
following program in fiscal year 2008:

[GRAPHICS NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]

The adjustments to the budget activities for Missile
Procurement, Air Force, are shown below:

[GRAPHICS NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]

JOINT AIR TO SURFACE STANDOFF MISSILE (JASSM)

The fiscal year 2008 budget request includes $201,125,000
for the procurement of 210 Joint Air to Surface Standoff
Missiles (JASSMs). For several years now the Committee has
expressed deep reservations about the reliability of this
missile. Until recently, multiple test failures indicated that,
in its current production configuration, the missile was about
as likely to fail a mission as it was to succeed. However,
during two days of recent flight testing in which four missiles
were fired, all four of the missiles failed. In addition, in
February the program reported a Nunn-McCurdy unit cost breach
that requires a certification by the Office of the Under
Secretary of Defense for Acquisition, Technology and Logistics
before the program can proceed. That certification has now been
deferred twice, pending approval of a plan to implement
management controls and improve reliability. Recognizing these
events, the Committee provides $167,125,000 for JASSM
procurement, the same level as provided in fiscal year 2007, a
reduction of $34,000,000 from the budget request.

ADVANCED EXTREMELY HIGH FREQUENCY PROGRAM

The Committee recommends $125,000,000 for Advanced
Extremely High Frequency satellite number 4 advanced
procurement, which is not included in the budget request.
Additionally, the Committee recommends $963,585,000 to fully
fund the Transformational Satellite program request. The
Committee is supportive of the Transformational Satellite
program, and wants to ensure there is not a gap in coverage
between the Advanced Extremely High Frequency program and the
Transformational Satellite program.

PROCUREMENT OF AMMUNITION, AIR FORCE

Fiscal year 2007 appropriation........................ $1,054,302,000
Fiscal year 2008 budget request....................... 868,917,000
Committee recommendation.............................. 342,494,000
Change from budget request............................ -526,423,000
This appropriation finances the acquisition of ammunition,
modifications, spares, weapons, and other ammunition-related
items for the Air Force.
The Committee recommends an appropriation of $342,494,000
for Procurement of Ammunition, Air Force, which is $711,808,000
less than the amount provided in fiscal year 2007 and
$526,423,000 less than the request for fiscal year 2008.

Program Recommended

The total amount recommended in the bill will provide the
following program in fiscal year 2008:

[GRAPHICS NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]

The adjustments to the budget activities for Procurement of
Ammunition, Air Force, are shown below:

[GRAPHICS NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]

FLARES

The fiscal year 2008 budget request includes $274,291,000
for procurement of flares. Flares are dispensed from a variety
of aircraft to either protect the aircraft by decoying enemy
heat-seeking missiles or as an illumination source for
reconnaissance, target marking, emergency night landings or
search and rescue. Due to ongoing contingency operations,
funding for the procurement of flares increased $106,050,000
beyond the planned increase from fiscal year 2007 to fiscal
year 2008. As such, the Committee defers the consideration of
these funds until such time that it addresses fiscal year 2008
supplemental requirements for ongoing operations.

OTHER PROCUREMENT, AIR FORCE

Fiscal year 2007 appropriation........................ $15,493,486,000
Fiscal year 2008 budget request....................... 15,421,162,000
Committee recommendation.............................. 15,255,186,000
Change from budget request............................ -165,976,000
This appropriation provides for the procurement of weapon
systems and equipment other than aircraft and missiles.
Included are vehicles, electronic and telecommunications
systems for command and control of operational forces, and
ground support equipment for weapon systems and supporting
structure.
The Committee recommends an appropriation of
$15,255,186,000 for Other Procurement, Air Force, which is
$238,300,000 less than the amount provided in fiscal year 2007
and $165,976,000 less than the request for fiscal year 2008.

Program Recommended

The total amount recommended in the bill will provide the
following program in fiscal year 2008:

[GRAPHICS NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]

The adjustments to the budget activities for Other
Procurement, Air Force, are shown below:

[GRAPHICS NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]

PROCUREMENT, DEFENSE-WIDE

Fiscal year 2007 appropriation........................ $2,903,292,000
Fiscal year 2008 budget request....................... 3,318,834,000
Committee recommendation.............................. 3,335,637,000
Change from budget request............................ +16,803,000
This appropriation provides funds for the procurement,
production, and modification of equipment, supplies, materials,
and spare parts.
The Committee recommends an appropriation of $3,335,637,000
for Procurement, Defense-Wide, which is $432,345,000 more than
the amount provided in fiscal year 2007 and $16,803,000 more
than the amount requested for fiscal year 2008.

Program Recommended

The total amount recommended in the bill will provide the
following program in fiscal year 2008:

[GRAPHICS NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]

The adjustments to the budget activities for Procurement,
Defense-wide, are shown below:

[GRAPHICS NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]

NATIONAL GUARD AND RESERVE EQUIPMENT

Fiscal year 2007 appropriation....................... $290,000,000
Fiscal year 2008 budget request...................... - - -
Committee recommendation............................. 925,000,000
Change from budget request........................... +925,000,000
The Committee recommends an appropriation of $925,000,000
for National Guard and Reserve Equipment, which is $635,000,000
more than the amount appropriated in fiscal year 2007 and
$925,000,000 more than the request for fiscal year 2008. The
Committee directs that no less than $700,000,000 be provided to
the Army National Guard to continue the effort begun in fiscal
year 2007 to meet the ``Essential 10 Equipment Requirements for
the Global War on Terror'' as identified by the Chief, National
Guard Bureau. The Committee has also provided funds for
National Guard and Reserve equipment consistent with the budget
request within the procurement accounts as noted in the
following table. Additionally, the Committee has added funding
for Guard and Reserve equipment in excess of the request in
several procurement accounts, as described elsewhere in this
report.

[In thousands of dollars]
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Committee
Accounts recommended;
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Aircraft procurement, Army........................... $224,844
Missile Procurement, Army............................ 307,792
Procurement of W&TCV, Army........................... 612,657
Procurement of Ammunition, Army...................... 310,102
Other Procurement, Army.............................. 3,041,223
Aircraft Procurement, Navy........................... 28,221
Procurement of Ammo, Navy & Marine Corps............. 222
Other Procurement, Navy.............................. 23,499
Procurement, Marine Corps............................ 99,900
Aircraft Procurement, Air Force...................... 807,628
Procurement of Ammunition, Air Force................. 162,446
Other Procurement, Air Force......................... 142,960
National Guard & Reserve Equipment................... 925,000
------------------
TOTAL................................................ 6,686,494
------------------------------------------------------------------------

DEFENSE PRODUCTION ACT PURCHASES

Fiscal year 2007 appropriation........................ $63,184,000
Fiscal year 2008 budget request....................... 18,592,000
Committee recommendation.............................. 64,092,000
Change from budget request............................ +45,500,000
The Committee recommends an appropriation of $64,092,000
for Defense Production Act Purchases, which is $908,000 more
than the amount provided in fiscal year 2007 and $45,500,000
more than the request for fiscal year 2008.
The Committee recommendation shall be distributed as
follows:

------------------------------------------------------------------------
Project Amount
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Beryllium Supply Industrial Base..................... $11,500,000
Lithium Ion Battery Production Initiative............ 1,089,000
Blue Force Tracking Production Initiative............ 2,000,000
Power & Energy Systems Production Initiative......... 4,000,000
Rare Earth Magnets Production Initiative............. 1,986,000
Traveling Wave Tube Amplifiers for Space............. 2,017,000
ALON and Spinel Optical Ceramics..................... 3,500,000
Production of Affordable Direct Methanol Fuel Cells.. 2,000,000
SWORDS Safety Confirmation Testing................... 2,000,000
Photovoltaic Solar Cell Encapsulent Domestic 1,500,000
Production Ctr......................................
Global Personal Recovery System Single Card Solution. 1,500,000
Flexible Aerogel Material Supplier Initiative........ 2,000,000
Low Cost Military GPS................................ 2,000,000
Life Cycle Support Center for Unmanned Systems....... 3,000,000
Vacuum Induction Melting and Vacuum Arc Re-melting 23,000,000
Furnace Capacity....................................
Production of Miniature Compressors for Electronics 1,000,000
and Personal Cooling................................
------------------------------------------------------------------------

Beryllium Supply Industrial Base

The Committee recommendation includes $11,500,000, an
increase of $4,000,000 over the request, for continued efforts
to maintain and support the beryllium supply industrial base,
including the continued design and construction of a new
production plant.
TITLE IV

RESEARCH, DEVELOPMENT, TEST AND EVALUATION

The fiscal year 2008 Department of Defense Research,
Development, Test and Evaluation budget request totals
$75,117,194,000. The accompanying bill recommends
$76,231,440,000. The total amount recommended is an increase of
$1,114,246,000 above the fiscal year 2008 budget estimate and
is $509,836,000 above the total provided in fiscal year 2007.
The table below summarizes the budget estimate and the
Committee's recommendations.

[GRAPHICS NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]

CRUISE MISSILE DEFENSE

The Committee remains concerned about the lack of an
integrated defense of the homeland against cruise missile,
other low-altitude aircraft and short range missile attacks.
While the Committee endorses the plan for the Commander, United
States Strategic Command, to be the Air and Missile Defense
Integrating Authority, and for the United States Northern
Command to retain responsibility for the Homeland Air and
Cruise Missile Defense mission, the Committee believes
sufficient progress has not been made with respect to
developing and fielding the capabilities necessary for defense
against such threats. To ensure progress toward fielding this
critical capability, the Committee directs the Secretary of
Defense to provide a report to the congressional defense
committees within 90 days of the enactment of this Act. The
report shall include a plan for development of the cruise
missile defense capabilities needed, deployment of those
capabilities, and integration of those capabilities into the
ballistic missile defense system when feasible. The plan shall
specify an organization within the Department of Defense
responsible for budgeting for and developing an overall
architecture definition, acquisition planning, integration and
testing of recommended deployment options, and execution of the
acquisition plan. This office will also be responsible for
coordinating with U.S. Strategic Command and U.S. Northern
Command. In addition, this plan will identify each element of
the Department of Defense that will be responsible under the
plan for individual element program acquisition execution in
order to achieve an integrated homeland defense capability. The
Committee strongly recommends leveraging both the existing
ballistic missile defense command and control capabilities
where applicable and the ongoing asymmetric missile defense
architecture definition activity.

JOINT COMMON MISSILE/JOINT AIR-TO-GROUND MISSILE

The Joint Air-to-Ground Missile (JAGM), formerly known as
the Joint Common Missile (JCM), is a fixed and rotary wing
aviation-launched missile system that provides advanced line-
of-sight and non-line-of-sight capabilities, including
precision strike, passive, and fire-and-forget seeker
technologies with increased range and lethality. JAGM provides
double the range of Hellfire (16,000 v. 8,000 meters for
helicopter launches) allowing flight crews to take full
advantage of target acquisition and guidance systems.
The Joint Common Missile (JCM) program was designed to
mitigate missile credibility gaps identified by the Joint
Capabilities Integration and Development System (JCIDS). The
program has performed on schedule and on budget. In December
2004, the Department of Defense terminated the program choosing
to assume temporary risk, and rely on less capable legacy
missiles, or other guided munitions, which address some of the
same targets. In August of 2005, the Joint Requirements
Oversight Council revalidated the requirement for Joint Common
Missile. A technology maturation effort began in February 2005.
In September 2006 the Joint Staff published Joint Requirements
Oversight Memorandum 185-06, reestablishing the program. The
Joint Common Missile has been renamed the Joint Air-to-Ground
Missile. On May 14, 2007, the Army notified the JCM/JAGM
contractor of a ``Limitation of Funds'', that no additional
funding would be added to the contract, and provided the
contractor with close out instructions. The Department of
Defense has indicated plans for a JCM/JAGM re-competition.
Congress added funds in the Department of Defense
Appropriations Acts for fiscal years 2006 and 2007 to keep the
JCM program going, recognizing the advanced capabilities
offered by the JCM program and also recognizing that the legacy
Maverick, Hellfire and TOW missiles offered less capability and
an aging inventory. The fiscal year 2008 budget request
includes $53,500,000 in Research, Development, Test and
Evaluation, Army; and $15,000,000 in Research Development, Test
and Evaluation, Navy for JAGM.
The Committee encourages the Department of Defense to
continue to pursue the Joint Air-to-Ground Missile program and
to fully resource the program in order to provide flight crews
with a weapon system that has greater engagement range,
insensitive munitions technology, and improved seeker, warhead
and rocket motor technologies. The Committee notes with
considerable frustration that the Department of Defense has
poorly managed and finally terminated a highly successful
program. The Department chose to terminate a program with a
validated requirement that was performing on cost and schedule,
and the Department did not execute the additional funding that
the Congress provided to continue this successful program.
The Committee recommendation fully funds the fiscal year
2008 request for Joint Air-to-Ground Missile. The Committee
strongly encourages the Department of Defense to fully fund the
Joint Air-to-Ground Missile program in future budget requests.
Additionally, the Committee directs the Government
Accountability Office (GAO) to conduct a review of the
management by the Department of Defense of the Joint Common
Missile program to include program requirements validation;
program performance; the decision to terminate the program;
subsequent requirements revalidation; the execution of
additional funding provided by Congress in order to continue
the program; and the decision to re-compete the program under a
new name, Joint Air-to-Ground Missile. The GAO shall provide a
report to the congressional defense committees not later than
January 30, 2008.

SMALL BUSINESS TECHNOLOGY INSERTION

The Committee notes that several major acquisition programs
under the purview of the Department of Defense have been
plagued by cost growth. The Committee is troubled by the
seemingly increasing trend in the number of programs that
breach the Nunn-McCurdy thresholds each year. A clear cut cause
for this trend is not immediately obvious. The Department often
preaches transformation and acquisition reform in its
acquisition policies and procedures, however the cost growth
trend continues. The Committee recognizes that transformation
combined with a smart acquisition process should result in
affordable and interoperable weapon systems and platforms. Open
architecture systems are an example of a tranformational
technology that has resulted in cost savings or avoidance to
the Department. The Committee believes that an untapped source
for similar technologies and ideas is the small business
community which harbors many of the Nation's innovative
thinkers and creative minds. In an effort to tap this source
for transformational technologies and ideas that should lead to
cost reduction measures such as improved manufacturing
processes, open architecture technologies, software development
and a host of others, the Committee provides $100,000,000 to
the Research and Development accounts of the services. This
funding will be available only to fund small business efforts
for high risk/high reward component and technology development
for inclusion in the major program acquisition process.

SPECIAL INTEREST ITEMS

REPROGRAMMING GUIDANCE FOR ACQUISITION ACCOUNTS

The Committee directs the Department of Defense to continue
to follow the reprogramming guidance specified in the report
accompanying the House version of the fiscal year 2006
Department of Defense Appropriations Bill (H.R. 109-110).
Specifically, the dollar threshold for reprogramming funds will
remain at $20,000,000 for procurement and $10,000,000 for
research, development, test and evaluation. The Department
shall continue to follow the limitation that prior approval
reprogrammings are set at either the specified dollar threshold
or 20 percent of the procurement or research, development, test
and evaluation line, whichever is less. These thresholds are
cumulative. Therefore, if the combined value of transfers into
or out of a procurement (P-1) or research, development, test
and evaluation (R-1) line exceeds the identified threshold, the
Department of Defense must submit a prior approval
reprogramming to the congressional defense committees. In
addition, guidelines on the application of prior approval
reprogramming procedures for congressional special interest
items are established elsewhere in this report.

RESEARCH, DEVELOPMENT, TEST AND EVALUATION, ARMY

Fiscal year 2007 appropriation........................ $11,054,958,000
Fiscal year 2008 budget request....................... 10,589,604,000
Committee recommendation.............................. 11,509,540,000
Change from budget request............................ +919,936,000
This appropriation finances the research, development, test
and evaluation activities of the Department of the Army.
The Committee recommends an appropriation of
$11,509,540,000 for Research, Development, Test and Evaluation,
Army, which is $454,582,000 more than the amount provided in
fiscal year 2007 and $919,936,000 more than the request for
fiscal year 2008.

