- TXT
-
PDF
(PDF provides a complete and accurate display of this text.)
Tip
?
109th Congress HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Report
2nd Session 109-452
_______________________________________________________________________
NATIONAL DEFENSE AUTHORIZATION ACT FOR FISCAL YEAR 2007
----------
R E P O R T
of the
COMMITTEE ON ARMED SERVICES
HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
on
H.R. 5122
together with
ADDITIONAL AND DISSENTING VIEWS
[Including cost estimate of the Congressional Budget Office]
May 5, 2006.--Committed to the Committee of the Whole House on the
State of the Union and ordered to be printed
NATIONAL DEFENSE AUTHORIZATION ACT FOR FISCAL YEAR 2007
109th Congress HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Report
2nd Session
109-452
_______________________________________________________________________
NATIONAL DEFENSE AUTHORIZATION ACT FOR FISCAL YEAR 2007
__________
R E P O R T
of the
COMMITTEE ON ARMED SERVICES
HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
on
H.R. 5122
together with
ADDITIONAL AND DISSENTING VIEWS
[Including cost estimate of the Congressional Budget Office]
May 5, 2006.--Committed to the Committee of the Whole House on the
State of the Union and ordered to be printed
HOUSE COMMITTEE ON ARMED SERVICES
One Hundred Ninth Congress
DUNCAN HUNTER, California, Chairman
CURT WELDON, Pennsylvania IKE SKELTON, Missouri
JOEL HEFLEY, Colorado JOHN SPRATT, South Carolina
JIM SAXTON, New Jersey SOLOMON P. ORTIZ, Texas
JOHN M. McHUGH, New York LANE EVANS, Illinois
TERRY EVERETT, Alabama GENE TAYLOR, Mississippi
ROSCOE G. BARTLETT, Maryland NEIL ABERCROMBIE, Hawaii
HOWARD P. ``BUCK'' McKEON, MARTY MEEHAN, Massachusetts
California SILVESTRE REYES, Texas
MAC THORNBERRY, Texas VIC SNYDER, Arkansas
JOHN N. HOSTETTLER, Indiana ADAM SMITH, Washington
WALTER B. JONES, North Carolina LORETTA SANCHEZ, California
JIM RYUN, Kansas MIKE McINTYRE, North Carolina
JIM GIBBONS, Nevada ELLEN O. TAUSCHER, California
ROBIN HAYES, North Carolina ROBERT A. BRADY, Pennsylvania
KEN CALVERT, California ROBERT ANDREWS, New Jersey
ROB SIMMONS, Connecticut SUSAN A. DAVIS, California
JO ANN DAVIS, Virginia JAMES R. LANGEVIN, Rhode Island
W. TODD AKIN, Missouri STEVE ISRAEL, New York
J. RANDY FORBES, Virginia RICK LARSEN, Washington
JEFF MILLER, Florida JIM COOPER, Tennessee
JOE WILSON, South Carolina JIM MARSHALL, Georgia
FRANK A. LoBIONDO, New Jersey KENDRICK B. MEEK, Florida
JEB BRADLEY, New Hampshire MADELEINE Z. BORDALLO, Guam
MICHAEL TURNER, Ohio TIM RYAN, Ohio
JOHN KLINE, Minnesota MARK UDALL, Colorado
CANDICE S. MILLER, Michigan G.K. BUTTERFIELD, North Carolina
MIKE ROGERS, Alabama CYNTHIA McKINNEY, Georgia
TRENT FRANKS, Arizona DAN BOREN, Oklahoma
BILL SHUSTER, Pennsylvania
THELMA DRAKE, Virginia
JOE SCHWARZ, Michigan
CATHY McMORRIS, Washington
MICHAEL CONAWAY, Texas
GEOFF DAVIS, Kentucky
Robert L. Simmons, Staff Director
C O N T E N T S
----------
Page
Explanation of the Committee Amendments.......................... 1
Purpose.......................................................... 2
Relationship of Authorization to Appropriations.................. 2
Summary of Authorization in the Bill............................. 2
Summary Table of Authorizations.................................. 3
Rationale for the Committee Bill................................. 12
Hearings......................................................... 16
DIVISION A--DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE AUTHORIZATION.................. 16
TITLE I--PROCUREMENT............................................. 16
OVERVIEW....................................................... 16
Aircraft Procurement, Army................................... 18
Overview................................................... 18
Items of Special Interest.................................. 22
AH-64 modern signal processing unit...................... 22
Joint cargo aircraft..................................... 22
HH-60 aircraft wireless intercom system upgrade.......... 23
UH-60A to UH-60L helicopter upgrade...................... 23
Missile Procurement, Army.................................... 23
Overview................................................... 23
Items of Special Interest.................................. 26
Patriot modifications.................................... 26
TOW missile inventory.................................... 26
Weapons and Tracked Combat Vehicles, Army.................... 26
Overview................................................... 26
Items of Special Interest.................................. 30
Army current to future force modernization strategy...... 30
Army modularity........................................ 30
Heavy brigade combat teams............................. 31
Abrams tank modernization.............................. 32
Bradley base sustainment program....................... 32
Integrated air burst weapon system....................... 32
Ammunition Procurement, Army................................. 33
Overview................................................... 33
Items of Special Interest.................................. 37
Desert optimized equipment............................... 37
Modernization of .50 caliber ammunition production line.. 37
Other Procurement, Army...................................... 37
Overview................................................... 37
Items of Special Interest.................................. 48
Bridge to future networks................................ 48
Combat medical support................................... 48
Immersive group simulation............................... 49
M915A3 production........................................ 49
Simulated combat training capability for Army National
Guard.................................................. 49
Aircraft Procurement, Navy................................... 50
Overview................................................... 50
Items of Special Interest.................................. 55
EP-3E service life extension............................. 55
H-53 series modifications................................ 55
P-3C modernization....................................... 55
Weapons Procurement, Navy.................................... 56
Overview................................................... 56
Item of Special Interest................................... 60
Conventional trident modification........................ 60
Ammunition Procurement, Navy & Marine Corps.................. 60
Overview................................................... 60
Shipbuilding and Conversion, Navy............................ 63
Overview................................................... 63
Items of Special Interest.................................. 67
313 ship navy force structure............................ 67
Aircraft carrier force structure requirements............ 67
Arleigh Burke class destroyer modernization.............. 67
Battleship transfer...................................... 68
Incremental funding for shipbuilding..................... 68
Littoral combat ship program............................. 69
Next-generation destroyer................................ 69
Shipbuilding/ship repair industrial base capacity........ 70
Ship cost estimates...................................... 71
Virginia class submarine................................. 71
Other Procurement, Navy...................................... 72
Overview................................................... 72
Items of Special Interest.................................. 82
AEGIS land based test site modernization................. 82
Amphibious ship integrated bridge system................. 82
AN/SPQ-9B radar.......................................... 82
AN/SPS-48 radar obsolescence, availability and recovery.. 83
Boat lifts for small boats............................... 83
Canned lube pumps for amphibious ships................... 83
CVN propeller replacement program........................ 83
Laser marksmanship training systems...................... 84
Man overboard identification system...................... 84
Materials handling equipment............................. 84
Medical support equipment................................ 85
Multi-climate protective system.......................... 85
Multi-spectral threat emitter system..................... 85
Serial number tracking system............................ 86
Submarine communications upgrades........................ 86
Submarine non-tactical application delivery interface
system shore interface................................. 86
Ultrasonic maintenance tools............................. 87
Procurement, Marine Corps.................................... 87
Overview................................................... 87
Items of Special Interest.................................. 94
Envelope protective covers for marine expeditionary unit
weapon systems and platforms........................... 94
Intelligent surveillance systems......................... 94
Laser perimeter awareness system......................... 94
Aircraft Procurement, Air Force.............................. 95
Overview................................................... 95
Items of Special Interest.................................. 102
B-1B molecular sieve oxygen generation system............ 102
B-2 radar modification program........................... 102
B-52 force structure..................................... 103
C-130 modifications...................................... 103
C-5 modernization programs............................... 104
C-9 hush kits............................................ 104
F-22..................................................... 105
F-35..................................................... 105
KC-135 aerial refueling aircraft recapitalization program 106
P5 combat training systems............................... 107
Strategic airlift force structure........................ 107
T-38 ejection seat upgrade program....................... 108
Ammunition Procurement, Air Force............................ 109
Overview................................................... 109
Item of Special Interest................................... 112
Insensitive munitions upgrade............................ 112
Missile Procurement, Air Force............................... 112
Overview................................................... 112
Other Procurement, Air Force................................. 116
Overview................................................... 116
Items of Special Interest.................................. 123
Cheyenne Mountain complex................................ 123
Combat survivor radios................................... 123
Combat training ranges................................... 123
Enterprise data collection solution...................... 124
Force protection near real time surveillance............. 124
High frequency ground control station antennas........... 124
Mobile approach control system........................... 125
Self-deploying infra-red streamer........................ 125
Procurement, Defense-Wide.................................... 125
Overview................................................... 125
Items of Special Interest.................................. 131
Advanced SEAL Delivery System............................ 131
Chemical and biological defense procurement.............. 131
Special operations forces operational enhancements....... 131
Unmanned aerial systems to counter improvised explosive
devices................................................ 132
U.S. Special Operations Command aviation modernization... 132
LEGISLATIVE PROVISIONS......................................... 133
Subtitle A--Authorization of Appropriations.................. 133
Sections 101-104--Authorization of Appropriations.......... 133
Subtitle B--Army Programs.................................... 133
Section 111--Multiyear Procurement Authority for Family of
Medium Tactical Vehicles................................. 133
Section 112--Multiyear Procurement Authority for MH-60R
Helicopters and Mission Equipment........................ 134
Section 113--Funding Profile for Modular Force Initiative
of the Army.............................................. 134
Section 114--Bridge to Future Networks Program............. 134
Subtitle C--Navy Programs.................................... 134
Section 121--Attack Submarine Force Structure.............. 134
Section 122--Adherence to Navy Cost Estimates for CVN-21
Class of Aircraft Carriers............................... 135
Section 123--Adherence to Navy Cost Estimates for LHA
Replacement Amphibious Assault Ship Program.............. 135
Section 124--Adherence to Navy Cost Estimates for San
Antonio (LPD-17) Class Amphibious Ship Program........... 135
Section 125--Multiyear Procurement Authority for V-22
Tiltrotor Aircraft Program............................... 136
Section 126--Quality Control in Procurement of Ship
Critical Safety Items and Related Services............... 136
Section 127--DD(X) Next-Generation Destroyer Program....... 136
Section 128--Sense of Congress that the Navy Make Greater
Use of Nuclear-Powered Propulsion Systems in its Future
Fleet of Surface Combatants.............................. 136
Subtitle D--Air Force Programs............................... 137
Section 131--Requirement for B-52 Force Structure.......... 137
Section 132--Strategic Airlift Force Structure............. 137
Section 133--Limitation on Retirement of U-2 Aircraft...... 137
Section 134--Multiyear Procurement Authority for F-22A
Raptor Fighter Aircraft.................................. 137
Section 135--Limitation on Retirement of KC-135E Aircraft
During Fiscal Year 2007.................................. 137
Section 136--Limitation on Retirement of F-117A Aircraft
During Fiscal Year 2007.................................. 138
TITLE II--RESEARCH, DEVELOPMENT, TEST, & EVALUATION.............. 138
OVERVIEW....................................................... 138
Army Research, Development, Test, & Evaluation............... 141
Overview................................................... 141
Items of Special Interest.................................. 155
Advanced hypersonic weapon mission planning and control.. 155
Applied communications and information networking........ 155
Armored systems modernization............................ 155
AT4 confined space weapon system enhancements............ 157
Center for rotorcraft innovation......................... 157
Digital array radar...................................... 157
Dominant military operations on urban terrain viewer..... 158
Environmental quality technology......................... 158
Excalibur precision guided artillery munition............ 158
Flexible display initiative.............................. 159
Gas-engine driven air conditioning system demonstrations. 159
High assurance secure object proxy....................... 159
Human systems integration................................ 159
Integrated digital environment service model............. 160
Intelligent surveillance sensor suite.................... 160
Joint land attack cruise missile defense and micro
electro mechanical system.............................. 160
Light utility vehicle.................................... 161
Lightweight small arms technologies...................... 161
Long-term armoring strategy.............................. 161
Medical advanced technology.............................. 162
Medical materiel/medical biological defense equipment--
SDD.................................................... 162
Miniaturized sensors for small and tactical unmanned
aerial vehicles........................................ 162
Missile recycling capability technology.................. 163
Mobile assessment detection and response system.......... 163
Next-generation advanced materials research.............. 163
Polymer matrix composites for rotorcraft drive systems... 163
Portable and mobile emergency broadband system........... 164
Product lifecycle management plus........................ 164
Radiation hardening initiative........................... 164
Smart energetics architecture............................ 165
Stryker vehicle open architecture electronic enhancements 165
Tactical wheeled vehicle product improvement program..... 165
Training-based collaborative research in military
consequence management................................. 166
Transparent armor........................................ 166
Warfighter sustainment................................... 166
Navy Research, Development, Test, & Evaluation............... 166
Overview................................................... 166
Items of Special Interest.................................. 181
Advanced composite riverine craft........................ 181
Advanced materials for acoustic window applications...... 181
Affordable towed array construction/fiber optic towed
array construction..................................... 181
Affordable weapon system................................. 182
Airborne reconnaissance systems.......................... 182
Aircraft carrier launch and recovery and support
equipment modernization................................ 182
Ballistic trajectory extended range munition............. 183
Bio-film packaging applied research...................... 183
Cobra Judy ship replacement.............................. 183
Common submarine radio room.............................. 184
Conventional Trident modification........................ 184
Defense research sciences................................ 185
Detection and recovery of unexploded ordnance............ 185
Dismounted soldier training test instrumentation......... 186
Distributed common ground system......................... 186
DockShock ship shock test system......................... 186
DP-2 vectored thrust aircraft............................ 187
E-2 advanced hawkeye identification friend or foe
technology development................................. 187
Electro-optic passive antisubmarine warfare system....... 187
F/A-18 squadrons......................................... 188
Flexible payload module and payload interface module
development............................................ 189
High performance FM fiber-optic link..................... 189
Human systems integration................................ 189
Integrated shipboard intelligent surveillance............ 189
Joint integrated systems for advanced digital networking. 190
Large aperture bow array................................. 190
Large displacement unmanned undersea vehicle at-sea
launch and recovery system............................. 190
Lightweight multi-threat encapsulated ceramic body armor. 191
Lithium battery technology............................... 191
Marine expeditionary rifle squad......................... 191
Maritime identification surveillance technology phased
array radar............................................ 192
Maritime technology...................................... 192
National shipbuilding research program................. 193
Shipbuilding industrial base improvement grants........ 193
Shipbuilding industrial base improvement loan
guarantees........................................... 193
Naval surface fire support............................... 193
Network communication system technology for extreme
environments........................................... 194
Next-generation electronic warfare simulator............. 195
Next-generation Phalanx.................................. 195
Permanent magnet motor................................... 196
Retroreflecting optical communications for special
operations............................................. 196
Sea fighter (X-Craft).................................... 196
Secure infrastructure technology laboratory.............. 197
Shipboard wireless maintenance assistant................. 197
Small arms and crew served weapons shot counter.......... 197
Smart valve.............................................. 197
Tactical electric field buoy development program......... 198
Validation of prognostic and health management systems... 198
VH-71.................................................... 198
Virtual-at-sea training technologies..................... 199
Warfare protection advanced technology................... 199
Wet end installation system element...................... 200
Wireless maritime inspection system...................... 200
Air Force Research, Development, Test, & Evaluation.......... 200
Overview................................................... 200
Items of Special Interest.................................. 214
Active feedback flow control technology.................. 214
Advanced engine starter/generator system prototype....... 214
Advanced optics and laser space technology............... 214
Advanced spacecraft technology........................... 215
Affordable lightweight power supply development.......... 215
B-52 internal weapons bay upgrade........................ 216
B-52 stand-off jammer program............................ 216
Biostatic protective clothing............................ 216
C-130 airlift squadrons.................................. 217
Combatant commanders' integrated command and control
system................................................. 217
Distributed mission interoperability toolkit program..... 218
Engineering tool improvement program..................... 218
High accuracy network determination system............... 218
High modulus polyacrylonitrile carbon fiber.............. 218
Human systems integration................................ 219
Interactive avionics roadmap............................. 219
Joint advanced global strike demonstration............... 219
Joint strike fighter development......................... 220
KC-135 aerial refueling aircraft recapitalization program 221
Large aircraft countermeasures system for AC-130U
aircraft............................................... 221
Laser peening fatigue life extension..................... 222
Low emission hybrid electric engine propulsion........... 222
Major test and evaluation investment..................... 222
Materials................................................ 223
Measurement and signature intelligence (MASINT)
visualization tools program............................ 223
Metals affordability initiative.......................... 223
Nanocrystalline diamond coatings......................... 223
Operationally responsive space........................... 224
Radio frequency identification tag rapid adoption
initiative, phase2..................................... 224
Small diameter bomb...................................... 224
Space-based radar........................................ 224
Space control test capabilities.......................... 225
Space technology......................................... 225
Tactical automated security system advanced
communications module.................................. 225
Transformational satellite communications system......... 226
Winglets for in-service aircraft......................... 226
Defense-Wide Research, Development, Test, & Evaluation....... 227
Overview................................................... 227
Items of Special Interest.................................. 240
Accelerated intelligence analyst education and training.. 240
Advanced data encryption technololgy..................... 240
Advanced SEAL Delivery System............................ 240
Advanced surface radar technologies...................... 241
Advanced tactical laser program.......................... 241
Ballistic missile defense................................ 241
Aegis ballistic missile defense........................ 242
Boost defense segment.................................. 242
Core................................................... 243
Midcourse defense segment.............................. 243
Multiple kill vehicle.................................. 244
System interceptor..................................... 244
Technology............................................. 245
Biological warfare defense............................... 245
Business transformation agency........................... 246
Chemical-biological collective protective shelters....... 246
Chemical and biological defense program.................. 246
Advanced technology development........................ 247
Applied research....................................... 247
Basic research......................................... 247
Combating terrorism technology support................... 248
Generic logistics research and development technology
demonstrations......................................... 248
Improved suborbital operations........................... 249
Joint training transformation............................ 249
Office of force transformation........................... 249
Special operations advanced technology development....... 250
Special operations forces operational enhancements....... 250
Special operations intelligence systems development...... 250
Special operations tactical systems development.......... 251
Special operations technology development................ 251
Operational Test and Evaluation, Defense..................... 252
Overview................................................... 252
LEGISLATIVE PROVISIONS......................................... 252
Subtitle A--Authorization of Appropriations.................. 252
Section 201--Authorization of Appropriations............... 252
Section 202--Amount for Defense Science and Technology..... 252
Subtitle B--Program Requirements, Restrictions, and
Limitations................................................ 252
Section 211--Alternate Engine for Joint Strike Fighter..... 252
Section 212--Extension of Authority to Award Prizes for
Advanced Technology Achievements......................... 252
Section 213--Extension of Defense Acquisition Challenge
Program.................................................. 252
Section 214--Future Combat Systems Milestone Review........ 253
Section 215--Independent Cost Analyses for Joint Strike
Fighter Engine Program................................... 253
Section 216--Dedicated Amounts for Implementing or
Evaluating DD(X) and CVN-21 Proposals Under Defense
Acquisition Challenge Program............................ 253
Subtitle C--Ballistic Missile Defense........................ 253
Section 221--Fielding of Ballistic Missile Defense
Capabilities............................................. 253
Section 222--Limitation on Use of Funds for Spacebased
Interceptor.............................................. 253
Subtitle D--Other Matters.................................... 254
Section 231--Review of Test and Evaluation Policies and
Practices to Address Emerging Acquisition Approaches..... 254
TITLE III--OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE............................. 255
OVERVIEW....................................................... 255
ITEMS OF SPECIAL INTEREST...................................... 288
Budget Request Adjustments--Readiness........................ 288
Army Knowledge Online Disaster Recovery.................... 289
Capital Security Cost Share................................ 289
Combat Enhancement Forces and Combat Communications........ 290
Homeland Defense Operational Planning System............... 290
Maritime Prepositioning Ship Lease Buyout.................. 290
Nationwide Dedicated Fiber Optic Network................... 291
Navy Marine Corps Intranet................................. 291
Port of Corpus Christi..................................... 291
Readiness and Environmental Protection Initiative.......... 291
Weapons of Mass Destruction Civil Support Teams............ 292
Environmental Issues......................................... 292
Fuel Tank Replacement at Point Loma, California............ 292
Non-thermal Treatment of Asbestos and Asbestos Containing
Material................................................. 292
Report on Uranium Located in Gore, Oklahoma................ 292
Site Assessment of Former World War II Ordnance
Manufacturing Facility, Rosemount, Minnesota............. 293
Information Technology Issues................................ 293
Information Technology Overview............................ 293
Business Transformation Agency and Enterprise Risk
Assessment Model......................................... 294
Readiness Issues............................................. 294
Air Force Transformation................................... 294
Army Logistics Modernization............................... 295
Base Operating Support and Facilities Recapitalization
Budget Shortfalls........................................ 295
Beryllium Supply Industrial Base........................... 296
Depot Maintenance Strategy and Implementation Plans........ 296
High Altitude Aviation Training............................ 297
National Space Studies Center Study........................ 298
LEGISLATIVE PROVISIONS......................................... 298
Subtitle A--Authorization of Appropriations.................. 298
Section 301--Operation and Maintenance Funding............. 298
Section 302--Working Capital Funds......................... 298
Section 303--Other Department of Defense Programs.......... 298
Subtitle B--Environmental Provisions......................... 299
Section 311--Revision of Requirement for Unexploded
Ordnance Program Manager................................. 299
Section 312--Identification and Monitoring of Military
Munitions Disposal Sites in Ocean Waters Extending from
United States Coast to Outer Boundary of Outer
Continental Shelf........................................ 299
Section 313--Reimbursement of Environmental Protection
Agency for Certain Costs in Connection with Moses Lake
Wellfield Superfund Site, Moses Lake, Washington......... 299
Section 314--Funding of Cooperative Agreements Under
Environmental Restoration Program........................ 299
Section 315--Analysis and Report Regarding Contamination
and Remediation Responsibility for Norwalk Defense Fuel
Supply Point, Norwalk, California........................ 300
Subtitle C--Workplace and Depot Issues....................... 300
Section 321--Extension of Exclusion of Certain Expenditures
from Percentage Limitation on Contracting for Depot-Level
Maintenance.............................................. 300
Section 322--Minimum Capital Investment for Air Force
Depots................................................... 300
Section 323--Extension of Temporary Authority for
Contractor Performance of Security Guard Functions....... 300
Subtitle D--Reports.......................................... 301
Section 331--Report on Nuclear Attack Submarine Depot
Maintenance.............................................. 301
Section 332--Report on Navy Fleet Response Plan............ 301
Section 333--Report on Navy Surface Ship Rotational Crew
Programs................................................. 301
Section 334--Report on Army Live-Fire Ranges in Hawaii..... 302
Section 335--Comptroller General Report on Joint Standards
and Protocols for Access Control Systems at Department of
Defense Installations.................................... 302
Section 336--Report on Personnel Security Investigations
for Industry and National Industrial Security Program.... 302
Subtitle E--Other Matters.................................... 303
Section 341--Department of Defense Strategic Policy on
Prepositioning of Materiel and Equipment................. 303
Section 342--Authority to Make Department of Defense Horses
Available for Adoption at End of Useful Working Life..... 304
Section 343--Sale and Use of Proceeds of Recyclable
Munitions Materials...................................... 304
Section 344--Capital Security Cost Sharing................. 304
Section 345--Prioritization of Funds Within Navy Mission
Operations, Ship Maintenance, Combat Support Forces, and
Weapons System Support................................... 304
Section 346--Prioritization of Funds Within Army
Reconstitution and Transformation........................ 305
TITLE IV--MILITARY PERSONNEL AUTHORIZATIONS...................... 306
OVERVIEW....................................................... 306
LEGISLATIVE PROVISIONS......................................... 306
Subtitle A--Active Forces.................................... 306
Section 401--End Strengths for Active Forces............... 306
Section 402--Revision in Permanent Active Duty End Strength
Minimum Levels........................................... 307
Section 403--Additional Authority for Increases of Army and
Marine Corps Active Duty End Strengths for Fiscal Years
2008 and 2009............................................ 307
Subtitle B--Reserve Forces................................... 307
Section 411--End Strengths for Selected Reserve............ 307
Section 412--End Strengths for Reserves on Active Duty in
Support of the Reserve Components........................ 308
Section 413--End Strengths for Military Technicians (Dual
Status).................................................. 308
Section 414--Fiscal Year 2007 Limitation on Number of Non-
Dual Status Technicians.................................. 309
Section 415--Maximum Number of Reserve Personnel Authorized
to be on Active Duty for Operational Support............. 309
Subtitle C--Authorization of Appropriations.................. 309
Section 421--Military Personnel............................ 309
Section 422--Armed Forces Retirement Home.................. 310
TITLE V--MILITARY PERSONNEL POLICY............................... 310
OVERVIEW....................................................... 310
ITEMS OF SPECIAL INTEREST...................................... 312
Academy Language Training.................................. 312
Closure of Article 32 Investigations in Cases of Sexual
Assault or Domestic Violence............................. 312
Department of the Navy Personal Responsibility and Values:
Education and Training Program........................... 313
Educational Opportunities in Interagency Coordination at
the Military War Colleges................................ 313
Joint Advertising, Market Research and Studies............. 314
Operation of Army Air Ambulance Detachments................ 314
Permanent Identification Cards for Adult Disabled Children. 315
Personnel Plan for Linguists............................... 315
Process for Restructuring the Army National Guard.......... 315
Social Security Numbers on Military Identification Cards... 316
Trafficking in Persons..................................... 316
Victim Service Organization Privilege in Cases Arising
Under Uniform Code of Military Justice................... 317
Web-based Enhancement to Support Family Readiness Programs. 318
LEGISLATIVE PROVISIONS......................................... 318
Subtitle A--Officer Personnel Policy......................... 318
Section 501--Authorized Strength of Navy Reserve Flag
Officers................................................. 318
Section 502--Standardization of Grade of Senior Dental
Officer of the Air Force with that of Senior Dental
Officer of the Army...................................... 318
Section 503--Management of Chief Warrant Officers.......... 319
Section 504--Reduction in Time-in-Grade Requirement for
Promotion to Captain in the Army, Air Force, and Marine
Corps and Lieutenant in the Navy......................... 319
Section 505--Military Status of Officers Serving in Certain
Intelligence Community Positions......................... 319
Subtitle B--Reserve Component Management..................... 319
Section 511--Revisions to Reserve Call-up Authority........ 319
Section 512--Military Retirement Credit for Certain Service
by National Guard Members Performed While in a State Duty
Status Immediately After the Terrorist Attacks of
September 11, 2001....................................... 320
Section 513--Report on Private Sector Promotion and
Constructive Termination of Members of the Reserve
Components Called or Ordered to Active Service........... 320
Subtitle C--Education and Training........................... 320
Section 521--Authority to Permit Members Who Participate in
the Guaranteed Reserve Forces Duty Scholarship Program to
Participate in the Health Professions Scholarship Program
and Serve on Active Duty................................. 320
Section 522--Junior Reserve Officers' Training Corps
Instruction Eligibility Expansion........................ 320
Section 523--Authority for United States Military Academy
and United States Air Force Academy Permanent Military
Professors to Assume Command Positions While on Periods
of Sabbatical............................................ 321
Section 524--Expansion of Service Academy Exchange Programs
with Foreign Military Academies.......................... 321
Section 525--Review of Legal Status of Junior ROTC Program. 321
Subtitle D--General Service Authorities...................... 322
Section 531--Test of Utility of Test Preparation Guides and
Education Programs in Enhancing Recruit Candidate
Performance on the Armed Services Vocational Aptitude
Battery (ASVAB) and Armed Forces Qualification Test
(AFQT)................................................... 322
Section 532--Nondisclosure of Selection Board Proceedings.. 322
Section 533--Report on Extent of Provision of Timely Notice
of Long-Term Deployments................................. 322
Subtitle E--Authorities Relating to Guard and Reserve Duty... 323
Section 541--Title 10 Definition of Active Guard and
Reserve Duty............................................. 323
Section 542--Authority for Active Guard and Reserve Duties
to Include Support of Operational Missions Assigned to
the Reserve Components and Instruction and Training of
Active-Duty Personnel.................................... 323
Section 543--Governor's Authority to Order Members to
Active Guard and Reserve Duty............................ 323
Section 544--National Guard Officers Authority to Command.. 323
Section 545--Expansion of Operations of Civil Support Teams 324
Subtitle F--Decorations and Awards........................... 324
Section 551--Authority for Presentation of Medal of Honor
Flag to Living Medal of Honor Recipients and to Living
Primary Next-of-Kin of Deceased Medal of Honor Recipients 324
Section 552--Cold War Victory Medal........................ 324
Section 553--Posthumous Award of Purple Heart for Prisoners
of War Who Die in or Due to Captivity.................... 324
Section 554--Advancement on the Retired List of Certain
Decorated Retired Navy and Marine Corps Officers......... 324
Section 555--Report on Department of Defense Process for
Awarding Decorations..................................... 325
Subtitle G--Matters Relating to Casualties................... 325
Section 561--Criteria for Removal of Member from Temporary
Disability Retired List.................................. 325
Section 562--Department of Defense Computer/Electronic
Accommodations Program for Severely Wounded Members...... 325
Section 563--Transportation of Remains of Casualties Dying
in a Theater of Combat Operations........................ 325
Section 564--Annual Budget Display of Funds for POW/MIA
Activities of Department of Defense...................... 326
Subtitle H--Assistance to Local Educational Agencies for
Defense Dependents Education............................... 327
Section 571--Continuation of Authority to Assist Local
Educational Agencies that Benefit Dependents of Members
of the Armed Forces and Department of Defense Civilian
Employees................................................ 327
Section 572--Enrollment in Defense Dependents' Education
System of Dependents of Foreign Military Members Assigned
to Supreme Headquarters Allied Powers, Europe............ 327
Subtitle I--Postal Benefits.................................. 327
Section 575--Postal Benefits Program for Members of the
Armed Forces............................................. 327
Section 576--Funding....................................... 327
Section 577--Duration...................................... 328
Subtitle J--Other Matters.................................... 328
Section 581--Reduction in Department of Defense Accrual
Contributions to Department of Defense Military
Retirement Fund.......................................... 328
Section 582--Dental Corps of the Bureau of Medicine and
Surgery.................................................. 328
Section 583--Permanent Authority for Presentation of
Recognition Items for Recruitment and Retention Purposes. 328
Section 584--Report on Feasibility of Establishment of
Military Entrance Processing Command Station on Guam..... 328
Section 585--Persons Authorized to Administer Enlistment
and Appointment Oaths.................................... 328
Section 586--Repeal of Requirement for Periodic Department
of Defense Inspector General Assessments of Voting
Assistance Compliance at Military Installations.......... 329
Section 587--Physical Evaluation Boards.................... 329
Section 588--Department of Labor Transitional Assistance
Program.................................................. 330
Section 589--Revision in Government Contributions to
Medicare-Eligible Retiree Health Care Fund............... 330
Section 590--Military Chaplains............................ 331
Section 591--Report on Personnel Requirements for Airborne
Assets Identified as Low-Density, High-Demand Airborne
Assets................................................... 331
Section 592--Entrepreneurial Service Members Empowerment
Task Force............................................... 331
Section 593--Comptroller General Report on Military
Conscientious Objectors.................................. 331
Section 594--Commission on the National Guard and Reserves. 331
TITLE VI--COMPENSATION AND OTHER PERSONNEL BENEFITS.............. 332
OVERVIEW....................................................... 332
ITEMS OF SPECIAL INTEREST...................................... 332
Elimination of the Survivor Benefit Plan Two-Tier Annuity
Computation System....................................... 332
Military Decorations and Uniform Accounterments Sold in
Military Exchange Stores................................. 333
Recoupment of Survivor Benefit Plan Overpayments........... 333
Second Destination Transportation of Exchange Store Goods.. 334
Treatment of Dual Military Couples......................... 334
United Service Organizations............................... 334
LEGISLATIVE PROVISIONS......................................... 335
Subtitle A--Pay and Allowances............................... 335
Section 601--Increase in Basic Pay for Fiscal Year 2007.... 335
Section 602--Targeted Increase in Basic Pay Rates.......... 335
Section 603--Conforming Change in General and Flag Officer
Pay Cap to Reflect Increase in Pay Cap for Senior
Executive Service Personnel.............................. 335
Section 604--Availability of Second Basic Allowance for
Housing for Certain Reserve Component or Retired Members
Serving in Support of Contingency Operations............. 335
Section 605--Extension of Temporary Continuation of Housing
Allowance for Dependents of Members Dying on Active Duty
to Spouses Who are Also Members.......................... 336
Section 606--Clarification of Effective Date of Prohibition
on Compensation for Correspondence Courses............... 336
Section 607--Payment of Full Premium for Coverage Under
Servicemembers' Group Life Insurance Program During
Service in Operation Enduring Freedom or Operation Iraqi
Freedom.................................................. 336
Subtitle B--Bonuses and Special and Incentive Pays........... 336
Section 611--Extension of Certain Bonus and Special Pay
Authorities for Reserve Forces........................... 336
Section 612--Extension of Bonus and Special Pay Authorities
for Health Care Professionals............................ 336
Section 613--Extension of Special Pay and Bonus Authorities
for Nuclear Officers..................................... 337
Section 614--Extension of Other Bonus, Special Pay, and
Separation Pay Authorities............................... 337
Section 615--Expansion of Eligibility of Dental Officers
for Additional Special Pay............................... 337
Section 616--Increase in Maximum Annual Rate of Special Pay
for Selected Reserve Health Care Professionals in
Critically Short Wartime Specialties..................... 337
Section 617--Authority to Provide Lump Sum Payment of
Nuclear Officer Incentive Pay............................ 337
Section 618--Increase in Maximum Amount of Nuclear Career
Accession Bonus.......................................... 337
Section 619--Increase in Maximum Amount of Incentive Bonus
for Transfer Between Armed Forces........................ 337
Section 620--Clarification Regarding Members of the Army
Eligible for Bonus for Referring Other Persons for
Enlistment in the Army................................... 338
Section 621--Pilot Program for Recruitment Bonus for
Critical Health Care Specialties......................... 338
Section 622--Enhancement of Temporary Program of Voluntary
Separation Pay and Benefits.............................. 338
Section 623--Additional Authorities and Incentives to
Encourage Retired Members and Reserve Component Members
to Volunteer to Serve on Active Duty in High-Demand, Low-
Density Assignments...................................... 338
Subtitle C--Travel and Transportation Allowance.............. 338
Section 631--Authoriy to Pay Costs Associated with Delivery
of Motor Vehicle to Storage Location Selected by Member
and Subsequent Removal of Vehicle........................ 338
Section 632--Transportation of Additional Motor Vehicle of
Members on Change of Permanent Station to or from
Nonforeign Areas Outside the Continental United States... 339
Section 633--Travel and Transportation Allowances for
Transportation of Family Members Incident to Illness or
Injury of Members........................................ 339
Subtitle D--Retired Pay and Survivors Benefits............... 339
Section 641--Military Survivor Benefit Plan Beneficiaries
Under Insurable Interest Coverage........................ 339
Section 642--Retroactive Payment of Additional Death
Gratuity for Certain Members Not Previously Covered...... 339
Section 643--Equity in Computation of Disability Retired
Pay for Reserve Component Members Wounded in Action...... 339
Subtitle E--Commissary and Nonappropriated Fund
Instrumentality Benefits................................... 340
Section 651--Treatment of Price Surcharges of Tobacco
Products and Certain Other Merchandise Sold at Commissary
Stores................................................... 340
Section 652--Limitation on Use of Department of Defense
Lease Authority to Undermine Commissaries and Exchange
and Other Morale, Welfare, and Recreation Programs and
Nonappropriated Fund Instrumentalities................... 340
Section 653--Use of Nonappropriated Funds to Supplement or
Replace Appropriated Funds for Construction of Facilities
of Exchange Stores System and Other Nonappropriated Fund
Instrumentalities, Military Lodging, Facilities, and
Community Facilities..................................... 340
Section 654--Report on Cost Effectiveness of Purchasing
Commercial Insurance for Commissary and Exchange
Facilities and Facilities of Other Morale, Welfare, and
Recreation Programs and Nonappropriated Fund
Instrumentalities........................................ 340
Subtitle F--Other Matters.................................... 341
Section 661--Repeal of Annual Reporting Requirement
Regarding Effects of Recruitment and Retention
Initiatives.............................................. 341
Section 662--Pilot Project Regarding Providing Golf Carts
Accessible for Disabled Persons at Military Golf Courses. 341
Section 663--Enhanced Authority to Remit or Cancel
Indebtedness of Members of the Armed Forces Incurred on
Active Duty.............................................. 341
TITLE VII--HEALTH CARE PROVISIONS................................ 342
OVERVIEW....................................................... 342
ITEMS OF SPECIAL INTEREST...................................... 343
Comprehensive Combat Casualty Care Center.................. 343
Comptroller General Report on a Unified Medical Command
Plan..................................................... 343
Fort Drum Health Care Pilot Program........................ 343
Mental Health Programs for Combat Veterans and Their
Families................................................. 344
Screening for Traumatic Brain Injury....................... 344
TRICARE Mail Order Pharmacy Program........................ 344
LEGISLATIVE PROVISIONS......................................... 345
Subtitle A--TRICARE Program Improvements..................... 345
Section 701--TRICARE Coverage for Forensic Examination
Following Sexual Assault or Domestic Violence............ 345
Section 702--Authorization of Anesthesia and Other Costs
for Dental Care for Children and Certain Other Patients.. 345
Section 703--Improvements to Descriptions of Cancer
Screening................................................ 345
Section 704--Prohibition on Increases in Certain Health
Care Costs for Members of the Uniformed Services......... 345
Section 705--Services of Mental Health Counselors.......... 346
Section 706--Demonstration Project on Coverage of Selected
Over-the-Counter Medications Under the Pharmacy Benefit
Program.................................................. 346
Section 707--Requirement to Reimburse Certain Travel
Expenses of Certain Beneficiaries Covered by TRICARE for
Life..................................................... 346
Section 708--Inflation Adjustment of Differential Payments
to Children's Hospitals Participating in TRICARE Program. 346
Section 709--Expanded Eligibility of Selected Reserve
Members Under TRICARE Program............................ 347
Section 710--Extension to TRICARE of Medicare Prohibition
of Financial Incentives Not to Enroll in Group Health
Plan..................................................... 347
Subtitle B--Studies and Reports.............................. 347
Section 711--Department of Defense Task Force on the Future
of Military Health Care.................................. 347
Section 712--Study and Plan Relating to Chiropractic Health
Care Services............................................ 347
Section 713--Comptroller General Study and Report on
Defense Health Program................................... 348
Section 714--Transfer of Custody of the Air Force Health
Study Assets to Medical Follow-up Agency................. 348
Section 715--Study on Allowing Dependents of Activated
Members of the Reserve Components to Retain Civilian
Health Care Coverage..................................... 348
Subtitle C--Other Matters.................................... 349
Section 721--Costs of Incentive Payments to Employees for
TRICARE Enrollment Made Unallowable for Contractors...... 349
Section 722--Requirement For Military Medical Personnel to
be Trained in Preservation of Remains.................... 349
Subtitle D--Pharmacy Benefits Program Improvements........... 349
Section 731--TRICARE Pharmacy Program Cost-Share
Requirements............................................. 349
TITLE VIII--ACQUISITION POLICY, ACQUISITION MANAGEMENT, AND
RELATED MATTERS.............................................. 350
OVERVIEW....................................................... 350
ITEMS OF SPECIAL INTEREST...................................... 352
Major Defense Acquisition Program Reform................... 352
Prime Vendor Program....................................... 352
Special Operations Command Requirements.................... 353
Undefinitized Contract Actions............................. 353
LEGISLATIVE PROVISIONS......................................... 353
Subtitle A--Provisions Relating to Major Defense Acquisition
Programs................................................. 353
Section 801--Requirements Management Certification Training
Program.................................................. 353
Section 802--Additional Requirements Relating to Technical
Data Rights.............................................. 354
Section 803--Study and Report on Revisions to Selected
Acquisition Report Requirements.......................... 354
Section 804--Quarterly Updates on Implementation of
Acquisition Reform in the Department of Defense.......... 355
Section 805--Establishment of Defense Challenge Process for
Critical Cost Growth Threshold Breaches in Major Defense
Acquisition Programs..................................... 356
Section 806--Market Research Required for Major Defense
Acquisition Programs Before Proceeding to Milestone B.... 357
Subtitle B--Acquisition Policy and Management................ 358
Section 811--Applicability of Statutory Executive
Compensation Cap Made Prospective........................ 358
Section 812--Prohibition on Procurement from Beneficiaries
of Foreign Subsidies..................................... 358
Section 813--Time-Certain Development for Department of
Defense Information Technology Business Systems.......... 358
Section 814--Establishment of Panel on Contracting
Integrity................................................ 358
Subtitle C--Amendments to General Contracting Authorities,
Procedures, and Limitations................................ 359
Section 821--Extension of Special Temporary Contract
Closeout Authority....................................... 359
Section 822--Limitation on Contracts for the Acquisition of
Certain Services......................................... 359
Section 823--Use of Federal Supply Schedules by State and
Local Governments for Goods and Services for Recovery
from Natural Disasters, Terrorism, or Nuclear,
Biological, Chemical, or Radiological Attack............. 359
Section 824--Waivers to Extend Task Order Contracts for
Advisory and Assistance Services......................... 359
Section 825--Enhanced Access for Small Business............ 360
Section 826--Procurement Goal for Hispanic-Serving
Institutions............................................. 360
Section 827--Prohibition on Defense Contractors Requiring
Licenses or Fees for Use of Military Likenesses and
Designations............................................. 360
Subtitle D--United States Defense Industrial Base Provisions. 361
Section 831--Protection of Strategic Materials Critical to
National Security........................................ 361
Section 832--Strategic Materials Protection Board.......... 361
TITLE IX--DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE ORGANIZATION AND MANAGEMENT...... 362
ITEMS OF SPECIAL INTEREST...................................... 362
Importance of Placing Foreign Area Officers in Combat Units 362
Increased Budgetary Confidence Level Implementation in
Space Acquisition........................................ 362
National Security Space Management......................... 362
Report on Developing Expertise in Emerging National
Security Challenges...................................... 363
Report on Coordination and Oversight of Military Cultural
and Linguistic Policies and Training..................... 363
LEGISLATIVE PROVISIONS......................................... 364
Subtitle A--Department of Defense Management................. 364
Section 901--Standardization of Statutory References to
``National Security System'' within Laws Applicable to
Department of Defense.................................... 364
Section 902--Correction of Reference to Predecessor of
Defense Information Systems Agency....................... 364
Section 903--Addition to Membership of Specified Council... 364
Section 904--Consolidation and Standardization of
Authorities Relating to Department of Defense Regional
Centers for Security Studies............................. 364
Section 905--Redesignation of the Department of the Navy as
the Department of the Navy and Marine Corps.............. 365
Subtitle B--Space Activities................................. 365
Section 911--Designation of Successor Organizations for the
Disestablished Interagency Global Positioning Executive
Board.................................................... 365
Section 912--Extension of Authority for Pilot Program for
Provision of Space Surveillance Network Services to Non-
United States Government Entities........................ 365
Section 913--Operationally Responsive Space................ 365
Subtitle C--Chemical Demilitarization Program................ 365
Section 921--Transfer to Secretary of the Army of
Responsibility for Assembled Chemical Weapons
Alternatives Program..................................... 365
Section 922--Comptroller General Review of Cost-Benefit
Analysis of Off-Site Versus On-Site Treatment and
Disposal of Hydrolysate Derived from Neutralization of VX
Nerve Gas at Newport Chemical Depot, Indiana............. 366
Section 923--Sense of Congress Regarding the Safe and
Expeditious Disposal of Chemical Weapons................. 366
Subtitle D--Intelligence-Related Matters..................... 366
Section 931--Repeal of Termination of Authority of
Secretary of Defense to Engage in Commercial Activities
as Security for Intelligence Collection Activities Abroad 366
TITLE X--GENERAL PROVISIONS...................................... 366
ITEMS OF SPECIAL INTEREST...................................... 366
Counter-Drug Activities...................................... 366
Overview................................................... 366
Items of Special Interest.................................. 367
Budget requests.......................................... 367
Counternarcotics Policy for Afghanistan.................. 367
Intelligence and technology.............................. 368
Maritime Domain Awareness................................ 368
Southwest Border Fence................................... 368
U.S. Central Command operations support.................. 369
U.S. Northern Command operations support................. 369
U.S. Pacific Command operations support.................. 369
U.S. Southern Command operations support................. 369
Other Activities............................................. 369
Aircraft Carrier Force Structure........................... 369
``Commercial First'' Maritime Sealift Policy............... 370
Department of Defense Civil Support........................ 370
Department of Defense Interagency Coordination in the
Global War on Terrorism.................................. 371
Department of Defense Participation in the Committee on
Foreign Investment in the United States.................. 372
Homeland Security/Defense Management Programs.............. 372
Improving International Pandemic Preparedness through
Theater Security Cooperation Programs.................... 373
Increasing the Availability of Intelligence, Surveillance,
and Reconnaissance Assets in the Event of a Catastrophic
Natural or Manmade Disaster.............................. 373
Joint Training and Certification for Nuclear, Chemical, and
Biological Defense....................................... 373
National Counter Proliferation Center...................... 374
Overhaul, Repair, and Maintenance of Vessels Carrying
Department of Defense Cargo.............................. 375
Report on Strategic Language Skills........................ 375
Special Operations Command as the Supported Command in the
Global War on Terrorism.................................. 376
Status and Implementation of Military Support for
Stability, Security, Transition, and Reconstruction
Operations............................................... 376
Terrorist Use of the Internet.............................. 377
LEGISLATIVE PROVISIONS......................................... 377
Subtitle A--Financial Matters................................ 377
Section 1001--General Transfer Authority................... 377
Section 1002--Authorizations of Supplemental Appropriations
for Fiscal Year 2006..................................... 377
Section 1003--Increase in Fiscal Year 2006 General Transfer
Authority................................................ 377
Section 1004--United States Contribution to NATO Common-
Funded Budgets in Fiscal Year 2007....................... 378
Section 1005--Report on Budgeting for Fluctuations in Fuel
Cost Rates............................................... 378
Section 1006--Reduction in Authorizations Due to Savings
Resulting from Lower than Expected Inflation............. 378
Subtitle B--Policy Relating to Naval Vessels and Shipyards... 378
Section 1011--Transfer of Naval Vessels to Foreign Nations
Based upon Vessel Class.................................. 378
Section 1012--Overhaul, Repair, and Maintenance of Vessels
in Foreign Shipyards..................................... 379
Section 1013--Report on Options for Future Lease
Arrangements for Guam Shipyard........................... 379
Section 1014--Shipbuilding Industrial Base Improvement
Program.................................................. 380
Section 1015--Transfer of Operational Control of Certain
Patrol Coastal Ships to Coast Guard...................... 380
Section 1016--Limitation on Leasing of Foreign-Built
Vessels.................................................. 380
Section 1017--Overhaul, Repair, and Maintenance of Vessels
Carrying Department of Defense Cargo..................... 381
Section 1018--Riding Gang Member Documentation Requirement. 381
Subtitle C--Counter-Drug Activities.......................... 381
Section 1021--Restatement in Title 10, United States Code,
and Revision of Department of Defense Authority to
Provide Support for Counter-Drug Activities of Federal,
State, Local, and Foreign Law Enforcement Agencies....... 381
Section 1022--Restatement in Title 10, United States Code,
and Revision of Department of Defense Authority to
Provide Support for Counter-Drug Activities of Certain
Foreign Governments...................................... 382
Section 1023--Extension of Authority to Support Unified
Counter-Drug and Counterterrorism Campaign in Colombia... 382
Section 1024--Continuation of Reporting Requirement
Regarding Department of Defense Expenditures to Support
Foreign Counter-Drug Activities.......................... 383
Section 1025--Report on Interagency Counternarcotics Plan
for Afghanistan and South and Central Asian Regions...... 383
Subtitle D--Other Matters.................................... 383
Section 1031--Revision to Authorities Relating to
Commission on the Implementation of the New Strategic
Posture of the United States............................. 383
Section 1032--Enhancement to Authority to Pay Rewards for
Assistance in Combating Terrorism........................ 384
Section 1033--Report on Assessment Process of Chairman of
the Joint Chiefs of Staff Relating to Global War on
Terrorism................................................ 384
Section 1034--Presidential Report on Improving Interagency
Support for United States 21st Century National Security
Missions................................................. 384
Section 1035--Quarterly Reports on 2006 Quadrennial Defense
Review Report Implementation............................. 385
Section 1036--Increased Hunting and Fishing Opportunities
for Members of the Armed Forces, Retired Members, and
Disabled Veterans........................................ 386
Section 1037--Technical and Clerical Amendments............ 386
Section 1038--Database of Emergency Response Capabilities.. 386
Section 1039--Information on Certain Criminal
Investigations and Prosecutions.......................... 387
Section 1040--Date for Final Report of EMP Commission...... 387
TITLE XI--CIVILIAN PERSONNEL MATTERS............................. 387
ITEM OF SPECIAL INTEREST....................................... 387
Performance Periods Established in Connection with Public-
private Competitions..................................... 387
LEGISLATIVE PROVISIONS......................................... 388
Section 1101--Increase in Authorized Number of Defense
Intelligence Senior Executive Service Employees.......... 388
Section 1102--Authority for Department of Defense to Pay
Full Replacement Value for Personal Property Claims of
Civilians................................................ 388
Section 1103--Accrual of Annual Leave for Members of the
Uniformed Services Performing Dual Employment............ 388
Section 1104--Death Gratuity Authorized for Federal
Employees................................................ 388
TITLE XII--MATTERS RELATING TO FOREIGN NATIONS................... 389
ITEMS OF SPECIAL INTEREST...................................... 389
Addressing the Threat Posed by the Islamic Republic of Iran 389
International Military Education and Training Programs..... 390
Report on Certain Cooperative Activities Involving the
United States and India.................................. 390
Report on Department of Defense Activities in Support of
Multinational Peacekeeping Operations in Sudan........... 391
LEGISLATIVE PROVISIONS......................................... 391
Subtitle A--Assistance and Training.......................... 391
Section 1201--Logistic Support for Allied Forces
Participating in Combined Operations..................... 391
Section 1202--Temporary Authority to Use Acquisition and
Cross-Servicing Agreements to Lend Certain Military
Equipment to Foreign Forces in Iraq and Afghanistan for
Personnel Protection and Survivability................... 392
Section 1203--Recodification and Revision to Law Relating
to Department of Defense Humanitarian Demining Assistance 392
Section 1204--Enhancements to Regional Defense Combating
Terrorism Fellowship Program............................. 392
Section 1205--CAPSTONE Overseas Field Studies Trips to
People's Republic of China and Republic of China on
Taiwan................................................... 393
Section 1206--Military Educational Exchanges Between Senior
Officers and Officials of the United States and Taiwan... 393
Subtitle B--Nonproliferation Matters and Countries of Concern 393
Section 1211--Procurement Restrictions Against Foreign
Persons That Transfer Certain Defense Articles and
Services to the People's Republic of China............... 393
Subtitle C--Other Matters.................................... 394
Section 1221--Execution of the President's Policy to Make
Available to Taiwan Diesel Electric Submarines........... 394
TITLE XIII--COOPERATIVE THREAT REDUCTION WITH STATES OF THE
FORMER SOVIET UNION............................................ 394
OVERVIEW....................................................... 394
Section 1301--Specification of Cooperative Threat Reduction
Programs and Funds....................................... 394
Section 1302--Funding Allocations.......................... 394
Section 1303--Temporary Authority to Waive Limitation on
Funding for Chemical Weapons Destruction Facility in
Russia................................................... 395
Section 1304--National Academy of Sciences Study........... 395
TITLE XIV--HOMELAND DEFENSE TECHNOLOGY TRANSFER.................. 395
LEGISLATIVE PROVISIONS......................................... 395
Sections 1401-1403--Homeland Defense Technology Transfer... 395
TITLE XV--AUTHORIZATION FOR INCREASED COSTS DUE TO OPERATION
IRAQI FREEDOM AND OPERATION ENDURING FREEDOM................... 396
OVERVIEW....................................................... 396
SUMMARY TABLE OF AUTHORIZATIONS................................ 396
ITEMS OF SPECIAL INTEREST...................................... 404
Budget Realignment......................................... 404
Procurement................................................ 404
Improvised electronic devices countermeasures............ 404
Joint surveillance target attack radar system utilization 405
Manned tactical persistent surveillance aircraft......... 406
Operation and Maintenance.................................. 407
Military Personnel......................................... 407
Research, Development, Test, & Evaluation.................. 407
U-2 aircraft sensor development.......................... 407
LEGISLATIVE PROVISIONS......................................... 407
Section 1501--Purpose...................................... 407
Subtitle A--Authorization of Appropriations.................. 408
Section 1502--Army Procurement............................. 408
Section 1503--Navy and Marine Corps Procurement............ 408
Section 1504--Air Force Procurement........................ 408
Section 1505--Defense-Wide Activities Procurement.......... 408
Section 1506--Research, Development, Test, & Evaluation.... 408
Section 1507--Operation and Maintenance.................... 408
Section 1508--Defense Health Program....................... 408
Section 1509--Classified Programs.......................... 408
Section 1510--Military Personnel........................... 408
Section 1511--Treatment as Additional Authorizations....... 408
Section 1512--Transfer Authority........................... 408
Section 1513--Availability of Funds........................ 409
DIVISION B--MILITARY CONSTRUCTION AUTHORIZATIONS................. 409
PURPOSE........................................................ 409
MILITARY CONSTRUCTION AND FAMILY HOUSING OVERVIEW.............. 409
Section 2001--Short Title.................................. 429
TITLE XXI--ARMY.................................................. 429
SUMMARY........................................................ 429
ITEMS OF SPECIAL INTEREST...................................... 429
Explanation of Funding Adjustments......................... 429
Future Year Programming.................................... 430
Planning and Design........................................ 430
Safety-Critical Projects................................... 430
Unspecified Minor Construction............................. 430
LEGISLATIVE PROVISIONS......................................... 430
Section 2101--Authorized Army Construction and Land
Acquisition Projects..................................... 430
Section 2102--Family Housing............................... 431
Section 2103--Improvements to Military Family Housing Units 431
Section 2104--Authorization of Appropriations, Army........ 431
TITLE XXII--NAVY................................................. 431
SUMMARY........................................................ 431
ITEMS OF SPECIAL INTEREST...................................... 431
Explanation of Funding Adjustments......................... 431
Planning and Design........................................ 432
LEGISLATIVE PROVISIONS......................................... 432
Section 2201--Authorized Navy Construction and Land
Acquisition Projects..................................... 432
Section 2202--Family Housing............................... 432
Section 2203--Improvements to Military Family Housing Units 432
Section 2204--Authorization of Appropriations, Navy........ 432
Section 2205--Modification of Authority to Carry Out
Certain Fiscal Year 2004 and 2005 Projects............... 432
TITLE XXIII--AIR FORCE........................................... 432
SUMMARY........................................................ 432
ITEM OF SPECIAL INTEREST....................................... 433
Planning and Design........................................ 433
LEGISLATIVE PROVISIONS......................................... 433
Section 2301--Authorized Air Force Construction and Land
Acquisition Projects..................................... 433
Section 2302--Family Housing............................... 433
Section 2303--Improvements to Military Family Housing Units 433
Section 2304--Authorization of Appropriations, Air Force... 433
TITLE XXIV--DEFENSE AGENCIES..................................... 433
SUMMARY........................................................ 433
ITEMS OF SPECIAL INTEREST...................................... 434
Explanation of Funding Adjustments......................... 434
Fuel Storage at Naval Base Point Loma, California.......... 434
Missile Defense Agency Construction Activities............. 434
LEGISLATIVE PROVISIONS......................................... 435
Section 2401--Authorized Defense Agencies Construction and
Land Acquisition Projects................................ 435
Section 2402--Family Housing............................... 435
Section 2403--Energy Conservation Projects................. 435
Section 2404--Authorized Base Closure and Realignment
Activities Funded Through Department of Defense Base
Closure Account 2005..................................... 435
Section 2405--Authorization of Appropriations, Defense
Agencies................................................. 435
Section 2406--Modification of Authority to Carry Out
Certain Fiscal Year 2006 Projects........................ 435
TITLE XXV--NORTH ATLANTIC TREATY ORGANIZATION SECURITY INVESTMENT
PROGRAM...................................................... 435
SUMMARY........................................................ 435
LEGISLATIVE PROVISIONS......................................... 436
Section 2501--Authorized NATO Construction and Land
Acquisition Projects..................................... 436
Section 2502--Authorization of Appropriations, NATO........ 436
TITLE XXVI--GUARD AND RESERVE FORCES FACILITIES.................. 436
SUMMARY........................................................ 436
ITEMS OF SPECIAL INTEREST...................................... 436
Planning and Design, Air National Guard.................... 436
Planning and Design, Army National Guard................... 436
Planning and Design, Air Reserve........................... 437
Planning and Design, Army Reserve.......................... 437
LEGISLATIVE PROVISION.......................................... 437
Section 2601--Authorized Guard and Reserve Construction and
Land Acquisition Projects................................ 437
TITLE XXVII--EXPIRATION AND EXTENSION OF AUTHORIZATIONS.......... 437
LEGISLATIVE PROVISIONS......................................... 437
Section 2701--Expiration of Authorizations and Amounts
Required to be Specified by Law.......................... 437
Section 2702--Effective Date............................... 437
TITLE XXVIII--MILITARY CONSTRUCTION GENERAL PROVISIONS........... 438
ITEMS OF SPECIAL INTEREST...................................... 438
Energy Savings and Renewable Energy Opportunities at Joint
Bases.................................................... 438
Remediation of Property at the Former Fort Ord, California. 438
LEGISLATIVE PROVISIONS......................................... 438
Subtitle A--Military Construction Program and Military Family
Housing Changes.......................................... 438
Section 2801--Increase in Maximum Annual Amount Authorized
to be Obligated for Emergency Military Construction...... 438
Section 2802--Applicability of Local Comparability of Room
Pattern and Floor Area Requirements to Construction,
Acquisition, and Improvement to Military Unaccompanied
Housing.................................................. 438
Section 2803--Authority to Use Proceeds from Sale of
Military Family Housing to Support Military Housing
Privatization Initiative................................. 439
Section 2804--Repeal of Special Requirement for Military
Construction Contracts on Guam........................... 439
Section 2805--Congressional Notification of Cancellation
Ceiling for Department of Defense Energy Savings
Peformance Contracts..................................... 439
Section 2806--Expansion of Authority to Convey Property at
Military Installations to Support Military Construction.. 439
Section 2807--Pilot Projects for Acquisition or
Construction of Military Unaccompanied Housing........... 439
Section 2808--Consideration of Alternative and More
Efficient Uses for General Officer and Flag Officer
Quarters in Excess of 6,000 Square Feet.................. 439
Section 2809--Repeal of Temporary Minor Military
Construction Program..................................... 440
Section 2810--One-Year Extension of Temporary, Limited
Authority to Use Operation and Maintenance Funds for
Construction Projects Outside the United States.......... 440
Subtitle B--Real Property and Facilities Administration...... 440
Section 2821--Consolidation of Department of Defense
Authorities Regarding Granting of Easements for Rights-
of-Way................................................... 440
Section 2822--Authority to Grant Restrictive Easements in
Connection with Land Conveyances......................... 440
Section 2823--Maximum Term of Leases for Structures and
Real Property Relating to Structures in Foreign Countries
Needed for Purposes Other than Family Housing............ 440
Section 2824--Consolidation of Laws Relating to Transfer of
Department of Defense Real Property Within the Department
and to Other Federal Agencies............................ 440
Section 2825--Congressional Notice Requirements in Advance
of Acquisition of Land by Condemnation for Military
Purposes................................................. 441
Subtitle C--Base Closure and Realignment..................... 441
Section 2831--Treatment of Lease Proceeds from Military
Installations Approved for Closure or Realignment After
January 1, 2005.......................................... 441
Subtitle D--Land Conveyances................................. 441
Section 2841--Land Conveyance, Naval Air Station, Barbers
Point, Hawaii............................................ 441
Section 2842--Modification of Land Acquisition Authority,
Perquimans County, North Carolina........................ 441
Section 2843--Land Conveyance, Radford Army Ammunition
Plant, Pulaski County, Virginia.......................... 441
Subtitle E--Other Matters.................................... 442
Section 2851--Availability of Community Planning Assistance
Relating to Encroachment of Civilian Communities on
Military Facilities Used for Training by the Armed Forces 442
Section 2852--Prohibitions Against Making Certain Military
Airfields or Facilities Available for Use by Civil
Aircraft................................................. 442
Section 2853--Naming Housing Facility at Fort Carson,
Colorado, in Honor of Joel Hefley, a Member of the House
of Representatives....................................... 442
Section 2854--Naming Navy and Marine Corps Reserve Center
at Rock Island, Illinois, in Honor of Lane Evans, a
Member of the House of Representatives................... 442
Section 2855--Naming of Research Laboratory at Air Force
Rome Research Site, Rome, New York, in Honor of Sherwood
L. Boehlert, a Member of the House of Representatives.... 442
DIVISION C--DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY NATIONAL SECURITY AUTHORIZATIONS
AND OTHER AUTHORIZATIONS..................................... 442
TITLE XXXI--DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY NATIONAL SECURITY PROGRAMS...... 442
OVERVIEW....................................................... 442
ITEM OF SPECIAL INTEREST....................................... 459
National Nuclear Security Administration..................... 459
Overview................................................... 459
Weapons Activities......................................... 459
Directed Stockpile Work.................................. 459
Reliable Replacement Warhead........................... 459
Responsive Infrastructure.............................. 459
Study of Quantification of Margins and Uncertainty
Methodology.......................................... 460
Transformation Plan for the Nuclear Weapons Complex.... 461
Inertial Confinement Fusion Ignition and High Yield
Campaign............................................... 462
Readiness in Technical Base and Facilities............... 462
Safeguards and Security.................................. 463
Test Readiness........................................... 464
Defense Nuclear Nonproliferation........................... 464
Global Threat Reduction Initiative....................... 464
International Materials Protection and Cooperation....... 464
Megaports Program...................................... 465
Radiation Detection Technology......................... 465
Mixed Oxide Fuel Facility................................ 465
Transfer Authority to Fund New or Emerging Activities
Outside the United States Under the Global Threat
Reduction Initiative................................... 468
Environmental and Other Defense Activities................... 468
Overview................................................... 468
Disposition of Plutonium Unsuitable for Conversion to Mixed
Oxide Fuel............................................... 469
Hanford Defense Site Waste Treatment and Immobilization
Plant.................................................... 469
Savannah River Site Defense Environmental Cleanup.......... 470
Tank Waste Cleanup Research and Development Program........ 471
Yucca Mountain............................................. 471
LEGISLATIVE PROVISIONS......................................... 471
Subtitle A--National Security Programs Authorizations........ 471
Section 3101--National Nuclear Security Administration..... 471
Section 3102--Defense Environmental Cleanup................ 471
Section 3103--Other Defense Activities..................... 472
Section 3104--Defense Nuclear Waste Disposal............... 472
Subtitle B--Program Authorizations, Restrictions, and
Limitations................................................ 472
Section 3111--Plan for Transformation of National Nuclear
Security Administration Nuclear Weapons Complex.......... 472
Section 3112--Extension of Facilities and Infrastructure
Recapitalization Program................................. 472
Section 3113--Utilization of Contributions to Global Threat
Reduction Initiative..................................... 472
Section 3114--Utilization of Contributions to Second Line
of Defense Program....................................... 472
Section 3115--Two-Year Extension of Authority for
Appointment of Certain Scientific, Engineering, and
Technical Personnel...................................... 472
Section 3116--National Academy of Sciences Study of
Quantification of Margins and Uncertainty Methodology for
Assessing and Certifying the Safety and Reliability of
the Nuclear Stockpile.................................... 472
Section 3117--Consolidation of Counterintelligence Programs
of Department of Energy and National Nuclear Security
Administration........................................... 473
TITLE XXXII--DEFENSE NUCLEAR FACILITIES SAFETY BOARD............. 473
OVERVIEW....................................................... 473
ITEM OF SPECIAL INTEREST.....................................
Role of the Defense Nuclear Facilities Safety Board........ 473
LEGISLATIVE PROVISIONS......................................... 473
Section 3201--Authorization................................ 473
TITLE XXXIII--NATIONAL DEFENSE STOCKPILE......................... 474
ITEM OF SPECIAL INTEREST....................................... 474
Sale of Strategic and Critical Materials................... 474
LEGISLATIVE PROVISIONS......................................... 474
Section 3301--Authorized Uses of National Defense Stockpile
Funds.................................................... 474
Section 3302--Revision of Limitations to Required Receipt
Objectives for Previously Authorized Disposals from
National Defense Stockpile............................... 474
TITLE XXXIV--NAVAL PETROLEUM RESERVES............................ 475
LEGISLATIVE PROVISIONS......................................... 475
Section 3401--Authorization of Appropriations.............. 475
TITLE XXXV--MARITIME ADMINISTRATION.............................. 475
ITEM OF SPECIAL INTEREST....................................... 485
Fuel Assistance Payments to State and Regional Maritime
Academies................................................ 475
LEGISLATIVE PROVISIONS......................................... 475
Section 3501--Authorization of Appropriations for Fiscal
Year 2007................................................ 00
Section 3502--Limitation on Transfer of Maritime Security
Fleet Operating Agreements............................... 476
Section 3503--Applicability of Certain Maritime
Administration Vessels of Limitations on Overhaul,
Repair, and Maintenance of Vessels in Foreign Shipyards.. 476
Section 3504--Vessel Transfer Authority.................... 476
Section 3505--United States Merchant Marine Academy
Graduates: Alternate Service Requirements................ 477
Section 3506--United States Merchant Marine Academy
Graduates: Service Obligation Performance Reporting
Requirement.............................................. 477
Section 3507--Temporary Authority to Transfer Obsolete
Combatant Vessels to Navy for Disposal................... 477
Section 3508--Temporary Requirement to Maintain Ready
Reserve Force............................................ 477
Departmental Data................................................ 477
Department of Defense Authorization Request.................... 477
Committee Position............................................... 479
Communications From Other Committees............................. 479
Fiscal Data...................................................... 487
Congressional Budget Office Estimate........................... 487
Committee Cost Estimate.......................................... 490
Oversight Findings............................................... 490
General Performance Goals and Objectives......................... 490
Constitutional Authority Statement............................... 491
Statement of Federal Mandates.................................... 491
Roll Call Votes.................................................. 491
Changes in Existing Law Made by the Bill, as Reported............ 498
Additional and Dissenting Views.................................. 499
Additional views of Ike Skelton, Steve Israel, Solomon P.
Ortiz, Ellen O. Tauscher, Adam Smith, G.K. Butterfield,
Loretta Sanchez, Silvestre Reyes, John Spratt, Madeleine Z.
Bordallo, Robert E. Andrews, Mark Udall, Neil Abercrombie,
Marty Meehan, Jim Langevin, Susan Davis, Vic Snyder, Tim
Ryan, Rick Larsen, Jim Marshall.............................. 499
Additional views of Jeff Miller................................ 502
Additional views of Jim Marshall............................... 503
Additional views of Cathy McMorris............................. 508
Dissenting views of Cynthia McKinney........................... 510
109th Congress Report
HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
2d Session 109-452
======================================================================
NATIONAL DEFENSE AUTHORIZATION ACT FOR FISCAL YEAR 2007
_______
May 5, 2006.--Committed to the Committee of the Whole House on the
State of the Union and ordered to be printed
_______
Mr. Hunter, from the Committee on Armed Services, submitted the
following
R E P O R T
together with
ADDITIONAL AND DISSENTING VIEWS
[To accompany H.R. 5122]
[Including cost estimate of the Congressional Budget Office]
The Committee on Armed Services, to whom was referred the
bill (H.R. 5122) to authorize appropriations for fiscal year
2007 for military activities of the Department of Defense, to
prescribe military personnel strengths for fiscal year 2007,
and for other purposes, having considered the same, report
favorably thereon with amendments and recommend that the bill
as amended do pass.
The amendments are as follows:
The amendment strikes all after the enacting clause of the
bill and inserts a new text which appears in italic type in the
reported bill.
The title of the bill is amended to relfect the amendment
to the text of the bill.
EXPLANATION OF THE COMMITTEE AMENDMENTS
The committee adopted an amendment in the nature of a
substitute during the consideration of H.R. 5122. The title of
the bill is amended to reflect the amendment to the text of the
bill. The remainder of the report discusses the bill, as
amended.
PURPOSE
The bill would--(1) Authorize appropriations for fiscal
year 2007 for procurement and for research, development, test
and evaluation (RDT&E); (2) Authorize appropriations for fiscal
year 2007 for operation and maintenance (O&M) and for working
capital funds; (3) Authorize for fiscal year 2007: (a) the
personnel strength for each active duty component of the
military departments; (b) the personnel strength for the
Selected Reserve for each reserve component of the armed
forces; (c) the military training student loads for each of the
active and reserve components of the military departments; (4)
Modify various elements of compensation for military personnel
and impose certain requirements and limitations on personnel
actions in the defense establishment; (5) Authorize
appropriations for fiscal year 2007 for military construction
and family housing; (6) Authorize emergency appropriations for
increased costs due to Operation Iraqi Freedom and Operation
Enduring Freedom; (7) Authorize appropriations for fiscal year
2007 for the Department of Energy national security programs;
(8) Modify provisions related to the National Defense
Stockpile; and (9) Authorize appropriations for fiscal year
2007 for the Maritime Administration.
RELATIONSHIP OF AUTHORIZATION TO APPROPRIATIONS
The bill does not generally provide budget authority. The
bill authorizes appropriations. Subsequent appropriation acts
provide budget authority. The bill addresses the following
categories in the Department of Defense budget: procurement;
research, development, test and evaluation; operation and
maintenance; working capital funds, military personnel; and
military construction and family housing. The bill also
addresses Department of Energy National Security Programs and
the Maritime Administration.
Active duty and reserve personnel strengths authorized in
this bill and legislation affecting compensation for military
personnel determine the remaining appropriation requirements of
the Department of Defense. However, this bill does not provide
authorization of specific dollar amounts for personnel.
SUMMARY OF AUTHORIZATION IN THE BILL
The President requested budget authority of $513.3 billion
for the national defense budget function for fiscal year 2007.
Of this amount, the President requested $491.5 billion for the
Department of Defense, including $16.7 billion for military
construction and family housing and $50 billion for estimated
emergency costs for the Global War on Terror. The defense
budget request for fiscal year 2007 also included $17.0 billion
for Department of Energy national security programs and the
Defense Nuclear Facilities Safety Board.
The committee recommends an overall level of $512.9 billion
in budget authority. This amount represents an increase of
approximately $21.4 billion from the amount authorized for
appropriation by the National Defense Authorization Act for
Fiscal Year 2006 (Public Law 109-163).
SUMMARY TABLE OF AUTHORIZATIONS
The defense authorization act provides authorization for
appropriations but does not generally provide budget authority.
Budget authority is provided in appropriations acts. In order
to relate the recommendations to the budget resolution, matters
in addition to the dollar authorizations contained in this bill
must be taken into account. A number of programs in the
national defense function are authorized in other legislation.
The following table summarizes authorizations included in the
bill for fiscal year 2007 and, in addition, summarizes the
implications of the committee action for the budget authority
totals for national defense (budget function 050).
RATIONALE FOR THE COMMITTEE BILL
H.R. 5122, the National Defense Authorization Act for
Fiscal Year 2007, reflects the House Armed Services Committee's
steadfast support of the courageous, professional and dedicated
men and women of the United States armed forces and the
committee's appreciation for the sacrifices they make to
accomplish their required missions. Events of the last year--
ranging from on-going operations in Iraq and Afghanistan to
robust counter-terrorism efforts around the globe to time-
sensitive disaster and humanitarian responses both at home and
abroad--serve to highlight the United States military's
flexibility and responsiveness in defending our nation's
interests and addressing security challenges, wherever and
whenever they may arise.
For example, with the support of our coalition partners and
over 220,000 Iraqi Security Forces personnel, members of the
United States military helped to establish secure, stable
conditions under which more than 12 million Iraqis could cast
their votes for new national assembly representatives last
December. That month also figured prominently in Afghanistan,
where United States, Afghan and allied forces maintained
security and stability as 351 men and women from all provinces,
tribes and ethnic groups were inaugurated into the National
Assembly. At home, United States forces actively contributed to
Hurricane Katrina relief efforts with approximately 20,000
Active Duty and 50,000 National Guard troops providing military
support to civil authorities.
The committee considers it critical that the capabilities
and capacity of the armed forces continue to improve so they
can accomplish the full range of diverse 21st century missions,
minimize risks associated with such challenges and effectively
engage in hostilities, when necessary, as far from American
shores as possible. Thus, the committee's top priority remains
ensuring that our military personnel receive the best
equipment, weapons systems and training possible. As such, H.R.
5122 would provide for both near- and longer-term military
personnel and force structure requirements. It also highlights
the need for improvements in acquisition processes and
cooperation among key federal departments and agencies.
Taking Care of Our Military Personnel
Through H.R. 5122, the committee continues its support for
the outstanding Soldiers, Sailors, Airmen and Marines, who
selflessly make significant personal sacrifices to protect and
defend our nation. To ensure that the United States armed
forces remain robust enough to meet the full range of 21st
Century security challenges, particularly those related to the
Global War on Terrorism, the committee recommends for Fiscal
Year 2007 additional active duty growth of 30,000, or 6
percent, for the Army and 5,000, or about 3 percent, for the
Marine Corps above the budget request. These recommendations
would bring the Army end strength to 512,400 and the Marine
Corps to 180,000. In addition, the committee supports the
Department of the Army's decision to request an Army National
Guard (ARNG) end strength of 350,000 and recommends adding
about 2,300 full-time ARNG support personnel. To support this
additional manpower, H.R. 5122 would increase ARNG funding by
$789 million for personnel and equipment costs.
H.R. 5122 also reflects the committee's on-going commitment
to improving the efficiency and effectiveness of
servicemembers' benefits. The committee recommends an across-
the-board pay raise, which would decrease the 4.5 percent gap
between military and private sector pay to about 4.0 percent.
Moreover, this legislation completes the transition to full
TRICARE health program coverage for selected reserve personnel
and, in light of the Department of Defense's proposed TRICARE
cost-sharing arrangement, requires further study to ensure that
a comprehensive policy and fiscal basis for sustaining future
military health care benefits are in place. H.R. 5122 also
improves programs for our nation's wounded military personnel
and the surviving family members of those who have died or have
been seriously injured in service.
Balancing Near- and Longer-Term Military Capabilities
The committee believes strongly that the Department of
Defense must not focus on long-term military capabilities at
the expense of resetting and recapitalizing the warfighting
force that is serving the United States so well in current
operations. In particular, this legislation sends a clear
signal that force protection remains this committee's top
priority. Through oversight hearings, briefings and numerous
trips to Iraq and Afghanistan, committee members continue to
follow the significant threat to our soldiers and marines from
improvised explosive devices (IEDs), or makeshift road-side
bombs. H.R. 5122 reflects the committee's initiative to ``take
back the roads'' and provide the best available IED jamming
devices and persistent surveillance capability this includes
$109.7 million for jamming devices that will prevent the radio-
initiation of road-side bombs, which currently cause the
majority of U.S. casualties in Iraq and Afghanistan, and $100
million for at least 10 manned persistent surveillance aircraft
to patrol road segments and other areas where IED activity is
greatest.
H.R. 5122 also provides insight into how the committee
believes the Department of Defense should strike the right
balance between accepting technical risk and providing
increased capabilities to these warfighters. It reflects the
committee's continuing concerns about the long lead times
required for major systems and the possibility that programs do
not focus adequately on the near-term requirements of the
United States armed forces.
For example, the committee questions how the Department of
the Army plans to fund the Future Combat System (FCS), the
Modular Force Initiative and reset programs--three costly
efforts that would require funding in excess of the funds
programmed for the next five years. H.R. 5122 reflects the
committee's decision to balance the health and capability of
the current force with the future needs of the Army by reducing
the FCS program by $326 million and requiring a Defense
Acquisition Board review of the FCS program.
In addition to reflecting concerns about the growing cost
of the FCS program, this legislation puts into place spending
limits on programs for other major programs for which cost
estimates are rapidly increasing. These legislative initiatives
would contain shipbuilding costs by holding the Department of
the Navy accountable to their cost estimates on the CVN-21
aircraft carrier, the Landing Helicopter Assault (LHA-R)
amphibious assault ship, and the LPD-17 Landing Platform Dock
amphibious ship and would increase competition for elements of
the Joint Strike Fighter (F-35) and next generation destroyer
(DD(X)) programs.
