42-224
2008
110TH CONGRESS 2D SESSION
SENATE
REPORT
| Calendar No. 732 |
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
NATIONAL DEFENSE AUTHORIZATION ACT FOR FISCAL YEAR 2009
42-224
2008
110TH CONGRESS 2D SESSION
SENATE
REPORT
| Calendar No. 732 |
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
| ? | |
| COMMITTEE ON ARMED SERVICES | |
| (110th Congress, 2d Session) | |
| CARL LEVIN, Michigan, Chairman | |
| EDWARD M. KENNEDY, Massachusetts ROBERT C. BYRD, West Virginia JOSEPH I. LIEBERMAN, Connecticut JACK REED, Rhode Island DANIEL K. AKAKA, Hawaii BILL NELSON, Florida E. BENJAMIN NELSON, Nebraska EVAN BAYH, Indiana HILLARY RODHAM CLINTON, New York MARK L. PRYOR, Arkansas JIM WEBB, Virginia CLAIRE MCCASKILL, Missouri |
JOHN MCCAIN, Arizona JOHN WARNER, Virginia JAMES M. INHOFE, Oklahoma JEFF SESSIONS, Alabama SUSAN M. COLLINS, Maine SAXBY CHAMBLISS, Georgia LINDSEY O. GRAHAM, South Carolina ELIZABETH DOLE, North Carolina JOHN CORNYN, Texas JOHN THUNE, South Dakota MEL MARTINEZ, Florida 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
Title II--Research, Development, Test, and Evaluation
Explanation of tables
Subtitle A--Authorization of Appropriations
Subtitle B--Program Requirements, Restrictions, and Limitations
Requirement for plan on overhead nonimaging infrared systems (sec. 211)
Advanced battery manufacturing and technology roadmap (sec. 212)
Availability of funds for defense laboratories for research and development of technologies for military missions (sec. 213)
Assured funding for certain information security and information assurance programs of the Department of Defense (sec. 214)
Requirements for certain airborne intelligence collection systems (sec. 215)
Subtitle C--Missile Defense Programs
Review of the ballistic missile defense policy and strategy of the United States (sec. 231)
Limitation on availability of funds for procurement, construction, and deployment of missile defenses in Europe (sec. 232)
Airborne Laser system (sec. 233)
Annual Director of Operational Test and Evaluation characterization of operational effectiveness, suitability, and survivability of the Ballistic Missile Defense System (sec. 234)
Independent assessment of boost-phase missile defense programs (sec. 235)
Study on space-based interceptor element of ballistic missile defense system (sec. 236)
Subtitle D--Other Matters
Modification of systems subject to survivability testing by the Director of Operational Test and Evaluation (sec. 251)
Biennial reports on joint and service concept development and experimentation (sec. 252)
Repeal of annual reporting requirement relating to the Technology Transition Initiative (sec. 253)
Executive agent for printed circuit board technology (sec. 254)
Report on Department of Defense response to findings and recommendations of the Defense Science Board Task Force on Directed Energy Weapons (sec. 255)
Assessment of standards for mission critical semiconductors procured by the Department of Defense (sec. 256)
Budget Items
Army
Army basic research programs
Network science and technology research center
Army materials research
Advanced Army energy and power technologies
Army aviation technologies
Sniper detection systems
Army vehicle reliability technologies
Unmanned ground vehicle weaponization
Standoff explosives detection technologies
Soldier positioning technologies
Military engineering technologies
Combat feeding technologies
Army medical research
Biosensor controller systems
Army medical advanced technology development
Army aviation advanced technology development
Army combat vehicle technologies
Diverse threat sensor development
Army training technologies
Deactivation of military explosives
Army missile and rocket technologies
Situational awareness technologies
Unique item ID data management research
Advanced electronics integration
Advanced environmental controls
Advanced fuel cell research
Radiation hardening initiative
High-altitude integration testbed
Air and missile defense architecture analysis
Stryker active protection system
Vibration management enhancement research
Next-generation combat helmet development
High Mobility Multi-purpose Wheeled Vehicle modernization research
Non-Line of Sight-Launch System anti-tamper research
Future Combat System
Urban training development
Extended range sniper rifle research
Army test and target development
Javelin modernization
Global Combat Support System, the Logistics Modernization Program and Product Lifecycle Management Plus
Army manufacturing technologies
Navy
Navy basic research
Manufacturing engineering training
Navy power projection research
Navy force protection research
Situational awareness processing technologies
Acoustic research and test capabilities
Navy electronics research
Advanced technologies for power projection
Force protection advanced technology
High-integrity Global Positioning System
Ground sensor networks
Shipboard system component development
Advanced submarine system development
Facilities improvements
Optical interconnect
Land attack technology
Directed energy
Next-generation cruiser
Improved towed array handler
