Home > Committee Reports > 113th Congress > H. Rept. 113-102 > Part 1

H. Rept. 113-102 - NATIONAL DEFENSE AUTHORIZATION ACT FOR FISCAL YEAR 2014113th Congress (2013-2014)

Committee Report

Report Type:	House Report
Accompanies:	H.R.1960
Committees:	Armed Services (Part 1, Part 2)

Parts for H. Rept. 113-102

Report text available as:

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

113th Congress Report
HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
1st Session 113-102
_______________________________________________________________________

NATIONAL DEFENSE AUTHORIZATION ACT FOR FISCAL YEAR 2014

----------

R E P O R T

OF THE

COMMITTEE ON ARMED SERVICES
HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

H.R. 1960

together with

ADDITIONAL AND DISSENTING VIEWS

[Including cost estimate of the Congressional Budget Office]

June 7, 2013.--Committed to the Committee of the Whole House on the
State of the Union and ordered to be printed

NATIONAL DEFENSE AUTHORIZATION ACT FOR FISCAL YEAR 2014

113th Congress Report
HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
1st Session 113-102
_______________________________________________________________________

NATIONAL DEFENSE AUTHORIZATION ACT FOR FISCAL YEAR 2014

__________

R E P O R T

OF THE

COMMITTEE ON ARMED SERVICES

HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

H.R. 1960

together with

ADDITIONAL AND DISSENTING VIEWS

[Including cost estimate of the Congressional Budget Office]

June 7, 2013.--Committed to the Committee of the Whole House on the
State of the Union and ordered to be printed

HOUSE COMMITTEE ON ARMED SERVICES
One Hundred Thirteenth Congress

HOWARD P. ``BUCK'' McKEON, California, Chairman

MAC THORNBERRY, Texas ADAM SMITH, Washington
WALTER B. JONES, North Carolina LORETTA SANCHEZ, California
J. RANDY FORBES, Virginia MIKE McINTYRE, North Carolina
JEFF MILLER, Florida ROBERT A. BRADY, Pennsylvania
JOE WILSON, South Carolina ROBERT E. ANDREWS, New Jersey
FRANK A. LoBIONDO, New Jersey SUSAN A. DAVIS, California
ROB BISHOP, Utah JAMES R. LANGEVIN, Rhode Island
MICHAEL R. TURNER, Ohio RICK LARSEN, Washington
JOHN KLINE, Minnesota JIM COOPER, Tennessee
MIKE ROGERS, Alabama MADELEINE Z. BORDALLO, Guam
TRENT FRANKS, Arizona JOE COURTNEY, Connecticut
BILL SHUSTER, Pennsylvania DAVID LOEBSACK, Iowa
K. MICHAEL CONAWAY, Texas NIKI TSONGAS, Massachusetts
DOUG LAMBORN, Colorado JOHN GARAMENDI, California
ROBERT J. WITTMAN, Virginia HENRY C. ``HANK'' JOHNSON, Jr.,
DUNCAN HUNTER, California Georgia
JOHN FLEMING, Louisiana COLLEEN W. HANABUSA, Hawaii
MIKE COFFMAN, Colorado JACKIE SPEIER, California
E. SCOTT RIGELL, Virginia RON BARBER, Arizona
CHRISTOPHER P. GIBSON, New York ANDRE CARSON, Indiana
VICKY HARTZLER, Missouri CAROL SHEA-PORTER, New Hampshire
JOSEPH J. HECK, Nevada DANIEL B. MAFFEI, New York
JON RUNYAN, New Jersey DEREK KILMER, Washington
AUSTIN SCOTT, Georgia JOAQUIN CASTRO, Texas
STEVEN M. PALAZZO, Mississippi TAMMY DUCKWORTH, Illinois
MARTHA ROBY, Alabama SCOTT H. PETERS, California
MO BROOKS, Alabama WILLIAM L. ENYART, Illinois
RICHARD B. NUGENT, Florida PETE P. GALLEGO, Texas
KRISTI L. NOEM, South Dakota MARC A. VEASEY, Texas
PAUL COOK, California
JIM BRIDENSTINE, Oklahoma
BRAD R. WENSTRUP, Ohio
JACKIE WALORSKI, Indiana

Robert L. Simmons II, Staff Director

C O N T E N T S

----------
Page
Purpose of the Legislation....................................... 1
Rationale for the Committee Bill................................. 2
Hearings......................................................... 10
Committee Position............................................... 10
Explanation of the Committee Amendments.......................... 10
Relationship of Authorization to Appropriations.................. 10
Summary of Discretionary Authorizations in the Bill.............. 10
Budget Authority Implication..................................... 11

DIVISION A--DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE AUTHORIZATIONS................. 13