The committee notes that the Fiscal Year 2007 budget
request included $2 billion for the Department of the Air
Force's F-22 aircraft program. However, despite the Fiscal Year
2006 projection for procurement of 29 F-22's in Fiscal Year
2007, the funds requested for Fiscal Year 2007 were for
subassemblies and not aircraft. Rather than authorize
incremental funding for major aircraft programs, which Congress
has not done in decades, the committee recommends an additional
$1.4 billion for the full funding for procurement of 20 F-22
aircraft.
Over the last five years, the Global War on Terrorism has
demonstrated time and again that U.S. intelligence,
surveillance and reconnaissance (ISR) capabilities are critical
to military effectiveness. The Department of Defense's most
recent Quadrennial Defense Review, released in February 2006,
highlighted gaps in ISR capabilities, and as a result of
several hearings and briefings over the last year, the
committee agrees that the United States currently has
insufficient capacity and capability to meet all national and
combatant commander requirements or provide tactical control
over needed ISR assets at the small-unit level. One key area
for improvement is persistent surveillance platforms, which the
DOD could usefully deploy for operations ranging from combat
and counterterrorism scenarios to stability and humanitarian
operations and domestic crises. For example, unmanned aerial
vehicles could provide a reliable battlefield picture on a 24-
hours-a-day/7-days-a-week basis. However, the committee notes
with concern that despite highlighting existing ISR gaps, DOD
officials decided to retire U-2 aircraft to achieve savings
without identifying a similar capability that will be available
in the near-term. H.R. 5122 would prohibit this retirement
until the Department certifies to Congress that the U-2 program
is not required to mitigate gaps in ISR capabilities.
Finally, H.R. 5122 underscores the need for operationally
responsive space capabilities. Adversaries recognize that the
backbone of the United States military's command, control,
communication, computers, intelligence, surveillance and
reconnaissance (C4ISR) system is space-based, making it
vulnerable to asymmetric attack and not easily reconstituted.
The committee believes that the United States must develop a
responsive space infrastructure, including flexible space
launch and rapidly deployable C4ISR platforms, to address this
vulnerability and reduce the temptation for adversaries to
attack our space assets. This legislation would establish an
Office of Operationally Responsive Space in the DOD to
contribute to the development of low-cost rapid reaction
payloads to fulfill joint military operational requirements.
Fielding the Right Equipment at the Right Time
The rising cost and lengthening production schedules of
major defense acquisition programs has led to more expensive
platforms fielded in fewer numbers. The committee believes that
internal DOD pressure to develop follow-on weapons systems that
include all necessary and anticipated military capabilities may
create an over-reliance on individual ``mega'' systems that are
potentially more expensive and time-consuming to develop than
less sophisticated but capable systems. These increases in cost
and development time generally result in smaller numbers of
platforms purchased, creating a ``high demand, low density''
situation in which the needed platforms have higher operational
tempos, wear out faster, increase stress on military personnel,
undermine the ability to conduct traditional presence missions
intended to shape the strategic choices of potential
adversaries and limit the strategic depth of United States
forces responding to multiple contingencies. Moreover, the
shrinking pool of skills and experience maintained by the
acquisition workforce and the inadequate prioritization of
combatant commands' requirements in deference to the military
services' priorities are strong concerns of the committee. At
the end of the day, the Department needs to recognize that its
acquisition process must result in cost-effectively `putting
metal on targets'--which in some cases will not require costly,
leading-edge technologies. H.R. 5122 would address these issues
by requiring training programs, improving management oversight
and internal controls and closely monitoring implementation of
acquisition reform in the Department of Defense.
Developing Partnerships
The committee notes that international coalition partners
have proven essential to military successes in Afghanistan,
Iraq and elsewhere and appreciates the diplomatic, financial
and military contributions made by foreign governments to the
Global War on Terrorism. However, the committee believes that
several key federal departments and agencies may lack the same
operational commitment to success in the on-the-ground war
effort.
Achieving United States security objectives requires the
integration of all national power--political, military and
economic. In many cases, non-military departments and agencies
lack planning, surge and overseas deployment capabilities, and
the interagency process--which coordinates national-level
policy development--has not been effective in executing
national security policy. As a result, our servicemembers
routinely fill gaps in civil capabilities, such as
reconstruction efforts, coordination of humanitarian relief and
training and equipping police forces. These missions are in
addition to the full range of military operational requirements
and may, in some cases, place an unfair burden on our armed
forces.
H.R. 5122 would require that the President assess the non-
DOD elements required to achieve the full spectrum of U.S.
national security interests, including organizational
structures, planning and assessment capabilities, information-
sharing policies, command and control systems, personnel
policies and acquisition authorities. The President would also
provide specific legislative proposals to improve interagency
capacity and enhance civilian capabilities for national
security purposes.
Supplemental Funding
The committee recommends authorization of $50 billion in
funds to support the defense activities principally associated
with Operation Iraqi Freedom (OIF) and Operation Enduring
Freedom (OEF). These funds are designated for emergency
contingency operations to support force protection equipment,
operational needs and military personnel requirements of the
units deployed and engaged in the Global War on Terrorism.
Included in the force protection recommendation is funding
for up-armored Humvees, tactical wheeled vehicle
recapitalization and modernization programs for the most
heavily used vehicles in OIF and OEF, night vision devices and
improvised explosive device jammers. In addition, the committee
recognizes the need to replenish critical small-arms and
ammunition procurement programs, including funding for the M16
rifle, M240 medium machine gun and M4 carbine modifications,
and .50 caliber cartridges, 120mm tank ammunition canisters and
155mm high explosive projectiles. Incorporated in the day-to-
day operation recommendation is funding to pay for food, fuel,
spare parts, maintenance, transportation, base expenses, as
well as costs incurred by stateside installations for increased
mobilizations and demobilizations due to OIF and OEF.
Over the past four years, the committee has recommended
increases in the active component manpower to sustain the full
range of capabilities required of the mission assigned to the
armed forces. The committee recommends funding a cumulative
active component increase of 30,000 for the Army and 5,000 for
the Marine Corps over the budget request.
HEARINGS
Committee consideration of the National Defense
Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2007 results from hearings
that began on February 1, 2006, and that were completed on
April 7, 2006. The full committee conducted fifteen sessions.
In addition, a total of thirty-two sessions were conducted by 6
different subcommittees on various titles of the bill.
DIVISION A--DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE AUTHORIZATION
TITLE I--PROCUREMENT
OVERVIEW
The budget request for fiscal year 2007 contained $84.2
billion for procurement. This represents a $6.2 billion
increase from the amount authorized for fiscal year 2006.
The committee recommends authorization of $85.9 billion, an
increase of $1.7 billion from the fiscal year 2007 request.
The committee recommendations for the fiscal year 2007
procurement program are identified in the table below. Major
issues are discussed following the table.
Aircraft Procurement, Army
Overview
The budget request for fiscal year 2007 contained $3.6
billion for Aircraft Procurement, Army. The committee
recommends authorization of $3.7 billion, an increase of $148.3
million, for fiscal year 2007.
The committee recommendations for the fiscal year 2007
Aircraft Procurement, Army program are identified in the table
below. Major changes to the Army request are discussed
following the table.
Items of Special Interest
AH-64 modern signal processing unit
The budget request contained $775.6 million for AH-64
modifications, but no funds were requested for the modern
signal processing unit (MSPU) initial integration and
production for the AH-64.
The MSPU is an embedded digital vibration diagnostic
technology already developed by the Army for the AH-64A Apache
and the AH-64D Longbow to monitor the tail rotor gearbox, the
intermediate gearbox, and the auxiliary power unit clutch for
incipient failures. The MSPU is a direct replacement for the
30-year-old analog signal processing unit which is known to
experience high failure rates and shown to be unreliable in
detecting incipient gearbox failures. The improved diagnostics
of the MSPU will improve flight safety and reduce maintenance
test costs.
The committee recommends an increase of $6.0 million to
integrate the modern signal processing unit into the AH-64A and
AH-64D production line and to procure the MSPU for fielding as
spares for both the active Army and Army National Guard Apache
and Longbow aircraft.
Joint cargo aircraft
The committee supports the decision to establish a joint
program office and to utilize a single capability development
document as the basis for requirements for the Joint Cargo
Aircraft (JCA). The committee believes that cost control is the
most critical factor in determining the likelihood for success
of the JCA program, and that the imperative for cost
containment will necessitate a strict control of requirements
and the use of maximum jointness and commonality in training,
sustainment and maintenance. The committee recommends that the
joint program office work to develop an acquisition and
sustainment strategy for JCA that is joint in all phases of the
program. The acquisition and sustainment strategy should
address the purchase of sufficient rights in technical data
required to provide competition in maintaining and sustaining
the aircraft throughout its complete lifecycle. The committee
notes that it has included a provision (section 802) that would
require acquisition programs to acquire sufficient technical
data required for lifecycle sustainment. The committee also
notes that the core logistics capability for cargo aircraft
currently in the Department of Defense (DOD) inventory resides
largely in the Air Force Air Logistics Centers and the
committee believes the JCA should be identified as a core
logistics capability under subsection (a)(2) of section 2464 of
title 10, United States Code, with no waiver under subsection
(b), if the JCA is acquired in sufficient numbers to warrant
such a designation. At a minimum, the Department should acquire
the technical data necessary to enable the government to
utilize its core logistics capability to maintain the JCA, if
required.
The committee directs the Secretary of Defense to submit to
the congressional defense committees a report on the plan to
acquire and sustain the JCA. The committee directs that the
report be delivered no later than 60 days after the acquisition
and sustainment strategy is approved by the appropriate
milestone decision authority. The committee further directs
that the report shall include DOD's recommendations regarding
whether or not the JCA will be identified as a core logistics
capability under subsection (a)(2) of section 2464 of title 10,
United States Code, and if so identified, whether the
Department intends to waive the limitation on contracting under
subsection (b) of such section for the JCA.
HH-60 aircraft wireless intercom system upgrade
The budget request contained $30.9 million for H-60
modifications, but included no funds for procurement of non-
encrypted aircraft wireless intercom system (AWIS) upgrades for
active and reserve HH-60 medical evacuation (MEDEVAC)
helicopters.
The committee notes there is no integrated or qualified
wireless communication system onboard HH-60 rotorcraft for use
by crewmembers. Consequently, this does not allow onboard
medical personnel, while in flight or during ground operations,
freedom to use both hands to perform emergency medical
procedures while communicating with the flight crew. Early
fielding of non-encrypted AWIS would eliminate the operational
hazards and restrictions inherent in the existing tethered
system for MEDEVAC crews.
The committee recommends an increase of $4.0 million to
modify HH-60 rotorcraft with wireless intercom systems.
UH-60A to UH-60L helicopter upgrade
The budget request included $554.6 million in aircraft
procurement for 38 UH-60M aircraft, but included no funds for
the non-recurring costs of replacement of UH-60A engine
transmission and engine upgrades as part of the UH-60A upgrade
program.
The committee notes the significant reduction in flying
hour costs, of over $700 per hour, offered by replacement of
the original UH-60A engines.
The committee recommends an additional $15.0 million for
the non-recurring development and engineering costs of
upgrading the UH-60A engine transmission and engine to the UH-
60L configuration.
Missile Procurement, Army
Overview
The budget request for fiscal year 2007 contained $1.4
billion for Missile Procurement, Army. The committee recommends
authorization of $1.5 billion, an increase of $140.0 million,
for fiscal year 2007.
The committee recommendations for the fiscal year 2007
Missile Procurement, Army program are identified in the table
below. Major changes to the Army request are discussed
following the table.
Items of Special Interest
Patriot modifications
The budget request contained $69.9 million for the
procurement of Patriot modifications.
The committee understands that the Army has an unfunded
requirement to transition or pure fleet existing Patriot
Advanced Capability-2 (PAC-2) missile battalions to an upgraded
PAC-3 missile battalion configuration capable of deploying the
PAC-3 missile by the end of fiscal year 2009.
The committee supports this initiative and recommends
$209.9 million, an increase of $140.0 million for the purpose
of restarting the PAC-3 production line, and for upgrading
tactical Patriot fire units to the PAC-3 configuration
capability.
TOW missile inventory
The budget request contained $31.6 million to procure 949
TOW missiles.
The committee recognizes the Army and Marine Corps face a
significant challenge in maintaining an adequate inventory of
TOW missiles. The TOW requirement is perceived to be at a
minimum 20,000 missiles but the Army's current program of
record supports an inventory of only 6,500 missiles. The
committee is aware the Army and Marine Corps have fired more
than 6,000 TOW missiles in Operation Iraqi Freedom (OIF), yet
by 2009, based on missile shelf life, the Army will have fewer
TOW missiles in its inventory than it had at the start of the
OIF.
While the committee notes the Army's intent to increase TOW
procurement and encourages the Army to proceed with this course
of action, the committee also notes the Army staff has not
defined a minimum warfighting inventory requirement for TOW
missiles.
Therefore, the committee directs the Secretary of the Army
to submit a report to the congressional defense committees by
March 15, 2007, that details the acquisition strategy for TOW
procurement across the Future Years Defense Program and
specifies the current, minimum warfighting requirement for the
TOW missile.
Weapons and Tracked Combat Vehicles, Army
Overview
The budget request for fiscal year 2007 contained $2.3
billion for Weapons and Tracked Combat Vehicles, Army. The
committee recommends authorization of $2.3 billion, an increase
of $33.1 million, for fiscal year 2007.
The committee recommendations for the fiscal year 2007
Weapons and Tracked Combat Vehicles, Army program are
identified in the table below. Major changes to the Army
request are discussed following the table.
Items of Special Interest
Army current to future force modernization strategy
The Army is implementing its current to future force
modernization strategy at a time when U.S. ground forces
continue to operate at high operational tempos in Iraq and
Afghanistan, as well as fill a critical role in the global war
on terrorism. The committee notes that while the Future Combat
Systems (FCS) is the Army's long-term transformation strategy,
modularity and equipment reset constitutes the near-term
strategy. Given fiscal realities, the Army's challenge of
simultaneously funding reset and modularity, and the high
technical risks associated with the development of FCS, the
committee is concerned the Army may sacrifice the warfighting
capability of the current force in order to resource FCS.
While conceptually supporting modularity, the committee
continues to have concerns about the details, not the least of
which is its escalating costs, uncertainty in adequate
resources for active Army and Army National Guard equipping
strategies, and whether the new modular designs for brigade
combat teams (BCTs) will provide sufficient capability for
sustained, high-intensity combat operations. Specifically, the
committee is concerned about the Army's decision to field
modular heavy BCTs with only two maneuver battalions, instead
of three. The committee understands that Stryker BCTs have
three maneuver battalions and FCS BCTs will also have three
maneuver battalions. Accordingly, the committee is concerned
that the Army's decision to field modular heavy BCTs with two
instead of three maneuver battalions is resource vice strategy
driven.
The committee notes that the Government Accountability
Office (GAO), the Congressional Budget Office, and the
Institute for Defense Analysis have also expressed similar
concerns in reference to modularity. The committee further
notes soldiers returning from Iraq have indicated that while
technology can be a critical combat enabler, technology alone
cannot serve as a replacement for force structure, ``boots on
the ground.'' The committee commends the Army for adding a
reconnaissance battalion to the modular brigade design. The
committee believes that although the reconnaissance battalion
is a critical force multiplier, it alone should not be required
to perform missions that would normally be performed by a third
maneuver battalion.
The Army has stated that the procurement funding for
modularity is within the Future Years Defense Program (FYDP)
and the procurement funding for FCS is beyond the FYDP.
However, the committee notes this position is not supported by
the information provided by the Army to the committee. The
committee agrees with GAO's assessment that given the degree of
uncertainty in modularity cost estimates and the likely cost
growth from FCS; the Army's modularity and FCS programs are at
risk of becoming unaffordable.
Army modularity
The committee continues to support the Army's restructuring
from a division based force to a more readily deployable
brigade centric force, a process known as modularity, and the
committee understands that modularity remains a top priority of
the Chief of Staff of the Army. However, the committee remains
concerned that the Army has not provided sufficient information
for Congress to assess the capabilities, costs, affordability,
and risks of the Army's modularity implementation plans. The
committee notes that the Army's cost estimate for completing
modularity by 2011 has grown from an initial estimate of $28.0
billion in 2004 to a current estimate of $52.5 billion.
Further, in the ``2005 Modularity'' report submitted to
Congress, the Army states a requirement for 77 brigade combat
teams (BCTs). Of the 77 BCTs, 35 were to be heavy BCTs
consisting of Abrams tanks and Bradley fighting vehicles. In
the ``2006 Modularity'' report and the 2007 budget request the
requirement is for 70 BCTs, of which 33 would be heavy BCTs.
The committee is concerned about the Army's rationale to reduce
the total BCT requirement and furthermore, it remains unclear
to the committee what impact the current modularity strategy
will have on meeting the needs of the combatant commanders.
Accordingly, the committee directs the Secretary of Defense
to obtain from each combatant commander, an assessment of the
Army's modularity initiative to include issues or concerns
regarding modularity designs, equipment, personnel and/or
rotation strategy. Further, the committee directs the Secretary
to submit a report, including the assessments from the
combatant commanders, to the Senate Committee on Armed Services
and the House Committee on Armed Services with the submission
of the President's budget for fiscal year 2008.
Heavy brigade combat teams
The budget request included $171.1 million for the M1A2
Abrams System Enhancement Program (SEP) tank and $285.0 million
for the Bradley base sustainment program.
The committee remains concerned about the Abrams tank and
Bradley fighting vehicle modernization programs and the
associated funding. Current operations continue to demonstrate
that there are few conflicts where main battle tanks and
Bradley fighting vehicles do not play a significant role in
ensuring the survivability and offensive firepower of the armed
forces. The committee remains resolute in its assessment that
the Army should pure fleet, at a minimum, 18 of its active
component heavy brigade combat teams (BCTs) with the M1A2
Abrams SEP tank and the Bradley A3 fighting vehicle.
The committee notes that in the Army's March 2006 report to
Congress, ``The Army Modular Initiative,'' it clearly states
that one of the key criteria for modularity funding was
``modernization of older equipment.'' The report further states
that modularity equipment modernization includes major systems
upgrades such as Apache and Chinook helicopters, but does not
include the M1A2 Abrams SEP tank or the Bradley A3 as part of
modernization. The committee believes that the M1A2 Abrams SEP
tank and the Bradley A3 are critical components of modular
heavy BCTs.
The committee is concerned that the Army's current
procurement strategy will not adequately fund the M1A2 Abrams
SEP tank program and the Bradley A3 program, to at least the
minimum economic quantity of approximately 60 and 144 per year,
respectively. The committee is also concerned that the Army's
current plan results in paying more to get fewer M1A2 Abrams
SEP tanks and Bradley A3s, which will result in a significant
delay in meeting the total requirement of 18 M1A2 Abrams SEP
tanks and Bradley A3 heavy BCTs. The committee notes that even
if the Army develops a plan that funds the M1A2 SEP tank and
the Bradley A3 production at the minimum economic quantity it
will take the Army up to 10 years to meet the total requirement
for 18 M1A2 Abrams SEP tank and Bradley A3 equipped heavy BCTs.
Accordingly, the committee directs the Secretary of the
Army to submit a report by February 28, 2007, to the Senate
Committee on Armed Services and the House Committee on Armed
Services providing the feasibility and rationale for multiyear
procurement authority for the M1A2 Abrams SEP tank and the
Bradley A3. At a minimum, the report shall include theimpact
that a multiyear procurement would have on the unit cost and the impact
this authority would have on meeting the total M1A2 Abrams SEP tank and
Bradley A3 requirement, consisting of 18 heavy BCTs.
Abrams tank modernization
The budget request included $171.1 million for 23 M1A2
Abrams System Enhancement Program (SEP) retrofit tanks.
The M1A2 Abrams SEP tank is an upgraded, fully digitized,
first generation M1A2 Abrams tank which enhances lethality,
survivability, and mobility, as well as providing improved
situational awareness for its crew.
Accordingly, the committee recommends an increase of $128.9
million for the M1A2 Abrams SEP tank program.
Bradley base sustainment program
The budget request included $285.0 million for 16 Bradley
A3 fighting vehicles and 90 Operation Desert Storm (ODS)
vehicles.
The Bradley base sustainment program upgrades earlier
variants of the Bradley A2 ODS and the Bradley A3 standard. The
Bradley A3 is more lethal and survivable; provides enhanced
command and control; and allows shared situational awareness.
The Bradley A3 continues to maintain combat overmatch above
current and future threat forces and remains compatible with
the M1A2 Abrams System Enhancement Program tank.
Accordingly, the committee recommends an increase of $147.0
million for the Bradley A3 program.
Integrated air burst weapon system
The budget request contained $32.3 million for the
integrated air burst weapon system family.
The committee understands this funding line would provide
procurement dollars for the low rate initial production of the
Objective Individual Combat Weapon, Increment One (OICW-1)
program; a family of small arms that are projected to be
replacements for existing carbines, rifles, and light machine
guns. The committee is aware that the official request for
proposals (RFP) for the OICW-1, originally announced in May
2005 was delayed and now has been terminated. The committee is
also aware that the program was redirected to the Joint
Requirements Oversight Council (JROC) for further review.
The committee notes the OICW-1 program has not yet been
reviewed by the JROC nor has an estimated date for a review
been established. The committee understands that pending the
outcome of this future JROC review, the new RFP would
incorporate additional joint requirements that would require
further development and refinement. The committee also notes
the Army is currently restructuring the procurement program for
small arms in support of the recently approved small arms
acquisition strategy, and recognizes these funds would be
redistributed to other small arms acquisition programs in
accordance with this new strategy.
Therefore, the committee believes the budget request for
the integrated air burst weapon system family is not justified
and recommends a decrease of $32.3 million. The committee also
recommends the redistribution of these funds to other small
arms acquisition programs as reflected in this report based on
urgent need and in support of the Army's recently restructured
small arms acquisition strategy.
Ammunition Procurement, Army
Overview
The budget request for fiscal year 2007 contained $1.9
billion for Ammunition Procurement, Army. The committee
recommends authorization of $1.7 billion, a decrease of $211.7
million, for fiscal year 2007.
The committee recommendations for the fiscal year 2007
Ammunition Procurement, Army program are identified in the
table below. Major changes to the Army request are discussed
following the table.
Items of Special Interest
Desert optimized equipment
The budget request contained $10.3 million for ammunition
peculiar equipment, but included no funds for desert optimized
ammunition peculiar equipment.
The committee understands that the harsh desert conditions
of Iraq and Afghanistan are causing ammunition peculiar
equipment to degrade at a much greater rate than anticipated.
The committee notes that there is great benefit to upgrading
forward deployed ammunition peculiar equipment with desert
optimized equipment.
The committee recommends an increase of $3.0 million to
optimize ammunition peculiar equipment for desert environments.
Modernization of .50 caliber ammunition production line
The budget request included $116.2 million for
modernization of ammunition production facilities, but included
no funds to modernize the line for production of .50 caliber
ammunition.
The committee notes that much of the existing facilities
and equipment used in the production of .50 caliber ammunition
date from the era of World War II. While this equipment has
been able to support .50 caliber ammunition production in
recent years, the production line is extremely difficult to
maintain and the obsolete nature of this equipment limits the
ability of the Army to increase production quantities on short
notice.
The committee directs the Army to develop a plan to
modernize the production line for .50 caliber ammunition, and
submit the plan to the congressional defense committees no
later than March 1, 2007. Furthermore, the plan should include
a proposed schedule for modernization consistent with continued
production of .50 caliber ammunition at levels similar to those
occurring in 2006, and a recommended funding program associated
with this schedule.
Other Procurement, Army
Overview
The budget request for fiscal year 2007 contained $7.7
billion for Other Procurement, Army. The committee recommends
authorization of $7.0 billion, a decrease of $211.7 million,
for fiscal year 2007.
The committee recommendations for the fiscal year 2007
Other Procurement, Army program are identified in the table
below. Major changes to the Army request are discussed
following the table.
Items of Special Interest
Bridge to future networks
The budget request contained $340.2 million for bridge to
future networks.
The Bridge to Future Networks program is comprised of two
elements: area common user system (ACUS) modernization and
joint network node (JNN). The committee is concerned about the
Army's plan to meet its battle command network requirement for
both the current and future force. The Army began the
acquisition of the JNN with funds appropriated in the Emergency
Supplemental Appropriations Act for Defense, the Global War on
Terror, and Tsunami Relief, 2005 (Public Law 109-13) that would
provide an urgent warfighting demand for a networking
capability in support of the global war on terrorism. The JNN
is not a program of record and the committee believes that
continued procurement of JNN through emergency supplemental
appropriations is not appropriate.
The committee further understands that the Department of
Defense's Director of Operational Test and Evaluation and the
General Counsel have determined that JNN should not proceed
beyond low rate initial production before completing
operational testing.
The committee also understands that the Army is developing
the Warfighter Information Network-Tactical (WIN-T) program at
the same time that it is procuring the JNN. According to the
Army, WIN-T is the foundation for network-centric brigade
operations and is applicable to not just the Future Combat
Systems (FCS) force, but also to today's current force of
modular brigade combat teams.
The committee is aware the Army has not developed a plan
that assesses how best to transition from JNN to WIN-T. It
remains unclear to the committee whether the Army will attempt
to accelerate development of WIN-T or pursue a parallel course
that continues to procure JNN while realigning the WIN-T
program with FCS. Therefore, the committee included a provision
(section 114) in this Act that would require the Secretary of
the Army to submit a report to the congressional defense
committees on the analysis of how the JNN and the WIN-T will be
integrated and whether or not there are opportunities to
leverage JNN technologies and equipment as part of the WIN-T
development effort.
Combat medical support
The budget request contained $20.5 million for combat
medical support, but included no funding for Golden Hour--4
units of red blood cells (GH4) and Golden Hour--30 units of red
blood cells or frozen plasma (GH30) blood bags. The committee
recommends more fully equipping the U.S. military with Golden
Hour technology blood bags to enable safe transport of blood to
the battlefield, resulting in more saved lives during military
conflicts and increasing the availability of useable blood.
The committee recommends an increase of $17.0 million for
Golden Hour blood bags.
Immersive group simulation
The budget request included $16.9 million for the Army's
networked system of manned simulators, but included no funds
for its immersive group simulation project.
The committee supports simulation efforts by the Army to
replicate elements on the combined arms battlefield. This
reduces overall training costs and provides training that might
otherwise be foregone because of limitations on live training
ranges. Immersive group simulations complement and enhance
training programs by allowing groups of trainers to place
groups of soldiers into synthetic training environments that
replicate real world conditions to stress reactive and decision
making capabilities, train on appropriate tactics and
techniques, and make mistakes where the consequences are non-
lethal.
Therefore, the committee recommends an increase of $6.5
million for the immersive group simulation project.
M915A3 production
The budget request contained $31.2 million for truck,
tractor, and line-haul equipment, including funds to procure
160 M915A3 line-haul tractor trucks.
The M915A3 is used by Army transportation companies to
transport breakbulk, containers, water and petroleum over
primary and secondary roads. The committee notes that previous
models of the M915 are experiencing operational readiness rates
below the Army goal and are difficult to support. The committee
also notes that there are significant inventory shortages
across the Army, but particularly in transportation companies
of the national guard and reserve forces.
The committee recommends $40.5 million for truck, tractor,
and line-haul equipment, an increase of $9.3 million to
accelerate fielding of the M915A3 to the Army National Guard.
Simulated combat training capability for Army National Guard
The budget request contained $38.5 million for combat
training centers support and other associated costs, but
included no funds for simulated combat training capability
systems for the Army National Guard.
The committee understands this system would provide
effective pre-mobilization and post-mobilization home-station
training for Army National Guard units engaged in the global
war on terrorism. The committee recognizes that although there
is no substitute for the robust live-fire and simulated
training capabilities provided at Combat Training Centers
(CTCs) and through the Joint National Training Capability
(JNTC), this particular system would supplement CTC and JNTC
activities, as well as provide additional training
opportunities for Army National Guard units at their home
stations. Furthermore, the committee believes that this
additional training capability would potentially contribute to
more effective CTC and JNTC training exercises for national
guard units.
The committee recommends $47.8 million, an increase of $9.3
million to provide simulated, flexible and expandable combat
training capability to Army National Guard units.
Aircraft Procurement, Navy
Overview
The budget request for fiscal year 2007 contained $10.9
billion for Aircraft Procurement, Navy. The committee
recommends authorization of $10.8 billion, a decrease of $108.1
million, for fiscal year 2007.
The committee recommendations for the fiscal year 2007
Aircraft Procurement, Navy program are identified in the table
below. Major changes to the Navy request are discussed
following the table.
Items of Special Interest
EP-3E service life extension
The budget request contained $56.8 million for EP-3E
aircraft modifications, but included no funds for service life
extension modifications in lieu of the Aerial Common Sensor
(ACS) program cancellation.
The committee is concerned about the impact the cancelled
ACS program may have on the qualitative service life of the EP-
3E. The committee understands that continued support of the
legacy EP-3E airframes and mission systems will be tenuous
until a viable joint or service-specific replacement is
identified and fully operational. The EP-3E capability
contributes significantly to the national collection posture of
the defense intelligence community and combatant commanders.
The committee understands that the EP-3E program was not
fully prepared for the cancellation of the ACS, and that
significant deficiencies to aircraft mission systems are
expected in fiscal year 2007.
Therefore, the committee recommends $66.8 million, an
increase of $10.0 million for additional service life extension
modifications needed to sustain the EP-3E.
H-53 series modifications
The budget request contained $28.3 million for H-53 series
modifications, but included no funds for the advanced
helicopter emergency egress lighting system (ADHEELS).
The ADHEELS provides crew escape lighting for helicopters
in the event of water impact. The committee understands that
the Department of the Navy has selected ADHEELS as its future
helicopter escape lighting system due to its superior
performance, significantly increased operational reliability,
and lower life cycle costs, and has recently equipped all SH-60
helicopters with this system; and therefore, the committee
recommends that the ADHEELS also be installed on the Navy's
fleet of H-53 helicopters.
Consequently, the committee recommends $31.3 million for H-
53 series modification, an increase of $3.0 million to begin
the installation of ADHEELS in the Navy's H-53 helicopter
fleet.
P-3C modernization
The budget request contained $204.6 million for P-3C
aircraft modifications, but contained no funds for the P-3C
high resolution digital recorder.
The committee understands the P-3C aircraft has been used
extensively in the global war on terrorism as a surveillance
and targeting platform to provide time-sensitive targeting
information to ground forces and other airborne assets. As part
of the P-3C anti-surface warfare improvement program (AIP)
upgrade, a next generation high resolution combined video and
radar recorder has been developed to replace the legacy
recorder. The committee understands that without key technology
upgrades and aircraft parts obsolescence management, the P-3C
ability to meet the Navy's Fleet Response Plan will be
degraded.
Therefore, the committee recommends $207.6 million, an
increase of $3.0 million for procurement of ten high resolution
digital recorders.
Weapons Procurement, Navy
Overview
The budget request for fiscal year 2007 contained $2.6
billion for Weapons Procurement, Navy. The committee recommends
authorization of $2.5 billion, a decrease of $38.0 million, for
fiscal year 2007.
The committee recommendations for the fiscal year 2007
Weapons Procurement, Navy program are identified in the table
below. Major changes to the Navy request are discussed
following the table.
Item of Special Interest
Conventional Trident modification
The budget request contained $957.6 million for Trident II
missile modifications, including $38.0 million for the
conventional Trident modification (CTM) program. The budget
request also contained $111.1 million for strategic missile
systems equipment, including $12.0 million for CTM.
The committee understands that the Department of Defense is
working to develop the prompt, precision, global conventional
strike capability called for in the 2001 Nuclear Posture
Review, and in the 2006 Quadrennial Defense Review. The
committee also understands that the existing Trident II weapons
system provides an opportunity to develop a long range
conventional strike capability by leveraging existing
technology at relatively low risk.
However, the committee is concerned that the development of
this conventional ballistic missile capability for a submarine
that has historically carried nuclear armed ballistic missiles
could cause a missile launch misinterpretation regarding which
type of a warhead a ballistic missile may be carrying. The
committee is encouraged that the Department has begun to engage
military and civilian leaders of the international community to
discuss the United States' intent behind this conventional
strike capability, and is also developing measures to preclude
misinterpretation of a conventional launch.
However, until this vital policy matter can be resolved,
the committee recommends $919.6 million for Trident II missile
modifications, a decrease of $38.0 million, and $99.1 million
for strategic missile systems equipment, a decrease of $12.0
million.
Ammunition Procurement, Navy & Marine Corps
Overview
The budget request for fiscal year 2007 contained $789.9
million for Ammunition Procurement, Navy & Marine Corps. The
committee recommends authorization of $758.8 million, a
decrease of $31.2 million, for fiscal year 2007.
The committee recommendations for the fiscal year 2007
Ammunition Procurement, Navy & Marine Corps program are
identified in the table below. Major changes to the Navy &
Marine Corps request are discussed following the table.
Shipbuilding and Conversion, Navy
Overview
The budget request for fiscal year 2007 contained $10.6
billion for Shipbuilding and Conversion, Navy. The committee
recommends authorization of $11.2 billion, an increase of
$604.6 million, for fiscal year 2007.
The committee recommendations for the fiscal year 2007
Shipbuilding and Conversion, Navy program are identified in the
table below. Major changes to the Navy request are discussed
following the table.
Items of Special Interest
313 ship navy force structure
The committee applauds the Chief of Naval Operations for
developing the Navy's future force structure and the
accompanying long-term shipbuilding plan to build it. This
long-term plan provides the shipbuilding industry a view into
the future that has been lacking. However, the committee is
concerned that the plan was developed using unrealistic
assumptions that will not make the plan executable. Of greatest
concern to the committee is the affordability of the ship
construction plan. According to the Navy's estimates, execution
of this plan requires a significant increase in shipbuilding
funds from $8.7 billion in fiscal year 2006 to $17.2 billion in
fiscal year 2011. Obtaining these additional funds in a period
of anticipated federal spending reductions will be difficult.
The plan also assumes that individual ship acquisition programs
can avoid the cost growth that has plagued most Navy ship
acquisition programs.
The committee is concerned about the affordability of the
Navy's long-term shipbuilding plan, recreating much of the
uncertainty about the future of naval shipbuilding that the
plan was designed to eliminate.
Aircraft carrier force structure requirements
The committee is concerned by the Chief of Naval
Operation's plan to retire the USS John F. Kennedy. According
to the Navy's long range shipbuilding plan, if the Navy retires
the Kennedy, then the aircraft carrier force will drop to 11
between now and 2012, and then drop to 10 in 2013 and 2014.
With the commissioning of CVN-78 in 2015, the aircraft carrier
force increases to 11 and then back to 12 in 2019 and beyond.
The committee believes it is the objective of the Chief of
Naval Operations to maintain a force of 12 aircraft carriers
since the long range shipbuilding plan shows a total of 12
aircraft carriers between 2019 and the far range of the plan in
2036. It is apparent to the committee that the decision to
allow the force structure to fall to 10 in the near future is
fiscally rather than operationally driven.
The committee believes that the Navy should continue to
maintain no less than 12 operational aircraft carriers in order
to meet potential global commitments. The committee believes
that a reduction below 12 aircraft carriers puts the nation in
a position of unacceptable risk.
Arleigh Burke class destroyer modernization
The budget request contained $2.2 million for the Arleigh
Burke class destroyer (DDG-51) modernization program.
The committee understands that the DDG-51 modernization
program is a comprehensive mid-life modernization effort to
ensure mission relevant service life of 35 years for the
Arleigh Burke class destroyers. The modernization will include
hull, mechanical and electrical technology upgrades to reduce
manning and total ownership costs, combat system integrated
warfighting improvements, and installation of an open
architecture computing environment to allow future ballistic
missile defense, air defense and other upgrades. The committee
also understands that this modernization effort will focus on
earlier Flight I ships (DDG-51 to DDG-71) to ensure they
support the Chief of Naval Operations Sea Power 21 requirements
of Sea Strike, Sea Shield and ForceNet. The committee believes
that because the next generation destroyer, DD(X), will not be
fielded until 2013, the DDG-51 fleet must be modernized at an
accelerated rate to take earlier advantage of the operating
cost reductions and the improved combat system capabilities.
Therefore, the committee recommends an increase of $200.0
million to accelerate the modernization program by two years.
Battleship transfer
In the conference report (H. Rept. 109-360) accompanying
the National Defense Authorization Act for fiscal year 2006,
the committee included instructions regarding the transfer of
the battleships USS Wisconsin and USS Iowa to the Commonwealth
of Virginia and State of California, respectively, and the
President's reversion authority pursuant to a national
emergency. The committee seeks to clarify that the battleships
USS Wisconsin and USS Iowa must be regarded as potential
mobilization assets and both the recipients and the U.S. Navy
are instructed to treat them as such. The committee notes that
the following measures should be taken: (1) the ships must not
be altered in any way that would impair their military utility;
(2) the ships must be preserved in their present condition
through the continued use of cathodic protection and
dehumidification systems and any other preservation methods as
needed; (3) spare parts and unique equipment such as 16-inch
gun barrels and projectiles, be preserved in adequate numbers
to support the two ships, if reactivated; and (4) the Navy must
prepare plans for the rapid reactivation of the two battleships
should they be returned to the Navy in the event of a national
emergency.
Incremental funding for shipbuilding
The budget request recommends incremental funding for 3 of
the 7 ships in the request, including for the first time
construction of a surface combatant, the next-generation
destroyer DD(X). Furthermore, during the consideration of the
National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2006 (Public
Law 109-163), the Navy sought and was granted the authority to
use incremental funding for the next aircraft carrier, which
will be recorded as procured in 2008.
The committee remains concerned that the use of incremental
funding is not a solution to the Navy's problem in funding
shipbuilding. While incremental funding can allow the Navy to
smooth out the dramatic spikes in shipbuilding funding required
as a result of aircraft carrier construction every four or five
years, it does not fundamentally increase the number of ships
that a given amount of money will purchase. During the
committee's hearings on shipbuilding, all witnesses emphasized
the importance of program and funding stability as the top
priority for reducing the cost of shipbuilding and sustaining
the shipbuilding industrial base. The committee notes that
Congress adopted the full funding policy in the 1950s in part
because of a concern that incremental funding was detrimental
to funding stability. Future congresses may find themselves
unwilling, or unable, to fund completion of ships begun in
prior years and only partially funded. The committee remains
convinced that the full funding policy is the correct policy
for funding shipbuilding.
The committee understands that the Department of Defense
this year considered submission of a legislative proposal that
would permanently authorize the use of ``split funding'' for
aircraft carriers and large deck amphibious ships, and the
Navy's fiscal year 2007shipbuilding plan already assumes such
authority for the second LHA class amphibious assault ship. The
committee has approved the use of split funding for certain ships in
certain cases. However, the committee does not believe that a blanket
policy supporting incremental funding for any class of ship is
appropriate, and has not included such a provision in the bill.
Littoral combat ship program
The committee is concerned about the uncertainty in the
Navy's acquisition strategy for the Littoral Combat Ship (LCS).
The Navy recently announced its intention to continue with the
Flight Zero design through fiscal year 2009. The Navy plans to
procure 15 LCSs through this initial design phase. How long the
Navy intends to continue with two separate designs for these
vessels remains unclear. The committee believes that it is also
unclear when the Navy will place this program into the
discipline of the normal acquisition process with definitive
and mature requirements and Director, Operational Test and
Evaluation, review before continuing with procurement. The
Navy's long-range shipbuilding plan calls for procuring 55
LCSs, and the committee encourages the Navy to develop an
acquisition strategy for the long-term that clarifies any
ambiguity in the current build profile. The committee further
encourages the Navy to downselect to one of the two LCS
variants currently in procurement in order to achieve economy
of scale, or present a compelling case to the congressional
defense committees on why both variants should be procured.
Next generation destroyer
The budget request contained $2.6 billion for split
procurement of two next generation destroyers (DD(X)).
The committee does not believe the DD(X) is affordable. The
committee supports recent efforts by the Navy to ``design cost
out'' of the lead ship and to focus on threshold instead of
objective requirements in an effort to reduce the risk of cost
growth. However, due to the unusually large number of new
technologies being integrated on the next generation destroyer,
the committee understands there is no prospect of being able to
design and build the two lead ships for the $6.6 billion
budgeted.
The committee is concerned that the Navy is attempting to
insert too much capability into a single platform. As a result,
the DD(X) is now expected to displace over 14,000 tons and by
the Navy's estimate, cost almost $3.3 billion each. Originally,
the Navy proposed building 32 next generation destroyers,
reduced that to 24, then finally to 7 in order to make the
program affordable. In such small numbers, the committee
struggles to see how the original requirements for the next
generation destroyer, for example providing naval surface fire
support, can be met. In this day of netted operations, the
committee advocates reducing the capabilities resident on the
next generation destroyer, to instead rely on the netted
sensors and weapons systems of other ships in the strike group.
By reducing the requirements for the DD(X), a smaller, less
expensive destroyer could be procured in greater numbers.
Because of its expense, the committee does not believe that
DD(X) will be procured in sufficient numbers to meet the
operational need. However, the committee does believe that the
DD(X) program's engineering development models show the
potential for some impressive advances in warfighting
capability. The committee supports the construction of up to
two DD(X)s to demonstrate technologies that could be
incorporated into future, more affordable, major surface
combatants. The committee recommends that these ships
demonstrate as wide a range of technologies as is reasonably
feasible, including both the advanced induction and permanent
magnet motor propulsion concepts that were originally
investigated for DD(X).
Therefore, the committee recommends $2.6 billion to fund
one next generation destroyer as a technology demonstrator.
Shipbuilding/ship repair industrial base capacity
The committee believes that the ability to build naval
ships and submarines is a critical national asset. Therefore,
it is imperative that the United States sustain a healthy ship
design, engineering and construction capability.
The first tier shipbuilding/ship repair industrial base is
made up of six private and four public shipyards. Since there
is very little commercial large-ship shipbuilding currently
being executed in these shipyards, all 10 shipyards are almost
wholly dependent on Department of Defense (DOD) work for
sustainment.
The committee is concerned that the U.S. shipbuilding/ship
repair industrial base has significant capacity beyond what is
necessary for all anticipated DOD new construction and
maintenance work, and believes that Navy ship acquisition
programs are paying the price.
The Navy recently published a long-term shipbuilding plan
that supports the goal of building and maintaining a 313 ship
Navy by 2020. Although this plan provides the needed
``stability'' that the U.S. shipbuilding industry has been
looking for, it does not appear to generate enough work to keep
the major U.S. shipbuilders operating at their current
capacity. Evidence of this is most obvious at General Dynamics
Electric Boat Division where the contractor is planning to lay
off hundreds of designers and engineers and thousands of
production workers in the next several years. The plan to
increase the procurement of Virginia class submarines from 1 to
2 per year has been delayed for over 10 years and the latest
plan has the increase happening in fiscal year 2012. Similar
challenges will affect the shipyards now constructing the last
of the DDG-51 destroyers. Those yards are starting to ramp up
to build the next generation destroyer, however, the next
generation destroyer is not expected to be built in a
sufficient quantity to keep the current workforce fully
employed.
The committee directs the Secretary of the Navy to report
to the congressional defense committees on measures that can be
taken to manage the capacity of the shipbuilding/ship repair
industrial base in a manner that would make Navy shipbuilding
more affordable. Such report shall be submitted by the
submission of the President's request for fiscal year 2008, as
required by section 1105 of title 31, United States Code.
Ship cost estimates
The committee is deeply concerned about the process used
for establishing the Navy's ship cost estimates. The committee
notes that the original cost estimates on numerous existing
ship classes have regularly been described by the Navy as
inaccurate and unrealistic when those ships near completion of
construction. The committee notes that in several cases it has
been informed that ship cost estimates delivered to the
committee in prior years either intentionally or
unintentionally excluded certain known shipbuilding costs such
as escalation, and that these cost estimates were known to be
inaccurate on the day they were first delivered to the
committee. The committee recommends that the process for
deriving ship cost estimates be revised to ensure that all
major known elements of ship cost are routinely included in all
ship cost estimates.
The committee notes that Sections 122, 123, and 124 of the
bill would impose cost limitations on three current ship
classes based on the Navy's latest costs estimates. The
committee further notes that the imposition of these statutory
cost limitations makes the need for a high level of confidence
in the cost estimates for these ship classes unusually
important. Accordingly, the committee directs that the
Secretary of the Navy revalidate the cost estimates for CVN-21,
for the ships currently programmed in the LHA Replacement
program, and for the eight ships of the San Antonio class
amphibious ship that follow the lead ship. The committee
further directs that the revalidated costs estimates be
submitted for review and approval by the Under Secretary of
Defense for Acquisition, Technology, and Logistics. Finally,
the committee directs that no later than July 1, 2006, the
Secretary of the Navy submit a report in writing to the
congressional defense committees containing the revalidated
cost estimates for these ship classes including a certification
by the Secretary that all known and anticipated major elements
of cost have been included in the estimate.
Virginia class submarine
The budget request contained $676.6 million for advance
procurement funding for Virginia class submarines.
The committee believes that the Navy's attack submarine
force structure must be maintained at no less than 48
submarines in order to meet potential global commitments. The
Navy's Annual Long-Range Plan for Construction of Naval Vessels
for fiscal year 2007 shows that the force will decrease below
48 attack submarines between 2020 and 2033, reaching a low of
40 attack submarines in 2028 and 2029. The committee believes
that a reduction below 48 attack submarines puts the country in
a position of unacceptable risk.
Therefore, the committee recommends $1.1 billion for
advance procurement of Virginia class submarines, an increase
of $400.0 million for the procurement of a second Virginia
class submarine in fiscal year 2009.
Other Procurement, Navy
Overview
The budget request for fiscal year 2007 contained $5.0
billion for Other Procurement, Navy. The committee recommends
authorization of $5.0 billion, an increase of $74.9 million,
for fiscal year 2007.
The committee recommendations for the fiscal year 2007
Other Procurement, Navy program are identified in the table
below. Major changes to the Navy request are discussed
following the table.
Items of Special Interest
AEGIS land-based test site modernization
The budget request contained $75.3 million for AEGIS
support equipment, but included no funds for modernizing AEGIS
land-based test sites.
The committee understands that the AEGIS land-based test
sites are essential to the operational effectiveness of the
AEGIS weapons system, including the development of an
integrated missile defense system capable of providing a
layered defense against ballistic and cruise missiles. The
committee is aware that in order to maintain the highest
possible level of effectiveness, the land-based test sites
require state-of-the-art upgrades to peripheral emulators and
switching systems used to collect and analyze combat system
performance data. Modernization of the emulators and switches
will ensure timely testing, certification and delivery of
updated AEGIS baselines to the fleet.
The committee recommends $80.3 million for AEGIS Support
Equipment, an increase of $5.0 million to be used for
modernizing AEGIS land-based test sites.
Amphibious ship integrated bridge system
The budget request contained $31.0 million for other
navigation equipment, but included no funds for the amphibious
ship integrated bridge system.
The committee is aware that the Navy has directed that all
ships in the fleet will use electronic navigation/electronic
charting by the end of fiscal year 2009. The committee believes
that additional funding will allow for the conversion of
amphibious ships to electronic navigation/electronic charting,
allowing them to meet the Navy's goal. Conversion to electronic
navigation/electronic charting will allow a reduction in bridge
manning, saving an estimated $0.6 million per ship per year,
more than paying for the conversion in less than three years.
The committee recommends $35.5 million for other navigation
equipment, an increase of $4.5 million to be used for the
amphibious ship integrated bridge system.
AN/SPQ-9B radar
The budget request contained $2.5 million for the AN/SPQ-9B
radar, but included no funds for testing of the AN/SPQ-9B on
the littoral combat ship (LCS).
The committee is aware that the two LCS variants now under
construction are to be delivered with tactical/fire control
radars chosen by the prime contractors. The committee believes
that the AN/SPQ-9B tactical/fire control radar, already in the
Navy inventory, may provide superior self-protection against
anti-ship sea skimming missiles than the radars being provided.
The AN/SPQ-9B radar has been thoroughly tested by the Navy and
a successful radar operational assessment was completed in
September 2002. The committee is aware that an identification
friend or foe capability, an LCS requirement, was successfully
added in 2005. The ability to provide volume surveillance,
another LCS requirement, is presently under development and
scheduled for completion in the spring or summer of 2006. The
committee believes that additional funds will be used for the
procurement of the AN/SPQ-9B radar for the LCS program.
The committee recommends $8.5 million for the AN/SPQ-9B
radar, an increase of $6.0 million to be used for the testing
of the AN/SPQ-9B on the LCS.
AN/SPS-48 radar obsolescence, availability and recovery
The budget request contained no funds for radar support and
no funds for the AN/SPS-48 radar obsolescence, availability and
recovery (ROAR) program.
The committee is aware that the AN/SPS-48 ROAR program's
goal is to maintain and support the air defense capabilities on
aircraft carriers, amphibious assault ships and the San Antonio
class amphibious warfare ships.
The committee recommends $7.3 million for the AN/SPS-48
radar obsolescence, availability and recovery program to
accelerate the ROAR program by two years.
Boat lifts for small boats
The budget request contained $41.1 million for standard
boats, but included no funds for boat lifts for shore-based
small boats.
The committee understands that the current inventory and
generally poor material condition of boat lifts at shore
activities has reduced the level of boat readiness and
increased lifecycle costs. The committee is aware that modern,
state-of-the-art boat lifts, due to their design and
capabilities, will expand boat service life, reduce maintenance
costs, and permit quick and safe docking and boarding.
Therefore, the committee recommends that modern commercial-off-
the-shelf boat lifts be purchased and installed at small boat
shore facilities to reduce lifecycle costs and improve
operational readiness of the shore-based small boat fleet.
The committee recommends $42.1 million for standard boats,
an increase of $1.0 million to be used for the procurement of
modern boat lifts for shore activities.
Canned lube pumps for amphibious ships
The budget request contained $172.8 million for items under
$5.0 million, but included no funds for installing canned lube
pumps on the Harpers Ferry and Whidbey Island class amphibious
ships.
The committee believes that the currently installed lube
oil pumps have a high failure rate, leak excessively, and are
driving up maintenance costs. Installation of the canned lube
oil pumps will provide operating efficiency and reduce
maintenance costs.
The committee recommends an increase of $4.0 million for
items under $5.0 million, to be used for installing canned lube
pumps on the Harpers Ferry and Whidbey Island class amphibious
ships.
CVN propeller replacement program
The budget request contained $172.8 million for items under
$5.0 million, but included no funds for the CVN propeller
replacement program.
The committee understands that the old-design propellers on
the Nimitz class aircraft carriers suffer from blade erosion
caused by cavitation and the high operating tempo of recent
years. Propeller refurbishment on the outboard and inboard
propellers is required every three and six years, respectively.
The committee believes that the new-design propellers will
require refurbishment every 12 years, more closely
corresponding to the interval of aircraft carrier drydockings.
The committee also believes that propeller replacement will
lead to increased ship operational availability and reduced
disruptions to planned maintenance schedules.
The committee recommends an increase of $3.5 million for
items under $5.0 million, to be used for the CVN propeller
replacement program.
Laser marksmanship training systems
The budget request contained $18.2 million for training
support equipment, but included no funds to procure laser
marksmanship training systems (LMTS) for the Navy Reserve.
The LMTS is a proven laser-based marksmanship training
system that simulates live-fire training, can be used in
various environmental conditions and locations, as well as
allowing sailors to train with their own primary personal
defense weapon to engage various types of targets.
The committee is aware this system contributes to
individual sailor and unit readiness, improves skill retention,
reduces unit training costs and achieves environmental cost
avoidance associated with traditional live-fire training
exercises. The committee understands the Navy Reserve has a
program to field LMTS to all Navy Reserve Centers.
The committee recommends $26.2 million for training support
equipment, an increase of $8.0 million to accelerate the
fielding of LMTS to all Navy Reserve Centers.
Man overboard identification system
The budget request contained $58.6 million for command
support equipment, but included no funds for the man overboard
identification system.
The committee is aware that the man overboard
identification system provides an active means by which a Navy
ship can be immediately alerted to a man-overboard incident and
further allows for precise location of the individual in the
water, thus reducing the chance of serious injury or death.
Each sailor or marine wears a small transmitter on his life
jacket, that, when activated upon water entry, transmits a
signal to the ship identifying the specific sailor, the ship
from which he fell and the global positioning system
coordinates of the incident. A direction finder then tracks the
location of the man-overboard during the rescue effort. Under
the current installation plan, the Navy would provide man-
overboard transmitters only to those sailors and marines
identified as at risk, approximately a third of all crew
onboard. The committee believes that the Navy needs to consider
providing a transmitter for every crewmember on the ship, not
just those considered at risk.
The committee recommends $67.4 million for command support
equipment, an increase of $8.8 million to be used for the man
overboard identification system.
Materials handling equipment
The budget request contained $13.7 million for materials
handling equipment (MHE), but contained no funding to procure
an 11,000 pound rough terrain, self deployable, manually
operated forklift system capable of operating efficiently in
nuclear, biological, and chemical environments for the Navy
Construction Force (NCF) Seabees.
The committee is aware the NCF Seabees are in the process
of recapitalizing their fleet of construction equipment and
MHE. The committee supports this initiative and notes that the
high operational tempo coupled with the harsh environment of
Iraq has consequently resulted in some equipment becoming
uneconomical to either repair or to rebuild through service
life extension programs or recapitalization programs.
The committee notes this system would address NCF Seabees
lift requirements for fiscal year 2007. The committee
recommends $23.7 million in materials handling equipment, an
increase of $10.0 million to accelerate the procurement and
delivery of 100 forklift material handling equipment systems
for the NCF Seabees.
Medical support equipment
The budget request contained $5.6 million for medical
support equipment, but included no funding for 3,600
lightweight and NATO-standard litters and litter load carriage
tools; 2,500 lightweight, combat medics' bags; or 4,500 onboard
kits for tactical vehicles, which include pelvic stabilization
devices, ear nose and throat packs, airway tools, and
tourniquets. The committee recommends more fully equipping
naval expeditionary forces to enable field medical personnel in
tactical units to stabilize and evacuate casualties more
rapidly, efficiently, and safely.
The committee recommends $11.8 million for medical support
equipment, an increase of $6.2 million for combat casualty care
equipment upgrades.
Multi-climate protective system
The budget request contained $18.6 million for various
aviation life support items, but included no funds for the
multi-climate protective system (MCPS).
The MCPS is a modular protective aircrew clothing ensemble
that provides flame protection, thermal protection, and
sufficient insulation while reducing the heat stress and bulk
commonly associated with cold weather clothing systems.
Components of the system can be used in a wide range of
temperatures and climate conditions. The committee understands
that funding to procure 5,532 MCPSs has been obligated thus
far, and that the Department of the Navy's MCPS requirement is
for 25,000 systems. The committee believes that procurement of
the MCPS should continue.
Accordingly, the committee recommends $22.6 million for
aviation life support, an increase of $4.0 million for
procurement of the MCPS. Additionally, the committee strongly
encourages the Department of the Navy to include the necessary
funds for the MCPS in its future budget requests to meet MCPS
requirements.
Multi-spectral threat emitter system
The budget request contained $56.2 million for weapons
range support equipment, but included no funds for the multi-
spectral threat emitter system (MTES).
The MTES provides a mobile surface-to-air and air defense
artillery electronic threat simulation for aircraft along the
East Coast of the United States to provide for more realistic
aircrew proficiency training. The committee notes that Congress
appropriated $2.5 million for fiscal year 2005 and $2.1 million
for fiscal year 2006 for the MTES, and recommends authorization
of additional funds to complete the procurement of two MTES
systems.
Accordingly, the committee recommends $64.2 million for
weapons range support equipment, an increase of $8.0 million
for procurement of two MTESs.
Serial number tracking system
The budget request contained $12.1 million for other supply
support equipment, but included no funds for implementation of
the serial number tracking system.
The serial number tracking system provides a web-based,
cradle-to-grave total asset visibility of individual components
through the supply, maintenance and transportation processes.
The technology enables rapid and accurate data collection for
information systems and permits logistics data to be used Navy-
wide for increased readiness. The committee recommends the
implementation of the serial number tracking system application
in the areas of shipboard medical equipment, warehouse and
ground support equipment management at Naval and Marine Corps
Air Stations. The committee believes that the use of modern
commercial-off-the-shelf automatic identification and data
collection technologies like the serial number tracking system
for critical asset management will yield significant
improvements in productivity and effectiveness.
The committee recommends $15.1 million for command support
equipment, an increase of $3.0 million to be used for
implementation of the serial number tracking system.
Submarine communications upgrades
The budget request contained $12.3 million for satellite
communications systems, but included no funds for the
Miniaturized Demand Assigned Multiple Access (mini-DAMA)
communications set upgrades.
The committee understands that the mini-DAMA communications
set provides communications links necessary for command and
control of battlegroups, as well as for control, targeting and
battle damage assessment for deployed tomahawk weapons. The
committee is aware that due to program delays in the Joint
Tactical Radio System, it is necessary to perform mini-DAMA
upgrades in the submarine fleet to avoid degradation of combat
missions.
The committee recommends an increase of $2.1 million to be
used for mini-DAMA communications set upgrades in the submarine
fleet.
Submarine non-tactical application delivery interface system shore
interface
The budget request contained $24.8 million for submarine
training device mods, including $2.9 million for the submarine
non-tactical application delivery interface system (SNADIS)
shore interface.
The committee recommends authorizing additional funds to
allow the Navy to accelerate the development and integration of
the shore command system with the existing deployed ship based
SNADIS. When these two systems are fully integrated and sharing
information, both the ship's commanding officer and shore
commander will have the information available to assess and
evaluate the readiness of the submarine force.
The committee recommends $27.8 million for submarine
training device mods, an increase of $3.0 million to be used
for the SNADIS shore interface.
Ultrasonic maintenance tools
The budget request contained $172.8 million for items less
than $5.0 million, but included no funds for ultrasonic
maintenance tools.
The committee understands that ultrasonic maintenance tools
have the potential to significantly reduce ship maintenance
man-hours by eliminating several time consuming maintenance
procedures currently used to locate and identify compartment
integrity breeches, fluid system leaks, bearing and gear
anomalies and clogged engine fuel injectors. The committee
believes significant cost-savings may be attained with
maintenance reducing technology.
The committee recommends an increase of $2.5 million for
the procurement of ultrasonic maintenance tools.
Procurement, Marine Corps
Overview
The budget request for fiscal year 2007 contained $1.3
billion for Procurement, Marine Corps. The committee recommends
authorization of $1.2 billion, a decrease of $49.7 million, for
fiscal year 2007.
The committee recommendations for the fiscal year 2007
Procurement, Marine Corps program are identified in the table
below. Major changes to the Marine Corps request are discussed
following the table.
Items of Special Interest
Envelope protective covers for marine expeditionary unit weapon systems
and platforms
The budget request contained $31.8 million for fire support
systems, but included no funds to procure envelope protective
covers for Marine Corps Expeditionary Units' (MEUs) weapon
systems and platforms.
The committee understands the Navy currently employs
envelope protective covers for equipment platforms and weapon
systems. The committee notes that widespread use of envelope
protective covers by the Navy is generating higher equipment
readiness ratings for protected naval weapon systems and
platforms, as well as lower maintenance requirements, reduced
manpower requirements, and higher return on equipment
investments. The committee encourages the Marine Corps to field
similar envelope protective covers to seven MEUs to cover such
equipment platforms as the M777 lightweight 155mm howitzers and
M198 155mm howitzers, as well as to capitalize on the economic
and performance benefits provided by these protective covers.
The committee recommends $34.8 million in fire support
systems, an increase of $3.0 million to procure envelope
protective equipment covers for seven MEUs.
Intelligent surveillance systems
The budget request contained $13.8 million for training
devices, but contained no funding for a modular intelligent
surveillance training system.
The committee understands a modular intelligent
surveillance system would provide Marine Corps trainers with
improved situational awareness of military personnel conducting
urban training exercises, and would provide immediate feedback
to the training unit in after action review format. Further,
the committee is aware this system would allow trainers to
observe in real-time a training event either from a ``blue'' or
``opposing'' force perspective; a capability not currently
employed by existing training systems.
The committee recommends $18.8 million for training
devices, an increase of $5.0 million to procure modular
intelligent surveillance training systems.
Laser perimeter awareness system
The budget request contained $5.2 million for physical
security equipment, but included no funds to procure laser
perimeter awareness systems (LPAS).
The LPAS is an all-weather surveillance sensor system that
would detect the presence and track the motion of intruders,
locating them in range, bearing, and elevation with respect to
the position of the sensor.
The committee understands Marine Corps regulations
governing the security of arms, ammunition, and explosives, as
well as aviation assets, mandate constant surveillance and
restricted access to these assets. The committee is aware that
Marine Corps installations are currently equipped with base-
wide electronic security systems that are outdated and require
extensive modernization. The committee notes the LPAS would
provide critical enhancements to existing security and force
protection technology to meet current Marine Corps security
requirements outlined in the Marine Corps's Flightline Security
Enhancement Program (FSEP), as well as increase the
effectiveness of available security manpower.
Therefore, the committee recommends $14.7 million for
physical security equipment, an increase of $9.5 million to
procure three LPAS and associated equipment, as well as to
address a Commandant of the Marine Corps unfunded requirement.
Aircraft Procurement, Air Force
Overview
The budget request for fiscal year 2007 contained $11.5
billion for Aircraft Procurement, Air Force. The committee
recommends authorization of $13.0 billion, an increase of $1.6
billion, for fiscal year 2007.
The committee recommendations for the fiscal year 2007
Aircraft Procurement, Air Force program are identified in the
table below. Major changes to the Air Force request are
discussed following the table.
Items of Special Interest
B-1B molecular sieve oxygen generation system
The budget request contained $53.1 million for B-1B
aircraft modifications, but included no funds for the molecular
sieve oxygen generation system (MSOGS) reliability improvement
program.
The committee understands the MSOGS is the B-1B oxygen
generation system which consists of a concentrator, water
separator, and a back-up oxygen system that provides the
aircrew with an unlimited source of oxygen for breathing during
flight. The committee notes that while operating in forward
basing locations containing a high humidity level, the rate of
repair for the MSOGS has doubled causing negative impacts to
operationally available aircraft. The committee is aware that
the original equipment manufacturer has identified an improved,
high-efficiency water separator that would enhance the
reliability of the MSOGS, increase operational availability of
the aircraft, and eliminate the need for a depot level repair.
Therefore, the committee recommends $57.6 million, an
increase of $4.5 million for the MSOGS reliability improvement
program.
B-2 radar modification program
The budget request contained $191.3 million for B-2
modernization, including $160.7 million for the B-2 radar
modification program (RMP).
The committee understands that in October 2000, the
Department of Commerce notified the Department of Defense that
the B-2 must vacate its current operating frequency before a
classified near-term date (NTD) and relocate to a frequency
band where the U.S. Government is the primary user. The
committee understands that this raised a significant challenge
for the Air Force due to budget cycle timing. The committee
notes the Air Force started the program in fiscal year 2003 to
replace the B-2 radar system by the NTD and modeled the program
around a traditional acquisition structure.
The committee notes the B-2 RMP plans to make a low-rate
production decision in February 2007, to procure four radar
modification units in fiscal year 2007. However, the committee
understands that radar flight testing will not have progressed
to the point that the first of two planned radar software
blocks is fully tested and certified until the beginning of
fiscal year 2008. Although flight testing will be underway,
only 23 percent of the flight testing is expected to be
completed by the beginning of fiscal year 2007. The committee
recognizes that producing RMP units before ensuring that the
design is mature and functions in its intended environment can
increase the likelihood of design changes that lead to cost
growth, schedule delays, and performance problems.
Although the committee realizes the challenges presented to
the Air Force to correct the radar frequency issue promptly,
the committee strongly discourages future programs from this
methodology of proceeding into low-rate production before
program components have been fully tested and certified.
B-52 force structure
The budget request included a proposal to retire 18 B-52
aircraft in fiscal year 2007, and 20 B-52 aircraft in fiscal
year 2008.
The committee understands that the 2006 Quadrennial Defense
Review directed the Air Force to reduce the B-52 force to 56
aircraft and use the savings to fully modernize the remaining
B-52s, B-1s, and B-2s to support global strike operations.
However, the committee understands that the estimated $680.0
million savings garnered from the proposed B-52 retirement in
the remaining Future Years Defense Program (FYDP) has not been
reinvested into modernizing the current bomber force, but has
instead been applied towards Air Force transformational
activities. The committee also understands that the current B-
52 combat coded force structure is insufficient to meet
combatant commander requirements for conventional long-range
strike, if the need should arise to conduct simultaneous
operations in two major regional conflicts.
Additionally, the committee is concerned that the decision
to retire 38 B-52 aircraft is primarily based on the nuclear
warfighting requirements of the Strategic Integrated Operations
Plan, and did not consider the role of the B-52 in meeting
combatant commander's conventional long-range strike
requirements. The committee disagrees with the decision to
reduce the B-52 force structure given that the Air Force has
not begun the planned analysis of alternatives to determine
what conventional long-range strike capabilities and platforms
will be needed to meet future requirements.
The committee is deeply concerned that retirement of any B-
52 aircraft prior to a replacement long-range strike aircraft
reaching initial operational capability status is premature.
Further, the committee strongly opposes a strategy to reduce
capability in present day conventional long-range strike
capability in order to provide funding for a replacement
capability that is not projected to achieve initial operational
capability until well into the future.
Therefore, the committee included a provision (section 131)
in this Act that would prohibit the Air Force from retiring any
B-52 aircraft, except for the one B-52 aircraft no longer in
use by the National Aeronautics and Space Administration for
testing. Additionally, this section would require the Air Force
to maintain a minimum B-52 force structure of 44 combat coded
aircraft until the year 2018, or until a long-range strike
replacement aircraft with equal or greater capability than the
B-52H model has attained initial operational capability status.
C-130 modifications
The budget request contained $217.7 million for C-130
modifications, but included no funds for the C-130 scathe view
communication systems improvement, or for procurement of the
AN/APN-241 radar for the Air Force Reserve Command (AFRC).
The C-130 scathe view system provides a near-real-time
imaging capability to support humanitarian relief and non-
combatant evacuation operations. The committee understands that
the C-130 scathe view system currently has a short-range, line-
of-sight capability to transmit full motion video, but this
capability could be extended to longer ranges with a tactical
common data link (TCDL) upgrade. Therefore, the committee
recommends an increase of $1.8 million for procurement of a
TCDL upgrade to the C-130 scathe view system.
The AN/APN-241 is a weather and navigation radar that
replaces the 1950's-era AN/APN-59 radar currently installed on
the AFRC's C-130 aircraft fleet. The committee understands that
the AN/APN-241 radar has significantly improved performance
capabilities and a much lower mean-time-between-failure rate.
The committee also understands that procurement and
installation of the AN/APN-241 radar is the second highest C-
130 unfunded priority for the AFRC. Therefore, the committee
recommends an increase of $5.5 million to procure AN/APN-241
radars for the AFRC's C-130 fleet.
Therefore, the committee recommends an increase of $1.8
million for the C-130 scathe view communication systems
improvement and an increase of $5.5 million for the AN/APN-241
radar for the AFRC.
C-5 modernization programs
The budget request contained $223.1 million for C-5
modernization programs, including $50.4 million for the C-5
avionics modernization program (AMP), $66.7 million for
advanced procurement of three reliability and re-engining
program (RERP) kits, and $28.9 million for aircraft defensive
systems.
The committee understands that the average C-5 aircraft has
approximately 70 percent of its forecasted structural life
remaining and supports the initiatives to modernize the C-5
fleet. The committee notes that the AMP and the RERP are
expected to increase the C-5 wartime operational availability
from a current average of 60 percent, to at least 75 percent.
Further, the committee understands that the AMP and the RERP
have the potential to reduce the total ownership cost of the C-
5 aircraft fleet by $24.0 billion (fiscal year 2005 dollars)
over the remaining service life of the fleet, and that a return
on investment of approximately $13.0 billion (fiscal year 2005
dollars) could be realized by the year 2028.
The committee understands that C-5A aircraft are prohibited
from directly delivering cargo into airfields assessed as
having a man-portable air defense system (MANPADS) threat.
Further, the committee understands that the C-5A aircraft must
land at a base outside of these MANPADS threat areas and
transfer its cargo onto another aircraft installed with an
operational missile warning and countermeasure system, causing
an increased delay in getting supplies and equipment to the
warfighter.
Therefore, the committee recommends $289.8 million, an
increase of $32.0 million for procurement of 8 additional AMP
kits; an increase of $12.5 million for procurement of 10, AN/
AAR-47 and AN/ALE-47 missile warning and countermeasure
dispensing systems; and an increase of $22.2 million for
advanced procurement of 1 additional RERP kit.
C-9 hush kits
The committee understands that funds appropriated in fiscal
year 2005 for Department of the Air Force C-9 hush kits remain
unobligated due to the near-term retirement of these aircraft
from the inventory. Hush kits are required to allow the ground
maintenance of C-9 engines to meet various locality noise
standards for engine ground-run maintenance. The committee also
understands that the Department of the Navy plans to maintain
its C-9 aircraft for at least the next 10 years, and therefore
encourages the Department of Defense to transfer the funding
provided for Department of the Air Force C-9 hush kits to the
Department of the Navy, ensuring that these funds will be
executed to best support the needs of the Department of
Defense.
F-22
The budget request contained $1.5 billion for the F-22
aircraft procurement program, but included insufficient funds
to procure 20 F-22 aircraft in fiscal year 2007. The F-22 is a
multi-mission fighter aircraft that combines a low-observable
radar signature with an ability to cruise atsupersonic speeds
without the use of thrust augmentation, and performs air dominance,
homeland and cruise missile defense, and air-to-ground attack missions.
The F-22 achieved its initial operational capability in the first
quarter of fiscal year 2006.
The budget request included an F-22 multiyear acquisition
strategy to procure 3 lots, numbered as lots 7 through 9, each
consisting of 20 aircraft, between fiscal years 2008 and 2010.
As part of this strategy, the budget request included a plan to
incrementally fund each of these three lots over a three year
period through budgeting for advance procurement two years
prior to full funding, subassembly activities to be budgeted
one year prior to full funding, and final assembly to be
budgeted in the third year. The committee understands that the
Department of Defense's F-22 multiyear acquisition strategy is
inconsistent with the full-funding policy which would allow for
advance procurement of long-lead items to protect a delivery
schedule, and require a budget for procurement of complete and
useable end items in a fiscal year.
The committee considers the F-22 incremental funding
acquisition strategy to be wholly unacceptable. The committee
believes that the full-funding policy should apply to the F-22
aircraft procurement program, and any other Department of
Defense aircraft procurement program contemplated in the
foreseeable future. The committee further believes that
incremental funding of aircraft procurement programs presents
an unacceptable budgeting risk that, due to unforeseen
circumstances, future funding increments may not be authorized
and appropriated to provide the required funding increments
which would result in partially completed end items that are of
no military value to the Department of Defense or to
warfighting commands.
Therefore, the committee recommends $2.9 billion to fully
fund and procure 20 F-22 aircraft in fiscal year 2007, an
increase of $1.4 billion. The committee very strongly urges the
Department of Defense and the Department of the Air Force to
restructure its future F-22 procurement budget plans to comply
with the full-funding policy.
F-35
The budget request contained $245.0 million in Aircraft
Procurement, Navy for F-35 advance procurement to procure the
long-lead items necessary to build eight short take-off and
vertical land (STOVL) Navy and Marine Corps variants, which
would be fully funded in fiscal year 2008. The budget request
also contained $118.3 million in Aircraft Procurement, Air
Force for F-35 advance procurement to procure the long-lead
items necessary to build eight conventional take-off and
landing (CTOL) Air Force variants, which would also be fully
funded in fiscal year 2008. Additionally, the budget request
contained $869.7 million for the first five CTOL Air Force F-35
variants.
The F-35 program, also known as the joint strike fighter
(JSF) program, is developing a family of three strike fighter
aircraft for the Air Force, Navy and Marine Corps. About 70
percent of the parts for all three fighter variants will be
common. The Air Force CTOL variant will replace the F-16 and A-
10 fleets; the Navy variant, or aircraft carrier version (CV),
will complement the F/A-18E/F; and the Marine Corps variant, or
short take-off, vertical landing (STOVL) version, will replace
the AV-8B and the F/A-18C/D fleets.
In the committee report (H. Rept. 109-89) accompanying the
National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2006, the
committee recommended that the F-35 program not begin its low-
rate initial procurement program in fiscal year 2007 because
testing to determine whether or not the redesigned, lower-
weight F-35 production configuration would meet mission
requirements would not be known until after the first flights
of the lower-weight STOVL and CTOL test aircraft. The committee
notes that the first flight of the higher-weight CTOL aircraft
has been delayed by three months, resulting in corresponding
delays in the first flights of the lower-weight STOVL and CTOL
test aircraft, now planned for the second and fourth quarters
of fiscal year 2008, respectively.
The Subcommittee on Tactical Air and Land Forces held a
hearing on March 16, 2006, at which the Government
Accountability Office (GAO) witness testified, that, ``the JSF
program remains committed to a business case that invests
heavily in production before testing has demonstrated an
acceptable level of performance of the aircraft,'' and that the
``program expects to begin low-rate initial procurement in 2007
with less than one percent of the flight test program completed
and no production representative prototypes built for the three
JSF variants.'' As a result, the committee remains very
concerned that concurrent development and production of the F-
35 is likely to result in further cost increases and schedule
delays. The committee notes that the GAO reports that only
three percent of the flight test program will be complete in
fiscal year 2008, and believes that JSF procurement for fiscal
year 2008 should also remain at the fiscal year 2007
procurement quantity of five aircraft.
Accordingly, the committee recommends $92.0 million in
Aircraft Procurement, Navy for the advance procurement of long-
lead components for three STOVL F-35 aircraft in fiscal year
2008, a decrease of $153.0 million. The committee also
recommends $30.3 million in Aircraft Procurement, Air Force,
for the advance procurement of long-lead components for two
CTOL F-35 aircraft in fiscal year 2008, a decrease of $88.0
million.
KC-135 aerial refueling aircraft recapitalization program
The budget request contained $36.1 million for advanced
procurement for the KC-135 aerial refueling aircraft
recapitalization program (KC-X). The budget request included a
proposal to retire 78 KC-135E aircraft.
The committee fully supports recapitalization of the KC-135
aerial refueling fleet. The committee notes that a system
development and design contract would likely not be awarded
until the end of fiscal year 2007, in accordance with the
estimated acquisition schedule of the Air Force. The committee
believes it is premature to authorize advanced procurement
funding at such an early stage of the KC-X program.
The committee notes that the Air Force has been restricted
since fiscal year 2004 from retiring KC-135E aircraft. However,
the committee believes that it is premature to retire 78 KC-
135E aircraft in fiscal year 2007 based on the tanker
recapitalization program still being in its early stages of
execution. The committee recognizes that 29 of the requested 78
KC-135E aircraft selected for retirement have been grounded
from flight since fiscal year 2004.
Therefore, the committee included a provision (section 135)
in this Act that would permit the Secretary of the Air Force to
retire the 29 KC-135E grounded aircraft, and require the
Secretary of the Air Force to maintain all retired KC-135Es,
beginning in fiscal year 2007, in a condition that would allow
recall to future service in the Air Force reserve, guard, or
active forces aerial refueling force structure. The committee
will consider additional KC-135E retirements based on the
future progress of the KC-X program. Lastly, the committee
recommends a decrease of $36.1 million for advanced procurement
for the KC-X program.
P5 combat training systems
The budget request contained $474.9 million for other
production charges, including $4.9 million for the P5 combat
training system (P5CTS).
The P5CTS is an airborne instrumentation subsystem pod used
by fighter and attack aircraft which provides the capability to
conduct air-to-air, air-to-surface, and electronic warfare
combat training while providing real-time aircraft monitoring
and recording events for post- mission debrief and analysis.
The committee notes that the P5CTS budget for fiscal year 2006
was $13.9 million and had been planned for $14.1 million in
fiscal year 2007, but understands that this amount was
decreased to $4.9 million because the Department of the Air
Force reprogrammed $9.2 million for other purposes. As a
result, the committee further understands that this decrease
will delay P5CTS fielding at various Air Force Bases (AFB),
including Shaw AFB where the current P5CTS fielding plan will
meet only half of its requirement for 48 P5CTSs.
To address this shortfall, the committee recommends $478.1
million for other production charges, an increase of $3.2
million to procure 24 additional P5CTSs.
Strategic airlift force structure
The budget request contained $2.6 billion for procurement
of 12 C-17s, including $389.6 million for shutdown costs of the
production line.
The Commander, U.S. Transportation Command and the
Commander, Air Mobility Command, both testified before the
House Committee on Armed Services March 2, 2006, that no more
than 20 C-17s, in addition to the 180 C-17s currently in the
Department of Defense's program of record, are needed to meet
both the inter-theater and intra-theater airlift requirements,
and provide a recapitalization solution for older C-17s being
used at a higher than planned utilization rate. Further, the
Commanders testified that the range of 292 to 383 strategic
airlift aircraft set forth in the Mobility Capability Study
(MCS), should not be considered a strict composition of a
specific type of aircraft, but should instead be considered a
capacity requirement based on an acceptable level of risk.
Lastly, the Chief of Staff of the Air Force identified seven
additional C-17s as the number one request on the Air Force's
unfunded priority list.