Submarine electronic chart updates
Next-generation Phalanx
NULKA anti-ship missile decoy system
Combat wound tissue transplantation technologies
F-35 Joint Strike Fighter competitive propulsion system
Navy test and evaluation support
Advanced LINAC facility
Navy support of the reliable replacement warhead
Warfighter enhanced decision making
Aviation improvements
Broad Area Maritime Surveillance Unmanned Aircraft System
Digital manufacturing technologies
National Shipbuilding Research Program--Advanced Shipbuilding Enterprise
Air Force
Air Force basic research programs
Air Force materials research
Optical components for air vehicles
Air Force training technology
Air Force aerospace propulsion technology
Aerospace sensor technologies
Air Force seismic research
Cyber attack mitigation technologies
Reconfigurable securing computing
Propulsion technologies
Thin film amorphous solar arrays
Integrated targeting devices
Optical interconnect for battlefield communications
High energy laser weapon systems
Global Positioning System III operational control segment
Space situational awareness
Transformational Communications satellite
Operationally Responsive Space
B-2 radar modernization program
Space-based space surveillance block 10
Space-based Infrared Satellite system
Third Generation Infrared Surveillance satellite system
F135 engine
Combat Search and Rescue Replacement Aircraft
High speed test track
B-52 bomber
Air Operations Centers
Joint surveillance target attack radar system research and development
Weather service research and development
C-17 research, development, test, and evaluation
Expeditionary Combat Support System
Defense Enterprise Accounting and Management System
Defense-wide
Defense Experimental Program to Stimulate Competitive Research
In-vitro models for biodefense vaccines
Superstructural particle evaluation
Next-generation over-the-horizon radar
Chemical agent fate response planning tool
Chemical and biological applied research
Chemical and biological infrared detector
Multivalent Marburg and Ebola vaccine
DARPA technology transition
Three-dimensional integrated circuit technologies
Blast mitigation and protection
Comprehensive National Incident Management System
Special operations technologies
Blast trauma research
Blackswift
Engineered biological detectors
Improved chemical, biological, and radiological filters
Raman chemical identification system
Command and control gap filler joint capabilities technology demonstration
High performance manufacturing technologies
Defense Logistics Agency technology programs
Superlattice nanotechnology
Special warfare domain awareness technologies
Weapon of mass destruction exercises
Arrow missile defense program
Short-range ballistic missile defense
Terminal High Altitude Area Defense
Ground-based Midcourse Defense
Airborne Laser
Real-time non-specific viral agent detector
Ballistic missile defense sensors
Kinetic Energy Interceptor
Ballistic missile defense reductions
Aegis Ballistic Missile Defense (BMD)
Space Tracking and Surveillance System
Multiple Kill Vehicles
Space test-bed
Missile Defense Agency funding reduction
Corrosion control technologies
Conflict modeling technologies
Prompt global strike
Net-enabled command and control
Central Test and Evaluation Investment Program
Anti-tamper technologies
Force transformation directorate
Software assurance education and research
Status of Operational Readiness and Training Systems
Industrial Base Innovation Fund
Items of Special Interest
Aegis Ballistic Missile Defense funding
Agency relocation
Executive helicopter program (VH-71A)
Expeditionary Fighting Vehicle
Global Positioning System
Improved commercial imagery integration
Title III--Operation and Maintenance
Subtitle A--Authorization of Appropriations
Explanation of tables
Subtitle B--Environmental Provisions
Expansion of cooperative agreement authority for management of natural resources to include off-installation mitigation (sec. 311)
Reimbursement of Environmental Protection Agency for certain costs in connection with Moses Lake Wellfield Superfund Site, Moses Lake, Washington (sec. 312)
Comprehensive program for the eradication of the brown tree snake population from military facilities in Guam (sec. 313)
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)
Minimum capital investment for certain depots (sec. 322)
Subtitle D--Reports
Additional information under annual submissions of information regarding information technology capital assets (sec. 331)
Subtitle E--Other Matters
Mitigation of power outage risks for Department of Defense facilities and activities (sec. 341)
Increased authority to accept financial and other incentives related to energy savings and new authority related to energy systems (sec. 342)
Recovery of improperly disposed of Department of Defense property (sec. 343)
Budget Items
Army
Computing services
Unmanned aircraft systems concept development
Shipping containers
Life cycle logistics contracting
Facilities sustainment, restoration, and modernization
Second destination transportation
Ammunition inspections and warehousing
Navy