TITLE I--PROCUREMENT............................................. 13
OVERVIEW....................................................... 13
Aircraft Procurement, Army................................... 13
Overview................................................... 13
Items of Special Interest.................................. 13
Apache helicopter transmission........................... 13
Lightweight combat medical evacuation systems............ 14
UH-72 Light Utility Helicopter........................... 14
Missile Procurement, Army.................................... 15
Overview................................................... 15
Procurement of Weapons and Tracked Combat Vehicles, Army..... 15
Overview................................................... 15
Items of Special Interest.................................. 15
Armor Brigade Combat Team force structure and industrial
base................................................... 15
Abrams tank upgrades................................... 16
Bradley fighting vehicle and transmission upgrades..... 17
Improved recovery vehicle.............................. 18
Carbine program.......................................... 18
M9 product improvement strategy.......................... 19
Procurement of Ammunition, Army.............................. 19
Overview................................................... 19
Items of Special Interest.................................. 19
Acquisition strategy for 40mm ammunition................. 19
Other Procurement, Army...................................... 20
Overview................................................... 20
Items of Special Interest.................................. 20
Army unmanned ground vehicle upgrades.................... 20
Civil Support Team information management needs.......... 20
Criteria on the Recertification and Quantity of GEM-Ts... 21
Gunshot detection systems................................ 21
Joint Tactical Radio System Manpack radio production
strategy............................................... 21
Patriot Modernization Costs.............................. 22
Personal protection equipment acquisition strategy....... 24
Aircraft Procurement, Navy................................... 24
Overview................................................... 24
Items of Special Interest.................................. 25
F/A-18E/F advance procurement............................ 25
MQ-8 Fire Scout.......................................... 25
Weapons Procurement, Navy.................................... 26
Overview................................................... 26
Procurement of Ammunition, Navy and Marine Corps............. 26
Overview................................................... 26
Shipbuilding and Conversion, Navy............................ 26
Overview................................................... 26
Items of Special Interest.................................. 26
Air and Missile Defense Radar deployment on naval vessels 26
Joint High Speed Vessel report........................... 27
Littoral Combat Ship radar capabilities.................. 28
Littoral Combat Ship (LCS) oversight..................... 28
Long-range plan for the construction of naval vessels.... 29
Navy Close-in Weapon System (CIWS) modernization......... 30
Navy fleet oilers........................................ 30
Use of fixed-price incentive fee contracts for ship
construction contracts................................. 30
Other Procurement, Navy...................................... 31
Overview................................................... 31
Procurement, Marine Corps.................................... 31
Overview................................................... 31
Aircraft Procurement, Air Force.............................. 31
Overview................................................... 31
Items of Special Interest.................................. 32
A-10 oxygen delivery systems modernization............... 32
B-52 Bomber modernization programs....................... 32
Battlefield airborne communications node................. 33
C-130H Avionics and Propulsion System Modernization and
Upgrade Programs....................................... 33
Global Hawk Block 30 aircraft............................ 34
MQ-9 Reaper remotely piloted aircraft.................... 35
Upgraded ejection seats.................................. 36
Procurement of Ammunition, Air Force......................... 36
Overview................................................... 36
Missile Procurement, Air Force............................... 36
Overview................................................... 36
Other Procurement, Air Force................................. 37
Overview................................................... 37
Items of Special Interest.................................. 37
Remotely Piloted Aircraft Squadron Operations Centers for
the Air National Guard................................. 37
Procurement, Defense-Wide.................................... 37
Overview................................................... 37
Items of Special Interest.................................. 37
Concurrent fielding of equipment for the Army National
Guard and Air National Guard........................... 37
Joint Urgent Operational Needs Fund...................... 39
Multiyear procurement authority for ground-based
interceptors........................................... 39
LEGISLATIVE PROVISIONS......................................... 40
Subtitle A--Authorization of Appropriations.................. 40
Section 101--Authorization of Appropriations............... 40
Subtitle B--Army Programs.................................... 40
Section 111--Limitation on Availability of Funds for
Stryker Vehicle Program.................................. 40
Subtitle C--Navy Programs.................................... 40
Section 121--Multiyear Procurement Authority for E-2D
Aircraft Program......................................... 40
Section 122--Cost Limitation for CVN-78 Aircraft Carriers.. 40
Subtitle D--Air Force Programs............................... 41
Section 131--Multiyear Procurement Authority for Multiple
Variants of the C-130J Aircraft Program.................. 41
Section 132--Prohibition on Cancellation or Modification of
Avionics Modernization Program for C-130 Aircraft........ 41
Section 133--Retirement of KC-135R Aircraft................ 41
Section 134--Competition for Evolved Expendable Launch
Vehicle Providers........................................ 41
Subtitle E--Defense-wide, Joint, and Multiservice Matters.... 42
Section 141--Multiyear Procurement Authority for Ground-
based Interceptors....................................... 42
Section 142--Multiyear Procurement Authority for Tactical
Wheeled Vehicles......................................... 42
Section 143--Limitation on Availability of Funds for
Retirement of RQ-4 Global Hawk Unmanned Aircraft Systems. 42
Section 144--Personal Protection Equipment Procurement..... 42
Section 145--Repeal of Certain F-35 Reporting Requirements. 43
Section 146--Study on Procurement of Personal Protection
Equipment................................................ 43
TITLE II--RESEARCH, DEVELOPMENT, TEST, AND EVALUATION............ 43
OVERVIEW....................................................... 43
Research, Development, Test, and Evaluation, Army............ 43
Overview................................................... 43
Items of Special Interest.................................. 43
Active protection system research and development........ 43
Army advanced multi-purpose tank round program........... 44
Army air and missile defense............................. 44
Army cargo unmanned aerial system........................ 44
Army directed energy testing............................. 45
Army modernization strategy for tactical communications
waveforms.............................................. 45
Combat vehicle fuel efficiency engine development........ 46
Continued development of vehicle underbody protection
systems................................................ 46
Fabric-based respiratory protective equipment............ 46
Improved turbine engine program.......................... 47
Innovative approaches in wound care research............. 47
Joint Air-to-Ground Missile program...................... 48
Joint Land Attack Cruise Missile Defense Elevated Netted
Sensor System.......................................... 48
M4 Carbine powered rail system........................... 49
Man-portable electronic warfare.......................... 49
Modeling and simulation for advanced materials........... 50
Modular protective systems for wheeled vehicles.......... 50
Multi-mission electronic warfare......................... 51
Nano-scale electronics and materials..................... 51
Night vision systems engineering development............. 51
Regenerative and rehabilitative engineering.............. 52
Stryker survivability systems integration program........ 52
Tactical vehicle armor development program............... 53
Thermal injury protection in combat and tactical vehicles 53
Third generation forward-looking infrared sensors........ 54
Ultra Lightweight Reconnaissance Robotic capability...... 54
Use of simulation technology in medical training......... 54
Research, Development, Test, and Evaluation, Navy............ 55
Overview................................................... 55
Items of Special Interest.................................. 55
Acoustic intelligence collection capability.............. 55
Augmentation of ultra high frequency communications
satellite systems using near space technologies........ 55
Carrier-based unmanned air vehicle system testing and
development............................................ 56
Cognitive wireless networks for naval applications....... 56
Marine Corps unmanned airborne electronic attack systems. 57
Maritime Laser Weapon System............................. 57
Multi-Stage Supersonic Target development program........ 58
Offensive anti-surface warfare weapon development........ 58
Precision Extended Range Munition Program................ 59
Prepositioned expeditionary assistance kits.............. 60
Service Life Extension of Navy Auxiliary General Purpose
Oceanographic Research vessels......................... 60
Unmanned Underwater Vehicle.............................. 61
Research, Development, Test, and Evaluation, Air Force....... 61
Overview................................................... 61
Items of Special Interest.................................. 61
Adaptive engine technology development................... 61
Aircraft engine component laser peening.................. 62
F-35 aircraft program.................................... 62
Global Positioning System Next Generation Operational
Control System......................................... 63
Hypersonic test facilities............................... 63
In-space solar electric propulsion....................... 64
Joint Space Operations Center Mission System............. 64
Joint surveillance target attack radar system............ 65
Liquid rocket engine technology.......................... 65
Metals Affordability Initiative.......................... 66
Operationally Responsive Space........................... 66
Overhead persistent infrared processing and exploitation. 67
Secure wireless networking applications.................. 68
Sense and avoid research for MQ-1 and MQ-9 remotely
piloted aircraft....................................... 68
Space Fence.............................................. 68
Trusted autonomy for unmanned aerial systems............. 69
Unmanned aerial systems development...................... 69
Wide area surveillance strategy.......................... 70
Wideband Global Satellite communications................. 70
Research, Development, Test, and Evaluation, Defense-Wide.... 71
Overview................................................... 71
Items of Special Interest.................................. 71
Advanced sensor application program...................... 71
Aegis Ballistic Missile Defense System................... 72
Request for multi-year procurement authority for
Standard Missile-3 Block IB beginning in FY15........ 72
Service Life Extension Program for Standard Missile-3
Block IA missile interceptor......................... 72
Standard Missile 3 Block IB ballistic missile
interceptor.......................................... 73
Airborne weapons layer................................... 73
Army Navy/Transportable Radar Surveillance Model 2 Radars 74
Ballistic Missile Defense Technology..................... 74
Missile defense directed energy application development 74
Solid Divert and Attitude Control System............... 75
Ballistic missile threat analysis........................ 75
Common Kill Vehicle for missile defense.................. 75
Conventional Prompt Global Strike........................ 76
Defense Science Board recommendations on Deterrent
Response Capabilities................................ 77
Defense research in remote sensing....................... 78
Detection and threat identification technologies......... 78
Distributed Common Ground System enterprise.............. 79
Electro Magnetic Rail Gun for Missile Defense............ 79
Enhancing participation at minority-serving universities
and institutions....................................... 80
Foreign directed energy threats to U.S. military systems. 81
Future missile defense sensor architectures.............. 82
Ground-based midcourse defense system.................... 82
East Coast missile defense site........................ 83
Fort Greely Missile Field 1............................ 84
Two-stage Interceptor for Ground-based Midcourse
Defense.............................................. 84
High-powered microwave applications...................... 84
Highly integrated photonics.............................. 85
Human-computer interaction............................... 85
Improving military medical innovation.................... 86
Individual equipment for female service members.......... 86
Inner-aural communications hearing protection capability
development............................................ 87
Iron Dome short-range rocket defense..................... 87
Israeli Cooperative Missile Defense Systems.............. 88
Medical research information sharing..................... 88
Microscale liquid plasmas................................ 88
Missile defense cooperation with Japan................. 89
Mitochondrial research................................... 90
Modeling and simulation concurrency...................... 90
Modeling and simulation grand challenges................. 90
National Defense Education Program....................... 91
Next generation Aegis missile--Standard Missile 3 block
IIB.................................................... 92
Non-Lethal directed energy applications.................. 92
Non-profit research institutions......................... 93
Open architecture systems................................ 93
Potential missile defense cooperation with the Republic
of Korea............................................. 94
Precision Tracking Space System.......................... 95
Quantum information science.............................. 95
Report on boost phase missile defense options............ 96
Report on HALT/HASS Testing of Ballistic Missile Defense
Systems and Components................................. 96
Ribonucleic acid technology research..................... 97
Soft biometrics for non-cooperative identification of
personnel.............................................. 97
Special operations technology development................ 98
Standardization of directed energy weapon systems
characterization....................................... 98
Synthetic protein development............................ 99
Technology harvesting of the Medium Extended Air Defense
System................................................. 99
Tele-medicine applications for ophthalmic injury......... 100
Terminal High Altitude Area Defense System............... 100
Three dimensional integrated circuits.................... 101
U.S. Special Operations Command undersea systems strategy 101
Vertical Lift Consortium................................. 101
Operational Test and Evaluation, Defense..................... 102
Overview................................................... 102
Items of Special Interest.................................. 102
Assessment of the Army Distributed Common Ground System.. 102
Test and evaluation capabilities for electromagnetic
pulse vulnerabilities.................................. 103
LEGISLATIVE PROVISIONS......................................... 103
Subtitle A--Authorization of Appropriations.................. 103
Section 201--Authorization of Appropriations............... 103
Subtitle B--Program Requirements, Restrictions, and
Limitations.............................................. 104
Section 211--Limitation on Availability of Funds for Ground
Combat Vehicle Engineering and Manufacturing Phase....... 104
Section 212--Limitation on Milestone A Activities for
Unmanned Carrier-Launched Airborne Surveillance and
Strike System Program.................................... 104
Section 213--Limitation on Availability of Funds for Air
Force Logistics Transformation........................... 104
Section 214--Limitation on Availability of Funds for
Defensive Cyberspace Operations of the Air Force......... 105
Section 215--Limitation on Availability of Funds for
Precision Extended Range Munition Program................ 105
Section 216--Limitation on the Availability of Funds for
the Program Manager for Biometrics of the Department of
Defense.................................................. 105
Section 217--Unmanned Combat Air System Demonstration
Testing Requirement...................................... 105
Section 218--Long-Range Standoff Weapon Requirement........ 105
Section 219--Review of Software Development for F-35
Aircraft................................................. 105
Section 220--Evaluation and Assessment of the Distributed
Common Ground Station.................................... 106
Section 221--Requirement to Complete Individual Carbine
Testing.................................................. 106
Section 222--Establishment of Funding Line and Fielding
Plan for Navy Laser Weapon System........................ 106
Section 223--Sense of Congress on Importance of Aligning
Common Missile Compartment of Ohio-Class Replacement
Program with the United Kingdom's Vanguard Successor
Program.................................................. 106
Section 224--Sense of Congress on Counter-electronics High
Power Microwave Missile Project.......................... 107
Subtitle C--Missile Defense Programs......................... 107
Section 231--Prohibition on Use of Funds For MEADS Program. 107
Section 232--Additional Missile Defense Site in the United
States for Optimized Protection of the Homeland.......... 107
Section 233--Limitation on Removal of Missile Defense
Equipment from East Asia................................. 108
Section 234--Improvements to Acquisition Accountability
Reports on Ballistic Missile Defense System.............. 108
Section 235--Analysis of Alternatives for Successor to
Precision Tracking Space System.......................... 108
Section 236--Plan To Improve Organic Kill Assessment
Capability of the Ground-Based Midcourse Defense System.. 108
Section 237--Availability of Funds for Iron Dome Short-
Range Rocket Defense Program............................. 109
Section 238--NATO and the Phased, Adaptive Approach to
Missile Defense in Europe................................ 109
Section 239--Sense of Congress on Procurement of Capability
Enhancement II Exoatmospheric Kill Vehicle............... 109
Section 240--Sense of Congress on 30th Anniversary of the
Strategic Defense Initiative............................. 109
Subtitle D--Reports.......................................... 110
Section 251--Annual Comptroller General Report on the
Amphibious Combat Vehicle Acquisition Program............ 110
Section 252--Report on Strategy To Improve Body Armor...... 110
Section 253--Report on Main Battle Tank Fuel Efficiency
Initiative............................................... 110
Section 254--Report on Powered Rail System................. 110
Subtitle E--Other Matters.................................... 111
Section 261--Establishment of Cryptographic Modernization
Review and Advisory Board................................ 111
Section 262--Clarification of Eligibility of a State to
Participate in Defense Experimental Program to Stimulate
Competitive Research..................................... 111
Section 263--Extension and Expansion of Mechanisms to
Provide Funds for Defense Laboratories for Research and
Development of Technologies for Military Missions........ 111
Section 264--Extension of Authority to Award Prizes for
Advanced Technology Achievements......................... 111
Section 265--Five-Year Extension of Pilot Program to
Include Technology Protection Features During Research
and Development of Certain Defense Systems............... 111
Section 266--Briefing on Power and Energy Research
Conducted at University Affiliated Research Centers...... 111
TITLE III--OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE............................. 112
OVERVIEW....................................................... 112
ITEMS OF SPECIAL INTEREST...................................... 113
Budget Request Adjustments................................... 113
Office of Economic Adjustment.............................. 113
Logistics and Sustainment Issues............................. 114
Air Force Fuel Leak Maintenance Efficiencies............... 114
Anti-corrosion Protective Covers for Military Hardware..... 114
Army Logisticians.......................................... 115
Comptroller General Littoral Combat System Sustainment
Review................................................... 115
Continuous Technology Refreshment.......................... 116
Defense Logistics Agency Roles and Missions Assessment..... 116
Disposition of Retrograded Equipment from Afghanistan...... 117
F-35 Sustainment Plan...................................... 118
Item Unique Identification and Automated Information and
Data Capture............................................. 119
Laser Peening Technology................................... 119
Logistical Support to the Department of Defense............ 120
Long-term Investment Plan for Land, Facilities, and
Equipment of Former Guam Ship Repair Facility............ 120
Navy Fleet Readiness....................................... 121
Submarine Propeller Repair and Overhaul.................... 121
Readiness Issues............................................. 122
Advanced Situational Awareness Training.................... 122
Combat Training Centers.................................... 122
Comptroller General Encroachment Study..................... 122
GAO Review of DOD Readiness and Risks...................... 124
Identification of Foreign-Language Competency.............. 125
Missile Defense Capabilities for Guam...................... 125
Navy Expeditionary Combat Command.......................... 126
Military Ocean Terminal Concord............................ 126
Report on Career Progression of U.S. Army and U.S. Marine
Corps Advisory Personnel................................. 127
Sustainable Range Planning................................. 128
Water Egress Training...................................... 128
Other Matters................................................ 129
Concerns Related to Fuel Rate Determinations............... 129
Department of Defense Travel Restrictions.................. 130
Navy Arctic Roadmap........................................ 130
North Atlantic Treaty Organization Special Operations
Headquarters............................................. 131
Operations and Maintenance of the Ballistic Missile Defense
System................................................... 131
Weather Data and Modeling.................................. 131
LEGISLATIVE PROVISIONS......................................... 132
Subtitle A--Authorization of Appropriations.................. 132
Section 301--Operation and Maintenance Funding............. 132
Subtitle B--Energy and Environment........................... 132
Section 311--Deadline for Submission of Reports on Proposed
Budgets for Activities Relating to Operational Energy
Strategy................................................. 132
Section 312--Facilitation of Interagency Cooperation in
Conservation Programs of the Departments of Defense,
Agriculture, and Interior to Avoid or Reduce Adverse
Impacts on Military Readiness Activities................. 132
Section 313--Reauthorization of Sikes Act.................. 132
Section 314--Cooperative Agreements Under Sikes Act for
Land Management Related to Department of Defense
Readiness Activities..................................... 133
Section 315--Exclusions from Definition of ``Chemical
Substance'' under Toxic Substances Control Act........... 133
Section 316--Exemption of Department of Defense from
Alternative Fuel Procurement Requirement................. 133
Section 317--Clarification of Prohibition on Disposing of
Waste in Open-Air Burn Pits.............................. 133
Section 318--Limitation on Plan, Design, Refurbishing, or
Construction of Biofuels Refineries...................... 133
Section 319--Limitation on Procurement of Biofuels......... 133
Subtitle C--Logistics and Sustainment........................ 134
Section 321--Littoral Combat Ship Strategic Sustainment
Plan..................................................... 134
Section 322--Review of Critical Manufacturing Capabilities
within Army Arsenals..................................... 134
Section 323--Inclusion of Army Arsenals Capabilities in
Solicitations............................................ 134
Subtitle D--Reports.......................................... 134
Section 331--Additional Reporting Requirements Relating to
Personnel and Unit Readiness............................. 134
Section 332--Repeal of Annual Comptroller General Report on
Army Progress............................................ 135
Section 333--Revision to Requirement for Annual Submission
of Information Regarding Information Technology Capital
Assets................................................... 135
Subtitle E--Limitations and Extensions of Authority.......... 135
Section 341--Limitation on Reduction of Force Structure at
Lajes Air Force Base, Azores............................. 135
Section 342--Prohibition on Performance of Department of
Defense Flight Demonstration Teams Outside the United
States................................................... 136
Subtitle F--Other Matters.................................... 136
Section 351--Requirement to Establish Policy on Joint
Combat Uniforms.......................................... 136
TITLE IV--MILITARY PERSONNEL AUTHORIZATIONS...................... 136
OVERVIEW....................................................... 136
ITEMS OF SPECIAL INTEREST...................................... 137
Operational Reserves......................................... 137
LEGISLATIVE PROVISIONS......................................... 137
Subtitle A--Active Forces.................................... 137
Section 401--End Strengths for Active Forces............... 137
Section 402--Revision in Permanent Active Duty End Strength
Minimum Levels........................................... 138
Subtitle B--Reserve Forces................................... 138
Section 411--End Strengths for Selected Reserve............ 138
Section 412--End Strengths for Reserves on Active Duty in
Support of the Reserves.................................. 138
Section 413-- End Strengths for Military Technicians (Dual
Status).................................................. 139
Section 414--Fiscal Year 2014 Limitation on Number of Non-
Dual Status Technicians.................................. 139
