[Senate Report 110-335]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
110th Congress 2d Session SENATE Report
110-335
_______________________________________________________________________
Calendar No. 732
NATIONAL DEFENSE AUTHORIZATION
ACT FOR FISCAL YEAR 2009
----------
R E P O R T
[to accompany s. 3001]
on
AUTHORIZING APPROPRIATIONS FOR FISCAL YEAR 2009 FOR MILITARY ACTIVITIES
OF THE DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE, FOR MILITARY CONSTRUCTION, AND FOR
DEFENSE ACTIVITIES OF THE DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY, TO PRESCRIBE PERSONNEL
STRENGTHS FOR SUCH FISCAL YEAR, AND FOR OTHER PURPOSES
COMMITTEE ON ARMED SERVICES
UNITED STATES SENATE
May 12, 2008.--Ordered to be printed
NATIONAL DEFENSE AUTHORIZATION ACT FOR FISCAL YEAR 2009
For Sale by the Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Government Printing Office
Internet: bookstore.gpo.gov Phone: toll free (866) 512-1800; (202) 512�091800
Fax: (202) 512�092104 Mail: Stop IDCC, Washington, DC 20402�090001
COMMITTEE ON ARMED SERVICES
(110th Congress, 2d Session)
CARL LEVIN, Michigan, Chairman
EDWARD M. KENNEDY, Massachusetts JOHN McCAIN, Arizona
ROBERT C. BYRD, West Virginia JOHN WARNER, Virginia
JOSEPH I. LIEBERMAN, Connecticut JAMES M. INHOFE, Oklahoma
JACK REED, Rhode Island JEFF SESSIONS, Alabama
DANIEL K. AKAKA, Hawaii SUSAN M. COLLINS, Maine
BILL NELSON, Florida SAXBY CHAMBLISS, Georgia
E. BENJAMIN NELSON, Nebraska LINDSEY O. GRAHAM, South Carolina
EVAN BAYH, Indiana ELIZABETH DOLE, North Carolina
HILLARY RODHAM CLINTON, New York JOHN CORNYN, Texas
MARK L. PRYOR, Arkansas JOHN THUNE, South Dakota
JIM WEBB, Virginia MEL MARTINEZ, Florida
CLAIRE McCASKILL, Missouri ROGER F. WICKER, Mississippi
Richard D. DeBobes, Staff Director
Michael V. Kostiw, Republican Staff Director
(ii)
C O N T E N T S
---------- --
--------
Page
Purpose of the Bill.............................................. 1
Committee overview........................................... 2
Explanation of funding summary............................... 3
Division A--Department of Defense Authorizations................. 15
Title I--Procurement............................................. 15
Subtitle A--Authorization of Appropriations.................. 15
Explanation of tables.................................... 15
Subtitle B--Army Programs.................................... 17
Stryker Mobile Gun System (sec. 111)..................... 42
Procurement of small arms (sec. 112)..................... 42
Budget Items--Army........................................... 43
Chief of Staff of the Army's unfunded priorities list.... 43
Armed Reconnaissance Helicopter.......................... 44
Forward-looking infrared radar systems................... 44
Grenades Army............................................ 44
Radford Ammunition Plant upgrades........................ 45
Bomb line modernization.................................. 45
Area Common User System Modernization.................... 45
Army Global Command and Control System................... 45
Information Technology Upgrades.......................... 46
Fido explosives detector................................. 46
Land Warrior............................................. 46
Combat Arms Training System.............................. 46
Immersive Group Simulation Virtual Training System....... 47
Joint Fires and Effects Trainer System................... 47
Laser collective combat advanced training system......... 47
Urban training center instrumentation.................... 47
Operator driving simulators.............................. 47
Joint Improvised Explosive Device Defeat Fund............ 48
Subtitle C--Navy Programs.................................... 48
Authority for advanced procurement and construction of
components for the Virginia-class submarine program
(sec. 131)............................................. 74
Refueling and complex overhaul of the USS Theodore
Roosevelt (sec. 132)................................... 74
Budget Items................................................. 74
E-2D Advanced Hawkeye.................................... 74
H-53 modifications....................................... 75
P-3 modifications........................................ 75
Common ECM equipment..................................... 75
Weapons industrial facilities............................ 76
Grenades Marine Corps.................................... 76
Virginia-class submarine advance procurement............. 76
Littoral combat ship..................................... 76
LPD-17 amphibious transport dock......................... 78
LHA(R) advance procurement............................... 79
DDG-51 Arleigh Burke-class destroyer modernization
program................................................ 79
Submarine training device modifications.................. 80
Man overboard indicators................................. 81
Logistics vehicle system replacement..................... 81
Combat casualty care equipment upgrade program........... 81
Subtitle D--Air Force Programs............................... 82
F-22A fighter aircraft (Sec. 151)........................ 99
Budget Items--Air Force...................................... 99
Advanced procurement for the F136 engine................. 99
C-17A engine spares...................................... 100
Tactical intelligence support............................ 100
Airborne Imaging......................................... 101
Wide-Area Airborne Surveillance.......................... 102
National-Tactical SIGINT Initiatives..................... 103
B-52 bomber.............................................. 104
Large aircraft infrared countermeasures system........... 104
C-130 Avionics Modernization Program..................... 104
Advanced targeting pod................................... 105
Budget request realignments.............................. 105
Improved stores ejection cartridge....................... 106
Joint Air-to-Surface Standoff Missile.................... 106
Advanced Extremely High Frequency satellite.............. 106
Intelligence communication equipment..................... 107
Combat training ranges................................... 107
Air Operations Centers................................... 108
Subtitle E--Joint and Multiservice Matters................... 108
Annual long-term plan for the procurement of aircraft for
the Navy and the Air Force (sec. 171).................. 108
Budget Items--Defense-wide................................... 109
Terminal High Altitude Area Defense...................... 118
Standard Missile-3 interceptors.......................... 119
Intelligence, surveillance, reconnaissance mission
equipment package...................................... 120
Special operations forces combat assault rifle........... 120
Special operations visual augmentation systems hand-held
imager/long-range...................................... 120
M53 Joint Chemical Biological Protective Mask............ 121
Joint Chemical Agent Detector............................ 121
Joint Biological Standoff Detection System............... 121
Items of Special Interest.................................... 121
Aegis modernization open architecture.................... 121
F/A-18 Hornet and Navy tactical aviation inventory
shortfall.............................................. 123
Light utility helicopter................................. 124
Material handling equipment study........................ 125
Mine Resistant Ambush Protected Vehicles................. 125
Mission packages......................................... 126
Operational support aircraft for U.S. Africa Command..... 126
Shadow unmanned aerial vehicle........................... 127
Ship maintenance and material condition.................. 127
Warfighter Information Network-Tactical.................. 128
Title II--Research, Development, Test, and Evaluation............ 129
Explanation of tables........................................ 129
Subtitle A--Authorization of Appropriations.................. 131
Subtitle B--Program Requirements, Restrictions, and
Limitations................................................ 131
Requirement for plan on overhead nonimaging infrared
systems (sec. 211)..................................... 131
Advanced battery manufacturing and technology roadmap
(sec. 212)............................................. 131
Availability of funds for defense laboratories for
research and development of technologies for military
missions (sec. 213).................................... 132
Assured funding for certain information security and
information assurance programs of the Department of
Defense (sec. 214)..................................... 132
Requirements for certain airborne intelligence collection
systems (sec. 215)..................................... 133
Subtitle C--Missile Defense Programs......................... 133
Review of the ballistic missile defense policy and
strategy of the United States (sec. 231)............... 133
Limitation on availability of funds for procurement,
construction, and deployment of missile defenses in
Europe (sec. 232)...................................... 134
Airborne Laser system (sec. 233)......................... 136
Annual Director of Operational Test and Evaluation
characterization of operational effectiveness,
suitability, and survivability of the Ballistic Missile
Defense System (sec. 234).............................. 136
Independent assessment of boost-phase missile defense
programs (sec. 235).................................... 137
Study on space-based interceptor element of ballistic
missile defense system (sec. 236)...................... 138
Subtitle D--Other Matters.................................... 139
Modification of systems subject to survivability testing
by the Director of Operational Test and Evaluation
(sec. 251)............................................. 139
Biennial reports on joint and service concept development
and experimentation (sec. 252)......................... 139
Repeal of annual reporting requirement relating to the
Technology Transition Initiative (sec. 253)............ 140
Executive agent for printed circuit board technology
(sec. 254)............................................. 141
Report on Department of Defense response to findings and
recommendations of the Defense Science Board Task Force
on Directed Energy Weapons (sec. 255).................. 142
Assessment of standards for mission critical
semiconductors procured by the Department of Defense
(sec. 256)............................................. 142
Budget Items................................................. 143
Army..................................................... 143
Army basic research programs......................... 159
Network science and technology research center....... 159
Army materials research.............................. 160
Advanced Army energy and power technologies.......... 161
Army aviation technologies........................... 162
Sniper detection systems............................. 162
Army vehicle reliability technologies................ 162
Unmanned ground vehicle weaponization................ 163
Standoff explosives detection technologies........... 163
Soldier positioning technologies..................... 163
Military engineering technologies.................... 163
Combat feeding technologies.......................... 164
Army medical research................................ 164
Biosensor controller systems......................... 165
Army medical advanced technology development......... 165
Army aviation advanced technology development........ 166
Army combat vehicle technologies..................... 167
Diverse threat sensor development.................... 168
Army training technologies........................... 168
Deactivation of military explosives.................. 168
Army missile and rocket technologies................. 168
Situational awareness technologies................... 168
Unique item ID data management research.............. 169
Advanced electronics integration..................... 169
Advanced environmental controls...................... 169
Advanced fuel cell research.......................... 169
Radiation hardening initiative....................... 169
High-altitude integration testbed.................... 170
Air and missile defense architecture analysis........ 170
Stryker active protection system..................... 170
Vibration management enhancement research............ 170
Next-generation combat helmet development............ 170
High Mobility Multi-purpose Wheeled Vehicle
modernization research............................. 171
Non-Line of Sight-Launch System anti-tamper research. 171
Future Combat System................................. 171
Urban training development........................... 172
Extended range sniper rifle research................. 172
Army test and target development..................... 172
Javelin modernization................................ 173
Global Combat Support System, the Logistics
Modernization Program and Product Lifecycle
Management Plus.................................... 173
Army manufacturing technologies...................... 174
Navy..................................................... 174
Navy basic research.................................. 188
Manufacturing engineering training................... 188
Navy power projection research....................... 189
Navy force protection research....................... 189
Situational awareness processing technologies........ 190
Acoustic research and test capabilities.............. 190
Navy electronics research............................ 190
Advanced technologies for power projection........... 190
Force protection advanced technology................. 191
High-integrity Global Positioning System............. 192
Ground sensor networks............................... 192
Shipboard system component development............... 192
Advanced submarine system development................ 193
Facilities improvements.............................. 193
Optical interconnect................................. 194
Land attack technology............................... 194
Directed energy...................................... 194
Next-generation cruiser.............................. 195
Improved towed array handler......................... 196
Submarine electronic chart updates................... 196
Next-generation Phalanx.............................. 196
NULKA anti-ship missile decoy system................. 197
Combat wound tissue transplantation technologies..... 197
F-35 Joint Strike Fighter competitive propulsion
system............................................. 197
Navy test and evaluation support..................... 197
Advanced LINAC facility.............................. 198
Navy support of the reliable replacement warhead..... 198
Warfighter enhanced decision making.................. 198
Aviation improvements................................ 199
Broad Area Maritime Surveillance Unmanned Aircraft
System............................................. 199
Digital manufacturing technologies................... 199
National Shipbuilding Research Program--Advanced
Shipbuilding Enterprise............................ 200
Air Force................................................ 200
Air Force basic research programs.................... 215
Air Force materials research......................... 215
Optical components for air vehicles.................. 216
Air Force training technology........................ 216
Air Force aerospace propulsion technology............ 216
Aerospace sensor technologies........................ 216
Air Force seismic research........................... 217
Cyber attack mitigation technologies................. 217
Reconfigurable securing computing.................... 217
Propulsion technologies.............................. 217
Thin film amorphous solar arrays..................... 218
Integrated targeting devices......................... 218
Optical interconnect for battlefield communications.. 218
High energy laser weapon systems..................... 218
Global Positioning System III operational control
segment............................................ 219
Space situational awareness.......................... 219
Transformational Communications satellite............ 219
Operationally Responsive Space....................... 220
B-2 radar modernization program...................... 221
Space-based space surveillance block 10.............. 221
Space-based Infrared Satellite system................ 221
Third Generation Infrared Surveillance satellite
system............................................. 222
F135 engine.......................................... 222
Combat Search and Rescue Replacement Aircraft........ 223
High speed test track................................ 223
B-52 bomber.......................................... 223
Air Operations Centers............................... 223
Joint surveillance target attack radar system
research and development........................... 224
Weather service research and development............. 224
C-17 research, development, test, and evaluation..... 225
Expeditionary Combat Support System.................. 225
Defense Enterprise Accounting and Management System.. 225
Defense-wide............................................. 226
Defense Experimental Program to Stimulate Competitive
Research........................................... 244
In-vitro models for biodefense vaccines.............. 244
Superstructural particle evaluation.................. 244
Next-generation over-the-horizon radar............... 244
Chemical agent fate response planning tool........... 245
Chemical and biological applied research............. 245
Chemical and biological infrared detector............ 245
Multivalent Marburg and Ebola vaccine................ 246
DARPA technology transition.......................... 246
Three-dimensional integrated circuit technologies.... 246
Blast mitigation and protection...................... 246
Comprehensive National Incident Management System.... 247
Special operations technologies...................... 247
Blast trauma research................................ 247
Blackswift........................................... 247
Engineered biological detectors...................... 249
Improved chemical, biological, and radiological
filters............................................ 249
Raman chemical identification system................. 249
Command and control gap filler joint capabilities
technology demonstration........................... 249
High performance manufacturing technologies.......... 250
Defense Logistics Agency technology programs......... 250
Superlattice nanotechnology.......................... 251
Special warfare domain awareness technologies........ 251
Weapon of mass destruction exercises................. 251
Arrow missile defense program........................ 251
Short-range ballistic missile defense................ 252
Terminal High Altitude Area Defense.................. 252
Ground-based Midcourse Defense....................... 254
Airborne Laser....................................... 256
Real-time non-specific viral agent detector.......... 257
Ballistic missile defense sensors.................... 257
Kinetic Energy Interceptor........................... 258
Ballistic missile defense reductions................. 259
Aegis Ballistic Missile Defense (BMD)................ 259
Space Tracking and Surveillance System............... 260
Multiple Kill Vehicles............................... 261
Space test-bed....................................... 262
Missile Defense Agency funding reduction............. 263
Corrosion control technologies....................... 263
Conflict modeling technologies....................... 263
Prompt global strike................................. 263
Net-enabled command and control...................... 264
Central Test and Evaluation Investment Program....... 264
Anti-tamper technologies............................. 265
Force transformation directorate..................... 265
Software assurance education and research............ 266
Status of Operational Readiness and Training Systems. 266
Industrial Base Innovation Fund...................... 266
Items of Special Interest.................................... 267
Aegis Ballistic Missile Defense funding.................. 267
Agency relocation........................................ 267
Executive helicopter program (VH-71A).................... 268
Expeditionary Fighting Vehicle........................... 270
Global Positioning System................................ 271
Improved commercial imagery integration.................. 271
Title III--Operation and Maintenance............................. 273
Subtitle A--Authorization of Appropriations.................. 273
Explanation of tables.................................... 273
Subtitle B--Environmental Provisions......................... 305
Expansion of cooperative agreement authority for
management of natural resources to include off-
installation mitigation (sec. 311)..................... 305
Reimbursement of Environmental Protection Agency for
certain costs in connection with Moses Lake Wellfield
Superfund Site, Moses Lake, Washington (sec. 312)...... 305
Comprehensive program for the eradication of the brown
tree snake population from military facilities in Guam
(sec. 313)............................................. 305
Subtitle C--Workplace and Depot issues....................... 305
Authority to consider depot-level maintenance and repair
using contractor furnished equipment or leased
facilities as core logistics (sec. 321)................ 305
Minimum capital investment for certain depots (sec. 322). 306
Subtitle D--Reports.......................................... 306
Additional information under annual submissions of
information regarding information technology capital
assets (sec. 331)...................................... 306
Subtitle E--Other Matters.................................... 306
Mitigation of power outage risks for Department of
Defense facilities and activities (sec. 341)........... 306
Increased authority to accept financial and other
incentives related to energy savings and new authority
related to energy systems (sec. 342)................... 307
Recovery of improperly disposed of Department of Defense
property (sec. 343).................................... 307
Budget Items................................................. 308
Army..................................................... 308
Computing services................................... 308
Unmanned aircraft systems concept development........ 308
Shipping containers.................................. 309
Life cycle logistics contracting..................... 309
Facilities sustainment, restoration, and
modernization...................................... 309
Second destination transportation.................... 309
Ammunition inspections and warehousing............... 309
Navy..................................................... 309
Unobligated Operation and Maintenance balances....... 309
Overstatements of civilian personnel pay requirements 310
Naval aircraft depot maintenance..................... 310
Damage control management............................ 310
MK 45 gun depot overhaul............................. 310
Marine Corps............................................. 311
Marine Corps shelters................................ 311
Mobile corrosion protection Marine Corps............. 311
Air Force................................................ 311
B-52 flying hours.................................... 311
F-15 depot maintenance............................... 311
B-52 depot maintenance............................... 311
B-2 depot maintenance................................ 312
Engine trailer life extension program................ 312
Land mobile radios................................... 312
National Security Space Institute.................... 312
Advanced ultrasonic inspection of aging aircraft
structures......................................... 312
Defense-wide............................................. 312
Expanded prisoner of war/missing in action research
in North Korea..................................... 312
Defense Security Cooperation Agency.................. 313
Status of Operational Readiness and Training System.. 313
Defense Readiness Reporting System................... 313
Readiness and Environmental Protection Initiative.... 314
STARBASE Academies................................... 314
Army Reserve............................................. 315
Mobile corrosion protection Army Reserve............. 315
Army Reserve military technician cost avoidance...... 315
Army National Guard...................................... 315
Aircraft humidity protection......................... 315
Expandable Light Air Mobility Shelters............... 315
Extended Cold Weather Clothing System................ 315
Rapid Data Management System......................... 315
Mobile corrosion protection Army National Guard...... 316
Weapons Skills Trainer............................... 316
Emergency satellite communications................... 316
Air National Guard....................................... 316
Controlled humidity protection....................... 316
Crypto-linguist and intelligence officer initiative.. 316
Items of Special Interest.................................... 316
Assessment of plans for contracting support in combatant
command operational plans.............................. 316
Combatant Commander Initiative Fund...................... 317
Commercial satellite communications...................... 318
Defense Information Systems Agency working capital fund
management............................................. 318
Funding for military morale, welfare, and recreation
programs............................................... 319
Long-range facilities and construction planning at Army
ammunition plants and arsenals......................... 320
Standards for deployable shelters........................ 320
Title IV--Military Personnel Authorizations...................... 323
Subtitle A--Active Forces.................................... 323
End strengths for active forces (sec. 401)............... 323
Subtitle B--Reserve Forces................................... 323
End strengths for Selected Reserve (sec. 411)............ 323
End strengths for Reserves on active duty in support of
the Reserves (sec. 412)................................ 324
End strengths for military technicians (dual status)
(sec. 413)............................................. 324
Fiscal year 2009 limitation on number of non-dual status
technicians (sec. 414)................................. 325
Maximum number of Reserve personnel authorized to be on
active duty for operational support (sec. 415)......... 325
Increased end strengths for Reserves on active duty in
support of the Army National Guard and Army Reserve and
military technicians (dual status) of the Army National
Guard (sec. 416)....................................... 325
Modification of authorized strengths for Marine Corps
Reserve officers on active duty in the grades of major
and lieutenant colonel to meet new force structure
requirements (sec. 417)................................ 326
Subtitle C--Authorizations of Appropriations................. 326
Military personnel (sec. 421)............................ 326
Budget Items................................................. 326
Military personnel funding changes....................... 326
Military personnel unobligated balances.................. 327
Title V--Military Personnel Policy............................... 329
Subtitle A--Officer Personnel Policy......................... 329
Modification of distribution requirements for
commissioned officers on active duty in general and
flag officer grades (sec. 501)......................... 329
Modification of limitations on authorized strengths of
general and flag officers on active duty (sec. 502).... 329
Clarification of joint duty requirements for promotion to
general or flag grades (sec. 503)...................... 330
Modification of authorities on length of joint duty
assignments (sec. 504)................................. 330
Technical and conforming amendments relating to
modification of joint specialty requirements (sec. 505) 330
Eligibility of reserve officers to serve on boards of
inquiry for separation of regular officers for
substandard performance and other reasons (sec. 506)... 330
Modification of authority on Staff Judge Advocate to the
Commandant of the Marine Corps (sec. 507).............. 331
Increase in number of permanent professors at the United
States Air Force Academy (sec. 508).................... 331
Service creditable toward retirement for thirty years or
more of service of regular warrant officers other than
regular Army warrant officers (sec. 509)............... 331
Modification of requirements for qualification for
issuance of posthumous commissions and warrants (sec.
510)................................................... 331
Subtitle B--Enlisted Personnel Policy........................ 331
Increase in maximum period of reenlistment of regular
members of the armed forces (sec. 521)................. 331
Subtitle C--Reserve Component Management..................... 332
Modification of limitations on authorized strengths of
reserve general and flag officers in active status
(sec. 531)............................................. 332
Extension to other reserve components of Army authority
for deferral of mandatory separation of military
technicians (dual status) until age 60 (sec. 532)...... 332
Increase in mandatory retirement age for certain Reserve
officers to age 62 (sec. 533).......................... 332
Authority for vacancy promotion of National Guard and
Reserve officers ordered to active duty in support of a
contingency operation (sec. 534)....................... 332
Authority for retention of reserve component chaplains
and medical officers until age 68 (sec. 535)........... 332
Modification of authorities on dual duty status of
National Guard officers (sec. 536)..................... 333
Modification of matching fund requirements under National
Guard Youth Challenge Program (sec. 537)............... 333
Report on collection of information on civilian skills of
members of the reserve components of the armed forces
(sec. 538)............................................. 333
Subtitle D--Education and Training........................... 333
Authority to prescribe the authorized strength of the
United States Naval Academy (sec. 551)................. 333
Tuition for attendance of certain individuals at the
United States Air Force Institute of Technology (sec.
552)................................................... 333
Increase in stipend for baccalaureate students in nursing
or other health professions under Health Professions
Stipend Program (sec. 553)............................. 334
Clarification of discharge or release triggering
delimiting period for use of educational assistance
benefit for reserve component members supporting
contingency operations and other operations (sec. 554). 334
Payment by the service academies of certain expenses
associated with participation in activities fostering
international cooperation (sec. 555)................... 334
Subtitle E--Defense Dependents' Education Matters............ 335
Continuation of authority to assist local educational
agencies that benefit dependents of members of the
armed forces and Department of Defense civilian
employees (sec. 561)................................... 335
Impact aid for children with severe disabilities (sec.
562)................................................... 335
Transition of military dependent students among local
educational agencies (sec. 563)........................ 335
Subtitle F--Military Family Readiness........................ 335
Authority for education and training for military spouses
pursuing portable careers (sec. 571)................... 335
Subtitle G--Other Matters.................................... 336
Department of Defense policy on the prevention of
suicides by members of the armed forces (sec. 581)..... 336
Relief for losses incurred as a result of certain
injustices or errors of the Department of Defense (sec.
582)................................................... 336
Paternity leave for members of the armed forces (sec.
583)................................................... 337
Enhancement of authorities on participation of members of
the armed forces in international sports competitions
(sec. 584)............................................. 337
Pilot programs on career flexibility to enhance retention
of members of the armed forces (sec. 585).............. 337
Prohibition on interference in independent legal advice
by the Legal Counsel to the Chairman of the Joint
Chiefs of Staff (sec. 586)............................. 338
Items of Special Interest.................................... 338
Enhancing family support for the National Guard and
reserve................................................ 338
Financial literacy....................................... 339
Legislative fellows from the Department of Defense....... 339
Premium conversion and flexible spending account options
for service members.................................... 340
Report on implementation of Yellow Ribbon Reintegration
Program................................................ 340
Secretary of Defense review of deferment from deployment
policy following birth of a child...................... 341
Title VI--Compensation and Other Personnel Benefits.............. 343
Subtitle A--Pay and Allowances............................... 343
Fiscal year 2009 increase in military basic pay (sec.
601)................................................... 343
Subtitle B--Bonuses and Special and Incentive Pays........... 343
Extension of certain bonus and special pay authorities
for Reserve forces (sec. 611).......................... 343
Extension of certain bonus and special pay authorities
for health care professionals (sec. 612)............... 343
Extension of special pay and bonus authorities for
nuclear officers (sec. 613)............................ 343
Extension of authorities relating to payment of other
bonuses and special pays (sec. 614).................... 344
Extension of authorities relating to payment of referral
bonuses (sec. 615)..................................... 344
Permanent extension of prohibition on charges for meals
received at military treatment facilities by members
receiving continuous care (sec. 616)................... 344
Accession and retention bonuses for the recruitment and
retention of psychologists for the armed forces (sec.
617)................................................... 344
Authority for extension of maximum length of service
agreements for special pay for nuclear-qualified
officers extending period of active service (sec. 618). 344
Incentive pay for members of precommissioning programs
pursuing foreign language proficiency (sec. 619)....... 345
Subtitle C--Travel and Transportation Allowances............. 345
Shipment of family pets during evacuation of personnel
(sec. 631)............................................. 345
Special weight allowance for transportation of
professional books and equipment for spouses (sec. 632) 345
Travel and transportation allowances for members of the
reserve components of the armed forces on leave for
suspension of training (sec. 633)...................... 345
Subtitle D--Retired Pay and Survivor Benefits................ 346
Presentation of burial flag to the surviving spouse and
children of members of the armed forces who die in
service (sec. 641)..................................... 346
Subtitle E--Other Matters.................................... 346
Separation pay, transitional health care, and
transitional commissary and exchange benefits for
members of the armed forces separated under surviving
son or daughter policy (sec. 651)...................... 346
Items of Special Interest.................................... 346
Aviation career incentive pay............................ 346
Travel allowances for family of service members with
serious psychiatric conditions......................... 346
Title VII--Health Care Provisions................................ 349
Subtitle A--TRICARE Program.................................. 349
Calculation of monthly premiums for coverage under
TRICARE Reserve Select after 2008 (sec. 701)........... 349
Subtitle B--Other Health Care Authorities.................... 349
Enhancement of medical and dental readiness of members of
the armed forces (sec. 711)............................ 349
Additional authority for studies and demonstration
projects relating to delivery of health and medical
care (sec. 712)........................................ 351
Travel for anesthesia services for childbirth for
dependents of members assigned to very remote locations
outside the continental United States (sec. 713)....... 351
Subtitle C--Other Health Care Matters........................ 351
Repeal of prohibition on conversion of military medical
and dental positions to civilian medical and dental
positions (sec. 721)................................... 351
Items of Special Interest.................................... 352
Chiropractic care for members of the armed forces........ 352
Comptroller General study on medical personnel
requirements, shortfalls, and actions needed to resolve
medical personnel shortages............................ 353
Mental health and traumatic brain injury................. 354
Modification of security clearance questionnaire to
reduce stigma for seeking mental health care........... 354
Organ and tissue donor program........................... 355
Title VIII--Acquisition Policy, Acquisition Management, and
Related Matters................................................ 357
Subtitle A--Provisions Relating to Major Defense Acquisition
Programs................................................... 357
Inclusion of major subprograms to major defense
acquisition programs under acquisition reporting
requirements (sec. 801)................................ 357
Inclusion of certain major information technology
investments in acquisition oversight authorities for
Major Automated Information System programs (sec. 802). 357
Configuration steering boards for cost control under
major defense acquisition programs (sec. 803).......... 357
Subtitle B--Acquisition Policy and Management................ 358
Internal controls for procurements on behalf of the
Department of Defense by certain non-defense agencies
(sec. 811)............................................. 358
Contingency contracting corps (sec. 812)................. 359
Expedited review and validation of urgent requirements
documents (sec. 813)................................... 359
Incorporation of energy efficiency requirements into key
performance parameters for fuel consuming systems (sec.
814)................................................... 359
Subtitle C--Amendments Relating to General Contracting
Authorities, Procedures, and Limitations................... 360
Multiyear procurement authority for the Department of
Defense for the purchase of alternative and synthetic
fuels (sec. 821)....................................... 360
Modification and extension of pilot program for
transition to follow-on contracts under authority to
carry out certain prototype projects (sec. 822)........ 361
Exclusion of certain factors in consideration of cost
advantages of offers for certain Department of Defense
contracts (sec. 823)................................... 361
Subtitle D--Department of Defense Contractor Matters......... 361
Database for Department of Defense contracting officers
and suspension and debarment officials (sec. 831)...... 361
Ethics safeguards for employees under certain contracts
for the performance of acquisition functions closely
associated with inherently governmental functions (sec.
832)................................................... 361
Information for Department of Defense contractor
employees on their whistleblower rights (sec. 833)..... 362
Subtitle E--Matters Relating to Iraq and Afghanistan......... 362
Performance by private security contractors of inherently
governmental functions in an area of combat operations
(sec. 841)............................................. 362
Additional contractor requirements and responsibilities
relating to alleged crimes by or against contractor
personnel in Iraq and Afghanistan (sec. 842)........... 363
Clarification and modification of authorities relating to
the Commission on Wartime Contracting in Iraq and
Afghanistan (sec. 843)................................. 364
Comprehensive audit of spare parts purchases and depot
overhaul and maintenance of equipment for operations in
Iraq and Afghanistan (sec. 844)........................ 364
Subtitle F--Other Matters.................................... 364
Expedited hiring authority for the defense acquisition
workforce (sec. 851)................................... 364
Specification of Secretary of Defense as ``Secretary
concerned'' for purposes of licensing of intellectual
property for the defense agencies and defense field
activities (sec. 852).................................. 365
Repeal of requirements relating to the military system
essential item breakout list (sec. 853)................ 365
Items of Special Interest.................................... 365
Contracting officer representatives...................... 365
Database and after-action reports for multiyear contracts 366
Past performance information............................. 366
Title IX--Department of Defense Organization and Management...... 369
Subtitle A--Department of Defense Management................. 369
Modification of status of Assistant to the Secretary of
Defense for Nuclear and Chemical and Biological Defense
Programs (sec. 901).................................... 369
Participation of Deputy Chief Management Officer of the
Department of Defense on Defense Business System
Management Committee (sec. 902)........................ 369
Repeal of obsolete limitations on management headquarters
personnel (sec. 903)................................... 369
General Counsel to the Inspector General of the
Department of Defense (sec. 904)....................... 369
Assignment of forces to the United States Northern
Command with primary mission of management of the
consequences of an incident in the United States
homeland involving a chemical, biological,
radiological, or nuclear device, or high-yield
explosives (sec. 905).................................. 370
Business transformation initiatives for the military
departments (sec. 906)................................. 370
Subtitle B--Space Matters.................................... 371
Space posture review (sec. 911).......................... 371
Subtitle C--Defense Intelligence Matters..................... 371
Requirement for officers of the armed forces on active
duty in certain intelligence positions (sec. 921)...... 371
Transfer of management of Intelligence Systems Support
Office (sec. 922)...................................... 372
Program on advanced sensor applications (sec. 923)....... 372
Title X--General Provisions...................................... 375
Subtitle A--Financial Matters................................ 375
General transfer authority (sec. 1001)................... 375
Incorporation into Act of tables in the report of the
Committee on Armed Services of the Senate (sec. 1002).. 375
United States contribution to NATO common-funded budgets
in fiscal year 2009 (sec. 1003)........................ 376
Subtitle B--Naval Vessels and Shipyards...................... 376
Government rights in designs of Department of Defense
vessels, boats, craft, and components developed using
public funds (sec. 1011)............................... 376
Reimbursement of expenses for certain Navy mess
operations (sec. 1012)................................. 376
Subtitle C--Counter-Drug Activities.......................... 377
Extension of authority for joint task forces to provide
support to law enforcement agencies conducting counter-
terrorism activities (sec. 1021)....................... 377
Two-year extension of authority for use of funds for
unified counterdrug and counterterrorism campaign in
Colombia (sec. 1022)................................... 378
Subtitle D--Miscellaneous Authorities and Limitations........ 378
Procurement by State and local governments of equipment
for homeland security and emergency response activities
through the Department of Defense (sec. 1031).......... 378
Enhancement of the capacity of the United States
Government to conduct complex operations (sec. 1032)... 378
Crediting of admiralty claim receipts for damage to
property funded from a Department of Defense working
capital fund (sec. 1033)............................... 379
Minimum annual purchase requirements for airlift services
from carriers participating in the Civil Reserve Air
Fleet (sec. 1034)...................................... 379
Termination date of base contract for the Navy-Marine
Corps Intranet (sec. 1035)............................. 379
Prohibition on interrogation of detainees by contractor
personnel (sec. 1036).................................. 380
Notification of Committees on Armed Services with respect
to certain nonproliferation and proliferation
activities (sec. 1037)................................. 381
Sense of Congress on nuclear weapons management (sec.
1038).................................................. 381
Sense of Congress on Joint Department of Defense-Federal
Aviation Administration Executive Committee on Conflict
and Dispute Resolution (sec. 1039)..................... 381
Sense of Congress on sale of new outsize cargo, strategic
lift aircraft for civilian use (sec. 1040)............. 382
Subtitle E--Reports.......................................... 383
Repeal of requirement to submit certain annual reports to
Congress regarding allied contributions to the common
defense (sec. 1051).................................... 383
Report on detention operations in Iraq (sec. 1052)....... 383
Strategic plan to enhance the role of the National Guard
and Reserves in the national defense (sec. 1053)....... 383
Review of nonnuclear prompt global strike concept
demonstrations (sec. 1054)............................. 384
Review of bandwidth capacity requirements of the
Department of Defense and the intelligence community
(sec. 1055)............................................ 384
Subtitle F--Wounded Warrior Matters.......................... 385
Modification of utilization of veterans' presumption of
sound condition in establishing eligibility of members
of the armed forces for retirement for disability (sec.
1061).................................................. 385
Inclusion of service members in inpatient status in
wounded warrior policies and protections (sec. 1062)... 385
Clarification of certain information sharing between the
Department of Defense and Department of Veterans
Affairs for wounded warrior purposes (sec. 1063)....... 385
Additional responsibilities for the wounded warrior
resource center (sec. 1064)............................ 385
Responsibility for the center of excellence in the
prevention, diagnosis, mitigation, treatment, and
rehabilitation of traumatic brain injury to conduct
pilot programs on treatment approaches for traumatic
brain injury (sec. 1065)............................... 386
Center of excellence in the mitigation, treatment, and
rehabilitation of traumatic extremity injuries and
amputations (sec. 1066)................................ 386
Three-year extension of Senior Oversight Committee with
respect to wounded warrior matters (sec. 1067)......... 387
Subtitle G--Other Matters.................................... 387
Military salute for the flag during the national anthem
by members of the armed forces not in uniform and by
veterans (sec. 1081)................................... 387
Modification of deadlines for standards required for
entry to military installations in the United States
(sec. 1082)............................................ 387
Items of Special Interest.................................... 387
Compliance with Rule XLIV of the Standing Rules of the
Senate................................................. 387
Fully interoperable electronic health information for the
Department of Defense and Department of Veterans
Affairs................................................ 388
Interagency coordination and participation in post-
conflict stability and reconstruction operations....... 388
National cyber security initiative....................... 389
Nuclear security......................................... 391
Nutrition and dietary care for seriously ill and injured
service members........................................ 391
Recovery care coordinators and medical care case managers
for seriously wounded and ill service members.......... 392
Refugee crisis in Iraq................................... 392
United States Africa Command............................. 393
Title XI--Civilian Personnel Matters............................. 395
Department of Defense strategic human capital plans (sec.
1101).................................................. 395
Conditional increase in authorized number of Defense
Intelligence Senior Executive Service personnel (sec.
1102).................................................. 395
Enhancement of authorities relating to additional
positions under the National Security Personnel System
(sec. 1103)............................................ 396
Expedited hiring authority for health care professionals
of the Department of Defense (sec. 1104)............... 396
Election of insurance coverage by federal civilian
employees deployed in support of a contingency
operation (sec. 1105).................................. 396
Permanent extension of Department of Defense voluntary
reduction in force authority (sec. 1106)............... 397
Four-year extension of authority to make lump sum
severance payments with respect to Department of
Defense employees (sec. 1107).......................... 397
Authority to waive limitations on pay for federal
civilian employees working overseas under areas of
United States Central Command (sec. 1108).............. 397
Technical amendment relating to definition of
professional accounting position for purposes of
certification and credentialing standards (sec. 1109).. 398
Title XII--Matters Relating to Foreign Nations................... 399
Subtitle A--Assistance and Training.......................... 399
Increase in amount available for costs of education and
training of foreign military forces under Regional
Defense Combating Terrorism Fellowship Program (sec.
1201).................................................. 399
Authority for distribution to certain foreign personnel
of education and training materials and information
technology to enhance military interoperability with
the armed forces (sec. 1202)........................... 399
Extension and expansion of authority for support of
special operations to combat terrorism (sec. 1203)..... 399
Modification and extension of authorities relating to
program to build the capacity of foreign military
forces (sec. 1204)..................................... 400
Extension of authority and increased funding for security
and stabilization assistance (sec. 1205)............... 401
Four-year extension of temporary authority to use
acquisition and cross-servicing agreements to lend
military equipment for personnel protection and
survivability (sec. 1206).............................. 401
Authority for use of funds for non-conventional assisted
recovery capabilities (sec. 1207)...................... 402
Subtitle B--Department of Defense Participation in Bilateral,
Multilateral, and Regional Cooperation Programs............ 403
Availability across fiscal years of funds for military-
to-military contacts and comparable activities (sec.
1211).................................................. 403
Enhancement of authorities relating to Department of
Defense regional centers for security studies (sec.
1212).................................................. 403
Payment of personnel expenses for multilateral
cooperation programs (sec. 1213)....................... 403
Participation of the Department of Defense in
multinational military centers of excellence (sec.
1214).................................................. 403
Subtitle C--Other Authorities and Limitations................ 404
Waiver of certain sanctions against North Korea (sec.
1221).................................................. 404
Subtitle D--Reports.......................................... 404
Extension and modification of updates on report on claims
relating to the bombing of the Labelle Discotheque
(sec. 1231)............................................ 404
Report on utilization of certain global partnership
authorities (sec. 1232)................................ 405
Title XIII--Cooperative Threat Reduction With States of the
Former Soviet Union............................................ 407
Specification of Cooperative Threat Reduction programs
and funds (sec. 1301).................................. 407
Funding allocations (sec. 1302).......................... 407
Title XIV--Other Authorizations.................................. 409
Summary and explanation of tables............................ 409
Subtitle A--Military Programs..................................412
Working capital funds (sec. 1401)........................ 412
National Defense Sealift Fund (sec. 1402)................ 412
Defense Health Program (sec. 1403)....................... 412
Chemical agents and munitions destruction, defense (sec.
1404).................................................. 412
Drug interdiction and counter-drug activities, defense-
wide (sec. 1405)....................................... 412
Defense Inspector General (sec. 1406).................... 412
Reduction in certain authorizations due to savings from
lower inflation (sec. 1407)............................ 412
Subtitle B--Armed Forces Retirement Home..................... 413
Authorization of appropriations for Armed Forces
Retirement Home (sec. 1421)............................ 413
Subtitle C--Other Matters.................................... 413
Responsibilities for chemical demilitarization Citizens'
Advisory Commissions in Colorado and Kentucky (sec.
1431).................................................. 413
Modification of definition of ``Department of Defense
Sealift Vessel'' for purposes of the National Defense
Sealift Fund (sec. 1432)............................... 413
Budget Items................................................. 414
LHA(R) advance procurement and research and development.. 414
Traumatic brain injury and post traumatic stress disorder
initiative............................................. 414
Department of Defense Inspector General.................. 414
Item of Special Interest..................................... 415
Completion of destruction of chemical weapons stockpile.. 415
Title XV--Authorization of Additional Appropriations for
Operations in Afghanistan...................................... 417
Overview..................................................... 417
Explanation of Tables........................................ 417
Purpose (sec. 1501)...................................... 420
Army procurement (sec. 1502)............................. 420
Navy and Marine Corps procurement (sec. 1503)............ 420
Air Force procurement (sec. 1504)........................ 420
Joint Improvised Explosive Device Defeat Fund (sec. 1505) 420
Defense-wide activities procurement (sec. 1506).......... 420
Research, development, test, and evaluation (sec. 1507).. 420
Operation and maintenance (sec. 1508).................... 420
Military personnel (sec. 1509)........................... 421
Working capital funds (sec. 1510)........................ 421
Other Department of Defense programs (sec. 1511)......... 421
Afghanistan Security Forces Fund (sec. 1512)............. 421
Treatment as additional authorizations (sec. 1513)....... 421
Special transfer authority (sec. 1514)................... 421
Limitation on use of funds (sec. 1515)................... 421
Requirement for separate display of budget for
Afghanistan (sec. 1516)................................ 422
Title XVI--Authorization of Additional Appropriations for
Operations in Iraq............................................. 423
Overview..................................................... 423
Explanation of Tables........................................ 423
Purpose (sec. 1601)...................................... 426
Army procurement (sec. 1602)............................. 426
Navy and Marine Corps procurement (sec. 1603)............ 426
Air Force procurement (sec. 1604)........................ 426
Joint Improvised Explosive Device Defeat Fund (sec. 1605) 426
Defense-wide activities procurement (sec. 1606).......... 427
Research, development, test, and evaluation (sec. 1607).. 427
Operation and maintenance (sec. 1608).................... 427
Military personnel (sec. 1609)........................... 427
Working capital funds (sec. 1610)........................ 427
Defense Health Program (sec. 1611)....................... 427
Iraq Freedom Fund (sec. 1612)............................ 427
Iraq Security Forces Fund (sec. 1613).................... 428
Treatment as additional authorizations (sec. 1614)....... 428
Limitation on use of funds (sec. 1615)................... 428
Contributions by the Government of Iraq to large-scale
infrastructure projects, combined operations, and other
activities in Iraq (sec. 1616)......................... 428
Division B--Military Construction Authorizations................. 429
Summary and explanation of funding tables.................... 429
Short title (sec. 2001).................................. 446
Expiration of authorizations and amounts required to be
specified by law (sec. 2002)........................... 446
Effective date (sec. 2003)............................... 446
Title XXI--Army.................................................. 447
Summary...................................................... 447
Authorized Army construction and land acquisition
projects (sec. 2101)................................... 447
Family housing (sec. 2102)............................... 447
Improvements to military family housing units (sec. 2103) 448
Authorization of appropriations, Army (sec. 2104)........ 448
Extension of authorizations of certain fiscal year 2005
projects (sec. 2105)................................... 448
Extension of authorization of certain fiscal year 2006
project (sec. 2106).................................... 448
Title XXII--Navy................................................. 449
Summary...................................................... 449
Authorized Navy construction and land acquisition
projects (sec. 2201)................................... 449
Family housing (sec. 2202)............................... 449
Improvements to military family housing units (sec. 2203) 450
Authorization of appropriations, Navy (sec. 2204)........ 450
Modification of authority to carry out certain fiscal
year 2005 project inside the United States (sec. 2205). 450
Modification of authority to carry out certain fiscal
year 2007 projects inside the United States (sec. 2206) 450
Title XXIII--Air Force........................................... 451
Summary...................................................... 451
Authorized Air Force construction and land acquisition
projects (sec. 2301)................................... 451
Family housing (sec. 2302)............................... 451
Improvements to military family housing units (sec. 2303) 451
Authorization of appropriations, Air Force (sec. 2304)... 451
Extension of authorizations of certain fiscal year 2006
projects (sec. 2305)................................... 452
Extension of authorizations of certain fiscal year 2005
projects (sec. 2306)................................... 452
Budget Item.................................................. 452
Planning and design, Air Force........................... 452
Title XXIV--Defense Agencies..................................... 453
Summary...................................................... 453
Subtitle A--Defense Agency Authorizations.................... 453
Authorized defense agencies construction and land
acquisition projects (sec. 2401)....................... 453
Energy conservation projects (sec. 2402)................. 453
Authorization of appropriations, defense agencies (sec.
2403).................................................. 453
Modification of authority to carry out certain fiscal
year 2007 project (sec. 2404).......................... 454
Extension of authorization of certain fiscal year 2006
project (sec. 2405).................................... 454
Subtitle B--Chemical Demilitarization Authorizations......... 454
Authorized chemical demilitarization program construction
and land acquisition projects (sec. 2411).............. 454
Authorization of appropriations, chemical
demilitarization construction, defense-wide (sec. 2412) 454
Modification of authority to carry out certain fiscal
year 1997 project (sec. 2413).......................... 454
Modification of authority to carry out certain fiscal
year 2000 project (sec. 2414).......................... 455
Title XXV--North Atlantic Treaty Organization Security Investment
Program........................................................ 457
Summary...................................................... 457
Authorized NATO construction and land acquisition
projects (sec. 2501)................................... 457
Authorization of appropriations, NATO (sec. 2502)........ 457
Title XXVI--Guard and Reserve Forces Facilities.................. 459
Summary...................................................... 459
Authorized Army National Guard construction and land
acquisition projects (sec. 2601)....................... 459
Authorized Army Reserve construction and land acquisition
projects (sec. 2602)................................... 459
Authorized Navy Reserve and Marine Corps Reserve
construction and land acquisition projects (sec. 2603). 459
Authorized Air National Guard construction and land
acquisition projects (sec. 2604)....................... 459
Authorized Air Force Reserve construction and land
acquisition projects (sec. 2605)....................... 459
Authorization of appropriations, Guard and Reserve (sec.
2606).................................................. 460
Extension of authorizations of certain fiscal year 2006
projects (sec. 2607)................................... 460
Extension of authorizations of certain fiscal year 2005
project (sec. 2608).................................... 460
Modification of authority to carry out certain fiscal
year 2008 project (sec. 2609).......................... 460
Budget Items................................................. 460
Planning and design, Army National Guard................. 460
Planning and design, Air National Guard.................. 461
Planning and design, Air Force Reserve................... 461
Title XXVII--Base Closure and Realignment Activities............. 463
Summary and explanation of tables............................ 463
Authorization of appropriations for base closure and
realignment activities funded through Department of
Defense base closure account 1990 (sec. 2701).......... 472
Authorized base closure and realignment activities funded
through Department of Defense base closure account 2005
(sec. 2702)............................................ 472
Authorization of appropriations for base closure and
realignment activities funded through Department of
Defense base closure account 2005 (sec. 2703).......... 472
Modification of annual base closure and realignment
reporting requirements (sec. 2704)..................... 472
Technical corrections regarding authorized cost and scope
of work variations for military construction and
military family housing projects related to base
closures and realignments (sec. 2705).................. 472
Title XXVIII--Military Construction General Provisions........... 473
Subtitle A--Military Construction Program and Military Family
Housing Changes............................................ 473
Increase in threshold for unspecified minor military
construction projects (sec. 2801)...................... 473
Authority to use operation and maintenance funds for
construction projects outside the United States (sec.
2802).................................................. 473
Improved oversight and accountability for military
housing privatization initiative projects (sec. 2803).. 473
Leasing of military family housing to Secretary of
Defense (sec. 2804).................................... 474
Cost-benefit analysis of dissolution of Patrick Family
Housing LLC (sec. 2805)................................ 474
Subtitle B--Real Property and Facilities Administration...... 475
Participation in conservation banking programs (sec.
2811).................................................. 475
Clarification of congressional reporting requirements for
certain real property transactions (sec. 2812)......... 475
Modification of land management restrictions applicable
to Utah national defense lands (sec. 2813)............. 475
Subtitle C--Land Conveyances................................. 476
Transfer of proceeds from property conveyance, Marine
Corps Logistics Base, Albany, Georgia (sec. 2821)...... 476
Subtitle D--Energy Security.................................. 476
Expansion of authority of the military departments to
develop energy on military lands (sec. 2831)........... 476
Subtitle E--Other Matters.................................... 476
Report on application of force protection and anti-
terrorism standards to gates and entry points on
military installations (sec. 2841)..................... 476
Items of Special Interest.................................... 477
Defense Access Roads criteria............................ 477
Military construction reprogrammings..................... 478
Title XXIX--War-Related Military Construction Authorizations..... 481
Summary...................................................... 481
Subtitle A--Fiscal Year 2008 Projects........................ 484
Authorized Army construction and land acquisition
projects (sec. 2901)................................... 484
Authorized Navy construction and land acquisition
projects (sec. 2902)................................... 484
Authorized Air Force construction and land acquisition
projects (sec. 2903)................................... 484
Termination of authority to carry out fiscal year 2008
Army projects (sec. 2904).............................. 484
Subtitle B--Fiscal Year 2009 Projects........................ 485
Authorized Army construction and land acquisition
projects (sec. 2911)................................... 485
Authorized Navy construction and land acquisition
projects (sec. 2912)................................... 485
Limitation on availability of funds for certain purposes
relating to Iraq (sec. 2913)........................... 485
Division C--Department of Energy National Security Authorizations
and Other Authorizations....................................... 487
Title XXXI--Department of Energy National Security Programs...... 487
Overview..................................................... 487
Subtitle A--National Security Programs Authorizations........ 510
National Nuclear Security Administration (sec. 3101)..... 510
Weapons activities................................... 510
Directed stockpile work.............................. 510
Campaigns............................................ 510
Readiness in the technical base...................... 511
Secure transportation asset.......................... 511
Nuclear weapons incident response.................... 511
Safeguards and security.............................. 512
Facilities and infrastructure........................ 512
Environmental projects and operations and
transformation disposition......................... 512
Stockpile surveillance testing....................... 512
Construction projects................................ 513
Defense Nuclear Nonproliferation programs............ 513
Nonproliferation and verification research and
development........................................ 514
Nonproliferation and international security.......... 514
International nuclear materials and cooperation...... 515
Fissile materials disposition........................ 515
Naval reactors....................................... 515
Office of the Administrator.......................... 515
Defense environmental cleanup (sec. 3102)................ 515
Other defense activities (sec. 3103)..................... 516
Defense nuclear waste disposal (sec. 3104)............... 516
Subtitle B--Program Authorizations, Restrictions, and
Limitations................................................ 516
Modifications of functions of Administrator for Nuclear
Security to include elimination of surplus fissile
materials usable for nuclear weapons (sec. 3111)....... 516
Report on compliance with Design Basis Threat issued by
the Department of Energy in 2005 (sec. 3112)........... 516
Modification of submittal of reports on inadvertent
releases of restricted data (sec. 3113)................ 517
Nonproliferation scholarship and fellowship program (sec.
3114).................................................. 517
Review of and reports on Global Initiatives for
Proliferation Prevention program (sec. 3115)........... 517
Title XXXII--Defense Nuclear Facilities Safety Board............. 519
Authorization (sec. 3201)................................ 519
Legislative Requirements..................................... 561
Departmental Recommendations............................. 561
Committee Action......................................... 561
Congressional Budget Office Cost Estimate................ 561
Regulatory Impact........................................ 561
Changes in Existing Law.................................. 561
110th Congress Report
SENATE
2d Session 110-335
======================================================================
AUTHORIZING APPROPRIATIONS FOR FISCAL YEAR 2009 FOR MILITARY ACTIVITIES
OF THE DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE, FOR MILITARY CONSTRUCTION, AND FOR
DEFENSE ACTIVITIES OF THE DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY, TO PRESCRIBE PERSONNEL
STRENGTHS FOR SUCH FISCAL YEAR, AND FOR OTHER PURPOSES
_______
May 12, 2008.--Ordered to be printed
_______
Mr. Levin, from the Committee on Armed Services, submitted the
following
R E P O R T
[To accompany S. 3001]
The Committee on Armed Services reports favorably an
original bill to authorize appropriations for the fiscal year
2009 for military activities of the Department of Defense, for
military construction, and for defense activities of the
Department of Energy, to prescribe personnel strengths for such
fiscal year, and for other purposes, and recommends that the
bill do pass.
PURPOSE OF THE BILL
This bill would:
(1) authorize appropriations for (a) procurement, (b)
research, development, test and evaluation, (c)
operation and maintenance and the revolving and
management funds of the Department of Defense for
fiscal year 2009;
(2) authorize the personnel end strengths for each
military active duty component of the Armed Forces for
fiscal year 2009;
(3) authorize the personnel end strengths for the
Selected Reserve of each of the reserve components of
the Armed Forces for fiscal year 2009;
(4) impose certain reporting requirements;
(5) impose certain limitations with regard to
specific procurement and research, development, test
and evaluation actions and manpower strengths; provide
certain additional legislative authority, and make
certain changes to existing law;
(6) authorize appropriations for military
construction programs of the Department of Defense for
fiscal year 2009; and
(7) authorize appropriations for national security
programs of the Department of Energy for fiscal year
2009.
Committee overview
The United States armed forces have been involved in armed
conflict for more than 6 years--6\1/2\ years in Afghanistan and
5 years in Iraq. Whether fighting in Afghanistan or Iraq,
delivering humanitarian assistance to the victims of natural
disasters in Asia or Africa, training foreign national forces
to combat terrorism in their own countries, or assisting State
and federal agencies responding to emergencies here at home,
the men and women of our armed forces, both active and reserve,
are serving honorably and courageously to promote and defend
our Nation's interests. They do so often at great personal risk
and significant sacrifice to themselves and their families.
After more than 6 years of war, our military, particularly
our ground forces, are severely stressed. The Vice Chief of
Staff of the Army, General Richard A. Cody, in testimony before
the Readiness and Management Subcommittee of the Committee on
Armed Services on April 1, 2008 stated, ``Our readiness, quite
frankly, is being consumed as fast as we can build it'' and
``I've never seen our lack of strategic depth be at where it is
today.''
Moreover, the requirement for large numbers of forces in
Iraq, coupled with an insufficient contribution from North
Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) member nations, has left
Afghanistan with a shortage of combatants and trainers. As the
Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Admiral Michael Mullen
noted on April 15, 2008, ``So until we come down in numbers of
brigades in Iraq, the brigade-size requirements in Afghanistan
just aren't going to be met. That link is very direct.''
To date in this Second Session of the 110th Congress, the
Committee on Armed Services has conducted 30 hearings and
numerous briefings on the President's budget request for fiscal
year 2009 and related defense matters. In order to provide a
framework for the consideration of these matters, the committee
identified seven priorities to guide its work on the National
Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2009. These
priorities are:
1. Provide fair compensation and first rate health care,
and improve the quality of life of the men and women in the
armed forces (active duty, National Guard and reserves) and
their families.
2. Provide our servicemen and women with the resources,
training, technology, equipment (especially force protection)
and authorities they need to succeed in combat and stability
operations in Iraq and Afghanistan.
3. Seek to reduce our Nation's strategic risk by taking
action aimed at restoring, as soon as possible, the readiness
of the military services to conduct the full range of their
assigned missions.
4. Improve the efficiency of Department of Defense programs
and activities, and apply the savings toward high-priority
programs.
5. Improve the ability of the armed forces to counter
nontraditional threats, including terrorism and the
proliferation of weapons of mass destruction.
6. Promote the transformation of the armed forces to deal
with the threats of the 21st century.
7. Ensure aggressive and thorough oversight of the
Department's programs and activities to ensure proper
stewardship of taxpayer dollars and compliance with relevant
laws and regulations.
Explanation of funding summary
The administration's budget request for the national
defense function of the federal budget for fiscal year 2009 was
$542.5 billion for the so-called ``base'' budget, which
excludes the costs of operations in Iraq and Afghanistan. This
amount includes scorekeeping adjustments by the Congressional
Budget Office. The President has also requested an additional
$70.0 billion in emergency defense funding for operations in
Iraq and Afghanistan. The combined total requested by the
President for the national defense budget function was $612.5
billion.
The following table summarizes both the direct
authorizations and the equivalent budget authority levels for
fiscal year 2009 defense programs. The columns relating to the
authorization request do not include funding for items that are
not within the jurisdiction of this committee or that do not
require an annual authorization. The table also includes the
authorization for spending from the trust fund of the Armed
Forces Retirement Home, which is outside the national defense
budget function.
Funding for all programs in the national defense function
is reflected in the columns related to the budget authority
request and the total budget authority implication of the
authorizations in this bill. The committee recommends funding
for national defense programs totaling $612.5 billion in budget
authority, which is consistent with the President's budget
request and with the funding levels for national defense in the
Concurrent Resolution on the Budget for Fiscal Year 2009 (S.
Con. Res. 70) adopted by the Senate on March 13, 2008.
In order to clearly identify the cost of war, funding for
operations in Afghanistan is contained in title XV of this Act,
and funding for operations in Iraq is contained in title XVI of
this Act. Titles XV and XVI authorize funding for personnel,
operation and maintenance, procurement, health care, working
capital funds, and other costs normally funded in division A of
this Act. Titles XV and XVI authorize $69.5 billion for
operations in Afghanistan and Iraq.
Title XXIX of this act authorizes an additional $500.0
million for war-related military construction, in particular,
for additional warrior transition units to care for injured
military personnel, whether such illness or injury resulted
from operations in Iraq or Afghanistan or from other
operations.
In total, this bill authorizes $70.0 billion in war-related
funding, the same amount requested by the President and
approved by the Senate in the Concurrent Resolution on the
Budget for Fiscal Year 2009.
In accordance with views and estimates of this committee to
the Senate Committee on the Budget for fiscal year 2009, the
committee bill does not designate any of the funding authorized
by this Act as emergency spending. The committee continues to
believe that the expected costs of longstanding operations such
as those in Iraq and Afghanistan should be included in the
budget request and should not be treated as emergencies.
The committee also continues to believe the financial cost
of war should be as transparent as possible. In an effort to
promote and enhance such transparency, the committee bill
allocates funding to operations in Afghanistan and Iraq
separately.
The committee notes that on February 8, 2008, Secretary of
Defense Robert Gates stated that, ``I worry that for many
Europeans the missions in Iraq and Afghanistan are confused . .
. I think that they combine the two . . . Many of them, I
think, have a problem with our involvement in Iraq and project
that to Afghanistan, and do not understand the very different--
for them--the very different kind of threat.'' The committee
shares this concern, and has included a provision that would
require future budget or supplemental requests to allocate
funds separately for operations in Afghanistan.
The $70.0 billion requested by the President for these
operations in the budget contains no supporting detail at the
service, account, or line-item level, nor does it allocate such
funding between operations in Iraq and Afghanistan.
Furthermore, this $70.0 billion is a ``placeholder'' that does
not purport to represent the full cost of these operations
during fiscal year 2009. While the committee understands that
projecting costs of ongoing operations where force levels are
changing cannot be an exact science, the committee does believe
that by omitting any supporting details and by not including a
realistic estimate of the full year cost of these operations,
the budget request failed to fully comply with the requirements
of section 1008 of the John Warner National Defense
Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2007 (Public Law 109-364).
The committee anticipates a future supplemental request for
additional funds for operations in Iraq and Afghanistan and
will consider such a request when it becomes available.
DIVISION A--DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE AUTHORIZATIONS
TITLE I--PROCUREMENT
Subtitle A--Authorization of Appropriations
Explanation of tables
The following tables provide the program-level detailed
guidance for the funding authorized in title I of this Act. The
tables also display the funding requested by the administration
in the fiscal year 2009 budget request for procurement
programs, and indicate those programs for which the committee
either increased or decreased the requested amounts.
These tables are incorporated by reference into this Act as
provided in section 1002 of this Act. The Department of Defense
may not exceed the authorized amounts (as set forth in the
tables or, if unchanged from the administration request, as set
forth in budget justification documents of the Department of
Defense) without a reprogramming action in accordance with
established procedures. Unless noted in this report, funding
changes to the budget request are made without prejudice.
Subtitle B--Army Programs
Stryker Mobile Gun System (sec. 111)
The committee recommends a provision that would require the
Secretary of Defense, through the Director of Operational Test
and Evaluation (DOT&E), to ensure that the Stryker Mobile Gun
System (MGS) is subject to testing to confirm the efficacy of
any actions taken to mitigate operational effectiveness,
suitability, and survivability deficiencies identified in
Initial Operational Test and Evaluation and Live Fire Test and
Evaluation. The provision would also require the Secretary of
the Army to provide quarterly updates to the congressional
defense committees on the status of the corrective measures and
expand section 117(a) of the National Defense Authorization Act
(NDAA) for Fiscal Year 2008 (Public Law 110-181) to future
fiscal years.
In January 2007, the Army decided to deploy the Stryker MGS
with the Stryker Brigade Combat Team (SBCT) that was deploying
to Iraq. This was done despite the DOT&E's concern that planned
operational and live fire ballistic test and evaluation were
not complete and were not yet adequate to support a final
assessment of MGS crew and system survivability, operational
effectiveness, and operational suitability.
In response to the Army's decision, Public Law 110-181
included a provision prohibiting the obligation or expenditure
of funds for the procurement of the Stryker MGS until 30 days
after the Secretary of the Army certifies to Congress that the
Stryker MGS is operationally effective, suitable, and
survivable for its anticipated deployment missions or until the
Secretary of Defense waives the limitation on MGS funding by
determining that further procurement of the Stryker MGS is in
the national security interest of the United States.
In February 2008, DOT&E provided a report to Congress on
the results of the operational and live fire ballistic test and
evaluation events. The report confirmed the January 2007
concerns of DOT&E's early fielding report and concluded that
the Stryker MGS continues to have problems associated with its
survivability, operational effectiveness, and operational
suitability. More specifically, the February 2008 report cited
mission equipment package failures, `fightability' shortfalls,
and, even more troubling, unique survivability shortfalls that
place MGS crews at greater risk than crews in other Stryker
variants.
The committee remains troubled by the Army's decision to
deploy low-rate initial production models to Iraq, and believes
that no more Stryker MGS's should be deployed until the Army
takes the actions necessary to make the Stryker MGS
operationally effective, suitable, and survivable. For this
reason, the provision recommended by the committee would extend
the limitation in section 117(a) on the procurement of
additional Stryker MGS units until appropriate action is taken.
Procurement of small arms (sec. 112)
The committee recommends a provision that would require the
Secretary of the Army to submit, within 90 days of enactment of
this act, a report on the small arms Capabilities Based
Assessment conducted by the Army's Training and Doctrine
Command. This assessment is overdue. The Army had indicated to
the committee that it would complete the small arms
Capabilities Based Assessment by August 2007 and failed to do
so. Accordingly, the committee recommends withholding authority
to obligate more than 75 percent of the aggregate amount
authorized to be appropriated for fiscal year 2009 and
available for the Guardrail Common Sensor until the report has
been delivered.
In the event that the Capabilities Based Assessment
identifies gaps in current small arms capability that require a
new individual weapon, the committee recommends that the
acquisition of such weapons should result from a full and open
competition. The committee further recommends that the
Secretary of Defense submit a report on the feasibility and
advisability of conducting a full and open competition for
carbine-type rifles.
Budget Items--Army
Chief of Staff of the Army's unfunded priorities list
The Chief of Staff of the Army's unfunded priorities list
for fiscal year 2009 addresses Army National Guard equipment
shortfalls required to accomplish its dual responsibilities--to
the States for crisis response and homeland security and to the
nation for the defense of the United States and its interests.
The items requested such as communications equipment, vehicles,
driver vision enhancement equipment, night vision goggles, and
water purification equipment will significantly enhance the
Guard's ability to respond to contingencies at home.
The committee welcomes this clear and substantial
commitment on the part of the Army to restore and improve the
homeland defense capabilities and readiness of the National
Guard. Accordingly, the committee recommends a total increase
in Army procurement of $391.2 million for dual-purpose
equipment in support of National Guard readiness.
The specific account increases are as follows--the
committee recommends an increase of $369.5 million in Other
Procurement, Army, which includes: $28.8 million for additional
night vision devices; $15.0 million for super high frequency
terminals; $4.0 million for tactical satellite equipment
upgrades; $5.9 million for life cycle software support; $5.9
million for additional automatic identification systems; $5.9
million for additional transportation coordinator's automated
information for movement system equipment; $5.9 million for
combat service support communications equipment; $1.2 million
for additional water purification systems; $22.8 million for
commercial off-the-shelf tactical radio equipment; $52.5
million for additional driver vision enhancement systems; $5.4
million for additional field feeding systems; $43.1 million for
additional heavy equipment transporter systems; $300,000 for
additional logistics automation systems; $1.4 million for
medical communication and combat casualty care equipment; $4.3
million for additional combat medical support equipment; $16.5
million for additional defense advanced Global Positioning
System receivers; $2.4 million for additional spares; $1.0
million for additional graders; $3.0 million for additional
skid steer loaders; $1.0 million for additional scrapers; $1.0
million for additional water distributors; $1.0 million for
additional engineer mission module water distributors; $2.0
million for additional loaders; $2.0 million for additional
tractors; $1.0 million for additional cranes; $8.0 million for
additional high mobility engineer excavators; $1.0 million for
construction equipment; $80.7 million for additional palletized
loading systems; and $44.6 million for additional tactical
electric generators.
The committee also recommends an increase of $19.6 million
in Aircraft Procurement, Army, which includes: $11.3 million
for additional avionics navigation equipment; $249,000 for
avionics support equipment; $2.4 million for aircrew integrated
systems; $5.5 million for air traffic control equipment;
$116,000 for additional avionics and airborne instrumentation
equipment; and $2,000 for high frequency radio equipment.
In addition, the committee recommends an increase of $2.2
million in weapons and tracked combat vehicles for additional
small arms.
Each of the committee's recommended increases is reflected
in title I of the Army procurement tables.
Armed Reconnaissance Helicopter
The budget request included $358.8 million in Aircraft
Procurement, Army (APA) for the Armed Reconnaissance Helicopter
(ARH). The committee appreciates the operational necessity of
replacing the aging OH-58D Kiowa Warrior and replacing combat
losses from the force structure. The committee has in the past
supported the Army's efforts to get the ARH program on track.
However, the committee believes that the Army is pursuing an
overly ambitious ARH development and fielding program, given
performance problems by the contractor. Decisions regarding the
acquisition approach and schedule for the ARH program have been
delayed by at least half a year, with no change in the
procurement program. The committee also notes that the Defense
Acquisition Board will meet in July 2008 to consider another
restructuring of this program. Such an ambitious program
exposes the Army to significant cost, performance, and schedule
risk, and may not result in fielding this capability to the
warfighter any sooner.
Therefore, the committee recommends a decrease of $75.0
million in APA for procurement of ARH.
Forward-looking infrared radar systems
The budget request included $10.9 million in Aircraft
Procurement, Army for utility helicopter modifications. This
funding will procure and field a number of safety modifications
for the UH-60 Blackhawk helicopter. The committee recommends an
increase of $3.0 million for the procurement of additional
forward-looking infrared radar systems for the UH-60 Blackhawk
helicopters.
Grenades Army
The budget request included $71.6 million in Procurement of
Ammunition, Army (PAA) for grenades. The committee recommends
an increase of $7.0 million in PAA for the procurement of
additional grenades.
Radford Ammunition Plant upgrades
The budget request included $187.4 million in Procurement
of Ammunition, Army (PAA) for the provision of industrial
facilities. The committee is encouraged by the Army's
commitment to its ammunition plants and supports plans to
accelerate repair or modernization of these facilities to
improve efficiency, safety, and reduce environmental risk. The
committee is particularly concerned about modernization at
Radford Army Ammunition Plant. Radford is the sole North
American provider for many of the propellants and explosives
used in munitions. The committee recommends an increase of
$20.0 million in PAA for production, safety, and environmental
upgrades at Radford Army Ammunition Plant.
Bomb line modernization
The budget request included $187.4 million in Procurement
of Ammunition, Army (PAA) for the provision of industrial
facilities, but provided no funds for bomb line modernization
at the McAlester Army Ammunition Plant, Oklahoma. The committee
recommends an increase of $1.0 million in PAA for bomb line
modernization.
Area Common User System Modernization
The budget request included $85.3 million in Other
Procurement, Army for the Warfighter Information Network--
Tactical (WIN-T) Area Common User System Modernization (ACUS-
Mod) program. This program is intended to provide ongoing and
planned modifications, upgrades, and recapitalization of the
Mobile Subscriber Equipment (MSE) and Tri-Service Tactical
(TRI-TAC) communications systems.
According to the Army, there are currently 19 units with
MSE and TRI-TAC equipment and each of these units is currently
developing a disposition and turn-in plan for their equipment.
However, some limited equipment purchases are required to
support the single shelter switch, battlefield video
teleconference, secure tactical fax, and tropo-scatter radio
systems currently deployed in Iraq and Afghanistan.
Given the rapidly declining number of units using the
equipment provided by the ACUS-Mod program, the committee
recommends a decrease of $42.0 million, leaving more than 50
percent of the funding for the limited equipment purchases
needed to support deployed equipment.
Army Global Command and Control System
The budget request included $33.5 million in Other
Procurement, Army for the Army Global Command and Control
System (GCCS) program. The committee recommends a reduction of
$4.7 million. Given constrained resources and the current
fielding schedule for GCCS--Army, the committee believes
procurement of Net-Enabled Command Capability equipment is not
required at this time. Additional concerns about the GCCS--Army
program are discussed in title II of this Act.
Information Technology Upgrades
The budget request included $231.3 million in Other
Procurement, Army for the Installation Information
Infrastructure Modernization program (I3MP). The committee
notes that high bandwidth connectivity provides military users
with enhanced capabilities for data, voice, and video
communications. These capabilities enable military
organizations to better support deployed forces and other
Department of Defense activities. The committee recommends an
additional $3.0 million for hardware enhancements to the
Defense Information System Network, especially to increase
network geographic diversity and alternative data pathways.
Fido explosives detector
The budget request included $46.8 million in Other
Procurement, Army (OPA) for ground standoff mine detection
systems, but provided no funds for the Fido explosives
detector. The Fido explosives detector is deployed and in use
by units in Iraq to counter improvised explosive devices and
land mines. The committee recommends an increase of $6.0
million in OPA for additional Fido explosives detectors.
Land Warrior
The budget request did not include any funds in Other
Procurement, Army (OPA) for the Land Warrior system. The
committee remains concerned that the Army has terminated this
program despite significant investment, its promising test
results, and its performance in combat.
Last year the Department of Defense Director of Operational
Test and Evaluation (DOT&E) assessed Land Warrior during tests
with the 4th Battalion, 9th Infantry, a Stryker unit preparing
to deploy to Iraq. The Director, in a carefully worded report
to this committee, determined that the system was ``on track''
to be operationally effective and suitable, even though it had
not completed its Initial Operational Test. DOT&E also
indicated that the system's test items could deploy to Iraq
with the 4th Battalion, 9th Infantry, the Army approved the
plan, and the battalion is using the system effectively today.
In testimony to the committee this year, the Army indicated
that it will move forward with the program based on the test
results and the feedback from the soldiers of the 4th
Battalion, 9th Infantry. Additionally, the Army included in its
fiscal year 2008 supplemental appropriation request sufficient
funding to outfit a brigade combat team with Land Warrior
equipment.
The committee is encouraged by the Army's action and
recommends accelerating the procurement of the system to
include enough equipment to outfit a second brigade combat team
preparing to deploy to Iraq or Afghanistan. Accordingly, the
committee recommends an increase of $102.0 million in OPA for
additional Land Warrior systems.
Combat Arms Training System
The budget request included $218.6 million in Other
Procurement, Army (OPA) for non-system training devices. The
Army is upgrading the Combined Arms Training System (CATS).
Funds authorized would be used to upgrade 1,900 fielded systems
and procure additional simulated weapons. The committee
recommends an increase of $6.0 million in OPA for CATS.
Immersive Group Simulation Virtual Training System
The budget request included $218.6 million in Other
Procurement, Army (OPA) for non-system training devices, but
provided no funding for the Immersive Group Simulation Virtual
Training System (IGS-VTS). The IGS-VTS is a fully immersive,
interactive virtual reality platform that supports soldier
vehicle training. The committee recommends an increase of $6.0
million in OPA for the IGS-VTS.
Joint Fires and Effects Trainer System
The budget request included $3.1 million in Other
Procurement, Army (OPA) for the Call for Fire Trainer (CFFT),
but included no funds for the Joint Fires and Effects Trainer
System (JFETS) project. JFETS is a next-generation, virtual
reality call for fire training simulation. The committee
recommends an increase of $5.0 million in OPA for JFETS.
Laser collective combat advanced training system
The budget request included $218.6 million in Procurement
of Ammunition, Air Force (PAAF) for non-system training
devices, but included no funds for the laser collective combat
advanced training system. This is a comprehensive laser-based
marksmanship training system and is currently in use by units
for urban operations, reflexive fire training, close-quarters
marksmanship, and movement to contact drills. The committee
recommends an increase of $8.0 million in OPA for the laser
collective combat advanced training system.
Urban training center instrumentation
The budget request included $218.6 million in Other
Procurement, Army (OPA) for non-system training devices. The
committee notes that the Army's readiness and rotation training
strategies call for units to accomplish more of their mission
training and rehearsals at their local training areas and
facilities. The Army is using several technologies to increase
the flexibility and value of local training ranges and
facilities including the Deployable Range Package, the
Homestation Instrumentation System, and the Integrated Military
Operations in Urbanized Terrain Training System. The committee
recommends an increase of $2.9 million in OPA for the
instrumentation of a regional urban operations training center.
Operator driving simulators
The budget request included $218.6 million in Other
Procurement, Army (OPA) for non-system training devices.
Additional driving simulators would allow deploying soldiers to
maximize their training time while providing a realistic
experience without risk to personnel or equipment. The
committee recommends an increase of $5.0 million in OPA for
operator driving simulators.
Joint Improvised Explosive Device Defeat Fund
The budget request included a total of $496.3 million for
the Joint Improvised Explosive Device Defeat Fund (JIEDDF), of
which $306.3 million was for the Joint Improvised Explosive
Device Defeat Organization (JIEDDO) attack the network line of
operation, $88.3 million was for the JIEDDO train the force
line of operation, and $101.7 million was for the JIEDDO staff
and infrastructure line of operation.
The committee recommends a transfer of $496.3 million in
the JIEDDF to titles XV and XVI of this Act. The committee
remains supportive of JIEDDO, but believes that JIEDDO's
expenses are war-related and should be accounted for in the
appropriate war-related accounts in titles XV and XVI of this
Act.
Improvised Explosive Devices (IED) are the weapon of choice
for terrorist organizations throughout the world because they
provide high profile, lethal attacks that attract attention,
provide propaganda, and expose vulnerabilities.
The committee understands the Department of Defense is
currently reviewing the JIEDDO mandate to determine how best to
leverage JIEDDO's capability to counter a future unknown
threat, recognizing that the enemy's current weapon of choice
is the IED and that this threat will evolve. The committee
welcomes this initiative by the Department and expects that the
Department will be able to develop a more clear path forward
for JIEDDO in the fiscal year 2010 budget submission.
JIEDDO has been able to stand up quickly an organization
capable of responding to the various IED threats that U.S.
forces face in Iraq and Afghanistan, but the committee is
concerned that JIEDDO's expanding budget, manpower, and
associated responsibilities have surpassed the Department's
ability to adequately oversee the activities of JIEDDO in a
manner that ensures no duplication of effort and the most
effective delivery of equipment and capabilities to the
warfighter.
The Government Accountability Office and the Defense
Science Board have raised similar concerns. If JIEDDO is to
continue to implement material solutions across all Department
components, the Department must reevaluate JIEDDO's authorities
and determine whether JIEDDO should be a permanent organization
and where it should be subordinated.
Subtitle C--Navy Programs
Authority for advanced procurement and construction of components for
the Virginia-class submarine program (sec. 131)
The committee recommends a provision that would modify the
multiyear authority provided in section 121 of the National
Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2008 (Public Law 110-
181). The provision would modify section 121 to permit the
Secretary of the Navy to enter into one or more contracts on
the Virginia-class submarine program, for which authorization
to enter a multiyear procurement contract was granted under
section 121, that could include advance construction activities
if he determines that such action would yield greater cost
savings or construction efficiencies.
The Navy believes that having such an option available
could help achieve greater cost savings and production
efficiencies as the program increases throughput to a rate of
two boats per year in fiscal year 2011.
Refueling and complex overhaul of the USS Theodore Roosevelt (sec. 132)
The committee recommends a provision that would provide a
one-time exemption to the normal full funding policy to allow
for contracting of a 3-year incrementally-funded aircraft
carrier refueling complex overhaul (RCOH) from the Shipbuilding
and Conversion, Navy (SCN) account. This language would provide
the Navy with the authority to commence the refueling overhaul
in fiscal year 2009. The Navy informs the committee that this
would help level the workload at the shipyard and avoid an
overhead increase of approximately $50.0 million across the
future-years defense program. The Department of Defense has
requested that this be a one-time authorization, not one to be
extended into future years.