Program Recommended

The total amount recommended in the bill will provide the
following program in fiscal year 2008:

[GRAPHICS NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]

The adjustments to the budget activities for Research,
Development, Test and Evaluation, Army, are shown below:

[GRAPHICS NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]

FUTURE COMBAT SYSTEMS

The Army began the Future Combat Systems (FCS) program in
May 2003 with the aggressive and somewhat risky strategy of
defining requirements and maturing technology simultaneously.
The fiscal year 2008 request includes nearly $3,600,000,000 in
research, development, test and evaluation funding, an increase
of $137,000,000 above the fiscal year 2007 appropriated amount.
The budget request for FCS includes for the first time
procurement funds in the amount of $99,606,000 for
facilitization and long lead items. FCS requested fiscal year
2008 funding supports the first of three planned technology
spin outs which will deliver the benefits of FCS technology to
other Army elements. Milestone 1 spin outs are planned to
include Network Capability Integration kits for Abrams Tanks,
Bradley Fighting Vehicles and HMMWVs. In preparing the fiscal
year 2008 request, the Army reduced FCS funding by
$266,800,000, seeking efficiencies and improved management
oversight in cost control. The Army also deferred four of the
original 18 systems: Class II and Class III unmanned aerial
vehicles; intelligent munitions systems; and large unmanned
ground vehicles. A recurring concern in the program has been
the demonstrated levels of technology readiness. However the
Government Accountability Office reports that about 80 percent
of FCS technologies can be assessed as mature, double the
number assessed as mature a year ago. The Committee remains
committed to Army force modernization and understands that the
centerpiece and primary effort in Army modernization is FCS.
The Committee encourages the Army to enhance program stability
and achieve advancements in technology to benefit the current
and near term force. The Committee recommends full funding of
$99,606,000 for FCS procurement. The Committee recommends
reductions totaling $433,800,000 in FCS research, development,
test and evaluation lines as detailed in the Project Level
Adjustment tables. The Committee recommends an additional
$25,000,000 for FCS in System of Systems Engineering and
Program Management for Small Business Technology Insertion.

TACTICAL METAL FABRICATION SYSTEM (TAC FAB)

The Committee recognizes the successful implementation of
the Army's Rapid Manufacturing System, formerly known as Mobile
Parts Hospital, but is concerned that the program is unable to
address the significant need for cast parts for tanks,
vehicles, guns and other weapons systems. The Committee is
aware that Soldiers and Marines in Iraq have expressed a need
for a mobile foundry, co-located with deployed forces. The
Committee understands that the Tactical Metal Fabrication
System would provide a mobile, containerized foundry to serve
as companion and complement to the Rapid Manufacturing System.
The Committee also understands that such an asset can
significantly contribute to easing current reset demands. The
Committee, therefore, recommends an additional $3,000,000 in PE
0602601A, Research, Development, Test and Evaluation, Army,
Combat Vehicle and Automotive Technology, for the Tactical
Metal Fabrication System.

WARFIGHTER INFORMATION NETWORK--TACTICAL

On March 5, 2007, congressional notification was made of a
Nunn-McCurdy cost growth breach for the Warfighter Information
Network--Tactical (WIN-T). On June 5, 2007, the Under Secretary
of Defense for Acquisition, Technology and Logistics provided
to the Congress certification that the WIN-T program satisfied
the requirements for continuation. The WIN-T program was
restructured to absorb the Joint Network Node (JNN) program as
an Acquisition Category 1D Major Defense Acquisition Program.
The restructured WIN-T program consists of four progressively
more capable increments. The Committee fully supports the
Army's efforts to stabilize the WIN-T and JNN programs through
one overarching Acquisition Strategy emphasizing an incremental
approach. The Committee understands that each element of the
restructured WIN-T/JNN program will report via a separate
Selected Acquisition Report for enhanced accountability. The
budget request included $222,296,000 for WIN-T. The Committee
recommends $356,296,000, an increase of $134,000,000. The
additional funds are transferred from Other Procurement, Army
line 67 for JNN procurement in order to stabilize the WIN-T
program and the incremental approach for the combined JNN and
WIN-T program.

GLOBAL COMBAT SUPPORT SYSTEM--ARMY

The Committee recommends $94,689,000 for Global Combat
Support System--Army, instead of $129,689,000 as proposed in
the budget request. GCSS-A is the tactical component of the
Single Army Logistics Enterprise, and will implement a
comprehensive logistics automation solution for deployed units
that provides streamlined supply operations, maintenance
operations, property accountability and logistics management,
and integration procedures. The Committee notes, however, that
the Army is encountering problems in executing the acquisition
and test strategies for this program, which will likely affect
the Army's ability to execute funds in a timely manner.

HYBRID PROPELLANT FOR MEDIUM AND LARGE CALIBER AMMUNITION

The Committee recommends $8,000,000 in Research,
Development, Test and Evaluation, Army, Line 108, only to
continue the development of a HYBRID propellant to be used in
small, medium and large caliber munitions. HYBRID propellant
combines the properties of chemical deterrents with the
geometry of perforated propellants, resulting in the highest
possible ballistic performance that can be tailored to meet
specific gun applications. This additional funding will allow
the Army to qualify the 105mm Artillery XM350 HYBRID propellant
charge and support the Extended Range Guided Munitions
propellant testing and shipboard qualification. The XM350
HYBRID propellant charge will replace both the M200 and the M67
propellant charges with one propellant due to the HYBRID
propellant's flexibility and superior ballistic properties and
thereby simplify battlefield management. Furthermore,
successful implementation of the HYBRID propellant will
significantly reduce the Army logistics burden and the
corresponding procurement and life cycle costs via the highest
possible muzzle velocity for extended ranges/lethality, lighter
barrels with less recoil and extended wear characteristics.

RAPID RESPONSE SYSTEM FOR ACTIVE PROTECTION OF GROUND AND AIR VEHICLES

The Committee recommends $5,000,000 in Research,
Development, Test and Evaluation, Army, Line 46, only for the
Rapid Response System for Active Protection of Ground and Air
Vehicles. The technology underlying this initiative has been
demonstrated as part of the Overwatch Advanced Concept
Technology Demonstration and the Weapons Surveillance System
program. The Committee recognizes the need to extend this
technology in order to provide a Rapid Response Sensor System
for immediate detection, warning and cueing as part of an
active protection countermeasure system for protecting ground
and airborne vehicles against projectile and missile threats.
This program will provide key advances in hostile fire
detection and classification in support of air and ground
vehicle protection and next generation hostile fire detection
for manned and unmanned platforms.

RESEARCH OF ADVANCED COMMUNICATIONS TECHNOLOGIES

The Committee recommends $5,000,000 in Research,
Development, Test and Evaluation, Army, Line 23, PE 0602782A,
only for the research of advanced communications technologies
for the purpose of providing the Army with enhanced
capabilities for secure, mobile, networked communications,
assured information delivery and presentation of information
that enables decision making. This activity includes but is not
limited to Project 779 (C2 and Platform Electronic technology)
and Project H92 (Communications Technology).

TACTICAL WHEELED VEHICLE COMPOSITE COMPONENT WEIGHT REDUCTION PROGRAM

The Committee has provided an additional $3,000,000 in
Research, Development, Test and Evaluation, Army, line 33, to
design, optimize, fabricate, and test composite components that
can be applied to the Army's Family of Medium Tactical Vehicles
(FMTV) and other interim vehicles in order to decrease weight
and increase protection. The Army's Tank Automotive Command has
completed work with industry to make a lighter and stronger
composite hood for the HMMWV as well as other components for
light vehicle platforms. Technology and processes used in this
program will be applied to components on FMTV trucks and other
vehicles that are being created for the purpose of replacing
the HMMWV in combat situation. Larger logistics trucks have the
same weight reduction and protection enhancement needs as the
HMMWV. Such a program will enhance the military's industrial
base and result in an Army fleet of larger and better armored
trucks.

NEUROTOXIN EXPOSURE TREATMENT RESEARCH PROGRAM

The Committee is aware that the United States Army Medical
Research and Materiel Command (USAMRMC) is conducting excellent
research in investigating the underlying biologic mechaisms and
therapeutic interventions of neuro-degenerative effects caused
by deployment, environmental, and occupational exposures.
Therefore, the Committee recommends $25,000,000 for the
continuation of this vital research into Parkinson's and other
neurolorical disorders through collabortive work between the
military, a non-profit organization and an academic laboratory
with distinguished scientific credentials in this field.

PAIN AND NEUROSCIENCE CENTER RESEARCH PROGRAM

The Committee is aware of the exceptional research outcomes
of the Pain and Neuroscience Center Research Program, including
the development of protocols for appropriate peripheral nerve
block catheterization use for severe peripheral limb loss and
damage, and the development of a comprehensive research,
clinical and educational program to address a variety of
neurological conditions with military and civilian relevance,
focusing on acute neurology and neuromuscular disorders. The
Committee continues to support this effort to increase the
quality of battlefield and post-deployment pain management and
neurological care.

SUSTAINING SUPPORT FOR ONGOING OPERATIONS

The Committee is concerned that the Army's C4ISR research,
development, test and evaluation acquisition and sustainment
assets are suffering workforce attrition at an unacceptably
high rate. To ensure the continuity of support for ongoing
operations, the Committee provides robust funding for critical
C4ISR research and development to ensure that workforce
attrition is mitigated. The Committee will examine both the
reasons for and potential solutions to this attrition problem.

UNDERSEA UXO CLEANUP

The Committee applauds the Army's effects to characterize,
monitor and clean up undersea munitions off the coast of Oahu.
The Committee encourages the Army to capitalize on the work
being done by the University of Hawaii and their partners to
conduct investigations and clean up at ocean dumping sites
around the United States. The Committee believes that the
Hawaii Undersea Chemical Weapons Assessment Program off Pearl
Harbor and the coast of Wainae could serve as a template for
work at other undersea clean up sites and encourages the Army
to monitor project activities for possible use of duplication
elsewhere.

ADVANCED AFFORDABLE TURBINE ENGINE (AATE)

The Committee is aware that the Army recently conducted a
competition for design and concept demonstration of an advanced
technology 3000 shaft horsepower turbine engine for the
application to H-60 Black Hawks, AH-64 Apaches and other future
force rotorcraft. The Committe, however, is concerned that the
Army's current engine development approach may lead to
selecting a single engine supplier prematurely. For these
reasons, the Committee believes it is imperative for the Army
to pursue and alternate engine design and test demonstration
from a second manufacturer. As such, the Committee directs
that, from funds available under this heading, $5,000,00 may be
used to pursue an alternative AATE engine.

CVP DESIGN

The Committe is aware that the ``CVP Design for Commonality
Across Platforms and Applications'' technology, which is
designed to greatly reduce wear and tear on vehicle
transmissions, is proving to be an effective tool to reduce
consumption. The Committee encourages the Army to provide
fundign for this activity in fiscal year 2008.

NATIONAL EYE EVALUATION AND RESEARCH NETWORK

The Committe recognizes the need for a nationwide
infrastructure to provide readily accessible evaluation and
testing for serious retinal injuries and diseases, as well as a
central repository for clinical trial research data. The
Committee directs $3,000,00 to be appropriated for use by the
National Eye Evaluation and Research Network, to be managed by
the National Neurovision Research Institute.

RESEARCH, DEVELOPMENT, TEST AND EVALUATION, NAVY

Fiscal year 2007 appropriation........................ $18,673,894,000
Fiscal year 2008 budget request....................... 17,075,536,000
Committee recommendation.............................. 17,718,624,000
Change from budget request............................ +643,088,000
This appropriation provides funds for the research,
development, test and evaluation activities of the Department
of the Navy, which includes the Marine Corps.
The Committee recommends an appropriation of
$17,718,624,000 for Research, Development, Test and Evaluation,
Navy, which is $955,270,000 less than the amount provided in
fiscal year 2007 and $643,088,000 more than the request for
fiscal year 2008.

Program Recommended

The total amount recommended in the bill will provide the
following program in fiscal year 2008:

[GRAPHICS NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]

The adjustments to the budget activities for Research,
Development, Test and Evaluation, Navy, are shown below:

[GRAPHICS NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]

BONE MARROW REGISTRY

The Committee provides $31,500,000, to be administered by
the C.W. Bill Young Bone Marrow Donor Recruitment and Research
Program, also known and referred to within the Naval Medical
Research Center as the Bone Marrow Registry. Funds appropriated
for the C.W. Bill Young Bone Marrow Donor Recruitment and
Research Program shall remain available only for the purposes
for which they were appropriated, and may only be obligated for
the C.W. Bill Young Bone Marrow Program. This DoD donor center
has recruited more than 420,000 DoD volunteers, and provides
more marrow donors per week than any other donor center in the
Nation. More than 2,575 service members and other DoD
volunteers from this donor center have provided marrow to save
the lives of patients. The Committee is aware of the continuing
success of this national and international life-saving program
for military contingencies and civilian patients, which now
includes more than 6,600,000 potential volunteer donors.
Further, the Committee encourages agencies involved in
contingency planning to continue to include the C.W. Bill Young
Bone Marrow Donor Recruitment and Research Program in the
development and testing of their contingency plans. DD Form
1414 shall show this as a congressional special interest item,
and the Committee directs that all of the funds appropriated
for this purpose be released to the C.W. Bill Young Bone Marrow
Recruitment and Research Program within 60 days of enactment of
the Department of Defense Appropriations Act, 2008.

INNOVATIVE METHODS FOR SHIPBUILDING CONSTRUCTION

The Committee supports the Navy's efforts to design,
develop, and implement high performance steel sandwich panel
construction techniques in order to improve quality and
performance and to reduce procurement costs for Navy ships.
Therefore, the Committee provides an additional $2,000,000 to
Program Element 0603123N for continuing the development and
qualification of advanced steel sandwich panels for ship
construction.

SYSTEM OPEN ARCHITECTURE/SMALL BUSINESS TECHNOLOGY INSERTION

While the Committee recognizes that the Navy has made
considerable strides in the recent past towards open
architecture combat systems, the overall effort could certainly
be accelerated and improved. The Chief of Naval Operations has
stated that after witnessing the cost-effective advantages
gained through the Acoustic Rapid Commercial off-the-shelf
Insertion/Advanced Processor Build Program (ARCI/APB) within
the submarine community, the Navy needs to work to rapidly
transition this concept to other acquisition programs. The
Committee applauds the Navy's attempt to expand the ARCI
concept from submarines to other platforms in an effort to
obtain the same types of advantages and efficiencies now being
seen in the submarine force. Examples include, but are not
limited to, modularity, rapid technology insertion, software
re-use, improved manufacturing processes, and cost reductions.
The Committee believes that a key requirement of tactical
systems is the sharing of information across networks in a
standard, consistent method via the use of middleware. Navy
Open Architecture doctrine calls for a standard-based,
middleware solution to be used for data communication. The
Committee strongly recommends the use of virtualization that
will allow disparate systems to co-exist on a single computer,
thus allowing shipboard computer rooms/processing centers to be
smaller in size, consume less power, and provide more
processing capability in a more efficient and effective way.
To that end, the Committee believes a valuable resource in
this area, the small business community, is oftentimes
overlooked in the hectic world that is the Department's
acquisition process. The small business community can provide
fresh, creative, and innovative solutions to the Navy's
requirements. Especially in light of cost growth recently
realized in such ship construction programs as the Littoral
Combat Ship, the Committee enthusiastically supports efforts to
reduce the burgeoning cost of ship acquisition using the
aforementioned ARCI concept as a blueprint. In an effort to
reduce the cost of ship acquisition, the Committee provides
$25,000,000 in program element 0604558N and $25,000,000 in
program element 0603553N to fund small business efforts for
high risk/high reward components of surface ship and submarine
combat system development.

UNIQUE IDENTIFICATION OF TANGIBLE ITEMS

In 2003, the Department of Defense mandated that by 2010,
the Services must be able to locate, control, and value assets
which should lead to lower cost of item management, improved
operational readiness, and reduced burden on the workforce
through increased productivity and efficiency. To date, no
Service or agency has developed a single standard approach to
meet this mandate. The Unique Identification of Tangible Items
program will satisfy the Department's mandated requirements for
item identification and tracking. Therefore, the Committee
provides $8,500,000 to accelerate the development of the Unique
Identification of Tangible Items program.

RESEARCH, DEVELOPMENT, TEST AND EVALUATION, AIR FORCE

Fiscal year 2007 appropriation........................ $24,516,276,000
Fiscal year 2008 budget request....................... 26,711,940,000
Committee recommendation.............................. 26,163,917,000
Change from budget request............................ -548,023,000
This appropriation finances the research, development, test
and evaluation activities of the Department of the Air Force.
The Committee recommends an appropriation of
$26,163,917,000 for Research, Development, Test and Evaluation,
Air Force, which is $1,647,641,000 more than the amount
provided in fiscal year 2007 and $548,023,000 less than the
request for fiscal year 2008.