Unobligated Operation and Maintenance balances
Overstatements of civilian personnel pay requirements
Naval aircraft depot maintenance
Damage control management
MK 45 gun depot overhaul
Marine Corps
Marine Corps shelters
Mobile corrosion protection Marine Corps
Air Force
B-52 flying hours
F-15 depot maintenance
B-52 depot maintenance
B-2 depot maintenance
Engine trailer life extension program
Land mobile radios
National Security Space Institute
Advanced ultrasonic inspection of aging aircraft structures
Defense-wide
Expanded prisoner of war/missing in action research in North Korea
Defense Security Cooperation Agency
Status of Operational Readiness and Training System
Defense Readiness Reporting System
Readiness and Environmental Protection Initiative
STARBASE Academies
Army Reserve
Mobile corrosion protection Army Reserve
Army Reserve military technician cost avoidance
Army National Guard
Aircraft humidity protection
Expandable Light Air Mobility Shelters
Extended Cold Weather Clothing System
Rapid Data Management System
Mobile corrosion protection Army National Guard
Weapons Skills Trainer
Emergency satellite communications
Air National Guard
Controlled humidity protection
Crypto-linguist and intelligence officer initiative
Items of Special Interest
Assessment of plans for contracting support in combatant command operational plans
Combatant Commander Initiative Fund
Commercial satellite communications
Defense Information Systems Agency working capital fund management
Funding for military morale, welfare, and recreation programs
Long-range facilities and construction planning at Army ammunition plants and arsenals
Standards for deployable shelters
Title IV--Military Personnel Authorizations
Subtitle A--Active Forces
End strengths for active forces (sec. 401)
Subtitle B--Reserve Forces
End strengths for Selected Reserve (sec. 411)
End strengths for Reserves on active duty in support of the Reserves (sec. 412)
End strengths for military technicians (dual status) (sec. 413)
Fiscal year 2009 limitation on number of non-dual status technicians (sec. 414)
Maximum number of Reserve personnel authorized to be on active duty for operational support (sec. 415)
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)
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)
Subtitle C--Authorizations of Appropriations
Military personnel (sec. 421)
Budget Items
Military personnel funding changes
Military personnel 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)
Modification of limitations on authorized strengths of general and flag officers on active duty (sec. 502)
Clarification of joint duty requirements for promotion to general or flag grades (sec. 503)
Modification of authorities on length of joint duty assignments (sec. 504)
Technical and conforming amendments relating to modification of joint specialty requirements (sec. 505)
Eligibility of reserve officers to serve on boards of inquiry for separation of regular officers for substandard performance and other reasons (sec. 506)
Modification of authority on Staff Judge Advocate to the Commandant of the Marine Corps (sec. 507)
Increase in number of permanent professors at the United States Air Force Academy (sec. 508)
Service creditable toward retirement for thirty years or more of service of regular warrant officers other than regular Army warrant officers (sec. 509)
Modification of requirements for qualification for issuance of posthumous commissions and warrants (sec. 510)
Subtitle B--Enlisted Personnel Policy
Increase in maximum period of reenlistment of regular members of the armed forces (sec. 521)
Subtitle C--Reserve Component Management
Modification of limitations on authorized strengths of reserve general and flag officers in active status (sec. 531)
Extension to other reserve components of Army authority for deferral of mandatory separation of military technicians (dual status) until age 60 (sec. 532)
Increase in mandatory retirement age for certain Reserve officers to age 62 (sec. 533)
Authority for vacancy promotion of National Guard and Reserve officers ordered to active duty in support of a contingency operation (sec. 534)
Authority for retention of reserve component chaplains and medical officers until age 68 (sec. 535)
Modification of authorities on dual duty status of National Guard officers (sec. 536)
Modification of matching fund requirements under National Guard Youth Challenge Program (sec. 537)
Report on collection of information on civilian skills of members of the reserve components of the armed forces (sec. 538)
Subtitle D--Education and Training
Authority to prescribe the authorized strength of the United States Naval Academy (sec. 551)
Tuition for attendance of certain individuals at the United States Air Force Institute of Technology (sec. 552)
Increase in stipend for baccalaureate students in nursing or other health professions under Health Professions Stipend Program (sec. 553)
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)
Payment by the service academies of certain expenses associated with participation in activities fostering international cooperation (sec. 555)