Budget Items
E-2D Advanced Hawkeye
The budget request included $496.4 million in Aircraft
Procurement, Navy (APN) for three E-2D Advanced Hawkeye
aircraft. The E-2D aircraft will provide improved airborne
early warning and surveillance capability to support carrier
strike groups in naval, joint, and coalition operations. In
fiscal year 2008, the administration requested--and the
Congress authorized and appropriated--funding for three
research and development E-2D aircraft. The committee notes
that the E-2D program has experienced several delays in
aircraft production over the past year due to development
difficulties with the advanced radar. Those delays threaten to
postpone the Milestone C decision for low rate initial
production, currently scheduled for the end of the second
quarter of fiscal year 2009, which would reduce the need for
production effort funded by the fiscal year 2009 budget.
Accordingly, the committee recommends the Navy decrease their
planned procurement of low rate initial production of E-2D
aircraft in fiscal year 2009 by one aircraft.
The committee recommends a reduction of $165.5 million in
APN for the E-2D Advanced Hawkeye aircraft.
H-53 modifications
The budget request included $56.4 million in Aircraft
Procurement, Navy (APN) for modifications of H-53 helicopters,
of which $2.9 million is for the Integrated Mechanical
Diagnostics Health and Usage Management System (IMDS). Since
2001, the Marines have been equipping the fleet of H-53
helicopters with the IMDS. The systems flying have already
provided a significant improvement in aircraft readiness rates
and ability to maintain the aircraft to support high tempo
operations, while simultaneously improving the accuracy of the
fleet health and material status reporting. The replacement for
the current CH-53, the CH-53K, is years away from achieving
initial operational capability, so buying additional IMDS kits
would still make a significant contribution to the readiness of
the fleet.
Therefore, the committee recommends an increase of $8.0
million for the procurement of additional IMDS systems.
P-3 modifications
The budget request included $152.7 million in Aircraft
Procurement, Navy (APN) for continuation of the Special
Structural Inspection-Kits (SSI-K) program, which replaces
fatigue-limited airframe structural components to enable the
airframe to fully reach its designed service life.
Analysis that was conducted as part of the ongoing fatigue
life management program determined that an area of the P-3 wing
surface not included in the SSI-K program, designated as Zone
5, has much worse predicted fatigue than previously estimated.
These results caused the Navy to ground 39 of 130 mission
aircraft in December 2007, and to initiate long-term mitigation
efforts to correct the critical deficiencies.
Due to the emergent nature of this P-3 sustainment issue,
the budget request does not include funding for Zone 5 kit
material and installation. The Chief of Naval Operations has
identified the correction of this critical operational and
safety of flight issue as the Navy's top unfunded priority. The
committee recommends an increase of $160.0 million in APN to
fund P-3 wing crack repair kits.
Common ECM equipment
The budget request included $66.4 million in Aircraft
Procurement, Navy (APN), common electronic countermeasures
(ECM) equipment, but included no funds to procure upgrades for
the AN/AAR-47 missile warning system to incorporate hostile
fire indications capability. This system improvement would
provide aircrews with warning of anti-aircraft artillery,
rocket-propelled grenade, or small arms fire. This capability
would undoubtedly assist Navy and Marine Corps aircrews in
avoiding or exiting dangerous environments. The committee
believes that the Department of the Navy should be fielding
this capability as a priority for aircraft potentially exposed
to such situations.
The committee recommends an increase of $10.0 million in
APN to begin fielding the hostile fire indications capability
for the AN/AAR-47 missile warning system.
Weapons industrial facilities
The budget request included $3.3 million for various
activities at government-owned, contractor-operated weapons
industrial facilities. The committee recommends an increase of
$30.0 million to accelerate the facilities restoration program
at the Allegany Ballistics Laboratory.
Grenades Marine Corps
The budget request included $39.0 million in Procurement of
Ammunition, Navy and Marine Corps (PANMC) for grenades. The
committee recommends an increase of $9.0 million in PANMC for
the procurement of additional grenades.
Virginia-class submarine advance procurement
The budget request included approximately $1.3 billion for
advance procurement for the Virginia-class submarine program,
including $596.8 million for economic order quantity (EOQ)
procurement of long lead material in conjunction with the
current multiyear procurement program.
Congress approved the Navy's request to enter into a
multiyear procurement contract in the National Defense
Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2008 (Public Law 110-181),
and added $588.0 million to help accelerate increasing the
attack submarine program to a rate of two boats per year. At
that time, the Navy planned to increase production to a rate of
two boats per year in fiscal year 2012.
This year, as a part of the fiscal year 2009 request, the
Navy plans to accelerate that production increase to fiscal
year 2011. The Navy has also identified that additional EOQ
funding in fiscal year 2009 and additional authority to conduct
advance construction activities would help achieve greater cost
savings and production efficiencies, and reduce the span time
for construction as the program increases throughput to a rate
of two boats per year in fiscal year 2011.
Therefore, the committee recommends an increase for EOQ
funding of $79.0 million. The committee also recommends a
provision (described elsewhere) that would give the Navy
authority to contract for advance construction activities for
which authorization to enter a multiyear procurement contract
was granted under section 121 of the National Defense
Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2008 (Public Law 110-181).
Littoral combat ship
The budget request included $920.0 million in Shipbuilding
and Conversion, Navy (SCN) for the construction of two Littoral
Combat Ships (LCS). The Navy intends this to be a relatively
smaller, more affordable vessel that carries modular payloads.
The Navy concept is that on one day, an LCS might be configured
to operate as an anti-submarine vessel. However, as mission
needs change, it could rapidly change the whole mission payload
within a day or so, and operate in an anti-surface warfare or
mine warfare mode.
Each of the two prime contractor teams had contracts to
build two ships. The prime contractors have teamed with smaller
shipyards in both cases in order to keep LCS costs lower than
would be possible in one of the major yards that normally build
Navy ships.
The first ship (LCS-1) was scheduled to deliver in late
2006. The Navy is now estimating that the first ship will
deliver sometime in late 2008. The LCS-1 contractor team had
barely started on their second ship (LCS-3) when the program
ran into major cost problems earlier last year. The Navy then
issued a stop work order on LCS-3 in order to reduce
expenditures and limit further cost exposure on the program
while it separately re-evaluated program cost estimates.
The Navy entered into negotiations with the LCS-1 team to
sign up to a fixed price contract on the two ships or face
outright cancellation on the second ship. The Navy terminated
the contract for LCS-3 for the convenience of the government.
As a result of that termination, the government will take
delivery of some sizeable inventory of equipment and material
for the cancelled LCS-3.
The second contractor team had a contract to build two LCS
vessels of another design (LCS-2 and LCS-4). The Navy awarded
this contract almost a year later, so LCS-2 was roughly 1 year
behind the LCS-1. The Navy went ahead with activities leading
to the start of construction on LCS-4, despite internal
warnings that the second contractor would face similar cost and
schedule problems as those faced by the first contractor. Late
last year, the same poor performance and fixed priced
negotiation scenario also played out on the LCS-2 and LCS-4.
This led the Navy to also cancel the LCS-4, again with the
result that the government will take delivery of some sizeable
inventory of equipment and material for the cancelled LCS-4.
Section 125 of the National Defense Authorization Act for
Fiscal Year 2008 (Public Law 110-181) places a cost ceiling on
LCS contracts of $460.0 million per ship, a dollar value
provided by the Navy. Congress also authorized and appropriated
one LCS in fiscal year 2008.
The Navy has not awarded the one LCS approved in the fiscal
year 2008 budget. The Navy's acquisition strategy, which has
been extremely fluid, is to award this ship, plus the two ships
from the fiscal year 2009 program later this calendar year. The
Navy's intent is that the award be a limited competition, with
each yard assured of being awarded at least one ship.
The total funding provided in fiscal year 2007 and prior
budgets for the six previously authorized Littoral Combat Ships
totals $1,639.0 million. The Navy has determined that $1,162.0
million of these funds is required for construction, test,
trials, outfitting, and post-delivery of LCS-1 and LCS-2. The
remaining $477.0 million funding is allocated against the
terminated ships, LCS-3 and LCS-4, including material purchased
for those ships prior to termination. Within the remaining
funding allocated against the terminated ships, sufficient
funding should also be available for LCS class design to ensure
that the follow-on ships commence production with ``clean,''
producible drawings and planning products. Presuming the Navy
maintains stable design requirements, the availability of clean
drawings and planning products should ensure healthy learning
curve performance in production. This learning curve
performance, in conjunction with material purchased in prior
years (from the terminated ships), should more than offset the
effects of one year's escalation for ships purchased in 2009.
The fiscal year 2008 budget has resources sufficient to
award one LCS within the cost cap to either shipyard, when
taking into account the inventory of equipment and material
available from that shipyard's cancelled ship. The Navy would
provide this equipment and material to the shipyard that wins
the fiscal year 2008 ship as government furnished material
(GFM). The value of this GFM would count against the cost cap.
Under their plan, the Navy would also award at least one of
the two ships in the fiscal year 2009 budget to the other
shipyard. The Navy would likewise provide the GFM from that
shipyard's cancelled ship to offset the cost of that one ship.
Similarly, the value of this GFM would count against the cost
cap on this ship as well.
The fiscal year 2009 budget request, however, would fund
both ships to the full cost cap and not take the value of this
GFM for the second cancelled ship into account. This means that
the budget request of $920.0 million includes more funding than
can be placed on contract without violating the cost cap,
unless the Navy were to withhold the GFM for the second
shipyard.
The committee believes that the Navy should apply the GFM
to both contractors' vessels as soon as a second ship is
purchased from either yard. Therefore, the committee recommends
a reduction of $123.0 million to take that GFM into account.
This will leave sufficient funds in the Navy's hands to award
two ships in fiscal year 2009, with both ships fully funded to
the congressional cost cap of $460.0 million.
LPD-17 amphibious transport dock
The budget request for fiscal year 2009 included $103.2
million to provide for LPD-17 program close out costs, but
included no funding for the tenth ship of the USS San Antonio
(LPD-17) class amphibious ship program, LPD-26.
The Navy's 2008 report to Congress on the long-range plan
for construction of naval vessels calls for assuming additional
risk in the expeditionary warfare force, by reducing
expeditionary force size, including reducing the LPD-17 class
from a total of 12 to nine ships. The Navy would instead extend
the service of some existing vessels as an interim measure,
with no real long-term plan to solve the problem.
The committee is concerned that this plan does not provide
the total number of amphibious ships needed to support the
Department of the Navy's two Marine Expeditionary Brigade lift
requirements for forcible entry operations. In testimony before
Congress in fiscal years 2005, 2006, 2007, and 2008, Marine
Corps leadership stated that a class of no less than 10 LPD-17
ships was required to meet Marine Corps forcible entry
requirements, with acceptable risk. The Chief of Naval
Operations and the Commandant of the Marine Corps have both
identified procurement of LPD-26 in 2009 as a top unfunded
priority for both services.
The committee is aware that construction for LPD-26 would
have commenced in fiscal year 2009 under the previous schedule.
However, with delays in other shipbuilding programs within the
contractor's facilities, and with the fact that the contractor
has recently had to subcontract significant work on earlier
LPD-17s with other vendors, it should be possible to procure
LPD-26 in fiscal year 2010 without incurring significant cost
growth or jeopardizing industrial base stability.
Therefore, the committee recommends: (1) an increase of
$170.0 million for advance procurement; and (2) a transfer of
the $103.2 million from program close out costs to advance
procurement. In total, including funding provided in fiscal
year 2008, the committee recommends $323.2 million for advance
procurement for LPD-26.
LHA(R) advance procurement
The fiscal year 2009 budget request for the National
Defense Sealift Fund (NDSF) included $348.3 million for advance
procurement for the first Maritime Prepositioning Force
(Future) (MPF(F)), based on the design of amphibious assault
replacement ships. These vessels are designated as the MPF(F)
LHA(R).
The committee does not agree with funding development and
procurement for amphibious assault ships within the NDSF and
has included a provision (described elsewhere) that would
clarify what programs will be included in the NDSF.
The Navy and the contractor have recently informed the
committee that there will be significant schedule delays and
cost increases for the LHD-8 amphibious assault ship. These
problems, and the continuing struggles to regain and retain
staffing and achieve productivity levels experienced before the
Hurricane Katrina disaster, do not bode well for making
expected progress on the LHA-6 amphibious assault ship, the
next large amphibious ship to be built by the contractor. LHA-6
is intended to be the basis for the design of the MPF(F)
LHA(R).
Based on all these factors, the committee does not believe
that the Navy can or should apply all of the requested advance
procurement funds in the MPF(F) LHA(R) in fiscal year 2009.
Therefore, the committee recommends a decrease of $170.0
million for MPF(F) LHA (R) advance procurement.
DDG-51 Arleigh Burke-class destroyer modernization program
The budget request included $165.5 million in Other
Procurement, Navy (OPN) for the DDG-51 modernization program.
This program upgrades the 62 ships of the DDG-51 class with key
technologies to provide improved warfighting capability while
reducing operating and support cost. This is planned to be a
20-year modernization program that will cost roughly $10.0
billion.
The Secretary of the Navy's fiscal year 2008 report to
Congress on the long-range plan for construction of naval
vessels identified the requirement to extend the service life
of the DDG-51 class to 40 years in order to meet surface
combatant force structure requirements. However, additional
planning and funding to accomplish this extended service life
is not included in the budget request.
The committee views the Navy's plan to operate the DDG-51
class for a full 40 years to be very high risk, based on recent
history of 20-25 year service life for surface combatants.
Additional fiscal year 2009 DDG-51 modernization procurement
funding would support critical planning, engineering, and
procurement activities for service life extension alterations.
The committee recommends an increase of $25.0 million in OPN
for the DDG-51 modernization program.
The 2008 Navy report to Congress on DDG modernization
indicated that the Navy staff had reviewed a concept that would
achieve favorable results for each of the program attributes
outlined in the report. The Navy report identified using the
multi-ship, multi-option (MSMO) contracts as the preferred
approach for conducting the DDG modernization. The MSMO
contracts are contracts for maintenance efforts on Navy ships
that are conducted in the ships' homeport area.
It is not apparent to the committee that the Navy seriously
evaluated conducting the modernization program at the shipyards
where the DDG-51s were built, or a so-called ``building yard''
approach. Further, upon reviewing the Navy's basis for
determining that MSMO contracts would be more suitable for
executing the DDG modernization program, the committee cannot
find that the Navy has established measures of effectiveness
and appropriate cost control mechanisms to maximize the
benefits promised by MSMO contract maintenance strategies.
The magnitude of this investment, coupled with the critical
need for this modernization effort, warrants a more thorough
assessment of the considerations leading to the Navy's
selection of an acquisition strategy.
Accordingly, the committee directs the Secretary of the
Navy to submit a DDG-51 modernization acquisition strategy
report to the congressional defense committees with the fiscal
year 2010 budget request. The report should include a plan to
execute a pilot project that would accomplish the full scope of
DDG-51 hull, mechanical and electrical, and combat system
maintenance and modernization in a single availability executed
at one of the building yards. Such plan shall include a
detailed quantitative and qualitative assessment of each of the
acquisition strategy and availability execution considerations
addressed by the Navy's 2008 report on DDG modernization. The
report shall also provide a quantitative and qualitative
comparison of this building yard plan with the Navy's plan to
execute DDG modernization within a MSMO contract framework. The
report shall include a plan for strengthening the Navy's MSMO
contract strategy by:
(1) establishing a correlation between MSMO
solicitation/award criteria and actual DDG-51
modernization program scope of work;
(2) incorporating performance benchmarks, metrics,
and incentives that enable the Navy to measure
performance and control cost consistent with the
discipline required of a major defense acquisition
program; and
(3) ensuring viable strategies are available to
leverage the benefits of competition across the 5-year
duration of the sole-source, cost-plus MSMO
environment.
Submarine training device modifications
The budget request included $33.6 million to procure
submarine training device modifications, but included no
funding for fielding any system that would provide commanders
and sailors with instant, continuous, and long-term feedback
regarding performance. The committee is aware that industry has
developed standardized metrics systems that could be used to
assess readiness and training proficiency. Such technology
would be interfaced with simulators and instrumented ranges to
automatically measure individual and crew performance as
thousands of tactical events are performed during a single day
of training. Having such systems would provide rapid, objective
feedback to sailors regarding the accuracy and consistency of
their tactical assessments and provide frequent and objective
assessments to force commanders, so that they can spot trends
and underperformers before an incident occurs.
Therefore, the committee recommends an increase of $3.8
million to expand the use of performance measurement systems by
completing definition of metrics and algorithms and installing
hardware and software in training sites.
Man overboard indicators
The budget request included $43.2 million in Other
Procurement, Navy (OPN) for command support equipment, but no
funding to procure man overboard indicators (MOBI).
The Navy has tested a one-per-person MOBI transmitter.
Additionally, at least two expeditionary strike groups
recommended the Navy procure MOBI transmitters for each
embarked sailor, marine, and airman. The committee understands
that a large majority of ship commanding officers having MOBI
systems installed have requested additional MOBI transmitters
in order to protect all embarked personnel. In addition, the
U.S. Navy Safety Center has recommended that each embarked
sailor and marine be afforded MOBI protection.
Therefore, the committee recommends an increase of $4.9
million for the procurement of additional MOBI systems.
Logistics vehicle system replacement
The budget request included $324.6 million in Procurement,
Marine Corps for the Logistics Vehicle System Replacement
(LVSR). The LVSR will provide the Marine Corps with a
replacement vehicle system for the current fleet of LVS's,
which are approaching the end of their service life.
The committee supports the LVSR program, but is concerned
the Marine Corps' current plan for procurement is too
aggressive given the number of engineer change proposals and
other manufacturing issues that have been discovered during the
low-rate initial production process. Further, the committee is
concerned that the Marine Corps inadequately pursued unit cost
reductions from the manufacturer given the 3-year window during
which the Marine Corps intends to procure these systems.
Therefore, the committee recommends a decrease of $25.0 million
in funding for fiscal year 2009.
Combat casualty care equipment upgrade program
The budget request included $6.6 million in Procurement,
Marine Corps, for Field Medical Equipment, but no funds for the
combat casualty care equipment upgrade program (CCCEUP), now
completing its fifth year of operation. The CCCEUP provides
lightweight, compact, field medical equipment for the Marine
Corps and Navy corpsmen delivering combat casualty care. This
equipment and the medical care it supports are designed
specifically to reduce preventable combat deaths and speed
recovery of the wounded.
The committee recommends an increase of $7.9 million for
the CCCEUP program.
Subtitle D--Air Force Programs
F-22A fighter aircraft (Sec. 151)
As described elsewhere in this report, the budget request
included $497.0 million for structural repairs to the F-15 that
were added to the aircraft maintenance budget in case they
would be needed to correct problems that might have emerged
after investigations and inspections following a mishap in
November 2007. Since that time, the Air Force has determined
that these additional funds are not necessary for completing
the repairs required to: (1) correct F-15 structural problems;
and (2) return them to flying status.
The committee recommends a provision that would provide
$497.0 million Aircraft Procurement, Air Force (APAF) for
either (1) advance procurement for F-22A aircraft in fiscal
year 2010; or (2) winding down the production line for F-22A
aircraft. The next President of the United States would have to
decide which alternative would be in the best interests of the
Nation and submit a certification of that decision to the
congressional defense committees before any of these funds
could be spent.
The budget request included $3,054.2 million in APAF for
building 20 F-22A aircraft. The budget request did not include
funding for either: (1) advance procurement to continue F-22A
production after fiscal year 2009; or (2) funding to support
government liability for costs of closing the production line.
The 20 F-22A aircraft in the fiscal year 2009 budget would
complete the currently approved program to buy 183 F-22A
aircraft. The committee heard conflicting testimony from
Department of Defense officials about whether 183 F-22A
aircraft are sufficient to meet the needs of the Department.
The budget request reflects the view that 183 aircraft are
enough to meet warfighting requirements. The Air Force
maintains that it needs to have 381 F-22A aircraft to meet
warfighting requirements, provide support to homeland defense
missions, and have sufficient aircraft to provide squadrons for
10 Air Expeditionary Forces (AEFs) and, thereby, support a
peacetime rotation base for the AEFs.
The committee also heard testimony from the Secretary of
Defense, with which the Secretary of the Air Force concurred,
that he would prefer to leave the question of continuing F-22A
production after fiscal year 2009 in a neutral position for the
next administration.
Therefore, the committee recommends an increase of $497.0
million, for either: (1) advance procurement to continue F-22A
production after fiscal year 2009; or (2) funding to support
government liability for costs of closing the production line,
as decided by the next President.
Budget Items--Air Force
Advanced procurement for the F136 engine
The budget request included $136.9 million in Aircraft
Procurement, Air Force (APAF) for advanced procurement for the
F-35 Joint Strike Fighter (JSF) program. In section 213 of the
National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2008 (Public
Law 110-181), Congress explicitly directed the Department of
Defense to (1) develop a competitive propulsion system for the
JSF aircraft; and (2) continue competition for the propulsion
system throughout the production phase of the JSF program.
In order to follow through on that direction and begin
competition with the F-135 engine in 2012, the Department of
Defense must begin funding for long lead items for the F-136
production line in 2009.
Therefore, the committee recommends in increase of $35.0
million in APAF for long lead items for the F-136 engine.
C-17A engine spares
The budget request included $367.6 million in Aircraft
Procurement, Air Force, for the C-17A aircraft, including
$114.6 million for engine spares. The funding stream for engine
spares over the past 3 years has shown little consistency,
going from a level of $76.0 million in fiscal year 2007 to zero
in fiscal year 2008, and $114.6 million this year.
The committee is aware that the operating forces have
lodged few complaints over the availability of spares, nor have
mission capability or effectiveness rates suffered in recent
years. The committee believes that funding to the fiscal year
2007 level should be more than adequate, at least until the Air
Force can provide adequate supporting documentation of the need
for additional spares.
Therefore, the committee recommends a reduction of $40.0
million for C-17 engine spares.
Tactical intelligence support
The Joint Special Operations Command (JSOC) forces
operating in Iraq and Afghanistan, in cooperation with the
intelligence community, have developed sophisticated
capabilities to identify, find, track, and kill or capture
high-value individuals. Whereas traditional force-on-force
military campaigns require techniques to find and attack large
mechanized formations, irregular warfare requires these new
``man-hunting'' capabilities.
Army and Marine Corps ground forces have requirements
similar to JSOC's in their counter-insurgency operations. Over
time, some of the systems as well as tactics, techniques, and
procedures developed by and for JSOC have begun to migrate from
JSOC to Army and Marine Corps ground forces. This process
includes specialized support from national intelligence
agencies. Also, the Army and Marine Corps themselves have
acquired innovative capabilities to conduct effective counter-
insurgency operations.
For example, the services have deployed ``human terrain
teams'' to enhance their understanding of the local social and
cultural environment. Biometric signature and forensic data
collection capabilities and effective reach-back to national-
level databases and processing are more widespread and well-
received by tactical elements. More national human intelligence
(HUMINT) and signals intelligence (SIGINT) databases are for
the first time being pushed forward to support tactical unit
operations with greater speed and frequency. Meanwhile, these
capabilities are linked with airborne and ground-based
intelligence capabilities that further enable the detection,
identification, location, and tracking of high-value targets.
The committee believes there is an urgent requirement to
enhance and increase access to this man-hunting capability to
all Army and Marine Corps ground forces in harm's way.
Consequently, the committee recommends a series of actions to
initiate, accelerate, or eliminate bottlenecks that impede
fielding of special-purpose equipment and capabilities, much of
them classified. Specific recommendations are outlined below,
but full explanations are provided only in the classified annex
to this report.
Airborne Imaging
Requirements for airborne full-motion video (FMV) platforms
are escalating rapidly as a result of demonstrated operational
successes. The Department of Defense (DOD) appears to have
responded belatedly and without appropriate focus to this
requirement. The committee believes that DOD has focused almost
exclusively on trying to accelerate fielding of the Predator,
Army Warrior, Reaper, and Shadow unmanned aerial systems (UAS).
Despite a sustained Air Force effort to surge the Predator
system, however, UAS likely will be unable to meet operational
requirements in the near term, for reasons discussed below.
The committee believes that manned aircraft could be
acquired and modified rapidly from the commercial sector, which
would allow DOD to meet operational requirements until the UAS
programs can catch up to demand. At that point, commercial
contracts could be terminated, or the manned aircraft systems
could be transferred to Iraqi security forces. The committee
believes that DOD could have chosen to pursue this approach as
an expedient through war-related supplemental funding.
The committee notes that the Commander of Special
Operations Command (SOCOM) has requested that Congress provide
funds for approximately five 24-hour orbits of primarily manned
aircraft in the fiscal year 2008 supplemental. This request,
while commendable, would satisfy one-quarter to one-third of
the immediate requirement. The committee is concerned that DOD
has not explained why it is not seeking more of what SOCOM has
requested. The committee encourages the Secretary of Defense to
address this issue in the next war-related supplemental funding
request.
The major medium- and long-endurance UAS programs cannot be
adequately accelerated in part because of shortages of
operators and looming training limitations, as noted in the
Conference Report on the National Defense Authorization Act for
Fiscal Year 2008 (Public Law 110-181). The Department is now
addressing the operator shortage by requesting funds for more
training capacity, examining whether rated pilots are required
to control these UAS, and investigating whether the Air Force
needs to establish a career field for UAS pilots. The other
major training-related problem is the lack of capabilities and
procedures to operate UAS in the National Airspace (NAS).
The committee is deeply concerned that DOD is unprepared to
meet Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) requirements to
operate in the NAS. The committee appreciates that DOD UAS
programs are growing larger and faster than anyone anticipated,
and are being used in unexpected locations and missions.
However, the major programs have been in the acquisition system
for 15 years, and many observers, including congressional
committees, warned DOD repeatedly of the risk of deferring
resolution of this challenge.
The Air Force is operating Global Hawk UAS from Beale Air
Force Base under Temporary Flight Restrictions. Developmental
test and acceptance flights for the Army Sky Warrior and the
Reaper cannot be conducted at night at El Mirage Flight
Operations Facility in California. The Army is fielding Shadow
UAS systems to many Guard and reserve units across the United
States that do not have access to restricted airspace for
training.
These problems require prompt and vigorous action. The
committee recommends that DOD and the FAA create a joint
committee between the DOD and the Federal Aviation
Administration at the level of the Under Secretary of Defense
for Acquisition, Technology, and Logistics (USD/AT&L) and the
Associate Administrator for Aviation safety. Such a committee
could serve as the focal point for dispute resolution and
policy development. The committee directs the Deputy Secretary
of Defense to seek an agreement with the Administrator of the
FAA to create an executive committee to implement the
memorandum of agreement signed in September 2007 for Operation
of Unmanned Aircraft Systems in the National Airspace System.
The committee also recommends funding to accelerate the
highest priority UAS airspace integration needs. The committee
recommends $31.0 million in Aircraft Procurement, Air Force
(APAF), RQ-4 Global Hawk (Line 20) and $31.0 million in APAF
MQ-1 Predator (Line 22) for two ground-based radars for Beale
Air Force Base, and El Mirage Flight Operations facility,
respectively, to provide enhanced ground-based collision-
avoidance capabilities to mitigate restrictions on terminal
flight operations. The committee also recommends $10.0 million
in Research, Development, Test, and Evaluation (RDT&E), Air
Force, PE 35219F, to accelerate development of critical sense-
and-avoid capabilities for Global Hawk and the Predator/Sky
Warrior UAS. Finally, the committee recommends $15.0 million in
RDT&E, Defense-wide, PE 64400D8Z, to begin the development for
the major UAS programs of modeling and simulation tools, and
standards, that will provide the foundation for gaining routine
UAS access to the national and international airspace.
Wide-Area Airborne Surveillance
One objection to buying many more airborne FMV platforms is
that they are an inefficient means of surveillance. FMV cameras
have a narrow field-of-view, requiring one platform for every
specific target or mission. In areas where the target density
permits, it would be more efficient to use camera systems that
can cover large areas. The Army Constant Hawk and Marine Corps
Angel Fire systems are current examples of wide-area collection
systems. The DOD leadership requested funds for the Air Force
to acquire a combined, enhanced system, currently called Wide-
Area Airborne Surveillance (WAAS), to image a larger area than
Constant Hawk or Angel Fire, enable night operations, real-time
support to ground forces, provide a forensic capability, and
support many simultaneous targeting and surveillance missions.
It could cue and hand off targets to FMV platforms for
prosecution.
The committee strongly supports this initiative for many
reasons, including its potential to reduce the requirement for
UAS with FMV and to make the latter more effective. However,
the WAAS system likely will not be available in useful numbers
for 2 years or more, and therefore cannot serve as a near-term
solution for U.S. Central Command's airborne FMV deficiency.
The Air Force intends to field the WAAS system on the
Reaper, or MQ-9, UAS. The committee understands that it may
require less time and cost to field the WAAS system on the Sky
Warrior, or Predator-1C. The committee is also aware that there
are several proposals under consideration to field WAAS
capabilities on other platforms, such as the Shadow UAS. The
committee directs the Deputy Secretary of Defense to examine
these issues and provide an assessment and recommendation to
the committee by June 15, 2008 to help inform decisions in
conference on the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal
Year 2009.
National-Tactical SIGINT Initiatives
The National Security Agency (NSA), with Special Operations
Command and the Army, has developed special capabilities
against modern signals encountered in Iraq and elsewhere. These
capabilities are now engineered for fielding as tactical
systems, on ground vehicles, and on airborne platforms. NSA and
the Army are fielding the Triton III system on Mine Resistant
Ambush Protected (MRAP) vehicles to support maneuver forces. A
program called Final e-Curfew provides more advanced area-
collection capabilities against the same target set from fixed
locations. These systems work in conjunction with databases
pushed forward to tactical echelons.
These systems should be fielded rapidly. The committee
recommends authorization of $25.0 million above the request in
Other Procurement, Army, line 74, to accelerate Triton III
procurement and installation on the MRAP vehicles. The
committee understands that the Army's needs for Triton III
procurement exceed the amount recommended for authorization.
The committee urges the Army and Office of the Secretary of
Defense to include the balance of the requirement in the next
war-related supplemental spending request. The committee also
recommends an authorization of $25.0 million in PE 35885G,
NSA's Tactical Cryptologic Activities, for development and
acquisition of Final e-Curfew systems for the Army and Marine
Corps units in Iraq.
Special SIGINT capabilities are also more widely available
for manned and unmanned aircraft deployment. The Air Force is
planning to field these capabilities as an adjunct to the
Airborne Signals Intelligence Program (ASIP)-2C configuration
on the Reaper and Predator, and the Army is planning to build
similar capabilities, under the Tactical SIGINT Program, for
the Sky Warrior/MQ-1C UAS. The committee is concerned that the
Army and the Air Force are developing very similar systems to
meet similar requirements and concepts of operation. At the
same time, the committee is concerned that neither service is
planning to incorporate certain fundamental collection
capabilities, as described in the classified annex to this
report. The committee understands that these advanced
capabilities will cost more and will consume a larger portion
of the payload of such potential platforms as the Reaper,
Predator, and Sky Warrior, but believes that these tradeoffs
must be seriously considered. The committee is also concerned
that the Air Force's preferred platform choice is the Reaper
even though it will be more difficult to collect against the
targets of interest from that platform's higher altitude.
Accordingly, the committee directs that the Deputy
Secretary of Defense, in consultation with the Under Secretary
of Defense for Intelligence, the USD/AT&L, the Joint Staff, and
the Director of NSA, to review requirements and determine
whether the Army and Air Force should pursue a single, joint
airborne UAS SIGINT program, and whether this development
should include the advanced collection capability described in
the classified annex to this report. The committee requests
that the Deputy Secretary report to the committee by June 15,
2008 to help inform decisions in conference on the National
Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2009.
B-52 bomber
The budget request included $41.7 million in Aircraft
Procurement, Air Force line 26 for the B-52 bomber, of which
$32.4 million is for combat network communications technology
(CONECT) and $7.3 million is for advanced weapons integration
(AWI). No funds were included for the selective availability
anti-spoofing module (SAASM). The committee recommends an
additional $18.1 million for the SAASM, $22.8 million for
CONECT, and $16.7 million for AWI, for a total of $57.6
million. The Air Force failed to include adequate funding in
the budget request to meet the requirements of the National
Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2008 (Public Law 110-
181) to maintain 76 B-52 bombers in a common configuration and
included this funding on the Air Force unfunded priorities
list.
Large aircraft infrared countermeasures system
The budget request included $59.5 million in Aircraft
Procurement, Air Force for procurement of aircraft installation
kits for the large aircraft infrared countermeasures (LAIRCM)
system for various C-130 aircraft. The LAIRCM system provides
protection against man-portable air defense systems (MANPADS)
which are widely available and have been used by adversaries in
Operations Enduring Freedom and Iraqi Freedom against both
military and commercial aircraft. Additional funding for
LAIRCM, including funding for nonrecurring engineering and kit
production for Special Operations Command (SOCOM), is included
on the Chief of Staff of the Air Force's unfunded priorities
list.
The committee recommends an increase of $15.0 million to
accelerate LAIRCM upgrades for C-130 aircraft, in general, and
an increase of $2.2 million to accelerate LAIRCM upgrades for
SOCOM AC-130 and MC-130 aircraft.
C-130 Avionics Modernization Program
The budget request included $422.8 million in Aircraft
Procurement, Air Force (APAF) for the C-130 Modifications
Program, including $149.1 million for the C-130 Avionics
Modernization Program (AMP). The C-130 AMP effort suffered a
Nunn-McCurdy breach in February 2007, which caused the
Department of Defense to significantly restructure and
recertify the program in June 2007. While the committee remains
supportive of the program, we have concerns over the
unexplained growth in overhead on the program.
The committee recommends a reduction of $25.0 million in
APAF for the C-130 AMP Modification Program.
Advanced targeting pod
The budget request included $521.4 million in Aircraft
Procurement, Air Force (APAF, line 78) for miscellaneous
production charges, including $49.9 million for the procurement
of advanced targeting pods (ATPs), also known as precision
attack systems. Advanced targeting pods provide targeting
capability for use with precision guided munitions on fighter,
bomber, and attack aircraft. The ATP is currently in use by
both the active and reserve components of the Air Force. The
Air Force Chief of Staff included $170.0 million for buying new
ATPs and upgrading existing ATPs in his unfunded priorities
list.
The Air Force and the contractor team for the Litening ATP
program have devised a spiral enhancement kit for existing
Litening ATPs that will provide:
(1) a new fourth generation forward looking infrared
sensor;
(2) a new fourth generation charged coupled device
(CCD) camera that enables targeting acquisition and
identification;
(3) a C-Band video downlink capability which will
provide exceptional standoff capability outside of most
surface-to-air threats at twice the distance of the
earlier Litening ATPs; and
(4) a laser spot tracker and a laser target imaging
processor which yield much improved performance for
targeting at long ranges using precision weapons.
The committee recommends an increase of $27.9 million for
the procurement of spiral upgrade kits for Litening ATPs.
Budget request realignments
The Air Force requested that Congress make several
realignments in their budget to correct various errors in their
submission of the Aircraft Procurement, Air Force (APAF)
documentation. The table below reflects these adjustments:
[insert at the end of budget items for APAF]
CHANGES TO CORRECT SUBMISSION ERRORS
(In millions)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Item Account Line item Amount
------------------------------------------------------------------------
C-130J.............................. APAF 49 -$25.0
C-130J.............................. APAF 6 +$25.0
JPATS............................... APAF 12 -$5.5
JPATS............................... APAF 39 -$0.4
JPATS............................... APAF 75 -$8.8
JPATS............................... APAF 63 +$14.7
(Adjustment to APAF line 63 already reflected in the budget request)
C-17................................ APAF 5 -$8.8
C-17................................ APAF 34 +$8.8
C-21................................ APAF 35 -$10.2
T-1................................. APAF 40 +$10.2
C-21................................ APAF 70 -$19.0
T-1................................. APAF 75 +$19.0
KC-X................................ APAF 10 -$61.7
KC-X................................ RDAF 83 +$61.7
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Improved stores ejection cartridge
The budget request included $150.8 million in Procurement
of Ammunition, Air Force (PAAF) for cartridges, but provided no
funds for improved stores ejection cartridges. Funds provided
will update the ejection cartridge currently used on numerous
aircraft platforms by all branches of the military for various
payload ejection applications, including, but not limited to,
the F-15, F-16, A-10, and B-52 aircraft. The committee
recommends an increase of $1.0 million in PAAF for improved
stores ejection cartridges.
Joint Air-to-Surface Standoff Missile
The budget request included $240.3 million in Missile
Procurement, Air Force (MPAF) for the Joint Air-to-Surface
Stand off Missile (JASSM). The JASSM program announced a Nunn-
McCurdy breach in February 2007. Following a review of the
program, the Under Secretary of Defense for Acquisition,
Technology, and Logistics (USD (AT&L)) declined to certify the
program, delaying the decision until at least May 2008. As part
of the effort leading to recertification, the Air Force has
been conducting JASSM flight tests, but those tests have drawn
concern from the Office of the Director of Test and Evaluation
(DOT&E). According to DOT&E, flight tests have not occurred in
a predicted way, leading to serious questions about
configuration control.
The committee continues to recognize that JASSM was
designed to meet a needed capability. The Air Force anticipates
that it will be able to ramp up production once the USD (AT&L)
recertifies the missile under Nunn-McCurdy rules. The Air Force
plan is to increase production from 115 missiles in fiscal year
2008 to 260 missiles in 2009. However, given the questions and
concerns over this program, the committee believes that such an
increase in quantities is unwarranted at this time.
Therefore, the committee recommends a reduction of $80.0
million in MPAF for JASSM.
Advanced Extremely High Frequency satellite
The budget request included $16.5 million in Missile
Procurement, Air Force for advanced procurement and launch
support for the third Advanced Extremely High Frequency (AEHF)
satellite but no funds for the fourth AEHF satellite. The
committee recommends an additional $100.0 million for advanced
procurement, parts obsolescence, test equipment, and spares for
the fourth AEHF.
In fiscal year 2008 $125.0 million was appropriated for
advanced procurement for the fourth AEHF satellite, with
direction to fully fund the fourth AEHF in the fiscal year 2009
budget request. The Milstar satellites, the predecessors to
AEHF, have lasted longer than expected and the Air Force has
determined that it can wait until the 2010 budget request to
include full funding for the fourth AEHF satellite. As a
result, the technical, schedule, and cost risks associated with
further extending the production break between the third and
fourth AEHF satellites will further increase the cost of the
fourth AEHF satellite.
The committee notes that the Air Force is currently
studying whether a fifth AEHF satellite might be needed. This
study will not be completed until June 2008.
Intelligence communication equipment
The budget request included $15.4 million in Other
Procurement, Air Force (OPAF), for intelligence communication
equipment, including $6.9 million for the ``Chief of Staff
Innovation Program.'' In fiscal year 2008, this program is
called ``Eagle Vision.'' Eagle Vision is a family of systems
that provide commercial imagery data to operational commanders
for mission planning, rehearsal, visualization, and
intelligence support purposes. Eagle Vision is composed of a
data acquisition segment (DAS) and a data integration segment
(DIS). Funds requested for fiscal year 2009 are to support
procurement of imagery ingestion capability upgrades as well as
Eagle Vision DAS and DIS upgrades. These upgrades will provide
improved processing capability, additional satellite
capabilities, and baseline upgrades.
Commercially available synthetic aperture radar (SAR) data
at 1 meter resolution could significantly improve surveillance
and search and rescue operations, since this data is
unclassified, and is releasable to State and local responders
or, with proper authorization, releasable to foreign
governments. The data intensive SAR image will require an
upgrade to the Eagle Vision communications and image archive
and processing system not included in the budget request. The
committee is aware that such an upgrade to the Eagle Vision
system is available. Such systems deployed with Air National
Guard will allow the Eagle Vision systems to respond to
military contingencies and maritime surveillance, and search
and rescue operations, or to natural or man-made disasters.
The committee recommends an increase of $3.5 million to
begin fielding the SAR upgrades for the Eagle Vision system.
Combat training ranges
The budget request included $55.3 million in Other
Procurement, Air Force (OPAF) for making improvements at combat
training ranges. These improvements are aimed at increasing the
capability to support realistic air-to-air, air-to-ground,
ground-to-air, and electronic warfare training, along with the
ability to record and playback events for aircrew debriefing
and analysis.
The unmanned threat emitter (UMTE) modernization program
will provide affordable and realistic threats, with sufficient
threat density, typical of today's adversarial combat
environment. This UMTE effort will upgrade performance
capabilities and extend the service life of existing UMTE range
assets by providing fully reactive, programmable, high-fidelity
threat simulators, electronic attack receivers, automatic video
tracking, and mobility to support time-critical targeting
exercises. The committee understands that the Air Force's
current threat emitters are inadequate to train F/A-22s, Joint
Strike Fighters.
Therefore, the committee recommends an increase of $10.7
million in OPAF for UMTE.
Air Operations Centers
The budget request included $35.1 million in Other
Procurement, Air Force (OPAF) line 33 for Air Operations
Centers (AOCs), including $29.0 million for fielding additional
AOCs, increment 10.1. The committee recommends a reduction of
$29.0 million in OPAF for the fielding of AOCs.
The Air Force plans to build between 12 to 30 AOCs in the
coming years, with five main regional sites, and many more
``tailored'' sites. The justification for the total number of
sites is not clear. The recent addition of a requirement for an
AOC for the newly created U.S. Africa Command (AFRICOM) is a
case in point. For the foreseeable future, AFRICOM will be
headquartered in Germany. U.S. European Command already has a
fully operational AOC for Europe, which is only partially used.
Moreover, the proliferation of AOCs has created manning
shortages in the AOCs across all regions. While the committee
recognizes the value of the AOC that is currently fully manned
and operated in the U.S. Central Command area of operations,
little justification has been made as to why each numbered air
force requires its own command facility, especially as reach-
back command and control continues to rapidly evolve.
Finally, increment 10.1 of the AOCs was not developed as a
service oriented architecture, even though that is the future
approach for command and control within the Department of
Defense. The committee recommends the Air Force take a pause in
fielding increment 10.1 and fundamentally rethink its AOC
fielding and operating strategy.
Subtitle E--Joint and Multiservice Matters
Annual long-term plan for the procurement of aircraft for the Navy and
the Air Force (sec. 171)
The committee recommends a provision that would require the
Secretary of Defense to submit an annual long-term plan for
procurement of aircraft for the Departments of the Navy and Air
Force. The provision would require that the plan project
procurement, inventories, retirements, and losses for the
following 30-year period.
Aircraft that would be covered by the plan would include
fighter aircraft, attack aircraft, bomber aircraft, strategic
lift aircraft, intratheater lift aircraft, intelligence,
surveillance and reconnaissance aircraft, tanker aircraft, and
any other major support aircraft designated by the Secretary.
The committee received testimony over the past 2 years
about shortfalls of fighter/attack aircraft within the Navy and
Marine Corps projected for the middle of the next decade, and,
this year, received testimony about shortfalls of fighter
aircraft within the Air Force projected for the year 2024.
The committee believes that the Department of Defense and
Congress need long-term projections so that the two
organizations can focus attention on potential shortfalls,
gaps, or mismatches well before the full range of options are
foreclosed. This annual report should help in that effort.
Budget Items--Defense-wide
Terminal High Altitude Area Defense
The budget request included no funds for procurement of
long lead items for Fire Units 3 and 4 of the Terminal High
Altitude Area Defense (THAAD) system. The committee recommends
an increase of $140.0 million in a new defense-wide procurement
funding line for procurement of long lead items for the
interceptors and ground equipment for THAAD Fire Units 3 and 4.
Of this additional amount, $65.0 million would be transferred
from research and development (R&D) funds requested in PE
63881C for THAAD.
Section 223(b) of the National Defense Authorization Act
for Fiscal Year 2008 (Public Law 110-181) required the
Department of Defense to request any long lead procurement
funding for THAAD Fire Units 3 and 4, and for Standard Missile-
3 interceptors, in the fiscal year 2009 budget request using
procurement funds, rather than R&D funds. In addition, section
223(c) of that act prohibits the use of fiscal year 2009 R&D
funds for procurement of long lead items for THAAD Fire Units 3
and 4.
THAAD is a high priority near-term missile defense system
intended to provide our regional combatant commanders with the
capability they need today to protect our forward-deployed
forces, allies, and other friendly countries against many
hundreds of existing short- and medium-range ballistic
missiles. The budget request for THAAD included a planned 1-
year delay in the delivery of Fire Units 3 and 4, and an 18-
month production gap in THAAD interceptors. After congressional
objections were raised to this planned delay, the Missile
Defense Agency (MDA) decided it would reallocate $65.0 million
of fiscal year 2009 funding for the THAAD system for long lead
procurement of interceptors for Fire Unit 3. However, contrary
to the law, MDA plans to use R&D funds to procure long lead
items for Fire Unit 3.
The committee disagrees with MDA's plan to use R&D funds
for procurement of long lead items for Fire Unit 3, because it
would be contrary to the law and contrary to the intent of
Congress in requiring the use of procurement funds for such
activity. Therefore, the committee recommends establishing a
new defense-wide procurement funding line for MDA missile
defense procurement activities. The committee expects MDA and
the Department of Defense to comply with the requirements of
section 223 of the National Defense Authorization Act for
Fiscal Year 2008 in executing any long lead procurement funding
for THAAD Fire Units 3 and 4.
The committee notes that the Joint Capabilities Mix (JCM)
study, conducted by the Joint Staff, concluded that the United
States needs about twice as many THAAD and Standard Missile-3
interceptors as the number currently planned, to meet just the
minimum operational requirements of regional combatant
commanders to defend our forward-deployed forces, allies, and
other friendly nations against short- and medium-range
ballistic missiles that exist today. To meet even these minimum
operational requirements, MDA would have to increase
substantially its plans and budgets for THAAD procurement. The
committee expects MDA to adjust its plans accordingly.
The committee is concerned that MDA has not planned or
budgeted any funds in fiscal year 2009 for procuring a THAAD
radar. This would create a gap in THAAD radar production and
cause a schedule disconnect between fire unit delivery and
radar delivery. Therefore, the committee also recommends an
increase of $40.0 million in the new missile defense
procurement funding line for long lead procurement of the THAAD
radar for Fire Unit 3, to avoid a production gap and a schedule
disconnect. The committee urges MDA to synchronize the THAAD
fire unit and radar production and delivery schedules.
Standard Missile-3 interceptors
The budget request included no procurement funds for long
lead procurement of Standard Missile-3 (SM-3) interceptors for
the Aegis Ballistic Missile Defense (BMD) system. Contrary to
the law, the budget request included $57.0 million in research
and development (R&D) funds in PE 63892C for long lead
procurement of SM-3 Block IA missiles. The committee recommends
transferring the requested $57.0 million in R&D funds to a new
defense-wide procurement funding line for procurement of long
lead items for SM-3 interceptors, consistent with the law. The
committee also recommends an increase of $20.0 million in the
new Procurement, Defense-wide line for long lead procurement of
an additional 15 SM-3 interceptor missiles.
Section 223(b) of the National Defense Authorization Act
for Fiscal Year 2008 (Public Law 110-181) required the
Department of Defense to request any long lead procurement
funding for SM-3 interceptors, and THAAD Fire Units 3 and 4, in
the fiscal year 2009 budget request using procurement funds,
rather than R&D funds. In addition, section 223(c) of that act
prohibits the use of fiscal year 2009 R&D funds for procurement
of long lead items for SM-3 interceptors and THAAD Fire Units 3
and 4.
The committee is deeply disappointed that the Department of
Defense chose not to comply with the requirements of section
223 of the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year
2008 (Public Law 110-181), and directs the Director of the
Missile Defense Agency and the Under Secretary of Defense
(Comptroller) to jointly provide a report to the congressional
defense committees by no later than October 1, 2008, providing
a detailed explanation of the reasons the Department chose not
to comply with the law, and an explanation of the Department's
plans to comply with the law.
The committee notes that the Joint Capabilities Mix (JCM)
study, conducted by the Joint Staff, concluded that U.S.
combatant commanders need about twice as many SM-3 and THAAD
interceptors as currently planned to meet just their minimum
operational requirements for defending against the many
hundreds of existing short- and medium-range ballistic
missiles. The committee is deeply disappointed that the Missile
Defense Agency (MDA) has not planned or budgeted to acquire
more than a fraction of the SM-3 interceptors needed to meet
the warfighters' minimum operational needs, and that it does
not plan to fund additional procurement beyond fiscal year
2010. The committee believes that achieving at least the JCM
levels of upper tier interceptors in a timely manner should be
the highest priority for MDA, and expects the Agency to modify
its plans and budgets to meet our combatant commanders' current
operational needs. In section 223 of the John Warner National
Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2007 (Public Law 109-
364), Congress specified the Aegis BMD system and its SM-3
interceptor as a high priority near-term program for the
Department to focus on. As the JCM study makes clear, the
Department has failed to do so.
To address these concerns, the committee recommends an
increase of $20.0 million in the new defense-wide procurement
funding line for long lead procurement of an additional 15 SM-3
missiles to start to address the need to meet the requirements
identified in the JCM analysis. As described elsewhere in this
report, the committee also recommends increases of $80.0
million for increasing the production rate of the SM-3 missile,
reducing schedule risk for the SM-3 Block IB missile, and for
improving the capability of the Aegis BMD system to conduct
engagements using offboard sensors, known as ``engage on
remote,'' and to engage missiles in the ascent phase of
midcourse flight.
Intelligence, surveillance, reconnaissance mission equipment package
The budget request included $54.1 million for Special
Operations Forces (SOF) Intelligence, but no funding for a
classified intelligence, surveillance, reconnaissance mission
equipment package to modify existing classified air assets.
This equipment is critical to enabling operators to fix, find,
and target terrorists. It is also the Commander of the U.S.
Special Operations Command's fifth highest priority item for
funding, in the event that additional funds are available for
the Special Operations Command.
The committee recommends an increase of $13.3 million in
Procurement, Defense-wide, SOF Intelligence Systems, for a
special operations forces intelligence, surveillance,
reconnaissance mission equipment package to modify existing
classified air assets.
Special operations forces combat assault rifle
The budget request included $2.7 million in Procurement,
Defense-wide for the special operations forces (SOF) Combat
Assault Rifle program, which provides the SOF operator a highly
reliable, accurate, and sustainable family of weapons, to
include the MK17 sniper support rifle, suppressors, the
operator tool kit, and spare weapons systems to support the
MK16 and MK17. However, the Commander, Special Operations
Command identified a $4.4 million shortfall in funding for the
MK17 sniper support rifle.
The committee recommends an increase of $4.4 million in
Procurement, Defense-wide, small arms and weapons, for the
Special Operations Command.
Special operations visual augmentation systems hand-held imager/long-
range
The budget request included $30.2 million in Procurement,
Defense-wide for the special operations forces (SOF) visual
augmentation, lasers and sensor systems. However, no funding
was included for the special operations visual augmentation
systems hand-held imager/long-range. These relatively new,
hand-held imagers are thermal imagers that significantly
improve the ability of special operators to track targets under
conditions where existing technology does not allow them to do
so. The Commander of the U.S. Special Operations Command has
identified a $15.4 million shortfall in funding for these hand-
held imagers.
The committee recommends an increase of $5.0 million in
Procurement, Defense-wide, SOF visual augmentation, lasers and
sensor systems, for the Special Operations Command.
M53 Joint Chemical Biological Protective Mask
The budget request did not include funding in the Defense-
wide, Procurement, special operations forces operational
enhancements account for the M53 Joint Chemical Biological
Protective Mask (JCBPM). The committee recommends an increase
of $5.0 million for M53 JCBPM in this account.
United States Special Operations Command (SOCOM) has a
validated requirement for 14,601 JCBPMs, but only 58 percent of
that requirement was procured with available funding from the
Joint Program Executive Officer-Chemical and Biological
Defense. Additional funding for this program would allow the
purchase of the remaining 42 percent of the JCBPMs that is
required by SOCOM.
Joint Chemical Agent Detector
The budget request included $200.0 million in Procurement,
Defense-wide (PDW) for chemical and biological contamination
avoidance, including $38.1 million for procurement of the Joint
Chemical Agent Detector (JCAD). The committee recommends an
increase of $10.0 million in PDW for procurement of additional
JCAD units. The JCAD is an automatic, lightweight chemical
agent detector, identifier, and warning unit that is
significantly more effective, smaller, and less expensive than
other fielded chemical agent detectors. It is replacing older,
less effective systems, including the M8 Chemical Agent Alarm
system that contains a radioactive source. It is important to
equip U.S. forces with this greatly improved JCAD system for
operational and force protection purposes.
Joint Biological Standoff Detection System
The budget request included $199.6 million in Procurement,
Defense-wide (PDW) for chemical and biological defense
contamination avoidance, but included no funds for the Joint
Biological Standoff Detection System (JBSDS). Standoff
detection of biological warfare agents is the highest priority
technology objective in the chemical and biological defense
program, and also one of the most challenging. The JBSDS is the
first U.S. standoff early warning biological detection system.
It has completed initial operational testing, and is capable of
detecting and warning of biological threats at distances of
several kilometers, before exposure occurs. It is thus a good
choice for force protection at high threat overseas military
facilities. The committee recommends an increase of $8.0
million in PDW to continue low-rate initial procurement of
additional JBSDS units, pending a final decision on full-rate
production.
Items of Special Interest
Aegis modernization open architecture
The Navy has been on a path to transition surface ship
systems to an open business model, commonly referred to as Open
Architecture (OA), for approximately 6 years. The goal of
employing OA systems is to bring to bear competition and
innovation to achieve improved performance and affordability
through use of modular designs, allowing public access to
design specifications, reusing software code, mandating common
interface standards, and achieving seamless interoperability
between system hardware and software applications.
The committee concurs with the Navy's determination that OA
is both a business imperative and a critical enabler for
modernizing the Surface Navy. However, the Navy's overall
progress in transitioning to OA is falling short of
expectations in the extent to which the Navy is opening up the
Aegis combat system for the DDG-51 modernization program. The
Senate Report accompanying S. 1547 (S. Rept. 110 77) directed
the Navy to outline its plan and progress with implementing OA.
The Navy's OA report provides valuable insight regarding the
strategy for implementing OA. However, the Navy has not
outlined a program plan that ensures alignment between system
development schedules, development contracts, Navy budget,
program management structure, and the Aegis modernization
program.
The committee's concerns with delays to OA implementation
are compounded by the revelation this year of significant
shortfalls to Aegis combat systems engineering funding through
the future-years defense program.
The committee understands that the Navy intends to continue
with a sole source contract to develop improvements in the
Aegis combat system for a 5-year period commencing in fiscal
year 2009. This decision is driven by schedule pressures. The
Navy has assessed that the Aegis combat system is
insufficiently ``open'' to enable competition for Aegis
modernization development efforts in the time remaining before
the first ship installation, scheduled in 2012. The decision
also reflects the challenges associated with performing the
tasks necessary to open this complex combat system for
competition under prior sole source development contracts.
The committee is concerned that, absent a rigorous program
plan that provides for steady, incremental progress at opening
the Aegis combat system, in lock-step with contracts governing
the system development, the Navy will continue to fall short of
the progress required to achieve the objectives for OA.
Therefore, the committee directs that no greater than 50
percent of the amounts authorized for fiscal year 2009 for the
surface combatant combat system engineering program (PE 64307N)
may be obligated under a sole source contract, until 30 days
after submission by the Secretary of the Navy of a detailed
program plan for implementing OA for the Aegis combat system.
The program plan shall be included in subsequent quarterly
reports to the congressional defense committees on Naval Open
Architecture, and shall include methodology and scheduling for
incrementally opening the Aegis combat system. The plan must
provide for measuring discrete progress toward achieving a full
open system commensurate with introduction of the 2012 Aegis
baseline (formerly referred to as ``COTS Refresh 3'').
It is the committee's intent that, following consultation
with the Navy regarding the details of this plan, the Navy
will: (1) establish future benchmarks to govern the transition
from sole source to competitive development during the period
2010 to 2013; and (2) transfer the lessons learned from this
initiative to remaining surface ship combat system development
programs.
F/A-18 Hornet and Navy tactical aviation inventory shortfall
The committee is concerned that the Navy is facing a
sizeable gap in aircraft inventory as older F/A-18A-D Hornets
retire before the aircraft carrier variant (F-35C) of the Joint
Strike Fighter (JSF) is available. Compounding this problem is
the higher-than-predicted use of Hornets in ongoing operations
and the challenges of meeting Marine Corps/Navy tactical
aircraft integration obligations. The committee similarly
raised this issue in the committee report accompanying S. 1547
(S. Rept. 110-77) of the National Defense Authorization Act for
Fiscal Year 2008.
This year, the committee again received testimony from the
Navy of a projected shortfall in Navy tactical aviation. The
Navy has indicated that, under current assumptions, it will
experience a shortfall of 69 tactical aircraft in the year
2017, a number that swells to 125 when requirements of the
United States Marine Corps are included. The committee believes
that the Navy's projection of this shortfall may be, however,
based on a series of questionable assumptions.
Regardless, the acknowledgement that the Navy will be
short, at minimum, the equivalent of a full carrier air wing
and an additional half of a carrier air wing of aircraft is
troubling to the committee. Navy aircraft carriers are among
the nation's most important power projection platforms. With
shortfalls as large as the Navy is projecting, we could be
faced with drastically reducing the number of aircraft
available on short notice to the combatant commanders, either
because we have deployed under-strength air wings, or because
we did not deploy the carrier at all because of these aircraft
shortages.
The committee understands that the Navy is preparing a
comprehensive tactical aviation plan to be delivered to the
committee late summer, 2008. The committee eagerly awaits the
results of that plan. Last year the committee directed the
Congressional Budget Office to report on the strike fighter
gap, with that report due this fall. Finally, as discussed
elsewhere in this report, the committee has asked for a
Department of Defense 30-year aviation plan, the first of which
is to be delivered with the defense budget next February. These
three plans should serve to inform the continuing debate over
the looming strike fighter shortfall.
The committee notes the Navy has testified about its
confidence in the F/A-18E/F Super Hornet and its commitment to
a long-term mix of Super Hornet aircraft and the future F-35C
variant. Navy plans indicate that F/A-18-E/F Super Hornets will
remain in the fleet until at least 2040. While the Navy has
programmed the purchase of 89 F/A-18E/F in its future-years
defense program (FYDP) (40 in fiscal year 2010, 27 in fiscal
year 2011, and 22 in fiscal year 2012), it has not positioned
itself to potentially increase its purchase of F/A-18 E/Fs in
order to address the projected carrier aircraft shortfall. In
the near term, the Navy has no satisfactory alternative to the
F/A-18E/F for filling the gap.
Therefore, the committee believes that a multiyear
procurement (MYP) of additional F/A-18E/F aircraft may be
helpful in closing whatever gap in capability is borne out by
the plans described above. Needless to say, the committee
expects that any MYP contract the Navy enters into, including
one for this program, will fully comply with the requirements
of section 2306b of title 10, United States Code, as amended by
section 811 of the National Defense Authorization Act for
Fiscal Year 2008 (Public Law 110-181). That section lays out a
framework that allows the services to decide on which major
weapons it seeks to buy under a multiyear contract,
deliberatively and timely.
Subject to the outcome of the plans described above, the
Navy should explore all available options in determining how to
address the anticipated tactical aircraft shortfall, although
options to resolve the Navy tactical aircraft shortfall must be
viewed realistically. Projections of the shortfall are already
predicated on extending the maximum number of F/A-18A-D fleet
aircraft to what virtually all observers have acknowledged is
the extreme limit, a level of 10,000 total flight hours.
Further, the shortfall assumes achieving an initial operational
capability for the F-35C in 2015.
The committee is particularly concerned that a failure to
establish the conditions for an MYP on the F/A-18E/F by fiscal
year 2010, should the Navy ultimately decide to purchase
additional F/A-18E/F aircraft to address the tactical aircraft
shortfall, could lead to the loss of ``substantial savings'' to
the government. If the Navy were to proceed with annual
purchases of F/A-18E/F aircraft to close the tactical aircraft
shortfall but not position itself to do so with an MYP, the
taxpayer may be deprived of ``substantial savings,'' within the
meaning of section 2306b of title 10, United States Code, as
amended. The committee understands that the two previous MYP
contracts that the Navy executed on this program obtained that
level of savings--a savings that exceed 10 percent of the total
costs of carrying out the program through annual contracts. The
first MYP resulted in an estimated savings of $700.0 million.
The second MYP resulted in an estimated savings of $1.1
billion. This suggests that the Navy could achieve significant
savings on a third MYP.
The committee remains supportive of the 5th generation F-
35, Joint Strike Fighter. This provision should in no way be
misconstrued as a lack of support for the F-35. In fact, the
Department of Defense's current FYDP funding and quantities for
the F-35C program should not be affected if the Navy decides to
pursue an F/A-18E/F multiyear contract unless changes to the F-
35C program are being made for purposes other than to
facilitate purchases of F/A-18E/F aircraft.
Light utility helicopter
The committee understands that the Army's Light Utility
Helicopter (LUH) is a commercial off the shelf procurement
program that will begin fielding to the National Guard in June
2008. The committee notes that the Army's current procurement
plan buys fewer aircraft per fiscal year in 2009, 2010, and
2011. The committee believes that the LUH program may benefit
from an accelerated procurement strategy. The committee,
therefore, directs the Secretary of the Army to reevaluate the
acquisition strategy for the LUH to determine if an accelerated
procurement plan could realize significant economic order
quantity unit cost savings, allow the Army to retire aging and
more expensive H-1 and H-58 model helicopters, and free up UH-
60 Blackhawks for the global war on terror and medium
helicopter operations. The Secretary shall provide the
congressional defense committees with the results of this
reevaluation not later than September 30, 2008.
Material handling equipment study
The committee understands that the U.S. Transportation
Command (TRANSCOM) has previously identified significant
shortfalls in Air Force material handling equipment (MHE)
capable of deploying and operating in austere expeditionary
environments. In response, Congress increased funding for the
Halvorsen Air Cargo Loader for a number of years.
The committee is concerned that ongoing attrition of older
MHE units, increased Army combat end strength potentially
requiring increased through put, and procurement of additional
strategic and theater lift aircraft including the JCA and KC-X
tanker with increased cargo capacity may serve to further
exacerbate the operational requirements versus availability of
MHE.
Therefore, the committee directs the Secretary of the Air
Force, in consultation with the Secretary of the Army, to
conduct a comprehensive analysis of current and future MHE
requirements across the Air Force, Army, and National Guard,
and report to Congress on the findings of the study with the
budget request for fiscal year 2010.
Mine Resistant Ambush Protected Vehicles
The National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2008
(Public Law 110-181) included over $17.2 billion for the
procurement of more than 15,000 Mine Resistant Ambush Protected
(MRAP) vehicles. At the beginning of April 2008, according to
the MRAP Joint Program Office, over 3,500 MRAP vehicles had
been delivered to the U.S. Central Command area of
responsibility--3,368 to Iraq and 154 to Afghanistan. The
committee commends the Department of Defense and industry for
working together to deliver rapidly to theater this urgently
needed piece of equipment.
The committee notes that in the coming months and years,
the Department will need to develop a plan to incorporate these
vehicles into the tactical wheeled vehicle fleets of the
military services and develop a sustainment plan for the
eventual transition of these vehicles from contractor logistic
support to government support. Further, the Department must
begin to account for the full cost of maintaining the different
manufacturer variants and to develop as many efficiencies as
possible.
The Government Accountability Office has noted that
developmental testing of the MRAP continues and that
significant engineering change proposals are necessary to
address a variety of issues. The committee intends to monitor
closely how the Department works to incorporate these changes
in the coming months, and the committee expects that the
Department will place a high priority on any force protection
and warfighter safety items that may be discovered in the
ongoing developmental testing.
The committee also encourages the Department to continue to
pursue aggressively force protection technologies that will
ensure that our military forces remain the best equipped in the
world. The committee continues to monitor a number of ongoing
research efforts, including active protection systems, reactive
armor, and other add-on armor kits for the existing legacy
fleet.
Mission packages
The Navy has embarked on a program to develop modular
counter-mine, anti-surface, and anti-submarine warfare systems,
referred to as mission packages, to be deployed on the Littoral
Combat Ship (LCS). The Navy envisions fielding 60 mission
packages, which Navy commanders could interchange across the
55-ship LCS class as operational requirements dictate. This
total system capability of the LCS program has been identified
by the Chief of Naval Operations as a top priority for
operations in the littorals. The committee similarly views the
capability provided by a family of LCS mission packages as a
key component of the maritime strategy. The committee is,
therefore, concerned by the delays to mission package initial
operational capability, deployment, and full operational
capability caused by delays to the LCS construction program.
The Navy has designed the LCS mission packages with
modularity and with open architecture. Having done this, the
Navy should be able to deploy this capability on other ship
classes. Such an expanded concept of operations would provide
opportunities to employ mission packages more rapidly, and
against threats and in operational scenarios perhaps not
envisioned today.
Therefore, the committee directs the Secretary of the Navy
to evaluate alternatives for employing LCS mission packages on
other ship classes of the battle force, and to provide a report
on his findings to the congressional defense committees with
submission of the 2010 budget request. The report shall outline
the feasibility, cost, and impacts associated with integrating
mine countermeasures and anti-submarine mission packages on
other surface combatant and amphibious force ship classes, and
provide an assessment of the operational utility afforded by
being able to deploy mission packages across the broader battle
force.
Operational support aircraft for U.S. Africa Command
The committee is concerned that the Commander of U.S.
Africa Command (AFRICOM) lacks the necessary air support to
execute effectively his mission in a continent comprised of 53
countries, spanning a geographic area larger than the United
States, China, and Western Europe combined.
The Air Force has requested a C-37B and a C-40 aircraft for
AFRICOM on its unfunded priorities list. The committee
considers AFRICOM's operational airlift capability a high
priority. The committee requests that the Air Force support the
AFRICOM Combatant Commander's requirement with existing assets
and, in the future, include these items in its regular budget
request.
Shadow unmanned aerial vehicle
The budget request included $316.6 million in Other
Procurement, Army for tactical unmanned aerial vehicles (UAV).
The Army originally submitted a budget request $194.5 million
higher in this PE than what was approved for submission to
Congress. Included in this amount was $162.4 million for
improvements to the Shadow vehicle. The Office of the Under
Secretary of Defense for Intelligence (USDI) cut this amount
due to a misunderstanding that the funds were intended to
procure many more Shadow units, well beyond the approved
procurement objective. The funds were in fact intended to field
a heavy fuel engine, a tactical common data link, a laser
designator, better cold-weather performance, and improved
launch and recovery capabilities for the Shadow UAV.
The committee believes that these proposed improvements are
needed not only for better combat performance; all but the
laser designator are also important for gaining routine access
to national airspace for training and support to domestic
emergencies. The committee recommends that the USDI reconsider
his position and identify resources for reprogramming to
initiate these improvements in fiscal year 2009.
Ship maintenance and material condition
The Navy has determined that a battle force of no less than
313 ships, operating within the framework of the Fleet Response
Plan (FRP), is necessary to meet the requirements of the
National Security Strategy. The FRP provides the framework for
managing training, maintenance, and material readiness to
ensure the Navy's ability to command the seas in major combat
operations. Successful execution of the FRP relies upon
individual unit readiness, which, in turn, relies upon the most
fundamental ability to self-assess and maintain material
condition. This is particularly critical as today's 280-ship
Navy falls well short of the Chief of Naval Operations'
requirement for 313 ships.
Chapter 633 of title 10, United States Code, establishes
the requirement for a Board of Officers, commonly referred to
as the Board of Inspection and Survey, or INSURV, to examine
naval vessels. The committee is concerned that recent INSURV
reports have found that certain front line ships of the Navy
are unfit for combat operations. When forward-deployed mine
countermeasure ships were unable to get underway in 2006, the
Navy attacked the material issues to restore these ships to
high readiness. However, subsequent reports of serious
degradation to amphibious ships, and more recently, the
determination that two Aegis combatants are ``unfit for combat
operations,'' raises concern that there are systemic issues
associated with organic level maintenance and self-assessment
that jeopardize the Navy's ability to meet its objectives under
the FRP.
The committee directs the Secretary of the Navy to submit a
report to the congressional defense committees with the fiscal
year 2010 budget which addresses ship material condition and
readiness. The report shall include underway material
inspection findings and trends of the INSURV board during 2003-
2008, with an analysis of the cause for any downward trends and
the actions underway to improve upon these trends. Further, the
report shall specifically address the factors surrounding any
ships found to be seriously degraded or unfit for combat
operations. The report shall also address the Navy's findings
with regard to unit level ability to self-assess and maintain
material condition readiness.
In view of the current emphasis by the Navy to reduce
shipboard manning, the report shall include the Navy's plan for
maintaining material readiness for the Littoral Combat Ship
(LCS), which the Navy currently intends to deploy for extended
durations. To support these extended deployments, the Navy
intends to utilize rotating crews, consisting of substantially
less than 50 percent of current combatant crew manning levels.
The LCS plan shall include a description of maintenance
requirements, performing organizations, budget requirements,
and any consideration by the Navy to outsource LCS maintenance.
Warfighter Information Network-Tactical
The committee continues to follow closely the test and
evaluation activities associated with the Warfighter
Information Network-Tactical (WIN-T) program. Following a
fiscal year 2007 Nunn-McCurdy unit cost breach, WIN-T is
currently being restructured, and will be fielded in four
increments. The first increment absorbs the former Joint
Network Node-Network (JNN-N) program and provides the Army an
initial battlefield networking capability down to the Army's
battalion level. Follow-on increments will provide the Army
with greater data capacity and more agile on-the-move
capabilities. Increment 3 is intended to provide the Army with
full interoperability with the Future Combat System (FCS).
The committee continues to recognize the importance of this
program to the Army's overall modernization efforts. However,
the committee shares the concerns raised by the Director of
Operational Test and Evaluation (DOT&E) regarding the risk
involved in pursuing an Initial Operational Test and Evaluation
(IOT&E) without proper documentation and test resourcing. Now
that the Army has completed its WIN-T Overarching Acquisition
Strategy Report with accompanying Increment 1 Annex, the
committee believes the Army must complete its WIN-T Increment 1
Test and Evaluation Master Plan and IOT&E test plan with
certification by DOT&E. Further, the committee believes it is
critical that the Army test systems that are procured under the
WIN-T Increment 1 contract, not equipment procured under the
JNN-N contract. Additionally, the committee emphasizes that,
for both WIN-T Increment 1 and 2 operational testing, the Army
must use field representative units engaged in a full spectrum
operations scenario.
Further, the committee directs the Secretary of the Army,
in coordination with the Under Secretary of Defense for
Acquisitions, Technology, and Logistics and the DOT&E, to
report, no later than 90 days after enactment of this Act, on
the Army's: (1) initial operational test plan, as approved by
the DOT&E for WIN-T Increment 1 as well as Test and Evaluation
Master Plans for WIN-T Increments 1,2, and 3; (2) current plans
to develop a baseline for WIN-T Increment 3; (3) timeline and
details for a memorandum of agreement on requirements stability
between FCS and WIN-T program offices; and (4) plans for
completing an independent life cycle cost estimate for WIN-T
Increment 3.
TITLE II--RESEARCH, DEVELOPMENT, TEST, AND EVALUATION
Explanation of tables
The following tables provide the program-level detailed
guidance for the funding authorized in title II of this Act.
The tables also display the funding requested by the
administration in the fiscal year 2009 budget request for
research and development programs, and indicate those programs
for which the committee either increased or decreased the
requested amounts.
These tables are incorporated by reference into this Act as
provided in section 1002 of this Act. The Department of Defense
may not exceed the authorized amounts (as set forth in the
tables or, if unchanged from the administration request, as set
forth in budget justification documents of the Department of
Defense) without a reprogramming action in accordance with
established procedures. Unless noted in this report, funding
changes to the budget request are made without prejudice.
Subtitle A--Authorization of Appropriations
Subtitle B--Program Requirements, Restrictions, and Limitations
Requirement for plan on overhead nonimaging infrared systems (sec. 211)
The committee recommends a provision that would direct the
Secretary of the Air Force to develop a comprehensive plan to
conduct and support research, development, and demonstration of
technologies that could evolve into the next generation of
overhead nonimaging systems. The plan would also include an
explanation of how such systems would be tested, including any
flight or on-orbit testing as well as how and when the
technologies would transition to an acquisition program. In
addition, the provision would prohibit appropriation of more
than 50 percent of the funds authorized to be appropriated for
the third generation infrared surveillance program until the
plan is submitted to the congressional defense committees.
Advanced battery manufacturing and technology roadmap (sec. 212)
The committee recommends a provision that would require the
Secretary of Defense to develop a detailed roadmap for the
development of advanced battery technologies, and a domestic
manufacturing base and assured supply chain to meet current and
future military requirements. The committee notes that the
Defense Science Board Task Force on DOD Energy Strategy has
highlighted the importance of advanced battery technologies in
meeting military vehicle power and portable power requirements.
The committee also notes that the Department of Defense (DOD)
expends significant resources on the procurement of legacy
batteries, and makes some investments in next-generation
battery technologies.
The committee believes that advanced battery technologies
can play a key role in improving system performance and
reducing operating and system life cycle costs. However, the
committee is concerned about the Department's ability to access
reliable, trusted sources of advanced battery technologies,
especially given the diminishing domestic manufacturing base
for these systems. The committee believes that the roadmap
required by this section will serve to better coordinate
service and agency efforts in battery technologies and directly
tie investments to specific capability gaps, technological
opportunities, and military requirements. The committee directs
that the roadmap be developed in cooperation with each of the
military departments, the defense and automotive industries,
academia, and the Department of Energy, to ensure that future
investments, programs, and plans are well coordinated and that
technological and manufacturing capabilities serve dual-use
purposes where applicable and advantageous to the Department.
Availability of funds for defense laboratories for research and
development of technologies for military missions (sec. 213)
The committee recommends a provision that would authorize
the Secretary of Defense to establish mechanisms through which
laboratory directors would be able to set aside up to 3 percent
of funding available to their laboratories to support defense
missions. The funds would be available for the purposes of
investing in innovative in-house research projects, promoting
transition of laboratory-developed technologies into
operational systems, or for science and engineering workforce
enhancement activities. The committee believes that the funds
to be used under the authority of this provision should be a
portion of those that are currently directly appropriated
funds; are funds derived from work for other Department of
Defense organizations, other federal agencies, and non-federal
organizations; or from other sources of laboratory revenue.
The committee notes that the Department of Energy
laboratories have had a similar authority, known as the
Laboratory Directed Research and Development program. This
authority is generally viewed as a necessary tool to support
innovative research at those laboratories and retain and
recruit the finest scientific talent, which helps ensure that
the laboratories remain world class research institutions. Over
the years, a number of independent groups, including the
Defense Science Board, National Research Council, and Naval
Research Advisory Committee have recommended similar authority
for Department of Defense laboratories. The committee feels
that this authority, if properly used, can help revitalize the
defense laboratories and enable them to better support
departmental missions and remain technically on par with their
private sector, international, and other federal peers.
Assured funding for certain information security and information
assurance programs of the Department of Defense (sec. 214)
The National Security Agency (NSA) and the Assistant
Secretary of Defense for Network and Information Integration
(ASD/NII) have attempted for a number of years to persuade the
Office of Management and Budget to establish a budget line item
for information assurance anticipatory development within the
Department of Defense (DOD). While these efforts have not been
successful, the committee believes that the arguments in favor
of such a program are compelling.
The information technology (IT) industry is the most
vibrant and rapidly evolving industry in the world. The
Department attempts to acquire or make use of these commercial
IT advances to achieve efficiencies and improved operational
effectiveness. However, DOD cannot effectively adopt this
technology if it cannot be used securely, yet the Department
has no appropriate mechanism for keeping pace with the march of
technology development.
There is, for example, an outstanding requirement for a
very high speed Internet Protocol encryption capability, but
NSA has almost no resources with which to respond. The
executive branch recently had to launch a satellite that lacked
encryption for a key wideband downlink. The Advanced Extremely
High Frequency Satellite program was delayed because of a
belated encryption subsystem development effort. These types of
requirements can be anticipated and, with modest funding,
security solutions can be developed to match acquisition
schedules.
The committee recommends a provision that would impose a
permanent 1 percent tax on the Department's information systems
security program, other information assurance programs, and the
non-National Intelligence Program-funded cyber security
initiative to finance this new program.
The committee directs that the program be executed by NSA's
Information Assurance Directorate unless otherwise specified by
the ASD/NII. The ASD/NII shall review and approve expenditures
under this program. The committee urges the administration to
vitiate the need for this statute-based funding mechanism by
submitting its own budget request for this activity.
Requirements for certain airborne intelligence collection systems (sec.
215)
The committee recommends a provision that would require
that, by October 1, 2012, all intelligence collection aircraft
that provide data to, or receive tasking from, the joint
Distributed Common Ground/Surface System (DCGS) be connected
to, and able to fully operate with, the Network Centric
Collaborative Targeting (NCCT) network. The provision would
provide for waivers on a case-by-case basis. The committee
stresses that the RIVET JOINT RC-135 signals intelligence
system is considered to be connected to the DCGS system via its
satellite-based reachback capability, and therefore would be
subject to the requirements of this provision.
The committee believes that NCCT is an important
intelligence and targeting capability that has not received
adequate resources or management attention. Intelligence budget
requests are generally based on inputs from the program
managers of the collection platforms and few of them see that
allocating scarce resources to connect to the NCCT network is a
high priority because doing so benefits consumers in general.