Program Recommended

The total amount recommended in the bill will provide the
following program in fiscal year 2008:

[GRAPHICS NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]

The adjustments to the budget activities for Research,
Development, Test and Evaluation, Air Force, are shown below:

[GRAPHICS NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]

KC-135 TANKER REPLACEMENT

The fiscal year 2008 budget request includes $314,454,000
for the development of a follow-on tanker to replace the aging
KC-135. The Committee notes that $70,000,000 was provided in
fiscal year 2007 for systems development and demonstration and
a replacement platform selection and that few funds have been
obligated. Therefore, a substantial amount of the fiscal year
2008 request is early to need and would not be executed.
Accordingly, the Committee reduces funding provided for the
development program by $200,000,000. The Committee is very
supportive of proceeding with the development and procurement
of a tanker to replace the KC-135 and as such has transferred
these funds into the Tanker Replacement Transfer Fund. The
Secretary of the Air Force may transfer these funds from this
account only for the purposes of proceeding with a tanker
acquisition program.

JOINT STRIKE FIGHTER F-136 ENGINE DEVELOPMENT

The fiscal year 2008 budget request includes no funding for
development of the F-136 as an alternate engine within the
Joint Strike Fighter program. The Committee recommends
$480,000,000 for this effort. These funds have been added to
the Air Force and Navy's respective Joint Strike Fighter
development lines.
The statement of the managers accompanying the conference
report on the Defense Appropriations Act for fiscal year 2007
directed the Department of Defense to fund the continued
development of both the F-135 and F-136 engines in the fiscal
year 2008 budget request. The Committee notes that this
direction was disregarded by the Office of the Secretary of
Defense. In exercising its power of the purse, the Committee
made the necessary program adjustments to the fiscal year 2008
budget request to fully fund the requirement for this engine
development program. The fiscal year 2009 requirement for the
F-136 is estimated to be $350,000,000. The Committee again
directs the Department of Defense to fully fund this
development program in the fiscal year 2009 budget submission.

JOINT STRIKE FIGHTER DEVELOPMENT

Elsewhere in this report, the Committee notes the
criticality of this period in the Joint Strike Fighter program.
The Committee has expressed concerns about delays in systems
design and development with regard to production of the test
aircraft. The Committee believes that additional funding for
development efforts at this time could help get production of
these aircraft back on track and prove extremely beneficial to
the long-term health of the program. Accordingly, the Committee
recommends an additional $200,000,000 divided between the Air
Force and Navy research and development lines to support
developmental activities. These funds may be used for unfunded
information assurance requirements driven by current Department
of Defense policy updates, or in support of investment into new
and more efficient manufacturing techniques that can drive down
aircraft cost and production schedule.

PERSONNEL RECOVERY SYSTEMS (CSAR-X)

The budget request includes $290,059,000 for the
development of a replacement helicopter for the HH-60 combat
search and rescue mission. The Committee notes that the
contract award for this program is under a bid protest and as
such been delayed significantly. Accordingly, the Committee
reduced funding for the request by $100,000,000.
The Committee is concerned about the selection criteria and
process by which this program has proceeded to source
selection. The Committee directs the Secretary of the Air Force
to submit a report to the congressional defense committees
detailing the source selection criteria and how they were
established. The report shall include the significant factors
of the Request for Proposal (RFP) that determined the source
selection, their importance, and how each of the respondents to
the RFP was rated against those factors. The report shall be
delivered not later than September 15, 2007.

JOINT STARS SYERS DEMONSTRATION

The Committee recommends an additional $16,000,000 to
develop and conduct a demonstration of the Senior Year Electro-
optical Reconnaissance System (SYERS) on a Joint STARS
aircraft. This funding is provided to address an Air Force
requirement for combat identification capability on Joint STARS
to reduce the sensor-to-shooter timeline. The Joint STARS
Operational Requirements Document dated December 2004 requires
a Combat Identification (CID) System/Function that entails the
process of attaining an accurate characterization of detected
objects in the joint battle space and provides decision quality
data to the operator so the timely application of military
options and weapons resource can occur. Demonstrating the
integration of an electro-optical sensor on the Joint STARS
will accelerate the ability to provide a combat identification
capability to this platform. The current target identification
concept of operations is a slow process measured in hours
dependent on coordination of multiple intelligence,
surveillance and reconnaissance systems. The Committee believes
that just as targeting pods have become huge force multipliers
by turning fighter jets into non-traditional intelligence,
surveillance and reconnaissance assets, the ability of the
Joint STARS to not only locate but also provide combat
identification of ground threats will be a similar advancement
and reduce the sensor-to-shooter timeline from hours to
minutes.

SPACE PROGRAMS

The combination of space systems and modern weaponry
provides today's armed forces with unprecedented lethality at a
reduced risk to the lives of our nation's soldiers, sailors,
airmen and marines. The present national security space
acquisition system, however, is replete with cost overruns and
schedule delays to the point that some observers have described
space acquisition as broken.
In almost every area of national security space, this
year's budget requests both space programs that have not yet
been fielded, and at the same time requests alternative, or
improved, programs for the same mission area. In missile
warning, the first Space Based Infrared System (SBIRS) has not
yet launched, and the Air Force is requesting funds for the
Alternative Infrared Satellite System (AIRSS) program. In
global positioning, the first Global Positioning Satellite
(GPS) IIF has not yet launched, and the Air Force is requesting
funds for the GPS III program. In communications, the first
Advanced Extremely High Frequency (AEHF) and Wideband Gapfiller
Satellite (WGS) satellites have not yet launched, and the Air
Force is requesting funds for the Transformational Satellite
(TSAT) program. The high cost of space acquisition is only
increased when the acquisition decision is to cut off a program
after spending billions of dollars to procure three, two, or
even a single satellite and to spend billions of dollars to
start a new acquisition. New programs might look good on paper
from a cost and schedule standpoint, but that is only because
they have not yet entered the riskiest periods of a satellite's
life during integration, testing, launch, and on-orbit
initialization. For all national security space programs, a
commitment to realistic budgets and schedules that reflects the
realities of engineering, manufacturing, launch and the
harshness of the space environment is necessary.
The Committee's review of the Department's space program
has led to the conclusion that funding for some of these
follow-on systems is requested ahead of need. The Committee
recommends $75,877,000 for the Alternative Infrared Satellite
System, which is a reduction of $155,000,000 below the request
for fiscal year 2008. The Alternative Infrared Satellite System
is investigating sensor improvements over the current Space
Based Infrared System, and should continue these research and
development efforts.
The Committee recommends $507,226,000 for the Global
Positioning System III, which is a reduction of $80,000,000
below the request for fiscal year 2008. The Global Positioning
System III acquisition plan includes a selection of a single
contractor to build eight satellites for block A of the program
and a future decision for block B and block C, which could
include a decision to purchase satellites from a different
contractor. Additionally, there is debate within the Department
of Defense regarding the requirements and timing for each of
the blocks of the program. The current acquisition strategy
should be modified in a way that ensures a healthy competition
for the objective program of block C and maximum flexibility
for blocks A and B.

SPACE SITUATIONAL AWARENESS AND OPERATIONALLY RESPONSIVE SPACE

The Committee recommends $197,604,000 for Space Situational
Awareness Systems, which is $9,800,000 more than the request
for upgrades to the Space Fence. In addition, the Committee
recommends $62,604,000 for Space Control Technology, which is
$25,000,000 more than the request for fiscal year 2008. These
additional funds are for Self Aware-Space Situational Awareness
described in the Air Force unfunded priorities list.
The Committee is strongly supportive of the ongoing efforts
to improve space situational awareness, especially in light of
the recently successful Chinese anti-satellite test.
Accordingly, the Committee has provided these additional funds
to improve the efforts to understand both natural and man-made
threats to space systems.
The Committee also recommends $107,032,000 for
Operationally Responsive Space, which is an increase of
$20,000,000. Of the $20,000,000 increase, $6,100,000 shall be
used as described in the classified annex. In light of the
recent Chinese anti-satellite test, the Committee provides
these additional funds for efforts associated with responsive
launch, payload, and bus development.

SPACE RADAR

The Committee recommends $186,000,000 for the Space Radar
program, which is consistent with the fiscal year 2007 level of
funding and has transferred the funding back to the same Air
Force Space Radar program element as fiscal year 2007. The
Committee remains concerned about the cost, value and maturity
of planning for the Space Radar program. For example, the
Department of Defense and the Intelligence Community have not
decided on issues such as responsibilities for transitioning to
operations and integration with other space and ground
capabilities. The total program cost, estimated by the
Congressional Budget Office as $35 billion to $50 billion, is
not affordable, the program has significant technical
challenges, the moving target indicator mission is currently
performed by airborne platforms, and the program is a lower
priority than other Defense requirements.

BALLISTIC MISSILE RANGE SAFETY TECHNOLOGY

The budget request includes $15,145,000 in PE 605860F,
Rocket Systems Launch Program, but does not include funding for
the Ballistic Missile Range Safety Technology (BMRST) program.
The Committee has long supported and continues to support
BMRST. The Committee recommends $20,145,000 in PE 605860F, an
increase of $5,000,000 for BMRST.
The Committee believes that BMRST has developed the
opportunity for a more flexible national launch complex and is
disappointed with the lack of effort shown by the Department of
the Air Force to assess the long term value in this project. As
a result, the Committee encourages the Department of Defense's
Executive Agent (EA) for Space to pursue this opportunity and
any other that will provide the Nation with minimal and
adaptable launch infrastructure requirements, mobile range
options, and launch-on-demand capabilities that fully leverage
GPS metric tracking and integrated communications relays. The
Committee also encourages the EA for Space, through the newly
established Operationally Responsive Space Office, to explore
ways that the BMRST program would enable the goals of
responsive launch.
Additionally, the Committee directs the Secretary of the
Air Force to perform the certification process for the BMRST
system on the eastern range with respect to full integration of
telemetry and command destruct capabilities. The Committee
directs that of the funds available in PE 305182F, Spacelift
Range Systems, $10,000,000 is restricted from obligation or
expenditure until 30 days after notification to the
congressional defense committees of the results from the BMRST
certification process.

MEDSTARS INTEGRATION WITH THE GLOBAL COMBAT SUPPORT SYSTEM

The Committee recommends $2,000,000 for MEDSTARS
Integration with the Global Combat Support System. As the
exposure to non-conventional weapons increases, servicemembers
need a frontline medical system to enable the rapid relay,
monitoring and assessment of the health of the combat force.
The MEDSTARS program is the only system that digitally collects
information using a state-of-the-art digital data tablet system
that can integrate with the Theater Trauma Registry program and
the Global Combat Support System (GCCS). The Committee urges
the rapid development and deployment of this system to best
provide our forces with instant access to health care
information and trauma reports.

WIDE AREA SURVEILLANCE RADAR INTEGRATION ON JOINT STARS

The Committee is concerned about the need for future radar
capability enhancements for the Joint STARS fleet and
understands that the Air Force is considering a plan to
transition the wide area surveillance (WAS) radar from the E-10
program to Joint STARS. The Committee believes the Air Force
should prepare a formal cost estimate and schedule for a
program to integrate the WAS on Joint STARS for consideration
by the congressional defense committees.

RESEARCH, DEVELOPMENT, TEST AND EVALUATION, DEFENSE-WIDE

Fiscal year 2007 appropriation........................ $21,291,056,000
Fiscal year 2008 budget request....................... 20,559,850,000
Committee recommendation.............................. 20,659,095,000
Change from budget request............................ +99,245,000
The appropriation provides funds for the research,
development, test and evaluation activities of the Department
of Defense for defense-wide activities.
The Committee recommends an appropriation of
$20,659,095,000 for Research, Development, Test and Evaluation,
Defense-Wide, which is $631,961,000 less than the amount
provided in fiscal year 2007 and $99,245,000 more than the
amount requested for fiscal year 2008.

Program Recommended

The total amount recommended in the bill will provide the
following program in fiscal year 2008:

[GRAPHICS NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]

The adjustments to the budget activities for Research
Development, Test and Evaluation, Defense-Wide, are shown
below:

[GRAPHICS NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]

Missile Defense Agency

REPORTING REQUIREMENTS

The Committee is concerned that the information currently
provided by the Missile Defense Agency (MDA) does not allow
Congress to exercise sufficient oversight over the Ballistic
Missile Defense programs. Past Congresses have established a
framework of laws that require program and cost reporting to
Congress to help exercise this oversight. However, because the
Ballistic Missile Defense System (BMDS) has not formally
entered DoD's System Development and Demonstration acquisition
phase, which triggers the application of a significant portion
of these laws, all the information essential for full oversight
has not been provided to Congress. Therefore, the Committee
directs MDA to develop a system-wide plan to report according
to the spirit of existing acquisition laws to improve
accountability and transparency of its program. MDA is directed
to report for all elements that are effectively in System
Development and Demonstration or production corresponding
baselines, the results of independent cost estimates performed
by the Cost Analysis Improvement Group, unit costs, and unit
cost growth. This direction should not be construed as
requiring full compliance with DoD Regulation 5000.2. In
addition, while developing and fielding the BMDS outside DoD's
normal acquisition cycle, MDA should address operational
testing by including operational test objectives in
developmental tests. The Committee directs that this plan be
delivered to the congressional defense committees with the
submission of the fiscal year 2009 budget and updated semi-
annually.

BLOCK STRUCTURE

The Committee understands that Missile Defense Agency (MDA)
is in the process of restructuring its block acquisition
approach. While the Committee does not wish to define the block
approach that MDA should follow, it does believe that the new
structure should include, at a minimum, a longer timeframe in
which to complete system-level developmental activities and the
manufacture and delivery of all assets that compose the block.
In addition, the block structure adopted should include only
those assets that will be fielded during the block.

EUROPEAN COMPONENT

The Department of Defense included $310,000,000 in the
fiscal year 2008 request for the Ballistic Missile Defense
European Component. This request includes funding for the
European Interceptor site in Poland, a Midcourse Radar in the
Czech Republic and the fielding of a Forward Based Radar (AN-
TPY-2). The cost of the proposed program exceeds $4,000,000,000
through fiscal year 2013 just for the tactical portion of the
proposal. These estimates, though, do not include costs for
barracks, family housing or any other costs normally associated
with infrastructure of a cantonment area at a military
facility. Also, the estimate does not include personnel costs
for manning the facilities.
The Committee believes that it is premature to provide full
funding for the European Component given the uncertainty
surrounding the program as of this writing. Accordingly, the
Committee has reduced without prejudice funding of $139,000,00
for the missile field construction and the associated
equipment.

SPACE TRACKING AND SURVEILLANCE SYSTEM (STSS)

The budget request includes $331,525,000 for STSS, of which
$105,789,000 is for the proposed follow-on space system. The
Committee recommends $30,720,000 for the follow-on effort. This
amount, adjusted for inflation, is equal to the amount provided
in the fiscal year 2007 appropriation. The Committee notes that
two demonstration satellites will be launched in fiscal year
2008 and that exploitation of data from these satellites will
allow the Missile Defense Agency to develop sensor requirements
and a concept of operations that will drive the follow-on space
system. As a result, the Committee believes it is premature to
award the follow-on space system contract and directs the
Missile Defense Agency to maintain the current level of effort
in pursuit of sensor technology development and risk reduction
with the remaining follow-on funds.
Additionally, the Committee has provided $2,000,000 for a
Federally Funded Research and Development Corporation to
conduct an analysis of alternatives for a satellite-based
capability for infrared and visible sensors to provide global
tracking of ballistic missiles. Further, this analysis should
also examine the applicability of the STSS demonstration system
and the proposed follow-on systems' ability to perform against
the space situational awareness mission requirement and other
space mission applications.

UNDEFINITIZED CONTRACTS

The Committee has become aware of the excessive use of un-
definitized contracts by the MDA. Based on information obtained
by the Committee, it is apparent that MDA has not provided the
proper oversight of contracting activities within various
programs. According to the MDA, the amounts of undefinitized
contracts may be in excess of $2,700,000,000. While the
Committee understands the need at times for programs to use
this type of contracting mechanism, it is apparent that the MDA
has grossly abused it with respect to volume, dollar amounts
and the numbers of days to definitize. The Committee directs
the MDA to definitize the current contracts in an expedient
manner and to minimize the use of the mechanism in the future.
The Committee further directs the Undersecretary of Defense,
Acquisition Technology and Logistics to review contracting
procedures at the MDA and provide a report to the congressional
defense committees within 90 days of enactment of this Act
detailing a strategy to reduce current, and minimize future,
undefinitized contracts in the MDA.