The committee is concerned that the decision by the
Department to maintain a strategic airlift force structure of
292 aircraft is not based on meeting future airlift
requirements, but based on fiscal constraints. Further, the
committee is concerned about the acceptable level of risk
provided with a strategic airlift force structure of 292
aircraft with critical uncertainties such as defining future
Army modularity and intra-theater airlift requirements, the
outcome of the C-5 modernization program, the C-130 wing-box
repair strategy, and the viability of the Civil Reserve Airlift
Fleet to augment future airlift requirements. The committee is
concerned that the MCS scenarios used for the modeled year were
not intended to fully stress the defense transportation system
and is deeply concerned by the shortsightedness of the MCS to
project capabilities required past the year 2012. The committee
supports the initiative to modernize the C-5 fleet and supports
the evaluation of a C-5A aircraft in the Reliability
Enhancement and Re- enginging Program (RERP) configuration.
Lastly, the committee urges the Secretary of the Air Force when
determining the composition of the future strategic airlift
fleet, to thoroughly examine the benefits of including both the
C-5 and C-17 platforms.
Therefore, the committee included a provision (section 132)
in this Act that would require the Secretary of the Air Force
to maintain a minimum strategic airlift aircraft force
structure of 299 aircraft beginning in fiscal year 2009.
Additionally, the provision would repeal section 132 of the
National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2004 (Public
Law 108-136), to allow the Air Force flexibility in managing
its strategic airlift fleet composition. Lastly, the committee
recommends $2.9 billion, an increase of $299.8 million for
procurement of 3 additional C-17s. The committee strongly
encourages the Secretary of the Air Force to apply the $389.6
million of shutdown costs towards the procurement of these 3
additional C-17s.
T-38 ejection seat upgrade program
The T-38 ejection seat upgrade program (ESUP) upgrades the
T-38 ejection seat system with an inter-seat sequencing system
that would accommodate a larger population of pilot heights and
weights.
The committee notes that the Air Force maintains an
inventory of 509 T-38 aircraft, but only 243 aircraft are
planned for the ESUP. The committee strongly encourages the Air
Force to budget for the ESUP for the entire T-38 fleet.
Ammunition Procurement, Air Force
Overview
The budget request for fiscal year 2007 contained $1.1
billion for Ammunition Procurement, Air Force. The committee
recommends authorization of $1.1 billion, an increase of $4.0
million, for fiscal year 2007.
The committee recommendations for the fiscal year 2007
Ammunition Procurement, Air Force program are identified in the
table below. Major changes to the Air Force request are
discussed following the table.
Item of Special Interest
Insensitive munitions upgrade
The budget request contained $235.5 million for general
purpose bombs of various types and weights. The committee notes
that the Department of the Air Force indicates that 40 percent
of the MK-84 2,000-pound general purpose (GP) bombs requested
for fiscal year 2007 would be loaded, assembled and packed with
a new, more expensive explosive fill, known as MNX-795, instead
of trinitroluene (TNT), which are classified as insensitive
munitions (IMs).
IMs are those providing a higher degree of safety in the
handling, manufacturing, storage, and use because they are more
insensitive to unplanned stimuli. The committee understands
that IMs will provide substantial improvements in decreasing
unplanned high-order detonations due to heat induced by fire,
bullet impact, fragment impact, and adjacent detonations; and
the committee believes that the percentage of IMs procured for
fiscal year 2007 should be expanded.
Accordingly, the committee recommends $239.5 million for
general purpose bombs, an increase of $4.0 million to procure
additional IMs.
Missile Procurement, Air Force
Overview
The budget request for fiscal year 2007 contained $4.2
billion for Missile Procurement, Air Force. The committee
recommends authorization of $4.2 billion, a decrease of $32.7
million, for fiscal year 2007.
The committee recommendations for the fiscal year 2007
Missile Procurement, Air Force program are identified in the
table below. Major changes to the Air Force request are
discussed following the table.
Other Procurement, Air Force
Overview
The budget request for fiscal year 2007 contained $15.4
billion for Other Procurement, Air Force. The committee
recommends authorization of $15.4 billion, an increase of $20.6
million, for fiscal year 2007.
The committee recommendations for the fiscal year 2007
Other Procurement, Air Force program are identified in the
table below. Major changes to the Air Force request are
discussed following the table.
Items of Special Interest
Cheyenne Mountain complex
The budget request contained $19.3 million for procurement
of the Cheyenne Mountain Complex, including $14.9 million for
tactical warning/attack assessment systems.
The committee believes that the modernization and
integration of the command and control systems at Cheyenne
Mountain, Colorado is critical to adequately support the North
American Aerospace Defense Command, U.S. Northern Command and
U.S. Strategic Command. However, the committee is aware of
management deficiencies in the Commander's integrated command
and control system (CCIC2S) program, which are resulting in a
significant cost overrun and an undefined delivery schedule.
Therefore, the committee directs the Secretary of Defense to
maintain essential operation and maintenance activities, and
limit future investment to only the developmental activities
deemed essential to national security needs.
The committee recommends $4.4 million for procurement of
the Cheyenne Mountain Complex, a decrease of $14.9 million.
Combat survivor radios
The budget request contained a total of $69.2 million for
combat survivor evader locator (CSEL) radios for the
Departments of the Army, Navy and Air Force.
The CSEL radio provides combat forces with secure,
encrypted, low probability of exploitation, two-way, over the
horizon, near real-time data-burst communications with precise
location and non-secure, unencrypted line-of-site voice and
beacon capability to support survival evasion, and personnel
recovery operations. In the committee report (H. Rept. 109-89)
accompanying the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal
Year 2006, the committee expressed its belief that procurement
funds should be made available for either the CSEL, or an
alternate survival radio, to meet immediate user requirements
since the CSEL radio program was late in delivering radios to
meet warfighter needs. The committee understands that the
Department of Defense requires over 40,000 survival radios,
that the CSEL radio program has been able to meet less than a
third of those requirements thus far, and that combatant
commanders still have an urgent need for survival radios.
Therefore, the committee directs that procurement funds
requested for CSEL radios be made available to procure either
CSEL radios or alternate survival radio systems that can
address the urgent survival radio need.
Combat training ranges
The budget request contained $35.4 million for combat
training ranges, but included no funds for the unmanned threat
emitter (UMTE) modernization program.
The UMTE modernization program provides updated electronic
threat simulations for combat aircrew training. The committee
understands that the UMTEs located at the Eielson Air Combat
Training Range have been modernized to more accurately
replicate current electronic threat systems and that this
upgrade has also reduced manpower, operations and support
costs. The committee further understands that five UMTEs
located at the Nellis Test and Training Range require the UMTE
modernization, and believes that these systems should be
upgraded.
Consequently, the committee recommends $47.4 million for
combat training ranges, an increase of $12.0 million for the
UMTE modernization program.
Enterprise data collection solution
The budget request contained $14.6 million for mechanized
material handing equipment, but included no funding for the
Enterprise Data Collection Solution (EDCS). The committee
understands that the EDCS assembles data from various Air Force
logistics systems across the enterprise, thus eliminating the
need to manually enter data for each transaction. This system
will not only save time and money, but it will reduce errors
and speed the flow of logistics.
The committee recommends $18.6 million for mechanized
material handling equipment, an increase of $4.0 million for
the procurement of common EDCS equipment for four key Air Force
installations.
Force protection near real time surveillance
The budget request contained $41.4 million for various
types of Air Force physical security systems, but included no
funds for the force protection surveillance system (FPSS).
The FPSS consists of a tactical communications intercept
system, a near real-time video surveillance system, and a
tactical internet communications system for dissemination of
surveillance information. The committee notes that Congress
appropriated an increase of $1.0 million for fiscal year 2006,
and believes that additional FPSSs should be acquired.
Accordingly, the committee recommends $44.4 million for Air
Force physical security systems, an increase of $3.0 million
for the acquisition, deployment and integration of the FPSS
into mission planning systems and surveillance platforms.
High frequency ground control station antennas
The budget request contained $7.7 million for radio
equipment, including $1.3 million for high frequency ground
control station (HFGCS) antennas.
The HFGCS is a strategic and tactical command and control
network that provides beyond line-of-sight interoperable voice
and data for aircrews. The HFGCS serves as the primary command
and control resource for the Air Mobility Command's (AMC) cargo
and tanker aircraft. The committee understands that most of
AMC's HFGCS antenna inventory is nearing or past its design
life and that numerous high frequency antenna are inoperative.
The committee notes that the Air Force Chief of Staff included
20 additional HFGCS antennas among his unfunded priorities for
fiscal year 2007.
Consequently, the committee recommends $12.7 million for
radio equipment, an increase of $5.0 million for the
procurement of 20 HFGCS antennas.
Mobile approach control system
The budget request contained $6.2 million for air traffic
control and landing systems, but included no funds to procure a
mobile approach control system (MACS).
The MACS provides military forces with next-generation
mobile air traffic control services, day and night, in all
weather conditions, to military and civilian aircraft, and will
replace the aging TPN-19 and MPN-14K landing control centers
employed by the Department of the Air Force combat
communications squadrons and Air National Guard (ANG) air
trafficcontrol squadrons. The committee understands that of 10
ANG air traffic control squadrons, only 4 have the MACS, and believes
that its procurement for the ANG should continue.
Consequently, the committee recommends $23.5 million for
air traffic control and landing systems, an increase of $17.3
million for one MACS for the ANG.
Self-deploying infra-red streamer
The budget request contained no funds for personal safety
and rescue equipment items less than $2.0 million, or for the
self-deploying infra-red streamer (SDIRS) system.
The SDIRS system is an 11-inch by 40 foot orange rescue
streamer distress signal which includes a water-activated light
system. The SDIRS is used in ejection seat-equipped aircraft
and is automatically deployed in the event of a water landing.
The committee believes that this system assists in more rapidly
locating and rescuing downed crew members and that it should be
installed on all Department of the Air Force ejection seat-
equipped aircraft.
Consequently, the committee recommends $4.0 million for
personal safety and rescue equipment items less than $2.0
million, an increase of $4.0 million for procurement and
installation of 5500 SDIRS systems.
Procurement, Defense-Wide
Overview
The budget request for fiscal year 2007 contained $2.9
billion for Procurement, Defense-Wide. The committee recommends
authorization of $2.9 billion, a decrease of $5.0 million, for
fiscal year 2007.
The committee recommendations for the fiscal year 2007
Procurement, Defense-Wide program are identified in the table
below. Major changes to the Air Force request are discussed
following the table.
Items of Special Interest
Advanced SEAL Delivery System
The committee acknowledges the Department of Defense's
recent decision to cancel the Advanced SEAL Delivery System
(ASDS) program due to its performance and reliability to date.
The committee has expressed its continued concern regarding
technical issues, contractor performance, and cost growths
throughout the life of the program and will continue to closely
monitor the development and fielding of this capability.
Additionally, due to the troubled history surrounding the
development of ASDS, the committee wants to ensure that the
ASDS improvement program (AIP) and accompanying ASDS concept
study consider the most current technologies for incorporation
into future ASDS capabilities and designs.
Therefore, the committee directs the Secretary of Defense
to conduct an ASDS design competition during fiscal year 2007
and authorizes an additional $10.0 million in research and
development funding specifically for this competition. Design
competition in fiscal year 2007 will ensure that ASDS program
decisions made upon completion of the critical systems review
portion of the AIP and of phase three of the ASDS concept study
take into account current technologies and designs available
through related industry research and development as well as
the lessons learned from the critical systems review and ASDS
concept study. Finally, the committee directs the Secretary of
Defense to report to the Senate Committee on Armed Services and
the House Committee on Armed Services by June 1, 2007, on the
results of the AIP's critical systems review and on the status
of an overall ASDS program decision.
Chemical and biological defense procurement
Section 1703 of the National Defense Authorization Act for
Fiscal Year 1994 (Public Law 103-160) establishes the Chemical
and Biological Defense Program. The Joint Program Executive
Office for Chemical and Biological Defense (JPEO(CBD)) is now
the joint services single focal point for advanced research and
development, acquisition, fielding, and lifecycle support of
chemical and biological defense equipment. Nevertheless, the
military services possess legacy chemical and biological
defense equipment, procured prior to the establishment of the
JPEO(CBD). The committee directs the Assistant to the Secretary
of Defense for Nuclear and Chemical and Biological Defense
Programs, acting through the JPEO(CBD), in coordination with
the military services, to develop a modernization plan for
legacy nuclear, biological, and chemical contamination
avoidance; biological defense; collective protection;
individual protection; and decontamination systems and to also
develop service sustainment plans for systems initially fielded
by the JPEO(CBD).
Special operations forces operational enhancements
The budget request contained $434.5 million for special
operations forces (SOF) operational enhancements, but included
no funds for secure wireless local area network (LAN)
cryptographic devices, and only $2.5 million for craft
modifications.
The committee recognizes that U.S. Special Operations
Command (USSOCOM) has the need to access and transmit
classified data over a wireless LAN. Funding would allow
USSOCOM to replace the legacy SECNET 11 wireless card with the
SECNET 54 card. The committee notes that this item is on the
unfunded priority list of the Commander, USSOCOM to provide
required secure wireless capability.
The committee recognizes that naval special warfare relies
on maritime combatant craft platforms to conduct target
interdiction and insertion/extraction of combatant forces.
Additional funds for craft modifications would fully equip the
entire operational inventory with key technological upgrades.
The committee notes that this item is on the unfunded priority
list of the Commander, USSOCOM to accelerate technology
insertion into this platform.
The committee recommends $444.5 million for SOF operational
enhancements, an increase of $1.8 million for the procurement
of secure wireless LAN cryptographic devices, and an increase
of $8.2 million for craft modifications.
Unmanned aerial systems to counter improvised explosive devices
The committee is aware of numerous systems being offered by
non-traditional defense companies seeking to support the global
war on terrorism by providing already developed capabilities to
counter the improvised explosive device threat.
The committee recommends that the Department of Defense
fully review and consider all viable sensor technologies and
currently available conventional and vertical take-off and
landing unmanned aerial vehicles to address the improvised
explosive device threat.
U.S. Special Operations Command aviation modernization
The committee recognizes that U.S. Special Operations
Command (USSOCOM) relies primarily on the modification of C-130
aircraft to special operations-capable aircraft to provide its
fixed wing special operations mission capability. USSOCOM has
maintained its AC-130 and MC-130 fleet through several upgrade
programs, to sustain USSOCOM's mission capability until a
future fleet of special operations aircraft could be developed
and fielded. Because of the increased operating hours placed on
USSOCOM's fleet from on-going combat operations, USSOCOM will
be unable to maintain its fixed wing capability until a future
fleet can be fielded. The committee further understands that
the C-130J model aircraft offers USSOCOM a platform that can be
recapitalized and modified into tanker, infiltration/
exfiltration, and gunship platforms.
Further, the committee recognizes that USSOCOM is expanding
its fixed wing fleet with the CV-22 aircraft. The current CV-22
program projects an initial operating capability of 10 aircraft
by fiscal year 2009 and a full operational capability of 50
aircraft by fiscal year 2017.
The committee believes that accelerated procurement both of
the C-130J for conversion into special operations capable
aircraft and of the CV-22 would allow USSOCOM to maintain its
special operations mission capability that is currently
stretched due to USSOCOM's high operational tempo. The
committee directs the Secretary of Defense to submit a report
by April 1, 2007, to the Senate Committee on Armed Services and
the House Committee on Armed Services on the feasibility of
accelerated procurement of the CV-22 and the C-130J aircraft.
LEGISLATIVE PROVISIONS
Subtitle A--Authorization of Appropriations
Sections 101-104--Authorization of Appropriations
These sections would authorize the recommended fiscal year
2007 funding levels for all procurement accounts.
Subtitle B--Army Programs
Section 111--Multiyear Procurement Authority for Family of Medium
Tactical Vehicles
This section would grant authority to the Secretary of the
Army in fiscal year 2008 to enter into a 3-year multiyear
procurement (MYP) contract for the family of medium tactical
vehicles (FMTV) for fiscal years 2008-2010. This section would
require that should the Secretary of the Army exercise his MYP
authority for FMTVs, the contract would follow all federal
procurement regulations including full and open competition.
Finally, this section would also require that FMTVs procured
under this MYP contract to incorporate improvements from
lessons learned from operations involving the global war on
terrorism, as well as existing FMTV product improvement
programs in the areas of force protection, survivability,
reliability, network communications, situational awareness and
safety.
The committee recognizes the current 5-year MYP contract
for FMTV A1R vehicles ends with fiscal year 2007 funding and
calendar year 2008 deliveries. The committee notes the Army's
Tactical Wheeled Vehicle (TWV) Modernization Strategy Report to
Congress stated, ``As a risk mitigator, use of contract options
will be sought to permit extension of current production models
to avoid any breaks in vehicle supply.'' The committee is
concerned that single year contract awards would be extremely
costly for the Army given the large quantity requirements that
continue to exist for FMTVs within the modular force construct
as well as the quantity requirements that should result from
the Army ``resetting the force'' through repair,
recapitalization and replacement of vehicles across the Future
Years Defense Program. The committee expects the Army to
modernize and recapitalize its TWV fleet with a more capable
vehicle or platform that would at the minimum incorporate
lessons learned from Operation Iraqi Freedom (OIF).
The committee is aware approximately 31,000 FMTVs have been
produced under three successive multiyear contracts that have
saved approximately 6-10 percent versus single year
procurements. Furthermore, the committee notes that a MYP
contract would potentially assure favorable, cost effective
prices for a more advanced configuration FMTV that would
incorporate lessons learned from OIF, as well as ensure
stability in the industrial base.
The committee is aware the Army is conducting an advanced
concept technology demonstration (ACTD) for a future tactical
truck system as part of its TWV Modernization Strategy. The
committee notes an essential component of this ACTD is the
maneuver sustainment vehicle (MSV). The committee also notes
this vehicle would potentially replace the FMTV and other heavy
TWVs, as well as understands the MSV would help shape
requirements for the next medium to heavy TWV. The committee
notes no formal production schedule exists for the MSV other
than the Army would conduct a system demonstration in late
calendar year 2006. The committee recognizes that previous
comparable TWV schedules would indicate a notional schedule for
an MSV production beginning in the 2011 timeframe.
Section 112--Multiyear Procurement Authority for MH-60R Helicopters and
Mission Equipment
This section would authorize the Secretary of the Army,
acting as the executive agent for the Department of the Navy,
to enter into a five-year, multiyear procurement contract for
144 MH-60R helicopters and associated mission equipment
beginning with the fiscal year 2007 program year. Further, the
multiyear procurement contract authority would be executed in
accordance with section 2306b of title 10, United States Code.
Section 113--Funding Profile for Modular Force Initiative of the Army
This section would require the Secretary of the Army to
include the M1A2 Abrams SEP tank and Bradley A3 fighting
vehicles within the Army's modularity funding profile beginning
with the 2008 budget submission, in accordance with the March
2006 Army report to Congress, ``The Army Modular Initiative.''
Section 114--Bridge to Future Networks Program
This section would limit the amounts authorized to be
appropriated or otherwise made available pursuant to the
authorization of appropriations for the bridge to future
networks program, to not more than 70 percent until the
Secretary of the Army submits a report to the congressional
defense committees. The report would include an analysis of how
the Joint Network Node (JNN) and the Warfighter Information
Network-Tactical (WIN-T) will be integrated and whether or not
there are opportunities to leverage JNN technologies and
equipment as part of the WIN-T development effort. The report
would also describe the extent to which JNN and WIN-T
components would be used together as elements of a single
tactical network and the Army's strategy for completing the
systems engineering necessary to ensure the end-to-end
interoperability of this network.
Subtitle C--Navy Programs
Section 121--Attack Submarine Force Structure
This section would amend section 5062 of title 10, United
States Code, mandating the Secretary of Defense maintain a
minimum force structure of 48 operational attack submarines.
Section 122--Adherence to Navy Cost Estimates for CVN-21 Class of
Aircraft Carriers
This section would limit the total amount to be obligated
or expended from funds appropriated or otherwise made available
for Shipbuilding and Conversion, Navy, or for any other
procurement account, for the detail design, non-recurring
engineering and actual construction of the lead ship of the
CVN-21 class aircraft carrier program to $10.5 billion. This
section would further limit the total amount to be obligated or
expended from funds appropriated or otherwise made available
for Shipbuilding and Conversion, Navy, or for any other
procurement account, for the actual construction of the follow-
on ships of the CVN-21 class aircraft carrier program to $8.1
billion. This section would allow the Secretary of the Navy to
adjust the limitation amount for economic inflation; changes in
federal, State or local laws enacted after September 30, 2006;
outfitting and post-delivery costs; and the amounts of
increases or decreases in costs of the ship that are
attributable to the insertion of new technology. The insertion
of new technology would be limited to those technologies that
could be used to either lower lifecycle costs or meet an
emerging threat. This section would require the Secretary to
report any adjustment to the cost limitation with the
submission of the annual budget request.
Section 123--Adherence to Navy Cost Estimates for LHA Replacement
Amphibious Assault Ship Program
This section would limit the total amount to be obligated
or expended from funds appropriated or otherwise made available
for Shipbuilding and Conversion, Navy, or for any other
procurement account, for each ship of the LHA replacement
amphibious assault ship program to $2.8 billion. This section
would allow the Secretary of the Navy to adjust the limitation
amount for economic inflation; changes in federal, State or
local laws enacted after September 30, 2006; outfitting and
post-delivery costs; and the amounts of increases or decreases
in costs of the ship that are attributable to the insertion of
new technology. The insertion of new technology would be
limited to those technologies that could be used to either
lower lifecycle costs or meet an emerging threat. This section
would require the Secretary to report any adjustment to the
cost limitation with the submission of the annual budget
request.
Section 124--Adherence to Navy Cost Estimates for San Antonio (LPD-17)
Class Amphibious Ship Program
This section would limit the total amount to be obligated
or expended from funds appropriated or otherwise made available
for Shipbuilding and Conversion, Navy, or for any other
procurement account, for eight San Antonio class amphibious
ships (LPD-18, LPD-19, LPD-20, LPD-21, LPD-22, LPD-23, LPD-24
and LPD-25) to the cost estimates submitted for those ships
with the fiscal year 2007 budget request. This section would
allow the Secretary of the Navy to adjust the limitation
amounts for economic inflation; changes in federal, State or
local laws enacted after September 30, 2006; outfitting and
post-delivery costs; and the amounts of increases or decreases
in costs of the ship that are attributable to the insertion of
new technology. The insertion of new technology would be
limited to those technologies that could be used to either
lower lifecycle costs or meet an emerging threat. This section
would require the Secretary to report any adjustment to the
cost limitation with the submission of the annual budget
request.
Section 125--Multiyear Procurement Authority for V-22 Tiltrotor
Aircraft Program
This section would authorize the Secretary of the Navy,
acting as executive agent for the Secretary of the Air Force
and the Commander, U.S. Special Operations Command, to enter
into a multiyear contract, beginning with the fiscal year 2008
program year, for procurement of up to 211 V-22 tiltrotor
aircraft, of which not more than 185 would be in the MV-22
configuration and not more than 26 would be in the CV-22
configuration.
Section 126--Quality Control in Procurement of Ship Critical Safety
Items and Related Services
This section would amend chapter 633 of title 10, United
States Code, by appending a new section 7317 that would require
the Secretary of Defense to prescribe in regulations a quality
control policy for the procurement of ship critical safety
items and the procurement of modifications, repair, and
overhaul of such items. This section would require the head of
the design control activity for ship critical safety items
establish processes to identify and managethese activities, the
head of the contracting activity for a ship critical safety item enter
into a contract for these activities only with an approved source, and
the ship critical safety items delivered and the services performed
meet the technical and quality requirements specified by the design
control activity. This section would define the term ``ship critical
safety item'' as any part, assembly, or support equipment of a vessel,
the failure, malfunction, or absence of which may cause a catastrophic
or critical failure resulting in loss or serious damage to the vessel,
or unacceptable risk of personal injury or loss of life. This section
would also make conforming amendments to section 2319 of title 10,
United States Code.
Section 127--DD(X) Next-Generation Destroyer Program
This section would authorize $2.6 billion in Shipbuilding
and Conversion, Navy for the next generation destroyer (DD(X))
program. This section would further authorize the Secretary of
the Navy to enter into two contracts simultaneously for the
DD(X) program during fiscal year 2007. One contract would
provide for detail design and construction of a DD(X), while
the other contract would provide only for detail design of a
DD(X).
Section 128--Sense of Congress that the Navy Make Greater Use of
Nuclear-Powered Propulsion Systems in its Future Fleet of Surface
Combatants
This section finds that securing and maintaining access to
affordable sources of oil is a vital national security interest
for the United States, and that the nation's dependence of
foreign oil is a threat to that security. The section expresses
the sense of Congress that the Navy should make greater use of
alternative technologies, including nuclear power, as a means
of vessel propulsion for its future fleet of surface
combatants.
Subtitle D--Air Force Programs
Section 131--Requirement for B-52 Force Structure
This section would prohibit the Air Force from retiring any
B-52 aircraft, except for the one B-52 aircraft no longer in
use by the National Aeronautics and Space Administration for
testing. Additionally, this section would require the Air Force
to maintain a minimum B-52 force structure of 44 combat coded
aircraft until the year 2018, or until a long-range strike
replacement aircraft with equal or greater capability than the
B-52H model has attained initial operational capability status.
Section 132--Strategic Airlift Force Structure
This section would require the Air Force to maintain a
minimum strategic airlift aircraft force structure of 299
aircraft beginning in fiscal year 2009, and would repeal
section 132 of the National Defense Authorization Act for
Fiscal Year 2004 (Public Law 108-136).
Section 133--Limitation on Retirement of U-2 Aircraft
This section would preclude the Department of Defense from
retiring the U-2 aircraft in fiscal year 2007, and would permit
retirement after fiscal year 2007 only if the Secretary of
Defense certifies to Congress that the U-2's intelligence,
surveillance and reconnaissance capabilities are no longer
required.
Section 134--Multiyear Procurement Authority for F-22A Raptor Fighter
Aircraft
This section would authorize the Secretary of the Air Force
to enter into a multiyear contract, in accordance with section
2306b of title 10, United States Code, beginning with the
fiscal year 2007 program year, for procurement of up to 60 F-
22A Raptor fighter aircraft, for three program years, subject
to the Secretary of Defense's certification that the conditions
specified in subsection (a) of section 2306b of title 10,
United States Code, have been satisfied with respect to that
contract, and 30 days have elapsed after the date on which the
Secretary has submitted the certification to Congress.
Section 135--Limitation on Retirement of KC-135E Aircraft During Fiscal
Year 2007
This section would prohibit the Air Force from retiring
more than 29 KC-135E aircraft during fiscal year 2007, and
require the Secretary of the Air Force to maintain all retired
KC-135Es, beginning in fiscal year 2007, in a condition that
would allow recall to future service in the Air Force reserve,
guard, or active forces aerial refueling force structure.
Section 136--Limitation on Retirement of F-117A Aircraft During Fiscal
Year 2007
This section would limit the number of F-117A aircraft to
be retired by the Secretary of the Air Force in fiscal year
2007 to 10 aircraft, and would require that the Secretary of
the Air Force maintain each F-117A aircraft, retired after
September 30, 2006, in a condition that would allow recall of
that aircraft to future service.
TITLE II--RESEARCH, DEVELOPMENT, TEST, & EVALUATION
OVERVIEW
The budget request contained $73.2 billion for research,
development, test, and evaluation (RDT&E). The committee
recommends $74.1 billion, an increase of $908.6 million to the
budget request.
Army Research, Development, Test, & Evaluation
Overview
The budget request contained $10.9 billion for Army
research, development, test, and evaluation (RDT&E).
The committee recommends $10.9 billion, an increase of
$76.7 million to the budget request.
Items of Special Interest
Advanced hypersonic weapon mission planning and control
The budget request contained $11.2 million in PE 63305A for
Army missile defense systems integration, but no funds for
development of mission planning and control for the advanced
hypersonic weapon.
The committee understands that the 2006 Quadrennial Defense
Review focuses on the need to provide a prompt global strike
capability and the advanced hypersonic weapon (AHW) has the
potential to meet this mission with a rapid strike response
over long distances. The committee notes that the U.S.
Strategic Command and the U.S. Army Space and Missile Defense
Command are already exploring the AHW concept. The committee is
aware of the need to conduct research into the mission planning
and control battle management capability that would integrate
the AHW system into future command and control systems.
The committee recommends an increase of $6.0 million in PE
63305A to design, prototype and demonstrate the mission
planning and control battle management capability for
integration of the AHW into joint warfighting command exercises
and simulations.
Applied communications and information networking
The budget request contained $44.0 million in PE 63008A for
electronic warfare advanced technology, but included no funds
for applied communications and information networking (ACIN).
The committee notes the importance to the Department of
Defense (DOD) to integrate state-of-the-art commercial
technologies in DOD command, control, communications, computer
and intelligences systems. ACIN has supported this objective to
enhance high-value military systems with rapidly advancing
commercial information technologies and innovative applications
of those technologies.
The committee supports the application of state-of-the-art
commercial technology to improve military systems and
recommends an increase of $7.0 million in PE 63008A for ACIN.
Armored systems modernization
The budget request included $3.3 billion in PE 64645A for
armored systems modernization, including $65.5 million for
reconnaissance platforms and sensors; $107.7 million for
unmanned ground vehicles; $17.7 million for unattended sensors;
$146.1 million for sustainment; $570.2 million for manned
ground vehicles; and $2.4 billion for system of systems
engineering and program management, as part of approximately
$3.7 billion requested for the Future Combat Systems (FCS)
program.
The committee continues to support a FCS program strategy
that is affordable and enables early spin out of FCS
technologies into the current force, a top priority of the
Chief of Staff of the Army.
The committee continues to have several concerns with the
FCS program:
(1) In a prepared statement before the Subcommittee
on Tactical Air and Land Forces on April 4, 2006, the
Government Accountability Office indicated, ``The
program remains a long way from having the level of
knowledge it should have had before it started product
development . . . FCS has all the markers for risk that
would be difficult to accept for any single system,
much less a complex multi-system effort.''
(2) The FCS Acquisition Decision Memorandum (ADM),
approving the programs entry into systems development
and demonstration, was signed on May 17, 2003. The ADM
directed that there be a milestone B update and
independent cost estimate by November 2004. Almost
three years later there has been no milestone B update
nor an independent cost estimate.
(3) Although firm system-level requirements should
have been established at the start of the program, the
process of setting and refining FCS system-level
requirements may not be complete until the preliminary
design review in 2008.
(4) The projected dates for maturing critical
technologies have slipped, and some technologies are
not expected to mature until well into the design phase
of the program and possibly into production.
(5) FCS design and production maturity would not be
demonstrated under the current acquisition strategy
until after the production decision is made.
(6) The low level of knowledge available today on
requirements and technologies makes FCS cost
projections very uncertain. FCS program costs are
estimated at $160.7 billion, an increase of 76 percent
since the program began.
The committee notes that funding for the FCS program
represents a significant portion of the Army's modernization
budget for the next 20 or more years. According to the
Congressional Budget Office (CBO), the Army estimates that
total procurement costs for the first 15 brigades' worth of
systems is just over $100.0 billion, which translates into an
average unit procurement cost of $6.7 billion per brigade at
three FCS BCTs per year. In 2005, based on resource
constraints, the Army reduced the yearly procurement goal of
three FCS brigade combat teams (BCTs) per year to 1.5 per year.
With the planned purchase of 1.5 brigades per year to begin in
2015, the FCS program requires $8.0 billion to $10.0 billion
annually. CBO notes that based on historical trends, the FCS
program costs could grow by 60 percent. CBO estimates that such
high rates may push the average annual funding needed for the
FCS program from $8.0 billion to 10.0 billion per year to
between $14.0 billion to 16.0 billion per year.
The committee is concerned that the spiraling cost growth
for Department of Defense (DOD) acquisition programs is at a
point where it directly places at risk the ability of the
United States to field weapons platforms in sufficient numbers
to support U.S. military strategy and national security
requirements. The committee notes that the Army's spiraling
costs per FCS BCT are forcing the Army into a situation similar
to that experienced by the Navy with its next generation
destroyer (DD(X)) program. Similar to the DD(X) program, the
costs for a FCS BCT is approaching a price where the Army will
have to continue to slow down procurement to make the program
more affordable, reduce the quantities of FCS BCTs, or attempt
to reduce force structure.
The committee believes that as the Department proceeds with
its decisions in reference to the FCS program, that it must
preserve its ability to change course on acquiring FCS
capabilities to guard against a situation in which FCS would
have to be acquired at any cost. The Department must hold the
Army accountable for delivering FCS within programmed
resources.
Accordingly, the committee recommends a decrease of $325.8
million in PE 64645A for armored systems modernization.
AT4 confined space weapon system enhancements
The budget request contained $118.1 million in PE 64808A
for system development and demonstration of landmine warfare
and barrier technology, but included no funds for enhancements
to the AT4 confined space (CS) weapon.
The AT4CS is a shoulder fired weapon system that employs a
warhead that produces high lethality and incendiary effects
against armored combat vehicles. The committee notes the AT4CS
has been utilized in Operation Iraqi Freedom and Operation
Enduring Freedom by dismounted infantrymen and special
operation forces to great effect, and is currently the only
shoulder-fired weapon in the Department of Defense inventory
capable of being fired from inside a room; making this weapon a
critical combat multiplier in military operations over urban
terrain.
The committee understands an anti-structure tandem warhead
is in development for the AT4CS. The committee is aware this
warhead would provide military personnel operating within a
confined space the capability to penetrate 8-inch reinforced
concrete and 12-inch triple brick walls. The committee is
supportive of rapidly developing technologies that would
promote the survivability of military personnel conducting the
global war on terrorism.
The committee recommends $121.1 million in PE 64808A, an
increase of $3.0 million to continue the development of an
anti-structure tandem warhead for use in the AT4CS.
Center for rotorcraft innovation
The budget request included $32.8 million in PE 62211A for
aviation and applied research and technology, but included no
funds for the Center for Rotorcraft Innovation (CRI).
The Center for Rotorcraft Innovation is a joint effort
between the rotorcraft industry, academic research centers and
government partners to increase rotorcraft research in the
United States. CRI collaborates to expand rotorcraft research
and development already underway between the rotorcraft
industry and its government partners in the National Rotorcraft
Technology Center. It will focus its new research efforts on
dual-use technologies that have national security and homeland
defense applications. The committee is aware that the CRI is
the only initiative of its kind and seeks to further
international competitiveness and long-term growth of the U.S.
rotorcraft industry.
Accordingly, the committee recommends an increase of $10.0
million in PE 62211A for the CRI.
Digital array radar
The budget request included $64.6 million in PE 63772A for
advanced tactical computer science and sensor technology, but
included no funds for digital array radar development.
The committee notes the need for reliable counter-fire
radars for protection against short-range mortar attack.
Technology advances warrant research and development to
demonstrate this technology.
Therefore, the committee recommends an increase of $5.0
million to complete development and test digital array radar
prototype antenna technology.
Dominant military operations on urban terrain viewer
The budget request included $19.2 million in PE 62270A, but
included no funds for the dominant military operations on urban
terrain viewer (DMV).
The committee is aware of an applied research technology
that has been successfully demonstrated that provides the
capability to detect, locate, and track moving and stationary
persons within structures from in excess of 100 meters.
Employment of such a capability could provide field commanders
with a tactical advantage, improved situational awareness, and
save lives. A tactical prototype is necessary to complete field
evaluation and testing of this capability.
Therefore, the committee recommends an additional $7.4
million in PE 62270A for the design, development, and testing
of a DMV prototype.
Environmental quality technology
The budget request contained $5.2 million in PE 63779A for
projects focused on validating the general military utility or
cost reduction potential of environmental quality technologies,
but included no funds for promising research ongoing at
facilities around the United States and in other countries to
develop lightweight vanadium micro-alloyed steels. The
committee recommends that the Department of Defense proceed
with full-scale demonstration projects and the transfer of this
technology to the domestic steel industry to increase the
potential benefits of vanadium micro-alloyed steels.
The committee recommends $9.6 million in PE 63779A, an
increase of $4.4 million for the Vanadium Technology
Partnership.
Excalibur precision guided artillery munition
The budget request contained $102.5 million in PE 64814A
for the Excalibur XM982 precision guided extended range
artillery projectile and lifecycle management cost reduction
strategies.
The committee recognizes the potential benefits provided
through studies of manufacturing technologies and methodologies
to help lower production costs without sacrificing stated
performance requirements of a weapon system. The committee
notes in fiscal year 2005, Excalibur XM982 lifecycle
improvement program efforts were able to reduce the production
cost of each projectile by 14.1 percent. The committee also
notes the fiscal year 2006 cost reduction efforts built upon
previous work and expanded production cost reduction of the
canard actuation system, as well as insensitive munitions
design improvements for the base and warhead of the projectile
identified in the lean design review.
The committee is aware the Excalibur XM982 projectile is
proceeding into early production to support an urgent fielding
requirement in Operation Iraqi Freedom. The committee
understands the Excalibur XM982 would potentially reduce
collateral damage in urban environments and serve as a
significant combat multiplier to military personnel.
Therefore, the committee recommends $112.5 million in PE
64814A, an increase of $11.0 million for the rapid fielding of
the Excalibur XM982 Block Ia-1 projectile and for the
continuation of lifecycle improvement costs.
Flexible display initiative
The budget request contained $38.4 million in PE 62120A for
electronics and electronic devices, but included no funds for
the flexible display initiative.
The committee is aware that new flexible display technology
has the potential to provide the military with technology to
fabricate high definition displays on rugged conformable,
flexible substrates. The committee notes that the United States
Display Consortium coordinates these efforts with over 80
companies, using investments from both the public and private
industry to accelerate the development of technologies and
products needed by the Army, other military services, and
various national security agencies.
Therefore, the committee recommends an increase of $5.0
million in PE 62120A for the flexible display initiative.
Gas-engine driven air conditioning system demonstrations
The budget request contained $7.8 million in PE 63734A for
military engineering, but included no funds for unitary gas-
engine driven air conditioning (GEDAC) system demonstrations.
The committee is aware that GEDAC use on bases in the
southwest has the potential to save significant electric power
and reduce water usage.
Therefore, the committee recommends an increase of $6.0
million in PE 63734A for GEDAC system demonstrations.
High assurance secure object proxy
The budget request contained $120.5 million in PE 35208A
for distributed common ground/surface systems, but included no
funds for high assurance secure object proxy technology
development.
The committee notes that high assurance secure object proxy
(HASOP) technology could significantly enhance the ability of
the Army to synchronize and integrate organic, joint and
multinational sensors and collection capabilities.
The committee recommends an increase of $6.0 million in PE
35208A, for HASOP development.
Human systems integration
The budget request contained $18.9 million in PE 62716A for
human factors engineering applied research, including $3.1
million for efforts supporting manpower and personnel
integration (MANPRINT).
The committee recognizes human systems integration (HSI)
initiatives as a means for reducing total ownership costs of
weapons programs, and continues to support efforts to more
formally consider HSI issues earlier in the acquisition cycle.
As previously noted in the committee report accompanying the
National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2006 (H.
Rept. 109-89), the committee remains concerned about the
overall level of coordination and support of HSI efforts
throughout the Department of Defense (DOD).
The committee notes the reporting requirement included in
H. Rept. 109-89 to assess HSI activity throughout DOD
acquisition programs. The committee is in receipt of a
preliminary assessment and understands that a more
comprehensive review is forthcoming. Concurrent with the
recommendations contained in the interim report, the committee
urges the department to establish a joint HSI Steering Group,
continue the collaborative development of HSI modeling within
and across all services, and strive for greater procedural and
regulatory HSI uniformity throughout the Department. Further,
the committee expects the completion of the comprehensive HSI
review in an expeditious manner.
Therefore, the committee recommends an increase of $4.0
million in PE 62716A for MANPRINT.
Integrated digital environment service model
The budget request contained $21.2 million in PE 62782A for
command, control, and communications technology, but included
no funding for the Integrated Digital Environment Service
Model. The committee understands that this program will allow
the Army to conduct much needed interoperability analysis of
the various communications, command, and control technologies
now under development. Most of today's systems were designed
for specific needs; such systems must be integrated into the
overall Global Information Grid for continued effectiveness.
The committee recommends $25.2 million in PE 62782A for
command, control, and communications technology, an increase of
$4.0 million for the Integrated Digital Environment Service
Model.
Intelligent surveillance sensor suite
The budget request included $44.3 million in PE 63710A for
night vision advanced technology, but included no funds for the
intelligent surveillance sensor suite.
The intelligence surveillance sensor suite is intended to
be used for perimeter security and intrusion detection at high
value sites, including chemical storage facilities, securing
ammunition caches, and forward operating bases. It employs
multiple detection and assessment technologies for a variety of
terrain applications.
The committee recommends an additional $6.0 million in PE
63710A for the fabrication and testing of multiple versions of
the intelligent surveillance and sensor suite to validate
technical data prior to competitive procurement.
Joint land attack cruise missile defense and micro electro mechanical
system
The budget request contained $264.5 million in PE 12419A
for the Joint Land Attack Cruise Missiles Defense (JLENS)
project.
The committee understands the critical role that the JLENS
Elevated Netted Sensor program plays in cruise missile defense.
The committee further understands that the Micro Electro
Mechanical (MEMS) demonstration radar system is an important
risk reduction effort in the JLENS acquisition strategy.
The committee recommends an increase of $2.0 million in PE
12419A to complete Phase II development of the Lightweight X-
Band Radar MEMS Electronically Steerable Antenna technology
demonstration.
Light utility vehicle
The budget request contained $59.3 million in PE 62601A for
combat vehicle and automotive technology, but included no funds
for the continued development of a light utility vehicle (LUV)
demonstrator.
The committee is aware the development of a LUV
demonstrator could be accelerated due to previous research in
LUV technology by the National Automotive Center. The committee
understands the base LUV platform would be improved based on
lessons learned through previous development testing. The
committee notes improvements to the base platform would include
prognostics and diagnostics for systems such as the drive-
train, suspension, and steering.
Accordingly, the committee recommends an increase of $6.0
million in PE 62601A to continue the design, development, and
delivery of an improved LUV demonstrator.
Lightweight small arms technologies
The budget request contained $7.2 million in PE 63607A for
the joint service small arms program, including $6.2 million
for lightweight small arms technologies (LSAT). The LSAT
program is attempting to reduce the weight of current soldier
small arms and small caliber ammunition by 30 to 40 percent.
The committee understands small arms and small caliber
ammunition account for two of the four heaviest items an
infantryman wears or carries into combat. The committee notes
that the basic infantryman entering combat can be required to
carry combat configured loads of equipment, that combined, can
exceed 90 pounds. The committee is supportive of efforts that
would accelerate advanced technologies to reduce the combat
carrying equipment load for dismounted infantrymen, as well as
notes the benefits lighter combat configured equipment loads
would have on soldier performance and mobility.
Therefore, the committee recommends $14.7 million in PE
63607A, an increase of $7.5 million to accelerate the
development of caseless small caliber ammunition and to
accelerate the early ``spin out'' of lightweight technology
enhancements to existing small arms weapon programs.
Long-term armoring strategy
The committee understands the Army's long-term armoring
strategy (LTAS) is a long-term capabilities-based armoring
strategy for tactical wheeled vehicles (TWVs) that would
provide greater protection to TWVs than the currently fielded
add-on-armor kits, as well as provide battlefield commanders
with the capability to change protection levels based on the
mission, threat, or technology changes by using an A-Kit/B-Kit
concept.
The committee understands LTAS is not a program in itself,
but rather an armor initiative that would address commonality
and standardization of armor-related components across the TWV
fleet. The committee notes the LTAS supports the development of
an integral A-Kit composed of hard-to-install components and
armor panels with structural attachment points for B-Kit armor
panels and components. The committee further notes the B-Kit
concept would provide units with the flexibility to remove
armor during peacetime operations, as well as improve
reliability, maintainability, and fuel economy for TWVs.
Finally, the committee notes the LTAS would allow for the
upgrade of armor protection as the threat increases or as new
armoring technologies are developed.
The committee supports this initiative and commends the
Army for pursuing this capabilities based strategy. The
committee has concerns over the implementation strategy and
whether adequate resources are programmed for the LTAS for all
families of TWVs across the Future Years Defense Program
(FYDP). The committee strongly encourages the Army to
adequately fund LTAS within the FYDP and to continue to pursue
light weight vehicle armor technology solutions to maximize
ballistic protection and vehicle payload capacity.
Medical advanced technology
The budget request contained $50.8 million in PE 63002A for
advanced technology research for healthy, medically protected
soldiers, but included no funds for the advancement of smart
sensing technologies for remote notification of catastrophic
physiological events, for evaluating the effectiveness of
oxygen diffusion dressings to accelerate wound healing and
reduce infection for soft tissue trauma care, or for
advancements of the Propaq monitor.
The committee recommends $58.3 million in PE 63002A medical
advanced technology, an increase of $3.0 million for
Nightengale, remote on-body sensing technologies; an increase
of $1.0 million for evaluation and development of oxygen
diffusion dressings for accelerated healing of battlefield and
other wounds; and an increase of $3.5 million for Thunderbolt,
the advanced Propaq monitor.
Medical materiel/medical biological defense equipment--SDD
The budget request contained $14.5 million in PE 64807A for
advanced development of medical materiel within the system
demonstration and low rate initial production portions of the
acquisition lifecycle, but included no funds for a Leishmania
diagnostic skin test phase III clinical trial. The development
of a diagnostic skin test for Leishmaniasis shows promise,
having successfully been tested in phase I safety trials and
with a phase II trial scheduled for 2006. Leishmaniasis is not
easily diagnosed, yet U.S. military hospitals have treated over
700 clinical cases of Leishmaniasis in military personnel
serving in Iraq and Afghanistan.
The committee recommends an increase of $1.7 million in PE
64807A for development of a Leishmania Diagnostic Skin Test.
Miniaturized sensors for small and tactical unmanned aerial vehicles
The budget request included $23.9 million in PE 62709A for
night vision technology, but included no funds for miniaturized
sensors for small and tactical unmanned aerial systems (UAVs).
The committee notes that among the major requirements for
UAVs are miniaturized and wide bandwidth visible, infrared, and
radar imaging sensors. Emphasis has been on the larger UAVs and
sensor development has continued to lag behind vehicle
development, which presents significant power, weight, and
cooling challenges in adapting sensors for use in small and
tactical UAVs.
Therefore, the committee recommends an additional $6.0
million for miniaturized sensor development for small and
tactical UAVs.
Missile recycling capability technology
The budget request contained $10.3 million in PE 63103A for
explosives demilitarization technology, but contained no funds
for missile recycling capability technology.
The committee is aware missile recycling capability
technology provides the Army with an environmentally friendly
and cost effective means of disposal for tactical missiles. The
committee is also aware this capability is transitioning to
prototype production capability. The committee notes this
capability reduces the usage of open burn/open detonation for
disposing of tactical missiles, as well as complies with
current environment regulations.
The committee recommends an increase of $6.0 million in PE
63103A to accelerate the transition of missile recycling
capability technology.
Mobile assessment detection and response system
The budget request included $74.7 million in PE 63004A for
weapons and munitions advanced technology, but included no
funds for the mobile assessment detection and rapid response
system (MDARS).
The MDARS unmanned ground vehicle currently provides the
capability to patrol, detect intruders, and remotely determine
inventory status. The committee is aware of requirements to
increase vehicle speed, incorporate operator-controlled non-
lethal weapons, and incorporate on-the-move intruder detection.
The committee recommends an additional $6.5 million in PE
63004A to integrate additional capabilities into MDARS.
Next-generation advanced materials research
The budget request contained $11.2 million in PE 63305A for
Army missile defense systems integration.
The committee understands that the development of advanced
composite materials can enhance the performance of both current
and next generation weapons systems. The committee notes that
lighter composite materials can significantly improve the
design, manufacturing, and performance of future Army
conventional missile launchers.
The committee recommends an increase of $6.0 million in PE
63305A to fabricate an integrated missile canister/multi-round
pack using state-of-the-art lightweight high strength carbon
composites.
Polymer matrix composites for rotorcraft drive systems
The budget request included $64.7 million in PE 63003A for
aviation advanced technology, but included no funds for the
demonstration of polymer matrix composite drive trains.
The committee notes the low level of funding for technology
development for rotorcraft. Improving the capability of
rotorcraft drive systems and reducing the operational cost of
rotorcraft operation is fundamental to programs like the Joint
Heavy Lift Program. These improvements may be achieved through
the introduction of non-metallic structures as critical drive
system components. Advancements in composite materials and
process technologies offer significant improvements over their
metallic counterparts and provide for the elimination of
corrosion, less fatigue, significant reductions in weight, and
lower acquisition and ownership costs.
The committee recommends an increase of $6.0 million in PE
63003A to demonstrate full scale polymer matrix composite drive
train test articles under the rotorcraft drive system-21
program.
Portable and mobile emergency broadband system
The budget request contained $44.0 million in PE 63008A for
electronic warfare advanced technology, but included no funds
for the portable and mobile emergency broadband system.
The committee is aware the portable and mobile emergency
broadband system, based on emerging commercial technology,
would allow for the rapid establishment of emergency
communications networks.
The committee recommends an increase of $4.0 million in PE
63008A to complete the critical development of the portable and
mobile emergency broadband system.
Product lifecycle management plus
The budget request contained $55.3 million in PE 33141A for
the global combat support system, but contained no funding to
accelerate the Product Lifecycle Management Plus system.
The committee believes that the Army's legacy logistics
business systems are outmoded and supports the creation of an
integrated Army logistics environment. The committee believes
the Product Lifecycle Management Plus system is an essential
part of future Army logistics systems and supports its rapid
deployment.
The committee recommends $61.3 million in PE 33141A for the
global combat support system, an increase of $6.0 million to
accelerated deployment of the Product Lifecycle Management Plus
system.
Radiation hardening initiative
The budget request contained $11.2 million in PE 63305A for
Army missile defense systems integration.
The committee is aware of the military requirement to
protect our space assets from the effects of high-altitude
nuclear weapons and the resulting electro-magnetic pulse. The
committee supports efforts to enhance the ability of the
developers of space technology to leverage the use of existing
radiation hardened (RadHard) technology initiatives resident in
the Missile Defense Agency's Space-based Infrared Phase II
Radiation-Hardening Catalog effort and other space programs.
The committee recommends an increase of $4.0 million in PE
63305A for the radiation hardening initiative to collect
RadHard technology and component information into one central
database.
Smart energetics architecture
The budget request included $42.1 million in PE 63313A for
missile and rocket advanced technology, but included no funds
for the smart energetics architecture project.
The committee is aware that the smart energetics
architecture project offers the potential to reduce traditional
tactical missile launch system weight by 60 percent,
significantly lower system power requirements, and provide
savings in lifecycle costs by simplifying assembly,
installation and use.
Therefore, the committee recommends an additional $6.0
million in PE 63313A for the smart energetics architecture
project.
Stryker vehicle open architecture electronic enhancements
The budget request contained $5.4 million in PE 63653A for
the advanced tank armament system, but included no funds for
Stryker vehicle open architecture electronic enhancements.
The committee understands the Army's modernization strategy
has identified capability gaps in current forces that require
the integration of network-centric capabilities into the
current Stryker brigade combat teams. The committee notes that
the incorporation of open systems electronics architecture into
the Stryker vehicles would support block upgrades and the early
adoption of emerging network-centric warfare capabilities into
the Stryker brigade combat teams.
The committee recommends an increase of $10.0 million in PE
63653A for Stryker vehicle open architecture electronic
enhancements in support of the Army's modernization strategy.
Tactical wheeled vehicle product improvement program
The budget request contained no funds for the tactical
wheeled vehicle (TWV) product improvement program (PIP).
The committee understands the Army is faced with the
difficult challenge of implementing its TWV modernization
strategy and must leverage three competing factors in support
of current operations and fleets, transforming TWVs to attain
future fleet capabilities and achieving modularity
requirements. The committee notes the Army requires the
flexibility to rapidly evaluate and integrate readily available
technology into TWV platforms as part of this TWV modernization
strategy.
The committee has concerns over the lack of funding
programmed for the TWV PIP initiative in the President's
request. The committee believes TWV PIP technologies would have
a real-time impact and effect on existing TWVs and would
provide increased capability in the areas of performance and
survivability. Consistent with committee views as expressed in
the committee report (H. Rept. 109-89) accompanying the
National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2006, the
committee continues to support a TWV PIP initiative, as well as
strongly encourages the Secretary of the Army to adequately
fund this initiative in the Future Years Defense Program.
The committee recommends an additional $10.0 million to
continue the TWV PIP initiative.
Training-based collaborative research in military consequence
management
The budget request contained $18.9 million in PE 62716A for
human factors engineering applied research, but contained no
funding for training-based collaborative research in military
consequence management efforts.
The committee recognizes the need for innovative approaches
to improve military consequence management initiatives,
especially in complex and dynamic threat environments. The
committee understands advanced capabilities are necessary in
the fields of military law enforcement, engineering, chemical-
biological management and training, mines and unexploded
ordnance, and non-lethal weapons. The committee believes a
commitment to technology transfer initiatives, coupled with
efforts to establish well-defined training performance
measurements, offers the greatest potential for advances in
training effectiveness.
Therefore, the committee recommends an increase of $20.0
million in PE 62716A for training-based collaborative research.
Transparent armor
The budget request contained $64.7 million in PE 63003A for
aviation advanced technology, but contained no funding for
advanced lightweight armored window technology.
The committee recognizes the unique threat confronting air
crews operating rotary aircraft in forward deployed areas. The
committee is supportive of efforts to rapidly field advanced
technologies to enhance the protection of military personnel.
The committee understands that significant opportunities exist
to facilitate the transition of technologies from research and
development to testing and fielding, particularly in the area
of self-protection. The effort to develop transparent,
lightweight armor is one such opportunity, as it offers the
promise of improving rotary aircraft survivability.
The committee, therefore, recommends an increase of $2.5
million in PE 63003A for lightweight armored window technology.
Warfighter sustainment
The budget request included $25.4 million for warfighter
technology in PE 62786A, but included no funds for improved
packaging and content of combat rations.
The committee is aware of technology that offers to improve
nutrition of combat rations, as well as reduce the cost and
bulk of associated packaging. The committee is also aware that
while combat rations meet the military recommended daily
allowances for nutrients, but improved nutraceutical content
could improve battlefield acuity and readiness.
Therefore, the committee recommends an increase of $5.3
million in PE 62786A for warfighter sustainment.
Navy Research, Development, Test, and Evaluation
Overview
The budget request contained $16.9 billion for Navy
research, development, test, and evaluation (RDT&E).
The committee recommends $17.4 billion, an increase of
$465.5 million to the budget request.
Items of Special Interest
Advanced composite riverine craft
The budget request contained $16.3 million in PE 63713N for
ocean engineering technology development, but included no funds
for advanced composite riverine craft.
The committee remains concerned with the maturity of the
operational concept for the Navy Expeditionary Combat Command
(NECC) and has reservations about the rapid pace with which the
Navy is moving ahead with its development. The committee
encourages the Navy to fully develop its operational
requirements for the NECC mission. However, the committee does
believe that the Navy should investigate options for advanced
composite hulls for the specialized missions the NECC might be
required to perform. Advanced composite hulls are expected to
provide the Navy with the technology for critical capabilities
in speed, weight, draft, stability, wake and g-force reduction.
Accordingly, the committee recommends an increase of $10.0
million in PE 63713N for development and construction of
advanced composite riverine craft.
Advanced materials for acoustic window applications
The budget request contained $9.4 million in PE 25620N for
surface anti-submarine warfare combat system integration, but
included no funds for advanced materials for acoustic window
applications.
The committee is aware that advanced materials for acoustic
window applications have the potential to reduce signature and
improve survivability of naval sonar dome windows at a reduced
cost. Current materials used to minimize turbulence and
hydrodynamic drag, and protect the sonar system from impacts
with debris use a non-corroding sandwich dome concept
constructed using fiber reinforced polymer composite skins with
a layered elastomeric core. Although this technology meets
current mission requirements, the committee understands there
is a need for lower-cost, structurally robust materials for
acoustic window applications.
Therefore, the committee recommends an increase of $4.0
million in PE 25620N for a development program on lower cost
advanced materials for warship design concepts.
Affordable towed array construction/fiber optic towed array
construction
The budget request contained $94.8 million in PE 64503N for
submarine systems equipment development, including $5.7 million
to continue the development of affordable towed array
technology.
The affordable towed array construction program utilizes
fiber optic thin line arrays to provide increased operational
capabilities and reliability improvements over existing
submarine thin line towed systems. The committee believes that
the development and fielding of fiber optic towed array
technology is important to maintain clear acoustical, tactical
and operational undersea dominance in the littorals.
Consequently, the committee recommends an increase of $4.5
million in PE 64503N to accelerate reliability testing and
introduction into the fleet of fiber optic towed arrays.
Affordable weapon system
The budget request contained $18.6 million in PE 63795N for
land attack technology, but included no funding for affordable
weapon system (AWS).
AWS is a low cost surface launched cruise missile based on
commercial-off-the-shelf technology that is designed to carry a
200 pound payload to a range of over 600 miles. AWS is a global
positioning system/inertial navigation system guided weapon
with both line-of-sight and satellite data links to allow
reprogramming in flight. Designed with the capability to
loiter, the weapon can be commanded by a forward observer to
attack precise targets on the ground in support of
expeditionary operations.
The committee continues to support the concept of a
loitering missile and is encouraged that the Navy is reviewing
a capabilities development document for a multipurpose
loitering missile. The committee supports the restructuring of
this program to implement a more disciplined approach to system
engineering and quality assurance, which the committee believes
is achievable without substantially altering the cost
objectives of the program.
The committee recommends an increase of $27.0 million for
PE 63795N to complete system design and demonstration, to
support live-fire testing aboard an amphibious warfare vessel
subsequent to successful testing from the Self Defense Test
Ship, and for limited rate initial production (LRIP) of an
additional 40 missiles. However, the committee expects that no
funds shall be available for LRIP prior to successful
completion of an operational evaluation with production
representative missiles.
Airborne reconnaissance systems
The budget request contained $35.0 million in PE 35206N for
airborne reconnaissance systems, but included no funding for
passive collision avoidance and reconnaissance (PCAR).
The committee is aware that unmanned aerial vehicles (UAV)
must fly in regions that make them a potential hazard to
commercial and other manned aircraft. The committee notes that
PCAR will sense an impending collision and allow the UAV to
safely avoid approaching aircraft.
Therefore, the committee recommends $40.0 million, an
increase of $5.0 million in PE 35206N for PCAR to improve the
safety of UAV operations.
Aircraft carrier launch and recovery and support equipment
modernization
The budget request contained $33.4 million in PE 64512N for
shipboard aviation systems development, but included no funds
to continue development of the aircraft carrier launch and
recovery (ALRE) and support equipment (SE) modernization
program.
The committee understands that the ALRE/SE modernization
program would develop modernization strategies for existing
ALRE/SE systems to reduce human error and operating costs while
improving safety and reliability. The committee also
understands that ALRE/SE technologies and design tools are
being developed for the CVN-21 future carrier, and believes
that application of these technologies to the Navy's existing
aircraft carrier fleet could substantially reduce operating
costs for the remainder of their useful life.
Accordingly, the committee recommends an increase of $1.0
million in PE 64512N to continue the ALRE/SE modernization
program.
Ballistic trajectory extended range munition
The budget request contained $18.6 million in PE 63795N for
land attack technology, but included no funds to continue the
ballistic trajectory extended range munition (BTERM)
demonstration program.
The committee notes that the Navy's current effort to field
the extended range guided munition (ERGM) faces significant
technological, cost and schedule performance challenges to meet
the Navy's requirement for precision targeting. The committee
understands that the BTERM program provides the Navy with an
alternative to the ERGM global positioning system/inertial
navigational system long-range, precise fire capability. The
committee further notes that until recently, the Navy intended
to re-compete the system design and development contract, but
later decided to reverse course and continue with ERGM
development. The committee remains greatly concerned with the
Navy's ability to provide naval surface fire support for
expeditionary forces ashore and strongly recommends that the
Navy re-compete this requirement.
Accordingly, the committee recommends an increase of $10.0
million in PE 63795N, to continue the development of the BTERM
demonstration program.
Bio-film packaging applied research
The budget request contained $90.0 million for PE 62236N
for warfighter sustainment applied research, but included no
funds for bio-film packaging applied research.
The committee notes that environmental quality technologies
enable sustained world-wide Navy operations in compliance with
all local, State, regional, national and international laws,
regulations and agreements. The committee understands that bio-
film packaging offers an environmentally friendly alternative
to solve the plastic waste disposal issue aboard Navy ships.
Unlike plastic packaging that cannot be thrown overboard and
disposed of because it is derived from hydrocarbons, bio-film
packaging waste can be disposed of at sea because it will break
down into bio-compatible components in ocean water.
The committee recommends an increase of $2.0 million in PE
62236N for development of durable bio-pallet wrap and
packaging.
Cobra Judy ship replacement
The budget request contained $135.4 million in PE 35149N
for the Cobra Judy ship replacement program.
The Cobra Judy program is a single ship-based radar suite
for world-wide technical data collection against ballistic
missiles in flight. The current Cobra Judy ship, the USNS
Observation Island, is unsustainable and is scheduled to go out
of service in 2012. The radar data and imaging from the Cobra
Judy platform supports a range of activities including
Department of State treaty monitoring and verification, and
ballistic missile defense development and testing. Failure to
replace the Cobra Judy ship by 2011 will result in a potential
gap in coverage.
The committee fully supports the Cobra Judy ship
replacement program and recommends $135.4 million in PE 35149N,
the amount of the budget request.
Common submarine radio room
The budget request contained $94.8 million in PE 64503N for
SSN-688 and Trident modernization, but included no funds for
the common submarine radio room.
The committee is aware that the common submarine radio room
provides a modern, automated, high capacity, interoperable
communications system across submarine classes. It employs an
open system architecture that maximizes the use of commercial-
off-the-shelf hardware and software. The committee recommends
funds to accelerate the development and deployment of the
common submarine radio room.
The committee recommends an increase of $4.5 million in PE
64503N to be used for the common submarine radio room.
Conventional Trident modification
The budget request contained $77.0 million in PE 64327N for
development of an advanced strike capability which will
demonstrate the feasibility of modifying the Trident II (D5)
strategic weapon system to carry conventional payloads.
The Navy is undertaking this effort to develop the
conventional precision global strike capability called for in
the 2001 Nuclear Posture Review. The committee understands that
the existing Trident weapons system provides an opportunity to
develop this long-range conventional strike capability by
leveraging existing technology at relatively low cost.
The committee, however, is concerned that the development
of this conventional capability on a submarine platform that
has historically carried nuclear armed ballistic missiles may
present concerns relating to the misinterpretation of the
launch of a missile carrying a conventional warhead for one
carrying a nuclear warhead. The committee is aware that the
Department of Defense is beginning to engage members of the
international community to discuss the U.S. intent behind the
conventional strike capability, as well as measures to preclude
misinterpretation of a conventional launch. The committee
directs the Secretary of Defense to continue this important
policy dialog with others in the international community.
The committee is also concerned with the costs associated
with the expenditure of a conventional warhead carried on a
Trident missile. While there may be high-value targets worth
the price of a conventionally equipped Trident missile, it is
not clear what scenarios would call for employment of the
conventional Trident missile.
The committee directs the Secretary to submit to the
congressional defense committees by February 1, 2007, a report
on the following:
(1) The status of discussions with other countries on
the concern of misinterpretation of a conventional
Trident missile strike for a nuclear attack;
(2) The proposed concept of operations detailing the
sequence of events for employing this weapon; and
(3) An assessment of the cost-effectiveness of using
this weapon against selected targets.
The committee recommends $30.0 million in PE 64327N to
explore the feasibility of modifying the Trident II strategic
weapon system to carry conventional payloads, a decrease of
$47.0 million.
Defense research sciences
The budget request contained $366.6 million in PE 61153N
for defense research sciences, but included no funds for
investigations of carbon nanotube-based radiation hard non-
volatile random access memory (RAM) or for expanding the naval
science and educational pipeline pilot program.
The committee recognizes the need to protect essential
electronic systems and applications during critical operations
from the harsh effects of natural and man-made radiation.
Therefore, the committee believes there is a need to ensure the
continual improvement of radiation-hardened memory, with
particular emphasis on a new generation of radiation hardened
devices constructed with single-walled carbon nanotube
materials.
The committee also recognizes the need to reverse the trend
of fewer U.S. students entering college programs to pursue
science, technology, engineering, and math degrees. The naval
science and educational pipeline (N-STEP) pilot program in
Virginia has provided science-related curriculum enhancements
at the K-12 level, in partnership with the Naval Surface
Warfare Center--Dahlgren Division.
The committee recommends $383.1 million in PE 61153N, an
increase of $9.0 million for development of carbon nanotube-
based radiation hard non-volatile RAM and an increase of $7.5
million to expand the N-STEP pilot program to other states with
naval warfare center laboratories, such as California,
Maryland, and Rhode Island.
Detection and recovery of unexploded ordnance
The budget request contained $25.3 million in PE 65873M for
Marine Corps program wide support, but included no funds to
provide technology that would advance the detection and
recovery of unexploded ordnance (UXO).
The committee is aware that many former and current
military training sites pose a high safety risk because of the
presence of UXO that could sometimes include 1,000 pound bombs.
The committee understands that no single sensor is capable of
providing the complete solution for detection, recovery, and
removal of UXO. The committee encourages the continued
development of a system of systems approach that would utilize
existing and near-term technology to identify, recover, and
remove UXO at military training sites.
The committee recommends $29.3 million in PE 65873M, an
increase of $4.0 million to advance the development of a sensor
suite and platform that would rapidly detect, recover, and
remove UXO at military training sites.
Dismounted soldier training test instrumentation
The budget request contained $218.5 million in PE 26313M
for Marine Corps communications systems development, but
included no funds for dismounted soldier or marine training
test instrumentation.
The committee understands this system provides advanced
training capabilities for marines conducting individual and
small unit operations through the use of commercially available
communication system and movement tracking technology. The
committee recognizes this project develops an instrumentation
capability that allows real-time tracking of individual
dismounted infantrymen or marines conducting training on
military training ranges as well as allows for rapid post-
operation reconstruction and feedback to soldiers and marines.
The committee notes this particular capability augments the
training readiness of soldiers and marines preparing for combat
deployment in the global war on terrorism.
The committee recommends an increase of $1.0 million in PE
26313M for dismounted soldier or marine training test
instrumentation.
Distributed common ground system
The budget request included $16.6 million in PE 35208N for
the Distributed Common Ground System-Navy (DCGS-N), as well as
$78.3 million in Common Imagery Ground Surface Systems for the
DCGS-N.
The committee recognizes the potential benefits of a fully
capable, completely interoperable DCGS-N system for service,
joint, and interagency connectivity in support of combatant
command priorities. The committee understands that the
acquisition plan includes funding for the procurement and
fielding of 34 DCGS-N 1.1 systems, with an eventual transition
to a more advanced 1.2 configuration. The committee understands
the DCGS-N 1.2 version represents a greater level of capability
in terms of enterprise interoperability with other service,
joint, and interagency connections.
The committee is concerned about the DCGS-N program delay
since submission of the fiscal year 2006 budget request. The
committee understands that the fiscal year 2007 budget request
included funding for the procurement of as many as six 1.1
DCGS-N systems prior to completion of the program's operational
evaluation (OPEVAL) milestone, and notes that OPEVAL is not
expected to occur until the latter part of the fiscal year. The
committee notes that a typical low to moderate risk acquisition
schedule completes OPEVAL prior to low-rate initial production
(LRIP) activities.
The committee strongly recommends that the Department of
the Navy further accelerate technology development for a more
robust and interoperable DCGS-N system. The committee further
urges the Department to reduce programmatic risk resulting from
a lack of concurrency between research and development and LRIP
activities.
DockShock ship shock test system
The budget request contained $61.5 million for PE 63123N
for force protection advanced technology, but included no funds
for DockShock ship shock test system.
The committee is aware that DockShock is a proposed
replacement system for the current practice of conducting ship
shock testing using large explosives in the open ocean. The
DockShock concept employs non-explosive, electro-chemical or
electro-mechanical pressure source arrays that can be used at
shore side or near shore locations. The committee understands
that the DockShock system would provide the Navy with a more
accurate, environmentally friendly, less costly process for
testing the survivability of Navy ships.
The committee recommends an increase of $8.0 million in PE
63123N to continue development and testing of the DockShock
ship shock test system.
DP-2 vectored thrust aircraft
The budget request contained $76.8 million in PE 63114N for
power projection advanced technology, but included no funding
for the DP-2 vectored thrust aircraft program.
The committee understands that the DP-2 is a twin engine,
thrust vectored, high-speed combat transport aircraft capable
of hover, as well as vertical take-off and landing. DP-2 has
the potential to provide leap-ahead capabilities to special
operations forces and other forces. The Office of Naval
Research set a series of milestones for unmanned tethered and
untethered hover testing, leading to manned, untethered testing
in ground effect at Yuma Proving Ground.
The committee recommends an increase of $8.0 million for PE
63114N to continue execution of the current DP-2 program test
plan.
E-2 advanced hawkeye identification friend or foe technology
development
The budget request contained $497.8 million in PE 64234N
for the development, demonstration and testing of the E-2
advanced hawkeye (AHE) aircraft, but included no funds to
accelerate the development of identification friend or foe
(IFF) systems.
The E-2 AHE program is developing a replacement for the
existing radar and other system components to modernize the E-
2C weapon system to maintain open ocean mission capability
while providing an effective littoral surveillance, battle
management and theater air and missile defense capability. The
committee understands that one of the key technologies in the
E-2 AHE program is the development of Mode 5 and Mode S IFF
systems which will provide improved identification of friendly
or civilian aircraft. The committee is aware that accelerating
the development of this technology in fiscal year 2007 would
reduce program risk and ensure that Mode 5 and Mode S IFF
capabilities are integrated into the first E-2 AHE prior to
delivery.
Therefore, the committee recommends $505.0 million in PE
64234N for the E-2 AHE development program, an increase of $7.2
million for acceleration of Mode 5 and Mode S development.
Electro-optic passive antisubmarine warfare system
The budget request contained $16.8 million in PE 63254N for
antisubmarine warfare (ASW) systems development, including $9.9
million for the electro-optic passive ASW system (EPAS).
The committee is concerned by the proliferation and
expansion of submarine forces worldwide, and views as a high
priority the development of ASW capabilities for acoustically
challenging littoral environments. The committee understands
that EPAS will incorporate a variety of optical and infrared
sensors into fieldable prototype systems to improve airborne
ASW capability.
The committee recommends an increase of $4.0 million in PE
63254N for EPAS to accelerate development, fielding, and
testing of prototype systems.
F/A-18 squadrons
The budget request contained $31.1 million in PE 24136N for
F/A-18 squadron development, but included no funds for an
aircraft composite missile launcher improvement program, for
accelerated development of a digital electronic warfare (EW)
system for F/A-18C/D and AV-8B aircraft, or for an F/A-18
digital heads-up display (HUD) upgrade.
The committee understands that existing aluminum aircraft
missile launch suspension equipment may have limited life and
may not support the next generation of guided missiles. The
committee further understands that new technologies have
emerged that may have the potential to increase missile launch
suspension equipment service life and reduce lifecycle costs.
Consequently, the committee recommends an increase of $2.0
million to develop, design, and demonstrate technologies that
would improve missile launcher suspension equipment. The
demonstration should include a side-by-side test of the
improved missile launcher with an existing system to evaluate
the advantages of new technologies.
The committee understands that EW technologies developed
for the future F-35 and F-22 aircraft can be applied to address
deficiencies in the Navy and Marine Corps' existing ALQ-126B
defensive countermeasures system, the ALQ-164 jamming pod, and
the ALR-67(V)2 radar warning receiver. The committee also
understands that development of a digital EW system for the
Navy's F/A-18C/D and the Marine Corps' AV-8B aircraft would
provide improved capabilities against future electronic threats
and improve commonality across the F/A-18C/D and AV-8B aircraft
fleets, thereby reducing future operations and support costs.
Accordingly, the committee recommends an increase of $10.0 to
accelerate the development of a digital EW system for F/A-18C/D
and AV-8B aircraft.
The F/A-18 HUD, which serves as the pilot's primary
targeting system, currently uses a cathode ray tube (CRT) and
is characterized as an analog solution to display targeting
information to the pilot. The committee understands that the F/
A-18's CRTs are becoming unreliable and that procurement
sources for CRTs are diminishing. To address this
supportability problem, the committee believes that migration
to a digital HUD solution will lower lifecycle costs, improve
reliability and performance, and provide higher accuracy with a
capability to process and display more information to the
pilot. Therefore, the committee recommends an increase of $5.1
million to begin the development of an F/A-18 digital HUD
upgrade.
In total, the committee recommends $48.2 million in PE
24136N for F/A-18 squadron development, an increase of $17.1
million.
Flexible payload module and payload interface module development
The budget request contained $169.6 million in PE 64558N
for the new design SSN, but included no funds for flexible
payload module and payload interface module development.
The committee understands the flexible payload module will
allow payloads, such as Tomahawk missiles, to be located
outside of the submarine's pressure hull, resulting in
significant cost savings. The flexible payload module will
house the new or existing payloads in a pressure proof or free-
flooded environment. The payload interface module is the
shipboard structure and standardized interface linking the
submarine's combat system with the payload.
The committee recommends an increase of $25.0 million in PE
64558N to be used for the flexible payload module and payload
interface module development.
High performance FM fiber-optic link
The budget request contained $84.9 million in PE 62114N for
power projection applied research, but included no funding for
high performance FM fiber-optic links.
The committee understands that FM fiber optic links could
be used for high bandwidth transmission of microwave and
millimeter wave signals, and have potential military
applications for remoting of communication and radar antennae.
The committee recommends an increase of $2.0 million for PE
62114N for applied research leading to development of high
performance FM fiber-optic links.
Human systems integration
The budget request included $82.0 million in PE 63236N for
warfighter sustainment advanced technology and $8.8 million in
PE 64703N for personnel, training, simulation, and human
factors, but contained no funding for Navy manpower and
personnel integration (SEAPRINT).
The committee supports further development of SEAPRINT in
conjunction with other Department of Defense human systems
integration efforts, and urges additional resources in this
area.
Therefore, the committee recommends an increase of $3.0
million in PE 63236N and $1.0 million in PE 64703N for
SEAPRINT, in an effort to further develop human systems
integration modeling throughout the Department.
Integrated shipboard intelligent surveillance
The budget request contained $817.5 million for total ship
system engineering, but included no funding for integrated
shipboard intelligent surveillance (ISIS).
The committee places a particularly high priority on force
protection. The committee believes that commercial-off-the-
shelf surveillance and monitoring technologies offer
opportunities to improve shipboard security, with respect to
both the exterior environment and critical interior engineering
and control spaces. From an engineering and cost perspective,
the best point to integrate those technologies is early in the
design process.
The committee recommends an increase of $5.0 million for PE
64300N for integration of ISIS on future Navy combatants.
Joint integrated systems for advanced digital networking
The budget request contained $748.7 million in PE 33109N
for satellite communications, but included no funding for joint
integrated systems for advanced digital networking (JIST-NET).
JIST-NET has shown great promise in providing integrated
communications systems situational awareness to combatant
commanders by identifying satellite communications systems gaps
and performance issues. The committee is encouraged by JIST-NET
progress to date and believes further funding to complete
integration of the network will provide important
communications capability for the warfighting commander.
The committee recommends $754.7 million in PE 33109N, an
increase of $6.0 million for JIST-NET.
Large aperture bow array
The budget request contained $169.6 million in PE 64558N
for the new design SSN, but included no funds for the
development of the large aperture bow (LAB) array sonar for the
Virginia class attack submarine.
The committee is aware that the LAB array is a water-backed
replacement for the air-backed spherical array in the bow of
Virginia class submarines. The LAB uses longer-lived, lower
cost sensors and commercial-off-the-shelf electronics, yielding
a cost savings of about $15.0 million per ship and additional
lifecycle cost savings. The committee is also aware that with a
larger aperture and expanded frequency coverage, there will be
a significant improvement to the anti-submarine warfare
capabilities of the Virginia class submarine. Importantly, the
LABalso allows additional payload by providing bow dome
arrangement flexibility and allows for rapid insertion of future sensor
technologies, and is a transformational approach to outboard sonar
array design. The committee understands the preliminary design will be
completed in 2006 and if inserted in the 2009 Virginia class hull,
would provide $300.0 million in savings for the remainder of the
Virginia class submarine construction program.
The committee recommends an increase of $20.0 million in PE
64558N to be used for the development of the LAB array sonar
for the Virginia class attack submarine.
Large displacement unmanned undersea vehicle at-sea launch and recovery
system
The budget request contained $140.4 million in PE 63561N
for advanced submarine system development, but included no
funds to develop an at-sea launch and recovery system for the
large displacement unmanned undersea vehicle (LD-UUV).
The committee understands that the LD-UUV provides the Navy
with next-generation capability to detect, track, mitigate and
defeat enemy threats. The committee notes that the LD-UUV is to
be compatible with the SSGN platform, serving as a force
multiplier with its improved payload capabilities and enhanced
long-range endurance for intelligence, surveillance and
reconnaissance missions. The committee strongly encourages the
Navy to devote adequate resources within the Future Years
Defense Program to continue concept design, development and
integration of the LD-UUV into the SSGN platform, including its
requisite stowage, launch and recovery systems.