The operational utility of universal NCCT participation for
commanders is not reflected in the programming process. The
committee urges the Office of the Secretary of Defense to
impose a joint perspective to NCCT.
Subtitle C--Missile Defense Programs
Review of the ballistic missile defense policy and strategy of the
United States (sec. 231)
The committee recommends a provision that would require the
Secretary of Defense to conduct a review of the ballistic
missile defense policy and strategy of the United States, and
to report the results of the review to Congress not later than
January 31, 2010. The provision specifies a number of elements
to be considered in the review.
The committee believes it is essential for the next
administration to conduct a full review of missile defense
policy, strategy, and related matters at the outset of its
tenure. The previous missile defense policy review was
conducted before the United States had deployed any missile
defense systems other than the Patriot system. In order to
expedite the deployment of an initial set of missile defense
capabilities, the Missile Defense Agency was created and given
extraordinary acquisition flexibility and authority, and high
levels of concurrency were adopted.
Now that the initial missile defense capabilities have been
deployed or are under production, the circumstances warrant a
new overarching review to guide the next phase of U.S. missile
defense programs and activities.
Limitation on availability of funds for procurement, construction, and
deployment of missile defenses in Europe (sec. 232)
The committee recommends a provision that would limit the
availability of fiscal year 2009 funds authorized to be
appropriated in this Act from being obligated or expended for
procurement, site activation, construction, preparation of
equipment for, or deployment of major components of a long-
range missile defense system in a European country until two
conditions have been met: (1) the government of the country in
which such major components of such missile defense system
(including interceptors and associated radars) are proposed to
be deployed has given final approval (including parliamentary
ratification) to any missile defense agreements negotiated
between such government and the United States Government
concerning the proposed deployment of such components in such
country; and (2) 45 days have elapsed following the receipt by
Congress of the report required by section 226(c) of the
National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2008 (Public
Law 110-181).
The provision would also limit the availability of fiscal
year 2009 funds for the acquisition (other than initial long
lead procurement) or deployment of operational interceptor
missiles for the proposed long-range missile defense system in
Europe until the Secretary of Defense certifies to Congress,
after receiving the views of the Director of Operational Test
and Evaluation, that the proposed interceptor to be deployed as
part of such a missile defense system has demonstrated, through
successful, operationally realistic flight testing, that it has
a high probability of accomplishing its mission in an
operationally effective manner.
The provision also makes clear that it would not limit
continuing obligations and expenditures of funds for missile
defense, including for research and development and for other
activities not otherwise limited by the provision, including
site surveys, studies, analysis, and planning and design for
the proposed missile defense deployment in Europe.
The committee notes that the provision would adopt the same
standard that was enacted in section 226 of the National
Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2008 (Public Law 110-
181) with respect to the availability of funds for the proposed
deployment of a long-range missile defense system in Europe.
The provision would make clear that if a European host nation
provides final approval of a negotiated deployment agreement
with the United States, it would be able to proceed without
waiting for the final approval of another European nation on
any missile defense agreements negotiated with the United
States.
The provision would also clarify that initial long-lead
procurement of parts for the planned 2-stage interceptors could
be acquired. The committee notes that the initial long lead
items planned for procurement are 100 percent common with both
the 2-stage and 3-stage Ground-Based Interceptors (GBIs).
Therefore, they could be used for purposes other than being
deployed on operational 2-stage GBIs if necessary, including
for flight test and ground test interceptors for either 3-stage
or 2-stage GBIs. As described elsewhere in this report, the
committee recommends authorizing initial funding for these long
lead parts, with the understanding that if there are problems
with the 2-stage GBI development program, these long lead parts
would be used for other purposes, rather than being wasted or
deployed before the 2-stage GBI is certified as ready.
The United States is continuing its negotiations with
Poland and the Czech Republic on agreements concerning the
proposed deployment of 10 GBI missiles in Poland and a
midcourse X-band radar in the Czech Republic. Although the
negotiations with the Czech Republic appear to be nearly
complete, the negotiations with Poland could still take months
to complete, and are conditioned on whether the United States
meets Poland's requests for security enhancements. If the
negotiations are concluded successfully, it will take
additional time for the Polish and Czech parliaments to
consider ratification of the agreements. Consequently, it
remains unclear whether or when any agreements would be finally
approved, a necessary condition before beginning any proposed
construction or deployment.
The committee notes that the proposed 2-stage interceptor
intended for deployment in Poland is still being developed, and
is not scheduled to have its first booster flight test until
the fourth quarter of fiscal year 2009. Given that a number of
Ground-based Midcourse Defense (GMD) flight tests have been
delayed substantially, it is possible that the 2-stage GBI
tests will also be delayed.
In an October 2007 report, the Director of Operational Test
and Evaluation (DOT&E) noted the ``significant differences''
between the proposed GMD deployment with a 2-stage interceptor
in Europe and the existing GMD system deployed in the United
States with a 3-stage GBI. According to the report, ``European
defense using GMD assets is a completely new mission area for
GMD.'' The report provided DOT&E's initial testing concept for
the proposed European deployment, which would include three
flight tests, two of which would be intercept tests. The
Missile Defense Agency (MDA) was originally planning to conduct
only two flight tests prior to deploying the system, one of
which would be an intercept test. This planned flight test
program would not meet the DOT&E minimum test plan concept. It
is difficult to envision the certification required of the
Secretary of Defense under these circumstances. However, MDA
has recently agreed to conduct three flight tests, in
accordance with the DOT&E test concept. The committee views
this as a positive development.
The committee notes that, in their Bucharest summit
declaration in April, Ministers of the North Atlantic Treaty
Organization (NATO) recognized the substantial contribution of
the planned deployment to the protection of NATO allies against
long-range missiles, and said they were exploring ways to link
the planned capability with NATO missile defense efforts. They
also said they would develop options for a comprehensive NATO
missile defense architecture to provide coverage of the
portions of NATO Europe that would not be covered by the
planned U.S. deployment, in order to inform any future
political decision by NATO on whether and how to provide
defensive coverage for the portion of its territory that would
not be protected against ballistic missiles, including from the
hundreds of Iranian ballistic missiles that exist today.
Airborne Laser system (sec. 233)
The committee recommends a provision that would require the
Director of Operational Test and Evaluation (DOT&E) to review
and evaluate the testing conducted on the first Airborne Laser
(ABL) aircraft and to report to the Secretary of Defense and to
Congress, not later than January 15, 2010, his assessment of
the operational effectiveness, suitability, and survivability
of the ABL system. The provision would also limit the
availability of funds for procurement of a second ABL aircraft
until the Secretary of Defense, after receiving the assessment
of DOT&E, certifies that the ABL system has demonstrated,
through successful testing and operational and cost analysis, a
high probability of being operationally effective, suitable,
survivable, and affordable.
The committee observes that Missile Defense Agency
officials indicated in a briefing to staff that the authority
to proceed with the second ABL aircraft has been granted on the
condition that the planned 2009 first shoot-down demonstration
test is successful, and that the budget request included $15.8
million to begin studies and analysis on a second ABL aircraft.
The committee believes that a decision on whether to proceed
with a possible second ABL aircraft should only be made after
much more information is available about the likelihood that
the system could eventually provide an operationally effective,
suitable, survivable, and affordable missile defense
capability.
As the committee noted last year, the ABL program has many
unanswered questions about operational effectiveness,
suitability, survivability, and affordability. The committee
believes these questions need to be answered before making a
commitment to procure a second ABL aircraft.
Annual Director of Operational Test and Evaluation characterization of
operational effectiveness, suitability, and survivability of
the Ballistic Missile Defense System (sec. 234)
The committee recommends a provision that would require the
annual report by the Director of Operational Test and
Evaluation (DOT&E) on the testing of the Ballistic Missile
Defense System (BMDS) to include a characterization of the
operational effectiveness, suitability, and survivability of
the BMDS and its elements that have been fielded or tested
before the end of the previous fiscal year.
Section 232(h) of the National Defense Authorization Act
for Fiscal Year 2002 (Public Law 107-107) requires DOT&E to
provide an annual report to Congress assessing the adequacy and
sufficiency of the test program of the Missile Defense Agency
(MDA) during the previous fiscal year. Section 234(b)(2) of the
National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2006 (Public
Law 109-163) requires DOT&E to submit a report to Congress
providing his characterization of the operational
effectiveness, suitability, and survivability of the BMDS at
the conclusion of testing of each 2-year block of the BMDS.
However, MDA eliminated the previous 2-year block structure and
replaced it with functional blocks that respond to specific
threats. These new blocks have no timelines associated with
them, thus changing the schedule assumptions of section
234(b)(2). This provision would retain the requirement for
DOT&E to report to Congress on the characterization of the
BMDS, consistent with the new MDA block structure.
The committee notes that the DOT&E annual missile defense
testing report for 2007 included the DOT&E characterization of
the operational effectiveness, suitability, and survivability
of the Block 2006 BMD system and its elements, in fulfillment
of the requirements of section 234(b)(2) of the National
Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2006. In testimony
before the committee, Dr. Charles McQueary, the DOT&E, stated
that he plans to include this characterization information in
future annual DOT&E reports on missile defense testing.
Independent assessment of boost-phase missile defense programs (sec.
235)
The committee recommends a provision that would require the
Secretary of Defense to enter into a contract with the National
Academy of Sciences to conduct an independent assessment of the
boost-phase missile defense programs of the United States to
consider the extent to which boost-phase missile defense is
feasible, practical, and affordable, and whether any of the
existing boost-phase missile defense technology programs of the
Department of Defense (particularly the Airborne Laser and the
Kinetic Energy Interceptor) have a high probability of
performing a boost-phase missile defense mission in an
operationally effective, suitable, survivable, and affordable
manner. Upon completion of its assessment, the National Academy
would submit a report on the results of its assessment to the
Secretary of Defense and the congressional defense committees,
along with any recommendations the Academy considers
appropriate.
The committee notes that the Department of Defense will
have spent over $5.1 billion since 1996 on the Airborne Laser
(ABL) technology demonstration program to conduct the first
proof of principle missile shoot-down demonstration test in
2009, and an additional $2.8 billion in the 4-year period
starting in fiscal year 2010. The Congressional Budget Office
provided an initial estimate that a fleet of seven ABL aircraft
could cost as much as $36.0 billion to develop, acquire, and
operate. Additionally, the Department plans to spend more than
$3.6 billion over the 7-year period starting in fiscal year
2007 on technology development for the Kinetic Energy
Interceptor (KEI) as a possible boost-phase intercept system.
Despite these significant past and planned expenditures, there
is no assurance that either of these systems will work in an
operationally effective, practical, or affordable manner.
As the committee noted last year, the ABL program has a
host of significant unanswered questions related to whether it
could work in an operationally effective, suitable, survivable,
and affordable manner. For example, the ABL concept is to
destroy a missile body--not the warhead--while it is boosting.
By the time this intercept would take place, the missile could
have achieved sufficient velocity to travel well outside the
border of the nation that launched it. Thus, the warhead could
continue to fly to an unintended location, including possibly
an allied country where U.S. forces are deployed, and cause
significant damage. Also, for the aircraft to have any
possibility of conducting intercepts, it would have to be
flying at exactly the right place and the right time, out of
range of air defenses, but within range of a boosting missile.
Given these constraints, there appear to be practical limits to
the ability of an ABL system to operate against most nations
that possess ballistic missiles.
In its March 2007 report, ``Defense Acquisitions: Missile
Defense Acquisition Strategy Generates Results but Delivers
Less at a Higher Cost,'' the Government Accountability Office
recommended an independent evaluation of ABL and KEI ``to
inform decisions on the future of the two programs.'' The
statement of managers to accompany the National Defense
Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2008 (Public Law 110-181)
expressed the view that an independent review should be
conducted of the ABL and KEI programs.
The committee believes it would be important to have an
independent, technically competent review of the feasibility,
practicality, and affordability of boost-phase missile defense
programs to help inform future decisions on missile defense
investments.
Study on space-based interceptor element of ballistic missile defense
system (sec. 236)
The committee recommends a provision that would direct the
Secretary of Defense to enter into a contract with one or more
independent entities to conduct a review of the feasibility and
advisability of developing a space-based interceptor element to
the ballistic missile defense system. The provision would
require that the contract be entered into after consultation
with the Chairman and Ranking members of the Committees on
Armed Services of the Senate and the House of Representatives,
and no later than 75 days after the date this Act is enacted.
The committee expects the Secretary of Defense to undertake a
thorough consultation with the Committees on Armed Services in
advance of selecting the independent entity or entities to
conduct the study.
The independent entities could be federally funded research
and development centers, including the Department of Energy
National Laboratories, recognized scientific and technical
organizations such as the National Academy of Sciences, the
American Association for the Advancement of Science, the
American Physical Society, or drawn from academia such as
JASON.
The provision would direct the report be provided
simultaneously to the Committees on Armed Services and to the
Secretary of Defense and would permit the Secretary a period of
60 days to submit comments or recommendations with respect to
the report to the committees. The report and any comments would
be submitted in an unclassified form but may include a
classified annex.
The provision would authorize $5.0 million from funds
available to the Missile Defense Agency for the study.
Subtitle D--Other Matters
Modification of systems subject to survivability testing by the
Director of Operational Test and Evaluation (sec. 251)
The committee recommends a provision that would ensure that
the Director of Operational Test and Evaluation (DOT&E) can
perform adequate and necessary oversight over the live fire,
survivability, and lethality testing of critical defense
systems. The committee has been concerned about the oversight
of testing, and the lack of standardized testing for systems
fielded to personnel in Iraq and Afghanistan, including
personnel protective equipment such as body armor and helmets.
The committee attempted to enhance testing and DOT&E oversight
authority over testing of these types of systems through
statutory changes in section 231 of the John Warner National
Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2007 (Public Law 109-
364). Section 231 intended to authorize the DOT&E to perform
necessary oversight activities over force protection and non-
lethal weapon systems.
The committee feels that the ability of the DOT&E to
perform his intended role to ensure that fielded systems are
survivable is hindered by lack of statutory authority and
limited cooperation by the military services. The committee
notes that the DOT&E has worked effectively in partnership with
the services in performing testing oversight duties on
important rapid development and fielding initiatives like the
Mine Resistant Ambush Protected (MRAP) vehicle, which have
contributed to improving the survivability and performance of
the systems without unnecessary delay in development or
fielding of vital combat systems.
The committee directs the secretaries of the military
departments to ensure that programs designated for
survivability oversight by the DOT&E under this authority
cooperate fully with testing oversight officials such that all
equipment fielded to deployed personnel is safe, survivable,
and of the highest performance possible.
Biennial reports on joint and service concept development and
experimentation (sec. 252)
The committee recommends a provision that would modify the
existing reporting requirement on joint warfighting
experimentation activities. The provision would reduce the
reporting requirement from annual to biennial and change the
report's focus to better reflect the current state of concept
development and experimentation activities in the Department of
Defense, and better highlight current and future activities
that will enable robust joint warfighting capabilities.
The committee commends United States Joint Forces Command
(JFCOM) for its extensive efforts in concept development and
experimentation. To date, JFCOM activities have explored a
number of emerging operational concepts, capabilities, and
technologies, including addressing future homeland defense,
interagency cooperation, urban operations, and multinational
operations scenarios. However, it is not clear that JFCOM is
placing a high enough priority on experimentation with future
concepts and technologies that could be operationally employed
in a time frame of greater than 10 years. The committee is also
concerned that the efforts of JFCOM in this regard have not had
sufficient and wide ranging impacts across the organizational
and force structures, doctrine, and materiel development
activities of the Department of Defense. The committee also
notes that the services continue to pursue their own
warfighting experimentation and concept development activities,
though often in a manner poorly coordinated with joint efforts.
Therefore, the provision's reporting requirements include
focused reporting on ``futures'' experimentation, an assessment
of the return on investments in concept development and
experimentation activities in terms of specific outcomes and
impacts within the Department of Defense, and descriptions of
the concept development and experimentation activities of the
military departments.
Further, the committee notes that the JFCOM Commander's
activities in joint training, provision of joint forces, and
position as the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO)
Supreme Allied Commander for Transformation may also serve to
motivate recommended changes in the Department's organizational
and force structure, doctrine, and materiel development
efforts, which should also be incorporated into the
recommendations included in the report.
Finally, the committee directs the secretaries of the
military departments to support the development of this report
through coordination, appropriate resources, and supplying
required information in a timely manner.
Repeal of annual reporting requirement relating to the Technology
Transition Initiative (sec. 253)
The committee recommends a provision that would eliminate
the recurring reporting requirement on the Technology
Transition Initiative (TTI). The committee originally proposed
this initiative in the National Defense Authorization Act for
Fiscal Year 2002 (Public Law 107-107) in order to accelerate
the transition of technologies from science and technology
programs into operational use. The initiative was codified in
section 242 of the Bob Stump National Defense Authorization Act
for Fiscal Year 2003 (Public Law 107-314).
The committee notes that the TTI is currently successfully
transitioning roughly 70 percent of its funded projects into
operational use. This committee believes that this success is a
result of the initiative's flexible funding, cost sharing
requirements, and joint and service participation in the
selection and funding of projects. The committee notes that the
statute and processes of the TTI have contributed to enhancing
the links between technology developers, requirements
generators, and operators, and have successfully enhanced
transition efficiency and speed. The committee notes that there
are now a number of parallel initiatives and programs seeking
to accelerate technology transition in the Department of
Defense, including, but not limited to, the Quick Reaction
Fund, the Joint Improvised Explosive Device Defeat Fund, the
work of the Joint Rapid Acquisition Cell, many Defense Advanced
Research Projects Agency efforts, and the Army Agile
Integration and Demonstration program.
The committee notes that some of these programs may be
duplicative and others may not be adequately coordinated with
partner services, agencies, and operational users, but rather
are flexible funds used solely in the discretion of a single
organization. The committee notes that the desire for complete
flexibility in the use of appropriated funds is a necessary but
insufficient condition for enhancing technology transition, and
can lead to problems in ensuring adequate oversight and in
coordination between elements of the Department. The committee
recommends that the Secretary of Defense, working through the
Technology Transition Council, continue to review these
programs and their relative merits and authorities and
recommend any necessary consolidation, expansion, or changes in
statutory authorities, or other changes in regulations or
execution that would increase their efficiency and
effectiveness.
Executive agent for printed circuit board technology (sec. 254)
The committee recommends a provision that would follow the
recommendations of the National Research Council and a report
of the Deputy Under Secretary of Defense for Logistics and
Materiel Readiness and would require the establishment of an
executive agent to oversee Department of Defense (DOD)
activities related to printed circuit board technologies. The
committee notes that the National Research Council's Board on
Manufacturing and Engineering Design studied the issue of DOD
access to legacy and future generations of printed circuit
board technologies to support defense and other missions. The
resulting 2005 report made a series of recommendations designed
to ensure DOD access to printed circuit board technology and
enable the development of new capabilities needed to support
emerging requirements.
In March 2008, a Principal Response Team convened by the
Navy and Defense Logistics Agency, and consisting of membership
from the Office of the Secretary of Defense, the National
Security Agency, the military services, and the Departments of
State and Energy, reported to Congress that ``DOD concurs with
comments on all NRC recommendations,'' and identified current
and potential actions to address each one.
The committee notes that printed circuit board technologies
are critical components of numerous defense systems, and cost
the Department roughly $500.0 million annually. There are
strong and growing concerns related to the development of next-
generation capabilities, to preserving assured access to
trusted sources of technology due to a diminishing domestic
manufacturing base, and even to the trustworthiness of existing
supplies of printed circuit board technology being used for
military systems. The committee notes that DOD efforts to
address these issues have been underfunded and disjointed in
the past. The establishment of an executive agent can raise the
profile of risk issues related to printed circuit board
technological, as well as production and acquisition issues,
and help ensure that these concerns are better addressed in
future budgets, plans, and programs. The committee further
notes that the March 2008 DOD report recommended a series of
possible actions for the executive agent to undertake to
address a variety of issues. The committee directs the
executive agent to carefully analyze and evaluate these
recommendations and act on them as appropriate.
Report on Department of Defense response to findings and
recommendations of the Defense Science Board Task Force on
Directed Energy Weapons (sec. 255)
The committee recommends a provision that would require the
Secretary of Defense to develop specific responses to the
findings and recommendations of the December 2007 Defense
Science Board (DSB) Task Force on Directed Energy Weapons. The
DSB found that directed energy offers promise as a
``transformational game changer,'' but that ``years of
investment have not resulted in any current operational high-
energy laser capability.'' The DSB made a series of
recommendations broadly aimed at accelerating the operational
use of directed energy weapons, including: better defining
concepts of operations for directed energy weapons; better
understanding the relative benefits and disadvantages of
directed energy systems versus traditional, kinetic systems;
and better focusing research and development and science and
technology investments on high priority potential operational
solutions and on resolving specific high priority technical
issues.
The committee directs the Secretary of Defense to
coordinate a formal response to the DSB findings and
recommendations in concert with appropriate technology
development, requirements generation, and operational
communities. The committee also directs that the required
analysis address the important issue of assuring that the
Department of Defense has sufficient testing expertise and
infrastructure to adequately perform all necessary
developmental and operational tests on directed energy systems.
Assessment of standards for mission critical semiconductors procured by
the Department of Defense (sec. 256)
The committee recommends a provision that would require the
Secretary of Defense to perform an assessment of existing and
emerging technical methods for verifying the trustworthiness of
semiconductors procured for use in critical defense
applications.
The committee notes that the manufacture of semiconductors
has continued to migrate to off-shore foundries, particularly
to foundries in China. Since the defense semiconductor market
comprises only 1 percent of the overall global semiconductor
market, the Department of Defense's (DOD) ability to procure
high end semiconductor technologies is largely dependent on
commercial interests, practices, and markets.
The committee notes that the Department is currently
depending primarily on a single source for high end
semiconductors for defense and intelligence applications
through the DOD Trusted Foundry program, which was established
in 2004. The February 2005 report by the Defense Science Board
Task Force on High Performance Microchip supply stated that the
Trusted Foundry Program is an interim source of high
performance integrated circuits (ICs) and was appropriate for
addressing the immediate needs for trusted sources of IC
supply. Since that time, the trend of migration of
semiconductor manufacturing overseas has continued, making it
more urgent to augment the Trusted Foundry by developing a more
comprehensive approach for the procurement of trusted parts.
The committee notes that one issue that needs to be
addressed by the Department through the required assessment is
providing defense programs assurance of dependable, continuous,
long-term access to trusted, mission critical semiconductors
from both foreign and domestic sources for its potentially
vulnerable defense systems. DOD needs for integrated circuits
include high end semiconductors, custom Application Specific
Integrated Circuits (ASICs), and Field Programmable Gate Arrays
(FPGAs). The committee notes that the assurance of trust
includes verifying that the semiconductor has not been tampered
with or modified in any way, and performs only the functions
expected and required. This also requires assurance that the
design process, fabrication, packaging, final assembly, and
test of semiconductors are also free from tampering.
The recommended provision would require that the Department
inventory and possibly implement the best methods currently
available for assuring trust. The committee recommends that the
Department put in place an overall policy and direction, as
well as a plan for the procurement of semiconductors that
assures continuous access and trust to support military
requirements. The committee believes the Department also needs
to monitor and implement new techniques and approaches as they
become available through technological advances.
Finally, the committee directs the Under Secretary of
Defense for Acquisition, Technology, and Logistics to keep the
congressional defense committees informed of the actions taken
pursuant to this provision.
Budget Items
Army
Army basic research programs
The budget request included $177.0 million in PE 61102A for
Army defense research sciences. The committee commends the Army
for increasing investments in basic research by over $75.0
million relative to the fiscal year 2008 budget request. The
committee notes that the previous Director of Defense Research
and Engineering has called for increases in fundamental
research of $300.0 to $500.0 million per year to support
focused efforts in discovery and innovation on crucial problems
for national security. Consistent with that effort, the
committee recommends a series of increases to support mission-
informed basic research.
The committee recommends an increase in PE 61102A of: $3.0
million for research on advanced energy storage technologies;
$1.5 million for research on drug resistant bacterial
infections; $1.5 million for research on understanding and
forecasting natural environments to support global military
operations; and $1.5 million for modeling and simulation
studies of organic semiconductor materials and devices.
The budget request also included $77.0 million in PE 61103A
for university research initiatives. The committee recommends a
number of increases in PE 61103A to support Army mission areas,
including: $2.0 million for research on the low temperature
performance of military vehicles; $2.0 million for research on
nanomaterials for lightweight composite systems; $1.2 million
for research on training and simulation to support urban
terrain operating capabilities; $2.5 million for nanoscale
biosensor research; and $1.5 million for development of
nanocomposite technologies for wireless energy applications.
Network science and technology research center
The budget request included $10.0 million in PE 61104A for
the establishment of a network science and technology research
center. The committee commends the Army for its continued
commitment to investments in basic research, especially in the
face of severe budget constraints due to the current operations
and reset of the force. The committee also commends the Army
for its new investments in network science and believes that
these investments can lead to significant enhancements in
operational capabilities.
The committee notes with concern that the current Army plan
calls for the majority of funding for this effort to go to the
establishment of a single research center. The committee
believes that this approach ironically fails to take advantage
of many of the benefits of networked, distributed research
efforts. The committee believes that these include the ability
to have a multitude of geographically diverse,
interdisciplinary researchers working collaboratively on
military network research issues, using shared or existing
resources to reduce overall cost, and exploiting advances in
computing, collaboration, and other information technologies to
make research and technology development efficient and
seamless.
The committee is also concerned that the Army's pre-
selection of a site for the center has created a situation in
which very few worthy academic institutions can legitimately
compete to manage the center, thereby severely limiting the
Army's ability to access the highest quality network science
research across the nation. The committee also notes that the
Army's management strategy for current university affiliated
research centers faces some major problems. These include the
fact that the centers and their relatively large basic research
funding levels limit the Army's ability to reach out to a broad
spectrum of universities to fund innovative research that would
supplement investments in the focused centers, as well as a
lack of planning for the process of terminating the centers, so
that the Army's research programs can remain responsive to
military needs and scientific opportunity.
Finally, the committee notes that the National Research
Council's 2007 report entitled ``Strategy for an Army Center
for Network Science, Technology, and Experimentation''
concluded that, ``based on Army needs, the NSTEC [Network
Science, Technology, and Experimentation Center] should be a
hybrid operation consisting of two or three centralized
facilities having interconnectivity to a variety of distributed
supporting elements.'' The current Army proposed plan and
budget is not consistent with this recommended hybrid approach.
Therefore, the committee directs that the network science
and technology research center be established as a virtual
center, with the majority of funding going to a networked group
of investigators selected on the basis of technical merit of
proposed research. The committee directs that only up to $2.0
million of the $10.0 million authorized in PE 61104A for the
establishment of a network science and technology research
center shall be available for the purpose of infrastructure and
facilities development at the proposed U.S. Army Aberdeen
Proving Ground, Maryland location. The remaining funds are to
be used for other program purposes, primarily the funding of
competitive projects to a diverse group of single investigators
and research teams who will participate in the virtual network
science center. The committee directs the Secretary of the Army
to report to the congressional defense committees on the status
of the virtual center, the use of authorized funding, and the
methods of selection of industry and academic participants in
the virtual center, no later than December 31, 2008.
Army materials research
The budget request included $27.0 million in PE 62105A for
applied research on materials technology. The committee notes
that the Army's Vehicle Armor Technology Objective seeks to
provide comprehensive solutions to threats that will be faced
by the Future Combat Systems ground vehicles. In support of
that objective, the committee recommends increases of: $2.0
million for research on lightweight composites for combat and
tactical vehicle applications and $1.7 million for development
of materials processing technologies to support production of
lightweight armor systems.
To help reduce life cycle costs of Army ground and aviation
assets, the committee recommends an increase of $2.0 million in
PE 62105A for development of cold spray coating technologies
for repair applications.
The committee notes that one of the major threats currently
facing deployed forces is improvised explosive devices (IED).
To support efforts to better technically characterize these
threats, the committee recommends an additional $475,000 in PE
62105A for development of simulations of IED blast effects.
Finally, in the May 2007 report to Congress on the Defense
Nanotechnology Research and Development program, the Director
of Defense Research and Engineering indicated that sustained
support was necessary to continue development of novel
nanotechnology-based systems and devices, and that increased
support was needed to further nanomanufacturing efforts.
Consistent with that report, the committee recommends an
additional $2.0 million for the development of advanced
magnetic nanosensor technologies, and an additional $1.5
million for the development of advanced nanomanufacturing
capabilities for multifunctional sensors.
Advanced Army energy and power technologies
The Defense Science Board (DSB) Task Force on Energy
Security highlighted the critical security, cost, and
performance issues that currently face and will increasingly
handicap the Department of Defense (DOD) due to its
overreliance on costly, sometimes unreliable sources of energy.
The DSB study noted that increased investments in research on
energy and power technologies were warranted in order to
address this issue, stating, ``. . . technologies with the
potential to make incremental improvements often are not
significant enough to attract much funding and are
disadvantaged in their competition for deployment into
programs.'' To support Army efforts to address emerging energy
and power requirements and enable new operational capabilities,
the committee makes a series of increases for energy and power
research activities.
The National Research Council's 2004 report entitled
``Meeting the Energy Needs of Future Warriors'' noted a number
of technical challenges for battery and fuel cell development
and commented that ``the challenge is to make them smaller,
lighter, cheaper, more reliable, and more energy-dense without
sacrificing safety.'' To support the achievement of this
technological goal, the committee recommends increases of: $2.0
million in PE 62120A for development of hydrogen battery
technologies; $2.0 million in PE 62705A for soldier portable
fuel cell technologies; and $2.0 million in PE 63734A for
direct methanol fuel cell development.
The DSB noted that there are a number of executive order
and statutory mandates that are driving the Department to
improve the energy efficiency of its facilities and to utilize
alternative fuels in its non-tactical alternative fueled
vehicles. In order to support the development of technologies
that could help DOD meet those goals, the committee recommends
a number of funding increases for investments in advanced
energy power and technologies for vehicle applications. The
committee recommends increases for advanced technology
development on combat vehicles of: $6.0 million in PE 63005A
for the development of military hybrid engines; $3.0 million
for advanced lithium battery technologies; $5.0 million to
support development of next-generation non-tactical fuel cell
vehicle technologies; $2.0 million for the development of
nickel metal hydride batteries for military vehicles; $10.0
million for an advanced military vehicle battery development
and testing initiative; $3.0 million for the development of
hydraulic hybrid vehicle systems; $4.0 million for development
of hybrid blast resistant vehicles; $3.5 million for the
demonstration of hydraulic hybrid retrofit technologies for
legacy Army vehicles; $1.0 million for the development of solid
hydrogen storage technologies; $2.0 million for development of
integrated power management and control technologies; $3.5
million for the development of logistics fuel processors; $5.0
million for development of electric drive technologies for
tactical wheeled vehicles; and $12.0 million for Army power and
energy research infrastructure and equipment.
The DSB task force also called for DOD to address critical
infrastructure security issues that result from energy use. To
help address these infrastructure issues, the committee
recommends an additional $1.0 million in PE 63734A for the
development of fuel cell systems to provide power for
continuity of operations missions.
The Future Combat Systems (FCS) program has identified
power and energy technologies, especially batteries, and
continuing work to leverage commercial technology development,
as a top science and technology priority. The committee also
recognizes the value of dual-use research and technology
research and development in the area of energy and power
systems for vehicles. To support these efforts the committee is
recommending a series of increases in applied research on dual-
use energy and power vehicle systems. The committee recommends
increases of: $1.5 million in PE 62601A for research on next-
generation vehicle design and biofuel technologies; $2.0
million for the development of hybrid electric vehicle battery
technologies for FCS; $4.0 million for development and testing
of fuel cells for medium and heavy duty vehicles; and $2.0
million for advanced lightweight electric drive technologies.
Additionally, the committee recommends an increase of $2.0
million in PE 62601A for research on novel military fuels.
Army aviation technologies
The budget request included $17.0 million in PE 62211A for
applied research for aviation technology. The committee notes
that the United States Central Command has identified the
development of standoff and persistent observation of the
improvised explosive device ``kill chain'' by advanced sensors
using unmanned air systems as a high science and technology
priority. To support the development and maturation of that
capability the committee recommends an increase in PE 62211A of
$2.5 million for research on slowed rotor technologies for
unmanned air systems.
Sniper detection systems
The budget request included $17.0 million in PE 62308A for
advanced concepts and simulation. The committee notes the
continued threats that snipers and mortars pose to deployed
forces, especially in urban settings. Therefore, the committee
recommends an increase of $3.0 million for the development of
wearable sniper detection systems to aid in localizing sniper
fire and mortar launches.
Army vehicle reliability technologies
The budget request included $55.2 million in PE 62601A for
applied research for combat vehicle and automotive
technologies. The committee notes that reducing the life cycle
costs of weapon systems is an important thrust area for the
Department of Defense, especially through enhancements in
system reliability in harsh operating environments and at high
operating tempos. To support the development of highly reliable
systems, the committee recommends increases in PE 62601A of
$4.5 million for the development of computer simulation tools
for vehicle design and optimization, and $2.0 million for
modeling of ground vehicle reliability and condition-based
maintenance.
Unmanned ground vehicle weaponization
The budget request included $30.6 million in PE 62624A for
weapons and munitions technology. The committee has been
supportive of the development of unmanned ground systems to
reduce casualties and to enable new operational concepts and
capabilities. The committee notes that the Near Autonomous
Unmanned Systems Army Technology Objective is developing
robotic technologies for future unmanned systems, and working
to transition technologies to programs such as Future Combat
Systems. To support these efforts, the committee recommends an
increase of $3.5 million to develop remotely controlled
unmanned systems with lethal and non-lethal capabilities.
Standoff explosives detection technologies
The budget request included $21.8 million in PE 62712A for
applied research on countermine systems. The committee notes
that the standoff detection of explosives is a capability that
is of critical concern to the Department of Defense as it seeks
to combat the use of improvised explosive devices in Iraq and
Afghanistan. Therefore, the committee recommends an additional
$3.0 million in PE 62712A for the development of standoff
explosives detection technologies.
Soldier positioning technologies
The budget request included $24.0 million in PE 62782A for
command, control, and communications technologies. The
committee notes that the 2003 National Research Council study
entitled ``Science and Technology for Army Homeland Security''
found that ``the current system for gaining situational
awareness in an urban environment is inadequate,'' and
recommended the development of robust technologies to address
this capability gap. To support this recommendation, the
committee recommends an increase of $2.0 million in PE 62782A
for research on portable positioning and timing devices for use
in urban terrains.
Military engineering technologies
The budget request included $52.1 million in PE 62784A for
military engineering technologies. The committee notes that the
Battle Space Terrain Reasoning and Awareness--Battle Command
Army Technology Objective seeks to provide actionable
information relating to terrain, atmospheric, and weather
impacts on deployed assets. To support this objective, the
committee recommends an increase of $2.5 million for
geosciences and atmospheric research.
The committee notes that the Modular Protective Systems for
Future Force Assets Army Technology Objective seeks to develop
systems that enhance the protection and survivability of
personnel and systems from conventional and asymmetric threats.
To support these efforts, the committee recommends an increase
of $1.5 million in PE 62784A for research on low-cost, high-
performance nanocomposite panels for enhanced blast and
ballistic protection, and an increase of $1.5 million in PE
62786A for development of ballistic materials for force
protection applications.
The committee notes that deployments in Iraq, Afghanistan,
and other regions of the world are putting on forward operating
bases infrastructure at unprecedented risk. Strategic,
tactical, and resource constraints sometimes restrict the
nature and scope of construction for these bases, yet the bases
must be hardened for long-term use and asymmetric terrorist and
insurgent attack.
The committee is aware of a number of efforts at service
laboratories, small businesses, and universities developing new
force protection technologies that can counter current and
emerging threats to bases. Given the long-term need for
enhanced and rapidly deployable force protection at bases in
volatile operating zones, the committee directs the Secretary
of Defense to develop a report outlining a plan for addressing
deployable force protection infrastructure technology. The
report should address current and emerging capability gaps,
specific research and development goals to be accomplished to
address those gaps, funding needs to address the gaps and
accelerate infrastructure force protection technology
deployment, and the value of creating research centers to
partner with service laboratories on promising research and
technology areas. The report should be delivered to the
committee not later than 6 months after the date of enactment
of this bill.
Combat feeding technologies
The budget request included $21.9 million in PE 62786A for
applied research for warfighter technologies. The committee
notes that reduction in logistics costs is a goal of the
Department of Defense and is being pursued through a number of
efforts, including the use of alternative energy technologies.
To support these efforts, the committee recommends an
additional $1.5 million for the development of energy
efficient, high performance mobile kitchen units.
Army medical research
The budget request included $75.4 million in PE 62787A for
applied research on medical technologies. The committee notes
that Army medical research and technology protects and treats
personnel to sustain combat strength, reduce casualties, and
save lives. The committee recommends a number of funding
increases in PE 62787A to support these efforts and to help
respond to a variety of medical care issues resulting from
current operations or to leverage emerging research and
technology.
The Army has a stated technology objective to develop fluid
resuscitation to reduce injury and loss of life on the
battlefield. In support of this, the committee recommends an
increase of $2.0 million to support clinical research on dried
blood technologies.
To help military surgeons find new limb-sparing techniques
to save injured extremities, avoid amputations, and preserve
and restore the function of injured extremities, the committee
recommends an increase of $5.0 million to continue peer-
reviewed research efforts on extremity war injuries. To support
the treatment of blast injuries, the committee recommends
increases of: $3.5 million for traumatic brain injury research;
$2.5 million for bio-engineering research to enhance soldier
survivability; $2.5 million for post traumatic stress disorder
research; $5.0 million for modeling of blast wave effects; and
$1.0 million for research on injury biomechanics.
The committee notes that Army infectious disease efforts
focus on medical countermeasures against naturally occurring
diseases of military importance. To support those research
efforts the committee recommends an increase of $2.0 million
for research on treatments for dengue fever.
Finally, the committee notes that next-generation
technologies will develop medical technologies and enable human
performance improvements that could radically transform
military operations. To support next-generation research
efforts in military medical technologies the committee
recommends increases of: $2.0 million for genetics research to
enhance soldier survival in extreme environments; $2.0 million
for research on nanomaterials to improve biological processes
such as targeted drug delivery; and $8.0 million to initiate a
military photomedicine program that would fund single
investigators and research centers to develop optics and
photonics based technologies to perform combat casualty care
missions.
Biosensor controller systems
The budget request included $46.8 million in PE 63001A for
development of advanced technologies for warfighters. The
January 2008 report to Congress entitled ``Efforts and Programs
of the Department of Defense Relating to the Prevention,
Mitigation, and Treatment of Blast Injuries'' identified the
development of diagnostics for traumatic brain injury as a
blast injury research knowledge gap. To support addressing that
gap, the committee recommends an increase of $3.5 million in PE
63001A for the development of biosensor systems to evaluate
treatment response in this and other disorders, as well as to
potentially serve to enhance operator-machine interface
technologies.
Army medical advanced technology development
The budget request included $59.0 million in PE 63002A for
medical advanced technology development. The committee
continues to recognize the critical need to advance military
medical technologies to address battlefield injuries. The
committee has taken a number of steps to advance these efforts,
including the establishment of a Department of Defense (DOD)
initiative to prevent, mitigate, and treat blast injuries in
section 256 of the National Defense Authorization Act for
Fiscal Year 2006 (Public Law 109-163). To support these and
similar efforts, as well as to support a number of Army
technology objectives in medical technologies, the committee
recommends a number of increases in medical research
investments.
The committee notes that improvised explosive devices have
created a new set of challenges for medical personnel in
dealing with soft tissue and bone damage. The committee
recommends an increase of $5.5 million for research on the
treatment of combat wounds. To help address the treatment of
blast injuries, in coordination with the Blast Mitigation
Initiative, the committee recommends an increase of $2.0
million for the development of technologies to efficiently
detect and assess mild traumatic brain injuries, and an
increase of $3.0 million for remote vital signs monitoring
systems.
The committee recognizes the continuing need to develop
advanced lower limb prostheses for battlefield amputees. The
committee recommends an additional $2.5 million for the
development of advanced lower limb prosthesis technologies.
The committee notes that the Battlefield Treatment of
Fractures and Soft Tissue Trauma Care Defense Technology
Objective includes a specific challenge to improve tissue
viability technologies. In support of this goal, the committee
recommends an increase of $5.0 million for research on novel
regenerative medical research to treat battlefield injuries. In
addition, to support advances in military capabilities to treat
combat injuries, the committee recommends increases of: $2.0
million for the development of tracheal intubation technologies
for use on the battlefield; $2.0 million for research on
bioelectric interactions to support wound healing capabilities;
and $5.0 million to develop advanced combat wound dressings.
The committee notes that the use of information
technologies can serve to make military medical operations more
successful and efficient, and can potentially lead to
considerable cost savings through the use of commercial
technologies. To promote the use of advanced information
systems and technologies in DOD medical operations, the
committee recommends an increase of $4.0 million to support
modernization of joint medical logistics efforts and an
increase of $2.0 million for the development of online medical
training programs for military personnel.
Finally, the committee recommends an increase of $13.0
million to support the continuing Gulf War Veterans' Illnesses
Research Program. The committee directs the Secretary of the
Army to utilize the authorized funding for this program to
undertake research on Gulf War illnesses. The committee directs
that activities under the program should include studies of
treatments for the complex of symptoms commonly referred to as
Gulf War Illness, and identification of objective markers for
Gulf War Illness. The committee recommends that no studies
based on psychiatric illness and psychological stress as the
central cause of Gulf War Illness be funded under the program.
The committee directs that the program be conducted using
competitive selection and peer review for the identification of
research with the highest technical merit and military value.
Further, the committee directs that this program be coordinated
with similar activities in the Department of Veterans Affairs
and the National Institutes of Health.
Army aviation advanced technology development
The budget request included $57.3 million in PE 63003A for
advanced technology development on aviation systems. The
committee continues to be supportive of efforts to use unmanned
systems on the battlefield. To support the development of new
capabilities for unmanned systems, the committee recommends an
increase of $2.0 million for the development of unmanned
systems for the precision delivery of supplies to friendly
forces.
The committee notes that the Army's Network-Enabled Command
and Control Technology Objective seeks to develop systems that
provide network-centric capabilities to the future force. In
support of the objective, the committee recommends an increase
of $3.5 million in PE 63003A for technologies to enable rapid
tactical integration and fielding of interoperable aviation
systems.
Finally, in support of the Army's Rotorcraft Survivability
Technology Objective the committee recommends an increase of
$1.5 million in PE 63003A for the development of lightweight
armor systems to reduce helicopter vulnerabilities to
battlefield threats, and an increase of $2.0 million in PE
63270A for development of laser systems for aircraft missile
defense.
Army combat vehicle technologies
The budget request included $108.0 million in PE 63005A for
advanced technology development on combat vehicles. The
committee notes with concern that this is nearly 20 percent
lower than the fiscal year 2008 budget request for this
account, despite the fact that: current Army operations are
heavily dependent on tactical vehicles; the Department of
Defense is seeking to make ground vehicles more survivable
against a growing number of battlefield threats, including
explosively formed penetrators, rocket propelled grenades
(RPGs), and improvised explosive devices (IEDs); the Army's
primary transformation effort is the Future Combat Systems
(FCS) program involving a large number of new vehicle
technologies; and the Department is also seeking to develop and
field novel energy and power vehicle technologies to reduce
costs and improve performance.
The Vehicle Armor Technology Army Technology Objective
seeks to provide comprehensive solutions for FCS ground
vehicles to address a variety of threats, including mines,
RPGs, IEDs, and other threats. Consistent with that objective,
the committee recommends a number of funding increases to
enhance vehicle survivability. The committee recommends
increases of: $2.0 million for the development of composite
armored cabs; $2.5 million for development of hostile fire
detection systems; and $4.0 million for development of
windshield armor systems.
The Prognostics and Diagnostics for Operational Readiness
and Condition Based Maintenance Army Technology Objective has a
goal to improve near-term and FCS commodity readiness and
maintainability through improvements in the capability to
detect and predict equipment health status and performance. In
coordination with this objective and as part of efforts to
improve the readiness of Army forces, the committee recommends
increases of: $5.0 million to support development of advanced
thermal and oil management systems to reduce vehicle life cycle
costs; $4.2 million for the development of test facilities to
evaluate advanced combat vehicle power train designs; $4.0
million to enhance Army capabilities for the rapid integration
of new technologies onto military vehicles; $3.5 million for
development of advanced vehicle prognostics systems; and $2.0
million to support ground vehicle fastening and joining
research.
Finally, the committee notes that the Army's future force
technology thrust in unmanned systems seeks to enhance the
effectiveness of unmanned systems through improved perception,
cooperative behaviors, and increased autonomy. In support of
those efforts, the committee recommends an increase of $12.0
million to continue the unmanned ground vehicle initiative.
Diverse threat sensor development
The budget request included $108.0 million in PE 63005A for
combat vehicle and automotive technology programs. The
committee notes that the Army has a need to develop systems
that coordinate unattended, airborne, man-portable, and
vehicle-mounted sensor inputs to identify and characterize
threats in complex terrain, including urban environments. The
committee recommends an increase of $1.0 million in PE 63005A
for development of systems that better combine sensor data to
provide enhanced threat warning capabilities.
Army training technologies
The budget request included $18.9 million in PE 63015A for
next-generation training and simulation systems. The committee
notes that the Army's Institute of Creative Technologies is
working on the development of a variety of simulations to
support the training requirements of the Army. The Army's
advanced simulation technology technology thrust area seeks to
provide increasingly realistic training and mission rehearsal
environments to support military missions. In order to support
development of advanced combat training simulators, the
committee recommends increases in PE 63015A of $3.5 million for
the development of joint fires training systems, and $2.0
million for modeling architectures to support battle command
simulation and training.
Deactivation of military explosives
The budget request included $10.6 million in PE 63103A for
explosives demilitarization technology. To support continuing
efforts to develop environmentally sound methods of disposing
munitions, the committee recommends an increase of $500,000 to
support research on the safe deactivation of military
explosives.
Army missile and rocket technologies
The budget request included $64.0 million in PE 63313A for
advanced missile and rocket technologies. The committee notes
the continuing need for development of advanced high speed,
precision strike weaponry. The committee recommends an increase
of $1.0 million to support studies of long range hypersonic
interceptor technology, in coordination with the efforts of the
Joint Technology Office for Hypersonics, previously established
by the committee.
Situational awareness technologies
The budget request included $39.9 million in PE 63710A for
advanced night vision technologies. The Army's intelligence,
surveillance, and reconnaissance future force technology thrust
area seeks to develop persistent and integrated situational
awareness capabilities to provide actionable intelligence to
support military operations. To support these efforts, the
committee recommends an increase of $3.5 million for research
on short range electro-optical sensor systems to support Future
Combat Systems.
Unique item ID data management research
The budget request included $600,000 in PE 63024A for the
ongoing development of the Army's unique item identification
(UID) research. The committee recommends an increase of $2.0
million for the continued research and development of an
enterprise-wide software application to support Army programs
that are required to comply with unique item mandates. UID
research is permitting the Army to better manage its logistic
activities, including accurate, non-intrusive item
identification and data collection and enhanced unit-pack level
visibility.
Advanced electronics integration
The budget request included $14.0 million in PE 63305A for
Army missile defense systems integration, but no funds for
advanced electronics integration. The committee recommends an
increase of $4.0 million in PE 63305A for advanced electronics
integration to advance state-of-the-art weapon system
electronics, with the goal of reducing the size, weight, and
cost of electronic components, while reducing hazardous
materials used in such advanced electronics. This effort
supports Army needs for research, prototyping, testing, and
production technologies that have the potential to produce more
efficient, higher performance, less hazardous and lower cost
electronics.
Advanced environmental controls
The budget request included $14.0 million in PE 63305A for
Army missile defense systems integration, but no funds for
advanced environmental control systems. The committee
recommends an increase of $5.0 million in PE 63305A for the
development of thermal management control systems that can
support sensors and electronic systems which operate in the
harsh environmental conditions required by missile defense
systems. The committee notes that advanced environmental
controls have applicability to a variety of military systems
that operate in harsh environments.
Advanced fuel cell research
The budget request included $14.0 million in PE 63305A for
Army missile defense systems integration, but no funds for
advanced fuel cell research. The committee recommends an
increase of $3.5 million in PE 63305A for the development of
advanced fuel cell technology for applications in Army space
and missile defense systems. The committee notes that
lightweight, reliable, and cost-effective power sources are
important components of complex weapon systems such as space
and missile defense systems. Advanced fuel cells would have
applicability to a wide variety of military systems.
Radiation hardening initiative
The budget request included $14.0 million in PE 63305A for
Army missile defense systems integration, but no funds for
radiation hardening integration. The subcommittee recommends an
increase of $3.0 million in PE 63305A for a radiation hardening
initiative to improve understanding of radiation transport and
effects, modeling and simulation tools, and radiation-hardened
design approaches. This activity should be coordinated with the
Joint Radiation Hardened Electronics Oversight Council.
High-altitude integration testbed
The budget request included $20.0 million in PE 63308A for
Army missile defense systems integration (space), but no funds
for continued development of the high-altitude integration
testbed. The committee recommends an increase of $3.0 million
in PE 63308A for the Army's high-altitude integration testbed
to integrate and test payloads for high altitude airships and
unmanned aerial vehicles for long-loiter missions. Such systems
could provide enhanced information to military forces.
Air and missile defense architecture analysis
The budget request included $116.4 million in PE 63327A for
air and missile defense engineering, but included no funds for
development of an integrated air and missile defense (IAMD)
architecture analysis program. The committee recommends an
increase of $5.0 million in PE 63327A for continued development
of an IAMD architecture analysis program to improve the
integration and coordination of air and missile defense
capabilities into a coherent system of systems to defend
against aircraft, cruise missiles, and ballistic missiles. The
Army has been selected as the lead service for joint IAMD. This
effort would support the Army's lead role, and its development
of an IAMD Battle Command System.
Stryker active protection system
The budget request included $108.0 million in PE 63653A for
Advanced Tank Armament System (ATAS), but provided no funds for
development of a Stryker active protection system. The
committee recommends an increase of $4.5 million in PE 63653A
for the Stryker active protection system.
Vibration management enhancement research
The budget request included $71.6 million in PE 64201A to
develop hardware and software improvements for the Army's
aviation system. The committee recommends an increase of $3.0
million to continue research and development of advanced
diagnostic tools to measure vibration in the aircraft and
develop possible mitigation measures. This research utilizes an
embedded condition-based maintenance system developed to detect
mechanical faults in transmissions, gearboxes, main and tail
rotors, and the entire power train.
Next-generation combat helmet development
The budget request included $42.4 million in PE 64601A for
infantry support weapons, but no funds were provided for next-
generation combat helmet development. Funds provided would
support the development of a next-generation combat helmet that
is safer and significantly lighter. The committee recommends an
increase of $3.0 million in PE 64601A for combat helmet
development.
High Mobility Multi-purpose Wheeled Vehicle modernization research
The budget request included no funding in PE 64642A for
advanced technology development for the Army's legacy light
tactical wheeled vehicles, including technology enhancements
and modernization activities for the High Mobility Multi-
purpose Wheeled Vehicle (HMMWV) in the areas of survivability,
mobility, and energy and power.
The committee recommends an increase of $5.0 million in PE
64642A for the HMMWV program manager to continue efforts to
develop, test, and integrate advanced technologies into the
HMMWV. Previous technology integration activities have included
improved cooling systems, seats and seat belt enhancements,
gunner restraints, vehicle intercom systems, and fire
suppression systems.
Non-Line of Sight-Launch System anti-tamper research
The budget request included $200.1 million in Research and
Development, Army for the Non-Line of Sight-Launch System
(NLOS-LS). The committee recommends an increase of $2.0 million
in PE 64646A to continue funding anti-tamper research. Anti-
tamper protection of weapon systems is a growing concern in
U.S. national security planning. In September 2007, the Defense
Science Board issued a report entitled ``Mission Impact of
Foreign Influence on Department of Defense Software'' that
found that given the military's increasing dependence on
software-based programs, ``current systems designs, assurance
methodologies, acquisition procedures, and knowledge of
adversarial capabilities and intentions are inadequate to the
magnitude of the threat.'' In January 2008, the Government
Accountability Office reported that military program managers
lack clear guidance on what information they need to protect
and are challenged in selecting anti-tamper solutions because
they do not have the tools needed to determine how much
protection is required. This additional funding will complete
ongoing NLOS-LS anti-tamper development activities, including
significant test and validation by Red Teams and government
agencies.
Future Combat System
The budget request included $3.6 billion for the Future
Combat System (FCS) program, the Army's comprehensive force
modernization program. The committee remains committed to the
modernization of the Army and is hopeful that the FCS program
will provide, as promised, an appropriate and affordable
combination of advanced technologies to support operational
concepts that will ensure future success across the spectrum of
conflict. The ambitiousness, complexity, and risk associated
with FCS have resulted in many challenges over the years that
the Army must continue to overcome.
Therefore, the committee agrees that this program merits
careful, even special oversight. Recognizing this, Congress
directed in section 211 of the National Defense Authorization
Act for Fiscal Year 2006 (Public Law 109-163) that the
Government Accountability Office (GAO) submit an annual report
on the program's progress. Moreover, in section 214 of the John
Warner National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2007
(Public Law 109-364), Congress directed the Secretary of
Defense to conduct a milestone review following FCS's
preliminary design review, now scheduled for April 2009.
Consequently, fiscal year 2009, as the GAO notes in its March
2008 annual report, is a critical year for this program.
The GAO's March 2008 annual review of the FCS program noted
that it will be difficult for the Army to demonstrate firm
requirements and technical maturity in time for its preliminary
design and Secretary of Defense reviews next year. Consistent
with other GAO reports, the committee believes that instability
in funding could make that challenge more difficult. The
committee remains convinced that FCS merits support and stable
funding, and therefore recommends full funding for FCS as
requested by the Army.
Urban training development
The budget request included $35.4 million in PE 64715A for
engineering development of non-system training devices. The
committee recognizes the importance of training concepts and
systems for joint military operations in urban terrain and
culture to increase unit effectiveness at reduced operating
costs. The committee recommends an increase of $6.0 million in
PE 64715A for development of systems for joint military
operations in urban terrain and cultural training.
Extended range sniper rifle research
The budget request included $52.1 million in PE 64802A for
weapons and munitions--system demonstration and development.
This program element funds multiple efforts for engineering
development of weapons and munitions systems. The committee
recommends an increase of $3.0 million for extended range
sniper rifle research.
Army test and target development
The budget request included $13.5 million in PE 64258A for
target simulator development. The committee continues to
support Department of Defense (DOD) investments in targets and
test and evaluation infrastructure and capabilities, which
serve to enhance force readiness, improve systems capabilities,
and reduce life cycle costs. The committee recommends an
increase of $3.0 million in PE 64258A to support development of
advanced fixed-wing aerial targets to support warfighters
facing current and future air defense threats.
The budget request included $74.6 million in PE 65602A for
technical test instrumentation and targets. The committee
recommends an increase of $3.0 million for enhancements in
laser and modeling systems to support testing of chemical and
biological defense systems.
The budget request included $2.8 million in PE 65605A for
the DOD High Energy Laser Test Facility (HELSTF). The committee
is concerned that this level of support will not preserve all
of the critical laser test functions that DOD requires,
including the Missile Defense Agency. Further, the lack of
funding will force a ``mothballing'' of test facilities and
lead to a loss of technical expertise and huge startup costs
when the facility is needed for potential use by the range of
advanced high power laser systems under development. The
committee also notes that the required analyses and reports on
high energy laser testing from the fiscal year 2008
authorization reports have yet to be delivered. Therefore, the
committee recommends an additional $15.0 million in PE 65605A
to support the operations of HELSTF.
Javelin modernization
The budget request included $1.5 million in PE 23802A for
other missile product improvement programs, but provided no
funds for the modernization of the Javelin anti-armor missile.
Funds provided would initiate a Javelin modernization program
that would increase the missile's effective range to beyond
line-of-sight. The committee recommends an increase of $10.0
million in PE 23802A for Javelin modernization development.
Global Combat Support System, the Logistics Modernization Program and
Product Lifecycle Management Plus
The budget request included $104.9 million in PE 33141A for
the Global Combat Support System (GCSS), $82.0 million in
Operation and Maintenance, Army (OMA), for the Logistics
Modernization Program (LMP), and $42.4 million in PE 33141A for
Product Lifecycle Management Plus (PLM+).
In July 2007, the Government Accountability Office (GAO)
reported that the Army would be investing approximately $5.0
billion over the next several years to develop and implement
their Enterprise Resource Programs (ERP). The GAO noted that
this significant investment was being made without the benefit
of a comprehensive business enterprise architecture, concept of
operations, and effective portfolio management. For example,
the three logistics systems, GCSS, LMP, and PLM+, utilize
separate financial systems and different versions of SAP
software, making future consolidation extremely complex. In
addition, as the Army itself reports, prior to 2006 the Army's
functional approach to governance led to development of
completely disparate ERPs. In a November 21, 2007 Acquisition
Decision Memorandum (ADM) the Under Secretary of Defense for
Acquisition, John Young, seemingly validates the GAO
conclusions, stating that additional work was necessary in
synchronizing the separate components of the Army's enterprise
resource planning strategy. While the committee expects the
three logistics ERP efforts--GCSS, LMP, and PLM+--to continue
development and fielding, synergies should be explored and
realized. On March 14, 2008 Secretary Young signed ADMs for two
Army ERPs, General Fund Enterprise Business System (GFEBS) and
GCSS, mandating one such efficiency by directing the
integration on the previously separate financial subset of GCSS
with GFEBS. Further efficiencies should be explored across the
Army's logistics ERPs.
The committee recommends decreases of $30.0 million in PE
33141A for GCSS, $20.0 million for LMP from OMA, and $10.0
million in PE 33141A for PLM+. While the committee has
historically been supportive of the Department of Defense's
business systems modernization efforts, it is concerned by the
Army's functionally ``stovepiped'' approach to its ERP systems.
Army manufacturing technologies
The budget request included $69.1 million in PE 78045A for
development of manufacturing technologies. The committee
continues to support increasing funding for manufacturing
research and technology to support the preservation of the
defense industrial base and reduce costs of weapons systems. To
enhance Army manufacturing research efforts, the committee
recommends increases in PE 78045A of: $2.5 million for advanced
nanotechnology manufacturing research; $3.5 million for
castings research to improve performance and lower the cost of
weapons systems; $3.0 million for research to improve machine
tool accuracy and performance; and $2.0 million for
manufacturing process improvements to reduce costs of body
armor plates.
Navy
Navy basic research
The budget request included $103.7 million in PE 61103N for
university research initiatives. The committee notes that the
2007 Marine Corps Science and Technology (S&T) Strategic Plan
lists the development of advanced robotic systems for ground
combat in order to ``take humans out of direct involvement in
hazardous and exceptionally arduous missions'' as a technology
objective. In support of achieving that objective, the
committee recommends an increase of $1.5 million for research
on automated robotic technologies for landmine detection.
The 2007 Naval S&T Strategic Plan identifies a specific
technology objective of adapting defense systems to the
environment, especially with respect to space environmental
effects. To help address this concern, the committee recommends
an increase of $1.0 million in PE 61103N for research on novel
radiation hardened microelectronics.
The budget request included $407.3 million in PE 61153N for
defense research sciences programs. The committee recommends an
increase of $1.5 million in PE 61153N for research on quantum
computing and quantum mechanics that can support efforts to
enhance Navy sensor and communications systems. The 2004
National Research Council study entitled ``Advanced Energetic
Materials'' characterized the U.S. effort on research and
development of energetic materials as ``suboptimal,'' but
stated that the materials are ``a key component of the nation's
defense strategies.'' To help address this identified gap, the
committee recommends an increase of $1.5 million in PE 61153N
for basic research on energetic materials.
To support efforts to enhance math and science education
nationally and develop the next generation of clearable
scientists and engineers to work on national security issues,
the committee recommends an additional $1.5 million in PE
61153N for science and technology educational outreach efforts.
Manufacturing engineering training
The budget request included $407.3 million in PE 61153N for
defense research sciences. The committee notes that National
Science and Technology Council's March 2008 report entitled
``Manufacturing the Future: Federal Priorities for
Manufacturing R&D'' highlighted the role that federal
investments could play in enhancing the domestic manufacturing
base through improvements in workforce training and education.
The report cited a 2005 National Association of Manufacturers
skills gap survey of more than 800 manufacturing businesses,
which found that 81 percent were experiencing ``severe'' (13
percent) or ``moderate'' (68 percent) shortages of skilled
workers overall, and 90 percent reported shortages of skilled
production employees. These shortages lead to deficiencies in
the defense industrial base and therefore weaken the Department
of Defense production and supply chain. To help address this
issue, the committee recommends an increase of $2.0 million in
PE 61153N for manufacturing engineering educational outreach
programs.
Navy power projection research
The budget request included $79.9 million in PE 62114N for
applied research on power projection technologies. The
committee notes that the 2007 Defense Science Board Task Force
on Directed Energy Weapons noted that science and technology
(S&T) funding for laser weapons should be focused on
concentrated development of free electron lasers for ship
defense. In support of that recommendation, the committee
recommends an increase of $3.5 million for high power free
electron laser development. To support the Naval S&T Strategic
Plan objective of developing energy storage technologies, the
committee recommends an increase of $2.5 million in PE 62114N
for the development of fuel cells for unmanned aerial vehicle
applications. Finally, the committee recommends an increase of
$1.5 million for research on advanced electron sources for use
in next-generation radar systems.
Navy force protection research
The budget request included $131.3 million in PE 62123N for
applied research on force protection technologies. The 2007
Naval S&T [science and technology] Strategic Plan identifies
the development of advanced materials in platform construction
to support the production of more survivable platforms as a key
technology objective. In support of that objective, the
committee recommends an increase of $3.0 million for composite
materials research for high speed craft, and an increase of
$2.0 million for research to reduce the structural weight and
improve signature characteristics of special operations
combatant craft through the use of lightweight composite
materials.
The Naval S&T Strategic Plan also has a technology
objective of enhancing homeland and port defense monitoring. In
support of this effort, the committee recommends an additional
$3.5 million in PE 62123N for development of deployable, under
hull inspection technologies. Consistent with the Navy's High
Energy and Pulse Power Technology Objective, which seeks to
develop energy storage power system architectures and pulsed
power control systems, the committee recommends an additional
$3.0 million to develop energy delivery technologies for
advanced naval weapons systems.
In support of Office of Naval Research efforts to improve
towed sonar array reliability and enhance situational
awareness, the committee recommends an additional $2.5 million
for modeling and simulation efforts on towed sonar array system
reliability. In support of Navy objectives to reduce the cost
of high-resolution infrared focal plane arrays for missile
seekers and other applications, and in conjunction with ongoing
related Army and Missile Defense Agency efforts, the committee
recommends an increase of $3.0 million for infrared materials
research.
Finally, consistent with Navy efforts to identify new
coating technologies for military equipment, the committee
recommends an increase of $3.5 million in PE 62123N for
development of novel surface coatings to improve performance
and reliability of defense systems.
Situational awareness processing technologies
The budget request included $36.5 million in PE 62131M for
applied research on Marine Corps landing force technologies.
The committee notes that one of the Marine Corps' science and
technology objectives is the development of ``improved
situational awareness for warfighters at all echelons.''
Consistent with that objective, the committee recommends an
additional $4.5 million for applied research on the
distribution of tactical information to individual warfighters.
Acoustic research and test capabilities
The budget request included $93.9 million in PE 62236N for
applied research on warfighter sustainment technologies. The
committee notes that the 2007 Strategic Plan for DOD
(Department of Defense) T&E (Test and Evaluation) Resources
stated that ``improved acoustic and radio frequency (RF)
signature measurement capability is necessary to adequately
conduct T&E on new hull forms.'' In support of the development
of that capability, the committee recommends an increase of
$1.5 million in PE 62236N for upgrades to Navy acoustic
research and test equipment.
Navy electronics research
The budget request included $54.8 million in PE 62271N for
radio frequency systems applied research. The committee notes
that next-generation Navy radars, communications, and
electronic warfare systems will all depend on advanced high
power microelectronics. The Navy's Power and Energy Science and
Technology Focus Area includes the specific objective of
developing new materials to increase the efficiency and power
density of Navy systems. To complement these efforts, the
committee recommends an increase of $1.5 million for research
on advanced semiconductor radio frequency power technologies.
Advanced technologies for power projection
The budget request included $60.4 million in PE 63114N for
advanced technologies for power projection. The committee notes
that the capability to support detection, tracking, and
identification of mobile targets, including to support maritime
interdiction and land attack of high value targets, is a high
priority based on several fleet and combatant commands
assessments of current operational capability gaps. The Defense
Advanced Research Projects Agency and Office of Naval Research
science and technology programs are currently supporting these
science and technology development efforts with planned
transitions in fiscal year 2012. To accelerate the development
and reduce the risk of these efforts, the committee recommends
an additional $3.5 million in PE 63114N for development of
mobile target tracking and identification technologies.
The committee notes that the Naval Expeditionary Command
recommendations to the Office of Naval Research for high
priority capability gaps to be addressed with science and
technology investments included ``fires detections and
engagement systems for incoming direct and indirect fires.'' To
support efforts to address that gap, the committee recommends
an increase of $2.5 million in PE 63114N for the development of
watercraft active protection systems.
Force protection advanced technology
The budget request included $55.1 million in PE 63123N for
force protection advanced technology. This program addresses
applied research associated with providing force protection
capability for all naval platforms.
The budget request included no funding for continuing the
development of wide band gap semiconductor substrate materials.
These materials offer capability for higher power and higher
frequency operation in high temperature environments across a
broad spectrum of applications. The committee recommends an
increase of $2.0 million for the continued development of wide
band gap semiconductor substrate material.
The budget request included no funding for any initiative
to leverage rapidly developing ongoing advances in hydrogen-
powered fuel cell vehicle technology to enable revolutionary
changes in the Department of the Navy non-tactical vehicle
fleet. Fuel cells powered by hydrogen could totally change the
present dependence on petroleum as the logistics fuel and could
offer the ability to run systems silently and with
significantly reduced thermal signatures for missions requiring
low probability of detection. In previous years, the Department
of the Navy conducted several short-term demonstrations of
hydrogen fuel cell powered vehicles. The committee recommends
an increase of $5.0 million for an expanded demonstration of
fuel cell vehicles, to include an extended vehicle range
refueling capability enhancement to include testing that could
establish the basis for a potential full qualification of a
hydrogen-powered fuel cell vehicle for fleet operations.
The budget request included no funding for development of a
lithium battery technology that could replace one of the three
generators normally in operation or reserve aboard all large
Navy ships. If lithium battery technology could be scaled up to
a capacity of roughly 2.5 megawatts, such a battery would
replace one of the three ship service generators normally in
operation or in reserve aboard all surface combatants. Such a
battery system could provide a lower cost, higher quality
source of electrical power that would replace redundant back-up
power sources dedicated to subsystems throughout the ship. The
battery would also eliminate the possibility of a ship
experiencing a catastrophic loss of power (``going dark'') due
to a cascading failure of generators and an inability to
restart the main engines following a loss of main power. The
committee recommends an increase of $9.0 million to enable the
development of such lithium battery technology.
The budget request included no funding for development of a
combined mishap reduction system. The committee is aware that
the private sector has developed web-based information
management systems that enable managers at all levels in an
organization to prevent avoidable accidents among their
personnel. These systems identify high-risk practices,
procedures, conditions, and attitudes before accidents occur
and provide paths to mitigate them. The Department of Defense
has long collected data about the causes of accidents after
they occur. Using this information alone, however, has proven
insufficient for reducing accident rates below recent
historical levels. The committee recommends an increase of $2.0
million to enable the development of a combined mishap
reduction system.
The budget request included no funding for an integrated
vehicle health monitoring program. Such a program could
determine the value of adopting commercial automotive standards
as a baseline for a set of open standards as part of an open
system vehicle electronics architecture. This program could
also achieve reductions in the demand for space, weight, power,
and cooling, as well as reduce the time and cost needed to
develop new vehicle applications. The committee recommends an
increase of $3.5 million to enable the development of a
prototype of an integrated health monitoring system for proof-
of-concept evaluation and demonstration.
The committee recommends a total authorization of $76.6
million in PE 63123N for force protection advanced technology.
High-integrity Global Positioning System
The budget request included $104.6 million for common
picture advanced technology in PE 63235N, Research,
Development, Test, and Evaluation, Navy, including $61.2
million for high-integrity Global Positioning System (GPS). The
committee recommends no funds for high-integrity GPS.
Ground sensor networks
The budget request included $100.8 million in PE 63640M for
Marine Corps advanced technology demonstrations. The committee
notes that small arms fire accounts for a large number of
coalition casualties in Iraq and Afghanistan, and that a number
of services and defense agencies are pursuing technological
solutions to meet urgent needs of deployed forces. To support
these efforts, the committee recommends an increase of $2.0
million for the development of ground sensor networks that can
detect and locate hostile fire.
Shipboard system component development
The budget request included $4.0 million in PE 63513N for
shipboard system component development, but included no funding
for high temperature superconductor alternating current (HTS-
AC) synchronous marine propulsion motor development or for
developing a permanent magnet hybrid propulsion system for the
DDG-51 Aegis destroyer.
The Navy has been developing and testing a 36.5 megawatt
prototype HTS-AC synchronous propulsion motor. Funds are
required to complete preliminary design and risk reduction of
the tactical motor in order to initiate detailed design and
fabrication of the motor in 2010. HTS propulsion motors could
support current and future Navy needs, either as an upgrade to
the DDG-1000, or for the CG(X) next-generation cruiser.
Successful development of the HTS motor will allow much greater
flexibility in regards to space and weight considerations on
Navy warships. The committee recommends an increase of $5.5
million to continue development and testing of the HTS-AC
synchronous marine propulsion motor.
The budget request included no funding for continued
development and testing of the permanent magnet motor (PMM).
Congress has provided funding for several fiscal years to
mature the PMM technology for main propulsion motor
applications. The team developing this system has developed a
plan to design and build a smaller PMM that would support a
hybrid electric drive system for DDG-51 Aegis destroyers. The
contractor claims that such a system installed on a DDG-51
would pay back the investment in approximately 3 years, based
only on fuel savings of approximately 13,000 barrels of fuel
per ship per year. The committee recommends an increase of $7.6
million to design and build a hybrid electric drive system
based on PMM technology.
The committee recommends a total authorization of $17.1
million in PE 63513N for shipboard system component
development.
Advanced submarine system development
The budget request included $141.7 million in PE 63561N for
advanced submarine systems development. The design and
development efforts in these programs are to evaluate a broad
range of system and technology alternatives to directly support
and enhance the mission capability of current submarines and
future submarine concepts.
The budget request included no funding to begin studies
that would lead to developing a replacement for the Ohio class
strategic missile submarine program which was designed in the
1970s. The Navy has begun studies under a program called the
Undersea Launch Missile Study (ULMS). The efforts within ULMS
will involve exploring new technologies, conceptual design of
ship configurations, supporting ship systems, consideration of
strategic payloads, and development of other payloads.
However, there appears to be insufficient work to maintain
the skill set among submarine designers until the Navy would
otherwise start designing a replacement for the Ohio class. A
previous report by the RAND Corporation evaluating the
submarine design industrial base concluded that it would be
less expensive to sustain some number of workers in excess of
those needed to meet the residual design demands during such a
gap. One means of achieving this goal would be to begin the
more extensive design activities earlier than the Navy would
otherwise start them to support a specific date to start
building the next class. The committee believes that the Navy
should continue that effort in fiscal year 2009 and recommends
an increase of $15.0 million for that purpose.
Facilities improvements
The budget request included $4.1 million in PE 63725N, but
included no funding for a program to develop a hydrokinetic
power generator. This technology uses the phenomenon of vortex-
induced vibrations to extract useful kinetic energy from ocean
and other water currents. Researchers claim that it is highly
scalable and could produce energy over a wide range of current
speeds, starting as low as 1 knot. This energy extraction
technology is non-obtrusive, environmentally compatible, and
modular. Such generating systems could be very useful for
supporting various Navy power needs, including coastal naval
bases, instrumentation stations, battery recharging, off-shore
stations, and ships not under way.
The committee recommends an increase of $2.0 million to
support development and testing of this power generation
approach.
Optical interconnect
The budget request included $2.8 million in PE 63739N for
Navy logistics productivity initiatives, but included no
funding to develop low cost, high quality fiber optic
interconnect technology for military aerospace application. The
Department of Defense continues to demand increasing data
processing, communication, and system control capabilities. The
next-generation data and communication management systems
needed for weapons systems will depend upon tightly integrated
optical fiber solutions, also known as optical interconnect.
This solution optimizes space utilization while achieving high
bandwidth, decreased weight, immunity to electromagnetic
interference, resistance to corrosion, and improved safety and
security. The Navy has requirements for next-generation optical
interconnect technology for several aircraft platform systems,
and anticipates that this technology could be applied to Navy
vessels as well. The committee recommends an increase of $4.0
million to develop this important technology.
Land attack technology
The budget request included $40.0 million in PE 63795N for
land attack technology, including $38.8 million for the naval
surface fire support development activity. Most of the funding
within this activity would have been applied to development of
the extended range guided munition (ERGM).
Based on continuing development problems, and capped by
recent test failures, the Navy decided to terminate the ERGM
program after submitting the fiscal year 2009 budget request.
The committee strongly supports making improvements in
naval surface fire support capability. However, the Navy cannot
usefully spend all of the funds requested in this program until
it decides on a path forward.
Therefore, the committee recommends a decrease of $30.0
million in land attack technology. The remaining funds should
be sufficient to support Navy efforts to mature other
technologies and develop a new plan for meeting surface fire
support requirements.
Directed energy
The budget request included $108.6 million PE 62114N and PE
63114N for directed energy and continued development of an
electromagnetic rail gun. No funding was requested in PE
63925N, directed energy and electric weapons systems. Neither
was there any funding included for a laser weapons system
(LAWS), which is a top research and development priority on the
Chief of Naval Operations' unfunded priorities list, or for the
Guillotine program. LAWS is under development as a rapid
prototype to serve as an adjunct laser weapon for the Navy's
Close-In Weapon System (CIWS) to counter rockets, artillery,
mortar, and unmanned aerial vehicles for ship and expeditionary
base defense. Additional funding would accelerate development
by 2 years. Guillotine would provide commanders with a non-
lethal capability to disrupt threats and terrorist operations.
The committee agrees with the Navy's objectives, outlined
in Joint Vision 2020, to develop directed energy weapons that
provide unique capability against emerging asymmetric threats.
The committee recommends an increase of $10.7 million in PE
63925N in support of LAWS and Guillotine development and
related directed energy and laser weapon systems research and
development, including high power free electron and high
brightness electron laser technology.
Next-generation cruiser
The budget request included $172.1 million in PE 64300N and
$140.4 million in PE 64501N for development efforts in support
of a next-generation cruiser, CG(X). CG(X) is planned to be the
replacement for the CG-47 class cruiser, with primary missions
including air and missile defense. The Navy's long-range
shipbuilding plan proposes to procure the first ship of the
CG(X) program in 2011.
The John Warner National Defense Authorization Act for
Fiscal Year 2007 (Public Law 109-364) required that the Navy
include nuclear power in its Analysis of Alternatives (AoA) for
the CG(X) propulsion system.
Section 1012 of the National Defense Authorization Act for
Fiscal Year 2008 (Public Law 110-181) further requires that
CG(X) be nuclear powered, unless the Secretary of Defense
submits a notification that inclusion of an integrated nuclear
power system is not in the national interest. The statement of
managers accompanying that act directed the Secretary of the
Navy to submit a report with the budget request for fiscal year
2009 providing information regarding CG(X) design, cost,
schedule, industrial base considerations, and risk assessment;
that would reflect the results of the CG(X) AoA and provide
evidence that the Navy is on schedule for procuring the first
ship of the class in 2011.
The Secretary of the Navy has delayed submission of the
CG(X) report because the CG(X) AoA, which was scheduled to be
complete by third quarter fiscal year 2007, remains under
review by the Navy. Fundamental considerations regarding the
cruiser's requirements, characteristics, technology readiness
levels, and affordability continue to be studied, making it
likely that milestone A, which was targeted for September 2007,
will slip into 2009. By all measures, there is no reasonable
path for the next-generation cruiser to meet the current
schedule for milestone B and award of a ship construction
contract in 2011.
Pending completion of the AoA, determination of radar
requirements, ship characteristics, propulsion system, and an
executable program schedule, and in view of the delay to
program major milestones, the activities planned for fiscal
years 2008 and 2009 cannot be executed per the schedule
reflected in the fiscal year 2009 budget request. Therefore,
the committee recommends a decrease of $87.2 million in PE
64300N and a decrease of $33.6 million in PE 64501N. These
recommended decreases would maintain the cruiser development
activities at the same level as was funded in fiscal year 2008.
Improved towed array handler
The budget request included $143.5 million in PE 64503N for
SSN-688 and Trident submarine modernization, but included no
funding for developing or testing improved handling gear for
submarine towed arrays. One continuing problem area involves
the mechanisms for deployment of the towed array from the
submarine's hull. The current system attempts to ``push'' the
flexible array out of the submarine using multiple rollers
which often results in damage to array elements and deployment
failure. A new system that ``pulls'' the array out could reduce
the number of rollers which are the source of array damage and
allow for other improvements and increased reliability.
