Report text available as:

  • TXT
  • PDF   (PDF provides a complete and accurate display of this text.) Tip ?


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

                         DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE
                       APPROPRIATIONS BILL, 2008

                               __________

                              R E P O R T

                                 of the

                      COMMITTEE ON APPROPRIATIONS

                        [to accompany H.R. 3222]

[GRAPHIC NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]


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












                            C O N T E N T S

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












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

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



 
            DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE APPROPRIATIONS BILL, 2008

                                _______
                                

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

                                _______
                                

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

                              R E P O R T

                        [To accompany H.R. 3222]

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

                              Bill Totals

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


[GRAPHIC NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]

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

                    Committee Budget Review Process

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

                  Select Intelligence Oversight Panel

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

                              Introduction

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

                      Stability in the Middle East

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

                           Fiscal Management

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

             Contracted Services and Acquisition Management

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

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

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

                            Member Requests

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

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

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

              Committee Recommendations by Major Category


         ACTIVE, RESERVE AND NATIONAL GUARD MILITARY PERSONNEL

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

                       OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE

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

                              PROCUREMENT

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

               RESEARCH, DEVELOPMENT, TEST AND EVALUATION

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

                          CLASSIFIED PROGRAMS

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

                         Forces To Be Supported


                         DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY

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

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

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

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

      Army National Guard (ARNG) Forces

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

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

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

                         DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY

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

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

                      DEPARTMENT OF THE AIR FORCE

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

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

                         DEFENSE HEALTH PROGRAM

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

                           MILITARY PERSONNEL

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

[GRAPHIC NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]

                      MILITARY PERSONNEL OVERVIEW

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

                        SUMMARY OF END STRENGTH

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

                      OVERALL ACTIVE END STRENGTH




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


                 OVERALL SELECTED RESERVE END STRENGTH




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



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

                     FULL-TIME SUPPORT END STRENGTH

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

                GUARD AND RESERVE FULL-TIME END STRENGTH

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

                       GROW-THE-FORCE INITIATIVE

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

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

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

                  RESERVE COMPONENT BUDGET SUBMISSIONS

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

                PAID INACTIVE DUTY TRAINING (IDT) TRAVEL

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

                        MILITARY PERSONNEL, ARMY





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


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

                          Program Recommended

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

[GRAPHICS NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]

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

[GRAPHIC NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]

                        MILITARY PERSONNEL, NAVY





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


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

                          Program Recommended

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

[GRAPHIC NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]

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

[GRAPHIC NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]

                    MILITARY PERSONNEL, MARINE CORPS





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


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

                          Program Recommended

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

[GRAPHIC NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]

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

[GRAPHIC NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]

                     MILITARY PERSONNEL, AIR FORCE





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


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

                          Program Recommended

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

[GRAPHIC NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]

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

[GRAPHIC NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]

                        RESERVE PERSONNEL, ARMY





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


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

                          Program Recommended

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

[GRAPHIC NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]

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

[GRAPHIC NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]

                        RESERVE PERSONNEL, NAVY





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


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

                          Program Recommended

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

[GRAPHIC NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]

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

[GRAPHIC NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]

                    RESERVE PERSONNEL, MARINE CORPS





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


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

                          Program Recommended

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

[GRAPHIC NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]

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

[GRAPHIC NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]

                      RESERVE PERSONNEL, AIR FORCE





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


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

                          Program Recommended

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

[GRAPHIC NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]

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

[GRAPHIC NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]

                     NATIONAL GUARD PERSONNEL, ARMY





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


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

                          Program Recommended

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

[GRAPHIC NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]

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

[GRAPHIC NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]

                  NATIONAL GUARD PERSONNEL, AIR FORCE





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


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

                          Program Recommended

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

[GRAPHIC NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]

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

[GRAPHIC NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]