The committee recommends an increase of $6.0 million in PE
63561N to develop and demonstrate the LD-UUV at-sea launch and
recovery hardware for the SSGN.
Lightweight multi-threat encapsulated ceramic body armor
The budget request contained $47.6 million in PE 26623M for
Marine Corps ground combat and supporting arms systems, but
included no funds to advance the development of encapsulated
ceramic body armor.
The committee recognizes encapsulating ceramic tiles
through enhanced bonding and residual compression could
potentially improve the ballistic performance and durability of
enhanced small arms protective inserts used in outer tactical
vests that constitute the Interceptor Body Armor (IBA) system.
The committee understands the Army and the Marine Corps are
continuously upgrading and modifying existing IBA components.
The committee recommends an increase of $2.0 million in PE
26623M to refine and test encapsulated ceramic protective
inserts. Further, should these tests prove to generate a more
effective solution than existing IBA ceramic inserts, the
committee encourages the Secretary of the Navy to use portions
of funds provided in title XV of this report to begin initial
procurement of these inserts.
Lithium battery technology
The budget request contained $124.5 million in PE 11221N
for strategic submarine and weapons system support, but
included no funds for superior lithium polymer battery
development.
The committee understands that the Navy and the Naval
Surface Warfare Center, Crane, Indiana are moving away from
traditional lead acid, nickel cadmium and silver zinc batteries
and toward newer lithium secondary batteries.
The committee also understands that a new technology known
as the superior lithium polymer battery offers improved power
densities, higher continuous discharge and recharge
capabilities and wider operating temperatures, with potential
military application to submersibles and other vehicles.
The committee recommends an increase of $2.5 million in PE
11221N for superior lithium polymer battery development.
Marine expeditionary rifle squad
The budget request contained $0.5 million in PE 63635M for
Marine Corps ground combat support systems, but included no
funds for the development of the Marine Expeditionary Rifle
Squad (MERS) program.
The MERS program focuses on the holistic, system level
integration of all items worn, consumed or carried by the
marine infantry rifle squad and is integral to the Marine Corps
concept of distributed operations (DO). The committee
understands MERS, in the near-term would address integration
issues resulting from the rapid fielding of urgently needed
weapons and equipment to infantry squads currently operating in
Operation Iraqi Freedom. The committee understands MERS's long-
term objective strategy would provide marine infantry rifle
squads with fully integrated future equipment systems that
would be integral to the effectiveness of conducting DO.
The committee recommends $3.5 million in PE 63635A, an
increase of $3.0 million to continue the phase development
strategy of the MERS program.
Maritime identification surveillance technology phased array radar
The budget request contained $61.7 million in PE 63235N for
common picture advanced technology, but included no funds for
the maritime identification surveillance technology (MIST)
phased array radar system.
The development of the MIST phased array radar system is
expected to provide continuous surveillance, identification and
tracking of all surface ships around naval platforms at sea, or
in coastal waters and harbors. In addition, the committee is
aware that this radar system will provide the Navy with an
advanced phased array radar technology test bed to support
future radar system technology development and validation.
The committee recommends an increase of $4.8 million in PE
63235N for the development and demonstration of a prototype
phased array radar system for integration into a MIST sensor
and networking technology test bed.
Maritime technology
The budget request contained no funds in PE 78730N for the
maritime technology program.
The committee understands that the purpose of the maritime
technology (MARITECH) program is to reduce the cost of naval
ship construction, modification, and repair by enhancing the
efficiency and competitiveness of the U.S. shipbuilding and
ship repair industries. The committee understands that since
the late 1970s the Navy has considered capital for facility
investments to be an allowable cost on contracts that are not
firm fixed price. The committee is also aware that in the past
three years, the Navy and industry have agreed to specific
recapitalization contract incentives in the Virginia class
submarine and the CVN-21 programs. These incentive clauses have
allowed the Navy and the contractors to identify improvements
in sequencing and build processes to lower construction costs.
The committee encourages the expansion of these efforts to all
ship procurements, including the Lewis and Clark (T-AKE) class
program.
The committee includes a provision (section 1014) that
creates a shipbuilding industrial base improvement program
through which the Secretary of the Navy shall award grants and
loan guarantees to qualified shipyards to improve their
productivity and cost effectiveness. These authorities will
allow the Navy to work to an even greater extent with
shipbuilders to identify and finance process changes, equipment
investments, and facilities improvements to lower the cost of
Navy ship procurement. The committee expects that these
authorities will allow the Navy to achieve savings in the
construction of the T-AKE class ships, in addition to other
ship classes, and improve the competitiveness of U.S.
shipyards. Consequently, the committee recommends providing
funds for the shipbuilding industrial base improvement program
and for the enhancement of the U.S. shipbuilding and ship
repair industrial base.
The committee recommends $120.0 million in PE 78730N for
the maritime technology program.
National shipbuilding research program
The budget request contained no funds in PE 78730N for the
national shipbuilding research program.
The committee understands that the national shipbuilding
research program (NSRP) provides a unique collaborative
environment where shipbuilders and government agencies examine
processes, tooling and management techniques to improve the
efficiency of the United States shipbuilding industry. The
committee understands that NSRP operates on a 50-50 cost share
between government and industry, all results are shared with
all members, and a conservative estimate for NSRP's return on
investment is five to one.
The committee recommends $20.0 million in PE 78730N for the
national shipbuilding research program.
Shipbuilding industrial base improvement grants
The budget request contained no funds in PE 78730N for
shipbuilding industrial base improvement grants.
The committee understands the national security importance
of sustaining viable and efficient shipbuilding and ship repair
industries in the United States. Accordingly, the committee
recommends providing grants to U.S. shipyards to facilitate the
development of innovative design and production technologies
and processes for naval vessel construction, and the
development of modernized shipbuilding infrastructure.
The committee recommends $50.0 million in PE 78730N for
shipbuilding industrial base improvement grants.
Shipbuilding industrial base improvement loan guarantees
The budget request contained no funds in PE 78730N for
shipbuilding industrial base improvement loan guarantees.
The committee understands the national security importance
of sustaining viable and efficient shipbuilding and ship repair
industries in the United States. Accordingly, the committee
recommends providing loan guarantees to U.S. shipyards to
facilitate the acquisition of technologies, processes and
infrastructure to enhance the efficiency and competitiveness of
the U.S. shipbuilding and ship repair industries.
The committee recommends $50.0 million in PE 78730N for
shipbuilding industrial base improvement loan guarantees.
Naval surface fire support
The committee remains deeply concerned by Navy shortfalls
in providing naval surface fire in support of expeditionary
warfare.
At the Navy's request, in the National Defense
Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2006 (Public Law 109-163)
Congress authorized the Secretary of the Navy to strike from
the Naval Vessel Register the battleships USS Wisconsin and USS
Iowa. With these retirements, the Navy loses the longest range
guns in its fleet, 16-inch 50-caliber guns capable of ranging
24 nautical miles. In the meantime, Navy efforts to improve
upon, much less replace, this capability have been highly
problematic.
The near-term effort involves extending the range of 5-inch
62-caliber guns on existing Arleigh Burke class destroyers from
13 nautical miles to more than 40 nautical miles with a rocket
assisted projectile. The 5-inch extended range guided munition
(ERGM) contains only 7.2 pounds of high explosive, but
incorporates global positioning system/inertial navigation
system guidance to provide precision targeting.
The ERGM program was initiated in 1996 with a planned
research and development cost of $78.6 million, which has now
grown more than 400 percent. Schedule performance has been
similarly disappointing, with initial operational capability
slipping a decade from fiscal year 2001 to fiscal year 2011. As
late as the submission of the President's budget request for
fiscal year 2007, the Navy planned to recompete the system
demonstration and development (SDD) contract in the third
quarter of fiscal year 2006, but recently reversed course and
elected to continue the current contract. The committee
questions the advisability of this decision. Notwithstanding
the not insignificant technical challenges, the committee
believes that program performance has been wanting. The
committee further notes the existence of other responsible
sources for the capabilities provided by ERGM, specifically the
ballistic trajectory extended range munition (BTERM) program
and a five-inch variant of the long-range land attack
projectile (LRLAP). The committee strongly believes that fair
and open competition would best serve the near-term naval
surface fire support objectives of the Navy.
The Navy plans to meet its mid-term precision strike
requirement of greater than 63 nautical miles with the 6-inch
LRLAP projectile in combination with the advanced gun system
(AGS), both of which are under development as part of the
Navy's next generation destroyer (DD(X)) program. The committee
is encouraged by the progress demonstrated in both the LRLAP
and AGS engineering development models. The committee notes,
however, that the first DD(X) will not become operational until
2012, assuming current timelines hold. Further, the committee
does not expect that DD(X) will be procured in the quantity
determined by the Marine Corps as necessary to support major
combat operations within desired timeframes. In fact, the
Navy's current long-range shipbuilding plan calls for
procurement of only seven DD(X)s. Accordingly, the committee
has strong reservations regarding the Navy's ability to meet
mid-term fire support requirements.
In summary, the committee is concerned that the Navy has
foregone the long-range fire support capability of the
battleship, has given little cause for optimism with respect to
meeting near-term developmental objectives, and appears
unrealistic in planning to support expeditionary warfare in the
mid-term. The committee views the Navy's strategy for providing
naval surface fire support as ``high risk,'' and will continue
to monitor progress accordingly.
Network communication system technology for extreme environments
The budget request contained $218.5 million in PE 26313M
for Marine Corps communication systems, but included no funds
to demonstrate network communication system technology for
extreme environments.
The committee understands this technology would use digital
signal processing software that would enable military personnel
to rapidly transmit and receive networked services such as
voice, video, and data, while operating in dense urban or
heavily forested areas. The committee notes this technology
would provide capability to transmit services with greater
bandwidth and more flexibility than provided by current
systems. The committee also notes this technology could improve
command decision times and enhance situational awareness at the
tactical level in both non-line-of-sight and beyond-line-of-
sight conditions.
The committee recommends an increase of $4.3 million in PE
26313M for Marine Corps communication systems to allow for
further research and engineering support for network
communication system technology for extreme environments.
Next-generation electronic warfare simulator
The budget request contained $372.4 million in PE 64269N
for the development, demonstration and testing of the EA-18G
electronic attack aircraft, but included no funds to develop,
configure and install next-generation electronic warfare
simulators in the Advanced Weapons Laboratory (AWL) at Naval
Air Station (NAS) China Lake, California.
The EA-18G electronic attack aircraft program is developing
a replacement for the currently used and aging EA-6B aircraft
to provide a capability to detect, identify, locate, and
suppress hostile emitters. The committee understands that the
Department of the Navy has used the F-18 AWL for integration
and development testing of previous F-18 variants, and believes
that EA-18G development, test, and evaluation will require
next-generation electronic warfare simulators to maximize
laboratory testing, avoid additional flight testing, and reduce
cost and schedule risk.
Accordingly, the committee recommends $380.4 million in PE
64269N for the EA-18G development program, an increase of $8.0
million to develop, configure and install next-generation
electronic warfare simulators in the AWL at NAS China Lake.
Next-generation Phalanx
The budget request contained $46.4 million in PE 64756N for
ship self defense (hard kill), but included no funding for
next-generation Phalanx.
Phalanx has been a mainstay of close-in ship self defense
against anti-ship cruise missiles. The committee believes that
the Phalanx weapon system has evolutionary potential for
improved performance, broader capability, and lower lifecycle
cost. This capability could be applied to the detection,
tracking, and engagement of small water craft in swarm attacks.
The committee particularly notes the rapid fielding and recent
operational success of a land-based Phalanx system for
defeating indirect fire in Operation Iraqi Freedom, a mission
for which the system was not originally intended.
The committee recommends an increase of $9.0 million for PE
64756N for development of a next-generation Phalanx weapon
system.
Permanent magnet motor
The budget request contained $817.5 million in PE 64300N
for next generation destroyer (DD(X)) total ship systems
engineering, but included no funds to continue development and
testing of the permanent magnet motor (PMM).
The committee is aware that the Navy originally intended to
integrate the PMM propulsion and power support technology into
the DD(X) due to its enhanced power density, acoustic
performance and weight reduction advantages over competing
motors. The committee understands that the PMM technology
experienced a stator insulator failure during the factory
testing phase; consequently, the Navy decided to forgo this
technology in favor of the backup advanced induction motor
(AIM) technology. Since then, the committee understands that
the stator insulator failure problem encountered with the PMM
technology has been rectified by substituting a conventional
insulation material and that the motor has repeatedly passed
successful tests at full power. The committee recognizes that
the PMM technology offers significant power efficiency and
weight reduction advantages over the AIM technology and
encourages the Navy to consider incorporating this technology
into future Navy ships.
Accordingly, the committee recommends an increase of $15.0
million in PE 64300N to continue land-based testing of the PMM.
Retroreflecting optical communications for special operations
The budget request contained $84.9 million in PE 62114N for
power projection applied research, but included no funding for
retroreflecting optical communications for special operations.
The committee understands that free space optical
communications provide advantages over longer wavelength
techniques in terms of bandwidth, spectrum congestion,
resistance to jamming, and probability of detection and
interception. A compact modulating retroreflector with a
special operations team on the ground would secure a tactical
data link to an airborne platform without requirement for
precise pointing.
The committee recommends an increase of $4.0 million for PE
62114N to continue development of retroreflecting optical
communications and to fabricate prototype hardware for a
tactical data link.
Sea Fighter (X-Craft)
The budget request contained $61.5 million in PE 63123N for
force protection advanced technology, but included no funding
for Sea Fighter.
Sea Fighter, formerly known as X-Craft, is a high speed,
shallow draft demonstration vessel for littoral warfare. The
vessel as currently configured has limitations with respect to
itsdeployability. The committee believes that deployment of Sea
Fighter can demonstrate and validate many of the Navy's operational
concepts for littoral warfare, and more specifically reduce risk in the
Littoral Combat Ship program.
The committee recommends an increase of $25.7 million for
PE 63123N for modifications to survivability, command and
control, armament, and other ship systems to make Sea Fighter
an operationally deployable asset.
Secure infrastructure technology laboratory
The budget request contained $61.5 million in PE 63123N for
force protection advanced technology, but included no funding
for Secure Infrastructure Technology Laboratory (SINTEL).
SINTEL has developed a suite of sensing technologies and
complementary computer analysis that shows great potential to
reliably detect hostile, underwater threats in both domestic
and foreign ports, a critical force protection requirement for
the Navy.
The committee recommends an increase of $8.0 million in PE
63729N for the Secure Infrastructure Technology Laboratory.
Shipboard wireless maintenance assistant
The budget request contained $14.1 million in PE 63513N for
shipboard system component development, but included no funding
for the shipboard wireless maintenance assistant (SWMA).
The committee believes that advances in information
technology can help to dramatically improve productivity and
reduce manning for shipboard maintenance. The committee
understands that SWMA allows maintenance data, text, and
associated drawings and imagery to be shared wirelessly in the
shipboard environment, and provides real-time ``reach back'' to
remote experts.
The committee recommends an increase of $3.0 million for PE
63513N for SWMA prototype shipboard testing and development of
pre-production models.
Small arms and crew served weapons shot counter
The budget request contained $47.6 million in PE 26623M for
Marine Corps ground combat and supporting arms systems, but
included no funds for the test and evaluation of weapon shot
counters for Marine Corps small arms and crew-served weapons.
The committee understands the Marine Corps has a
requirement to track service life and wear rates of small arms
and crew-served weapon systems. The committee notes a
lightweight, easily manageable weapons shot counter that could
readily fit into the stock or grip of existing small arms and
crew-served weapon systems would potentially address this
requirement. The committee recognizes the additional funds
would be used to initiate a lightweight weapons shot counter
program.
The committee recommends an increase of $3.3 million in PE
26623M for the initiation, demonstration and evaluation of
weapon shot counters for Marine Corps small arms and crew-
served weapon systems.
Smart valve
The budget request contained $14.1 million in PE 63513N for
shipboard system component development, but included no funding
for smart valve.
The committee understands that in a shipboard environment
with plentiful power and robust networking, linear
electromechanical actuator technology presents some interesting
opportunities to eliminate high pressure hydraulic and
pneumatic systems. The committee believes that technologies
like smart valve can offer reduced size and weight, lower
maintenance, and a self diagnostic capability that would warn
of impending malfunction.
The committee recommends an increase of $2.0 million for PE
63513N for development of smart valve technology.
Tactical electric field buoy development program
The budget request contained $16.8 million in PE 63254N for
anti-submarine warfare systems development, but included no
funding for the tactical electric (E) field buoy development
program.
The committee supports the Navy's efforts to develop
enhanced anti-submarine warfare capabilities using networked
sensor systems. Countering emerging threats in the acoustically
problematic littorals may require the exploitation of
phenomenology that has previously received little attention.
The tactical E-field buoy development program designs and tests
air deployable sensors capable of detecting the electric field
signature of a threat submarine.
The committee recommends an increase of $6.0 million for PE
63254N to design, build and test 10 engineering development
model E-field buoys for evaluation at sea.
Validation of prognostic and health management systems
The budget request contained $82.0 million in PE 63236N for
warfighter sustainment advanced technology, but included no
funds for a program to validate prognostic and health
management systems.
The committee understands that advanced modeling and
simulation software has been developed for determining the
remaining life of critical joint strike fighter engine
components. However, the committee further understands that a
program to certify the key models used in the software are
required to validate prognostic and health management systems,
and that such a program would enable engine life assessment
modeling tools to be verified for fleet management purposes.
Consequently, the committee recommends an increase of $2.5
million in PE 63236N for a program to validate prognostic and
health management systems.
VH-71
The budget request included $682.6 million in PE 64273N for
the VH-71 helicopter program.
The committee understands that the VH-71 will replace the
current fleet of VH-3 and VH-60 helicopters which provide
transportation to the President. Section 220 of the National
Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2006 (Public Law 109-
163) limited the expenditure of funds on VH-71 until the
Secretary of the Navy delivered to Congress an event driven
acquisition strategy that incorporates no more than moderate
risk for increment two of the program. Section 220 also
required an operational evaluation using production
representative test vehicles. Further, section 220 directed
that the Director, Operational Test and Evaluation (DOT&E)
provide an evaluation of the acquisition strategy.
The committee received the Navy's report on the new
acquisition strategy for the VH-71 program along with comments
from the Director, Operational Test and Evaluation on March 14,
2006. Although some beneficial changes have been made to the
program including the creation of a Senior Leadership Council
(SLC), the schedule for the program remains high risk and the
test and evaluation planned to occur prior to production of
increment two aircraft will not include production
representative test vehicles. Further, the DOT&E recommends the
addition of readiness reviews prior to award of contracts for
production of low rate initial production (LRIP) lots two and
three. The current program plan would approve all three lots of
LRIP at the same time. The committee directs that the Secretary
of the Navy include the readiness reviews recommended by the
DOT&E in the VH-71 program schedule. The committee further
directs that these additional reviews should occur with the
participation of the SLC, and that approval be given for LRIP
contract award only with the consensus of all members of the
SLC.
The committee notes that the budget request included $39.0
million to procure long lead materials for three LRIP aircraft
in the increment two configuration, known as the VH-71B. The
committee understands that the first contractor-provided test
article for the VH-71B will not be delivered to the Navy until
2008, and that the modification of VH-71A test articles into
the VH-71B configuration will not start until the later half of
fiscal year 2008 and will not be completed until the later half
of fiscal year 2009. The committee believes that the obligation
of funds to begin long lead procurement of materials for VH-71B
aircraft in fiscal year 2007 is premature.
The committee recommends $643.6 million, a decrease of
$39.0 million in PE 64273N for the VH-71 helicopter program.
Virtual-at-sea training technologies
The budget request contained $82.0 million in PE 63236N for
warfighter sustainment advanced technology, but included no
funding for leveraging virtual-at-sea training (VAST)
technologies in support of qualification and readiness training
for the Littoral Combat Ship (LCS).
The committee understands that training in a simulated
environment can provide valuable crew experience in a cost
effective manner, and provides in some cases the only means to
train for certain contingencies. The committee notes that the
Navy's ``Report to Congress on Annual Long-Range Plan for
Construction of Naval Vessels for FY 2007'' describes a future
force structure that includes 55 LCSs, although none have been
commissioned to date. Given the large number of ships in this
class planned for procurement, the committee believes
investment in training technologies is particularly prudent.
The committee recommends an increase of $5.0 million for PE
63236N for extension of VAST technologies to support crew
training for LCS.
Warfare protection advanced technology
The budget request contained $18.0 million in PE 63729N for
warfare protection advanced technology, but included no funds
for the Naval Special Warfare Performance and Injury Prevention
Program. The committee is aware that the Performance and Injury
Prevention Program would implement intervention models that
will permit Navy special operations forces to mitigate the risk
of musculoskeletal injury and optimize physical performance.
The committee recommends $20.5 million in PE 63729N, an
increase of $2.5 million for the Naval Special Warfare
Performance and Injury Prevention Program.
Wet end installation system element
The budget request contained $58.3 million in PE 64784N for
distributed surveillance system, but included no funding for
the wet end installation system element (WISE).
The committee supports the Navy's efforts to enhance anti-
submarine warfare (ASW) capability by shifting the focus from
expensive platforms to relatively inexpensive networked
sensors. The Navy's current program, the advanced deployable
system, is a passive acoustic surveillance system that will be
deployed from a littoral combat ship equipped with the ASW
mission package. The committee believes the value of such
systems is further enhanced by covert deployment. WISE will
employ submarine based expendable unmanned underwater vehicles
to install fixed sensor fields, with a goal of reducing system
cost by 50 percent.
The committee recommends an increase of $3.4 million for PE
64784N for continued development of WISE and the expendable
array installation vehicle.
Wireless maritime inspection system
The budget request contained $817.5 million in PE 64300N
for SC-21 total ship engineering, but included no funds for the
wireless maritime inspection system.
The wireless maritime inspection system will establish an
operational capability that reduces the risk associated with
military interception operations. The committee recognizes that
this system will allow Navy personnel to board ships, as
needed, to effectively inspect personnel, cargo and other items
on the suspect ship while being connected in near real-time to
critical Navy organizations. Specifically, it will enable
boarding teams to transmit intelligence such as photos of crew,
passports and evidence to the operational commander and
national agencies in near-real time. The committee notes this
will allow senior personnel to remotely make decisions without
having to recall a portion of the interdiction team. This
capability will provide improved force protection, as well as
enable real-time correlation with other interdiction operations
to ensure broader effectiveness.
The committee recommends an increase of $5.0 million in PE
64300N to be used for the wireless maritime inspection system.
Air Force Research, Development, Test, and Evaluation
Overview
The budget request contained $24.4 billion for Air Force
research, development, test, and evaluation (RDT&E).
The committee recommends $24.8 billion, an increase of
$413.3 million to the budget request.
Items of Special Interest
Active feedback flow control technology
The budget request contained $112.8 million in PE 62201F
for aerospace vehicle technologies, including $2.0 million for
advancement of intelligent aerospace systems (AIAS).
The committee understands that AIAS focuses on the concept
and development of valuable simulation tools for Air Force
engineers and scientists for assessment of proposed future Air
Force weapons systems. AIAS incorporates active feedback flow
control (AFFC) technology for simulation and modeling tools in
the evaluations of unsteady aerodynamic, turbulence, thermal
and noise studies. Currently, there are no universal, validated
tools available for the new weapon systems development program
designer interested in using AFFC concepts at the beginning
stages of design. The committee also understands AFFC tools are
highly relevant for a broad spectrum of designs and development
such as onboard intelligence for maneuvering missiles and
projectiles, and onboard intelligence for unmanned air
vehicles, and micro-unmanned air vehicles utilizing
neurobiological inspired computational processes.
Therefore, the committee recommends an increase of $3.0
million in PE 62201F for AIAS in the development of AFFC.
Advanced engine starter/generator system prototype
The budget request contained $170.9 million in PE 62203F
for aerospace propulsion, but included no funds for the
development of an advanced engine starter/generator (AESG)
system for future aircraft.
The committee notes that existing engine starter/generator
systems on current and future designed aircraft are physically
heavy and expensive to procure and sustain. The AESG contains
design and technology advancements in power-electronics and
high-speed-machinery. Subsequently, the AESG has the potential
to provide future aircraft with a high-powered, engine starter/
generator system that is 30 percent less in weight and 28
percent lower in lifecycle cost.
Therefore, the committee recommends an increase of $3.5
million for development of an advanced engine starter/generator
system.
Advanced optics and laser space technology
The budget request contained $51.3 million in PE 63605F for
advanced weapons technology, including $21.4 million for
advanced optics and laser space technology.
The committee believes that characterization of laser
propagation through atmospheric turbulence and demonstration of
advanced adaptive optical and tracking technologies are
critical enabling technologies for applications such as high-
resolution satellite imaging, space object illumination and
tracking, and satellite diagnostics testing. However, the
committee is concerned by the potential applicability of this
technology development for anti-satellite and advanced space
weapons capabilities. Therefore, the committee directs that
none of the funds authorized for this program element shall be
used for development or demonstration of laser space
technologies with anti-satellite weapons purposes.
The committee recommends $44.8 million in PE 63605F, a
decrease of $6.5 million for advanced optics and laser space
technology.
Advanced spacecraft technology
The budget request contained $68.0 million in PE 63401F for
advanced spacecraft technology, but included no funds for
precision integrated navigation and position-intelligent
networking technology (PINPOINT), small, low-cost
reconnaissance spacecraft, or intelligent free space optical
satellite communications nodes.
The committee is aware that PINPOINT operates through
cooperative navigation, which enables an array of satellites to
form a more accurate, integrated navigation solution through
the fusion of all global positioning satellite system
information available within the array. With this approach, a
satellite that cannot form a complete navigation solution on
its own, due to poor geometry plasma effects, jamming or
interference, can now accurately determine its position through
interaction with other array members. The committee believes
that this technology directly improves warfighter capabilities
by enabling improved situational awareness and relative
position accuracies.
The committee recognizes that small reconnaissance
spacecraft that cost less than $4.0 million each could fulfill
a variety of military and intelligence applications. The
committee believes that a program focused on integrating low-
mass, low-cost components into a single purpose imaging
satellite, while maintaining 80 percent of the performance
specifications of other larger imaging spacecraft currently in
development could be of great value to the Department of
Defense and the Intelligence Community.
Further, the committee is aware that on-going military
operations require dramatic increases in space communications
bandwidth through secure communications networks. The committee
feels that lightweight, low-cost spacecraft laser
communications hardware technology can reduce the development
risk of the transformation communication architecture program
by providing the capability for low-cost, adaptive, multi-
access laser and radio frequency communications.
The committee recommends $84.0 million in PE 63401F, an
increase of $16.0 million, including $5.0 million for PINPOINT,
$4.0 million for small, low-cost reconnaissance spacecraft, and
$7.0 million for intelligent free space optical satellite
communications nodes.
Affordable lightweight power supply development
The budget request contained $170.9 million in PE 62203F
for applied research in aerospace propulsion, but included no
funds for lightweight proton exchange membrane fuel cells.
The committee notes the need of U.S. armed forces for
efficient and robust power sources. Fuel cells, which are
lighter than conventional batteries or generator power
supplies, offer a high potential for reducing vehicle fuel
consumption, the weight of the subsistence and combat load
carried by individual soldiers, marines, sailors, and airmen in
the field, environmental pollution, and an enemy's ability to
detect combat vehicles. The committee further notes advances in
technology and the potential for development of durable and
cost-effective high temperature proton exchange membrane fuel
cells that would address these operational requirements.
The committee recommends an increase of $3.2 million in PE
62203F for applied research in lightweight proton exchange
membrane fuel cells.
B-52 internal weapons bay upgrade
The budget request contained $71.4 million in PE 11113F for
B-52 squadrons, but contained no funds for the military-
standard-1760 (MIL-STD-1760) integration for the B-52 internal
weapons bay upgrade.
The committee understands modernization and upgrade efforts
are underway for the B-52 aircraft to enable employment of
precision guided weapons from both the internal weapons bay and
the external wing pylons. These upgrades will allow the
aircraft to employ advanced precision guided weapons such as
the joint direct attack munition, the joint air-to-surface
stand- off missile, and the joint stand-off weapon. The
committee understands that the MIL-STD-1760 provides a common
interface between the weapons and the aircraft, and is used to
transfer guidance information to the weapons located in the
internal bay racks and on the external wing pylons.
Therefore, the committee recommends $77.4 million in PE
11113F, an increase of $6.0 million for accelerated integration
of the MIL-STD-1760 into the internal weapons bay of the B-52.
B-52 stand-off jammer program
The budget request contained no funds in PE 64429F for the
B-52 stand-off jammer (SOJ) program. The budget request also
terminated the B-52 SOJ program in order to fund Air Force
transformational activities in the remaining Future Years
Defense Program (FYDP).
The committee notes that in PE 64429F, Congress
appropriated $107.1 million in fiscal year 2006 for the B-52
SOJ program. The committee notes that current Air Force
electronic attack requirements are being fulfilled by Marine
Corps EA-6B platforms scheduled to be completely retired in
2012. Further, the committee understands the B-52 SOJ program
was originally developed to fulfill future Air Force electronic
attack requirements beginning in 2012 to mitigate the
capability gap created by the retirement of the EA-6B.
Consequently, the committee is deeply concerned that the
Air Force will not have a replacement electronic attack
capability once the Marine Corps EA-6B platform is retired, and
strongly encourages the Secretary of the Air Force to reexamine
the decision to cancel the B-52 SOJ program in light of this
capability gap.
Biostatic protective clothing
The budget request contained $1.0 million in PE 48011F for
agile combat support, but included no funds for development of
biostatic protective clothing.
The committee understands that the capabilities of
biostatic protective clothing include a thermally efficient
wicking concept made with an extruded continuous filament yarn
which has the potential for superior moisture management. The
committee is aware that early biostatic protective clothing
prototypes have been tested and found to resolve some
shortcomings associated with clothing used by those military
personnel currently deployed to combat theaters of operation.
Consequently, the committee recommends $3.9 million in PE
48011F, an increase of $2.9 million for biostatic protective
clothing.
C-130 airlift squadrons
The budget request contained $248.3 million in PE 41115F
for C-130 development programs, but included no funds for
development of the automated inspection, repair, corrosion and
aircraft tracking (AIRCAT) system.
The AIRCAT system develops tools for collection and
analysis of data for the purpose of instituting a condition-
based maintenance (CBM) program on the C-130 aircraft. The
committee understands CBM techniques are used in many aviation
activities because they improve fleet maintenance planning and
management, improve safety through a better awareness of flight
worthiness, and reduce total ownership costs. The committee
notes that Congress appropriated $2.5 million for the AIRCAT
system for fiscal year 2006, and believes that this program
should be continued.
Accordingly, the committee recommends $255.4 million in PE
41115F for C-130 development programs, an increase of $7.1
million for the AIRCAT system.
Combatant commanders' integrated command and control system
The budget request contained $50.9 million in PE 35906F for
the combatant commanders' integrated command and control system
(CCIC2S).
The committee believes that the modernization and
integration of the command and control systems at Cheyenne
Mountain, Colorado is critical to adequately support the North
American Aerospace Defense Command, U.S. Northern Command, and
U.S. Strategic Command. However, the committee is aware of
management deficiencies in the program that are resulting in a
significant cost overrun and an undefined delivery schedule.
Therefore, the committee directs the Secretary of Defense
to maintain essential operation and maintenance activities, and
limit future investment to only the developmental activities
deemed essential to national security needs. Prior to
proceeding with further development, the committee directs the
Secretary of Defense to ensure that the Department of Defense
(DOD) approves an acquisition approach that designates the
program as a major automated information system. In addition,
the committee directs the Secretary of Defense to submit a
report by March 1, 2007, to the congressional defense
committees that includes an affordability assessment to
demonstrate that the program's resource estimates will be
available and realistic in terms of DOD's overall long-range
modernization priorities and investment plans, an economic
analysis that assesses the lifecycle costs and benefits of the
program, and an independent estimate of program lifecycle cost.
The committee recommends no funding in PE 35906F for
CCIC2S, a decrease of $50.9 million.
Distributed mission interoperability toolkit program
The budget request contained $0.2 million in PE 64740F for
development of integrated command and control applications, but
included no funds for the distributed mission interoperability
toolkit (DMIT) program.
The DMIT is a suite of software tools that enables on-
demand, trusted, interoperability among and between air mission
command, control, communication, computer and intelligence
(C4I) systems and mission simulator models. The committee
understands that the DMIT program leverages best practices from
the commercial sector including the use of open architectures,
existing and emerging web standards, and state-of-the-art
technologies to provide a more efficient translation of air
mission tasks from C4I systems into a format compatible with
mission simulator formats. The committee notes that Congress
appropriated an increase of $5.0 million in fiscal year 2006
for this purpose, and believes that the DMIT program should be
continued in fiscal year 2007.
Accordingly, the committee recommends $5.2 million in PE
64740F, an increase of $5.0 million for continuation of the
DMIT program.
Engineering tool improvement program
The budget request contained $106.1 million in PE 62500F
for multi-disciplinary space technology, but included no
funding for the engineering tool improvement program (ETIP).
The committee notes Congress has appropriated funding for
the ETIP since fiscal year 2003. The ETIP effort provides the
Air Force Research Laboratory with the ability to rapidly
assess system viability and mission suitability by performing
design and analysis of aerospace vehicles and propulsion
technologies during the design phase.
The committee recommends an increase of $3.0 million in PE
62500F for ETIP.
High accuracy network determination system
The budget request contained $6.0 million in PE 63444F Maui
space surveillance system, but included no funds for the high
accuracy network determination system (HANDS).
The committee believes that low cost, innovative
technologies are needed to address critical space situational
awareness needs and notes that HANDS research is leading to a
networked, operationally secure, multi-sensor system, which
could obtain highly accurate observations of space objects and
reduce the potential for collisions of space objects by
reducing errors in the current space-object maintenance
catalog.
The committee recommends $11.0 million for PE 63444F, an
increase of $5.0 million for HANDS.
High modulus polyacrylonitrile carbon fiber
The budget request contained $111.1 million in PE 62102F
for materials, but included no funds for high modulus
polyacrylonitrile (PAN) carbon fiber.
The committee notes that high modulus PAN carbon fiber
research and development is in line with and supportive of the
Air Force's initiatives for advanced composite parts
development and carbon fiber sourcing. High modulus PAN carbon
fiber is in demand by composite manufacturers for the
production of military aircraft, as well as components of
missiles and satellites where there is a need for material
stiffness at a relatively low weight. Currently only one
manufacturer of high modulus PAN carbon fiber exists and is
located overseas. The committee urges the Department of Defense
to secure a domestic-based manufacturer of high modulus PAN
carbon fiber.
Therefore, the committee recommends an increase of $3.0
million in PE 62102F for the development and certification of a
domestic-based manufacturer of high modulus PAN carbon fiber.
Human systems integration
The budget request included $92.9 million in PE 62202F for
human effectiveness applied research, but contained no funding
for improved performance research integration (IMPRINT).
The committee supports further development of IMPRINT in
support of the airman performance integration (AIRPRINT)
program and in conjunction with other Department of Defense
human systems integration efforts.
Therefore, the committee recommends an increase of $3.0
million in PE 62202F for IMPRINT to further develop human
systems integration modeling throughout the Department.
Interactive avionics roadmap
The budget request contained no funds in PE 72239F for
avionics component improvement programs, and other program
elements included no funds for development of the interactive
avionics roadmap.
The interactive avionics roadmap is a tool that provides
program managers with real-time, internet web-based data that
is used to continually monitor and forecast program
requirements. The interactive avionics roadmap would enable
program managers to monitor changes as they occur and implement
mitigation alternatives as required on a real-time basis. The
committee understands that existing roadmap documents are
heavily manpower dependent, and are subject to degradation as
changes in program requirements are encountered; and the
committee believes that the use of interactive avionics
roadmaps would automate data feeds, reduce costs for avionics
systems, and enhance the ability of program managers to more
proactively manage and prioritize budgets based on more up-to-
date system requirements.
Therefore, the committee recommends $2.0 million in PE
72239F, an increase of $2.0 million for development of the
interactive avionics roadmap.
Joint advanced global strike demonstration
The budget request contained $14.7 million in PE 65860F for
the Rocket Systems Launch program, but included no funds for
prompt global strike development.
The committee notes that the 2006 Quadrennial Defense
Review called for improved capability for prompt, conventional
global strike. The committee is aware that U.S. Strategic
Command has approved the concept of a joint advanced global
strike (JAGS) demonstration that would use ballistic missile
boosters currently in the inventory, as vehicles for a new
land-based prompt global strike capability. The committee notes
that the Rocket Systems Launch program can use its excess
ballistic missile assets to develop a land-based prompt
conventional global strike capability.
The committee recommends $26.7 million in PE 65860F, an
increase of $12.0 million for the JAGS demonstration program.
Joint strike fighter development
The budget request contained $2.0 billion in PE 64800F for
the Department of the Air Force's development of the joint
strike fighter (JSF), also known as the F-35, but included no
funds for research and development of a second aircraft tire
source for the JSF and other existing combat aircraft, or for
development of an alternate JSF engine. The committee notes
that the budget request also includes $2.0 billion in PE 64800N
for the Department of the Navy's development of JSF.
The committee understands that aircraft tires are a high-
demand, critical component needed to sustain high military
operational tempos, and believes that a second JSF tire
sourceshould be established in the United States to ensure that a
reliable and sustainable source of aircraft tires are available to meet
requirements for the JSF and other aircraft. Consequently, the
committee recommends an increase of $1.5 million for research and
development of a second tire source for the JSF and other existing
combat aircraft. The committee expects that these funds will be used
for the development of advanced reinforced materials and new materials
for combat aircraft tires.
The JSF alternate engine program is developing the F136
engine which would provide an alternative to the currently-
planned F135 engine. In the committee report (H. Rept. 109-89)
accompanying the National Defense Authorization Report for
Fiscal Year 2006, the committee expressed its belief that a
two-engine source for the single-engine JSF would be the most
cost effective and operationally effective engine solution
during the JSF's service life, and is disappointed that the
budget request did not include funds for development of an
alternate JSF engine beyond fiscal year 2006. During a hearing
held by the Subcommittee on Tactical Air and Land Forces on
March 16, 2006, the Under Secretary of Defense for Acquisition,
Technology, and Logistics testified, ``While the benefits of a
second supplier are undeniable, our judgment is that those
benefits are not worth the substantial financial cost of a
second supplier.'' To confirm those judgments, the committee
requested that the Government Accountability Office (GAO)
witness at the hearing review and report on the Department of
Defense's analysis that resulted in the judgment to terminate
the JSF alternate engine program. On April 12, 2006, the GAO
witness reported to the committee that the ``Department of
Defense's quantitative analysis focuses only on potential
savings for engine acquisition and does not appear to fully
examine potential savings that may be possible when competition
exists for providing support for maintenance and operations
over the lifecycle of the engine.'' The committee concurs with
GAO's observation, and believes that the JSF alternate engine
program should continue until the Department of Defense fully
analyzes potential costs and savings resulting from competition
over the JSF engine's lifecycle.
Accordingly, the committee recommends an increase of $408.0
million to continue the JSF alternate engine program for fiscal
year 2007. Additionally, the committee recommends a provision
(section 211) that would require that the Department of the
Navy and the Department of the Air Force obligate not less than
$408.0 million, of the funds authorized to be appropriated for
the system development and demonstration program for the Joint
Strike Fighter, for continued development of an alternate
engine for the Joint Strike Fighter. The committee also
recommends a provision (section 215) that would require both
the Secretary of Defense, acting through the Department of
Defense Cost Analysis Improvement Group, and the Comptroller
General to conduct independent analyses of the JSF alternate
engine program and provide a report to the congressional
defense committees by March 15, 2007.
In total, the committee recommends $2.4 billion in PE
64800F for the Department of the Air Force's portion of JSF
development, an increase of $409.5 million.
KC-135 aerial refueling aircraft recapitalization program
The budget request contained $203.9 million in PE 41221F
for the KC-135 aerial refueling aircraft recapitalization
program (KC-X).
The committee fully supports recapitalization of the KC-135
aerial refueling fleet. The committee notes that a system
development and design (SDD) contract would not likely be
awarded until the end of fiscal year 2007, in accordance with
the estimated acquisition schedule of the Air Force. Further,
Congress appropriated $100.0 million in fiscal year 2005 for
the Tanker Replacement Transfer Fund, and $97.8 million in
fiscal year 2006 for the KC-X program, of which only $10.2
million has been obligated thus far. The committee understands
that approximately $70.0 million is required to execute an SDD
contract in fiscal year 2007. The committee believes the
unobligated balance of $187.6 million should be sufficient to
support funding requirements for the KC-X program in fiscal
year 2007.
Therefore, the committee recommends $152.4 million in PE
41221F, a decrease of $51.5 million for the KC-X program.
Large aircraft countermeasures system for AC-130U aircraft
The budget request contained $34.9 million in PE 41134F for
development and integration of the large aircraft
countermeasures (LAIRCM) system on various airlift and tanker
aircraft, but included no funds to integrate the LAIRCM system
on the AC-130U aircraft.
The AC-130U is a heavily-armed aircraft which uses side-
firing weapons integrated with sensor, navigation, and fire
control systems to provide precise firepower for close air
support, air interdiction and force protection missions. The
LAIRCM system, which is planned for integration on various
airlift and tanker aircraft, provides a capability to detect,
track, jam and counter incoming surface-to-air, infra-red
guided missiles. The committee notes that the Air Force Chief
of Staff has included the integration of the LAIRCM system on
the Air Force Special Operations Command's (AFSOC) HC-130 and
MC-130 aircraft among his top unfunded priorities for fiscal
year 2007, and believes that the LAIRCM system should be
integrated into AFSOC's AC-130U fleet.
Accordingly, the committee recommends $49.9 million in PE
41134F, an increase of $15.0 million to integrate the LAIRCM
system on the AC-130U aircraft.
Laser peening fatigue life extension
The budget request contained $36.7 million in PE 78011F for
various manufacturing technology programs, but included no
funds for testing, demonstration, and evaluation of laser
peening technology for military aircraft landing gear.
The committee understands that the laser peening process
has the potential to strengthen metals thereby extending the
life and improving the fatigue strength, while also providing
increased resistance to corrosion and cracking. The committee
further understands that the laser peening process is used in
the commercial aviation industry and has shown promise in
improving the fatigue strength of commercial aircraft landing
gear. Based on commercial experience, the committee believes
that the laser peening process also has the potential to
improve fatigue strength for military landing gear systems.
Consequently, the committee recommends an increase of $3.0
million in PE 78011F for the testing, demonstration and
evaluation of laser peening technology as a metal fatigue
prevention tool to extend the life of military aircraft landing
gear.
Low emission hybrid electric engine propulsion
The budget request contained $10.6 million in PE 78611F for
support systems development, but included no funds for the
testing of low emission and fuel efficient hybrid electric
engine propulsion systems for Air Force heavy tactical wheeled
vehicles such as aviation refueling trucks.
The committee is aware that existing Air Force aviation
refueling trucks operate over short distances in a manner that
causes high fuel use, high emissions and decreased engine life.
The committee notes that a first generation hybrid electric
vehicle has been delivered to the Air Force for testing and
understands this technology would potentially deliver a better
than 40 percent improvement in fuel efficiency.
The committee recommends $13.6 million in PE 78611F, an
increase of $3.0 million for the continued refinement in system
development and demonstration of low emission and fuel
efficient hybrid electric engine propulsion for use by aviation
refueling trucks.
Major test and evaluation investment
The budget request contained $58.5 million in PE 64759F for
major test and evaluation investment, but included limited
funds for acquisition of hardware and software for data
management and archiving systems for the effective collection,
management, distribution, and long-term availability of flight
test data.
The committee recommends an increase of $5.8 million in PE
64759F for an enterprise test data management system at the Air
Force Flight Test Center, Edwards Air Force Base, California,
and an additional increase of $3.0 million in PE 64759F for
hardware and software to improve the flight test ground
infrastructure and tools at the Air Armament Center, Eglin Air
Force Base, Florida.
Materials
The budget request contained $111.1 million in PE 62102F
for materials applied research, but included no funds for
research for electronic type-specific buckytubes.
The committee recognizes the national need for electronic
type-specific buckytubes for military, intelligence, and
homeland security applications. Therefore, the committee
believes there is a need to ensure the continual improvements
of capabilities in these areas.
The committee recommends an increase of $9.4 million in PE
62102F for development of electronic type-specific buckytubes.
Measurement and signature intelligence (MASINT) visualization tools
program
The budget request contained $119.2 million in PE 62702F
for command, control and communications, but included no funds
for the measurement and signature intelligence (MASINT)
visualization tools program.
The committee notes that the (MASINT) visualization tools
program would integrate measurement and signature intelligence
into existing and future information processing architectures
so that information could be managed and displayed in real-time
without processing delays.
The committee recommends $125.2 million in PE 62702F, an
increase of $6.0 million for the accelerated development of the
MASINT visualization tools program.
Metals affordability initiative
The budget request included $48.9 million in PE 63112F for
advanced materials for weapon systems.
The committee supports the continued government-industry
collaboration provided through the Metals Affordability
Initiative, providing significant improvements in the
manufacturing of specialty metals for aerospace applications
for the private and government sectors of the aerospace
industry.
The committee recommends an additional $11.3 million in PE
63112F for the Metals Affordability Initiative.
Nanocrystalline diamond coatings
The budget request included $111.1 million in PE 62102F for
materials applied research and $64.7 million in PE 63003A for
aviation advanced technology, but included no funds for
nanocrystalline diamond coatings.
The committee understands that a nanocrystalline diamond
coating has been developed with characteristics that offer
increased durability, transparency, and protective
characteristics to include anti-icing and abrasion protection
for aircraft surfaces.
The committee recommends an additional $2.9 million in PE
62102F and $2.9 million in PE 63003A for development and
application of nanocrystalline coatings on radome and high wear
aircraft components for testing.
Operationally responsive space
The budget request contained $35.6 million in PE 64857F for
operationally responsive space.
The committee recognizes that the Department of Defense
recently began developing an affordable, rapid reaction
combination of spacelift, launch control, and satellites in an
effort to provide responsive tactical satellite capabilities to
the warfighter. The committee commends this effort and believes
that continued pursuit of low-cost, responsive tactical
capabilities can fill a niche capability requested by the
warfighter and lead to long-term benefits by advancing
technology, enhancing the skills of the space cadre, and
broadening the space industrial base.
The committee recommends $55.6 million in PE 64857F, an
increase of $20.0 million for operationally responsive space.
Radio frequency identification tag rapid adoption initiative, phase 2
The budget request contained $36.7 million in PE 78011F for
industrial preparedness, but contained no funding for the
Frequency Identification Tag Rapid Adoption Initiative, Phase
2.
The committee believes that great efficiencies can be
gained, and more importantly, capability delivered rapidly to
the front line troops, through a systemic adoption of radio
frequency identification tagging within the Department of
Defense's logistics enterprise. Given the disparate logistics
systems throughout the Department, no single entity is focused
on the system wide adoption of this promising technology.
The committee recommends an increase of $3.0 million in PE
78011F for the Radio Frequency Identification Tag Rapid
Adoption Initiative, Phase 2.
Small diameter bomb
The budget request included $224.2 million in PE 64240F for
the B-2 advanced technology bomber, but contained no funds for
the integration of the small diameter bomb.
The committee recognizes the unique attributes of the B-2
bomber as a stealthy, long-range delivery platform and supports
further development of the fleet as a means to address the
evolving nature of potential threats.
The committee recognizes the potential benefit of
maintaining a long-range delivery system with the capacity to
carry heavy and medium, as well as relatively lightweight
munitions. The committee is encouraged with the potential
capabilities of the 250-pound small diameter bomb and intrigued
with the possibility of coupling this technology with the B-2
program.
Therefore, the committee recommends an increase of $16.0
million in PE 64240F to integrate the small diameter bombs
aboard the B-2 bomber.
Space-based radar
The budget request contained $266.4 million in PE 63858F
for space-based radar.
The committee is aware that the Executive Agent for Space
of the Department of Defense is taking steps to restructure the
space-based radar program in order to address concerns about
the affordability of space-based radar, and is evaluating the
potential to develop on-orbit demonstration satellites to
validate technology maturity and costs. The committee commends
the Department for this effort and encourages continued
progress towards an effective and affordable space radar
capability. However, the committee believes that a 171 percent
increase over fiscal year 2006 funded level is unwarranted as
the space radar program does not have a finalized development
approach or a concept of operations.
The committee recommends $236.4 million in PE 63858F, a
decrease of $30.0 million for space-based radar.
Space control test capabilities
The budget request contained $47.3 million in PE 64421F for
counterspace systems, but contained no funds for space control
test capabilities (SCTC).
The committee is aware that the integration of new space
control systems and requirements into the existing command and
control architecture requires significant objective analysis in
order to optimize systems effectiveness and prevent degradation
or failure of the command and control infrastructure. The
committee believes that SCTC provides a method of assessing the
effects of loading data from newly developed systems into the
existing command and control infrastructure, thereby providing
a test capability prior to development of system requirements.
The committee recommends $52.3 million in PE 64421F, an
increase of $5.0 million for space control test capabilities.
Space technology
The budget request contained $85.6 million in PE 62601F for
space technology, but contained no funds for elastic memory
composites or for deployable structures for space.
The committee notes space-qualified elastic memory
composite materials can significantly improve the reliability
of on-orbit spacecraft deployment mechanisms and may enable
composite tank structures for spacecraft applications.
The committee believes that continued improvement in
spacecraft deployment systems is necessary to achieve the large
apertures needed to support enhanced imaging and improved space
situational awareness requirements.
The committee recommends $91.6 million for PE 62601F, an
increase of $6.0 million, to include $3.0 million for elastic
memory composites and $3.0 million for deployable space
structures.
Tactical automated security system advanced communications module
The budget request contained $0.2 million in PE 63287F for
physical security equipment, but included no funds for the
tactical automated security system (TASS) advanced
communications module.
TASS systems are widely deployed by the U.S. Air Force and
other services supporting current operations and provide both
physical security and force protection. The committee is aware
the current communications element of TASS has limited
bandwidth capability and is subject to obsolescence due to age.
The committee recommends $3.2 million in PE 63287F, an
increase of $3.0 million to complete the development of the
TASS advanced communications module.
Transformational satellite communications system
The budget request contained $867.1 million in PE 63845F
for the transformational satellite communications systems
(TSAT).
The committee is aware that the TSAT program has been
restructured into a block-build approach that will reduce the
complexity and capacity of the first block of satellites in an
effort to reduce development and integration risk and increase
schedule confidence. While the committee believes this
restructuring, along with budgeting TSAT to 80/20 cost
confidence, is appropriate based on historical performance of
the TSAT program, the committee is concerned that the two-fold
increase in the TSAT budget can not be prudently executed.
The committee recommends $787.1 million in PE 63845F, a
decrease of $80.0 million for TSAT.
Winglets for in-service aircraft
The committee commends the Air Force in its efforts to
increase aircraft fuel efficiency and decrease fuel
consumption. The committee notes that initiatives such as re-
engining aircraft, modifying in-flight profiles, and revising
aircraft ground operations contribute to decreased fuel
consumption and increased life-cycle savings.
The committee is aware that winglet technology exists for
aircraft to increase fuel efficiency, improve take-off
performance, increase cruise altitudes, and increase payload
and range capability. The committee notes that winglets are
currently used on commercial aircraft and result in a five to
seven percent increase in fuel efficiency. On September 16,
1981, the National Aeronautics and Space Administration
released the KC-135 Winglet Program Review on the incorporation
of winglets for KC-135 aerial refueling aircraft. However, the
Air Force concluded that the cost of adding winglets to the KC-
135 did not provide sufficient payback in fuel savings or
increased range to justify modification. Although the Air Force
did conclude that modifying aircraft with winglets could
increase fuel efficiency, the Air Force determined thatre-
engining the KC-135 aircraft produced a greater return on investment.
The committee believes that incorporating winglets on military aircraft
could increase fuel efficiency on certain platforms and that the Air
Force should reexamine incorporating this technology onto its
platforms.
Therefore, the committee directs the Secretary of the Air
Force to provide a report to the congressional defense
committees by March 1, 2007, examining the feasibility of
modifying Air Force aircraft with winglets. The report shall
include a cost comparison analysis of the cost of winglet
modification compared to the return on investment realized over
time for each airlift, aerial refueling, and intelligence,
surveillance, and reconnaissance aircraft in the Air Force
inventory; the market price of aviation fuel at which
incorporating winglets would be beneficial for each Air Force
platform; all positive and negative impacts to aircraft
maintenance and flight operations; and investment strategies
the Air Force could implement with commercial partners to
minimize Air Force capital investment and maximize investment
return.
Defense-Wide Research, Development, Test, and Evaluation
Overview
The budget request contained $20.8 billion for Defense-wide
research, development, test, and evaluation (RDT&E).
The committee recommends $20.8 billion, a decrease of $46.9
million to the budget request.
Items of Special Interest
Accelerated intelligence analyst education and training
The budget request contained no funds in PE 33140G within
the information systems security program for intelligence
analyst education and training.
The committee is aware that the defense intelligence
community needs a new generation of intelligence analysts due
to the emergence of new missions and the retirement of older
analysts. The committee further understands that there are very
few colleges and universities that provide organized degree
programs that can lead to intelligence analyst certification in
preparation for subsequent entry into the defense intelligence
analyst career field. The lack of such programs is compounded
by the lengthy security clearance process, making it more
challenging to develop a qualified analyst pool.
The committee recommends an increase of $3.0 million in PE
33140G for the National Security Agency to establish a process
to identify those college and university curriculums that may
lead to intelligence analyst certification. The committee also
recommends this funding be used to identify those security
clearance eligible students enrolled in such programs who may
also be interested in pursuing a career as an intelligence
analyst.
Advanced data encryption technology
The budget request contained $404.3 million in PE 33140G
for the information systems security program, but included no
funding for advanced data encryption technology.
The committee supports the Department of Defense's (DOD)
increased emphasis on information assurance programs in the
budget request, but believes that more should be done to
address future cyber security threats. The committee is
concerned that the proliferation of super computers around the
globe renders DOD systems vulnerable to cyber attack, and
believes that the Department should pursue the development and
deployment of polymorphic encryption and decryption technology
to provide for more secure computer and data systems.
The committee recommends an increase of $4.0 million in PE
33140G for the development of the polymorphic encryption and
detection protocol.
Advanced SEAL Delivery System
The budget request contained $32.5 million in PE 1160426BB
for advanced SEAL delivery systems development, but included no
funds for a new design competition.
The committee understands that the Department of Defense
recently cancelled the advanced SEAL delivery system (ASDS) due
to its performance and reliability to date. The committee
believes a new design competition will ensure that the most
current technologies are incorporated into future ASDS designs
and will provide valuable information for future decisions
regarding the ASDS program.
The committee recommends $42.5 million in PE 1160426BB for
advanced SEAL delivery systems development, an increase of
$10.0 million for a new design competition.
Advanced surface radar technologies
The budget request contained no funds in PE 63720S for
advanced surface radar technologies (ASuRT).
The ASuRT program will focus on the development and
adaptation of electronic components for application in the
Navy's next-generation surface ship radar systems. The
committee notes that future theater air and missile defense
(TAMD) radar systems for next- generation surface ships must be
modular and scalable, have a designed-in growth path for
technology insertion upgrades, and must include major
improvements over current radar systems in power, sensitivity
and cost.
To support these requirements, the committee recommends an
increase of $8.0 million in PE 63720S and encourages the
Defense Microelectronics Activity organization to focus on the
development of lower cost, modular and open architecture radar
components for use in future TAMD radar systems.
Advanced tactical laser program
The budget request contained $80.4 million in PE 1160402BB
for special operations advanced technology development,
including $45.0 million for the advanced tactical laser
advanced concept technology demonstration (ATL ACTD).
The committee has previously expressed concern with the ATL
ACTD program but recognizes that funding in the fiscal year
2007 budget allows a full test of the integrated system and
completion of the ACTD.
Therefore, the committee recommends that no change be made
to the budget request of $45.0 million for the completion of
the ATL ACTD. The committee makes it clear that this funding
completes the ATL ACTD and that no further funding will be
provided past fiscal year 2007.
Ballistic missile defense
The budget request contained $9.3 billion for the ballistic
missile defense programs of the Missile Defense Agency (MDA).
The committee supports the more cautious, measured approach
to missile defense testing arising out of the Independent
Review Team recommendations and standup of the Mission
Readiness Task Force in 2005. While the committee understands
that the spiral development strategy employed by the Department
of Defense (DOD) for ballistic missile defense (BMD) is
appropriate to the research and development nature of the BMD
program elements, the committee also notes that rigorous
testing that leads to fielding of operational systems should
take priority over future block research and development
efforts.
A March 2006 Government Accountability Office (GAO) report
titled, ``Missile Defense Agency Fields Initial Capability but
Falls Short of Original Goals,'' is critical of several
fundamental management processes within the MDA, and cites
costs overruns at $458.0 million in fiscal year 2005, with
Ground-based Midcourse Defense (GMD) accounting for $365.0
million of this overrun, as well as a failure to meet program
goals for many program elements. The report states that while
both the Airborne Laser (ABL) and the Kinetic Energy
Interceptor (KEI) programs follow a knowledge-based strategy,
the GMD program has not. The GMD program is permitted by the
Department to concurrently mature technology, complete design
activities, and produce and field assets before end-to-end
testing of the GMD system. The GAOreport finds that the failure
to require this knowledge-based strategy of the GMD program has
resulted in poor quality control, cost overruns, and inability to
achieve performance goals.
The committee strongly encourages the Secretary of Defense
to implement a knowledge-based acquisition strategy for all
Ballistic Missile Defense System (BMDS) program elements, which
the committee understands is consistent with the DOD's
acquisition regulations. The committee agrees with GAO's
findings that BMDS program elements would benefit from the more
detailed knowledge-based review conducted by other DOD
acquisition programs.
The committee also agrees with certain aspects of GAO's
report, which questions whether MDA's current two-year block
strategy is compatible with the knowledge-based development
strategy. While stopping short of directing the Department to
restructure the two-year block organization of BMDS elements,
the committee directs the Secretary of Defense to conduct a
detailed review of the knowledge-based strategy in the context
of the existing two-year block organization of BMDS elements,
and report to the congressional defense committees by March 1,
2007, the findings and recommendations of this review. This
report shall specifically assess whether there are changes that
need to be made to the two-year block organization to more
appropriately reflect wider application of knowledge-based
strategies as has been utilized in the restructuring of the ABL
and KEI programs.
The committee recommends a reallocation of the request to
focus on testing and fielding of near-term capability ballistic
missile defense elements while deferring more long-term
efforts.
The committee recommends $9.1 billion, a decrease of $183.5
million for BMD programs of the Missile Defense Agency.
Aegis ballistic missile defense
The budget request contained $1.0 billion in PE 63892C for
Aegis ballistic missile defense (BMD).
The committee is encouraged by the Aegis BMD program
performance and overall cost/schedule performance. The
committee understands that budget constraints have reduced
planned SM-3 interceptor procurement, thereby delaying SM-3
interceptor deployment to Aegis BMD platforms.
The committee recommends $1.1 billion in PE 63892C for
Aegis BMD, an increase of $40.0 million, to include: $10.0
million for continued S-band advanced radar algorithm work for
missile defense applications, $10.0 million for Aegis open
architecture program acceleration, and $20.0 million to
increase the SM-3 production rate from two per month to four
per month.
Boost defense segment
The budget request contained $631.6 million in PE 63883C
for boost phase defense.
The committee notes that the Airborne Laser (ABL) program
achieved several significant milestones in 2005, including the
successful System Integration Laboratory laser long run
performance test and is scheduled to conduct a lethal
demonstration in calendar year 2008. While the ABL program
still faces risks associated with cutting-edge technology, the
committee believes that the potential benefits to national
security of a successful lethal demonstration warrant continued
program support. The committee notes with approval the
knowledge point-based foundation for the ABL program.
The committee recommends $631.6 million for PE 63883C, the
amount of the budget request.
Core
The budget request contained $473.1 million in PE 63890C
for ballistic missile defense systems (BMDS) core.
The committee is concerned with the results of a March 2006
Department of Defense Inspector General report finding
weaknesses in the Missile Defense Agency's systems engineering
plans and processes. The committee is particularly concerned
with the report's finding that the Aegis missile defense
system, an element of the BMDS that has achieved success in
actual intercept tests and that is being fielded and deployed
now, lacks an approved systems engineering plan. The committee
directs the Secretary of Defense to submit a report to the
congressional defense committees by February 1, 2007, stating
the specific deficiencies in the Aegis systems engineering plan
and the required corrective action.
The committee recommends $483.1 million in PE 63890C, an
increase of $10.0 million for additional support for the Aegis
missile defense system information assurance and systems
engineering integration efforts.
Midcourse defense segment
The budget request contained $2.9 billion in PE 63882C for
ballistic missile defense (BMD) midcourse defense segment.
The committee supports the restructured Ground-Based
Midcourse Defense (GMD) testing program following the
recommendations of the Independent Review Team and the new
charter from the Mission Readiness Task Force. As in previous
years, the committee continues to urge the Director of the
Missile Defense Agency to focus on robust testing of near-term
block capabilities even where that means deferring work on
future blocks. As noted above, the committee shares the
concerns of the Government Accountability Office (GAO) in their
March 2006 report, ``Missile Defense Agency Fields Initial
Capability but Falls Short of Original Goals,'' that the rush
to deploy GMD capabilities while concurrently developing future
blocks has negatively impacted the program. In order to sustain
the current fielded system, the committee recommends an
increase of $20.0 million to support concurrent test and
operations of the existing block 2004/2006 capability.
The committee notes that the budget request contained
$354.9 million for block 2008 development, including the
development and testing of new and evolving BMD systems
technologies. The budget request specifically referenced Block
2008 efforts that will include enhanced exo-atmospheric kill
vehicle (EKV) and sea-based X-band radar capabilities, and
additional GMD fire control capabilities and countermeasures
mitigation. While the committee understands that investing in
future capabilities is integral to a spiral development
program, the committee also believes it is premature to spend
funds on future technology development when the initial block
2004/2006 capability is yet to be tested in a successful end-
to-end flight intercept test. While the committee recommends
authorization of the requested $354.9 million for GMD Block
2008 development, the committee also withholds $200.0 million
of the request until 30 days after receiving certification from
the Secretary of Defense that the planned FTG-04 and FTG-05
intercept tests referenced in the March 17, 2006, GMD corrected
testing schedule forwarded to the committee have met their test
objectives. In the event that these tests objectives are not
met, the committee directs the Secretary to report to the
congressional defense committees within 30 days of the
completion of these intercept tests as to whether the remaining
block 2008 funds should be reallocated for additional testing
of the block 2004/2006 configuration.
The committee notes that the budget request contained
$118.9 million for block 2010, including $55.8 million for the
third site in Europe, and $63.1 million for long-lead items for
European site interceptors. The committee believes it is
premature to invest in the third site until the existing block
2004/2006 GMD configuration successfully completes integrated
end-to-end testing. Accordingly, the committee authorizes no
funds for the third site. With respect to long-lead procurement
of third site interceptors, the committee authorizes $63.1
million, the amount of the request, to initiate long-lead
procurement for interceptors 41-50 understanding that these
interceptors could be available for use as assets at either the
Fort Greeley, Alaska, or Vandenberg, California GMD sites.
The committee is concerned with reports of GMD costs
overruns, $365.0 million was reported by the GAO in the March
2006 report, as well as with problems GAO noted with the EKV.
The committee urges the Department of Defense to swiftly
address these issues with contractor performance.
The committee recommends $2.8 billion in PE 63882C, a
decrease of $35.8 million for the midcourse defense segment.
Multiple kill vehicle
The budget request contained $165.0 million in PE 63894C
for the Multiple Kill Vehicle program.
The committee notes that the request is triple the amount
of funding in fiscal year 2006 and is for a program that would
support the ballistic missile defense system program no earlier
than 2010. The committee believes the amount of the request to
be excessive for a program that is oriented for block 2010
prior to successful demonstration of the Exo-atmospheric Kill
Vehicle technology resident in the block 2004/2006 Ground-based
Midcourse Defense configurations.
The committee recommends $100.0 million, a decrease of
$65.0 million in PE 63894C for the Multiple Kill Vehicle
program, and encourages the Department of Defense to focus on
risk reduction for critical technologies.
System interceptor
The budget request contained $405.5 million in PE 63886C
for system interceptor.
The committee notes that in the National Defense
Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2006 (Public Law 109-163),
the conferees stated that the Department of Defense had
designated the Airborne Laser (ABL) program as the primary
boost phase defense and that the system interceptor, or Kinetic
Energy Interceptor (KEI) program, represented a risk-mitigation
strategy should ABL fail to perform as expected. The conferees
directed that fiscal year 2006 funding for the program be
focused on reducing high-technology challenges. The committee
understands that future funding profiles have resulted in
shifting the system interceptor from a 2012 to 2014 capability
and that the Department is also exploring use of the
interceptor in midcourse defense scenarios.
The committee is concerned with the affordability of
pursuing both the ABL and KEI programs in parallel through the
projected 2008 knowledge point demonstrations. Given that ABL
is the primary boost phase defense program and that the KEI
capability is not scheduled to be fielded until the 2014 time-
frame, the committee believes that the KEI program should
focuson only those critical technology efforts that support the 2008
booster demonstration. Any long-term efforts not directly associated
with the 2008 booster tests should be deferred until a decision is made
on the future of both the ABL and KEI programs.
The committee recommends $305.5 million in PE 63886C, a
decrease of $100.0 million for the system interceptor program,
and directs that the KEI program focus its priority on the 2008
booster demonstration.
Technology
The budget request contained $206.7 million in PE 63175C
for ballistic missile defense (BMD) technology.
The committee notes that the BMD technology request
includes $40.7 million for the High Altitude Airship (HAA);
however, the HAA program did not meet its weight or advanced
concept technology demonstration criteria last year. The
committee also notes that the request states that the benefit
to the ballistic missile defense system (BMDS) is for potential
use as a sensor and communications and/or weapons platform
without any greater connection to a specific BMDS element. The
committee does not view the HAA program as an essential element
of the BMDS system.
The committee recommends no funding for the HAA program.
The committee provides an additional $8.0 million in PE
63175C for the Net-Centric Airborne Defense Element (NCADE) to
continue the NCADE risk-mitigation program that commenced in
fiscal year 2006.
The committee recommends $173.9 million in PE 63175C for
BMD technology, a decrease of $32.7 million.
Biological warfare defense
The budget request contained $112.2 million in PE 62383E
for biological warfare defense applied research, but included
no funds for the development of asymmetrical protocols to
enhance biological defense capabilities.
The committee notes that there are a number of biological
agents that could, with the appropriate development and
weaponization, be used in biological warfare and terrorist
attack. Yet, developing specific protections against all
possible biological agents is not feasible. The cost of
developing one new medicine is currently estimated at $800.0
million and the average development time is 10 to 15 years. As
a result, the committee believes there is a need for
therapeutics that would provide broad spectrum protection
against a range of possible biological agents, necessitating
research in approaches for enhancing individual non-specific
immunities and blocking pathogens to a degree commensurate with
the biological warfare threat.
The committee recommends $124.2 million in PE 62383E for
biological warfare defense, an increase of $12.0 million for
asymmetrical protocols for biological defense enhancement.
Business transformation agency
The budget request contained $140.2 million in PE 65020BTA
for the research and development activities of the Business
Transformation Agency (BTA).
The committee supports the mission of the agency, but
believes that a new agency such as BTA will not be able to
effectively execute this funding.
The committee recommends $190.2 million in PE 65020BTA, a
decrease of $50.0 million for the Business Transformation
Agency.
Chemical-biological collective protective shelters
The budget request included $280.4 million in PE 62384BP
for chemical and biological defense applied research, but
contained no funds for low-cost collective protection shelters.
The committee continues to support efforts to improve
collective protection against chemical and biological agents.
Therefore, the committee recommends an increase of $5.0
million in PE 62384BP for low-cost collective protection
shelters.
Chemical and biological defense program
The committee recommends continuation of the chemical and
biological basic research, applied research, and advanced
technology development initiatives established in the Ronald W.
Reagan National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2005
(Public Law 108-375). These initiatives would provide
opportunities for emerging technologies and concepts to compete
for funding on the basis of technical merit and on the
contribution that such technologies could make to the chemical
and biological defense capabilities of the armed forces and to
homeland defense.
The committee also notes that the 2006 Quadrennial Defense
Review recommended an investment of more than $1.5 billion over
the next five years to develop broad-spectrum medical
countermeasures against advanced bio-terror threats, referred
to as the Transformational Medical Technology Initiative
(TMTI). This is an ambitious program, for which initial efforts
began in late fiscal year 2006. While the committee supports
both TMTI and the concept of broad-spectrum medical
countermeasures, the committee is concerned that the supporting
technologies identified in fiscal year 2006 will not be
sufficiently mature in fiscal year 2007 to execute the funding
proposed in the President's request for related applied
research and advanced technology development.
Advanced technology development
The budget request contained $207.1 million in PE 63384BP
for chemical and biological warfare defense advanced technology
development.
The committee recommends that the technologies to be
considered for funding under the chemical and biological
advanced technology development initiative, would include, but
would not be limited to the following:
(1) Antioxidant micronutrient therapeutic
countermeasures for chemical agents; and
(2) Advanced technologies for biological and chemical
agent detection sensor systems.
The committee recommends $197.1 million in PE 63384BP for
chemical and biological defense, an increase of $10.0 million
for the chemical and biological advanced technology development
initiative and a decrease of $20.0 million for the
Transformational Medical Technology Initiative.
Applied research
The budget request contained $280.4 million in PE 62384BP
for chemical and biological warfare defense applied research.
The committee recommends that the technologies to be
considered for funding under the chemical and biological
applied research initiative, would include, but would not be
limited to the following:
(1) Novel vaccine/therapeutic delivery means,
particularly for recombinant protein vaccines;
(2) Multipurpose biodefense immunoarrays and
diagnostic tools;
(3) Self-decontaminating polymer-based coatings for
fabrics and other substrates; and
(4) Novel prophylaxis/therapeutics effective against
biological warfare agents.
The committee recommends an increase in PE 62384BP of $20.0
million for the chemical and biological applied research
initiative and a decrease of $30.0 million in PE 62384BP for
the Transformational Medical Technology Initiative.
Basic research
The budget request contained $99.2 million in PE 61384BP
for chemical and biological warfare defense basic research.
The committee recommends that the technologies to be
considered for funding under the chemical and biological basic
research initiative, would include, but would not be limited to
the following:
(1) Mismatch repair technology for the development of
human antibodies for prophylactic and therapeutic
treatments; and
(2) Superstructural particle evaluation and
characterization with targeted reaction analysis of
emerging prophylactics for chemical and biological
agent protection.
The committee recommends $109.2 million in PE 61384BP for
chemical and biological defense, an increase of $10.0 million
for the chemical and biological basic research initiative.
Combating terrorism technology support
The budget request contained $65.8 million in PE 63122D8Z
for combating terrorism technology support, but included no
funds for additional prototypes of technologies for which the
Technical Support Working Group (TSWG) and its international
partners have previously invested.
The committee recommends TSWG support the development of a
limited number of additional prototypes of the following
systems for more rapid military utility evaluation: (1) SHIELD,
(2) COLD FIRE, (3) Wall Street, and (4) Muzzle Flash Detection
System.
The committee recommends an increase of $18.0 million in PE
63122D8Z for cooperative research, development, and
prototyping.
Generic logistics research and development technology demonstrations
The budget request contained $23.4 million in PE 63712S for
generic logistics research and development technology
demonstrations, but included no funds for the expansion of the
Connectory program for rapid identification of technology
sources for the Department of Defense (DOD), for the emerging
critical interconnection technology program, or for vacuum-
aided mobility packing technology.
The committee notes that the Department needs access to the
best available technologies from all sources, especially small
and medium size companies not normally accessed by the defense
acquisition process. The committee encourages the Defense
Logistics Agency to:
(1) Expand Connectory profiles to include detailed
sources for high-priority DOD required products and
services;
(2) Collaborate with DOD agencies and other
government organizations having databases of technology
products in order to test the feasibility of linking
the Connectory to these other data sources; and
(3) Explore ways to allow small companies to obtain
first-time business with the Department using the
Connectory program.
The committee also notes that printed circuit boards are
fundamental components of military navigation, guidance and
control, electronic warfare, missile, and surveillance and
communications equipment. Printed circuit boards for military
systems have unique design requirements for high performance,
high reliability, and the ability to operate under extreme
environmental conditions that require the use of high density,
highly rugged, and highly reliable interconnection technology.
Moreover, the commercial printed circuit board industry focuses
on the design and high-volume production of low-cost boards and
the United States has lost much of its printed circuit board
manufacturing capability to overseas sources. The committee
recognizes the need to enhance the United States' capability
for development and production of high density, highly reliable
printed circuit boards for use in U.S. military systems.
Finally, the committee understands vacuum-aided mobility
packing technology may provide considerable benefits for
transporting troop supplies. The committee is aware that such
technology may provide significant improvements in weight,
space, and handling requirements and may facilitate more
efficient utilization of military lift assets.
The committee recommends $34.4 million in PE 63712S for
generic logistics research and development technology
demonstrations, an increase of $1.0 million for the Connectory
program for rapid identification of technology sources for the
Department and an increase of $10.0 million for the emerging
critical interconnection technology program. The committee also
urges the Secretary of Defense to explore vacuum-aided mobility
packing technology as a potential cost saving measure.
Improved suborbital operations
The budget request contained $254.9 million in PE 63287E
for space programs and technology, but contained no funds for
improved suborbital space operations.
The committee believes that the design and development of
an unmanned, reusable suborbital launch vehicle to provide a
platform for tactical battlefield surveillance, can provide
quick reaction, fast turnaround, and frequent regional
reconnaissance capabilities.
The committee recommends $259.9 million in PE 63287E, an
increase of $5.0 million for improved suborbital space
operations.
Joint training transformation
The budget request contained $72.9 million in PE 63757D8Z
for joint training transformation, but included no funds for
the development of a joint simulation capability for linking
campaign analysis to warfighter mission rehearsal. The
committee recommends the Department of Defense capitalize on
the joint infrastructure and connectivity built into the Joint
Warfare System (JWARS) simulation program to expand into
complementary mission space areas, by linking in-theater tools
to campaign analysis capabilities and database providers in the
continental United States.
The committee recommends $76.9 million in PE 63757D8Z for
joint training transformation, an increase of $4.0 million for
joint simulation for linking campaign analysis to warfighter
mission rehearsal.
Office of force transformation
The budget request contained $20.4 million in PE 66799D8Z
for the Office of Force Transformation, including unspecified
funding for the Project Sheriff initiative, but included no
funds for the tactical re-directed energy technology
initiative.
The committee notes that the Project Sheriff initiative
meets a validated and approved urgent operational need to
provide combat commanders with more options for dealing with
the chaos of urban operations. Project Sheriff is a combat
system that incorporates a unique blend of lethal and non-
lethal capabilities that have never before been integrated
together into a single vehicle.
The tactical re-directed energy technology initiative
intends to quickly develop an experimental prototype that can
be rapidly fielded to gain new insights into the use of
directed energy at the tactical level. The committee notes that
this initiative focuses on targeting those who lay improvised
explosive devises (IEDs) rather than the IEDs themselves.
The committee recommends $30.4 million in PE 66799D8Z, an
increase of $10.0 million, $5.0 million for the Project Sheriff
initiative and $5.0 million for the tactical re-directed energy
initiative program.
Special operations advanced technology development
The budget request contained $80.4 million in PE 1160402BB
for special operations advanced technology development, but
included no funds for special operations modular computing
technology, for the surveillance augmentation vehicle-
insertable on request (SAVIOR) system, or for Foxhound Arabic
software.
The committee understands that U.S. Special Operations
Command (USSOCOM) is currently procuring non-ruggedized modular
personal computers and that the Naval Postgraduate School's
Coalition and Operating Area Surveillance and Targeting System
(COASTS) plans to further develop the modular personal computer
application to broader configurations. Additional funds would
allow the development of a ruggedized version of the modular
PC.
The committee understands that the SAVIOR system is a
mobile, intelligent sensor suite that can alert ground forces
to the presence of a threat with its intensive surveillance
network. SAVIOR meets USSOCOM's need for a rapidly
configurable, highly mobile sensor and command and control
platform.
The committee understands that Foxhound Arabic
transliteration and genealogical search software provides
USSOCOM with enhanced capability to conduct automated
transliteration and link-analysis key to counter-terrorism
operations. The software is currently being used at
headquarters level and further funding would provide the
capability to operator levels.
The committee recommends $92.9 million in PE 1160402BB for
special operations advanced technology development, an increase
of $5.0 million for special operations modular computing
technology, an increase of $3.5 million for development of the
SAVIOR system and an increase of $4.0 million for Foxhound
Arabic software.
Special operations forces operational enhancements
The budget request contained $99.0 million in PE 1160408BB
for special operations forces (SOF) operational enhancements,
but included no funds for miniaturized tracking devices. The
committee understands that these devices provide SOF the
ability to successfully track and monitor high value targets.
The committee recommends $106.0 million in PE 1160408BB for
SOF operational enhancements, an increase of $7.0 million for
miniaturized tracking devices.