The committee recommends an increase of $4.1 million to
complete further development of the new handling system and
testing of a prototype to demonstrate improved thin-line towed
array system reliability from better array handlers.
Submarine electronic chart updates
The budget request included $143.5 million in PE 64558N,
but included no funding for a program to update electronic
charts for submarines.
Navy instructions mandate the use of electronic chart
display products across the Navy. This requirement was
conceived in stand-alone, display workstation applications,
which no longer represent the state-of-the-practice of net-
ready, web-service environments. The committee is aware that
the Navy conducted a Small Business Innovative Research effort
that focused on the demonstration of net-ready, web-service
updates of electronic charts for submarines. Funding is needed
to:
(1) enhance the current voyage management system/
enhanced control display unit capabilities on the
attack submarines;
(2) establish an interim chart update repository
ashore to support the Navy until formal transition to
National Geospatial-Intelligence Agency production;
(3) develop and evaluate potential bandwidth
reduction options for vector data products, and
establish related certification requirements and
procedures;
(4) demonstrate navigation task reduction through
automated chart updates by data consumers; and
(5) complete operational testing of developed
services and web clients for release to the fleet.
The committee recommends an increase of $5.3 million to
support these activities.
Next-generation Phalanx
The budget request included $36.2 million in PE 64756N for
ship self-defense (hard kill), but included no funding for
next-generation Phalanx. The Phalanx weapon system is the
Navy's principal close-in weapon system for ship self-defense,
and has proven to be extremely adaptive for performance against
emerging air and surface target sets. The continually evolving
nature of the threat, unique challenges posed by operations in
the littorals, increased emphasis on single ship probability of
raid annihilation, and fact of life technology obsolescence
require continued development effort to sustain the superior
performance of this critical ship self-defense system. The
committee recommends an increase of $10.7 million in PE 64756N
for the continued development of the next-generation Phalanx.
NULKA anti-ship missile decoy system
The budget request included $57.6 million for ship self-
defense soft-kill systems development in PE 64757N, including
$3.0 million for various development activities related to the
NULKA anti-ship missile decoy system.
The Navy has identified a series of development activities
associated with the NULKA system that are required to
understand and deal with emerging threats:
(1) an improved payload that would provide radio
frequency coverage of more than one band of the
spectrum to deal with anti-ship missiles;
(2) better countermeasures techniques for advanced
anti-ship cruise missiles with advanced seekers;
(3) an improved guidance and propulsion system to
allow more precise positioning of the decoy during
operations;
(4) increased duty cycle; and
(5) additional systems engineering and software
support.
The committee recommends an increase of $9.0 million for
the NULKA development program to continue these efforts.
Combat wound tissue transplantation technologies
The budget request included $7.8 million in PE 64771N for
medical development. The committee notes the continuing and
growing need for combat casualty care technologies including
tissue and organ replacement and transplantation. The committee
recommends an increase of $2.5 million in PE 64771N for
composite tissue transplantation research.
F-35 Joint Strike Fighter competitive propulsion system
The budget request included $1,532.7 million in PE 64800N
and $1,524.0 million in PE 64800F for the F-35 Joint Strike
Fighter (JSF) program. In section 213 of the National Defense
Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2008 (Public Law 110-181),
Congress explicitly directed the Department of Defense to (1)
develop a competitive propulsion system for the JSF aircraft;
and (2) continue competition for the propulsion system
throughout the production phase of the JSF program.
The committee is disappointed that the administration chose
to ignore the law by failing to fund the competitive propulsion
system. Accordingly, the committee recommends an increase of
$215.0 million in PE 64800N and $215.0 million in PE 64800F for
development of the F-35 JSF competitive propulsion system.
Navy test and evaluation support
The budget request included $356.3 million in PE 65864N for
test and evaluation support. The committee commends the Navy
for the growth in this line, and urges the Navy to continue to
sustain and modernize test capabilities to support current and
emerging service and joint requirements. However, the committee
is concerned that test and evaluation accounts are often used
to deposit discretionary funds that are then transferred for
use for other purposes.
The committee recommends a reduction of $10.0 million in PE
65864N for the activities described in budget presentations as
``PBD P19--COTF Balancing.'' The committee was later informed
that the Office of the Secretary of Defense transferred the
funds to the Navy without sufficient explanation, so the amount
was placed into a test and evaluation account for the purposes
of the budget request until clarification was received. The
committee has not received any clarification for the purpose of
the funds and feels that this is insufficient justification for
the request.
Advanced LINAC facility
The budget request included $80.1 million in PE 11221N,
Research, Development, Test, and Evaluation, Navy (RDTEN), but
included no funding for the Crane linear accelerator facility
(LINAC). The committee recommends an increase of $4.0 million
for the LINAC to simulate the high radiation environment in
space. The committee directs the Navy to develop and use these
additional funds in conjunction with the Joint Radiation
Hardened Electronics Oversight Council.
Navy support of the reliable replacement warhead
The budget request included $23.3 million in PE 11221N
Research, Development, Test, and Evaluation, Navy (RDTEN) for
support to the reliable replacement warhead (RRW). The
committee recommends no funds for Navy support to phase 3 RRW
activities and a reduction of $23.3 million. This effort
anticipated that the National Nuclear Security Administration
would be moving to the phase 3 of the RRW study process in
2009. No funds were provided for RRW phase 2A in fiscal year
2008, as a result funding for phase 3 is premature.
Warfighter enhanced decision making
The budget request included $26.7 million in PE 24163N for
fleet communications, but included no funding for a warfighter
enhanced decision making and mobile networking applications
initiative (WEDM).
Two years ago, Congress directed the Navy to establish a
laboratory to address information technology (IT) challenges
facing local and regional commands. The laboratory's focus on
emerging technologies offers a unique opportunity to develop
and test a joint operational proof-of-concept WEDM. This
initiative would be aimed at fielding leading edge applications
that could shorten the operational ``kill chain'' and enhance
information flow to the warfighter. WEDM would also provide an
opportunity for the academic community to work with the
Department of Defense to develop and rapidly deploy training
curricula for emerging technologies.
The committee recommends an increase of $3.0 million to
establish the WEDM pilot program to provide modeling and
simulation, lab testing, live testing, and training on
equipment prior to shore site acquisition to ensure that the
C4I systems programmed for installation on Navy ships are
compatible with shore facilities and are of appropriate
capacity to support fleet deployments worldwide.
Aviation improvements
The budget request included $122.9 million in PE 25633N for
aviation improvements, but no funds to develop next-generation
automated test systems (ATS) instrumentation for aircraft
avionics or to develop rapid repair structural adhesives for
aircraft applications.
Current ATS are large and numerous. The Navy finds it
difficult to keep the commercial hardware used in test
equipment modernized on a schedule similar to advanced and
evolving aircraft avionics. The Navy specifically, and the
Department of Defense broadly, require technology that is
easily upgradeable and flexible to conduct complex tests on a
variety of fielded systems. Therefore, the committee recommends
an increase of $3.0 million to develop new technology for ATS
to reduce the size and increase the versatility of test
equipment through software upgrades.
The Navy has been pursuing efforts to develop structural
adhesives that cure in the presence of ultraviolet light,
reducing required maintenance equipment while retaining
required strength. This would permit rapid repair of
structures, such as damaged military aircraft and radomes.
Present technology only supports either room temperature curing
for several days or high pressure and temperature cycles in
autoclaves. Developing adhesives that cure rapidly, store at
room temperature, last on the shelf for a year, and are
environmentally safe would have great benefits to Navy
logistics. Therefore, the committee recommends an increase of
$1.0 million to develop structural adhesives that exhibit these
properties.
The committee recommends a total authorization of $126.9
million in PE 25633N for aviation improvements.
Broad Area Maritime Surveillance Unmanned Aircraft System
The budget request included $480.1 million in PE 35205N for
the Broad Area Maritime Surveillance Unmanned Aircraft System
(BAMS UAS). The BAMS UAS program development contract, which
the Navy had expected to award in October 2007, was delayed
until late April 2008. As a result, development activities
originally planned for fiscal year 2008 will inevitably move to
fiscal year 2009. For example, an updated BAMS UAS program
schedule indicates that system engineering activities such as
the system functional review have slipped to fiscal year 2009.
Therefore, the committee recommends a reduction of $48.2
million in PE 35205N for BAMS UAS to reflect this delay.
Digital manufacturing technologies
The budget request included $56.7 million in PE 78011N for
Navy manufacturing technology programs. The committee notes
that the Director of Defense Research and Engineering and the
Defense Science Board have both identified significant
shortfalls in manufacturing research and development funding in
the Department of Defense. To help address these shortfalls and
strengthen the defense industrial base, the committee
recommends an increase of $1.7 million in PE 78011N for the
development of advanced direct digital manufacturing
technologies to support the rapid prototyping of defense
materiel.
National Shipbuilding Research Program--Advanced Shipbuilding
Enterprise
The budget request included no funding in PE 78730N for
maritime technology. The National Shipbuilding Research
Program--Advanced Shipbuilding Enterprise (NSRP-ASE) is a
collaborative effort between the Navy and industry which has
yielded significant productivity improvements for Navy ship
construction and repair. Under this program the Navy provides
funding that is matched and exceeded by industry investment.
Using this approach, the Navy has achieved a high return on
investment by providing near-term savings and avoiding
significant future costs. The committee believes that
continuation of the NSRP-ASE effort is a vital element of the
overarching objective of improving the affordability of naval
warship construction and maintaining a healthy, innovative
shipbuilding industrial base.
The committee recommends an increase of $15.0 million in PE
78730N for the NSRP-ASE.
Air Force
Air Force basic research programs
The budget request included $125.9 million in PE 61103F for
university research initiatives. The committee commends the Air
Force for increasing its investments in basic research in the
fiscal year 2009 budget request. This is consistent with the
National Research Council's 2005 report entitled ``Assessment
of Department of Defense Basic Research,'' which recommended
that ``the Department of Defense should redress the imbalance
between its current basic research allocation, which has
declined critically over the past decade, and its need to
better support the expanded areas of technology, the need for
increased unfettered basic research, and the support of new
researchers.''
Consistent with the need to fund more basic research
efforts in areas of technological interest to the Air Force,
the committee recommends increases in PE 61103F of: $2.0
million for research on advanced hypersonic technology designs;
$2.0 million for information security research; $1.6 million
for research on reducing military decision making cycle times;
and $2.5 million for research on diamond substrates for
microelectronics.
Air Force materials research
The budget request included $117.1 million in PE 62102F for
applied research on materials. The committee notes that the
National Research Council's 2005 report on ``High Performance
Structural Fibers for Advanced Polymer Matrix Composites''
highlighted the need for the Department of Defense to reduce
costs and improve its understanding of the manufacture and
properties of advanced carbon fibers. Consistent with those
recommendations, the committee recommends an increase of $2.5
million in PE 62102F for research on advanced carbon fiber
materials for Air Force applications. The committee notes that
the Naval Studies Board's 2007 report on ``Conventional Prompt
Global Strike (CPGS) Capability'' noted that ``the boost glide
and high-speed cruise missile concepts as CPGS options require
advanced technologies, especially in the areas of thermal
protection and management . . .'' The committee recommends an
increase of $2.5 million for the development of thermal
protection systems for global strike hypersonic vehicles.
The Director of Defense Research and Engineering's 2007
Strategic Plan identified advanced materials as an enabling
technology for a number of desired military capabilities,
including protection against improvised explosive devices and
air dominance. The committee recommends an increase of $2.0
million in PE 62102F for development of fire and blast
resistant materials for force protection missions.
Finally, the committee notes that the Air Force Research
Laboratory strategy has a strategic goal to ``accurately
diagnose the current state and predict the future state of
aerospace systems'' by 2015. To support that effort, the
committee recommends an increase of $1.5 million for
development of health monitoring sensors of aerospace
components.
The budget request included $41.9 million in PE 63112F for
advanced materials technology development for weapons systems.
The committee recommends an increase of $5.0 million to develop
and transition metals and process technologies for fielded and
future Air Force systems.
Optical components for air vehicles
The budget request included $122.9 million in PE 62201F for
applied research on aerospace vehicle technologies. The
committee notes that the National Research Council's 2006 study
on ``Future Air Force Needs for Survivability'' noted the need
to reduce electronic emission signatures on aircraft. The
committee recommends an additional $1.5 million in PE 62201F
for research on optical components to replace electrical
components for use in onboard aircraft communications systems.
Air Force training technology
The budget request included $82.1 million in PE 62202F for
applied research on human effectiveness. The committee notes
that in a 2007 memorandum to the Secretary of Defense, the
Director of Defense Research and Engineering highlighted the
need to significantly increase investments in research on
adaptive, interactive full immersion training. To enhance Air
Force and joint training capabilities, the committee recommends
increases in PE 62202F of $2.0 million for advanced satellite
operator training systems development and $2.5 million for
development of immersive tools for enhancing theater air-to-
ground command and control coordination modeling and
simulation.
Air Force aerospace propulsion technology
The budget request included $218.0 million in PE 62203F for
applied research on aerospace propulsion. The 2006 National
Research Council report entitled ``A Review of United States
Air Force and Department of Defense Aerospace Propulsion
Needs'' concluded that Air Force investments in propulsion
science and technology need ``. . . to be increased if
technical gaps are to be filled.'' The report focused on a
variety of space, tactical air, and engine technology gaps that
need to be addressed.
To enhance Air Force propulsion technology efforts, the
committee recommends an increase in 62203F of $2.0 million for
development of high temperature, corrosion resistant bearings
for advanced propulsion systems.
The committee continues to support Department of Defense
efforts to develop technologies to support time-critical strike
missions. The committee recommends an increase of $5.0 million
in PE 62203F for robust scramjet research activities leading to
flight tests and demonstration of an alternate engine to
support the Air Force X-51 testbed program.
Aerospace sensor technologies
The budget request included $109.0 million in PE 62204F for
applied research on aerospace sensors. The committee notes that
the Air Force Research Laboratory (AFRL) science and technology
(S&T) strategy highlights the need for development of ``novel
data mining and advanced relevance assessment technologies'' to
support establishment of ``universal situational awareness.''
To help address this need, the committee recommends an increase
of $1.5 million for research on enhancing information quality
to support persistent surveillance missions.
The AFRL S&T strategy has set a strategic goal of
demonstrating ``layered and flexible sensing architecture that
respond to the Commander's intent'' by identifying and
precisely locating high value difficult targets by 2015. To
support the development of this architecture, the committee
recommends an increase of $3.0 million in PE 62204F for
development of wideband system components to support electronic
intelligence systems.
Air Force seismic research
The budget request included $117.5 million in PE 62601F
Research, Development, Test, and Evaluation, Air Force for
space technologies including $6.8 for seismic technologies to
support national requirements for monitoring nuclear
explosions. The committee recommends an increase of $13.0
million to improve operational seismic capability.
Cyber attack mitigation technologies
The budget request included $109.5 million in PE 62702F for
applied research on command, control, and communications
technologies. The September 2007 Defense Science Board study
entitled ``Mission Impact of Foreign Influence on DOD
Software'' highlighted the need for ``programs to advance the
state-of-the-art in vulnerability detection and mitigation in
software and hardware.'' In support of this finding, the
committee recommends an increase of $2.5 million for the
development of systems to detect and defeat malicious software
on military networks and information systems.
Reconfigurable securing computing
The budget request included $56.9 million in PE 63203F for
development of advanced aerospace sensors. The Air Force and
Department of Defense have set cybersecurity as a high
technology priority. To support these efforts at the tactical
level and reduce the costs for the development of security
systems, the committee recommends an increase of $2.0 million
to develop reconfigurable secure computing technologies for
advanced sensor systems.
Propulsion technologies
The budget request included $170.9 million in PE 63216F for
aerospace and propulsion and power technology development. The
Defense Science Board Task Force on DOD Energy Strategy
recommended investing ``in energy efficient and alternative
energy technologies to a level commensurate with their
operational and financial value.'' The committee believes that
the development of alternative sources of fuel for Air Force
missions could result in huge cost savings for the Department
of Defense, and therefore recommends an increase of $3.0
million in PE 63216F for research on assured aerospace fuels to
assess alternative fuels from sources such as coal, biomass,
and shale, while minimizing environmental impact.
The committee continues to support development of
hypersonic technologies to enable high speed, precision strike
capabilities. The committee recommends an additional $6.0
million in PE 63216F for development of supersonic and
hypersonic cruise missile engine technologies, as part of the
Versatile Affordable Advanced Turbine Engine (VAATE) High Speed
Turbine Engine Demonstrator (HiSTED) program.
Thin film amorphous solar arrays
The budget request included $81.0 million in PE 63401F for
advanced spacecraft technology. The committee recommends an
increase of $2.0 million for thin film amorphous solar arrays
for space systems. Fiscal year 2009 will be the last year of
this successful research and development program of advanced
solar arrays for space systems using thin film amorphous
substrate. These solar arrays are 10 times cheaper, three to
five times lighter, and significantly more efficient than
current solar arrays. After the successful demonstration flight
on the Tac-Sat2 satellite, the committee believes that the Air
Force should work with industry to explore future opportunities
to transition these solar arrays to future Tac-Sat satellites
or other satellite programs of record. Fiscal year 2009 funds
would be used to finish the analysis of the experimental and
demonstration data and complete the project.
Integrated targeting devices
The budget request included $11.8 million in PE 63601F for
development of conventional weapons technology. The Air Force
Research Laboratory science and technology strategy states that
``an important aspect of universal situational awareness is the
advancement of sensor technologies.'' In order to support the
development of enhanced sensor technologies to support
improving precision strike capabilities, the committee
recommends an increase of $3.0 million for lightweight,
targeting device development to integrate multiple sensor
types.
Optical interconnect for battlefield communications
The budget request included $30.1 million in PE 63789F for
advanced development of command, control, communications, and
intelligence technologies. The Director of Defense Research and
Engineering's 2007 strategic plan highlights networks and
communications, including technologies to address airborne
networks, as an enabling technology that should receive the
highest level of corporate attention and coordination. To
support these efforts the committee recommends an additional
$2.0 million for development of optical interconnects to
support data communications onboard unmanned aircraft systems
and satellites.
High energy laser weapon systems
The budget request included $4.0 million in PE 63924F for
the high energy laser advanced technology program managed by
the high energy laser joint technology office. The committee
notes that the Defense Science Board Task Force on Directed
Energy Weapons recommended that ``the Director of Defense
Research and Engineering should give high priority to science
and technology activities addressing high power solid state
laser development and accompanying beam quality and beam
control development.'' To support this effort, the committee
recommends an increase of $5.0 million in PE 63924F for
optimization of solid state laser technologies and acceleration
of the transition of operational systems to warfighters.
Global Positioning System III operational control segment
The budget request included $734.7 million in Research,
Development, Test, and Evaluation, Air Force (RDTEAF) for the
Global Positioning System III (GPS III) in three separate
budget lines: $420.3 million for the GPS III space segment;
$3.0 million for the GPS III operational control segment; and
$304.4 million for the backwards compatibility for the
operational control segment. Previously all three GPS
activities were in a single GPS III program element. While the
committee recognizes some value in separating the ground and
space segments, the committee believes that separating the
ground segment into two different budget lines needlessly
removes program management flexibility.
The committee recommends combining RDTEAF line 37 with line
36 into a single budget line and program element, PE 63423F,
for the GPS III operational control segment.
If the continued separation of the space and operational
control segments introduces additional cost or management
difficulty into the GPS III program, the committee would
support recombining both segments into a single program
element.
Space situational awareness
The budget request included $76.8 million in PE 63438F for
space control technology. The committee recommends an increase
of $5.0 million to utilize Missile Defense Agency X-band and
UHF-band sensors for additional space object tracking to
improve space situational awareness.
Transformational Communications satellite
The budget request included $843.0 million in Research,
Development, Test, and Evaluation, Air Force (RDTEAF) for the
Transformational Communications satellite (TSAT). This amount
is $384.8 million less than was projected for TSAT just last
year. The committee recommends an increase of $350.0 million
for TSAT.
The Air Force and the Department of Defense (DOD) reduced
the TSAT program by $3.6 billion over the future-years defense
program (FYDP), delaying the first launch of TSAT until fiscal
year 2018 or beyond, a delay of 4 years. The committee is very
disappointed in the decision to delay TSAT. For the last
several years the Air Force and the DOD executive agent for
space have asserted that TSAT is one of its highest priorities
for the Department and the core of the protected satellite
communications architecture.
TSAT would provide protected, high data rate, wideband
communications with many times the capability of the Advanced
Extremely High Frequency (AEHF) and the Wideband Global System
(WGS) that it will replace. The significantly enhanced
capabilities provided by TSAT are required to support a broad
range of modernization programs, including the Army Future
Combat System and the many existing and future unmanned aerial
vehicle (UAV) programs. In addition, TSAT will provide a
networking capability based on Internet protocols that will
substantially increase the number of users and the way
information is shared.
The TSAT program started with an overly aggressive
schedule, significant technical risks, and significant cost
uncertainty, but with substantial management attention the
technical and other risks are being addressed. The key
technologies for TSAT are all at a technical readiness level 6
and the independent program assessment found that TSAT is ready
to move to the preliminary design phase.
Nevertheless, the Department has initiated a review to
revalidate the TSAT program requirements as part of a military
satellite communications investment strategy study. The
committee is concerned that some of the options being discussed
as part of the study will, if adopted, further delay delivery
of the TSAT capabilities to the broad user community, waste
money in the long run, and generate a significant
communications gap in the future. Many of the options under
consideration will so reduce the capability of TSAT that the
committee questions why such a substantially downgraded TSAT is
worth the effort, time, and expense. TSAT as originally
envisioned would dramatically increase data throughput and,
through the introduction of an Internet protocol approach,
fundamentally change the way in which satellite communications
are utilized.
The committee recognizes the critical need for the full
scope TSAT, but will not support TSAT under the circumstances
as currently presented to the committee by the Air Force and
DOD. At this juncture the committee would support funding for
TSAT only if the Air Force and DOD return TSAT to a meaningful
technology and schedule path. This is a difficult decision
given the superb management of the program by the TSAT program
office.
Once again the committee questions the senior level Air
Force commitment to being a space force.
Operationally Responsive Space
The budget request included $110.0 million in PE 64857F for
Operationally Responsive Space (ORS). The committee recommends
an increase of $10.0 million for increased work on approaches
to standardized bus designs with common interfaces, additional
satellite launches to support both technology demonstrations
and operational concepts, and additional launch capabilities
including a resource study to look at block buys for launch
vehicles.
The committee commends the work of the ORS office since it
was formally established last year, and appreciates the effort
required to establish a multi-service, multi-agency,
functioning program office. To support the multi-service,
multi-agency nature of the office the committee supports the
concept of rotational directors and deputy directors.
The committee urges the ORS office to continue to maintain
a balanced program including launch, bus development, sensor
development, and developing fully integrated satellites. In
addition, the launch of the Tac-Sat2 satellite demonstrated
that many issues remain to be resolved in the development of
operational concepts for the Transformational Communications
Satellite (TSAT).
B-2 radar modernization program
The budget request included $351.4 million in PE64240F for
the B-2 bomber, including $83.1 million for radar
modernization. The committee recommends a transfer of $18.5
million from PE6420F to Aircraft Procurement, Air Force line 24
to facilitate the management of the radar modernization
program.
Space-based space surveillance block 10
The budget request included $210.5 million for space
situational awareness systems in PE 64425F including $210.5
million for space-based space surveillance block 10 (SBSS 10).
SBSS 10 is a spacecraft to improve deep space situational
awareness by finding, fixing, and tracking space objects that
is scheduled to launch in early 2009. The committee recommends
an additional $10.0 million for SBSS 10 to allow for timely
development of training materials, technical orders, and a
simulation environment to train Air Force SBSS 10 operators,
thereby reducing the time between launch and transition to Air
Force operations.
Space-based Infrared Satellite system
The budget request included $529.8 million in PE 64441F for
the Space-based Infrared Satellite system (SBIRS). The
committee recommends an increase of $30.0 million for SBIRS
operations and training.
The SBIRS program is suffering from the same problem that
is becoming increasingly apparent in several space systems--a
disconnect between the ground and space segments. Because of
the technical, cost, and schedule issues that have surrounded
the SBIRS space segment, the Air Force has had to divert funds
slated for ground related activities to the space segment for
at least the last 3 years. As a result, the ground activities
associated with SBIRS have been underfunded. The committee
notes that for both fiscal years 2008 and 2009 funding for the
ground segment has appeared on the Chief of the Air Force's
unfunded priorities list.
Now that the first HEO sensor is on orbit, with excellent
initial performance, and the second HEO sensor is close behind,
the lack of ground funding is a growing problem. The unfunded
requirement in fiscal year 2009 is $71.2 million and includes
funding for such basic items as the wideband data transmission
requirements needed for the payload on-orbit test station to
exploit and utilize the capabilities of the new HEO sensors,
and crew training. Also included on the unfunded list is
completing the hardware and software to allow the mission
control station and the backup station to control, track, task,
and process the data from both the legacy and the SBIRS
systems. Moreover, on the current schedule the backup station
will be certified for full operations before the main mission
station.
The committee also notes that the Air Force has now decided
not to include the Space and Atmospheric Burst Reporting System
(SABRS), part of the U.S. nuclear detonation system, as part of
the payload on the SBIRS-GEO 3 satellite. The committee directs
the Air Force to either reinstate the SABRS on the SBIRS-GEO 3
satellite or find an equally capable alternative host and
report its decision to the congressional defense committee no
later than August 30, 2008.
Third Generation Infrared Surveillance satellite system
The budget request included $149.1 million in PE 64443F for
the Third Generation Infrared Surveillance (3GIRS) satellite
system. The committee recommends a reduction of $30.0 million.
3GIRS is a technology development program to develop the
next generation of infrared early warning satellite. The
committee supports further development and on orbit testing of
new technologies to support the follow-on to the Space Based
Infrared Satellite system (SBIRS). The last SBIRS GEO satellite
will probably launch in fiscal year 2016 depending on the final
decision as to the full size of the SBIRS GEO constellation. In
its budget justification material for 3GIRS, the Air Force
plans to freeze the technology for the follow-on to SBIRS and
make a decision to proceed to build an operational satellite at
the end of fiscal 2010 even though the first launch of the
follow-on would not be until 2019. The committee is concerned
that the Air Force plan would prematurely lock in a technology
without completing needed sensor development and without fully
understanding the performance of the two approaches currently
funded. The committee notes that there is a third unfunded
option as well. As a result, the committee urges the Air Force
to complete development of the focal plane arrays and to
consider short-term on orbit demonstrations of both approaches.
The committee encourages utilizing the Operationally Response
Space Office to explore opportunities to conduct on orbit
experiments.
F135 engine
The budget request included $1,524.0 million in PE 64800F
for the F-35 Joint Strike Fighter (JSF) program. Over the past
2 years, Congress has added $820.0 million to continue funding
of the F136 engine, a competitive propulsion source, to ensure
there is fair and full competition for the propulsion system of
the JSF.
The Department of Defense froze the technology baseline of
the F135 engine several years ago when the JSF and the engine
began system development and demonstration (SDD). To ensure
that both engines incorporate the best configuration and most
recent technology available, the Department should invest in
and direct a program for the F135 and F136 engine programs that
would drive technology insertion and provide potential
customers with the best performing, most efficient engines
possible. For example, the committee believes that the
potential application of new composite materials in the F135
engine program could result in life cycle cost savings. Because
no funds were set aside for the F136 engine in the
administration's budget request, elsewhere in this report the
committee has recommended an increase of $430.0 million for the
development of the F-136 engine.
In order to maintain a level playing field, the committee
recommends an increase of $35.0 million in PE 64800F for F135
engine technology development.
Combat Search and Rescue Replacement Aircraft
The budget request included $305.1 million in PE 65277F for
development of the Combat Search and Rescue Replacement
Aircraft (CSAR-X) and $15.0 million in Aircraft Procurement,
Air Force (APAF) for advanced procurement for CSAR-X. The Air
Force anticipated awarding the development contract for the
CSAR-X in the spring of 2008, but the award has been delayed
until the first quarter of fiscal year 2009 due to successful
protests by losing offerors, development of additional data
about the program, as well as the offerors' schedules.
On April 11, 2008, the Air Force released Amendment 6 to
the Request for Proposal for the CSAR-X. Amendment 6 modifies
the development funding required in fiscal year 2009, lowering
the amount, according to the Air Force, to $265.1 million.
These delays and the new program profile associated with
Amendment 6 also remove the need for programming any advance
procurement funds in fiscal year 2009.
Therefore, the committee recommends a reduction of $40.0
million in PE 65277F for CSAR-X and a reduction of $15.0
million in APAF for CSAR-X advance procurement.
High speed test track
The budget request included $61.8 million in PE 64759F for
major test and evaluation investments. The committee continues
to be concerned about the Air Force's downsizing of its test
and evaluation infrastructure and workforce. The committee
believes that a shortsighted reduction in Air Force testing
capabilities will inevitably increase technical risk, life
cycle costs, and potentially reduce operational performance of
future Air Force acquisition programs. The committee recommends
an increase of $4.0 million to support development of high
speed test track technology for use on testing of critical
missile, propulsion, and sensor subsystems.
B-52 bomber
The budget request included $38.7 million in PE 11113F for
B-52 squadrons, including $35.2 million for combat network
communications technology (CONECT). The committee recommends an
additional $9.5 million for CONECT. The Air Force failed to
include adequate funding in the budget request to meet the
requirements of the National Defense Authorization Act for
Fiscal Year 2008 (Public Law 110-181) to maintain 76 B-52
bombers in a common configuration and included this funding on
the Air Force unfunded priorities list.
Air Operations Centers
The budget request included $118.8 million in PE 27410F for
Air Operations Centers, including $40.4 million for integration
and development of Air Operation Centers (AOCs), increment
10.2. The Air Force has not finished fielding increment 10.1 of
the AOCs, yet has launched into development of increment 10.2.
Increment 10.2 will rely, in part, on the Defense Information
Systems Agency's Net-enabled Command and Control (NECC).
However, both the Director of Defense Research and
Engineering's technology readiness assessment and the Director
of Operational Test and Evaluation's ongoing oversight of the
NECC program have raised concerns regarding technical risk,
aggressive and optimistic scheduling, and unclear testing and
deployment strategies.
Until technical risk, testing, and program schedule issues
are addressed in a coordinated and joint fashion for both NECC
and AOCs, the committee believes that continuing development of
AOCs, increment 10.2 would be premature. Therefore, the
committee recommends a reduction of $40.4 million in PE 27410F
for the development of AOCs, increment 10.2.
Joint surveillance target attack radar system research and development
The budget request included $97.6 million in PE 27581F for
research and development projects for the E-8 joint
surveillance target attack radar system (JSTARS).
The E-10 aircraft was supposed to be a test bed for the
multi-platform radar technology insertion program (MP-RTIP).
The Air Force intends to field this MP-RTIP sensor suite on a
number of air vehicles, including the Global Hawk unmanned
aerial vehicle (UAV).
Last year, the Air Force decided to cancel the E-10
program. However, the Air Force realized that canceling testing
and development of the large MP-RTIP would leave a void in its
capability to defend the U.S. homeland as well as U.S. and
coalition forces against cruise missile attacks. The JSTARS (E-
8) was the original platform designated for MP-RTIP. That makes
the current JSTAR aircraft a prime candidate as the Air Force
investigates a path forward. The Air Force could transfer the
radar back to JSTARS with minimal risk. Installation of MP-RTIP
could provide nearly the same capability as the E-10 while
saving scarce defense dollars.
The committee believes that the Air Force should pursue
another path, whether that would be the E-8 JSTARS or some
other platform, and field the better capability than can be
achieved with the Global Hawk. Therefore, the committee
recommends an increase of $98.0 million in PE 27581F for
maturing the MP-RTIP sensor suite.
Weather service research and development
The budget request included $47.3 million in PE 35111F for
research and development projects for the Air Force weather
weapon system (AFWWS), but included no funding to develop
software toolkits for operations risk management (STORM)
upgrades for the system.
AFWWS and its warfighter application are charged with
providing regional and tactical weather observations and
forecasts to Command, Control, Communications, Computers,
Intelligence, Surveillance, and Reconnaissance (C4ISR) systems
used by commanders, planners, and operators throughout the
world. The Air Force needs to upgrade AFWWS to provide
commanders and mission planners with a better appreciation of
the uncertainty of weather forecasts and observations. Such an
upgrade should enable them to better determine the risk of
ongoing and planned operations. The AFWWS is currently capable
of calculating the needed uncertainty but is unable to provide
computer-to-computer transfer of such information.
Therefore, the committee recommends an increase of $6.0
million to upgrade the AFWWS and integrate all vital
information (terrain, weather, risk assessment) into one visual
display.
C-17 research, development, test, and evaluation
The budget request included $236.0 million in PE 41130F for
C-17 research, development, test, and evaluation (RDT&E),
including $150.8 million for performance improvement
development and testing. The funding for performance
improvement development and testing represents a 50 percent
increase over the fiscal year 2008 amount.
The committee believes that the Air Force should continue
to seek improvements in existing weapons systems, and therefore
is not recommending elimination of all funding. However, given
the superb performance and operation of the C-17 fleet over the
past several years, the committee sees no justification for
increased RDT&E funding for C-17s at this time.
Therefore, the committee recommends a reduction of $48.0
million in PE 41130F for C-17 performance improvement
development and testing.
Expeditionary Combat Support System
The budget request included $189.7 million in PE 78610F for
the Expeditionary Combat Support System (ECSS). The committee
is encouraged by the recent progress ECSS has made towards
achieving Milestone B certification in the fall of this year.
Also encouraging is the Air Force strategy briefed to the
committee for better coordination and integration of ECSS with
another information technology initiative, the Defense
Enterprise Accounting and Management System (DEAMS). However,
significant concerns remain. Current plans show that over the
next 3 years the Air Force has underfunded the ECSS by over
$500.0 million. Additionally, the committee has learned that
the program office is significantly understaffed. While the
committee has been given assurances that the funding concerns
will be reconciled in future years, the current schedule of
concurrently developing and fielding Release 1 and Release 2
appears high risk. Until the Air Force fully funds the ECCS and
provides sufficient manning, the current schedule appears
overly optimistic. Therefore, the committee recommends a
decrease of $50.0 million in PE 78610F for ECSS, Release 2.
Defense Enterprise Accounting and Management System
The budget request included $27.3 million in PE 91538F for
the research, development, test, and evaluation activities
related to the Defense Enterprise Accounting and Management
System (DEAMS). The committee has historically been supportive
of the Department of Defense's business systems modernization
efforts, but is concerned by the Air Force's functionally
``stovepiped'' approach to its Enterprise Resource Planning
(ERP) financial systems. Current Air Force strategy designates
DEAMS as the Air Force financial system of record for working
capital fund accounting, requiring the Expeditionary Combat
Support System (ECSS) financial transaction to be provided to
DEAMS. Current strategy increases the number of interfaces
between DEAMS and ECSS, increases long-term costs, and greatly
complicates the Air Force movement to a fully integrated
information technology environment.
The committee notes that the Air Force has recognized the
weaknesses of the current ``stovepiped'' strategy and, under a
proposed new strategy, plans to migrate working capital fund
financials to ECSS. Supported by the Office of the Secretary of
Defense's Business Transformation Agency, this proposal will
provide the foundation for the Air Force's evolution to a
single enterprise resource program. Under the new strategy, the
committee believes that the development funding requested for
DEAMS is excess to need.
Therefore, the committee recommends a reduction of $15.0
million for DEAMS. The committee directs that the Air Force
preserve funding for testing activities related to DEAMS when
allocating the reduction.
Defense-wide
Defense Experimental Program to Stimulate Competitive Research
The budget request included $2.8 million in PE 61114D8Z for
the Defense Experimental Program to Stimulate Competitive
Research (DEPSCoR). The committee notes that this program was
funded at $16.9 million in fiscal year 2008 and, according to
military service program managers, has funded meritorious basic
research programs that have contributed to defense
capabilities. The program is currently undergoing a
congressionally directed independent assessment that will serve
to improve the management and execution of the program. The
committee recommends an additional $8.0 million for the DEPSCoR
program.
In-vitro models for biodefense vaccines
The budget request included $53.2 million in PE 61384BP for
chemical and biological defense basic research, but no funds
for development of lung models to improve vaccines. The
committee recommends an increase of $1.0 million in PE 61384BP
for development of an in-vitro lung model to support biodefense
vaccines against aerosolized pathogens. The committee notes
that there is insufficient understanding of the interaction
between human lung immune cells and aerosolized biological
agents. In order to design effective vaccines against such
threats, it would be important to improve this understanding.
Superstructural particle evaluation
The budget request included $53.2 million in PE 61384BP for
chemical and biological defense basic research. This basic
research improves the understanding of the scientific processes
for protection against chemical and biological agents. The
committee recommends an increase of $3.0 million in PE 61384BP
to continue efforts in superstructural particle evaluation and
characterization with targeted reaction analysis. This program
shows potential as an enabling technology for other efforts in
the chemical and biological defense area.
Next-generation over-the-horizon radar
The budget request included $31.3 million for the Lincoln
Laboratory Research Program in PE 62234D8Z, but no funds for
next-generation over-the-horizon radar development (OTHR). The
budget request did include $1.0 million in PE 63648D8Z to begin
a Joint Capability Technology Demonstration (JCTD) of a next-
generation OTHR. The Department of Homeland Security (DHS) is
expected to contribute funds to this JCTD in fiscal year 2009
as well.
The Joint Requirements Oversight Council has validated a
Joint Capabilities Document for homeland air and cruise missile
defense of North America, which documents significant
surveillance gaps in the approaches to the United States. The
OTHR JCTD is intended to address these vulnerabilities. U.S.
Northern Command and North American Aerospace Defense Command
(NORTHCOM/NORAD), the sponsors of the JCTD, submitted a high-
priority requirement to augment funding for the OTHR JCTD to
conduct technology risk reduction activities.
This JCTD will capitalize on the large investment of the
Australian Ministry of Defense in OTHR technology. The risk-
reduction initiative would procure a copy of a brass board
next-generation radar design developed by Australia. This brass
board would be used to develop and test technology to enhance
performance.
The committee believes that this project merits support and
applauds the joint efforts of the Department of Defense and DHS
to find innovative solutions for securing U.S. airspace. The
committee recommends an increase of $2.8 million in PE
62234D8Z, and $1.9 million in Other Procurement, Air Force,
line 24, General Information Technology, for OTHR JCTD risk
reduction.
Chemical agent fate response planning tool
The budget request included $203.7 million in PE 62384BP
for chemical and biological defense applied research, but
included no funds to develop analytic tools to plan appropriate
responses to chemical exposures. The committee recommends an
increase of $2.0 million in PE 62384BP to develop an
appropriate response planning tool that uses the chemical agent
fate database and supports consequence management and
operations effects assessments. Such a response planning tool
would fulfill a requirement of the Joint Operational Effects
Federation.
The committee notes that the chemical agent fate program is
a joint service program that focuses on the acquisition and use
of chemical warfare agent persistence data to improve the
ability of U.S. forces to protect themselves and their
equipment while operating in a chemically contaminated
environment. It also has applications to domestic consequence
management planning and response.
Chemical and biological applied research
The budget request included $203.7 million in PE 62384BP
for chemical and biological defense applied research. The
committee recommends an increase of $5.0 million in PE 62384BP
to develop advanced processes for the production of molecular
therapeutics against botulism, with the goal of advancing to
Phase I clinical studies. The committee notes that there is no
vaccine approved and licensed by the Food and Drug
Administration against the botulism toxin, and therapeutic
approaches may hold significant potential.
The committee also recommends an increase of $4.0 million
in PE 62384BP for rapid response countermeasures for chemical
and biological threats. This effort is intended to provide a
low-cost sensor that can be widely distributed and networked to
provide early warning capabilities. This effort would address
issues related to sensitivity, selectivity, miniaturization,
manufacturability, and low-cost production. The committee notes
that progress in these areas would permit a significant
improvement in chemical and biological sensors.
Chemical and biological infrared detector
The budget request included $203.7 million in PE 62384BP
for chemical and biological defense applied research, but
included no funds to develop miniaturized infrared detection
technology. The committee recommends an increase of $3.0
million in PE 62384BP to continue development and
miniaturization of an advanced infrared detection system for
chemical and biological agents. The objective is to demonstrate
a functional prototype that operates at high speed and
sensitivity with minimal false alarm rates. This technology may
provide an end product with significantly lower logistical
burden than other technologies.
Multivalent Marburg and Ebola vaccine
The budget request included $203.7 million in PE 62384BP
for chemical and biological defense applied research, but
included no funds to advance Marburg/Ebola vaccine candidates
into clinical trials. The committee recommends an increase of
$4.5 million in PE 62384BP to help move candidate vaccines
against Marburg and Ebola viruses into Phase I clinical trials,
including clinical lot production for human injection, human
safety trials, and human dose escalation studies. The
Department of Defense is currently evaluating five different
vaccine technologies for Marburg and Ebola, and this additional
funding would permit progress toward selecting the most
promising candidate for advanced development.
DARPA technology transition
The budget request included $371.5 million in PE 62702E,
$107.9 million in PE 63286E, and $287.0 million in PE 63287E
for Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency (DARPA) science
and technology projects. The committee recommends reductions of
$4.5 million in PE 62702E for laser guided bullet research;
$3.0 million in PE 63286E for the A160 program; and $10.0
million in PE 63287E for the Integrated Sensor is Structure
program. The committee is concerned that these programs do not
have clearly delineated transition paths in place, or
programmed funding in place, so that they will be adopted by
any service program of record or science and technology
activity.
The committee commends DARPA's efforts to invest in high
risk, high payoff technologies, but believes that scarce
science and technology resources should be used in a manner
well coordinated between the science and technology executives
of the military services and DARPA.
Three-dimensional integrated circuit technologies
The budget request included $211.5 million in PE 62716E for
applied research in electronics technology. To support efforts
to miniaturize defense technologies, the committee recommends
an additional $2.5 million for research on three-dimensional
integrated circuits for use in sensors and other defense
applications.
Blast mitigation and protection
The budget request included $211.1 million in PE 62718BR
for technologies to defeat weapons of mass destruction. The
committee recommends an increase of $2.0 million in PE 62718BR
for blast mitigation and protection analysis and software
development to improve the Vulnerability Assessment and
Protection Option analytic tool used by the Defense Threat
Reduction Agency to predict the effects of explosive blasts on
buildings, and to design protection and mitigation options for
military facilities. Given the threat of terrorists using high
explosives, this analytic capability is an important component
of force protection assessment and planning.
Comprehensive National Incident Management System
The budget request included $211.1 million in PE 62718BR
for technologies to defeat weapons of mass destruction (WMD).
The committee recommends an increase of $4.0 million in PE
62718BR for the Comprehensive National Incident Management
System being developed by the Defense Threat Reduction Agency
to improve national capabilities to analyze potential
catastrophic events such as pandemic influenza and terrorist
attacks using WMD. This technology has the potential to
significantly improve the ability of the Department of Defense
and U.S. Northern Command to analyze, model, and plan for such
catastrophic events, including the ability to provide support
to civil authorities for consequence management of such events.
Special operations technologies
The budget request included $23.1 million in PE 116401BB
for special operations technology development. The committee
notes that the United States Special Operations Command (SOCOM)
has highlighted ``tagging, tracking, and locating'' as a key
technology challenge. To support development of tracking
technologies, the committee recommends an additional $2.0
million in PE 1160401BB for the development of multi-sensor
data fusion systems to enhance detection and discrimination of
targets hidden in foliage.
The budget request included $2.5 million in PE 1160407BB
for special operations forces medical technology development.
The committee recommends an increase of $1.5 million for the
development of portable devices to diagnose traumatic brain
injuries.
Blast trauma research
The budget request included $80.0 million in PE 63122D8Z
for technology support for combating terrorism. To help address
issues of traumatic brain injuries suffered by military
personnel, the committee recommends an increase of $2.0 million
for development of threshold blast-induced traumatic brain
injury data that will provide safe weapons operations
guidelines, safe standoff distances for the use of explosions
in combat training and operations, and inform engineering
design considerations of force protection equipment. The
committee directs that this work be performed in coordination
with the activities of the Department of Defense Blast Injury
Research Program Coordinating Office.
Blackswift
The budget request included $70.0 million in PE 63287E and
$50.0 million in PE 35206F for the Blackswift Test Bed. The
Blackswift program seeks to develop ``an extended duration
hypersonic test bed which will allow for the study of tactics
for a hypersonic airplane.'' The committee recommends a
reduction of $40.0 million from PE 63287E for the Blackswift
program. The committee directs the Defense Advanced Research
Projects Agency (DARPA), Director of Defense Research and
Engineering (DDRE), the Air Force, the Prompt Global Strike
Office, and the newly established Joint Technology Office for
Hypersonics to review the program to ensure that it is focused
on addressing the highest priority hypersonics technological
gaps in order to operationally field hypersonic capabilities in
the future. The committee recommends that the remaining $30.0
million requested for Blackswift in PE 63287E be used to
continue the program.
The committee notes that the 2006 National Research Council
report, ``Future Air Force Needs for Survivability'', states:
Hypersonic missiles with ranges comparable to those
of current missiles could increase targeting timeliness
and flexibility and thus increase operational utility
in the 2018 time frame. It is not clear, however,
whether a hypersonic cruise aircraft (other than a
missile) designed for long-range flight and recovery
offers unique capability and operational utility.
Furthermore, it is unlikely that such an air-breathing
hypersonic platform, other than a missile, will be
available in the near term.
The committee notes that although it is widely agreed that
the best opportunity for near-term transition of hypersonics
technology will be in cruise missile or conventional strike
systems, especially to support time critical and prompt global
strike missions, sufficient resources for research,
development, or testing of the systems has never been focused,
coordinated, or sustained within the Department of Defense.
Examples of these programs include the DARPA Falcon Hypersonic
Technology Vehicle (HTV-2), the Air Force's X-51 program and
the now terminated HyFly and Revolutionary Approach to Time
Critical Long-Range Strike Project (RATTLRS) programs. The
committee feels that these programs have all suffered from a
lack of investment in addressing fundamental technical issues
and insufficient resources for required flight test and
demonstration activities.
The committee further notes that many fundamental research
and technology challenges related to hypersonics flight were
identified by both the DDRE National Aerospace Initiative and
the 2004 National Research Council's ``Evaluation of the
National Aerospace Initiative,'' including air-breathing
propulsion and flight test, materials, thermal protection
systems, structures, integrated vehicle design and
multidisciplinary optimization, and integrated ground testing
and numerical simulation/analysis remain insufficiently funded.
In addition, there is still no set of approved requirements for
any hypersonic missile or aircraft.
Finally, the committee notes that the Blackswift program
has been projected to cost at least $800.0 million, with DARPA
and the Air Force sharing the cost according to a recent
memorandum of understanding. Given the severe constraints on
the Air Force budget, especially in science and technology and
test and evaluation, the committee is not convinced that the
Air Force will be able to provide the resources necessary to
keep this ambitious program on schedule or on budget,
especially since it is not tied to any specific requirement.
The committee notes that one of the drivers of the technical
program is the need to have the aircraft perform typical
aircraft maneuvers, such as an aileron roll, although it is not
clear why that will necessarily enhance the program's
probability of transition into formal acquisition. The
committee also directs that the Air Force and DARPA work to
ensure that the flight test program is consistent with the
projected goals of the program.
Further, the Air Force (AF) budget request included $50.0
million in PE 35206F to ``provide a temporary repository for AF
funds supporting DARPA Blackswift unmanned, hypersonic ISR
[intelligence, surveillance, and reconnaissance] and strike
vehicle.'' The committee recommends a reduction of $10.0
million for this effort. The committee directs that the
remaining funding be invested in addressing the highest
priority technological challenges to meet Air Force needs in
hypersonics technology.
Engineered biological detectors
The budget request included $337.9 million in PE 63384BP
for chemical and biological defense advanced technology
development, but included no funds to develop engineered
biological warfare agent detectors. The committee recommends an
increase of $2.7 million in PE 63384BP for development of a
prototype biological sensor for assessment and testing as a
spiral upgrade of current generation systems. Effective
detection of biological warfare agents is the key to
contamination avoidance and force protection in a biologically
contaminated area.
Improved chemical, biological, and radiological filters
The budget request included $337.9 million in PE 63384BP
for chemical and biological defense advanced technology
development, but included no funds for developing improved
chemical, biological, and radiological (CBR) filtration
capabilities. The committee recommends an increase of $2.0
million in PE 63384BP for design, engineering, and prototyping
of CBR filters. Improved filters would fill a requirement for
enhanced collective protection capability against a wide
spectrum of threat agents. Such filters would be multi-use and
multi-platform configurable, for use in buildings, ships, and
shelters.
Raman chemical identification system
The budget request included $337.9 million in PE 63384BP
for chemical and biological defense advanced technology
development, but included no funds to develop a miniaturized
Raman chemical agent identification system. The committee
recommends an increase of $2.5 million in PE 63384BP for
development of a hand-held chemical agent identification system
that is smaller and more reliable than existing systems, in
order to improve the ability of U.S. forces to rapidly identify
unknown chemical agents and substances for force protection
purposes.
Command and control gap filler joint capabilities technology
demonstration
The budget request included $206.3 million in PE 63648D8Z,
Research, Development, Test, and Evaluation, Defense-wide, for
Joint Capability Technology Demonstrations (JCTD). While $4.0
million of these funds will be allocated for the command and
control for North American surveillance gap filler JCTD, U.S.
Northern Command (NORTHCOM) testified that the JCTD is
underfunded by $22.8 million. This JCTD is the number one
unfunded priority for NORTHCOM.
As identified in the National Strategy for Aviation
Security, the National Strategy for Maritime Security, and the
Joint Requirements Oversight Council-validated Homeland Air and
Cruise Missile Defense of North America Joint Capabilities
Document, there are significant airspace surveillance
deficiencies and gaps--7 years after September 11, 2001.
The gap filler JCTD will remedy many of these deficiencies
by integrating feeds from all the disparate surveillance
systems operated by government departments and agencies,
including classified systems, and sustain development of new
technology for extending air surveillance based on the
utilization of ambient radio waves from such sources as
television and radio station broadcasts.
The committee recommends an authorization of $26.8 million
for this gap filler JCTD, $22.8 million above the requested
amount.
High performance manufacturing technologies
The budget request included $12.0 million in PE 63680D8Z
for the manufacturing science and technology program. The
committee recommends an increase of $10.0 million for efforts
on the development of high performance manufacturing
technologies as authorized by title II, subtitle D of the
National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2006 (Public
Law 109-163). The committee directs that the funding be used
for development of test beds and prototypes of advanced
manufacturing technologies, diffusion of advanced manufacturing
processes throughout the industrial base, and the development
of technology roadmaps to ensure that the Department of Defense
can access required manufacturing and technology capabilities
in critical defense technologies.
Defense Logistics Agency technology programs
The budget request included $19.4 million in PE 63712S for
generic logistics research and development and technology
demonstrations. Following the recommendation of the Defense
Science Board Task Force on DOD Energy Strategy, the committee
recommends a series of investments designed to address defense
energy requirements using lower cost, reliable, alternative
fuel sources. The committee recommends an increase of $4.0
million for research on advanced biofuels to support military
operations, $10.0 million to continue efforts to develop
advanced vehicle fuel cell technologies and demonstrate the use
of hydrogen technologies for defense operations, and $3.0
million for the development of deployable microgrid systems
that can utilize a variety of energy sources to produce
installation and vehicle power.
The committee notes that the National Research Council
Committee on Manufacturing Trends in Printed Circuit Technology
recommended that the Department of Defense ``should ensure
access to new printed circuit board (PrCB) technology by
expanding its role in fostering new PrCB design and
manufacturing technology.'' DOD recently concurred with the
recommendations of that report, but has yet to make any
significant changes in investment level in this area. In
support of that recommendation, the committee recommends an
increase of $2.0 million for the development of emerging
critical interconnect and printed circuit board technology.
Superlattice nanotechnology
The budget request included no funding in PE 63720S for
microelectronics technology development and support. The
committee notes that the 2007 report on the Defense
Nanotechnology Research and Development Program states a goal
``to utilize breakthroughs in nanotechnology to provide
revolutionary devices and systems to advance warfighter
capabilities and battle systems capabilities.'' Consistent with
that goal, the committee recommends an increase of $3.0 million
in PE 63720S for research on superlattice nanotechnology to
develop high power, high temperature devices for defense
applications.
Special warfare domain awareness technologies
The budget request included $113.9 million in PE 63826D8Z
for quick reaction special projects. The committee notes that
the 2007 Naval Science and Technology (S&T) Strategic Plan's
asymmetric and irregular warfare focus area has a specific
objective of enhancing riverine surveillance capabilities
through development of ``common and persistent'' maritime
pictures. To support this objective, the committee recommends
an increase of $2.0 million in PE 63826D8Z for development of
augmented reality systems to support special warfare
situational awareness needs.
Weapon of mass destruction exercises
The budget request included $114.9 million in PE 63828D8Z
for joint experimentation programs. The committee notes that
the United States Joint Forces Command's joint experimentation
program funds concept development and experimentation efforts
and leads the development, exploration, and assessment of new
joint concepts, organizational structures, and emerging
technologies. A focus of committee attention this year has been
the threat of domestic use of weapons of mass destruction (WMD)
by terrorist groups, and the capabilities of the Department of
Defense to participate in actions to detect and defeat or
mitigate the effects of such an event. Therefore, the committee
recommends an increase of $1.5 million in PE 63828D8Z to
support experimentation activities related to the potential use
of WMD against critical domestic infrastructure, and directs
that such activities involve the participation of other
appropriate Federal, local and State entities so as to better
inform planning and coordination efforts.
Arrow missile defense program
The budget request included approximately $1.0 billion for
terminal defense programs in PE 63881C, of which $74.3 million
is for the U.S.-Israeli cooperative program of development and
procurement for the Israeli Arrow missile defense system. The
Arrow Weapon System provides Israel defense against regional
ballistic missiles, including against Iran's Shahab-3 missile.
Israel is interested in an upper-tier follow-on to its Arrow
system in order to provide more capable protection against
missiles with possible weapons of mass destruction warheads.
There are several options under consideration for an upper-
tier follow-on to the Arrow system. One would be to develop a
new Israeli Arrow-3 interceptor, which would also require the
development of a new long-range radar for the system to be
effective. Other options include the possibility of using
existing U.S. missile defense technologies, such as the
Terminal High Altitude Area Defense (THAAD) system or a land-
based version of the Standard Missile-3 interceptor, which is
used by the Aegis Ballistic Missile Defense (BMD) system, to
provide highly effective upper-tier defense for Israel. The
committee believes that developing a new Israeli interceptor
missile and long-range radar would be very expensive and would
duplicate existing U.S. capabilities. Therefore, the committee
encourages the full consideration of U.S. systems as
potentially the most effective and cost-effective approach to
providing an upper-tier missile defense capability for Israel.
The committee recommends an increase of $30.0 million in PE
63881C for the Missile Defense Agency to fully evaluate the
potential of existing U.S. missile defense systems and
technologies--particularly a land-based version of the Standard
Missile-3 interceptor used in conjunction with a THAAD radar--
to provide an operationally effective, timely, and cost-
effective upper-tier missile defense capability for Israel.
Such an option would be fully interoperable with deployed U.S.
missile defense systems, which could reinforce and support the
Israeli upper-tier system.
Short-range ballistic missile defense
The budget request included approximately $1.0 billion for
terminal defense programs in PE 63881C, of which $44.9 million
is for cooperative U.S.-Israeli development of a short-range
ballistic missile defense system called the David's Sling
Weapon System. This system is being developed in response to
short-range missile and rocket attacks against Israel from
Lebanon. The United States is sharing the development of the
system in order to ensure that it is compatible with U.S.
missile defense systems, and to provide an option for the U.S.
military to procure the system in the future if needed. The
committee recommends an increase of $28.0 million in PE 63881C
to accelerate the development of the David's Sling Weapon
System in order to permit timely fielding of the system.
Terminal High Altitude Area Defense
The budget request included approximately $1.0 billion for
terminal defense programs in PE 63881C, of which $864.9 million
is for the Terminal High Altitude Area Defense (THAAD) program.
The committee recommends a transfer of $65.0 million from the
budget request, and an increase of $75.0 million, to a new
defense-wide procurement line for long lead procurement of
interceptors and ground equipment for THAAD Fire Units 3 and 4.
This would permit awarding the long lead contract for both Fire
Units 3 and 4 together, and would lead to a more efficient and
economical production plan. It would also permit a production
rate of three interceptors per month, which would reduce the
cost of each interceptor while delivering the capability sooner
than the current plan.
The committee is deeply disappointed that the budget
request for the THAAD system would delay the delivery of
interceptors for Fire Units 3 and 4 by a year and cause a
production gap of 18 months. This delay would be wholly
inconsistent with the need to provide our regional combatant
commanders with the near-term effective defenses they need to
defend our forward-deployed military forces, allies, and
friends against the many hundreds of short- and medium-range
ballistic missiles that exist today. As specified in section
223 of the John Warner National Defense Authorization Act for
Fiscal Year 2007 (Public Law 109-364), the THAAD system is a
high priority near-term system, and the committee believes that
delaying its production for budget reasons is unacceptable.
The committee notes that after the budget was submitted and
congressional objections were raised to the planned delay, the
Missile Defense Agency (MDA) acknowledged that the delay would
be unacceptable and indicated that it plans to change the
allocation of fiscal year 2009 funding within the funds
requested for THAAD, and to use an inflation adjustment, to
provide $65.0 million for long lead procurement of interceptors
for Fire Unit 3, to avoid the delay and the production gap. The
committee believes MDA should not have planned for the delay
and the production gap in the first place.
A number of new requirements were placed on the THAAD
program by the Army, including requirements to meet new
insensitive munitions standards, and to use a 5-ton truck
instead of a High-Mobility Multipurpose Wheeled Vehicle (HMMWV)
for the fire control vehicle. Given the extraordinary
acquisition authority and flexibility granted to the MDA, the
committee is disappointed that MDA did not budget the funds
from lower priority programs outside of THAAD to meet these new
requirements while keeping the THAAD production schedule on
track.
Furthermore, the committee is disappointed that MDA is only
planning and budgeting to procure four THAAD Fire Units and 96
THAAD interceptors. As the Commander of the Joint Force
Component Command for Integrated Missile Defense told the
committee in April 2007, the Joint Capabilities Mix study,
conducted by the Joint Staff in association with the combatant
commands and the military departments, concluded that the
United States needs about twice as many THAAD and Standard
Missile-3 interceptors as the number currently planned, just to
meet the minimum inventory needs of the combatant commanders to
provide protection against existing short- and medium-range
missile threats. That minimum number does not include the
normally required spare, reserve, and reload missiles.
The committee observes that the United Arab Emirates has
expressed an interest in purchasing three THAAD fire units and
144 THAAD interceptors for defense of its territory, which is
about the size of Maine. Their purchase would be 50 percent
larger than the number of interceptors currently planned by MDA
for all U.S. forces, and would include twice as many
interceptors per fire unit as MDA is currently planning for
U.S. forces.
The committee believes that MDA's current plan for THAAD
acquisition is wholly inadequate and needs to be changed to
meet the current needs of our combatant commanders. The
committee believes that MDA should focus on meeting at least
these minimum inventory upper-tier requirements as its highest
acquisition priority, and directs MDA to report to the
congressional defense committees by no later than December 1,
2008 on its plans to meet the inventory requirements identified
in the Joint Capabilities Mix study.
Additionally, the committee notes that section 223(b) of
the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2008
(Public Law 110-181) required the Department of Defense to
request any long lead procurement for THAAD Fire Units 3 and 4
in the fiscal year 2009 budget request using procurement funds,
rather than research and development (R&D) funds. In addition,
section 223(c) of that act prohibits the use of fiscal year
2009 R&D funds for procurement of long lead items for Fire
Units 3 and 4. Therefore, the committee recommends that all
$140.0 million in long lead procurement funds for THAAD Fire
Units 3 and 4 be provided in a new defense-wide procurement
line, as described elsewhere in this report and displayed in
the funding tables in this report.
Finally, the committee is concerned that MDA has not
planned or budgeted any funds in fiscal year 2009 for procuring
a THAAD radar. This would create a gap in THAAD radar
production and cause a schedule disconnect between fire unit
delivery and radar delivery. Therefore, the committee also
recommends an increase of $40.0 million in the new missile
defense procurement funding line for long lead procurement of
the THAAD radar for Fire Unit 3, to avoid a production gap and
a schedule disconnect. The committee urges MDA to synchronize
the THAAD fire unit and radar production and delivery
schedules.
Ground-based Midcourse Defense
The budget request included $2.1 billion in PE 63882C for
the ballistic missile defense midcourse element, which is the
source of funds for the Ground-based Midcourse Defense (GMD)
system deployed in Alaska and California, and for the proposed
deployment of the GMD system in Europe.
The budget request included $19.2 million for long lead
procurement of operational 2-stage Ground-Based Interceptors
(GBIs) intended for European deployment, ``pending successfully
meeting the criteria described in Section 226 of the FY08
National Defense Authorization Report [sic].'' Section 226 of
the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2008
(Public Law 110-181) prohibits the use of fiscal year 2008
funds to acquire or deploy the planned operational European 2-
stage GBIs until the Secretary of Defense, after receiving the
views of the Director of Operational Test and Evaluation
(DOT&E), certifies that the system has a high probability of
working in an operationally effective manner. The committee
recommends a similar provision for fiscal year 2009, as
described elsewhere in this report.
The committee notes that the proposed 2-stage interceptor
intended for deployment in Poland is still being designed and
developed, and is not scheduled to have its first booster
flight test until the fourth quarter of fiscal year 2009, and
the first planned intercept test in the second quarter of
fiscal year 2010. Given that a number of GMD flight tests have
been delayed substantially, it is possible that these 2-stage
GBI tests will also be delayed.
In an October 2007 report, DOT&E noted the ``significant
differences'' between the proposed GMD deployment with a 2-
stage interceptor in Europe and the existing GMD system
deployed in the United States with a 3-stage GBI. According to
the report, ``European defense using GMD assets is a completely
new mission area for GMD.'' The report provided DOT&E's initial
testing concept for the proposed European deployment, which
would include three flight tests, two of which would be
intercept tests. The Missile Defense Agency (MDA) originally
planned to conduct only two flight tests prior to deploying the
system, one of which would be an intercept test. This planned
flight test program would not meet the DOT&E minimum test plan
concept. It is difficult to envision the certification required
of the Secretary of Defense under these circumstances. However,
MDA has recently agreed to conduct three flight tests, in
accordance with the DOT&E test concept. The committee views
this as a positive development.
The committee notes that the long lead items planned for
procurement with the $19.2 million are 100 percent common with
both the 2-stage and 3-stage GBIs. Therefore, they could be
used for purposes other than being deployed on operational 2-
stage GBIs if necessary, including for flight test and ground
test interceptors for either 3-stage or 2-stage GBIs.
Consequently, the committee recommends authorizing the
requested $19.2 million, with the understanding that if there
are problems with the 2-stage GBI development program, these
long lead assets would be used for other purposes, rather than
being wasted or deployed before the 2-stage GBI is certified as
ready.
The committee notes that MDA has changed its GMD test plans
to accelerate the testing of the 2-stage GBI intended for
European deployment. As part of this change, MDA merged the
objectives of two previously planned tests (FTG-06 and FTG-07)
into one test (FTG-06), so that the next test could be the
first Booster Verification Test (BVT-01) of the 2-stage GBI.
Consequently, the target originally planned and budgeted for
FTG-07 is no longer needed for that test, since that test's
objectives are being merged into FTG-06. The committee directs
MDA to inform Congress of any significant changes in its test
and target plans on a timely basis.
The committee notes that the political process toward
negotiation and ratification of agreements with Poland and the
Czech Republic on the proposed deployment of a missile defense
system on their territory will take additional time to resolve
itself, possibly through fiscal year 2008. This additional time
may delay the ability of MDA to obligate or expend fiscal year
2008 funds into fiscal year 2009, which would presumably delay
its ability to obligate and expend fiscal year 2009 funds. The
committee is concerned that MDA will have difficulty executing
funds requested for fiscal year 2009 for the proposed European
deployment.
For example, Congress appropriated $28.0 million in fiscal
year 2008 for site activation activities, but those funds
cannot be obligated or expended until the governments of Poland
and the Czech Republic give final approval to the proposed
deployments on their respective territories. This raises
concerns that the funds requested in fiscal year 2009 for site
activation will be premature or unexecutable. The committee
directs MDA to keep the congressional defense committees
informed regularly of the plans and schedule for executing
funds for the proposed European deployment, and of any delays
in the planned execution of funds.
Airborne Laser
The budget request included $421.2 million in PE 63883C for
the Airborne Laser (ABL) technology demonstration program. The
committee notes that the budget request for ABL included $15.8
million for planning and analysis related to a possible second
ABL aircraft. Since the first planned proof of principle shoot-
down demonstration test is not scheduled until the fourth
quarter of fiscal year 2009, and since even a successful test
will not provide answers to the many questions about whether
the ABL technology could be made into an effective, suitable,
survivable, and affordable weapon system, the committee
believes it is inappropriate to provide any funds in fiscal
year 2009 related to a potential second ABL aircraft.
Any decision on whether to proceed with a possible second
ABL aircraft should only be made after much more information is
available about the likelihood that the system could eventually
provide a militarily useful, operationally effective, and
affordable missile defense capability, when balanced against
other missile defense programs, capabilities, and needs, and
also balanced against other Department of Defense priorities
and needs. As described elsewhere in this report, the committee
recommends a provision that would limit the availability of
funds for procurement of a second ABL aircraft until the
Secretary of Defense certifies that it has a high probability
of accomplishing its mission in an operationally effective,
suitable, survivable, and affordable manner.
The Government Accountability Office has noted that the ABL
program has a history of significant cost increases and
schedule delays. When the program was originally proposed in
1996 it was estimated that the technology demonstration program
would cost $1.0 billion and be completed in 2001. However,
after numerous cost and schedule delays, it is now estimated
that the technology demonstration program will cost more than
$5.1 billion and be completed in 2010, a 500 percent cost
growth and 9-year delay. In 2007, because of integration issues
and technical challenges, the program increased its costs by
$253.0 million and added a year to the program schedule.
As the committee noted last year, the ABL program remains a
far-term, high risk technology development and demonstration
program. If the technology could be made to work in a
militarily useful and operationally effective manner, it would
not produce an operational capability before 2018. The
committee believes there are higher priorities for missile
defense funds, particularly the near-term capabilities
currently needed by our combatant commanders to defend our
forward-deployed forces, allies, and other friendly nations
against many existing short- and medium-range ballistic
missiles.
Therefore, the committee recommends a reduction in PE
63883C of $15.8 million, the funds requested for work related
to a second ABL aircraft, and a reduction of $30.0 million for
work not related to maintaining the schedule for the planned
proof of principle shoot-down demonstration test in 2009.
Real-time non-specific viral agent detector
The budget request included $51.3 million in PE 63884BP for
chemical and biological defense advanced component development
and prototypes, but included no funds for development of a
mobile non-specific viral agent detector. The committee
recommends an increase of $4.0 million in PE 63884BP for
development of a mobile real-time non-specific viral agent
detector that would improve current detection capabilities. The
committee notes that this effort could provide a significant
upgrade to the Joint Biological Agent Identification and
Diagnostic System (JBAIDS). This technology, which would add
the capability to detect infectious diseases, would be useful
both for forward-deployed forces and for potential domestic
consequence management missions.
Ballistic missile defense sensors
The budget request included $1.1 billion in PE 63884C for
radars and other sensors for the Ballistic Missile Defense
System (BMDS), including sensors for different missile defense
elements.
The committee notes that there is no funding requested in
fiscal year 2009 to begin production of the THAAD radar for
Fire Unit 3, designated AN/TPY #8, and is concerned that this
would result in a production gap and a schedule disconnect with
Fire Unit 3. The committee recommends an increase of $40.0
million in a new defense-wide missile defense procurement
funding line for long lead procurement of AN/TPY #8 for THAAD
Fire Unit 3, as described elsewhere in this report.
The committee is concerned that the consolidation of all
sensor work in one program element may have the unintended
consequence of reducing focus on and responsiveness to the
needs of the individual elements for the timely production of
sensors for the element weapon systems, such as THAAD radars to
accompany THAAD fire units. The committee expects the Missile
Defense Agency (MDA) to ensure that funding and production of
radars for THAAD will be synchronized with the production
schedules for their associated fire units.
The committee notes that the budget request included $26.5
million for the site activation and deployment of a forward-
based X-band radar, designated AN/TPY-2 #3, to an undecided
location, and $18.0 million for overseas site security for this
radar. Since the MDA has not decided where to deploy such a
radar, has not begun negotiations with any foreign nation for
such a deployment, and there is no agreement with any foreign
nation to deploy such a radar on its soil, the committee
believes this funding is premature. Therefore, the committee
recommends a reduction of $26.5 million in PE 63884C for costs
related to site activation and deployment of AN/TPY-2 #3 radar
to an undecided foreign location, and a reduction of $18.0
million for overseas site security of AN/TPY-2 #3.
The budget request included $20.3 million to operationalize
the External Sensors Lab boost-phase capabilities. Since there
are no boost-phase missile defense systems within a decade of
deployment, the committee believes this funding is premature.
The committee recommends a reduction of $20.3 million in PE
63884C.
The committee is aware of a proposal to enhance the BMDS
sensor system by deploying additional shipboard radars to
increase the coverage and availability of mobile radar
networks, while potentially producing significant cost savings.
This mobile sensor enhancement concept is worth evaluating to
determine if it would provide a significant improvement to the
capability of an integrated BMDS. The committee recommends an
increase of $5.0 million in PE 63884C for the MDA and the Navy
to evaluate this concept and determine whether it merits
further development.
Kinetic Energy Interceptor
The budget request included $386.8 million in PE 63886C for
the Kinetic Energy Interceptor (KEI) program. This is $172.8
million more than requested in the fiscal year 2008 budget
request for KEI, $46.7 million more than appropriated, and a
very large sum of funds for a program at such an early stage of
development. The committee notes that the KEI program was
originally conceived as a boost-phase risk reduction
alternative to the Airborne Laser (ABL) program because of the
high risks associated with the ABL technology development
effort.
However, the KEI program is no longer considered primarily
a boost-phase program; it is being managed as a technology
development program for a mid-course follow-on to the Ground-
based Interceptors (GBIs) being deployed as part of the Ground-
based Midcourse Defense (GMD) program. The GBIs are scheduled
to be deployed through 2013, and will have many years of useful
operational life following deployment, so there is no urgent
need to develop a follow-on now to a system that will not
complete its deployment for another 5 years.
The fiscal year 2008 budget request for KEI focused on
developing the technology for a high-performance silo-based
interceptor, rather than as a mobile system, with a flight test
in 2008. That flight test has now been delayed until 2009
because of technology problems with the development program.
The budget request for KEI represents another significant
change in direction and a significant increase in program
funding at a time when the program has lost focus and
direction, and when the long-range midcourse defense capability
is being addressed by the GMD system with its GBI interceptors.
The committee is concerned that this level of funding is more
than can be effectively executed during fiscal year 2009. The
committee believes there are higher priority needs in the
missile defense program, such as near-term defenses against
existing short- and medium-range missiles, and that the KEI
program can and should take more time to develop technologies
that may be useful in the decades to come when the GBIs reach
the end of their useful operational life, if there is not
another capability that is more suitable. Therefore, the
committee recommends a reduction of $45.0 million to PE 63886C
for the Kinetic Energy Interceptor development program.
Ballistic missile defense reductions
The budget request included $432.3 million in PE 63890C for
the Ballistic Missile Defense (BMD) Systems Core program; and
$288.3 million in PE 63891C for Missile Defense Agency (MDA)
Special Programs. The committee recommends a decrease of $30.0
million in PE 63890C for BMD Systems Core; and a decrease of
$100.0 million in PE 63891C for MDA Special Programs to
partially offset the additional funding needed for the Aegis
Ballistic Missile Defense (BMD) program and its Standard
Missile-3 (SM-3) interceptor, the Terminal High Altitude Area
Defense (THAAD) program, and other high priority near-term
missile defense programs described elsewhere in this report.
The committee notes that the proposed funding reductions are
for projects that are of lower priority than the near-term
capabilities provided by the Aegis BMD, SM-3, and THAAD
programs, which meet the needs of combatant commanders to
defend our forward-deployed forces, allies, and other friendly
nations against the existing threat of many hundreds of short-
and medium-range ballistic missiles. The Joint Capabilities Mix
study concluded that we need about twice as many THAAD and SM-3
interceptors as currently planned just to meet the minimum
operational requirements of our regional combatant commanders.
Aegis Ballistic Missile Defense (BMD)
The budget request included $1.2 billion in PE 63892C for
the Aegis Ballistic Missile Defense (BMD) program, including
$57.0 million for long lead procurement of Standard Missile-3
(SM-3) Block IA interceptor missiles. The committee notes that
the Aegis BMD system with its SM-3 interceptor is the only
midcourse defense system currently being deployed to provide
defense against short- and medium-range ballistic missile
threats to our forward-deployed forces, allies, and other
friendly nations. The Aegis BMD system has had an impressive
record of successful tests against short- and medium-range
targets, including a multi-mission test against a ballistic
missile and an air-breathing threat, and a multiple target
intercept against two ballistic missile targets.
The SM-3 missile is being developed to have increasing
capability with each successive version, from Block IA, to
Block IB, to the Block IIA version being developed jointly with
Japan. The Aegis BMD system and its SM-3 interceptor have the
potential to provide a significant measure of defensive
capability in various regions of the world, and to increase its
capability to conduct intercepts based on radar tracks from
offboard sensors, known as ``engage on remote,'' and to engage
missiles early in their midcourse flight, including in the
ascent phase.
The committee notes that the Joint Capabilities Mix (JCM)
study, conducted by the Joint Staff, concluded that U.S.
combatant commanders need about twice as many SM-3 and THAAD
interceptors as currently planned to meet just their minimum
operational requirements for defending against the many
hundreds of existing short- and medium-range ballistic
missiles. The committee is deeply disappointed that the Missile
Defense Agency (MDA) has not planned or budgeted to acquire
more than a fraction of the SM-3 interceptors needed to meet
the warfighters' minimum operational needs. The committee
believes that achieving at least the JCM levels of upper tier
interceptors in a timely manner should be the highest priority
for MDA, and expects the Agency to modify its plans and budgets
to meet our combatant commanders' current operational needs. In
section 223 of the John Warner National Defense Authorization
Act for Fiscal Year 2007 (Public Law 109-364), Congress
specified the Aegis BMD system and its SM-3 interceptor as a
high priority near-term program for the Department of Defense
to focus on. As the JCM study makes clear, the Department has
failed to do so.
Section 223(b) of the National Defense Authorization Act
for Fiscal Year 2008 (Public Law 110-181) requires that any
long lead or advance procurement for SM-3 Block IA missiles in
the fiscal year 2009 budget be requested in procurement funds,
rather than in research and development (R&D) funds. Section
223(c) of that act prohibits the use of fiscal year 2009 R&D
funds for procurement of long lead items for SM-3 Block IA
missiles. The Department chose not to comply with the law, and
requested R&D funds for procuring long lead items for the SM-3
missiles. This is not acceptable. The committee notes that the
Department is obliged to comply with the law, and expects the
Department to do so.
To be consistent with the law, and to correct the
Department's failure to comply with the law, the committee
recommends that all long lead funds for SM-3 missiles be
authorized and appropriated in a new defense-wide procurement
line described elsewhere in this report. Accordingly, the
committee recommends a transfer of $57.0 million from PE 63892C
to the new procurement line for long lead procurement of SM-3
Block IA missiles. The committee also recommends an increase of
$20.0 million in that new procurement line for the procurement
of long lead items for an additional 15 SM-3 interceptors, to
begin the process of increasing the inventory of SM-3 missiles
toward the JCM levels. The committee notes that MDA does not
plan any procurement of SM-3 Block IB missiles after fiscal
year 2010, which is inconsistent with the JCM study conclusions
concerning the need for about twice as many SM-3 and THAAD
missiles as are currently planned. The committee expects MDA to
modify its plans and budgets for the fiscal year 2010 budget
submission to address the inventory levels indicated by the JCM
study.
To address these numerous concerns, the committee
recommends an increase of $80.0 million in PE 63892C for the
following projects: $20.0 million for facilitizing an increase
in SM-3 production capacity to four missiles per month; $20.0
million to reduce schedule risk for the Block IB missile; and
$40.0 million for accelerated development of enhanced Aegis BMD
capability for ``engage on remote'' and ascent-phase
engagement.
Space Tracking and Surveillance System
The budget request included $242.4 million in PE 63893C for
the Space Tracking and Surveillance System (STSS). The
committee notes that the Missile Defense Agency (MDA) has again
changed the approach to the STSS program for fiscal year 2009,
but the program is out of phase with the schedule of related
events.