KINETIC ENERGY INTERCEPTOR

The Committee has included $372,853,000 for the Kinetic
Energy Interceptor (KEI) program, an increase of $145,354,000
above the budget request. In the fiscal year 2008 request, the
Missile Defense Agency (MDA) reduced the planned funding by
$178,009,000 to $227,499,000. Additionally, the MDA drastically
descoped the program. Even though the KEI program has met each
knowledge point while remaining on schedule and on budget, it
has been used as an offset on numerous occasions for other more
high risk programs. As originally conceived, the KEI mission is
as a boost phase defense weapon with mobile capability on land
and sea. In the current request, the KEI has been descoped to a
booster program aimed at replacing the Ground-based Midcourse
Interceptor. The Committee disagrees with this change and has
provided additional funding in an effort to accelerate this
much-needed capability.

AIRBORNE LASER (ABL)

The Committee believes that a robust boost intercept
capability is vital to a layered missile defense system.
Further, the Committee notes the technical progress that the
Airborne Laser (ABL) program has made over the last three years
with the early accomplishment of the firing and refurbishment
of the high energy laser and the continuing flight testing of
the associated beam control/fire control (BC/FC) system. These
technical challenges were accomplished while the program stayed
within the government determined schedule and budget. The
Committee looks forward to continued strong support and
commensurate funding by the Missile Defense Agency of ABL.

AIRBORNE LASER LESSONS LEARNED

The Committee commends the MDA on its continued efforts on
the Airborne Laser program. While the program has seen many
technology successes, the Committee is concerned about the
transition of these successes to other service programs. The
Committee directs the Missile Defense Agency to develop a
lessons learned program for the Airborne Laser program for
future use by the Department of Defense.

COMMAND AND CONTROL, BATTLE MANAGEMENT AND COMMUNICATIONS (C2BMC)
PROGRAM

The Committee recommends $460,703,000 for the Command and
Control, Battle Management and Communications program. In
fiscal year 2006, funding for the C2BMC program was reduced by
$30,000,000. However, during the year of execution the MDA
increased funding for C2BMC by over $50,000,000 by using funds
in other program elements to back-fill the congressional
reduction. The Committee in fiscal year 2007 reinstated the
fiscal year 2006 congressional reduction and directed the MDA
to fully comply with congressional intent by funding C2BMC
within program element 0603889C. In fiscal year 2008, the MDA
has chosen to ignore congressional intent by funding C2BMC in
the C2BMC program element and has also included $208,000,000 in
various other program elements. This disregard of congressional
intent obfuscates total funding allocated to the program. This
method of funding also creates impediments to Congress'
fiduciary responsibility to taxpayers in providing oversight of
the programs. As in previous years, the Committee again directs
the Missile Defense Agency to fully fund C2BMC in the C2BMC
program element. If the MDA continues to fund C2BMC in multiple
different program elements, the Committee will consider all
funding outside of the C2BMC program element to be excess to
need. If, due to emergent requirements, the program needs
additional funding during the year of execution, the Missile
Defense Agency is directed to comply with the reprogramming
guidance specified in this report and in the report
accompanying the House version of the fiscal year 2007
Department of Defense Appropriations bill as it pertains to
guidelines allowing agencies to reprogram funds from one
program element or appropriation to another.

AEGIS BALLISTIC MISSILE DEFENSE SYSTEM

The Committee commends the MDA for showing progress and
promise in continued success in its Aegis Ballistic Missile
Defense System. In this bill, the Committee has included
additional funding for the continuation of the Open
Architecture and Ballistic Missile Signal Processor.
Additionally, the Committee has included funding to upgrade two
additional Aegis Destroyers to a Long Range Track and
Surveillance (LRT&S) and Engage capability specifically for the
Atlantic Fleet by the end of 2009. The Committee strongly urges
that MDA refrain from transferring funds out of the Aegis
program to other missile defense programs; MDA shall fully fund
and execute the Aegis program as Congress intends.

MULTIPLE KILL VEHICLE

The Committee has provided $272,151,000 only for the
Multiple Kill Vehicle (MKV) program. The Committee encourages
the Missile Defense Agency to accelerate development and
delivery of the MKV capability. The Committee designates the
MKV program as congressional special interest items subject to
prior approval reprogramming procedures.

ASYMMETRIC MISSILE DEFENSE

The Committee has previously noted its concern about and
responded to the possibility of an asymmetric missile threat
against the United States homeland, defined by a terrorist or
other non-state actor lauching a cruise or short-range
ballistic missile from air or sea-based platforms to the United
States' territory. In fiscal years 2006 and 2007, the Committee
provided additional funding targeted specifically at this
potential threat.
The Committee believes that while the MDA has made valuable
contributions in conducting studies and analyses and providing
recommendations for potential means to address the threats,
much additional work remains to be done within the U.S.
government. As a result, the Committee recommends an additional
$15,000,000 to continue the Missile Defense Agency's efforts to
conduct experiments, develop prototypes, test concepts of
operations, and recommend deployment options for an integrated
asymmetric missile defense capability that would protect
population centers. In additional to the current efforts, the
Committee directs the MDA to conduct an operationally realistic
test using sea-based assets. The MDA shall develop a
recommended architecture and concept of operations for homeland
asymmetric missile defense to include progressions for spiral
technology upgrades that would enhance cruise and ballistic
missile defense capabilities over time. The Director, MDA, in
consultation with Commanders, U.S. Northern Command and U.S.
Strategic Command, shall provide a report to the congressional
defense committees not later than March 1, 2008 on results of
the efforts to date along with a recommended program plan for
further development, to include recommended knowledge points to
guide further investment in the critical capability.

FISSILE MATERIAL DETECTION RESEARCH

The Committee recommends an increase of $26,500,000 for the
Defense Threat Reduction Agency (DTRA) to accelerate
improvements in the detection of improvised fissile material
devices. While the Department has funded small efforts in the
fiscal year 2008 request, the Committee is concerned that the
Department is not fully addressing this threat by providing the
appropriate level of funding. Accordingly, the Committee is
providing this funding specifically targeted to increasing the
capability of detection of fissile material and allowing for
the acceleration of these efforts by several years.

SPECIAL OPERATIONS COMMAND

The Committee recommendation includes $444,637,000 for the
Special Operations Command. This amount is $109,422,000 below
the fiscal year 2007 enacted amount and $73,359,000 above the
request. Of this amount, an increase of $25,000,000 is included
for the GPS Extension Program, transferred from the Air Force,
RDT&E. The funds will enable the Special Operations Command to
prove the ability to develop and manufacture GPS Extension user
equipment in a portable device prior to funding future
developmental efforts which compete with GPS III anti-jam
capabilities. The request is to augment the GPS signal using
the Iridium constellation of communications satellites for the
benefit of SOCOM users. The task would be to modify GPS
receivers to receive both GPS and Iridium signals on a handheld
device.

CHEMICAL AND BIOLOGICAL DEFENSE PROGRAM

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

DEFENSE ADVANCED RESEARCH PROJECTS AGENCY

The Committee has included $3,035,222,000 for the Defense
Advanced Research Projects Agency (DARPA), which is a decrease
of $50,395,000 from the fiscal year 2008 request and a decrease
of $80,088,000 from the amount appropriated in fiscal year
2007. Based on historic under-execution in several program
elements, the Committee has reduced funding in the Biological
Warfare, Electronics Technology, Advanced Aerospace Systems and
Land Warfare Technology program elements. Additionally, the
Committee has reduced funding for various programs as
identified by DARPA that have been cancelled subsequent to the
submission of the fiscal year 2008 budget.
In the statement of the managers accompanying the
Conference Report on the Department of Defense Appropriation
Act, 2007, the conferees expressed concern over the development
of the DARPA budget submission material and encouraged DARPA to
include additional programmatic detail in the fiscal year 2008
budget request. DARPA chose not to address these concerns.
Therefore, the Committee directs DARPA to provide in future
budget justification material more individual programmatic
detail, to include budget information, programmatic
achievements and goal by fiscal year, as well as transition
plans.

ADVANCE DEVELOPMENT INITIATIVE

The Committee includes $50,000,000 for an Advanced
Development Initiative Fund. This fund, under the direction of
the Director, Defense Research and Engineering (D,DR&E), shall
be used to resource projects that will enhance the Department's
long-range research and development strategy, as determined by
the D,DR&E. The Committee has denied funding for various new
starts in the fiscal year 2008 request due to concern over an
apparent lack of relations to and integration into that long-
range strategy. A more coordinated approach that targets funds
to key development programs should result in a more successful
research and development effort over time.

FIRSTLINK--IEE (TECHNOLOGY TRANSITION LINE)

The Committee continues its support for the FirstLink
program and strongly encourages the Department of Defense to
include the funding for this program in its fiscal year 2009
budget submission. FirstLink has been highly successful at
helping the Department transfer its technologies as well as
generating new revenue through the return on investment this
activity provides to the Department of Defense Laboratories
while at the same time making these technologies available for
both the military and first responder applications. The
Department is urged to make the FirstLink program a permanent
part of its technology, transition, and acquisition activities.

WMD MEDICAL COUNTERMEASURES

The Committee recognizes that there remains a signficant
threat from biological and chemical weapons. It is paramount
that better medical defensive strategies are developed. It is
unlikely that the agent of a deployed weapon of mass
destructuion can be readily identified. Consequently, the DoD
is encouraged to develop a multi-threat treatment
countermeasure that can be used for exposures to chemical,
biological and radiation exposures. DoD is encouraged to seek
technologies that would facilities pre-symptomatic real-time
diagnoses to avoid catastrophic health consequences.

OPERATIONAL TEST AND EVALUATION, DEFENSE

Fiscal year 2007 appropriation........................ $185,420,000
Fiscal year 2008 budget request....................... 180,264,000
Committee recommendation.............................. 180,264,000
Change from budget request............................ - - -
This appropriation funds the Operational Test and
Evaluation activities of the Department of Defense.
The Committee recommends an appropriation of $180,264,000
for Operational Test and Evaluation, Defense. The following
table provides a summary of the Committee's recommendation.

Program Recommended

The total program recommended in the bill will provide the
following in fiscal year 2008:

[GRAPHICS NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]

TITLE V

REVOLVING AND MANAGEMENT FUNDS

DEFENSE WORKING CAPITAL FUNDS

Fiscal year 2007 appropriation........................ $1,345,998,000
Fiscal year 2008 budget request....................... 1,352,746,000
Committee recommendation.............................. 1,352,746,000
Change from budget request............................ - - -
This appropriation finances, through the receipt of funded
reimbursable orders, the operation of industrial, commercial
and support-type activities such as depot maintenance, supply
operations, distribution depots, transportation services, Navy
research, finance and accounting services, information systems
and telecommunication services. Working capital fund accounts
use cost accounting and business management techniques to
provide managers with information that can be used to monitor,
control, and minimize costs of operations.
The Committee recommends an appropriation of $1,352,746,000
for the Defense Working Capital Funds. The recommendation is
$6,748,000 more than the amount provided in fiscal year 2007
and the same as the request for fiscal year 2008.

NATIONAL DEFENSE SEALIFT FUND

Fiscal year 2007 appropriation........................ $1,071,932,000
Fiscal year 2008 budget request....................... 1,079,094,000
Committee recommendation.............................. 2,489,094,000
Change from budget request............................ +1,410,000,000
This appropriation provides funds for the lease, operation,
and supply of pre-positioning ships, operation of the Ready
Reserve Force, and acquisition of ships for the Military
Sealift Command, the Ready Reserve Force, and the Marine Corps.
The Committee recommends an appropriation of $2,489,094,000
for the National Defense Sealift Fund, which is $1,417,162,000
more than the amount provided in fiscal year 2007 and
$1,410,000,000 more than the request for fiscal year 2008.

T-AKE ACQUISITION

The Lewis and Clark Class of Dry Cargo/Ammunition Ships (T-
AKE) will provide logistic lift capability as a shuttle ship
from supply sources to ships at sea. The request includes
$456,110,000 for the acquisition of the eleventh Lewis and
Clark Class T-AKE Dry Cargo/Ammunition Ship. In an effort to
provide stability to the Navy's shipbuilding program by
increasing throughput, the Committee provides $1,866,110,000
for the procurement of 3 additional T-AKE ships, which is
$1,410,000,000 above the request. In addition to providing
stability, this effort satisfies the second highest priority on
the Navy's unfunded priority list. This increase will allow the
Navy to buy out the T-AKE requirement for the Maritime Pre-
positioned Force (Future) while at the same time promoting
stability to the construction yard and sub-vendors and
achieving volume efficiencies.

DEFENSE COALITION SUPPORT FUND

Fiscal year 2007 appropriation........................ - - -
Fiscal year 2008 budget request....................... $22,000,000
Committee recommendation.............................. - - -
Change from budget request............................ -22,000,000
The budget requests a new appropriation to finance the
acquisition of defense articles and defense services in
anticipation of their temporary use or transfer to eligible
foreign countries and international organizations, including
the support of coalition or international military stability or
counter-terrorism operations. The Committee has not included an
appropriation of $22,000,000 requested for the Defense
Coalition Support fund as this appropriation is unauthorized.
TITLE VI

OTHER DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE PROGRAMS

DEFENSE HEALTH PROGRAM
Fiscal year 2007 appropriation........................ $21,217,000,000
Fiscal year 2008 budget request....................... 22,541,124,000
Committee recommendation.............................. 22,957,184,000
Change from the budget request........................ +416,060,000
This appropriation funds the Defense Health Program of the
Department of Defense.
The Committee recommends an appropriation of
$22,957,184,000 for the Defense Health Program, which is
$1,740,184,000 more than the amount provided in fiscal year
2007 and $416,060,000 more than the request for fiscal year
2008.

Program Recommended

The total amount recommended in the bill will provide the
following program in fiscal year 2008:

[GRAPHICS NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]

The adjustments to the budget activities for Defense Health
Program are shown below:

[GRAPHICS NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]

Traumatic Brain Injury (TBI)

From the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, traumatic brain
injury has emerged as a significant cause of morbidity to the
war fighter. Whether mild, moderate or severe brain trauma, the
Committee finds that the level of assessment and standard of
care provided to the injured war fighter is in need of
enhancement. Diagnosis, treatment and rehabilitation must be at
a level to ensure the best possible outcome is reached. To this
end, the Committee recommends the development and adherence to
specific protocols to address all levels of brain injury (mild,
moderate and severe) and directs the Department of Defense to
implement the use of off-the-shelf, computerized, proven
technology that generates baseline scores for every member of
the military to be administered prior to and upon return from
the war theater. The Department shall create centers of
excellence to provide specialized treatment and rehabilitation
for brain injured troops. Such centers already exist in the
private sector. The Department of Veterans Affairs and military
centers should coordinate with civilian centers, to ensure
optimal treatments are available throughout the country.
Finally, identification and use of community-based treatment
facilities is essential for a seamless transition throughout
treatment.
The vast majority of disabled troops will ultimately return
to their home communities, which may be remote from specialized
centers. The identification of local services is crucial to an
appropriate rehabilitation plan. The employment of case
managers (who are frequently trained rehabilitation nurses and
used by private insurers) are well suited to find and
coordinate appropriate services from physicians, therapists and
community support personnel.
Congress provided $450,000,000 in the ``U.S. Troop
Readiness, Veterans' Care, Katrina Recovery, and Iraq
Accountability Appropriations Act, 2007'', (Public Law 110-28)
for the creation of a dynamic, peer-reviewed research program
to identify and employ the most current and promising
diagnosis, treatment, and rehabilitative tools available. To
date, the Committee has not received a plan on how these funds
will be expended. During the fiscal year 2008 budget cycle, the
Committee received numerous project proposals for TBI research.
The Committee believes, however, that prior to considering
these proposals, the Department must first establish protocols
and standards utilizing the framework discussed above.
The Committee understands that the Department is aware of
gaps within TBI treatment methods that need to be addressed,
which include epidemiology, diagnosis, identification and
assessment; protection and prevention treatment; and, clinical
management. The Committee directs the Department, in
conjunction with the Departments of Veterans Affairs, and
Health and Human Services, academia and industry, to focus the
research that will address the gaps that were identified by the
Congressionally Directed Medical Research Program.