Special operations intelligence systems development
The budget request contained $29.0 million in PE 1160405BB
for special operations (SO) intelligence systems development,
but included no funds for the U.S. Special Operations Command
(USSOCOM) joint meteorological and oceanographic (METOC)
program. The joint METOC program provides USSOCOM with
deployable sensors to measure weather conditions and other
environmental and situational parameters. The joint METOC
program would further develop an air-droppable version and
would meet requirements for additional measurement
capabilities.
The committee recommends $34.0 million in PE 1160405BB for
SO intelligence systems development, an increase of $5.0
million for the joint METOC program.
Special operations tactical systems development
The budget request contained $45.3 million in PE 1160404BB
for special operations tactical systems development, but
contained no funds for the special operations forces (SOF)
combat assault rifle (SCAR) or for Dominant Vision, and only
$1.4 million for covert wave packet modulation (WPM).
The committee understands that SCAR will replace five
different weapons systems currently used by SOF and that low
rate initial production will support milestone C final
validation for inclusion of SCAR in U.S. Special Operations
Command's (USSOCOM) 2008 program objective memorandum.
The committee understands that Dominant Vision enhances
USSOCOM's capability to conduct special operations by enhancing
aircrew's situational awareness and ability to locate, identify
and engage targets. Additional funding would continue
development of spectral targeting, integrated defense
capability, and ground station capability, and would integrate
and test the digital sensor recorder.
The committee understands that covert WPM waveform modules
will be embedded into USSOCOM communication, networked threat
warning and networked sensor systems that are critical to the
safety and covertness of special operations missions. The
effort will develop a new joint tactical radio system-compliant
covert communication capability with embedded positive threat
identification.
The committee recommends $58.3 million in PE 1160404BB for
special operations tactical systems development, an increase of
$4.1 million for the SOF combat assault rifle, anincrease of
$4.5 million for Dominant Vision, and an increase of $4.4 million for
covert WPM waveform modules.
Special operations technology development
The budget request contained $12.7 million in PE 1160401BB
for special operations technology development, but included no
funds for AngelFire and no funds for Global Observer.
The AngelFire program is derived from the full-spectrum
active protection close-in layered shield (FCLAS) to protect
special operations forces' assets from rocket propelled
grenades by using counter munitions. The committee understands
that AngelFire will provide increased protection to lightly
protected aircraft and vehicles operating in hostile
environments.
Global Observer promises to fulfill U.S. Special Operations
Command's (USSOCOM) requirements for persistent intelligence,
surveillance and reconnaissance. Global Observer will develop a
seven day endurance, hydrogen-fueled unmanned aircraft system
that will significantly expand USSOCOM's ability to identify,
track, and interdict targets, as well as enhance force
protection of U.S. forces.
The committee recommends $32.7 million in PE 1160401BB for
special operations technology development, an increase of $10.0
million for the AngelFire for FCLAS program, and an increase of
$10.0 million for the Global Observer program.
Operational Test and Evaluation, Defense
Overview
The budget request contained $181.5 million for Operational
Test and Evaluation, Defense.
The committee recommends $181.5 million, no change to the
budget request.
LEGISLATIVE PROVISIONS
Subtitle A--Authorization of Appropriations
Section 201--Authorization of Appropriations
This section would establish the amounts authorized to be
appropriated for research, development, test, and evaluation
for the Department of Defense for fiscal year 2007.
Section 202--Amount for Defense Science and Technology
This section would establish basic, research, applied
research, and advanced technology development funding levels
for the Department of Defense for fiscal year 2007.
Subtitle B--Program Requirements, Restrictions, and Limitations
Section 211--Alternate Engine for Joint Strike Fighter
This section would require that the Departments of the Navy
and the Air Force obligate not less than $408.0 million of the
funds authorized to be appropriated for the system development
and demonstration program for the Joint Strike Fighter, for
continued development of an alternate engine for the Joint
Strike Fighter.
Section 212--Extension of Authority To Award Prizes for Advanced
Technology Achievements
This section would amend section 2374a of title 10, United
States Code, to extend the authority of the Director, Defense
Advanced Research Projects Agency (DARPA), to award prizes for
advanced technology achievements through September 30, 2010.
The Director's current prize authority would expire on
September 30, 2007.
Section 213--Extension of Defense Acquisition Challenge Program
This section would amend section 2359b of title 10, United
States Code, to remove the September 30, 2007, termination
clause for the Defense Acquisition Challenge Program. This
program, established as a pilot program, has shown its value to
provide opportunities for the increased introduction of
innovative and cost-saving technology in acquisition programs
of the Department of Defense.
This section would also direct the Under Secretary of
Defense for Acquisition Technology and Logistics to ensure that
the identity of each proposed challenger is not disclosed
outside the federal government, without the consent of the
challenger.
Section 214--Future Combat Systems Milestone Review
This section would require the Secretary of Defense to
conduct a Future Combat Systems (FCS) milestone review,
following the preliminary design review, by September 30, 2008.
This section would also require the Secretary to submit a
report on the results of the FCS milestone review which will be
a go/no-go review of the FCS program that is based on its
demonstration of a sound business case to the congressional
defense committees not later than February 13, 2009.
Section 215--Independent Cost Analyses for Joint Strike Fighter Engine
Program
This section would require the Comptroller General and the
Secretary of Defense through the Cost Analysis Improvement
Group to conduct independent cost analyses and provide
independent reports on alternate engine acquisition strategies
for the Joint Strike Fighter (JSF). The reports would include
an analysis of an acquisition strategy resulting in the JSF
powered with the F135 engine, an acquisition strategy resulting
in the JSF powered by either the F135 or the F136 engine
through a competitive program, or any other alternative,
whether competitive or sole source, that would reduce the total
program lifecycle cost, improve program schedule, or both.
Section 216--Dedicated Amounts for Implementing or Evaluating DD(X) and
CVN-21 Proposals Under Defense Acquisition Challenge Program
This section would require the Secretary of Defense to
provide the Defense Acquisition Challenge Program with an
additional $4.0 million to evaluate or implement challenge
proposals specifically for the DD(X) next-generation destroyer
and the CVN-21 next-generation aircraft carrier programs.
Subtitle C--Ballistic Missile Defense
Section 221--Fielding of Ballistic Missile Defense Capabilities
This section would allow funds to be authorized to the
Secretary of Defense for research, development, test, and
evaluation for the Missile Defense Agency to be used for the
development and fielding of ballistic missile defense
capabilities.
Section 222--Limitation on Use of Funds for Space Based Interceptor
This section would prevent the Department of Defense from
obligating funds for the testing or deployment of a space-based
interceptor program until 90 days after submitting a report to
Congress describing the program and its national security
implications.
Subtitle D--Other Matters
Section 231--Review of Test and Evaluation Policies and Practices To
Address Emerging Acquisition Approaches
This section would amend section 239(b)(2) of title 10,
United States Code, to require the Director, Operational Test
and Evaluation (DOT&E) to state whether the results of
operational test and evaluation of major defense acquisition
programs confirm that the items tested are operationally
acceptable under limited conditions. Under current law, DOT&E
prepares a report at the conclusion of operational test and
evaluation, stating: (1) whether the test and evaluation
performed were adequate, and (2) whether the results of such
test and evaluation confirm that the items tested are effective
and suitable for combat.
The committee is aware that in the Director's report, DOT&E
evaluates a system as not operationally effective or suitable
for combat if the system does not fully meet the Capabilities
Development Document (CDD), or similar description of the
user's standards for effectiveness and suitability as reflected
in the requirements process. DOT&E has also informally included
assessments of military utility for mission environments which
are less than those set forth in the system's requirements.
This section would formalize this valuable analysis by DOT&E to
enable reasoned decision making by the combatant commanders and
acquisition program managers regarding the fielding of systems
which meet some, but not all, of the systems' requirements.
This section would also require the Under Secretary of
Defense for Acquisition, Technology, and Logistics (USD(AT&L)),
in coordination with DOT&E and the Director of the Defense Test
Resource Management Center (DTRMC) to review Department of
Defense test and evaluation (T&E) policies and practices and
issue new or revised guidance, as necessary, to ensure test and
evaluation practices keep pace with emerging acquisition
approaches.
The committee is aware that T&E policies and practices have
been impacted by both the spiral development authorities and
the rapid acquisition authorities of sections 803 and 806,
respectively, of the Bob Stump National Defense Authorization
Act for Fiscal Year 2003 (Public Law 107-314). T&E policies and
practices could potentially be further impacted by other
emerging acquisition approaches. For example, should USD(AT&L)
accept therecommendations of the ``Defense Acquisition
Performance Assessment'' (DAPA) report issued in January 2006, T&E
policies and practices could be affected by the implementation of time-
certain development programs. The DAPA report defines time-certain
development programs as development programs which are assigned, ``. .
. a specific length of time in which milestone events will be
accomplished by contract.'' The committee wishes to ensure that T&E
policies and practices neither impede the intended flexibilities of
these authorities nor fail to provide an independent assessment of
system capabilities. Lastly, the committee believes T&E policies and
practices should be reviewed to ensure the Department is properly
testing and evaluating materiel, such as outer tactical vests, that do
not fall within the purview of DOT&E, because they do not meet the
acquisition thresholds set forth in sections 2366 and 2399 of title 10,
United States Code, but which do require limited operational test and
evaluation to ensure the safety and survivability of the materiel and
the personnel using the materiel.
This section would also require the Director of DTRMC to
ensure that any revisions to T&E policies and practices are
reflected in a description of and in the budgeting for the
testing needs of the Department. Finally, this section would
require USD (AT&L) to report to the congressional defense
committees within nine months after the enactment of the this
Act on the review conducted and on any new or revised guidance
issued.
TITLE III--OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE
OVERVIEW
The budget request contained approximately $154.8 billion
in operation and maintenance funds to ensure the U.S. military
can meet the demands identified by each combatant commander.
These funds will be used to train U.S. forces, purchase
equipment and spare parts, repair older equipment, and
transport equipment and personnel around the world. The budget
request represents an increase of $7.4 billion over spending
levels authorized and appropriated for fiscal year 2006. The
challenge for the Department of Defense is that most of the
$7.4 billion covers civilian pay raises and general inflation
($4.0 billion) and price growth due to rising fuel costs ($3.0
billion). The committee is concerned that the total budget
increase does not accurately reflect the impact of inflation
and increased fuel prices.
The committee is concerned about the state of military
readiness, as the global war on terrorism (GWOT) enters its
fifth year. The committee notes that the increased budget
request actually funds fewer operation and maintenance related
activities critical to ensuring the armed forces' ability to
fight and win our nation's wars. As the Department faces rising
health care costs, fuel costs and inflation, budget challenges
are found in the operation and maintenance accounts. Currently,
all the services are funded below the levels required to
conduct the minimal training necessary to maintain military
readiness. For example, the shortfalls in fiscal year 2007
budget are as follows:
(1) Navy funds only 36 steaming days a quarter versus
the required 51 steaming days per quarter;
(2) Navy increases deferred maintenance from $54.0
million in fiscal year 2005 to $240.0 million in fiscal
year 2007;
(3) Army funds 615 tank miles a year versus the
combined arms training strategy requirement of 899
miles;
(4) Army funds 11.6 helicopter flying hours per month
versus 14.5 helicopter flying hours per month;
(5) Marine Corps funds 88 percent of the combat ready
days--equipment and training requirement; and
(6) Air Force funds 98 percent of the flying hour
training requirement while mission capable rates are
scheduled to fall to 75 percent for the first time
since 1998.
In the fiscal year 2006 Future Years Defense Program
(FYDP), the services anticipated receiving $154.7 billion for
operation and maintenance programs in fiscal year 2007.
Instead, this year's budget request is $154.8 billion, a
decrease of $0.1 billion. Combined with the $4.0 billion in
price growth due to inflation and the $3.0 billion in price
growth due to rising fuel costs, the budget request reduces
critical training and maintenance programs by close to $7.0
billion. The committee is concerned by this overall decrease in
the dollars available to conduct training and maintenance
activities and its long-term impact on military readiness.
In addition, the committee notes an increasing propensity
by the Department to fund activities, or portions of
activities, formerly found in the procurement and military
construction accounts with operation and maintenance dollars.
In particular, the military services are increasing their use
of service contracts for military flight simulator training and
initial flight screening and classifying this training as a
``commercial'' service. These contracts include facility site
surveys, construction of training facilities and leasing of
training equipment. The committee is concerned about the
consequences of poor performance on any of these service
contracts and the potential gap in vital military training if
these contracts are terminated, leaving the department with no
organic capacity to conduct the training.
For the last three years, the committee has closely
examined the ability of the secretaries of the military
departments to reset and reconstitute military equipment that
has returned from deployment. The committee is concerned that
the high rate of equipment damage and battle loss, coupled with
continuing equipment requirements in theater and at home
station, present the services with a growing problem. To
address this critical challenge, the service secretaries must
develop sound strategies to fulfill their reset requirements.
The committee believes that, despite other service initiatives
such as transformation and modernization, equipment reset must
be among the services' highest priorities. This requires not
only a commitment to adequately fund, but also carefully
considered policies in areas that support equipment reset, such
as industrial facility utilization and the procurement of next
generation weapons systems. The service secretaries must also
base these well reasoned strategies on full and accurate
information. The committee is concerned that, in some cases, a
lack of information prevents the services from accurately
programming for equipment reset. For example, the Department
has not yet made a decision on what will be done with the
equipment currently in Iraq. The committee urges the service
secretaries to adequately provide for the equipment needs of
the reserve component, and in the case of the Army, to identify
and segregate the requirements and funding associated with
equipment reset and the service's transformation to modularity.
Finally, the committee recognizes the contribution and
performance of the public depots and arsenals. The GWOT
requirement on these industrial facilities continues and the
committee commends them for their ongoing role in ensuring our
national security.
ITEMS OF SPECIAL INTEREST
Budget Request Adjustments--Readiness
The committee recommends the following adjustments to the
fiscal year 2007 amended budget request:
[in millions of dollars]
Department of the Army Adjustments:
BA 1 Army Management Headquarters Activities............. (19.1)
BA 1 Combat Development Core............................. (47.7)
BA 1 M-Gator............................................. +1.0
BA 1 Restoration of Training Requirement................. +82.1
BA 1 Standing Joint Forces Headquarters.................. (5.0)
BA 1 Unfunded Requirements in Depot Maintenance.......... +101.0
BA 2 Logistics Modernization Program..................... (2.3)
BA 2 Restoration of Prepositioned Stocks................. +105.8
BA 3 Live Training Instrumentation for Air and Missile
Defense Units........................................... +4.0
BA 3 Leadership for Leaders Command and General Staff
College................................................. +1.0
BA 3 Spirit of America JROTC Youth Conference............ +0.4
BA 4 Army Operations Center Headquarters................. (50.0)
BA 4 Army Knowledge Online Disaster Recovery............. +3.5
BA 4 Combat Readiness Center............................. (16.2)
BA 4 Continue Holocaust Education Exhibits............... +0.5
BA 4 Future Business Systems............................. (4.9)
BA 4 Logistics Modernization Program..................... (4.6)
BA 4 Other Contracts--Excessive Growth................... (31.1)
Undistributed Operational Unobligated Balances Estimate... (100.0)
BA 1 National Guard Advanced Solar Covers................ +1.0
BA 1 National Guard Army National Guard Battery
Modernization Program................................... +6.0
BA 1 National Guard Extended Cold Weather Clothing System +1.0
BA 1 National Guard Homeland Defense Operational Planning
System.................................................. +10.0
BA 1 National Guard Nationwide Dedicated Fiber Optic
Network................................................. +2.5
BA 1 Weapons of Mass Destruction Civil Support Teams..... +9.5
BA 4 National Guard Citizen Soldier Support Program...... +0.9
Undistributed National Guard restore Funding to Support
350K End Strength....................................... +220.0
BA 4 Reserve Citizen Soldier Program..................... +0.9
Department of the Navy Adjustments:
BA 1 Damage Control Inventory Management and Stowage
System.................................................. +3.0
BA 1 Man Overboard Safety System Installation............ +3.0
BA 1 METBENCH Automated Calibration System............... +3.7
BA 1 Navy Enterprise Resource Planning................... (10.0)
BA 1 Restore Ship Deferred Maintenance................... +145.0
BA 1 Restore Steaming Day Reduction...................... +121.0
BA 1 Shipyard Rate Savings--Mission Funding Conversion... (262.0)
BA 1 Unfunded Aviation Requirements...................... +75.0
BA 2 U.S. Navy Ship Disposal Program..................... +8.0
BA 3 Continued Education for Childcare Providers......... +1.0
BA 3 Naval Sea Cadet Corps............................... +0.3
BA 3 Navy National Guard RINGGOLD Linguists.............. +0.4
BA 4 Flash Detection System.............................. +4.0
BA 4 FYDP Improvement Project............................ (9.6)
BA 4 Navy/Marine Corps Intranet.......................... (70.0)
BA 4 NAV 2030 Vision Principals.......................... (2.0)
BA 4 Other Contracts--Excessive Growth................... (15.0)
BA 4 PR-07/POM-08 Planning and Analysis.................. (3.0)
BA 4 Special Project Aircraft............................ +3.0
BA 4 Trident............................................. +3.0
BA 4 Unjustified Growth for HQ Staff..................... (8.9)
Undistributed Navy Civilian Personnel Overstatement....... (96.8)
Undistributed Operational Unobligated Balances Estimate... (135.0)
United States Marine Corps Adjustments:
BA 1 Cold Weather High Performance Layering System....... +2.0
BA 1 EMI Hardened Fluorescent Stringable Tent Lighting
System.................................................. +7.0
BA 1 Marine Air Traffic Control and Landing System....... +9.0
BA 1 Maritime Prepositioning Reconstitution.............. +9.9
BA 1 Redesignation / Establishment of Unnecessary Command
Structures.............................................. (5.9)
BA 1 Unfunded Requirements in Depot Maintenance.......... +40.1
BA 3 Formal School Support............................... +8.6
BA 3 Recruit Training Support............................ +2.4
BA 3 Training Support Requirements....................... +25.0
Undistributed Operational Unobligated Balances............ (3.0)
Department of the Air Force Adjustments:
BA 1 B-52 Attrition Reserve.............................. +49.8
BA 1 Counter Space Operations............................ (10.0)
BA 1 MBU-20/P Oxygen Mask with Lights.................... +2.0
BA 1 Nevada Test and Training Range / Utah Test and
Training Range.......................................... +8.0
BA 1 Unjustified Transformational Efficiencies........... +70.0
BA 3 Euro NATO Jet Pilot Training........................ (10.0)
BA 3 Initial Flight Screening............................ (5.0)
BA 3 National Space Center Study......................... +2.0
BA 4 Administration--General Reduction................... (10.0)
BA 4 Air Force Manufacturing Technical Assistance
Production.............................................. +4.0
BA 4 Unjustified Growth.................................. (115.0)
Undistributed Executive General Schedule.................. (180.0)
Undistributed Other Contracts--Excessive Growth........... (50.0)
Undistributed Ranch Hand Data............................. +0.9
Defense-Wide Activities Adjustments:
BA 1 JCS--Excessive Growth............................... (10.0)
BA 4 Capital Security Cost Share......................... (33.0)
BA 4 Commercial Technologies for Maintenance Activities
(CMTA).................................................. +15.0
BA 4 Kids Voting Pilot Program........................... +0.2
BA 4 Meals Ready to Eat Reserve.......................... +5.0
BA 4 Port of Corpus Christi Seaport Infrastructure....... +5.0
BA 4 Procurement Technical Assistance Program............ +6.8
BA 4 Readiness and Environmental Protection Initiative
(REPI).................................................. +30.0
BA 4 Starbase............................................ +1.0
BA 4 WHS Excessive Growth................................ (14.0)
Undistributed Cold War Medal.............................. +2.0
Undistributed DOD Supplementary Impact Aid................ +50.0
Undistributed DOD Supplementary Impact Aid--Force
Structure/Relocation.................................... +15.0
Undistributed Operational Unobligated Balances Estimate... (272.1)
Undistributed Ranch Hand Data............................. +0.2
Army Knowledge Online Disaster Recovery
The budget request contained $70.8 million for the Army
Knowledge Management program.
The Knowledge Management program is an enterprise wide
program that will transform the Army into a network-centric,
knowledge-based force. An essential part of this effort is the
Army Knowledge Online (AKO) Disaster Recovery initiative, which
serves as the communications center for AKO Disaster Recovery
operations throughout the Army.
Accordingly, the committee recommends $74.3 million for the
Knowledge Management program, an increase of $3.5 million in
operation and maintenance for the Army to upgrade the AKO
Disaster Recovery operation.
Capital Security Cost Share
The budget request contained $126.7 million for capital
security cost share.
The committee notes that a November 2004 Government
Accountability Office report estimated the cost share for the
Department of Defense (DOD) for fiscal year 2007 to be $93.1
million. Furthermore, the committee is concerned that the
Secretary of Defense has no accounting of defense personnel
stationed in overseas diplomatic facilities and therefore can
not reconcile the cost share levied by the Secretary of State.
Accordingly, this Act contains a provision (Section 344) that
would require the Secretary of Defense to perform an annual
accounting of DOD overseas staffing requirements.
Therefore, the committee recommends $93.7 million for the
Capital Security Cost Share program, a decrease of $33.0
million.
Combat Enhancement Forces and Combat Communications
The budget request contained $603.7 million for Air Force
combat enhancement forces and $1.6 billion for combat
communications.
The committee notes that most of these critical forces have
been operating above maximum surge levels since the beginning
of the global war on terrorism and reports continue to reflect
a declining trend in the readiness of these forces. The
committee strongly believes that special operations forces and
weather teams, combat rescue forces, combat control teams,
manned reconnaissance platforms, and electronic warfare
capabilities are critical defense assets and this decline in
readiness must be addressed.
The committee recommends an increase of $40.0 million for
combat enhancement forces and an increase of $30.0 million for
combat communications.
Homeland Defense Operational Planning System
The budget request contained no funds for operation and
maintenance of the California Army National Guard's homeland
defense operational planning system (HOPS).
The committee understands HOPS received initial funding in
fiscal year 2004 and continued collaboration with Lawrence
Livermore National Laboratory will further develop the
operational capability of HOPS, which provides highly detailed
situational awareness thatenhances the California Army National
Guard's ability to prepare for, and respond to, weapons of mass
destruction attacks and to defend facilities critical to the U.S.
infrastructure.
The committee recommends an increase of $10.0 million for
HOPS.
Maritime Prepositioning Ship Lease Buyout
The budget request contained $35.1 million in the National
Defense Sealift Fund to exercise the purchase options on 1 of
the 10 remaining maritime prepositioning ships on long- term
lease.
The committee is aware of the continuing need for these
ships beyond the original 25-year-term and the lifecycle cost
savings garnered by exercising the purchase options. The
committee recommends exercising the purchase option on all of
the 10 remaining maritime prepositioning ships, as soon as
possible.
The committee recommends $101.9 million in the National
Defense Sealift Fund to exercise the purchase option on 2 of
the 10 remaining maritime prepositioning ships on long-term
lease, an increase of $66.8 million.
Nationwide Dedicated Fiber Optic Network
The budget request contained no funding for the Nationwide
Dedicated Fiber Optic Network (NDFON).
NDFON will provide a dedicated, high speed, high bandwidth
fiber optic network backbone to support national guard
operations. The committee continues to urge the Department of
Defense to complete this network, which showed its value in the
national guard's response to Hurricane Katrina. When no cell
phones were working on the storm ravaged Gulf Coast, the NDFON
backbone provided critical, reliable communications capability.
Accordingly, the committee recommends an increase of $2.5
million in operation and maintenance for the Army National
Guard to complete the NDFON nationwide engineering design
package.
Navy Marine Corps Intranet
The committee supports the Navy Marine Corps Intranet
(NMCI) and commends the Secretary of the Navy for resolving the
long standing contract dispute on the NMCI contract. The
committee remains concerned, however, about the cost of the
contract and the enduring nature of legacy programs that a now
mature NMCI was designed to replace. For that reason, the
committee cannot support the increased funding contained in the
budget request.
Accordingly, the committee recommends $240.5 million in
servicewide communications for NMCI, a decrease of $70.0
million.
Port of Corpus Christi
The committee directs the Director of the Department of
Defense Office of Economic Adjustment to provide $5.0 million
to the Port of Corpus Christi for military seaport
infrastructure upgrades.
Readiness and Environmental Protection Initiative
The budget request contained $20.0 million for the
Readiness and Environmental Protection Initiative (REPI).
The committee expects the secretaries of the military
departments to use the authority and funding available through
the REPI program to enter into agreements with willing entities
to prevent or limit the use of property in the vicinity of a
military installation that would impede the mission of that
military installation. The committee is pleased by the recent
successes of the REPI program at installations such as Fort
Carson, and expects the Secretary of the Army to continue to
adequately fund the REPI efforts at Fort Carson, which the Army
identifies as its highest priority site. The committee also
encourages the other services to explore the utilization of
this authority at installations such as Whiteman Air Force
Base, McChord Air Force Base, Fairchild Air Force Base, and
Naval Air Station Whidby.
The committee recommends $50.0 million for the Readiness
and Environmental Protection Initiative, an increase of $30.0
million.
Weapons of Mass Destruction Civil Support Teams
The budget request contained no funding for additional
Weapons of Mass Destruction Civil Support Teams (WMD-CST).
The committee recognizes the value of the Army National
Guard's WMD-CST in rapid support of civilian first responders
in the event of a chemical, biological, or radiological
incident. Now that each state's national guard has a WMD-CST,
the committee believes that states possessing obvious targets
should be identified for a second team. In that regard, the
committee is pleased to note that California has a second team,
and believes that New York should have a second team as well.
Accordingly, the committee recommends an additional $9.5
million for the Army National Guard to establish a second WMD-
CST in New York.
Environmental Issues
Fuel Tank Replacement at Point Loma, California
The committee is concerned about the fuel tank leakage at
the Defense Energy Support Center (DESC) Fuel Storage Point
(DFSP) at Naval Base Point Loma, California. Data from recent
monitoring of the ground soil indicate that the leakage is more
extensive than originally estimated. In addition to ongoing
mitigation efforts, the committee is aware that the DESC has a
military construction project in the fiscal year 2008 Future
Years Defense Program that would replace all existing bulk
storage infrastructure with modern, Department of Defense-
standard storage tanks and support equipment. The committee
notes that the DFSP is part of the strategic reserve, and its
capabilities and readiness are matters of national security.
The committee expects the Navy and the DESC to expedite to the
furthest extent practicable their clean up actions, and to
continue an ongoing dialogue about data, findings, and status
with the congressional defense committees and the local
community.
Non-thermal Treatment of Asbestos and Asbestos Containing Material
The committee is concerned about the long-term effects of
the disposal of asbestos and asbestos containing material
(ACM). The committee recognizes the benefits of transforming
asbestos and ACM into a non-hazardous material and notes the
problems associated with thermal treatment of hazardous waste.
The committee is aware that the Department of Defense (DOD) is
currently testing the application of non-thermal treatment
processes. The committee encourages the Department to continue
its exploration of non-thermal asbestos technology and to
consider its use when treating asbestos or ACM at DOD
installations.
Report on Uranium Located in Gore, Oklahoma
The committee acknowledges that since completion of work in
1993, 1.5 million pounds (approximately 1,200 barrels) of U.S.
Government-provided uranium is being stored at the former
Sequoyah Fuels Corporation site located in Gore, Oklahoma. This
site was used to convert DU6 to DU4 for use by the Army in
anti-tank ammunition. The storage of this uranium at the Gore,
Oklahoma, site may impede the efforts to decontaminate and
decommission the facility.
Therefore, the committee directs the Secretary of Defense
to work in conjunction with the Secretary of Energy to submit a
report to the Senate Committee on Armed Services and the House
Committee on Armed Services no later than six months after the
enactment of this Act that would identify whether a remediation
plan is necessary regarding the uranium located in Gore,
Oklahoma, and, if so, the plans for remediation.
Site Assessment of Former World War II Ordnance Manufacturing Facility,
Rosemount, Minnesota
The committee is aware that the United States Army Corps of
Engineers recently completed a preliminary assessment of
property in Rosemount, Minnesota. The property, once the site
of an ordnance manufacturing facility (Gopher Ordnance Works),
is now owned by the University of Minnesota. The committee
notes that one potential next action in this environmental
cleanup process is for the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers to
conduct a site inspection of the property. The committee is
interested in the expeditious resolution of this matter, and
therefore requests the Secretary of the Army to initiate the
next action in the process. Furthermore, the committee expects
the Secretary to continue an ongoing dialogue about data,
findings, and status with the congressional defense committees
and the local community.
Information Technology Issues
Information Technology Overview
The committee remains deeply concerned with information
technology (IT) development, procurement, and management across
the Department of Defense (DOD). The committee recognizes the
challenges of building a fully integrated, secure, reliable
system for a world-wide deployable military force. The
committee also recognizes that the challenge is complicated by
conflicting user requirements and a decentralized procurement
system. In many ways, the Department's IT difficulties are a
subset of DOD's larger acquisition challenges. Notwithstanding
the difficulties, the committee believes that too many of the
Department's IT programs are poorly managed and would benefit
from increased scrutiny and a new way of doing business.
The committee supports the Department's broad goal of net
centric operations, but is troubled by the procurement history
of the Global Information Grid, the backbone of net centric
operations. The committee notes the findings of the Government
Accountability Office report ``DOD Management Approach and
Processes Not Well-Suited to Support Development of Global
Information Grid,'' dated January 30, 2006. This report clearly
describes the great risk of attempting to build an enterprise-
wide system for which no one entity is in charge and for which
no one can enforce operational or investment decisions.
For these reasons, the committee believes a prudent pause
in selected IT programs is in order to allow the broader
development of the Global Information Grid to progress. In that
way, spending on these systems of the future can be more
precisely directed to the reality of a more mature GIG
backbone, resulting in greater efficiency and more rapid
deployment of new systems. To that end, the committee has
recommended funding reductions elsewhere in this report in
several programs.
Similarly, the committee has recommended legislation that
would require new business systems to come swiftly to fruition
or lose funding. The committee believes that this change, along
with other, broader acquisition initiatives recommended by the
committee, will begin to realize greater efficiencies in DOD
information technology programs. The committee believes that
information technology is one of the critical elements that
make our military forces as lethal as they are--but for almost
$31 billion, we must do better.
Business Transformation Agency and Enterprise Risk Assessment Model
The committee is heartened by the Deputy Secretary of
Defense's decision to create the Business Transformation Agency
(BTA), and will monitor its activities closely to ensure it
adds value to the management of enterprise-wide business
programs. Far too often, information technology (IT) programs
are created with great promise, only to fall victim to the
impossible goal of perfection. The result: expensive new
programs drag on for years, not realizing their potential,
while the legacy systems they were designed to replace continue
to consume operation and maintenance dollars.
To that end, the committee also supports the recently
announced Enterprise Risk Assessment Model (ERAM), which
promises to speed the delivery of DOD wide business systems and
provide streamlined execution of programs. The committee
applauds these initiatives and urges the Secretary of Defense
to support these new enterprises.
Readiness Issues
Air Force Transformation
The committee is aware that the Air Force has initiated a
transformation plan in an effort to modernize and recapitalize
the force structure by focusing on three major areas:
streamlining the organizational structure, incorporating
process efficiencies, and continuing force structure reductions
to become a more lethal, agile, and balanced total force.
Although not clearly justified, the fiscal year 2007 operation
and maintenance budget request reflects a $945.0 million
reduction due to efficiencies that the Air Force anticipates
reaping through transformation. The committee is aware of
declining trends in readiness, and is concerned that these
trends will continue to decline as a result of this swift move
to organizational change.
Therefore, the committee directs the Secretary of the Air
Force to submit a report to the Senate Committee on Armed
Services and the House Committee on Armed Services by April 1,
2007, describing transformational initiatives, evaluating the
impact of these changes on unit-level readiness, detailing
force structure realignments and reductions, and accounting
actual cost savings accrued through the transformational
initiatives.
Army Logistics Modernization
The committee is encouraged by the Army's efforts to
transform its logistics processes and is interested in the
potential of the Logistics Modernization Program (LMP) to
streamline logistics and improve financial management. However,
a June 2005 report by the Government Accountability Office
(GAO), Army Depot Maintenance: Ineffective Oversight of Depot
Maintenance Operations and Systems Implementation Efforts,
describes the problems associated with the implementation of
LMP at Tobyhanna Army Depot. The committee is concerned with
these findings and directs the Secretary of the Army to submit
a report to the House Committee on Armed Services and the
Senate Committee on Armed Services by December 31, 2006, on the
status of the LMP deficiencies outlined in GAO's report.
Base Operating Support and Facilities Recapitalization Budget
Shortfalls
In the committee report (H. Rept. 109-89) accompanying the
National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2006, the
committee expressed concern that shortfalls in base operating
support (BOS) budgets at U.S. military installations were
causing the services to consider a decrease in basic services
such as child care, dining hall operations, and facilities
management activities. As such, the committee urged the
Department of Defense (DOD) to fully fund and execute BOS
sustainment, and facilities recapitalization accounts.
Despite this level of congressional interest in and
commitment to BOS and facilities recapitalization accounts, the
fiscal year 2007 budget request once again contains severe
shortfalls in these areas. For instance, Army BOS budgets are
underfunded by at least $1.9 billion, Army National Guard and
Reserve BOS budgets are underfunded by more than $360.0
million, and Air Force BOS budgets are underfunded by more than
$250.0 million.
In general, BOS requirements are ``must pay'' bills,
failure to fully fund these accounts will result in a decrease
in base services, such as shortened hours at dining facilities,
elimination of recreational activities, or increased fees for
morale, welfare, and recreation activities. While DOD leaders
have expressed their intent to transfer funds into these
accounts during the fiscal year, this approach is a haphazard
manner of managing budget accounts that are significant both in
size and impact on personnel.
In addition to the Department's general failure to support
BOS requirements, analysis of facilities restoration, and
modernization budgets indicates that the services have
essentially ceased to fund these accounts.
The services have justified their actions, in part, by
citing DOD models for facilities sustainment and
recapitalization which show facilities ``recap rates'' that are
below DOD targets. Unfortunately, these indicators were skewed
by the impact of base closure activities and funding to rebuild
after natural disasters. Nevertheless, these results, which
effectively overstate the level of funding provided to the
general inventory of facilities, have been used to justify
severe decreases in restoration and modernization accounts. The
committee is greatly concerned with this misapplication of
facilities management model results.
After decades of failing to fund facilities construction,
sustainment, restoration, and modernization budgets, the
Department's recent efforts to ensure that its facilities are
properly maintained over their lifecycles is ``one step
forward''. Unfortunately, budget requests that virtually
eliminate facilities restoration and modernization funding,
such as the fiscal year 2007 request, represent ``two steps
backward''.
This ``pause'' in restoration and modernization budgets
will be difficult to reverse in the current budget environment,
likely resulting in an entire generation of facilities passing
through mid-lifecycle periods without renovations required to
maintain the ability to support military requirements.
The committee urges the service secretaries to increase
funding for facilities restoration and modernization in future
budget requests. Supporting such requirements is critical to
extending the useful lifecycle of DOD facilities while
maintaining quality work and living environments.
In general, the committee is greatly concerned by the
direction of the Department's requests for installation
operation and management budgets. If the Department continues
to fail to fund these accounts, there will be substantial
negative impacts on both military readiness and quality of
life. As such, the committee urges DOD leadership to renew its
commitment to installations management budgets by fully funding
BOS sustainment, restoration, and modernization accounts in
current and future fiscal years.
Beryllium Supply Industrial Base
The Department of Defense (DOD) issued a report in May
2004, at the direction of Congress, concluding that the
strategic and critical metal, beryllium, plays a key role in
systems that support the transformational armed services. This
report also noted that the domestic supply of beryllium is in
danger of being depleted because the only domestic supplier has
closed its primary metal production facility.
A total of $10.8 million was appropriated by congress
during the past two years, through the Defense Production Act
purchases for the design and construction of a new beryllium
production plant. In order to complete the timely construction
of the plant, the committee supports the $7.5 million in the
President's request for the Beryllium Supply Industrial Base
Project.
Depot Maintenance Strategy and Implementation Plans
The committee notes that in fiscal year 2005 the Air
Force's three air logistics centers exceeded scheduled aircraft
production, reduced costs, achieved the highest ever on-time
delivery record, and improved overall quality of work. The
committee believes that the implementation of the 2002 Air
Force Depot Maintenance Master Strategy was a driving factor in
this transformational success and commends the Air Force for
these achievements.
Furthermore, the committee notes that despite the direction
in the committee report (H. Rept. 108-106) accompanying the
National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2004, the
Secretary of Defense has not developed a comprehensive,
results-oriented management plan to guide future service depot
maintenance and has not provided a framework that assures the
long-term viability of the depot system. The committee believes
that it is essential that the Secretary build upon past
strategic planning efforts, including the recent successes
generated by implementation of the Air Force's Depot
Maintenance Master Strategy, to help guide futureservice depot
maintenance. Therefore, the committee directs the Secretary to develop
an overarching depot maintenance strategy for the department and to
submit a report on this strategy, by March 1, 2007, to the
congressional defense committees. This report, at a minimum, shall
include:
(1) An assessment of the extent to which current
facilities will continue to be used;
(2) An assessment of the extent to which the
appropriate work is being performed in the depots to
maintain core capability;
(3) Future planning for core capability and the
identification of workloads by depot and commodity
group that are currently being performed in the depots;
(4) Current workforce breakdown and a personnel
requirements strategy for maintaining the required
workforce;
(5) Planned equipment and facility improvements and
the associated funding stream, by depot with
distinction made for that which is planned as a
replacement and that which will provide capability for
a new system;
(6) A specification of statutory, regulatory or
operational impediments, if any, to achieving a
strategy that enables a capital investment in
facilities, equipment, processes and personnel of an
amount not less than six percent of the actual total
revenue; and
(7) A description of the benchmarks established by
each depot for capital investment and the relations of
the benchmarks to applicable performance methods used
in the private sector.
The committee directs the Comptroller General to evaluate
this report and provide comment and analysis to the
congressional defense committees no later than 90 days after
the Secretary of Defense submits the report.
High Altitude Aviation Training
The committee is aware that a portion of non-hostile losses
of Army rotary winged aircraft in Operation Enduring Freedom
and Operation Iraqi freedom are related to operations in high
elevations and mountainous terrain. The committee believes that
high altitude aviation training can reduce the number of the
accidents by ensuring that crews are properly trained and
current in the procedures for operating in such a challenging
environment. Therefore, the committee requests the Secretary of
the Army provide a report on high altitude aviation training to
the congressional defense committees by December 15, 2006. The
report should include:
(1) The current location and type of high altitude
training, to include the percentage of pilots who
receive such training on an annual basis at each
location and the types of aircraft used in such
training;
(2) The number and type of helicopters required to
provide the high altitude aviation training needed to
sustain the war strategies contained in the 2006
Quadrennial Defense Review, assuming that priority for
such training is given to commanders, instructor
pilots, aviation safety officers, and deploying units;
and
(3) A thorough evaluation of the accident rates for
deployed Army helicopter pilots who received high
altitude training and deployed helicopter pilots who
did not receive such training, including the number of
accidents related to power management, using high and
low estimates and the number of accidents involving
combat and non-combat environments.
National Space Studies Center Study
The committee is well aware of the increasing reliance on
space to support both our warfighters and our global economy
and believes that it is imperative to have a comprehensive
understanding of how dependence on space assets, both military
and commercial, can impact U.S. national security and economic
security. Therefore, the committee directs the Secretary of
Defense, through the National Space Studies Center, to expand
ongoing efforts to assess the value of space contributions with
emphasis on the United States dependence on space, innovative
ideas contributing to ensuring freedom of action in space, and
integration of all space forces.
LEGISLATIVE PROVISIONS
Subtitle A--Authorization of Appropriations
Section 301--Operation and Maintenance Funding
This section would authorize $129.8 billion in operation
and maintenance funding for the military departments and
defense-wide activities.
Section 302--Working Capital Funds
This section would authorize $2.6 billion for working
capital funds of the Department of Defense and the National
Defense Sealift Fund.
Section 303--Other Department of Defense Programs
This section would authorize $22.4 billion for other
Department of Defense Programs for (1) the Defense Health
Program; (2) Chemical Agents and Munitions Destruction; (3)
Drug Interdiction and Counter-Drug Activities, Defense-Wide;
and (4) the Defense Inspector General.
Subtitle B--Environmental Provisions
Section 311--Revision of Requirement for Unexploded Ordnance Program
Manager
This section would rescind the authority extended to the
Secretary of Defense to delegate the unexploded ordnance
program manager position to one of the military departments.
This section would also add research to the list of duties for
this position.
Section 312--Identification and Monitoring of Military Munitions
Disposal Sites in Ocean Waters Extending From United States Coast to
Outer Boundary of Outer Continental Shelf
This section would require the Secretary of Defense to
identify, research, monitor, and provide navigational and
safety information on conventional and chemical military
munitions disposal sites in the ocean waters that extend from
the United States coast to the outer boundary of the outer
continental shelf. Specifically, it would require the Secretary
to review historical records to determine the number and
probable locations of disposal sites, the size of these sites,
and the types and quantities of military munitions disposed of
at these sites. The Secretary shall release periodically to the
public and submit annually to Congress the information obtained
in this review. This section would also require the Secretary
to cooperate with the National Oceanic and Atmospheric
Administration to inform those who use the ocean environment of
known or potential hazards. Finally, this section would require
the Secretary to conduct research on the effects of military
munitions, and to monitor certain disposal sites to recognize
and track potential contamination.
Section 313--Reimbursement of Environmental Protection Agency for
Certain Costs in Connection With Moses Lake Wellfield Superfund Site,
Moses Lake, Washington
This section would authorize the Secretary of Defense to
transfer not more than $111,114.03 to the Moses Lake Wellfield
Superfund Site, 10-6J Special Account, to reimburse the
Environmental Protection Agency for costs incurred in
overseeing a remedial investigation and feasibility study
performed by the Department of the Army.
Section 314--Funding of Cooperative Agreements Under Environmental
Restoration Program
This section would amend section 2701(d)(2) of title 10,
United States Code, to allow cooperative agreements entered
into for environmental restoration at defense facilities to
extend beyond the present two-year limitation when the
agreements are funded out of either the Department of Defense
Base Closure Account 1990 or the Department of Defense Base
Closure Account 2005.
Section 315--Analysis and Report Regarding Contamination and
Remediation Responsibility for Norwalk Defense Fuel Supply Point,
Norwalk, California
This section would require the Secretary of the Air Force
to report to Congress not later than January 30, 2007, on
matters relating to contamination and remediation of property
at the Norwalk Defense Fuel Supply Point in Norwalk,
California. This section would also prohibit the Secretary from
conveying the property by public auction before pursuing a fair
market value transfer of the property to the city of Norwalk,
submitting the report required, and providing an explanation of
why efforts to transfer the property to the city have not been
successful.
Subtitle C--Workplace and Depot Issues
Section 321--Extension of Exclusion of Certain Expenditures From
Percentage Limitation on Contracting for Depot-Level Maintenance
This section would extend for five years the authority to
exclude amounts expended for the performance of depot-level
maintenance and repair workload by non-federal government
personnel at a Center of Industrial and Technical Excellence
from the percentage limitation in section 2466(a) of title 10,
United States Code, if the personnel performing the work are
provided pursuant to a public-private partnership.
Section 322--Minimum Capital Investment for Air Force Depots
This section would require the Secretary of the Air Force
to invest a minimum of six percent of the total revenue of the
Air Force depots in the capital investment budget to improve or
sustain depot maintenance facilities, equipment, or processes.
Section 323--Extension of Temporary Authority for Contractor
Performance of Security Guard Functions
This section would amend subsection 332(c) of the Bob Stump
National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2003 (Public
Law 107-314) to extend the temporary authority to contract for
increased performance of security guard functions. The
authority would expire at the end of fiscal year 2008. This
section would require the Secretary of Defense to submit a
report by February 1, 2007, to the Senate Committee on Armed
Services and House Committee on Armed Services detailing
progress towards implementing the recommendations of the
Government Accountability Office report entitled, ``Army's
Guard Program Requires Greater Oversight and Reassessment of
Acquisition Approach.'' The extension of authority granted in
this section would not be effective until the report is
submitted to the Senate Committee on Armed Services and the
House Committee on Armed Services.
Subtitle D--Reports
Section 331--Report on Nuclear Attack Submarine Depot Maintenance
This section would require the Secretary of the Navy to
submit a report to the Senate Committee on Armed Services and
the House Committee on Armed Services by February 1, 2007, on
criteria used when a nuclear attack submarine is sent for
maintenance to a facility other than a facility located at the
homeport of the submarine.
Section 332--Report on Navy Fleet Response Plan
This section would require the Secretary of the Navy to
submit a report to the Senate Committee on Armed Services and
the House Committee on Armed Services by December 1, 2006, on
the Navy Fleet Response Plan. The committee expects the report
would include assessments from senior enlisted officers, for
example chief engineers and command master chiefs, who served
on aircraft carriers, destroyers and cruisers that participated
in the Fleet Response Plan regarding the following:
(1) material condition of the ship;
(2) maintenance of the ship;
(3) en-route training;
(4) professional development training available on
the ship;
(5) combat skill training;
(6) personnel assignments and manning;
(7) retention of personnel; and
(8) suggestions for improvement.
This section would also require the Comptroller General to
submit a review of the Secretary of the Navy report to the
Senate Committee on Armed Services and the House Committee on
Armed Services that includes a recommendation on the extension
of the Fleet Response Plan to expeditionary strike groups by
March 15, 2007. Finally, this section would postpone the
expansion of the Fleet Response Plan beyond the carrier strike
groups until October 1, 2007.
The committee has concerns regarding expansion of the Fleet
Response Plan to other ships beyond those in a carrier strike
group. The committee notes the Navy has neither fully tested
and evaluated the Fleet Response Plan nor formally implemented
the required operational, training and personnel directives to
manage this program.
Section 333--Report on Navy Surface Ship Rotational Crew Programs
This section would require the Secretary of the Navy to
submit a report to the Senate Committee on Armed Services and
the House Committee on Armed Services by April 1, 2007, on ship
rotational crew experiments. This section would also require
the Comptroller General to submit an assessment of the
Secretary of Navy's report to the Senate Committee on Armed
Services and the House Committee on Armed Services by July 15,
2007.
This section would further require the Director of the
Congressional Budget Office to submit a report to the Senate
Committee on Armed Services and the House Committee on Armed
Services that examines long-term benefits and costs of surface
ship crew rotational programs by July 15, 2007. Finally, this
section would postpone the implementation of any new surface
ship rotational crew experiment or program until October 1,
2009.
The committee is concerned about the expansion of the
surface ship rotation crew program formally known as Sea Swap
to other surface ships. Potential disadvantages of Sea Swap
include extensive wear and tear on the deployed ship due to a
lengthy period of time at sea, reduced sense of crew ownership
of a given ship, reduced opportunities for transit port calls
and a negative impact on crew morale and retention.
Section 334--Report on Army Live-Fire Ranges in Hawaii
This section would require the Secretary of the Army to
submit a report to Congress by March 1, 2007, on the adequacy
of live-fire training facilities in the state of Hawaii in
relation to current and future training requirements, and plans
for modifications or additions to the live-fire training
infrastructure in Hawaii.
Section 335--Comptroller General Report on Joint Standards and
Protocols for Access Control Systems at Department of Defense
Installations
This section would require the Comptroller General to
submit a report to the Senate Committee Armed Services and the
House Committee on Armed Services within one year of enactment
of this Act, on joint standards and protocols for access
control systems at Department of Defense (DOD) installations.
The report would contain an assessment of whether the
establishment of joint standards and protocols for access
control at DOD installations would improve access control
across all installations by providing greater consistency and
improved force protection.
Section 336--Report on Personnel Security Investigations for Industry
and National Industrial Security Program
This section would require the Secretary of Defense to
submit, within 90 days of enactment, a report on the future
requirements of the Department of Defense with respect to the
Personnel Security Investigations for Industry and the National
Security Investigations for Industry Security Program of the
Defense Security Service. The report would be delivered to the
congressional defense committees, the Committee on Homeland
Security and Governmental Affairs of the Senate, and the
Committee on Government Reform of the House of Representatives.
This report would include an accounting of clearance
investigations completed, the number of each type of clearance
granted, the unit cost of each clearance granted, the unit cost
to the Department of Defense of each security clearance
granted, the amount of any fee or surcharge paid by the Office
of Personnel Management as a result of conducting a personnel
security clearance investigation, a description of the
procedures used to estimate future investigations to be
performed, and a plan for meeting increased demand of
clearances. It would also require subsequent semi-annual
reports on future funding requirements, backlog size, and
progress toward meeting implemented changes in the
investigation process. Lastly, it would require the Government
Accountability Office to examine the Department's plan and to
conduct an independent assessment after the initial report is
submitted by the Department of Defense.
The Committee recommends that the Office of Management and
Budget further open and extend its review and reform efforts
for the security clearance process to include the appropriate
external expert sources such as defense contractors, academic
institutions, workforce providers, and research and development
organizations to provide intelligence and resources to assist
in the development of a new clear human capital management
system, as current process does not fully address the needs and
impacts of the institutions and organizations outside of the
federal government and related agencies.
The committee is disappointed by an announcement that the
Defense Security Service has suspended the processing of new
clearances and is concerned about the potential impact on
national security and the defense industrial base. The
committee is concerned by the Defense Security Service's
failure to warn Congress of this failure in advance so that the
problem might have been averted. The committee remains
committed to finding a solution to the problem of clearance
investigations as soon as possible.
Subtitle E--Other Matters
Section 341--Department of Defense Strategic Policy on Prepositioning
of Materiel and Equipment
This section would amend chapter 131 of title 10, United
States Code, to require the Secretary of Defense to establish a
comprehensive approach to Department of Defense (DOD)
prepositioning programs. This section would also limit the
diversion of materiel and equipment from prepositioned stocks
except for the purpose of supporting a contingency operation,
or in accordance with a change to the prepositioning policy
required under this section. This section would require the
Secretary to notify the congressional defense committees before
implementing or changing the prepositioning policy. Finally,
this section would require the Secretary to establish the
prepositioning policy within six months after the enactment of
this Act.
The committee recognizes that prepositioned materiel offers
significant strategic flexibility, as demonstrated in Operation
Iraqi Freedom. The committee is concerned, however, that there
is a lack of clear DOD policy to guide the prepositioning
programs of the services. Furthermore, the committee notes that
the Secretary of Defense has failed to report on DOD
prepositioned equipment and materiel as required in section
1046 of the Ronald W. Reagan National Defense Authorization Act
of Fiscal Year 2005 (Public Law 108-375).
Additionally, the committee is discouraged by recent
decisions regarding Army prepositioned stocks. For example, the
Army recently programmed the download of an entirebrigade set
from its afloat prepositioned combat capability. Furthermore, the
Government Accountability Office (GAO) testified before the
Subcommittees on Readiness and Tactical Air and Land Forces on March
30, 2006, that the Army is making plans to reduce its contractor
workforce in Charleston, South Carolina, where it performs the
maintenance on its afloat stocks. GAO also noted that the Army has a
large military construction project well underway at a site in Italy,
but the Army's draft prepositioning strategy identifies no significant
prepositioning mission in Europe. The committee believes these recent
changes to the Army prepositioning program, together with the continued
challenge of maintaining the combat capability of the Army
prepositioned stocks in Korea and Southwest Asia, contribute to a
severe underinvestment in these assets.
Section 342--Authority to Make Department of Defense Horses Available
for Adoption at End of Useful Working Life
This section would amend section 2583 of title 10, United
States Code to include horses owned by the Department of
Defense. The committee notes that currently private adoption of
caisson horses from the 1st Battalion, 3rd United States
Infantry Regiment is prohibited. The committee notes the
contributions of these animals and their service to the public
good.
Section 343--Sale and Use of Proceeds of Recyclable Munitions Materials
This section would authorize the Secretary of the Army to
establish a separate program to sell recyclable munitions
materials resulting from the demilitarization of conventional
military munitions such as brass, scrap metal, propellants, and
explosives. Furthermore, this section would credit the proceeds
from the sales to the funds available to the Army for
reclamation, recycling, and reuse of conventional military
munitions. This process would be consistent with the Solid
Waste Disposal Act, commonly referred to as the Resource
Conservation and Recovery Act (42 U.S.C. 6901 et seq.) and its
implementing regulations.
Section 344--Capital Security Cost Sharing
This section would require the Secretary of Defense to
perform an annual accounting of Department of Defense (DOD)
overseas staffing requirements in order to reconcile cost-
sharing fees levied by the Secretary of State, in accordance
with section 629(e)(1) of the Consolidated Appropriations Act,
2005 (Public Law 108-447).
Section 345--Prioritization of Funds Within Navy Mission Operations,
Ship Maintenance, Combat Support Forces, and Weapons System Support
This section would require the Secretary of Navy to ensure
that 100 percent of the requirements for steaming days per
quarter for deployed and non-deployed ship operations and 100
percent of the projected ship and air depot maintenance
workload are funded before funds appropriated to the Department
of Navy for operation and maintenance may be expended for the
Navy Expeditionary Combat Command. This section would also
require the Secretary of Navy to submit a report with the
annual budget request that certifies these requirements are
fully funded.
The committee is aware that the Department of Navy has
funded ship and air operations and depot maintenance below the
operational requirements. For example, ship operation funding
for deployed ships was funded at 71 percent of the requirement.
Accordingly, carrier strike groups and expeditionary strike
groups will be unable to fully execute missions in their
assigned area of responsibility.
Against this backdrop, the committee has learned that the
Department of Navy has expanded its role and function to ground
and river combat missions. The Navy Expeditionary Combat
Command was established on January 13, 2006, in order to expand
the Navy's capabilities for participating in the global war on
terrorism. The Navy will deploy Riverine Group 1 to patrol the
waterways of Baghdad, Iraq in 2007. At the moment, these
sailors have no boats, no manuals, and no past mission to draw
experience from before they engage in combat operations.
While the committee understands the Department of Navy's
desire to expand its role from the sea to the river and land,
we have concerns that the traditional role and mission of the
Navy is not being adequately funded.
Section 346--Prioritization of Funds Within Army Reconstitution and
Transformation
This section would require the Secretary of the Army to
fully fund in each fiscal year after fiscal year 2007 the reset
of equipment used in the global war on terrorism, the
fulfillment of equipment requirements for units transforming to
modularity, and the reconstitution of prepositioned stocks.
This section would require the Secretary to submit a report to
the congressional defense committees at the time the budget
request is transmitted to Congress. This report would provide
information on the funding priorities described in this section
and would be required annually until the requirements of these
priorities are met. This section would also limit to $2.85
billion the funds to be appropriated in any fiscal year after
fiscal year 2007 for the Future Combat Systems (FCS) until the
funding priorities described in this section are met in that
fiscal year. If the Army does not meet this requirement, this
section would require funds that were not expended for FCS to
be used for the identified funding priorities.
For the purposes of this section, the requirements of the
identified funding priorities shall be based on the following
guidelines. The Army has testified, based on equipment combat
losses and battle damage, that the amount needed in fiscal year
2006 to repair, recapitalize, and replace equipment used in the
global war on terrorism is $13.5 billion. The committee is also
aware that a recent cost estimate to payback equipment to the
reserve component in accordance with Department of Defense
Directive 1225.6 is $4.8 billion. The committee assumes that
the current use of equipment in Operation Iraqi Freedom and
Operation Enduring Freedom will continue at the same level as
experienced in fiscal year 2006. Therefore, the committee
calculates that at least $72.3 billion over the fiscal year
2008 Future Years Defense Program would be required to
adequately fund equipment reset in both the active and reserve
components.
The committee considers the equipment requirements for
units transforming to modularity to be those that were
described in the Modular Force Initiative report submitted to
Congress in March 2006. Additionally, the committee expects the
Army to include the procurement of M1A2 Abrams SEP tanks and
Bradley Fighting Vehicle A3s in the funding requirements for
modularity. The cost estimate for equipment requirements for
modularity stated in this section includes this additional
requirement.
The committee also considers the requirement for the
reconstitution of Army Prepositioned Stocks (APS) to be
consistent with the materiel configuration outlined in APS
Strategy 2012 or a subsequent strategy created in accordance
with section 2229 of title 10, United States Code, a section
added to title 10 in another section of this Act.
TITLE IV--MILITARY PERSONNEL AUTHORIZATIONS
OVERVIEW
The committee continues to believe that the manpower levels
in the budget request for the active components of the Army and
the Marine Corps are too low for the requirements placed on
those services by the national security strategy. Beginning
with the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year
2003, as passed by the House of Representatives, the committee
has recommended active end strength levels, especially for the
Army, greater than those requested. Similarly, the committee's
recommendations for fiscal year 2007 increase the active Army
end strength by six percent, and the Marine Corps end strength
by nearly three percent above the budget request. In
recognition of the integral roles and missions performed by the
reserve components, the committee commends and supports the
decision by the Secretary of the Army and the chief of staff of
the Army to request an Army National Guard end strength of
350,000, and recommends an increase of $789.0 million in Army
National Guard personnel, operations and maintenance, defense
health and procurement accounts to support the Army
leadership's request.
LEGISLATIVE PROVISIONS
Subtitle A--Active Forces
Section 401--End Strengths for Active Forces
This section would authorize the following end strengths
for active duty personnel of the armed forces as of September
30, 2007:
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
FY 2007 Change from
FY 2006 ---------------------------------------------------------
Service authorized Committee FY 2007 FY 2006
Request recommendation request authorized
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Army.................................. 512,400 482,400 512,400 30,000 0
Navy.................................. 352,700 340,700 340,700 0 -12,000
USMC.................................. 179,000 175,000 180,000 5,000 1,000
Air Force............................. 357,400 334,200 334,200 0 -23,200
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
DOD............................... 1,401,500 1,332,300 1,367,300 35,000 -34,200
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The authorizations contained in this section for the Army
and Marine Corps exceed by 30,000 and 5,000 respectively the
end strengths for those services requested in the budget
because the committee does not believe that the budget request
provided adequate manning levels for the Army and Marine Corps.
Additional funding for these increases is provided in title XV
of the bill.
Section 402--Revision in Permanent Active Duty End Strength Minimum
Levels
This section would establish new minimum active duty end
strengths for the Army, Navy, Marine Corps and Air Force as of
September 30, 2007. The committee recommends 504,400 as the
minimum active duty end strength for the Army. The minimum
strengths of the Navy, Marine Corps and Air Force are identical
to the committee recommendations for those services shown in
section 401.
Section 403--Additional Authority for Increases of Army and Marine
Corps Active Duty End Strengths for Fiscal Years 2008 and 2009
This section would authorize additional increases of active
duty end strength for the Army and for the Marine Corps in
fiscal years 2008 and 2009 above the strengths authorized for
those services in fiscal year 2007. Over the two-year period,
the Army would be authorized to increase active duty end
strength up to a total of 532,400, and the Marine Corps would
be authorized to increase active duty end strength to 184,000.
Subtitle B--Reserve Forces
Section 411--End Strengths for Selected Reserve
This section would authorize the following end strengths
for selected reserve personnel, including the end strength for
reserves on active duty in support of the reserves, as of
September 30, 2007:
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
FY 2007 Change from
FY 2006 ---------------------------------------------------------
Service authorized Committee FY 2007 FY 2006
Request recommendation request authorized
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Army National Guard................... 350,000 350,000 350,000 0 0
Army Reserve.......................... 205,000 200,000 200,000 0 -5,000
Navy Reserve.......................... 73,100 71,300 71,300 0 -1,800
Marine Corps Reserve.................. 39,600 39,600 39,600 0 0
Air National Guard.................... 106,800 107,000 107,000 0 200
Air Force Reserve..................... 74,000 74,900 74,900 0 900
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
DOD Total......................... 848,500 842,800 842,800 0 -5,700
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Coast Guard Reserve................... 10,000 10,000 10,000 0 0
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The committee notes that subsequent to the receipt of the
budget request, which proposed a fiscal year 2007 end strength
for the Army National Guard of 332,900, the Secretary of
Defense submitted a revised Army National Guard end strength
authorization of 350,000 for fiscal year 2007. The committee
recommendation supports that higher authorization and provides
the required additional funding of $471.0 million in the
authorizations of appropriations for military personnel,
operations and maintenance and defense health. Title I of this
Act also recommends an additional $318.0 million for Army
National Guard procurement to support the recommended end
strength.
Section 412--End Strengths for Reserves on Active Duty in Support of
the Reserve Components
This section would authorize the following end strengths
for reserves on active duty in support of the reserves as of
September 30, 2007:
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
FY 2007 Change from
FY 2006 ---------------------------------------------------------
Service authorized Committee FY 2007 FY 2006
Request recommendation request authorized
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Army National Guard................... 27,396 27,441 28,165 724 769
Army Reserve.......................... 15,270 15,416 15,416 0 146
Naval Reserve......................... 13,392 12,564 12,564 0 -828
Marine Corps Reserve.................. 2,261 2,261 2,261 0 0
Air National Guard.................... 13,123 13,206 13,291 85 168
Air Force Reserve..................... 2,290 2,707 2,707 0 417
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
DOD Total......................... 73,732 73,595 74,404 809 672
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The committee's recommendation in section 411 would support
the Secretary of Defense's revised request for an end strength
higher than what was initially requested for fiscal year 2007
for the Army National Guard. Consistent with that
recommendation, the committee also recommends an increase in
the end strength of Army National Guard personnel on active
duty in support of that component. Furthermore, the committee
recommends an increase of 85 Air National Guard personnel to
improve the capability of the E-8C Joint Surveillance Target
Attack Radar System (Joint STARS) to support the combatant
commanders. In title XV of this Act, the committee recommends
the funding for this Air National Guard increase.
Section 413--End Strengths for Military Technicians (Dual Status)
This section would authorize the following end strengths
for military technicians (dual status) as of September 30,
2007:
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
FY 2007 Change from
FY 2006 ---------------------------------------------------------
Service authorized Committee
(floor) Request recommendation FY 2007 FY 2006
(floor) request authorized
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Army National Guard................... 25,563 26,050 27,615 1,565 2,052
Army Reserve.......................... 7,649 7,912 7,912 0 263
Air National Guard.................... 22,971 23,255 23,255 0 284
Air Force Reserve..................... 9,852 10,124 10,124 0 272
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
DOD Total......................... 66,035 67,341 68,906 1,565 2,871
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The committee's recommendation in section 411 would support
the Secretary of Defense's revised request for an end strength
higher than what was initially requested for fiscal year 2007
for the Army National Guard. Consistent with that
recommendation, the committee also recommends an increase in
the end strength of Army National Guard military technicians
(dual status). The committee's recommendation would provide for
a 4.3 percent growth in the strength of military technicians
above the levels authorized in fiscal year 2006.
Section 414--Fiscal Year 2007 Limitation on Number of Non-Dual Status
Technicians
This section would establish the maximum end strengths for
the reserve components of the Army and Air Force for non-dual
status technicians as of September 30, 2007:
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
FY 2006 Change from
FY 2005 ---------------------------------------------------------
Service authorized Committee FY 2006 FY 2005
Request recommendation request authorized
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Army National Guard................... 1,600 1,600 1,600 0 0
Army Reserve695....................... 595 595 595 0 -100
Air National Guard.................... 350 350 350 0 0
Air Force Reserve..................... 90 90 90 0 0
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
DOD Total......................... 2,735 2,635 2,635 0 -100
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Section 415--Maximum Number of Reserve Personnel Authorized To Be on
Active Duty for Operational Support
This section would authorize, as required by section 115(b)
of title 10, United States Code, the maximum number of reserve
component personnel who may be on active duty or full-time
national guard duty during fiscal year 2007 to provide
operational support. The personnel authorized here do not count
against the end strengths authorized by sections 401 or 412.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
FY 2007 Change from
FY 2006 ---------------------------------------------------------
Service authorized Committee FY 2007 FY 2006
Request recommendation request authorized
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Army National Guard................... 17,000 17,000 17,000 0 0
Army Reserve.......................... 13,000 13,000 13,000 0 0
Naval Reserve......................... 6,200 6,200 6,200 0 0
Marine Corps Reserve.................. 3,000 3,000 3,000 0 0
Air National Guard.................... 16,000 16,000 16,000 0 0
Air Force Reserve..................... 14,000 14,000 14,000 0 0
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
DOD Total......................... 69,200 69,200 69,200 0 0
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Subtitle C--Authorization of Appropriations
Section 421--Military Personnel
This section would authorize $1,098.2 million to be
appropriated for military personnel. This authorization of
appropriations reflects both reductions and increases to the
budget request for military personnel that are itemized below:
Military personnel
Amount (in thousands of dollars)
H411 ARNG: Restore funding to support 350,000 end
strength............................................ 189,000
H411 ARNG: Restore TRICARE accrual funding.............. 62,000
H601 Additional 0.5% basic pay raise.................... 300,000
H615 Expanded eligibility of dental officers for special
pay................................................. 4,000
H623: Incentives for high-demand, low density skills.... 5,000
H632 Ship second privately owned vehicle to non-foreign
overseas areas...................................... 30,000
Army: Recruiting and retention bonuses.................. 100,000
Army: Expanded Army early commissioning program
(Skelton)........................................... 3,500
USAR: Army-wide office basic course funding............. 39,200
Navy: Deferred PCS (CNO UFR)............................ 100,000
Air Guard: Recruiting and retention bonuses............. 59,000
Leg. proposal not adopted: Extend basic pay table to 40
years of service.................................... -4,000
Targeted pay raise savings due to 0.5% basic pay
increase............................................ -5,000
Unexpended MILPERS balances............................. -1,839,000
Section 422--Armed Forces Retirement Home
This section would authorize $54.8 million to be
appropriated for the operation of the Armed Forces Retirement
Home during fiscal year 2007.
TITLE V--MILITARY PERSONNEL POLICY
OVERVIEW
The committee's recommendations reflect heavily the views
and issues raised by servicemembers to committee Members and
staff during oversight visits in the United States, in the
combat zones of Southwest Asia, and across the world.
Furthermore, the recommendations in this title represent the
committee's continuing commitment to support the dedicated,
exceptional Americans who serve in the armed forces. The
committee recognizes that the active duty, national guard, and
reserve members serving today are performing superbly,
notwithstanding the many stresses of the global war on
terrorism. The committee trusts that the recommendations made
here will help to relieve some of that stress and also
recognize the significant sacrifices that take place each day
in the lives of the men and women who serve in uniform, and in
the lives of the families that support them.
A major focus of this title involves not only
servicemembers who have been wounded or injured, but also the
surviving family members of those who have died or been
seriously injured in service. Such focus continues the
committee's initiatives enacted in the National Defense
Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2006 (Public Law 109-163) to
improve programs that directly affect the injured, the wounded
and the survivors. Therefore, the committee recommends the
following:
(1) The remains of military personnel who die during
combat operations or who die of non-combat related
injuries in the theater of combat, would be moved by
dedicated aircraft, from Dover Air Force Base,
Delaware, to the military airfield nearest to the
servicemember's place of interment and would be
accompanied by military personnel who would render
military honors at the destination airfield.
(2) The military services' physical evaluation board
(PEB) process would be reformed to address concerns of
military members, particularly reserve component
members, about the consistency and timeliness of PEB
decisions, the ability of members to gain information
about PEB procedures, and the rationale supporting
board decisions.
(3) The Secretary of Defense would be authorized to
provide computer/electronic assistive technology,
devices, and technology services to military personnel
who have sustained a severe or debilitating illness or
injury while serving in support of a contingency
operation and keep those devices after they separate
from the military.
The reserve components constitute another major focus of
this title. Their roles and responsibilities have changed
dramatically since the start of the global war on terrorism and
the committee believes it is necessary to adjust existing
authorities and create new authorities to better reflect the
nation's continuing reliance on the national guard and the
reserves. Therefore, the committee recommends:
(1) New authority to enable the mobilization of
members of the reserve components to provide assistance
in serious natural or manmade disasters.
(2) An extension from 270 days to 365 days the
maximum period of mobilization under what is known as
the President's Selected Reserve Call-up authority.
(3) New authority that formally authorizes current
practices in which full-time national guard and reserve
members are performing many additional functions beyond
their traditional support to the reserve components.
Such additional functions include instructing and
training active duty members, Department of Defense
civilians and foreign military personnel in the United
States.
(4) New authority that would authorize State
governors, under title 32, United States Code, to
mobilize national guard forces to support operational
missions taken at the request of the President or the
Secretary of Defense, and to perform training
operations and missions assigned by the secretaries of
the Army or Air Force.
Finally, in this title, the committee makes recommendations
to improve the quality of the service and the quality of life
of servicemembers and their families and to recognize that
service. Those recommendations include the following:
(1) Supplementary funding, totaling $65.0 million,
for local educational agencies that are heavily
impacted by the attendance of military dependents or
that experience significant increases or decreases in
the average daily attendance of military dependent
students due to military force structure changes.
(2) Permanent authority for the military services,
especially the Army, to reduce from 24 months to 18
months the minimum time-in-grade required for promotion
from 1st lieutenant to captain, using an Army example.
This authority would assist the military departments in
meeting long-term unit and operational requirements.
(3) Improved transition assistance for servicemembers
leaving active duty by directing that the Secretary of
Defense require attendance at the Department of Labor
transition assistance programs of all who had not
previously attended.
(4) Authorization of a Cold War Victory Medal that
would be issued upon the application of an eligible
enlisted member, officer, or warrant officer who served
during the Cold War; and the authorization of the award
of the Purple Heart to members of the armed forces who
died as prisoners of war in captivity, or who died
after captivity due to illness or injury sustained
while a prisoner of war.
ITEMS OF SPECIAL INTEREST
Academy Language Training
The committee notes that the Department of Defense has
placed great emphasis on improving the strategic language
posture of the United States. The military academies of the
United States are implementing new plans to strengthen their
current programs. Accordingly, the committee directs the
secretaries of the Army, Navy, and Air Force to report on the
current state of language programs and the plans for
implementing a strategic language development program at the
United States Military Academy, the United States Naval
Academy, and the United States Air Force Academy. In
consultation with the superintendents of each academy, the
secretaries should provide data on the number of students
participating in language training, the languages in which they
are participating, levels of proficiency, and language classes
offered. In addition, the superintendents should identify their
plans for expanding foreign language programs, provide an
update on their current implementation of the language
initiatives included in the fiscal year 2007 budget request,
and describe the costs required for the programs.
The committee directs the Secretaries to submit their plans
for the expansion of language programs and the resource
requirements to accomplish them to the Senate Committee on
Armed Services and the House Committee on Armed Services 180
days after the date of enactment of this Act.
Closure of Article 32 Investigations in Cases of Sexual Assault or
Domestic Violence
The committee directs the Secretary of Defense to review
the procedures used in pretrial investigations under Article 32
of the Uniform Code of Military Justice. The purpose of the
review is to identify additional criteria and factors for
inclusion in the Manual for Courts-Martial that would better
serve to guide commanders and investigating officers, in cases
of sexual assault and domestic violence, in determining when,
and to what extent, such Article 32 proceedings should be
closed to spectators, the media, and others in order to protect
witnesses and victims of crime against inappropriate treatment,
intimidation, or embarrassment, or from unwarranted publicity
or sensationalism resulting from their role in testifying or
providing evidence in the investigation. The review shall be
conducted with the particular interests in mind for victims of
sexual assault and domestic violence and the unique concerns
that may be associated with or accompany their testimony in a
public forum, as well as for all other victims and witnesses
who may provide less than complete testimony in a public
setting due to embarrassment or timidity. In conducting the
review, the Secretary should also consider the recommendation
made on this matter in the June 2005 ``Report of The Defense
Task Force on Sexual Harassment & Violence at the Military
Service Academies'' that Congress should amend Title 10 of the
U.S. Code regarding Article 32 to explicitly permit commanders
to close the hearings to the public. The Secretary should also
consider, in this review, prior precedent regarding the closing
of Article 32 proceedings to the public in decisions of the
United States Supreme Court, United States Court of Appeals for
the Armed Forces, and the Military Departments' Courts of
Criminal Appeals. The committee directs the Secretary of
Defense to present to the House Committee on Armed Services and
the Senate Committee on Armed Services a report on the results
of this review and any recommendations for change to the Manual
for Courts-Martial no later than April 15, 2007.
Department of the Navy Personal Responsibility and Values: Education
and Training Program
The Committee is aware that the Navy's Personal
Responsibility and Values: Education and Training (PREVENT)
program has enjoyed great success in addressing alcohol and
drug abuse issues among new recruits and enlisted sailors
between the ages of 18-26. The committee is impressed that the
Navy is using the PREVENT program to empower junior members to
take responsibility for their lives by making positive choices
designed to enhance personal and professional effectiveness.
Specifically, the committee notes that the program gives
sailors the tools they need to avoid, reduce, or eliminate
risky, self-destructive behaviors such as alcohol and substance
abuse that adversely impact Navy readiness and performance.
Given the positive outcomes this program has achieved in
the lives of sailors and its contributions to readiness and
mission performance, the committee urges the Secretary of the
Navy to increase funding for this program to ensure that
additional Navy personnel have the opportunity to participate.
Additionally, the committee recommends that the Secretary
extend the benefits of participation in the PREVENT program to
enlisted personnel in the Marine Corps. Accordingly, the
committee directs the Secretary of the Navy to study the
feasibility of allocating additional funding to the PREVENT
program and extending eligibility to Marine Corps personnel.
The committee directs the Secretary to report his findings
and recommendations by March 31, 2007, to the Senate Committee
on Armed Services and the House Committee on Armed Services.
Educational Opportunities in Interagency Coordination at the Military
War Colleges
The committee believes that improving interagency
coordination is vital to U.S. national security, and that the
military war colleges should provide educational opportunities
in the area of interagency coordination. The committee commends
the Department on the steps it has already taken to incorporate
the subject of interagency coordination in its professional
educational activities but believes that opportunities may
exist to increase the interagency component in those
educational activities.
Therefore, the committee directs the Secretary of Defense
to submit to the Senate Committee on Armed Services and the
House Committee on Armed Services, by April 1, 2007, a report
on the steps the military war colleges should take to provide
educational opportunities in the area of interagency
coordination. The report shall address the advisability of
creating faculty positions or chairs in each war college to
allow faculty representation from the Department of Justice,
the Department of State, the Department of Homeland Security,
and agencies under the oversight of the Director of National
Intelligence. The report shall include estimates of the cost of
implementing the findings of the report.
Joint Advertising, Market Research and Studies
The Joint Advertising, Market Research and Studies (JAMRS)
program is the Department of Defense's (DOD) corporate level
effort to bolster the effectiveness of the recruiting programs
conducted by the military services. Among its principal
initiatives is a campaign to build advocacy and support among
parents, teachers, and coaches for service to the nation by
ensuring that these key influencers of youth have the facts
about military service and are able to engage in conversations
with youth about serving the nation in the military. The
committee has received testimony from a wide range of senior
DOD personnel regarding the challenges recruiters face in
convincing youth influencers about the value of service to the
nation. The committee notes that despite such testimony, the
budget request for JAMRS has not increased over the last two
years, remaining at $7.0 million. The committee believes that
this funding level is insufficient and urges the Secretary of
Defense to substantially increase future funding for JAMRS.
Operation of Army Air Ambulance Detachments
The committee understands that the Army will discontinue
the operation of the Army air ambulance detachment at Fort
Drum, New York, and replace the military capability with a
contracted air ambulance service to support only the
installation needs. Replacing the military air ambulance
capability with a contracted, on-call civilian service could
potentially result in reduced aeromedical evacuation capability
and responsiveness for on-post emergencies and accidents.
Furthermore, the loss of the military air ambulance unit means
the end of military support under the Military Assistance to
Safety and Traffic (MAST) program. As a result, the region
surrounding Fort Drum will face a devastating loss of emergency
response capability. Providing at least an equal replacement
capability, in a cost-effective manner, will be extremely
difficult, because of the relative isolation of the
installation and the climatic challenges of the region. Given
the potential negative impact on both the installation and the
region, the committee directs the Secretary of the Army to
continue to provide military air ambulance support to the Fort
Drum installation, as well as to support to the region
surrounding the installation under the MAST program. To
evaluate any future decision regarding the continuation of
military air ambulance support at Fort Drum, the committee also
directs the Secretary of the Army to provide the committee with
the following:
(1) The plan for stationing air ambulance detachments
at U.S. military installations and the discreet
criteria used to determine that stationing;
(2) A report on the cost-effectiveness and changes in
medical response factors at other installations where
Army air ambulance detachments have been replaced by
contracted capabilities; and
(3) A review of the potential contracting out options
at Fort Drum, to include, an analysis of the
feasibility of an umbrella contract for aeromedical
evacuation that provides not only support to Fort Drum,
but also to the region.
Permanent Identification Cards for Adult Disabled Children
The committee is concerned by reports that military members
with permanently disabled dependent children are required to
periodically renew identification cards for their children.
This process is especially cumbersome and demanding for elderly
parents of adult children who must meet the challenge of the
verification process repeatedly over the course of many years.
The committee believes that there is an option to develop a
procedure to grant permanent identification cards for adult
children without significant risk to the integrity of the
military identification system. Therefore, the committee
directs the Secretary of Defense to study the feasibility of
providing discretionary authority to the secretaries concerned
to grant permanent military identification cards to adult
children of military members when disabilities can be medically
validated as permanent and financial support qualification can
be assessed as being of indefinite duration.