The committee notes that the launch of the two STSS
demonstration prototype satellites has been delayed until
November 2008. MDA plans to gather on-orbit data from these
demonstration satellites through 2010. These data will be
necessary to determine further changes in design of the
objective follow-on STSS satellites. The committee is concerned
that MDA plans to issue a Request for Proposals for the
objective follow-on satellites in August of 2008, several
months before the demonstration satellites are launched, and
well before actual orbital data are available to help determine
the final design parameters of the follow-on satellites.
Furthermore, the committee notes that MDA and the Air Force
are just beginning to obtain actual on-orbit data from the
initial Space-based Infrared System (SBIRS) satellites, and the
results appear both promising and important for understanding
what our current capabilities are and what our future
requirements will be for the STSS system. Before MDA finalizes
its design for the follow-on STSS satellites, the committee
believes it should work closely with the Air Force to fully
evaluate the data available from the SBIRS system, and evaluate
the data provided by the two STSS demonstration satellites.
Only then will MDA be in a position to determine the final
design for the STSS system. The STSS program schedule is ahead
of need, and ahead of the data it will need to determine the
final requirements and design for the objective STSS
satellites.
Consequently, the committee recommends a decrease of $50.0
million in PE 63893C, to allow more time to evaluate on-orbit
data from SBIRS and from the two STSS demonstration satellites
before proceeding with the final design of the objective STSS
satellites.
The committee also urges MDA to coordinate with the Air
Force to use the SBIRS ground stations for STSS residual
operational capability and for the STSS objective system.
Multiple Kill Vehicles
The budget request included $354.5 million in PE 63894C for
the Multiple Kill Vehicle (MKV) program. This is nearly a
three-fold increase from the fiscal year 2007 funding level,
and an increase of nearly $125.0 million from the fiscal year
2008 funding level, which represents large budget growth in the
MKV program.
The committee notes that the MKV program is at an early
development stage, with the preliminary design review not
expected until the third quarter of fiscal year 2010 and the
first substantive knowledge point not expected until mid-2011.
The committee is concerned that the program cannot effectively
execute the large amount of funding requested for a program at
such an early stage of development. Therefore, the committee
recommends a decrease of $50.0 million in PE 63894C.
The committee believes that, although the MKV program is
pursuing a laudable technical goal, there are higher priorities
for current missile defense funds, including providing our
regional combatant commanders with near-term capabilities to
defend our forward-deployed forces, allies, and other friendly
nations against the many hundreds of short- and medium-range
ballistic missiles that exist today.
The committee also notes that the Missile Defense Agency
(MDA) plans to fund two contractor teams with competing
technology approaches, but does not plan to have a competitive
selection of the best technology in the future. Although MDA is
pursuing development of MKV technologies for long-range
midcourse defense interceptors and for the Standard Missile-3
Block II interceptor, keeping two contractor teams for the
indefinite future is both expensive and possibly unnecessary.
The committee urges MDA to consider a competitive selection
process to determine which of the two contractor teams has the
best technology, and to select that team as the only team to
fund in the future.
The committee is also concerned that the consolidation of
all kinetic kill vehicle technology development in one office
may have the unintended effect of removing continued focus on
developing or improving existing and planned unitary kinetic
kill vehicles, such as the unitary kill vehicle planned for the
Standard Missile-3 Block IIA missile being developed jointly by
the United States and Japan.
As the Director of Operational Test and Evaluation has
reported, there are still no validated or accredited models and
simulations available to provide confidence in the performance
of the Exoatmospheric Kill Vehicle deployed on the Ground-Based
Interceptors of the Ground-based Midcourse Defense system. It
is essential to fully demonstrate and improve the capability of
this system, which will likely be deployed for at least 20
years.
The committee urges MDA to consider whether it needs to
take mitigating actions to ensure that the unitary kill vehicle
programs have sufficient focus and resources, particularly in
the event that the MKV efforts do not yield effective or
affordable results.
Space test-bed
The budget request included $29.7 million in PE 63895C for
Ballistic Missile Defense System space programs, of which $10.0
million is for a ``space test-bed.'' The committee recommends a
decrease of $10.0 million in PE 63895C, the entire amount
requested for the space test-bed.
As the committee noted last year, the proposed space test-
bed is intended to be the initial step toward deploying space-
based interceptors. There is no need or justification to deploy
space-based interceptors, and therefore no justification to
create the proposed space test-bed. The committee notes that
Congress denied all funding requested for the proposed space
test-bed in fiscal year 2008.
There are, however, numerous real missile threats in
existence today for which near-term missile defense
capabilities are needed. The Joint Capabilities Mix study has
concluded that there is a need for about twice as many Standard
Missile-3 and Terminal High Altitude Area Defense interceptors
just to meet the minimum operational requirements of the
regional combatant commanders against the hundreds and hundreds
of short- and medium-range ballistic missiles that currently
can target our forward-deployed forces, allies, and other
friendly nations. As Congress made clear in section 223 of the
John Warner National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year
2007 (Public Law 109-364), the committee believes it is a high
priority to fund these near-term effective systems that meet
current combatant commander needs against existing threats.
Missile Defense Agency funding reduction
The budget request included $9.3 billion for the Missile
Defense Agency (MDA) in research, development, test, and
evaluation funds. The committee recommends an undistributed
reduction of $268.7 million in MDA funding.
Corrosion control technologies
The budget request included $5.1 million in PE 64016D8Z for
the Department of Defense Corrosion Program. The committee
notes that corrosion damage to Department of Defense (DOD)
assets has been estimated to lead to a $20.0 billion annual
cost to the Department. The committee supports the research
efforts of the DOD Corrosion Program, which seeks to develop
and demonstrate new technologies to mitigate the effects of
corrosion. To support these efforts the committee recommends an
additional $3.0 million for research on the use of polymer
materials and coatings to enhance corrosion prevention and
mitigation. The committee also recommends an increase of $3.5
million to develop comprehensive technical, maintenance, and
training systems to reduce asset life cycle costs related to
corrosion damage.
Conflict modeling technologies
The budget request included $6.0 million in PE 64670D8Z for
human, social, and cultural behavioral research and
engineering. The committee supports enhancing Department of
Defense capabilities to model and anticipate future conflicts
and better understand political-social systems and their
interactions. The committee recommends an increase of $2.5
million in PE 64670D8Z to continue conflict modeling, planning,
and outcomes experimentation activities.
Prompt global strike
The budget request included $117.6 million in PE 64165D8Z
for prompt global strike. The committee recommends an increase
of $30.0 million in PE 64165D8Z and $45.0 million for the
advanced hypersonic boost glide vehicle.
The budget request for prompt global strike included $40.0
million for the alternative re-entry system/warhead engineering
and delivery vehicle options/development, which would support
work on various aspects of a biconic re-entry vehicle for use
as a possible prompt global strike option. The committee
believes that work on the biconic vehicle is premature and
therefore recommends that no funds be made available for the
manufacture of the biconic vehicle. Work on technologies to
support prompt global strike systems generally, such as command
destruct, fuze development, and similar generally applicable
technologies, however, should continue. The committee notes
that the Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency (DARPA)
hypersonic glide vehicle HTV-2 is scheduled for testing in
fiscal year 2009, and that if these tests are successful, there
would be no need for the biconic vehicle.
The committee recommends that of the funds that were
included in the budget request for the biconic vehicle,
approximately $15.0 million shall be available for the advanced
hypersonic boost glide vehicle in addition to the $30.0 million
for a total of $45.0 million. The committee notes that funding
for the advanced hypersonic boost glide vehicle was previously
included in PE63305A. The committee believes that all prompt
global strike activities, with the exception of the DARPA
funded work on HTV-2, which will terminate at the end of fiscal
year 2009, should be consolidated in one budget account.
Net-enabled command and control
The budget request included $147.3 million in PE 33158K for
the Joint Command and Control Program for Net-enabled command
and control, as well as $8.0 million in Procurement, Defense-
wide (PDW) Line 21 and $35.7 million in Operation and
Maintenance, Defense-wide (OMDW) Line 120 for the same program.
This is out of a total investment of $227.4 million for the
program and nearly $675.0 million between fiscal years 2007 and
2010 to develop and begin to field the program. The committee
recommends decreases of $90.0 million in PE 33158K, $25.0
million from OMDW, and $7.9 million from PDW.
The committee notes that both the Director of Defense
Research and Engineering's (DDRE) technology readiness
assessment and the Director of Operational Test and
Evaluation's ongoing oversight of the Network enabled command
and control (NECC) program have raised issues regarding
technical risk, aggressive and overly optimistic scheduling,
and unclear testing and deployment strategies. The DDRE
assessment noted a lack of definition of the program as to
requirements or agreement on program definition with
stakeholders. The committee understands that these and other
NECC program issues could lead to a delay in the Milestone B
decision approval for the program.
In addition, the committee notes that the services are
currently developing information systems under the Global
Command and Control System Family of Systems (GCCS-FOS), which
are planned for eventual integration into a single NECC
architecture. The committee is not aware of any service that
has a well articulated and coordinated transition strategy and
deployment and integration schedule for this complex system of
systems. Finally, the committee notes that GCCS-FOS
technologies have not yet been fully fielded, nor will users
and testers have significant operational experience with the
newest versions of the GCCS-FOS for a number of years. Since
NECC is designed to be the follow-on program for the GCCS-FOS,
the committee recommends a reduction in its funding growth
until technical risk, testing, and program schedule issues are
addressed in a coordinated and joint fashion amongst all
stakeholders, and a set of operational lessons learned and
capability gaps from GCCS-FOS deployments is developed and
analyzed.
Central Test and Evaluation Investment Program
The budget request included $133.9 million in PE 64940D8Z
for the Central Test and Evaluation (T&E) Investment Program
managed by the Test Resource Management Center, originally
established by the committee in section 231 of the Bob Stump
National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2003 (Public
Law 107-314). The 2007 Strategic Plan for DOD T&E Resources
noted that ``outdated threat missile fly-out models reduced the
effectiveness of both active and passive countermeasures
testing.'' To help address this shortfall, the committee
recommends an additional $5.0 million for development of
surface-to-air missile hardware simulators. The strategic plan
also commented that ``the expanded computing capability being
deployed in the upcoming C4ISR [command, control,
communications, computers, intelligence, surveillance, and
reconnaissance] systems will need to be replicated at the
(test) ranges by upgrading existing or acquisition of new
hardware and software systems.'' Consistent with addressing
that need, the committee recommends an increase of $3.5 million
for development of range network enterprise systems to support
distributed testing.
Anti-tamper technologies
The budget request included $2.2 million in PE 65790D8Z for
Small Business Innovation Research program activities. The
committee notes that the 2007 Defense Science Board study,
``Mission Impact of Foreign Influence on DOD [Department of
Defense] Software,'' found that ``software deployed across the
DOD continues to contain numerous vulnerabilities and weak
information security design characteristics.'' To address these
weaknesses the committee recommends an increase of $3.0 million
for the development of anti-tamper software systems.
Force transformation directorate
The budget request included $20.7 million in PE 65799D8Z
for the force transformation directorate. The committee
recommends a reduction of $15.0 million from this account, and
directs that the remaining requested funds be used to
transition programs to other activities within the Department
of Defense. The committee notes that the disestablishment of
the Office of Force Transformation (OFT) has diminished the
role that this program plays in driving transformative defense
technologies and operational concepts. The committee
acknowledges that OFT has made significant contributions to the
development of active protection systems and operationally
responsive space capabilities, but feels that the Department of
Defense needs to reconsider the totality of programs that all
seemed to be aimed at a common, laudable purpose of driving
force transformation.
The committee believes that the efforts of the Defense
Advanced Research Projects Agency, United States Joint Forces
Command, and the Joint Capability Technology Demonstration
program, among others, can be coordinated to serve the role
that was intended for the research and development programs of
OFT at its inception. The committee notes that all these
efforts are under the oversight or direct control of the
Director of Defense Research and Engineering (DDRE), and so
directs the DDRE to strongly consider merging force
transformation program activities with these other efforts.
Software assurance education and research
The budget request included $394.1 million in PE 33140G for
the Information Systems Security Program, but no funds for the
development and integration of secure software design practices
in curricula of higher education institutions that teach
computer science and software engineering.
The committee recommends an increase of $1.0 million for
this purpose at one of the institutions designated as a
National Center of Academic Excellence in Information Assurance
Education by the National Security Agency.
Status of Operational Readiness and Training Systems
The budget request included $36.4 million in PE 33150K for
the Global Command and Control System (GCCS). The committee
notes that this program includes funding to continue the
development, testing, and fielding of the legacy Status of
Operational Readiness and Training Systems (SORTS) that is
currently being replaced by the Department of Defense's
objective system, the Defense Readiness Reporting System. The
committee recommends a decrease of $2.0 million in PE 33150K
for SORTS.
Industrial Base Innovation Fund
The budget request included $20.5 million in PE 78011S for
industrial preparedness programs. The committee notes that the
2006 Defense Science Board Task Force on the Manufacturing
Technology Program called for increased investment in
manufacturing research and technology over a 5-year period to a
level of ``one percent of the RDT&E budget,'' to align the
Department of Defense with the level of manufacturing
technology investments in the early 1980s. The committee notes
that for the fiscal year 2009 budget request this would be
$796.0 million. The actual Manufacturing Technology (Mantech)
budget request is only $198.0 million.
The committee further notes that the Director of Defense
Research and Engineering called for an increase in funding for
``manufacturing science technology'' in the range of $50.0 to
$70.0 million per year. The committee notes that the fiscal
year 2009 Mantech budget request is only an increase of $4.6
million over the fiscal year 2008 budget request and a decrease
of $80.4 million relative to fiscal year 2008 appropriated
levels.
The committee notes that investing in innovation in the
defense industrial base can only serve to help address many of
the issues facing the Department of Defense. For example, the
committee believes that the development of innovative
manufacturing capabilities can lead to lower cost, more
efficient production of defense systems, potentially lead to
spin-off commercial technologies that can support national
manufacturing and industrial base needs, and address critical
manufacturing assured supply chain issues that limit the
Department's capability to acquire critical defense equipment
and technologies, such as body armor, production of advanced
aerospace materials, and electronic components.
Therefore, the committee recommends an increase of $30.0
million in PE 78011S to continue the Industrial Base Innovation
Fund. The committee directs that the funds be executed jointly
with the Deputy Under Secretary of Defense for Industrial
Policy, to ensure that critical shortfalls in the defense
industrial base are addressed. The committee directs that the
highest priority on investments be made in areas that support
accelerating the surge production of items likely to be
required in near-term military operations and in areas to
preserve or expand diminishing critical defense industrial
base.
Items of Special Interest
Aegis Ballistic Missile Defense funding
The committee notes that the Aegis Ballistic Missile
Defense (BMD) system was used in February for a one-time
mission to intercept and destroy a decaying U.S. satellite
before it re-entered the earth's atmosphere. This mission,
which cost more than $90.0 million, used considerable Aegis BMD
assets and funding. The committee is concerned that the Aegis
BMD program will not be fully reimbursed for its expenses in
preparing for, testing for, and conducting the mission, as well
as for restoring the system's components to their normal
missile defense configuration, and replacing the Standard
Missile-3 interceptor used for the mission. If the Aegis BMD
program is not reimbursed for these expenses, it would not be
able to perform some $90.0 million worth of planned and
budgeted activities that have been approved by Congress. This
would not be acceptable.
The committee directs the Missile Defense Agency (MDA) and
the Department of Defense to ensure that the Aegis BMD program
is fully reimbursed for all expenses related to the one-time
satellite intercept mission, so that all previously planned,
funded, and approved Aegis BMD work will proceed without delay.
The committee directs MDA to report to the congressional
defense committees by no later than October 1, 2008 on the
status of the full reimbursement of the Aegis BMD program.
Agency relocation
The budget request included $28.0 million in PE 65897E for
Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency (DARPA) relocation
costs, and another $45.0 million is programmed for this purpose
in fiscal year 2010. The committee believes that the request
and budget plan have not yet been adequately justified and
directs the Secretary of Defense to develop a report on the
plan for DARPA's relocation, as described below. The committee
notes that current plans for the relocation call for the
Department of Defense (DOD) to lease a new facility for DARPA
and to provide funding for the building's outfitting to meet
mandated force protection requirements.
The plans also call for the Department to provide funding
for other DARPA requirements, including facilities to handle
classified information, specialized heating, ventilation, and
air conditioning (HVAC) equipment, and specialized information
technology requirements. The committee is unclear as to whether
the Department will be responsible for restoring the building's
specialized modifications at the end of DARPA's new lease to
the satisfaction of the building owner and what that cost will
be to the government.
The committee is unclear as to the rationale and cost
implications for selecting a commercial lease requiring
extensive upgrades over government facilities, which government
facilities were evaluated as alternatives to leasing, what
cost-benefit analyses were performed, and what criteria were
used to finally select an option. The committee understands
that the DARPA leasing plan has been approved through the
General Services Administration and by the relevant
congressional committees of jurisdiction. Nonetheless, the
committee notes that upon expiration of its current lease in
2010, DARPA could potentially be relocated onto other existing
government property, which may more cost-effectively meet force
protection, classified facility, and information technology
requirements and therefore save valuable resources.
The committee notes that research agencies like DARPA need
to be able to attract the finest technical talent to perform
their critical mission for DOD. The committee notes that DARPA
has had some difficulty attracting appropriate talent, despite
special personnel flexibilities available to the organization,
and has plans to use commercial executive search firms to
enhance recruiting efforts. The committee understands that an
agency's location plays a role in its ability to attract
talent, and further notes that some organizations with similar
hiring challenges, like the Office of Naval Research and Air
Force Office of Scientific Research are located in commercially
developed areas, while others, such as the Naval Research
Laboratory, the Defense Threat Reduction Agency, the National
Security Agency, and the Army's Night Vision Laboratory are
not.
The committee directs the Secretary of Defense to provide a
report to the congressional defense committees detailing the
justification for the agency relocation plans and requested
funding, no later than September 1, 2008. The report shall
include a cost-benefit analysis comparing the leasing of
commercial property and upgrading those facilities to meet
DARPA requirements to alternative options; describe which
government properties, buildings, and facilities were evaluated
as alternatives to commercial leasing; detail the costs that
will be incurred to the government to restore the building to
the lessor's requirements at the end of the lease; describe the
criteria that were finally used to select an option; and
include certifications that to perform its mission efficiently,
DARPA must maintain a headquarters in the Washington, DC
region, that no commercial or government facilities currently
exist within that region to meet DARPA's unique requirements,
and that the selected plan for relocation represents the best
value for the Department.
Executive helicopter program (VH-71A)
The budget request included $1,047.8 million in PE 64273N
for continued development of the executive helicopter, VH-71A.
The VH-71A program is intended to provide the replacement
helicopter for transportation of the President and Vice
President of the United States, heads of state, and other
dignitaries. The administration established challenging
performance requirements and an aggressive fielding schedule
for the program, reflecting an elevated level of urgency to
field this new capability for post-9/11 operations. In an
effort to manage programmatic risk and meet the stressing
demands for this new capability, the program adopted an
incremental fielding strategy for the 23 aircraft to be placed
in service. The first portion of the program, called Increment
One, would deliver five aircraft, with four of these aircraft
used to provide an initial limited capability to fulfill
immediate presidential transport requirements. The second
portion of the program, called Increment Two, would deliver 19
aircraft to complete all of the presidential support
requirements.
The committee is aware that the VH-71A program has
encountered significant challenges associated with modifying
the selected commercial aircraft to meet the cost and schedule
requirements for Increment One. As a result, the Navy plans for
only limited employment for Increment One aircraft due to
expectations that service life of these helicopters will be
limited.
The Navy has found that Increment Two, which was originally
planned for concurrent development with Increment One, is
beyond the reach of the cost, technical, and schedule baseline
established for the program. Faced with this realization, the
Department of Defense has restructured the program with a focus
on validating requirements, establishing realistic cost and
schedule estimates, eliminating concurrency, and developing a
new baseline for future budget requirements.
Recognizing that the fiscal year 2008 budget would have
been inadequate to support concurrent efforts on both Increment
One and Increment Two, the Department issued a ``stop work''
order on Increment Two. Although the program continues to
refine an independent cost assessment in support of future
budget decisions, initial estimates point toward a cost overrun
of at least 70 percent. This level is well in excess of the
percentages that would trigger a breach of the Nunn-McCurdy
limits for major acquisition programs.
While it is evident that the VH-71A program will require a
Nunn-McCurdy certification in order to proceed with Increment
Two, the Department has apparently chosen to wait until
submission of the annual Selected Acquisition Report to
initiate the certification process. This delay appears to be
based on a technical interpretation that, since the government
has stopped all work on Increment Two and has neither finalized
cost assessments nor revised the program's baseline to reflect
the cost growth, it is premature to declare that thresholds
have been breached. Under this scenario, the Navy would
potentially receive fiscal year 2009 funding and be in a
position to sign a contract modification for Increment Two
prior to declaring a Nunn-McCurdy breach. Subsequent to signing
such a contract, they would then declare a Nunn-McCurdy breach
and, thereby, trigger the certification process that this
provision of law requires.
The committee realizes that the administration has spent
significant time conducting senior level analysis and review of
this critical program's requirements, cost, and schedule, in
conjunction with the ongoing restructure and deliberations on
the fiscal year 2010 budget. However, the committee is
concerned that program cost and schedule may be further
impacted by potential delays associated with meeting the
requirements for Nunn-McCurdy certification, and encourages the
Department to initiate proceedings in accordance with section
2433 of title 10, United States Code. The committee notes that
the Secretary of the Air Force did not wait until either the
Air Force had signed a contract or had received additional
funds before declaring a Nunn-McCurdy breach on the C-5
reliability enhancement and re-engining program.
Because of all these concerns, the committee directs the
Secretary of the Navy to submit a VH-71A report to the
congressional defense committees outlining VH-71A program:
(1) performance requirements;
(2) revised cost estimates;
(3) causes for cost growth;
(4) detailed breakout of cost growth related to under-
estimated requirements; and
(5) actions being implemented to reduce and control
development and production costs.
Additionally, the committee directs the Secretary to
identify alternatives for extending the service life of
Increment One aircraft and increasing their utility in the
effort to provide greater return on this investment.
The committee directs that, of the amounts authorized for
fiscal year 2009 for VH-71A Executive Helicopter Development
(PE 64273N), the Secretary may obligate no funding for
Increment Two efforts until: (1) the Defense Department
completes VH-71A unit cost reporting requirements as prescribed
by section 2433 of title 10, United States Code; and (2) the
Secretary of the Navy submits the VH-71A report described above
to the congressional defense committees.
Expeditionary Fighting Vehicle
Military threats to amphibious operations have forced the
Navy and Marine Corps to develop a concept of operations,
referred to as Operational Maneuver from the Sea, for launching
an amphibious assault from over the horizon. The Navy and
Marine Corps are fielding the full capability required to
launch amphibious assaults from 25 miles at sea--with one
critical exception: the Expeditionary Fighting Vehicle (EFV).
Designed to rapidly transport marines ashore and maneuver to
inland objectives, the EFV is the missing component of the
Marine Corps' amphibious assault triad, which also includes the
Landing Craft Air Cushion and the MV-22 Osprey.
Under current plans, the EFV will not achieve Initial
Operational Capability (IOC) until 2015 and Full Operational
Capability (FOC) until 2025--about 35 years after the EFV
program entered development. Without the EFV, amphibious
assault operations would require the Navy to bring amphibious
ships and escorts close to shore to disembark the aged Advanced
Amphibious Vehicles, exposing the ships and the marines to
anti-access threats. The committee is very concerned that the
EFV program plan places the Marine Corps' primary mission
capability--amphibious operations--at risk for an unacceptably
long duration.
The committee understands that the EFV program has
experienced serious developmental delays and cost growth, which
have added years to the schedule. The program is emerging from
a critical Nunn-McCurdy cost breach, and the restructured
program has added 4 years of further development prior to a
full-rate production decision. The program's cost challenges,
however, are compounded by the protracted production schedule
planned for the vehicle. The Marine Corps projects that its
budget will permit a production rate limited to 55 vehicles per
year once full-rate production begins in 2016. This low rate of
production will delay full fielding while discarding potential
cost benefits afforded by more economic rates of procurement.
The committee believes that greater priority must be given
to achieving EFV Full Operational Capability within the
Department of Defense's equation for balancing requirements
with developmental risk and budget constraints. Accordingly,
the committee directs the Secretary of the Navy to evaluate
cost and risk for alternatives that would improve upon current
EFV Initial Operational Capability projections, and accelerate
Full Operational Capability to meet the 2020 threat baseline.
The Secretary shall report the results of this evaluation to
the congressional defense committees with submission of the
fiscal year 2010 budget request. The report shall include an
assessment of total program cost, annual budget requirements,
and technical risk for the accelerated program, and compare
these results with the program of record. Additionally, the
report shall provide an assessment of the operational impact
and risk to amphibious assault capabilities associated with
delaying FOC to 2025.
Global Positioning System
The committee is concerned that the space, ground control,
and user equipment segments of the Global Positioning Satellite
system (GPS) program are not well synchronized. The committee
notes that the ground control needed to utilize the M-code on
the GPS IIR satellites will not be fully available until after
the last of the GPS IIR satellites is launched and the user
equipment will not be fully fielded until after the first of
the M-code GPS IIR satellites reaches the end of its useful
life. The first M-code GPS IIR satellite was launched in
September 2005. The M-code is a special code to allow military
users to continue using GPS signals in an area of operation
while jamming other signals.
Looking ahead to the GPS III satellites, the committee
notes that the possibility for a similar disconnect among
space, ground control, and user equipment is significant. The
Air Force reduced anticipated funding in the early years and
the GPS schedule is compressed with very little margin.
Moreover, the contract award is late, with the space segment
originally scheduled for award in 2007. The committee is
concerned that adequate management attention be paid to the GPS
program to minimize additional risks to the program.
Improved commercial imagery integration
The committee notes that the government is investing
substantial funds in the commercial imagery industry to meet
important operational requirements of the combatant commands
and the intelligence community. However, the tasking,
processing, exploitation, and dissemination (TPED) systems for
commercial imagery and imagery collected by government-owned
assets are not integrated, which causes commercial imagery
resources to be under-utilized and other inefficiencies. The
government needs to be able to task commercial imagery
collection against specific areas without revealing that fact
to the world, to be able to share commercial imagery within the
national security community freely, and to routinely and
automatically task commercial satellites when they are the
logical choice to satisfy a requirement. These needs will
become critical if the administration and Congress decide to
shift a larger proportion of imagery collection requirements to
the commercial sector.
Accordingly, the committee directs that, as feasible within
available funding, the National Geospatial Intelligence Agency
and the National Reconnaissance Office complete the tasking
prototype effort, including an integrated constellation
optimization tool; integrate commercial imagery data streams
into the existing national dissemination network; and begin
systems engineering and development to enable SECRET-level
operations within the commercial-data provider facilities and
networks.
TITLE III--OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE
Subtitle A--Authorization of Appropriations
Explanation of tables
The following tables provide the program-level detailed
guidance for the funding authorized in title III of this Act.
The tables also display the funding requested by the
administration in the fiscal year 2009 budget request for
operation and maintenance programs, and indicate those programs
for which the committee either increased or decreased the
requested amounts.
These tables are incorporated by reference into this Act as
provided in section 1002 of this Act. The Department of Defense
may not exceed the authorized amounts (as set forth in the
tables or, if unchanged from the administration request, as set
forth in budget justification documents of the Department of
Defense) without a reprogramming action in accordance with
established procedures. Unless noted in this report, funding
changes to the budget request are made without prejudice.
Subtitle B--Environmental Provisions
Expansion of cooperative agreement authority for management of natural
resources to include off-installation mitigation (sec. 311)
The committee recommends a provision that would authorize
the secretaries of the military departments to enter
cooperative agreements for the management of natural resources
outside of Department of Defense installations, if the
cooperative agreements benefit the Department by relieving or
eliminating current or anticipated restrictions on military
activities.
Reimbursement of Environmental Protection Agency for certain costs in
connection with Moses Lake Wellfield Superfund Site, Moses
Lake, Washington (sec. 312)
The committee recommends a provision that would authorize
the Secretary of Defense to reimburse the Environmental
Protection Agency for certain costs incurred in connection with
Moses Lake Wellfield Superfund Site, Moses Lake, Washington.
Comprehensive program for the eradication of the brown tree snake
population from military facilities in Guam (sec. 313)
The committee recommends a provision that would direct the
Department of Defense to establish a comprehensive program to
control and, to the extent practicable, eradicate the brown
tree snake (Boiga irregularis) population from military
facilities in Guam and prevent their spread to other areas.
The committee is concerned about the ecological and
economic risks posed by the inadvertent introduction of the
brown tree snake from Guam to other areas in the Pacific region
and the United States. Force stationing changes in the Pacific
planned by the Department over the next several years will
significantly increase the number of department facilities and
activities on Guam, resulting in an equally significant
increase in military traffic to and from the island. The
Department has the responsibility to control and, to the
maximum extent practicable, ensure that its facilities and
activities do not contribute to the spread of the brown tree
snake to other areas.
Subtitle C--Workplace and Depot issues
Authority to consider depot-level maintenance and repair using
contractor furnished equipment or leased facilities as core
logistics (sec. 321)
The committee recommends a provision that would authorize
the military departments to count workload performed by
Government employees using contractor furnished equipment, or
in facilities leased to the Government, as sustaining a core
logistics capability under section 2464 of title 10, United
States Code, if that work is being performed pursuant to a
public-private partnership as defined by section 2474 of title
10, United States Code.
Section 2474 encourages private sector investment at
Centers of Industrial and Technical Excellence. This private
sector investment may include facilities or equipment. This
proposed change would authorize partnered workloads performed
by Government employees using contractor-furnished equipment or
leased facilities to be counted as core.
Minimum capital investment for certain depots (sec. 322)
The committee recommends a provision that would amend
section 332 of the John Warner National Defense Authorization
Act for Fiscal Year 2007 (Public Law 109-364) to require the
Department of Defense to report the separate levels of capital
investment for Navy and Marine Corps depots. The committee also
recommends the addition of the following Army arsenals to the
list of covered depots:
Watervliet Arsenal, New York
Rock Island Arsenal, Illinois
Pine Bluff Arsenal, Arkansas
Subtitle D--Reports
Additional information under annual submissions of information
regarding information technology capital assets (sec. 331)
The committee recommends a provision that would synchronize
the information the Department of Defense provides to both
Congress and the Office of Management and Budget (OMB)
regarding major Department of Defense information technology
(IT) investments. The committee believes that the change
recommended in this provision will make the IT budget
justification documents more usable to Congress and the public,
and increase the transparency of the Department's IT programs.
Subtitle E--Other Matters
Mitigation of power outage risks for Department of Defense facilities
and activities (sec. 341)
The February 2008 report of the Defense Science Board Task
Force on DOD Energy Strategy found that, ``critical national
security and homeland defense missions are at an unacceptably
high risk of extended outage from failure of the [commercial
electricity] grid and other crucial national infrastructure.''
The task force recommended that the Department of Defense take
several actions to assess and reduce risk to critical missions
at fixed installations and activities from the loss of
commercial power.
The Department is in the process of evaluating the task
force report and is developing a comprehensive energy strategy.
However, the committee is concerned that, despite numerous
vulnerability studies, the extent of technical and operational
risks to specific critical missions are not adequately
assessed, or plans for their mitigation programmed. This
incomplete assessment coupled with the trend over the last
several years to place more defense installations onto the
commercial power grid suggests that Department infrastructure
energy plans may not be synchronized with an up-to-date
technical and operational risk evaluation.
Accordingly, the committee recommends a provision that
would direct the Secretary of Defense to conduct a
comprehensive technical and operational risk assessment for
mission critical Department installations, facilities, and
activities; to develop integrated prioritized plans to
eliminate or mitigate risks; and to establish goals to mitigate
or eliminate the greatest and most urgent risks. The committee
further recommends that the Secretary provide the defense
committees an annual report on the Department's integrated
prioritized plans and progress on efforts to mitigate or
eliminate risks to mission critical installations, facilities,
and activities.
Increased authority to accept financial and other incentives related to
energy savings and new authority related to energy systems
(sec. 342)
The committee recommends a provision that would increase
the authority of the Secretary of Defense to accept financial
and other incentives related to energy savings and energy
systems. The provision would authorize the acceptance of such
incentives in connection with the construction of an energy
system using solar energy or other renewable forms of energy.
Recovery of improperly disposed of Department of Defense property (sec.
343)
The committee recommends a provision that would prohibit
the sale or other disposition of military or Department of
Defense (DOD) property except in accordance with statutes and
regulations governing such property. If property is disposed of
in violation of this prohibition, the person holding the
property would have no right or title to, or interest in, the
property, and the property would be subject to seizure by
appropriate law enforcement officials. Under the provision, the
appropriate federal district court would have jurisdiction to
determine whether property was improperly disposed of and is
subject to seizure.
The DOD has informed the committee that the absence of a
comprehensive statute has complicated law enforcement efforts
to recover military and DOD property that has been
misappropriated or that was the subject of unauthorized
disposition by members of the armed forces, DOD civilians,
contractors, and others. For example, the DOD reports that
ceramic plate inserts for body armor, night vision goggles, and
munitions list items that were reported as lost or misplaced by
Navy personnel have later been found for sale on the Internet.
Recently published reports indicate that military equipment
offered for sale on the Internet also includes infrared patches
used to identify U.S. troops on the battlefield, as well as
spare parts for Chinook helicopters and F-14 fighters. In one
case, there was even an attempt to sell a Navy airplane over
the Internet.
The provision recommended by the committee would address
this problem by establishing a comprehensive statutory approach
to the improper disposal of military and DOD property and
facilitating the recovery of such property regardless of to
whom it was furnished and who was responsible for its improper
disposal.
Budget Items
Army
Computing services
The committee recommends a total reduction of $200.0
million from service and defense-wide operation and maintenance
accounts that support the procurement and delivery of computing
services. The reductions include a $50.0 million decrease each
from Army, Navy, Air Force, and defense-wide accounts. The
committee does not intend for these reductions to be assessed
against Defense Information Systems Agency (DISA) computing
services activities. The committee directs the services to
aggressively explore increased opportunities to utilize DISA
computing services and eliminate redundant, wasteful service-
specific computing services activities.
The committee notes that consolidation of computing
services activities, such as reductions in numbers of computing
centers, data storage systems, and electronic file servers, has
saved the Department of Defense an estimated $200.0 million or
more annually since 1990, according to DISA. Further, a June
2007 independent assessment of DISA's computing services noted
that they ``. . . provided world-class computing services that
enable the DOD community to better execute their missions,''
and compared DISA's services favorably to general government,
federal, and workload peers. The assessment also recommended
continuing assessment of organizational staffing, structure,
and realignment, as well as continued maturation of data center
processes. Finally, the committee notes that uncoordinated,
Department-wide deployment of servers, mainframes, data
warehouses, web sites, and other computing services has
resulted in inefficiencies, underutilization of computing
infrastructure, and interoperability difficulties.
The committee recommends that the Assistant Secretary of
Defense for Networks and Information Integration initiate
independent, comparative benchmarking studies of computing
services across the Department of Defense to inform and
accelerate the consolidation of the provision of computing
services to increase efficiency, improve services, and reduce
costs.
Unmanned aircraft systems concept development
The budget request included $1.0 billion in Operation and
Maintenance, Army (OMA) for aviation assets, but provided no
funds for unmanned aircraft systems (UAS) concept development.
The committee supports the efforts of the Army's Aviation
Warfighting Center at Fort Rucker, Alabama to develop current
and future UAS concepts that will meet joint and Army
operational objectives. The committee expects that the Army's
UAS concept development will be consistent with the Department
of Defense's roles and missions review, as required by section
941 of the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year
2008 (Public Law 110-181). This increase is not intended to
prejudice or influence that report. The committee recommends an
increase of $3.0 million in OMA for UAS concept development.
Shipping containers
The budget request included $204.5 million in Operation and
Maintenance, Army (OMA) for strategic mobility, but provided no
funds for shipping containers. The committee recommends an
increase of $2.0 million in OMA for the purchase of shipping
containers.
Life cycle logistics contracting
The budget request included $7.3 billion in Operation and
Maintenance, Army (OMA) for base operations support. These
funds include the cost of providing logistics support to Army
forces operating around the world. The committee is aware of
the Army's challenges in contracting for base operation
services, including shelter, utilities, food, water, and
sanitization, to meet the logistics needs of forward deployed
forces. The committee recommends an increase of $21.6 million
in OMA for the Army Contracting Agency to improve its life
cycle acquisition planning, solicitation, and negotiation
activities.
Facilities sustainment, restoration, and modernization
The budget request included $2.1 billion for facilities
sustainment, restoration, and modernization for the Army. The
committee recommends an increase of $7.8 million for
restoration or modernization of barracks.
Second destination transportation
The budget request included $552.6 million in Operation and
Maintenance, Army (OMA) for service-wide and second destination
transportation. These funds support the cost of line haul,
over-ocean, and inland transportation for worldwide movement of
Army supplies and equipment to and from depots, between
commands, and to overseas commands by civilian and military air
and surface modes. Additional funds allow the Army to
redistribute more equipment and supplies to correct unit
shortages and increase readiness. The committee recommends an
increase of $50.0 million in OMA for second destination
transportation.
Ammunition inspections and warehousing
The budget request included $450.3 million in Operation and
Maintenance, Army (OMA) for ammunition management. These funds
support the management of operations within the life cycle of
conventional ammunition, including procurement administration,
storage, distribution, maintenance, and demilitarization.
Additional funds allow the Army to reduce backlogs in
ammunition inspections and re-warehousing efforts. The
committee recommends an increase of $25.0 million in OMA for
ammunition management.
Navy
Unobligated Operation and Maintenance balances
The committee notes that the challenges associated with
operations in Iraq and Afghanistan create a difficult fiscal
management situation, especially for the Army and Marine Corps.
However, the Department of Defense continues to under-execute
its Operation and Maintenance (O&M) appropriations for the
active and reserve components. According to the Government
Accountability Office (GAO), the Department of Defense had
$247.3 million in average yearly unobligated balances for
fiscal years 2003 through 2007. The military departments had
$1.1 billion in average yearly unobligated balances for fiscal
years 2003 through 2007.
The committee recalls that 3 years ago the Department began
to reduce the O&M portion of its annual funding request and
future-years defense program before submission to Congress
based, in part, on the GAO analysis of unobligated balances.
The Department also underfunds important maintenance and
activities in its annual request in anticipation of
supplemental appropriations. Whether made available in annual
or supplemental appropriations, the Department and services
must ensure that taxpayer dollars are appropriately managed to
provide the best possible readiness for the force and avoid the
expiration of obligating authority. Therefore, the committee
recommends a decrease of $212.4 million to the Department's O&M
accounts, as follows: Operation and Maintenance, Navy, $70.0
million; Operation and Maintenance, Air Force, $72.0 million;
and Operation and Maintenance, Defense-wide, $70.4 million.
Overstatements of civilian personnel pay requirements
Analysis performed by the Government Accountability Office
based on the services' civilian personnel end strength data as
of February 2008, projects that the Department of Defense
civilian personnel costs are overstated for fiscal year 2009 by
$565.3 million. Therefore, the committee recommends a decrease
of $65.8 million in Operation and Maintenance, Navy, and a
decrease of $131.7 million in Operation and Maintenance, Air
Force for overstatement of civilian personnel pay.
Naval aircraft depot maintenance
The budget request included $34.9 billion for Operation and
Maintenance, Navy but only $1.1 billion for aircraft depot
maintenance. The Navy identified a shortage of resources for
aircraft depot maintenance for fiscal year 2009. The committee
recommends an increase of $63.0 million in Operation and
Maintenance, Navy for aircraft depot maintenance.
Damage control management
The budget request included $3.5 billion in Operation and
Maintenance, Navy (OMN) for mission and other ship operations,
but provided no funds for the development and installation of
an improved damage control inventory management and stowage
system for amphibious ships. The committee recommends an
increase of $3.0 million in OMN for development of a damage
control management system for amphibious ships.
MK 45 gun depot overhaul
The budget request included $478.1 million in Operation and
Maintenance, Navy (OMN) for weapons maintenance, but provided
no funds for MK 45 5'' gun depot overhauls. The committee
recommends an increase of $9.0 million in OMN for MK 45 depot
overhauls.
Marine Corps
Marine Corps shelters
The budget request included $759.8 million in Operation and
Maintenance, Marine Corps (OMMC) for operational forces, but
provided no funds for the Family of Shelters and Tents (FST).
The committee recommends an increase of $2.5 million in OMMC
for FST.
Mobile corrosion protection Marine Corps
The budget request included $502.4 million in Operation and
Maintenance, Marine Corps (OMMC) for field logistics
activities. The committee recommends an increase of $7.6
million in OMMC for mobile corrosion protection and abatement.
Air Force
B-52 flying hours
The budget request included $2.8 billion in Operation and
Maintenance, Air Force (OMAF) for flying hours. The committee
recommends an increase of $47.9 million in OMAF for B-52
squadron flying hours. The Air Force failed to include adequate
funding in the budget request to meet the requirements of the
National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2008 (Public
Law 110-181) to maintain 76 B-52 bombers in a common
configuration and included this funding on the Air Force
unfunded priorities list.
F-15 depot maintenance
The budget request included $35.9 billion for Operation and
Maintenance, Air Force of which $2.7 billion is for aircraft
depot maintenance. The Air Force depot maintenance request
includes $497.0 million for F-15 repairs related to a
structural problem identified in an aircraft mishap in November
2007. After inspections of the F-15 fleet the number of
aircraft requiring major repair was not as anticipated,
therefore funds requested for fiscal year 2009 exceed the
requirement. The committee recommends a reduction of $497.0
million in Operation and Maintenance, Air Force for F-15 depot
maintenance.
B-52 depot maintenance
The budget request included $2.7 billion in Operation and
Maintenance Air Force (OMAF) for depot maintenance. The
committee recommends an increase of $48.0 million in OMAF for
B-52 aircraft depot maintenance. The Air Force failed to
include adequate funding in the budget request to meet the
requirements of the National Defense Authorization Act for
Fiscal Year 2008 (Public Law 110-181) to maintain 76 B-52
bombers in a common configuration and included this funding on
the Air Force unfunded priorities list.
B-2 depot maintenance
The budget request included $35.9 billion for Operation and
Maintenance, Air Force (OMAF) of which $2.7 billion is for
aircraft depot maintenance. The committee notes that B-2 Bomber
scheduled workload for fiscal year 2009 will be less due to the
loss of an aircraft in a flight mishap on Guam in February
2008. The committee recommends a reduction of $2.0 million in
OMAF.
Engine trailer life extension program
The budget request included $2.7 billion in Operation and
Maintenance, Air Force (OMAF) for depot maintenance, but
provided no funds for engine trailer life extension. The
committee recommends an increase of $3.0 million in OMAF to
begin the re-manufacturing and refurbishing of Air Force engine
trailers.
Land mobile radios
The budget request included $2.4 billion in Operation and
Maintenance, Air Force (OMAF) for air operations base support,
but provided no funds for land mobile radios. Upgrades to the
radio system used at Nellis Test and Training Range are
necessary to comply with required federal communication
standards. The committee recommends an increase of $2.1 million
in OMAF for land mobile radios.
National Security Space Institute
The budget request included $19.5 million in Operation and
Maintenance, Air Force (OMAF) for the National Security Space
Institute (NSSI). The committee recommends an increase of $2.8
million for the NSSI. The NSSI, which is operated by the Air
Force, is the space education and professional development
center for the Department of Defense. The additional funding
will allow the NSSI to continue to reinstate one advanced
course, sustain one advanced course, and establish distance
learning programs. This program is on the Chief of Staff of the
Air Force's unfunded priorities list.
Advanced ultrasonic inspection of aging aircraft structures
The budget request included $917.7 million in Operation and
Maintenance, Air Force (OMAF) for logistics operations, but
included no funds for advanced ultrasonic inspection of aging
aircraft. Ultrasonic inspection of the Air Force's aging fleet
would provide a non-destructive means to determine the
structural condition of aircraft, saving time and money. The
committee recommends an increase of $1.0 million in OMAF for
advanced ultrasonic inspection techniques.
Defense-wide
Expanded prisoner of war/missing in action research in North Korea
The budget request did not include funding to cover the
costs associated with resumption of recovery operations in
North Korea for the remains of prisoners of war/missing in
action (POW/MIA) personnel. The committee recommends an
increase of $13.7 million for Operation and Maintenance,
Defense-wide.
The Under Secretary of Defense for Policy recently reported
to Congress on the organization, management, and budgeting of
the Joint POW/MIA Accounting Command (JPAC). In that report, he
stated that ``JPAC is funded to meet its current mission,
excluding operations in North Korea, if those should be resumed
at some point.''
The committee notes that cooperation with North Korea to
recover the remains of U.S. POW/MIAs was suspended by the
United States in 2005. The committee views this program as an
important humanitarian effort that should proceed. Since time
is a factor for the families of the POW/MIAs, the committee
urges the Department of Defense to begin talks with the North
Korean military regarding how to resume recovery operations at
the earliest possible time.
Defense Security Cooperation Agency
The budget request included $880.0 million in Operation and
Maintenance, Defense-wide (OMDW) for the Defense Security
Cooperation Agency. Of this amount, $500.0 million was
requested for the Global Train and Equip program to build the
security capacity of foreign forces to meet urgent or emerging
threats. Section 1206 of the National Defense Authorization Act
for Fiscal Year 2006 (Public Law 109-163), as amended by
section 1206 of the John Warner National Defense Authorization
Act for Fiscal Year 2007 (Public Law 109-364), authorizes the
Global Train and Equip program at a level of $300.0 million
through September 30, 2008. The Global Train and Equip program
is reauthorized under this Act through fiscal year 2011 at a
level of $400.0 million in each fiscal year. Therefore, the
committee recommends a decrease of $100.0 million to OMDW for
the Global Train and Equip program.
Status of Operational Readiness and Training System
The budget request included $89.2 million in Operation and
Maintenance, Defense-wide (OMDW) for the Global Command and
Control System (GCCS). The committee is aware that this program
includes funds to continue to support fielding and upgrades of
the legacy Status of Operational Readiness and Training Systems
(SORTS) that is currently being replaced by the Department of
Defense's objective system, the Defense Readiness and Reporting
System. The committee recommends a decrease of $20.0 million in
OMDW for SORTS.
Defense Readiness Reporting System
The budget request included $4.9 million in Operation and
Maintenance, Defense-wide for the Defense Readiness Reporting
System (DRRS). The committee recommends an increase of $16.2
million for the acceleration of the development and deployment
of DRRS.
The committee is aware of the challenges associated with
the accurate, reliable, and timely measurement and reporting of
the readiness of military forces. The current readiness
reporting system, Global Status of Resources and Training
System (GSORTS), is inadequate to meet the demands of the force
rotation strategy that supports operations in Iraq,
Afghanistan, and around the world. The Department of Defense
(DOD), Joint Staff, and U.S. Joint Forces Command lack the
visibility of deployed and non-deployed forces' capabilities
and readiness required to manage global military commitments.
In June 2002, DOD issued a directive establishing the DRRS,
a capabilities-based, adaptive, near-term readiness reporting
system. The directive requires all components to align their
readiness reporting processes with DRRS. Since then, we
understand DOD and the services have taken a number of steps
but that DRRS is not yet fully operational and aligned with the
services' reporting processes. As a result, DOD's most recent
quarterly readiness report to Congress contains both DRRS and
GSORTS data.
The committee supports the Department's development of DRRS
as an important management modernization and replacement for
GSORTS. However, the committee is concerned that the Department
has yet to successfully plan, organize, resource, and execute
tests and full deployment for DRRS's within the Global Command
and Control System. Accordingly, the committee directs the
Secretary of Defense to provide the congressional defense
committees a report not later than March 1, 2009 on its plan to
accelerate the full deployment of DRRS and retire GSORTS. The
committee also directs that the Government Accountability
Office evaluate the DRRS program, DOD's plan, and identify
factors affecting DOD's ability to fully develop and implement
DRRS and retire GSORTS.
Readiness and Environmental Protection Initiative
The budget request included $39.8 million in Operation and
Maintenance, Defense-wide (OMDW) for the Readiness and
Environmental Protection Initiative (REPI). The committee is
encouraged that this is $10.0 million more than requested in
fiscal year 2008.
The committee believes that the military departments should
continue to pursue voluntary agreements with other public and
private entities as authorized under section 2684a of title 10,
United States Code, to prevent the development or use of
property that would be incompatible with the mission of an
installation, and preserve habitat that is compatible with
environmental requirements that might otherwise result in
current or anticipated environmental restrictions on military
bases.
The committee recommends an increase of $20.0 million in
OMDW for the REPI and directs that the military departments
give priority to projects that benefit critical mission
training sites that have the greatest potential to prevent or
reduce encroachment through the creation of a compatible use
buffer zone.
STARBASE Academies
The budget request included $108.0 million in Operation and
Maintenance, Defense-wide (OMDW) for Civil Military Programs,
but did not provide sufficient funds to sustain the operations
of the 60 existing STARBASE Academies. The committee recommends
an increase of $5.2 million in OMDW for STARBASE.
Army Reserve
Mobile corrosion protection Army Reserve
The budget request included $87.5 million in Operation and
Maintenance, Army Reserve (OMAR) for land forces systems
readiness. The committee recommends an increase of $4.8 million
in OMAR for mobile corrosion protection and abatement.
Army Reserve military technician cost avoidance
The budget request included $2.6 billion in Operation and
Maintenance, Army Reserve (OMAR). Operation and maintenance
accounts ordinarily fund military technician pay and benefits
as civilian pay. When mobilized and serving on active duty,
however, this compensation is paid by military personnel
appropriations. Based on an analysis of the services' actual
military technician mobilization data, the Government
Accountability Office (GAO) projects that the Army Reserve
could realize $14.9 million in cost avoidance in fiscal year
2009. The committee recommends a decrease of $4.5 million in
OMAR for military technician cost avoidance.
Army National Guard
Aircraft humidity protection
The budget request included $905.8 million in Operation and
Maintenance, Army National Guard (OMARNG) for maneuver units,
but provided no funds for aircraft humidity protection. The
Government Accountability Office (GAO) has found that the
readiness and safety of military equipment can be severely
degraded by corrosion. The most cost-effective means of
combating corrosion is prevention. The committee recommends an
increase of $5.0 million in OMARNG for aircraft controlled
humidity protection.
Expandable Light Air Mobility Shelters
The budget request included $905.8 million in Operation and
Maintenance, Army National Guard (OMARNG) for maneuver units
but provided no funds for Expandable Light Air Mobility
Shelters (ELAMS). The committee recommends an increase of $6.5
million in OMARNG for the procurement of ELAMS.
Extended Cold Weather Clothing System
The budget request included $316.3 million in Operation and
Maintenance, Army National Guard (OMARNG) for force readiness
operations support, but included no funds for the Extended Cold
Weather Clothing System (ECWCS). The committee recommends an
increase of $1.0 million in OMARNG for ECWCS.
Rapid Data Management System
The budget request included $316.3 million in Operation and
Maintenance, Army National Guard (OMARNG) for force readiness
operations support, but provided no funds for the Rapid Data
Management System (RDMS). RDMS is an integrated data collection
and management system that allows first responders to gather
data during field operations. It was successfully tested and
used by the Marine Corps during Exercise COBRA GOLD 2007, and
is currently used by the American Red Cross. The committee
recommends an increase of $9.5 million in OMARNG for RDMS.
Mobile corrosion protection Army National Guard
The budget request included $120.2 million in Operation and
Maintenance, Army National Guard (OMARNG) for land forces
systems readiness activities. The committee recommends an
increase of $4.8 million in OMARNG for mobile corrosion
protection and abatement.
Weapons Skills Trainer
The budget request included $316.3 million in Operation and
Maintenance, Army National Guard (OMARNG) for force readiness
operations support, but included no funds for the Weapons
Skills Trainer (WST). The committee notes the high mobilization
rates of members of the National Guard. Individual and unit
weapons training are enhanced by the availability of a
multilevel weapons simulator such as the WST. The committee
recommends an increase of $3.5 million in OMARNG for the
Weapons Skills Trainer.
Emergency satellite communications
The budget request included $120.2 million in Operation and
Maintenance, Army National Guard (OMARNG) for land forces
systems readiness. The committee recommends an increase of $4.0
million in OMARNG for additional authorized Joint Incident
Scene Communication Capability packages required for disaster
response.
Air National Guard
Controlled humidity protection
The budget request included $3.6 billion in Operation and
Maintenance, Air National Guard (OMANG) for air operations, but
provided no funds for controlled humidity protection. The
Government Accountability Office (GAO) has found that the
readiness and safety of military equipment can be severely
degraded by corrosion. The Department of Defense spends
billions of dollars annually to address corrosion damage that
could be avoided with increased prevention and mitigation
technology such as controlled humidity protection. The
committee recommends an increase of $3.6 million in OMANG for
controlled humidity protection.
Crypto-linguist and intelligence officer initiative
The budget request did not include sufficient funding for
airborne crypto-linguists to conduct training and related
activities. The committee recommends an increase of $750,000
for Operation and Maintenance, Air National Guard for airborne
crypto-linguists.
Items of Special Interest
Assessment of plans for contracting support in combatant command
operational plans
The committee notes the inadequacy of initial planning and
execution related to contracting support for contingency
operations in Iraq and Afghanistan. Assumptions with respect to
the scope and duration of post-conflict stability operations
made by the Department of Defense left military planners with
little justification to provide for more robust reconstruction
and civil-military logistics and the contracting support
necessary for efficient and effective execution.
The committee believes that contingency plans must have
comprehensive, detailed, and realistic contracting support
plans that meet the operational requirements of the force
before, during, and after combat operations. The Department
appears to be applying the lessons of Operations Iraqi Freedom
and Enduring Freedom and notes the recent publication of
Chairman, Joint Chief of Staff Manual 3133.03C (CJCSM 3133.03C)
providing planning guidance that requires combatant commanders
to include contracting support plans in their contingency
operations plans.
The committee directs that the Government Accountability
Office (GAO) conduct an assessment of the implementation of the
directives contained in CJCSM 3133.03C. In conducting this
assessment the GAO shall also evaluate the contracting support
plans for those combatant command operations plans as reported
in the Quarterly Readiness Report to Congress (QRRC) as
required by section 482 of title 10, United States Code. The
GAO should base its assessment of contracting support plans on
the requirements of CJCSM 3133.03C but shall also include an
evaluation of each plan's assumptions, comprehensiveness,
feasibility, adequacy of executable detail, resources required
and available, contracting related operational risk at each
phase of the plan, and any other aspect of contracting support
planning useful to this review. The GAO shall provide this
assessment to the congressional defense committees not later
than September 30, 2009.
Combatant Commander Initiative Fund
The budget request included $75.0 million in Operation and
Maintenance, Defense-wide (OMDW), for the Combatant Commander
Initiative Fund (CCIF). The committee notes that this fund is
intended to make small amounts of monies available promptly to
combatant commanders to enable them to meet unexpected
contingencies and take advantage of opportunities that arise
but that are not amenable to the time-consuming reprogramming
process. The statement of managers accompanying the National
Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Years 1990 and 1991
(Public Law 101-189) directs that these funds ``may only be
used for activities for which funding is not available in a
timely fashion under existing authorizations and
appropriations.'' The committee urges the Department of Defense
to preserve the flexibility of this fund, consistent with the
intent of Congress, by refraining from programming these funds
at the beginning of the fiscal year.
Funding for the CCIF reflects an increase of $50.0 million
over the fiscal year 2008 level for this fund. The committee
believes that priority in the use of this $50.0 million in
additional funding should be given to enabling geographic
combatant commanders to respond to unanticipated emergencies in
their respective areas of responsibility by providing urgent
humanitarian relief and reconstruction assistance, particularly
in foreign countries where U.S. armed forces are engaged in a
contingency operation. The authority to use the CCIF to provide
urgent and unanticipated humanitarian relief and reconstruction
assistance is under the authority added to section 166a(b)(6)
of title 10, United States Code, by section 902 of the John
Warner National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2007
(Public Law 109-364).
The committee notes that the statement of managers
accompanying Public Law 109-364 urged the Department to develop
guidance for the use of the additional authority provided by
section 902 of that act to ensure that the authority could be
used quickly and without bureaucratic delay under urgent
circumstances. That statement of managers also urged that such
guidance include procedures for coordinating with the relevant
Department of State country team as a precondition for
providing assistance under this authority. The committee is
unaware of the Department having developed such guidance and
again urges the Department to do so, consistent with the
statement of managers' recommendations.
The committee also notes that the additional authority
provided under section 902 is not intended for use in
Afghanistan or Iraq so long as Commanders' Emergency Response
Program (CERP) authority is available for use in those
countries.
The committee directs the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of
Staff, after consultation with the combatant commanders, to
submit a report to the Committees on Armed Services of the
Senate and House of Representatives by October 31, 2009,
providing a detailed description of the activities funded by
the CCIF during fiscal year 2009, and an assessment of the
benefits derived from those activities.
Commercial satellite communications
The committee notes that approximately 80 percent of the
Department of Defense satellite communications capacity is
currently provided by commercially operated satellites. These
services are purchased on an as-needed basis, predominately
with funds made available through supplemental appropriations
acts or other short-term funding. While the percentages have
varied, the Department of Defense estimates that as much as 50
percent of satellite communications capabilities in the long-
term could be provided using commercially operated satellites.
The committee urges the Secretary of Defense to review the
Defense Department commercial satellite communications
requirements and determine the most efficient and reliable way
to acquire commercial satellite communications capabilities.
This review should include the most appropriate funding
approach for sustained and surge requirements and opportunities
to involve the commercial satellite industry in planning to
ensure the capability will be available when and where it is
needed.
Defense Information Systems Agency working capital fund management
The committee notes that section 321 of the National
Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2008 (Public Law 110-
181) gave the Defense Information Systems Agency (DISA) greater
flexibility to utilize working capital funds (WCF) in small
modernization projects for its systems. Congress noted that the
rate of technological advances in information systems
represents a major challenge to DISA as it attempts to keep
pace with commercial technology and provide better service to
its defense customers. The authority provided was intended to
help address those challenges, by enabling DISA to use flexible
WCF funds to make investments that would replace outdated,
unsupported software and hardware systems, and other equipment
to maintain network performance and functionality.
The committee notes that there are no mechanisms currently
available within the DISA WCF to raise capital in order to make
the investments permitted under the authority granted last
year. Further, unlike other WCF activities, DISA utilizes
funding from direct appropriations for technology refreshment
and modernization purposes. The committee notes that dependence
on the direct authorization and appropriation of funds for
systems operated and maintained using WCFs is inconsistent with
the WCF concept itself. The committee further notes that
requiring DISA to build technology refreshment into the Defense
Information Systems Network (DISN) customer rate structure,
similar to the mechanisms other working capital funds use,
could increase usage costs for the DISA customer base.
The committee recognizes the contradiction between the new
authority and current DISA WCF practices and operations.
Therefore, the committee directs the Director of DISA to report
to the congressional defense committees no later than April 1,
2009 on planned mechanisms to continue to invest in timely,
flexible, technology refreshment and modernization on its
systems; an analysis of the current DISN rate structure and
customer billing mechanisms and their adequacy for providing
sufficient funding for technology refreshment needs; and any
suggested changes to WCF authorities or DISN rate structures
and mechanisms that may be necessary to provide warfighters
with the most current, highest performance information systems
possible.
Funding for military morale, welfare, and recreation programs
The availability of appropriated funds for military morale,
welfare, and recreation (MWR) programs is a continuing concern
to the committee. As the committee learned from hearing
testimony given this year, many military family organizations
share this concern. Programs funded through MWR programs, such
as child care and youth programs, libraries, and fitness
centers, have always been an important and critical benefit for
our military families. Now, in light of the multiple and
lengthy deployments many military families have been facing
over the past few years, the programs provided through these
funds are more important than ever. These types of programs and
benefits are also vital retention tools. While funds for MWR
have increased slightly over the past few years, the committee
believes that each of the military departments should consider
increasing the amount of funds that support MWR programs, in
order to ensure the best quality of life possible for our
military families.
Long-range facilities and construction planning at Army ammunition
plants and arsenals
The committee notes the absence of long-range planning for
the recapitalization and modernization of Army ammunition
plants and arsenals nationwide. In many cases, these ammunition
plants and arsenals, operating in facilities that have not been
upgraded in decades, serve as the sole producer of critical
components that are absolutely essential to the mission of the
Department of the Army. The committee further notes that other
Department of Defense industrial operations such as depots have
developed comprehensive long-range modernization plans that
benefit from a mandatory level of recapitalization funding each
year required by Congress. These long-range plans are essential
to ensure that Department of the Army industrial operations can
meet current and future mission requirements with effective,
efficient systems and equipment that are safe, secure, and
comply with environmental regulations.
The committee directs the Secretary of the Army develop a
comprehensive long-range plan for each ammunition plant and
arsenal. Long-range plans should establish a detailed
investment strategy and priorities to: correct unsafe,
hazardous, or environmentally harmful working conditions;
upgrade deteriorated facilities to an adequate condition;
modernize equipment and manufacturing processes to industry
standards; and incorporate investments in new technology that
will improve efficiencies in production. Furthermore, the
committee directs the Secretary to submit a report to the
defense committees no later than 180 days after bill enactment
and annually thereafter with the budget request for a period of
5 years detailing the following:
(1) the investment master plan for each ammunition plant
and arsenal;
(2) the status of the implementation of such plans to date
at each plant and arsenal; and,
(3) the amount contained in the budget request that is
proposed to be applied to the investment strategy for each
ammunition plant or arsenal.
Standards for deployable shelters
The committee recognizes the need for maximum
interoperability among the services and with civilian
organizations for certain types of equipment that support both
contingency military operations and homeland defense missions.
Deployable expeditionary facilities, such as shelters and tents
used for housing, medical care, and other combat service
support functions should meet minimum safety standards and be
fully interoperable for joint operations, peacekeeping efforts,
refugee support, and homeland defense missions. In certain
cases the military services have developed standards, such as
the U.S. Air Force Operational Requirements Document (ORD) CAF
316-92-II/IIIB, to ensure that shelters and tents meet
consistent, interoperable safety and security standards. The
committee is concerned that all the military services may not
have a consistent standard to guide acquisition of these
critical equipment items.
Therefore, the committee directs the Secretary of Defense
to submit a report to the congressional defense committees, not
later than May 1, 2009, assessing whether the Department of
Defense criteria, requirements, and acquisition policies for
the acquisition of deployable shelters acquired for troop
housing, medical care, and other combat service support
functions meet adequate structural, environmental, and security
standards, and that, to the maximum extent practicable, such
standards will facilitate optimal interoperability between the
military and civil support functions.
TITLE IV--MILITARY PERSONNEL AUTHORIZATIONS
Subtitle A--Active Forces
End strengths for active forces (sec. 401)
The committee recommends a provision that would authorize
active-duty end strengths for fiscal year 2009, as shown below:
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Fiscal year
-------------------------------------------
2008 2009 2009
authorization request recommendation
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Army........................ 525,400 532,400 532,400
Navy........................ 329,098 325,300 325,300
Marine Corps................ 189,000 194,000 194,000
Air Force................... 329,563 316,600 316,771
------------------------------------------------------------------------
The National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2008
(Public Law 110-181) authorized active-duty end strength for
the Army at 525,400 and for the Marine Corps at 189,000.
Additional authority was provided in section 403 of that act to
increase active-duty end strength for fiscal years 2009 and
2010 by up to 22,000 for the Army and 13,000 for the Marine
Corps above the fiscal year 2008 authorized levels of 525,400
and 189,000, respectively.
The committee supports the Army and Marine Corps efforts to
increase their active-duty end strength and commends the Army
for its efforts to achieve an active-duty end strength of
547,400 by 2010 rather than 2012 as originally planned. The
wars in Iraq and Afghanistan have severely stressed the
nation's ground forces. In the past year, the Army extended
troop rotations to 15 months, with only 12 months dwell time
between deployments. With the ongoing commitments in Iraq and
Afghanistan, the growth in the Army and Marine Corps is clearly
necessary to assist in alleviating the burden of multiple
lengthy deployments. The committee recommends an active-duty
end strength for fiscal year 2009 for the Army and Marine Corps
of 532,400 and 194,000, respectively.
The committee recommends an additional 171 active-duty
personnel for the Air Force above the budget request to support
the operation and maintenance of 76 B-52 aircraft.
Subtitle B--Reserve Forces
End strengths for Selected Reserve (sec. 411)
The committee recommends a provision that would authorize
Selected Reserve end strengths for fiscal year 2009, as shown
below:
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Fiscal year
-------------------------------------------
2008 2009 2009
authorization request recommendation
------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Army National Guard of 351,300 352,600 352,600
the United States..........
The Army Reserve............ 205,000 205,000 205,000
The Navy Reserve............ 67,800 66,700 66,700
The Marine Corps Reserve.... 39,600 39,600 39,600
The Air National Guard of 106,700 106,700 106,756
the United States..........
The Air Force Reserve....... 67,500 67,400 67,400
The Coast Guard Reserve..... 10,000 10,000 10,000
------------------------------------------------------------------------
The authorizations contained in this section include an
increase of 56 personnel for the Air National Guard. The
committee believes these additional personnel should be used to
enhance essential training and readiness missions.
End strengths for Reserves on active duty in support of the Reserves
(sec. 412)
The committee recommends a provision that would authorize
full-time support end strengths for fiscal year 2009, as shown
below:
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Fiscal year
-------------------------------------------
2008 2009 2009
authorization request recommendation
------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Army National Guard of 29,204 29,950 29,950
the United States..........
The Army Reserve............ 15,870 16,170 16,170
The Navy Reserve............ 11,579 11,099 11,099
The Marine Corps Reserve.... 2,261 2,261 2,261
The Air National Guard of 13,936 14,337 14,360
the United States..........
The Air Force Reserve....... 2,721 2,733 2,733
------------------------------------------------------------------------
The committee recommends increases of 746 in the Army
National Guard, 300 in the Army Reserve, 401 in the Air
National Guard, and 35 in the Air Force Reserve over levels
approved for fiscal year 2008. The committee supports increases
in full-time support manning consistent with requested levels
to increase readiness in the reserve components. The
authorizations contained in this section include an increase of
23 personnel for the Air National Guard. The committee believes
these additional personnel should be used to enhance essential
training and readiness missions.
The committee also recommends a decrease from the fiscal
year 2008 level of 480 in the Navy Reserve, consistent with
reductions in both active Navy and Navy Reserve end strength.
The committee recommends an end strength for the Marine Corps
Reserve equal to the fiscal year 2008 level, consistent with
the budget request.
End strengths for military technicians (dual status) (sec. 413)
The committee recommends a provision that would authorize
end strengths for military technicians (dual status) for fiscal
year 2009, as shown below:
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Fiscal year
-------------------------------------------
2008 2009 2009
authorization request recommendation
------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Army Reserve............ 8,249 8,395 8,395
The Army National Guard of 26,502 27,210 27,210
the United States..........
The Air Force Reserve....... 9,909 10,003 10,003
The Air National Guard of 22,553 22,452 22,459
the United States..........
------------------------------------------------------------------------
The authorizations contained in this section include an
increase of 7 personnel for the Air National Guard. The
committee believes these additional personnel should be used to
enhance essential training and readiness missions.
Fiscal year 2009 limitation on number of non-dual status technicians
(sec. 414)
The committee recommends a provision that would establish
limits on the number of non-dual status technicians who may be
employed in the Department of Defense as of September 30, 2009,
as shown below:
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Fiscal year
-------------------------------------------
2008 2009 2009
authorization request recommendation
------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Army National Guard of 1,600 1,600 1,600
the United States..........
The Army Reserve............ 595 595 595
The Air National Guard of 350 350 350
the United States..........
The Air Force Reserve....... 90 90 90
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Maximum number of Reserve personnel authorized to be on active duty for
operational support (sec. 415)
The committee recommends a provision that would establish
limits on the number of reserve personnel authorized to be on
active duty for operational support under section 115(b) of
title 10, United States Code, as of September 30, 2009, as
shown below:
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Fiscal year
-------------------------------------------
2008 2009 2009
authorization request recommendation
------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Army National Guard of 17,000 17,000 17,000
the United States..........
The Army Reserve............ 13,000 13,000 13,000
The Navy Reserve............ 6,200 6,200 6,200
The Marine Corps Reserve.... 3,000 3,000 3,000
The Air National Guard of 16,000 16,000 16,000
the United States..........
The Air Force Reserve....... 14,000 14,000 14,000
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Increased end strengths for Reserves on active duty in support of the
Army National Guard and Army Reserve and military technicians
(dual status) of the Army National Guard (sec. 416)
The committee recommends a provision that would authorize
additional Active Guard and Reserve (AGR) end strength for the
Army National Guard and Army Reserve, and additional end
strength for Army National Guard military technicians (dual
status). The provision would also require that this additional
end strength be funded out of funds appropriated for fiscal
year 2009 by titles XV or XVI of this Act.
The committee notes that full-time support for Army reserve
component soldiers and units, including AGR personnel and
military technicians, is critical to the readiness of the
reserve components. The Department of the Army has continued to
increase the number of personnel assigned to provide full-time
support to its reserve components and seeks a fiscal year 2013
end state of 32,060 AGR personnel in the National Guard, 16,261
AGR personnel in the Army Reserve, 28,380 military technicians
(dual status) in the National Guard, and 8,395 military
technicians (dual status) in the Army Reserve. This provision
would authorize the Department to accelerate attainment of
these levels by the end of fiscal year 2009. The committee
expects the Department to update a 1999 manpower study that
evaluates the number of AGR and military technician personnel
required to achieve adequate full-time support to its reserve
components in light of the increased operational use of the
reserve components since that study's completion, and to
include discussion of this requirement in its evaluation of the
recommendations of the Commission on the National Guard and
Reserves.
Modification of authorized strengths for Marine Corps Reserve officers
on active duty in the grades of major and lieutenant colonel to
meet new force structure requirements (sec. 417)
The committee recommends a provision that would amend
section 12011 of title 10, United States Code, to increase the
limit on the number of Marine Corps majors and lieutenant
colonels authorized to serve on full-time reserve component
duty at the end of any fiscal year.
Subtitle C--Authorizations of Appropriations
Military personnel (sec. 421)
The committee recommends a provision that would limit the
amounts authorized to be appropriated for military personnel
accounts of the Department of Defense for fiscal year 2009.
Budget Items
Military personnel funding changes
The amount authorized to be appropriated for military
personnel programs in section 421 of this Act includes the
following changes from the budget request: (1) an increase of
$316.0 million to increase the pay raise for military personnel
by an additional 0.5 percentage point; (2) an increase of $12.5
million for increased active-duty Air Force end strength
levels; (3) an increase of $3.3 million to reflect increased
Air National Guard end strength levels; and (4) a reduction of
$1.1 billion to reflect anticipated unobligated balances, which
is described in more detail elsewhere in this report.
Military personnel unobligated balances
The Department of Defense has consistently underexecuted
its military personnel funding since fiscal year 1995 for
active and reserve members. The Government Accountability
Office estimates the average potential unexpended balances for
fiscal year 2009, based on the most recent data from recent
years, to be $1.1 billion. The committee recommends a decrease
of $1.1 billion to the military personnel accounts to reflect
these anticipated unobligated balances.
TITLE V--MILITARY PERSONNEL POLICY
Subtitle A--Officer Personnel Policy
Modification of distribution requirements for commissioned officers on
active duty in general and flag officer grades (sec. 501)
The committee recommends a provision that would amend
section 525 of title 10, United States Code, to increase from
16.3 percent to 16.4 percent the percentage of general and flag
officers in a military service that may be appointed above the
grade of major general or rear admiral, and to exclude from
this limitation those reserve general or flag officers on
active duty under a call or order to active duty specifying a
period of active duty of not longer than 3 years.
Modification of limitations on authorized strengths of general and flag
officers on active duty (sec. 502)
The committee recommends a provision that would amend
section 526 of title 10, United States Code, to authorize the
Secretary of Defense to designate up to 324 general and flag
officer positions as joint duty assignments that would be
excluded from the limitation on the number of general and flag
officers in each service and would specify the minimum number
of officers required to serve in these positions for each
service. The provision would realign the number of general and
flag officers authorized to serve on active duty in the Army
from 302 to 222 officers; in the Navy from 216 to 159 officers;
in the Air Force from 279 to 206 officers; and in the Marine
Corps from 80 to 59 officers. The provision would also repeal
section 721 of title 10, United States Code, which limits the
number of general and flag officers authorized to serve in
positions outside their own service.
The provision would also establish goals for the number of
general officers and flag officers in the Department of Defense
(DOD) and the military services who serve in acquisition
positions and who have significant contracting experience. The
October 31, 2007, report of the Commission on Army Acquisition
and Program Management in Expeditionary Operations (the
``Gansler Commission'') attributed contracting failures in Iraq
and Afghanistan, in significant part, to the Army's lack of
general officers in the contracting field. The report states:
The Army's difficulty in adjusting to the singular
problems of Kuwait, Iraq and Afghanistan is in large
part due to the fact that there are no Generals
assigned to contracting responsibilities. This is a
decade-old blight: the cutbacks began in 1991, and no
general officers have held an Army contracting position
since 1998. In a military environment (especially in an
expeditionary environment), the number and level of the
Generals associated with a discipline reflects its
importance. A General is held accountable for his or
her leadership. Today, the Secretary of the Army cannot
replace a General and obtain a new start for Army
contracting--the Army has no Generals doing
contracting.
The findings of the Gansler Commission are symptomatic of a
broader decline in the number of acquisition and contracting
positions across the Department of Defense. In fiscal year
2000, 104 general officers--roughly 12 percent of all general
officers in DOD--served in acquisition positions. By fiscal
year 2007, DOD had only 73 general officers serving in such
positions--despite the fact that DOD's acquisition spending had
almost doubled in the interim.
Without increasing the number of general officers serving
in these positions, DOD is unlikely to reverse the ongoing
decline in its acquisition workforce and revitalize its
acquisition and contracting practices. The committee urges the
Secretary of Defense, the secretaries of the military
departments, and the chiefs of staff to significantly increase
the number of general officers serving in acquisition and
contracting positions in the near future.
Clarification of joint duty requirements for promotion to general or
flag grades (sec. 503)
The committee recommends a provision that would amend
section 619a of title 10, United States Code, to provide that
with certain exceptions, an officer must be designated as a
joint qualified officer, rather than a joint specialty officer,
in accordance with section 661 of title 10, United States Code,
before being eligible for promotion to general or flag officer.
Modification of authorities on length of joint duty assignments (sec.
504)
The committee recommends a provision that would amend
section 664 of title 10, United States Code, to align
prescribed joint duty assignment lengths with the joint
qualification system implemented pursuant to section 516 of the
John Warner National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year
2007 (Public Law 109-364), to take into account multiple joint
experiences in satisfying joint duty assignment requirements.
Technical and conforming amendments relating to modification of joint
specialty requirements (sec. 505)
The committee recommends a provision that would make
technical and conforming amendments to sections 663, 665, and
667 of title 10, United States Code, to replace references to
joint specialty officers with officers designated as joint
qualified officers.
Eligibility of reserve officers to serve on boards of inquiry for
separation of regular officers for substandard performance and
other reasons (sec. 506)
The committee recommends a provision that would amend
section 1187 of title 10, United States Code, to authorize
reserve officers to serve as members of boards of inquiry
convened to consider whether regular officers should be
retained on active duty. This implements a recommendation of
the Commission on the National Guard and Reserves regarding
elimination of policies which unnecessarily distinguish reserve
component personnel from their active-duty counterparts and
thereby impede full integration.
Modification of authority on Staff Judge Advocate to the Commandant of
the Marine Corps (sec. 507)
The committee recommends a provision that would amend
sections 5046 and 525 of title 10, United States Code, to
require that an officer, while serving as the Staff Judge
Advocate to the Commandant of the Marine Corps, shall serve in
the grade of major general. The provision would also exclude an
officer serving in this grade and position from the limitation
on the authorized number of officers serving in grades above
brigadier general in the Marine Corps.
Increase in number of permanent professors at the United States Air
Force Academy (sec. 508)
The committee recommends a provision that would amend
section 9331 of title 10, United States Code, to increase from
21 to 25 the number of permanent professors at the Air Force
Academy.
Service creditable toward retirement for thirty years or more of
service of regular warrant officers other than regular Army
warrant officers (sec. 509)
The committee recommends a provision that would amend
section 1305 of title 10, United States Code, to authorize the
retirement of a regular warrant officer of the Navy, Marine
Corps, and Coast Guard 60 days after the date on which the
officer completes 30 years of active service.
Modification of requirements for qualification for issuance of
posthumous commissions and warrants (sec. 510)
The committee recommends a provision that would amend
sections 1521 and 1522 of title 10, United States Code, to
replace the condition for a posthumous commission or warrant
that the death be in the line of duty with a requirement for a
certification by the secretary concerned that, at the time of
death, the member was qualified for appointment to the next
higher grade.
Subtitle B--Enlisted Personnel Policy
Increase in maximum period of reenlistment of regular members of the
armed forces (sec. 521)
The committee recommends a provision that would amend
section 505(d) of title 10, United States Code, and section
308(a) of title 37, United States Code, to increase from 6 to 8
years the maximum period of reenlistment of regular members of
the armed forces.