POST TRAUMATIC STRESS DISORDER (PTSD)

Survival rates today for servicemembers wounded in combat
are even higher than earlier in the war due to improved
personal protection and better health care. More than 800
soldiers have lost a limb; more than 100 have been blinded; and
many are disfigured by burns or have brain injuries. An
estimated 2,000 cases of brain injury have been treated, while
many less-severe or less-obvious injuries go undetected. The
Committee believes there should be an active stress prevention
component, along with methods of diagnosing and treating stress
from the battlefield. Baseline testing should be considered for
deploying and returning forces. The Committee also believes
strongly that the Department of Defense should address the
shortages of mental health experts in the military and report
to the congressional defense committees by January 15, 2008, on
the state of mental health experts available across the
military, both at Military Treatment Facilities as well as the
availability of care in the private sector.
The Committee directs the Department of Defense and the
Department of Veterans Affairs to study jointly mental health
care, the onset and nature of Post Traumatic Stress Disorder
(PTSD), panic disorder. Also, these departments must improve
mental health testing and tracking of returning combat duty
servicemen, to include the Reserve Component. The Department
shall report to the congressional defense committees on the
findings by May 31, 2008.
Congress provided $450,000,000 in ``U.S. Troop Readiness,
Veterans' Care, Katrina Recovery, and Iraq Accountability
Appropriations Act'', 2007, (Public Law 110-28), for the
creation of a dynamic, peer-reviewed research program on PTSD.
To date, the Committee has not received a plan on how these
funds will be expended. The Committee received numerous project
proposals for PTSD research. The Committee believes, however,
that prior to considering these proposals the Department must
first establish protocols and standards for detection,
prevention and treatment of PTSD.
The Committee directs the Department in conjunction with
Veterans Affairs, Health and Human Services, academia and
industry to focus the research that will address the gaps
identified by the Congressionally Directed Medical Research
Program.

ELECTRONIC HEALTH INFORMATION SHARING

The Committee is extremely dismayed that the Department of
Defense (DoD) and the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) still
do not have medical record electronic interoperability. DOD's
health care system is comprised of 65 military hospitals, 800
medical and dental clinics in the direct care system and 2,800
network facilities with 190,000 network providers in the
private or purchased care system. On average a weekly workload
consists of 19,600 in-patient admissions; 642,000 professional
out-patient encounters; 102,900 dental sessions; 2.2 million
prescriptions and 2,100 births. These numbers alone show that
it is imperative that the DOD and VA have interoperability
across the continuum--garrison and theater.
Using off-the-shelf technology may assist the Department in
bridging the gaps that currently exist between VA and DOD. The
Committee includes $2,000,000 within Research, Development,
Test and Evaluation, Army, for the Wireless Electronic Patient
Records, WPIC Personal Information Center to improve the
Department's ability to track medical information pertinent to
the treatment of servicemembers whether in a Military Treatment
Facility or on the battlefield. The Committee further directs
the Department to use funding provided in the Joint Incentives
Fund for initiatives that will record-keeping interoperability
between the Department of Defense and the Department of
Veterans Affairs.

DEFENSE ENROLLMENT ELIGIBILITY REPORTING SYSTEM (DEERS)

DEERS is a computerized database of military sponsors,
families and others worldwide who are entitled under the law to
TRICARE benefits. Active-duty and retired service members are
automatically registered in DEERS, but they must take action to
register their family members and ensure they are correctly
entered into the database. Mistakes in the DEERS database can
cause problems with TRICARE claims and benefits. Other
complications arise in the DEERS system with registration of
dual military dependents. The system is only able to register
the dependent under one of the parents, but not both.
Therefore, the Committee directs the Department of Defense
to report to the congressional defense committees by January
15, 2008, on the number of dual military member families
currently in the military system and on how to correct the
inability of the system to register dependents under both
parents. The report should include the cost estimates for
correcting any flaws and deficiencies within the system.

DIABETES RESEARCH

The Committee remains concerned over the increasing number
of type I and type II diabetes cases in the United States,
specifically the growing numbers of children, teens and young
adults afflicted by the disease. Over 50 percent of Americans
are overweight and 30 percent are obese. Ninety percent of type
II diabetes is attributed to excess weight. In the Department
of Defense alone, there are 111,275 known cases of diabetes,
with the Air Force having 43,733 known cases. Also, junior
enlisted are four times more likely and senior enlisted are
three times more likely to have diabetes than officers. The
health care expenditures associated with treatment of this
disease are increasing dramatically. Without proper medical
care, monitoring and education, diabetes patients will
experience significant adverse consequences. Nutrition, early
detection, diagnosis and treatment are essential to alleviating
this trend. Therefore, the Committee has provided $25,000,000
for diabetes research. Of the funds provided, $5,000,000 shall
be for type I diabetes and $20,000,000 shall be for type II
diabetes research.

WOUNDED WARRIOR ASSISTANCE

This year has been wrought with issues and problems
affecting the wounded warrior. Much improvement is needed for
medical and dental care of servicemembers assigned to an
outpatient status. Continuity of care and support for the
wounded servicemembers and their families is essential to
recovery. As such, the Committee provides $66,000,000 for
wounded warrior assistance. The funds provided will address the
need to improve the standard of living for the wounded and to
improve the administrative systems that support these troops
and their families.

WARRIORS IN TRANSITION

Warriors in transition are defined as troops who meet the
qualification for medical hold, medical holdover or active duty
medical extension, and active component troops who require a
medical evaluation board or who have medical needs requiring
more than six months of treatment. This year has proven that
the military's system for ensuring that its programs to support
these warriors in transition, namely housing, treating,
transitioning, and integrating troops after injury, are
extremely overburdened and in need of significant improvement.
The problems occurred on many levels, from failed
infrastructure, rehabilitative care, administrative process,
and policy incongruities between the Department of Defense, the
Services, and the Department of Veterans Affairs.
Following the disclosure of these deficiencies, the
Department of Defense established an independent commission to
review current rehabilitative care and processes, and the Army
Inspector General reviewed the Physical Disability System. The
results of these reviews highlighted many systemic
deficiencies, as noted above.
The Committee is frustrated that this situation occurred
despite all of the funding and support that has been provided
over the years to the Department of Defense to ensure that
returning troops have access to the best medical treatment and
recovery facilities possible. Therefore, the Committee directs
the Department of Defense to implement the findings of the
independent commission and the Army Inspector General, and to
provide a progress report to the congressional defense
committees no later than 60 days after enactment of this Act
regarding their implementation.
The Committee also directs the Department of Defense to
report to the congressional defense committees by January 15,
2008, on how it plans to update the Physical Disability
Evaluation System to more accurately reflect the injuries of
war. This report should include a review of the differences
among the Services' rating systems and the Department of
Veterans Affairs system, and provide a process for how and when
these various rating systems will be standardized.
The Committee is concerned that these reviews also revealed
policy variances and differences in Physical Disability
personnel training guidelines among the Department of Defense,
Department of the Army regulatory guidance, and the Department
of Veterans Affairs. These reviews also revealed insufficient
data management systems and information management concerns.
The issues outlined above, coupled with the increasing
number of injured troops entering the system, have stressed the
Department's ability to efficiently manage this responsibility.
The Committee intends to closely monitor the Department's
progress in addressing these concerns, and directs the
Undersecretary of Defense for Personnel and Readiness to report
quarterly to the congressional defense committees on the status
of implementing these improvements, and to notify the
congressional defense committees promptly if other issues
arise.

MILITARY TREATMENT FACILITIES USAGE OF RED CROSS VOLUNTEER PHYSICIANS

Across the Nation there is a shortage of care givers in
many medical fields. The military is facing a similar shortage
due to the high rates of deploying physicians and specialty
physicians. This shortage is acute within the Military
Treatment Facilities (MTFs). Therefore, the Committee directs
the Assistant Secretary of Defense for Health Affairs to report
to the congressional defense committees by September 15, 2007,
that describes the current regulations for allowing volunteer
physicians to work in MTFs and what changes are needed to
ensure that volunteers are used in such facilities across the
military.

ORTHOPEDIC INJURY RESEARCH

Serious limb trauma, vascular injury, major limb tissue
damage and blood flow disruption contribute heavily to U.S.
military casualties. Amputation following battlefield injury
now occurs at twice the rate of past wars. Recent advances in
battlefield medical treatments have focused on reducing time
from injury to evacuation and treatment, but the consequences
of blood flow disruption to damaged limb tissues remain a major
cause of permanent disability or death among military war
fighters.
Extremity injuries are the number one battlefield injury.
Understanding how to prevent, treat, and rapidly recover from
orthopedic injuries should be a top priority for the Military
Health System. Further, the Committee believes that dynamic
research and treatment is necessary to provide servicemembers
the greatest ability to recovery from injuries sustained on the
battlefield.
The Committee is concerned that the Institute of Surgical
Research is not working with all necessary entities to share
data and collaborate on research and analysis. The Committee
believes that every aspect of orthopedic research should be
considered, to include reducing the negative impact of reduced
blood flow. The Committee provided funding in the fiscal year
2007 supplemental to address this critical issue and expects
the Department to use the research funds to benefit
servicemembers wounded during the global war on terror.

VISION RESEARCH

The Department of the Army continually reassesses new
technologies and therapies to address the ocular ailments of
combat troops. Current ocular research targets the causes,
effects and treatment of eye damage and disease that, despite
different mechanisms and pathogenesis, all have a common end
result: degeneration of the critical components of the eye and
impairment or loss of vision. In order to implement therapeutic
strategies to prevent or treat visual problems common to
servicemembers, the Army needs to develop and validate
compounds and strategies. The Committee directs the Army to
target the various causes and effects of visual damage
resulting from exposures during combat to elements, and damage
resulting from Improvised Explosive Devices (IED). This
research will be used to ensure and sustain combat readiness.

PREVENTIVE MEDICINE AND SURVEILLANCE

Preventive medicine is the key to sustaining a healthy and
ready force. The Committee fully supports the budget requests
for vaccine development and research. The Committee has
included additional funding for malaria and leishmaniasis
vaccine research and fully supports the $100,000,000 for avian
flu requested for the Defense Health Program.
The Committee also believes that surveillance and an
enterprise information management system will further protect
Department of Defense (DoD) personnel. The Committee has
included $15,660,000 for the Defense Occupational and
Environmental Health Readiness System (DOEHRS). DOEHRS, once
developed, will have the capability to document industrial
hygiene and environmental health conditions at DoD
installations and in the deployed settings.
DoD lacks a full-spectrum mortality registry, a well-proven
public health and preventive medicine tool for decreasing
mortality. Currently, the Armed Forces Institute of Pathology
(AFIP) maintains a registry for all service members who die
while on active duty, but no other beneficiary category is
included. A full-spectrum registry would provide critical
insight regarding long-term outcomes from military service and
environmental exposures. To enhance this registry, the
Committee has included $1,500,000 for the Department.
Further, the Armed Forces Health Surveillance Center
maintains a longitudinal health record for service members: the
Defense Medical Surveillance System (DMSS). The Committee has
included $1,400,000 to automate the collection and transmission
of environmental sampling data to DMSS and to expand linkages
with various personnel data systems to allow the accurate
identification of individuals at risk.
Tracking the immunization status of active duty personnel
is an essential component of force health protection.
Currently, each Service utilizes a Service-specific electronic
immunization tracking system that, depending on the vaccine,
may vary significantly with centrally-held records. This
represents the potential for service members receiving excess
vaccines, with attendant increased individual risk as well as
excess cost to the Department. The Committee has included
$4,000,000 for a universal immunization tracking system that
would help resolve this liability.

EMBEDDED METAL FRAGMENT REGISTRY

Military operations in OIF/OEF have increased the number of
casualties with embedded metal fragments. Current medical
practice guidelines often call for leaving such fragments in
place unless they are clinically contraindicated. Currently,
the DoD lacks a sufficient understanding of the toxicological
implications of metal fragments. Therefore, the Committee has
included $700,000 for DoD to develop and implement an Embedded
Metal Fragment Registry (EMFR) to monitor the health status of
all such servicemembers, refine medical management guidelines,
and more effectively partner with the Department of Veterans
Affairs in the on-going care of these veterans.

LIMITED ACCESS TO MILITARY TREATMENT FACILITIES IN RURAL AREAS

The Committee is encouraged by the Department of Defense's
recent efforts to address the lack of access to care in rural
and remote communities. However, the Committee remains
concerned that, despite these efforts, under-served communities
still have difficulty accessing health care services,
especially the Guard and Reserve components. Therefore, the
Committee encourages the Assistant Secretary of Defense for
Health Affairs to redouble the Department's efforts to expand
health care services in areas where military installations are
not located.

REDUCTION OF CARRYOVER PERCENTAGE

The current fiscal year 2006 Defense Health Program (DHP),
Operation and Maintenance (O&M) account unobligated balance is
below the fiscal year 2006-2007 DHP O&M two percent carryover
threshold authorized in the Fiscal Year 2006 Department of
Defense Appropriations Act. The Committee understands that any
balances not required for pricing adjustments will be
reapportioned into fiscal year 2007 to be obligated prior to
fiscal year end. Therefore, the Committee has reduced the
percentage the Department of Defense is able to carry over
within the Operation and Maintenance account of the Defense
Health Program from two to one percent for fiscal year 2008.

REVIEW OF TRICARE CO-PAYS

For several years now, the Congress has demonstrated its
disapproval of increasing co-pays as a method for addressing
the rising costs of health care by not enacting legislative
proposals made by the Department of Defense.
Civilian employers have studied whether or not covering or
waiving the cost of drugs can save money over the long term for
chronic conditions. The Committee directs the Assistant
Secretary of Defense for Health Affairs to review TRICARE co-
pays and determine whether or not elimination of certain co-
pays would in the long run, be a cost saving measure. The
Secretary is to report to the congressional defense committees
by January 15, 2008, on whether any savings could be achieved
by eliminating certain co-pays.

CHEMICAL AGENTS AND MUNITIONS DESTRUCTION, ARMY

Fiscal year 2007 appropriation........................ $1,277,304,000
Fiscal year 2008 budget request....................... 1,455,724,000
Committee recommendation.............................. 1,455,724,000
Change from budget request............................ - - -
This appropriation funds the Chemical Agents and Munitions
Destruction activities of the Department of the Army.
The budget requested $1,455,724,000 for the Chemical Agents
and Munitions Destruction, Army program, an increase of
$178,420,000 from the fiscal year 2007 appropriation. The
Committee recommends $1,455,724,000, fully funding the budget
request.

Program Recommended

The total program recommended in the bill will provide the
following in fiscal year 2008.

EXPLANATION OF PROJECT LEVEL ADJUSTMENTS
[In thousands of dollars]
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Budget Committee Change from
request recommended request
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Chem Demilitarization--O&M.... 1,198,086 1,198,086 ............
Chem Demilitarization--Proc... 36,426 36,426 ............
Chem Demilitarization--RDTE... 221,212 221,212 ............
-----------------------------------------
Total, Chem Agents & 1,455,724 1,455,724 ............
Munitions Destruction,
Army...................
------------------------------------------------------------------------

DRUG INTERDICTION AND COUNTER-DRUG ACTIVITIES, DEFENSE

Fiscal year 2007 appropriation........................ $977,632,000
Fiscal year 2008 budget request....................... 936,822,000
Committee recommendation.............................. 945,772,000
Change from the budget request........................ +8,950,000
This appropriation provides funds for Military Personnel;
Operation and Maintenance; Procurement; and Research,
Development, Test and Evaluation for drug interdiction and
counter-drug activities of the Department of Defense to include
activities related to narcoterrorism.
The Committee recommends an appropriation of $945,772,000
for Drug Interdiction and Counter-drug Activities, Defense,
which is $31,860,000 less than the amount provided in fiscal
year 2007 and $8,950,000 more than the request for fiscal year
2008.
The adjustments to the budget activities for Drug
Interdiction and Counter-Drug Activities, Defense are shown
below:

[GRAPHICS NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]

JOINT IMPROVISED EXPLOSIVE DEVICE DEFEAT FUND

Fiscal year 2007 appropriation........................ - - -
Fiscal year 2008 budget request....................... $500,000,000
Committee recommendation.............................. 500,000,000
Change from budget request............................ - - -
This appropriation funds the Joint Improvised Explosive
Device Defeat Organization (JIEDDO).
The Committee recommends $500,000,000 for the Joint
Improvised Explosive Device Defeat Organization, fully funding
the President's budget request. This is the first time the
budget includes a funding request for the JIEDDO through the
regular appropriations process, and the Committee encourages
the continued submission of requests in this manner,
particularly for ongoing operating costs. The Committee has
limited to $110,000,000 amounts available to the Organization
for operating and administrative costs.