The committee directs the Secretary to submit a report on
his findings and recommendations by March 31, 2007, to the
Senate Committee on Armed Services and the House Committee on
Armed Services.
Personnel Plan for Linguists
The committee continues to be very concerned about the need
to develop a comprehensive plan for better management of both
officer and enlisted linguists in the armed forces. The
committee believes that current personnel programs fail to
provide linguists adequate incentives to achieve their full
potential in language and cultural skills and sufficient
promotion opportunities within the linguist career path. The
committee is particularly concerned that enlisted members are
denied promotion opportunities to senior noncommissioned
officer grades. The committee believes that the military
departments should invest sufficient grade structure in the
services' career paths for linguists to allow highly skilled
members to compete for promotion within their linguist
specialties without feeling that they must either change their
specialty to improve their promotion opportunity or remain a
linguist and sacrifice their promotion potential. The committee
anxiously awaits the Secretary's report on the need for a
personnel plan for linguists in the armed forces, required by
section 581 of the National Defense Authorization Act for
Fiscal Year 2006 (Public Law 109-163) and trusts that it will
address the Committee's concerns about the promotion of
linguists.
Process for Restructuring the Army National Guard
The Army's active, reserve, and national guard are integral
partners in the sustained success of the ``one'' Army concept.
The committee, therefore, is concerned that force structure
changes proposed in December 2005 would have had a profound
impact on the national guard if developed without the active
participation of, or consultation with, the Army National
Guard. The committee strongly believes that any plan to
restructure the Army National Guard should be achieved through
a transparent and inclusive process. The National Guard Bureau
and the Adjutants General should be full partners in the
development of Army National Guard transformation plans. The
committee urges senior Army leadership, the National Guard
Bureau, and the Adjutants General to confer jointly to develop
a process to ensure the Army National Guard is properly
postured, prepared, and equipped to meet its warfighting
requirements, as well as its homeland defense and emergency
response requirements.
Social Security Numbers on Military Identification Cards
The committee is aware that many service members are
concerned that the inclusion of their social security numbers
on military identification cards places them at greater risk of
identity theft. Although the committee recognizes that a new
generation of identity cards may eliminate this risk in the
future, there would seem to be a more urgent need for the
Department of Defense to develop an alternative that would
allow servicemembers to request that the social security number
be eliminated from their identification cards or another number
be substituted for the social security number. The committee
notes that other State and local governments have responded to
the increasing risk of identity theft with similar alternative
procedures. Therefore, the committee directs the Secretary of
Defense to study the feasibility of developing an alternative
process that would allow servicemembers to immediately request
that their military identification cards do not include their
social security numbers.
The committee directs the Secretary to submit a report on
his findings and recommendations by March 31, 2007, to the
Senate Committee on Armed Services and the House Committee on
Armed Services.
Trafficking in Persons
The committee has followed with interest the Department of
Defense's (DOD) response to the crime of human trafficking. The
Committee appreciates the steps that the DOD and various
combatant commanders have taken to address human trafficking
since 2002. The Secretary of Defense's strongly worded memo of
September 16, 2004 entitled ``Combating Trafficking in
Persons,'' was particularly welcome. Such unequivocal
leadership is essential for setting standards and creating a
culture that deters any sort of human trafficking. Further, the
committee believes that actions must be taken by DOD to
implement the zero tolerance policy mandated by the Secretary
of Defense. To this end, the committee directs the following:
(1) The Secretary of Defense is to ensure that
combatant commanders designate a person on their
respective staffs to carry out anti-trafficking
programs and oversee implementation of OSD anti-
trafficking directives; and
(2) Military criminal investigators and prosecutors
be trained on how to use existing provisions in the
Uniform Code of Military Justice, the Manual for
Courts-Martial, and the Military Extraterritorial
Jurisdiction Act to identify and prosecute human
trafficking cases;
(3) The Joint Service Committee on Military Justice
study whether the Uniform Code of Military Justice and
Manual for Courts-Martial are adequate to proscribe
trafficking in persons by military personnel; and
(4) The Office of the Secretary of Defense shall
compile and disseminate to combatant commanders best
practices to combat trafficking, particularly those
which have already been used effectively by one or more
combatant commander.
Victim Service Organization Privilege in Cases Arising Under Uniform
Code of Military Justice
The committee directs the Secretary of Defense to review
the issue of privileged or protected communications made by
victims of sexual assaults to health care providers and victim
advocates. The purpose of the review is to identify whether
potential changes to the Manual for Courts-Martial should be
made to extend the privileges that are already included within
Section V of the Military Rules of Evidence to include heath
care providers and victim advocates.
This review should include:
(1) Existing privileged or protected communications
that currently exist in Federal and state law and the
Manual for Courts-Martial for both victim advocates,
which include any representative of a victim service
organization, and health care providers, or a
representative of a health care provider, and the
reasoning behind those privileges;
(2) Definitions and qualifications of victims
advocates and or health care providers, as defined
above; especially the education and training that is
involved in order to become a victim advocate or health
care provider; and whether those qualifications should
be a factor in defining the privilege.
(3) The nature of the relationship between the
victim, victims advocate and health care provider.
(4) The role and responsibilities of the victim
advocate.
(5) The extent to which the privilege can be claimed
by individuals other than the victim, victims advocate
and health care professionals.
(6) Whether these individuals are military personnel
or civilians and whether there are any state licensing
requirements for these positions. If there are state
licensing requirements or if individuals are licensed
in a state then the review should include what the
state licensing requirements entail and whether or not
any state requirements could conflict if privileged
communication were to be extended to victim advocates
and health care providers.
(7) An analysis of the recommendation made on this
matter in the June 2005 ``Report of The Defense Task
Force on Sexual Harassment & Violence at the Military
Service Academies'' that Congress should create a
statutory privilege protecting communications made by
victims of sexual assault to health care providers and
victim advocates. This recommendation stated that the
privilege should extend to both medical and mental
health care providers and to those victim advocates
designated and trained to perform that duty in a manner
prescribed by Department of Defense regulation.
(8) A review of prior precedent regarding privilege
and the rights of the accused, weighing the accused
rights and the rights of the victim in decisions of the
United States Supreme Court, United States Court of
Appeals for the Armed Forces, and the Military
Departments' Courts of Criminal Appeals.
The committee directs the Secretary of Defense to present
to the Senate Committee on Armed Services and the House
Committee on Armed Services a report on the results of this
review and any recommendations for change to the Manual for
Courts-Martial no later than April 15, 2007.
Web-based Enhancement to Support Family Readiness Programs
The committee commends the Department of Defense and the
military services for their efforts to improve family support
programs for both active duty and reserve families. However,
the committee is concerned that extended and multiple
deployments may have an adverse impact on the stability of
military families and believes the services should explore
efforts to use new technologies to further enhance outreach and
support to such families. It has been shown that the use of
volunteer-based family support groups has been very effective
in helping to build self-sufficient families and provide
critical support in times of need. The committee understands
that the Army is using a new technology called the Virtual
Family Readiness Group that is proving to be an effective tool
for family support groups to communicate and collaborate across
geographic, temporal and other boundaries such as geography,
war zones, languages, installations, and deployments. The
committee urges the other services to explore using similar
interactive technology to support their family readiness teams
to improve efficiency and create more effective outreach
avenues for military families particularly during this period
of high deployment tempo.
LEGISLATIVE PROVISIONS
Subtitle A--Officer Personnel Policy
Section 501--Authorized Strength of Navy Reserve Flag Officers
This section, while retaining the authorized strength of
Navy Reserve flag officers at 48, would eliminate existing
limitations on the distribution and allocation of those flag
officers. Present law mandates a numerical boundary between the
line and staff corps and makes specific flag officer
allocations among the staff corps elements.
Section 502--Standardization of Grade of Senior Dental Officer of the
Air Force with that of Senior Dental Officer of the Army
This section would require that the officer serving as the
senior dental officer in the Air Force be appointed in the
grade of major general. This is the same grade to which the
officer serving as the Chief of the Dental Corps in the Army is
appointed.
Section 503--Management of Chief Warrant Officers
This section would authorize the secretary concerned to
retain Chief Warrant Officers, W-4, after twice failing to be
promoted using procedures prescribed by the secretary without a
mandatory selective continuation board, as required under
current law. This section would also increase the years of
service as a warrant officer that would require mandatory
retirement from 24 to 30 years of service.
Section 504--Reduction in Time-in-Grade Requirement for Promotion to
Captain in the Army, Air Force, and Marine Corps and Lieutenant in the
Navy
This section would make permanent the authority to reduce
from 24 months to 18 months the minimum time-in-grade required
as an 0-2 before being eligible for promotion to the grade of
0-3.
Section 505--Military Status of Officers Serving in Certain
Intelligence Community Positions
This section would clarify that general and flag officers
assigned to senior level positions within the Central
Intelligence Agency and the Office of the Director of National
Intelligence shall not be subject to the supervision or control
of the Secretary of Defense and shall not exercise supervision
or control over Department of Defense personnel. This section
would further clarify that the assignment of an officer to such
a position would not affect the officer's status, grade, rank,
compensation, rights, or benefits and that officer's military
pay and allowances would be reimbursed to the Department of
Defense from funds available to the Director, Central
Intelligence Agency or the Director of National Intelligence,
as appropriate.
Subtitle B--Reserve Component Management
Section 511--Revisions to Reserve Call-up Authority
This section would extend from 270 days to 365 days the
duration of service for members of the Selected Reserve and
Individual Ready Reserve involuntarily called to active duty to
support operational missions. This section would also permit
the President to use this authority to order reserve component
members to active duty to provide assistance in serious natural
or manmade disasters, accidents or catastrophes that occur in
the United States, its territories and possessions, the
District of Columbia and the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico. This
section would also establish criteria that the Secretary of
Defense must consider to ensure the fair treatment of reserve
component personnel before mobilizing them under this
authority.
Section 512--Military Retirement Credit for Certain Service by National
Guard Members Performed While in a State Duty Status Immediately After
the Terrorist Attacks of September 11, 2001
This section would authorize reserve retirement credit for
members of the Army National Guard and the Air National Guard
who were mobilized in a State active duty status in response to
the declaration of federal emergencies in the counties of the
State of New Jersey surrounding New York City following the
terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001.
Section 513--Report on Private Sector Promotion and Constructive
Termination of Members of the Reserve Components Called or Ordered to
Active Service
This section would require the Secretary of Defense to
report on the post-mobilization effects on the private sector
employment of members of the reserve components. Thus, this
section would require the secretary to provide data, based on
information voluntarily provided by reserve component members,
not only on post-mobilization private sector promotions, but
also on the voluntary resignations by the reservist because of
private sector working conditions the employee found
unbearable. The secretary's report to the Senate Committee on
Armed Services and the House Committee on Armed Services would
be due no later than March 1, 2007.
Subtitle C--Education and Training
Section 521--Authority to Permit Members Who Participate in the
Guaranteed Reserve Forces Duty Scholarship Program to Participate in
the Health Professions Scholarship Program and Serve on Active Duty
This section would authorize the Secretary of the Army to
modify agreements entered into by cadets in the Reserve
Officers' Training Corps who participate in the Guaranteed
Reserve Forces Duty Scholarship Program so that a cadet or
former cadet could receive assistance under the Armed Forces
Health Professions Scholarship Program (HPSP) and serve on
active duty as required by the HPSP. At present, a cadet who
participates in the Guaranteed Reserve Forces Duty Scholarship
Program must serve in a reserve component troop program unit.
Section 522--Junior Reserve Officers' Training Corps Instruction
Eligibility Expansion
This section would allow the employment of retired reserve
and national guard members as Junior Reserve Officers' Training
Corps (JROTC) instructors. Existing law only allows the
employment of active duty and retired regular officers and non-
commissioned officers as JROTC instructors. This section would
also decouple the JROTC instructor salaries of retired reserve
and national guard from active duty pay and military retirement
entitlements and allow the secretary of the military department
concerned to determine their salaries and to reimburse the
JROTC host institution by an amount determined by the secretary
concerned.
Section 523--Authority for United States Military Academy and United
States Air Force Academy Permanent Military Professors to Assume
Command Positions While on Periods of Sabbatical
This section would authorize the secretaries of the Army
and the Air Force to assign military officers who are permanent
professors at the United States Military and Air Force
Academies, respectively, to act in a command capacity while on
sabbaticals outside the academic realm of the academies.
Section 524--Expansion of Service Academy Exchange Programs with
Foreign Military Academies
This section would increase from 24 to 100 the number of
cadets at the United States Military Academy and the United
States Air Force Academy, and the number of midshipmen at the
United States Naval Academy, who may participate in exchange
programs with foreign military academies. This section would
also increase from 24 to 100 the number of students from
foreign military academies whom may receive instruction at each
of the service academies. Furthermore, this section would
increase from $120,000 to $1.0 million the amount of
appropriated funding that each service academy could expend in
support of the exchange programs and would authorize the
academies to also use additional funding that was provided from
other than appropriated sources to support the exchange
programs. The committee, however, does not intend that the
additional funding from other than appropriated sources be used
to fund exchange students in excess of the limit set by this
section.
Section 525--Review of Legal Status of Junior ROTC Program
This section would require the Secretary of Defense to
review the 1976 legal opinion issued by the Department of
Defense General Counsel that determined that Junior Reserve
Officers' Training Corps (JROTC) instructors may be transported
to a non-host school only to teach students previously enrolled
in the JROTC unit at the host school, and only when it is
impractical to require them to take courses at that host
school. The purpose of the secretary's review would be to
determine whether changes in law since 1976, including the
repeal of the statutory limits on the number of JROTC units,
and local school redistricting, which have split a host
school's JROTC students into nearly equal groups, would now
allow for the instructors from a host school to travel to and
instruct JROTC students at another nearby school. This section
also would allow a host school that is currently providing for
the assignment of JROTC instructors to another school with 70
or more students the authority to continue such support until
180 days following the submission of the report by the
Secretary of Defense.
Subtitle D--General Service Authorities
Section 531--Test of Utility of Test Preparation Guides and Education
Programs in Enhancing Recruit Candidate Performance on the Armed
Services Vocational Aptitude Battery (ASVAB) and Armed Forces
Qualification Test (AFQT)
This section would require the Secretary of Defense to
administer a test program conducted by the secretaries of the
military departments to determine the utility of commercially
available test preparation guides and education programs to
assist recruit candidates in achieving improved scores on
military recruit qualification tests. The Secretary would
identify 2,000 recruit candidates to receive test preparation
assistance and a like number of recruit candidates to
participate in a control group to allow comparisons of test
performance and subsequent duty performance in training and
unit settings following active duty entry. The Secretary would
begin the test within nine months following the date of
enactment of this Act. The test would identify participants
over a 1-year period from the start of the test and shall
assess duty performance for each participant for 18 months
following entry on active duty.
The committee has observed that there are many self-paced,
computer assisted, and instructor led options for providing
test preparation assistance for recruit qualification tests.
The committee is interested in exploring the potential that
these test preparation guides and education programs offer for
the military to assist recruit candidates to achieve higher and
more accurate aptitude and qualification scores. The committee
believes that the test program proposed in this section would
allow the Secretary to determine if test preparation assistance
can be reliably used to improve the process by which recruits
are placed in specialties and increase the number of youth that
qualify for entry into the armed forces.
Section 532--Nondisclosure of Selection Board Proceedings
This section would clarify that selection board proceedings
regarding promotion, retention, retirement, separation, and
other personnel actions shall not be disclosed to any person
who is not a board member and board records shall be immune
from legal process, not be admitted as evidence, and not used
for any judicial or administrative proceeding without the
consent of the secretary concerned.
Section 533--Report on Extent of Provision of Timely Notice of Long-
Term Deployments
This section would require the Secretary of Defense to
report on the number of members of the Armed Forces who, since
September 11, 2001, have not received at least 30-days notice
prior to a deployment that was scheduled to last 180 days or
more. This section would require the report be made to the
Senate Committee on Armed Services and the House Committee on
Armed Services no later than March 1, 2007.
Subtitle E--Authorities Relating to Guard and Reserve Duty
Section 541--Title 10 Definition of Active Guard and Reserve Duty
This section would establish a new definition of ``active
guard and reserve'' in section 101 of title 10, United States
Code, and would also clarify the definition of ``active guard
and reserve duty'' in the same section.
Section 542--Authority for Active Guard and Reserve Duties to Include
Support of Operational Missions Assigned to the Reserve Components and
Instruction and Training of Active-Duty Personnel
This section would authorize reserve component personnel
performing active guard and reserve duty, as well as military
technicians (dual status), to also instruct or train active
duty members of the armed forces, members of the foreign
military forces, and Department of Defense contractor personnel
and civilian employees. This section would limit the
instructional or training duty only to that conducted in the
United States, its possessions, the District of Columbia and
the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico. This section would also
require that the performance of such instructional and training
duty be in addition to, not in lieu of, the primary duties of
personnel on active guard and reserve duty and military
technicians (dual status), which is to assist in the
organizing, administering, recruiting, instructing and training
the reserve components.
Section 543--Governor's Authority to Order Members to Active Guard and
Reserve Duty
This section would authorize the governor of a State, or
the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico, or the Virgin Islands, or the
commanding general of the District of Columbia, to order
members of the national guard to perform active guard and
reserve duty, under title 32, United States Code, to support
operations or missions at the request of the President or
Secretary of Defense, or to support training operations and
training missions assigned in whole or in part by the Secretary
of the Army or the Secretary of the Air Force.
Section 544--National Guard Officers Authority to Command
This section would permit, with Presidential authorization
and consent of the governor, any national guard officer to
retain a State commission in the national guard while serving
on active duty. Thus, the officer would possess a dual status,
State and federal, that would permit the officer to command
forces and mixed component units operating under title 10,
United States Code, and under title 32, United States Code.
This section would provide that the Presidential authorization
and gubernatorial consent be obtained in advance in order to
establish command succession in active duty and mixed component
units.
Section 545--Expansion of Operations of Civil Support Teams
This section would expand the types of emergencies to which
members of the reserve components who are assigned to weapons
of mass destruction civil support teams might respond. Thus,
this section would authorize employment of such teams in the
United States in natural or manmade disasters, or in the
intentional or unintentional release of nuclear, biological,
radiological, or toxic or poisonous chemical materials in the
United States that results, or could result, in the
catastrophic loss of life or property.
Subtitle F--Decorations and Awards
Section 551--Authority for Presentation of Medal of Honor Flag to
Living Medal of Honor Recipients and to Living Primary Next-of-Kin of
Deceased Medal of Honor Recipients
This section would allow the purchase and presentation of a
Medal of Honor flag to all living Medal of Honor recipients or,
if deceased, to their living primary next-of-kin.
Section 552--Cold War Victory Medal
This section would require the Secretary of Defense to
design a Cold War Victory Medal and issue it, upon application
by a servicemember, to those individuals who:
(1) Performed active duty or inactive duty for
training as an enlisted member, officer, or warrant
officer, during the Cold War and completed an initial
term of enlistment or obligation; or
(2) If discharged before completion of the initial
term of enlistment or obligation, was honorably
discharged after completion of not less than 180 days
of service on active duty.
Section 553--Posthumous Award of Purple Heart for Prisoners of War Who
Die in or Due to Captivity
This section would require the Secretary of Defense to
award, posthumously, the Purple Heart to a member of the armed
forces who died while in captivity as a prisoner of war or died
due to injury or illness obtained while in captivity as a
prisoner of war. If a servicemember died prior to the enactment
of this Act then the secretary concerned would award the Purple
Heart, upon receipt of an application that is made to the
secretary containing such information as the secretary
requires, to the appropriate next-of-kin of the servicemember.
Section 554--Advancement on the Retired List of Certain Decorated
Retired Navy and Marine Corps Officers
This section would require the Secretary of the Navy to
advance to the next higher on the retired list of officers who
had been specifically commended for performance of duty in
combat during World War II. Advancement on the retired list had
been promised to a number of officers with valor decorations
during World War II, but officers have been denied the honor
because they retired after the expiration of the authority in
law. This section would allow advancement on the retired list,
but would only be honorary and would have no affect on
compensation or benefits.
Section 555--Report on Department of Defense Process for Awarding
Decorations
This section would require the Secretary of Defense to
review the policy, procedures, and processes of the military
departments for awarding decorations to members of the Armed
Forces. The object of the review is to ensure that award
recommendations are submitted and processed in a timely fashion
and that the same consideration and timeliness that is afforded
recommendations for active duty personnel is also provided to
recommendations for reserve component members. This section
would require the Secretary of Defense, no later than 90 days
after the date of the enactment of this act, to submit a report
to the Senate Committee on Armed Services and the House
Committee on Armed Services regarding the findings and
recommendations, if any, for changes to the procedures and
processes of the military departments.
Subtitle G--Matters Relating to Casualties
Section 561--Criteria for Removal of Member from Temporary Disability
Retired List
This section would clarify that a member with less than a
30 percent disability rating may not be removed from the
temporary disability retired list (TDRL) and separated prior to
the maximum TDRL period allowed by law unless the disability is
of a permanent nature and stable.
Section 562--Department of Defense Computer/Electronic Accommodations
Program for Severely Wounded Members
This section would authorize the Secretary of Defense to
provide assistive technology, assistive technology devices, and
assistive technology services to a member of the armed forces
who has sustained a severe or debilitating illness or injury
while serving in support of a contingency operation. This
section would further authorize the Secretary to continue to
provide such devices and services for an indefinite period,
without regard to whether the person being assisted continues
to be a member of the armed forces.
Section 563--Transportation of Remains of Casualties Dying in a Theater
of Combat Operations
This section would require the Secretary of Defense to
transport by air, when air transport is appropriate, the
remains of military servicemembers who died during combat
operations or who died of non-combat related injuries in the
theater of combat, from Dover Air Force Base, Delaware, to the
military airfield nearest to the servicemember's place of
internment or, if the next-of-kin requests it, to the
commercial airfield nearest the interment location. This
section would also require that:
(1) Either military aircraft or aircraft contracted
by the military be dedicated to the exclusive mission
of moving the remains;
(2) Active or reserve component military personnel
escort the remains during transportation from Dover Air
Force Base until the remains are delivered to the next-
of-kin of the deceased servicemember or a
representative of the next-of-kin; and
(3) A proper military escort, made up of, either,
members of the active or reserve components, are
present in sufficient number at the arrival airfield to
remove the servicemember's remains from the aircraft
and to render proper military honors.
This section would permit one exception to the use of
military aircraft by authorizing the use of commercial airlines
to move the servicemember's remains from Dover to the airport
nearest to the servicemember's interment only if requested by
the next-of-kin of the servicemember. The committee makes these
recommendations based on a strong belief that the remains of
our military men and women should be transported with the
utmost ceremony, honors, and respect.
Section 564--Annual Budget Display of Funds for POW/MIA Activities of
Department of Defense
This section would require the Secretary of Defense to
submit to Congress, as a part of the Department of Defense
justification material that supports the President's annual
budget request, a consolidated budget justification display
that includes the prior year and future year funding for all
programs and activities of the following organizations whose
missions involve the accounting for and recovery of military
personnel of the armed forces who are missing in action or
prisoners of war: the Defense Prisoner of War/Missing Personnel
Office (DPMO), the Joint POW/MIA Accounting Command (JPAC), the
Armed Forces DNA Identification Laboratory (AFDIL), and the Air
Force's Life Sciences Equipment Laboratory (LSEL). The budget
display should include for each of these organizations:
(1) The amount, by appropriation and functional area,
originally requested for the fiscal year of the budget
request, with the supporting narrative describing the
rationale for the requested funding levels;
(2) A summary of actual or estimated expenditures for
the two fiscal years preceding the fiscal year for
which the budget is being submitted;
(3) The amounts requested in the budget for the
fiscal year of the request;
(4) A detailed explanation of any inconsistencies
between the amount originally requested by each
organization and the amount of funds requested by the
President's annual budget; and,
(5) The budget estimates for these organizations for
the next five years.
The committee makes these recommendations because it
believes that the mission to account for our missing
servicemembers from past conflicts is a critical mission and to
effectively perform its range of missions DPMO, JPAC, AFDIL,
and LSEL must be fully resourced.
Subtitle H--Assistance to Local Educational Agencies for Defense
Dependents Education
Section 571--Continuation of Authority to Assist Local Educational
Agencies that Benefit Dependents of Members of the Armed Forces and
Department of Defense Civilian Employees
This section would provide $50.0 million for assistance to
local educational agencies that have military dependent
students comprising at least 20 percent of the students in
average daily attendance during a year. This section would also
provide $15.0 million for assistance to local educational
agencies that experience significant increases or decreases in
the average daily attendance of military dependent students due
to military force structure changes, the relocation of military
forces from one base to another, and from base closures and
realignments. The committee makes this recommendation in
connection with its continuing strong support of the need to
help local school districts with significant concentrations of
military students.
Section 572--Enrollment in Defense Dependents' Education System of
Dependents of Foreign Military Members Assigned to Supreme Headquarters
Allied Powers, Europe
This section would authorize the Secretary of Defense to
enroll on a space-required, tuition-free basis a limited number
of dependents of foreign military members who are assigned to
the Supreme Headquarters Allied Powers Europe, in the
Department of Defense dependents' education system in Mons,
Belgium.
Subtitle I--Postal Benefits
Section 575-Postal Benefits Program for Members of the Armed Forces
This section would require the Secretary of Defense, in
consultation with the United States Postal Service, to provide
a program of postal benefits to military members who are
serving in Iraq or Afghanistan, or who are hospitalized at a
medical facility under the jurisdiction of the armed forces as
a result of disease or injury incurred while serving in Iraq or
Afghanistan. The postal benefit would be provided using coupons
or other forms of evidence indicating a mailing privilege to be
used to mail letters, sound and video recordings, printed
materials, or ground parcels not exceeding 15 pounds in weight
at no cost. The section would require that the mailing
privilege be exercised at a United States post office and be
addressed to a qualified individual.
Section 576--Funding
This section would specify that the Secretary of Defense
shall provide funding to support the operation of the postal
benefit program from funds appropriated for a contingent
emergency reserve fund or as an emergency supplemental
appropriation. This section would also require the Secretary to
closely coordinate the transfer of funding to support the
program with the United States Postal Service.
Section 577--Duration
This section would specify that the Secretary of Defense
shall operate the postal benefit program for the one-year
period beginning on the date on which the Secretary publishes
regulations to administer the program.
Subtitle J--Other Matters
Section 581--Reduction in Department of Defense Accrual Contributions
to Department of Defense Military Retirement Fund
This section would reduce the Department of Defense's
accrual contributions into the Military Retirement Fund by
requiring the department to contribute at the lower, more
appropriate part-time rate for reserve component soldiers who
are mobilized or on active duty for special work. Under current
law, the department must make a contribution for such reserve
component personnel at the higher, full-time rate even though
when the reserve component personnel retire their reserve
retirement annuity would be lower than the retirement annuity
of an active component member.
Section 582--Dental Corps of the Bureau of Medicine and Surgery
This section would change the current structure of the
Department of the Navy Bureau of Medicine and Surgery by
eliminating the requirement for a separate dental division
within the bureau. However, this section would also establish
the Dental Corps within the bureau and provide for the
integration of the Dental Corps into the operations of the
bureau.
Section 583--Permanent Authority for Presentation of Recognition Items
for Recruitment and Retention Purposes
This section would make permanent the authority in section
2261 of title 10, United States Code, to expend appropriated
funds to procure recognition items of nominal or modest value
for recruitment or retention purposes and to present such items
to members of the armed forces and to family members of members
of the armed forces, and other individuals, recognized as
providing support that substantially facilitates service in the
armed forces.
Section 584--Report on Feasibility of Establishment of Military
Entrance Processing Command Station on Guam
This section would require the Secretary of Defense to
submit a report by June 1, 2007, on the feasibility and cost
effectiveness of establishing on Guam a military entrance
processing station for new recruits of the armed forces who are
drawn from the western Pacific region. The Secretary's report
would be provided to the Senate Committee on Armed Services and
to the House Committee on Armed Services.
Section 585--Persons Authorized to Administer Enlistment and
Appointment Oaths
This section would allow the Secretary of Defense to
designate who is authorized to administer an enlistment or
appointment oath, and would expand the number of people
eligible to administer such oaths when the situation dictates.
Sections 502 and 1031 of title 10, United States Code,
currently permit any commissioned office of any component of
the armed forces to administer such oaths. By contrast, section
936(b)(6) of title 10 provides that the authority to administer
oaths includes ``[a]ll other persons designated by regulations
of the armed forces or by statute.'' This change would clarify
any apparent contradictions between these sections of law.
Section 586--Repeal of Requirement for Periodic Department of Defense
Inspector General Assessments of Voting Assistance Compliance at
Military Installations
This section would eliminate the requirement for the
Inspector General of the Department of Defense (DOD) to conduct
periodic assessments of compliance with voting assistance
requirements at military installations. The inspectors general
of the Army, Navy and Air Force already conduct installation
visits to assess this compliance; therefore, any visits made by
the DOD Inspector General would duplicate that effort. This
section would not change the requirement that the DOD inspector
general provide Congress with an annual report consolidating,
summarizing and independently assessing the results of the
reviews by the military service inspectors general.
Furthermore, the DOD Inspector General would still maintain the
statutory authority to conduct installation assessment visits
throughout the Department to augment those conducted by the
inspectors general of the military services.
Section 587--Physical Evaluation Boards
This section would make the following improvements to
Physical Evaluation Board (PEB) operations and timeliness and
consistency of decisions:
(1) Require the secretaries of the military
departments to ensure that documents announcing
decisions of PEBs convey the findings and conclusions
of the board in an orderly and itemized fashion with
specific attention to each issue presented by the
member in regard to that member's case.
(2) Require the Secretary of Defense to publish
regulations establishing requirements and training
standards for Physical Evaluation Board liaison
officers and to assess the compliance of the
secretaries of the military departments with those
regulations at least once every three years; and
(3) Require the Secretary of Defense to publish
regulations establishing standards and guidelines
concerning PEB assignment and training of staff,
operating procedures, and consistency and timeliness of
board decisions and to assess the compliance of the
secretaries of the military departments with those
regulations at least once every three years.
As the war placed greater demands on the disability
evaluation system, the committee observed increased complaints
from servicemembers, particularly reserve component members,
about the consistency and timeliness of PEB decisions, the
ability of members to gain information about PEB procedures,
and the rationale supporting board decisions. The committee
also noted that the Government Accountability Office report,
Military Disability System: Improved Oversight Needed to Ensure
Consistent and Timely Outcomes for Reserve and Active Duty
Service Members (GAO-06-362), March 2006, was critical of the
absence of oversight management of the PEBs exercised by the
Department of Defense. The committee believes that the
initiatives proposed in this section would result in enhanced
consistency and timeliness of PEB decisions and improved
communication with members being serviced by the disability
evaluation system.
Section 588--Department of Labor Transitional Assistance Program
This section would require participation by eligible
members of the armed forces within the Department of Defense in
the transitional assistance program provided by the Secretary
of Labor. The Secretary of Defense is not required but shall
encourage members to attend the program if they have previously
participated in the program or upon discharge from active duty,
are returning to an employment position or are enrolled in
school.
Section 589--Revision in Government Contributions to Medicare-Eligible
Retiree Health Care Fund
This section would change the formula by which the
government makes annual contributions to the Medicare-eligible
Uniformed Services Retiree Health Care Fund. This fund is used
to finance the health care provided by the uniformed services
to retirees of those services who are also eligible to receive
health care under Medicare. The section would not make any
change in the health care benefits provided to Medicare-
eligible uniformed services retirees. The section, however,
would reduce the annual government contribution to the fund by
changing the formula for calculating that contribution, as
follows:
(1) Excluding the cadets and midshipmen at the
service academies of the armed forces;
(2) Excluding members of the reserve components who
are not counted against active component end strength
by reason of section 115(i) of title 10, United States
Code; and
(3) Basing the calculation on Selected Reserve
strength, not the strength of the larger Ready Reserve.
The section would also restate and clarify Congressional
intent, enacted by section 725 of the Ronald W. Reagan National
Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2005 (Public Law 108-
375), by prohibiting any funds authorized or appropriated to
the Department of Defense from being used to make any payment
to the fund. Then, as now, the committee intends that the
Secretary of the Treasury, not the Secretary of Defense, be
wholly, completely and exclusively responsible for making the
annual accrual payments required by Chapter 56 of title 10
United States Code. Therefore, the committee also directs that
no annual accrual payment required by Chapter 56 be charged,
credited, or classified in any budget formulation, budget
functional classification or scoring of mandatory or
discretionary spending against the Department of Defense. The
committee takes this action because budget requests since the
enactment of section 725 have not complied with Congressional
intent.
Section 590--Military Chaplains
This section would establish that chaplains in each of the
military services would have the prerogative to pray according
to the dictates of their own consciences, except as must be
limited by military necessity. The section would also clarify
that whenever a limitation for military necessity was applied
it would be imposed in the least restrictive manner feasible.
Section 591--Report on Personnel Requirements for Airborne Assets
Identified as Low-Density, High-Demand Airborne Assets
This section would require the Secretary of Defense to
submit a report, not later than 90 days after enactment of this
Act, on personnel requirements and shortfalls for airborne
assets identified as low-density, high-demand airborne assets
based on combatant commander requirements to conduct and
sustain operations for the global war on terrorism, and would
include: the number of operations and maintenance crews to meet
tasking contemplated to conduct operations for the global war
on terrorism; the current numbers of operations and maintenance
crews; if applicable, shortages of operations and maintenance
crews; whether such shortages are addressed in the future years
defense program; whether end-strength increase are required to
meet any such shortages; costs of personnel needed to address
shortfalls; and if applicable, the number and types of
equipment needed to address training shortfalls.
Section 592--Entrepreneurial Service Members Empowerment Task Force
This section would require the Secretary of Defense, in
coordination with the Administrator of the Small Business
Administration, to establish a task force to provide timely
input and recommendations to both the secretary and the
administrator on:
(1) Measures to improve not only programs designed to
address the economic concerns, challenges and
opportunities of reserve component members; and,
(2) The coordination among various governmental
entities whose programs could assist reserve component
members with those economic concerns, challenges and
opportunities.
This section would authorize the task force to operate
until September 30, 2009.
Section 593--Comptroller General Report on Military Conscientious
Objectors
This section would require the Comptroller General to
submit to Congress, not later than 180 days after enactment of
this Act, a report concerning members of the Armed Forces who
have claimed the status as a military conscientious objector
between January 1, 1989 and December 31, 2006.
Section 594--Commission on the National Guard and Reserves
This section would amend section 513 of the Ronald W.
Reagan National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2005
(Public Law 108-375) to extend the Commission on the National
Guard and Reserves by six months. This section would also
direct the commission to study and report to Congress by March
1, 2007, on the following additional matters: the advisability
and feasibility of implementing the provisions of H.R. 5200 of
the 109th Congress; whether the Chief, National Guard Bureau,
should serve in the grade of general in his current capacity;
and whether the Department of Defense processes for defining
the equipment and funding necessary for the National Guard to
perform its responsibilities, under title 10, United States
Code, and title 32, United States Code, are adequate.
TITLE VI--COMPENSATION AND OTHER PERSONNEL BENEFITS
OVERVIEW
The committee continues to believe that successful
recruiting and retention in a wartime environment is directly
dependent on the close oversight of compensation and benefit
programs to ensure that they remain current, flexible, and
effective. Accordingly, the committee recommends an across-the-
board pay raise of 2.7 percent and a further adjustment to the
military pay table to target increases to mid-grade and senior
noncommissioned officers and warrant officers. The committee
also recognizes that some previously adopted compensation
policies, bonuses, and special pays require modification to
ensure they remain current and effective and the committee has
recommended a number of such adjustments.
The committee remains committed to protecting and enhancing
military exchange, commissary, and morale, welfare, and
recreation programs. Accordingly, the committee has included
provisions that would clarify the primacy of nonappropriated
fund activities in providing ancillary support services when
government property is leased to private parties, specify the
allocation of revenue received by commissaries for certain
products, and require a test of golf carts that are accessible
to disabled persons.
ITEMS OF SPECIAL INTEREST
Elimination of the Survivor Benefit Plan Two-Tier Annuity Computation
System
The committee has learned that there may be approximately
137 Survivor Benefit Plan (SBP) annuitants experiencing a
reduction in their overall compensation as a result of the
phased elimination of the two-tier annuity computation for
surviving spouses enacted in the National Defense Authorization
Act for Fiscal Year 2005 (Public Law 108-136). The committee
believes that the reduction in overall income may result in
those cases where annuitants receive full payment of Dependency
Indemnity Compensation (DIC) from the Department of Veterans
Affairs and Supplemental Survivor Benefit Program (SSBP)
benefits without the dollar for dollar offset that is taken
from standard SBP payments. The committee notes that retirees
were charged higher premiums to participate in SSBP and
specifically counter the reduction in SBP benefits that occurs
when annuitants arrive at age 62 and social security benefits
became available. The committee fears that as the phased
elimination of the two-tier system progresses, the SSBP
payments are being incrementally replaced by payments from the
standard SBP. This means that income that has not been subject
to the DIC offset is being replaced with income that is subject
to the offset thus resulting in a loss of income to the
annuitant. The committee is troubled that the loss of income
being experienced by annuitants is potentially an unintended
consequence of the process to eliminate the two-tier annuity
computation system. Therefore, the committee directs the
Secretary of Defense to study this issue to confirm that the
problem exists and determine the number of annuitants that are
losing income, the extent of the income being lost, the cause
of the income loss, and, if appropriate, the legislative
solution.
The committee directs the Secretary to report his findings
and recommendations, including any legislative proposals, by
March 31, 2007 to the Senate Committee on Armed Services and
the House Committee on Armed Services.
Military Decorations and Uniform Accouterments Sold in Military
Exchange Stores
The committee strongly believes that all medals associated
with military decorations and military ribbons, badges,
insignia, and other uniform accouterments offered to military
members in military exchange stores should be manufactured
within the United States. The committee is aware of concerns
that some medals and uniform accouterments manufactured outside
the United States have appeared in exchange and other
government procurement channels. Accordingly, the committee
directs the Secretary of Defense to review the policies and
procedures used by the Army Air Force Exchange Service, the
Navy Exchange Service Command, and Marine Corps exchanges to
procure military medals and military ribbons, badges, insignia,
and other uniform accouterments to determine the extend to
which foreign made products are available for sale to
servicemembers.
The committee directs the Secretary to submit a report on
his findings and recommendations by March 31, 2007, to the
Senate Committee on Armed Services and the House Committee on
Armed Services.
Recoupment of Survivor Benefit Plan Overpayments
The committee is concerned by reports that many survivors
of military retirees are experiencing great anxiety,
inconvenience, and financial hardship as a result of the
procedures employed by the Defense Finance and Accounting
Service (DFAS) when reconciling the simultaneous payment of the
Survivor Benefit Plan (SBP) and Dependency and Indemnity
Compensation (DIC) benefits. The committee understands that the
survivors are normally subjected to an automated and impersonal
process that provides little opportunity for survivors to
understand the details of the recoupment process that
frequently involves thousands of dollars. The survivors are
also routinely required to pay a large recoupment amount, which
is typically followed by a refund back to the survivor of SBP
premiums that no longer apply because of DIC eligibility. The
committee believes that DFAS, in cooperation with the
Department of Veterans Affairs, is capable of providing better
customer service, that is more sensitive to limiting the
financial disruption imposed on survivors. Therefore, the
committee directs the Secretary of Defense to study the
problems associated with the current DFAS procedures regarding
the simultaneous entitlement to SBP and DIC with a view toward
improving customer service and minimizing the financial
disruptions imposed on survivors.
The committee directs the Secretary to submit a report on
his findings and recommendations by March 31, 2007, to the
Senate Committee on Armed Services and the House Committee on
Armed Services.
Second Destination Transportation of Exchange Store Goods
The committee was disappointed to learn that the Secretary
of the Army had failed to include funding in the fiscal year
2007 budget request for second destination transportation of
Army and Air Force Exchange Service (AAFES) goods for resale at
overseas stores. Although the Secretary has been quick to make
the needed adjustment to the budget request to fully account
for AAFES' second destination transportation requirements,
there remains the obvious conclusion that the Secretary chose
to ignore the specific requirement in law requiring the use of
appropriated funds to pay for second destination transportation
expenses (10 U.S.C., 2643). The committee concludes that this
oversight reflects a lack of commitment within the Army to
protecting the quality of life of members and families residing
overseas. The Secretary should take note that the committee
does not tolerate such an oversight and that the committee is
closely monitoring the second destination transportation
funding level during fiscal year 2007 and in future budget
requests. The committee trusts that the Secretary is in a
position to prevent such oversights in the future.
Treatment of Dual Military Couples
The committee recognizes that there are over 90,000
military members who are married to other military members and
that the number of these dual military couples is increasing.
However, the committee notes that personnel and compensation
law and policy that have been established over time have not
taken into account the changing marital demographics of the
force. For example, this Act includes a provision that would
ensure that a surviving dual military spouse of a service
member who dies while serving on active duty is provided the
same continuation of basic allowance for housing as other
surviving spouses who are not military members. This issue
raises concerns that there may be other circumstances when law
or policy disadvantages dual military couples. Therefore, the
committee directs the Secretary of Defense to review personnel
and compensation law and policy to ensure that dual military
couples are treated equitably and fairly.
The committee directs the Secretary to submit a report on
his findings and recommendations by March 31, 2007, to the
Senate Committee on Armed Services and the House Committee on
Armed Services.
United Service Organizations
The committee recognizes that the United Service
Organization (USO) celebrity tours are well known and beloved
by our men and women in uniform, particularly among those
deployed overseas. Over the years, the USO has offered
thousands of entertainers the opportunity to volunteer their
time and talents entertaining the troops and their families.
The committee is aware that the Armed Forces Entertainment
(AFE) program has limited resources available to support USO
celebrity tours to the levels being requested, but the
committee acknowledges the dedicated effort by AFE to support
morale and welfare within the worldwide military community. The
committee commends the USO for its support for our military
personnel and their families and in particular for its
extraordinary celebrity tour program that provides world class
entertainment in collaboration with the AFE to deployed
military forces across the globe.
LEGISLATIVE PROVISIONS
Subtitle A--Pay and Allowances
Section 601--Increase in Basic Pay for Fiscal Year 2007
This section would increase basic pay for members of the
armed forces by 2.7 percent effective January 1, 2007. This
raise would continue to fulfill Congress' commitment to enhance
pay raises for the armed forces and would reduce the gap
between military and private sector pay increases from 4.5
percent to 4.0 percent.
Section 602--Targeted Increase in Basic Pay Rates
This section would target mid-grade and senior
noncommissioned officers and warrant officers for additional
pay raises effective April 1, 2007. The targeted raises would
allow these groups to achieve a level of income that is more
comparable with their private sector peers.
Section 603--Conforming Change in General and Flag Officer Pay Cap to
Reflect Increase in Pay Cap for Senior Executive Service Personnel
This section would increase the cap on general and flag
officer pay levels from Level III to Level II on the Executive
Schedule. This section would allow general and flag officer pay
levels to keep pace with Senior Executive Service pay levels.
Section 604--Availability of Second Basic Allowance for Housing for
Certain Reserve Component or Retired Members Serving in Support of
Contingency Operations
This section would authorize the secretary concerned to
provide a second monthly basic allowance for housing to reserve
component members without dependents mobilized in support of a
contingency operation and serving in a duty location that does
not allow the members to reside at their permanent residence.
Section 605--Extension of Temporary Continuation of Housing Allowance
for Dependents of Members Dying on Active Duty to Spouses Who are Also
Members
This section would authorize military members who are
surviving spouses of members who die while serving on active
duty to receive the basic allowance for housing that would be
due to the deceased member for 365 days in the same way that
such an allowance would be paid to surviving spouses who are
not military members.
Section 606--Clarification of Effective Date of Prohibition on
Compensation for Correspondence Courses
This section would clarify that the prohibition barring
reserve component members from receiving compensation for work
or study performed in a correspondence course is effective
September 7, 1962, and includes members of the national guard
while not in federal service.
Section 607--Payment of Full Premium for Coverage Under Servicemembers'
Group Life Insurance Program during Service in Operation Enduring
Freedom or Operation Iraqi Freedom
This section would require the secretary concerned to
increase the allowance paid to members serving in either
Operation Enduring Freedom or Operation Iraqi Freedom to
reimburse the cost of all levels of coverage under the
Servicemember's Group Life Insurance (SGLI) elected by the
members. Section 613 of the National Defense Authorization Act
for Fiscal Year 2006 (Public Law 109-163) required that the
Secretaries concerned pay an allowance to reimburse the cost of
only the first $150,000 of insurance coverage elected by the
member.
Subtitle B--Bonuses and Special and Incentive Pays
Section 611--Extension of Certain Bonus and Special Pay Authorities for
Reserve Forces
This section would extend the authority for the Selected
Reserve reenlistment bonus, the Selected Reserve affiliation or
enlistment bonus, special pay for enlisted members assigned to
certain high priority units, the Ready Reserve enlistment bonus
for persons without prior service, the Ready Reserve enlistment
and reenlistment bonus for persons with prior service, and the
Selected Reserve enlistment bonus for persons with prior
service until December 31, 2007.
Section 612--Extension of Bonus and Special Pay Authorities for Health
Care Professionals
This section would extend the authority for the nurse
officer candidate accession program, the accession bonus for
registered nurses, the incentive special pay for nurse
anesthetists, the special pay for Selected Reserve health care
professionals in critically short wartime specialties, the
accession bonus for dental officers, and the accession bonus
for pharmacy officers until December 31, 2007. This section
would also extend the authority for repayment of educational
loans for certain health professionals who serve in the
Selected Reserve until January 1, 2008.
Section 613--Extension of Special Pay and Bonus Authorities for Nuclear
Officers
This section would extend the authority for the special pay
for nuclear-qualified officers extending a period of active
service, nuclear career accession bonus, and the nuclear career
annual incentive bonus until December 31, 2007.
Section 614--Extension of Other Bonus, Special Pay, and Separation Pay
Authorities
This section would extend the authority for the aviation
officer retention bonus, assignment incentive pay, the
reenlistment bonus for active members, the enlistment bonus for
active members, the retention bonus for members with critical
military skills, the accession bonus for new officers in
critical skills, the military occupational specialty conversion
incentive bonus and the transfer between armed forces incentive
bonus until December 31, 2007, except for assignment incentive
pay which is extended until December 31, 2008.
Section 615--Expansion of Eligibility of Dental Officers for Additional
Special Pay
This section would clarify that dentists may be paid
additional special pay notwithstanding their participation in
internship or residency programs.
Section 616--Increase in Maximum Annual Rate of Special Pay for
Selected Reserve Health Care Professionals in Critically Short Wartime
Specialties
This section would increase the maximum annual rate of
special pay for Selected Reserve health care professionals in
critically short wartime specialties from $10,000 to $25,000.
Section 617--Authority to Provide Lump Sum Payment of Nuclear Officer
Incentive Pay
This section would authorize nuclear officer incentive pay
to be paid as a lump sum or in variable annual amounts in
addition to payment in equal annual installments.
Section 618--Increase in Maximum Amount of Nuclear Career Accession
Bonus
This section would increase the maximum amount of the
nuclear career accession bonus from $20,000 to $30,000.
Section 619--Increase in Maximum Amount of Incentive Bonus for Transfer
Between Armed Forces
This section would increase the maximum amount of the
incentive bonus for transfer between armed forces from $2,500
to $10,000.
Section 620--Clarification Regarding Members of the Army Eligible for
Bonus for Referring Other Persons for Enlistment in the Army
This section would clarify that military retirees, to
include a member of a reserve component under 60 years of age
who, but for age, would be eligible for retired pay, are
eligible to be paid the referral bonus.
Section 621--Pilot Program for Recruitment Bonus for Critical Health
Care Specialties
This section would authorize the Secretary of Defense to
establish a two-year pilot program to offer additional
financial recruiting incentives under the Armed Forces Health
Professions Scholarship and Financial Assistance Program for up
to five critical medical specialties. The Secretary would be
required to submit a mid-term and final report on lessons
learned from the pilot program to the Senate Committee on Armed
Services and the House Committee on Armed Services.
Section 622--Enhancement of Temporary Program of Voluntary Separation
Pay and Benefits
This section would expand the temporary program of
voluntary separation pay and benefits authorized in section 643
of the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2006
(Public Law 109-163) to remove the bar prohibiting
participation of enlisted personnel and officers with between
12 and 20 years of service. This section would also extend the
expiration date of the authority from December 31, 2008 to
December 31, 2009.
Section 623--Additional Authorities and Incentives to Encourage Retired
Members and Reserve Component Members to Volunteer to Serve on Active
Duty in High-Demand, Low-Density Assignments
This section would authorize the Secretary of Defense to
pay a bonus of up to $50,000 to encourage retired members,
reservists, and former members discharged from the military who
possess critical skills to return to active duty to fill
shortage manpower requirements in units tasked to provide high-
demand, low-density military capabilities or to fill other
critically manned specialties, as designated by the Secretary.
This section would also authorize the Secretary to develop
additional incentives to encourage personnel with critical
high-demand, low-density skills to return to active duty which
the Secretary may implement after notifying the Congressional
defense subcommittees of the reasons why the proposal is needed
and waiting 30 days. The authority would expire on December 31,
2010.
Subtitle C--Travel and Transportation Allowances
Section 631--Authority to Pay Costs Associated with Delivery of Motor
Vehicle to Storage Location Selected by Member and Subsequent Removal
of Vehicle
This section would authorize the secretary concerned to pay
the costs for members to deliver and remove privately owned
vehicles from storage locations chosen by the member. Such
payments would not be authorized to exceed the total cost that
would have been incurred by the government if the government
storage location had been used.
Section 632--Transportation of Additional Motor Vehicle of Members on
Change of Permanent Station to or from Nonforeign Areas Outside the
Continental United States
This section would authorize members with at least one
family member eligible to drive to ship two privately owned
vehicles during permanent change of station moves to nonforeign
duty locations located outside the continental United States.
Nonforeign duty locations outside the continental United States
include Alaska, Hawaii, Puerto Rico, Guam, and other
territories and possessions.
Section 633--Travel and Transportation Allowances for Transportation of
Family Members Incident to Illness or Injury of Members
This section would expand the authority to pay for travel
and transportation of family members to visit ill or injured
members to include family members that are also military
members.
Subtitle D--Retired Pay and Survivor Benefits
Section 641--Military Survivor Benefit Plan Beneficiaries Under
Insurable Interest Coverage
This section would allow military retirees who participate
in the Survivor Benefit Plan and elect the insurable interest
coverage to select a new insurable interest if their
beneficiary dies.
Section 642--Retroactive Payment of Additional Death Gratuity for
Certain Members Not Previously Covered
This section would correct a technical error in section 664
of the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2006
(Public Law 109-163) that prevented the payment of an
additional $150,000 death gratuity intended for surviving
family members of non-combat active duty deaths that occurred
during the period from May 12, 2005 through August 31, 2005.
Section 643--Equity in Computation of Disability Retired Pay for
Reserve Component Members Wounded in Action
This section would authorize the retired pay for a member
of a reserve component to be calculated using the member's
total years of service in lieu of active duty years of service
when the retirement involves a disability that was incurred
under circumstances that resulted in the award of the Purple
Heart.
Subtitle E--Commissary and Nonappropriated Fund Instrumentality
Benefits
Section 651--Treatment of Price Surcharges of Tobacco Products and
Certain Other Merchandise Sold at Commissary Stores
This section would clarify that for products that are sold
as special exceptions to the standard surcharge of five percent
of the revenue above cost of the products shall be applied to
the surcharge fund as if it were a uniform surcharge product.
The products that would be handled in this manner include
tobacco products and, during the ongoing test of the sale of
impulse purchase products, one-time use cameras, film, and
telephone cards.
Section 652--Limitation on Use of Department of Defense Lease Authority
to Undermine Commissaries and Exchanges and Other Morale, Welfare, and
Recreation Programs and Nonappropriated Fund Instrumentalities
This section would bar ancillary services from being
provided in facilities on property leased by the government to
private entities if the secretary concerned determines that
those ancillary services will be provided in direct competition
with exchanges, commissaries, and morale, welfare, and
recreation activities. This section would make an exception for
facilities on leased property that is part of a base closure
site.
The committee believes that the military exchanges,
commissaries, and morale, welfare and recreation activities
have primacy in providing ancillary services and merchandise
over the interests of private sector entities leasing
government property if the facilities on the leased property
will directly compete with the exchanges, commissaries, and
morale, welfare, and recreation activities.
Section 653--Use of Nonappropriated Funds to Supplement or Replace
Appropriated Funds for Construction of Facilities of Exchange Stores
System and Other Nonappropriated Fund Instrumentalities, Military
Lodging, Facilities, and Community Facilities
This section would authorize the Secretary of Defense to
allocate nonappropriated funds to augment or replace
appropriated funding of construction of military exchange,
military lodging; morale, welfare, and recreation; and
community facilities. This section would also require that the
Secretary provide notification to the congressional defense
committees when allocating nonappropriated funding to support
any construction project.
Section 654--Report on Cost Effectiveness of Purchasing Commercial
Insurance for Commissary and Exchange Facilities and Facilities of
Other Morale, Welfare, and Recreation Programs and Nonappropriated Fund
Instrumentalities
This section would require the Secretary of Defense to
conduct a study to determine the cost effectiveness of
nonappropriated fund activities purchasing commercial insurance
to protect financial interests in facilities operated by
morale, welfare and recreation activities, military exchange
stores, and commissary stores. This section would require the
Secretary to submit a report on his findings and
recommendations by July 31, 2007.
The committee notes that many nonappropriated fund
facilities destroyed and damaged during the 2005 hurricane
season will be replaced using appropriated funds. The committee
recognizes that commercial insurance may be a better option for
protecting nonappropriated fund property. However, the
committee is concerned that more must be understood about the
cost effectiveness of purchasing commercial insurance and
whether such insurance represents a useful option in all cases
or only for the most high risk locations. The committee
believes that the study proposed in this section would provide
the needed information.
Subtitle F--Other Matters
Section 661--Repeal of Annual Reporting Requirement Regarding Effects
of Recruitment and Retention Initiatives
This section would repeal the requirement in section 1015
of title 37, United States Code, for the Secretary of Defense
to submit an annual recruiting and retention report.
Section 662--Pilot Project Regarding Providing Golf Carts Accessible
for Disabled Persons at Military Golf Courses
This section would require the Secretary of Defense to
conduct a test to determine the cost effectiveness, demand, and
utility of purchasing golf carts that are accessible to
disabled persons. This section would require the Secretary to
purchase or acquire from other Department of Defense resources
a minimum of three golf carts designed to provide access to
disabled golfers at a minimum of three military golf courses.
The three golf courses would be geographically dispersed, but
one would be in the Washington D.C. metropolitan area. The test
would be conducted for a minimum of one year. This section
would require the Secretary to submit a report on his findings
and recommendations not later than 180 days after the
conclusion of the test.
The committee believes that it is important for military
golf courses to lead the nation in facilitating the
participation of disabled golfers by offering the latest in
golf cart technology. However, the committee appreciates that
more must be understood about the cost effectiveness, demand,
and utility of purchasing the specialized golf carts. The
committee believes that the study proposed in this section
would provide the needed information.
Section 663--Enhanced Authority to Remit or Cancel Indebtedness of
Members of the Armed Forces Incurred on Active Duty
This section would extend the termination date of the
temporary expanded authority for the secretaries of the
military departments to remit or cancel indebtedness of
military members included in section 683 of the National
Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2006 (Public Law 109-
163) from December 31, 2007, to December 31, 2009. This section
would also increase the period of time following honorable
discharge or separation during which the secretaries may
exercise the expanded authority to remit and cancel
indebtedness from one year to five years.
TITLE VII--HEALTH CARE PROVISIONS
OVERVIEW
The committee is concerned about the capability of the
Defense Health Program to sustain the long-term quality and
accessibility of the health care provided to the members of the
armed forces and their families, along with retirees and their
families. In the face of the growing cost of health care, the
committee recognizes that the Department of Defense (DOD) may
face significant challenges controlling that cost while
providing for the medical readiness and force health protection
for the men and women in uniform and ensuring health care
services to all other beneficiaries. In this context, the
committee closely examined the Department of Defense proposals
to reduce the cost of health care and concluded that the plan
relies too narrowly on increasing the costs of TRICARE to
retirees. The committee believes that a more comprehensive
approach to sustaining the military health care benefit is
required and that changes to the military health care benefit
require careful, deliberate consideration with a full
accounting of the impact across the board. Therefore, the
committee recommends legislation to require a review of DOD
plans to reduce the cost of health care and an assessment and
recommendations for sustaining the military health care
services provided to members of the armed forces, retirees, and
their families. The committee makes these recommendations to
allow for a period of time to shape a comprehensive approach to
address the cost of military health care.
The committee remains strongly committed to ensuring that
members of the armed forces, retirees, and their families have
access to quality health care. Accordingly, the committee
recommends legislation to provide coverage for forensic
examinations following sexual assaults and domestic violence
and coverage for anesthesia and hospital costs for dental care
provided to children and certain other beneficiaries. In
addition, the committee directs the Secretary of Defense to
conduct a demonstration project to provide over-the-counter
medications under the pharmacy benefit program.
Finally, the committee is steadfast in its view that the
Department of Defense and the federal government should not be
doubly liable for the cost of financial incentives paid by DOD
contractors to employees to enroll in the TRICARE program and
still be at risk for the cost of providing health care to
TRICARE-eligible employees. As such, the committee recommends
legislation that would establish as unallowable the contract
costs that result when DOD contractors pay or otherwise create
financial incentives for TRICARE-eligible employees to use the
TRICARE or other government-sponsored health care programs in
lieu of the contractor-provided health care program.
In light of the many challenges faced by the military
health care system, the committee continues to believe that the
Defense Health Program must be fully funded.
ITEMS OF SPECIAL INTEREST
Comprehensive Combat Casualty Care Center
The committee is aware of an effort by the Department of
the Navy to establish a comprehensive combat casualty care
center at the Naval Medical Center, San Diego, California, for
all military personnel. The center would allow wounded
servicemembers to continue their rehabilitation closer to their
families in the western region of the United States. Currently,
there is no regional Department of Defense (DOD) center to
support such efforts in the west. The center would complement
the activities at Walter Reed Army Medical Center and Brooke
Army Medical Center, enhance efforts with the Department of
Veterans Affairs (VA) in providing specialized care to wounded
servicemembers, and allow for a seamless transition the
Department of Veterans Affairs, if necessary. The committee
urges the Department of Defense to consider funding such a
center through the DOD-VA Joint Incentive Fund.
Comptroller General Report on a Unified Medical Command Plan
The committee notes with great interest the Department of
Defense's (DOD) effort to improve the effectiveness and enhance
military medicine through a unified medical command. The Army,
Navy, and Air Force medical communities have provided superior,
high-quality health care to our servicemembers, particularly
those who have been injured or wounded on the front lines of
combat. However, efforts to improve and streamline care have
been hampered by the lack of standardized equipment and
processes. The committee believes a unified medical command
could improve the care being provided by the services with
significant cost savings. The committee understands that the
Department has established a Joint/Unified Medical Command
Working Group to develop recommendations for two specific
commands, a single joint/unified medical command responsible
for all market areas of private sector care, and a joint/
unified medical command responsible for operational/deployed
medicine. The committee is concerned that two separate and
distinct commands, one for operational medicine and one for
private sector care, may actually hamper efforts to achieve
greater efficiencies. As such, the committee directs the
Comptroller General to conduct a review of the various studies
that the Department of Defense and other organizations have
undertaken and provide an analysis of the various unified
medical command structures under consideration by the
Department and outside organizations. The Comptroller General
review shall include the studies undertaken by DOD's Joint/
Unified Medical Command Working Group, as well as reviews
conducted by the Center for Naval Analysis Corporation and
other organizations, such as the Defense Business Board. The
committee directs the Comptroller General to submit a report on
his findings to the Senate Committee on Armed Services and the
House Committee on Armed Services by March 31, 2007.
Fort Drum Health Care Pilot Program
The Ronald W. Reagan National Defense Authorization Act for
Fiscal Year 2005 (Public Law 108-375) established a pilot
program to test initiatives that build cooperative health care
arrangements and agreements between military installations and
local regional non-military health care systems. As an
installation undergoing profound growth, Fort Drum, New York,
was selected as one of two test sites for the pilot program.
The committee recommends $0.4 million for the Fort Drum
regional health planning organization that has been organized
to coordinate the pilot program, as well as to help conduct
necessary assessments and/or studies.
Mental Health Programs for Combat Veterans and Their Families
The committee recognizes the need for programs that assist
military veterans who return from Iraq and Afghanistan to
effectively deal with mental health issues and applauds the
efforts of the Department of Defense and the Veterans
Administration to provide mental health programs to combat
veterans and their families. The committee urges both
Departments to expand their current programs to include
training programs, services and resources designed by
behavioral health personnel with experience in a combat theater
and focused on addressing combat stress and reintegration
issues for active and reserve component personnel and their
families.
Screening for Traumatic Brain Injury
The committee applauds the efforts of the Department of
Defense to implement a comprehensive policy for assessing the
health status of military personnel prior to deploying, upon
redeployment and again three to six months after returning
home. However, the committee is aware of Defense and Veterans
Brain Injury Center studies showing that 31 percent of combat
injured patients evacuated from Iraq and Afghanistan have a
traumatic brain injury (TBI). According to the studies, many of
these injuries result from blasts and are not always
accompanied by obvious head trauma. Formal screening by trained
medical personnel is required to identify these injuries and
many injuries are never diagnosed. The committee is concerned
that servicemembers with undiagnosed and untreated traumatic
brain injuries may compromise operational readiness and may
experience long-term medical effects from the injury. To
address this issue, the committee directs the Secretary of
Defense to modify the pre- and post-deployment assessments and
the post-deployment reassessment by March 31, 2007, to contain
questions that screen for traumatic brain injury.
In addition, the committee directs the Secretary to develop
a comprehensive and systematic approach for the identification,
treatment, disposition and documentation of TBI, including mild
to moderate TBI, for combat and peace time injuries. The
committee directs the Secretary to develop a comprehensive
approach by May 1, 2007, and to report its actions to the
Senate Committee on Armed Services and the House Committee on
Armed Services.
TRICARE Mail Order Pharmacy Program
The committee is aware that the TRICARE Mail Order Pharmacy
program is an outstanding benefit for members of the armed
services, retirees and their families. The mail order pharmacy
is a cost effective and burden free method for beneficiaries to
obtain medications. However, the committee is concerned that a
lack of awareness and understanding of the program may exist
among providers who prescribe medication within the facilities
of the uniformed services and in the purchased care system. In
addition, the committee is concerned that prescribing
medications for distribution through the TRICARE Mail Order
Pharmacy is time consuming and burdensome for providers.
The committee directs the Secretary of Defense to implement
a comprehensive education program on the TRICARE Mail Order
Pharmacy program that targets providers within the facilities
of the uniformed services and in the purchased care system. The
committee further directs the Secretary to take the necessary
steps to ensure that the Pharmacy Data Transaction System and
the Armed Forces Health Technology Application are modified to
provide electronic transmission of prescriptions directly to
the TRICARE Mail Order Pharmacy System. The committee directs
the Secretary of Defense to implement these recommendations and
submit a report on the progress of the implementation to the
Senate Committee on Armed Services and the House Committee on
Armed Services by December 31, 2007.
LEGISLATIVE PROVISIONS
Subtitle A--TRICARE Program Improvements
Section 701--TRICARE Coverage for Forensic Examination Following Sexual
Assault or Domestic Violence
This section would provide coverage under the TRICARE
program for forensic examinations following sexual assault or
domestic violence.
Section 702--Authorization of Anesthesia and Other Costs for Dental
Care for Children and Certain Other Patients
This section would provide coverage under the TRICARE
program for anesthesia services and institutional costs for
dental treatment for beneficiaries with developmental, mental
or physical disabilities and for children under the age of
five.
Section 703--Improvements to Descriptions of Cancer Screening
This section would update the terminology used in the
description of primary and preventive health care screenings
authorized for female beneficiaries of the military health
system. This section would authorize screening tests for
cervical cancer and breast cancer without prescribing the use
of the Papanicolau test or the mammogram. The committee
understands that as new medical technology develops, legacy
screening methods may become obsolete.
Section 704--Prohibition on Increases in Certain Health Care Costs for
Members of the Uniformed Services
This section would prohibit the Department of Defense (DOD)
from increasing the premium, deductible and copayment for
TRICARE Prime, the charge for inpatient care for TRICARE
Standard, and the premium for TRICARE Reserve Select and
TRICARE Standard for members of the Selected Reserve during the
period from April 1, 2006 to December 31, 2007. The committee
shares the DOD's concern about the rise in the cost of military
health care and the potential for the escalating cost to have a
negative impact on the ability of the Department to sustain the
benefit over the long-term. However, the committee believes
that changes to the military health care benefit require
careful, deliberate consideration with a full accounting of the
impact across the board. The committee makes these
recommendations to allow for a period of time to shape a more
balanced approach to address the cost of military health care.
Section 705--Services of Mental Health Counselors
This section would allow mental health counselors, without
prior physician referral or supervision, to be reimbursed for
services provided to TRICARE beneficiaries. This section would
also amend section 704 of the National Defense Authorization
Act for Fiscal Year 1995 (Public Law 103-337) to allow mental
health counselors to enter into personal service contracts with
the Department of Defense for the purpose of providing mental
health services to TRICARE beneficiaries. Further, this section
would require that mental health counselors meet the licensure
or certification requirements for ``health care professional''
established by section 1094 of title 10, United States Code.
Section 706--Demonstration Project on Coverage of Selected Over-the-
Counter Medications Under the Pharmacy Benefit Program
This section would require the Secretary of Defense to
conduct a demonstration project that would authorize the use of
over-the-counter medications, in lieu of the equivalent
prescription drugs. The demonstration program would take place
in at least two of the three venues (military treatment
facilities, TRICARE mail order pharmacy and retail pharmacies)
where medications are dispensed to beneficiaries. At a minimum,
the Secretary would be required to conduct the demonstration in
at least five sites in each of the TRICARE regions for each of
the two venues selected. The committee urges the Secretary to
select the retail pharmacy program as one of the two venues in
which to conduct the demonstration.
Section 707--Requirement to Reimburse Certain Travel Expenses of
Certain Beneficiaries Covered by TRICARE for Life
This section would allow a beneficiary who receives initial
care at a military treatment facility prior to attaining the
age of 65 to receive reimbursement for travel expenses
associated with limited follow up care at the same facility in
which the initial care was received. In addition, the
beneficiary must reside over 100 miles from the military
treatment facility and must be referred to the facility by a
specialty care provider to be eligible.
Section 708--Inflation Adjustment of Differential Payments to
Children's Hospitals Participating in TRICARE Program
This section would require the Secretary of Defense to
establish an annual inflationary adjustment for the TRICARE
children's hospital differential payment rate beginning in
fiscal year 2007.
Section 709--Expanded Eligibility of Selected Reserve Members Under
TRICARE Program
This section would provide coverage under the TRICARE
Standard program to all members of the Selected Reserves and
their families while in a non-active duty status. Participants
would be required to pay a premium that would be 28 percent of
the total amount determined by the Secretary of Defense as
being reasonable for the TRICARE coverage. This section would
not extend TRICARE eligibility to reservists who were also
federal employees entitled to Federal Employee Health Benefits
Plan coverage under title 5, United States Code. Further, this
section would repeal the three tiered cost share TRICARE
program for reserves established by the fiscal year 2006
National Defense Authorization Act.
Section 710--Extension to TRICARE of Medicare Prohibition of Financial
Incentives Not to Enroll in Group Health Plan
This section would extend to the TRICARE program the same
rule that currently applies to the Medicare program, making it
unlawful for an employer or other entity to offer any financial
or other incentive for a TRICARE retired beneficiary (military
retirees and theirdependents) not to enroll under a health plan
which would under law be primary payer to TRICARE. Further, this
section would authorize the Secretary of Defense to adopt exceptions to
the provision that the Secretary deems necessary for implementation of
the prohibition. This section would also authorize the Secretary to
discontinue the relationship with a contractor for repeated violations
of this section. The committee makes this recommendation to address the
growing concern that employers are shifting the financial
responsibility of providing health care benefits to their employees to
the federal taxpayers. Such cost shifting, left unchecked, would
greatly increase government costs.
Subtitle B--Studies and Reports
Section 711--Department of Defense Task Force on the Future of Military
Health Care
This section would require the Secretary of Defense to
establish a task force to assess the future of military health
care. The task force would consist of 14 members appointed by
the Secretary and would be required to develop recommendations
on the actions the Department of Defense would have to take to
improve and sustain the military health system over the long-
term. This section would require the Secretary to develop a
plan based on the recommendations of the task force, and submit
the plan to the Senate Committee on Armed Services the House
Committee on Armed Services not later than six months after
receipt of the task force report.
Section 712--Study and Plan Relating to Chiropractic Health Care
Services
This section would require the Secretary of Defense to
develop a plan for providing chiropractic health care services
to all members of the uniformed services, as required by the
Floyd D. Spence National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal
Year 2001 (Public Law 106-398). In addition, this section would
require the Secretary to study the cost, feasibility, health
benefit and potential cost savings of providing chiropractic
care for active duty family members, members of the reserves
and their family members, and retirees and their family
members. The study would also include the cost of providing
chiropractic care on a space available basis in those medical
treatment facilities currently providing chiropractic care. The
effects of chiropractic care on readiness and the acceleration
of the return to duty of the members of the armed forces
following an injury that can be appropriately treated with
chiropractic health care services would also be included in the
study. The Secretary shall submit a report, including the plan
and the study, to the Senate Committee on Armed Services and
the House Committee on Armed Services by March 31, 2007.
Section 713--Comptroller General Study and Report on Defense Health
Program
This section would require the Comptroller General to
conduct a study of the cost savings projections included by the
Department of Defense in the fiscal year 2007 budget request
for the Defense Health Program. The study would include an
evaluation of the rationale for the Department's calculation of
the cost and the cost increases of the Defense Health program,
the amounts paid by beneficiaries for health care, and the
estimated savings associated with implementation of cost
sharing increases. Further, the study would include a review of
the rates of inflation in governmental and non-governmental
health care programs, as well as other health care indexes. The
Comptroller General is required to present his findings to the
Senate Committee on Armed Services and the House Committee on
Armed Services by June 1, 2007.
Section 714--Transfer of Custody of the Air Force Health Study Assets
to Medical Follow-up Agency
This section would require the Secretary of the Air Force
to notify and contact participants of the Air Force Health
Study (commonly referred to as the Ranch Hand Study) to obtain
written consent to transfer their data and biological specimens
to the Institute of Medicine of the National Academy of Science
by September 30, 2007. The Secretary of the Air Force is
required to submit a report to the Armed Services Committees of
the Senate and the House of Representatives on the results of
the disposition of the assets and must maintain the specimens
that were not able to be transferred for at least one year
following submission of the report.
Section 715--Study on Allowing Dependents of Activated Members of the
Reserve Components to Retain Civilian Health Care Coverage
This section would require the Secretary of Defense to
conduct a study on the feasibility of allowing family members
of reservists who are mobilized to continue health care
coverage under a civilian health care program. The study would
include an assessment of the number of family members with
special health care needs, who would benefit from remaining in
a member's civilian health plan, the feasibility of reimbursing
the member for the civilian health coverage and a
recommendation on the appropriate rate of reimbursement.
Further, the study would include the feasibility of allowing
family members of mobilized reservists, who do not have access
to TRICARE providers, to continue civilian health care
coverage. Not later than 180 days after enactment, the
Secretary shall submit a report on the study to the Senate
Committee on Armed Services and the House Committee on Armed
Services.
Subtitle C--Other Matters
Section 721--Costs of Incentive Payments to Employees for TRICARE
Enrollment Made Unallowable for Contractors
This section would establish as unallowable the contract
costs that result when Department of Defense (DOD) contractors
pay or otherwise create financial incentives for TRICARE-
eligible employees to use the TRICARE or other government-
sponsored health care programs in lieu of the contractor
provided health care program. The committee makes this
recommendation because it believes that neither the DOD nor the
federal government should be doubly liable for the cost of
financial incentives paid by DOD contractors to employees to
enroll in the TRICARE program and still be at risk for the cost
of providing health care to TRICARE-eligible employees.
Section 722--Requirement For Military Medical Personnel to be Trained
in Preservation of Remains
The section would require the Secretary of Defense to
develop a program requiring each military department to include
training in the preservation of remains for their health care
professionals. The committee believes that all medical
professionals need to be trained in theproper post mortem care
in theater in order to ensure that the proper preservation of remains
is accomplished. The committee does not intend for the responsibilities
of mortuary affairs to become the responsibility of medical
professionals but rather, under certain circumstances, for medical
professionals to assist in the preservation of remains.
Subtitle D--Pharmacy Benefits Program Improvements
Section 731--TRICARE Pharmacy Program Cost-Share Requirements
This section would require the Secretary of Defense to
establish beneficiary cost sharing requirements for the TRICARE
Mail Order Pharmacy program that are the same as for generic
and formulary drugs provided to beneficiaries at military
treatment facilities. At present, beneficiaries are not charged
for generic and formulary drugs obtained through the military
treatment facilities. Further, the section would limit the cost
sharing requirements for drugs provided through the TRICARE
retail pharmacy program to amounts not more than $6 for generic
drugs, $16 for formulary drugs and $22 for non-formulary drugs.
The committee makes these recommendations in order to provide
incentives to beneficiaries to make greater use of the TRICARE
Mail Order Pharmacy Program. The cost sharing schedules
established by this section would end December 31, 2007.
TITLE VIII--ACQUISITION POLICY, ACQUISITION MANAGEMENT, AND RELATED
MATTERS
OVERVIEW
Simply put, the Department of Defense (DOD) acquisition
process is broken. The ability of the Department to conduct the
large scale acquisitions required to ensure our future national
security is a concern of the committee. The rising costs and
lengthening schedules of major defense acquisition programs
lead to more expensive platforms fielded in fewer numbers. The
committee's concerns extend to all three key components of the
Acquisition process including requirements generation,
acquisition and contracting, and financial management.
The Joint Capabilities Integration and Development System
(JCIDS) and Joint Requirements Oversight Council (JROC) are not
operating as envisioned. The Under Secretary of Defense for
Acquisition, Technology & Logistics (USD(AT&L)) is failing to
control spiraling costs of major defense acquisition programs.
As a result, programs to replace key weapons systems are
attempting to place all necessary and imagined capabilities
onto developing platforms. The JCIDS/JROC process is under
intense pressure to ensure that a follow-on system meets all
the military departments' current, future and anticipated
needs. Consequently, by relying on one system to meet all the
necessary requirements, the Department is increasing the costs
and development time to field new systems. Ultimately, this
process results in low quantities of higher priced systems
delivered on a longer schedule.
The unintended consequence of these pressures is a JCIDS/
JROC process reflecting a culture of forced cooperation, where
the members must approve other military department's programs
in order to have their programs approved. The ``jointness''
required in the JROC process creates a culture where each
member faces pressure to accept the criticality of approving a
new system for their sister service. The process also
encourages military departments to request expensive added
capabilities on systems, paid for by other departments in the
name of jointness.
In the wake of a ten-year decrease in the acquisition
workforce, the Department is facing a critical shortage of
certain acquisition professionals with technical skills related
to systems engineering, program management and cost estimation.
While Congress has directed this decrease in the acquisition
workforce over the past decade, the committee is dissatisfied
with the Department's approach to these statutory decreases.
Instead of cutting overhead and minimizing bureaucracy related
to the acquisition workforce, the Department cut critical
resources such as production and systems engineers, opting to
outsource these functions to contractors. As a result of these
workforce-structure decisions, there is a potential conflict of
interest developing between contractors acting as ``lead-system
integrators'' on projects for which they have oversight. In
addition, the Department has outsourced too many processes
closely related to ``inherently governmental functions,''
ceding de facto project responsibility and decision-making to
industry. The reductions of the past decade were an effort to
create a streamline corps of acquisition professionals
utilizing best practices to obtain the best value for all DOD-
related acquisitions. Instead, there is a critical shortage of
individuals necessary to ensure systems with the best
technology on the fastest schedule at the most competitive
price are available to the Department. The committee believes
that the Department lacks a coherent strategic human capital
plan for the future of the acquisition workforce. A strategy is
necessary to define and shape the DOD's future workforce. One
essential focus of this strategy should be the continuity of
program managers. The committee recommends that the tenure of
program managers be extended to ensure program stability. In
addition, the committee believes the strategy should focus on
the value of systems engineers in ensuring affordability and
producability of future systems.
Furthermore, training programs at the Defense Acquisition
University need to expand their focus beyond just the
contracting side of acquisition. The Department should create
training programs that will ensure requirements personnel and
financial managers are adequately trained. The Department
should also seek to integrate acquisition and financial
management information technology systems to ensure
interoperability.
The Deputy Secretary of Defense recently commissioned a
comprehensive overview of the acquisition process. The Defense
Acquisition Performance Assessment (DAPA) consisted of a panel
of leading acquisition experts from both the government and
industry. Their review provided a series of recommendations
related to defense acquisition reform. Of note is a
recommendation to have the JROC presided over by an objective
civilian--possibly the USD(AT&L). The DAPA report also found
the JCIDS/JROC process does not adequately prioritize
requirements provided by the combatant commanders, whom DAPA
believes should have a greater say in determining requirements
for future programs. Additionally, the committee recommends
that the Department consider a prompt transition to a
capabilities based acquisition system where combatant
commanders are considered the major stakeholders and the
military services act primarily as implementers.