Subtitle C--Reserve Component Management
Modification of limitations on authorized strengths of reserve general
and flag officers in active status (sec. 531)
The committee recommends a provision that would amend
section 12004 of title 10, United States Code, to exclude from
the limitations on the numbers of reserve general and flag
officers in an active status those reserve general and flag
officers serving in joint duty assignments. The number of
reserve general and flag officers excluded could not exceed 20
percent of the number of authorized flag and general officers
authorized for the service concerned.
Extension to other reserve components of Army authority for deferral of
mandatory separation of military technicians (dual status)
until age 60 (sec. 532)
The committee recommends a provision that would amend
section 10216(f) of title 10, United States Code, to require
the Secretary of the Air Force to implement personnel policies
that would allow a military technician (dual status) who
continues to meet the requirements for dual status to continue
to serve until the technician reaches age 60 and attains
eligibility for an unreduced annuity. Currently, this
requirement applies only to the Secretary of the Army.
Increase in mandatory retirement age for certain Reserve officers to
age 62 (sec. 533)
The committee recommends a provision that would amend
sections 12647 and 14702 of title 10, United States Code, to
increase the mandatory retirement age from age 60 to age 62 for
commissioned officers assigned to the Selective Service System
or as property and fiscal officers; Army National Guard
officers assigned to a headquarters or headquarters detachment
of a State; and reserve officers of the Army or Air Force who
are required to maintain membership in a Selected Reserve unit
or organization as a condition of continued employment as a
National Guard or reserve technician.
Authority for vacancy promotion of National Guard and Reserve officers
ordered to active duty in support of a contingency operation
(sec. 534)
The committee recommends a provision that would amend
section 14317 of title 10, United States Code, to authorize the
promotion of reserve component officers who are recommended for
promotion to fill a position vacancy under section 14315 of
title 10, United States Code, and who are ordered to active
duty in support of a contingency operation.
Authority for retention of reserve component chaplains and medical
officers until age 68 (sec. 535)
The committee recommends a provision that would amend
section 14703(b) of title 10, United States Code, and section
324(a) of title 32, United States Code, to authorize reserve
component chaplains and medical officers to be retained in an
active status until the date on which the officer becomes 68
years of age.
Modification of authorities on dual duty status of National Guard
officers (sec. 536)
The committee recommends a provision that would amend
section 325 of title 32, United States Code, to authorize all
National Guard officers, not just those in command of National
Guard units, to retain their state status while serving on
active duty when authorized by the President and with the
consent of the Governor or the commanding general of the
District of Columbia National Guard as applicable. The
provision would also allow the consent or authorization to be
given in advance for the purpose of establishing the succession
of command of a unit.
Modification of matching fund requirements under National Guard Youth
Challenge Program (sec. 537)
The committee recommends a provision that would amend
section 509(d) of title 32, United States Code, to clarify that
the limitation on assistance provided by the Department of
Defense to a State National Guard Youth Challenge Program may
not be construed as a limitation on the amount of assistance
that may be provided by other sources.
Report on collection of information on civilian skills of members of
the reserve components of the armed forces (sec. 538)
The committee recommends a provision that would require the
Secretary of Defense to submit a report by March 1, 2009, on
the feasibility, uses, and cost effectiveness of collecting
information about skills, qualifications, and professional
certifications possessed by members of the reserve components.
The Commission on the National Guard and Reserves
recommended that the Department of Defense develop a
standardized system for developing and maintaining a ``civilian
skills database'' that is consistent with standardized database
formats, such as that used by the North Atlantic Treaty
Organization, to allow worldwide interoperability. The
committee believes that collection of this information should
be considered for inclusion in the Reserve Components Common
Personnel Data System pursuant to Department of Defense
Instruction 7730.54, dated March 31, 2008.
Subtitle D--Education and Training
Authority to prescribe the authorized strength of the United States
Naval Academy (sec. 551)
The committee recommends a provision that would amend
section 6954 of title 10, United States Code, to provide that
the authorized strength of the Brigade of Midshipmen at the
United States Naval Academy is 4,400 midshipmen or such lower
number as may be prescribed by the Secretary of the Navy.
Tuition for attendance of certain individuals at the United States Air
Force Institute of Technology (sec. 552)
The committee recommends a provision that would amend
section 9314(c) of title 10, United States Code, to require the
United States Air Force Institute of Technology to charge
tuition for instruction of civilians from the military
departments, other components of the Department of Defense, and
other federal agencies, and to use these funds to defray the
costs of such instruction.
Increase in stipend for baccalaureate students in nursing or other
health professions under Health Professions Stipend Program
(sec. 553)
The committee recommends a provision that would amend
section 16201 of title 10, United States Code, to equate the
authority for the stipend paid to baccalaureate students in
nursing or other health professions under the Health
Professions Stipend Program for health care professionals in
reserve components to the amount of the stipend paid to
participants in the Armed Forces Health Professions Scholarship
Program under section 2121(d) of title 10, United States Code.
Clarification of discharge or release triggering delimiting period for
use of educational assistance benefit for reserve component
members supporting contingency operations and other operations
(sec. 554)
The committee recommends a provision that would amend
section 16164 of title 10, United States Code, to clarify that
only service members who separate under honorable conditions
are eligible to use the educational benefits in chapter 1607 of
title 10, United States Code, for a period of 10 years after
separation. The provision aligns eligibility under this section
with the eligibility requirements for the post-separation use
of educational benefits under chapter 30 of title 38, United
States Code.
Payment by the service academies of certain expenses associated with
participation in activities fostering international cooperation
(sec. 555)
The committee recommends a provision that would amend
chapter 101 of title 10, United States Code, to authorize the
superintendents of the United States Military Academy, the
United States Naval Academy, and the United States Air Force
Academy, in the interest of international cooperation, to pay
certain expenses of officers, students, and representatives of
foreign countries visiting the service academy concerned.
The provision would also authorize payment of per diem at a
rate lower than the rate authorized by the Joint Federal Travel
Regulations to United States Military Academy cadets, United
States Air Force Academy cadets, or United States Naval Academy
midshipmen who travel or study abroad in a program to enhance
language skills or cultural understanding. The service
academies' language and cultural immersion programs generally
include cadets and midshipmen staying with families or living
in university dormitories with some meals provided. This
provision would authorize the academies to determine the
appropriate amount of compensation for missed meals and
incidentals under these circumstances.
Subtitle E--Defense Dependents' Education Matters
Continuation of authority to assist local educational agencies that
benefit dependents of members of the armed forces and
Department of Defense civilian employees (sec. 561)
The committee recommends a provision that would authorize
$30.0 million in Operation and Maintenance, Defense-wide
(OMDW), for continuation of the Department of Defense
assistance program to local educational agencies that are
impacted by enrollment of dependent children of military
members and civilian employees of the Department of Defense.
The committee also recommends authorization of $10.0 million in
OMDW, for assistance to local educational agencies with
significant changes in enrollment of military and civilian
school-aged dependent children due to base closures, force
structure changes, or force relocations.
Impact aid for children with severe disabilities (sec. 562)
The committee recommends a provision that would authorize
$5.0 million in Operation and Maintenance, Defense-wide, for
impact aid payments for children with disabilities under
section 8003(d) of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act
of 1965 (20 U.S.C. 7703(d)), using the formula set forth in
section 363 of the Floyd D. Spence National Defense
Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2001 (Public Law 106-398),
for continuation of the Department of Defense's assistance to
local educational agencies that benefit dependents with severe
disabilities.
Transition of military dependent students among local educational
agencies (sec. 563)
The committee recommends a provision that would amend
section 574(d) of the John Warner National Defense
Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2007 (Public Law 109-364), to
require the Secretary of Defense to work collaboratively with
the Secretary of Education in any efforts to ease the
transition of military dependent students between Department of
Defense dependent schools, schools of local educational
agencies, and other schools. This provision would authorize the
Secretary of Defense to use funds of the Department of Defense
Education Activity for this purpose.
Subtitle F--Military Family Readiness
Authority for education and training for military spouses pursuing
portable careers (sec. 571)
The committee recommends a provision that would amend
section 1784 of title 10, United States Code, to authorize the
Secretary of Defense to carry out programs to provide training
and education to spouses of members of the armed forces on
active duty who are pursuing portable careers.
Subtitle G--Other Matters
Department of Defense policy on the prevention of suicides by members
of the armed forces (sec. 581)
The committee recommends a provision that would require the
Secretary of Defense to develop a comprehensive policy designed
to prevent suicide by members of the armed forces. The policy
would ensure that investigations, analyses, and appropriate
data collection occur across the military departments on the
causes and factors surrounding suicides by members of the armed
forces, and that information from those studies contributes to
the development of effective strategies to educate members of
the armed forces in preventing suicides and suicide attempts.
The committee believes that uniform data collection by the
military services will facilitate analysis of events in the
aggregate for trends and patterns that may lead to improved
strategies to prevent suicides and suicide attempts.
The committee is particularly concerned about the increase
in the rate of suicide within the United States Army from 2004
through 2007, which is higher than historic Army rates. Active
Army suicide rates have doubled from 9.8 per 100,000 in 2001 to
19.7 per 100,000 in 2007. Suicide attempts resulting in medical
evacuation or hospitalization have also increased from 263 in
2004 to 948 in 2006. A general officer steering committee
appointed to address the rise in suicides in the Army has
reaffirmed and expanded the Army's suicide prevention
strategies.
To take advantage of any new developments in suicide
prevention, the committee directs the Secretary of the Army to
initiate a review of the Army's suicide prevention program.
This review shall include participation by non-Department of
Defense and non-Department of Veterans Affairs experts on
suicide prevention. The Secretary shall report to the
Committees on Armed Services of the Senate and House of
Representatives no later than September 1, 2008 on the results
of this review. The report shall include the findings and
recommendations of the review and a description of any changes
or modifications to the Army suicide prevention program made as
a result of the review.
Relief for losses incurred as a result of certain injustices or errors
of the Department of Defense (sec. 582)
The committee recommends a provision that would add a new
section 127e to title 10, United States Code, to authorize the
Secretary of Defense and the secretaries of the military
departments to provide relief to a member or former member of
the armed forces who, in the determination of the secretary
concerned, has suffered imprisonment pursuant to a court-
martial conviction as a result of an injustice or error on the
part of the Department of Defense or any of its employees
acting in their official capacity. The relief provided may
include the payment of moneys, including interest, from funds
available for emergency and extraordinary expenses under
section 127 of title 10, United States Code.
Paternity leave for members of the armed forces (sec. 583)
The committee recommends a provision that would amend
section 701 of title 10, United States Code, to authorize up to
21 days of leave for a male service member whose spouse gives
birth to a child. The leave would be in addition to any other
leave to which the service member is entitled.
Enhancement of authorities on participation of members of the armed
forces in international sports competitions (sec. 584)
The committee recommends a provision that would amend
section 717 of title 10, United States Code, to include the
Military World Games as an international sports competition in
which members of the armed forces may be authorized to
participate. The provision would increase the maximum amounts
from $3.0 million to $6.0 million that the Secretary of Defense
may apportion among the military departments, and from $100,000
to $200,000 for the Coast Guard and Department of Homeland
Security, that may be spent during each successive 4-year
period beginning on October 1, 2008, for participation in
certain international sports competitions. The provision would
also require the Secretary to submit to the Committees on Armed
Services of the Senate and the House of Representatives not
later than October 1, 2009, a report setting forth a
comprehensive plan for participation in and planning for
hosting of international sports activities, competitions, and
events.
The committee believes that participation by military
members in and Department of Defense support of international
sports competitions is important and should be funded through
appropriated funds rather than non-appropriated sources needed
for morale, welfare, and recreation activities. The events
sponsored by the International Military Sports Council (CISM)
such as the Military World Games, in particular, also serve as
security cooperation activities that foster military-to-
military contact and promote Western values. The Department,
however, must comprehensively set forth its plan for funding
and supporting the various international sports competitions in
which service members participate.
Pilot programs on career flexibility to enhance retention of members of
the armed forces (sec. 585)
The committee recommends a provision that would authorize
the secretaries of the military departments to conduct pilot
programs to evaluate the need for more flexibility in career
patterns of a limited number of active-duty officers and
enlisted members. Under the pilot programs, selected service
members would leave active duty for a period of up to 3 years,
and then return to active duty in the same grade and years of
service that they held at the time they were inactivated. Time
spent while inactivated would not count toward retirement
eligibility, computation of retired pay, or years of service.
The authority to conduct pilot programs under this authority
would commence January 1, 2009 and end December 31, 2014. The
provision would require the secretaries of the military
departments to submit interim reports in 2010 and 2012. The
Secretary of Defense would be required to submit a final report
no later than March 1, 2015 evaluating all the pilot programs
conducted under this authority.
Prohibition on interference in independent legal advice by the Legal
Counsel to the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff (sec. 586)
The committee recommends a provision that would amend
section 156(d) of title 10, United States Code, to prohibit any
officer or employee of the Department of Defense from
interfering with the ability of the Legal Counsel to the
Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff to give independent legal
advice to the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff and to the
Joint Chiefs of Staff.
Items of Special Interest
Enhancing family support for the National Guard and reserve
The committee commends the Secretary of Defense and the
secretaries of the military departments for the increased
priority for family support programs presented in testimony in
review of the President's budget request for fiscal year 2009.
In particular, the Army would devote $1.5 billion for family
support programs in fiscal year 2009, with the goal of better
meeting family needs for child care, youth programs, and
community recreation.
The committee remains concerned about the adequacy of
support for family members of the National Guard and reserve,
especially for the families of the nearly 500,000 members who
have deployed. The final report of the Commission on the
National Guard and Reserves (January 2008) correctly focused on
identifying the needs and gaps in service to reserve component
family members.
The committee applauds the Department of Defense's efforts
to implement the Yellow Ribbon Reintegration Program authorized
in section 582 of the National Defense Authorization Act for
Fiscal Year 2008 (Public Law 110-181) in all States during
fiscal year 2009. The committee believes that the Department
should increase efforts to publicize the Military OneSource
program, a valuable but under-utilized resource which can help
overcome the challenge of geographic isolation for families of
the National Guard and reserve. The committee also urges the
Secretary to promote partnerships among the Departments of
Defense and Veterans Affairs and State and local community
mental health programs in order to increase access for Guard
and reserve members and their families to quality mental health
services.
The committee notes that for fiscal year 2009, as in
previous years, the Department continues to rely on
supplemental appropriations for a significant portion of the
funding of critical family support programs, including
counseling and child care. The committee reiterates its belief
that family support programs are enduring requirements for the
all volunteer force, and its expectation that family support
programs will be fully integrated into the Department's annual
budget process and future-years defense plan.
Financial literacy
The committee recognizes that our nation's military
personnel and their families can face financial challenges as a
result of the demands of service, including deployments
overseas. To add to this, service members and their families
have been the target of aggressive predatory lending practices.
Recent press reports have highlighted the fact that
financial readiness is increasingly becoming an issue for many
military families. In addition, military families themselves
have identified increased financial education and literacy as a
need.
The committee believes that early education on fiscal
responsibility may help younger generations of military family
members avoid financial stress. Therefore, the committee
encourages the Department of Defense Education Activity to
develop a comprehensive, research-based financial literacy
curriculum for grades kindergarten through 12.
Legislative fellows from the Department of Defense
The Secretary of Defense has recently directed an increase
in the number of legislative fellows from 26 to 100 by 2009 and
extended offers for their assignment to the members assigned to
14 congressional committees. This sudden growth in the number
of legislative fellows must be implemented in a manner that
takes into account the needs of the Department of Defense and
the professional development needs of each officer selected.
The committee notes that, while a legislative fellowship can be
a valuable experience, officer availability for professional
development opportunities outside the Department is already
severely compressed to meet a growing list of institutional
requirements and for rotational forces in all services. In the
case of fellows, this is compounded by the requirement for
follow-on utilization assignments as required by controlling
Department of Defense regulations.
The committee directs the Secretary of Defense to perform a
critical review of how the legislative fellowship program is
organized, resourced, managed, and controlled within the
Department of Defense and the military departments. The
Secretary should articulate with greater clarity the
institutional and professional development goals and objectives
of the legislative fellows program. The Secretary should also
establish how the program will be evaluated in meeting these
goals and objectives. Given competing demands on officer
manpower, the Secretary should establish a coherent policy to
ensure that the officers selected for a legislative fellowship
opportunity are career-oriented officers whose experience as a
fellow will be utilized appropriately in their future military
assignments.
The Secretary's review should specify the numbers of
fellows by military department who will be assigned each year,
and the billets and positions in the Department of Defense and
military departments for which a legislative fellowship
assignment is a prerequisite or provides essential professional
development. Additionally, the review shall provide a plan
setting forth the criteria for selection, assignment, pre-
fellowship training, monitoring and evaluation of performance,
and post-fellowship assignments. The review should discuss the
methods that will be used to ensure that officers who are
assigned as legislative fellows will be assigned to utilization
tours that are fully consistent with their competitive
categories and career progression requirements. The Secretary
shall report the results of this review to the congressional
defense committees not later than May 1, 2009.
Premium conversion and flexible spending account options for service
members
The Senate report accompanying S. 1042 (S. Rept. 109-69) of
the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2006
contained a requirement directing the Secretary of Defense to
provide to the congressional defense committees a plan to
evaluate and implement premium conversion and flexible spending
account programs for uniformed service members. On May 15,
2007, the Department of Defense (DOD) submitted its report,
concluding that ``DOD must determine how PC/FSA benefit
programs under a cafeteria plan might work best for each
component, and whether, when, and how to offer those
programs.'' The report recognized that there were no statutory
barriers to implementation of these programs, but failed to
commit to providing these programs to service members. Premium
conversion and flexible spending account programs remain
unavailable to service members, though they are available to
federal employees, and are widely available in the civilian
sector. The committee directs the Secretary of Defense to
submit a report to the congressional defense committees by July
1, 2008 detailing the Department's plan to implement these
programs for both active-duty and Selected Reserve members, or
explaining the Department's decision not to offer these
programs in spite of the advantages they offer.
The committee continues to believe that active-duty members
and Selected Reserve members should be able to use premium
conversion to pay dental insurance premiums, and Selected
Reserve personnel should be able to use it to pay TRICARE
Reserve Select premiums. The committee also continues to
believe that active-duty and Selected Reserve members should
have access to flexible spending account options that allow
them to pay for out-of-pocket medical and dental expenses,
dependent care expenses, and child care services.
Report on implementation of Yellow Ribbon Reintegration Program
The committee directs the Secretary of Defense to submit to
the Committees on Armed Services of the Senate and House of
Representatives by October 1, 2008, a status report on the
implementation of the Yellow Ribbon Reintegration Program. The
report shall include a description, by State, of
accomplishments for fiscal year 2008, and those planned for
fiscal year 2009. The report shall also include an
identification of current and future resource requirements,
including personnel, necessary to implement and execute the
Yellow Ribbon Reintegration Program, as well as a plan for full
implementation and oversight of the Yellow Ribbon Reintegration
Program in all States.
The committee expects that the Under Secretary of Defense
for Personnel and Readiness, serving as Executive Agent, will
ensure that the program is carried out based on uniform program
requirements throughout the United States, and in a manner that
equitably serves both National Guard and reserve personnel as
required by section 582 of the National Defense Authorization
Act for Fiscal Year 2008 (Public law 110-181).
Secretary of Defense review of deferment from deployment policy
following birth of a child
Current Department of Defense (DOD) policy governing
military personnel assignments requires that for a minimum of 4
months after the birth of a child, ``a military mother shall be
deferred from assignment to a dependent-restricted overseas
tour or an unaccompanied overseas tour when concurrent travel
is denied'' (Department of Defense Instruction 1315.18). The
secretary of the military department, however, may extend the
deferment based on force readiness needs. Army and Air Force
policies provide for the minimum 4-month deferment from
deployment. The Marine Corps currently defers deployment for 6
months, and the Navy for 1 year.
The committee directs the Secretary of Defense to conduct a
review of policies concerning deferment from deployment of
service members following the birth of a child. The review
shall include an assessment of the impact of service policies
on military readiness, including recruitment and retention of
female service members, and the desirability of a uniform
policy for all military services. The review shall take into
account such factors as differing conditions during deployment
and the manpower requirements of each service, the medical and
psychological readiness of military members to deploy, policies
regarding family care plans, and policies responding to
personal hardship following childbirth, such as a newborn with
special medical treatment needs.
In conducting the review, the Secretary shall consult with
public and private sector experts, such as the U.S. Health
Resources and Services Administration, the American Academy of
Pediatrics, the American College of Obstetricians and
Gynecologists, and the American Academy of Family Physicians,
to ensure that Department of Defense assignment policies for
female service members following childbirth are informed by the
most current scientific and clinical expertise regarding the
well-being of new mothers and infants.
The committee directs the Secretary to report to the
Committees on Armed Services of the Senate and the House of
Representatives on the results of this review by May 1, 2009.
The report shall describe changes to DOD or service policies as
a result of the review.
TITLE VI--COMPENSATION AND OTHER PERSONNEL BENEFITS
Subtitle A--Pay and Allowances
Fiscal year 2009 increase in military basic pay (sec. 601)
The committee recommends a provision that would authorize a
pay raise for members of the uniformed services of 3.9 percent,
0.5 percent above the pay raise recommended in the budget
request, to become effective on January 1, 2009.
Subtitle B--Bonuses and Special and Incentive Pays
Extension of certain bonus and special pay authorities for Reserve
forces (sec. 611)
The committee recommends a provision that would extend for
1 year the authority to pay the Selected Reserve reenlistment
bonus; the Selected Reserve affiliation or enlistment bonus;
the special pay for enlisted members assigned to certain high
priority units; the Ready Reserve enlistment bonus for persons
without prior service; the Ready Reserve enlistment and
reenlistment bonus for persons with prior service; and the
Selected Reserve enlistment bonus for persons with prior
service.
Extension of certain bonus and special pay authorities for health care
professionals (sec. 612)
The committee recommends a provision that would extend for
1 year the authority to pay the nurse officer candidate
accession bonus; the repayment of education loans for certain
health professionals who serve in the Selected Reserve; the
accession bonus for registered nurses; incentive special pay
for nurse anesthetists; special pay for Selected Reserve health
professionals in critically short wartime specialties; the
accession bonus for dental officers; the accession bonus for
pharmacy officers; the accession bonus for medical officers in
critically short wartime specialties; and the accession bonus
for dental specialist officers in critically short wartime
specialties.
Extension of special pay and bonus authorities for nuclear officers
(sec. 613)
The committee recommends a provision that would extend for
1 year the authority to pay the special pay for nuclear-
qualified officers extending their period of active service;
the nuclear career accession bonus; and the nuclear career
annual incentive bonus.
Extension of authorities relating to payment of other bonuses and
special pays (sec. 614)
The committee recommends a provision that would extend for
1 year the authority to pay the aviation officer retention
bonus; assignment incentive pay; the reenlistment bonus for
active members; the enlistment bonus; the accession bonus for
new officers in critical skills; the incentive bonus for
conversion to military occupational specialty to ease personnel
shortage; the accession bonus for officer candidates; the
retention bonus for members with critical military skills or
assigned to high priority units; and income replacement for
reserve members experiencing extended and frequent
mobilizations.
Extension of authorities relating to payment of referral bonuses (sec.
615)
The committee recommends a provision that would extend for
1 year the authority to pay the health professions referral
bonus and the Army referral bonus under sections 1030 and 3252
of title 10, United States Code, respectively.
Permanent extension of prohibition on charges for meals received at
military treatment facilities by members receiving continuous
care (sec. 616)
The committee recommends a provision that would amend
section 402 of title 37, United States Code, to make permanent
the prohibition on charges for meals received at military
treatment facilities by members receiving continuous care.
Accession and retention bonuses for the recruitment and retention of
psychologists for the armed forces (sec. 617)
The committee recommends a provision that would add a new
section 301f to title 37, United States Code, authorizing a
multiyear retention bonus for uniformed psychologists in the
maximum amount of $25,000 per year for up to 4 years. The
provision would also add a new section 302m to title 37, United
States Code, authorizing an accession bonus for uniformed
psychologists of up to $400,000 for an active-duty commitment
of at least 4 years.
The Report of the Department of Defense Task Force on
Mental Health found that the number of active-duty
psychologists is insufficient and likely to decrease further
without substantial intervention. According to the report, data
from post-deployment health reassessments show that 38 percent
of soldiers and 31 percent of marines report psychological
problems. These bonuses, in conjunction with existing benefits,
are intended to help overcome critical shortages in the number
of uniformed psychologists.
Authority for extension of maximum length of service agreements for
special pay for nuclear-qualified officers extending period of
active service (sec. 618)
The committee recommends a provision that would amend
section 312 of title 37, United States Code, to eliminate the
3, 4, and 5 year options currently in law, and require only
that the period of continuation be at least 3 years with the
objective of providing more flexibility in administering the
nuclear officer continuation pay.
Incentive pay for members of precommissioning programs pursuing foreign
language proficiency (sec. 619)
The committee recommends a provision that would create a
new section 316a of title 37, United States Code, to authorize
the Secretary of Defense to pay incentive pay to an individual
pursuing foreign language proficiency while enrolled in the
Senior Reserve Officers' Training Corps or the Marine Corps
Platoon Leaders Class. The individual must participate in an
approved language immersion program, study abroad, or academic
course that involves instruction in a foreign language of
strategic interest to the Department of Defense. The incentive
pay may not exceed $3,000 per year per individual. The
provision would also require the Secretary of Defense to report
to the Office of Management and Budget and the congressional
defense committees by January 1, 2010, and annually thereafter,
on the payment of incentive pay under this section.
Subtitle C--Travel and Transportation Allowances
Shipment of family pets during evacuation of personnel (sec. 631)
The committee recommends a provision that would amend
section 406 of title 37, United States Code, to authorize
transportation, including the payment of shipment and
quarantine costs, of two household pets in cases of evacuation
from a permanent station located in a foreign area.
Special weight allowance for transportation of professional books and
equipment for spouses (sec. 632)
The committee recommends a provision that would amend
section 406 of title 37, United States Code, to authorize a
special weight allowance of up to an additional 500 pounds for
professional books and equipment belonging to the spouses of
service members ordered to make a change of permanent station.
The provision would take effect October 1, 2009.
Travel and transportation allowances for members of the reserve
components of the armed forces on leave for suspension of
training (sec. 633)
The committee recommends a provision that would add a new
section 411k to title 37, United States Code, to authorize
travel and transportation allowances for service members on
active duty for more than 30 days to travel from a temporary
duty station back to their permanent duty station and back
again during times when training is suspended at the temporary
duty station for a period of 5 days or more.
Subtitle D--Retired Pay and Survivor Benefits
Presentation of burial flag to the surviving spouse and children of
members of the armed forces who die in service (sec. 641)
The committee recommends a provision that would amend
section 1482 of title 10, United States Code, to authorize the
presentation of a burial flag to the surviving spouse of a
deceased service member when the surviving spouse is not
otherwise entitled to a flag as the person designated to direct
the disposition of the remains. The provision would also
authorize the presentation of a burial flag to each child of a
deceased service member.
Subtitle E--Other Matters
Separation pay, transitional health care, and transitional commissary
and exchange benefits for members of the armed forces separated
under surviving son or daughter policy (sec. 651)
The committee recommends a provision that would provide
service members separated under the Department of Defense
surviving son or daughter policy with separation pay under
section 1174 of title 10, United States Code; transitional
health care under section 1145 of title 10, United States Code;
and transitional commissary and exchange benefits under section
1146 of title 10, United States Code.
Items of Special Interest
Aviation career incentive pay
The committee has received reports of officers qualified
for aviation service missing their ``gate'' thresholds for
continued eligibility for receipt of aviation career incentive
pay (ACIP) due to non-flying assignments, including ``in lieu
of'' or individual augmentee assignments in Operations Enduring
Freedom and Iraqi Freedom. The committee directs the Secretary
of the Air Force and the Secretary of the Navy to review their
ACIP programs, their assignment of officers qualified for
aviation service to non-flying duty assignments, and the effect
of these assignments on these officers' continued eligibility
for ACIP. The committee directs the Secretary of the Air Force
and the Secretary of the Navy to report to the Committees on
Armed Services of the Senate and the House of Representatives
by March 1, 2009 on the results of this review.
Travel allowances for family of service members with serious
psychiatric conditions
The committee notes that section 411h of title 37, United
States Code, authorizes the secretaries of the military
departments to pay travel and transportation allowances for
family members of service members who are seriously injured,
seriously ill, or in a situation of imminent death when the
attending physician or surgeon and the commander or head of the
military medical facility concerned determine that the family's
presence may contribute to the service member's health and
welfare.
The committee strongly believes that service members who
suffer from serious psychiatric conditions meet the seriously
injured or seriously ill threshold under section 411h of title
37, United States Code, and that family members of such service
members should be eligible for travel and transportation
allowances in accordance with that section. The committee
directs the Secretary of Defense to report to the congressional
defense committees by June 1, 2008 on the Department of Defense
policies regarding the eligibility of family members of such
service members to receive travel and transportation allowances
under that section.
TITLE VII--HEALTH CARE PROVISIONS
Subtitle A--TRICARE Program
Calculation of monthly premiums for coverage under TRICARE Reserve
Select after 2008 (sec. 701)
The committee recommends a provision that would require the
Secretary of Defense to base the actuarial calculation of the
amount of monthly premiums paid by members of the Selected
Reserve for health care coverage under the TRICARE Reserve
Select (TRS) program on the reported costs of providing
benefits. For 2009, the premium amount would be based on the
reported program costs for 2006 and 2007. For each year after
2009, the premium amount would be based on the actual cost of
providing benefits during calendar years preceding that year.
The committee is concerned that, according to a Government
Accountability Office review of the Department of Defense's
cost of implementing the TRS program for members of the Guard
and reserve required by the John Warner National Defense
Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2007 (Public Law 109-364),
``The premium for individual coverage under tier 1 was 72
percent higher than the average cost per plan of providing
benefits through the program. Similarly, the premium for family
coverage under tier 1 was 45 percent higher than the average
cost per plan of providing benefits.''
The provision reflects the Comptroller General's
recommendation that the Department should stop basing TRS
premium adjustments only on the Federal Employees Health
Benefits Program's Blue Cross and Blue Shield plan, and use
instead the reported costs of providing benefits when adjusting
premiums in the future.
The committee is also concerned that learning how to use
TRICARE is difficult for newly eligible beneficiaries,
especially those in the reserve components. The committee
agrees with the recommendation in the January 2008 report of
the Commission on the National Guard and Reserves that
information materials about TRICARE need to be redesigned, in
both print and electronic format, to be more user-friendly,
especially for first time users. The committee directs that the
Secretary of Defense report to the Committees on Armed Services
of the Senate and the House of Representatives by February 1,
2009 on programs and plans to achieve such improvements during
fiscal year 2009.
Subtitle B--Other Health Care Authorities
Enhancement of medical and dental readiness of members of the armed
forces (sec. 711)
The committee recommends a provision that would amend
section 1074a(d)(1) of title 10, United States Code, to require
the secretary of each military department to provide to members
of the Selected Reserve who are assigned to units scheduled for
deployment within 75 days after mobilization annual medical
screenings, a full physical examination for members who are
over the age of 40 every 2 years, and annual dental screenings
and dental care required to ensure that a member meets the
dental standards required for deployment. These services are to
be provided at no cost to the member. The provision would also
authorize the secretaries concerned to provide the same
services to other members of the Selected Reserve and to a
member of the Individual Ready Reserve with a deployment
responsibility, if those services are necessary to ensure that
members meet applicable standards of medical and dental
readiness.
The committee notes that section 1074a(f) of title 10,
United States Code, authorizes the secretaries of the military
departments to provide any medical and dental screening and
care necessary to meet applicable medical and dental standards
for deployment to members of the Ready Reserve who have been
notified that they will be called or ordered to active duty for
a period of more than 30 days. The provision would clarify that
operation and maintenance funds available to the reserve
components may be used to achieve these goals.
The provision would also amend section 1076a(e) of title
10, United States Code, to authorize the Secretary of Defense
to waive, in whole or in part, during a time of national
emergency, the requirement for members of the Selected Reserve
enrolled in the TRICARE dental insurance program to pay
copayments for restorative care necessary to meet dental
readiness standards, in order to facilitate readiness of a unit
or individual scheduled for deployment.
The provision would also require the Secretary of Defense
to submit a report by March 1, 2009 on the policies and
procedures to ensure medical and dental readiness of members of
the armed forces, including a description of the manner in
which each military department applies such standards with
respect to performance evaluation and promotion.
The committee believes that the medical and dental
readiness of the reserve components must be strengthened in
order to support their increasing operational roles. Of
particular concern is the lack of dental readiness of the
reserve components. According to the Department of Defense, in
the first quarter of 2008, 57 percent of the Army National
Guard and 50 percent of the Army Reserve members were dental
class III or IV, and thus would not meet deployability
standards, compared with 10 percent of the Navy Reserve, 11
percent of the Air National Guard, 15 percent of the Air Force
Reserve, 22 percent of the Marine Corps Reserve, and 26 percent
of the Coast Guard Reserve.
The committee recognizes that the Department of Defense has
established an expanded Reserve Health Readiness Program to
help meet these needs, but believes that more needs to be done.
The provision is intended to clarify the committee's intent
that funds available to the reserve components for operation
and maintenance may be used for the purpose of improving
medical readiness, and to underscore the committee's belief
that individuals and commanders should be held accountable for
meeting all applicable medical and dental readiness standards.
Additional authority for studies and demonstration projects relating to
delivery of health and medical care (sec. 712)
The committee recommends a provision that would amend
section 1092(a) of title 10, United States Code, to authorize
the Secretary of Defense to conduct additional studies and
demonstrations relating to the delivery of health and medical
care, which may include:
(1) projects to provide awards and incentives to
TRICARE covered service members and beneficiaries who
obtain certain health promotion and disease prevention
health care services;
(2) projects to provide awards and incentives to
individual health care professionals to encourage
improved quality and effectiveness of health care
services;
(3) projects to improve the medical and dental
readiness of the reserve components; and
(4) projects to improve the continuity of health care
services for family members of mobilized members of the
reserve components, including payment of a stipend for
continuation of employer-provided health coverage.
Travel for anesthesia services for childbirth for dependents of members
assigned to very remote locations outside the continental
United States (sec. 713)
The committee recommends a provision that would amend
section 1040(a) of title 10, United States Code, to authorize
the Secretary of Defense to pay travel expenses for a dependent
of a service member assigned to a very remote location outside
the continental United States who requires or elects anesthesia
services for childbirth to a location in the United States.
Under current law, payment of travel expenses is authorized
for required medical attention that is not available in the
locality in order to travel to the nearest medical facility in
which adequate medical care is available. The provision would
clarify that anesthesia services for childbirth should be
included in the scope of required medical attention.
Subtitle C--Other Health Care Matters
Repeal of prohibition on conversion of military medical and dental
positions to civilian medical and dental positions (sec. 721)
The committee recommends a provision that would repeal
subsection (a) of section 721 of the National Defense
Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2008 (Public Law 110-181),
which prohibits the military departments from converting any
military medical or dental position to a civilian medical or
dental position through September 30, 2012. The provision would
also restore subsections (a) and (b) of section 742 of the John
Warner National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2007
(Public Law 109-364), which require certification by the
secretary of a military department that any planned conversion
will not increase the cost or decrease the quality of care or
access to military health care, and requires a review by the
Comptroller General of these certifications.
The Department of Defense has informed the committee that
the prohibition ``. . . has created chaos in planned personnel
actions in FY 2008, essentially guaranteeing a detrimental
impact on medical staffing levels and access to care . . .''
The provision recommended by the committee would repeal this
prohibition.
However, the committee continues to believe that the
military departments did not adequately address the
certification requirements contained in section 742 of Public
Law 109-364 when it was in effect. The committee remains
concerned that planned conversions may increase costs, decrease
access to care, decrease quality of care, or negatively impact
recruitment and retention of military personnel. Therefore, the
provision would restore this certification requirement.
In planning any future conversions of military medical or
dental positions to civilian medical or dental positions, the
committee expects the military departments to fully assess all
aspects of the conversions, including those concerns listed
above. The committee also expects the departments to supply
these certifications to the committee in accordance with
applicable deadlines.
The language in subsection (b) of section 721 of Public Law
110-181 requiring the military departments to restore any
positions converted between October 1, 2004, and September 30,
2008 that have not yet been filled by a civilian back to
military positions remains in effect.
Items of Special Interest
Chiropractic care for members of the armed forces
Section 702 of the Floyd D. Spence National Defense
Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2001 (Public Law 106-398)
required the Secretary of Defense to develop a plan to provide
chiropractic health care services and benefits for all members
of the armed forces on active duty. Although all active-duty
service members are eligible for this benefit, services are
available only at designated military treatment facilities: 17
medical facilities in the Army, 13 in the Navy, and 19 in the
Air Force. Services are not available to members who are
deployed or assigned to any overseas location other than Alaska
and Hawaii.
The committee is concerned that the extreme physical
demands of military service resulting from Operation Iraqi
Freedom and Operation Enduring Freedom, compounded by injuries
which have been incurred, may have increased the requirement
for chiropractic services for service members, including those
assigned to overseas locations. A September 2005 report by the
Comptroller General found that although the Department of
Defense had implemented the chiropractic benefit, the
Department had not monitored whether the benefit meets current
or future demand from active-duty personnel.
In response to the increased physical demands on our
service members, the committee directs the Secretary of Defense
to conduct a study to reassess the requirement for chiropractic
services for members on active duty. The committee directs that
the study should include, but not be limited to, surveys of
service members, unit commanders, and medical treatment
facility personnel, and a review of injury data for active-duty
service members since 2001. In particular, the surveys and
assessment shall include the needs of members assigned to units
outside of the continental United States. The Secretary shall
report the results of the study to congressional defense
committees by June 1, 2009.
Comptroller General study on medical personnel requirements,
shortfalls, and actions needed to resolve medical personnel
shortages
The committee is concerned that the Department of Defense
continues to experience significant shortfalls in physician,
dentist, nurse, and other allied health specialties. With the
demand for military medical care rising, due to ongoing
contingency operations, restructuring of forces, and the
planned growth of the Army and Marine Corps, medical shortfalls
must be resolved. Military and civilian health care
professionals are needed to support contingency operations, and
provide medical training, research, and care for military
families, retirees, and their families.
A report by the Assistant Secretary of Defense for Health
Affairs in May 2007, ``Department of Defense Military Medical
Recruiting and Retention,'' confirmed that significant
shortfalls exist throughout the military medical departments,
and committed to working with the military departments to
identify funding for accession bonuses and special pay and
incentive authorities enhanced in the John Warner National
Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2007 (Public Law 109-
364). The report also described the initiation of a human
capital management plan for the military health system. In the
National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2008 (Public
Law 110-181), Congress enhanced authorities for the hiring of
civilian health care professionals by utilizing compensation
authorities available to the Department of Veterans Affairs
under title 38, United States Code.
The committee directs the Comptroller General to conduct a
study of the medical and dental personnel requirements of the
Departments of the Army, Navy, and Air Force, including their
reserve components, in order to meet their medical mission in
support of contingency operations, deliver high quality health
care to eligible beneficiaries, and support necessary training
and research. The Comptroller General shall evaluate medical
workforce planning efforts throughout the Department of Defense
to determine those medical specialty areas that have
experienced the largest gaps between identified needs and fill
rates; challenges that hinder the achievement of medical
personnel goals, both military and civilian; and the plans of
each military department and the Department of Defense to
resolve medical personnel shortfalls.
The Comptroller General shall submit a report to the
congressional defense committees by April 1, 2009 containing
the results of the study and such recommendations as the
Comptroller General deems appropriate.
Mental health and traumatic brain injury
The committee applauds the work of Army medical department
behavioral health researchers who continue their study of the
mental health needs of soldiers and marines in Operation Iraqi
Freedom and Operation Enduring Freedom. Like the Mental Health
Advisory Team (MHAT) studies which have preceded it, the MHAT
V, conducted in October and November 2007, brought to light
important findings about the mental health needs of deployed
forces, in particular the high risk factors associated with
multiple and lengthy deployments. Soldiers reported significant
barriers in access to mental health care, including an
insufficient number of behavioral health providers. Several
studies, including the June 2007 report of the Department of
Defense Task Force on Mental Health, ``An Achievable Vision,''
have called for more effective behavioral health treatment and
care for service members and their families across a broad
continuum of care, including prevention, intervention, and
treatment. Though psychological injuries are not new to
warfare, most experts believe that the need for behavioral
health services in the future will increase, especially as
research reveals more about clinical approaches to mental
health conditions and traumatic brain injury.
Elsewhere in this report, the committee recommends
provisions which would improve incentives to recruit and retain
mental health providers in the military, as well as streamline
the hiring of civilian behavioral health providers. The
committee urges the Secretary of Defense to work with the
military departments to identify funding needed to take full
advantage of improved recruiting and retention incentives to
increase the supply of behavioral health professionals who
support members of the armed forces and their families.
Modification of security clearance questionnaire to reduce stigma for
seeking mental health care
The Department of Defense Task Force on Mental Health
reported in June 2007 that the stigma associated with seeking
mental health care in the military ``represents a critical
failure of the community that prevents service members and
their families from getting the help they need when they need
it most. Further, stigma is of particular concern in the
military because of the degree to which military members may
bear responsibility for lives beyond their own.'' The Task
Force identified concerns by service members that self-
identification relating to mental health care would impede
their careers or efforts to obtain a security clearance and
recommended that the Department of Defense ``work to clarify
those mental health conditions that must be reported because
they are indicative of defects in judgment, reliability, or
emotional stability that are potentially disqualifying or raise
significant security concerns.''
The committee commends the Secretary of Defense for
revising the Department of Defense Standard Form 86 (SF86)
questionnaire for national security positions regarding mental
and emotional health to implement the recommendation of the
Task Force. In a memorandum dated April 18, 2008, the Secretary
of Defense informed all Department of Defense components that
the Department had ``successfully advocated a revision to
Question 21 on the SF86 regarding mental and emotional
health,'' and directed the following revised question 21 be
used until the Office of Personnel and Management publishes an
updated SF86:
Mental health counseling in and of itself is not a reason
to revoke or deny a clearance.
In the last 7 years, have you consulted with a health care
professional regarding an emotional or mental health condition
or were you hospitalized for such a condition? Answer `No' if
the counseling was for any of the following reasons and was not
court-ordered:
Strictly marital, family, grief not related
to violence by you; or
Strictly related to adjustments from service
in a military combat environment.
The committee also commends the Under Secretaries of
Defense for Intelligence and Personnel and Readiness for their
affirmation in a memorandum to all individuals completing the
SF86 that ``Seeking professional care for these mental health
issues should not be perceived to jeopardize an individual's
security clearance. On the contrary, failure to seek care
actually increases the likelihood that psychological distress
could escalate to a more serious mental condition, which could
preclude an individual from performing sensitive duties.''
By advocating and achieving this long overdue change, the
Secretaries have fulfilled the responsibilities that all
leaders bear to reduce the stigma associated with seeking
mental health care.
Organ and tissue donor program
The committee is pleased that it is Department of Defense
(DOD) policy to encourage all DOD beneficiaries to donate
organs and tissue. Information about organ and tissue donation
is provided to officer candidates during initial training and
to new recruits after completion of basic training and before
arrival at their first duty station. All members of the armed
forces have recurring opportunities to elect to be organ or
tissue donors while serving and upon retirement from military
service. The committee recommends that the Department continue
efforts to encourage military personnel and their families to
become organ donors.
The military health system participates in the National
Organ Procurement and Transportation Network to facilitate and
coordinate the donation of organs and tissues, the recovery of
donated organs and tissues, and the matching of donors and
recipients. All inpatient military treatment facilities are
required to maintain a Memorandum of Understanding, in
coordination with military transplant centers and local organ
procurement organizations, to provide organ and tissue
procurement services.
DOD regulations require that an individual's election to be
an organ or tissue donor be recorded in medical information
systems, personnel data systems, and on the individual's DOD-
issued identification card. The committee directs the Secretary
of Defense to report to the Committees on Armed Services of the
Senate and the House of Representatives, no later than March 1,
2009, on the feasibility of including an individual's election
to be an organ or tissue donor on his or her military
identification tags.
TITLE VIII--ACQUISITION POLICY, ACQUISITION MANAGEMENT, AND RELATED
MATTERS
Subtitle A--Provisions Relating to Major Defense Acquisition Programs
Inclusion of major subprograms to major defense acquisition programs
under acquisition reporting requirements (sec. 801)
The committee recommends a provision that would authorize
the Secretary of Defense to designate as major subprograms of a
major defense acquisition program (MDAP) two or more categories
of end items to be delivered under the MDAP that differ
significantly from each other in form and function. If the
Secretary chooses to designate major subprograms under this
provision, program acquisition unit costs and procurement unit
costs would be reported to Congress for each of the major
subprograms, rather than for the MDAP as a whole. Other key
information would be reported to Congress both for the MDAP as
a whole and for each of the major subprograms.
The underlying assumption for unit cost reporting is that
the quantity of items to be provided is relatively uniform in
terms of cost and functionality. The committee recognizes that
such uniformity may not be present in the case of a ``system of
systems,'' such as the Future Combat Systems and the Ballistic
Missile Defense System, which includes multiple end items that
differ significantly from each other in form and function. The
provision recommended by the committee would authorize the
Secretary to break the MDAP into major subprograms only in such
cases, to ensure the rational and consistent reporting of unit
costs. The committee notes that this authority does not apply
to multiple variants of a single system.
Inclusion of certain major information technology investments in
acquisition oversight authorities for Major Automated
Information System programs (sec. 802)
The committee recommends a provision that would amend
chapter 144A of title 10, United States Code, to require the
Department of Defense to extend reporting requirements for
information technology acquisitions to cover both Major
Automated Information System (MAIS) programs and other major
information technology investments. Under current law, these
reporting requirements apply only to MAIS programs.
Configuration steering boards for cost control under major defense
acquisition programs (sec. 803)
The committee recommends a provision that would require the
secretaries of the military departments to establish
configuration steering boards (CSBs) to control costs on major
defense acquisition programs. CSBs would be responsible for
reviewing any proposed changes to program requirements or
system configuration that could have the potential to adversely
impact program cost or schedule and for recommending changes
that have the potential to improve program cost or schedule in
a manner consistent with program objectives. The committee
expects any CSB decisions with regard to program requirements
pursuant to subsection (c)(2) of this provision to be signed
personally by the Chairman of the CSB.
In its March 2008 report on selected weapon programs, the
Government Accountability Office (GAO) found that changes in
program requirements often have a significant adverse impact on
cost and schedule. According to GAO:
Unsettled requirements in acquisition programs can
create significant turbulence. Sixty-three percent of
the programs we received data from had requirement
changes after system development began. These programs
encountered cost increases of 72 percent, while costs
grew by 11 percent among those programs that did not
change requirements.
On July 30, 2007, the Under Secretary of Defense for
Acquisition, Technology, and Logistics directed the secretaries
of the military departments to address this problem by
establishing CSBs to control requirements. The Under
Secretary's memorandum states that:
The CSBs will review all requirements changes and any
significant technical configuration changes which have
the potential to result in cost and schedule impacts to
the program. Such changes will generally be rejected,
deferring them to future blocks or increments. Changes
may not be approved unless funds are identified and
schedule impacts are mitigated.
The committee understands that the implementation of CSBs
by the military departments has been uneven. By
institutionalizing the CSB process, the provision recommended
by the committee would ensure that CSBs become an effective
mechanism for cost control on major defense acquisition
programs.
Subtitle B--Acquisition Policy and Management
Internal controls for procurements on behalf of the Department of
Defense by certain non-defense agencies (sec. 811)
The committee recommends a provision that would require the
Inspector General of the Department of Defense (DOD) to conduct
joint reviews with the inspectors general of certain non-
defense agencies to determine whether procurements conducted by
the non-defense agencies on behalf of DOD have been conducted
in compliance with defense procurement requirements.
Section 802 of the Ronald W. Reagan National Defense
Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2005 (Public Law 108-375),
section 811 of the National Defense Authorization Act for
Fiscal Year 2006 (Public Law 109-163), section 817 of the John
Warner National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2007
(Public Law 109-364), and section 801 of the National Defense
Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2008 (Public Law 110-181)
contained similar requirements for joint audits.
The provision recommended by the committee would modify
requirements adopted in previous years by: (1) Deleting the
requirement for follow-up audits of contracts awarded through
the Department of the Treasury and the National Aeronautics and
Space Administration; and (2) adding a new requirement for
joint audits of contracts awarded through the Department of
Commerce and the Department of Energy.
Contingency contracting corps (sec. 812)
The committee recommends a provision that would require the
Secretary of Defense to establish a contingency contracting
corps to ensure that the Department of Defense has the
capability, when needed, to support contingency contracting
actions in a deployed environment.
Expedited review and validation of urgent requirements documents (sec.
813)
The committee recommends a provision that would require the
military departments to ensure that urgent requirements
documents developed by operational field commanders are
presented to appropriate authorities for review and validation
not later than 60 days after the documents are submitted.
Over the last several years, operational commanders in Iraq
have identified urgent operational needs for mine-resistant,
ambush-protected vehicles (MRAPs), non-lethal laser dazzlers,
and other critical equipment. The committee is aware of
allegations that requests for some of these items not only went
unmet, but were not even presented to senior officials
responsible for validating the requests for periods in excess
of a year. While the military services must continue to have
the flexibility to balance competing needs and determine what
equipment to acquire, urgent operational needs identified by
commanders in the field should at a minimum receive a speedy
review and response by responsible officials.
Incorporation of energy efficiency requirements into key performance
parameters for fuel consuming systems (sec. 814)
The February 2008 report of the Defense Science Board Task
Force on DOD Energy Strategy found that the Department of
Defense had taken limited action on recommendations from a
similar Defense Science Board energy study in 2001 with respect
to energy efficiency and investments in weapons systems. The
task force concluded that the Department ``systematically
underestimates'' the full cost of fuel in the life cycle costs
of weapons systems and that the Department fails to value or
emphasize the benefits of fuel efficiency in its requirements,
budgeting, or acquisition processes. The task force argues that
demand-side remedies provide the greatest opportunity to reduce
cost and operational risk in fuel consumption and availability.
The committee notes that the Department is in the early
stages of considering changes to the acquisition process with
respect to energy related requirements and the calculation and
consideration of the fully burdened cost of fuel for current
and future systems. The task force, however, recommended that
the Department accelerate the implementation of new standards,
or key performance parameters, for energy efficiency in the
research, development, and acquisition of future weapons
systems. For example, designs for the manned ground combat
vehicles of the Army's Future Combat System will use hybrid
electric drive with the potential for significant operational
risk reduction and fuel costs savings.
The committee believes that the Department should respond
aggressively to the task force's recommendations for
emphasizing energy efficiency in the modification of current or
development of future fuel consuming systems. Accordingly, the
committee recommends a provision that would direct the Under
Secretary of Defense for Acquisition, Technology, and Logistics
to develop acquisition policies, regulations, and directives,
and a plan for their implementation, that would require program
managers to incorporate energy efficiency requirements into the
key performance parameters for military systems. The committee
further recommends that the Under Secretary provide the defense
committees a report on the Department's implementation plans
and accomplishments with its future budget submissions.
Subtitle C--Amendments Relating to General Contracting Authorities,
Procedures, and Limitations
Multiyear procurement authority for the Department of Defense for the
purchase of alternative and synthetic fuels (sec. 821)
The committee recommends a provision that would authorize
the head of a defense agency to enter into multiyear contracts,
for a period of up to 10 years, for the purchase of alternative
or synthetic fuels. Such a contract would be authorized only
if: (1) the agency head determines, on the basis of a business
case analysis, that the proposed contract is economical and
cost-effective; and (2) the contract specifies that the life
cycle greenhouse gas emissions associated with the production
and combustion of the fuels to be provided under the contract
are not greater than such emissions from conventional
petroleum-based fuels that are used in the same application.
The Secretary of Defense would be required to prescribe
regulations providing specific standards for determinations to
be made by agency heads.
The committee notes that: (1) the cost-effectiveness
requirements recommended by the committee are comparable to
those applicable to multiyear contracts for major weapon
systems; and (2) the greenhouse gas requirement recommended by
the committee is identical to the standard in section 526 of
the Energy Independence and Security Act of 2007 (Public Law
110-140). Representatives of both the Department of Defense and
private sector companies seeking to develop alternative and
synthetic fuel resources have stated that technology is
available to meet the greenhouse gas requirements.
Modification and extension of pilot program for transition to follow-on
contracts under authority to carry out certain prototype
projects (sec. 822)
The committee recommends a provision that would extend for
4 years the authority granted in section 847 of the National
Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2004 (Public Law 108-
136) for the Department of Defense to carry out a pilot program
for the transition of non-traditional defense contractors from
prototype transactions to follow-on contracts. The provision
would also ensure that the transition authority may be used for
technologies developed under research projects carried out
pursuant to section 2371 of title 10, United States Code.
Exclusion of certain factors in consideration of cost advantages of
offers for certain Department of Defense contracts (sec. 823)
The committee recommends a provision that would require the
Department of Defense (DOD) to ensure that a company seeking a
DOD contract does not receive a competitive advantage as a
result of a proposal that reduces costs through the use of
overseas subsidiaries or other similar corporate structures
that enable it to avoid the payment of taxes to the Federal or
State government for or on behalf of employees of the company
(or any subsidiary or affiliate of the company).
The committee understands that this provision would apply
to efforts to avoid the payment of federal social security and
medicare taxes, and State unemployment taxes, for or on behalf
of employees. It would not apply to other taxes, such as
corporate taxes, which are not paid for or on behalf of
employees.
Subtitle D--Department of Defense Contractor Matters
Database for Department of Defense contracting officers and suspension
and debarment officials (sec. 831)
The committee recommends a provision that would require the
Under Secretary of Defense for Acquisition, Technology, and
Logistics to establish and maintain a database of information
regarding the integrity and contract performance of Department
of Defense (DOD) contractors for use by DOD acquisition
officials in making responsibility determinations, past
performance evaluations, and other contract decisions.
Ethics safeguards for employees under certain contracts for the
performance of acquisition functions closely associated with
inherently governmental functions (sec. 832)
The committee recommends a provision that would require
that each Department of Defense (DOD) contract (or task or
delivery order) in excess of $500,000 that calls for the
performance of acquisition functions closely associated with
inherently governmental functions include a contract clause
addressing potential personal conflicts of interests of
contractor employees who will be responsible for the
performance of such functions.
The required contract clause would require covered
contractors to prohibit employees from conducting work for DOD
with respect to a program, company, contractor, or other matter
in which the employees have a financial interest; obtain and
review financial disclosure statements from employees; prohibit
employees from accepting gifts from companies affected by work
that they are performing for DOD; prohibit employees from using
non-public government information for personal gain; take
appropriate steps to enforce these requirements; and promptly
report any violations to the appropriate contracting officer.
The provision requires DOD to develop an appropriate
definition of the term ``financial interest'' that is similar
to the definition in statutes and regulations applicable to
federal employees. The committee expects the implementing
regulations to encompass both direct and indirect financial
interests, as well as both actual and apparent conflicts of
interest.
In March 2008, the Government Accountability Office (GAO)
issued a report entitled ``Additional Personal Conflict of
Interest Safeguards Needed for Certain DOD Contractor
Employees.'' GAO determined that contractor employees often
work alongside DOD employees and perform critical acquisition
tasks, such as the development of contract requirements,
advising or assisting on source selection, and making award-fee
determinations.
Yet, DOD lacks a Department-wide policy requiring
safeguards against personal conflicts of interest by such
contractor employees. GAO recommended that DOD institute such
safeguards and reported that this recommendation was supported
by DOD oversight officials, officials of the Office of
Government Ethics, members of an expert panel on contracting,
and many program managers. The provision recommended by the
committee would require DOD to implement the GAO
recommendation.
Information for Department of Defense contractor employees on their
whistleblower rights (sec. 833)
The committee recommends a provision that would require the
Secretary of Defense to ensure that contractor employees are
informed of their whistleblower rights and protections under
section 2409 of title 10, United States Code.
Subtitle E--Matters Relating to Iraq and Afghanistan
Performance by private security contractors of inherently governmental
functions in an area of combat operations (sec. 841)
The committee recommends a provision that would require the
Secretary of Defense to revise the regulations issued pursuant
to section 862 of the National Defense Authorization Act for
Fiscal Year 2008 (Public Law 110-181) to ensure that private
security contractors are not authorized to perform inherently
governmental functions in an area of combat operations.
``Inherently governmental functions'' are defined in Office
of Management and Budget Circular A-76 and in the Federal
Acquisition Regulation to include those functions that are ``so
intimately related to the public interest as to mandate
performance by government personnel.'' Such functions include
activities that ``significantly affect the life, liberty, and
property of private persons.''
Paragraph E2.1.4 of Department of Defense (DOD) Instruction
1100.22 provides that security provided for the protection of
people and property in uncontrolled or unpredictable high
threat areas outside the United States entails a wide range of
capabilities, some of which are inherently governmental and
others of which may be provided by contractors. In particular,
paragraph E2.1.4.1.4 states:
Security operations that involve more than a response
to hostile attacks typically entail substantial
discretion and are inherently governmental. For
example, security operations that are performed in
highly hazardous public areas where the risks are
uncertain, could require deadly force that is more
likely to be initiated by U.S. forces than occur in
self defense. Security operations that require
immediate decisions on the appropriate course of action
or the acceptable level of risk typically require
substantial discretion and are inherently governmental
particularly when the outcome could significantly
affect the life, liberty, or property of private
persons or international relations. Such operations
typically require on-the-spot judgments on the
appropriate level of force, acceptable level of
collateral damage, and whether the target is `friend or
foe.' They also require protocols on the use of force
that permit discretion for `preemptive' attacks. Such
high risk operations require military training and
discipline . . . and are designated for military
performance.
Despite this guidance, it appears that private security
contractors in Iraq have frequently engaged in activities that
``are performed in highly hazardous public areas where risks
are uncertain,'' ``could require deadly force that is more
likely to be initiated by U.S. forces than occur in self
defense,'' ``require immediate decisions on the appropriate
course of action or the acceptable level of risk,'' and
``require on-the-spot judgments on the appropriate level of
force, acceptable level of collateral damage, and whether the
target is `friend or foe.' ''
The provision recommended by the committee would address
these problems by codifying the standards in DOD Instruction
1100.22, making these standards uniformly applicable to all
private security contractors operating in an area of combat
operations, and requiring contracting agencies to put
appropriate mechanisms in place to ensure compliance with these
standards.
Additional contractor requirements and responsibilities relating to
alleged crimes by or against contractor personnel in Iraq and
Afghanistan (sec. 842)
The committee recommends a provision that would amend
section 861 of the National Defense Authorization Act for
Fiscal Year 2008 (Public Law 110-181) to require the
development of mechanisms to ensure that: (1) contractors are
required to report alleged crimes by or against their employees
in Iraq and Afghanistan to appropriate investigative
authorities; and (2) contractor employees receive appropriate
victim and witness assistance in connection with such alleged
crimes.
Over the last several months, a number of contractor
employees who were victims of rape or sexual assault in Iraq
have publicly alleged that they received little or no help from
either contractor or government officials. Several of these
women testified before congressional committees that they were
``ignored or disciplined'' by company officials to whom they
reported the alleged assaults, and that they were actively
discouraged from reporting anything to the government.
In one case, a woman working for a defense contractor
reported that she was gang-raped by a co-worker and a soldier
at a U.S. base in Iraq. Her supervisors, she testified, tried
to discourage her from reporting the assault. Rather than
supporting her, the woman's employer submitted her to extensive
questioning, then required her to sign an inaccurate statement
of facts before allowing her to move between bases.
In another case, a woman working in Iraq for the same
contractor reported that she was sexually assaulted by a male
co-worker who was never charged.
The provision recommended by the committee is intended to
ensure that contractor employees who are the victims of similar
assaults in the future are not deprived of their legal rights,
and receive the help that they need and the investigative
assistance that they deserve.
Clarification and modification of authorities relating to the
Commission on Wartime Contracting in Iraq and Afghanistan (sec.
843)
The committee recommends a provision that would authorize
the co-chairmen of the Commission on Wartime Contracting in
Iraq and Afghanistan established pursuant to section 841 of the
National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2008 (Public
Law 110-181) to exercise waiver authority under section
8344(i)(1) or section 8468(f)(1) of title 5, United States
Code, to ensure that federal retirees serving as members or
staff of the Commission may be paid for their work on behalf of
the Commission without forfeiting retired pay.
Comprehensive audit of spare parts purchases and depot overhaul and
maintenance of equipment for operations in Iraq and Afghanistan
(sec. 844)
The committee recommends a provision that would require the
Army Audit Agency, the Naval Audit Service, and the Air Force
Audit Agency to conduct comprehensive audits of spare parts
purchases and depot overhaul and maintenance of equipment for
operations in Iraq and Afghanistan.
Subtitle F--Other Matters
Expedited hiring authority for the defense acquisition workforce (sec.
851)
The committee recommends a provision that would authorize
the Secretary of Defense to designate any category of
acquisition positions within the Department of Defense as
shortage category positions. A shortage category designation
would enable the Department of Defense to use direct hiring
authority, substantially shortening the period of time required
to fill the positions.
Section 853 of the National Defense Authorization Act for
Fiscal Year 2008 (Public Law 110-181) extended direct hiring
authority for acquisition positions in all federal agencies
other than the Department of Defense. The provision recommended
by the committee would provide the same authority, for the same
period, to the Department of Defense.
Specification of Secretary of Defense as ``secretary concerned'' for
purposes of licensing of intellectual property for the defense
agencies and defense field activities (sec. 852)
The committee recommends a provision that would clarify
that the Secretary of Defense is the ``secretary concerned''
for the purpose of licensing intellectual property for the
defense agencies and defense field activities pursuant to
section 2260 of title 10, United States Code.
Repeal of requirements relating to the military system essential item
breakout list (sec. 853)
The committee recommends a provision that would repeal
section 813 of the National Defense Authorization Act for
Fiscal Year 2004 (Public Law 108-136), which requires the
Secretary of Defense to submit an annual report to the
congressional defense committees listing essential items,
assemblies, and components of military systems and identifying
where they are produced. The committee has been unable to
identify a purpose for this reporting requirement.
Items of Special Interest
Contracting officer representatives
The committee notes that Department of Defense (DOD)
employees serving as contracting officer representatives (CORs)
play a critical role in the acquisition process both inside and
outside the United States. According to the October 31, 2007,
report of the Commission on Army Acquisition and Program
Management in Expeditionary Operations, Army CORs in Iraq and
Afghanistan have not received the training that they need. The
report states:
CORs represent the ``last tactical mile'' of
expeditionary contracting. However, CORs are assigned *
* * as an ``extra duty,'' requiring no experience. A
COR is often a young Soldier who does not have any
experience as a COR. * * * Although being a COR would
ideally be a career-enhancing duty, the COR assignment
is often used to send a young Soldier to the other side
of the base when a commander does not want to have to
deal with the person. Additionally, little, if any
training is provided. To further compound matters,
generally all COR training is geared for a low-
operations, low-risk tempo, so it is barely adequate.
Despite this, there are still too few CORs. Moreover,
COR turnover is high, frequently leaving many gaps in
contract coverage.
As a result of these failures, the Commission found, there
are often ``no resources trained to monitor and ensure that the
contractor is performing and providing the services needed by
the warfighter.'' In some cases, the Army had difficulty
knowing whether a contractor had performed at all.
The committee directs the Secretary of Defense to report to
the Committees on Armed Services of the Senate and the House of
Representatives by no later than September 30, 2008, on the
steps that the Department is taking to ensure that it can field
an adequate number of appropriately trained CORs to monitor the
performance of contracts both inside and outside the United
States.
Database and after-action reports for multiyear contracts
In March 2008, the Government Accountability Office (GAO)
issued a report on multiyear procurements by the Department of
Defense (DOD). The GAO report recommended that DOD: (1)
implement a central database to track multiyear procurements
for major weapon systems; and (2) conduct after-action
assessments at the conclusion of such multiyear procurements to
determine their effectiveness in achieving predicted benefits
while managing associated risks. The GAO report recommended
that after-action assessments address any major deviations
between the costs and savings predicted and the costs and
savings actually achieved.
DOD concurred with GAO's recommendations and has started to
implement both the database and the after-action assessments.
The committee expects the Department to complete the
implementation of both recommendations in a timely manner and
to use the database and the after-action assessments to inform
decisions on future multiyear procurements.
Past performance information
For more than a decade, the Federal Acquisition Regulation
has required contracting officials to consider information on
the past performance of offerors when making contract award
decisions. The committee continues to believe that past
contract performance can be an important indicator of the
likelihood that an offeror will successfully perform a similar
contract in the future.
In several recent contract award decisions, however, it
appears that the past performance information considered by
contracting officials may have been seriously flawed. For
example, the winning bidder on a recent Army ammunition
contract valued at more than $300.0 million received top
ratings for its past performance, even though the company was
managed by a 22-year-old and had never previously performed a
contract valued at more than $20.0 million. Similarly, the
winning bidder on a recent Air Force communications contract
was given top ratings for past performance, even though it was
a new company that had never previously performed any similar
work.
The committee directs the Under Secretary of Defense for
Acquisition, Technology, and Logistics to review methods used
by the Department of Defense to collect, standardize, access,
and evaluate past performance information and to report to the
Committees on Armed Services of the Senate and the House of
Representatives by no later than 1 year after the date of the
enactment of this Act on steps that the Department plans to
take to improve the use of such information.
TITLE IX--DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE ORGANIZATION AND MANAGEMENT
Subtitle A--Department of Defense Management
Modification of status of Assistant to the Secretary of Defense for
Nuclear and Chemical and Biological Defense Programs (sec. 901)
The committee recommends a provision that would amend
section 142 of title 10, United States Code, to clarify that
the Assistant to the Secretary of Defense for Nuclear and
Chemical and Biological Defense is equivalent to an assistant
secretary of defense. The committee notes that this important
position has been vacant for over 18 months.
Participation of Deputy Chief Management Officer of the Department of
Defense on Defense Business System Management Committee (sec.
902)
The committee recommends a provision that would make the
Deputy Chief Management Officer of the Department of Defense
the Vice Chairman of the Defense Business System Management
Committee. This is a conforming change to section 904 of the
National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2008 (Public
Law 110-181), which established the position of the Deputy
Chief Management Officer, and would ensure that the statutory
reporting chain for the Business Transformation Agency is
consistent with the reporting chain for the Director of that
Agency.
Repeal of obsolete limitations on management headquarters personnel
(sec. 903)
The committee recommends a provision that would repeal caps
on the number of personnel employed in headquarters activities
of the military departments and defense agencies, as requested
by the Department of Defense.
Section 901 of the National Defense Authorization Act for
Fiscal Year 2008 (Public Law 110-181) repealed the Department-
wide limitation on the number of personnel in headquarters
activities. However, limitations on the number of personnel in
headquarters activities of the military departments and defense
agencies continue to impede the Department's ability to meet
new demands and expanded requirements in the most cost-
effective manner possible.
General Counsel to the Inspector General of the Department of Defense
(sec. 904)
The committee recommends a provision that would provide for
a General Counsel to the Department of Defense Inspector
General who would serve at the discretion of the Inspector
General, report exclusively to the Inspector General, and be
independent of the Office of General Counsel of the Department
of Defense. The committee understands that the Inspectors
General of other federal agencies have general counsels who
report only to them. The availability of such independent legal
advice is critical to the successful performance of the
Inspector General's function of carrying out independent audits
and investigations to identify problems and deficiencies in the
programs and operations of the Department.
Assignment of forces to the United States Northern Command with primary
mission of management of the consequences of an incident in the
United States homeland involving a chemical, biological,
radiological, or nuclear device, or high-yield explosives (sec.
905)
The committee recommends a provision that would express the
sense of Congress that: (1) the Department of Defense should
make every effort to help protect the Nation from the threat of
a chemical, biological, radiological, nuclear, or high-yield
explosive (CBRNE) attack; (2) efforts to establish forces to
manage the consequences of CBRNE incidents should receive the
highest level of attention within the Department; and (3) the
additional forces needed for CBRNE consequence management
should be identified, trained, equipped, and assigned to U.S.
Northern Command as soon as possible. The provision would also
require the Secretary of Defense to submit three reports to the
congressional defense committees describing the progress made
toward assigning such forces to U.S. Northern Command. The
provision specifies a number of elements to be included in the
reports.
The committee notes that the Department has directed that a
full-time, dedicated CBRNE consequence management force be
trained and equipped by the end of fiscal year 2008, and that
two additional such forces are to be established by the end of
the next 2 fiscal years. The Department has begun the process
of establishing these CBRNE consequence management forces,
which will be assigned to U.S. Northern Command.
The committee observes that the Commission on the National
Guard and the Reserves and the Government Accountability Office
have been critical of the capacity of the Department to respond
to domestic CBRNE incidents. The committee believes that
establishing the CBRNE consequence management forces under U.S.
Northern Command is an essential step in enhancing the ability
of the Nation to respond to such incidents.
Business transformation initiatives for the military departments (sec.
906)
The committee recommends a provision that would require
each military department to carry out a business transformation
initiative and to establish an Office of Business
Transformation (OBT) to assist in that effort.
Over the last 4 years, the Department of Defense (DOD) has
demonstrated a commitment to business systems modernization by
establishing a Defense System Management Committee, a Business
Transformation Agency, and a new federated architecture for DOD
business systems. However, the military departments have not
yet followed DOD's lead in establishing new governance
structures to address business transformation; have not yet
developed comprehensive enterprise architectures and transition
plans consistent with statutory requirements; and continue to
rely upon stovepiped structures to implement piecemeal reforms.
The committee expects the new OBTs to lead cross-domain
governance of business transformation efforts and to ensure
that business solutions optimize the military department's
business operations as a whole rather than the operations of
separate functional elements of the department. OBTs should be
staffed with functional and technical experts who are able to
establish working level relationships with the functional
elements and ensure that their needs are addressed within a
comprehensive end-to-end business architecture. The provision
recommended by the committee would authorize the Directors of
Business Transformation to direct specific actions by such
functional elements when necessary to carry out a business
transformation initiative.
Subtitle B--Space Matters
Space posture review (sec. 911)
The committee recommends a provision that would direct the
Secretary of Defense, in conjunction with the Director of
National Intelligence, to conduct a comprehensive review of the
space posture of the United States. The review would cover a
10-year period beginning February 1, 2009. The Secretary would
be required to submit the report no later than December 1,
2009.
The committee is concerned that most military space
capabilities are being modernized simultaneously. Almost all of
these modernization programs have exceeded their schedule and
cost estimates, some significantly. The growth in and demands
on the space budget are occurring at a time when Air Force
Space Command is trying to improve space situational awareness
capabilities, and the space community in general is concerned
about possible threats to space systems. The review in the
recommended provision would emphasize the increased focus on
space awareness and control activities. In completing the
review the committee directs the Secretary and the Director to
look at the comparative funding levels for both space
situational awareness and satellite protection programs and the
satellite modernization programs.
The provision would also direct a review of the export
control regime with respect to space systems and technologies.
Subtitle C--Defense Intelligence Matters
Requirement for officers of the armed forces on active duty in certain
intelligence positions (sec. 921)
The committee recommends a provision that would require,
effective October 1, 2008, that the principal deputy to the
senior service intelligence officer be a commissioned officer
of the armed forces on active duty.
Each of the military services assigns a senior active duty
military officer of flag or general officer rank to serve as
the senior intelligence adviser to the Chief of Staff or Chief
of Naval Operations. However, the services are not consistent
in assigning military officers as the deputy to the senior
service intelligence officers, with uneven results. This
provision would correct that situation.
Transfer of management of Intelligence Systems Support Office (sec.
922)
As discussed elsewhere in this report, the committee
recommends a provision that would transfer management of the
Intelligence Systems Support Office and other projects and
activities currently conducted by the Office of the Under
Secretary of Defense for Intelligence (OUSDI) to other
components of the Department of Defense. This provision would
ensure consistent application of OUSDI policy regarding OUSDI
execution of development, acquisition, and operational support
programs.
Program on advanced sensor applications (sec. 923)
The committee is troubled that the Department of Defense
(DOD) has not complied with section 215 of the National Defense
Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2008 (Public Law 110-181).
Section 215 directed that the Department transfer funds within
60 days of enactment to the Advanced Sensor Applications
Program (ASAP), a deadline reached on March 28, 2008, without
any action by the Department.
The committee is cautiously optimistic that DOD is gaining
an understanding of the facts about the ASAP and its
importance. With that understanding, DOD appears to be moving
towards compliance with congressional direction for sustaining
funding for the ASAP for fiscal year 2008 and to identify
funding for fiscal year 2009.
However, without official notification of action to comply
with section 215, the committee must act to preserve its
interest in this matter. Therefore, the committee recommends a
provision that would establish the ASAP within the Office of
the Under Secretary of Defense for Acquisition, Technology, and
Logistics.
The committee remains concerned that the Under Secretary of
Defense for Intelligence (USDI) intends to transfer the program
to elements of the Navy that have attempted strenuously to
terminate the program, and to sever the existing partnership
with an ally. The USDI's position has been that it is
inappropriate for the USDI to oversee the execution of a
program involving scientific and engineering assessment of
intelligence data, and that the Navy should have total
responsibility for this activity.
The committee has two fundamental problems with USDI's
position. The first is that transferring total program
responsibility to the Navy is inconsistent with the mandate
Congress established for the ASAP long ago and has maintained
consistently since.
This mandate is for the Department to conduct a scientific
and engineering assessment of potential anti-submarine warfare
(ASW) threats that is parallel to, but independent of, the
Submarine Security Program run by the Navy. To ensure
independence, Congress has always insisted that this effort be
sponsored by an Office of the Secretary of Defense
organization, even while supporting execution by Navy elements
with an ASW mission. Transferring the program entirely to the
Navy subjects the program to pressures arising from various
institutional biases. Also, despite long experience with its
own submarine security program, which like the ASAP is neither
an intelligence nor an acquisition program, the Navy's Office
of Naval Intelligence and acquisition community appear
determined to put the ASAP program into one category or the
other.
The second problem is that the USDI sponsors and executes,
albeit through an Air Force program element, a large number of
operational support activities and research and development
(R&D) programs. Indeed, USDI has long maintained a significant
budget for R&D that it uses to delve into diverse topics it
deems to be of special interest. If there is no place for the
ASAP in USDI, then USDI should not be conducting these other
activities either.
The budget request included no funds in PE 63714D8Z for the
ASAP. The committee recommends an authorization of $20.0
million for ASAP. The committee recommends a reduction of $10.0
million to the request for the Intelligence Systems Support
Office (ISSO) (PE 11815F), and a reduction of $10.0 million
from the request in Air Force Operation and Maintenance funds
for the Threat Financing program executed by ISSO.
TITLE X--GENERAL PROVISIONS
Subtitle A--Financial Matters
General transfer authority (sec. 1001)
The committee recommends a provision that would provide for
the transfer of up to $5.0 billion of funds authorized in
division A of this Act to unforeseen higher priority needs in
accordance with normal reprogramming procedures. This is the
amount contained in the administration's fiscal year 2009
budget request. Transfers of funds between military personnel
authorizations would not be counted toward the dollar
limitation in this provision.
Incorporation into Act of tables in the report of the Committee on
Armed Services of the Senate (sec. 1002)
The committee recommends a provision that would incorporate
the funding tables in this report into the National Defense
Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2009 and make the items in
each such funding table binding on agency heads, subject to
reprogramming in accordance with established procedures.
Consistent with the previously expressed views of the
committee, the provision would also require that decisions by
agency heads to commit, obligate, or expend funds on the basis
of such funding tables be based on authorized, transparent,
statutory criteria, and merit-based decisionmaking in
accordance with the requirements of sections 2304(k) and 2374
of title 10, United States Code. Under these provisions, the
presumption in favor of competitive, merit-based awards may be
overcome only by a provision of law that specifically refers to
section 2304 or section 2374, identifies the particular non-
Federal Government entity involved, and states that award to
the entity is required notwithstanding the policy favoring
merit-based selection.
On January 29, 2008, the President signed Executive Order
13457, which states that agency decisions to commit, obligate,
or expend funds may not be ``based on language in any report of
a committee of Congress, joint explanatory statement of a
committee of conference of the Congress, statement of managers
concerning a bill in the Congress, or any other non-statutory
statement or indication of views of the Congress, or a House,
committee, Member, officer, or staff thereof.''
The consistent practice of the Committee on Armed Services
has been to include broad categorical authorizations in bill
language--such as $10.0 billion for Army research, development,
test, and evaluation or $25.0 billion for Air Force research,
development, test, and evaluation--while specifying the
particular programs for which this money is authorized in
funding tables in the committee report accompanying the bill.
These tables are placed before the committee in mark-up, are
subject to amendment by the committee, and are approved by the
committee when the bill is reported to the floor. It is, and
has been, the intent of the committee that these funding
decisions are binding upon the executive branch.
The provision recommended by the committee would ensure the
force and effect of funding decisions made by the committee by
incorporating the funding tables reflecting those decisions
into the bill.
The committee notes that the table included in the bill in
compliance with Rule XLIV of the Standing Rules of the Senate--
which discloses information on members requesting funding
items, suggested recipients, and suggested locations of
performance--is not a funding table, is not binding on the
executive branch, and is not incorporated into the bill by this
provision.