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)
Impact aid for children with severe disabilities (sec. 562)
Transition of military dependent students among local educational agencies (sec. 563)
Subtitle F--Military Family Readiness
Authority for education and training for military spouses pursuing portable careers (sec. 571)
Subtitle G--Other Matters
Department of Defense policy on the prevention of suicides by members of the armed forces (sec. 581)
Relief for losses incurred as a result of certain injustices or errors of the Department of Defense (sec. 582)
Paternity leave for members of the armed forces (sec. 583)
Enhancement of authorities on participation of members of the armed forces in international sports competitions (sec. 584)
Pilot programs on career flexibility to enhance retention of members of the armed forces (sec. 585)
Prohibition on interference in independent legal advice by the Legal Counsel to the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff (sec. 586)
Items of Special Interest
Enhancing family support for the National Guard and reserve
Financial literacy
Legislative fellows from the Department of Defense
Premium conversion and flexible spending account options for service members
Report on implementation of Yellow Ribbon Reintegration Program
Secretary of Defense review of deferment from deployment policy following birth of a child
Title VI--Compensation and Other Personnel Benefits
Subtitle A--Pay and Allowances
Fiscal year 2009 increase in military basic pay (sec. 601)
Subtitle B--Bonuses and Special and Incentive Pays
Extension of certain bonus and special pay authorities for Reserve forces (sec. 611)
Extension of certain bonus and special pay authorities for health care professionals (sec. 612)
Extension of special pay and bonus authorities for nuclear officers (sec. 613)
Extension of authorities relating to payment of other bonuses and special pays (sec. 614)
Extension of authorities relating to payment of referral bonuses (sec. 615)
Permanent extension of prohibition on charges for meals received at military treatment facilities by members receiving continuous care (sec. 616)
Accession and retention bonuses for the recruitment and retention of psychologists for the armed forces (sec. 617)
Authority for extension of maximum length of service agreements for special pay for nuclear-qualified officers extending period of active service (sec. 618)
Incentive pay for members of precommissioning programs pursuing foreign language proficiency (sec. 619)
Subtitle C--Travel and Transportation Allowances
Shipment of family pets during evacuation of personnel (sec. 631)
Special weight allowance for transportation of professional books and equipment for spouses (sec. 632)
Travel and transportation allowances for members of the reserve components of the armed forces on leave for suspension of training (sec. 633)
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)
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)
Items of Special Interest
Aviation career incentive pay
Travel allowances for family of service members with serious psychiatric conditions
Title VII--Health Care Provisions
Subtitle A--TRICARE Program
Calculation of monthly premiums for coverage under TRICARE Reserve Select after 2008 (sec. 701)
Subtitle B--Other Health Care Authorities
Enhancement of medical and dental readiness of members of the armed forces (sec. 711)
Additional authority for studies and demonstration projects relating to delivery of health and medical care (sec. 712)
Travel for anesthesia services for childbirth for dependents of members assigned to very remote locations outside the continental United States (sec. 713)
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)
Items of Special Interest
Chiropractic care for members of the armed forces
Comptroller General study on medical personnel requirements, shortfalls, and actions needed to resolve medical personnel shortages
Mental health and traumatic brain injury
Modification of security clearance questionnaire to reduce stigma for seeking mental health care
Organ and tissue donor program
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)
Inclusion of certain major information technology investments in acquisition oversight authorities for Major Automated Information System programs (sec. 802)
Configuration steering boards for cost control under major defense acquisition programs (sec. 803)
Subtitle B--Acquisition Policy and Management
Internal controls for procurements on behalf of the Department of Defense by certain non-defense agencies (sec. 811)
Contingency contracting corps (sec. 812)
Expedited review and validation of urgent requirements documents (sec. 813)
Incorporation of energy efficiency requirements into key performance parameters for fuel consuming systems (sec. 814)
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)
Modification and extension of pilot program for transition to follow-on contracts under authority to carry out certain prototype projects (sec. 822)