Based on the recommendations of the DAPA report, the
committee believes that the model for the future DOD
acquisition system should be considered by determining
requirements based primarily on capabilities needed by
combatant commanders. A revised JCIDS/JROC process could
objectively validate programs and these validated ``joint''
capability requirements could be executed by the military
services, which would conduct acquisition and program
management functions to deliver the combatant commanders
identified ``joint'' capability ratherthan focusing on service
specific solutions. In addition, the Department should further consider
``competing'' missions among the services. This does not mean that one
service will only conduct one mission with one platform. Instead, the
services should compete at the design and concept level to encourage a
creative means of accomplishing missions with new and innovative
solutions.
Ultimately, the Department must carefully consider its
ability to cost effectively put metal on targets. Some missions
do not require cutting-edge technology to accomplish their
objectives. The USD(AT&L), in collaboration with the JROC
should reemphasize the need to focus on ``best value'' as it
relates to accomplishing current and future DOD missions.
ITEMS OF SPECIAL INTEREST
Major Defense Acquisition Program Reform
The committee enacted major reform of the acquisition
process for Major Defense Acquisition Programs (MDAPs) through
two sections of the National Defense Authorization Act for
Fiscal Year 2006 (Public Law 109-163). In particular, section
801 required the certification of numerous requirements related
to technological maturity, affordability, alternative
acquisition strategies and compliance with relevant Department
of Defense policies, regulations and directives, prior to
approval of Milestone B for a MDAP. Section 802 rewrote the
``Nunn-McCurdy'' amendment (10 U.S.C. 2433), to prevent
rebaselining of original baseline estimates for MDAPs. It also
redefined the thresholds at which Congress requires
notification. In particular, section 802 defined a
``significant cost growth threshold'' as programs that exceed
15 percent over the current baseline estimate or 30 percent
over the original baseline estimate and a ``critical cost
growth threshold'' as programs that exceed 25 percent over the
current baseline estimate or 50 percent over the original
baseline estimate. Notably, after enactment of section 802, in
the first submission of the Selected Acquisition Report, the
Department reported 36 programs in breach of either the
``significant'' or ``critical'' cost growth thresholds. The
committee directs the Under Secretary of Defense for
Acquisition, Technology and Logistics to submit a consolidated
report describing efforts taken to implement major defense
acquisition reform, as implemented by sections 801 and 802 of
the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2006
(Public Law 109-163). The report shall be delivered to the
Senate Committee on Armed Services and the House Committee on
Armed Services by March 1, 2007.
Prime Vendor Program
The committee understands that the overall purpose of the
Prime Vendor Program is to streamline supply chain management,
lower overall costs to the government, and improve services to
military customers by allowing them to buy commercial products
directly from a list of pre-established commercial
distributors. Concerns about the prices of products being
procured through the Defense Logistics Agency's (DLA) Prime
Vendor Program were raised at a hearing before the House
Committee on Armed Services on November 9, 2005. As a result of
this hearing, DLA officials recognized the need to improve
management oversight and internal controls over the program and
proposed a series of corrective actions. In order to allow time
for DLA to implement these actions and ensure effective
results, the committee directs the Comptroller General to
review the actions taken by the Department of Defense to
improve the Prime Vendor Program and submit a report to the
Senate Committee on Armed Services and the House Committee on
Armed Services by March 1, 2007.
Special Operations Command Requirements
The committee recognizes that title 10, United States Code,
grants U.S. Special Operations Command (USSOCOM) specific
acquisition authority for special operations peculiar
equipment, material, supplies and services. The committee is
concerned that USSOCOM is not fully capable of executing this
Department-like authority under current Department of Defense
policies and practices, which is particularly troubling because
of the key role USSOCOM plays in current combat operations in
Iraq and Afghanistan and in the global war on terrorism. The
committee strongly urges the Secretary of Defense to consider
the unique role and authorities of USSOCOM as the Department
makes needed reforms to its acquisitions and logistics
processes, to ensure USSOCOM can efficiently, responsively, and
effectively execute authorities granted in title 10.
Undefinitized Contract Actions
Undefinitized Contract Actions (UCAs), also known as
``unpriced'' contracts or ``letter'' contracts, authorize
contractors to start work and incur costs before reaching a
final agreement on terms and conditions, including price. The
committee recognizes UCAs can be helpful to support urgent
operational needs, but such contracts are not a desirable form
of contracting because they place the Department of Defense in
an unfavorable negotiating position and do not provide
incentives to achieve cost controls, since the contractor
operates in a cost-plus mode until negotiations are complete.
The committee directs the Comptroller General to undertake a
study to determine if the Department is properly using such
contracts and pricing them on time. At a minimum, the committee
directs the Comptroller General determine: (1) Why the
Department is using UCAs; and (2) whether certain sufficient
management controls restrict the use of such contracts in
urgent situations, ensure limited scope modifications and
appropriate profits. The committee directs the Comptroller
General to submit a report on the finding of this study to the
Senate Committee on Armed Services and the House Committee on
Armed Services by March 1, 2007.
LEGISLATIVE PROVISIONS
Subtitle A--Provisions Relating to Major Defense Acquisition Programs
Section 801--Requirements Management Certification Training Program
This section would require the Under Secretary of Defense
for Acquisition, Technology and Logistics, in consultation with
the Defense Acquisition University, to establish competency
requirements and a certification training program to improve
the ability of civilian and military personnel of the
Department of Defense to generate requirements that are added
to Major Defense Acquisition Programs (MDAPs). This section
would require instruction on the interdependence and interfaces
between the requirements generation system; the planning,
programming, budgeting and execution system; and the defense
acquisition system that collectively contribute to the outcomes
of MDAPs. This section would require the UnderSecretary of
Defense for Acquisition, Technology and Logistics to ensure compliance
with the training program.
Section 802--Additional Requirements Relating to Technical Data Rights
This section would require the Secretary of Defense to
establish regulations to ensure that a major system developed
with federal or private funds acquires sufficient technical
data to allow competition for contracts required for
sustainment of the system. This section would also require any
contract for a major system to include price and delivery
options for acquiring, at any point during the lifecycle of the
system, major elements of technical data not acquired at the
time of initial contract award. The regulations would establish
a standard for acquiring rights in technical data to enable the
lowest possible lifecycle cost for the item or process
acquired.
The committee notes, in recent years, acquisition program
managers have minimized their purchases of technical data
rights for new weapons systems. The committee understands that
guidance issued in the 1990s intentionally sought to reverse
the previous policy on technical data rights, which may have
inappropriately assumed that all rights to technical data
should be purchased, even in unnecessary situations. This
section would require program managers to negotiate price
options for acquiring additional data rights, at the time of
award, when the government has maximum leverage in
negotiations. The committee believes that this balanced
approach will require program managers to buy those data rights
necessary to minimize lifecycle cost without requiring the
purchase of unneeded technical data rights.
Section 803--Study and Report on Revisions to Selected Acquisition
Report Requirements
This section would require the Under Secretary of Defense
for Acquisition, Technology and Logistics, in coordination with
the service acquisition executives of each military department,
to conduct a study on revisions to requirements related to
Selected Acquisition Reports (SARs), as set forth in section
2432 of title 10, United States Code.
The SAR provides the committee with a critical tool for
providing oversight of major defense acquisition programs. The
SAR gives the committee access to clear and regular information
on program progress, including information of a classified
nature. The committee understands that the elements currently
required to be included in the SAR have not been updated for a
number of years. Some important elements of program progress
are not included in the current SAR, and in some cases,
information which may have previously been a good measure of
program progress may no longer be as relevant to program
oversight.
The committee recognizes that in order for the SAR to be
useful to both the Department of Defense (DOD) and the
committee, it should focus on those measures of program
progress for major defense acquisition programs that are the
most useful for oversight across a broad range of programs,
without placing an undue reporting burden. One element in the
current SAR that is clearly critical to congressional oversight
is the unit cost information which provides the basis for
reporting of cost growth under the Nunn-McCurdy Act (10 U.S.C.
2433). However, many elements of program progress beyond unit
cost are essential to both departmental and congressional
oversight. The committee believes that a revised SAR should be
based upon the normal, internal-working documents utilized by
the program manager on a day-to-day basis and not created
exclusively in response to a congressional reporting
requirement. The SAR should be a tool that provides both
appropriate congressional oversight, validates the health of a
program, and demonstrates that the program management
techniques being employed are appropriate. DOD's
recommendations shall be submitted to the committee by March 1,
2007.
Section 804--Quarterly Updates on Implementation of Acquisition Reform
in the Department of Defense
This section would require the Secretary of Defense to
provide quarterly reports to the Senate Committee on Armed
Services and the House Committee on Armed Services on the
implementation of plans to reform the defense acquisition
system. The updates would cover implementation of reforms of
the processes for Acquisition, including generation of
requirements, award of contracts, and financial management. The
quarterly updates would include, at a minimum, consideration of
recommendations made by:
(1) The Defense Acquisition Performance Assessment
Panel;
(2) The Defense Science Board Summer Study on
Transformation;
(3) The Center for Strategic and International
Studies: Beyond-Goldwater-Nichols Study;
(4) The Quadrennial Defense Review; and
(5) The Committee Defense Review of the House
Committee on Armed Services.
The first quarterly update would be required no later than
45 days after the enactment of this Act and the first day of
each successive quarter. The requirement would terminate on the
first day of the quarter in which the Selected Acquisition
Reports indicate that no new programs have breached either the
significant cost growth threshold or the critical cost growth
threshold.
The ability of the Department of Defense to analyze and
synthesize these reform recommendations into a series of
meaningful and actionable implementation plans concerns the
committee. In the past, bureaucratic impediments, changing
senior leadership, and numerous other factors prevented
implementation of major acquisition reform despite
comprehensive studies on the subject. In particular, the
committee notes that the President's Blue Ribbon Commission on
Defense (1986), commonly known as the ``Packard Commission,''
recommended numerous reforms to the acquisition system that,
despite the efforts of Congress and the Department, have not
been fully realized. Nearly twenty years later, the four major
acquisition reform studies of 2005 identify the same challenges
identified by the ``Packard Commission'' including rampant cost
growth, unreliable cost estimates, and requirements relying on
immature technology increasing overall program cost. The
committee is concerned about the ability of the Department to
solve these decades' old problems.
Section 805--Establishment of Defense Challenge Process for Critical
Cost Growth Threshold Breaches in Major Defense Acquisition Programs
This section would amend section 2359b of title 10, United
States Code, to establish requirements for Defense Acquisition
Challenge Program proposals (referred to as ``challenge
proposals'') solicited in response to a critical cost growth
threshold breach for a major defense acquisition program
(MDAP). A critical cost growth threshold breach occurs when an
MDAP has exceeded the critical cost growth threshold
established by section 2433 of title 10, United States Code.
This section would require the Under Secretary of Defense for
Acquisition, Technology, and Logistics (USD(AT&L)) to issue a
solicitation for challenge proposals that may result in near-
term improvements in affordability for an MDAP that has
experienced a critical cost growth breach, in addition to the
current Defense Acquisition Challenge Program (DACP) annual
broad agency announcement and unsolicited proposal processes.
The committee believes that challenge proposals for critical
cost growth breaches warrant expeditious procedures for both
preliminary and full review and evaluation. Therefore, this
section would require critical cost growth breach DACP
solicitations to be issued within 14 days following the date
that the Selected Acquisition Report on the MDAP is submitted
to Congress, as described in sections 2433(g) and 2432(f) of
title 10, United States Code. Such a solicitation should
provide sufficient detail on the cost and schedule variances
and the design, engineering, manufacturing, and technology
integration issues contributing to the MDAP cost growth, to
allow responders to prepare responsive proposals for
consideration in no less than 30 days. This section would
require a panel established by USD(AT&L) to complete a
preliminary evaluation of such challenge proposals within 60
days following the date that the Selected Acquisition Report on
the MDAP is submitted to Congress. The panel would also be
required to share the results of its preliminary evaluation
with the Secretary of Defense to aid in the completion of the
Secretary's written certification required by section
2433(e)(2)(B) of title 10, United States Code.
In the event a critical cost breach challenge proposal is
found to have merit during the full review and evaluation
process, this section would require the MDAP to fund such a
challenge proposal following contract award. In the event a
critical cost breach challenge proposal is found to have merit
upon preliminary review, but later receives an unfavorable
evaluation during full review by the office carrying out the
MDAP, this section would require the MDAP program manager to
provide a narrative explaining the rationale for the
unfavorable evaluation to the panel that conducted the
preliminary evaluation. If the panel does not agree with the
MDAP program manager's rationale, the panel may request that
the MDAP program manager reconsider. If after further
consideration, the MDAP program manager still evaluates the
challenge proposal unfavorably, the full review and evaluation
is complete. Upon the conclusion of full review and evaluation,
USD(AT&L) shall provide a report to the congressional defense
committees detailing the rationale for each unfavorable
evaluation and documenting the dissenting opinion of the panel,
as applicable. This section would require full review and
evaluation and the report to the congressional defense
committees, as necessary, to be completed within 60 days
following the preliminary evaluation by the panel.
In addition, this section would amend section 2433 of title
10, United States Code, to require the Secretary of Defense to
carry out an additional assessment under the requirements of
paragraph (e)(2) of such section, to assess the availability of
alternative components, subsystems, or systems that may result
in near-term improvements in affordability for any MDAP that
has exceeded the critical cost growth threshold. The Secretary
shall carry out this assessment through DACP.
This section would further amend section 2433 of title 10,
United States Code, to require the Secretary to include an
additional statement in the written certification required by
paragraph (e)(2) of such section, stating that DACP, having
issued a competitive solicitation for critical cost breach
challenge proposals and having completed a preliminary review
of proposals received, found no promising proposals meriting
full review and evaluation.
Finally, this section would also amend section 2433(g) of
title 10, United States Code, to require the Secretary to
include a description of design, engineering, manufacturing,
and technology integration issues in the narrative of
significant occurrences contributing to critical cost growth,
which is a component of the Selected Acquisition Report
required in section 2433(e) of title 10, United States Code.
Section 806--Market Research Required for Major Defense Acquisition
Programs Before Proceeding to Milestone B
This section would require certification that market
research has been conducted prior to technology development to
reduce duplication of existing technology and products. The
committee believes that conducting market research before
issuing a technology development contract will prevent
duplication of existing technology and reduce program costs
before a major defense acquisition program receives Milestone B
approval. The committee urges the Department to consider new
and creative means of ensuring that appropriate market research
is conducted to advance technological development of unique
capabilities and eliminate reinvention by using proven
technologies available in the marketplace.
The committee is concerned that the Department of Defense
(DOD) may not comply with the requirements of part 10 of the
Federal Acquisition Regulation related to market research,
which results in the lack of reasonable inclusion of large and
small businesses with cost-effective and superior technologies
in defense contracting. The committee is concerned that current
DOD acquisition practices might limit the use of innovative
solutions from both large and small businesses and fail to
create incentives for DOD prime contractors to embrace
innovative technologies from large and small businesses that
are commercially available. Traditional cost-reimbursable labor
contracts under the cost-plus-fixed-fee or cost-plus-award-fee
structure may increase the difficulty of offering proven
capabilities to the Department by inadvertently rewarding
higher expenditures and reducing incentives to cut costs. The
committee notes that cost-plus-percentage-of-cost contracts are
prohibited by statute and encourages the Department to take
action to ensure that the intent of this prohibition is
followed.
Subtitle B--Acquisition Policy and Management
Section 811--Applicability of Statutory Executive Compensation Cap Made
Prospective
This section would amend section 808(e)(2) of the National
Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 1998 (Public Law 105-
85) to clarify that the underlying provision is prospective
from the date of enactment. Currently, compensation of certain
executives in excess of a ``benchmark'' set by regulations is
unallowable. As a result, in General Dynamics Corporation v.
United States, 47 Fed.Cl. 514 (Fed. Cl. 2000), the court held
that application of the statutory cap to a contract awarded
prior to the enactment section 808(e)(2) constituted a breach
of contract, and that the U.S. Government was liable for breach
damages due to the retroactive application of the cap. This
section would still subject executive compensation to a test of
reasonableness.
Section 812--Prohibition on Procurement From Beneficiaries of Foreign
Subsidies
This section would prohibit the Secretary of Defense from
entering into a contract with a foreign person (including a
joint venture, cooperative organization, partnership or
contracting team), who has received a subsidy from the
government of a foreign country that is a member of the World
Trade Organization, if the United States has requested a
consultation with that foreign country on the basis that the
subsidy is prohibited under the Agreement on Subsidies and
Countervailing Measures.
Section 813--Time-Certain Development for Department of Defense
Information Technology Business Systems
This section would require that Department of Defense
information technology business systems be fielded within five
years of the system entering the technology development phase
of the acquisition process, known as Milestone A approval. The
committee is concerned that many large information technology
acquisition programs begin with great promise, yet linger in
the development phase for many years without delivering any
useful products to the Department. This section would limit the
time allowed for development of such systems.
Section 814--Establishment of Panel on Contracting Integrity
This section would establish a panel on contracting
integrity to eliminate areas of vulnerability of the defense
contracting system to fraud, waste and abuse. The panel would
be chaired by the Deputy Secretary of Defense and include the
service acquisition executive of each military department, the
Inspector General of the Department of Defense, the Director of
the Defense Logistics Agency, the Director of the Defense
Contract Management Agency and the Director of the Defense
Contract Audit Agency. This section would require the panel to
submit an annual report on its activities to the congressional
defense committees.
Subtitle C--Amendments to General Contracting Authorities, Procedures,
and Limitations
Section 821--Extension of Special Temporary Contract Closeout Authority
This section would allow the Department of Defense to
maximize its efforts to close contracts by extending the
authority. Section 804 of the National Defense Authorization
Act for Fiscal Year 2004 (Public Law 108-136) as amended,
permits the Department to close contracts entered prior to
October 1, 1996, provided the contracts are administratively
complete and the financial account has an unreconciled balance,
either positive or negative, that is less than $0.1 million.
Section 822--Limitation on Contracts for the Acquisition of Certain
Services
This section would prohibit the Secretary of Defense from
entering into a contract for covered services if the amount of
the contract exceeds 75 percent of the estimated value of the
asset required for the provision of services under the contract
or exceeds $150.0 million in payments over the life of the
contract.
Section 823--Use of Federal Supply Schedules by State and Local
Governments for Goods and Services for Recovery from Natural Disasters,
Terrorism, or Nuclear, Biological, Chemical, or Radiological Attack
This section would provide the Administrator of General
Services the authority to allow State or local governments to
use General Services Administration's (GSA) federal supply
schedules for goods and services to facilitate recovery from
natural disasters, terrorism or nuclear, biological, chemical,
or radiological attack. This section would build on the
successful cooperative purchasing program authorized in section
211 of the E-Government Act of 2002 (Public Law 107-347) which
opened GSA's schedules for information technology for use by
State and local governments.
Section 824--Waivers To Extend Task Order Contracts for Advisory and
Assistance Services
This section would amend section 2304b(b) of title 10,
United States Code, and section 253i(b) of title 41, United
States Code, to allow the head of an agency to issue a waiver
to extend an Advisory and Assistance Services (AAS) contract up
to ten years maximum through five one-year options, if he
determines in writing that the contract provides engineering or
technical services of such a unique and substantial technical
nature that recompetition is harmful to the continuity of the
program; that recompetition would create a large disruption in
ongoing support due to prime contract recompetition when the
Department of Defense has a successfully performing prime
contractor; and the Department would endure program risk during
critical program stages due to loss of program corporate
knowledge of ongoing program activities.
The committee is concerned about the Department's growing
reliance on AAS contracts. This section would require the
Secretary of Defense to submit a report to the Senate Committee
on Armed Services and the House Committee on Armed Services by
April 1, 2007. The report would include the following
information:
(1) Methods used by the Department to identify a
contract as an AAS contract;
(2) Number of AAS contracts awarded by the Department
in the five years prior to the enactment of this Act;
(3) Average annual expenditures by the Department for
AAS contracts;
(4) Average length of AAS contracts;
(5) Number of AAS contracts recompeted and awarded to
the previous award winner;
(6) Number of AAS contractors who previously
qualified as a small business but no longer qualify as
a small business for a recompetition;
(7) Number of AAS contracts required for a period of
greater than five years and a justification as to why
those services are required for greater than five
years, including rationale for not performing the
service inside the Department;
(8) Percentage of AAS contracts awarded by the
Department in the five years prior to the enactment of
this Act for assistance in the introduction and
transfer of engineering and technical knowledge for
fielded systems, equipment, and components; and
(9) Steps taken by the Department to prevent
organizational conflicts of interest in the use of AAS
contracts.
This waiver authority would be ineffective if the Secretary
of Defense fails to issue the required report by April 1, 2007.
Section 825--Enhanced Access for Small Business
This section would amend section 9(a) of the Contract
Disputes Act of 1978 (41 U.S.C. 608) to provide that the Armed
Services Board of Contract Appeals and the Civilian Board of
Contract Appeals shall provide for expedited disposition of
appeals of small businesses where the amount in dispute is
$150,000 or less.
Section 826--Procurement Goal for Hispanic-Serving Institutions
This section would amend section 2323 of title 10, United
States Code to extend the contract goals for small
disadvantaged businesses and certain institutions of higher
education to include Hispanic-serving institutions.
Section 827--Prohibition on Defense Contractors Requiring Licenses or
Fees for Use of Military Likenesses and Designations
This section would require that any contract entered into
by the Department of Defense include a provision prohibiting
the contractor from requiring toy and hobby manufacturers,
distributors, or merchants to obtain licenses from or pay fees
to the contractor for the use of military likenesses or
designations on items provided under the contract.
Subtitle D--United States Defense Industrial Base Provisions
Section 831--Protection of Strategic Materials Critical to National
Security
This section would amend title 10, United States Code, by
inserting section 2533b, ``Requirement to buy strategic
materials critical to national security from American sources;
exceptions.'' This section would prohibit the use of
appropriated funds for the procurement of a specialty metal or
an item critical to national security, as determined by the
Strategic Materials Protection Board, unless the item is
reprocessed, reused, or produced in the United States.
The committee believes this section will build on the
strong tradition of section 2533a of title 10, United States
Code, known as the ``Berry Amendment,'' while simultaneously
addressing certain issues related to the procurement of
specialty metals. In particular, the committee is concerned by
claims that confusion exists over the applicability of the
Berry Amendment to all tiers of the supply chain. This section
would clarify the original intent of the Berry Amendment by
noting that the section applies to subcontracts at any tier
under a prime contract, as well as the prime contract. This
section would maintain all current exceptions and waivers to
the current Berry Amendment. The committee notes that
application of this section would allow foreign governments to
purchase only specialty metals or items critical to national
security from the United States or from their own domestic
suppliers. The committee believes that allowing foreign
governments to purchase specialty metals from any source not
only defeats the intent of the Berry Amendment but also creates
a grave risk to national security. This section would prohibit
the practice of delivering non-compliant components to the
federal government without charge in order to be considered
compliant with the Berry Amendment.
The committee is aware that certain suppliers currently
claim that they are inadvertently non-compliant with the Berry
Amendment as it relates to specialty metals. This section would
allow a 12-month ``get well'' period for suppliers at all
levels of the supply chain to become compliant with section
2533b of title 10, United States Code. This section would
require public notice of non-compliant suppliers on
Fedbizoops.gov, a website that allows the commercial venders to
seek federal markets for their products, written notification
of non-compliance to the supplier and prime contractor, and
receipt of a compliance plan from the non-compliant supplier
and prime contractor. This section would allow a waiver for
inadvertent non-compliance to be granted only after public
posting of non-compliance and the opportunity for a challenger
to offer the federal government the opportunity to substitute
the non-compliant components with compliant components. This
inadvertent non-compliance waiver would require approval from
the secretary of the military department concerned.
Section 832--Strategic Materials Protection Board
This section would establish a Strategic Material
Protection Board. The board would be established by the
Secretary of Defense and include the Under Secretary of Defense
for Acquisition, Technology and Logistics, the Under Secretary
of Defense for Intelligence, the Secretary of the Army, the
Secretary of the Navy, and the Secretary of the Air Force. The
committee believes that the Department of Defense should create
a process to identify items that are critical to national
security. In particular, the committee notes that certain
materials, should they be unavailable domestically would
severely impair our national security. This section would
require the board to publish a list of items determined to be
critical to national security. Additionally, this section would
prohibit the removal of specialty metals listed in section
2533b of title 10, United States Code, from the list of items
critical to national security.
TITLE IX--DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE ORGANIZATION AND MANAGEMENT
ITEMS OF SPECIAL INTEREST
Importance of Placing Foreign Area Officers in Combat Units
The committee notes the contribution made by Foreign Area
Officers (FAOs) to the military services, in terms of their
knowledge of the language, culture, and personalities of their
regions of expertise. While this contribution is routinely
limited to strategic levels of operations, the committee
believes that this contribution proves valuable at every level
of military operations. To encourage that end, the military
services should provide sufficient numbers of FAOs so that each
regional combatant commander can provide at least one FAO to
each subordinate combat units commanded by a two-star general
or flag officer. The committee recommends that these FAOs be
assigned to the policy and plans staff of the subordinate
commands to allow the command to benefit from their regional
expertise in its exercise of command and control functions.
Increased Budgetary Confidence Level Implementation in Space
Acquisition
Historically, space acquisitions have been budgeted to a 50
percent certainty that the final cost will be at or below the
estimate. The committee believes that cost estimating at a 50
percent confidence level leaves little management reserve,
reduces probability of program execution, and increases total
program costs by requiring budget and schedule adjustments
during execution. Furthermore, the committee believes that
budgeting to an 80 percent confidence level mitigates problems
caused by inaccurate cost estimating and therefore, encourages
the Secretary of Defense to raise the required budgetary
confidence level of all new and restructured space programs
from 50 percent to 80 percent.
National Security Space Management
The committee recognizes efforts within the national
security space community to enhance relationships and
coordinate activities that span acquisition, research and
development, and operations in order to create more responsive
and agile space capabilities to support critical intelligence
and defense missions. In particular, the committee recognizes
the need for the Department of Defense's Executive Agent for
Space, the Director, National Reconnaissance Office, and the
Under Secretary of the Air Force to maintain close coordination
in oversight and management of space capabilities.
The committee requests the Secretary of Defense, in
consultation with the Director of National Intelligence, submit
a report to the congressional defense committees by March 1,
2007, describing the roles and responsibilities of each of
these positions with respect to resource and staffing
requirements, program development, requirements processes, and
acquisition authority. The committee also requests a
description of the additional roles, responsibilities, and
authorities of the Director, National Reconnaissance Office, as
the Assistant to the Secretary of the Air Force for
Intelligence Space Technology.
Report on Developing Expertise in Emerging National Security Challenges
The committee believes that the Department of Defense (DOD)
should consider how best to develop expertise in emerging
national security challenges and distribute appropriately such
knowledge throughout the Department, including the military
services. For example, the committee notes the role that the
Center for the Study of Chinese Military Affairs within the
National Defense University has played in developing knowledge
and expertise in a focused area of military importance. The
committee believes that DOD personnel currently may be
benefiting, or may benefit in the future, from similar
concentration in other key defense and security areas, such as
stability and support operations.
Therefore, the committee directs the Secretary of Defense
to submit to the Senate Committee on Armed Services and the
House Committee on Armed Services by March 31, 2007, a report
that identifies key defense and security areas and the
capabilities required to educate DOD personnel appropriately.
The report shall note what capabilities the Department already
has in these areas and ways in which the Department may develop
these capabilities as competencies, whether through the
development of Centers of Excellence, the fusing of existing
institutions, integration into the professional military
education curriculum, or any other steps the Secretary may
recommend.
Report on Coordination and Oversight of Military Cultural and
Linguistic Policies and Training
The committee believes that the relevance and importance of
cultural knowledge, regional expertise, and linguistic
capability will remain critical to national security for
decades to come, in the long war and in future wars. The
committee commends the Department for its initiative in respect
to coordinating and setting a direction for language skills,
and commends the services for the multiple initiatives they
have taken in regards to cultural training.
The committee believes it may be beneficial to synchronize
efforts in the cultural training and regional expertise fields
across the Department by creating an office within the Office
of the Secretary of Defense that would provide oversight for
the Department's cultural and linguistic policies and training.
Therefore, the committee directs the Secretary of Defense to
submit to the Senate Committee on Armed Services and the House
Committee on Armed Services by April 1, 2007, a report on the
options to provide such oversight, to include consideration of
the establishment of an office within the Office of the
Secretary of Defense for that function, and the resources
required to create such an office.
LEGISLATIVE PROVISIONS
Subtitle A--Department of Defense Management
Section 901--Standardization of Statutory References to ``National
Security System'' within Laws Applicable to Department of Defense
This section would amend sections 2222, 2223, and 2315 of
title 10, United States Code, to ensure the definition of
national security systems contained in title 10 is consistent
with the definition provided in the Federal Information
Security Management Act (FISMA) of 2002 (Public Law 107-347).
FISMA applies federal government wide and provides a broader
definition of national security systems than contained in title
10, expanding the term to apply to all systems used for
classified data, as well as those operated by a contractor of
an agency or other organization on behalf of the agency.
Section 902--Correction of Reference to Predecessor of Defense
Information Systems Agency
This section would amend section 193 of title 10, United
States Code, to reflect the current name of the Defense
Information Systems Agency.
Section 903--Addition to Membership of Specified Council
This section would amend section 179 of title 10, United
States Code, to include the Commander, United States Strategic
Command, on the Nuclear Weapons Council.
Section 904--Consolidation and Standardization of Authorities Relating
to Department of Defense Regional Centers for Security Studies
This section would streamline the management of Department
of Defense Regional Centers for Security Studies, which to date
have operated under different authorities. This section would
allow the Centers to pursue research in addition to
communication and exchange of ideas involving U.S. and foreign
military officers, civilian governmental personnel, and non-
governmental personnel.
This section would allow foreign governments and U.S.
federal agencies to fund foreign participation in center
activities and the Secretary of Defense to waive reimbursement
of costs of activities for military officers and civilian
defense and security officials from developing countries. This
section would continue an annual requirement for the Secretary
of Defense to submit to Congress a report on the regional
centers' status, objectives, budgets, international
participation, and foreign gifts and donations.
Section 905--Redesignation of the Department of the Navy as the
Department of the Navy and Marine Corps
This section would designate the Department of the Navy as
the Department of the Navy and the Marine Corps and change the
title of its Secretary to Secretary of the Navy and Marine
Corps. This provision would formally recognize the
responsibility of the Office of the Secretary of the Navy over
both the Navy and Marine Corps and the Marine Corps' status as
an equal partner with the Navy.
Subtitle B--Space Activities
Section 911--Designation of Successor Organizations for the
Disestablished Interagency Global Positioning Executive Board
This section would amend section 2281 of title 10, United
States Code, to reflect the new organizational structure
created by the United States Space-Based Positioning,
Navigation, and Timing Policy issued December 8, 2004, and
permit continued multi-agency funding for this activity.
Section 912--Extension of Authority for Pilot Program for Provision of
Space Surveillance Network Services to Non-United States Government
Entities
This section would extend the expiring authority of the
Secretary of Defense to conduct a pilot program that would
allow non-U.S. government entities to purchase space
surveillance network services from assets owned or controlled
by the Department of Defense through September 30, 2009. The
current authority would expire on May 22, 2007.
Section 913--Operationally Responsive Space
This section would require establishment of an
Operationally Responsive Space Program Office, and would
require the Secretary of Defense to submit a report to the
congressional defense committees setting forth a plan for
acquisition of capabilities for operationally responsive space
support to the warfighter.
Subtitle C--Chemical Demilitarization Program
Section 921--Transfer to Secretary of the Army of Responsibility for
Assembled Chemical Weapons Alternatives Program
This section would transfer program management
responsibility for the Assembled Chemical Weapons Alternatives
(ACWA) program from the Under Secretary of Defense for
Acquisition, Technology, and Logistics (USD (AT&L)) to the
Secretary of the Army by January 1, 2007; would provide for
management of the program as a part of the Department of the
Army organization for management of the chemical weapons
demilitarization program as specified in section 1521 of title
50, United States Code; and would require the Secretary of the
Army to implement fully the alternative technologies previously
selected for destruction of lethal chemical munitions at Pueblo
Chemical Depot, Colorado, and Blue Grass Army Depot, Kentucky.
The transfer of management of the ACWA program to the Secretary
of the Army would in no way diminish the responsibility of the
USD (AT&L) for oversight of the chemical weapons
demilitarization program, including ACWA, nor the USD (AT&L)'s
responsibility as defense acquisition executive for the
acquisition category 1D program.
Section 922--Comptroller General Review of Cost-Benefit Analysis of
Off-Site Versus On-Site Treatment and Disposal of Hydrolysate Derived
from Neutralization of VX Nerve Gas at Newport Chemical Depot, Indiana
This section would require the Comptroller General to
review and report to Congress by December 1, 2006, on the
adequacy of the cost benefit analysis prepared by the Secretary
of the Army comparing options to treat and dispose of the
hazardous material that is a byproduct of the process of
neutralizing VX nerve gas stored at Newport Chemical Depot,
Indiana. This section would also prohibit the Secretary from
proceeding with any action to transport this hazardous
material, or hydrolysate, until 60 days after the Comptroller
General's report is received by Congress. Pending enactment of
this section, the committee intends that the Secretary of the
Army take no action to transport hydrolysate from Newport Army
Depot until the actions that would be required by this section
are completed.
Section 923--Sense of Congress Regarding the Safe and Expeditious
Disposal of Chemical Weapons
This section would express the sense of Congress that the
process used for selecting a site for remote disposal of
hazardous material remaining after the initial processing of
chemical munitions should be free from political influence and
that a process similar to that used for base closure and
realignment be considered for adoption.
Subtitle D--Intelligence-Related Matters
Section 931--Repeal of Termination of Authority of Secretary of Defense
to Engage in Commercial Activities as Security for Intelligence
Collection Activities Abroad
This section would amend section 431(a) of title 10, United
States Code, to repeal the termination of authority for the
Secretary of Defense to engage in commercial activities as
security for intelligence collection activities abroad.
TITLE X--GENERAL PROVISIONS
ITEMS OF SPECIAL INTEREST
Counter-Drug Activities
Overview
The budget request contained $926.9 million for drug
interdiction and counter-drug activities, in addition to $131.9
million, for operational tempo which is included within the
operating budgets of the military services. The fiscal year
2007 budget is organized to address four broad national
priorities: (1) international support; (2) domestic support;
(3) intelligence and technology support; and (4) demand
reduction.
The committee recommends an authorization for fiscal year
2007 Department of Defense counter-drug activities as follows:
FY07 Drug Interdiction and Counter-Drug Request............... $926,890
International Support......................................... $435,919
Domestic Support.............................................. $205,416
Intelligence and Technology Support........................... $151,322
Demand Reduction.............................................. $134,233
Recommended Decreases
SOUTHCOM..................................................
NORTHCOM.................................................. $7,000
PACOM..................................................... $2,000
CENTCOM................................................... $1,000
Intelligence and Technology............................... $2,000
Support................................................... $4,000
Recommended Increases
Southwestern Border Fence................................. $10,000
Maritime Domain Awareness................................. $6,000
Recommendation................................................ $926,890
Items of Special Interest
Budget requests
The fiscal year 2007 drug interdiction and counter-drug
activities budget request of $926.9 million covers all
counternarcotics resources in the Department of Defense (DOD)
with the exception of those resources in the operating budget
for the military services for operational tempo, military
personnel, and military construction. The committee notes that
the services' budget requests include an additional $131.9
million for operational tempo expenses related to counter-drug
activities in their respective appropriations. The committee,
therefore, directs the Secretary of Defense to integrate the
associated operational tempo costs contained in the services'
budgets for drug interdiction and counter-drug activities into
DOD's drug interdiction and counter-drug activities budget
justification material for fiscal year 2008, and thereafter.
The committee directs that the budget justification material
which lists drug resources by function shall include the
associated operational tempo costs to the services in the total
budget request by the Department for counter-drug activities.
Counternarcotics policy for Afghanistan
The committee supports the efforts of the Department of
Defense (DOD) to use drug interdiction and counternarcotics
resources to support the global war on terrorism and notes that
there are clear links between international narcotics
trafficking and international terrorism. In that regard, the
committee supports DOD's unified campaign against narcotics
trafficking and activities by organizations designated as
terrorist organizations in Colombia and Afghanistan. The
committee notes with regards to Afghanistan, the Department has
responded to requests for support from the Department of State,
the Drug Enforcement Administration and the Government of the
United Kingdom to help the Government of Afghanistan develop
the capacity to address the country's serious and growing
narcotics problem. The committee believes that the high level
of DOD support to the Department of State in building law
enforcement capacity in Afghanistan is the correct approach.
The committee is concerned that despite the development of
an interagency implementation plan for U.S. counternarcotics
activities in Afghanistan and the surrounding region, the
Department is being asked to fund and manage activities that
are well beyond its core mission. The Department must continue
to play an important role in the international andinteragency
fight against narcotics in Afghanistan, but it must not take on roles
in which other countries or other agencies of the U.S. Government have
core capabilities.
Intelligence and technology
The budget request contained $151.3 million for
intelligence and technology support.
The committee understands the importance of intelligence
and technology in the counternarcotics program. Intelligence
and technology are used to dismantle narcotics networks and
terrorist organizations linked to drug trafficking. The
committee notes that the authorization of funds for
intelligence and technology will result in increased
development, testing, evaluation, and deployment of
technologies that collect and monitor narcotics intelligence on
land, sea, and in the air.
Accordingly, the committee recommends $147.3 million for
intelligence and technology, a decrease of $4.0 million. The
recommended funding represents a significant increase over the
fiscal year 2006 authorization.
Maritime domain awareness
The budget request contained $2.5 million for research and
development of a detection and monitoring domain awareness
system. This system integrates multiple sensors, databases, and
anomaly detection tools into a data fusion testbed that
provides persistent-situational awareness across domains and
operation systems. One system under development provides wide-
area surveillance, maritime domain awareness, and distributes
actionable intelligence concerning potential narcotics
trafficking or terrorist threats. This system operations
succeeded in a test conducted by Joint Task Force-North and
will be evaluated during fiscal year 2007 by the Joint
Interagency Task Force-South and in Colombia.
Accordingly, the committee recommends an increase of $6.0
million for this purpose.
Southwest Border Fence
The committee is concerned that the southwest border
continues to be a heavily utilized human and drug smuggling
corridor allowing access into U.S. metropolitan areas from
Mexico. Since 1990, construction and rehabilitation along this
prolific drug smuggling corridor has resulted in 7.6 miles of
double-layer fencing, 59 miles of single fencing, and 169.5
miles of road. These advances have reduced drug trafficking
into the region and have eliminated the smuggling corridor.
Completing the fence construction project in San Diego,
California, will allow counter-drug assets to be redeployed to
other areas. The committee supports this fence and road-
building activity in the southwest region. Funds authorized
within this Act shall be used to complete construction of the
14-Mile Border Infrastructure System near San Diego,
California; increase the height of existing border vehicle
barriers to a minimum of 10 feet; and build an additional 5
miles of primary fencing east of the Otay Mesa port of entry.
In addition, not less than $3.0 million shall be used to
design, plan, deploy and rehabilitate fencing for 15 miles on
either side of the Laredo, Texas port of entry. Finally, not
less than $2.0 million shall be used to design, plan, deploy
and rehabilitate fencing at the Marine Corps Air Station, Yuma,
Arizona.
Accordingly, the committee recommends an increase of $10.0
million for this purpose.
U.S. Central Command operations support
The budget request contained $27.6 million for U.S. Central
Command (USCENTCOM) and participating nation support for
USCENTCOM operations. Reductions in support activities are
planned, in light of other worldwide commitments.
Accordingly, the committee recommends a decrease of $2.0
million for this purpose.
U.S. Northern Command operations support
The budget request contained $15.5 million for U.S.
Northern Command domestic operations support. Reductions in
support activities are planned, in light of other worldwide
commitments.
Accordingly, the committee recommends a decrease of $2.0
million for this purpose.
U.S. Pacific Command operations support
The budget request contained $27.2 million for U.S. Pacific
Command (USPACOM) and participating nation support for USPACOM
operations. Reductions in support activities are planned, in
light of other worldwide commitments.
Accordingly, the committee recommends a decrease of $1.0
million for this purpose.
U.S. Southern Command operations support
The budget request contained $372.7 million for U.S.
Southern Command (USSOUTHCOM) and participating nation support
for USSOUTHCOM operations. Reductions in support activities are
planned, in light of other worldwide commitments.
Accordingly, the committee recommends a decrease of $7.0
million for this purpose.
Other Activities
Aircraft Carrier Force Structure
The committee notes that the Department of Defense's
legislative proposal for fiscal year 2007, included a section
that would effectively allow retirement of the conventionally-
powered aircraft carrier, USS John F. Kennedy, thereby reducing
the carrier force structure from 12 to 11 ships.
The committee believes that the Navy's decision to reduce
the number of carriers was not based on mission requirements
analysis; rather, the decision was based on fiscal constraints.
Section 126 of the National Defense Authorization Act for
Fiscal Year 2006 (Public Law 109-163) amended section 5062 of
title 10, United States Code, to set a minimum carrier force
structure of not less than 12 operational aircraft carriers.
The committee believes the aircraft carrier force structure
should be maintained at 12 ships in order to meet worldwide
commitments.
However, the committee would like to explore options for
maintaining the USS John F. Kennedy in an operational status
either within or outside the U.S. Navy, to include the
possibility of transferring operational control to the North
Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO). Therefore, the committee
directs the Secretary of Defense to submit a report to the
congressional defense committees by March 1, 2007, that
examines options for maintaining the USS John F. Kennedy in an
operational status both within and outside the U.S. Navy. In
examining the NATO option, the Secretary shall coordinate an
assessment with the NATO Secretary General. The report shall
include the cost and manning required, statutory restrictions
that would preclude transfer of the USS John F. Kennedy to
organizations or entities outside the U.S. Navy, and a
classified annex on how the Navy would meet global operational
requirements with an aircraft carrier force structure of less
than 12 ships.
``Commercial First'' Maritime Sealift Policy
The committee is aware of recent discussions between the
U.S. Transportation Command (USTRANSCOM) and the operators of
U.S. flag vessels concerning the longstanding policy of using
commercial vessels to transport military cargo when sufficient
resources are available. Under this policy, the Department of
Defense is required to, at least annually, determine the number
of ships it needs to own or have under charter to meet its
peacetime, contingency and wartime projected requirements. Once
this ``fleet'' is sized, ships under charter to the U.S.
Government, or government-owned ships that have been activated
to full operating status, shall be used to the ``maximum extent
practicable'' when vessel schedules satisfy cargo delivery
requirements. Assuring that the multiple components of sealift
capacity are fully utilized is a difficult balancing act. The
United States must retain its commercial capacity and
simultaneously act as good stewards of the taxpayer's dollar
when government-controlled carriers have been activated and are
available. The Secretary of Defense has empowered USTRANSCOM to
ensure that U.S. troops deployed worldwide have the assets they
need, when they need them. This is a difficult task given the
wide range of operational demands placed on U.S. armed forces
at this point in time. This balancing act is not one that lends
itself to a legislative solution, nor is one warranted. The
committee is confident that satisfactory solutions are
attainable through continuing dialogue.
Department of Defense Civil Support
The committee commends the men and women of the U.S. armed
forces who played an invaluable role in helping the citizens of
Louisiana, Alabama and Mississippi respond to the devastation
of Hurricane Katrina and saved countless lives. The committee
notes, however, that there are a number of areas where the
Department of Defense (DOD) could have improved the execution
of military support during Hurricane Katrina. The committee
further notes that both the Final Report of the Select
Bipartisan Committee to Investigate the Preparation for and
Response to Hurricane Katrina and the White House Report on the
Federal Response to Hurricane Katrina identify areas where DOD
response to Hurricane Katrina was lacking, and makes
recommendations for improvement.
The committee is pleased that both reports emphasize the
critical support provided by the respective National Guards of
Alabama, Mississippi, and Louisiana in responding to this
crisis, as well as the support provided by the National Guard
Bureau in mobilizing assets from guard units around the nation.
The committee applauds the national guard's response to
Hurricane Katrina, and believes that the command and control
arrangements for national guard units during this multi-state
emergency worked well and should serve as a model for future
multi-state responses. In short, the governors of Louisiana and
Mississippi each commanded the national guard effort in their
respective states, and commanded the various national guard
units from across the country who volunteered to serve under
previously agreed Emergency MutualAssistance Compacts. Thus,
the committee believes that national guard units, operating under the
command and control of the governor, should not execute multi-state
missions, and that regional, multi-state coordination of first response
efforts remain a Department of Homeland Security mission. The committee
believes, however, that the national guard will continue to be an
essential element in any response to a domestic emergency that
overwhelms first responders.
Therefore, the committee directs the Assistant Secretary of
Defense for Homeland Defense to review the findings applicable
to the Department made in the Final Report of the Select
Bipartisan Committee to Investigate the Preparation for and
Response to Hurricane Katrina. The committee also directs the
Assistant Secretary of Defense for Homeland Defense to submit
to the Senate Committee on Armed Services and the House
Committee on Armed Services by April 1, 2007, a report
detailing how the Department intends to address the issues
raised by the Select Committee report and the White House
report. In particular, the report shall clarify U.S. Northern
Command's role in planning and executing support to the
Department of Homeland Security and national guard units
operating under title 32, United States Code, status during
domestic contingencies.
Department of Defense Interagency Coordination in the Global War on
Terrorism
The committee notes the importance of interagency
coordination in all matters affecting national security,
particularly in the global war on terrorism (GWOT), where
success depends on the seamless application of all elements of
national power. The committee is aware that the National
Counterterrorism Center (NCTC) is in the process of completing
the National Implementation Plan, which will provide
integrated, strategic, operational plans for counterterrorism
activities within and among agencies. While the committee
expects that the National Implementation Plan will improve
interagency coordination in the GWOT, the committee believes
that the NCTC, alone, will not solve problems in interagency
coordination.
The committee notes that the Department of Defense (DOD)
has advocated improved interagency coordination in its National
Defense Strategy, National Military Strategy and the 2006
Quadrennial Defense Review (QDR). The QDR, in particular,
identifies a number of DOD initiatives aimed at improving
interagency coordination.
Therefore, the committee directs the Secretary of Defense
to submit to the Senate Committee on Armed Services and the
House Committee on Armed Services by March 1, 2007, a report on
how the Department is implementing the 2006 QDR objective of
strengthening interagency operations. The report shall address
how the Department is improving and strengthening internal DOD
mechanisms for GWOT interagency coordination at the strategic,
operational, and tactical level; and suggest means to address
any remaining gaps in the interagency planning and execution
process.
Department of Defense Participation in the Committee on Foreign
Investment in the United States
The committee believes that the Committee on Foreign
Investment in the United States (CFIUS) does not adequately
scrutinize the effects on national security of mergers,
acquisitions and takeovers by foreign persons, which could
result in foreign control of persons engaged in interstate
commerce in the United States. The committee notes that recent
decisions by CFIUS, such as approving attempts by the China
National Offshore Oil Corporation to acquire Unocal and Dubai
Ports World to acquire operation of six U.S. ports, underscores
that CFIUS is neither applying sufficient analytical rigor to
its review process nor providing sufficient weight to genuine
concerns about the adverse impact of such transactions on U.S.
national security. The committee urges the President to reform
the process to ensure that CFIUS members do not prioritize
securing foreign investment in the United States ahead of
protecting national security.
The committee notes that the Department of Defense is a
CFIUS member and that the Department will often conduct an
internal review of transactions as part of a CFIUS review. The
committee is concerned that the Department may not be
adequately scrutinizing and taking into consideration all of
the national security implications of proposed mergers,
acquisitions or takeovers under CFIUS review or voicing
strongly its concerns to other CFIUS members.
Therefore, the committee directs the Secretary of Defense
to submit to the Senate Committee on Armed Services and the
House Committee Armed Services by April 1, 2007, a report
explaining how the Department evaluates the national security
implications of mergers, acquisitions or takeovers that are
subject to CFIUS review. This report shall also provide
examples of how the Department raised national security
concerns within the CFIUS structure over the last five years,
how CFIUS sought assurances to resolve such concerns and
explain how the Department monitors and enforces these
assurances.
Homeland Security/Defense Management Programs
The committee notes the efforts of civilian academia to
provide important educational opportunities in the area of
Homeland Security/Defense Management, and supports such
efforts, especially when executed in cooperation with the
Homeland Security/Defense Education Consortium and other
Department of Defense educational institutions. The committee
encourages the Department, as well as other federal agencies
and civilian institutions, to continue to support these types
of programs.
Improving International Pandemic Preparedness Through Theater Security
Cooperation Programs
The committee notes that the Department of Defense was
successful in providing rapid humanitarian assistance to
Southeast Asia following the December 2004, tsunami due, in
part, to military to military agreements, relationships, and
training established through U.S. Pacific Command's Theater
Security Cooperation Program. Such pre-existing military
agreements, relationships, and training could only prove
beneficial during other disasters, including regional health
epidemics or a global pandemic. The committee believes that
during foreign military training and joint exercises with
international partners, the Department should actively seek to
improve the capabilities of military allies in the areas of
surveillance and early warning of infectious disease outbreak
and pandemic preparedness, particularly in Africa and Southeast
Asia. The committee encourages the regional combatant
commanders to review current efforts and make specific
recommendations to the Secretary of Defense for opportunities
to expand such efforts in fiscal years 2007 and 2008.
Increasing the Availability of Intelligence, Surveillance, and
Reconnaissance Assets in the Event of a Catastrophic Natural or Manmade
Disaster
The committee is aware that the federal response to
Hurricane Katrina was hampered by a lack of situational
awareness of post-landfall conditions along the Gulf Coast, as
noted in the final report of the Select Bipartisan Committee to
Investigate the Preparation for and Response toHurricane
Katrina. The Department of Defense possesses unparalleled assets for
intelligence collection that are used worldwide to coordinate and
support military operations.
Therefore, the committee directs the Secretary of Defense
to increase the availability of these Intelligence,
Surveillance, and Reconnaissance assets in the event of a
catastrophic natural or manmade disaster for use in damage
assessment and the coordination of relief efforts. The
committee also directs the Secretary of Defense to provide a
report to the congressional defense committees as to the status
of this effort by January 31, 2007.
Joint Training and Certification for Nuclear, Chemical, and Biological
Defense
The 2006 Quadrennial Defense Review (QDR) envisioned the
future force would be organized, trained, equipped, and
resourced to deal with all aspects of the threat posed by
weapons of mass destruction; but the QDR provided no insight
into how the Department of Defense will achieve its nuclear,
chemical, and biological defense training objective. Therefore,
the committee directs the Assistant to the Secretary of Defense
for Nuclear and Chemical and Biological Defense Programs, in
coordination with the Secretary of the Army, Secretary of the
Navy, and Secretary of the Air Force, to perform a gap analysis
on nuclear, chemical, and biological (NCB) defense training, to
review NCB defense doctrine across each of the military
services, and to make recommendations to the Secretary of
Defense, the Senate Committee on Armed Services and the House
Committee on Armed Services by October 1, 2007, regarding the
implementation of joint training, certification, and doctrinal
alignment for NCB defense for both the active and reserve
components.
National Counter Proliferation Center
The committee commends the Director of National
Intelligence for formally establishing the National Counter
Proliferation Center (NCPC) on November 21, 2005. As a result
of testimony received during recent Terrorism, Unconventional
Threats, and Capabilities Subcommittee hearings, the committee
believes that it is essential that a body within the U.S.
Government integrate and coordinate all elements of national
power to combat weapons of mass destruction. The committee
notes that the National Security Intelligence Reform Act of
2004 (Public Law 108-458) mandates that the NCPC address seven
missions and objectives. The committee is concerned that the
NCPC is not, and has no plans to carry out the following two
missions and objectives: (1) coordinating counter proliferation
plans and activities of the various departments and agencies of
the U.S. Government to prevent and halt the proliferation of
weapons of mass destruction, their delivery systems, and
related materials and technologies and (2) conducting strategic
operational counter proliferation planning for the U.S.
Government to prevent and halt the proliferation of weapons of
mass destruction, their delivery systems, and related materials
and technologies.
Therefore, the committee directs the Director of the NCPC
to submit to the Senate Committee on Armed Services and the
House Committee on Armed Services, and the Senate Select
Committee on Intelligence and the House Permanent Select
Committee on Intelligence by February 1, 2007, a report that
explains why the NCPC has not taken steps to carry out its
statutorily mandated missions and objectives to coordinate U.S.
Government counter proliferation plans and activities and
conduct strategic operational counter proliferation planning
for the U.S. Government. The report should indicate whether the
NCPC expects the President to waive any of the missions and
objectives assigned to the NCPC pursuant to the National
Security Intelligence Reform Act of 2004 (Public Law 108-458).
In the event the NCPC will not carry out any or all of the
seven of the missions and objectives detailed in the National
Security Intelligence Reform Act of 2004, (Public Law 108-458)
and the President will not execute a national security waiver,
the report should explain how the President is meeting the
requirements in section 1022 of the National Security
Intelligence Reform Act of 2004 (Public Law 108-458).
Overhaul, Repair, and Maintenance of Vessels Carrying Department of
Defense Cargo
In section 1017 of this act, the committee includes an
interim provision to address concerns that vessels engaged in
the coastwise trades, including the domestic offshore trades,
are undergoing repairs and modifications in shipyards located
outside the United States. In general, vessels engaged in the
coastwise trades are limited to those that are U.S. built, U.S.
crewed, and U.S. owned. Also, a vessel may not be ``rebuilt''
in a shipyard that is not located in the United States. Thus,
no vessels built outside the United States can enter these
trades. Part of the current discussions, center around the fact
that the Coast Guard issued section 67.177 of title 46, Code of
Federal Regulations that provides guidelines on when a vessel
is deemed ``rebuilt.'' In general, this occurs when relevant
work, which is defined as work performed on its hull or
superstructure, constitutes a considerable part of the hull or
superstructure or when a major component of the hull or
superstructure, not built in the United States, is added to a
vessel. With regard to the former test, percentage limitations
have been established in section 67.117(b) of title 46, Code of
Federal Regulations. Specifically with respect to vessels the
hull and superstructure of which is constructed of steel,
certain thresholds have been established. The issue is that a
vessel is deemed rebuilt when the relevant work constitutes
more than ten percent of the vessel's steelweight prior to the
work. A vessel may be considered ``rebuilt'' if the relevant
work constitutes more than 7.5 percent but not more than ten
percent of the vessel's steelweight prior to the work. The
conflict which seems to exist is the Coast Guard has one test
for when a vessel is initially considered to be ``built'' in
the United States for the purposes of engaging in the coastwise
trades, and another test for when a vessel is deemed
``rebuilt'' outside the United States, and thus losing its
right to engage in the coastwise trades.
The committee is concerned that this apparent dichotomy has
resulted in a number of vessels being repaired and modified in
foreign shipyards. To resolve this issue, and to be fair to
proponents and opponents of the practice of repairing and
overhauling coastwise eligible vessels in foreign shipyards,
the committee intends to conduct a hearing or series of
hearings in the near-term. The committee recognizes this is a
very complicated issue with significant policy ramifications,
and thus chose to address this issue through an interim
legislative provision in this Act. Nevertheless, hearings will
provide the opportunity for all parties to present their views.
The committee believes that a more detailed and permanent
solution is obtainable.
Report on Strategic Language Skills
The committee notes that the Department of Defense has
placed great emphasis on improving the strategic language
posture of the United States. Accordingly, the committee
directs the Secretary of Defense to identify objectives for
developing capabilities in immediate investment languages and
stronghold languages, as specified on the fiscal year 2006
Department of Defense Strategic Languages List, and develop a
comprehensive implementation plan as to how the Secretary of
Defense and the military departments will achieve those
objectives. The committee expects that the plan for achieving
the objectives for strategic languages will be coordinated with
and will complement the Secretary's report on the need for a
personnel plan for linguists in the armed forces required by
section 581 of the National Defense Authorization Act for
Fiscal Year 2006 (Public Law 109-163).
The committee directs the Secretary to submit these
language objectives and implementation plan to the Senate
Committee on Armed Services and the House Committee on Armed
Services by March 31, 2007.
Special Operations Command as the Supported Command in the Global War
on Terrorism
The committee notes that the 2004 Unified Command Plan made
U.S. Special Operations Command (USSOCOM) the supported, or
lead, combatant command in the global war on terrorism (GWOT).
The committee further notes that annex C of the National
Military Strategic Plan for the War on Terrorism, published
February 1, 2006, implements USSOCOM's designation as the
supported combatant command for the GWOT by charging SOCOM with
planning, synchronizing, and, as directed, executing global
operations against terrorist networks. The committee finds,
however, that USSOCOM's roles and responsibilities as the
supported combatant command for the GWOT remain ambiguous.
Therefore, the committee directs the Secretary of Defense
to submit to the Senate Committee on Armed Services and the
House Committee on Armed Services by February 1, 2007, a report
that clarifies the roles and responsibilities of the Commander,
USSOCOM in his capacity as the supported combatant commander in
the GWOT. The report shall:
(1) Identify a clear chain of command affording the
Commander, USSOCOM the authority to more effectively
carry out his role as the lead Commander for GWOT
planning and operations;
(2) Explain under what circumstances will USSOCOM be
directed to exercise command and control of
counterterrorism operations;
(3) Verify whether current USSOCOM acquisition,
training and manning authorities are sufficient to
allow Commander, USSOCOM to meet his responsibilities
as the supported combatant commander for GWOT; and
(4) Clarify the command and control relationship
between the geographic combatant commanders and USSOCOM
in terms of GWOT planning and operations.
Status and Implementation of Military Support for Stability, Security,
Transition, and Reconstruction Operations
The committee is pleased to note that the Department of
Defense issued Directive 3000.05, dated November 28, 2005, on
`` Military Support for Stability, Security, Transition, and
Reconstruction (SSTR) Operations.'' Such operations will remain
common critical military tasks in the foreseeable future and
the Department should be fully prepared to execute such tasks.
The committee believes that the Department should integrate, to
the greatest extent possible, SSTR-related requirements across
its doctrine, training, logistics, organization, materiel,
personnel, and facilities (DTLOM-PF).
The committee directs the Secretary of Defense to submit to
the Senate Committee on Armed Services and the the House
Committee on Armed Services by April 1, 2007, a report on the
status and plan (including timeline) to implement the Directive
across DTLOM-PFs. This report shall include, among other
relevant issues, a special focus on professional
militaryeducation and training, including but not limited to revisions
to Academy and War College curricula, if any; training plans at the
service and joint operational levels; the possible creation of SSTR
fellowships within the Agency for International Development or related
organizations (including non-governmental organizations); and any
reorganizations that will be required to implement the Directive.
Terrorist Use of the Internet
The committee is concerned that terrorist organizations,
such as al Qaeda, are using the internet to carry out strategic
and operational objectives. The committee believes that
terrorist organizations should not be permitted to exploit the
internet, and that the Department of Defense should take steps
to combat terrorists' use of the internet.
Therefore, the committee directs the Secretary of Defense
to submit to the Senate Committee on Armed Services and the
House Committee on Armed Services by May 1, 2007, a report that
describes how terrorist organizations use the internet, and
recommend ways the Department can counter terrorists' use of
the internet. The report shall also state how the Department is
currently countering terrorist recruiting, training and
operations that are executed through the internet, and should
identify any legal challenges the Department may face in trying
to combat terrorists' use of the internet.
LEGISLATIVE PROVISIONS
Subtitle A--Financial Matters
Section 1001--General Transfer Authority
This section would provide fiscal year 2007 transfer
authority to the Department of Defense for amounts up to $3.75
billion.
Section 1002--Authorizations of Supplemental Appropriations for Fiscal
Year 2006
This section would authorize adjustments in the National
Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2006 (Public Law 109-
163) for the Department of Defense by supplemental
appropriations pursuant to such authorization.
Section 1003--Increase in Fiscal Year 2006 General Transfer Authority
This section would amend section 1001(a)(2) of the National
Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2006 (Public Law 109-
163) to increase the fiscal year 2006 transfer authority from
$3.5 billion to $3.75 billion.
Section 1004--United States Contribution to NATO Common-Funded Budgets
in Fiscal Year 2007
This section would authorize the United States contribution
to North Atlantic Treaty Organization common-funded budgets for
fiscal year 2007, including the use of unexpended balances.
Section 1005--Report on Budgeting for Fluctuations in Fuel Cost Rates
This section would require the Secretary of Defense to
submit a report to the Senate Committee on Armed Services and
the House Committee on Armed Services by January 15, 2007, on
the fuel costs rate projection used in the annual Department of
Defense budget. This section would also require the Comptroller
General to review the report and submit an assessment by March
15, 2007.
Section 1006--Reduction in Authorizations Due to Savings Resulting From
Lower-than-Expected Inflation
The Department of Defense assumed an inflation rate of 2.2
percent in its fiscal year 2007 budget submission. However,
according to the House Budget Committee's report (109-402), the
Congressional Budget Office's estimate of inflation is 0.4
percentage points lower than the President's request for fiscal
year 2007. The savings resulting from the lower-than-expected
inflation for fiscal year 2007 is $1,583 million less than the
budget request.
Subtitle B--Policy Relating to Naval Vessels and Shipyards
Section 1011--Transfer of Naval Vessels to Foreign Nations Based Upon
Vessel Class
This section would allow the transfer of a specified number
of ships to a particular nation without identification of the
specific vessel by hull number or ship name. Section 7037 of
title 10, United States Code, requires legislative approval for
the transfer to other nations of specific vessels exceeding
3,000 tons or vessels that are less than 20-years-old. The
legislative approval process typically begins two years or more
prior to the actual decommissioning of the U.S. Navy vessel and
ship transfer. Decommissioning plans frequently change as a
result of changing operational commitments, material condition,
and other factors. Linking a specific vessel to a specific
country can result in a lost transfer opportunity if that
vessel's decommissioning status changes. Additionally, it must
be replaced by another vessel of the same class as a transfer
candidate.
This section would better support the goal of affecting
``hot'' ship transfers. Hot ship transfers reduce the cost of
decommissioning preparation and lay-up for the U.S. Navy and
may support a higher selling price for the ship as an ``excess
defense article.'' For the purchaser, a hot ship transfer is
advantageous because it eliminates reactivation costs
attributed to long post-decommissioning lay-up and because the
ship transfer can be more quickly and economically realized.
This section would still require Congress to authorize the
release of specific naval capabilities and technologies to
specific countries, but it would provide flexibility to best
match available decommissioned ships to customer navies'
requirements. Finally, Congress would still be free to
designate specific ships to specific countries where
circumstances dictated.
Section 1012--Overhaul, Repair, and Maintenance of Vessels in Foreign
Shipyards
The committee includes a provision that will clarify those
commonwealths and possessions that are to be considered as part
of the United States for the purposes of naval vessels to
include any Military Sealift Command vessels that are owned or
chartered under thejurisdiction of the Secretary of Navy. This
section also further defines the term emergency voyage repair and
extends the limitations on overhaul, repair and maintenance of vessels
in foreign shipyards.
Section 1013--Report on Options for Future Lease Arrangement for Guam
Shipyard
This section would require the Secretary of Navy to submit
a report to the Senate Committee on Armed Services and the
House Committee on Armed Services by December 15, 2006, on the
Guam Shipyard located in San Rita, Guam. This section would
also require the Comptroller General to submit an evaluation of
the Secretary of Navy's report to the Senate Committee on Armed
Services and the House Committee on Armed Services by March 1,
2007.
Under the statutory authority of section 2304c(3) of title
10, United States Code, and the Federal Acquisition Regulation
6.302-3(a)(2)(i), the Navy has been awarding non-competitive
contracts to Guam Shipyard located in San Rita, Guam since
fiscal year 1998 to maintain the industrial base in support of
national strategic objectives. In 1998, Commander, U.S. Pacific
Fleet determined that maintaining a private ship repair
capability in Guam is a matter of national strategic importance
for future defense operations in the western Pacific.
In a report to Congress on Repair of Military Sealift
Command Ships dated May 2004, the Commander, U.S. Pacific Fleet
validated the importance of this shipyard. In the fiscal year
2006 Class Justification and Approval For Other Than Full and
Open Competition, the Commander, U.S. Pacific Fleet again
determined that maintaining a private ship repair capability as
a mobilization base facility on Guam is a matter of vital
strategic importance for operations in the Western Pacific Area
of Responsibility. In support of that determination, the
Commander U.S. Pacific Fleet submitted a letter to the
Commander, Military Sealift Command on March 30, 2005, that
stated:
``Guam is strategically located with respect to those
Asian countries that border the Pacific-Rim and
provides an excellent site for logistical support to
the Navy's operating forces in that region. With the
U.S. Navy's continuing focus on the Pacific Area of
Responsibility, the former U.S. Naval Ship Repair
Facility Guam, due to its geographically unique
location and positive force protection status, is
essential to our ability to respond to possible
contingencies.''
Until such time as the Secretary of the Navy prepares the
requested report, this section would further require the
awarding of contracts under the authority of section 2304(c)(3)
of title 10, United States Code and section 6.302-3(a)(2)(i) of
the Federal Acquisition Regulation in an equal to the average
amount awarded between Fiscal Year 1998 and Fiscal Year 2006.
The committee supports the Secretary of Navy's decision to
continue to designate the Guam Shipyard as critical to
maintaining the industrial base in support of national
strategic objectives, as certified by the Commander, U.S.
Pacific Fleet, for each of the past eight fiscal years.
Section 1014--Shipbuilding Industrial Base Improvement Program
This section would establish a program to provide grants
and loan guarantees to U.S. shipbuilders to make capital
investments in their shipbuilding processes and facilities to
improve the efficiency, cost-effectiveness, and quality of U.S.
ship construction and promote the international competitiveness
of U.S. shipyards. This section would authorize the Secretary
of the Navy to solicit and approve grant applications from
shipbuilding companies to research and develop innovative
technologies, processes and infrastructure to improve the
efficiency and cost-effectiveness of naval vessel construction.
This section would also authorize the Secretary of the Navy to
provide loan guarantees to shipyards to purchase and implement
a technology, a process or an infrastructure improvement that
he determines will improve the productivity and cost-
effectiveness of naval vessel construction. This section would
also require the Secretary of the Navy to perform annual
assessments of the shipbuilding industrial base to determine
where and to what extent inefficiencies exist and to what
extent innovative design and production technologies, processes
and infrastructure can be developed to alleviate such
inefficiencies. This section would also require that funding
for the National Shipbuilding Research Program be separately
identified and set forth in budget justification materials
submitted to Congress for that fiscal year in support of that
budget.
Section 1015--Transfer of Operational Control of Certain Patrol Coastal
Ships to Coast Guard
This section would require the Secretary of the Navy to
enter into an agreement with the Commandant of the Coast Guard
for the transfer of operational control of not less than five
179 foot Cyclone class patrol coastal ships for a period
extending at least through September 30, 2012.
Section 1016--Limitation on Leasing of Foreign-Built Vessels
This section would amend section 2401 of title 10, United
States Code, to prohibit the secretary of a military department
from entering into a contract for lease or charter of a vessel
for a term of more than 24 months, including all options to
renew or extend the contract, if the hull or superstructure of
that vessel was constructed in a foreign shipyard.
Section 1017--Overhaul, Repair, and Maintenance of Vessels Carrying
Department of Defense Cargo
This section would provide that the Secretary of Defense
may not award any contract for the carriage by vessel of cargo
for the Department of Defense, unless the contract includes a
requirement under which the contractor shall ensure that the
overhaul and repair work is done in a shipyard located in the
United States or the contractor must report any repair work
conducted in a shipyard located outside the Unites States.
Section 1018--Riding Gang Member Documentation Requirement
This section would prohibit the Secretary of Defense from
awarding a charter or a contract for carriage of defense cargo
unless the charter or contract requires that each riding gang
member that performs any work on the vessel during the
effective period of the charter or contract holds a merchant
mariner's document issued by the U.S. Coast Guard. This section
also allows the Secretary of Defense to issue regulations to
exempt a riding gang member from the above requirement under
limited circumstances, and then only if a background check is
performed.
Subtitle C--Counter-Drug Activities
Section 1021--Restatement in Title 10, United States Code, and Revision
of Department of Defense Authority to Provide Support for Counter-Drug
Activities of Federal, State, Local, and Foreign Law Enforcement
Agencies
This section would codify section 1004 of the National
Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 1991 (Public Law 101-
510), as amended by section 1021(a) of the National Defense
Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2002 (Public Law 107-107).
The current authority, which would expire at the end of fiscal
year 2006, enables the Department of Defense to assist the
counter-drug activities of any other department or agency of
the federal government or of any State, local, or foreign law
enforcement agencies. This support includes the maintenance and
repair of equipment; transportation of personnel; establishment
and operation of bases of operation or training facilities;
counter-drug related training of law enforcement personnel; the
detection, monitoring, and communication of air and sea
traffic; construction of roads, fences and installation
lighting, establishment of command, control, communications,
and computer networks; provision of linguist and intelligence
analysis services; and aerial and ground reconnaissance.
Section 1022--Restatement in Title 10, United States Code, and Revision
of Department of Defense Authority to Provide Support for Counter-Drug
Activities of Certain Foreign Governments
This section would codify and expand section 1033 of the
National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 1998 (Public
Law 105-85), as amended by section 1021 of the National Defense
Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2004 (Public Law 108-136).
The current authority, which would expire at the end of fiscal
year 2006, enables the Department of Defense (DOD) to provide
counter-drug equipment in addition to that provided under
section 1004 of the National Defense Authorization Act for
Fiscal Year 1991 (Public Law 101-510), as amended by section
1021(a) of the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal
Year 2002 (Public Law 107-107), to nations in South America and
Central Asia, including: Colombia, Peru, Ecuador, Bolivia,
Afghanistan, Pakistan, Uzbekistan, Turkmenistan and Tajikistan.
Additionally, this section would expand the authority to
include countries that are located in primary narcotics-
trafficking routes in Central America and Central Asia,
including: Panama, Guatemala, Belize, Azerbaijan, Kazakhstan
and Kyrgyzstan. During calendar year 2006, incidents against
Afghan security forces by narcotics traffickers have increased.
Most of these incidents involved small arms, machine guns,
rocket propelled grenades, and improvised explosive devises.
Afghan security forces need to be armed to effectively deal
with narcotics traffickers. The Government of Afghanistan
raised the issue of security forces obtaining additional arms
and ammunition support at the recent United States-Afghanistan
Strategic Partnership meeting held in Washington, DC in March
2006. In the Emergency Supplemental Appropriations Act for
Defense, the Global War on Terror, and Tsunami Relief, 2005
(Public Law 109-13), Congress authorized providing Afghanistan
crew-served weapons. Pursuant to this authority, the U.S.
Government has provided the government of Afghanistan with two
DShKMs heavy machine guns (.50-caliber). This section would
also establish the authority to provide crew-served weapons of
.50-caliber or less to Afghanistan for fiscal years 2007 and
2008. This section would also authorize that during fiscal
years 2007 and 2008, $20.0 million of additional expenditures
under this authority should be authorized each fiscal year, for
a total of $60.0 million each fiscal year.
This section would also require the Secretary of Defense,
in consultation with the Secretary of State, to prepare a
counter-drug plan for the governments to which support will be
provided under this section. This section would require the
Department of Defense to submit the annual plans to the
congressional defense committees and the Senate Committee on
Foreign Affairs and the House Committee on International
Relations by December 31st of each year.
Section 1023--Extension of Authority to Support Unified Counter-Drug
and Counterterrorism Campaign in Colombia
This section would extend the continuation of authorities
provided in section 1021 of the Ronald W. Reagan National
Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2005, (Public Law
108-375) which allow the Department of Defense to support a
unified campaign in Colombia against narcotics trafficking and
terrorist organizations for fiscal years 2007 and 2008. This
section would also extend the limitation on the number of U.S.
military and federally funded civilian contractor personnel in
the Republic of Colombia through fiscal year 2008. Section 1021
limited the number of military personnel in Colombia in fiscal
years 2005 and 2006 to 800 people and the number of federally
funded civilian contractors employed to support Plan Colombia
to 600 people. This section would extend these authorities for
an additional two years to provide support to the consolidation
phase of Plan Colombia, the Government of Colombia's long-term
blueprint to end the country's long-running civil war, reduce
narcotics trafficking, and promote economic and social
development.
Section 1024--Continuation of Reporting Requirement Regarding
Department of Defense Expenditures to Support Foreign Counter-Drug
Activities
This section would extend by one year the requirement for
the Secretary of Defense to submit a report detailing the
expenditure of funds by the Secretary during fiscal year 2006
in direct and indirect support of the counter-drug activities
of foreign governments. This requirement was reinstated for
fiscal year 2005. The committee notes that the Department of
Defense has increased its level of counternarcotics assistance
to foreign law enforcement agencies and militaries in recent
years. The committee believes it should continue to monitor
such expenditures closely.
Section 1025--Report on Interagency Counternarcotics Plan for
Afghanistan and South and Central Asian Regions
This section would require the Secretary of Defense to
submit a report to the congressional defense committees by
February 15, 2007, updating the interagency counternarcotics
implementation plan for Afghanistan and the South and Central
Asian regions. The committee notes that the Secretary of
Defense failed to submit a report on this matter, as directed
by the committee, by December 31, 2005.
Subtitle D--Other Matters
Section 1031--Revision to Authorities Relating to Commission on the
Implementation of the New Strategic Posture of the United States
This section would extend the assessment horizon of the
Commission of the Implementation of the New Strategic Posture
of the United States, as established in section 1051 of the
National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2006 (Public
Law 109-163), from 2008 to 2025. This horizon pertains
particularly to the commission's assessment of the ability of
the current nuclear stockpile to address the evolving strategic
threat environment and the commission's recommendations on
changes to nuclear stockpile and infrastructure required to
preserve a nuclear capability commensurate with that threat
environment.
This section would also change the commission's report date
from June 30, 2007, to 18 months after commencement of
commission activities and the commission's termination date
from July 30, 2007, to 60 days after the report submission.
Section 1032--Enhancement to Authority to Pay Rewards for Assistance in
Combating Terrorism
This section would increase the flexibility and
responsiveness of the counterterrorism reward program by
allowing the combatant commanders to delegate approval
authority for such rewards, which may amount to $50,000 each,
to the commander of a command directly subordinate to that
combatant commander. Such delegation of authority to a
subordinate commander must have the approval of the Secretary
of Defense, the Deputy Secretary of Defense, or an Under
Secretary of Defense designated by the Secretary. This section
would also increase reward authority, which the combatant
commander may further delegate, from $2,500 to $10,000.
Section 1033--Report on Assessment Process of Chairman of the Joint
Chiefs of Staff Relating to Global War on Terrorism
This section would direct the Secretary of Defense to
submit to the Senate Committee on Armed Services and the House
Committee on Armed Services by March 1, 2007, a report on the
findings of the semi-annual global war on terrorism (GWOT)
assessment process described in the Implementation and
Assessment Annex (annex R) of the National Military Strategic
Plan for the War on Terrorism (NMSP-WOT).
The committee is encouraged by the Joint Chiefs of Staff
effort to develop and publish a ``NMSP-WOT.'' The committee
believes that this document effectively presents the approach
the Department of Defense will take in fulfilling its role
within the national strategy for combating terrorism. The
committee notes with interest that the NMSP-WOT sets military
priorities for the GWOT, establishes a set of metrics for
evaluating progress in the global war on terrorism and
implements an assessment process.
Section 1034--Presidential Report on Improving Interagency Support for
United States 21st Century National Security Missions
This section would require the President to submit to
Congress by February 1, 2007, a report that identifies
interagency capabilities needed to achieve U.S. national
security goals and objectives in the 21st century, describing
how best to enhance the integration of those capabilities with
those of the deployed military, and discussing the criteria and
considerations used to evaluate progress in building and
integration such capacity. This section would further
requirethe President to make recommendations for improving interagency
coordination in the form of specific legislative proposals.
Since 2002, the administration has outlined broad U.S.
national security goals and objectives through several strategy
documents, including the March 2006 National Security Strategy,
the November 2005 National Strategy for Victory in Iraq, the
February 2003 National Strategy for Combating Terrorism, and
the July 2002 National Strategy for Homeland Security. The
Department of Defense (DOD) has complemented these documents
with its own defense-specific strategies, such as the 2005
National Defense Strategy and the 2004 National Military
Strategy. Most recently, the 2006 Quadrennial Defense Review
(QDR) laid out DOD's perspective on ways in which to execute
these various security and defense strategies. In particular,
the QDR highlighted the need for improved, robust interagency
capacity to complement the work done by deployed military
forces in achieving U.S. national security goals.
The committee believes it is critical that the President
provide his view on both the civilian and military capabilities
required to address 21st century national security challenges
and the extent to which such federal departments and agencies
must integrate these capabilities for optimal effectiveness.
Moreover, the committee seeks the President's view on the
possible legislative changes that might strengthen U.S.
national security. Toward this end and recognizing the
complexity of the current and emerging national security
challenges, the committee urges the President to incorporate
the inputs of the broadest practicable group of national
security players into this report, including representatives of
domestic departments and agencies that must coordinate in
planning and response to national and homeland security
challenges.