United States contribution to NATO common-funded budgets in fiscal year
2009 (sec. 1003)
The resolution of ratification for the Protocols to the
North Atlantic Treaty of 1949 on the Accession of Poland,
Hungary, and the Czech Republic contained a provision (section
3(2)(c)(ii)) requiring a specific authorization for U.S.
payments to the common-funded budgets of the North Atlantic
Treaty Organization (NATO) for each fiscal year, beginning in
fiscal year 1999, in which U.S. payments exceed the fiscal year
1998 total. The committee recommends a provision that would
authorize the U.S. contribution to NATO common-funded budgets
for fiscal year 2009, including the use of unexpended balances
from prior years.
Subtitle B--Naval Vessels and Shipyards
Government rights in designs of Department of Defense vessels, boats,
craft, and components developed using public funds (sec. 1011)
The committee recommends a provision that would affirm that
the government's rights in the designs of vessels, boats,
craft, and components developed for the Department of Defense
(DOD) using public funds in whole or in part are governed
exclusively by the requirements of section 2320 of title 10,
United States Code or, in certain cases, the agreement pursuant
to which the development was undertaken.
Section 2320 provides that: (1) in the case of items
developed by a contractor or subcontractor exclusively with
government funds, the government has unlimited technical data
rights; and (2) in the case of items developed with mixed
government and private funding, rights in technical data are
determined by negotiation and generally include government-
purpose rights. The continued application of section 2320 and
the DOD implementing regulations should ensure that DOD is not
required to purchase the same data rights more than once.
Reimbursement of expenses for certain Navy mess operations (sec. 1012)
The committee recommends a provision that would authorize
the Secretary of Defense to fund from agency operating accounts
the cost of meals on United States naval and naval auxiliary
vessels for non-military personnel. For the purposes of this
provision, this includes nongovernmental organization (NGO) and
host and partner nation participants in civil-military
operations and foreign national patients treated during the
conduct of civil-military operations, as well as their escorts.
Recent humanitarian relief missions executed by the USNS
MERCY and other vessels have successfully fostered a positive
image of America worldwide. Project Hope and other NGOs, host
and partner nations, joint services, and U.S. Government
agencies participated in these missions, providing medical
services including the treatment of foreign national patients
onboard and ashore. These participants have been required to
pay for their meals. There is no specific statutory authority
to waive such meal payment or to use general operation and
maintenance appropriated funds to pay for official visitor/
guest messing.
As a result of the success of these missions, the
Department of the Navy plans future deployments that will
include the conduct of civil-military operations, including
delivery of medical, dental, veterinary, and engineering
services to underserved populations in Southeast Asia, Africa,
and other places. The Department of the Navy has determined
that the participation of NGOs and host and partner nations is
vital to the successful execution of these important missions,
that their contribution far outweighs the cost of messing, and
that it is not in the government's best interests to assess
these participants and patients messing costs. To the extent
future official visitor/guest messing costs are anticipated, an
alternative to emergency or extraordinary expense funding--
which has been covering these costs to date--would be
appropriate.
The Department of Defense has informed the committee that
the Department of the Navy estimates the fiscal year 2009 cost
of these operations at about $700,000.
Subtitle C--Counter-Drug Activities
Extension of authority for joint task forces to provide support to law
enforcement agencies conducting counter-terrorism activities
(sec. 1021)
The committee recommends a provision that would extend
authority for joint task forces to use counterdrug funds to
support law enforcement agencies conducting counterterrorist
activities.
The committee directs the Deputy Assistant Secretary of
Defense for Counternarcotics Affairs to provide an annual
briefing about the use of this authority to the committee.
The committee notes that if the Department of Defense (DOD)
or the law enforcement agencies do not have sufficient funds
for counterterrorist activities, funding should be sought for
those purposes. The base budget for DOD counterdrug activities
has remained constant over about the last decade, and while the
committee supports using funds to address counterdrug and
counterterrorist threats simultaneously, the committee urges
DOD to be mindful of counterdrug priorities.
Two-year extension of authority for use of funds for unified
counterdrug and counterterrorism campaign in Colombia (sec.
1022)
The committee recommends a provision that would extend by 2
years the authority to use counterdrug funds to support the
Government of Colombia's unified campaign against narcotics
cultivation and trafficking, and against terrorist
organizations involved in such drug trafficking activities.
The committee has provided funding since fiscal year 2000
to support Colombia's effort to defeat the narco-terrorists
threatening the Colombian state and stability in the region.
The Colombian Government has moved from Plan Colombia to Plan
Patriota, the military campaign to retake control of all
municipalities in Colombia, to the current third phase, Plan
Consolidacion. This plan, which should stretch to the end of
2009, aims to establish governance and ensure that military
gains are irreversible. Meanwhile, the military campaign to
defeat the narco-terrorists continues, along with the
demobilization of the paramilitaries. President Uribe's
administration, with U.S. help, is also making efforts to
improve human rights, and create employment opportunities for
the over 30,000 demobilized paramilitaries.
The committee applauds the military progress that Colombian
forces, with U.S. assistance, have achieved and encourages the
Colombian Government to continue to increase its emphasis on
socio-economic reform and development, human rights, and to
further improve military professionalization and proficiency.
Subtitle D--Miscellaneous Authorities and Limitations
Procurement by State and local governments of equipment for homeland
security and emergency response activities through the
Department of Defense (sec. 1031)
The committee recommends a provision that would expand the
categories of equipment that may be purchased through the
Department of Defense (DOD) by State and local governments to
include consequence management equipment for homeland security
and emergency response activities, as requested by DOD.
Enhancement of the capacity of the United States Government to conduct
complex operations (sec. 1032)
The committee recommends a provision that would authorize
the Secretary of Defense to establish a Center for Complex
Operations. This center would facilitate the activities of a
consortium made up of education and training institutions from
across the U.S. Government. These activities, including
conferences, seminars, and other information exchanges, would
allow the center to identify topics of importance for the
leadership of the U.S. Government and the complex operations
community. The objective would be to enhance the training and
education of military personnel and their civilian counterparts
across different agencies, and to increase unity of effort in
complex operations. The provision would define complex
operations as stability, security, transition and
reconstruction operations; counterinsurgency operations; and
irregular warfare.
The committee notes that such a center does currently
exist. Express authorization for the center would allow for the
center to be funded collectively by the Departments of Defense
and State, U.S. Agency for International Development, and other
departments and agencies, rather than having to rely on
discrete partner funding for each activity. This would
facilitate greater interagency cooperation and allow for smooth
execution of activities. This legislation would also allow the
center to receive funding from other agencies, states, or other
foreign and domestic entities.
Crediting of admiralty claim receipts for damage to property funded
from a Department of Defense working capital fund (sec. 1033)
The committee recommends a provision that would provide
that payments received by the United States in settlement of an
admiralty claim for damage or loss to property that is operated
and maintained using monies from a Department of Defense
working capital fund account would be credited to the working
capital fund which was used to operate and maintain the damaged
or lost property.
Minimum annual purchase requirements for airlift services from carriers
participating in the Civil Reserve Air Fleet (sec. 1034)
The committee recommends a provision that would allow the
Department of Defense to guarantee higher minimum levels of
business than are currently authorized by law to United States
air carriers participating in the Civil Reserve Air Fleet
(CRAF). This provision was included in the set of provisions in
the authorization request of the Department of Defense.
Section 356 of the National Defense Authorization Act for
Fiscal Year 2008 (Public Law 110-181) required the Secretary of
Defense to provide for an independent assessment of the
viability of the CRAF program. Section 356 required a report on
a number of issues. This direction asked for the assessment to
make specific recommendations for improving the CRAF program,
including assessing potential incentives for increasing
participation in the CRAF program. One potential method for
increasing participation specifically identified was the option
of establishing a minimum annual purchase amount during
peacetime. Although the report was supposed to be delivered to
the congressional defense committees by April 1, 2008, the
Department has indicated that this report will not be ready
until later this year.
In anticipation that the report could recommend
establishing minimum annual purchase amounts during peacetime,
the committee believes that the legislative option for doing so
this year should remain open.
Termination date of base contract for the Navy-Marine Corps Intranet
(sec. 1035)
The committee recommends a provision that would provide the
Navy flexibility in extending the termination date of the
current Navy-Marine Corps Intranet (NMCI) contract by 1 month.
The Navy is currently finalizing requirements and developing an
acquisition strategy for the Next Generation Enterprise Network
(NGEN), a program that will provide computing services and
infrastructure to significant portions of the Navy and Marine
Corps upon termination of the current NMCI program. The
committee has some concern about the compressed nature of the
NGEN selection process and schedule and the lack of direct
engagement with industry on requirements, technical issues, and
acquisition strategy and expects these to be addressed over the
coming months.
The committee believes that providing authority to extend
the current NMCI contract will enable the Navy to be better
able to run a full, fair, and open selection process that
results in the best value for the government and meets Navy
requirements. The committee believes the extension will also
smooth the transition of provision of services under the
current NMCI program and the NGEN program. Finally, the
extension will enable the Navy to better adjust activities to
reflect the potential of a late appropriation in fiscal year
2011 that could cause disruption of services to Navy and Marine
Corps personnel and organizations.
Prohibition on interrogation of detainees by contractor personnel (sec.
1036)
The committee recommends a provision that would provide
that the interrogation of detainees during or in the aftermath
of hostilities is an inherently governmental function that
cannot be transferred to private sector contractors. The
provision would become effective 1 year after the date of the
enactment of this Act, to provide the Department of Defense
(DOD) time to comply.
DOD guidance documents in effect through 2005 provided that
``How enemy prisoners of war (POWs), terrorists, and criminals
are treated when captured, in transit, confined, and
interrogated during or in the aftermath of hostilities entails
the discretionary exercise of government authority'' and
``cannot be transferred to the private sector.'' In 2006,
however, this guidance was revised to expressly authorize the
use of contractors to perform interrogations.
According to reports of investigations conducted by Major
General Antonio M. Taguba and Major General George R. Fay,
contract interrogators are alleged to have participated in some
of the abuses at Abu Ghraib prison 4 years ago. At that time,
the Acting Secretary of the Army testified that the Army was
planning ``to build additional force structure so that
operational and theater level intelligence functions will be
performed in-house in the future.'' Four years later, the
Department of Defense still has almost 100 contractor employees
conducting interrogations of detainees.
The interrogation of detainees during or in the aftermath
of hostilities entails the exercise of substantial discretion
in applying government authority and is likely to have a
significant impact on the life and liberty of the individuals
questioned. The committee concludes that the conduct of such
interrogations is an inherently governmental function that
should be performed exclusively by military or civilian
employees of the Department.
Notification of Committees on Armed Services with respect to certain
nonproliferation and proliferation activities (sec. 1037)
The committee recommends a provision that would direct the
Departments of Defense, Energy, State, and Commerce, and the
Nuclear Regulatory Commission to keep the Committees on Armed
Services of the Senate and the House of Representatives fully
and currently informed with respect to their activities to
prevent the proliferation of weapons of mass destruction and
the Director of National Intelligence to keep the committees
currently informed with respect to the current activities of
foreign nations that are of significance from the proliferation
standpoint.
Sense of Congress on nuclear weapons management (sec. 1038)
The committee recommends a provision that would set forth
the sense of Congress finding that the unauthorized transfer of
nuclear weapons from Minot Air Force Base, North Dakota, to
Barksdale Air Force Base, Louisiana, in August 2007; the
unauthorized transfer of classified intercontinental ballistic
missile parts, discovered in March 2008; and a lack of training
and staffing for nuclear matters, demonstrate a lack of
attention by the Department of Defense (DOD) to nuclear issues
in general. In addition, the provision would set forth the
sense of Congress that safety and security of nuclear weapons
and related equipment should be a high priority for the United
States; that the President should take steps to nominate an
individual to fill the position of the Assistant to the
Secretary of Defense for Nuclear and Chemical and Biological
Defense Programs; and that the Secretary of Defense should
establish a senior position in the DOD Office of Policy at an
assistant secretarial or deputy under secretarial level with
responsibility for nuclear policy issues.
The three reviews of the nuclear weapons transfer incident
concluded that attention to nuclear matters has substantially
eroded over the last decade. This erosion in turn, has led to
inattention to nuclear procedures and policies. The three
review teams made over 100 recommendations to address the many
problems. The committee will be watching closely how DOD and
the Air Force implement these recommendations.
Sense of Congress on Joint Department of Defense-Federal Aviation
Administration Executive Committee on Conflict and Dispute
Resolution (sec. 1039)
As discussed at length elsewhere in this report, there is
an urgent need for the Department of Defense (DOD) and the
Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) to work more effectively
together to resolve problems and issues that impede DOD
unmanned aerial systems (UAS) from operating in the National
Airspace (NAS). DOD and the FAA signed a memorandum of
agreement (MOA) in September 2007 creating a working
relationship to address technical, procedural, and policy
issues regarding UAS access to the NAS. The FAA has created an
Unmanned Aircraft Program Office and the DOD has created a UAS
Task Force and UAS Senior Steering Group. These steps, while
important, have not produced the rate of progress necessary to
sustain and grow vital UAS support to the combatant commands.
It is the committee's judgment that national security could be
adversely affected without more vigorous efforts.
The committee believes that a formal DOD-FAA committee
should be established at a senior level to ensure progress by
the military services and the FAA in meeting their obligations
under the MOA, to resolve disputes, and to make the agreements
necessary for DOD to carry out its plans to field very large
numbers of UAS and utilize them effectively.
More broadly, senior DOD and FAA officials agree that there
are multiple, important issues that require higher-level and
sustained policy attention. One example is the ongoing
discussions over fee-for-service aerial refueling. The
committee is encouraged by recent efforts to resolve conflicts
over type ratings for aerial refueling aircraft, but much work
remains to be done. A senior-level body for conflict resolution
could pave the way for more streamlined, safety-conscious
interactions and more effective national policy development.
Therefore, the committee recommends a provision that would
express the sense of Congress that the Secretary of Defense
should seek an agreement with the Administrator of the FAA to
establish a Joint Executive Committee at the level of the
Associate Administrator for Aviation Safety (AAAS) and the
Under Secretary of Defense for Acquisition, Technology, and
Logistics (USD/AT&L). Such a Committee could serve as the focal
point for dispute resolution and policy development, and a
mechanism for identifying solutions to a range of mutual
issues.
Sense of Congress on sale of new outsize cargo, strategic lift aircraft
for civilian use (sec. 1040)
The committee recommends a provision that would express the
sense of Congress that the Secretary of Defense should:
(1) review the benefits and feasibility of pursuing a
commercial-military cargo initiative for the C-17
aircraft and determine whether such an initiative is in
the national interest; and
(2) if the Secretary determines that such an
initiative is in the national interest, take
appropriate actions to coordinate with the Federal
Aviation Administration (FAA) to achieve the type
certification for such aircraft required by section
21.27 of title 14, Code 12 of Federal Regulations.
The FAA has informed the committee that no fewer than six
commercial operators have expressed interest in procuring a
commercial variant of the C-17 aircraft. According to officials
within the FAA, the FAA cannot initiate a type certification
review that would be required to allow C-17 commercial
operations on its own initiative. Some other government entity,
such as the Department of Defense, the Department of Homeland
Security, the Congress, etc., would have to decide that it
would be in the national interest and so inform the FAA before
it could begin such a review. This provision would encourage
the Secretary of Defense to decide whether it would be in the
national interest.
Subtitle E--Reports
Repeal of requirement to submit certain annual reports to Congress
regarding allied contributions to the common defense (sec.
1051)
The committee recommends a provision that would repeal
certain annual reporting requirements relating to the
contributions of North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO)
members to the common defense. The committee believes these
reporting requirements are outdated, and impose an unnecessary
burden on the executive branch. The committee notes that
relevant information on allied contributions is provided in a
number of annual reports to Congress, such as those on the NATO
Prague Capabilities Commitment and the NATO Response Force
agreements, and other sources.
Report on detention operations in Iraq (sec. 1052)
The committee recommends a provision that would require the
Secretary of Defense to submit a report to the congressional
defense committees on detention operations at theater
internment facilities and reintegration centers in Iraq since
January 1, 2007. The report would require detailed information
on changes in detention policies and procedures intended to
incorporate counterinsurgency doctrine into detention
operations and programs to prepare detainees for reintegration
upon their release.
The committee urges the Department of Defense to assess
thoroughly the impact of the revised detention and
reintegration policies and procedures in Iraq. The committee
believes that the revised U.S. detention policies and
procedures implemented in Iraq since 2007 could provide
valuable lessons for U.S. detention practices elsewhere. The
committee strongly encourages the Department to integrate these
lessons into Department directives, joint doctrine, exercises,
and training for detention and interrogation operations.
Strategic plan to enhance the role of the National Guard and Reserves
in the national defense (sec. 1053)
The committee recommends a provision that would require the
Secretary of Defense to develop a strategic plan to enhance the
role of the National Guard and reserves in the national
defense, including the transition of the reserve components of
the armed forces from a strategic force to an operational
force. The provision would require the Secretary to submit to
the Committees on Armed Services of the Senate and the House of
Representatives a report setting forth the plan not later than
July 1, 2009.
The Report of the Commission on the National Guard and
Reserves is a comprehensive evaluation of the reserve
components of the armed forces that recognizes that legislative
and policy changes have not kept pace with the changes in the
use of the National Guard and reserves. This report contains 95
recommendations that must be evaluated and considered for
implementation. The committee directs the Secretary of Defense
to develop a strategic plan that considers the role of the
National Guard and reserves that takes into account the
findings and recommendations of this Commission; the findings
and recommendations of the report of the Center for Strategic
and International Studies on ``The Future of the National Guard
and Reserves''; S. 2760 of the 110th Congress, the National
Guard Empowerment and State-National Defense Integration Act of
2008; and current policies of the Department of Defense.
The committee greatly appreciates the contributions of the
Commission on the National Guard and Reserves and the Center
for Strategic and International Studies that lead to a greater
understanding of the issues involved in the increased use of
the reserve components. The committee intends to ensure that
the issues raised are fully considered and acted on as
appropriate, taking into account the primacy of the Department
of Defense's combat responsibilities.
Review of nonnuclear prompt global strike concept demonstrations (sec.
1054)
The committee recommends a provision that would direct the
Secretary of Defense, in consultation with the Secretary of
State, to conduct a review of the prompt global strike
technologies that will be demonstrated beginning in fiscal year
2010. The report would set forth the cost of the demonstration,
identify any legal, treaty, or policy related issues that might
be associated with the concept demonstrated or the
demonstration itself, and whether and to what extent there is a
possibility that the concept or the demonstration itself could
be confused with a nuclear weapons system. In addition, the
report would set forth a description of the types of targets
against which the concept demonstrated might be used. The
report would be submitted to the congressional defense
committees no later than 30 days after the date on which the
budget is submitted.
Review of bandwidth capacity requirements of the Department of Defense
and the intelligence community (sec. 1055)
The committee recommends a provision that would direct the
Secretary of Defense and the Director of National Intelligence
to conduct a joint review of the current and future bandwidth
capacity requirements of the Department of Defense (DOD) and
the intelligence community over the next 10 years. The review
would also include a discussion of any mitigation concepts,
including operational or technical options that might be used
to address bandwidth capacity shortfalls. Not later than 1 year
after the date of enactment of this Act, the Secretary and the
Director would be required to submit a report setting forth the
results of the review to the congressional defense committees
and the intelligence committees of the Senate and the House of
Representatives. The Secretary and the Director should include
and fully address in the review all means by which bandwidth is
provided, including ground, aerial, and satellite options.
The provision would also direct the Secretary and the
Director to establish a formal process, for each major defense
acquisition or major system acquisition program, to ensure
during the Milestone B or key decision point B phase of the
acquisition process, that the bandwidth requirements of each
such system can be met.
The committee is concerned that there is a disconnect
between the bandwidth requirements of major systems such as
unmanned aerial vehicles and other intelligence surveillance
and reconnaissance systems, and the Army Future Combat System,
and the ground and space systems required to meet those
requirements.
Subtitle F--Wounded Warrior Matters
Modification of utilization of veterans' presumption of sound condition
in establishing eligibility of members of the armed forces for
retirement for disability (sec. 1061)
The committee recommends a provision that would amend
sections 1201 and 1203 of title 10, United States Code, to
adopt the same presumption of sound condition used by the
Department of Veterans Affairs in accordance with section 1111
of title 38, United States Code, that a disability is incurred
while on active duty if the disability was not noted at the
time of a member's entrance on active duty unless clear and
unmistakable evidence demonstrates that the disability existed
before the member's entrance on active duty and was not
aggravated by active military service.
Inclusion of service members in inpatient status in wounded warrior
policies and protections (sec. 1062)
The committee recommends a provision that would amend
section 1602(7) of the Wounded Warrior Act (title XVI of the
National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2008 (Public
Law 110-181)) to include inpatient service members in the
definition of a ``recovering service member'' for purposes of
policies and protections for wounded warriors.
Clarification of certain information sharing between the Department of
Defense and Department of Veterans Affairs for wounded warrior
purposes (sec. 1063)
The committee recommends a provision that would amend
section 1614(b)(11) of the Wounded Warrior Act (title XVI of
the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2008
(Public Law 110-181)) to require the Secretary of Defense and
the Secretary of Veterans Affairs to implement a process for
transferring medical records of a recovering service member
from the Department of Defense to the Department of Veterans
Affairs when the transfer is authorized by regulations
implementing the Health Insurance Portability and
Accountability Act of 1996.
Additional responsibilities for the wounded warrior resource center
(sec. 1064)
The committee recommends a provision that would amend
section 1616(a) of the Wounded Warrior Act (title XVI of the
National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2008 (Public
Law 110-181)), to require the Secretary of Defense to provide
referrals for legal assistance where appropriate to wounded
warriors, their families, and primary caregivers.
The committee has been made aware of certain cases where
family or legal guardians of incapacitated wounded warriors
were in need of legal assistance to help with future financial
and estate planning and other needs on behalf of the service
member. The committee believes that the wounded warrior center
established by section 1616 should be a comprehensive resource
not only for wounded warriors, but for their families and
caregivers as well. Therefore, the committee directs that
referral information be made available where appropriate upon
request. The committee notes that the intent of this provision
is not to create a new entitlement for legal assistance.
Responsibility for the center of excellence in the prevention,
diagnosis, mitigation, treatment, and rehabilitation of
traumatic brain injury to conduct pilot programs on treatment
approaches for traumatic brain injury (sec. 1065)
The committee recommends a provision that would amend
section 1621(c) of the Wounded Warrior Act (title XVI of the
National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2008 (Public
Law 110-181)) to authorize the Secretary of Defense to conduct
pilot programs to promote or assess the efficacy of treatment
approaches for all forms of traumatic brain injury, to include
mild traumatic brain injury.
The committee recognizes that the Department of Defense and
the National Institutes of Health (NIH) have numerous efforts
underway to conduct research on effective clinical approaches
to mitigating the consequences of traumatic brain injury,
including potential pharmacological approaches. One such
potential candidate is the drug progesterone, for which
according to the Department of Defense (DOD), future studies
are planned by NIH. The committee encourages the Department to
continue research efforts on potential clinical drug candidates
to treat traumatic brain injury under the auspices of the DOD
Center of Excellence in the Prevention, Diagnosis, Treatment,
and Rehabilitation of Traumatic Brain Injury, to include
participation, as appropriate, in clinical trials conducted by
the National Institutes of Health.
Center of excellence in the mitigation, treatment, and rehabilitation
of traumatic extremity injuries and amputations (sec. 1066)
The committee recommends a provision that would require the
Secretary of Defense and the Secretary of Veterans Affairs to
jointly establish a center of excellence in the mitigation,
treatment, and rehabilitation of traumatic extremity injuries
and amputations, as well as a comprehensive plan and strategy
for how the center should approach these issues. The provision
would also require the Secretaries of Defense and Veterans
Affairs to jointly submit to Congress annual reports on the
activities of the center.
The committee believes there is a need for targeted medical
research to help military surgeons find new limb-sparing
techniques to save injured extremities, avoid amputations, and
preserve and restore the function of injured extremities.
Three-year extension of Senior Oversight Committee with respect to
wounded warrior matters (sec. 1067)
The committee recommends a provision that would require the
Secretary of Defense and the Secretary of Veterans Affairs to
jointly take actions to continue the operations of the Senior
Oversight Committee established to address concerns related to
the treatment of wounded, ill, and injured members of the armed
forces and veterans until September 30, 2011.
Subtitle G--Other Matters
Military salute for the flag during the national anthem by members of
the armed forces not in uniform and by veterans (sec. 1081)
The committee recommends a provision that would amend
section 301 of title 36, United States Code, to authorize
members of the armed forces and veterans to render a military
salute in the same manner as members of the armed forces in
uniform during a rendition of the national anthem.
Modification of deadlines for standards required for entry to military
installations in the United States (sec. 1082)
The committee recommends a provision that would amend
section 1069 of the National Defense Authorization Act for
Fiscal Year 2008 (Public Law 110-181) to extend deadlines
established for the development and implementation of standards
for access to military installations in the United States. The
Department of Defense has informed the committee that it is
unable to develop and implement the required standards in the
time provided.
Items of Special Interest
Compliance with Rule XLIV of the Standing Rules of the Senate
In accordance with the requirements of Rule XLIV of the
Standing Rules of the Senate, this report includes a table
listing additional funding for items requested by Senators,
along with the intended recipient and intended location of
performance for those spending items. The information in this
table will be posted on the website of the Committee on Armed
Services after the committee votes to report the bill.
In addition, the committee has requested that each member
requesting additional funding for items in this bill provide a
certification that neither the Senator nor the Senator's
immediate family has a pecuniary interest in the item, as
required by Rule XLIV of the Standing Rules of the Senate. The
committee has received the requested certification from each
Senator requesting funding for items that is provided in this
bill. These certifications will also be posted on the website
of the Committee on Armed Services after the committee votes to
report the bill.
By including a table of requested funding items in the
report and posting Member certifications relative to such
funding items on the committee website, the committee takes no
position as to which of these items, if any, meet the
definition of a congressionally directed spending item, limited
tax benefit, or limited tariff benefit in Rule XLIV of the
Standing Rules of the Senate. The committee directs the
Department of Defense to use all applicable competitive, merit-
based procedures in the award of any new contract, grant, or
other agreement entered into with funds authorized to be
appropriated by this bill. No provision in the bill or report
shall be construed to direct funds to any particular location
or entity unless the provision expressly so provides.
Fully interoperable electronic health information for the Department of
Defense and Department of Veterans Affairs
The committee notes that 5 years have passed since the May
2003 recommendation of the President's Task Force to Improve
Health Care Delivery for Our Nation's Veterans that the
Department of Defense (DOD) and Department of Veterans Affairs
(VA) should ``develop and deploy by fiscal year 2005 electronic
medical records that are interoperable, bidirectional and
standards-based.'' According to a report of the Comptroller
General dated April 30, 2008, although some progress has been
made, the goal to develop interoperable electronic medical
records has been only partially achieved.
In July 2007, the President's Commission on Care for
America's Returning Wounded Warriors found that the Departments
had continued to develop independent, stand-alone systems, and
recommended that DOD and VA move rapidly to make all essential
health information available to clinicians, working toward a
``fully interoperable information system that will meet the
long-term administrative and clinical needs of all military
personnel over time.''
Section 1635 of the National Defense Authorization Act for
Fiscal year 2008 (Public Law 108-181) required the
establishment of a joint DOD and VA Program Office to ``develop
and implement electronic health record systems or capabilities
that allow for full interoperability of personal health care
information'' between the DOD and VA by September 30, 2009.
The committee is concerned that the Departments are moving
too slowly in the development of milestones and plans needed to
achieve this important statutory requirement, and that initial
plans for the Joint Program Office characterized its role as
``management oversight'' rather than the directive, accountable
entity intended by Congress. The committee intends to closely
scrutinize the Departments' progress and application of
resources toward achievement of the long overdue goal of fully
interoperable electronic health information for the Department
of Defense and Department of Veterans Affairs.
Interagency coordination and participation in post-conflict stability
and reconstruction operations
Recent and ongoing experience in Iraq and Afghanistan
continues to highlight the need for effective interagency
coordination and participation in post-conflict stability and
reconstruction operations. The committee remains concerned that
the civilian agencies of the U.S. Government do not have all of
the resources and authorities, or the institutional cultures,
necessary to be able to deploy personnel and expertise to
situations such as those we are currently facing in Iraq and
Afghanistan. While this challenge has received much needed
attention in recent years, and while improvements have been
made, it is clear that making and sustaining the needed
institutional changes will be a years-long process. In the
meantime, Provincial Reconstruction Teams (PRTs) in Iraq and
Afghanistan remain understaffed. The civilian agencies of
government have not been able to recruit sufficient personnel
to fill PRT requirements. While the Department of Defense (DOD)
has deployed personnel to fill the gaps, DOD has struggled to
recruit personnel with the appropriate skills for those
positions. In addition, DOD funds are being used for urgent
humanitarian and reconstruction assistance because the agencies
normally responsible for those functions--the Department of
State and the U.S. Agency for International Development--are
underfunded and lack authorities that allow for sufficient
flexibility to respond to urgent, unanticipated requirements.
The committee notes the many studies on these matters that
have been completed or are currently underway in think tanks
and nongovernmental organizations, including a report on the
national security interagency system that was required by the
National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2008 (Public
Law 110-181), which is to be provided to Congress and the
President by September 1, 2008. The committee further notes
that many new authorities have been provided to DOD in the area
of foreign military assistance precisely to provide near-term
solutions to systemic problems that demand longer-term and
thoroughly considered solutions. It is clear that the next
administration will have to grapple with these challenges. The
committee looks forward to reviewing any proposals that emerge
over the coming year and to working with other committees of
Congress and the executive branch to help ensure that our
national security and civilian agencies of government are well
configured, resourced, and institutionally inclined to work
together so that the U.S. Government can effectively promote
its interests and accomplish its objectives when conducting
post-conflict stability and reconstruction operations.
National cyber security initiative
The committee applauds the administration for developing a
serious, major initiative to begin to close the vulnerabilities
in the government's information networks and the nation's
critical infrastructure. The committee believes that the
administration's actions provide a foundation on which the next
president can build.
However, the committee has multiple, significant issues
with the administration's specific proposals and with the
overall approach to gaining congressional support for the
initiative.
A chief concern is that virtually everything about the
initiative is highly classified, and most of the information
that is not classified is categorized as ``For Official Use
Only.'' These restrictions preclude public education,
awareness, and debate about the policy and legal issues, real
or imagined, that the initiative poses in the areas of privacy
and civil liberties. Without such debate and awareness in such
important and sensitive areas, it is likely that the initiative
will make slow or modest progress. The committee strongly urges
the administration to reconsider the necessity and wisdom of
the blanket, indiscriminate classification levels established
for the initiative.
The administration itself is starting a serious effort as
part of the initiative to develop an information warfare
deterrence strategy and declaratory doctrine, much as the
superpowers did during the Cold War for nuclear conflict. It is
difficult to conceive how the United States could promulgate a
meaningful deterrence doctrine if every aspect of our
capabilities and operational concepts is classified. In the era
of superpower nuclear competition, while neither side disclosed
weapons designs, everyone understood the effects of nuclear
weapons, how they would be delivered, and the circumstances
under which they would be used. Indeed, deterrence was not
possible without letting friends and adversaries alike know
what capabilities we possessed and the price that adversaries
would pay in a real conflict. Some analogous level of
disclosure is necessary in the cyber domain.
The committee also shares the view of the Senate Select
Committee on Intelligence that major elements of the cyber
initiative request should be scaled back because policy and
legal reviews are not complete, and because the technology is
not mature. Indeed, the administration is asking for
substantial funds under the cyber initiative for fielding
capabilities based on ongoing programs that remain in the
prototype, or concept development, phase of the acquisition
process. These elements of the cyber initiative, in other
words, could not gain approval within the executive branch if
held to standards enforced on normal acquisition programs. The
committee's view is that disciplined acquisition processes and
practices must be applied to the government-wide cyber
initiative as much as to the ongoing development programs upon
which the initiative is based.
The committee also concludes that some major elements of
the cyber initiative are not solely or even primarily intended
to support the cyber security mission. Instead, it would be
more accurate to say that some of the projects support foreign
intelligence collection and analysis generally rather than the
cyber security mission particularly. If these elements were
properly defined, the President's cyber security initiative
would be seen as substantially more modest than it now appears.
That is not to say that the proposed projects are not
worthwhile, but rather that what will be achieved for the more
than $17.0 billion planned by the administration to secure the
government's networks is less than what might be expected.
Finally, the committee concludes that, for all its
ambitions, the cyber initiative sidesteps some of the most
important issues that must be addressed to develop the means to
defend the country. These tough issues include the
establishment of clear command chains, definition of roles and
missions for the various agencies and departments, and
engagement of the private sector.
Additional information on the cyber initiative is contained
in the classified annex to this report.
Nuclear security
In the wake of the Labor Day weekend unauthorized transfer
of nuclear weapons from Minot Air Force Base, North Dakota, to
Barksdale, Louisiana, discussed in more detail elsewhere in
this report, the Air Force included a long list of nuclear
security related items on the unfunded priorities list of the
Chief of Staff of the Air Force. The long list totals
approximately $122.0 million and ranges from $30,000 to operate
security cameras that have already been installed, to building
roads. Many of these items have significant out-year costs as
well. The committee is aware that there are needed security
enhancements but has declined to include additional funds for
any of the items on the list. The committee directs the
Secretary of the Air Force to develop a rational plan to fund
needed nuclear security enhancements and to submit that plan to
the congress with the fiscal year 2010 budget. The committee
expects that the funding to support the plan will be included
in the Air Force fiscal year 2010 budget request.
Nutrition and dietary care for seriously ill and injured service
members
The committee believes that dietary care of seriously ill
and injured service members is an important element of quality
care. Appropriate dietary and nutritional care reduces the risk
of illness, mitigates the physical effects of extended periods
of recovery, and leads to improved health outcomes for ill and
injured soldiers. The committee is concerned that although
dietary care is carefully controlled for hospital inpatients,
access to such services for those in an outpatient status,
including service members in warrior recovery or transition
units, is hampered by limited dietary personnel resources, and
reliance on referrals by medical and non-medical personnel of
service members for dietary and nutritional care.
The committee directs the Secretary of Defense, in
consultation with the service secretaries, to conduct a review
of the adequacy of dietary and nutritional services to
seriously ill and injured service members. The review shall
include:
(1) an assessment of the requirements for military
and civilian dieticians, based on the full range of
service member needs, from common dietary challenges to
the unique needs of patients recovering from burn or
blast injuries, in both inpatient and outpatient
settings;
(2) analysis of current staffing capabilities of the
military departments for providing dietary and
nutrition services;
(3) identification of any gaps in such staffing;
(4) analysis of training of medical and non-medical
case managers to identify service members in need of
treatment for dietary and nutritional problems;
(5) an assessment of the adequacy of screening for
dietary and nutritional needs for recovering service
members; and
(6) analysis of referral procedures for service
members in an outpatient status.
The Secretary shall submit a report on the results of this
review to the Committees on Armed Services of the Senate and
the House of Representatives by March 1, 2009. The report shall
also include a plan for appropriate improvements in training
and referral procedures for case managers, unit commanders, and
health care personnel, and such other recommendations and
actions as the Secretary deems appropriate for improving the
availability of dietary and nutritional services for seriously
ill and injured soldiers, in particular those in an outpatient
status.
The committee reiterates its expectation that the Secretary
shall ensure that any health care service required by an
active-duty service member shall be provided where and when it
is needed under the supplemental health and dental care
programs, regardless of any policy concerning access or
benefits in effect for the TRICARE program.
Recovery care coordinators and medical care case managers for seriously
wounded and ill service members
The committee is aware that the Department of Defense and
Department of Veterans Affairs have begun to hire recovery care
coordinators and medical care managers to improve assistance in
care and transition of wounded and ill service members and
veterans. The committee is concerned that the training and
hiring of these personnel is not proceeding as rapidly as
needed, and as a result, care management needs, especially of
those who were wounded early in Operation Enduring Freedom and
Operation Iraqi Freedom, are not being met.
The committee encourages the Department of Defense, in
collaboration with the Department of Veterans Affairs, to
explore opportunities to establish partnerships among
Department of Defense and Department of Veterans Affairs
medical facilities, as well as with public and private sector
universities, to assist in training medical care case
management personnel needed to support America's returning
wounded and ill service members. One example of an existing
partnership which can be built upon to provide such training is
in Augusta, Georgia, with the Dwight D. Eisenhower Army Medical
Center at Fort Gordon, the Charlie Norwood Department of
Veterans Affairs Medical Center, and the Medical College of
Georgia School of Nursing. Such model partnerships can be a
means of identifying best practices in both care and care
management for our wounded warriors, and may provide a
foundation for improved care and training efforts where needed
elsewhere.
Refugee crisis in Iraq
The committee continues to monitor closely the ongoing
refugee crisis in Iraq, a crisis resulting from the U.S.
invasion of Iraq. According to the United Nations High
Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR), there are approximately 2.8
million Iraqis displaced internally--1.5 million of them after
the Samarra bombings in February 2006, and two million more in
neighboring states, particularly Jordan and Syria.
The committee notes that the continuing ethno-sectarian
violence across Iraq is forcing thousands more to leave their
homes every month. However, the committee notes that recent
reports from UNHCR indicate that new displacement is continuing
at a slower pace than in previous years. The slowdown is due to
a number of factors including closed borders in the region and
in provinces where internally displaced persons (IDPs) are not
allowed to enter their territories. Other factors include the
presence of more homogenous communities, districts, and
neighborhoods; exhaustion of resources for many families; and a
decrease in violence. Despite these improvements, given the
U.S. role and stake in the conflict, the committee believes the
United States must continue to play a significant role in
addressing the plight of displaced Iraqis, particularly those
highly vulnerable religious minorities.
In recent years, the National Defense Authorization Act has
included legislation to permit the Department of Defense to
assist those Iraqis who have helped the United States to
sustain and manage its presence. In the National Defense
Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2008 (Public Law 110-181),
the committee included a provision expanding the Iraqi special
immigrant visa program. The committee has noted that the
special immigrant status provisions for certain Iraqis are
first and foremost intended to help those Iraqis who have
provided faithful and valuable service to the United States
Government. The provisions are meant to help and reward those
Iraqi workers for their assistance to the U.S. Government.
Under the special immigrant program, applicants are required to
prove that they have experienced or are experiencing an ongoing
serious threat as a result of their employment by the U.S.
Government.
There is strong evidence that Iraqis who have assisted the
United States have experienced ongoing serious threats because
of their service to the United States. Many have been killed,
or have had family members killed. Others have been threatened.
The committee expects that, absent unusual circumstances,
Iraqis who have assisted the United States mission in Iraq will
meet this statutory standard.
United States Africa Command
The committee supports the Department of Defense (DOD)
decision to stand up a new United States Combatant Command for
the continent of Africa, known as AFRICOM. The committee
recognizes the increasing strategic significance of Africa and
that Africa will continue to pose one of the greatest potential
instability challenges in the world. The large ungoverned areas
in Africa, HIV/AIDS epidemic, corruption, weak governance, and
poverty that exist throughout the continent are challenges that
affect nearly every country in Africa.
The DOD has referred to AFRICOM as the new model for
combatant commands as AFRICOM would have all the roles and
responsibilities of a traditional geographic combatant command,
including the ability to lead military operations, but would
also include a broader ``soft power'' mandate to establish and
maintain a stable security environment. AFRICOM will include a
larger civilian component than other combatant commands. It
will incorporate personnel from a variety of U.S. Government
agencies outside of the Department of Defense. This new
interagency model will require a significant amount of support
from non-DOD departments and agencies of the U.S. Government.
While the committee supports DOD's decision to create a
combatant command that relies more heavily on a whole
government approach, the committee is concerned that the other
departments and agencies of government are not adequately
resourced to support this model. It is the committee's
understanding that AFRICOM is already encountering some
difficulties in staffing portions of the command.
The committee is also concerned about staffing in various
United States embassies in Africa. AFRICOM has proposed placing
liaison officers in each United States Embassy on the continent
of Africa so that AFRICOM can find ways to support the ongoing
bilateral activities of the country team. Of the 47 U.S.
embassies on the African continent, there are 23 with a U.S.
Agency for International Development (USAID) Mission Director
and, in many cases, Foreign Service officers are being asked to
serve simultaneously as political, economic, and public
diplomacy officers. Given these current staffing challenges,
the committee recognizes the need for USAID and the Department
of State to be funded adequately. If funded adequately, other
government departments and agencies will be able to leverage
more fully the capacity of AFRICOM to assist our African
partners to professionalize their respective militaries and
assist in the delivery of humanitarian and disaster relief.
The committee is also monitoring closely the progress of
the African Contingency Operation Training Assistance program,
the African component of the Global Peace Operations
Initiative. This program is training African peacekeepers for
the five African Union-sponsored regional standby brigades. The
success of the program is critical to enabling African
countries to develop the security apparatus needed to respond
to crises across the continent. The committee expects AFRICOM
to play a more significant role in this program once it reaches
full operational capability at the beginning of the next fiscal
year.
TITLE XI--CIVILIAN PERSONNEL MATTERS
Department of Defense strategic human capital plans (sec. 1101)
The committee recommends a provision that would codify the
requirement for the Secretary of Defense to submit an annual
strategic human capital plan to shape and improve the civilian
employee workforce of the Department of Defense (DOD).
Section 1122 of the National Defense Authorization Act for
Fiscal Year 2006 (Public Law 109-163) required DOD to develop a
strategic human capital plan by no later than March 2007. On
November 6, 2007, more than 8 months after the statutory
deadline, DOD submitted a plan in response to this requirement.
However, the Government Accountability Office (GAO) reported
that the plan did not meet the legislative requirements.
According to GAO:
the plan does not address the majority--six of
eight--of the congressional reporting requirements. For
example, the plan does not include an assessment of
current mission-critical competencies, future critical
skills and competencies needed, gaps between the
current and future needs, or specific recruiting and
retention goals, even though these elements are
required by the 2006 act. DOD officials acknowledged
that the plan they submitted to the committees is
incomplete.
DOD's civilian employee workforce is one of the
cornerstones of the Department's national security mission. The
Department's continued failure to conduct adequate planning for
this workforce could undermine its ability to perform some
aspects of this critical mission.
Conditional increase in authorized number of Defense Intelligence
Senior Executive Service personnel (sec. 1102)
The committee recommends a provision that would authorize
an increase in the number of Defense Intelligence Senior
Executive Service (DISES) personnel, provided that the rate of
increase in such personnel does not exceed the rate of increase
in the number of Senior Executive Service (SES) personnel in
the Department of Defense (DOD) as a whole and that the
increase is allocated to components of the intelligence
community most in needed of additional DISES personnel.
This is the fourth consecutive year in which the Department
has requested an increase in the authorized number of DISES
personnel. In Senate Report 110-77, accompanying S. 1547, the
National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2008, the
committee stated that it would be premature to approve this
request until the Department: (1) provides a strategic plan for
the entire DOD SES workforce, as required by section 1102 of
the John Warner National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal
Year 2007 (Public Law 109-364); (2) presents a comprehensive
proposal that addresses the need for SES across the entire
Department, rather than addressing the needs of a single
community; and (3) justifies the proposed allocation of DISES
billets within the intelligence community.
These conditions remain relevant and the Department has not
yet met them. Rather than deferring the increase for another
year, however, the provision recommended by the committee would
make the requested increase contingent upon the Department
adopting a more comprehensive approach that is consistent with
the conditions established in last year's committee report.
Enhancement of authorities relating to additional positions under the
National Security Personnel System (sec. 1103)
The committee recommends a provision that would clarify the
authority of the Department of Defense (DOD) to utilize
streamlined hiring practices under the National Security
Personnel System.
Over the last 7 years, the workload of the Department has
grown dramatically as a result of the ongoing conflicts in Iraq
and Afghanistan. During that time, the contractor workforce of
the Department has more than doubled--from less than 750,000 in
2000 to more than 1.5 million in 2007--while the number of
civilian employees of the Department has remained virtually
unchanged at just under 700,000.
The committee concludes that the Department needs expedited
hiring authority to bring the DOD civilian employee workforce
back in line with the critical responsibilities for which it is
responsible.
Expedited hiring authority for health care professionals of the
Department of Defense (sec. 1104)
The committee recommends a provision that would authorize,
for purposes of sections 3304, 5333, and 5753 of title 5,
United States Code, the Secretary of Defense to designate any
category of health care position within the Department of
Defense as a shortage category position, if he determines that
there is a severe shortage of candidates or a critical hiring
need for such a position. This authority would terminate on
September 30, 2012.
Election of insurance coverage by federal civilian employees deployed
in support of a contingency operation (sec. 1105)
The committee recommends a provision that would amend
section 8702(c) of title 5, United States Code, to authorize
federal civilian employees deployed in support of a contingency
operation and Department of Defense employees designated as
emergency essential to elect to receive automatic life
insurance coverage upon notification of deployment or
designation.
This provision would also amend sections 8714a(b) and
8714b(b) of title 5, United States Code, to authorize such
civilian employees to elect optional life insurance or
additional optional life insurance, respectively, within 60
days after the employee's date of notification of deployment or
designation.
This provision responds to a recommendation by the
Commission on Army Acquisition and Program Management in
Expeditionary Operations in its October 31, 2007 report
entitled, ``Urgent Reform Required: Army Expeditionary
Contracting.'' It would offer additional options for life
insurance to federal civilian employees deployed in support of
contingency operations, and provide them with both the benefits
and peace of mind that their service deserves.
Permanent extension of Department of Defense voluntary reduction in
force authority (sec. 1106)
The committee recommends a provision that would amend
section 3502(f) of title 5, United States Code, to make
permanent the authority to substitute the voluntary separation
of an employee for the separation of another employee who would
otherwise be separated due to a reduction in force.
Four-year extension of authority to make lump sum severance payments
with respect to Department of Defense employees (sec. 1107)
The committee recommends a provision that would amend
section 5595(i)(4) of title 5, United States Code, to extend
until the end of fiscal year 2014 the authority of the
Secretary of Defense or the secretaries of the military
departments to pay an employee the total amount of severance
pay in one lump sum.
Authority to waive limitations on pay for federal civilian employees
working overseas under areas of United States Central Command
(sec. 1108)
The committee recommends a provision that would authorize
the head of an executive agency to waive limitations on the
aggregate of basic and premium pay, and on allowances,
differentials, bonuses, awards, and similar cash payments
payable during calendar year 2009 to an employee who performs
work in an overseas location that is in the area of
responsibility of the Commander, United States Central Command
in support of a contingency operation or an operation in
response to a declared emergency.
The total amount payable may not exceed the total annual
compensation payable to the Vice President under section 104 of
title 3, United States Code. The provision would also authorize
any amount over the cap to be paid to the employee in a lump
sum at the beginning of calendar year 2010.
Under current law, the head of an executive agency may
waive limitations on the aggregate of basic and premium pay
payable during calendar year 2008 up to $212,100, and there is
no provision allowing for the rollover of any pay that exceeds
this cap.
Although not limited to Army contracting personnel, the
provision responds to a recommendation by the Commission on
Army Acquisition and Program Management in Expeditionary
Operations in its October 31, 2007 report entitled ``Urgent
Reform Required: Army Expeditionary Contracting,'' aimed at
providing improved incentives for longer tours for high quality
civilian contracting personnel deployed in support of
contingency operations.
Technical amendment relating to definition of professional accounting
position for purposes of certification and credentialing
standards (sec. 1109)
The committee recommends a provision that would amend
section 1599d(e) of title 10, United States Code, to update the
definition of a ``professional accounting position.''
Current law refers only to the General Schedule pay plan in
reference to the Department of Defense's professional
accounting positions. During the Department's transition to the
National Security Personnel System, the definition should be
updated to reflect not only the General Schedule pay plan but
also this alternative personnel system with new position
classification.
TITLE XII--MATTERS RELATING TO FOREIGN NATIONS
Subtitle A--Assistance and Training
Increase in amount available for costs of education and training of
foreign military forces under Regional Defense Combating
Terrorism Fellowship Program (sec. 1201)
The committee recommends a provision that would amend
section 2249c(b) of title 10, United States Code, to increase
the amount of funds available for the Regional Defense
Combating Terrorism Fellowship Program up to $35.0 million.
The committee notes that this ``parallel'' program to the
International Military Education and Training (IMET) program,
authorized under title 22, United States Code, would now be
funded at about one-third the size of the $90.5 million
requested for IMET for fiscal year 2009. The committee urges
the President to address the requirements met by the title 10
authority by providing additional funding to the Department of
State programs, so that the agency traditionally authorized to
set policy and programs for foreign military education and
training is properly funded to do so.
Authority for distribution to certain foreign personnel of education
and training materials and information technology to enhance
military interoperability with the armed forces (sec. 1202)
The committee recommends a provision that would authorize
the Secretary of Defense, with the concurrence of the Secretary
of State, to provide electronically-distributed education and
training materials to the military and civilian personnel of
friendly foreign governments to enhance interoperability
between the armed forces and military forces of friendly
foreign nations. This provision would make permanent the
authority provided under section 1207 of the John Warner
National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2007 (Public
Law 109-364), which expires on September 30, 2008.
Extension and expansion of authority for support of special operations
to combat terrorism (sec. 1203)
The committee recommends a provision that would amend
section 1208(a) of the Ronald W. Reagan National Defense
Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2005 (Public Law 108-375), to
increase the amount the Secretary of Defense may expend during
any fiscal year to $35.0 million, and to extend the authority
to fiscal year 2011.
This provision would also amend the original language to
clarify the intent of the provision, including changing the
title of section 1208 from ``Support of military operations to
combat terrorism'' to ``Support of special operations to combat
terrorism.''
Modification and extension of authorities relating to program to build
the capacity of foreign military forces (sec. 1204)
The committee recommends a provision that would extend and
modify the authority under section 1206 of the National Defense
Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2006 (Public Law 109-163), as
amended by section 1206 of the John Warner National Defense
Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2007 (Public Law 109-364),
for the Secretary of Defense, with the concurrence of the
Secretary of State, to build the capacity of foreign military
forces to conduct counterterrorism operations or to support
military or stability operations in which U.S. armed forces are
participating.
The provision would expand the types of security forces
eligible to be trained and equipped under section 1206
authority to include coast guard, border protection, and other
security forces whose primary mission is counterterrorism
operations. The committee notes that the restrictions on the
training of police or other law enforcement forces, codified in
section 2420 of title 22, United States Code, would apply to
activities under this authority.
The provision would increase the limitation on funding for
building the capacity of foreign forces from $300.0 million to
$400.0 million per fiscal year and would provide that funds
available for one fiscal year may be used for programs that
begin in that fiscal year but end in the next fiscal year. The
provision also would extend the section 1206 authority for 3
years through September 30, 2011.
The train and equip authority under section 1206 was
initiated as a pilot program to address urgent and emerging
needs for building the capacity of foreign military forces,
particularly those of developing or other countries that
otherwise would be unable to build this capacity on their own.
This authority is not intended to duplicate or substitute for
other foreign assistance authorities, nor is it intended to
sustain train and equip programs over multiple years. In
extending this authority for an additional 3-year period, the
committee emphasizes the need for train and equip programs to
be executed consistent with the legislative intent of the
section 1206 authority.
Specifically, the committee is concerned that funds under
this authority are being used for programs, particularly in
countries where the terrorist threat is currently low, that
primarily serve to build counter-narcotics capabilities. While
recognizing a degree of overlap between counterterrorism and
counter-narcotics capabilities, the committee urges the
Department of Defense to fund programs to build counter-
narcotics capabilities using funds and authorities intended to
support counter-narcotics activities, and, if appropriate, seek
any necessary modifications to existing counter-narcotics
authorities to support these activities.
The committee also recognizes that urgent U.S. national
security priorities and compelling terrorist threats vary from
one geographic combatant command to another. The committee
therefore expects that programs and funding under section 1206
authority will not be equitably distributed among the
geographic combatant commands. For example, the committee notes
that many countries in what will be the U.S. Africa Command
area of responsibility are vulnerable to terrorist activity and
have limited resources to address these threats. Therefore, the
committee views the need for section 1206 assistance in that
geographic command to be particularly compelling.
Extension of authority and increased funding for security and
stabilization assistance (sec. 1205)
The committee recommends a provision that would extend and
enhance the authority for security and stabilization assistance
provided under section 1207 of the National Defense
Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2006 (Public Law 109-163), as
amended by section 1210 of the National Defense Authorization
Act for Fiscal Year 2008 (Public Law 110-181). Under that
section, the Secretary of Defense is authorized to provide the
Secretary of State services, defense articles, or funding to
support Department of State programs for reconstruction,
security, or stabilization assistance.
The provision recommended by the committee would extend the
authority of section 1207 for 3 years until September 30, 2011,
and increase the total value of all services, defense articles,
and funds that may be provided or transferred under this
section in a fiscal year to $200.0 million.
The committee is concerned that the Department of Defense
has inappropriately restricted the uses for which services or
funds may be provided to the Department of State under section
1207 security and stabilization assistance authority. The
Secretary of Defense stated in testimony before the Committee
on Armed Services of the House of Representatives on April 15,
2008 that section 1207 authority is primarily for bringing
civilian expertise to operate alongside or in place of our
armed forces. The committee is concerned that this is too
narrow an interpretation of the original administration
rationale for, and the legislative intent of, section 1207
authority, which is intended to enable the Secretary of Defense
to support the provision by the Secretary of State of
reconstruction, security, or stabilization assistance to a
foreign country. This could include, for instance, providing
early civilian resources to avert a crisis that could otherwise
subsequently require U.S. military forces to assist or
intervene. The committee encourages the Department of Defense
to improve its coordination with the Department of State, and
its consultation with the relevant committees of Congress, in
formulating and implementing programs under the section 1207
authority.
Four-year extension of temporary authority to use acquisition and
cross-servicing agreements to lend military equipment for
personnel protection and survivability (sec. 1206)
The committee recommends a provision that would extend the
authority provided under section 1202 of the John Warner
National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2007 (Public
Law 109-364), as amended by section 1252 of the National
Defense Authorization Act of 2008 (Public Law 110-181), to loan
or lease certain items for personnel protection or
survivability to the military forces of foreign nations
participating in combined operations with the United States in
Iraq, Afghanistan, or as part of a peacekeeping operation under
the United Nations Charter or other international agreement.
The committee notes that the authority of section 1202 of
the John Warner National Defense Authorization Act allows
certain significant military equipment to be treated as if it
were logistical support, supplies, and services under
Acquisition and Cross-Servicing Agreements. This authority
provides a temporary solution for meeting the urgent personnel
protection needs of foreign military forces operating in
combination with U.S. armed forces in Operation Enduring
Freedom, Operation Iraqi Freedom, and other coalition
peacekeeping operations under an international mandate. The
committee notes the Department of Defense's interest in making
this authority permanent and to extend it to other coalition
operations, including peace operations and stability
operations. The committee is concerned about making the
treatment of significant military equipment in this manner
permanent, and about extending this temporary authority to
other kinds of operations where the requirement for coalition
partners to have such equipment is less exigent. The committee
urges the Department to consider alternatives to using
Acquisition and Cross-Servicing Agreements for these purposes,
as such agreements are not intended for the loan or lease of
significant military equipment.
Authority for use of funds for non-conventional assisted recovery
capabilities (sec. 1207)
The committee recommends a provision that would authorize
the commander of a combatant command, with the concurrence of
the relevant chief of mission, to expend funds in fiscal years
2009 and 2010 to establish, develop, and maintain non-
conventional assisted recovery (NAR) capabilities in a foreign
country if the commander determines that expenditure of such
funds for that purpose is necessary in connection with support
of NAR efforts in that foreign country. NAR is defined as
recovery of isolated personnel in enemy-held, hostile, or
uncertain areas using indigenous/surrogate personnel. NAR is
used when conventional methods of personnel recovery are
unavailable to, or unsuitable for, the combatant commander. The
total amount of funds expended in each fiscal year may not
exceed $20.0 million.
The Secretary of Defense shall notify the congressional
defense committees in writing within 48 hours of the use of
such authority.
Not later than 30 days after the close of each fiscal year
this provision is in effect, the Secretary of Defense shall
submit to the congressional defense committees a report
describing the support provided, including the amount of funds
expended, a description of the recipient of the support, and
the assistance provided by the recipient.
Subtitle B--Department of Defense Participation in Bilateral,
Multilateral, and Regional Cooperation Programs
Availability across fiscal years of funds for military-to-military
contacts and comparable activities (sec. 1211)
The committee recommends a provision that would amend
section 168(e) of title 10, United States Code, by making funds
available for programs or activities under this section that
begin in a fiscal year and end in the following fiscal year.
Enhancement of authorities relating to Department of Defense regional
centers for security studies (sec. 1212)
The committee recommends a provision that would amend
section 184(f) of title 10, United States Code, to make funds
available for programs and activities that begin in a fiscal
year and end in the following fiscal year, effective October 1,
2008.
As a pilot program, the committee would also authorize the
Secretary of Defense to waive reimbursement costs for
nongovernmental and international organization personnel
participating in regional center activities during fiscal years
2009 and 2010. In order to do so, the Secretary of Defense must
determine that attendance of such personnel without
reimbursement is in the national security interests of the
United States. The amount that may be waived may not exceed
$1.0 million.
The annual report submitted by the Secretary of Defense for
fiscal years 2011 and 2012 would include information on the
attendance of personnel of nongovernmental and international
organizations who participate in activities of the regional
centers during the preceding fiscal year, including information
on costs incurred by the United States for the participation of
personnel of nongovernmental and international organizations.
Payment of personnel expenses for multilateral cooperation programs
(sec. 1213)
The committee recommends a provision that would amend
section 1051 of title 10, United States Code, by expanding
authority for bilateral and regional programs to cover
multilateral programs, and to permit funding to be available
for programs that begin in one fiscal year and end in another.
Participation of the Department of Defense in multinational military
centers of excellence (sec. 1214)
The committee recommends a provision that would give
permanent authority to the Secretary of Defense, with the
concurrence of the Secretary of State, to authorize Department
of Defense civilian and military personnel to participate in
North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) multinational
military centers of excellence. This authority was previously
provided for fiscal year 2007 under section 1205 of the John
Warner National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2007
(Public Law 109-364), and extended through fiscal year 2008
under section 1204 of the National Defense Authorization Act
for Fiscal Year 2008 (Public Law 110-181).
The committee notes that the Department of Defense (DOD)
remains interested in expanding this authority beyond NATO-
accredited multinational military centers of excellence. The
committee believes that the NATO-accredited multinational
military centers of excellence offer recognized expertise and
experience that supports alliance transformation. Participation
in these NATO centers benefits DOD military and civilian
personnel, and NATO capabilities overall, by providing
opportunities to enhance education and training, improve
interoperability and capabilities, assist in doctrine
development, and/or test and validate concepts through
experimentation. The committee has yet to be convinced that
expanding the authority under this section to unspecified or
currently non-existent non-NATO centers of excellence would
offer comparable benefits to the United States. The committee
further notes that with respect to centers of excellence
focused on training international peacekeepers, the Global
Peace Operations Initiative provides the appropriate legal
authority for U.S. participation in the training of foreign
nation peacekeepers, and separate DOD authority for the same
purpose is neither necessary nor desirable.
Subtitle C--Other Authorities and Limitations
Waiver of certain sanctions against North Korea (sec. 1221)
The committee recommends a provision that would provide the
President with limited authority to waive, with respect to
North Korea, the application of sanctions under 102(b) of the
Arms Export Control Act (22 U.S.C. 2799aa-1(b)). The President
would be required to notify Congress 15 days in advance of
exercising such waiver authority. In addition, the provision
would require the President to submit an annual report listing
all the waivers granted during the preceding year and describe
in detail the progress being made by North Korea in
implementing of the commitments included in the Joint Statement
of September 19, 2005 to abandon all nuclear weapons, existing
nuclear programs, and all other programs associated with the
elimination of the ability of North Korea to develop, deploy,
transfer, or maintain weapons of mass destruction or their
delivery systems.
The committee notes that waiver authority is necessary to
enable the Departments of Energy and Defense to carry out work
needed to implement the Joint Statement.
Subtitle D--Reports
Extension and modification of updates on report on claims relating to
the bombing of the Labelle Discotheque (sec. 1231)
The committee recommends a provision that would require a
quarterly report on the status of negotiations between the
Government of Libya and United States claimants in connection
with the bombing of the Labelle Discotheque in Berlin, Germany,
that occurred in April 1986. The reporting requirement is an
extension of section 1225 of the National Defense Authorization
Act (NDAA) for Fiscal Year (FY) 2006 (Public Law 109-163) and
section 1261 in the NDAA for FY 2008 (Public Law 110-181).
On April 5, 1986, Libya directed its agents to execute a
terrorist attack in West Berlin for the sole purpose of killing
as many American military personnel as possible. The Labelle
Discotheque was known to be frequented by large numbers of U.S.
military personnel. The bombing of the discotheque occurred at
a time when 260 people, including U.S. military personnel, were
present. When the bomb detonated, two U.S. soldiers were killed
and over 90 U.S. soldiers were severely injured.
In 2002, the American Labelle victims and the families of
deceased soldiers filed a lawsuit in the United States District
Court for the District of Columbia. Since that time, the
Government of Libya has settled the claims of the German
victims of the LaBelle bombing and the claims of the victims of
the Libyan bombing of Pan Am flight 103 over Lockerbie,
Scotland.
Since the beginning of 2008, Libya has shown renewed
interest in negotiations with a number of claimant groups,
including the Labelle claimants. The committee continues to
monitor closely the details surrounding the cases of Labelle
claimants and the other major claims against the Government of
Libya and hopes this matter will be brought to a close in short
order.
Report on utilization of certain global partnership authorities (sec.
1232)
The committee recommends a provision that would require the
Secretary of Defense, with the concurrence of the Secretary of
State, to submit by December 31, 2010, a report on the
implementation of certain Building Global Partnership
authorities from the date of enactment of this Act until
September 30, 2010. The Building Global Partnership authorities
covered by the report would consist of the authority for
building the capacity of foreign military forces under section
1206 of the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year
2006 (Public Law 109-163), as amended; the authority for
security and stabilization assistance under section 1207 of
Public Law 109-163, as amended; and the authority to provide
urgent and unanticipated civic assistance under the Combatant
Commander Initiative Fund under section 166a(b)(6) of title 10,
United States Code, as amended by section 902 of the John
Warner National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2007
(109-364).
The committee notes that security cooperation,
stabilization assistance, and humanitarian relief in response
to unanticipated emergencies are critical foreign policy tools
for advancing U.S. national security interests worldwide. The
implementation of certain of the Building Global Partnership
authorities covered by this report has benefited from close
cooperation between the Department of Defense and the
Department of State. The committee encourages these departments
to continue to pursue an interagency approach in the
formulation and execution of projects under these authorities.
TITLE XIII--COOPERATIVE THREAT REDUCTION WITH STATES OF THE FORMER
SOVIET UNION
Specification of Cooperative Threat Reduction programs and funds (sec.
1301)
The committee recommends a provision that would define the
Cooperative Threat Reduction (CTR) programs, define the funds
as authorized to be appropriated in section 301 of this bill,
and authorize CTR funds to be available for obligation for 3
fiscal years.
Funding allocations (sec. 1302)
The committee recommends a provision that would authorize
$434.1 million, an increase of $20.0 million above the budget
request, for the Cooperative Threat Reduction (CTR) program.
This provision would also authorize specific amounts for each
CTR program element, require notification to Congress 15 days
before the Secretary of Defense obligates and expends fiscal
year 2009 funds, and require notification to Congress 15 days
before the Secretary of Defense obligates and expends fiscal
year 2009 funds in excess of the specific amount authorized for
each CTR program element.
The committee recommends an additional $10.0 million for
new activities in states outside of the former Soviet Union,
$9.0 million for nuclear weapons storage security in Russia for
additional automated inventory control management systems, and
$1.0 million for additional expenses associated with the
Russian chemical weapons destruction activities.
The committee continues to believe that one of the highest
priorities of the CTR program is destroying Russian chemical
weapons munitions at the destruction facility in Shchuch'ye,
Russia. The CTR program has entered into an arrangement with
the Russian Government that assigns responsibility to Russia to
complete the U.S. funded destruction facility and begin
operations. Timely startup and safe operation of the facility
is essential and continues to be a matter of concern to the
committee. As a result, the committee directs the Secretary to
notify the congressional defense committees immediately if
there is any delay or other problem in the startup of either
the Russian funded destruction facility or the U.S. funded
destruction facility.
TITLE XIV--OTHER AUTHORIZATIONS
Summary and explanation of tables
This title contains funding authorizations for working
capital and revolving funds, the Defense Health Program, the
destruction of chemical munitions, drug interdiction and
counterdrug activities, the Department of Defense Inspector
General, and other programs which contain elements of more than
one type of traditional funding account (such as procurement or
operation and maintenance) inside a single account.
This title also reflects savings from lower inflation that
affect multiple accounts and titles within this Act,
legislative proposals regarding the national defense stockpile,
and authorizes trust fund expenditures for the Armed Forces
Retirement Home, which is outside the national defense budget
function.
The following table provides the program-level detailed
guidance for the funding authorized in title XIV of this Act.
The table also displays the funding requested by the
administration in the fiscal year 2009 budget request for these
programs, and indicates those programs for which the committee
either increased or decreased the requested amounts. This table
is incorporated by reference into this Act as provided in
section 1002 of this Act. The Department of Defense may not
exceed the authorized amounts (as set forth in the tables or,
if unchanged from the administration request, as set forth in
budget justification documents of the Department of Defense)
without a reprogramming action in accordance with established
procedures. Unless noted in this report, funding changes to the
budget request are made without prejudice.
Subtitle A--Military Programs
Working capital funds (sec. 1401)
The committee recommends a provision that would authorize
fiscal year 2009 funds for Defense Working Capital Funds.
National Defense Sealift Fund (sec. 1402)
The committee recommends a provision that would authorize
fiscal year 2009 funds for the National Defense Sealift Fund.
Defense Health Program (sec. 1403)
The committee recommends a provision that would authorize
fiscal year 2009 funds for the Defense Health Program.
Chemical agents and munitions destruction, defense (sec. 1404)
The committee recommends a provision that would authorize
funds for fiscal year 2009 for the destruction of chemical
agents and munitions, including funds for procurement;
research, development, test, and evaluation; and operation and
maintenance. The provision would authorize $1.5 billion, the
amount requested by the Department of Defense.
Drug interdiction and counter-drug activities, defense-wide (sec. 1405)
The committee recommends a provision that would authorize
appropriations for drug interdiction and counterdrug activities
of the Department of Defense.
Defense Inspector General (sec. 1406)
The committee recommends a provision that would authorize
fiscal year 2009 funds for the Defense Inspector General.
Reduction in certain authorizations due to savings from lower inflation
(sec. 1407)
The committee recommends a provision that would reduce the
amounts authorized in division A of this Act by $1.0 billion to
bring the inflation assumptions applicable to purchases by the
Department of Defense for fiscal year 2009 in line with the
economic assumptions previously adopted by the Senate.
The Office of Management and Budget assumed an inflation
rate of 2.0 percent in its fiscal year 2009 budget submission.
However, the Congressional Budget Office's estimate of
inflation for 2009 is 1.7 percent, or 0.3 percentage points
lower than the administration's estimate. The Concurrent
Resolution on the Budget for Fiscal Year 2009 (S. Con. Res. 70)
adopted by the Senate on March 13, 2008, was based on the
economic assumptions of the Congressional Budget Office.
Subtitle B--Armed Forces Retirement Home
Authorization of appropriations for Armed Forces Retirement Home (sec.
1421)
The committee recommends a provision that would authorize
$63.0 million to be appropriated for fiscal year 2009 from the
Armed Forces Retirement Home Trust Fund for the operation and
maintenance of the Armed Forces Retirement Home.
Subtitle C--Other Matters
Responsibilities for chemical demilitarization Citizens' Advisory
Commissions in Colorado and Kentucky (sec. 1431)
The committee recommends a provision that would transfer
responsibility for the chemical demilitarization Citizens'
Advisory Commissions in Colorado and Kentucky from the
Secretary of the Army to the Program Manager for Assembled
Chemical Weapons Alternatives (ACWA). This would be consistent
with the overall responsibility of the ACWA Program Manager for
other aspects of the ACWA program and facilities.
The provision would also establish requirements to ensure
that the newly transferred Citizens' Advisory Commissions would
work in an effective manner.
The committee notes that each chemical demilitarization
facility has a Citizens' Advisory Commission to serve as a
mechanism for input and communication between the affected
States, local communities, and the Federal Government. The
chemical destruction facilities at Pueblo, Colorado and Blue
Grass, Kentucky are the only two ACWA sites, and are managed by
the ACWA Program Manager, rather than by the Secretary of the
Army. Despite this separate management structure for the ACWA
sites, the Citizens' Advisory Commissions for Colorado and
Kentucky have been managed by the Secretary of the Army. This
provision would correct this disparity.
Modification of definition of ``Department of Defense Sealift Vessel''
for purposes of the National Defense Sealift Fund (sec. 1432)
The committee recommends a provision that would clarify the
intent of Congress on what vessels the Navy should acquire and
manage within the National Defense Sealift Fund (NDSF).
The fiscal year 2009 budget request included $68.7 million
within the NDSF for various research and development
activities, including $41.8 million for the Maritime
Prepositioning Force (Future) (MPF(F)). This amount included
$5.4 million for research and development on amphibious assault
replacement ships which are to be assigned to the MPF(F),
designated MPF(F) LHA(R). The NDSF request also included $348.3
million for advance procurement for the first MPF(F) LHA(R).
The committee does not agree with funding development and
procurement for amphibious assault ships within the NDSF. This
ship type was specifically not included within the scope of
sealift vessels eligible for NDSF, defined within section 2218
of title 10, United States Code.
Budget Items
LHA(R) advance procurement and research and development
The fiscal year 2009 budget request included $68.7 million
within the National Defense Sealift Fund (NDSF) for various
research and development activities, including $41.8 million
for the Maritime Prepositioning Force (Future) (MPF(F)). This
amount included $5.4 million for research and development on
amphibious assault replacement ships which are to be assigned
to the MPF(F), designated MPF(F) LHA(R). The NDSF request also
included $348.3 million for advance procurement for the first
MPF(F) LHA(R).
The committee does not agree with funding development and
procurement for amphibious assault ships within the NDSF. This
ship type was specifically not included within the scope of
sealift vessels eligible for NDSF, defined within section 2218
of title 10, United States Code. The committee has included a
provision (described elsewhere) that would clarify the intent
of Congress on what vessels should be acquired and managed
within the NDSF.
Therefore, the committee recommends a decrease of $5.4
million in PE 48042N, and a corresponding increase of $5.4
million in PE 64567N for MPF(F) LHA(R) ship contract design;
and a decrease of $348.3 million in PE 48042N, and an
adjustment in Shipbuilding and Conversion, Navy (SCN), line 16,
for LHA(R) advance procurement.
Traumatic brain injury and post traumatic stress disorder initiative
The budget request included $38.1 million in PE 63115HP for
medical development. The committee notes that dealing with
traumatic brain injury (TBI) and post traumatic stress disorder
(PTSD) are among the highest priority medical research
challenges facing the Department of Defense. In order to
support continued efforts to develop diagnoses and treatments
for TBI and PTSD, the committee recommends an additional $3.0
million in PE 63115HP for TBI and PTSD research initiatives,
including support of efforts to develop processes, procedures,
and the application of technologies to gather baseline
information on military personnel during pre-combat deployment
and post-combat diagnosis of TBI and PTSD.
Department of Defense Inspector General
The budget request included $246.4 million in Operation and
Maintenance, Defense-wide (OMDW) for the Office of the
Inspector General (OIG). The committee is concerned that
funding levels for independent audit and investigative
functions should keep pace with the demand for these services.
Therefore, the committee recommends a total increase of $26.0
million in OMDW for the OIG, of which $24.0 million is for
operation and maintenance and $2.0 million is for procurement.
The OIG audits, investigates, inspects, and evaluates the
programs and operations of the Department of Defense (DOD), and
recommends policies and process improvements that promote
economy, efficiency, effectiveness, and integrity in DOD
programs and operations. The committee notes the dramatic
growth in the number and cost of Department contracts for
operations, procurement, research, and construction within the
United States and around the world. The committee understands
that the OIG plans to conduct 83 audits related to military
operations and Department of Defense contracting in Iraq and
Afghanistan over the next few years. The increase recommended
by the committee should enable the OIG to conduct oversight
related to the global war on terror, contract management and
acquisitions, and support audits to identify potential waste,
fraud, and abuse.
Item of Special Interest
Completion of destruction of chemical weapons stockpile
The committee remains disappointed in the notification from
the Secretary of Defense on April 10, 2006, that the United
States does not expect to meet its obligation under the
Chemical Weapons Convention (CWC) to destroy its chemical
weapons stockpile by the extended deadline of April 29, 2012.
The committee notes the commitment of the Secretary in the
April 10, 2006 notification to ``continue working diligently to
minimize the time to complete destruction without sacrificing
safety and security,'' and ``to continue requesting resources
needed to complete destruction as close to April 29, 2012 as
practicable.''
The committee continues to urge the Department of Defense
to fulfill this commitment by taking all necessary and
appropriate steps to dispose of the U.S. chemical weapons
stockpile by the 2012 Chemical Weapons Convention deadline, or
as soon thereafter as possible, and to request the funding
needed in future budget requests to accelerate the chemical
weapons stockpile destruction schedule to meet the United
States' legal obligations under the Convention.
In order to meet the destruction deadline under the
Convention at all or most of its chemical demilitarization
facilities, the Department must consider options for
accelerated destruction and increased funding levels for the
program.
Section 922 of the National Defense Authorization Act for
Fiscal Year 2008 (Public Law 110-181) included a requirement
for the Secretary of Defense to submit to Congress semiannual
reports on implementation by the United States of its chemical
weapons destruction obligations under the CWC, including a
description of the options for accelerating such destruction
and the funding required for each option. Section 8119 of the
Department of Defense Appropriations Act for Fiscal Year 2008
(Public Law 110-116), included a similar reporting requirement
and mandated that the U.S. chemical weapons stockpile must be
destroyed no later than December 31, 2017.
The committee will continue to monitor closely the
Department's compliance with the Convention's destruction
deadline, as well as the destruction deadline established in
section 8119 of Public Law 110-116.
TITLE XV--AUTHORIZATION OF ADDITIONAL APPROPRIATIONS FOR OPERATIONS IN
AFGHANISTAN
Overview
The President's budget requested $70.0 billion in emergency
funding in the national defense budget function for operations
in Afghanistan and Iraq. The request did not allocate specific
funding to either operation, nor to any specific budget titles,
accounts, or programs. The committee bill separates funding for
these operations. This title authorizes $19.9 billion in
funding for operations in Afghanistan. Title XVI authorizes
funding for operations in Iraq.
Funding authorized in this title is for the incremental
costs of operations in Afghanistan. As described later in this
report, any such funds not designated by Congress for a
specific program may not be obligated until 15 days after the
Secretary of Defense transmits to the congressional defense
committees a report setting forth the proposed allocation of
such funds at the line-item level.
Explanation of tables
The summary table that follows describes the funding
authorized in this bill for operations in Afghanistan.
Purpose (sec. 1501)
This section states the purpose of this title, which is to
authorize additional appropriations for operations in
Afghanistan for fiscal year 2009.
This title authorizes funding for military personnel,
operation and maintenance, procurement, research and
development, working capital funds, health care, and other
programs normally authorized in division A of this Act.
Additional war-related authorizations for military construction
programs are contained in title XXIX of this Act.
Army procurement (sec. 1502)
This section would authorize an additional $1.8 billion for
fiscal year 2009 procurement of war-related items for the Army.
Navy and Marine Corps procurement (sec. 1503)
This section would authorize an additional $387.5 million
for fiscal year 2009 procurement of war-related items for the
Navy and the Marine Corps.
Air Force procurement (sec. 1504)
This section would authorize an additional $575.0 million
for fiscal year 2009 procurement of war-related items for the
Air Force.
Joint Improvised Explosive Device Defeat Fund (sec. 1505)
The budget request included a total of $496.3 million for
the Joint Improvised Explosive Device Defeat Fund (JIEDDF), of
which $306.3 million was for the Joint Improvised Explosive
Device Defeat Organization (JIEDDO) attack the network line of
operation, $88.3 million was for the JIEDDO train the force
line of operation, and $101.7 million was for the JIEDDO staff
and infrastructure line of operation.
The committee recommends a transfer of $496.3 million in
the JIEDDF to titles XV and XVI of this Act. The committee
believes that JIEDDO's expenses are war-related and should be
accounted for in the appropriate war-related accounts in titles
XV and XVI of this Act. Therefore, the committee recommends
increases of $750.0 million for all of JIEDDO's activities in
support of operations in Afghanistan.
Defense-wide activities procurement (sec. 1506)
This section would authorize an additional $62.5 million
for fiscal year 2009 procurement of war-related items for the
defense agencies and the United States Special Operations
Command, plus an additional $100.0 million for Mine Resistant
Ambush Protected (MRAP) vehicles.