                                TITLE II

                       OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE

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

[GRAPHIC NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
    
                            FORCE STRUCTURE

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

                             TRAINING TEMPO

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

          RECOMMENDED OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE FUNDING LEVELS

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

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

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

                           IMPACT OF REBASING

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

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

    PERIMETER SECURITY FORCE PROTECTION AND OTHER FACILITY SECURITY 
                              IMPROVEMENTS

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

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

                      SUPPORT TO MILITARY FAMILIES

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

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

                        FAMILY ADVOCACY PROGRAMS

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

                           CHILDCARE CENTERS

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

           DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE DEPENDENTS EDUCATION (DODEA)

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

                OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE REPROGRAMMINGS

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

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


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

            OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE BUDGET EXECUTION DATA

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

                    OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE, ARMY





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


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

                          Program Recommended

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

[GRAPHIC NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]

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

[GRAPHIC NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]

                       UNJUSTIFIED PROGRAM GROWTH

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

                 STATUS OF RESOURCE AND TRAINING SYSTEM

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

                        FACT OF LIFE ADJUSTMENTS

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

                      CIVILIAN PERSONNEL STRENGTH

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

                 COMMON LOGISTICS OPERATING ENVIRONMENT

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

                SCANNING TECHNOLOGY TO ACCELERATE RESET

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

         WESTERN HEMISPHERE INSTITUTE FOR SECURITY COOPERATION

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

                   WORKING CAPITAL FUND CASH TRANSFER

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

                    OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE, NAVY

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

                          Program Recommended

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

[GRAPHICS NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]

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

[GRAPHICS NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]

                NAVY SHORE INFRASTRUCTURE TRANSFORMATION

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

                      NPS LABORATORY MODERNIZATION

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

                      CIVILIAN PERSONNEL STRENGTH

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

                OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE, MARINE CORPS

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

                          Program Recommended

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

[GRAPHICS NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]


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

[GRAPHICS NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]


                          RESOURCE REALIGNMENT

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

                  OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE, AIR FORCE

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

                          Program Recommended

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

[GRAPHICS NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]


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

[GRAPHICS NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]


                      PORTABLE ILLUMINATION SYSTEM

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

                      CIVILIAN PERSONNEL STRENGTH

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

                   WORKING CAPITAL FUND CASH TRANSFER

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

                       EXCESS ON-ORDER INVENTORY

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

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

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

 OVERSTATEMENT OF FACILITIES SUSTAINMENT, RESTORATION AND MAINTENANCE 
                              REQUIREMENTS

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

                 OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE, DEFENSE-WIDE

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

                          Program Recommended

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

[GRAPHICS NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]


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

[GRAPHICS NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]


                       Special Operations Command

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

                     Defense Legal Services Agency


                     OFFICE OF MILITARY COMMISSIONS

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

               Department of Defense Dependents Education


                   EXCEPTIONAL FAMILY MEMBER SERVICES

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

                  Defense Security Cooperation Agency


                         GLOBAL TRAIN AND EQUIP

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

                        Defense Security Service

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

                   Office of the Secretary of Defense


                        Personnel and Readiness


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

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

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

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

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

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

                            Additional Items


CADET AND MIDSHIPMAN SOCIAL REPRESENTATION AND DIVERSITY AT THE SERVICE 
                               ACADEMIES

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

            DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE ENERGY SECURITY TASK FORCE

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

                OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE, ARMY RESERVE

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

                          Program Recommended

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

[GRAPHICS NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]


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

[GRAPHICS NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]


                OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE, NAVY RESERVE

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

                          Program Recommended

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

[GRAPHICS NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]


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

[GRAPHICS NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]


            OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE, MARINE CORPS RESERVE

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

                          Program Recommended

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

[GRAPHICS NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]


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

[GRAPHICS NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]


              OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE, AIR FORCE RESERVE

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

                          Program Recommended

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

[GRAPHICS NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]


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

[GRAPHICS NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]


             OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE, ARMY NATIONAL GUARD

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

                          Program Recommended

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

[GRAPHICS NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]


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

[GRAPHICS NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]




         PROCESS REFINEMENT AND IMPLEMENTATION INITIATIVE (PRI)

             FOR NATIONAL GUARD JOINT CONUS COMMUNICATIONS

                      SUPPORT ENVIRONMENT (JCCSE)

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

             OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE, AIR NATIONAL GUARD

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

                          Program Recommended

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

[GRAPHICS NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]


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

[GRAPHICS NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]


            OVERSEAS CONTINGENCY OPERATIONS TRANSFER ACCOUNT

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

          UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE ARMED FORCES

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

                    ENVIRONMENTAL RESTORATION, ARMY

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

                    ENVIRONMENTAL RESTORATION, NAVY

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

                  ENVIRONMENTAL RESTORATION, AIR FORCE

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

                ENVIRONMENTAL RESTORATION, DEFENSE-WIDE

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

         ENVIRONMENTAL RESTORATION, FORMERLY USED DEFENSE SITES

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

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

              FORMER SOVIET UNION THREAT REDUCTION ACCOUNT

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

             STRATEGIC OFFENSIVE ARMS ELIMINATION (RUSSIA)

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

               NUCLEAR WEAPONS STORAGE FACILITY (RUSSIA)

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

                 CHEMICAL WEAPONS DESTRUCTION (RUSSIA)

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

           WMD PROLIFERATION PREVENTION (FORMER SOVIET UNION)

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

                            NEW INITIATIVES

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

                 UNOBLIGATED BALANCES FROM PRIOR YEARS

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

                              PROCUREMENT

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

[GRAPHICS NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]


                     GROW-THE-ARMY AND MARINE CORPS

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

                    JOINT STRIKE FIGHTER PRODUCTION

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

         ACQUISITION AND MANAGEMENT OF UNMANNED AERIAL SYSTEMS

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

                             MILITARY TIRES

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

                        RESET AND MODERNIZATION

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

                         SPECIAL INTEREST ITEMS

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

            REPROGRAMMING GUIDANCE FOR ACQUISITION ACCOUNTS

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

                  REPROGRAMMING REPORTING REQUIREMENTS

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

                           FUNDING INCREASES

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

                            CLASSIFIED ANNEX

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

                       AIRCRAFT PROCUREMENT, ARMY

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

                          Program Recommended

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

[GRAPHICS NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]


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

[GRAPHICS NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]


                    ARMED RECONNAISSANCE HELICOPTER

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

                          JOINT CARGO AIRCRAFT

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

                        LIGHT UTILITY HELICOPTER

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

                       MISSILE PROCUREMENT, ARMY

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

                          Program Recommended

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

[GRAPHICS NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]


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

[GRAPHICS NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]


        PROCUREMENT OF WEAPONS AND TRACKED COMBAT VEHICLES, ARMY

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

                          Program Recommended

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

[GRAPHICS NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]


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

[GRAPHICS NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]


                                STRYKER

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

                    PROCUREMENT OF AMMUNITION, ARMY

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

                          Program Recommended

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

[GRAPHICS NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]


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

[GRAPHICS NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]


                        OTHER PROCUREMENT, ARMY

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

                          Program Recommended

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

[GRAPHICS NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]


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

[GRAPHICS NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]


                       BRIDGE TO FUTURE NETWORKS

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

                        JOINT HIGH SPEED VESSEL

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

                                 HMMWV

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

     HEAVY EXPANDED MOBILE TACTICAL TRUCK EXTENDED SERVICE PROGRAM

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

                   NIGHT VISION THERMAL WEAPONS SIGHT

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

                      TACTICAL OPERATIONS CENTERS

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

                      FIELD MEDICAL EQUIPMENT LINE

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

                       AIRCRAFT PROCUREMENT, NAVY

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

                          Program Recommended

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

[GRAPHICS NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]