Exclusion of certain factors in consideration of cost advantages of offers for certain Department of Defense contracts (sec. 823)
Subtitle D--Department of Defense Contractor Matters
Database for Department of Defense contracting officers and suspension and debarment officials (sec. 831)
Ethics safeguards for employees under certain contracts for the performance of acquisition functions closely associated with inherently governmental functions (sec. 832)
Information for Department of Defense contractor employees on their whistleblower rights (sec. 833)
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)
Additional contractor requirements and responsibilities relating to alleged crimes by or against contractor personnel in Iraq and Afghanistan (sec. 842)
Clarification and modification of authorities relating to the Commission on Wartime Contracting in Iraq and Afghanistan (sec. 843)
Comprehensive audit of spare parts purchases and depot overhaul and maintenance of equipment for operations in Iraq and Afghanistan (sec. 844)
Subtitle F--Other Matters
Expedited hiring authority for the defense acquisition workforce (sec. 851)
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)
Repeal of requirements relating to the military system essential item breakout list (sec. 853)
Items of Special Interest
Contracting officer representatives
Database and after-action reports for multiyear contracts
Past performance 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)
Participation of Deputy Chief Management Officer of the Department of Defense on Defense Business System Management Committee (sec. 902)
Repeal of obsolete limitations on management headquarters personnel (sec. 903)
General Counsel to the Inspector General of the Department of Defense (sec. 904)
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)
Business transformation initiatives for the military departments (sec. 906)
Subtitle B--Space Matters
Space posture review (sec. 911)
Subtitle C--Defense Intelligence Matters
Requirement for officers of the armed forces on active duty in certain intelligence positions (sec. 921)
Transfer of management of Intelligence Systems Support Office (sec. 922)
Program on advanced sensor applications (sec. 923)
Title X--General Provisions
Subtitle A--Financial Matters
General transfer authority (sec. 1001)
Incorporation into Act of tables in the report of the Committee on Armed Services of the Senate (sec. 1002)
United States contribution to NATO common-funded budgets in fiscal year 2009 (sec. 1003)
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)
Reimbursement of expenses for certain Navy mess operations (sec. 1012)
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)
Two-year extension of authority for use of funds for unified counterdrug and counterterrorism campaign in Colombia (sec. 1022)
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)
Enhancement of the capacity of the United States Government to conduct complex operations (sec. 1032)
Crediting of admiralty claim receipts for damage to property funded from a Department of Defense working capital fund (sec. 1033)
Minimum annual purchase requirements for airlift services from carriers participating in the Civil Reserve Air Fleet (sec. 1034)
Termination date of base contract for the Navy-Marine Corps Intranet (sec. 1035)
Prohibition on interrogation of detainees by contractor personnel (sec. 1036)
Notification of Committees on Armed Services with respect to certain nonproliferation and proliferation activities (sec. 1037)
Sense of Congress on nuclear weapons management (sec. 1038)
Sense of Congress on Joint Department of Defense-Federal Aviation Administration Executive Committee on Conflict and Dispute Resolution (sec. 1039)
Sense of Congress on sale of new outsize cargo, strategic lift aircraft for civilian use (sec. 1040)
Subtitle E--Reports
Repeal of requirement to submit certain annual reports to Congress regarding allied contributions to the common defense (sec. 1051)
Report on detention operations in Iraq (sec. 1052)
Strategic plan to enhance the role of the National Guard and Reserves in the national defense (sec. 1053)
Review of nonnuclear prompt global strike concept demonstrations (sec. 1054)
Review of bandwidth capacity requirements of the Department of Defense and the intelligence community (sec. 1055)
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)
Inclusion of service members in inpatient status in wounded warrior policies and protections (sec. 1062)
Clarification of certain information sharing between the Department of Defense and Department of Veterans Affairs for wounded warrior purposes (sec. 1063)
Additional responsibilities for the wounded warrior resource center (sec. 1064)
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)
Center of excellence in the mitigation, treatment, and rehabilitation of traumatic extremity injuries and amputations (sec. 1066)
Three-year extension of Senior Oversight Committee with respect to wounded warrior matters (sec. 1067)
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)
Modification of deadlines for standards required for entry to military installations in the United States (sec. 1082)