Section 1035--Quarterly Reports on 2006 Quadrennial Defense Review
Report Implementation
This section would require the Secretary of Defense to
submit to the Senate Committee on Armed Services and the House
Committee on Armed Services quarterly reports on the processes
and procedures to examine the various recommendations of the
2006 Quadrennial Defense Review (QDR), implementation plans and
strategies for each area highlighted by the QDR report, and
relevant information about the status of such implementation.
Because the national security environment of the 21st century
is evolving rapidly, these reports would also indicate changes
in the Secretary's assessment of the defense strategies or
capabilities required since the publication of the 2006
Quadrennial Defense Review Report. This section would require
that the Secretary submit the first report by January 31, 2007,
and would terminate the reporting requiring upon publication of
the next QDR report or upon notification by the Secretary to
the armed services committees that implementation is complete,
whichever comes first.
The committee recognizes that the latest QDR Report
describes the complex security challenges facing armed forces
in the 21st century, clearly indicating that the document
reflects a ``snapshot in time'' regarding the Department of
Defense's (DOD) strategy and the capabilities required to
execute that strategy, and notes that the Department is in the
process of transformation. The Department devoted significant
analytical resources to ensure that the QDR process identified
various scenarios and described the types of capabilities,
ranging from weapons platforms to cultural and language skills
to combat support and combat service support elements, that are
required to prevail in these scenarios and shape the
international security environment.
The QDR also reflects the reality that the U.S. Government
must develop, procure, and employ such capabilities through a
long-term strategy. The committee understands that the
Department has developed several working groups to examine
various areas that may impact future authorities and funding
requests by the Department.
For example, the committee notes that in the post-September
11th world, irregular warfare--or conflicts in which enemy
combatants are not regular military forces of nation-states--
has emerged as a primary form of warfare confronting the United
States and that developing irregular warfare capability is
critical to military success in the global war on terrorism.
The QDR report stipulates that while sustaining capabilities to
address conventional combat operations, the Department must
develop and enhance capabilities to carry out long-duration
operations, unconventional warfare, foreign internal defense,
counterterrorism, counterinsurgency and stabilization, and
reconstruction operations. In particular, the QDR report
identifies irregular warfare as an area that will need
continuous reassessment and improvement in the coming years and
requires the development of a ``roadmap'' by a working group to
address such issues.
Because implementing the QDR recommendations in irregular
warfare and other areas will require strong commitment and
emphasis from not only the Secretary of Defense and leaders
from other federal departments and agencies but also from
Congress, it is critical that the Secretary of Defense maintain
robust, timely information flow to the armed services
committees, particularly on the work of these QDR-related
groups.
Section 1036-Increased Hunting and Fishing Opportunities for Members of
the Armed Forces, Retired Members, and Disabled Veterans
This section would require the Secretary of Defense to
ensure that service members, military retirees, disabled
veterans, and persons assisting disabled veterans are able to
utilize Department of Defense (DOD) lands that are available
for hunting and fishing. This section would also require the
Secretary to report to Congress within 180 days of enactment of
this Act on actions necessary to increase the availability of
DOD lands to such persons for hunting and fishing activities.
Finally, this section would require the Secretary of the
Interior to cease plans to exterminate deer and elk on Santa
Rosa Island, California by helicopter and would prohibit the
Secretary from exterminating or nearly exterminating the deer
and elk on the island. Under current plans, all deer and elk
will be eliminated from the island by 2012.
Section 1037--Technical and Clerical Amendments
This section would make a number of technical and clerical
amendments to existing law of a non-substantive nature.
Section 1038--Database of Emergency Response Capabilities
This section would direct the Secretary of Defense to
ensure that the Department of Defense maintains a database of
emergency response capabilities for domestic disasters. The
committee believes that a single entity in the Department
should be responsible for tracking the full range of military
disaster response capabilities that exist domestically. The
committee acknowledges U.S. Northern Command's role in domestic
disaster preparedness and response, and recommends that it be
involved in this effort.
Section 1039--Information on Certain Criminal Investigations and
Prosecutions
This section would expand the annual reporting requirement
in section 1093 of the Ronald W. Reagan National Defense
Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2005 (Public Law 108-375) to
include a detailed and comprehensive description of any
investigation or prosecution, and any resulting judicial or
non-judicial punishment or other disciplinary action, for any
violation of international obligations or laws of the United
States regarding the treatment of individuals detained by the
U.S. armed forces or by a person providing services to the
Department of Defense on a contractual basis, if such
information would not compromise any ongoing criminal or
administrative investigation or prosecution.
This section would also include additional information on
investigations and prosecutions for any officer nominated for
command, or nominated for promotion or appointment to a
position requiring the advice and consent of the Senate, which
should be clearly designated as such. The information in
connection with nominations shall be submitted to the House
Committee on Armed Services and the Senate Committee on Armed
Services on a regular, timely basis in advance of any
nomination.
Section 1040--Date for Final Report of EMP Commission
This section would direct the Electromagnetic Pulse (EMP)
Attack Commission, established by title 14 of the Floyd D.
Spence National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2001
(Public Law 106-398), and reestablished by section 1042 of the
National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2006 (Public
Law 109-163) to move its final report date from June 30, 2007,
to 18 months after commencement of commission activities.
TITLE XI--CIVILIAN PERSONNEL MATTERS
ITEM OF SPECIAL INTEREST
Performance Periods Established in Connection with Public-private
Competitions
The committee notes that civilian in-house workforces and
contractor workforces who win A-76 competitions are treated
differently with respect to recompetitions at the end of their
performance periods. The committee also notes that OMB Circular
A-76 (revised May 29, 2003), while technically allowing an in-
house workforce to receive an extension to the performance
period, in effect, rarely results in an extension. The
committee further notes that in contrast, the regulations in
the Federal Acquisition Regulations regarding contractor
performance periods appear to result in frequent extensions to
contractor performance periods. The committee believes that
this apparent disparity may prejudice civilian in-house
employees.
The committee directs the Secretary of Defense, in
coordination with the Office of Management and Budget, to
examine this apparent inequity and report to the congressional
defense committees by March 1, 2007. The report its findings
shall include an analysis and comparison of recompetitions
conducted since January 1, 2001 through the date of the
enactment of this Act to determine the frequency of in-house
extensions and contractor extensions. Thereport shall also
examine the existing regulations governing recompetitions to identify
areas of possible disparity between in-house and contractor workforces.
The committee further directs the Secretary to provide recommendations
regarding any inequities between the in-house and contractor workforces
disclosed in this examination.
LEGISLATIVE PROVISIONS
Section 1101--Increase in Authorized Number of Defense Intelligence
Senior Executive Service Employees
This section would increase the authorization for the
number of Defense Intelligence Senior Executive Service
employees by 50 in fiscal year 2007.
Section 1102--Authority for Department of Defense to Pay Full
Replacement Value for Personal Property Claims of Civilians
This section would amend section 2636a(a) of title 10,
United States Code, to authorize full replacement value
coverage for household goods of civilian employees of the
Department of Defense damaged or lost during transportation at
government expense. Currently, only members of the armed forces
may receive full replacement coverage. This section would
resolve an area of disparate treatment for civilian employees
compared to military personnel.
Section 1103--Accrual of Annual Leave for Members of the Uniformed
Services Performing Dual Employment
This section would amend section 5534a of title 5, United
States Code, to provide that servicemembers hired by the U.S.
Government for a civilian position while on terminal leave from
the military would accrue annual leave in the manner specified
in section 6303(a) of title 5, United States Code. Currently, a
servicemember on terminal leave hired for a federal civilian
position receives civil service leave and military leave at the
same time. This section would limit leave accrual of such
individuals to that of a military retiree.
Section 1104--Death Gratuity Authorized for Federal Employees
This section would add a new section in chapter 81 of title
10, United States Code, to provide a death gratuity of $0.1
million to civilian employees of the U.S. Government in the
case of a death resulting from wounds, injuries, or illnesses
that are incurred in the performance of duty in a contingency
operation. The gratuity would be payable retroactively for
deaths after October 7, 2001, in the theater of operations of
Operation Enduring Freedom and Operation Iraqi Freedom. During
this period of time eight civilian employees of the Department
of Defense have lost their lives as a direct result of their
assignments to Afghanistan and Iraq. This section would provide
covered civilians with a death gratuity similar to the $.1
million authorized for service members under section 664 of the
National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2006 (Public
Law 109-163).
TITLE XII--MATTERS RELATING TO FOREIGN NATIONS
ITEMS OF SPECIAL INTEREST
Addressing the Threat Posed by the Islamic Republic of Iran
The committee notes that the Islamic Republic of Iran
currently poses a serious threat to the security of the United
States, as well as to the peace and stability of the
international community by continuing dangerous nuclear
activities, including development of uranium enrichment
capabilities; violating the human rights of the Iranian people;
supporting terrorists; calling for the destruction of the State
of Israel; creating instability in Iraq; and undermining the
spread of freedom and democracy in the Middle East.
Given these circumstances, the committee directs the
Secretary of Defense to provide to the Senate Committee on
Armed Services and the House Committee on Armed Services, by
January 31, 2007, a classified report encompassing the present
period through 2016, which describes the Department of
Defense's (DOD) strategy for addressing current and foreseeable
Iranian threats to U.S. security and international security.
The report shall describe the range of U.S. military options,
including possible scenarios in which the use of U.S. military
force may be appropriate and any limits or obstacles to using
such force. The report shall also specifically address Iran's
nuclear activities; support for terrorists; influence in the
Middle East region, particularly Iraq; and any broader
destabilizing ambitions of the Iranian regime.
To supplement this report, the committee directs the
Secretary of Defense to provide regular, timely briefings to
the Senate Committee on Armed Services and the House Committee
on Armed Services which include detailed political-military
assessments of existing and emerging threats posed by Iran to
the security of the United States and the peace and stability
of the international community, and DOD plans to address such
threats. The briefings shall include, as appropriate,
coordination of the Department with the Department of State or
other relevant government agencies; alternative intelligence
analyses from these agencies; the status of negotiations with
Iran regarding its nuclear activities and involvement in Iraq;
and the impact of Iran's nuclear activities, support for
terrorists, and influence in Iraq and the Middle East, on the
security of the United States and the peace and stability of
the international community.
Finally, in the event the U.S. participates in direct talks
with Iran on the subject of Iraq, the committee urges the
appropriate U.S. officials to address in any such talks the
need for Iran to stop the flow of any Iranian-supplied
explosives to Iraq, withdraw any presence of the Iranian
Revolutionary Guard Corps in Iraq, and end Iranian financial
support to insurgent groups in Iraq.
International Military Education and Training Programs
The committee notes that it has received testimony before
the full committee from the commander of the U.S. Southern
Command on March 16, 2006 on the value of the U.S. Government's
International Military Education and Training (IMET) programs
and the unintended consequences of IMET restrictions under the
American Servicemembers' Protection Act of 2002 (ASPA) (title
II of Public Law 107-206). The committee also notes that it had
previously received testimony before the full committee of the
value of IMET programs by the commanders of U.S. Southern and
European Command on March 9, 2005 and by the commander of the
U.S. Central Command on March 2, 2005.
Specifically, the committee perceives that IMET programs
create opportunities for military-to-military engagement
between U.S. armed forces and the militaries of developing
nations. Such interactions are critical to advancing the
understanding of, and respect for, civil-military relations;
enhancing the understanding of U.S. military principles and
values; bridging cultural differences; and developing important
long-term relationships with future military and civilian
leaders. Generally, such engagement has positively affected
U.S. armed forces' global access and influence and has proved
helpful in the global war on terrorism.
The committee notes that ASPA-related restrictions on IMET
programs have reduced U.S. engagements with countries in ways
that create opportunities for third-party governments and
actors, which may not share the democratic principles and
values of the United States, to exert undue influence in
countries subject to IMET restrictions in ways that undermine
the U.S. national security and broader interests.
The committee notes that ASPA provides the President with
the authority to waive IMET restrictions, but the President has
not yet chosen to exercise this authority. The committee urges
the President to use, where appropriate, the waiver authority
granted to him under ASPA to impede undue influence on U.S.
partner nations and improve U.S. strategic relationships.
Additionally, the committee requests that the President provide
the committee with legislative proposals for the strengthening
of key military-to-military relationships without undermining
the importance of article 98 agreements under ASPA.
The committee emphasizes that it supports all aspects of
ASPA that do not involve IMET restrictions, including the
restrictions on foreign military financing. The committee
supports article 98 agreements, which protect U.S. citizens
against prosecution under the International Criminal Court. The
committee does not believe that selectively waiving IMET
restrictions under ASPA will undermine the effectiveness of
ASPA or diplomatic efforts to secure article 98 agreements and
does not intend such result.
Report on Certain Cooperative Activities Involving the United States
and India
The committee emphasizes its support for a robust U.S.-
India strategic partnership and commends India for its recent
efforts to bring its national export controls for dual-use and
other sensitive materials and technologies in line with
international standards.
Given the President's proposed deepening of U.S.-India
nuclear cooperation and its possible effect on safeguards that
prevent theft or other illicit transfer of nuclear materials
and technologies, the committee directs the Secretary of Energy
to submit, by February 1, 2007, a report to the Committees on
Armed Services and Foreign Relations of the Senate and the
Committees on Armed Services and International Relations of the
House of Representatives on the Department's current and
planned cooperative activities to enhance India's export
control system and nuclear safeguards and to prevent such theft
or transfer. The report should also describe how the Department
of Energy coordinates these activities with similar efforts of
the Departments of Defense and State; provide an assessment of
the limits and vulnerabilities in India's current export
control system and other safeguards as they relate to nuclear
materials; and identify possible areas for expanded U.S.-India
export control- or nuclear-related cooperative activities.
The Secretary of Energy should coordinate this report with
the Secretary of Defense and the Secretary of State. To the
maximum extent possible, the report shall be unclassified, with
a classified annex if necessary.
Report on Department of Defense Activities in Support of Multinational
Peacekeeping Operations in Sudan
Noting with concern the ongoing crisis in the Darfur region
of Sudan, the committee directs the Secretary of Defense to
submit to the Senate Committee on Armed Services, the House
Committee on Armed Services, the Senate Committee on Foreign
Relations, and the House Committee on International Relations
by April 1, 2007, a report describing any current or planned
Department of Defense activities, including those activities
involving U.S. military forces, in support of peacekeeping
missions of United Nations or North Atlantic Treaty
Organization forces in Sudan.
LEGISLATIVE PROVISIONS
Subtitle A--Assistance and Training
Section 1201--Logistic Support for Allied Forces Participating in
Combined Operations
This section would allow the Secretary of Defense, with the
concurrence of the Secretary of State, to use up to $100.0
million of funds available to the Department of Defense for
operation and maintenance in any given fiscal year to provide
logistics support, supplies, and services to foreign military
forces. To receive such support, the foreign military forces
must be participating in an operation, such as active
hostilities, a contingency, or a non-combat operation, with
U.S. armed forces. Also, the Secretary of Defense must
determine that the support is essential to the success of the
combined operation and that without such support, the foreign
military forces would be unable to participate in the combined
operation. Finally, the support provided must be allowable
under existing export control laws and regulations.
Section 1202--Temporary Authority To Use Acquisition and Cross-
Servicing Agreements To Lend Certain Military Equipment to Foreign
Forces in Iraq and Afghanistan for Personnel Protection and
Survivability
This section would provide the Secretary of Defense with
the authority to lend certain military equipment, using
acquisition and cross-servicing agreements, to the military
forces of nations participating in combined operations with the
U.S. armed forces in Iraq and Afghanistan. This section would
limit this authority to fiscal years 2007 and 2008, limit such
equipment to those items marked as ``significant military
equipment'' in categories I, II, III, and VII on the U.S.
Munitions List, allow the provision of such equipment for up to
one year and only if the U.S. forces participating in that
combined operation have no unfilled requirements for that
equipment, and require the Secretary of Defense to submit to
the Senate Committee on Armed Services and the House Committee
on Armed Services detailed reports on the exercise of such
authority.
Section 1203--Recodification and Revision to Law Relating to Department
of Defense Humanitarian Demining Assistance
This section would recodify in a section of title 10,
United States Code, the provisions relating to the humanitarian
mine action (HMA) program. This section would amend the
authorities for HMA missions so secretaries of the military
departments may base their decisions on whether the mission
offers training value to participating U.S. military units or
promotes the strategic interests of the United States. The
committee notes that restrictions on actual physical detection,
lifting, or destruction of landmines by U.S. military personnel
do not change and there is no restriction on servicemembers
visiting the physical site of demining activities.
Section 1204--Enhancements to Regional Defense Combating Terrorism
Fellowship Program
This section would amend section 2249c of title 10, United
States Code, to describe the nature of the Counterterrorism
Fellowship Program (CTFP) more clearly by changing the program
title to the Combating Terrorism Fellowship Program and further
explaining the authorities associated with the program, to
allow the Department of Defense to manage the program more
effectively and efficiently, and to increase the total amount
of funds that may be used under this authority in any fiscal
year from $20.0 million to $25.0 million.
The committee notes that the CTFP successfully engages
potential partners in the global war on terrorism by educating
and training foreign military officers, ministry of defense
officials, and security officials with combating terrorism
responsibilities. The committee is aware that before accepting
CTFP candidates into the program the Department requires that
each candidate enters a thorough human rights verification
background vetting process. The committee expects that this
policy will remain unchanged. Additionally, where it is not
already part of the CTFP, the committee encourages the
Department to develop and include curricula that promote human
rights values and respect for democratic principles.
Section 1205--CAPSTONE Overseas Field Studies Trips to People's
Republic of China and Republic of China on Taiwan
This section would require the Secretary of Defense to
conduct field studies trips to the People's Republic of China
and the Republic of China on Taiwan during the overseas section
of the CAPSTONE course for newly-selected flag and general
officers. Overseas CAPSTONE trips provide a unique opportunity
for the next generation of senior military leadership to
familiarize themselves with areas of strategic importance.
Therefore, this section would require that the Secretary
provide one trip per year to China and one trip per year to
Taiwan.
Section 1206--Military Educational Exchanges Between Senior Officers
and Officials of the United States and Taiwan
This section would require the Secretary of Defense to
establish and conduct exchanges of senior defense officials and
officers with the Republic of China on Taiwan at the level of
Deputy Assistant Secretary and flag-rank officers or above. The
committee notes that the United States currently conducts
reciprocal visits with senior defense officials and military
officers from the People's Republic of China. The committee
believes that similar programs with Taiwan are appropriate.
More importantly, the committee believes that maintaining a
balance of power across the Taiwan Strait is critical to
ensuring deterrence and preserving peace, security, and
stability in Asia. China's National People's Congress adopted
an anti-secession law that essentially authorizes China's
Central Military Commission to use non-peaceful means against
Taiwan if the latter declares independence. The committee is
concerned that this law, in conjunction with an excessive
military build-up by China, may signal a weakening of
deterrenceacross the Taiwan Strait. The committee believes that
the exchange program, by helping to strengthen Taiwan's defenses, would
help preserve and strengthen deterrence, thereby encouraging China and
Taiwan to resolve their differences peacefully.
Subtitle B--Nonproliferation Matters and Countries of Concern
Sec 1211--Procurement Restrictions Against Foreign Persons That
Transfer Certain Defense Articles and Services to the People's Republic
of China
This section would prohibit the Secretary of Defense from
purchasing goods or services from any entity that knowingly
transfers an item that is on the United States Munitions List
to the People's Republic of China. The committee notes that
China's military modernization has proceeded apace with roughly
double-digit increases in its defense budget almost every year
for the last decade and a half. The committee is concerned that
China's military modernization now exceeds its legitimate
security needs, is undermining the balance of power that has
maintained peace and security in the Western Pacific for
decades, may be undermining deterrence in the region, and may
be contributing to the increasingly bellicose nature of Chinese
foreign policy. This section would create disincentives for
potential arms exports to China by denying sellers access to
Department of Defense procurement opportunities and would
provide incentives for foreign persons to choose not to export
arms to China in order to maintain their ability to sell goods
and services to the Department of Defense.
Subtitle C--Other Matters
Section 1221--Execution of the President's Policy to Make Available to
Taiwan Diesel Electric Submarines
This section would establish that it is the policy of the
United States to make available to Taiwan plans and options for
design work and construction work on future diesel electric
submarines under the U.S. foreign military sales process. The
availability of such work would be consistent with U.S.
national disclosure policy and subject to U.S. export control
laws.
The section would also require the Secretary of Defense to
submit to the congressional defense committees, not later than
30 days after enactment of this Act, a report on the Department
of the Navy's efforts to execute the President's policy to sell
diesel electric submarines to Taiwan, including ongoing and
planned activities to make Taiwanese officials aware of foreign
military sales options.
TITLE XIII--COOPERATIVE THREAT REDUCTION WITH STATES OF THE FORMER
SOVIET UNION
OVERVIEW
The budget request for Cooperative Threat Reduction
contained $372.1 million for fiscal year 2007, representing a
decrease of $43.4 million from the amount authorized for fiscal
year 2006, exclusive of any supplemental funds authorized for
fiscal year 2006. This request included increases for strategic
offensive arms elimination, nuclear weapons storage security,
and nuclear weapons transportation security in Russia, as well
as biological threat reduction efforts in states of the former
Soviet Union. The request also included a decrease for weapons
of mass destruction proliferation prevention in the states of
the former Soviet Union and a $65.8 million decrease for
chemical weapons destruction in Russia, reflecting the upcoming
completion of the construction of a chemical weapons
destruction facility.
LEGISLATIVE PROVISIONS
Section 1301--Specification of Cooperative Threat Reduction Programs
and Funds
This section would define the programs and funds that are
Cooperative Threat Reduction programs and funds as those
authorized to be appropriated in section 301 of this Act and
specify that Cooperative Threat Reduction funds shall remain
available for obligation for three fiscal years.
Section 1302--Funding Allocations
This section would authorize $372.1 million for the
Cooperative Threat Reduction program. This section would
authorize specific amounts for each Cooperative Threat
Reduction program element and would require notification to
Congress 30 days before the Secretary of Defense obligates and
expends fiscal year 2007 funds for purposes other than those
specifically authorized. This section would also provide
limited authority to obligate amounts for a Cooperative Threat
Reduction program element in excess of the amount specifically
authorized for that purpose.
Section 1303--Temporary Authority to Waive Limitation on Funding for
Chemical Weapons Destruction Facility in Russia
This section would extend, until the completion of the
facility, the President's authority to waive restrictions
established in section 1305 of the National Defense
Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2000 (Public Law 106-65) for
continuing the construction of a chemical weapons destruction
facility at Shchuch'ye, Russia. The President's current
authority expires at the end of calendar year 2006. This
section would also require the Secretary of Defense to submit
to Congress a notification that specifies the date of
completion of the facility, not later than 30 days after
completion.
Section 1304--National Academy of Sciences Study
This section would authorize a study by the National
Academy of Sciences to analyze lessons learned, past and
present challenges, and possible options in effectively
managing and facilitating threat reduction and nonproliferation
projects under the Department of Defense Cooperative Threat
Reduction Program.
This section would also require the Secretary of Defense to
submit, by December 31, 2007, a report on this study to the
Senate Committee on Armed Services and the House Committee on
Armed Services. The report would review and evaluate project
management, interagency interaction, public outreach and
community involvement, cooperation of Russia and other states
of the former Soviet Union, legal frameworks, transparency,
adequacy of funding from the United States and any Cooperative
Threat Reduction program partner, and interaction with threat
reduction and nonproliferation projects of Global Partnership
countries.
TITLE XIV--HOMELAND DEFENSE TECHNOLOGY TRANSFER
LEGISLATIVE PROVISIONS
Sections 1401-1403--Homeland Defense Technology Transfer
These sections would authorize the Secretary of Defense to
create a Homeland Defense Technology Transfer Consortium to
improve the effectiveness of the Department of Defense (DOD)
processes for identifying and deploying relevant DOD technology
to federal, State, and local first responders. The consortium
would assist the Secretary in fulfilling the Department's
technology transfer responsibilities required by section 1401
of the Bob Stump National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal
Year 2003 (Public Law 107-314).
TITLE XV--AUTHORIZATION FOR INCREASED COSTS DUE TO OPERATION IRAQI
FREEDOM AND OPERATION ENDURING FREEDOM
OVERVIEW
The committee recommends authorization of $50.0 billion in
funds to be appropriated available upon enactment of this Act
to support the defense activities principally associated with
Operation Iraqi Freedom and the Operation Enduring Freedom.
SUMMARY TABLE OF AUTHORIZATIONS
The following table summarizes authorizations included in
the bill for ongoing operations in Iraq and Afghanistan.
ITEMS OF SPECIAL INTEREST
Budget Realignment
The committee recommends a realignment of $1.5 billion from
the budget request for programs and projects relating to the
global war on terrorism. As a result, this would ensure that
funding relating to the global war on terrorism is accurately
consolidated as well as facilitate proper execution of the
funds during fiscal year 2007.
Procurement
For procurement, the committee recommends including
continued support of the force protection needs of units
deployed and engaged in the global war on terrorism. Included
in the force protection recommendation is funding for up-
armored high mobility multipurpose wheeled vehicles, tactical
wheeled vehicle recapitalization and modernization programs for
the most heavily used vehicles in Operation Iraqi Freedom and
Operation Enduring Freedom, night vision devices and improvised
explosive device jammers. In addition, the committee recognizes
the need to replenish critical small-arms and ammunition
procurement programs, including funding for the M16 rifle, M240
medium machine gun, and M4 carbine modifications, and .50
caliber cartridges, 120mm tank ammunition canister, and 155mm
high explosive projectiles.
Improvised electronic devices countermeasures
The budget request contained no funds for procurement of
electronic jamming devices for defeating the radio-initiated
improvised explosive devices (IEDs) used against U.S. and
Coalition forces in Operation Iraqi Freedom (OIF) and Operation
Enduring Freedom (OEF).
The committee continues to strongly support force
protection efforts to defeat radio-initiated IEDs. The
committee notes these devices continue to be the primary cause
of casualties among U.S. armed forces in OIF and OEF. The
committee believes there are weaknesses in the capability
provided by current electronic IED jamming devices.
The committee is aware of recent tests of a new, man-
portable jammer that is based on proven technology and exhibits
high success against the evolving radio-controlled IED threat.
The committee is also aware of recent tests of a third
generation vehicle-mounted jammer that also exhibits high
success against this same threat. The committee strongly
believes that the Department of Defense should procure
electronic countermeasures that are based on a proven
technology and that can rapidly enter into production.
The committee notes that Section 811 of the National
Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2005 (Public Law 108-
375) established a rapid acquisition authority for the
Secretary of Defense to use in combat emergencies and further
notes this authority was used to acquire IED jammers for
dismounted military personnel in OIF. The committee also
assisted with expediting the production of these man-portable
jammers for deployment to OIF.
Therefore, the committee recommends an additional $69.0
million in Title XV to procure and deploy 10,000 of the
successfully tested man-portable jammers referenced in this
report. In addition, the committee also recommends an
additional $40.7 million in Title XV to procure and deploy 460
of the successfully tested vehicle-born jamming devices also
referenced in this report. Further, the committee encourages
the Secretary to continue to use the rapid acquisition
authority to expedite procurement and deployment of these
critical IED countermeasures.
Joint surveillance target attack radar system utilization
The committee is deeply concerned that U.S. Central Command
(USCENTCOM) is underutilizing the capabilities of the joint
surveillance target attack radar system (JSTARS) by assigning
it a number one mission priority of serving as a communications
relay platform for military road convoys.
The committee understands that the Air Force defines the
mission of the JSTARS as a joint platform designed to enhance
battle management by providing air and land component
commanders with near real-time, wide-area surveillance and
targeting information on moving and stationary ground targets,
slow moving rotary and fixed wing aircraft, rotating antennas,
and theater missile defense targets of interest. The committee
ascertained during recent congressional delegation oversight
visits to Iraq that the JSTARS platform is not optimally
employed as a communications relay platform. Consequently, the
committee believes this adversely impacts the ability of the
combined forces air component commander to wholly support Army
and Marine Corps ground component commanders' requests for
ground moving target indicator (GMTI) capability using the
JSTARS platform. The committee understands the vital importance
of having effective communications between military road
convoys with limited radio line-of-sight capability, and
command and control facilities. However, the committee strongly
believes that other aircraft platforms are properly equipped to
perform this communication relay mission, and that routinely
assigning a high demand/low density platform for a task well
outside of its principally designed purpose does not optimize
the utilization of JSTARS.
Further, the committee recognizes that the JSTARS platform
can make significant contributions to the mission effectiveness
of ground component commanders. However, the committee is
troubled that no formal process exists to analyze or assess
JSTARS post-mission intelligence data. Conversely, the
committee notes that post-mission intelligence data gathered by
similar, high-value reconnaissance platforms such as the U-2,
RC-135 and EP-3 is analyzed through a formal process,
contributing significantly to mission effectiveness and combat
capability.
Lastly, the committee is aware that a JSTARS mission-crew
shortfall exists at the unit level and significantly limits the
JSTARS ability to perform at surge-rate operational tempos for
extended periods of time. The committee is troubled by the
inability of the Air National Guard and the active Air Force to
fill 24 authorized combat coded crews for this high demand/low
density asset causing a significant capability gap in providing
additional GMTI capability to the combatant commander. The
committee recognizes that without fully manning 24 combat coded
mission crews, JSTARS is unable to provide the necessary
increase of JSTARS capability to USCENTCOM.
Therefore, the committee strongly urges the Commander,
USCENTCOM, to reassess the prioritization of missions assigned
to the JSTARS platform, and directs the Secretary of the Air
Force to implement formal procedures to analyze JSTARS post-
mission intelligence data to more effectively support the
warfighter at all levels. Additionally, the committee
authorizes the Air National Guard an increase of 85 active
guard and reserve (AGR) positions in title IV of this Act, and
authorizes $6.7 million for military personnel and $0.4 million
for operation and maintenance in title XV of this Act to
support the AGR personnel increase. Finally, the committee
strongly encourages the Secretary of the Air Force to program
the required funding in the Air Force Future Years Defense
Program to convert the remaining 107 part-time positions to
active guard and reserve positions.
Manned tactical persistent surveillance aircraft
The budget request contained no funds for procurement of
inexpensive manned, aerial, persistent surveillance platforms
for use in Operation Iraqi Freedom (OIF) and Operation Enduring
Freedom (OEF).
The committee recognizes there is a critical tactical
mission requirement in OIF and OEF for additional manned,
aerial, persistent surveillance platforms to combat asymmetric
threats such as improvised explosives devices (IED). The
committee understands IEDs continue to be the primary cause of
casualties for U.S. armed forces in OIF and OEF. The committee
is aware that current surveillance platforms deployed in OIF
and OEF are used almost exclusively for intelligence gathering
missions rather than direct support of tactical operations such
as interdiction of IED emplacement and convoy security.
The committee strongly encourages that manned, aerial,
persistent surveillance platforms be rapidly procured for use
by ground commanders in OIF and OEF. The committee believes
that if these platforms are employed in tactical operations,
such as conducting persistent road surveillance missions, then
these platforms could prevent the emplacement of IEDs and
counter other threats faced by U.S. armed forces on the roads
in Iraq. The committee expects these platforms to be configured
and staffed so that they can be rapidly deployed and easily
maintained without placing additional, unnecessary logistic
burdens on U.S. armed forces. The committee also expects these
platforms to be equipped for day and night surveillance and for
simple, direct communication with ground- and air-based quick
reaction forces.
The committee expects the United States Central Command
(CENTCOM) to take responsibility for assigning these additional
tactical surveillance assets to U.S. military units based on
regional threat levels within CENTCOM's area of responsibility.
Since these platforms would be considered tactical assets, the
committee expects that they would be controlled at the brigade
and lower levels.
The committee recommends $100.0 million in Title XV for the
rapid procurement of no less than ten manned, aerial,
persistent surveillance platforms for tactical operations in
OIF and OEF.
Operation and Maintenance
The military departments and defense agencies need
operation and maintenance funds to pay for food, fuel, spare
parts, maintenance, transportation, camp, post, and base
expenses associated with Operation Iraqi Freedom (OIF) and
Operation Enduring Freedom (OEF). Without additional funding at
the start of fiscal year 2007, the military departments will be
forced to use third quarter and fourth quarter funds in the
initial months of fiscal year 2007 to pay for OIF and OEF
costs. The committee recommends including costs associated with
stateside installations for increased mobilizations and
demobilizations due to OIF and OEF.
Military Personnel
Over the past four years, the committee has recommended
increases in the active component manpower to sustain the full
range of capabilities required of the mission assigned to the
armed forces. The committee recommends funding a cumulative
active component increase of 30,400 for the Army and 5,000 for
the Marine Corps over and above the budget request. The
committee also recommends including the costs associated with
Operation Noble Eagle, as well as recruitment and retention
initiatives.
Research, Development, Test, and Evaluation
U-2 aircraft sensor development
The budget request contained no funding in PE 35202F for
the U-2 aircraft sensor development.
The committee is surprised by the Department of Defense's
(DOD) decision to accelerate the retirement of the U-2
aircraft. The committee notes that the 2006 Quadrennial Defense
Review (QDR) highlights the DOD's needs for expanded
intelligence, surveillance and reconnaissance (ISR)
capabilities, some of which are currently provided by the U-2
aircraft and its sensor suite. The committee is concerned with
the retirement of an ISR asset such as the U-2 before
replacement ISR assets are brought on-line. The committee
understands that the U.S. Strategic Command and the Department
of the Air Force are currently reviewing ISR needs and whether
continued U-2 service is required to meet the needs of the
combatant commanders.
The committee disagrees with the decision to retire the U-2
aircraft and includes a section in title I of this Act
preventing retirement of the U-2 in fiscal year 2007 and
allowing retirement in future years only upon certification to
Congress that the U-2 ISR capability is no longer required as
an intelligence asset to mitigate any ISR gaps identified in
the 2006 QDR.
The committee recommends an additional $7.0 million in PE
35202F for U-2 aircraft sensor development.
LEGISLATIVE PROVISIONS
Section 1501--Purpose
This section would establish this title and make emergency
authorization of appropriations available upon enactment of
this Act for the Department of Defense, in addition to amounts
otherwise authorized in this Act, to provide for additional
costs due to Operation Iraqi Freedom and Operation Enduring
Freedom.
Subtitle A--Authorization of Appropriations
Section 1502--Army Procurement
This section would authorize an additional $3,773.8 million
for Army procurement.
Section 1503--Navy and Marine Corps Procurement
This section would authorize an additional $955.4 million
for Navy and Marine Corps procurement.
Section 1504--Air Force Procurement
This section would authorize an additional $296.9 million
for Air Force procurement.
Section 1505--Defense--Wide Activities Procurement
This section would authorize an additional $140.2 million
for Defense-Wide Activities procurement.
Section 1506--Research, Development, Test and Evaluation
This section would authorize an additional $37.5 million
for Defense-Wide Activities research, development, test and
evaluation.
Section 1507--Operation and Maintenance
This section would authorize an additional $31,983.3
million for operations and maintenance programs.
Section 1508--Defense Health Program
This section would authorize an additional $950.2 million
to the Defense Health Program for operations and maintenance.
Section 1509--Classified Programs
This section would authorize an additional $2,500.0 billion
to the Department of Defense for classified programs.
Section 1510--Military Personnel
This section would authorize an additional $9,362.8 million
for military personnel.
Section 1511--Treatment as Additional Authorizations
This section would authorize an additional $50.0 billion
for emergency contingency operations related to Operation Iraqi
Freedom and Operation Enduring Freedom.
Section 1512--Transfer Authority
This section would provide transfer authority of $3.0
billion to the Department of Defense for the authorizations
contained in this title.
Section 1513--Availability of Funds
This section would require the funds provided in this title
to be made available for obligation by the end of the first
quarter of fiscal year 2007.
DIVISION B--MILITARY CONSTRUCTION AUTHORIZATIONS
PURPOSE
Division B provides military construction, family housing,
and related authorities in support of the military departments
during fiscal year 2007. As recommended by the committee,
Division B would authorize appropriations in the amount of
$16,689,423,000 for construction in support of the active
forces, reserve components, defense agencies, and the North
Atlantic Treaty Organization security infrastructure fund for
fiscal year 2007.
MILITARY CONSTRUCTION AND FAMILY HOUSING OVERVIEW
The Department of Defense (DOD) requested $6,796,940,000
for military construction, $5,817,443,000 for base realignment
and closure (BRAC) activities, and $4,084,040,000 for family
housing for fiscal year 2007. The committee recommends
authorization of $7,085,898,000 for military construction,
$5,817,443,000 for BRAC activities, and $4,055,553,000 for
family housing in fiscal year 2007. In addition, the committee
anticipates rescissions of $260,471,000. Taking these
rescissions into account, the committee's recommendations are
consistent with a total budget authority level of
$16,689,423,000 for military construction, BRAC, and family
housing in fiscal year 2007.
The Department's fiscal year 2007 request for military
construction, family housing, and BRAC activities was, once
again, a disappointing one. While the total request appears to
be a significant increase over the fiscal year 2006 level, in
reality, nearly the entire increase is the result of budget
increases required for BRAC and chemical weapons
demilitarization. After removing BRAC funds from the request,
the non-BRAC request is approximately the same as the amount
contained in the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal
Year 2006 (Public Law 109-163).
The committee continues to believe that DOD budget requests
for military construction and family housing are inadequate to
support military readiness and quality of life requirements.
For this reason, the committee has once again reallocated funds
within the requested funding levels to provide for additional
military construction projects that are necessary for military
training, operations, or to improve living or working
conditions for military personnel.
A tabular summary of the authorizations provided in
Division B for fiscal year 2007 follows:
Section 2001-Short Title
This section would cite division B of this Act as the
``Joel Hefley Military Construction Authorization Act for
Fiscal Year 2007.
TITLE XXI--ARMY
SUMMARY
The budget request contained $2,059,762,000 for Army
military construction and $1,271,820,000 for family housing for
fiscal year 2007. The committee recommends authorization of
$2,135,598,000 for military construction and $1,253,448,000 for
family housing for fiscal year 2007.
ITEMS OF SPECIAL INTEREST
Explanation of Funding Adjustments
The committee has recommended reduction or elimination of
funding for several projects contained within the budget
request for Army military construction and family housing.
These reductions include:
(1) $1,644,000 from the funding amount requested for
a barracks complex at Fort Richardson, Alaska. This
project, as requested, includes funds for demolition of
facilities at installations other than Fort Richardson.
While the committee appreciates the Department of
Defense's efforts to offset construction with
demolition during recapitalization, the committee
believes that demolition should not be included within
a military construction project request unless it is
necessary to support construction of that project.
(2) $31,000,000 for the purchase of temporary
administrative buildings at Fort Belvoir, Virginia. The
Department of the Army leased these facilities in
January 2003 for up to five years in order to house
Army Materiel Command (AMC). However, AMC will soon be
moved to Redstone Arsenal, Alabama as a result of 2005
Base Realignment and Closure (BRAC) decisions. While
the Department has asserted that Fort Belvoir currently
has a deficit of administrative space, the committee is
not convinced that expending $31,000,000 to purchase
temporary facilities which have only 20 years remaining
in their anticipated lifespan is an effective use of
funds. If the Department has a validated requirement
for additional administrative space that is not related
to BRAC 2005 moves, the committee urges the Secretary
of the Army to request in future budgets funding for
construction of permanent facilities.
(3) $27,000,000 for construction of a museum support
center at Fort Belvoir, Virginia. The committee notes
that the National Museum of the Marine Corps (NMMC) is
scheduled to open in Quantico, Virginia in the fall of
2006. According to the Navy's Future Years Defense
Program, the NMMC will also require museum support
facilities. Given the close proximity of Fort Belvoir
to Quantico, the committee believes that a joint
facility to support both the NMMC and the National
Museum of the United States Army could yield
significant efficiencies over separate facilities,
while enhancing efforts to preserve, conserve, and
restore historic artifacts. As such, the committee
urges the Secretary of the Navy and the Secretary of
the Army to consider joint construction of a single
museum support facility in a future year.
Future Year Programming
The committee is concerned that changes to military
construction budget projections resulted in the removal of
several important projects from the Army's Future Years Defense
Program (FYDP), including a special operations free fall
simulator at Yuma Proving Grounds, Arizona and a community
dining facility at Dugway Proving Ground, Utah. The committee
believes that these projects are critical to enhancing
training, reducing costs, and improving quality of life. As
such, the committee directs the Secretary of the Army to
include the free fall simulator and the community dining
facility in the next FYDP.
Planning and Design
The committee recommends that, within authorized amounts
for planning and design, the Secretary of the Army complete
planning and design activities for the following projects:
(1) $365,000--Special Operations Free Fall Simulator,
Yuma Proving Grounds, Arizona
(2) $243,000--Community Dining Facility, Dugway
Proving Grounds, Utah
(3) $1,260,000--Sensitive Compartmented Information
Facility, National Ground Intelligence Center, Virginia
Safety-Critical Projects
The committee encourages the Secretary of the Army to
ensure that construction projects that are necessary to
eliminate safety hazards to personnel receive priority funding
in the Future Years Defense Program (FYDP). As such, the
committee urges the Secretary of the Army to accelerate
projects, such as the programmed effort to address safety
hazards at the Advanced Training Support Center at Fort Eustis,
Virginia, within the next FYDP.
Unspecified Minor Construction
The committee recommends that, within authorized amounts
for unspecified minor construction, the Secretary of the Army
complete planning and design activities for the following
project:
(1) $930,000--Combat Pistol Qualification Course,
Fort Benning, Georgia
LEGISLATIVE PROVISIONS
Section 2101--Authorized Army Construction and Land Acquisition
Projects
This section contains the list of authorized Army
construction projects for fiscal year 2007. The authorized
amounts are listed on an installation-by-installation basis.
The state list contained in this report is intended to be the
binding list of the specific projects authorized at each
location.
Section 2102--Family Housing
This section would authorize new construction and planning
and design of family housing units for the Army for fiscal year
2007.
Section 2103--Improvements to Military Family Housing Units
This section would authorize improvements to existing units
of family housing for fiscal year 2007.
Section 2104--Authorization of Appropriations, Army
This section would authorize specific appropriations for
each line item contained in the Army's budget for fiscal year
2007. This section would also provide an overall limit on the
amount the Army may spend on military construction projects.
TITLE XXII--NAVY
SUMMARY
The budget request contained $1,162,038,000 for Navy
military construction and $814,197,000 for family housing for
fiscal year 2007. The committee recommends authorization of
$1,219,871,000 for military construction and $818,082,000 for
family housing for fiscal year 2007.
ITEMS OF SPECIAL INTEREST
Explanation of Funding Adjustments
The committee is troubled by the January 10, 2006, guidance
from the Office of Management and Budget to cease use of
incremental funding of military construction projects except
for the purposes of base realignment and closure activities and
projects that have ``major national security impacts.''
Due to the implementation of this guidance during the
fiscal year 2007 budget process, Department of Defense
components were forced to cut a number of important projects
from the fiscal year 2007 program. As a result, several
construction projects that are critical to military readiness,
important to the effective conduct of military operations, or
necessary to enhance quality of life have been indefinitely
deferred. In at least one such case, incremental execution
would likely be the more efficient means of funding and
constructing the project.
The committee notes that the Department has a record of
effective management while utilizing incremental funding for
military construction projects. As such, the committee
recommends ``re-incrementing'' two projects contained in the
budget request, including recapitalization of hangar 5 at Naval
Air Station Whidbey Island, Washington. While this would result
in a funding reduction in fiscal year 2007 of $31,153,000, the
committee recommends full authorization for the project of
$57,653,000 and expects the Secretary of the Navy to execute
the project under proven incremental funding practices.
Planning and Design
The committee recommends that, within authorized amounts
for planning and design, the Secretary of the Navy complete
planning and design activities for the following project:
(1) $945,000--Full Scale Electric Drive Test
Facility, Naval Surface Warfare Center Shipyard Systems
Engineering Station, Pennsylvania
LEGISLATIVE PROVISIONS
Section 2201--Authorized Navy Construction and Land Acquisition
Projects
This section contains the list of authorized Navy
construction projects for fiscal year 2007. The authorized
amounts are listed on an installation-by-installation basis.
The state list contained in this report is intended to be the
binding list of the specific projects authorized at each
location.
Section 2202--Family Housing
This section would authorize new construction and planning
and design of family housing units for the Navy for fiscal year
2007.
Section 2203--Improvements to Military Family Housing Units
This section would authorize improvements to existing units
of family housing for fiscal year 2007. Within amounts
authorized by this section, the committee recommends an
increase of $3,700,000 for a project to install air
conditioning at housing units at Vista Del Sol, 29 Palms,
California.
Section 2204--Authorization of Appropriations, Navy
This section would authorize specific appropriations for
each line item contained in the Navy's budget for fiscal year
2007. This section would also provide an overall limit on the
amount the Navy may spend on military construction projects.
Section 2205--Modification of Authority to Carry Out Certain Fiscal
Year 2004 and 2005 Projects
This section would amend section 2201(a) of the Military
Construction Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2004 (division B
of Public Law 108-136), as amended, and the Military
Construction Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2005 (division B
of Public Law 108-375), as amended, to consolidate authority
for construction of an outlying landing field.
TITLE XXIII--AIR FORCE
SUMMARY
The budget request contained $1,156,148,000 for Air Force
military construction and $1,938,209,000 for family housing for
fiscal year 2007. The committee recommends authorization of
$1,233,673,000 for military construction and $1,924,209,000 for
family housing for fiscal year 2007.
ITEM OF SPECIAL INTEREST
Planning and Design
The committee recommends that, within authorized amounts
for planning and design, the Secretary of the Air Force
complete planning and design activities for the following
projects:
(1) $2,070,000--Information Technology Complex, Phase
1, Wright Patterson AFB, Ohio
(2) $1,026,000--Pararescue Jumper/Combat Rescue
Officer Rescue and Recovery Training Center, Kirtland
AFB, New Mexico
(3) $1,935,000--Software Support Facility, Robins
AFB, Georgia
(4) $1,530,000--Logistics Readiness Center, Mountain
Home AFB, Idaho
(5) $1,071,000--Fire Station, Grand Forks AFB, North
Dakota
LEGISLATIVE PROVISIONS
Section 2301--Authorized Air Force Construction and Land Acquisition
Projects
This section contains the list of authorized Air Force
construction projects for fiscal year 2007. The authorized
amounts are listed on an installation-by-installation basis.
The state list contained in this report is intended to be the
binding list of the specific projects authorized at each
location.
Section 2302--Family Housing
This section would authorize new construction and planning
and design of family housing units for the Air Force for fiscal
year 2007.
Section 2303--Improvements to Military Family Housing Units
This section would authorize improvements to existing units
of family housing for fiscal year 2007.
Section 2304--Authorization of Appropriations, Air Force
This section would authorize specific appropriations for
each line item contained in the Air Force's budget for fiscal
year 2007. This section would also provide an overall limit on
the amount the Air Force may spend on military construction
projects.
TITLE XXIV--DEFENSE AGENCIES
SUMMARY
The budget request contained $1,339,191,000 for defense
agency military construction (including chemical weapon
demilitarization construction) and $59,814,000 for family
housing for fiscal year 2007. In addition, the budget request
contained $191,220,000 for activities related to prior base
realignment and closure (BRAC) activities and $5,626,223,000
for activities related to the 2005 round of BRAC.
The committee recommends authorization of $1,283,099,000
for military construction and $59,814,000 for family housing
for defense agencies for fiscal year 2007. In addition, the
committee recommends authorization of $191,220,000 for prior
BRAC round activities and $5,626,223,000 for BRAC 2005
activities.
ITEMS OF SPECIAL INTEREST
Explanation of Funding Adjustments
As noted in title XXII, the committee is troubled by the
January 10, 2006, guidance from the Office of Management and
Budget to cease use of incremental funding of military
construction projects except for the purposes of base
realignment and closure activities and projects that have
``major national security impacts.''
In light of the Department of Defense's proven record of
effective management while utilizing incremental funding for
military construction projects, the committee recommends ``re-
incrementing'' the project to replace a clinic at MacDill Air
Force Base, Florida. While this results in a funding reduction
in fiscal year 2007 of $41,400,000, the committee recommends
full authorization for the project of $92,000,000 and expects
the Secretary of Defense to execute the project under proven
incremental funding practices.
The committee also recommends a reduction of $20,000,000
for increment 2 of the Regional Security Operations Center at
Fort Gordon, Georgia. While the committee supports the
requirement for this facility and recommends full authorization
for the project, the National Security Agency does not
anticipate obligating the nearly $50,000,000 appropriated for
fiscal year 2006 until fall of 2006, at the earliest. Due to
the large amount of unexpended funds available for this
project, the committee believes it unlikely that all funds
requested for fiscal year 2007 would be expended.
Fuel Storage at Naval Base Point Loma, California
As noted in title III, the committee is concerned about the
fuel tank leakage at the Defense Energy Support Center (DESC)
Fuel Storage Point (DFSP) at Naval Base Point Loma, California.
Although DESC has a military construction project in the fiscal
year 2008 Future Years Defense Program (FYDP) to replace
existing bulk storage infrastructure with modern tanks and
support equipment, the committee notes that the Department of
Defense has a history of annually deferring projects within the
FYDP due to budgetary pressures. The committee believes the
construction project to address the fuel leakage at Naval Base
Point Loma to be of utmost importance and urges the Secretary
of Defense to ensure that the project remains programmed for
fiscal year 2008.
Missile Defense Agency Construction Activities
The reduction of $7,592,000 for a Missile Defense Agency
project at Kwajalein Atoll is without prejudice, and the
committee expects the agency to execute this project through
use of the authority provided in section 233 of the National
Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2006 (Public Law 109-
163).
LEGISLATIVE PROVISIONS
Section 2401--Authorized Defense Agencies Construction and Land
Acquisition Projects
This section contains the list of authorized defense
agencies construction projects for fiscal year 2007. The
authorized amounts are listed on an installation-by-
installation basis. The state list contained in this report is
intended to be the binding list of the specific projects
authorized at each location.
Section 2402--Family Housing
This section would authorize construction and planning and
design of family housing units for defense agency activities
for fiscal year 2007.
Section 2403--Energy Conservation Projects
This section would authorize the Secretary of Defense to
carry out energy conservation projects.
Section 2404--Authorized Base Closure and Realignment Activities Funded
Through Department of Defense Base Closure Account 2005
This section would authorize the amount for base
realignment and closure (BRAC) activities and projects for
fiscal year 2007. This section would also amend the Military
Construction Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2006 (division B
of Public Law 109-163) to authorize the amount for BRAC
activities and projects for fiscal year 2006.
Section 2405--Authorization of Appropriations, Defense Agencies
This section would authorize specific amounts for each line
item contained in the defense agencies' budgets for fiscal year
2007. This section would also provide an overall limit on the
amount the defense agencies may spend on military construction
projects.
Section 2406--Modification of Authority to Carry Out Certain Fiscal
Year 2006 Projects
This section would amend the Military Construction
Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2006 (division B of Public
Law 109-163) to increase the authorization level for regional
security operations centers in Augusta, Georgia and Kunia,
Hawaii and for an operations and technology building in Menwith
Hill, United Kingdom.
TITLE XXV--NORTH ATLANTIC TREATY ORGANIZATION SECURITY INVESTMENT
PROGRAM
SUMMARY
The budget request contained $220,985,000 for the North
Atlantic Treaty Organization Security Investment Program (NSIP)
for fiscal year 2007. The committee recommends authorization of
$200,985,000 for NSIP for fiscal year 2007. This reduction
reflects correction of a programming error contained in the
budget request.
LEGISLATIVE PROVISIONS
Section 2501--Authorized NATO Construction and Land Acquisition
Projects
This section would authorize the Secretary of Defense to
make contributions to the North Atlantic Treaty Organization
Security Investment Program in an amount equal to the sum of
the amount specifically authorized in section 2502 of this Act
and the amount of recoupment due to the United States for
construction previously financed by the United States.
Section 2502--Authorization of Appropriations, NATO
This section would authorize $200,985,000 as the U.S.
contribution to the North Atlantic Treaty Organization Security
Investment Program.
TITLE XXVI--GUARD AND RESERVE FORCES FACILITIES
SUMMARY
The budget request contained $858,816,000 for military
construction of guard and reserve facilities for fiscal year
2007. The committee recommends authorization for fiscal year
2007 of $1,019,672,000 to be distributed as follows:
Army National Guard..................................... $518,403,000
Air National Guard...................................... $212,788,000
Army Reserve............................................ $169,487,000
Naval and Marine Corps Reserve.......................... $55,158,000
Air Force Reserve....................................... $56,836,000
ITEMS OF SPECIAL INTEREST
Planning and Design, Air National Guard
The committee recommends that, within authorized amounts
for planning and design, the Secretary of the Air Force
complete planning and design activities for the following
projects:
(1) $502,000--Replace Pararescue Complex, Gabreski
Air National Guard Base, New York
(2) $1,000,000--Wing Operations and Training Complex,
McEntire Joint Reserve Base, South Carolina
(3) $1,000,000--Squadron Operations Facility/Relocate
Main Gate, McGhee-Tyson Air National Guard Base,
Tennessee
(4) $801,000--Information Warfare Aggressor Squadron
Facility, McCord Air Force Base, Washington
Planning and Design, Army National Guard
The committee recommends that, within authorized amounts
for planning and design, the Secretary of the Army complete
planning and design activities for the following projects:
(1) $1,031,000--Combined Support Maintenance Shop,
Camp Smith, New York
(2) $749,000--Add/Alt Readiness Center, Salem, Oregon
Planning and Design, Air Reserve
The committee recommends that, within authorized amounts
for planning and design, the Secretary of the Air Force
complete planning and design activities for the following
projects:
(1) $1,008,000--Joint Deployment Processing Facility,
March Air Reserve Base, California
(2) $1,134,000--C-17 and C-5 Squadron Operations and
Training Facility, Travis AFB, California
Planning and Design, Army Reserve
The committee recommends that, within authorized amounts
for planning and design, the Secretary of the Army complete
planning and design activities for the following project:
(1) $252,000--Combat Support Training Center Range
Control Facility, Camp Parks, California
(2) $2,414,000--Syracuse Armed Forces Reserve Center/
OMS/AMSA/Unheated Storage, Mattydale, New York
LEGISLATIVE PROVISION
Section 2601--Authorized Guard and Reserve Construction and Land
Acquisition Projects
This section would authorize appropriations for military
construction for the guard and reserve by service component for
fiscal year 2007. The state list contained in this report is
intended to be the binding list of the specific projects
authorized at each location.
TITLE XXVII--EXPIRATION AND EXTENSION OF AUTHORIZATIONS
LEGISLATIVE PROVISIONS
Section 2701--Expiration of Authorizations and Amounts Required to be
Specified by Law
This section would provide that authorizations for military
construction projects, repair of real property, land
acquisition, family housing projects and facilities,
contributions to the North Atlantic Treaty Organization
infrastructure program, and guard and reserve projects will
expire on October 1, 2009, or the date of enactment of an act
authorizing funds for military construction for fiscal year
2010, whichever is later. This expiration would not apply to
authorizations for which appropriated funds have been obligated
before October 1, 2009, or the date of enactment of an act
authorizing funds for military construction for fiscal year
2010, whichever is later.
Section 2702--Effective Date
This section would provide that titles XXI, XXII, XXIII,
XXIV, XXV, and XXVI of this Act shall take effect on October 1,
2006, or upon enactment of this Act, whichever is later.
TITLE XXVIII--MILITARY CONSTRUCTION GENERAL PROVISIONS
ITEMS OF SPECIAL INTEREST
Energy Savings and Renewable Energy Opportunities at Joint Bases
The committee directs the Secretary of Defense to submit to
the House Committee on Armed Services by March 1, 2007, a
report on the potential use of energy conservation measures and
renewable energy systems at joint military bases. The report
should include energy savings and renewable energy
opportunities in the areas of facility infrastructure, energy
supply and transmission systems, and vehicles. The committee
believes that the Department of Defense's 12 joint bases
present new opportunities for energy savings and expects that
this report will explore such opportunities and outline a plan
of action for exploiting energy conservation and renewable
energy options at such locations.
Remediation of Property at the Former Fort Ord, California
Fort Ord was closed as part of the 1991 Base Realignment
and Closure (BRAC) round. A March 22, 1995 Memorandum of
Understanding between the Army and the Bureau of Land
Management (BLM) supported the transfer of approximately 7,500
acres of land from the Army to BLM. Despite entreaties from
Congress to expedite plans for remediation of the property and
the passage of more than 11 years since the agreement, no
definitive protocols or timeline for remediation of the
property have been completed. Therefore, the committee directs
the Secretary of the Army to engage the BLM on this matter
submit a report to the House Committee on Armed Services by
November 1, 2006, with a plan for achieving clean up of the BLM
lands at the former Fort Ord.
LEGISLATIVE PROVISIONS
Subtitle A--Military Construction Program and Military Family Housing
Changes
Section 2801--Increase in Maximum Annual Amount Authorized To Be
Obligated for Emergency Military Construction
This section would amend section 2803 of title 10, United
States Code, to increase from $45,000,000 to $60,000,000 the
maximum amount of funds the Secretary of Defense may annually
obligate using emergency construction authorities.
Section 2802--Applicability of Local Comparability of Room Pattern and
Floor Area Requirements to Construction, Acquisition, and Improvement
to Military Unaccompanied Housing
This section would amend section 2826 of title 10, United
States Code, to require that floor space in unaccompanied
housing be built to standards consistent with local private
construction.
Section 2803--Authority To Use Proceeds From Sale of Military Family
Housing To Support Military Housing Privatization Initiative
This section would amend section 2831 of title 10, United
States Code, to authorize the transfer of proceeds from the
handling and disposal of family housing units into the
Department of Defense Family Housing Improvement Fund, which is
used to support military family housing privatization
activities. Current law provides for the transfer of such
proceeds to the military family housing management account.
Section 2804--Repeal of Special Requirement for Military Construction
Contracts on Guam
This section would repeal section 2864 of title 10, United
States Code, which places special limitations on military
construction contracts on Guam.
Section 2805--Congressional Notification of Cancellation Ceiling for
Department of Defense Energy Savings Performance Contracts
This section would amend section 2865 of title 10, United
States Code, to require a notice and wait period for the
Secretary of Defense before the award of an energy savings
performance contract that contains a cancellation ceiling in
excess of $7,000,000.
Section 2806--Expansion of Authority To Convey Property at Military
Installations To Support Military Construction
This section would amend section 2869 of title 10, United
States Code, to authorize the secretaries of the military
departments to exchange excess property for construction
projects, land, housing, or to support agreements to limit
encroachments under section 2684a of title 10, United States
Code.
Section 2807--Pilot Projects for Acquisition or Construction of
Military Unaccompanied Housing
This section would amend section 2881a of title 10, United
States Code, to reduce notification and wait periods required
before the Secretary of the Navy may enter into a contract for
the privatization of unaccompanied housing using the
authorities provided by section 2881a. The section would also
extend from September 30, 2007 to September 30, 2011, the
expiration of the pilot authority provided by section 2881a of
title 10, United States Code and increase the number of pilot
projects authorized from three to six.
Section 2808--Consideration of Alternative and More Efficient Uses for
General Officer and Flag Officer Quarters in Excess of 6,000 Square
Feet
This section would amend section 2831 of title 10, United
States Code, to require the Secretary of Defense to identify
and consider alternative uses for general and flag officer
housing units that exceed 6,000 square feet. The committee
notes that such large housing units have extraordinary
operations, maintenance, and utility costs, and believes that
many such large facilities would be more efficiently utilized
for alternative purposes, such as administrative facilities.
Section 2809--Repeal of Temporary Minor Military Construction Program
This section would repeal section 2810 of the Military
Construction Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2006 (division B
of Public Law 109-163), which provides for temporary authority
to expend minor construction funds at increased limits for
construction of child development centers.
Section 2810--One-Year Extension of Temporary, Limited Authority To Use
Operation and Maintenance Funds for Construction Projects Outside the
United States
This section would extend through 2007 the authority
provided by section 2808 of the National Defense Authorization
Act for Fiscal Year 2004 (Public Law 108-136), which permits
the Secretary of Defense to utilize operation and maintenance
funds to construct facilities necessary for temporary
operational requirements related to a declaration of war,
national emergency, or contingency.
Subtitle B--Real Property and Facilities Administration
Section 2821--Consolidation of Department of Defense Authorities
Regarding Granting of Easements for Rights-of-Way
This section would consolidate provisions in chapter 159 of
title 10, United States Code, which govern the granting of
easements for rights-of-way by the Department of Defense and
make several technical corrections. This section would make no
substantive change to the law.
Section 2822--Authority To Grant Restrictive Easements in Connection
With Land Conveyances
This section would authorize the secretaries of the
military departments to grant restrictive easements when
disposing of certain properties. Such easements would allow for
greater protection of historic properties.
Section 2823--Maximum Term of Leases for Structures and Real Property
Relating to Structures in Foreign Countries Needed for Purposes Other
Than Family Housing
This section would amend section 2675 of title 10, United
States Code, to increase from 5 to 10 years the maximum length
of lease term the secretary of a military department may enter
into for non-housing structures and real properties located in
foreign countries.
Section 2824--Consolidation of Laws Relating to Transfer of Department
of Defense Real Property Within the Department and to Other Federal
Agencies
This section would consolidate provisions in title 10,
United States Code, which govern the transfer of real property
within the Department of Defense and to other federal agencies.
This section would make no substantive change to the law.
Section 2825--Congressional Notice Requirements in Advance of
Acquisition of Land by Condemnation for Military Purposes
This section would express the sense of Congress that the
Secretary of Defense, when acquiring land for military
purposes, should make every effort to do so by purchases from
willing sellers, and that the use of condemnation, eminent
domain, or seizure procedures should only be employed as a
matter of last resort in cases of compelling national security
requirements. This section would also amend section 2663 of
title 10, United States Code, to require a notice and wait
period before the Secretary of Defense may begin condemnation,
eminent domain, or seizure procedures to acquire property.
Subtitle C--Base Closure and Realignment
Section 2831--Treatment of Lease Proceeds from Military Installations
Approved for Closure or Realignment After January 1, 2005
This section would amend section 2667 of title 10, United
States Code, to ensure that lease proceeds received at a
military installation closed or realigned by a base closure law
are deposited into the appropriate base closure and realignment
account.
Subtitle D--Land Conveyances
Section 2841--Land Conveyance, Naval Air Station, Barbers Point, Hawaii
This section would require the Secretary of the Navy to
dispose of approximately 499 acres at the former Naval Air
Station Barbers Point, Hawaii, that are subject to the Ford
Island Master Development Agreement, by September 30, 2008.
In addition, the committee is aware that the Navy continues
to retain additional property at NAS Barbers Point that was
directed for disposal by the 1993 and 1995 Base Realignment and
Closure rounds. The committee urges the Secretary of the Navy
to return this property to productive use by September 30,
2008, as well.
Section 2842--Modification of Land Acquisition Authority, Perquimans
County, North Carolina
This section would amend section 2846 of the Military
Construction Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2002 (division B
of Public Law 107-107), as amended, to increase the acreage
authorized for acquisition.
Section 2843--Land Conveyance, Radford Army Ammunition Plant, Pulaski
County, Virginia
This section would authorize the Secretary of the Army to
convey approximately 85 acres at the Radford Army Ammunition
Plant in Pulaski County, Virginia to the Virginia Department of
Veterans' Services for the purposes of establishing a veterans'
cemetery.
Subtitle E--Other Matters
Section 2851--Availability of Community Planning Assistance Relating to
Encroachment of Civilian Communities on Military Facilities Used for
Training by the Armed Forces
This section would amend section 2391 of title 10, United
States Code, to authorize the use of grants for the purposes of
addressing encroachment of state-owned and operated national
guard facilities that are subject to significant training use
by the armed forces.
Section 2852--Prohibitions Against Making Certain Military Airfields or
Facilities Available for Use by Civil Aircraft
This section would prohibit the regular use of property at,
or conveyance of property for, the civil aviation purposes at
Marine Corps Air Station and Marine Corps Base Camp Pendleton,
Marine Corps Air Station Miramar, and Naval Air Station North
Island, California.
Section 2853--Naming Housing Facility at Fort Carson, Colorado, in
Honor of Joel Hefley, a Member of the House of Representatives
This section would require the Secretary of the Army to
designate one of the military family housing areas or
facilities constructed for Fort Carson, Colorado, using housing
privatization authorities provided by subchapter IV of chapter
169 of title 10, United States Code in honor of Representative
Joel Hefley.
Section 2854--Naming Navy and Marine Corps Reserve Center at Rock
Island, Illinois, in Honor of Lane Evans, a Member of the House of
Representatives
This section would designate the Navy and Marine Corps
reserve center at Rock Island Arsenal, Illinois as the ``Lane
Evans Navy and Marine Corps Reserve Center.''
Section 2855--Naming of Research Laboratory at Air Force Rome Research
Site, Rome, New York, in Honor of Sherwood L. Boehlert, a Member of the
House of Representatives
This section would designate the new laboratory building at the Air
Force Rome Research Site, Rome, New York as the ``Sherwood L. Boehlert
Engineering Center.''
DIVISION C--DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY NATIONAL SECURITY AUTHORIZATIONS AND
OTHER AUTHORIZATIONS
TITLE XXXI--DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY NATIONAL SECURITY PROGRAMS
OVERVIEW
The budget request contained $15.8 billion for atomic
energy defense activities and energy supply of the Department
of Energy for fiscal year 2007. Of this amount, $9.3 billion is
for the programs of the National Nuclear Security
Administration, $6.5 billion is for environmental and other
defense activities, and $6.0 million is for energy supply. The
committee recommends $15.8 billion, the amount of the request.
ITEMS OF SPECIAL INTEREST
National Nuclear Security Administration
Overview
The budget request contained $9.3 billion for the National
Nuclear Security Administration for fiscal year 2007. The
committee recommends $9.3 billion, a decrease of $50.0 million.
Weapons Activities
The budget request contained $6,407.9 million for Weapons
Activities of the National Nuclear Security Administration. The
committee recommends $6,467.9 million, an increase of $60.0
million.
Directed Stockpile Work
The budget request contained $1,410.3 million for Directed
Stockpile Work. The committee recommends $1,410.3 million, the
amount of the budget request.
Reliable Replacement Warhead
The budget request contained $27.7 million within Directed
Stockpile Work for the Reliable Replacement Warhead (RRW)
program. The committee notes that section 3111 of the National
Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2006 (Public Law 109-
163) established the objectives of the RRW program and
established requirements for both an interim report, which the
committee has received, and a final report, which is due by
March 1, 2007.
The committee notes that elsewhere in this title, the
committee directs the Secretary of Energy and the Secretary of
Defense to submit a plan for the transformation of the nuclear
weapons complex. The vision for this plan will necessarily be
influenced by the specific design and production capability
requirements deemed essential for supporting the RRW program.
The committee therefore urges the Secretary of Energy and the
Secretary of Defense to ensure complete transparency between
the RRW Project Officer's Group and those National Nuclear
Security Administration and Department of Defense personnel
working on the nuclear weapons complex transformation plan.
The committee recommends $27.7 million for the Reliable
Replacement Warhead program, the amount of the budget request.
Responsive Infrastructure
The budget request contained $15.4 million for the National
Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA) responsive
infrastructure.
The committee fully supports the development of the
responsive infrastructure and in section 3111 of this title
requires the Secretary of Energy and the Secretary of Defense
to submit a plan for the transformation of the nuclear weapons
complex to Congress. The committee encourages NNSA to establish
an Office of Transformation within Defense Programs to plan and
execute actions to achieve the responsive infrastructure goal.
The committee recommends $15.4 million, the amount of the
budget request, for responsive infrastructure, and authorizes
the Administrator of the NNSA to use up to $15.4 million of the
funds authorized to establish an Office of Transformation.
Should the Administrator elect to establish an Office of
Transformation, the Administrator shall submit to the
congressional defense committees a report stating the specific
charter for this new office within 60 days after the
establishment of such office.
Study of Quantification of Margins and Uncertainty
Methodology
Section 3111 of the National Defense Authorization Act for
Fiscal Year 2006 (Public Law 109-163) established the
objectives for the Reliable Replacement Warhead (RRW) program.
The RRW program is intended to increase the reliability, safety
and security of the nuclear weapons stockpile. One of the key
objectives of the program is to further reduce the likelihood
of the resumption of underground nuclear weapons testing. This
objective is carried out by using designs that are consistent
with basic design parameters employed in those nuclear weapons
which have undergone testing or by otherwise using components
that are well understood or certifiable without the need to
resume underground testing.
According to documents accompanying the fiscal year 2007
Department of Energy budget request, the RRW program will rely
upon the National Nuclear Security Administration's (NNSA)
campaigns to assess whether the RRW can be certified without
underground nuclear testing. A critical analytic tool employed
by the national laboratories in making this determination is
the Quantification of Margins and Uncertainties (QMU)
methodology. A recent report by the Government Accountability
Office found that the QMU methodology, while conceptually well-
accepted, is still in its early stages and requires maturation
and further refinement.
The committee understands the importance of the QMU
methodology in establishing a scientific basis for assessing
whether the RRW will be able to be certified without
underground nuclear testing. Given the importance of the RRW
program and the need to reduce the likelihood of having to
conduct an underground nuclear test in order to certify this
warhead, the committee believes that an independent review of
the NNSA laboratory utilization of QMU methodology is required
to gain confidence that the RRW program objectives can be
achieved.
Accordingly, the committee directs the National Academy of
Sciences to conduct an independent assessment of the QMU
methodology employed by the national laboratories and whether
this methodology can be used to certify an RRW without
underground nuclear testing. The Academy shall ensure that the
panel chartered to conduct this review has among its members
the following:
(1) Former weapons designers;
(2) Individuals well-versed in the underlying science
associated with nuclear weapons, including the physics
associated with weapon primaries and secondaries; and
(3) Individuals familiar with the application of QMU
principles, including probabilistic risk assessment
methods, in industries such as the nuclear power
industry.
Of the amounts made available to the Department of Energy
for weapons activities, $2.0 million shall be available for
carrying out this study. The Academy report shall be submitted
to the congressional defense committees by September 30, 2007.
Transformation Plan for the Nuclear Weapons Complex
The committee notes that the 2001 Nuclear Posture Review
set forth the requirements for a responsive infrastructure
within the National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA)
weapons complex. Through multiple hearings and briefings before
the subcommittee on Strategic Forces, the committee has been
informed of initiatives that would modernize the Nuclear
Weapons Complex to achieve the desired responsive
infrastructure capability while consolidating and disposing of
special nuclear material. The committee also notes that section
3111 of the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year
2006 (Public Law 109-163) established objectives for the
Reliable Replacement Warhead program, an initiative that has
the potential to enhance the safety, security and reliability
of the nuclear stockpile, while setting the requirements for
the capabilities of the responsive infrastructure.
The committee includes a provision (section 3111) that
would require the Secretary of Energy and the Secretary of
Defense to develop a plan to transform the nuclear weapons
complex so as to achieve a responsive infrastructure. This plan
shall be submitted to Congress by February 1, 2007, and shall
meet certain objectives.
With respect to eliminating duplication of production
capability except as necessary to ensure the safety,
reliability and security of the stockpile, the committee
intends the transformation plan to look at all production
functions including but not limited to primary, secondary and
non-nuclear production elements. The committee intends that the
national security mission continue as the primary mission for
the national security laboratories. Other laboratory work (such
as work conducted for the Offices of Science or Energy Research
within the Department of Energy, the Department of Homeland
Security or for the Intelligence Community) should be conducted
so as to maintain the primary mission of supporting the nuclear
weapons stockpile. The committee encourages the Secretary of
Energy in the formulation of this transformation plan to take a
long-term strategic view of the desired optimal mix of NNSA
primary mission work and other laboratory work to ensure a
responsive capability into the future. With respect to both the
production plants and the national security laboratories, the
committee expects the transformation plan to consider how best
to maintain the requisite human capital expertise while
transforming to a more efficient complex.
The committee establishes as an objective the elimination
of category I and II special nuclear materials from the
national security laboratories by 2010. This objective does not
preclude the retention of category I and II special nuclear
materials at a national security laboratory, if the
transformation plan for the nuclear weapons complex envisions a
pit production capability at a national security laboratory.
Based on testimony before the subcommittee on Strategic
Forces, the committee is aware of NNSA plans to purchase more
non-nuclear weapons components from commercial suppliers in the
future. While the committee supports those business practices
that will lead to a more efficient enterprise, the committee
also has some concerns for the security and cost implications
of further outsourcing and expects the transformation plan to
specifically address these concerns.
The committee understands that the Department of Defense is
reviewing the military requirements for the W-80 warhead and is
considering deferring the planned life extension program (LEP).
The committee directs the Administrator of the National Nuclear
Security Administration, working with the Nuclear Weapons
Council, to prepare a plan for redirecting the human resources
and facilities currently required for the W-80 LEP to the
Reliable Replacement Warhead program and complex
transformation. This plan shall be submitted to the
congressional defense committees by February 1, 2007.
Inertial Confinement Fusion Ignition and High Yield Campaign
The budget request contained $451.2 million for the
Inertial Confinement Fusion Ignition and High Yield Campaign,
including $111.4 million for the National Ignition Facility
(NIF) construction and $143.4 million for the NIF demonstration
campaign.
The committee fully supports the NIF program's goal of
beginning the initial ignition campaign in 2010 with a series
of integrated experiments that would culminate in full energy
experiments in 2011. The committee believes that full funding
of NIF construction and demonstration programs is essential in
order to achieve ignition in 2010. Furthermore, the committee
believes that additional investments in ignition target design
and testing will enhance project success.
The committee recommends $461.2 million for the Inertial
Confinement Fusion Ignition and High Yield Campaign, an
increase of $10.0 million to support enhanced target production
and characterization capabilities and for tests on the Omega
and Z facilities.
Readiness in Technical Base and Facilities
The budget request contained $1,685.8 million for Readiness
in Technical Base and Facilities.
The committee is encouraged by the progress made in the
reduction of deferred maintenance backlogs in the defense
nuclear complex. In section 3111, the committee requires the
Department of Energy and Department of Defense to submit a
transformation plan for the nuclear weapons complex to achieve
the responsive infrastructure envisioned by the Nuclear Posture
Review. Recognizing that this plan may provide for
modernization of the Pantex and the Y-12 production plants in
Texas and Tennessee, respectively, the committee also
recognizes that both facilities need additional infrastructure
support as soon as possible.
The committee recommends an additional $17.0 million for
plant infrastructure repair and equipment replacement at
Pantex, to be executed in a manner consistent with the
priorities of both the 10 year site comprehensive plan and the
transformation plan required by this title.
The committee recommends an additional $17.0 million for
the Y-12 complex, to include: $2.0 million for material recycle
and recovery to process materials generated in the Directed
Stockpile Work accelerated dismantlement program, and $15.0
million for plant infrastructure repair and equipment
replacement consistent with the priorities of both the 10 year
site comprehensive plan and the transformation plan required by
this title.
The committee fully supports the efforts of the
Administrator of the National Nuclear Security Administration
(NNSA) to reduce safeguards and security costs throughout the
complex by consolidating nuclear material storage and by
accelerating certain construction projects that will permit
even further consolidation of nuclear materials. The
transformation plan for the nuclear weapons complex, required
by section 3111, should assist NNSA senior managers in ensuring
that any maintenance or upgrades to existing facilities or
construction of new facilities will be consistent with both the
10 year site comprehensive plans and the transformation plan's
vision for the complex of the future.
The committee is also aware of design changes to the Highly
Enriched Uranium Material Facility (HEUMF) at Y-12 required by
revisions to the design basis threat policy and resulting from
construction problems with this new facility. The committee
recognizes the importance of the HEUMF project in achieving
material consolidation objectives at the Y-12 complex. However,
the committee is disappointed with the extent of the problems
that have surfaced with a relatively simple project. Should
additional funds be required to move forward with the HEUMF
facility in fiscal year 2007, the Secretary of Energy shall
submit a reprogramming request to the congressional defense
committees.
The committee recommends $1,719.8 million, an increase of
$34.0 million for Readiness in Technical Base and Facilities.
Safeguards and Security
The budget request contained $721.4 million for safeguards
and security.
The committee continues to be deeply concerned with
safeguards and security practices and the costs associated with
complying with design basis threat (DBT) requirements
throughout the complex. As evidenced by section 3113 of the
National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2006 (Public
Law 109-163), the committee believes that the Department of
Energy (DOE) must employ a risk based approach in decision-
making associated with DBT compliance. The committee notes with
approval the decision by the Department to waive compliance
with certain aspects of the DBT at the Y-12 plant in Tennessee
pending completion of the Highly Enriched Uranium Material
Facility.
The committee is aware that the Department has discussed
shifting accounting for security costs from direct to indirect
costs. The committee believes that only the use of direct cost
accounting for security costs provides the necessary
transparency into what it takes to comply with DOE's DBT
policy. Accordingly, the committee directs that until directed
otherwise by Congress, the Department shall continue to employ
direct cost accounting for all security costs.
The committee supports the efforts of the Administrator of
the National Nuclear Security Administration to enhance
security practices through consolidation of nuclear material at
individual sites and throughout the complex. The committee
notes that the nuclear weapons complex transformation plan
required in sectio