Section 415--Maximum Number of Reserve Personnel Authorized
To Be on Active Duty for Operational Support............. 140
Subtitle C--Authorization of Appropriations.................. 140
Section 421--Military Personnel............................ 140
TITLE V--MILITARY PERSONNEL POLICY............................... 140
OVERVIEW....................................................... 140
ITEMS OF SPECIAL INTEREST...................................... 141
Air Force Education Programs................................. 141
Assessing the Trend in Costs of General and Flag Officers on
Active Duty................................................ 142
Clarification of Conferees Statement on the Assignments of
Military Officers as Academic Instructors at Military
Service Academies as Joint Duty Assignments................ 142
Community-Based Youth Organizations.......................... 143
Comptroller General Review of Recommendations to Prevent
Sexual Misconduct at Lackland Air Force Base and Other
Basic and Technical Training Facilities.................... 143
Consistency Among Exceptional Family Member Programs......... 144
Disposition of Remains by Host Nations....................... 144
Domestic Violence and Child Abuse............................ 145
Department of Defense Efforts to Ensure Operation of Current
Prohibition on Accrual of Interest on Direct Student Loans
of Members of the Armed Forces Receiving Imminent Danger
Pay........................................................ 145
Foreign Exchange Program for Reserve Officer Training Corps
Cadets and Critical Military Language Training............. 145
Fully Burdened Life Cycle Cost of Military Personnel......... 146
Mental Health Professional on a Physical Evaluation Board.... 147
National Support for Service Members, Veterans, Retirees and
their Families............................................. 147
Navy Sea Cadet Corps Sustainment............................. 148
Relocation Assistance Program Resource Access Review......... 148
Reserve Component Temporary Duty Assignments................. 148
Review of Programs for Male Victims of Sexual Assault in the
U.S. Military.............................................. 149
Suicides and Military Families............................... 149
Support for the Interstate Compact on Educational Opportunity
for Military Children...................................... 150
Transition Assistance Program................................ 150
Tuition Assistance........................................... 150
U.S. Special Operations Command Educational Initiatives...... 151
Use of Radio in Department of Defense Advertising............ 151
Yellow Ribbon Reintegration Program.......................... 152
LEGISLATIVE PROVISIONS......................................... 152
Subtitle A--Officer Personnel Policy Generally............... 152
Section 501--Limitations on Number of General and Flag
Officers on Active Duty.................................. 152
Subtitle B--Reserve Component Management..................... 153
Section 511--Minimum Notification Requirements for Members
of Reserve Components Before Deployment or Cancellation
of Deployment Related to a Contingency Operation......... 153
Section 512--Information to be Provided to Boards
Considering Officers for Selective Early Removal from
Reserve Active-Status List............................... 153
Section 513--Temporary Authority to Maintain Active Status
and Inactive Status Lists of Members in the Inactive
National Guard........................................... 153
Section 514--Review of Requirements and Authorizations for
Reserve Component General and Flag Officers in an Active
Status................................................... 154
Section 515--Feasibility Study on Establishing a Unit of
the National Guard in American Samoa and in the
Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands............. 154
Subtitle C--General Service Authorities...................... 154
Section 521--Review of Integrated Disability Evaluation
System................................................... 154
Section 522--Compliance Requirements for Organizational
Climate Assessments...................................... 154
Section 523--Command Responsibility and Accountability for
Remains of Members of the Army, Navy, Air Force, and
Marine Corps Who Die Outside the United States........... 155
Section 524--Contents of Transition Assistance Program..... 155
Section 525--Procedures for Judicial Review of Military
Personnel Decisions Relating to Correction of Military
Records.................................................. 155
Section 526--Establishment And Use of Consistent Definition
of Gender-Neutral Occupational Standard For Military
Career Designators....................................... 155
Section 527--Expansion and Enhancement of Authorities
Relating to Protected Communications of Members of The
Armed Forces and Prohibited Retaliatory Actions.......... 156
Section 528--Applicability of Medical Examination
Requirement Regarding Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder or
Traumatic Brain Injury to Proceedings Under the Uniform
Code of Military Justice................................. 156
Section 529--Protection of the Religious Freedom of
Military Chaplains to Close a Prayer Outside of a
Religious Service According to the Traditions,
Expressions, and Religious Exercises of the Endorsing
Faith Group.............................................. 156
Section 530--Expansion and Implementation of Protections of
Rights of Conscience of Members of the Armed Forces and
Chaplains of Such Members................................ 156
Section 530A--Service Members' Accountability, Rights, and
Responsibilities Training................................ 157
Section 530B--Inspector General of the Department of
Defense Review of Separation of Members of the Armed
Forces who Made Unrestricted Reports of Sexual Assault... 157
Section 530C--Report on Data and Information Collected in
Connection with Department of Defense Review of Laws,
Policies, and Regulations Restricting Service of Female
Members of the Armed Forces.............................. 157
Section 530D--Sense of Congress Regarding the Women in
Service Implementation Plan.............................. 157
Subtitle D--Military Justice and Legal Matters, Including
Sexual Assault Prevention and Response................... 158
Section 531--Limitations on Convening Authority Discretion
Regarding Court-Martial Findings and Sentence............ 158
Section 532--Elimination of Five-Year Statute of
Limitations on Trial By Court-Martial for Additional
Offenses Involving Sex-Related Crimes.................... 158
Section 533--Discharge or Dismissal for Certain Sex-Related
Offenses and Trial of Offenses by General Courts-Martial. 159
Section 534--Regulations Regarding Consideration of
Application for Permanent Change of Station or Unit
Transfer by Victims of Sexual Assault.................... 159
Section 535--Consideration of Need for, and Authority to
Provide for, Temporary Administrative Reassignment or
Removal of a Member on Active Duty Who is Accused of
Committing a Sexual Assault or Related Offense........... 159
Section 536--Victims' Counsel for Victims of Sex-Related
Offenses and Related Provisions.......................... 160
Section 537--Inspector General Investigation of Allegations
of Retaliatory Personnel Actions Taken in Response to
Making Protected Communications Regarding Sexual Assault. 160
Section 538--Secretary Defense Report on Role of Commanders
in Military Justice Process.............................. 160
Section 539--Review and Policy Regarding Department of
Defense Investigative Practices in Response to
Allegations of Sex-Related Offenses...................... 161
Section 540--Uniform Training and Education Programs for
Sexual Assault Prevention and Response Program........... 161
Section 541--Development of Selection Criteria for
Assignment as Sexual Assault Response and Prevention
Program Managers, Sexual Assault Response Coordinators,
and Sexual Assault Victim Advocates...................... 161
Section 542--Extension of Crime Victims' Rights to Victims
of Offenses Under the Uniform Code of Military Justice... 161
Section 543--Defense Counsel Interview of Complaining
Witnesses in Presence of Counsel for the Complaining
Witnesses or a Sexual Assault Victim Advocate............ 162
Section 544--Participation by Complaining Witness in
Clemency Phase of Courts-Martial Process................. 162
Section 545--Eight-Day Incident Reporting Requirement in
Response to Unrestricted Report of Sexual Assault in
Which the Victim is a Member of the Armed Forces......... 162
Section 546--Amendment to Manual for Courts-Martial to
Eliminate Considerations Relating to Character and
Military Service of Accused in Initial Disposition of
Sex-Related Offenses..................................... 163
Section 547--Inclusion of Letters of Reprimand, Nonpunitive
Letters of Reprimand and Counseling Statements........... 163
Section 548--Enhanced Protections for Prospective Members
and New Members of the Armed Forces During Entry-Level
Processing and Training.................................. 163
Section 549--Independent Reviews and Assessments of Uniform
Code of Military Justice and Judicial Proceedings of
Sexual Assault Cases..................................... 163
Section 550--Review of the Office of Diversity Management
and Equal Opportunity Role in Sexual Harassment Cases.... 164
Subtitle E--Military Family Readiness........................ 164
Section 551--Department of Defense Recognition of Spouses
of Members of the Armed Forces Who Serve in Combat Zones. 164
Section 552--Protection of Child Custody Arrangements For
Parents Who Are Members of the Armed Forces.............. 164
Section 553--Treatment of Relocation of Members of the
Armed Forces for Active Duty for Purposes of Mortgage
Refinancing.............................................. 164
Section 554--Family Support Programs for Immediate Family
Members of Members of the Armed Forces Assigned to
Special Operations Forces................................ 164
Subtitle F--Education and Training Opportunities and
Administration........................................... 165
Section 561--Inclusion of Freely Associated States within
Scope of Junior Reserve Officers' Training Corps Program. 165
Section 562--Improved Climate Assessments and Dissemination
and Tracking of Results.................................. 165
Section 563--Service-wide 360 Assessments.................. 165
Section 564--Health Welfare Inspections.................... 165
Section 565--Review of Security of Military Installations,
Including Barracks and multi-family residences........... 166
Section 566--Enhancement of Mechanisms to Correlate Skills
and Training for Military Occupational Specialties with
Skills and Training Required for Civilian Certification
and Licenses............................................. 166
Section 567--Use of Educational Assistance for Courses in
Pursuit of Civilian Certifications or Licenses........... 166
Subtitle G--Defense Dependents' Education.................... 166
Section 571--Continuation of Authority To Assist Local
Educational Agencies that Benefit Dependents of Members
of the Armed Forces and Department of Defense Civilian
Employees................................................ 166
Section 572--Support for Efforts to Improve Academic
Achievement and Transition of Military Dependent Students 167
Section 573--Treatment of Tuition Payments Received for
Virtual Elementary and Secondary Education Component of
Department of Defense Education Program.................. 167
Subtitle H--Decorations and Awards........................... 167
Section 581--Fraudulent Representations about Receipt of
Military Decorations or Medals........................... 167
Section 582--Repeal of Limitation on Number of Medals of
Honor That May Be Awarded to the same Member of the Armed
Forces................................................... 167
Section 583--Standardization of Time-Limits for
Recommending and Awarding Medal of Honor, Distinguished-
Service Cross, Navy Cross, Air Force Cross, and
Distinguished-Service Medal.............................. 167
Section 584--Recodification and Revision of Army, Navy, Air
Force, and Coast Guard Medal of Honor Roll Requirements.. 167
Section 585--Treatment of Victims of the Attacks at
Recruiting Station in Little Rock, Arkansas, and at Fort
Hood, Texas.............................................. 168
Section 586--Retroactive Award of Army Combat Action Badge. 168
Section 587--Report on Navy Review, Findings, and Actions
Pertaining to Medal of Honor Nomination of Marine Corps
Sergeant Rafael Peralta.................................. 168
Section 588--Authorization For Award Of The Distinguished-
Service Cross To Sergeant First Class Robert F. Keiser
For Acts Of Valor During The Korean War.................. 168
Subtitle I--Other Matters.................................... 169
Section 591--Revision of Specified Senior Military Colleges
to Reflect Consolidation of North Georgia College and
State University and Gainesville State College........... 169
Section 592--Authority to Enter into Concessions Contracts
at Army National Military Cemeteries..................... 169
Section 593--Commission on Military Behavioral Health and
Disciplinary Issues...................................... 169
Section 594--Commission on Service to the Nation........... 169
TITLE VI--COMPENSATION AND OTHER PERSONNEL BENEFITS.............. 170
OVERVIEW....................................................... 170
ITEMS OF SPECIAL INTEREST...................................... 170
Military Exchanges, Commissaries, and Morale, Welfare, and
Recreation Activities...................................... 170
LEGISLATIVE PROVISIONS......................................... 170
Subtitle A--Pay and Allowances............................... 170
Section 601--Extension of Authority to Provide Temporary
Increase in Rates of Basic Allowance for Housing Under
Certain Circumstances.................................... 170
Subtitle B--Bonuses and Special and Incentive Pays........... 171
Section 611--One-Year Extension of Certain Bonus and
Special Pay Authorities for Reserve Forces............... 171
Section 612--One-Year Extension of Certain Bonus and
Special Pay Authorities for Health Care Professionals.... 171
Section 613--One-Year Extension of Special Pay and Bonus
Authorities for Nuclear Officers......................... 171
Section 614--One-Year Extension of Authorities Relating to
Title 37 Consolidated Special Pay, Incentive Pay, and
Bonus Authorities........................................ 171
Section 615--One-Year Extension of Authorities Relating to
Payment of Other Title 37 Bonuses and Special Pays....... 172
Section 616--One-Year Extension of Authority to Provide
Incentive Pay for Members of Precommissioning Programs
Pursuing Foreign Language Proficiency.................... 172
Section 617--Authority to Provide Bonus to Certain Cadets
and Midshipmen Enrolled in the Senior Reserve Officers'
Training Corps........................................... 172
Subtitle C--Disability, Retired Pay, Survivor, and
Transitional Benefits.................................... 172
Section 621--Transitional Compensation and Other Benefits
for Dependents of Certain Members Separated for Violation
of the Uniform Code of Military Justice.................. 172
Section 622--Prevention of Retired Pay Inversion for
Members whose Retired Pay is Computed Using High-Three
Average.................................................. 172
Subtitle D--Commissary and Nonappropriated Fund
Instrumentality Benefits and Operations.................. 173
Section 631--Expansion of Protection of Employees of
Nonappropriated Fund Instrumentalities from Reprisals.... 173
Section 632--Purchase of Sustainable Products, Local Food
Products, and Recyclable Materials for Resale in
Commissary and Exchange Store Systems.................... 173
Section 633--Correction of Obsolete References to Certain
Nonappropriated Fund Instrumentalities................... 173
Subtitle E--Other Matters.................................... 173
Section 641--Authority to Provide Certain Expenses for Care
and Disposition of Human Remains Retained by the
Department Of Defense for Forensic Pathology
Investigation............................................ 173
Section 642--Provision of Status under Law by Honoring
Certain Members of the Reserve Components as Veterans.... 174
Section 643--Survey of Military Pay and Benefits
Preferences.............................................. 174
TITLE VII--HEALTH CARE PROVISIONS................................ 174
OVERVIEW....................................................... 174
ITEMS OF SPECIAL INTEREST...................................... 174
Additional Therapeutic Treatment Activities Available Under
Exceptional Care Health Option............................. 174
Administration of Blood Products On-board U.S. Medical
Evacuation Aircraft........................................ 175
Alcohol Abuse Prevention Programs............................ 175
Department of Defense and Early Autism Diagnosis and
Intervention for Military Families......................... 175
Efforts to Advance Lower Extremity Prosthetics and Orthotics. 176
Efforts to Improve Treatment for Post Traumatic Stress and
Traumatic Brain Injury..................................... 176
Healthy Base Initiative...................................... 177
Military Health System Governance Reform Report.............. 177
Report on Prostate Cancer Imaging Research................... 177
Report on Provider Referrals for Ancillary Services Under
TRICARE.................................................... 178
Review of the Military Health System Medical Training
Consolidation.............................................. 178
Therapeutic Service Dog Training Program..................... 178
Trauma Clinical Research Repository.......................... 179
LEGISLATIVE PROVISIONS......................................... 179
Subtitle A--Improvements to Health Benefits.................. 179
Section 701--Mental Health Assessments for Members of the
Armed Forces............................................. 179
Section 702--Periodic Mental Health Assessments for Members
of the Armed Forces...................................... 180
Subtitle B--Health Care Administration....................... 180
Section 711--Future Availability of TRICARE Prime for
Certain Beneficiaries Enrolled in TRICARE Prime.......... 180
Section 712--Cooperative Health Care Agreements Between the
Military Departments and Non-Military Health Care
Entities................................................. 180
Section 713--Limitation on Availability of Funds for
Integrated Electronic Health Record Program.............. 180
Section 714--Pilot Program on Increased Third-Party
Collection Reimbursements in Military Medical Treatment
Facilities............................................... 180
Subtitle C--Other Matters.................................... 180
Section 721--Display of Budget Information for Embedded
Mental Health Providers of the Reserve Components........ 180
Section 722--Authority of Uniformed Services University of
Health Sciences to Enter Into Contracts and Agreements
and Make Grants to Other Nonprofit Entities.............. 181
Section 723--Mental Health Support for Military Personnel
and Families............................................. 181
Section 724--Research Regarding Hydrocephalus.............. 181
Section 725--Traumatic Brain Injury Research............... 181
TITLE VIII--ACQUISITION POLICY, ACQUISITION MANAGEMENT, AND
RELATED MATTERS.............................................. 181
ITEMS OF SPECIAL INTEREST...................................... 181
Advanced Technical Exploitation Program...................... 181
Commercial Items Pricing Information......................... 182
Competition in Air Force Network-Centric Solutions Contracts. 182
Implementation of Requirement for Designation of a Lead
Inspector General for Certain Contingency Operations....... 183
Online Reverse Auctions...................................... 184
Report on Operational Contract Support in Afghanistan........ 184
Use of Lowest Price, Technically Acceptable Source Selection
Processes.................................................. 185
Utilization of Standardized Services Contract Approval Form.. 186
LEGISLATIVE PROVISIONS......................................... 187
Subtitle A--Acquisition Policy and Management................ 187
Section 801--Modification of Reporting Requirement for
Department of Defense Business System Acquisition
Programs when Initial Operating Capability is not
Achieved within Five Years of Milestone A Approval....... 187
Section 802--Enhanced Transfer of Technology Developed at
Department of Defense Laboratories....................... 187
Section 803--Extension of Limitation on Aggregate Annual
Amount Available for Contract Services................... 187
Subtitle B--Amendments to General Contracting Authorities,
Procedures, and Limitations.............................. 187
Section 811--Additional Contractor Responsibilities in
Regulations Relating to Detection and Avoidance of
Counterfeit Electronic Parts............................. 187
Section 812--Amendments Relating to Detection and Avoidance
of Counterfeit Electronic Parts.......................... 188
Section 813--Government-wide Limitations on Allowable Costs
for Contractor Compensation.............................. 188
Section 814--Inclusion of Additional Cost Estimate
Information in Certain Reports........................... 189
Section 815--Amendment Relating to Compelling Reasons for
Waiving Suspension or Debarment.......................... 189
Section 816--Requirement that Cost or Price to the Federal
Government be Given at Least Equal Importance as
Technical or Other Criteria in Evaluating Competitive
Proposals for Defense Contracts.......................... 189
Section 817--Requirement to Buy American Flags from
Domestic Sources......................................... 189
Subtitle C--Provisions Relating to Contracts in Support of
Contingency Operations in Iraq or Afghanistan............ 190
Section 821--Amendments Relating to Prohibition on
Contracting with the Enemy............................... 190
Section 822--Collection of Data Relating to Contracts in
Iraq and Afghanistan..................................... 190
Subtitle D--Other Matters.................................... 190
Section 831--Extension of Pilot Program on Acquisition of
Military Purpose Non-Developmental Items................. 190
Section 832--Extension of Authority to Acquire Products and
Services Produced in Countries Along a Major Route of
Supply to Afghanistan.................................... 191
TITLE IX--DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE ORGANIZATION AND MANAGEMENT...... 191
ITEMS OF SPECIAL INTEREST...................................... 191
Air Force Force Structure.................................... 191
Air Force Materiel Command Metrics........................... 192
Air Sea Battle Office........................................ 193
Air Force High Consequence Information Technology Services... 193
Assessment of Cyber Centers of Academic Excellence........... 194
Briefing to Congress on ICBM motor stockpile................. 194
Cadastral Geographic Information Systems Inventory........... 195
Comptroller General Review of the Department of Defense's
Implementation of Civilian Personnel Furloughs............. 195
Comptroller General Review of Department of Defense Cyber
Resiliency................................................. 195
Comptroller General Review of Conduct of Roles and Missions
Analysis................................................... 196
Coordination of Cyber and Electronic Warfare Capabilities.... 198
Cost Drivers in the Department of Defense.................... 198
Critical Program Information................................. 199
Cyber Standards Framework.................................... 199
Data Management and Protection............................... 200
Defense Intelligence Collection Management................... 200
Enterprise Query and Correlation Pilot....................... 201
Exploitation of Foreign Commercial Cellular Networks......... 201
Global Response Force........................................ 201
Guidance on the Use of Borrowed Military Manpower............ 202
Guidance Regarding the Conversion of Functions Performed by
Non-appropriated Fund Employees............................ 203
Input into National Intelligence Priorities Framework........ 203
Integrated Science and Technology Campus for the Defense
Intelligence Agency........................................ 203
Intelligence, Surveillance, and Reconnaissance Aircraft
Utilization................................................ 204
Non-Perimeter Cyber Defenses................................. 205
Open-Source Intelligence Utilization......................... 205
Pilot to Counter Brokers of Transnational Criminal
Organizations.............................................. 206
Science and Technology Community Intelligence Needs Planning. 206
Software Assurance Policy.................................... 207
Space Training............................................... 207
Technical Defense Intelligence Training...................... 208
Training Standards for Department of Defense Cyber Missions.. 208
Vulnerability of Tactical Data Links in Denied Areas......... 209
LEGISLATIVE PROVISIONS......................................... 209
Subtitle A--Department of Defense Management................. 209
Section 901--Redesignation of the Department of the Navy as
the Department of the Navy and Marine Corps.............. 209
Section 902--Revisions to composition of transition plan
for defense business enterprise architecture............. 209
Subtitle B--Space Activities................................. 209
Section 911--National Security Space Satellite Reporting
Policy................................................... 209
Section 912--National Security Space Defense and Protection 210
Section 913--Space Acquisition Strategy.................... 210
Section 914--Space Control Mission Report.................. 211
Section 915--Responsive Launch............................. 211
Subtitle C--Defense Intelligence and Intelligence-Related
Matters.................................................. 211
Section 921--Revision of Secretary of Defense Authority to
Engage in Commercial Activities as Security for
Intelligence Collection Activities....................... 211
Section 922--Department of Defense Intelligence Priorities. 212
Section 923--Defense Clandestine Service................... 212
Section 924--Prohibition on National Intelligence Program
Consolidation............................................ 212
Subtitle D--Cyberspace-related Matters....................... 213
Section 931--Modification of Requirement for Inventory of
Department of Defense Tactical Data Link Systems......... 213
Section 932--Defense Science Board assessment of United
States Cyber Command..................................... 213
Section 933--Mission Analysis for Cyber Operations of
Department of Defense.................................... 213
Section 934--Notification of Investigations Related to
Compromise of Critical Program Information............... 214
Section 935--Additional Requirements Relating to the
Software Licenses of the Department of Defense........... 214
Subtitle E--Total Force Management........................... 215
Section 941--Requirement to Ensure Sufficient Levels of
Government Oversight of Functions Closely Associated with
Inherently Governmental Functions........................ 215
Section 942--Five-Year Requirement for Certification of
Appropriate Manpower Performance......................... 215
TITLE X--GENERAL PROVISIONS...................................... 215