Items of Special Interest
Compliance with Rule XLIV of the Standing Rules of the Senate
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
National cyber security initiative
Nuclear security
Nutrition and dietary care for seriously ill and injured service members
Recovery care coordinators and medical care case managers for seriously wounded and ill service members
Refugee crisis in Iraq
United States Africa Command
Title XI--Civilian Personnel Matters
Department of Defense strategic human capital plans (sec. 1101)
Conditional increase in authorized number of Defense Intelligence Senior Executive Service personnel (sec. 1102)
Enhancement of authorities relating to additional positions under the National Security Personnel System (sec. 1103)
Expedited hiring authority for health care professionals of the Department of Defense (sec. 1104)
Election of insurance coverage by federal civilian employees deployed in support of a contingency operation (sec. 1105)
Permanent extension of Department of Defense voluntary reduction in force authority (sec. 1106)
Four-year extension of authority to make lump sum severance payments with respect to Department of Defense employees (sec. 1107)
Authority to waive limitations on pay for federal civilian employees working overseas under areas of United States Central Command (sec. 1108)
Technical amendment relating to definition of professional accounting position for purposes of certification and credentialing standards (sec. 1109)
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)
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)
Extension and expansion of authority for support of special operations to combat terrorism (sec. 1203)
Modification and extension of authorities relating to program to build the capacity of foreign military forces (sec. 1204)
Extension of authority and increased funding for security and stabilization assistance (sec. 1205)
Four-year extension of temporary authority to use acquisition and cross-servicing agreements to lend military equipment for personnel protection and survivability (sec. 1206)
Authority for use of funds for non-conventional assisted recovery capabilities (sec. 1207)
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)
Enhancement of authorities relating to Department of Defense regional centers for security studies (sec. 1212)
Payment of personnel expenses for multilateral cooperation programs (sec. 1213)
Participation of the Department of Defense in multinational military centers of excellence (sec. 1214)
Subtitle C--Other Authorities and Limitations
Waiver of certain sanctions against North Korea (sec. 1221)
Subtitle D--Reports
Extension and modification of updates on report on claims relating to the bombing of the Labelle Discotheque (sec. 1231)
Report on utilization of certain global partnership authorities (sec. 1232)
Title XIII--Cooperative Threat Reduction With States of the Former Soviet Union
Specification of Cooperative Threat Reduction programs and funds (sec. 1301)
Funding allocations (sec. 1302)
Title XIV--Other Authorizations
Summary and explanation of tables
Subtitle A--Military Programs
Working capital funds (sec. 1401)
National Defense Sealift Fund (sec. 1402)
Defense Health Program (sec. 1403)
Chemical agents and munitions destruction, defense (sec. 1404)
Drug interdiction and counter-drug activities, defense-wide (sec. 1405)
Defense Inspector General (sec. 1406)
Reduction in certain authorizations due to savings from lower inflation (sec. 1407)
Subtitle B--Armed Forces Retirement Home
Authorization of appropriations for Armed Forces Retirement Home (sec. 1421)
Subtitle C--Other Matters
Responsibilities for chemical demilitarization Citizens' Advisory Commissions in Colorado and Kentucky (sec. 1431)
Modification of definition of `Department of Defense Sealift Vessel' for purposes of the National Defense Sealift Fund (sec. 1432)
Budget Items
LHA(R) advance procurement and research and development
Traumatic brain injury and post traumatic stress disorder initiative
Department of Defense Inspector General
Item of Special Interest
Completion of destruction of chemical weapons stockpile
Title XV--Authorization of Additional Appropriations for Operations in Afghanistan
Overview
Explanation of Tables
Purpose (sec. 1501)
Army procurement (sec. 1502)
Navy and Marine Corps procurement (sec. 1503)
Air Force procurement (sec. 1504)
Joint Improvised Explosive Device Defeat Fund (sec. 1505)
Defense-wide activities procurement (sec. 1506)
Research, development, test, and evaluation (sec. 1507)
Operation and maintenance (sec. 1508)
Military personnel (sec. 1509)
Working capital funds (sec. 1510)
Other Department of Defense programs (sec. 1511)
Afghanistan Security Forces Fund (sec. 1512)
Treatment as additional authorizations (sec. 1513)
Special transfer authority (sec. 1514)
Limitation on use of funds (sec. 1515)
Requirement for separate display of budget for Afghanistan (sec. 1516)
Title XVI--Authorization of Additional Appropriations for Operations in Iraq
Overview
Explanation of Tables