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

[GRAPHICS NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]


                              UH-1Y/AH-1Z

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

                                  E-2D

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

               VERTICAL TAKE-OFF UNMANNED AERIAL VEHICLE

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

                              F-18 SERIES

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

                               P-3 SERIES

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

                                 SPARES

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

                       WEAPONS PROCUREMENT, NAVY

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

                          Program Recommended

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

[GRAPHICS NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]


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

[GRAPHICS NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]


                   CONVENTIONAL TRIDENT MODIFICATION

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

                 ADVANCED ANTI-RADIATION GUIDED MISSILE

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

            PROCUREMENT OF AMMUNITION, NAVY AND MARINE CORPS

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

                          Program Recommended

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

[GRAPHICS NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]


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

[GRAPHICS NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]


                   SHIPBUILDING AND CONVERSION, NAVY

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

                          Program Recommended

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

[GRAPHICS NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]


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

[GRAPHICS NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]


                              SHIPBUILDING

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

                        VIRGINIA CLASS SUBMARINE

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

                                 LPD-17

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

                          CARRIER REPLACEMENT

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

                          LITTORAL COMBAT SHIP

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

                      DDG-1000 ADVANCE PROCUREMENT

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

                                DDG-1000

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

                    LITTORAL COMBAT SHIP OUTFITTING

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

                     LEASING OF FOREIGN BUILT SHIPS

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

                            SHIP INSULATION

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

                        OTHER PROCUREMENT, NAVY

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

                          Program Recommended

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

[GRAPHICS NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]


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

[GRAPHICS NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]


                  INTEGRATED SUBMARINE IMAGING SYSTEM

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

                     CRUISER MODERNIZATION PROGRAM

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

                            ASW ENHANCEMENTS

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

                  LITTORAL COMBAT SHIP MISSION MODULES

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

                      SUBMARINE SUPPORT EQUIPMENT

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

                     Q-70 FAMILY OF DISPLAY SYSTEMS

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

                    MAN OVERBOARD INDICATOR PROGRAM

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

                  ENHANCED DETECTION ADJUNCT PROCESSOR

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

                       PROCUREMENT, MARINE CORPS

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

                          Program Recommended

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

[GRAPHICS NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]


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

[GRAPHICS NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]

                    Range Transformation Initiative

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

                    AIRCRAFT PROCUREMENT, AIR FORCE

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

                          Program Recommended

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

[GRAPHICS NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]


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

[GRAPHICS NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]


                            C-17 PRODUCTION

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

                              GLOBAL HAWK

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

                        B-2 RADAR MODERNIZATION

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

                     MISSILE PROCUREMENT, AIR FORCE

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

                          Program Recommended

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

[GRAPHICS NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]


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

[GRAPHICS NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]


             JOINT AIR TO SURFACE STANDOFF MISSILE (JASSM)

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

               ADVANCED EXTREMELY HIGH FREQUENCY PROGRAM

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

                  PROCUREMENT OF AMMUNITION, AIR FORCE

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

                          Program Recommended

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

[GRAPHICS NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]


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

[GRAPHICS NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]


                                 FLARES

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

                      OTHER PROCUREMENT, AIR FORCE

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

                          Program Recommended

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

[GRAPHICS NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]


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

[GRAPHICS NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]


                       PROCUREMENT, DEFENSE-WIDE

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

                          Program Recommended

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

[GRAPHICS NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]


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

[GRAPHICS NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]


                  NATIONAL GUARD AND RESERVE EQUIPMENT

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

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

                    DEFENSE PRODUCTION ACT PURCHASES

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

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

                    Beryllium Supply Industrial Base

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

               RESEARCH, DEVELOPMENT, TEST AND EVALUATION

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

[GRAPHICS NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]