Program Recommended

The total program recommended in the bill will provide the
following in fiscal year 2008:

[GRAPHICS NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]

RAPID ACQUISITION FUND

Fiscal year 2007 appropriation........................ - - -
Fiscal year 2008 budget request....................... $100,000,000
Committee recommendation.............................. - - -
Change from budget request............................ -100,000,000
The Committee recomends no funding for the Rapid
Acquisition Fund. This request will be considered by the
Committee during its deliberations of the fiscal year 2008 war
supplemental.

OFFICE OF THE INSPECTOR GENERAL

Fiscal year 2007 appropriation........................ $216,297,000
Fiscal year 2008 budget request....................... 215,995,000
Committee recommendation.............................. 239,995,000
Change from budget request............................ +24,000,000
The Committee recommends an appropriation of $239,995,000
for the Office of the Inspector General. Of this amount,
$238,995,000 shall be for operation and maintenance, and
$1,000,000 shall be for procurement. The recommendation is an
increase of $24,000,000 above the amount requested and will
allow the DoD Inspector General to provide additional oversight
of Department of Defense contracted services.

TITLE VII

RELATED AGENCIES

NATIONAL AND MILITARY INTELLIGENCE PROGRAMS

The National Intelligence Program (NIP) consists of those
intelligence activities of the government that provide the
President, other officers of the Executive Branch, and the
Congress with national intelligence on broad strategic concerns
bearing on U.S. national security. These concerns are stated by
the National Security Council in the form of long-range and
short-range requirements for the principal users of
intelligence. In addition, the Military Intelligence Program
(MIP) consists of intelligence activities of the Department of
Defense that provide servicemembers with tactical intelligence
on the battlefield, as well as provide the President, other
officers of the Executive Branch, and the Congress with
defense-related intelligence pertinent to defending the United
States.
The National Intelligence Program and the Military
Intelligence Program budgets funded in the Department of
Defense Appropriations Act consist primarily of resources for
the Director of National Intelligence including the
Intelligence Community Management staff, the Central
Intelligence Agency (CIA), the Defense Intelligence Agency, the
National Reconnaissance Office, the National Security Agency,
the National Geospatial-Intelligence Agency, the intelligence
services of the Departments of the Army, Navy, Air Force, and
Marine Corps and the CIA Retirement and Disability fund.

CLASSIFIED ANNEX

The Committee's budget reviews are published in a separate
detailed and comprehensive classified annex. The intelligence
community, Department of Defense and other organizations are
expected to fully comply with the recommendations and
directions in the classified annex accompanying the Department
of Defense Appropriations Act, 2008. As directed by House
Resolution 35, the recommendations of the Select Intelligence
Oversight Panel are addressed as recommendations to the House
Appropriations Committee, Subcommittee on Defense, in the
accompanying classified annex.

CENTRAL INTELLIGENCE AGENCY RETIREMENT AND DISABILITY SYSTEM FUND
Fiscal year 2007 appropriation........................ $256,400,000
Fiscal year 2008 budget request....................... 262,500,000
Committee recommendation.............................. 262,500,000
Change from request................................... - - -
This appropriation provides payments of benefits to
qualified beneficiaries in accordance with the Central
Intelligence Agency Retirement Act of 1964 for Certain
Employees (P.L. 88-643), as amended by Public Law 94-522. This
statute authorized the establishment of the CIA Retirement and
Disability System (CIARDS) for certain employees and authorized
the establishment and maintenance of a fund from which benefits
would be paid to those beneficiaries.
The Committee recommends the budget request of $262,500,000
for the Central Intelligence Agency Retirement and Disability
System fund. This is a mandatory account.

INTELLIGENCE COMMUNITY MANAGEMENT ACCOUNT
Fiscal year 2007 appropriation........................ $621,611,000
Fiscal year 2008 budget request....................... 705,376,000
Committee recommendation.............................. 683,276,000
Change from request................................... -22,100,000
The Committee recommends an appropriation of $683,276,000
for the Intelligence Community Management Account, a decrease
of $22,100,000 below the budget request. Of the amount
appropriated under this heading, $39,000,000 is for transfer to
the Department of Justice for operations at the National Drug
Intelligence Center (NDIC). This is an increase of $23,000,000
above the budget request.
Within the available funding, the Committee has provided
$1,000,000 for the purpose of allowing NDIC to support requests
utilizing the Real-time Analytical Intelligence Data Base
(RAID) software and training to enhance the capabilities of
foreign nations, particularly those in Central America, to
address and combat transnational drug and gang-related criminal
activities, to include providing translation services and a
Spanish language version of the RAID software.

TITLE VIII

GENERAL PROVISIONS

Title VIII includes the general provisions recommended by
the Committee. Most of these provisions were included in the
Department of Defense Appropriations Act for fiscal year 2007
and many have been included in the Defense Appropriations Acts
for a number of years. A description of each provision follows.
Section 8001 provides that no funds made available in this
Act may be used for publicity or propaganda purposes not
authorized by Congress.
Section 8002 provides for conditions and limitations on the
payment of, compensation to, or employment of, foreign
nationals.
Section 8003 provides that no funds made available in this
Act may be obligated beyond the end of the fiscal year unless
express provision for a greater period of availability is
provided elsewhere in the Act.
Section 8004 provides a 20 percent limitation on the
obligation of funds provided in this Act during last two months
of the fiscal year.
Section 8005 provides for the general transfer authority.
Section 8006 provides for the establishment of a baseline
for application of reprogramming and transfer authorities for
fiscal year 2008.
Section 8007 provides for limitations on the use and
transfer authority of working capital fund cash balances.
Section 8008 provides that none of the funds appropriated
in this Act may be used to initiate a special access program
without prior notification to the congressional defense
committees.
Section 8009 provides limitations and conditions on the use
of funds made available in this Act to initiate multi-year
contracts.
Section 8010 provides for the use and obligation of funds
for humanitarian and civic assistance costs under Chapter 20 of
title 10, United States Code.
Section 8011 provides that civilian personnel of the
Department may not be managed on the basis of end-strength or
be subject to end-strength limitations.
Section 8012 prohibits funds made available in this Act
from being used to influence congressional action on any
matters pending before the Congress.
Section 8013 prohibits compensation from being paid to any
member of the Army who is participating as a full-time student
and who receives benefits from the Education Benefits Fund when
time spent as a full-time student is counted toward that
member's service commitment.
Section 8014 provides for the limitations on the conversion
of any activity or function of the Department of Defense to
contractor performance.
Section 8015 provides for the transfer of funds
appropriated in title III of this Act for the Department of
Defense Pilot Mentor-Protege Program.
Section 8016 provides for the Department of Defense to
purchase anchor and mooring chains manufactured only in the
United States.
Section 8017 prohibits funds made available to the
Department of Defense from being used to demilitarize or
dispose of certain surplus firearms.
Section 8018 provides a limitation on funds being used for
the relocation of any Department of Defense entity into or
within the National Capital Region.
Section 8019 provides for incentive payments authorized by
section 504 of the Indian Financing Act of 1974 (25 U.S.C.
1544).
Section 8020 provides for a 24-month limitation on a study
of a single activity or function and a 30-month limitation on a
study of multiple activities or functions.
Section 8021 provides that no funds made available in this
Act for the American Forces Information Service may be used for
national or international political or psychological
activities.
Section 8022 provides for the obligation of funds for
purposes specified in section 2350j(c) of title 10, United
States Code.
Section 8023 provides funding for the Civil Air Patrol
Corporation.
Section 8024 provides for the number of staff years of
technical effort that may be funded for defense Federally
Funded Research and Development Centers (FFRDCs) and deletes
language on the number of staff years that may be funded for
defense studies and analysis by FFRDCs.
Section 8025 provides for the Department of Defense to
procure carbon, alloy or armor steel plate melted and rolled
only in the United States and Canada.
Section 8026 defines the Congressional Defense Committees
as being the Armed Services Committees and the Subcommittees on
Defense of the Committees on Appropriations of the House and
Senate.
Section 8027 provides for competitions between private
firms and Department of Defense Depot Maintenance Activities
for modification, depot maintenance, and repair of aircraft,
vehicles and vessels as well as the production of components
and other Defense-related articles.
Section 8028 provides for revocation of blanket waivers of
the Buy American Act upon a finding that a country has violated
a reciprocal trade agreement by discriminating against products
produced in the United States that are covered by the
agreement.
Section 8029 provides for the availability of funds for the
Young Marines Program.
Section 8030 provides for the availability of funds for
purposes specified in section 2921(c)(2) of the 1991 National
Defense Authorization Act, namely facility maintenance and
repair and environmental restoration at military installations
in the United States.
Section 8031 provides for the conveyance, without
consideration, of relocatable housing units located at Grand
Forks and Minot Air Force Bases to Indian Tribes located in
North and South Dakota, Montana, and Minnesota.
Section 8032 provides authority to use operation and
maintenance appropriations to purchase items having an
investment item unit cost of not more than $250,000, or upon
determination by the Secretary of Defense that the operational
requirements of a Commander of a Combatant Command engaged in
contingency operations overseas can be met, funds may be used
to purchase items having an investment item unit cost of not
more than $500,000.
Section 8033 prohibits the use of Working Capital Funds to
purchase specified investment items.
Section 8034 provides that none of the funds appropriated
for the Central Intelligence Agency shall remain available for
obligation beyond the current fiscal year except for funds
appropriated for the Reserve for Contingencies, the Working
Capital Fund, or other certain programs authorized under
section 503 of the National Security Act.
Section 8035 provides that funds available for the Defense
Intelligence Agency may be used for intelligence communications
and intelligence information systems for the Services, the
Unified and Specified Commands, and the component commands.
Section 8036 provides funding for the procurement of
competitive, domestic expansion of essential vacuum induction
melting furnace capacity and vacuum arc re-melting furnace
capacity.
Section 8037 provides for the Department of Defense to
comply with the Buy American Act (title III of the Act entitled
``An Act making appropriations for the Treasury and Post Office
Departments for the fiscal year ending June 30, 1934, and for
other purposes'').
Section 8038 provides conditions under which contracts for
studies, analyses or consulting services may be entered into
without competition on the basis of an unsolicited proposal.
Section 8039 provides for the limitations of funds made
available in this Act to establish Field Operating Agencies.
Section 8040 provides grant authorities for the Department
of Defense acting through the Office of Economic Adjustment.
Section 8041 provides for the rescission of $367,786,000
from the following programs:

2006 Appropriations:
Aircraft Procurement, Air Force:
C-5 RERP........................................ $10,000,000
C-5 RERP Advanced Procurement................... 15,786,000
2007 Appropriations:
Aircraft Procurement, Air Force:
C-5 RERP........................................ 40,000,000
C-5 RERP Advanced Procurement................... 11,000,000
Research, Development, Test and Evaluation, Navy:
Expeditionary Fighting Vehicle.................. 24,000,000
Research, Development, Test and Evaluation, Air
Force:
Personnel Recovery Systems...................... 92,000,000
Defense Reconnaissance/Support Activities....... 50,000,000
Research, Development, Test and Evaluation, Defense-
Wide:
Defense Advance Research Projects Agency........ 125,000,000