Purpose (sec. 1601)
Army procurement (sec. 1602)
Navy and Marine Corps procurement (sec. 1603)
Air Force procurement (sec. 1604)
Joint Improvised Explosive Device Defeat Fund (sec. 1605)
Defense-wide activities procurement (sec. 1606)
Research, development, test, and evaluation (sec. 1607)
Operation and maintenance (sec. 1608)
Military personnel (sec. 1609)
Working capital funds (sec. 1610)
Defense Health Program (sec. 1611)
Iraq Freedom Fund (sec. 1612)
Iraq Security Forces Fund (sec. 1613)
Treatment as additional authorizations (sec. 1614)
Limitation on use of funds (sec. 1615)
Contributions by the Government of Iraq to large-scale infrastructure projects, combined operations, and other activities in Iraq (sec. 1616)
Division B--Military Construction Authorizations
Summary and explanation of funding tables
Short title (sec. 2001)
Expiration of authorizations and amounts required to be specified by law (sec. 2002)
Effective date (sec. 2003)
Title XXI--Army
Summary
Authorized Army construction and land acquisition projects (sec. 2101)
Family housing (sec. 2102)
Improvements to military family housing units (sec. 2103)
Authorization of appropriations, Army (sec. 2104)
Extension of authorizations of certain fiscal year 2005 projects (sec. 2105)
Extension of authorization of certain fiscal year 2006 project (sec. 2106)
Title XXII--Navy
Summary
Authorized Navy construction and land acquisition projects (sec. 2201)
Family housing (sec. 2202)
Improvements to military family housing units (sec. 2203)
Authorization of appropriations, Navy (sec. 2204)
Modification of authority to carry out certain fiscal year 2005 project inside the United States (sec. 2205)
Modification of authority to carry out certain fiscal year 2007 projects inside the United States (sec. 2206)
Title XXIII--Air Force
Summary
Authorized Air Force construction and land acquisition projects (sec. 2301)
Family housing (sec. 2302)
Improvements to military family housing units (sec. 2303)
Authorization of appropriations, Air Force (sec. 2304)
Extension of authorizations of certain fiscal year 2006 projects (sec. 2305)
Extension of authorizations of certain fiscal year 2005 projects (sec. 2306)
Budget Item
Planning and design, Air Force
Title XXIV--Defense Agencies
Summary
Subtitle A--Defense Agency Authorizations
Authorized defense agencies construction and land acquisition projects (sec. 2401)
Energy conservation projects (sec. 2402)
Authorization of appropriations, defense agencies (sec. 2403)
Modification of authority to carry out certain fiscal year 2007 project (sec. 2404)
Extension of authorization of certain fiscal year 2006 project (sec. 2405)
Subtitle B--Chemical Demilitarization Authorizations
Authorized chemical demilitarization program construction and land acquisition projects (sec. 2411)
Authorization of appropriations, chemical demilitarization construction, defense-wide (sec. 2412)
Modification of authority to carry out certain fiscal year 1997 project (sec. 2413)
Modification of authority to carry out certain fiscal year 2000 project (sec. 2414)
Title XXV--North Atlantic Treaty Organization Security Investment Program
Summary
Authorized NATO construction and land acquisition projects (sec. 2501)
Authorization of appropriations, NATO (sec. 2502)
Title XXVI--Guard and Reserve Forces Facilities
Summary
Authorized Army National Guard construction and land acquisition projects (sec. 2601)
Authorized Army Reserve construction and land acquisition projects (sec. 2602)
Authorized Navy Reserve and Marine Corps Reserve construction and land acquisition projects (sec. 2603)
Authorized Air National Guard construction and land acquisition projects (sec. 2604)
Authorized Air Force Reserve construction and land acquisition projects (sec. 2605)
Authorization of appropriations, Guard and Reserve (sec. 2606)
Extension of authorizations of certain fiscal year 2006 projects (sec. 2607)
Extension of authorizations of certain fiscal year 2005 project (sec. 2608)
Modification of authority to carry out certain fiscal year 2008 project (sec. 2609)
Budget Items
Planning and design, Army National Guard
Planning and design, Air National Guard
Planning and design, Air Force Reserve
Title XXVII--Base Closure and Realignment Activities
Summary and explanation of tables
Authorization of appropriations for base closure and realignment activities funded through Department of Defense base closure account 1990 (sec. 2701)
Authorized base closure and realignment activities funded through Department of Defense base closure account 2005 (sec. 2702)
Authorization of appropriations for base closure and realignment activities funded through Department of Defense base closure account 2005 (sec. 2703)
Modification of annual base closure and realignment reporting requirements (sec. 2704)
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)
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)
Authority to use operation and maintenance funds for construction projects outside the United States (sec. 2802)
Improved oversight and accountability for military housing privatization initiative projects (sec. 2803)