ITEMS OF SPECIAL INTEREST...................................... 215
Counter-Drug Activities...................................... 215
Counternarcotics Strategy in Central America............... 215
Humanitarian Efforts in U.S. Southern Command.............. 215
National Guard Bureau Counter-drug Mission................. 216
Operation Martillo......................................... 216
Transition of Tethered Aerostat Radar System Program....... 217
U.S. Southern Command Assets............................... 217
Other Matters................................................ 218
Assessment of Military Construction Project................ 218
Combatant Command Headquarters Personnel and Resources
Requirements............................................. 219
Comptroller General Review of Functional Combatant Commands 220
Comptroller General Review of Medical Countermeasures
Against Genetically Engineered Bio-Terror Agents......... 220
Comptroller General Review of Planning and Preparedness for
Threats Posed by Non-Traditional Chemical Agents......... 221
Comptroller General Review of Role of the Army and the
Marine Corps in Access-denied Areas...................... 223
Comptroller General Review of U.S. Central Command
Headquarters............................................. 223
Defense Forensic Enterprise................................ 224
Detailed Report on Defense Efficiencies.................... 225
Energy Security Assessments in the Quadrennial Defense
Review................................................... 225
Humanitarian Mine Action and Counter-Improvised Explosive
Device Technologies...................................... 225
Hybrid Airship Technology.................................. 226
Nuclear Deterrence Education in the Armed Forces........... 226
Nuclear Weapons Council and Commonality in Nuclear Forces
and Nuclear Warheads..................................... 227
Personnel Growth at the Office of the Secretary of Defense,
Joint Staff, and the Service Secretariats................ 228
Preventing Unfair Trade Practices in Military Equipment
Sales.................................................... 229
Replacement Plan for E-4B.................................. 229
Report on Implementation of Acquisition Strategy to
Minimize Costs for Defense Base Act Insurance............ 230
Report on Security Exemptions and Waivers for U.S. Nuclear
Forces................................................... 230
Reporting Pursuant to the War Powers Resolution............ 230
Secure Internet Protocol Router Network for the
Congressional Defense Committees......................... 230
Sustainment of Sociocultural Understanding Capabilities.... 231
LEGISLATIVE PROVISIONS......................................... 232
Subtitle A--Financial Matters................................ 232
Section 1001--General Transfer Authority................... 232
Section 1002--Budgetary Effects of This Act................ 232
Section 1003--Audit of Department of Defense Fiscal Year
2018 Financial Statements................................ 232
Section 1004--Authority to Transfer Funds to the National
Nuclear Security Administration to Sustain Nuclear
Weapons Modernization.................................... 232
Subtitle B--Counter-Drug Activities.......................... 232
Section 1011--Extension of Authority to Support Unified
Counter-drug and Counterterrorism Campaign in Colombia... 232
Section 1012--Extension of Authority for Joint Task Forces
to Provide Support to Law Enforcement Agencies Conducting
Counterterrorism Activities.............................. 233
Section 1013--Two-Year Extension of Authority to Provide
Additional Support for Counter-drug Activities of Certain
Foreign Governments...................................... 233
Section 1014--Sense of Congress Regarding the National
Guard Counter-narcotic Program........................... 233
Subtitle C--Naval Vessels and Shipyards...................... 233
Section 1021--Clarification of Sole Ownership Resulting
from Ship Donations at No Cost to the Navy............... 233
Section 1022--Availability of Funds for Retirement or
Inactivation of Ticonderoga Class Cruisers or Dock
Landing Ships............................................ 233
Section 1023--Repair of Vessels in Foreign Shipyards....... 234
Section 1024--Sense of Congress Regarding a Balanced Future
Naval Force.............................................. 234
Section 1025--Authority for Short-term Extension or Renewal
of Leases for Vessels Supporting the Transit Protection
System Escort Program.................................... 234
Subtitle D--Counterterrorism................................. 234
Section 1030--Clarification of Procedures for Use of
Alternate Members on Military Commissions................ 234
Section 1031--Modification of Regional Defense Combating
Terrorism Fellowship Program Reporting Requirement....... 234
Section 1032--Prohibition on Use of Funds To Construct or
Modify Facilities in the United States To House Detainees
Transferred from United States Naval Station, Guantanamo
Bay, Cuba................................................ 235
Section 1033--Requirements for Certifications Relating to
the Transfer of Detainees at United States Naval Station,
Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, to Foreign Countries and Other
Foreign Entities......................................... 235
Section 1034--Prohibition on the Use Of Funds for the
Transfer or Release of Individuals Detained at United
States Naval Station, Guantanamo Bay, Cuba............... 236
Section 1035--Unclassified Summary of Information Relating
to Individuals Detained at Parwan, Afghanistan........... 236
Section 1036--Assessment of Affiliates and Adherents of Al-
Qaeda Outside the United States.......................... 236
Section 1037--Designation of Department of Defense Senior
Official for Facilitating the Transfer of Individuals
Detained at United States Naval Station, Guantanamo Bay,
Cuba..................................................... 236
Section 1038--Rank of Chief Prosecutor and Chief Defense
Counsel in Military Commissions Established to Try
Individuals Detained at Guantanamo....................... 237
Section 1039--Report on Capability of Yemeni Government to
Detain, Rehabilitate, and Prosecute Individuals Detained
at Guantanamo who are Transferred to Yemen............... 237
Section 1040--Report on Attachment of Rights to Individuals
Detained at Guantanamo if Transferred to the United
States................................................... 237
Section 1040A--Summary of Information Relating to
Individuals Detained at Guantanamo who Became Leaders of
Foreign Terrorist Groups................................. 237
Subtitle E--Sensitive Military Operations.................... 238
Section 1041--Congressional Notification of Sensitive
Military Operations...................................... 238
Section 1042--Report on Process for Determining Targets of
Lethal Operations........................................ 238
Section 1043--Counterterrorism Operational Briefings....... 238
Subtitle F--Nuclear Forces................................... 238
Section 1051--Prohibition on Elimination of the Nuclear
Triad.................................................... 238
Section 1052--Limitation on Availability of Funds for
Reduction of Nuclear Forces.............................. 239
Section 1053--Limitation on Availability of Funds for
Reduction or Consolidation of Dual-Capable Aircraft Based
in Europe................................................ 239
Section 1054--Statement of Policy on Implementation of Any
Agreement for Further Arms Reduction Below the Levels of
the New START Treaty; Limitation on Retirement Or
Dismantlement of Strategic Delivery Systems.............. 239
Section 1055--Sense of Congress on Compliance with Nuclear
Arms Control Agreements.................................. 240
Section 1056--Retention of Capability to Redeploy Multiple
Independently Targetable Reentry Vehicles................ 240
Section 1057--Assessment of Nuclear Weapons Program of the
People's Republic of China............................... 241
Section 1058--Cost Estimates for Nuclear Weapons........... 241
Section 1059--Report on New START Treaty................... 241
Subtitle G--Miscellaneous Authorities and Limitations........ 241
Section 1061--Enhancement of Capacity of the United States
Government to Analyze Captured Records................... 241
Section 1062--Extension of Authority to Provide Military
Transportation Services to Certain Other Agencies at the
Department of Defense Reimbursement Rate................. 242
Section 1063--Limitation on Availability of Funds for
Modification of Force Structure of the Army.............. 242
Section 1064--Limitation on Use of Funds for Public-Private
Cooperation Activities................................... 242
Subtitle H--Studies and Reports.............................. 243
Section 1071--Oversight of Combat Support Agencies......... 243
Section 1072--Inclusion in Annual Report of Description of
Interagency Coordination Relating to Humanitarian
Demining Technology...................................... 243
Section 1073--Extension of Deadline for Comptroller General
Report on Assignment of Civilian Employees of the
Department of Defense as Advisors to Foreign Ministries
of Defense............................................... 243
Section 1074--Repeal of Requirement for Comptroller General
Assessment of Department of Defense Efficiencies......... 243
Section 1075--Matters for Inclusion in the Assessment of
the 2013 Quadrennial Defense Review...................... 244
Section 1076--Review and Assessment of United States
Special Operations Forces and United States Special
Operations Command....................................... 244
Section 1077--Reports on Unmanned Aircraft Systems......... 245
Section 1078--Online Availability of Reports Submitted to
Congress................................................. 245
Section 1079--Provision of Defense Planning Guidance and
Contingency Operation Plan Information to Congress....... 245
Subtitle I--Other Matters.................................... 245
Section 1081--Technical and Clerical Amendments............ 245
Section 1082--Transportation of Supplies for the United
States by Aircraft Operated by United States Air Carriers 245
Section 1083--Reduction in Costs to Report Critical Changes
to Major Automated Information System Programs........... 246
Section 1084--Extension of Authority of Secretary of
Transportation to Issue Non-Premium Aviation Insurance... 246
Section 1085--Revision of Compensation of Members of the
National Commission on the Structure of the Air Force.... 246
Section 1086--Protection of Tier One Task Critical Assets
from Electromagnetic Pulse and High-Powered Microwave
Systems.................................................. 246
Section 1087--Strategy for Future Military Information
Operations Capabilities.................................. 246
Section 1088--Compliance of Military Departments with
Minimum Safe Staffing Standards.......................... 247
Section 1089--Determination and Disclosure of
Transportation Costs Incurred by Secretary of Defense for
Congressional Trips Outside the United States............ 247
TITLE XI--CIVILIAN PERSONNEL MATTERS............................. 247
ITEMS OF SPECIAL INTEREST...................................... 247
National Research Council Report on Chemical Biological
Defense Programs Capabilities.............................. 247
Wage Grade Pay Parity at Joint Installations................. 247
LEGISLATIVE PROVISIONS......................................... 248
Section 1101--One-Year Extension of Authority To Waive
Annual Limitation on Premium Pay and Aggregate Limitation
on Pay for Federal Civilian Employees Working Overseas... 248
Section 1102--One-year Extension of Discretionary Authority
to Grant Allowances, Benefits, and Gratuities to
Personnel on Official Duty in a Combat Zone.............. 248
Section 1103--Extension of Voluntary Reduction-In-Force
Authority for Civilian Employees of the Department of
Defense.................................................. 248
Section 1104--Extension of Authority to Make Lump-Sum
Severance Payments to Department of Defense Employees.... 248
Section 1105--Revision to Amount of Financial Assistance
under Department of Defense Science, Mathematics, and
Research for Transformation (SMART) Defense Education
Program.................................................. 248
Section 1106--Extension of Program for Exchange of
Information-Technology Personnel......................... 248
Section 1107--Defense Science Initiative for Personnel..... 248
TITLE XII--MATTERS RELATING TO FOREIGN NATIONS................... 248
OVERVIEW....................................................... 248
ITEMS OF SPECIAL INTEREST...................................... 251
Assistance to Civilians in Locations where U.S. Combat
Operations Occur........................................... 251
Congressional Notifications Relating To Status of Forces
Agreements................................................. 252
Governance in Afghanistan and the Afghan Presidential
Elections.................................................. 253
Importance of International Security Assistance Force
Retrograde for the North Atlantic Treaty Organization and
the Role of U.S. European Command.......................... 253
Missile Defense Discussions between the United States and the
Russian Federation......................................... 253
Missile Defense Programs of the Russian Federation and the
People's Republic of China................................. 254
North Atlantic Treaty Organization Commitment to
International Security Assistance Force Mission............ 255
Semi-Annual Reporting on Russian Non-Strategic Nuclear Weapon
Deployments................................................ 255
Report and Briefings on Declassification of Certain Missile
Defense Information........................................ 256
Report on Operation Observant Compass........................ 256
Report on Terms and Agreements for Retrograde of U.S.
Equipment and Supplies Through the Northern Distribution
Network and Pakistan....................................... 257
Report on U.S. Strategy in Afghanistan Post-2014............. 257
Report on U.S. Support to Advising Mission in Afghanistan.... 258
Resource Requirements For and Posture of Fleet Anti-Terrorism
Security Teams and Commanders' In-Extremis Forces.......... 259
Resource Requirements to Support U.S. Policy Objectives in
Syria...................................................... 259
RIMPAC 2014 Oversight........................................ 260
Security Assistance and the Leahy Law........................ 260
Support for Military Information Sharing Agreement Between
the Governments of Japan and the Republic of Korea and
Related Initiatives........................................ 261
U.S. Extended Deterrence in Asia............................. 262
U.S. Military Engagement with Burma.......................... 262
U.S. Policy and Interagency Strategy in Iraq................. 263
U.S. Strategic Partnership with Pakistan..................... 263
U.S. Security Sector Assistance.............................. 264
Use of Missile Defense Declassification Authority by
Director, Missile Defense Agency........................... 264
LEGISLATIVE PROVISIONS......................................... 265
Subtitle A--Assistance and Training.......................... 265
Section 1201--Modification and Extension of Authorities
Relating to Program to Build the Capacity of Foreign
Military Forces.......................................... 265
Section 1202--Three-Year Extension of Authorization for
Non-Conventional Assisted Recovery Capabilities.......... 266
Section 1203--Global Security Contingency Fund............. 266
Section 1204--Codification of National Guard State
Partnership Program...................................... 266
Section 1205--Authority to Conduct Activities to Enhance
the Capability of Certain Foreign Countries to Respond to
Incidents Involving Weapons of Mass Destruction in Syria
and the Region........................................... 266
Section 1206--One-Year Extension of Authority to Support
Foreign Forces Participating in Operations to Disarm the
Lord's Resistance Army................................... 267
Subtitle B--Matters Relating to Iraq, Afghanistan, and
Pakistan................................................. 267
Section 1211--One-Year Extension and Modification of
Authority for Reimbursement of Certain Coalition Nations
for Support Provided to United States Military Operations 267
Section 1212--One-Year Extension of Authority to Use Funds
for Reintegration Activities in Afghanistan.............. 268
Section 1213--Extension of Commanders' Emergency Response
Program in Afghanistan................................... 268
Section 1214--Extension of Authority to Support Operations
and Activities of the Office of Security Cooperation in
Iraq..................................................... 269
Section 1215--One-Year Extension and Modification of
Authority for Program to Develop and Carry Out
Infrastructure Projects in Afghanistan................... 269
Section 1216--Special Immigrant Visas for Certain Iraqi and
Afghan Allies............................................ 269
Section 1217--Requirement to Withhold Department of Defense
Assistance to Afghanistan in Amount Equivalent to 100
Percent of All Taxes Assessed By Afghanistan to Extent
Such Taxes Are Not Reimbursed By Afghanistan............. 270
Subtitle C--Matters Relating to Afghanistan Post 2014........ 270
Section 1221--Modification of Report on Progress Toward
Security and Stability in Afghanistan.................... 270
Section 1222--Sense of Congress on United States Military
Support in Afghanistan................................... 271
Section 1223--Defense Intelligence Plan.................... 271
Section 1224--Limitation on Availability of Funds for
Certain Authorities for Afghanistan...................... 272
Subtitle D--Matters Relating to Iran......................... 273
Section 1231--Report on United States Military Partnership
with Gulf Cooperation Council Countries.................. 273
Section 1232--Additional Elements in Annual Report on
Military Power of Iran................................... 273
Section 1233--Sense of Congress on the Defense of the
Arabian Gulf............................................. 273
Subtitle E--Reports and Other Matters........................ 273
Section 1241--Report on Posture and Readiness of United
States Armed Forces to Respond to Future Terrorist
Attacks in Africa and the Middle East.................... 273
Section 1242--Role of the Government of Egypt to United
States National Security................................. 274
Section 1243--Sense of Congress on Military Developments on
the Korean Peninsula..................................... 274
Section 1244--Sense of Congress on Defense Cooperation with
Georgia.................................................. 274
Section 1245--Limitation on Establishment of Regional
Special Operations Forces Coordination Centers........... 274
Section 1246--Additional Reports on Military and Security
Developments Involving the Democratic People's Republic
of Korea................................................. 275
Section 1247--Amendments to Annual Report Under Arms
Control and Disarmament Act.............................. 275
Section 1248--Limitation On Funds to Provide the Russian
Federation with Access to Certain Missile Defense
Technology............................................... 275
Section 1249--Reports On Actions to Reduce Support of
Ballistic Missile Programs of China, Syria, Iran, and
North Korea.............................................. 275
Section 1250--Congressional Notifications Relating to
Status of Forces Agreements.............................. 276
Section 1251--Sense of Congress on the Conflict in Syria... 276
Section 1252--Revision of Statutory References to Former
NATO Support Organizations and Related NATO Agreements... 276
Section 1253--Limitation on Funds to Implement Executive
Agreements Relating to United States Missile Defense
Capabilities............................................. 277
Section 1254--Limitation on Availability of Funds for
Threat Reduction Engagement Activities and United States
Contributions to the Comprehensive Nuclear-Test Ban
Treaty Organization...................................... 277
Section 1255--Sense of Congress on Military-to-Military
Cooperation Between the United States and Burma.......... 277
Section 1256--Sense of Congress on the Stationing of United
States Forces in Europe.................................. 277
Section 1257--Sense of Congress on Military Capabilities of
the People's Republic of China........................... 277
Section 1258--Rule of Construction......................... 278
TITLE XIII--COOPERATIVE THREAT REDUCTION......................... 278
OVERVIEW....................................................... 278
ITEMS OF SPECIAL INTEREST...................................... 279
Cooperative Threat Reduction Program Focus................... 279
Cooperative Biological Engagement Program.................... 279
U.S.-Russia Umbrella Agreement Negotiations.................. 280
LEGISLATIVE PROVISIONS......................................... 280
Section 1301--Specification of Cooperative Threat Reduction
Programs and Funds....................................... 280
Section 1302--Funding Allocations.......................... 280
Section 1303--Extension for Use of Contributions to the
Cooperative Threat Reduction Program..................... 281
TITLE XIV--OTHER AUTHORIZATIONS.................................. 281
ITEMS OF SPECIAL INTEREST...................................... 281
Working Capital Fund Cash Balance Concerns................... 281
LEGISLATIVE PROVISIONS......................................... 282
Subtitle A--Military Programs................................ 282
Section 1401--Working Capital Funds........................ 282
Section 1402--National Defense Sealift Fund................ 282
Section 1403--Chemical Agents and Munitions Destruction,
Defense.................................................. 282
Section 1404--Drug Interdiction and Counter-Drug
Activities, Defense-Wide................................. 282
Section 1405--Defense Inspector General.................... 282
Section 1406--Defense Health Program....................... 282
Subtitle B--National Defense Stockpile....................... 282
Section 1411--Use of National Defense Stockpile for the
Conservation of a Strategic and Critical Materials Supply 282
Section 1412--Authority to Acquire Additional Materials for
the National Defense Stockpile........................... 282
Subtitle C--Other Matters.................................... 283
Section 1421--Authority for Transfer of Funds to Joint
Department of Defense-Department of Veterans Affairs
Medical Facility Demonstration Fund for Captain James A.
Lovell Health Care Center, Illinois...................... 283
Section 1422--Authorization of Appropriations for Armed
Forces Retirement Home................................... 283
Section 1423--Cemeterial Expenses.......................... 283
TITLE XV--AUTHORIZATION OF ADDITIONAL APPROPRIATIONS FOR OVERSEAS
CONTINGENCY OPERATIONS....................................... 283
OVERVIEW....................................................... 283
ITEMS OF SPECIAL INTEREST...................................... 283
National Guard and Reserve Component Equipment Fund.......... 283
Intelligence, Surveillance, and Reconnaissance Support for
U.S. Special Operations Forces and Partner Nation Forces... 284
LEGISLATIVE PROVISIONS......................................... 284
Subtitle A--Authorization of Additional Appropriations....... 284
Section 1501--Purpose...................................... 284
Section 1502--Procurement.................................. 284
Section 1503--Research, Development, Test, and Evaluation.. 284
Section 1504--Operation and Maintenance.................... 284
Section 1505--Military Personnel........................... 284
Section 1506--Working Capital Funds........................ 284
Section 1507--Drug Interdiction and Counter-Drug
Activities, Defense-Wide................................. 286
Section 1508--Defense Inspector General.................... 286
Section 1509--Defense Health Program....................... 286
Subtitle B--Financial Matters................................ 286
Section 1521--Treatment as Additional Authorizations....... 286
Section 1522--Special Transfer Authority................... 286
Subtitle C--Limitations and Other Matters.................... 286
Section 1531--Afghanistan Security Forces Fund............. 286
Section 1532--Future Role of Joint Improvised Explosive
Device Defeat Organization............................... 287
Section 1533--Limitation on Intelligence, Surveillance, and
Reconnaissance Support for Operation Observant Compass... 287
Section 1534--Report on United States Force Levels and
Costs of Military Operations in Afghanistan.............. 287
TITLE XVI--INDUSTRIAL BASE MATTERS............................... 287
ITEMS OF SPECIAL INTEREST...................................... 287
Apportionment of Small Business Funds under Continuing
Resolutions................................................ 287
Carbon Nanotube Devices...................................... 288
Communication between the Department of Defense and Industry. 288
Contracting for Textiles and Clothing........................ 289
Defense Security Service Access to Information in Conducting
the National Industrial Security Program................... 289
Export Control Reform........................................ 291
Foreign Commercial Satellite Services Review................. 291
Germanium Wafer Defense Industrial Base...................... 292
Improving Information Technology Acquisition Outcomes........ 292
Monitoring and Enforcement of Mitigation Agreements Related
to Foreign Investment in the United States................. 293
National Defense Stockpile Beryllium Upgrade................. 294
Next Generation Global Positioning System Receiver Equipment. 294
Regional Commercialization Activities........................ 294
Report on Diversification of Supply Activities Related to
Rare Earth Elements........................................ 295
Report on Export of Night Vision Devices..................... 296
Report on the Integrity of the Supply Chain for Nuclear
Command and Control and Critical Defense Capabilities...... 296
Report on the Implementation of Rare Earth Elements Strategy
in the Joint Strike Fighter Program........................ 298
Risks to the Cruise Missile Industrial Base.................. 298
Small Business Size Standards................................ 299
Solid Rocket Motor Industrial Base........................... 300
Space Surveillance Telescope................................. 301
Specialty Metals Clause Waiver Processes and Notification.... 301
Transfer of International Traffic in Arms Regulations
Controlled Missile Defense Technology to the National
Aeronautics and Space Administration....................... 303
Trusted Sources of Microelectronics.......................... 303
LEGISLATIVE PROVISIONS......................................... 304
Section 1601--Periodic Audits of Contracting Compliance by
Inspector General of Department of Defense............... 304
Section 1602--Expansion of the Procurement Technical
Assistance Program to Advance Small Business Growth...... 304
Section 1603--Amendments Relating to Procurement Technical
Assistance Cooperative Agreement Program................. 305
Section 1604--Strategic Plan for Requirements for War
Reserve Stocks of Meals Ready-To-Eat..................... 305
Section 1605--Foreign Commercial Satellite Services........ 305
Section 1606--Proof of Concept Commercialization Pilot
Program.................................................. 306