                         CRUISE MISSILE DEFENSE

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

            JOINT COMMON MISSILE/JOINT AIR-TO-GROUND MISSILE

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

                  SMALL BUSINESS TECHNOLOGY INSERTION

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

                         SPECIAL INTEREST ITEMS

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

            REPROGRAMMING GUIDANCE FOR ACQUISITION ACCOUNTS

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

            RESEARCH, DEVELOPMENT, TEST AND EVALUATION, ARMY

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

                          Program Recommended

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

[GRAPHICS NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]


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

[GRAPHICS NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]


                         FUTURE COMBAT SYSTEMS

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

              TACTICAL METAL FABRICATION SYSTEM (TAC FAB)

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

                WARFIGHTER INFORMATION NETWORK--TACTICAL

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

                   GLOBAL COMBAT SUPPORT SYSTEM--ARMY

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

       HYBRID PROPELLANT FOR MEDIUM AND LARGE CALIBER AMMUNITION

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

 RAPID RESPONSE SYSTEM FOR ACTIVE PROTECTION OF GROUND AND AIR VEHICLES

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

            RESEARCH OF ADVANCED COMMUNICATIONS TECHNOLOGIES

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

 TACTICAL WHEELED VEHICLE COMPOSITE COMPONENT WEIGHT REDUCTION PROGRAM

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

             NEUROTOXIN EXPOSURE TREATMENT RESEARCH PROGRAM

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

             PAIN AND NEUROSCIENCE CENTER RESEARCH PROGRAM

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

               SUSTAINING SUPPORT FOR ONGOING OPERATIONS

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

                          UNDERSEA UXO CLEANUP

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

               ADVANCED AFFORDABLE TURBINE ENGINE (AATE)

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

                               CVP DESIGN

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

              NATIONAL EYE EVALUATION AND RESEARCH NETWORK

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

            RESEARCH, DEVELOPMENT, TEST AND EVALUATION, NAVY

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

                          Program Recommended

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

[GRAPHICS NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]


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

[GRAPHICS NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]


                          BONE MARROW REGISTRY

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

            INNOVATIVE METHODS FOR SHIPBUILDING CONSTRUCTION

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

      SYSTEM OPEN ARCHITECTURE/SMALL BUSINESS TECHNOLOGY INSERTION

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

                UNIQUE IDENTIFICATION OF TANGIBLE ITEMS

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

         RESEARCH, DEVELOPMENT, TEST AND EVALUATION, AIR FORCE

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

                          Program Recommended

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

[GRAPHICS NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]


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

[GRAPHICS NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]


                       KC-135 TANKER REPLACEMENT

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

             JOINT STRIKE FIGHTER F-136 ENGINE DEVELOPMENT

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

                    JOINT STRIKE FIGHTER DEVELOPMENT

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

                  PERSONNEL RECOVERY SYSTEMS (CSAR-X)

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

                    JOINT STARS SYERS DEMONSTRATION

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

                             SPACE PROGRAMS

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

     SPACE SITUATIONAL AWARENESS AND OPERATIONALLY RESPONSIVE SPACE

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

                              SPACE RADAR

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

               BALLISTIC MISSILE RANGE SAFETY TECHNOLOGY

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

       MEDSTARS INTEGRATION WITH THE GLOBAL COMBAT SUPPORT SYSTEM

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

        WIDE AREA SURVEILLANCE RADAR INTEGRATION ON JOINT STARS

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

        RESEARCH, DEVELOPMENT, TEST AND EVALUATION, DEFENSE-WIDE

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

                          Program Recommended

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

[GRAPHICS NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]


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

[GRAPHICS NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]


                         Missile Defense Agency


                         REPORTING REQUIREMENTS

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

                            BLOCK STRUCTURE

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

                           EUROPEAN COMPONENT

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

             SPACE TRACKING AND SURVEILLANCE SYSTEM (STSS)

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

                        UNDEFINITIZED CONTRACTS

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

                       KINETIC ENERGY INTERCEPTOR

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

                          AIRBORNE LASER (ABL)