Leasing of military family housing to Secretary of Defense (sec. 2804)
Cost-benefit analysis of dissolution of Patrick Family Housing LLC (sec. 2805)
Subtitle B--Real Property and Facilities Administration
Participation in conservation banking programs (sec. 2811)
Clarification of congressional reporting requirements for certain real property transactions (sec. 2812)
Modification of land management restrictions applicable to Utah national defense lands (sec. 2813)
Subtitle C--Land Conveyances
Transfer of proceeds from property conveyance, Marine Corps Logistics Base, Albany, Georgia (sec. 2821)
Subtitle D--Energy Security
Expansion of authority of the military departments to develop energy on military lands (sec. 2831)
Subtitle E--Other Matters
Report on application of force protection and anti-terrorism standards to gates and entry points on military installations (sec. 2841)
Items of Special Interest
Defense Access Roads criteria
Military construction reprogrammings
Title XXIX--War-Related Military Construction Authorizations
Summary
Subtitle A--Fiscal Year 2008 Projects
Authorized Army construction and land acquisition projects (sec. 2901)
Authorized Navy construction and land acquisition projects (sec. 2902)
Authorized Air Force construction and land acquisition projects (sec. 2903)
Termination of authority to carry out fiscal year 2008 Army projects (sec. 2904)
Subtitle B--Fiscal Year 2009 Projects
Authorized Army construction and land acquisition projects (sec. 2911)
Authorized Navy construction and land acquisition projects (sec. 2912)
Limitation on availability of funds for certain purposes relating to Iraq (sec. 2913)
Division C--Department of Energy National Security Authorizations and Other Authorizations
Title XXXI--Department of Energy National Security Programs
Overview
Subtitle A--National Security Programs Authorizations
National Nuclear Security Administration (sec. 3101)
Weapons activities
Directed stockpile work
Campaigns
Readiness in the technical base
Secure transportation asset
Nuclear weapons incident response
Safeguards and security
Facilities and infrastructure
Environmental projects and operations and transformation disposition
Stockpile surveillance testing
Construction projects
Defense Nuclear Nonproliferation programs
Nonproliferation and verification research and development
Nonproliferation and international security
International nuclear materials and cooperation
Fissile materials disposition
Naval reactors
Office of the Administrator
Defense environmental cleanup (sec. 3102)
Other defense activities (sec. 3103)
Defense nuclear waste disposal (sec. 3104)
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)
Report on compliance with Design Basis Threat issued by the Department of Energy in 2005 (sec. 3112)
Modification of submittal of reports on inadvertent releases of restricted data (sec. 3113)
Nonproliferation scholarship and fellowship program (sec. 3114)
Review of and reports on Global Initiatives for Proliferation Prevention program (sec. 3115)
Title XXXII--Defense Nuclear Facilities Safety Board
Authorization (sec. 3201)
Legislative Requirements
Departmental Recommendations
Committee Action
Congressional Budget Office Cost Estimate
Regulatory Impact
Changes in Existing Law
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
[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 authorization 2009 request 2009 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 authorization 2009 request 2009 recommendation
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Army National Guard of the United States 351,300 352,600 352,600
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 the United States 106,700 106,700 106,756
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 authorization 2009 request 2009 recommendation
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Army National Guard of the United States 29,204 29,950 29,950
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 the United States 13,936 14,337 14,360
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 authorization 2009 request 2009 recommendation
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Army Reserve 8,249 8,395 8,395
The Army National Guard of the United States 26,502 27,210 27,210
The Air Force Reserve 9,909 10,003 10,003
The Air National Guard of the United States 22,553 22,452 22,459
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
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 authorization 2009 request 2009 recommendation
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Army National Guard of the United States 1,600 1,600 1,600
The Army Reserve 595 595 595
The Air National Guard of the United States 350 350 350
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 authorization 2009 request 2009 recommendation
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Army National Guard of the United States 17,000 17,000 17,000
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 the United States 16,000 16,000 16,000
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.