DIVISION B--MILITARY CONSTRUCTION AUTHORIZATIONS................. 306

PURPOSE........................................................ 306
MILITARY CONSTRUCTION AND FAMILY HOUSING OVERVIEW.............. 306
Section 2001--Short Title.................................. 307
Section 2002--Expiration of Authorizations and Amounts
Required To Be Specified by Law.......................... 307
Section 2003--Effective Date............................... 307
TITLE XXI--ARMY MILITARY CONSTRUCTION............................ 307
SUMMARY........................................................ 307
ITEMS OF SPECIAL INTEREST...................................... 307
Explanation of Funding Adjustment............................ 307
LEGISLATIVE PROVISIONS......................................... 307
Section 2101--Authorized Army Construction and Land
Acquisition Projects..................................... 307
Section 2102--Family Housing............................... 308
Section 2103--Authorization of Appropriations, Army........ 308
Section 2104--Additional Authority to Carry Out Certain
Fiscal Year 2004 Project................................. 308
Section 2105--Modification of Authority to Carry Out
Certain Fiscal Year 2010 Project......................... 308
Section 2106--Modification of Authority to Carry Out
Certain Fiscal Year 2011 Project......................... 308
Section 2107--Extension of Authorizations of Certain Fiscal
Year 2010 Projects....................................... 308
Section 2108--Extension of Authorizations of Certain Fiscal
Year 2011 Projects....................................... 308
TITLE XXII--NAVY MILITARY CONSTRUCTION........................... 309
SUMMARY........................................................ 309
LEGISLATIVE PROVISIONS......................................... 309
Section 2201--Authorized Navy Construction and Land
Acquisition Projects..................................... 309
Section 2202--Family Housing............................... 309
Section 2203--Improvements to Military Family Housing Units 309
Section 2204--Authorization of Appropriations, Navy........ 309
Section 2205--Limitation on Project Authorization to Carry
Out Certain Fiscal Year 2014 Project..................... 309
Section 2206--Modification of Authority to Carry Out
Certain Fiscal Year 2011 Project......................... 309
Section 2207--Modification of Authority to Carry Out
Certain Fiscal Year 2012 Project......................... 310
Section 2208--Extension of Authorizations of Certain Fiscal
Year 2011 Projects....................................... 310
TITLE XXIII--AIR FORCE MILITARY CONSTRUCTION..................... 310
SUMMARY........................................................ 310
LEGISLATIVE PROVISIONS......................................... 310
Section 2301--Authorized Air Force Construction and Land
Acquisition Projects..................................... 310
Section 2302--Family Housing............................... 310
Section 2303--Improvements to Military Family Housing Units 310
Section 2304--Authorization of Appropriations, Air Force... 310
Section 2305--Modification of Authority to Carry Out
Certain Fiscal Year 2013 Project......................... 311
Section 2306--Limitation on Project Authorization to Carry
Out Certain Fiscal Year 2014 Project..................... 311
Section 2307--Extension of Authorization of Certain Fiscal
Year 2011 Project........................................ 311
TITLE XXIV--DEFENSE AGENCIES MILITARY CONSTRUCTION............... 311
SUMMARY........................................................ 311
ITEMS OF SPECIAL INTEREST...................................... 312
Explanation of Funding Adjustments........................... 312
LEGISLATIVE PROVISIONS......................................... 314
Subtitle A--Defense Agency Authorizations.................... 314
Section 2401--Authorized Defense Agencies Construction and
Land Acquisition Projects................................ 314
Section 2402--Authorized Energy Conservation Projects...... 314
Section 2403--Authorization of Appropriations, Defense
Agencies................................................. 314
Subtitle B--Chemical Demilitarization Authorizations......... 314
Section 2411--Authorization of Appropriations, Chemical
Demilitarization Construction, Defense-Wide.............. 314
TITLE XXV--NORTH ATLANTIC TREATY ORGANIZATION SECURITY INVESTMENT
PROGRAM...................................................... 314
SUMMARY........................................................ 314
LEGISLATIVE PROVISIONS......................................... 314
Section 2501--Authorized NATO Construction and Land
Acquisition Projects..................................... 314
Section 2502--Authorization of Appropriations, NATO........ 315
TITLE XXVI--GUARD AND RESERVE FORCES FACILITIES.................. 315
SUMMARY........................................................ 315
ITEMS OF SPECIAL INTEREST...................................... 315
Explanation of Funding Adjustments........................... 315
LEGISLATIVE PROVISIONS......................................... 316
Subtitle A--Project Authorizations and Authorization of
Appropriations........................................... 316
Section 2601--Authorized Army National Guard Construction
and Land Acquisition Projects............................ 316
Section 2602--Authorized Army Reserve Construction and Land
Acquisition Projects..................................... 316
Section 2603--Authorized Navy Reserve and Marine Corps
Reserve Construction and Land Acquisition Projects....... 316
Section 2604--Authorized Air National Guard Construction
and Land Acquisition Projects............................ 316
Section 2605--Authorized Air Force Reserve Construction and
Land Acquisition Projects................................ 316
Section 2606--Authorization of Appropriations, National
Guard and Reserve........................................ 316
Subtitle B--Other Matters.................................... 317
Section 2611--Modification of Authority to Carry Out
Certain Fiscal Year 2013 Project......................... 317
Section 2612--Extension of Authorization of Certain Fiscal
Year 2011 Projects....................................... 317
TITLE XXVII--BASE REALIGNMENT AND CLOSURE ACTIVITIES............. 317
SUMMARY........................................................ 317
LEGISLATIVE PROVISIONS......................................... 317
Subtitle A--Authorization Of Appropriations.................. 317
Section 2701--Authorization of Appropriations for Base
Realignment and Closure Activities Funded Through
Department of Defense Base Closure Account............... 317
Subtitle B--Other Matters.................................... 317
Section 2711--Prohibition on Conducting Additional Base
Realignment and Closure (BRAC) Round..................... 317
Section 2712--Elimination of Quarterly Certification
Requirement Regarding Availabilty of Military Health Care
in National Capital Region............................... 317
TITLE XXVIII--MILITARY CONSTRUCTION GENERAL PROVISIONS........... 318
ITEMS OF SPECIAL INTEREST...................................... 318
Air Education and Training Command........................... 318
Air Force Institute of Technology Laboratory Recapitalization 318
Analysis of Type I and Type III Retro-Reflective Glass Beads. 318
Blast Protection for Forward Military Locations in
Contingency Operations..................................... 319
Foreign Materiel Exploitation................................ 319
Dayton Peace Accord Exhibit.................................. 319
Department of Defense Joint Bases............................ 320
Distributed Generation and Energy Security................... 320
European Consolidation Initiative............................ 321
Industrial Control Systems Integration into the Department of
Defense Networks........................................... 321
KC-46A Air National Guard Basing Strategy.................... 321
Leased Space Assessment...................................... 322
Lincoln Laboratory Recapitalization.......................... 322
Military Heritage Sites...................................... 323
Plan for Replacement of MQ-1 Aircraft of the National Guard.. 323
Report on Army 2020 Force Structure Realignment.............. 323
Space Management............................................. 324
Study on Treating Defense Nuclear Facilities as Military
Construction............................................... 325
Update to Master Plan for Camp Lemonnier, Djibouti........... 326
U.S. Air Force Space Command Infrastructure.................. 326
Utilization of Armament Retooling and Manufacturing Support
Initiative................................................. 327
Vulnerability of Defense Infrastructure to Seismic Hazards... 327
LEGISLATIVE PROVISIONS......................................... 328
Subtitle A--Military Construction Program and Military Family
Housing Changes.......................................... 328
Section 2801--Modification of Authority to Carry Out
Unspecified Military Construction........................ 328
Section 2802--Repeal of Requirements for Local
Comparability of Room Patterns and Floor Areas for
Military Family Housing and Submission of Net Floor Area
Information.............................................. 328
Section 2803--Repeal of Separate Authority to Enter into
Limited Partnerships with Private Developers of Housing.. 328
Section 2804--Military Construction Standards to Reduce
Vulnerability of Structures to Terrorist Attack.......... 328
Section 2805--Treatment of Payments Received for Providing
Utilities and Services in Connection with Use of
Alternative Authority for Acquisition and Improvement of
Military Housing......................................... 329
Section 2806--Repeal of Advance Notification Requirement
for Use of Military Family Housing Investment Authority.. 329
Section 2807--Additional Element for Annual Report on
Military Housing Privatization Projects.................. 329
Section 2808--Extension of Temporary, Limited Authority to
Use Operation and Maintenance Funds for Construction
Projects in Certain Areas Outside the United States...... 329
Subtitle B--Real Property and Facilities Administration...... 329
Section 2811--Codification of Policies and Requirements
Regarding Closure and Realignment of United States
Military Installations in Foreign Countries.............. 329
Subtitle C--Energy Security.................................. 330
Section 2821--Continuation of Limitation on Use of Funds
for Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design (LEED)
Gold or Platinum Certification........................... 330
Subtitle D--Provisions Related to Guam Realignment........... 330
Section 2831--Change From Previous Calendar Year to
Previous Fiscal Year for Period Covered by Annual Report
of Interagency Coordination Group of Inspectors General
for Guam Realignment..................................... 330
Section 2832--Repeal of Certain Restrictions on Realignment
of Marine Corps Forces in Asia-Pacific Region............ 330
Subtitle E--Land Conveyances................................. 330
Section 2841--Real Property Acquisition, Naval Base Ventura
County, California....................................... 330
Section 2842--Land Conveyance, Former Oxnard Air Force
Base, Ventura County, California......................... 331
Section 2843--Land Conveyance, Philadelphia Naval Shipyard,
Philadelphia, Pennsylvania............................... 331
Section 2844--Land Conveyance, Camp Williams, Utah......... 331
Section 2845--Conveyance, Air National Guard Radar Site,
Francis Peak, Wasatch Mountains, Utah.................... 331
Section 2846--Land Conveyance, Former Fort Monroe, Hampton,
Virginia................................................. 331
Section 2847--Land Conveyance, Mifflin County United States
Army Reserve Center, Lewistown, Pennsylvania............. 331
Subtitle F--Other Matters.................................... 331
Section 2861--Repeal of Annual Economic Adjustment
Committee Reporting Requirement.......................... 331
Section 2862--Redesignation of the Asia-Pacific Center for
Security Studies as the Daniel K. Inouye Asia-Pacific
Center for Security Studies.............................. 332
Section 2863--Redesignation of the Graduate School of
Nursing at the Uniformed Services University of the
Health Sciences as the Daniel K. Inouye Graduate School
of Nursing............................................... 332
Section 2864--Renaming Site of the Dayton Aviation Heritage
National Historical Park, Ohio........................... 332
Section 2865--Distinguished Flying Cross National Memorial
in Riverside, California................................. 332
TITLE XXIX--OVERSEAS CONTINGENCY OPERATIONS MILITARY CONSTRUCTION 332
SUMMARY........................................................ 332
LEGISLATIVE PROVISIONS......................................... 332
Section 2901--Authorized Army Construction and Land
Acquisition Project...................................... 332
TITLE XXX--MILITARY LAND TRANSFERS AND WITHDRAWALS TO SUPPORT
READINESS AND SECURITY....................................... 333
LEGISLATIVE PROVISIONS......................................... 333
Subtitle A--Limestone Hills Training Area, Montana........... 333
Section 3001--Withdrawal and Reservation of Public Lands
for Limestone Hills Training Area, Montana............... 333
Section 3002--Management of Withdrawn and Reserved Lands... 333
Section 3003--Special Rules Governing Minerals Management.. 333
Section 3004--Grazing...................................... 333
Section 3005--Duration of Withdrawal and Reservation....... 333
Section 3006--Payments in Lieu of Taxes.................... 333
Section 3007--Hunting, Fishing and Trapping................ 333
Section 3008--Water Rights................................. 334
Section 3009--Brush and Range Fire Prevention and
Suppression.............................................. 334
Section 3010--On-Going Decontamination..................... 334
Section 3011--Application for Renewal of a Withdrawal and
Reservation.............................................. 334
Section 3012--Limitation on Subsequent Availability of
Lands for Appropriation.................................. 334
Section 3013--Relinquishment............................... 334
Subtitle B--White Sands Missile Range, New Mexico............ 334
Section 3021--Transfer of Administrative Jurisdiction,
White Sands Missile Range, New Mexico.................... 334
Section 3022--Water Rights................................. 334
Section 3023--Withdrawal................................... 334
Subtitle C--Naval Air Weapons Station China Lake, California. 335
Section 3031--Transfer of Administrative Jurisdiction,
Naval Air Weapons Station China Lake, California......... 335
Section 3032--Water Rights................................. 335
Section 3033--Withdrawal................................... 335
Subtitle D--Chocolate Mountain Aerial Gunnery Range,
California............................................... 335
Section 3041--Transfer of Administrative Jurisdiction
Chocolate Mountain Aerial Gunnery Range, California...... 335
Section 3042--Management and Use of Transferred Land....... 335
Section 3043--Realignment of Range Boundary and Related
Transfer of Title........................................ 335
Section 3044--Effect of Termination of Military Use........ 335
Section 3045--Temporary Extension of Existing Withdrawal
Period................................................... 336
Section 3046--Water Rights................................. 336
Subtitle E--Marine Corps Air Ground Combat Center Twentynine
Palms, California........................................ 336
Section 3051--Designation of Johnson Valley National Off-
Highway Vehicle Recreation Area.......................... 336
Section 3052--Limited Biannual Marine Corps Air Ground
Combat Center Twentynine Palms Use of Johnson Valley
National Off-Highway Vehicle Recreation Area............. 336
Section 3053--Transfer of Administrative Jurisdiction,
Southern Study Area, Marine Corps Air Ground Combat
Center Twentynine Palms, California...................... 336
Section 3054--Water Rights................................. 336
Subtitle F--Naval Air Station Fallon, Nevada................. 337
Section 3061--Transfer of Administrative Jurisdiction,
Naval Air Station Fallon, Nevada......................... 337
Section 3062--Water Rights................................. 337
Section 3063--Withdrawal................................... 337