Research, development, test, and evaluation (sec. 1507)
This section would authorize an additional $60.0 million
for fiscal year 2009 war-related research and development
expenses.
Operation and maintenance (sec. 1508)
This section would authorize an additional $11.8 billion
for fiscal year 2009 war-related operation and maintenance
expenses of the military services, the defense agencies, and
the United States Special Operations Command.
Military personnel (sec. 1509)
This section would authorize an additional $750.0 million
for fiscal year 2009 war-related military personnel expenses of
the active and reserve components, including mobilization costs
for reserve and National Guard forces.
Working capital funds (sec. 1510)
This section would authorize an additional $250.0 million
for the fiscal year 2009 war-related working capital fund
expenses of the Department of Defense.
Other Department of Defense programs (sec. 1511)
This section would authorize additional funding for fiscal
year 2009 war-related expenses of the Defense Health Program
and for counter-narcotics efforts in Afghanistan.
Afghanistan Security Forces Fund (sec. 1512)
The committee recommends a provision that would authorize
an additional $3.0 billion for the fiscal year 2009 war-related
expenses of the Afghanistan Security Forces Fund. The provision
would also specify the authorized use of these funds, authorize
the transfer of funds from this account to other accounts of
the Department of Defense, provide for prior notice to Congress
before obligation of these funds, and require quarterly reports
on the specific use of these funds.
Treatment as additional authorizations (sec. 1513)
This section would provide that the amounts authorized for
war-related purposes in this title are in addition to the
amounts otherwise authorized in this Act for the base budget.
Special transfer authority (sec. 1514)
The committee recommends a provision that would authorize
the transfer of up to $3.0 billion of war-related funding
authorizations in this title among the accounts in this title
and title XVI. This special transfer authority is in addition
to the general transfer authority contained in section 1001 of
this Act, but the same reprogramming procedures applicable to
transfers under section 1001 would also apply to transfers
under this section. No more than $300.0 million could be
transferred to the Iraq Security Forces Fund under this
authority.
Limitation on use of funds (sec. 1515)
The President did not allocate any of the funding in his
budget request for Iraq and Afghanistan to specific programs.
This section would provide that any funding in this title not
designated by Congress for a specific program could not be
obligated until 15 days after the Secretary of Defense
transmits to the congressional defense committees a report
setting forth the proposed allocation of such funds at the
line-item level.
Requirement for separate display of budget for Afghanistan (sec. 1516)
This provision would require the Secretary of Defense to
identify separately the funding requested for operations in
Afghanistan in any future annual or supplemental budget
request.
The committee notes that on February 8, 2008, Secretary of
Defense Robert Gates stated that, ``I worry that for many
Europeans the missions in Iraq and Afghanistan are confused * *
* I think that they combine the two * * * Many of them, I
think, have a problem with our involvement in Iraq and project
that to Afghanistan, and do not understand the very different--
for them--the very different kind of threat.'' The committee
shares this concern, and believes this provision would help
address this public perception problem.
TITLE XVI--AUTHORIZATION OF ADDITIONAL APPROPRIATIONS FOR OPERATIONS IN
IRAQ
Overview
The President's budget requested $70.0 billion in emergency
funding in the national defense budget function for operations
in Afghanistan and Iraq. The request did not allocate specific
funding to either operation, nor to any specific budget titles,
accounts, or programs. The committee bill separates funding for
these operations. This title authorizes $49.6 billion in
funding for operations in Iraq. Funding for operations in
Afghanistan is authorized in title XV.
Funding authorized in this title is for the incremental
costs of operations in Iraq. As described later in this report,
any such funds not designated by Congress for a specific
program may not be obligated until 15 days after the Secretary
of Defense transmits to the congressional defense committees a
report setting forth the proposed allocation of such funds at
the line-item level.
Explanation of tables
The summary table that follows describes the funding
authorized in this bill for operations in Iraq.
Purpose (sec. 1601)
This section states the purpose of this title, which is to
authorize additional appropriations for operations in Iraq for
fiscal year 2009.
This title authorizes funding for military personnel,
operation and maintenance, procurement, research and
development, working capital funds, health care, and other
programs normally authorized in division A of this Act.
Additional war-related authorizations for military construction
programs are contained in title XXIX of this Act.
Army procurement (sec. 1602)
This section would authorize an additional $5.5 billion for
fiscal year 2009 procurement of war-related items for the Army.
Navy and Marine Corps procurement (sec. 1603)
This section would authorize an additional $1.2 billion for
fiscal year 2009 procurement of war-related items for the Navy
and the Marine Corps.
Air Force procurement (sec. 1604)
This section would authorize an additional $925.0 million
for fiscal year 2009 procurement of war-related items for the
Air Force.
Joint Improvised Explosive Device Defeat Fund (sec. 1605)
The budget request included a total of $496.3 million for
the Joint Improvised Explosive Device Defeat Fund (JIEDDF), of
which $306.3 million was for the Joint Improvised Explosive
Device Defeat Organization (JIEDDO) attack the network line of
operation, $88.3 million was for the JIEDDO train the force
line of operation, and $101.7 million was for the JIEDDO staff
and infrastructure line of operation.
The committee recommends a transfer of $496.3 million in
the JIEDDF to titles XV and XVI of this Act. The committee
believes that JIEDDO's expenses are war-related and should be
accounted for in the appropriate war-related accounts in titles
XV and XVI of this Act. Therefore, the committee recommends
increases of approximately $2.3 million for all of JIEDDO's
activities in support of operations in Iraq.
Further, the committee directs that JIEDDO provide $5.0
million for the Marine Corps to continue research and
development on the breeding and training of dogs for the
Improvised Explosive Device (IED) mission and other missions in
support of infantry operations, and $5.0 million for the Army's
Maneuver Support Command to field an IED dog capability in
cooperation with the Marine Corps.
The Marine Corps Warfighting Laboratory has developed a
very innovative program to train dogs to work off-leash to
detect IED and explosive caches. In contrast to other attempts
to use dogs for this mission, the Marine Corps was able to find
a breed that can stay on task for the length of patrols, even
in extreme heat, and that can be trained to operate effectively
with minimally trained handlers. These dogs have been deployed
to Iraq and have performed superbly. The Marine Corps believes
that these dogs have saved lives and enhanced the effectiveness
of supported units.
The committee believes that the Army could benefit from a
similar program and understands that the Army's Maneuver
Support Command at Fort Leonard Wood is interested in working
with the Marine Corps.
In addition, the committee directs that JIEDDO fund at a
level of not less than $60.0 million the ongoing efforts of the
Irregular Warfare Support (IWS) office under the Assistant
Secretary of Defense for Special Operations/Low Intensity
Conflict. The IWS program leverages ongoing research efforts of
the United States Special Operations Command, the military
departments, defense agencies, and other federal agencies to
analyze, modify, design, and demonstrate enduring technical and
operational capabilities for irregular warfare. IWS projects
include developing capabilities to attack adversaries'
organizations, their infrastructure and sanctuaries, financing,
support operations, the motivations of their members, and their
propaganda. The IWS also utilizes multi-disciplinary approaches
that combine intelligence, operations, and technology.
Defense-wide activities procurement (sec. 1606)
This section would authorize an additional $187.5 million
for fiscal year 2009 procurement of war-related items for the
defense agencies and the United States Special Operations
Command, plus an additional $500.0 million for Mine Resistant
Ambush Protected (MRAP) vehicles.
Research, development, test, and evaluation (sec. 1607)
This section would authorize an additional $140.0 million
for fiscal year 2009 war-related research and development
expenses.
Operation and maintenance (sec. 1608)
This section would authorize an additional $35.2 billion
for fiscal year 2009 war-related operation and maintenance
expenses of the military services, the defense agencies, and
the United States Special Operations Command.
Military personnel (sec. 1609)
This section would authorize an additional $2.3 billion for
fiscal year 2009 war-related military personnel expenses of the
active and reserve components, including mobilization costs for
reserve and National Guard forces.
Working capital funds (sec. 1610)
This section would authorize an additional $750.0 million
for the fiscal year 2009 war-related working capital fund
expenses of the Department of Defense.
Defense Health Program (sec. 1611)
This section would authorize additional funding for fiscal
year 2009 war-related expenses of the Defense Health Program.
Iraq Freedom Fund (sec. 1612)
The committee recommends a provision that would authorize
an additional $150.0 million for the fiscal year 2009 war-
related expenses of the Iraq Freedom Fund. The provision would
also authorize the transfer of funds from this account to other
accounts of the Department of Defense and require prior notice
to Congress before obligation of these funds.
Iraq Security Forces Fund (sec. 1613)
The committee recommends a provision that would authorize
an additional $200.0 million for the fiscal year 2009 war-
related expenses of the Iraq Security Forces Fund. The
provision would also specify the authorized use of these funds,
authorize the transfer of funds from this account to other
accounts of the Department of Defense, provide for prior notice
to Congress before obligation of these funds, and require
quarterly reports on the specific use of these funds.
The amount authorized for this program would be
dramatically reduced from the fiscal year 2008 level in light
of the ability of the Iraqi Government to finance its own
security forces given the significant increases in Iraqi oil
revenues and the large balances of unspent Iraqi funds. Funding
authorized for this program is intended only for areas where
the United States is in a position to make a unique
contribution to Iraqi security, particularly in the area of
training. No funds are authorized for expenditure on
infrastructure programs for the Iraqi security forces for
fiscal year 2009. The committee believes the Iraqi Government
is well able to afford to finance its own infrastructure needs
at this point.
Treatment as additional authorizations (sec. 1614)
This section would provide that the amounts authorized for
war-related purposes in this title are in addition to the
amounts otherwise authorized in this Act for the base budget.
Limitation on use of funds (sec. 1615)
The President did not allocate any of the funding in his
budget request for Iraq and Afghanistan to specific programs.
This section would provide that any funding in this title not
designated by Congress for a specific program could not be
obligated until 15 days after the Secretary of Defense
transmits to the congressional defense committees a report
setting forth the proposed allocation of such funds at the
line-item level.
Contributions by the Government of Iraq to large-scale infrastructure
projects, combined operations, and other activities in Iraq
(sec. 1616)
The committee recommends a provision that would prohibit
the use of funds authorized by this Act to pay for any large-
scale infrastructure project commenced after the date of
enactment of this Act. The provision would also require the
United States Government to begin negotiating an agreement with
the Government of Iraq to share the costs of combined
operations between the Government of Iraq and Multinational
Forces Iraq. The provision would further require that the
United States Government act to ensure that Iraqi funds are
used to pay the costs of training, equipping, and sustaining
the Iraqi Security Forces and the costs associated with the
Sons of Iraq.
DIVISION B--MILITARY CONSTRUCTION AUTHORIZATIONS
Summary and explanation of funding tables
Division B of this Act authorizes funding for military
construction projects of the Department of Defense. It includes
funding authorizations for the construction and operation of
military family housing as well as military construction for
the reserve components, the defense agencies, and the North
Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) Security Investment
Program. It also provides authorization for the base closure
accounts that fund military construction, environmental
cleanup, and other activities required to implement the
decisions in base closure rounds.
The following tables provide the project-level
authorizations for the military construction funding authorized
in division B of this Act, other than the war-related projects
authorized in title XXIX, and summarize that funding by
account. Funding for base closure projects is summarized in the
table that follows, and is explained in additional detail in
the table included in title XXVII of this report. These tables
are incorporated by reference into this Act as provided in
section 1002 of this Act.
The fiscal year 2009 budget requested $24.4 billion for
military construction and housing programs. Of this amount,
$11.7 billion was requested for military construction, $3.2
billion for the construction and operation of family housing,
and $9.5 for base closure activities, including $9.1 billion to
implement the results of the 2005 Base Realignment and Closure
(BRAC) round.
Excluding the war-related projects in title XXIX, the
committee recommends authorization of appropriations for
military construction and housing programs totaling $24.8
billion. The total amount authorized for appropriations
reflects the committee's continuing commitment to invest in the
recapitalization of Department of Defense facilities and
infrastructure. The committee recommends an increase of $596.6
million for additional construction projects, and a reduction
of $191.6 million in unjustified or lower priority projects,
for a net increase of $405.0 million to the amount requested
for military construction and family housing.
Short title (sec. 2001)
The committee recommends a provision that would designate
division B of this Act as the Military Construction
Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2009.
Expiration of authorizations and amounts required to be specified by
law (sec. 2002)
The committee recommends a provision that would establish
the expiration date for authorizations in this Act for military
construction projects, land acquisition, family housing
projects, and contributions to the North Atlantic Treaty
Organization infrastructure program, as October 1, 2011, or the
date of enactment of an act authorizing funds for military
construction for fiscal year 2012, whichever is later.
Effective date (sec. 2003)
The committee recommends a provision that would provide
that titles XXI, XXII, XXIII, XXIV, XXV, XXVI, XXVII, and XXIX
of this Act take effect on October 1, 2008 or the date of
enactment of this Act, whichever is later.
TITLE XXI--ARMY
Summary
The budget request included authorization of appropriations
of $4.6 billion for military construction and $1.4 billion for
family housing for the Army for fiscal year 2009.
The committee recommends authorization of appropriations of
$4.6 billion for military construction and $1.4 billion for
family housing for fiscal year 2009.
The committee has eliminated the military construction
funding proposed for a commissary at Fort Riley, Kansas, which
is inconsistent with the longstanding practice of not using
military construction funding for revenue-generating non-
appropriated fund projects.
The committee has fully authorized the construction of a
command and battle center at Weisbaden, Germany, but has
reduced the fiscal year 2009 funding for this project by $42.6
million. This reduction is made without prejudice. The
committee expects the Army to request the balance of the
funding needed to complete this project in the fiscal year 2010
budget request.
The committee has fully funded the Army's request for
$125.0 million to begin construction of a family housing
complex at Camp Humphreys in the Republic of Korea. The
committee understands the Army is pursuing leasing options with
the private sector as an alternative way to meet this
requirement.
Should this alternative approach show sufficient promise
and maturity before the conference report on this legislation
is enacted, the committee is open to alternative uses of these
construction funds, if such alternative uses would more quickly
and effectively fulfill the requirement for accompanied housing
in Korea.
Authorized Army construction and land acquisition projects (sec. 2101)
The committee recommends a provision that would authorize
military construction projects for the active component of the
Army for fiscal year 2009. The authorized amounts are listed on
an installation-by-installation basis.
Family housing (sec. 2102)
The committee recommends a provision that would authorize
new construction and planning and design of family housing
units for the Army for fiscal year 2009. It would also
authorize funds for facilities that support family housing,
including housing management offices and housing maintenance
and storage facilities.
Improvements to military family housing units (sec. 2103)
The committee recommends a provision that would authorize
funding for fiscal year 2009 to improve existing Army family
housing units.
Authorization of appropriations, Army (sec. 2104)
The committee recommends a provision that would authorize
appropriations for the active component military construction
and family housing projects of the Army authorized for
construction for fiscal year 2009 in this Act. This provision
would also provide an overall limit on the amount authorized
for military construction and family housing projects for the
active-duty component of the Army. The State list contained in
this report is the binding list of the specific projects
authorized at each location.
Extension of authorizations of certain fiscal year 2005 projects (sec.
2105)
The committee recommends a provision that would extend the
authorizations for certain Army fiscal year 2005 military
construction projects until October 1, 2009, or the date of
enactment of an act authorizing funds for military construction
for fiscal year 2010, whichever is later. These extensions were
requested by the Department of Defense.
Extension of authorization of certain fiscal year 2006 project (sec.
2106)
The committee recommends a provision that would extend the
authorization for an Army fiscal year 2006 military
construction project at Schofield Barracks, Hawaii, until
October 1, 2009, or the date of enactment of an act authorizing
funds for military construction for fiscal year 2010, whichever
is later. This extension was requested by the Department of
Defense.
TITLE XXII--NAVY
Summary
The budget request included authorization of appropriations
of $3.1 billion for military construction and $758.9 million
for family housing for the Department of the Navy for fiscal
year 2009.
The committee recommends authorization of appropriations of
$3.1 billion for military construction and $758.9 million for
family housing for fiscal year 2009.
The committee has deleted funding for a classified project
for which adequate justification was not provided.
The committee has also deleted the funding requested for an
aircraft maintenance hangar in Djibouti. The committee values
the relationship between the United States and the Government
of Djibouti, and supports the defensive and offensive
operational objectives of Combined Joint Task Force--Horn of
Africa (CJTF-HOA) currently operating at Camp Lemonier,
Djibouti. However, the committee reiterates two concerns
expressed by the conferees in the statement of managers to
accompany the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal
Year 2008 (Public Law 110-181). First, the United States still
lacks a long-term lease for our facilities in Djibouti, thus
calling into question the wisdom of making long-term
investments at this time. The committee believes such improved
lease terms can be achieved.
Second, a coherent strategy of basing and operations for
the new U.S. Africa Command remains a work in progress. The
committee believes such a strategy should be in place to
provide a strategic context for investment plans in Djibouti or
other nations in Africa. While the commander of U.S. Africa
Command has stated that CJTF-HOA will have an ``enduring''
presence in Djibouti, the President has stated that it is not
our intent to have military bases in Africa. The committee
believes plans for the U.S. Africa Command require
clarification before Congress funds construction of enduring
facilities in Africa.
Authorized Navy construction and land acquisition projects (sec. 2201)
The committee recommends a provision that would authorize
Navy and Marine Corps military construction projects for fiscal
year 2009. The authorized amounts are listed on an
installation-by-installation basis.
Family housing (sec. 2202)
The committee recommends a provision that would authorize
new construction and planning and design of family housing
units for the Navy for fiscal year 2009. It would also
authorize funds for facilities that support family housing,
including housing management offices and housing maintenance
and storage facilities.
Improvements to military family housing units (sec. 2203)
The committee recommends a provision that would authorize
funding for fiscal year 2009 to improve existing Navy family
housing units.
Authorization of appropriations, Navy (sec. 2204)
The committee recommends a provision that would authorize
appropriations for the active component military construction
and family housing projects of the Department of the Navy
authorized for construction for fiscal year 2009 in this Act.
This provision would also provide an overall limit on the
amount authorized for military construction and family housing
projects for the active-duty components of the Navy and the
Marine Corps. The State list contained in this report is the
binding list of the specific projects authorized at each
location.
Modification of authority to carry out certain fiscal year 2005 project
inside the United States (sec. 2205)
The committee recommends a provision that would amend
section 2201 of the Military Construction Authorization Act for
Fiscal Year 2005 (division B of Public Law 108-375) to increase
the project authorization for a strategic weapons facility at
Bangor, Washington, by $16.7 million. This increase was
requested by the Department of Defense.
Modification of authority to carry out certain fiscal year 2007
projects inside the United States (sec. 2206)
The committee recommends a provision that would amend
section 2201 of the Military Construction Authorization Act for
Fiscal Year 2007 (division B of Public Law 109-364) to increase
the authorization for a project at Suitland, Maryland by $8.3
million and the authorization for a project at Whidbey Island,
Washington by $2.8 million. These increases were requested by
the Department of Defense.
TITLE XXIII--AIR FORCE
Summary
The budget request included authorization of appropriations
of $934.9 million for military construction and $995.3 million
for family housing for the Air Force in fiscal year 2009.
The committee recommends authorization of appropriations of
$1.1 billion for military construction and $995.3 million for
family housing for fiscal year 2009.
The committee has deleted funding for a close air support
parking apron project in Qatar. The committee notes that the
Department of Defense is now requesting that this project be
funded using fiscal year 2008 supplemental funds.
The committee is concerned that the very low levels of
funding contained in the fiscal year 2009 future years defense
program for the Air Force Reserve and Air National Guard do not
represent adequate investment levels in the facilities of the
reserve components of the Air Force. The committee urges the
Air Force to allocate more funding to modernizing its reserve
component facilities than the levels projected in this year's
plan.
Authorized Air Force construction and land acquisition projects (sec.
2301)
The committee recommends a provision that would authorize
Air Force military construction projects for fiscal year 2009.
The authorized amounts are listed on an installation-by-
installation basis.
Family housing (sec. 2302)
The committee recommends a provision that would authorize
new construction and planning and design of family housing
units for the Air Force for fiscal year 2009. It would also
authorize funds for facilities that support family housing,
including housing management offices and housing maintenance
and storage facilities.
Improvements to military family housing units (sec. 2303)
The committee recommends a provision that would authorize
funding for fiscal year 2009 to improve existing Air Force
family housing units.
Authorization of appropriations, Air Force (sec. 2304)
The committee recommends a provision that would authorize
appropriations for the active component military construction
and family housing projects of the Air Force authorized for
construction for fiscal year 2009 in this Act. This provision
would also provide an overall limit on the amount authorized
for military construction and family housing projects for the
active-duty component of the Air Force. The State list
contained in this report is the binding list of the specific
projects authorized at each location.
Extension of authorizations of certain fiscal year 2006 projects (sec.
2305)
The committee recommends a provision that would extend the
authorizations for certain Air Force fiscal year 2006 military
construction projects until October 1, 2009, or the date of
enactment of an act authorizing funds for military construction
for fiscal year 2010, whichever is later. These extensions were
requested by the Department of Defense.
Extension of authorizations of certain fiscal year 2005 projects (sec.
2306)
The committee recommends a provision that would extend the
authorizations for certain Air Force fiscal year 2005 military
construction projects until October 1, 2009, or the date of
enactment of an act authorizing funds for military construction
for fiscal year 2010, whichever is later. These extensions were
requested by the Department of Defense.
Budget Item
Planning and design, Air Force
The committee directs that the amount of $1.8 million,
added to the authorization of appropriations for planning and
design for the Air Force be used to complete the design of a
logistics readiness center at Mountain Home Air Force Base,
Idaho, and that $810,000 added to this same account be used to
complete the design of a missile service complex at F.E. Warren
Air Force Base, Wyoming.
TITLE XXIV--DEFENSE AGENCIES
Summary
The budget request included authorization of appropriations
of $1.8 billion for military construction for the defense
agencies, $134.3 million for chemical demilitarization
construction, and $54.6 million for family housing for the
defense agencies, the Family Housing Improvement Fund, and the
Homeowners Assistance Program for fiscal year 2009.
The committee recommends authorization of appropriations of
$1.8 billion for military construction, $144.3 million for
chemical demilitarization construction, and $54.6 million for
the three family housing programs for fiscal year 2009.
The committee bill would authorize the construction of a
European-based missile defense system, including an interceptor
site in Poland and a radar site in the Czech Republic, subject
to the conditions of section 232 of this Act that would
restrict the obligation of funds for this system until
agreements are ratified by the host nations. The committee is
concerned that the Department of Defense may be relying too
heavily on the prime contractor to carry out all the major
phases of this system, from requirements definition to
construction to operation of the system. The committee urges
the Under Secretary of Defense for Acquisition, Technology, and
Logistics to carefully review the acquisition process being
used for this program, and to ensure the Department of Defense
complies with the requirements of section 2851 of title 10,
United States Code.
Finally, the committee has eliminated the funding requested
for a transportable missile defense radar. The committee found
the justification for this request inadequate.
Subtitle A--Defense Agency Authorizations
Authorized defense agencies construction and land acquisition projects
(sec. 2401)
The committee recommends a provision that would authorize
military construction projects for the defense agencies for
fiscal year 2009. The authorized amounts are listed on an
installation-by-installation basis.
Energy conservation projects (sec. 2402)
The committee recommends a provision that would authorize
the Secretary of Defense to carry out energy conservation
projects.
Authorization of appropriations, defense agencies (sec. 2403)
The committee recommends a provision that would authorize
appropriations for the military construction and family housing
projects of the defense agencies authorized for construction
for fiscal year 2009 in this Act. This provision would also
provide an overall limit on the amount authorized for military
construction and family housing projects for the defense
agencies. The State list contained in this report is the
binding list of the specific projects authorized at each
location.
Modification of authority to carry out certain fiscal year 2007 project
(sec. 2404)
The committee recommends a provision that would amend
section 2401 of the Military Construction Authorization Act for
Fiscal Year 2007 (division B of Public Law 109-364) to increase
the construction authorization for a project at Fort Detrick,
Maryland by $133.0 million. This increase was requested by the
Department of Defense.
Extension of authorization of certain fiscal year 2006 project (sec.
2405)
The committee recommends a provision that would extend the
authorization for a fiscal year 2006 military construction
project for the Defense Logistics Agency until October 1, 2009,
or the date of enactment of an act authorizing funds for
military construction for fiscal year 2010, whichever is later.
This extension was requested by the Department of Defense.
Subtitle B--Chemical Demilitarization Authorizations
Authorized chemical demilitarization program construction and land
acquisition projects (sec. 2411)
The committee recommends a provision that would authorize
military construction projects for the chemical
demilitarization program for fiscal year 2009. The authorized
amounts are listed on an installation-by-installation basis.
Authorization of appropriations, chemical demilitarization
construction, defense-wide (sec. 2412)
The committee recommends a provision that would authorize
appropriations for the chemical demilitarization projects
authorized for construction for fiscal year 2009 in this Act.
This provision would also provide an overall limit on the
amount authorized for chemical demilitarization military
construction projects. The State list contained in this report
is the binding list of the specific projects authorized at each
location.
Modification of authority to carry out certain fiscal year 1997 project
(sec. 2413)
The committee recommends a provision that would amend
section 2401 of the Military Construction Authorization Act for
Fiscal Year 1997 (division B of Public Law 104-201) to increase
the construction authorization for the chemical
demilitarization program at the Pueblo Army Depot, Colorado, by
$223.0 million. This increase was requested by the Department
of Defense.
Modification of authority to carry out certain fiscal year 2000 project
(sec. 2414)
The committee recommends a provision that would amend
section 2401 of the Military Construction Authorization Act for
Fiscal Year 2000 (division B of Public Law 106-65) to increase
the construction authorization for the chemical
demilitarization program at the Bluegrass Army Depot, Kentucky,
by $201.7 million. This increase was requested by the
Department of Defense.
TITLE XXV--NORTH ATLANTIC TREATY ORGANIZATION SECURITY INVESTMENT
PROGRAM
Summary
The Department of Defense requested authorization of
appropriation of $240.9 million for the North Atlantic Treaty
Organization (NATO) Security Investment Program for fiscal year
2009. The committee recommends an authorization of
appropriation of $240.9 million for this program. The committee
notes that a significant portion of the NATO Security
Investment Program is currently devoted to support of the NATO
mission in Afghanistan, and expects that a significant portion
of the funding for fiscal year 2009 would be used to continue
those efforts.
Authorized NATO construction and land acquisition projects (sec. 2501)
The committee recommends a provision that would authorize
the Secretary of Defense to make contributions to the North
Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) Security Investment Program
in an amount equal to the sum of the amount specifically
authorized in section 2502 of this title and the amount of
recoupment due to the United States for construction previously
financed by the United States.
Authorization of appropriations, NATO (sec. 2502)
The committee recommends a provision that would authorize
appropriations of $240.9 million for the United States'
contribution to the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO)
Security Investment Program for fiscal year 2009.
TITLE XXVI--GUARD AND RESERVE FORCES FACILITIES
Summary
The Department of Defense requested authorization of
appropriations of $931.7 million for military construction in
fiscal year 2009 for National Guard and reserve facilities. The
committee recommends a total of $1.2 billion for military
construction for the reserve components. The detailed funding
recommendations are contained in the State list table included
in this report.
Authorized Army National Guard construction and land acquisition
projects (sec. 2601)
The committee recommends a provision that would authorize
military construction projects for the Army National Guard for
fiscal year 2009. The authorized amounts are listed on a
location-by-location basis.
Authorized Army Reserve construction and land acquisition projects
(sec. 2602)
The committee recommends a provision that would authorize
military construction projects for the Army Reserve for fiscal
year 2009. The authorized amounts are listed on a location-by-
location basis.
Authorized Navy Reserve and Marine Corps Reserve construction and land
acquisition projects (sec. 2603)
The committee recommends a provision that would authorize
military construction projects for the Navy Reserve and Marine
Corps Reserve for fiscal year 2009. The authorized amounts are
listed on a location-by-location basis.
Authorized Air National Guard construction and land acquisition
projects (sec. 2604)
The committee recommends a provision that would authorize
military construction projects for the Air National Guard for
fiscal year 2009. The authorized amounts are listed on a
location-by-location basis.
Authorized Air Force Reserve construction and land acquisition projects
(sec. 2605)
The committee recommends a provision that would authorize
military construction projects for the Air Force Reserve for
fiscal year 2009. The authorized amounts are listed on a
location-by-location basis.
Authorization of appropriations, Guard and Reserve (sec. 2606)
The committee recommends a provision that would authorize
appropriations for the reserve component military construction
projects authorized for construction for fiscal year 2009 in
this Act. This provision would also provide an overall limit on
the amount authorized for military construction projects for
each of the reserve components of the military departments. The
State list contained in this report is the binding list of the
specific projects authorized at each location.
Extension of authorizations of certain fiscal year 2006 projects (sec.
2607)
The committee recommends a provision that would extend the
authorizations for certain Guard and reserve fiscal year 2006
military construction projects until October 1, 2009, or the
date of enactment of an act authorizing funds for military
construction for fiscal year 2010, whichever is later. These
extensions were requested by the Department of Defense.
Extension of authorization of certain fiscal year 2005 project (sec.
2608)
The committee recommends a provision that would extend the
authorizations for an Army National Guard fiscal year 2005
military construction project in California until October 1,
2009, or the date of enactment of an act authorizing funds for
military construction for fiscal year 2010, whichever is later.
This extension was requested by the Department of Defense.
Modification of authority to carry out certain fiscal year 2008 project
(sec. 2609)
The committee recommends a provision that would amend
section 2601 of the Military Construction Authorization Act for
Fiscal Year 2008 (division B of Public Law 110-181) to increase
the authorization for a project for the Army National Guard at
North Kingstown, Rhode Island, by $5.0 million. This increase
is necessary because of unforeseen increases in the cost of
this project subsequent to the initial project authorization.
The authorization of additional appropriations for this fiscal
year 2008 project is included in the amount in section 2606(1)
of this Act, and this additional funding is reflected in the
table of fiscal year 2009 military construction authorizations
in division B of the report accompanying this Act.
Budget Items
Planning and design, Army National Guard
The committee directs that the amount of $2.0 million,
added to the authorization of appropriations for planning and
design for the Army National Guard, be used to complete the
design of a field maintenance shop in Las Vegas, Nevada; that
$204,000 added to this account be used to complete the design
of an infantry platoon battle course at Fort Chaffee, Arkansas;
and that $682,000 added to this account be used to complete the
design of a readiness center at The Dalles, Oregon.
Planning and design, Air National Guard
The committee directs that the amount of $1.1 million,
added to the authorization of appropriations for planning and
design for the Air National Guard, be used to complete the
design of a combat communications training complex at
Springfield-Beckley Air National Guard Base, Ohio, and that
$850,000 added to this account be used to complete the design
of an apron and taxiway for the C-5 aircraft at Eastern West
Virginia Regional Airport/Shepherd Field in Martinsburg, West
Virginia.
Planning and design, Air Force Reserve
The committee directs that the amount of $900,000 added to
the authorization of appropriations for planning and design for
the Air Force Reserve be used to complete the design of phase 2
of the joint services lodging facility at the Youngstown Air
Reserve Station, Ohio.
TITLE XXVII--BASE CLOSURE AND REALIGNMENT ACTIVITIES
Summary and explanation of tables
The budget request included $393.4 million for the ongoing
cost of environmental remediation and other activities
necessary to continue implementation of the 1988, 1991, 1993,
and 1995 Base Realignment and Closure (BRAC) rounds. The
committee has authorized the amount requested for these
activities in section 2701 of this Act.
In addition, the budget requested an authorization of
appropriations of $9.1 billion for implementation of the 2005
BRAC round. Section 2703 of this Act would authorize the full
$9.1 billion requested for BRAC activities in fiscal year 2009.
Included in the $9.1 billion requested for BRAC is an
authorization of appropriations for $7.2 billion in military
construction projects that would be initiated in fiscal year
2009. The total of new full project authorizations, and
increases in the total authorized cost of three previously
authorized medical center projects, is $7.0 billion. Section
2702 of this Act provides the authorization for these projects.
The following table provides the specific amount authorized
for each BRAC military construction project as well as the
amount authorized for appropriations for all BRAC activities,
including military construction, environmental costs,
relocation and other operation and maintenance costs, permanent
change of station costs for military personnel, and other BRAC
costs. This table is incorporated by reference into this Act as
provided in section 1002 of this Act.
Authorization of appropriations for base closure and realignment
activities funded through Department of Defense base closure
account 1990 (sec. 2701)
The committee recommends a provision that would authorize
appropriations for fiscal year 2009 for ongoing activities that
are required to implement the decisions of the 1988, 1991,
1993, and 1995 Base Realignment and Closure (BRAC) rounds.
Authorized base closure and realignment activities funded through
Department of Defense base closure account 2005 (sec. 2702)
The committee recommends a provision that would authorize
military construction projects for fiscal year 2009 that are
required to implement the decisions of the 2005 Base
Realignment and Closure (BRAC) round. The table included in
this title of the report lists the specific amounts authorized
at each location.
Authorization of appropriations for base closure and realignment
activities funded through Department of Defense base closure
account 2005 (sec. 2703)
The committee recommends a provision that would authorize
appropriations for military construction projects for fiscal
year 2009 that are required to implement the decisions of the
2005 Base Realignment and Closure (BRAC) round. This provision
would also provide an overall limit on the amount authorized
for BRAC military construction projects. The State list
contained in this report is the binding list of the specific
projects authorized at each location.
Modification of annual base closure and realignment reporting
requirements (sec. 2704)
The committee recommends a provision that would modify the
reporting requirements for ongoing base closure actions to
implement the decisions of the 2005 Base Realignment and
Closure (BRAC) round by terminating the reporting requirements
for actions regarding realigned bases with the report submitted
with the budget request for fiscal year 2014, and for closing
bases with the report submitted with the budget request for
fiscal year 2016. The base closure round implementation period
ends in September 2011. The committee believes the sunset dates
proposed in this provision will provide adequate time to
document the closure and realignment actions of the 2005 BRAC
round.
Technical corrections regarding authorized cost and scope of work
variations for military construction and military family
housing projects related to base closures and realignments
(sec. 2705)
The committee recommends a provision that would make two
technical corrections to section 2705 of the Military
Construction Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2008 (division B
of Public Law 110-181). These technical corrections reflect the
original intent of the conferees.
TITLE XXVIII--MILITARY CONSTRUCTION GENERAL PROVISIONS
Subtitle A--Military Construction Program and Military Family Housing
Changes
Increase in threshold for unspecified minor military construction
projects (sec. 2801)
The committee recommends a provision that would amend
section 2805(a)(1) of title 10, United States Code, by raising
the cost ceiling of a construction project authorized by this
section from $2.0 million to $3.0 million. This provision would
also eliminate the separate threshold for projects intended
solely to correct deficiencies that are life-threatening,
health-threatening, or safety-threatening. The committee
believes this unified threshold for unspecified minor
construction projects will provide both greater flexibility and
greater efficiency for the Department of Defense.
Authority to use operation and maintenance funds for construction
projects outside the United States (sec. 2802)
The committee recommends a provision that would further
amend section 2808 of the National Defense Authorization Act
for Fiscal Year 2004 (Public Law 108-136), as amended, to
extend for 1 additional year, through the end of fiscal year
2009, the temporary authority provided to the Secretary of
Defense to use funds appropriated for operation and maintenance
to carry out construction projects intended to satisfy certain
operational requirements in support of a declaration of war,
national emergency, or other contingency.
The provision would also modify current law to allow the
Department of Defense to use this authority to construct
temporary facilities in support of contingency operations at
locations in Afghanistan where the United States expects to
have an enduring presence. The provision would also extend from
30 to 45 days the time for the Department of Defense to
transmit the quarterly reports on the use of this authority.
Improved oversight and accountability for military housing
privatization initiative projects (sec. 2803)
The committee recommends a provision that would require
enhanced oversight of, and reporting on, housing privatization
projects. The provision would require greater interaction among
the government and private entities involved in these projects,
establish minimum bonding levels, specify procedures to be used
in the case of significant schedule or performance
deficiencies, ensure that the Department of Defense maintains a
database of entities that achieve unsatisfactory performance
ratings on such projects, and require the Department to
identify and establish regulations to implement best practices
for monitoring the progress and performance of housing
privatization projects.
The committee has long supported, and continues to support,
the military housing privatization program. The committee is
disappointed that privatization projects at Air Force
installations in Arkansas, Georgia, Florida, and Massachusetts
failed to meet schedule and other performance standards.
However, the committee notes that the problems with these
projects, all of which involved a single developer, do not and
should not overshadow the enormous successes achieved by the
military housing privatization initiative across the United
States and across all the military departments over the past
decade.
Intrinsic to the very idea of privatization is a more
``hands off'' approach by Congress and, to a lesser degree, by
the Department of Defense, than is normally the case with
acquisition or construction programs. The committee seeks to
find an appropriate balance that will enhance oversight of this
program and reduce the chance of the damaging failure of these
projects being repeated, while still preserving the essential
structure and benefits of the existing privatization program.
Leasing of military family housing to Secretary of Defense (sec. 2804)
The committee recommends a provision that would authorize
the Secretary of Defense to live in, and lease, a military
family housing unit in the National Capital Region, and would
prescribe the rental rate for such quarters.
The Department of Defense requested this provision in the
belief that housing the Secretary of Defense in established
quarters on a secure military installation is far more cost-
effective than installing, maintaining, and protecting
sensitive Department of Defense equipment, along with secure
information facilities and security and detection systems, in
private residences. The Department also believes that housing
the Secretary on a military installation would substantially
reduce the logistics burden, disruptions to the public, and
costs associated with protecting the Secretary, and would
provide the Secretary with quarters that are properly equipped
for executive security and communications. The committee agrees
with the Department's rationale.
Cost-benefit analysis of dissolution of Patrick Family Housing LLC
(sec. 2805)
The committee recommends a provision that would require the
Secretary of the Air Force to submit to the congressional
defense committees a cost-benefit analysis regarding the
dissolution of the Patrick Family Housing LLC created in
connection with the privatization of military family housing at
Patrick Air Force Base, Florida, and would prohibit the
Secretary from dissolving that entity until this analysis has
been submitted.
Subtitle B--Real Property and Facilities Administration
Participation in conservation banking programs (sec. 2811)
The committee recommends a provision that would authorize
the Department of Defense to participate in conservation
mitigation bank programs. This authority would generally
operate under the same terms and conditions as the existing
wetlands mitigation bank authority contained in section 2694b
of title 10, United States Code.
The committee believes this additional authority has the
potential to enhance training and testing both for forces as
they are currently stationed as well as for installations, such
as those on Guam, where additional forces may be stationed,
which will in turn increase the need for local training to
accommodate the increased population at such installations.
Clarification of congressional reporting requirements for certain real
property transactions (sec. 2812)
The committee recommends a provision that would amend
section 2662 of title 10, United States Code, to clarify the
requirement for the Secretaries of the military departments to
notify the Committees on Armed Services of the Senate and House
of Representatives and to wait a specified period before
entering into real property transactions listed in section 2662
of title 10, United States Code.
The notice and wait requirement applies to six listed real
property transactions, and provides for limited exceptions.
Subsection (c) states that section 2662 does not apply to
``river and harbor projects or flood control projects, or to
leases of Government-owned real property for agricultural or
grazing purposes or to any real property acquisition
specifically authorized in a Military Construction
Authorization Act.''
This section would clarify and expand the current exception
for ``river and harbor projects or flood control projects'' to
cover ``Army civil works water resource development projects.''
This is consistent with an informal understanding that section
2662 applies only to military real property transactions. The
Army civil works mission, however, now includes more than just
river and harbor or flood control projects. This amendment
would recognize the intended scope of section 2662 and
specifically exclude all Army civil works water resource
development projects from the notice and wait requirements.
Modification of land management restrictions applicable to Utah
national defense lands (sec. 2813)
The committee recommends a provision that would sunset a
reporting requirement and associated restriction contained in
section 2815 of the National Defense Authorization Act for
Fiscal Year 2000 (Public Law 106-65). This provision of current
law restricts the actions of the Department of the Interior
until the Secretary of Defense submitted a report. The
Department of Defense has failed, in over 7 years, to submit
this report, and has not given the committee any indication
that the report will ever be submitted. The committee does not
believe it is sound public policy for one government agency to
restrict the actions of another agency indefinitely simply
through inaction. The committee believes these restrictions
should be terminated not later than the end of fiscal year
2013, which is the date contained in the legislation on this
matter adopted by the Senate in 2007.
Subtitle C--Land Conveyances
Transfer of proceeds from property conveyance, Marine Corps Logistics
Base, Albany, Georgia (sec. 2821)
The committee recommends a provision that would allow the
Secretary of Defense to transfer the proceeds from the sale of
the Boyett Village Housing Complex at the Marine Corps
Logistics Base Albany, Georgia, into the Family Housing
Improvement Fund (FHIF) for carrying out military family
housing privatization activities. This housing is surplus to
long-term Marine Corps family housing requirements.
Absent special authority, the proceeds from the disposal of
family housing property must be transferred to the Defense
Military Family Housing Management Account under section 2831
of title 10, United States Code. Those proceeds would then be
used to carry out operations and maintenance activities
associated with government-owned military family housing.
Because of the extensive privatization of military family
housing property already achieved, these funds are not needed
in the operations and maintenance account.
The committee urges the Department of Defense to give first
priority for the use of these proceeds to remedying the
problems at the Air Force housing privatization projects in
Arkansas, Florida, Georgia, and Massachusetts.
Subtitle D--Energy Security
Expansion of authority of the military departments to develop energy on
military lands (sec. 2831)
The committee recommends a provision that would expand the
authority of the military departments to develop energy
resources on military lands. Section 2917 of title 10, United
States Code currently authorizes such development in the case
of geothermal energy resources. The provision recommended by
the committee would expand this authority to include other
renewable energy resources, such as solar energy.
The committee notes that this provision would have the
effect of expanding the authority of the Department of Defense
to enter into long-term contracts for geothermal energy under
section 2922a of title 10, United States Code, to other
renewable energy resources developed on military lands.
Subtitle E--Other Matters
Report on application of force protection and anti-terrorism standards
to gates and entry points on military installations (sec. 2841)
The committee recommends a provision that would require the
Secretary of Defense to submit to the congressional defense
committees a report, not later than February 1, 2009, on the
implementation of Department of Defense anti-terrorism/force
protection (AT/FP) standards for main gates or entry points of
military installations.
The committee recognizes the importance of anti-terrorism
and force protection (AT/FP) measures for Department of Defense
installations and facilities. The continued need for attention
to this issue is emphasized by the recent bombing of an Army
recruiting station located in New York City, New York. The
committee is concerned that adequate funding has not been
requested to construct permanent facilities and equipment to
ensure compliance with AT/FP standards. Timely execution of
these requirements is necessary to protect the safety and
welfare of service members and their families. The committee
expects the Department of Defense to include, in conjunction
with this report, funding in the fiscal year 2010 budget and
future-years defense program to ensure that main gates and
entry points at military installations comply with AT/FP
standards.
Items of Special Interest
Defense Access Roads criteria
The Department of Defense (DOD) has the responsibility to
determine whether proposed improvements to roads serving
military installations may be eligible for financing through
the Defense Access Roads (DAR) program. Section 210 of title
23, United States Code, authorizes DOD to pay a fair share of
the cost of public road improvements necessary to mitigate an
unusual impact of a defense activity if the Secretary of
Defense determines the requirement to be important to national
defense. An unusual impact includes the establishment of a new
military installation, a significant increase in assigned
personnel at an existing military installation, the relocation
of an access gate, compensation for a closure of a public road
caused by military activities, transport of heavy equipment
over a public road, or a temporary surge of military activity
creating intolerable congestion.
The committee is concerned that the current DAR eligibility
criteria contained in the Federal-aid Policy Guide of the
Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) do not consider the full
range of transportation impacts or requirements. The committee
is aware that the criteria currently do not account for safety
and security concerns for local roads, even though certain DAR
projects have been carried out in the past 5 years in order to
correct significant deficiencies threatening the safety of
military personnel.
In addition, the decisions of the 2005 Defense Base Closure
and Realignment process, relocations of forces from overseas,
and growth in the size of the Army and Marine Corps have led to
a substantial increase in the number of personnel on certain
military installations over a period of just a few years. Yet
the staggered nature of these basing decisions make it
difficult to show that any one decision meets the strict
criterion of at least doubling local traffic, or easily
determine the appropriate scope of cumulative impacts. As a
result, valid transportation requirements may not be considered
eligible due to a strict interpretation of the Adoubling@
criterion, despite a significant expansion of the
installation's population.
The committee notes that the Transportation Research Board,
which serves as an independent adviser to the President,
Congress, and federal agencies on scientific and technical
questions, has published a Highway Capacity Manual, which
contains state-of-the-art techniques for estimating road
capacity and determining levels of service for transportation
facilities and modes. These techniques have been adopted by the
Federal Highway Administration as a basis for assessment of
road requirements based on current congestion and saturation
levels for traffic flows on public roads.
The DAR criteria were developed to assess the relative
impact of military activities on public roads. Therefore, the
committee directs the Secretary of Defense, working with the
Secretary of Transportation, to review the current DAR
eligibility requirements and to submit a report to Congress,
not later than September 30, 2008, that includes the following:
(1) a description of the current DAR criteria,
including the statutory, regulatory, or policy basis
for each of them;
(2) the procedures in place to assist installation
commanders in understanding the DAR criteria and
submitting requests for DAR projects;
(3) an assessment of whether each DAR project carried
out in the past 10 years has specifically met the
current criteria;
(4) an analysis of whether a separate military
construction account for DAR projects is in the best
interest of the Department;
(5) a review of the best practices and techniques
used by the FHWA to assess road capacity requirements,
and whether these techniques and measurement tools
would be appropriate for assessing eligibility for DAR
projects; and
(6) any recommendations for changes in the criteria.
Military construction reprogrammings
Military construction projects are authorized on an
installation-by-installation basis in statute in annual
military construction authorization acts. The statement of
managers in the conference reports that accompany those acts
provides a binding ``State list'' that describes each specific
project at each installation. Annual military construction
appropriations conference reports provide similar binding lists
of the construction projects for which appropriations are being
made available. These projects are not specified individually
in the statutory language of annual appropriations acts.
Section 2853 of title 10, United States Code, allows for
variation in the cost or scope of such projects above certain
limits. With respect to the authorization for such projects,
changes to the authorized amounts are made on a notice-and-wait
basis following the notices provided pursuant to section 2853.
With respect to the appropriations for such projects, the
transfers are made not on a notice-and-wait basis, but on a
prior approval basis, as directed in the statement of managers
of annual military construction appropriations acts.
Since military construction projects require both an
authorization and an appropriation, the committee believes the
procedures for changing the congressionally approved funding
for such projects should be consistent among the committees,
and consistent with established practices for the reprogramming
of other defense funds.
Beginning with fiscal year 2009 projects, the committee
directs the Department of Defense to submit proposed transfers
of funds between military construction projects to the
Committee on Armed Services of the United States Senate on the
same prior approval basis as these reprogrammings are submitted
to the Committees on Appropriations of the Senate and the House
of Representatives.
TITLE XXIX--WAR-RELATED MILITARY CONSTRUCTION AUTHORIZATIONS
Summary
In March 2008, the Department of Defense made an informal
request to the congressional defense committees to add new
projects for fiscal year 2008, both inside the United States as
well as in the U.S. Central Command area of responsibility, and
to cancel some projects which were authorized in title XXIX of
the Military Construction Authorization Act for Fiscal Year
2008 (division B of Public Law 110-181).
The provisions in subtitle A of this Act relating to fiscal
year 2008 authorize $355.2 million in additional construction
projects requested by the Department of Defense, and cancel the
authorizations for $105.7 million of previously authorized
projects in Iraq.
The President's budget request for fiscal year 2009
included $70.0 billion for operations in Iraq and Afghanistan.
The administration has not yet provided any detailed allocation
of how those funds will be used. However, the committee
understands that there are fiscal year 2009 military
construction requirements related to these operations,
specifically, for additional warrior transition unit facilities
for wounded warriors. The committee recommends an additional
$500.0 million in fiscal year 2009 war-related construction
funding, within the overall total of $70.0 billion for war-
related activities in this Act, for such purposes.
The following table describes the specific project
adjustments for fiscal year 2008. No specific projects have
been identified at this time for fiscal year 2009. These tables
are incorporated by reference into this Act as provided in
section 1002 of this Act.
Subtitle A--Fiscal Year 2008 Projects
Authorized Army construction and land acquisition projects (sec. 2901)
The committee recommends a provision that would authorize
$162.1 million in additional war-related military construction
projects for the Army for fiscal year 2008. These
authorizations are in addition to the projects and amounts
authorized in title XXIX of the Military Construction
Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2008 (division B of Public
Law 110-181).
The additional funding would construct 15 additional child
development centers at installations in the United States.
These projects were requested by the Department of Defense.
Authorized Navy construction and land acquisition projects (sec. 2902)
The committee recommends a provision that would authorize
$94.7 million in additional war-related military construction
projects for the Navy for fiscal year 2008. These
authorizations are in addition to the projects and amounts
authorized in title XXIX of the Military Construction
Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2008 (division B of Public
Law 110-181).
The majority of this additional funding is for counter-
improvised explosive device (IED) battle courses at various
Navy and Marine Corps locations in the United States. The
balance of the funding, $28.3 million, would construct child
development centers at Camp Lejeuene, North Carolina and in San
Diego, California.
These projects were requested by the Department of Defense.
Authorized Air Force construction and land acquisition projects (sec.
2903)
The committee recommends a provision that would authorize
$98.4 million in additional war-related military construction
projects for the Air Force for fiscal year 2008. These
authorizations are in addition to the projects and amounts
authorized in title XXIX of the Military Construction
Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2008 (division B of Public
Law 110-181).
Of this additional funding, $60.4 million would accelerate
a close air support project at Al Udeid Air Base in Qatar that
was originally requested in the fiscal year 2009 budget into
the fiscal year 2008 budget. There is also an additional $36.6
million to construct child development centers at three Air
Force installations in the United States.
These projects were requested by the Department of Defense.
Termination of authority to carry out fiscal year 2008 Army projects
(sec. 2904)
The committee recommends a provision that would repeal the
project authorizations for $105.7 million of Army construction
projects in Iraq that were authorized in title XXIX of the
Military Construction Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2008
(division B of Public Law 110-181).
The Department of Defense has accomplished one of these
projects using another authority, and has advised the committee
that the remainder of these projects are no longer required.
Subtitle B--Fiscal Year 2009 Projects
Authorized Army construction and land acquisition projects (sec. 2911)
The committee recommends a provision that would authorize
$450.0 million in war-related military construction projects
for the Army for fiscal year 2009. The committee understands
the Army has identified a substantial requirement for
additional warrior transition unit facilities, primarily
barracks, for fiscal year 2009. This provision would provide
additional funding for such facilities. The funding would be
available 14 days after the Secretary of Defense submits a
report to Congress with a description and justification of the
specific projects to be funded.
The committee is disappointed that the Army has not
included these projects in the fiscal year 2009 budget request,
nor did the Chief of Staff of the Army highlight them as one of
his unfunded Army priorities. The committee believes facilities
to care for wounded warriors should be a top priority of the
Army and the Department of Defense and funding for such
facilities should have been included in the budget request. The
committee intends to build on the progress made in last year's
Wounded Warrior Act, and has included these funds in
anticipation of the Army identifying such requirements as a
fiscal year 2009 supplemental request.
Authorized Navy construction and land acquisition projects (sec. 2912)
The committee recommends a provision that would authorize
$50.0 million in war-related military construction projects for
the Navy for fiscal year 2009. This provision would provide
additional funding for warrior transition unit facilities,
primarily barracks. The funding would be available 14 days
after the Secretary of Defense submits a report to Congress
with a description and justification of the specific projects
to be funded.
The committee urges the Secretary of the Navy to ensure
that the Department of the Navy is providing all the facilities
needed for the care and recovery of wounded marines or sailors.
The committee believes facilities to care for wounded warriors
should be a top priority of the Department of Defense, and
expects the Secretary of the Navy to promptly identify any
facility requirements pursuant to this authorization.
Limitation on availability of funds for certain purposes relating to
Iraq (sec. 2913)
The committee recommends a provision that would extend the
prohibition enacted in section 1222 of the National Defense
Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2008 (Public Law 110-181) to
fiscal year 2009. This provision would prohibit the use of
funds appropriated pursuant to authorizations in this Act to
establish any installation or base intended to provide for the
permanent stationing of United States forces in Iraq, or to
exercise control over the oil resources of Iraq.
DIVISION C--DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY NATIONAL SECURITY AUTHORIZATIONS AND
OTHER AUTHORIZATIONS
TITLE XXXI--DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY NATIONAL SECURITY PROGRAMS
Overview
Title XXXI authorizes appropriations for atomic energy
defense activities of the Department of Energy for fiscal year
2009, including: the purchase, construction, and acquisition of
plant and capital equipment; research and development; nuclear
weapons; naval nuclear propulsion; environmental restoration
and waste management; operating expenses; and other expenses
necessary to carry out the purposes of the Department of Energy
Organization Act (Public Law 95-91). This title authorizes
appropriations in four categories: (1) National Nuclear
Security Administration (NNSA); (2) defense environmental
cleanup; (3) other defense activities; and (4) defense nuclear
waste disposal. The budget request for atomic energy defense
activities at the Department totaled $16.0 billion, a 5.6
percent increase above the fiscal year 2008 appropriated level.
Of the total amount suggested:
(1) $9.1 billion is for NNSA, of which
(a) $6.6 is for weapons activities;
(b) $1.2 is for defense nuclear nonproliferation
activities;
(c) $828.1 million is for naval reactors; and
(d) $404.1 million is for the Office of the
Administrator;
(2) $5.3 billion is for defense environmental cleanup;
(3) $1.3 billion is for other defense activities; and
(4) $247.4 million is for defense nuclear waste disposal.
The budget request also included $7.6 million within energy
supply.
The committee recommends $16.0 billion for atomic energy
defense activities, the amount of the budget request.
Of the amounts authorized, the committee recommends:
(1) $9.6 billion for NNSA, of which
(a) $6.6 billion is for weapons activities, a
decrease of $7.4 million below the budget request;
(b) $1.8 billion is for defense nuclear
nonproliferation activities, an increase of $552.0
million above the budget request;
(c) $828.1 million is for naval reactors, the amount
of the budget request; and
(c) $404.1 million is for the Office of the
Administrator, the amount of the budget request;
(2) $5.3 billion for defense environmental cleanup
activities, the amount of the budget request;
(3) $826.5 million for other defense activities, a decrease
of $487.0 million below the budget request; and
(4) $197.4 million for defense nuclear waste disposal, a
decrease of $50.0 million below the budget request.
The committee recommends no funds for energy supply, a
reduction of $7.6 million.
The following table summarizes the budget request and the
authorizations:
Subtitle A--National Security Programs Authorizations
National Nuclear Security Administration (sec. 3101)
The committee recommends a provision that would authorize a
total of $9.6 billion for the Department of Energy in fiscal
year 2009 for the National Nuclear Security Administration to
carry out programs necessary to national security, an increase
of $544.6 million above the budget request.
Weapons activities
The committee recommends $6.6 billion for weapons
activities, a decrease of $7.4 million below the budget
request. The committee authorizes the following activities:
$1.6 billion for directed stockpile work; $1.6 billion for
campaigns; $1.7 billion for readiness in the technical base and
facilities; $221.1 million for the secure transportation asset;
$221.9 million for nuclear weapons incident response; $40.6
million for environmental projects and operations; $77.4
million for transformation disposition; $899.8 million for
safeguards and security; and $233.8 million for facilities and
infrastructure recapitalization.
Directed stockpile work
The committee recommends $1.6 billion for directed
stockpile work, a decrease of $26.0 million below the amount of
the budget request. The directed stockpile account supports
work directly related to weapons in the stockpile, including
day-to-day maintenance as well as research, development,
engineering, and certification activities to support planned
life extension programs and the reliable replacement warhead.
This account also includes fabrication and assembly of weapons
components, feasibility studies, weapons dismantlement and
disposal, training, and support equipment.
The committee recommends a decrease of $18.0 million in the
W76 life extension program as a result of schedule delays. In
addition, the committee recommends an increase of $12.0 million
in weapons dismantlement and disposition for additional studies
for the device assembly facility (DAF) and a decrease of $20.0
million in pit manufacturing. The committee believes that the
DAF is under-utilized and that the efforts begun last year to
expand the current missions at the DAF should be continued. The
committee notes that the National Nuclear Security
Administration (NNSA) has restructured funding for pit
manufacturing into two new project lines for fiscal year 2009.
There appears to be substantial overlap in the activities in
the two new project lines.
Campaigns
The committee recommends $1.6 billion for campaigns, a
decrease of $27.6 million below the amount of the budget
request. The campaigns focus on science and engineering efforts
involving the three nuclear weapons laboratories, the Nevada
Test Site, and the weapons production plants. Each campaign is
focused on a specific activity to support and maintain the
nuclear stockpile without underground nuclear weapons testing.
These efforts from the scientific underpinning of the
Department of Energy's annual certification that the stockpile
remains safe, secure, and reliable with nuclear weapons
testing. The reduction in the tritium readiness campaign takes
into account a large carryover balance resulting in contracting
delays.
Readiness in the technical base
The committee recommends $1.7 million for readiness in the
technical base, a decrease of $50.0 million below the budget
request. This account funds facilities and infrastructure in
the nuclear weapons complex and includes construction funding
for new facilities.
The committee recommends a decrease of $50.0 million in the
Chemistry and Metallurgy Facility Replacement project (CMRR),
Project 04-D-125, at the Los Alamos National Laboratory as a
result of uncertainty in the design of the CMRR. As the Defense
Nuclear Facility Safety Board (DNFSB) noted, replacing the
existing facility is essential but the CMRR has significant
unresolved issues for which there is no clear resolution. The
CMRR is one of two projects with which the DNFSB have the most
significant unresolved safety issues. These issues are
associated with the project's safety-related systems. Until
such time as the safety basis documents are completed, the
outstanding issues cannot be resolved. CMRR will be a category
I facility supporting pit operations in building PF-4 and has a
preliminary cost estimate of $2.6 billion. The committee
continues to support reconstitution of the pit manufacturing
capability in PF-4 but urges that all safety issues with CMRR
be resolved as soon as possible. If there is any change in the
planned mission at CMRR, the committee directs the Secretary of
Energy to notify the congressional defense committees.
The committee has included an offset of $8.0 million for
prior year balances in weapons activities and directs that this
offset be applied to the Ion Beam Laboratory Refurbishment at
Sandia National Laboratory, Project 08-D-806. These funds are
available as result of the completion of the Microelectronics
Facility at Sandia National Laboratory.
Secure transportation asset
The committee recommends $221.1 million for the secure
transportation asset (STA), the amount of the budget request.
The secure transportation asset is responsible for the
transportation of nuclear weapons, weapons materials, and
components, and other materials requiring safe and secure
transport. The committee directs the STA to include in its
budget submittal for fiscal year 2010 a break out of the lease
expenses for each leased facility and the expenses for each
minor construction project. In addition, the committee reminds
STA of its obligation to fully notify Congress of all third-
party financing arrangements in advance of executing any
leases.
Nuclear weapons incident response
The committee recommends $221.9 million for nuclear weapons
incident response, the amount of the budget request.
Safeguards and security
The committee recommends $899.8 million for safeguards and
security, an increase of $40.0 million above the budget
request. The committee recommends additional funds to continue
to address training and equipment issues and to meet the 2005
design basis threat.
Facilities and Infrastructure
The committee recommends $223.8 million for the facilities
and infrastructure program (FIRP), an increase of $64.2 million
above the amount of the budget request, to meet urgent
maintenance requirements across the NNSA complex. FIRP was
established to address the backlog of deferred maintenance at
NNSA facilities. While the FIRP has been successful, the
committee is concerned that as the FIRP comes to a close,
routine maintenance of facilities, and utilities and
infrastructure upgrades, such as electrical system and road
improvement, will once again be deferred to address
programmatic demands. As a result, the committee recommends
that the NNSA establish a separate facilities management
function reporting to the Administrator or the Principal
Administrator. This function should be devoted exclusively to
managing and maintaining facilities so that both new and
existing facilities, including those that have been built
recently, and that are planned, do not fall into disrepair.
Environmental projects and operations and transformation disposition
The committee recommends $40.6 million for environmental
projects and $77.4 million for transformation, the amount of
the budget request. Transformation is a new account in fiscal
year 2009 dedicated to disposition of excess facilities through
demolition, sale, or transfer. Some facilities will be
stabilized and transferred to the Office of Environmental
Management. The committee directs the NNSA to work closely with
the Office of Environmental Management (EM) to ensure that the
work funded in both budget lines is fully coordinated with EM.
The committee notes that the increase in environmental projects
and the new transformation disposition activity represents a
substantial increase in funding for these activities in NNSA.
Stockpile surveillance testing
In 2001 the Department of Energy (DOE) Inspector General
(IG) reported that the DOE was behind schedule in conducting
stockpile surveillance tests. These surveillance tests are
supposed to be conducted on a routine basis to support the
annual requirement to certify that the nuclear weapons
stockpile remains safe, secure, and reliable. In response to
the 2001 report, the National Nuclear Security Administration
(NNSA) committed to take steps to return the stockpile
surveillance tests to the planned schedule. In October 2006,
the DOE IG office conducted a follow-up review of the
commitments made in 2001 and whether NNSA had resolved the
surveillance testing backlog. Again, the IG found that although
NNSA had made progress, significant backlogs existed in the
surveillance tests. In response, NNSA committed to fully
resolve the backlog in surveillance testing by the end of 2007.
The committee directs the DOE IG to review the status of
stockpile surveillance tests to determine whether the backlog
in surveillance continues, and if it still exists, the extent
of the backlog.
Construction projects
The committee is increasingly concerned that the Department
of Energy (DOE) is moving away from funding construction
projects with funds authorized and appropriated for line item
construction projects and seeking non-traditional approaches to
construction funding. These non-traditional projects may, in
the long-term, be more expensive than traditional line item
construction projects, and may introduce new security risks and
other management complications at DOE sites. In addition, the
committee is concerned that efforts to secure non-traditional
funding may be because the projects in question do not meet
programmatic requirements or fill programmatic needs. If the
Secretary of Energy determines that there is a need for a new
facility or building to meet programmatic requirements and
activities, the committee urges the Secretary to include
requests for traditional line item construction projects to
meet such programmatic requirements.
The committee is aware of anecdotal complaints about the
construction planning and decision process, and urges the DOE
to address issues that arise from management of the process or
to bring to the committee's attention any issues that are
founded in statutory requirements.
The committee recognizes that the many multiple
disciplinary activities at the DOE laboratories and facilities
support both direct DOE activities as well as activities that
assist broader United States Government activities, and
encourage DOE to take these responsibilities into consideration
in determining requirements for new buildings and facilities.
As the DOE moves forward to recapitalize manufacturing and
continues to improve science, engineering, research, and other
capabilities, while downsizing the overall footprint of the
complex, it must ensure sound, transparent financial planning
and execution.
Defense Nuclear Nonproliferation programs
The committee recommends $1.8 billion for the Defense
Nuclear Nonproliferation program, an increase of $552.0 million
above the budget request for the Defense Nuclear
Nonproliferation program. The National Nuclear Security
Administration (NNSA) has management and oversight
responsibility for the nuclear nonproliferation programs at the
Department of Energy (DOE).
The committee recommends funding for these programs as
follows: $286.9 million for nonproliferation and verification
research and development, an increase of $25.0 million; $120.5
million for nonproliferation and international security, a
decrease of $20.0 million; $479.7 million for international
nuclear materials production and cooperation, an increase of
$50.0 million; $141.3 million for elimination of weapons-grade
plutonium production, the amount of the budget request; $538.8
million for fissile materials disposition which includes a
transfer of $487.0 million from another program office in the
DOE and an increase of $10.0 million; and $219.6 million for
the global threat reduction initiative, the amount of the
budget request.
Nonproliferation and verification research and development
The committee recommends an increase of $25.0 million for
nonproliferation and verification research and development, for
increased forensics capabilities, international safeguards
technologies, nuclear detonation systems, seismic monitoring,
and proliferation detection technologies. The committee
continues to be concerned about the continued ability of the
United States to effectively monitor and detect clandestine
nuclear weapons development activity and to attribute nuclear
weapons, improvised nuclear devices, and radiological dispersal
devices. Recent collaborative interagency efforts are
encouraging but the committee urges the many federal agencies
to exercise this developing interagency process for detection
and attribution, including the role that the DOE and its
laboratories play in the nuclear forensics portion of this
process.
The committee notes that elsewhere in this Act, it has
included a provision that would establish a scholarship and
fellowship program for nuclear nonproliferation activities. A
recently released study by the American Association for the
Advancement of Science and the American Physical Society, which
discusses nuclear forensics, highlights the work that needs to
be done to develop the global, technical, and operational
cooperation needed in the event that a terrorist successfully
detonates a nuclear weapon or device or uses a radiological
dispersal device.
Nonproliferation and international security
The committee recommends a decrease of $20.0 million,
including a reduction of $5.0 million for Global Initiatives
for Proliferation Prevention (GIPP), and a reduction of $15.0
million for support to the Global Nuclear Energy program
(GNEP). The committee believes that the GIPP has helped to
ensure that former nuclear, chemical, and biological weapons
scientists in the former Soviet Union (FSU) were gainfully
employed during a period of transition. Today, Russia and some
of the other FSU countries are enjoying economic growth and, as
the Government Accountability Office has noted, may no longer
need the assistance provided under the GIPP program. On the
other hand, some of the FSU countries have not been as
fortunate. For these and for additional countries, such as Iraq
and possibly North Korea, new partnership opportunities might
be useful. Elsewhere in this Act the committee recommends a
provision calling for a review of the GIPP program. This review
will afford NNSA the opportunity to re-baseline the GIPP
program, reviewing the need for and goals of the program.
The committee also notes that some of the work in
nonproliferation and international security is in direct
support of the GNEP. The committee takes no view on the GNEP as
it is not a program funded as part of the Atomic Energy Defense
activities, but believes that the nonproliferation programs
should not directly support specific future energy
technologies. As a result the committee recommends a decrease
of $15.0 million.
International nuclear materials and cooperation
The committee recommends an increase of $50.0 million in
international nuclear materials and cooperation to verifiably
disable and dismantle the North Korean nuclear program.
Elsewhere in this Act the committee recommends a provision that
would enable the NNSA to support the Department of State in
North Korean denuclearization activities.
Fissile materials disposition
The committee recommends a transfer of $487.0 million from
nuclear energy, other defense activities to the NNSA for the
mixed oxide fuel (MOX) facility. The NNSA is mandated to carry
out nonproliferation activities. The Unites States and Russia
have made considerable progress in formulating a new plan for
each country to disposition 34 metric tons of excess weapons
grade plutonium. As a result the committee continues to support
the fissile materials disposition program as an important part
of the overall nuclear nonproliferation program. The committee
recognizes that the NNSA will have additional amounts of excess
plutonium to disposition and expects the NNSA to continue to
use this approximately $12.0 billion complex of facilities to
disposition plutonium well into the future.
The committee recommends an additional $10.0 million for
the Russian fissile materials disposition program to continue
the joint gas reactor technology demonstration program. The gas
reactor is a more efficient burner of excess plutonium than
conventional reactors. The committee notes that the Russian
Government and the United States jointly fund this effort and
that Russian Government support for the program will exceed the
U.S. contribution.
Naval reactors
The committee recommends $793.6 million for naval reactors,
the amount of the budget request. The committee directs the
Office of Naval Reactors to review carefully options for using
low enriched uranium fuel in new or modified reactor plants for
surface ships and submarines.
Office of the Administrator
The committee recommends $404.1 million for program
direction for the National Nuclear Security Administration
(NNSA), the amount of the budget request. This account provides
program direction funding for all elements of the NNSA, except
for the naval reactors program and the secure transportation
asset.
Defense environmental cleanup (sec. 3102)
The committee recommends a provision that would authorize
$5.3 billion for the Department of Energy (DOE) in fiscal year
2009 for defense environmental cleanup, the amount of the
budget request. The provision would authorize $501.2 million in
additional environmental projects offset by $501.2 million in
prior year balances. The committee recommends the additional
authorization authority in the event funds become available to
address a variety of projects at DOE defense sites to address
budget shortfalls. Without additional funds, much of the
ongoing cleanup would be disrupted, causing the DOE to miss
many enforceable milestones, require significant layoffs, and
increase the overall cost of the cleanup. The specific projects
are listed in the DOE budget tables for the defense cleanup
program in this committee report.
Other defense activities (sec. 3103)
The committee recommends a provision that would authorize
$826.5 million for other defense activities, a decrease of
$487.0 million from the amount of the budget request. The
committee recommends: $446.9 million for health, safety, and
security, the amount of the budget request; $186.0 million for
legacy management, the amount of the request; $6.6 million for
the office of hearings and appeals; and $78.8 million for
nuclear energy, a decrease of $487.0 million. The committee
recommends that the $487.0 million included in the budget
request for other defense activities for the mixed oxide fuel
fabrication be transferred to the National Nuclear Security
Administration.
Defense nuclear waste disposal (sec. 3104)
The committee recommends a provision that would authorize
$197.4 million for defense nuclear waste disposal, a decrease
of $50.0 million below the budget request due to uncertainties
in the program. The committee remains supportive of the effort
to establish a geologic repository as delays in the repository
delay the ability of the Defense Environmental Management
program to complete its work with respect to high level waste
and spent nuclear fuel, and increase the overall cost of
cleanup.
Subtitle B--Program Authorizations, Restrictions, and Limitations
Modifications of functions of Administrator for Nuclear Security to
include elimination of surplus fissile materials usable for
nuclear weapons (sec. 3111)
The committee recommends a provision that would amend
section 2402(b)(1) of title 50, United States Code, by adding a
new paragraph assigning responsibility for elimination of
surplus fissile materials usable for nuclear weapons to the
Administrator for Nuclear Security. This provision would
restate that the responsibility for this activity is assigned
to the Deputy Administrator for Defense Nuclear
Nonproliferation.
Report on compliance with Design Basis Threat issued by the Department
of Energy in 2005 (sec. 3112)
The committee recommends a provision that would direct the
Secretary of Energy to submit a report on the progress made by
the Department of Energy (DOE) to achieve compliance with the
requirements of the 2005 design basis threat (DBT) for each DOE
site with Category I nuclear materials. The DBT establishes the
physical security requirements for each DOE site. This report
would be a follow-on report to the 2006 DBT report, which laid
out a plan for each site to either be compliant by 2008 or
obtain a waiver. The provision would also direct the Secretary
to conduct an assessment of the 2005 DBT and to identify any
necessary modifications, updates, or revisions to the 2005 DBT.
The committee is concerned that several sites may not be in
compliance with the 2005 DBT by the end of 2008.
Modification of submittal of reports on inadvertent releases of
restricted data (sec. 3113)
The committee recommends a provision that would amend
section 2672 of title 50, United States Code, to make the
annual report on inadvertent releases of restricted data due
every other year rather than annually. This report deals with
inadvertent releases of restricted data that might occur during
the process of declassifying historical documents. When the
current process for declassification was established
approximately 10 years ago, there were a series of inadvertent
releases. Since that time the process has become much more
rigorous and an annual report is no longer needed.
The provision would further amend section 2672 to change
the frequency of the report that the Secretary of Energy
submits to Congress to identify the plans of various federal
agencies to prevent the inadvertent release of restricted data.
Each agency that has or may have restricted data in its
historical documents slated for release must prepare a plan to
ensure that such data is not inadvertently released. The
Department of Energy (DOE) must review the plans, determine
that they are sufficient, and determine if the agency is in
compliance with its plan. This amendment would modify the
frequency of the DOE review of the agencies' plans from
periodic, which has been treated by the Secretary as an annual
requirement, to once every 2 years. The agencies have made
considerable progress in establishing effective plans.
Nonproliferation scholarship and fellowship program (sec. 3114)
The committee recommends a provision that would direct the
Administrator of the National Nuclear Security Administration
(NNSA) to establish a nonproliferation scholarship program. The
committee is concerned that certain technical areas of
expertise critical to nonproliferation programs, such as radio-
chemistry, are increasingly difficult for the NNSA and the
Department of Energy laboratories to attract and retain. The
scholarship program would be available to both undergraduate
and graduate students in disciplines to be determined by the
Administrator. A student would be required to work as a Federal
Government employee or as a laboratory employee for 1 year for
each year that the student received support under the program.
Review of and reports on Global Initiatives for Proliferation
Prevention program (sec. 3115)
The committee recommends a provision that would direct the
Administrator of the National Nuclear Security Administration
to conduct a review of the Global Initiatives for Proliferation
Prevention (GIPP) program and submit a report on the review to
the congressional defense committees no later than February 1,
2009.
The report would include a description of the goals for the
GIPP program and the criteria for partnership projects together
with recommendations regarding the future of projects in Russia
and the other countries of the former Soviet Union as well as
plans for projects in countries other than the former Soviet
Union. In addition, the report would include a plan for
completing all projects in the countries of the former Soviet
Union by 2012.
TITLE XXXII--DEFENSE NUCLEAR FACILITIES SAFETY BOARD
Authorization (sec. 3201)
The committee recommends a provision that would authorize
$29.0 million for the Defense Nuclear Facilities Safety Board
(DNFSB). This is an increase of $3.0 million above the budget
request. The DNFSB has the responsibility to ensure that the
health and safety of the public surrounding, and workers at
Department of Energy (DOE) defense nuclear facilities are
adequately protected. The DNFSB is responsible not only for
operational nuclear safety of existing facilities and
activities, but also ensures that the design and construction
of new defense nuclear projects and decommissioning of old
facilities meets applicable DOE orders.
The DOE is in the process of designing and constructing
many new facilities, including major new nuclear facilities,
and decommissioning the older facilities that are no longer
needed. The committee believes that additional funds are needed
to enable the DNFSB to hire additional technical staff to
ensure that the DNFSB fully reviews and provides the results of
those reviews to DOE. Timely interaction with DOE is
particularly important in the design and construction process.
The work of the DNFSB is growing substantially as DOE is
undertaking 26 new nuclear construction projects. The budget
request funds only two thirds of the DNFSB statutory staffing
levels.
The committee continues to find the quarterly reports
useful by highlighting issues as they emerge, and commends the
DNFSB for submitting reports that are succinct, clearly
written, and timely.
The committee is concerned that if the DOE pursues third
party financing of facilities in which nuclear operations are
conducted, the DNFSB will either not be able to carry out its
statutory responsibilities or that it will be more difficult or
costly to do so. The committee reminds the DOE that if it is
conducting nuclear operations at a defense nuclear facility,
the DNFSB has jurisdiction over the facility and the
operations.
Recently the DOE National Nuclear Security Administration
(NNSA) asked the DNFSB to provide technical assistance for the
Mixed Oxide Fuel facility, a facility not within the
jurisdiction of the DNFSB. The committee supports the use of
the DNFSB in this capacity, but notes that the DNFSB does not
have funds authorized and appropriated for this purpose. The
committee directs the DNFSB and the NNSA to enter into an
agreement that provides for full cost recovery by the DNFSB for
work for others.
LEGISLATIVE REQUIREMENTS
Departmental Recommendations
By letter dated February 5, 2008, the General Counsel of
the Department of Defense forwarded to the President of the
Senate proposed legislation ``To authorize appropriations for
fiscal year 2009 for military activities of the Department of
Defense, to prescribe military personnel strengths for fiscal
year 2009, and for other purposes.'' The transmittal letter and
proposed legislation were officially referred as Executive
Communication 5192 to the Committee on Armed Services on
February 26, 2008.
Executive Communication 5192 is available for review at the
committee.
Committee Action
The committee ordered reported a comprehensive original
bill and a series of original bills for the Department of
Defense, military construction and Department of Energy
authorizations by voice vote.
The committee vote to report the National Defense
Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2009 passed by roll call
vote, 24-0, as follows: In favor: Senators Levin, Kennedy,
Byrd, Lieberman, Reed, Akaka, Nelson of Florida, Nelson of
Nebraska, Bayh, Pryor, Webb, McCaskill, McCain, Warner, Inhofe,
Sessions, Collins, Chambliss, Graham, Dole, Cornyn, Thune,
Martinez and Wicker. Opposed: None.
The roll call votes on motions and amendments to the bill
which were considered during the course of the markup have been
made public and are available at the committee.
Congressional Budget Office Cost Estimate
It was not possible to include the Congressional Budget
Office cost estimate on this legislation because it was not
available at the time the report was filed. It will be included
in material presented during floor debate on the legislation.
Regulatory Impact
Paragraph 11(b) of rule XXVI of the Standing Rules of the
Senate requires that a report on the regulatory impact of the
bill be included in the report on the bill. The committee finds
that there is no regulatory impact in the case of the National
Defense Authorization Bill for Fiscal Year 2009.
Changes in Existing Law
Pursuant to the provisions of paragraph 12 of rule XXVI of
the Standing Rules of the Senate, the changes in existing law
made by certain portions of the bill have not been shown in
this section of the report because, in the opinion of the
committee, it is necessary to dispense with showing such
changes in order to expedite the business of the Senate and
reduce the expenditure of funds.