Section 8042 prohibits funds made available in this Act
from being used to reduce authorized positions for military
(civilian) technician of the Army National Guard, Air National
Guard, Army Reserve and Air Force Reserve unless such
reductions are a direct result of a reduction in military force
structure.
Section 8043 provides that none of the funds made available
in this Act may be obligated or expended for assistance to the
Democratic People's Republic of Korea unless appropriated for
that purpose.
Section 8044 provides for reimbursement to the National
Guard and Reserve when members of the National Guard and
Reserve provide intelligence or counterintelligence support to
the Combatant Commands, Defense Agencies and Joint Intelligence
Activities.
Section 8045 prohibits funds made available in this Act
from being used to reduce civilian medical and medical support
personnel assigned to military treatment facilities below the
September 30, 2003, level unless the Service Surgeon General
certifies to the congressional defense committees that it is a
responsible stewardship of resources to do so.
Section 8046 provides that Defense and Central Intelligence
Agency drug interdiction and counter-drug activity funds may
not be transferred to other agencies unless specifically
provided in an appropriations law.
Section 8047 prohibits the use of funds appropriated by
this Act for the procurement of ball and roller bearings other
than those produced by a domestic source and of domestic
origin.
Section 8048 provides for the Department of Defense to
purchase supercomputers manufactured only in the United States.
Section 8049 prohibits the use of funds made available in
this or any other Act to transfer administrative
responsibilities or budgetary resources of any program,
project, or activity financed by this Act to the jurisdiction
of another Federal agency not financed by this Act without
expressed authorization of the Congress.
Section 8050 provides for prior Congressional notification
of article transfers to international peacekeeping
organizations.
Section 8051 prohibits the use of funds made available in
this Act for contractor bonuses from being paid due to business
restructuring.
Section 8052 provides for the transfer of funds to be used
to support personnel supporting approved non-traditional
defense activities.
Section 8053 provides for the Department of Defense to
dispose of negative unliquidated or unexpended balances for
expired or closed accounts.
Section 8054 provides conditions for the use of equipment
of the National Guard Distance Learning Project on a space-
available, reimbursable basis.
Section 8055 provides for the availability of funds
provided by this Act to implement cost-effective agreements for
required heating facility modernization in the Kaiserslautern
Military Community, Germany.
Section 8056 provides for the limitation on the use of
funds appropriated in title IV to procure end-items for
delivery to military forces for operational training,
operational use or inventory requirements.
Section 8057 provides for the use of funds made available
in this Act for the transportation of relief supplies to
American Samoa and the Indian Health Service.
Section 8058 prohibits the use of funds made available in
this Act from being used to approve or license the sale of the
F-22A advanced tactical fighter to any foreign government.
Section 8059 provides for a waiver of the ``Buy America''
provisions for certain cooperative programs.
Section 8060 prohibits the use of funds made available in
this Act to support the training of members of foreign security
forces who have engaged in gross violations of human rights.
Section 8061 provides for the Department to develop, lease
or procure T-AKE class ships with main propulsion engines and
propulsors manufactured only in the United States by a
domestically operated entity.
Section 8062 prohibits the use of funds made available in
this Act for repairs or maintenance to military family housing
units.
Section 8063 provides obligation authority for new starts
for joint concept technology demonstration projects only after
notification to the congressional defense committees.
Section 8064 provides that the Secretary of Defense shall
provide a classified quarterly report on certain matters as
directed in the classified annex accompanying this Act.
Section 8065 provides for the crediting of travel and
purchase card refunds.
Section 8066 provides for the registration of financial
management information technology systems with the DoD Chief
Information Officer for certifications of compliance with the
Financial Management Modernization Plan and with the Clinger-
Cohen Act.
Section 8067 prohibits the use of funds made available to
the Department of Defense to provide support to an agency that
is more than 90 days in arrears in making payments to the
Department of Defense for goods or services provided on a
reimbursable basis.
Section 8068 provides for the use of National Guard
personnel to support ground-based elements of the National
Ballistic Missile Defense System.
Section 8069 prohibits the use of funds made available in
this Act to transfer to any nongovernmental entity ammunition
held by the Department of Defense that has a center-fire
cartridge and is designated as ``armor piercing'' except for
demilitarization purposes.
Section 8070 provides for a waiver by the Chief, National
Guard Bureau or his designee for all or part of consideration
in cases of personal property leases of less than one year.
Section 8071 prohibits funds made available in this Act
from being used to purchase alcoholic beverages.
Section 8072 provides for the use of funds made available
to the Department of Defense for the Global Positioning System.
Section 8073 provides for the transfer of funds made
available in this Act under ``Operation and Maintenance, Army''
to other activities of the Federal Government for classified
purposes.
Section 8074 provides for the forced matching of
disbursement and obligations made by the Department of Defense
in fiscal year 2008.
Section 8075 provides grant authority for the construction
and furnishing of additional Fisher Houses to meet the needs of
military family members when confronted with the illness or
hospitalization of an eligible military beneficiary.
Section 8076 provides the Secretary of Defense, in
coordination with the Secretary of Health and Human Services,
the authority to distribute surplus dental and medical
equipment to Indian Health Service facilities and to federally
qualified health centers.
Section 8077 provides funding and transfer authority for
the Arrow missile defense program.
Section 8078 provides for the transfer funds to properly
complete prior year shipbuilding programs.
Section 8079 provides for the noncompetitive appointments
of certain medical occupational specialties, as prescribed by
section 7403(g) of title 38, U.S.C.
Section 8080 provides that funds made available in this Act
are deemed to be specifically authorized by Congress for
purposes of section 504 of the National Security Act of 1947.
Section 8081 prohibits the use of funds made available in
this Act to initiate a new start program without prior written
notification.
Section 8082 provides authority for the Secretary of the
Army to make a grant only to the Center for Military
Recruitment, Assessment and Veterans Employment.
Section 8083 requires the Department of the Army and the
Department of Defense to program and budget to fully finance
the Non-Line of Sight Future Force Cannon program; to achieve
fielding by fiscal year 2010; to deliver eight combat
operational pre-production Non-Line of Sight Future Force
Cannons by the end of calendar year 2008; and to ensure
budgetary and programmatic plans to provide no fewer than eight
Stryker Brigade Combat Teams.
Section 8084 provides the Secretary of Defense the
authority to make grants in the amounts specified.
Section 8085 provides that the budget of the President for
fiscal year 2008 shall include separate budget justification
documents for costs of the United States Armed Forces'
participation in all named operations estimated to exceed
$100,000,000 in cost.
Section 8086 prohibits funds made available in this Act
from being used for the research, development, test,
evaluation, procurement or deployment of nuclear armed
interceptors of a missile defense system.
Section 8087 prohibits funds made available in this Act
from being used to reduce or disestablish the operation of the
53rd Weather Reconnaissance Squadron of the Air Force Reserve.
Section 8088 prohibits funds made available in this Act
from being used for the integration of foreign intelligence
information unless the information has been lawfully collected
and processed during conduct of authorized foreign intelligence
activities.
Section 8089 provides that at the time members of Reserve
components of the Armed Forces are called or ordered to active
duty, each member shall be notified in writing of the expected
period during which the member will be mobilized.
Section 8090 provides that the Secretary of Defense may
transfer funds from any available Department of the Navy
appropriation to any available Navy ship construction
appropriation to liquidate costs caused by rate adjustments or
other economic factors.
Section 8091 provides for the use of current and expired
Shipbuilding and Conversion, Navy subdivisions to reimburse the
Judgment Fund.
Section 8092 provides for the presentation of promotional
materials to active or Reserve members who have participated in
Operation Enduring Freedom or Operation Iraqi Freedom.
Section 8093 provides for unspecified reductions to reflect
savings from revised economic assumptions.
Section 8094 provides limitations for the reimbursement of
any health care provider for inpatient mental health services.
Section 8095 provides authority to the Secretary of Defense
to adjust wage rates for civilian employees hired for certain
health care occupations.
Section 8096 provides authority to purchase heavy and light
armored vehicles notwithstanding price or other limitations on
the purchase of passenger carrying vehicles.
Section 8097 provides obligation authority of supervision
and administration costs associated with construction projects
outside the United States.
Section 8098 limits the obligation authority of funds
provided for the Director of National Intelligence to the
current fiscal year except for research and technology which
shall remain available for the current and the following fiscal
years.
Section 8099 provides for the adjustment of obligations
within the Shipbuilding and Conversion, Navy appropriation.
Section 8100 provides that not more than 35 percent of the
funds made available in this Act for environmental remediation
may be obligated under indefinite delivery/indefinite quantity
contracts with a total contract value of $130,000,000 or
higher.
Section 8101 provides for the creation of a major force
program category for space for the Future Years Defense Program
of the Department of Defense.
Section 8102 provides additional appropriations to and
transfer authority for the Tanker Replacement Transfer Fund.
Section 8103 prohibits the use of funds made available in
this Act to establish any permanent military installation or
base in Iraq.
Section 8104 prohibits the use of funds made available in
this Act to contravene laws enacted or regulations promulgated
to implement the United Nations Convention Against Torture and
Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment.
Section 8105 provides limitations on the use of funds made
available in this Act to pay negotiated indirect cost rates on
agreements or arrangements between the Department of Defense
and certain entities conducting basic research.
Section 8106 requires the cost of ongoing operations be
included in the budget request. The Congress has urged the
Department of Defense to include the reasonably known and
ongoing costs of military operations in Afghanistan and Iraq
within the annual regular budget request each year over the
past five years. However, the fiscal year 2008 budget again
included the cost for military operations in Afghanistan and
Iraq as a supplemental funding request out side the regular
budget and in a separate schedule. This non-compliance not only
defies Congressional direction, it contravenes stated policy of
the Executive Office of the President Office of Management and
Budget (OMB), found in OMB circular A-11, which states, that
supplemental and budget amendments are to be used for ``an
unforeseen emergency situation . . .'' The Committee observes
that the historical precedent for including the cost of ongoing
military operations in the annual regular budget requests of
the President following initial funding for such operations by
emergency or supplemental appropriations Acts, includes:
--funds for Operation Noble Eagle, beginning in the
budget request of President George W. Bush for fiscal
year 2005;
--funds for operations in Kosovo, beginning in the
budget request of President George W. Bush for fiscal
year 2001;
--funds for operations in Bosnia, beginning in budget
request of President Clinton for fiscal year 1997;
--funds for operations in Southwest Asia, beginning
in the budget request of President Clinton for fiscal
year 1997;
--funds for operations in Vietnam, beginning in the
budget request of President Johnson for fiscal year
1966; and
--funds for World War II, beginning in the budget
request of President Roosevelt for fiscal year 1943.
Accordingly, this section requires the cost of overseas
military operations, to include operations in
Afghanistan and Iraq, to be included within the annual
regular budget request.
Section 8107 prohibits award fees to any defense contractor
contrary to the provisions of section 814 of the National
Defense Authorization Act, Fiscal Year 2007 (Public Law 109-
364).
Section 8108 limits to 90 percent the funds appropriated to
the Department of Defense for contracted services unless and
until the Secretary of Defense submits to the congressional
defense committees a report of contracted services.
Section 8109 makes available up to $30,000,000 from funds
appropriated under ``Operations and Maintenance, Defense-Wide''
for impact aid to eligible local education agencies.

HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES REPORTING REQUIREMENTS

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

Changes in the Application of Existing Law

Pursuant to clause 3(f)(1) of rule XIII of the Rules of the
House of Representatives, the following statements are
submitted describing the effect of provisions in the
accompanying bill which directly or indirectly change the
application of existing law.
Language is included in various parts of the bill to
continue on-going activities which require annual authorization
or additional legislation, which to date has not been enacted.
The bill includes a number of provisions which place
limitations on the use of funds in the bill or change existing
limitations and which might, under some circumstances, be
construed as changing the application of existing law.
The bill includes a number of provisions, which have been
virtually unchanged for many years, that are technically
considered legislation.
The bill provides that appropriations shall remain
available for more than one year for some programs for which
the basic authorizing legislation does not presently authorize
each extended availability.
In various places in the bill, the Committee has allocated
funds within appropriation accounts in order to fund specific
programs.
Changes in the application of existing law found within
appropriations headings:
Language is included that transfers funds appropriated
under the heading ``Operation and Maintenance, Army'' to the
U.S. Corps of Engineers for expenses related to dredging of the
Hudson River Channel and provides that such transfer shall be
in addition to any other transfer authority provided elsewhere
in the bill.
Language is included that provides for emergency and
extraordinary expenses within the appropriation for ``Operation
and Maintenance, Army''.
Language is included that provides that any transfer
authority provided under the heading ``Operation and
Maintenance, Army'' is in addition to any other transfer
authority provided elsewhere in the Act.
Language is included that provides for emergency and
extraordinary expenses within the appropriation for ``Operation
and Maintenance, Navy''.
Language is included that provides that any transfer
authority provided under the heading ``Operation and
Maintenance, Navy'' is in addition to any other transfer
authority provided elsewhere in the Act.
Language is included that provides for emergency and
extraordinary expenses within the appropriation for ``Operation
and Maintenance, Air Force''.
Language is included that provides that any transfer
authority provided under the heading ``Operation and
Maintenance, Air Force'' is in addition to any other transfer
authority provided elsewhere in the Act.
Language is included that provides not more than
$25,000,000 for the Combatant Commander Initiative Fund.
Language is included that provides for emergency and
extraordinary expenses of the Office of the Secretary of
Defense.
Language is included that provides for the Procurement
Technical Assistance Cooperative Agreement Program and centers.
Language is included that provides not less than
$245,075,000 shall be available for the Combatant Commander's
Exercise Engagement and Training Transformation program.
Language is included that provides that none of the funds
in or made available by this Act shall be used to plan or
implement consolidation of a budget or appropriations liaison
office of various offices with the Department into a
legislative affairs or legislative liaison office.
Language is included that provides specific amounts for the
Office of Legislative Affairs within the Office of the
Secretary.
Language is included that provides, notwithstanding section
130(a) of title 10, U.S.C., funds shall be available for the
Office of the Undersecretary of Defense Comptroller and Chief
Financial Officer.
Language is included that funds provided for the personnel
security investigations of the Defense Security Service shall
be paid at rates not to exceed those rates in effect as of
August 1, 2006.
Language is included that provides $4,000,000, to remain
available until expended, only for expenses for certain
classified programs, may be transferred to certain accounts and
that ceilings on investment unit item cost shall not apply to
such funds.
Language is included that provides that any transfer
authority provided under the heading ``Operation and
Maintenance, Defense-Wide'' shall be in addition to any other
transfer authority provided in the Act.
Language is included for the various Environmental
Restoration accounts that provides that the service secretaries
may transfer such funds for the purposes of the funds provided
under such appropriations headings.
Language is included that provides that funds made
available for foreign disaster relief and response activities
shall remain available until expended.
Language is included that provides for specific
construction, acquisition or conversion of vessels under the
heading ``Shipbuilding and Conversion, Navy''.
Language is included that prohibits the use of funds
provided under ``National Defense Sealift Fund'' to award new
contracts that provide for the acquisition of major components
unless such components are made in the United States.
Language is included that provides that the exercise of an
option in a contract award through the obligation of previously
appropriated funds shall not be considered to be the award of a
new contract.
Language is included that provides waiver authority of the
Buy America provisions under ``National Defense Sealift Fund''
under certain circumstances.
Language is included that provides that not less than
$10,000,000 of funds provided under ``Defense Health Program''
shall be available for HIV prevention education activities.
Language is included that provides for the carry-over of
one percent of the Operation and Maintenance account under the
``Defense Health Program''.
Language is included that provides for the transfer of
funds within the Operation and Maintenance account under the
``Defense Health Program''.
Language is included under the heading ``Chemical Agents
and Munitions, Destruction, Army'' providing for the allocation
of funds for specific activities.
Language is included that provides for the transfer of Drug
Interdiction and Counter-Drug Activities. Such transfer
authority shall be in addition to other transfer authority
provided elsewhere in the Act.
Language is included that provides for operating and
administrative costs within the Joint Improvised Explosive
Device Defeat Fund.
Language is included that allows the Director of the Joint
Improvised Explosive Device Defeat Organization to undertake
certain activities.
Language is included that requires that within 60 days of
enactment of this Act, a plan for the intended management and
use of the Joint Improvised Explosive Defeat Fund is to be
provided to the congressional defense committees.
Language is included that requires the Secretary of Defense
to submit a report to the congressional defense committees
providing assessments of the evolving threats, service
requirements to counter threats, pre-deployment training
strategy and funds execution of the Joint Improvised Explosive
Defeat Fund.
Language is included under the Joint Improvised Explosive
Defeat Fund to transfer funds. Such transfer authority shall be
in addition to other transfer authority provided elsewhere in
the Act.
Language is included that provides for the transfer of
funds for the National Drug Intelligence Center.
Language is included that requires the National Drug
Intelligence Center to maintain the personnel and technical
resources to support law enforcement authorities with counter-
drug, counter-terrorism and national security investigations
and operations.
Changes in the application of existing law found within
general provisions:
Language is included that provides that no funds made
available in this Act may be used for publicity or propaganda
purposes not authorized by Congress.
Language is included that provides for conditions and
limitations on the payment of compensation to, or employment
of, foreign nationals.
Language is included that provides that no funds made
available in this Act may be obligated beyond the end of the
fiscal year unless express provision for a greater period of
availability is provided elsewhere in the Act.
Language is included that provides a 20 percent limitation
on the obligation of funds provided in this Act during the last
two months of the fiscal year.
Language is included that provides for the general transfer
authority.
Language is included that provides for the establishment of
a baseline for application of reprogramming and transfer
authorities for fiscal year 2008 and prohibits certain
reprogrammings until after submission of a report.
Language is included that provides for limitations on the
use and transfer authority of working capital fund cash
balances.
Language is included that provides that none of the funds
appropriated in this Act may be used to initiate a special
access program without prior notification to the congressional
defense committees.
Language is included that provides limitations and
conditions on the use of funds made available in this Act to
initiate multi-year contracts.
Language is included that provides for the use and
obligation of funds for humanitarian and civic assistance costs
under Chapter 20 of title 10, United States Code.
Language is included that provides that civilian personnel
of the Department may not be managed on the basis of end-
strength or be subject to end-strength limitations.
Language is included that prohibits funds made available in
this Act from being used to influence congressional action on
any matters pending before the Congress.
Language is included that prohibits compensation from being
paid to any member of the Army who is participating as a full-
time student and who receives benefits from the Education
Benefits Fund when time spent as a full-time student is counted
toward that member's service commitment.
Language is included that provides for the limitations on
the conversion of any activity or function of the Department of
Defense to contractor performance.
Language is included that provides for the transfer of
funds appropriated in title III of this Act for the Department
of Defense Pilot Mentor-Protege Program.
Language is included that provides for the Department of
Defense to purchase anchor and mooring chains manufactured only
in the United States.
Language is included that prohibits funds made available to
the Department of Defense from being used to demilitarize or
dispose of surplus firearms.
Language is included that provides a limitation on funds
being used for the relocation of any Department of Defense
entity into or within the National Capital Region.
Language is included that provides for incentive payments
authorized by section 504 of the Indian Financing Act of 1974
(25 U.S.C. 1544).
Language is included that provides for a 24 month
limitation on a study of a single activity or function and a 30
month limitation on a study of multiple activities or
functions.
Language is included that provides that no funds made
available in this Act for the American Forces Information
Service may be used for national or international political or
psychological activities.
Language is included that provides for the obligation of
funds for purposes specified in section 2350j(c) of title 10,
United States Code.
Language is included that provides funding for the Civil
Air Patrol Corporation.
Language is included that provides for the number of staff
years of technical effort that may be funded for defense
Federally Funded Research and Development Centers (FFRDC) and
deletes language on the number of staff years that may be
funded for defense studies and analysis by FFRDCs.
Language is included that provides for the Department of
Defense to procure carbon, alloy or armor steel plate melted
and rolled only in the United States and Canada.
Language is included that defines congressional defense
committees as being the Armed Services Committees and the
Subcommittees on Defense of the Committees on Appropriations of
the House and Senate.
Language is included that provides for competitions between
private firms and Department of Defense Depot Maintenance
Activities for modification, depot maintenance, and repair of
aircraft, vehicles and vessels as well as the production of
components and other Defense-related articles.
Language is included that provides for revocation of
blanket waivers of the Buy American Act upon a finding that a
country has violated a reciprocal trade agreement by
discriminating against products produced in the United States
that are covered by the agreement.
Language is included that provides for the availability of
funds for the Young Marines Program.
Language is included that provides for the availability of
funds for purposes specified in section 2921(c)(2) of the 1991
National Defense Authorization Act, namely facility maintenance
and repair and environmental restoration at military
installations in the United States.
Language is included that provides for the conveyance,
without consideration, of relocatable housing units located at
Grand Forks and Minot Air Force Bases to Indian Tribes located
in North and South Dakota, Montana, and Minnesota.
Language is included that provides authority to use
operation and maintenance appropriations to purchase items
having an investment item unit cost of not more than $250,000,
or upon determination by the Secretary of Defense that the
operational requirements of a Commander of a Combatant Command
engaged in contingency operations overseas can be met, funds
may be used to purchase items having an investment item unit
cost of not more than $500,000.
Language is included that prohibits the use of Working
Capital Funds to purchase specified investment items.
Language is included that provides that none of the funds
appropriated for the Central Intelligence Agency shall remain
available for obligation beyond the current fiscal year except
for funds appropriated for the Reserve for Contingencies, the
Working Capital Fund, or other certain programs authorized
under section 503 of the National Security Act.
Language is included that provides that funds available for
the Defense Intelligence Agency may be used for intelligence
communications and intelligence information systems for the
Services, the Unified and Specified Commands, and the component
commends.
Language is included that provides that of the funds made
available in this Act under the heading ``Defense Production
Act Purchases'', funds shall be for the procurement of
competitive, domestic expansion of essential vacuum furnace
melting capacity and vacuum arc re-melting furnace capacity.
Language is included that provides for the Department of
Defense to comply with the Buy American Act (title III of the
Act entitled ``An Act making appropriations for the Treasury
and Post Office Departments for the fiscal year ending June 30,
1934, and for other purposes'').
Language is included that provides conditions under which
contracts for studies, analyses or consulting services may be
entered into without competition on the basis of an unsolicited
proposal.
Language is included that provides for the limitations of
funds made available in this Act to establish Field Operating
Agencies.
Language is included that provides grant authorities for
the Department of Defense acting through the Office of Economic
Adjustment.
Language is included that provides for the rescission of
previously appropriated funds.
Language is included that prohibits funds made available in
this Act from being used to reduce authorized positions for
military (civilian) technician of the Army National Guard, Air
National Guard, Army Reserve and Air Force Reserve unless such
reductions are a direct result of a reduction in military force
structure.
Language is included that provides that none of the funds
made available in this Act may be obligated or expended for
assistance to the Democratic People's Republic of Korea unless
appropriated for that purpose.
Language is included that provides for reimbursement to the
National Guard and Reserve when members of the National Guard
and Reserve provide intelligence or counterintelligence support
to the Combatant Commands, Defense Agencies and Joint
Intelligence Activities.
Language is included that prohibits funds made available in
this Act from being used to reduce civilian medical and medical
support personnel assigned to military treatment facilities
below the September 30, 2003, level unless the Service Surgeons
General certifies to the congressional defense committees that
it is a responsible stewardship of resources to do so.
Language is included that provides that Defense and Central
Intelligence Agency drug interdiction and counter-drug activity
funds may not be transferred to other agencies unless
specifically provided in an appropriations law.
Language is included that prohibits the use of funds
appropriated by this Act for the procurement of ball and roller
bearings other than those produced by a domestic source and of
domestic origin.
Language is included that provides for the Department of
Defense to purchase supercomputers manufactured only in the
United States.
Language is included that prohibits the use of funds made
available in this or any other Act to transfer administrative
responsibilities or budgetary resources of any program,
project, or activity financed by this Act to the jurisdiction
of another Federal agency not financed by this Act without
expressed authorization of the Congress.
Language is included that provides for prior Congressional
notification of article transfers to international peacekeeping
organizations.
Language is included that prohibits the use of funds made
available in this Act for contractor bonuses from being paid
due to business restructuring.
Language is included that provides for the transfer of
funds to be used to support personnel supporting approved non-
traditional defense activities.
Language is included that provides for the Department of
Defense to dispose of negative unliquidated or unexpended
balances for expired or closed accounts.
Language is included that provides conditions for the use
of equipment of the National Guard Distance Learning Project on
a space-available, reimbursable basis.
Language is included that provides for the availability of
funds provided by this Act to implement cost-effective
agreements for required heating facility modernization in the
Kaiserslautern Military Community, Germany.
Language is included that provides for the limitation on
the use of funds appropriated in title IV to procure end-items
for delivery to military forces for operational training,
operational use or inventory requirements.
Language is included that provides for the use of funds
made available in this Act for the transportation of relief
supplies to American Samoa and the Indian Health Service.
Language is included that prohibits the use of funds made
available in this Act from being used to approve or license the
sale of the F-22A advanced tactical fighter to any foreign
government.
Language is included that provides for a waiver of the
``Buy America'' provisions for certain cooperative programs.
Language is included that prohibits the use of funds made
available in this Act to support the training of members of
foreign security forces who have engaged in gross violations of
human rights.
Language is included that provides for the Department to
develop, lease or procure T-AKE class ships with main
propulsion engines and propulsors manufactured only in the
United States by a domestically operated entity.
Language is included that prohibits the use of funds made
available in this Act for repairs or maintenance to military
family housing units.
Language is included that provides obligation authority for
new starts for advanced concept technology demonstration
projects only after notification to the congressional defense
committees.
Language is included that provides that the Secretary of
Defense shall provide a classified quarterly report on certain
matters as directed in the classified annex accompanying this
Act.
Language is included that provides for the crediting of
travel and purchase card refunds.
Language is included that provides for the registration of
financial management information technology systems with the
DoD Chief Information Officer for certifications of compliance
with the Financial Management Modernization Plan and with the
Clinger-Cohen Act.
Language is included that prohibits the use of funds made
available to the Department of Defense to provide support to an
agency that is more than 90 days in arrears in making payments
to the Department of Defense for goods or services provided on
a reimbursable basis.
Language is included that provides for the use of National
Guard personnel to support ground-based elements of the
National Ballistic Missile Defense System.
Language is included that prohibits the use of funds made
available in this Act to transfer to any nongovernmental entity
ammunition held by the Department of Defense that has a center-
fire cartridge and is designated as ``armor piercing'' except
for demilitarization purposes.
Language is included that provides for a waiver by the
Chief, National Guard Bureau or his designee for all or part of
consideration in cases of personal property leases of less than
one year.
Language is included that prohibits funds made available in
this Act from being used to purchase alcoholic beverages.
Language is included that provides for the use of funds
made available to the Department of Defense for the Global
Positioning System.
Language is included that provides for the transfer of
funds made available in this Act under ``Operation and
Maintenance, Army'' to other activities of the Federal
Government for classified purposes.
Language is included that has been amended and provides for
the forced matching of disbursement and obligations made by the
Department of Defense in fiscal year 2008.
Language is included that provides funds and grant
authority for the construction and furnishing of additional
Fisher Houses to meet the needs of military family members when
confronted with the illness or hospitalization of an eligible
military beneficiary.
Language is included that provides the Secretary of
Defense, in coordination with the Secretary of Health and Human
Services, the authority to distribute surplus dental and
medical equipment to Indian Health Service facilities and to
federally-qualified health centers.
Language is included that provides funding and transfer
authority for the Arrow missile defense program.
Language is included that provides for the transfer funds
to properly complete prior year shipbuilding programs.
Language is included that provides for the noncompetitive
appointments of certain medical occupational specialties, as
prescribed by section 7403(g) of title 38, U.S.C.
Language is included that provides that funds made
available in this Act are deemed to be specifically authorized
by Congress for purposes of section 504 of the National
Security Act of 1947.
Language is included that prohibits the use of funds made
available in this Act to initiate a new start program without
prior written notification.
Language is included that provides authority for the
Secretary of the Army to make a grant only to the Center for
Military Recruitment, Assessment and Veterans Employment.
Language is included that requires the Department of the
Army and the Department of Defense to program and budget to
fully finance the Non-Line of Sight Future Force Cannon
program; to achieve fielding by fiscal year 2010; to deliver
eight combat operational pre-production Non-Line of Sight
Future Force Cannons by the end of calendar year 2008; and to
ensure budgetary and programmatic plans to provide no fewer
than seven Stryker Brigade Combat Teams.
Language is included that provides the Secretary of Defense
the authority to make grants in the amounts specified.
Language is included that provides that the budget of the
President for fiscal year 2008 shall include separate budget
justification documents for costs of the United States Armed
Forces' participation in named operations with an estimated
cost in excess of $100,000,000.
Language is included that prohibits funds made available in
this Act from being used for the research, development, test,
evaluation, procurement or deployment of nuclear armed
interceptors of a missile defense system.
Language is included that prohibits funds made available in
this Act from being used to reduce or disestablish the
operation of the 53rd Weather Reconnaissance Squadron of the
Air Force Reserve.
Language is included that prohibits funds made available in
this Act from being used for the integration of foreign
intelligence information unless the information has been
lawfully collected and processed during conduct of authorized
foreign intelligence activities.
Language is included that provides that at the time members
of Reserve components of the Armed Forces are called or ordered
to active duty, each member shall be notified in writing of the
expected period during which the member will be mobilized.
Language is included that provides that the Secretary of
Defense may transfer funds from any available Department of the
Navy appropriation to any available Navy ship construction
appropriation to liquidate costs caused by rate adjustments or
other economic factors.
Language is included that provides for the use of current
and expired Shipbuilding and Conversion, Navy subdivisions to
reimburse the Judgment Fund.
Language is included that provides hereafter for the
presentation of promotional materials to active or Reserve
members who have participated in Operation Enduring Freedom or
Operation Iraqi Freedom.
Language is included that provides for unspecified
reductions to reflect savings from revised economic
assumptions.
Language is included that provides limitations for the
reimbursement of any health care provider for inpatient mental
health services.
Language is included that provides authority to the
Secretary of Defense to adjust wage rates for civilian
employees hired for certain health care occupations.
Language is included that provides authority to purchase
heavy and light armored vehicles notwithstanding price or other
limitations on the purchase of passenger carrying vehicles.
Language is included that provides obligation authority of
supervision and administration costs associated with
construction projects outside the United States.
Language is included that limits the obligation authority
of funds provided for the Director of National Intelligence to
the current fiscal year except for research and technology
which shall remain available for the current and the following
fiscal years.
Language is included that provides for the adjustment of
obligations within the Shipbuilding and Conversion, Navy
appropriation.
Language is included that provides that not more than 35
percent of the funds made available in this Act for
environmental remediation may be obligated under indefinite
delivery/indefinite quantity contracts with a total contract
value of $130,000,000 or higher.
Language is included that provides for the creation of a
major force program category for space for the Future Years
Defense Program of the Department of Defense.
Language is included that provides additional
appropriations to and transfer authority for the Tanker
Replacement Transfer Fund.
Language is included that prohibits the use of funds made
available in this Act to establish any permanent military
installation or base in Iraq.
Language is included that prohibits the use of funds made
available in this Act to contravene laws enacted or regulations
promulgated to implement the United Nations Convention Against
Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or
Punishment.
Language is included that provides limitations on the use
of funds made available in this Act to pay negotiated indirect
cost rates on agreements or arrangements between the Department
of Defense and certain entities conducting basic research.
Language is included that requires any request for funds
for a fiscal year after fiscal year 2008 for an ongoing
military operation shall be included in the annual budget of
the President.
Language is included that prohibits award fees to any
defense contractor contrary to the provisions of section 814 of
the National Defense Authorization Act, 2007.
Language is included that limits to 90 percent the funds
appropriated to the Department of Defense for contracted
services unless and until the Department of Defense submits to
the congressional defense committees a report on contracted
services.
Language is included that provides appropriations for
assistance to local education agencies.

Appropriations Not Authorized by Law

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

[GRAPHICS NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]

Transfer of Funds

Pursuant to clause 3(f)(2) of rule XIII of the Rules of the
House of Representatives, the following is submitted describing
the transfer of funds provided in the accompanying bill.
Language has been included in ``Operation and Maintenance,
Defense-Wide'' which provides for the transfer of funds
relating to classified activities.
Language has been included in ``Environmental Restoration,
Army'' which provides for the transfer of funds for
environmental restoration, reduction and recycling of hazardous
waste, removal of unsafe buildings and debris or for similar
purposes.
Language has been included in ``Environmental Restoration,
Navy'' which provides for the transfer of funds for
environmental restoration, reduction and recycling of hazardous
waste, removal of unsafe buildings and debris or for similar
purposes.
Language has been included in ``Environmental Restoration,
Air Force'' which provides for the transfer of funds for
environmental restoration, reduction and recycling of hazardous
waste, removal of unsafe buildings and debris or for similar
purposes.
Langage has been included in ``Environmental Restoration,
Defense-Wide'' which provides for the transfer of funds for
environmental restoration, reduction and recycling of hazardous
waste, removal of unsafe buildings and debris or for similar
purposes.
Language has been included in ``Environmental Restoration,
Formerly Used Defense Sites'' which provides for the transfer
of funds for environmental restoration, reduction and recycling
of hazardous waste, removal of unsafe buildings and debris at
sites formerly used by the Department of Defense.
Language has been included in ``Drug Interdiction and
Counter-Drug Activities, Defense'' which transfers funds to
other appropriations accounts of the Department of Defense.
Language has been included in ``Joint Improvised Explosive
Device Defeat Fund'' which provides for the transfer of funds
to appropriations for military personnel; operation and
maintenance; procurement; research, development, test and
evaluation; and the defense working capital funds.
Lannguage has been included in ``Intelligence Community
Management Account'' which provides for the transfer of funds
to the Department of Justice for the National Drug Intelligence
Center.
Language has been included in several accounts and general
provisions which allows for the transfer of funds between
accounts.

Rescissions

Pursuant to clause 3(f)(2) of rule XIII of the Rules of the
House of Representatives, the following table is submitted
describing the rescissions recommended in the accompanying
bill:
Aircraft Procurement, Air Force, 2006/2008............ $25,786,000
Aircraft Procurement, Air Force, 2007/2009............ 51,000,000
Research, Development, Test and Evaluation, Navy, 2007/ 24,000,000
2008.................................................
Research, Development, Test and Evaluation, Air Force 142,000,000
2007/2008............................................
Research, Development, Test and Evaluation, Defense- 125,000,000
Wide, 2007/2008......................................
Compliance With Clause 3 of Rule XIII (Ramseyer Rule)

In compliance with clause 3(e) of rule XIII of the Rules of
the House of Representatives, the Committee notes that the
accompanying bill does not propose to repeal or amend a statute
or part thereof.

Statement of General Performance Goals and Objectives

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

Constitutional Authority

Clause 3(d)(l) of rule XIII of the Rules of the House of
Representatives states that:

Each report of a committee on a bill or joint
resolution of a public character, shall include a
statement citing the specific powers granted to the
Congress in the Constitution to enact the law proposed
by the bill or joint resolution.

The Committee on Appropriations bases its authority to
report this legislation from Clause 7 of Section 9 of Article I
of the Constitution of the United States of America which
states:

No money shall be drawn from the Treasury but in
consequence of Appropriations made by law . . .

Appropriations contained in this Act are made pursuant to
this specific power granted by the Constitution.

Comparison With the Budget Resolution

Clause 3(c)(2) of rule XIII of the Rules of the House of
Representatives requires an explanation of compliance with
section 308(a)(1)(A) of the Congressional Budget and
Impoundment Control Act of 1974 (Public Law 93-344), as
amended, which requires that the report accompanying a bill
providing new budget authority contain a statement detailing
how that authority compares with the reports submitted under
section 302 of the Act for the most recently agreed to
concurrent resolution on the budget for the fiscal year from
the Committee's section 302(a) allocation. This information
follows:
[In millions of dollars]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
302(b) allocation This bill
---------------------------------------------------
Budget Budget
authority Outlays authority Outlays
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Discretionary............................................... 459,332 475,980 459,332 473,079
Mandatory................................................... 263 263 263 263
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Five-Year Outlay Projections

In compliance with section 308(a)(l)(B) of the
Congressional Budget and Impoundment Control Act of 1974
(Public Law 93-344), as amended, the following table contains
five-year projections associated with the budget authority
provided in the accompanying bill.

------------------------------------------------------------------------
(Millions)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Budget Authority........................................... 459,332
Outlays:
2008................................................... 309,511
2009................................................... 101,111
2010................................................... 29,442
2011................................................... 9,931
2012 and beyond........................................ 8,588
------------------------------------------------------------------------

Financial Assistance to State and Local Governments

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

Earmarks

Pursuant to clause 9 of rule XXI of the Rules of the House
of Representatives, this bill, as reported, contains the
following congressional earmarks, limited tax benefits, or
limited tariff benefits as defined in clause 9(d), 9(e), or
9(f) of rule XXI.

[GRAPHICS NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]

Full Committee Votes

Pursuant to the provisions of clause 3(b) of rule XIII of
the House or Representatives, the results of each roll call on
an amendment or on the motion to report, together with the
names of those voting for and those voting against, are printed
below:
No recorded votes were ordered during consideration of the
bill in Committee.

[GRAPHICS NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]