DIVISION C--DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY NATIONAL SECURITY AUTHORIZATIONS
AND OTHER AUTHORIZATIONS....................................... 337

TITLE XXXI--DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY NATIONAL SECURITY PROGRAMS...... 337
OVERVIEW....................................................... 337
ITEMS OF SPECIAL INTEREST...................................... 337
National Nuclear Security Administration..................... 337
Overview................................................... 337
Weapons Activities......................................... 337
Advanced manufacturing within the nuclear security
enterprise............................................. 337
Budget tables for NNSA Production Office................. 338
Cyber Security........................................... 339
Clarification of Congressional Intent Regarding National
Security Laboratories.................................. 339
Deferred Maintenance in the Nuclear Security Enterprise.. 339
Directed Stockpile Work.................................. 340
Exascale Computing....................................... 341
Ignition and Budget Prioritization....................... 341
Livermore Valley Open Campus............................. 341
Trilateral Cooperation................................... 342
Risks within long-term schedule for life extension
programs............................................... 342
Defense Nuclear Nonproliferation........................... 343
Follow-on to Global Threat Reduction Initiative.......... 343
Mixed Oxide Fuel Fabrication Facility Analysis........... 343
Nonproliferation and arms control verification technology
research and development............................... 344
Naval Reactors............................................. 344
Fissile material stockpiles.............................. 344
Naval Reactors........................................... 344
Office of the Administrator................................ 345
Office of Infrastructure and Operations.................. 345
Plan and roadmap to address security problems............ 345
Reprogramming Procedure and Funding Control Levels....... 346
Environmental and Other Defense Activities................... 347
Overview................................................... 347
Defense Environmental Cleanup.............................. 347
Environmental Management Technology Development Program.. 347
Transuranic Wastes at Hanford Tank Farms................. 347
Other Defense Activities................................... 348
Idaho Sitewide Safeguards and Security Program........... 348
LEGISLATIVE PROVISIONS......................................... 349
Subtitle A--National Security Program Authorizations......... 349
Section 3101--National Nuclear Security Administration..... 349
Section 3102--Defense Environmental Cleanup................ 349
Section 3103--Other Defense Activities..................... 349
Section 3104--Energy Security and Assurance................ 349
Subtitle B--Program Authorizations, Restrictions, and
Limitations.............................................. 349
Section 3111--Clarification of Principles of National
Nuclear Security Administration.......................... 349
Section 3112--Termination of Department of Energy Employees
to Protect National Security............................. 349
Section 3113--Modification of Independent Cost Estimates on
Life Extension Programs and New Nuclear Facilities....... 350
Section 3114--Plan for Retrieval, Treatment, and
Disposition of Tank Farm Waste at Hanford Nuclear
Reservation.............................................. 351
Section 3115--Enhanced Procurement Authority to Manage
Supply Chain Risk........................................ 352
Section 3116--Limitation on Availability of Funds for
National Nuclear Security Administration................. 352
Section 3117--Limitation on Availability of Funds for
Office of the Administrator.............................. 353
Section 3118--Limitation on Availability of Funds for
Global Threat Reduction Initiative....................... 354
Section 3119--Establishment of Center for Security
Technology, Analysis, Testing, and Response.............. 354
Section 3120--Cost-Benefit Analyses for Competition of
Management and Operating Contracts....................... 355
Section 3121--W88-1 Warhead and W78-1 Warhead Life
Extension Options........................................ 355
Section 3122--Extension of Principles of Pilot Program to
Additional Facilities of the Nuclear Security Enterprise. 356
Subtitle C--Reports.......................................... 357
Section 3131--Annual Report and Certification on Status of
the Security of the Nuclear Security Enterprise.......... 357
Section 3132--Modifications to Annual Reports Regarding the
Condition of the Nuclear Weapons Stockpile............... 358
Section 3133--Repeal of Certain Reporting Requirements..... 358
Subtitle D--Other Matters.................................... 359
Section 3141--Congressional Advisory Panel on the
Governance of the Nuclear Security Enterprise............ 359
Section 3142--Study of Potential Reuse of Nuclear Weapon
Secondaries.............................................. 359
Section 3143--Clarification of Role of Secretary of Energy. 360
Section 3144--Technical Amendment to Atomic Energy Act of
1954..................................................... 360
TITLE XXXII--DEFENSE NUCLEAR FACILITIES SAFETY BOARD............. 360
OVERVIEW....................................................... 360
LEGISLATIVE PROVISIONS......................................... 360
Section 3201--Authorization................................ 360
Section 3202--Improvements to the Defense Nuclear
Facilities Safety Board.................................. 360
TITLE XXXIV--NAVAL PETROLEUM RESERVES............................ 361
LEGISLATIVE PROVISIONS......................................... 361
Section 3401--Authorization of Appropriations.............. 361
TITLE XXXV--MARITIME ADMINISTRATION.............................. 361
ITEMS OF SPECIAL INTEREST...................................... 361
Title XI Ship Loan Guarantee................................. 361
LEGISLATIVE PROVISIONS......................................... 361
Section 3501--Authorization of Appropriations for National
Security Aspects of the Merchant Marine for Fiscal Year
2014..................................................... 361
Section 3502--5-Year Reauthorization of Vessel War Risk
Insurance Program........................................ 362
Section 3503--Sense of Congress............................ 362

DIVISION D--FUNDING TABLES....................................... 362

Section 4001--Authorization of Amounts in Funding Tables... 362
TITLE XLI--PROCUREMENT........................................... 369
Section 4101--Procurement.................................. 369
Section 4102--Procurement for Overseas Contingency
Operations............................................... 410
TITLE XLII--RESEARCH, DEVELOPMENT, TEST, AND EVALUATION.......... 420
Section 4201--Research, Development, Test, and Evaluation.. 420
Section 4202--Research, Development, Test, and Evaluation
for Overseas Contingency Operations...................... 451
TITLE XLIII--OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE........................... 453
Section 4301--Operation and Maintenance.................... 453
Section 4302--Operation and Maintenance for Overseas
Contingency Operations................................... 471
TITLE XLIV--MILITARY PERSONNEL................................... 482
Section 4401--Military Personnel........................... 482
Section 4402--Military Personnel for Overseas Contingency
Operations............................................... 483
TITLE XLV--OTHER AUTHORIZATIONS.................................. 484
Section 4501--Other Authorizations......................... 484
Section 4502--Other Authorizations for Overseas Contingency
Operations............................................... 487
TITLE XLVI--MILITARY CONSTRUCTION................................ 489
Section 4601--Military Construction........................ 489
TITLE XLVII--DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY NATIONAL SECURITY PROGRAMS..... 507
Section 4701--Department of Energy National Security
Programs................................................. 507

Department of Defense Authorization Request...................... 518
Communications from Other Committees............................. 520
Fiscal Data...................................................... 533
Congressional Budget Office Estimate............................. 534
Statement Required by the Congressional Budget Act............... 534
Committee Cost Estimate.......................................... 535
Advisory of Earmarks............................................. 535
Oversight Findings............................................... 535
General Performance Goals and Objectives......................... 535
Statement of Federal Mandates.................................... 537
Federal Advisory Committee Statement............................. 537
Applicability to the Legislative Branch.......................... 537
Duplication of Federal Programs.................................. 537
Disclosure of Directed Rule Makings.............................. 537
Committee Votes.................................................. 537
Changes in Existing Law Made by the Bill, as Reported............ 556
Additional Views................................................. 557
Dissenting Views................................................. 563

113th Congress Report
HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
1st Session 113-102

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

NATIONAL DEFENSE AUTHORIZATION ACT FOR FISCAL YEAR 2014

_______

June 7, 2013.--Committed to the Committee of the Whole House on the
State of the Union and ordered to be printed

_______

Mr. McKeon, from the Committee on Armed Services, submitted the
following

R E P O R T

together with

ADDITIONAL AND DISSENTING VIEWS

[To accompany H.R. 1960]

[Including cost estimate of the Congressional Budget Office]

The Committee on Armed Services, to whom was referred the
bill (H.R. 1960) to authorize appropriations for fiscal year
2014 for military activities of the Department of Defense and
for military construction, to prescribe military personnel
strengths for such fiscal year, and for other purposes, having
considered the same, reports favorably thereon with amendments
and recommend that the bill as amended do pass.
The amendments are as follows:
The amendment strikes all after the enacting clause of the
bill and inserts a new text which appears in italic type in the
reported bill.
The title of the bill is amended to reflect the amendment
to the text of the bill.

PURPOSE OF THE LEGISLATION

The bill would: (1) Authorize appropriations for fiscal
year 2014 for procurement and for research, development, test,
and evaluation (RDT&E); (2) Authorize appropriations for fiscal
year 2014 for operation and maintenance (O&M) and for working
capital funds; (3) Authorize for fiscal year 2014: (a) the
personnel strength for each Active Duty component of the
military departments; (b) the personnel strength for the
Selected Reserve for each Reserve Component of the Armed
Forces; (4) Modify various elements of compensation for
military personnel and impose certain requirements and
limitations on personnel actions in the defense establishment;
(5) Authorize appropriations for fiscal year 2014 for military
construction and family housing; (6) Authorize appropriations
for Overseas Contingency Operations; (7) Authorize
appropriations for fiscal year 2014 for the Department of
Energy national security programs; (8) Modify provisions
related to the National Defense Stockpile; and (9) Authorize
appropriations for fiscal year 2014 for the Maritime
Administration.

RATIONALE FOR THE COMMITTEE BILL

H.R. 1960, the National Defense Authorization Act for
Fiscal Year 2014, is a key mechanism through which the Congress
of the United States fulfills one of its primary
responsibilities as mandated in Article I, Section 8 of the
Constitution of the United States, which grants Congress the
power to raise and support an Army; to provide and maintain a
Navy; and to make rules for the government and regulation of
the land and naval forces. Rule X of the House of
Representatives provides jurisdiction over the Department of
Defense (DOD) generally, and over the military application of
nuclear energy, to the House Committee on Armed Services. The
committee bill includes the large majority of the findings and
recommendations resulting from its oversight activities in the
current year, as informed by the experience gained over the
previous decades of the committee's existence.
The bill reflects the House Armed Services Committee's
steadfast support of the courageous, professional, and
dedicated men and women of the United States Armed Forces and
the committee's appreciation for the sacrifices they make to
accomplish their required missions. Events of the last year--
ranging from on-going operations in Afghanistan, robust
counter-terrorism efforts around the globe, to time-sensitive
disaster and humanitarian responses--serve to highlight the
United States military's flexibility and responsiveness in
defending our nation's interests and addressing security
challenges. The committee understands that the capabilities of
our Armed Forces are underpinned by the dedicated civilian
employees of the Department of Defense (DOD) and the Department
of Energy's National Nuclear Security Administration, as well
as the defense industrial base. Each of these elements is
required to enable the U.S. military to be the guarantor of
peace and economic security that it has been for generations.
The committee is deeply committed to providing full
authorization for the funding required to restore the readiness
of our military; enhance the quality of life of military
service members and their families; sustain and improve the
Armed Forces; and properly safeguard the national security of
the United States.
In addition to providing authorization of appropriations,
the committee bill ensures our troops deployed in Afghanistan
and around the world have the equipment, resources,
authorities, training, and time needed to successfully complete
their missions and return home; mandates greater transparency
and accountability for sensitive military operations to
Congress; provides our warfighters and their families with the
resources and support they need, deserve, and have earned;
protects members of the Armed Forces from the unacceptable risk
of sexual assault; invests in the capabilities and force
structure needed to protect the United States from current and
future threats; and incentivizes greater competition for
defense dollars and greater fiscal responsibility within the
Department of Defense.