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

                     AIRBORNE LASER LESSONS LEARNED

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

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

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

                 AEGIS BALLISTIC MISSILE DEFENSE SYSTEM

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

                         MULTIPLE KILL VEHICLE

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

                       ASYMMETRIC MISSILE DEFENSE

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

                  FISSILE MATERIAL DETECTION RESEARCH

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

                       SPECIAL OPERATIONS COMMAND

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

                CHEMICAL AND BIOLOGICAL DEFENSE PROGRAM

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

               DEFENSE ADVANCED RESEARCH PROJECTS AGENCY

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

                     ADVANCE DEVELOPMENT INITIATIVE

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

              FIRSTLINK--IEE (TECHNOLOGY TRANSITION LINE)

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

                      WMD MEDICAL COUNTERMEASURES

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

                OPERATIONAL TEST AND EVALUATION, DEFENSE

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

                          Program Recommended

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

[GRAPHICS NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]


                                TITLE V


                     REVOLVING AND MANAGEMENT FUNDS


                     DEFENSE WORKING CAPITAL FUNDS

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

                     NATIONAL DEFENSE SEALIFT FUND

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

                           T-AKE ACQUISITION

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

                     DEFENSE COALITION SUPPORT FUND

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

                  OTHER DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE PROGRAMS

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

                          Program Recommended

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

[GRAPHICS NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]


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

[GRAPHICS NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]


                      Traumatic Brain Injury (TBI)

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

                 POST TRAUMATIC STRESS DISORDER (PTSD)

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

                 ELECTRONIC HEALTH INFORMATION SHARING

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

        DEFENSE ENROLLMENT ELIGIBILITY REPORTING SYSTEM (DEERS)

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

                           DIABETES RESEARCH

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

                       WOUNDED WARRIOR ASSISTANCE

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

                         WARRIORS IN TRANSITION

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

 MILITARY TREATMENT FACILITIES USAGE OF RED CROSS VOLUNTEER PHYSICIANS

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

                       ORTHOPEDIC INJURY RESEARCH

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

                            VISION RESEARCH

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

                  PREVENTIVE MEDICINE AND SURVEILLANCE

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

                    EMBEDDED METAL FRAGMENT REGISTRY

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

     LIMITED ACCESS TO MILITARY TREATMENT FACILITIES IN RURAL AREAS

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

                   REDUCTION OF CARRYOVER PERCENTAGE

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

                       REVIEW OF TRICARE CO-PAYS

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

            CHEMICAL AGENTS AND MUNITIONS DESTRUCTION, ARMY

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

                          Program Recommended

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

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

         DRUG INTERDICTION AND COUNTER-DRUG ACTIVITIES, DEFENSE

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

[GRAPHICS NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]


             JOINT IMPROVISED EXPLOSIVE DEVICE DEFEAT FUND

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

                          Program Recommended

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

[GRAPHICS NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]


                         RAPID ACQUISITION FUND

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

                    OFFICE OF THE INSPECTOR GENERAL

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

                               TITLE VII

                            RELATED AGENCIES

              NATIONAL AND MILITARY INTELLIGENCE PROGRAMS

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

                            CLASSIFIED ANNEX

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

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

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

                               TITLE VIII

                           GENERAL PROVISIONS

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

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

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

            HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES REPORTING REQUIREMENTS

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

               Changes in the Application of Existing Law

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

                  Appropriations Not Authorized by Law

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

[GRAPHICS NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]


                           Transfer of Funds

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

                              Rescissions

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

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

         Statement of General Performance Goals and Objectives

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

                        Constitutional Authority

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

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

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

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

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

                 Comparison With the Budget Resolution

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

                      Five-Year Outlay Projections

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

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

          Financial Assistance to State and Local Governments

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

                                Earmarks

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

[GRAPHICS NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]


                          Full Committee Votes

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

[GRAPHICS NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]