Equipment, Resources, Authorities, Training, and Time To Accomplish
Missions

The committee considers it critical that the capabilities
and capacity of the Armed Forces continue to improve so these
forces can accomplish the full range of diverse missions within
a complex operating environment, minimize risks associated with
such challenges and effectively engage in hostilities when
necessary. Thus, a top priority remains ensuring that our
military personnel continue to receive the best equipment,
weapon systems and training. As such, H.R. 1960 would provide
for both near- and long-term military personnel and force
structure requirements.
The military continues to put pressure on Al Qaeda and its
associated forces. The bill makes clear that Congress has a
constitutional oversight role critical at each stage of
sensitive military operations conducted to combat these forces.
The committee includes a provision that would require an
assessment of the affiliates and adherents of Al Qaeda and the
evolving threat they pose to U.S. national security. The bill
also would codify the requirement for notification and
briefings following targeted lethal or capture operations by
the Armed Forces overseas. The legislation would require the
Secretary of Defense to submit an explanation of the legal and
policy considerations and approval processes used in
determining whether an individual or group of individuals could
be the target of a lethal or capture operation conducted by the
Armed Forces of the United States outside the United States.
The committee bill also includes several additional provisions
to extend detention policies and procedures.
While the committee continues its inquiry into the tragic
events in Benghazi on September 11, 2012, the bill would ensure
that the Department of Defense has begun to apply the lessons
already learned. The committee bill also addresses concerns
regarding the conflict in the Syrian Arab Republic and would
ensure that Congress is kept informed of the resources required
and risks associated with a variety of courses of action or
inaction in Syria. Likewise, the committee expects that if the
President determines that U.S. military involvement is
required, the President will submit a supplemental funding
request to Congress for consideration. Understanding that
unilateral U.S. response to the Syrian crisis is not in
America's best interest, the bill would authorize the Armed
Forces to train and equip regional partners for weapons of mass
destruction response.
Elsewhere in this report, the committee notes the continued
threat posed by the Islamic Republic of Iran and the steps
taken by the committee to address gaps in U.S. intelligence,
expand information about Iran's global threat network, foster
partnerships with the Gulf Cooperation Council nations, and
express concerns about the strategic consequences of having
only one carrier in the region of the Arabian Gulf. Likewise,
the committee notes the rogue actions of the Democratic
People's Republic of Korea, which are unacceptable and contrary
to international peace and stability and extends reporting on
North Korea's military capabilities. The committee also
reflects concerns regarding the modernization efforts of the
People's Liberation Army (PLA), as reflected in testimony
before the committee and the annual report on the Military and
Security Developments Involving the People's Republic of China.
The ballistic missile threat continues to increase both
qualitatively and quantitatively. Defending against ballistic
or theater missile attack is an important priority for the
committee. The committee bill would restrict the removal of
missile defense hardware from East Asia, while requiring
analysis on missile defense capabilities in Guam, invest in
proven and vital systems like Iron Dome, and provide
significant resources for other Israeli Cooperative Missile
Defense programs, like Arrow 2, Arrow 3 and the David's Sling
Weapon System. The legislation would provide authorization and
funding for the deployment of an East Coast missile defense
site, while the Missile Defense Agency undertakes siting and
environmental studies.
Additionally, robust intelligence, surveillance, and
reconnaissance (ISR) capabilities are vital to current combat
operations in Afghanistan, as well as emerging threats in North
Africa and elsewhere. To ensure that use and availability of
ISR resources are maximized, the bill would require the
Secretary of Defense to submit a plan related to the drawdown
of defense intelligence assets in Afghanistan and it would
prevent the premature retirement of Global Hawk block 30
unmanned aircraft.
Finally, recent reports only enhance the committee's
concerns about the threat posed by cyber attacks. The bill
would require the Department of Defense to conduct a mission
analysis for cyber operations and examine the proper balance of
cyber capabilities across the national security organization,
as well as a report on coordination of cyber and electronic
warfare activities. The committee would also require the
Department to provide congressional notification when
investigations are initiated or completed regarding network
cyber intrusions that result in the compromise of critical
information. Additionally, the legislation would require the
Defense Science Board to conduct an independent assessment of
the organization, missions and authorities of U.S. Cyber
Command, and require the Secretary of Defense to create
standards for cyber operations training. The bill also would
provide important authorities to the Department of Energy to
ensure the integrity of its information technology supply
chain--similar to authority available to the Department of
Defense and the Intelligence Community.

Combatting Sexual Assault in the Military

The American public holds the U.S. Armed Forces to the
highest standards and in great esteem. Consequently, the
scourge of sexual assault has no place within these ranks. The
committee has made sexual assault prevention and prosecution a
conerstone of this bill.
The bill would reform the Uniform Code of Military Justice
(UCMJ) to strip commanders of their authority to dismiss a
finding by a court martial or from reducing guilty findings to
lesser offenses. The committee bill would also establish
minimum sentencing guidelines for sexual assault-related
offenses. Currently, such guidelines only exist in the military
for the crimes of murder and espionage. The proposed changes to
the UCMJ would also enable the victim of a crime to provide the
convening authority materials for the convening authority's
post-trial consideration; set guidelines for defense council
interviews of the victim; and articulate the rights of a crime
victim.
Recognizing that victim support is as vital as prosecution,
the legislation would allow victims of sexual assault to apply
for a permanent change of station or unit transfer, while
authorizing the Secretary of Defense to inform commanders of
their authority to remove or temporarily reassign service
members who are the alleged perpetrators of sexual assault. The
committee bill would require the provision of victims'
counsels, qualified and specially trained lawyers in each of
the services, to be made available to provide legal assistance
to the victims of sex-related offenses.
Moreover, the bill seeks to improve the climate for
reporting of a sex-related offense by adding rape, sexual
assault, and other sexual misconduct to the protected
communications of service members with a member of Congress or
an Inspector General. The committee recommends reforms to
improve unit climate assessments, improve the performance
evaluation process, increase commander accountability, and help
establish a military culture intolerant of sexual assaults
through improved security, as well as health and welfare
inspections.
Finally, to ensure that the military is better positioned
to deal with the crisis of sexual assault within its ranks, the
committee bill would require both the Secretary of Defense and
the independent panel established in the National Defense
Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2013 (Public Law 112-239) to
assess the current role and authorities of commanders in the
administration of military justice and the investigation,
prosecution, and adjudication of offenses under the UCMJ;
direct the Government Accountability Office to review
implementation of the Air Force corrective actions following
the sexual misconduct at Lackland Air Force Base; and mandate
the processing for administrative separation of any service
member guilty of an inappropriate and prohibited relationship,
communication, conduct, or contact, including when such an
action is consensual, with a prospective member of the Armed
Forces or a member undergoing entry-level processing or
training.

Preserving Key Capabilities in a Time of Fiscal Austerity

In April 2011, the President announced his intention to
seek over $400.0 billion in savings within the Department of
Defense over the next decade. Subsequently, the Congress passed
the Budget Control Act of 2011 (Public Law 111-25) (BCA) in
August 2011. The BCA significantly reduced discretionary
spending across the Federal Government and for the military in
particular. The Department of Defense noted that cuts relating
to the BCA amounted to $489.0 billion. In addition,
sequestration went into effect across the Federal Government on
March 1, 2013. Should sequestration remain in effect, funding
for national defense will be cut by an additional $42.5 billion
during fiscal year 2013 and approximately half a trillion
dollars through 2021.
The committee is particularly concerned about readiness
levels and threats to our national security once the full
weight of sequestration is realized. History tells us that when
readiness is low and our units ill-equipped and unprepared to
fight, our troops pay the price with their lives. Areas of
additional concern include the size and force structure of our
armed forces and funding levels as we prepare to draw down in
Afghanistan.
The committee is concerned about the Navy's overall fleet
size and the continuous sustained demand for naval forces,
especially in light of the Administration's strategic shift to
operations in the Asia-Pacific. Therefore, the restriction
precluding the Navy from retiring seven Ticonderoga-class
guided missile cruisers and two amphibious ships well before
the end of their expected service life continues for fiscal
year 2014. The committee would provide additional funds to the
Navy to properly modernize and maintain these critical naval
assets. The committee notes that it is less costly to maintain
existing assets than to procure new ones and this funding
ensures the correct naval capabilities and fleet mix for the
length of time originally authorized by Congress. The committee
also would authorize multiyear procurements for the E-2D
Advanced Hawkeye and the C-130J Super Hercules to ensure the
Department is able to save significant resources over the term
of the contract.
The committee also would fund needed ship construction to
obviate the negative consequences of sequestration on the
various ship construction programs. The committee would provide
sufficient funds to support the acquisition of the 10th DDG-51
class destroyer of a multiyear procurement; additional funds to
support the continued acquisition of two Virginia Class attack
submarines; and additional funds associated with the completion
of the DDG-1000 class destroyer, the Moored Training Ship, and
the Joint High Speed Vessel.
In noting concerns about potential strike fighter
shortfalls and combat aviation capability, the committee would
preserve the Air Force and Navy strike fighter industrial base
by supporting the continued development of the Joint Strike
Fighter program, provide for additional advance procurement for
the F/A-18 E/F Super Hornet, and address a critical Air Force
unfunded requirement for strike fighter engines. The committee
notes the importance of unmanned aerial systems (UAS) and
intelligence, surveillance, and reconnaissance (ISR) aircraft.
The bill would retain the Air Force's Global Hawk Block 30 ISR
aircraft, rather than shifting these assets to storage, as they
are critical combat enablers for the deployed warfighter. The
legislation would also provide additional funding for the Air
Force Reaper UAS, a high-demand, low-density asset critical to
Operation Enduring Freedom. The committee also recommends
additional funding to allow for the continued sustainment of
America's heavy armored vehicle production base by maintaining
at least minimum sustained production for Abrams tank upgrades
and heavy improved recovery vehicles. The committee also would
preserve the continued operational capability of the National
Guard and Reserve Components by providing additional funding to
address National Guard and Reserve Component unfunded
modernization requirements. These changes preserve capability
in the Active Component, as well as the Guard and Reserve, but
not at the expense of the readiness of the Active Component.
The committee would fund the Overseas Contingency
Operations (OCO) at $85.8 billion, consistent with the House-
passed fiscal year 2014 budget resolution, H. Con. Res. 25,
thereby taking a partial step to replenish underfunded
readiness accounts within the OCO. In so doing, the committee
was able to replenish shortfalls resulting from unexpected
costs in fiscal year 2013 to important accounts supporting
reset and reconstitution of the force after more than a decade
of combat and enabling support for wartime operations.
Specifically, the committee took steps to restore critical
readiness shortfalls by providing additional resources for
training activities, flight hours, facilities sustainment,
critical spares, combat support forces equipment and
sustainment, and the stabilization of fuel rates. The committee
also provided funding for unfunded priority items like a new
Marine crisis response force for Africa and growth in the
Marine Security Guard program responsible for security at our
diplomatic posts. The bill would restore $400.0 million in
critical equipment reset funding in the OCO that would
refurbish war-torn equipment, specifically for the Army.
In making these changes, the committee heeded the testimony
of the service chiefs, who stressed the importance of ensuring
the United States does not repeat the mistakes of the past by
hollowing force structure in response to budget cuts.
Therefore, for every change to force structure recommended by
this bill includes funding for military personnel and operation
and maintenance costs associated with such force structure.
Moreover, each of these changes was funded within the top line
funding allocation provided by the House-passed fiscal year
2014 budget resolution, H. Con. Res. 25, which reduced overall
discretionary spending below the fiscal year 2014 cap mandated
by the Budget Control Act (Public Law 111-25).

Resources for Warfighters and Families

Recognizing the need to maintain a high quality all-
volunteer combat-ready force, the committee bill supports
current law, which mandates an automatic 1.8% annual increase
in troop pay.
The committee bill would ensure that end strength requests
are within the limitations for reductions set by the National
Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2013 (Public Law 112-
239), reflecting concerns that budgetary pressures will force
each service to reduce its end strength too quickly and to
divest vital battlefield experience and know how.
Committee members believe access to quality healthcare
during retirement is a benefit earned through prior service to
our nation. Mindful of Congress' commitment to service members
and their families, the legislation would reject proposals to
increase some TRICARE fees or establish new TRICARE fees. The
committee has already put TRICARE on a sustainable path through
reforms enacted in several recent defense authorization acts.
Those reforms connect TRICARE fee increases to retiree cost of
living increases. The record of the Department of Defense in
incorrectly calculating TRICARE costs and its repeated requests
to transfer billions of unused dollars out of the program to
cover other underfunded defense priorities raises questions
about repeated claims by the Department that the Defense Health
Program is unsustainable. The committee bill also would provide
beneficiaries an opportunity to remain in TRICARE Prime after
the Department of Defense reduces the availability of Prime to
retired beneficiaries.
After a decade of honorable service in hostile
environments, women have demonstrated a wide range of
capabilities in combat operations. The committee bill would
establish the definition of a gender-neutral occupational
standards that would be used by each military service to
develop the standards required for all military career
designators.
Other provisions in the committee bill are designed to
protect warfighters and their families from external threats,
while ensuring that units and families are supported and
prepared for deployments. The committee bill would require a
minimum 120-day notification before deployment or the
cancellation of a deployment for the operational reserves. It
also would authorize the commander of U.S. Special Forces
Command to provide additional family support services to U.S.
Special Operations Forces and their families. The committee
bill would take action on body armor, one of the most basic
elements of protection provided to our troops. The bill would
facilitate the development of ever more functional, lighter,
and more protective body armor by requiring each service to
create a separate procurement budget line for personal
protective equipment, thus making body armor a more traditional
weapon system acquisition program that can build on successive
generations of innovation and investment, rather than the ad
hoc procedure now in place. The bill also would require the
Secretary of Defense to conduct a comprehensive study and
assessment on ways to improve personal protective equipment for
female service members.

Fiscal Responsibility, Transparency, and Accountability

The committee scrutinized the Department of Defense's
budget and identified inefficiencies whose savings can be
invested in higher national security priorities. The committee
bill would reflect the fact that as a nation, we must make
tough choices in order to provide for America's common defense
by examining every aspect of the defense enterprise to find
ways that we can accomplish the mission of providing for the
common defense more effectively. The findings of the
committee's Panel on Defense Financial Management and
Auditability Reform and the Panel on Business Challenges within
the Defense Industry continue to guide the committee's
consideration of legislation that would be included in this
bill. The committee bill would include a number of provisions
to strengthen fiscal responsibility, including direction to the
Department of Defense to strengthen Item Unique Identification
and other automated information and data capture initiatives
which would lower total life cycle cost of items acquired and
managed and save taxpayer money through improved
accountability. The bill would also include the sense of
Congress regarding the Department of Defense's ongoing
Financial Improvement and Audit Readiness process and support
the goal of audit readiness across the Department by 2017,
which have only increased in importance as sequestration is
implemented. To that end, the bill would require that a full
and complete audit take place for fiscal year 2018.
Furthermore, recognizing that any future contingency operation
will be heavily reliant on contractors and incorporating the
lessons learned from U.S. operations in the Republic of Iraq
and the Islamic Republic of Afghanistan, the committee bill
would encourage the Inspectors General of the Department of
Defense, the Department of State, and USAID to establish a
memorandum of agreement that would serve as a framework for
designating a lead Inspector General for overseas contingency
operations not later than 30 days after the commencement of
certain military operations.

Controlling Costs and Making Wise Choices

The committee recognizes that in an era of constrained
resources, controlling costs should be a key priority. At the
same time, the committee sought to avoid false short term
savings at the expense of vital long-term strategic
capabilities.
The committee bill would require the Department of Defense
to take several steps toward reducing wasteful bureaucracy. For
example, the Secretary of Defense would be required to develop
a plan for the future role of the Joint Improvised Explosive
Device Defeat Organization and to determine if the Air-Sea
Battle Office is duplicative of efforts more efficiently
carried out by the Joint Staff. The bill would also reduce
general and flag officer billets by 24.
The bill would require greater accountability for cost
overruns associated with troubled acquisition programs. The
committee expresses concern regarding the design of the Arleigh
Burke Class Destroyer Flight III and limits funding for the
next stage of the Army's Ground Combat Vehicle until the
Secretary of the Army submits a status report to Congress.
Likewise, the committee would require the Secretary of the Army
to develop a strategy to improve the fuel efficiency of the M1
Abrams Tank. The bill would also scrutinize plans for the
sustainment of the Littoral Combat Ship and the F-35 Joint
Strike Fighter.
Significant emphasis is placed on identifying additional
efficiencies. The committee bill would task the Government
Accountability Office (GAO) with carrying out several studies
with an intent to reduce bureaucracy, including an examination
of the headquarters functions of U.S. Central Command, all of
the functional combatant commands, the office of the Secretary
of Defense, the Joint Staff, and service secretaries. The bill
would also require the Secretary of Defense to report back on
actions taken to address the recommendations of the GAO with
regard to similar reviews undertaken at the remaining
geographic combatant commands last year. Moreover, the
committee notes that the Department has failed to adequately
conduct the Quadrennial Roles and Missions Review required by
the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2008
(Public Law 110-181), nor has the Department submitted a
mission based budget as required. Therefore, the committee
would task GAO to examine contributing factors to this lack of
compliance.
In addition, the committee would seek to increase cost
savings through enhanced competition and alternative
contracting mechanisms. Among other initiatives, the committee
bill would direct a federally funded research and development
center to conduct a study to identify and assess alternative
and effective means for stimulating competition and innovation
in the personal protection equipment industrial base, to
include body armor. Other enhancements to competition would
include the requirement to ensure a fair evaluation of
competing contractors in awarding a contract to a certified
evolved expendable launch vehicle provider. The bill would also
require the Secretary of Defense to enter into a 5-year pilot
program for the multiyear procurement of tactical wheeled
vehicles and authorize multiyear contracts for the E-2D
Advanced Hawkeye and the C-130J Super Hercules. The committee
would also direct a strategy to reduce the cost of commercial
satellite services through multiyear awards.

HEARINGS

Committee consideration of the National Defense
Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2014 results from hearings
that began on March 5, 2013, and that were completed on May 9,
2013. The full committee conducted 10 sessions. In addition, a
total of 13 sessions were conducted by 6 different
subcommittees.

COMMITTEE POSITION

On June 5, 2013, the Committee on Armed Services, a quorum
being present, approved H.R. 1960, as amended, by a vote of 59-
2.

EXPLANATION OF THE COMMITTEE AMENDMENTS

The committee adopted an amendment in the nature of a
substitute during the consideration of H.R. 1960. The title of
the bill is amended to reflect the amendment to the text of the
bill. The remainder of the report discusses the bill, as
amended.

RELATIONSHIP OF AUTHORIZATION TO APPROPRIATIONS

The bill does not generally provide budget authority. This
bill authorizes appropriations; subsequent appropriation acts
will provide budget authority. However, the committee strives
to adhere to the recommendations as issued by the Committee on
the Budget as it relates to the jurisdiction of this committee.
The bill addresses the following categories in the
Department of Defense budget: procurement; research,
development, test, and evaluation; operation and maintenance;
military personnel; working capital funds; and military
construction and family housing. The bill also addresses the
Armed Forces Retirement Home, Department of Energy National
Security Programs, the Naval Petroleum Reserve and the Maritime
Administration.
Active Duty and Reserve personnel strengths authorized in
this bill and legislation affecting compensation for military
personnel determine the remaining appropriation requirements of
the Department of Defense. However, this bill does not provide
authorization of specific dollar amounts for military
personnel.

SUMMARY OF DISCRETIONARY AUTHORIZATIONS IN THE BILL

The President requested discretionary budget authority of
$625.2 billion for programs within the jurisdiction of the
committee for fiscal year 2014. Of this amount, $526.6 billion
was requested for ``base'' Department of Defense programs,
$80.7 billion was requested for the Overseas Contingency
Operations requirements covering the entire fiscal year, and
$17.9 billion was requested for Department of Energy national
security programs and the Defense Nuclear Facilities Safety
Board.
The committee recommends an overall discretionary
authorization of $630.2 billion in fiscal year 2014, including
$85.8 billion for Overseas Contingency Operations. The base
committee authorization of $544.4 billion is a $0.4 billion
decrease below the levels provided for in the National Defense
Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2013 (Public Law 112-239).
The table preceding the detailed program adjustments in
division D of this report summarizes the committee's
recommended discretionary authorizations by appropriation
account for fiscal year 2014 and compares these amounts to the
President's request.

BUDGET AUTHORITY IMPLICATION

The President's total request for the national defense
budget function (050) in fiscal year 2014 is $641.0 billion, as
estimated by the Congressional Budget Office. In addition to
funding for programs addressed in this bill, the total 050
request includes discretionary funding for national defense
programs not in the committee's jurisdiction, discretionary
funding for programs that do not require additional
authorization in fiscal year 2014, and mandatory programs.
The table preceding the detailed program adjustments in
division D of this report details changes to all aspects of the
national defense budget function.
DIVISION A--DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE AUTHORIZATIONS

TITLE I--PROCUREMENT

OVERVIEW

The budget request for fiscal year 2014 contained $98.2
billion for procurement. This represents a $900.0 million
decrease over the amount authorized for fiscal year 2013.
The committee recommends authorization of $99.6 billion, an
increase of $1.4 billion from the fiscal year 2014 request.
The committee recommendations for the fiscal year 2014
procurement program are identified in division D of this Act.

Aircraft Procurement, Army

Overview

The budget request for fiscal year 2014 contained $5.0
billion for Aircraft Procurement, Army. The committee
recommends authorization of $5.2 billion, an increase of $135.1
million, for fiscal year 2014.
The committee recommendations for the fiscal year 2014
Aircraft Procurement, Army program are identified in division D
of this Act.

Items of Special Interest

Apache helicopter transmission
The budget request contained $759.4 million for procurement
of the Apache helicopter program.
The committee continues to support the AH-64E Apache
helicopter program and believes that it provides a critical
capability to the Army. The committee understands that the
program has had production issues with the current
transmission. The Apache transmission is a ``single point-of-
failure'' component in that only one vendor is currently
certified to make this particular transmission. The committee
notes that the Army had to make difficult decisions to mitigate
the impact to the industrial base and fielding schedule. The
committee encourages the Army to continue its mitigation
efforts with the prime contractor in regards to the
transmission subcontractor meeting required production
schedules. The committee also encourages the Army to work with
the prime contractor and determine if the qualification of a
second source is warranted considering the critical nature of
the transmission.
The committee recommends $759.4 million, the full amount of
the request, for the Apache helicopter program.
Lightweight combat medical evacuation systems
The committee is concerned about weight-related performance
issues impacting rotorcraft systems used for medical evacuation
(MEDEVAC) missions. The committee understands that current
MEDEVAC rotorcraft are required to operate over long distances
in the Islamic Republic of Afghanistan as well as in other
remote areas of operations. The committee is aware of recent
efforts by the U.S. Army Aviation Research Laboratory under the
Medical Research and Materiel Command and the Army Aviation
Engineering Directorate at Redstone Arsenal to test ways to
reduce the weight of MEDEVAC rotorcraft, including lightweight
rack systems for the transport and treatment of injured
military personnel. The committee notes that a lightweight rack
system could provide flight medical personnel additional
capabilities to accomplish critical evacuation missions by
improving space, range, and altitude performance for the
rotorcraft.
The committee encourages the Army to continue expedited
testing of lightweight tactical, rapidly installable medical
evacuation racks as one of many possible options to better
manage rotorcraft weight and improve overall performance.
UH-72 Light Utility Helicopter
The budget request included $96.2 million for procurement
of 10 UH-72 Light Utility Helicopters (LUH).
According to the Army, this is the final year of UH-72
purchases, truncating the total program buy at 315 aircraft,
instead of 346 as originally planned. The committee notes that
even though this ends production short of the original plan,
the final buy fully meets the agreed upon UH-72 requirements of
the Army National Guard.
The committee recognizes that funding constraints and
assessments in investment priorities contributed to the Army's
decision to end UH-72 LUH production early, but also recognizes
the platform has performed very well in valuable mission
scenarios, to include homeland security, patrol along the
Southwest boarder, and state and regional emergency response.
These scenarios are important to operations in the permissive
U.S. environment. However, the committee is concerned that the
Army's decision may have an impact on the UH-72 LUH industrial
base that increase risks over time for the support of its
fielded fleet of 315 aircraft.
Therefore, the committee recommends $231.3 million, an
increase of $135.1 million, for procurement of UH-72 LUH. The
committee acknowledges that the additional procurement funds
complete the total requirement for the LUH program. The
committee understands that while no further requirements for
additional platforms have been formally identified by the
National Guard Bureau; should additional requirements be
identified, the committee expects the National Guard to use
National Guard and Reserve Equipment account funds. In
addition, the committee encourages the Army to assess the
feasibility of transferring additional UH-72 LUH rotorcraft
from the Active Component to the National Guard if additional
requirements are validated.

Missile Procurement, Army

Overview

The budget request for fiscal year 2014 contained $1.3
billion for Missile Procurement, Army. The committee recommends
authorization of $1.3 billion, no change to the budget request,
for fiscal year 2014.
The committee recommendations for the fiscal year 2014
Missile Procurement, Army program are identified in division D
of this Act.

Procurement of Weapons and Tracked Combat Vehicles, Army

Overview

The budget request for fiscal year 2014 contained $1.6
billion for Procurement of Weapons and Tracked Combat Vehicles,
Army. The committee recommends authorization of $1.8 billion,
an increase of $191.0 million, for fiscal year 2014.
The committee recommendations for the fiscal year 2014
Procurement of Weapons and Tracked Combat Vehicles, Army
program are identified in division D of this Act.

Items of Special Interest

Armor Brigade Combat Team force structure and industrial base
The committee notes that as a result of the Budget Control
Act of 2011 (Public Law 112-25), the Army is in the process of
reducing its Active Duty end strength to 490,000. In addition,
the Army has also announced plans to eliminate at least eight
Active Component Brigade Combat Teams (BCTs), reducing the
total number from 45 to 37. The active Army has 17 Armor BCTs
(ABCT), 20 Infantry BCTs, and 8 Stryker BCTs. The Army has
stated that at least two of the eight BCTs eliminated will be
ABCTs. The committee notes that the ABCT, which is comprised of
Abrams tanks and Bradley fighting vehicles, is the only full-
spectrum force in the Army's force structure. With regard to
the future utility of armored forces, the committee notes a
Rand Corporation report from 2010 that concluded, ``Heavy
forces-based on tanks and infantry fighting vehicles-are key
elements of any force that will fight hybrid enemies that have
a modicum of training, organization, and advanced weapons.
Light and medium forces can complement heavy forces,
particularly in urban and other complex terrain; they do not
provide the survivability, lethality, or mobility inherent in
heavy forces. Quite simply, heavy forces reduce operational
risks and minimize friendly casualties.''
The committee is concerned that the Army may eliminate too
many ABCTs based on resource constraints rather than meeting
the needs of combatant commanders. The committee understands
the Army has completed a force structure and BCT mix analysis.
Although the committee has been informed that the Army will add
a third maneuver battalion back into the Active Component Armor
and Infantry BCTs which will also impact the total amount of
BCTs, the committee has not been briefed on final force
structure and BCT mix decisions. The committee is supportive of
all BCTs having a third maneuver battalion and notes that the
committee opposed the Army's original decision of two maneuver
battalions per BCT in the committee report (H. Rept. 109-452)
accompanying the John Warner National Defense Authorization Act
for Fiscal Year 2007. The committee also notes that in the
committee report (H. Rept. 112-479) accompanying the National
Defense Act for Fiscal Year 2013, the committee directed the
Secretary of the Army, or his designee, and the Chairman, Joint
Chiefs of Staff, or his designee, to brief and submit a report
to the congressional defense committees on how the Army's
recent force structure and BCT mix analysis meet the needs of
the combatant commanders. This information has not been
provided to the congressional defense committees.
In addition to the mix of BCTs, the committee is also
concerned about the Army's position that Foreign Military Sales
(FMS) alone is sufficient to protect the armor industrial base
until follow-on programs begin around the fiscal year 2019
time-frame. The committee believes that the associated impact
this position has on the industrial base at both the prime
contractor and vendor level poses an unacceptable level of
risk. The ABCT industrial base is not dependent upon one
platform. The committee continues to believe that insufficient
information is available to Congress to make an informed
decision regarding current and potential future risks to the
armor industrial base at the prime and vendor levels. The
committee understands that the Army believes that it will soon
have the necessary analytical information required to make
informed decisions about the industrial base. The committee
needs to understand the ramifications to the future ABCT
industrial base capabilities regarding the Abrams tank, Bradley
fighting vehicle, Paladin howitzer, Hercules recovery vehicle,
Armored Multi-Purpose Vehicle, and the Ground Combat Vehicle.
The committee needs to understand the Army's projected
requirements in the fiscal year 2019 time-frame to maintain a
public and private workforce to sustain the current level of
ABCTs, and what capabilities the Army will need in the future
to produce new or improved platforms.
The committee believes that FMS may help to mitigate some
of the risk to the industrial base, but believes FMS alone will
not be enough to ensure that the ABCT industrial base is
maintained at viable levels until follow-on production efforts
begin in the fiscal year 2019 time-frame. In the absence of a
force mix BCT analysis, and a detailed quantitative analysis of
the impacts to the ABCT industrial base, the committee
recommends adjustments to the Army's budget request elsewhere
in this report.
Abrams tank upgrades
The budget request contained no funding for the Abrams tank
upgrade program.
The committee believes that the Army must maintain the
ability for its Armored Brigade Combat Teams (ABCT) to over
match any possible threat, and is concerned that the Army still
does not have a realistic plan for maintaining the M1 Abrams
tank industrial base for the future. The Army has testified, in
support of the fiscal year 2014 budget request, that they do
not have any plans to close down the industrial facilities used
to upgrade M1 Abrams tanks. The Army has also testified that
they plan on proceeding with the next M1 Abrams tank upgrade
program in 2019, which the committee assumes will require an
active and healthy industrial base. In addition, the Army has
testified that one of their top modernization programs, the
Ground Combat Vehicle program, is also scheduled to enter
production in the 2019 time frame and that the Army will need a
viable industrial base to produce it as well.
While the committee understands that the Army assumes that
Foreign Military Sales (FMS) alone are enough to keep the
Abrams tank line ``warm'' until the 2019 time frame, based on
current world events, the committee believes that reliance upon
FMS alone poses an unacceptable level of risk to our heavy
vehicle industrial base, and thus to our national security. As
a result, the committee believes that the best course of action
would be a combination of continued tank upgrades for the Army
and ongoing FMS, the combination of which should maintain
production lines and suppliers until the next Abrams tank
upgrade program begins. To further mitigate risk to the
industrial base, the committee encourages the Army to begin the
next series of Abrams tank upgrades in the 2017 or 2018 time
frame, rather than delaying to 2019.
With regard to the military need for more M1A2 tank
upgrades, the committee notes that six National Guard ABCTs are
currently equipped with a less capable version of the Abrams
tank. In addition, the committee believes that in the future
the National Guard's share of ABCTs in the Army will increase
due to possible Active Duty reductions, making the Army more
reliant on its National Guard brigades in case of a major
conflict. Therefore, the committee believes that as long as the
National Guard has a less capable version of the Abrams tank,
there will be a requirement for additional modernized M1A2
Abrams tanks.
The committee recommends $168.0 million in Procurement of
Weapons and Tracked Combat Vehicles, Army for the Abrams tank
upgrade program.
Bradley fighting vehicle and transmission upgrades
The budget request contained $158.0 million for Bradley
fighting vehicle modifications.
The committee encourages the Army to use fiscal year 2013
authorized and appropriated funds to convert Bradley M2 Calvary
vehicles into Bradley M3 infantry fighting vehicles. The
committee understands that if the Bradley fighting vehicle
production line is shut down, then other currently funded
combat vehicle programs, such as the Paladin integrated
management and the M88A2 recovery vehicle, will experience cost
increases.
The committee also notes that regardless of whether the
Ground Combat Vehicle is developed and fielded on schedule, the
Army must continue upgrades to the remaining fleet of Bradley
fighting vehicles through the Bradley Engineering Change
Proposal (ECP) program. If the Army chooses to upgrade the
vehicle transmission as part of the ECP program, than the
committee encourages the Army to conduct a competitive award
process for a transmission provided as government furnished
equipment, or to require the prime contractor to conduct a
competition to select the transmission used in the upgrade. The
committee believes that such a competition will ensure that the
Army gets the best possible transmission available at the
lowest possible cost.
The committee recommends $158.0 million, the full amount
requested, for Bradley fighting vehicle modifications.
Improved recovery vehicle
The budget request contained $111.0 million for the M88A2
improved recovery vehicle program.
The committee is aware that in order to provide greater
protection for soldiers, the Army's current and future fleet of
combat vehicles has grown significantly in weight. As a result,
the M88A1 recovery vehicles are approaching their maximum
capability with the current fleet, and its capability will be
greatly exceeded by the future fleet. The committee supports
the Army's decision to include funds in the budget request for
procurement of additional M88A2 vehicles, but believes
additional funds are necessary to maintain production. The
committee believes this will provide the Army with ample time
to finalize its force structure and Brigade Combat Team
adjustments and to determine a more accurate requirement for
the procurement of additional M88A2s.
The committee recommends $186.0 million, an increase of
$75.0 million, for the M88A2 improved recovery vehicle program.
Carbine program
The budget request contained $70.8 million for the carbine
program. Of this amount, $18.9 million was requested for 12,000
M4A1 carbines and $48.6 million was requested for 29,897 new,
individual carbine weapons. The budget request also contained
$10.3 million for M4 carbine modifications.
As noted in the committee report (H. Rept. 112-78)
accompanying the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal
Year 2012 and in the committee report (H. Rept. 112-479)
accompanying the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal
Year 2013, the committee continues to support the Army's dual-
path acquisition strategy for modernizing its inventory of
carbine weapons, which would allow the Army to upgrade its
current M4 carbines as well as procure a new carbine after the
current individual carbine competition is complete. Section 212
of the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2012
(Public Law 112-81) required the Secretary of the Army to
submit to the congressional defense committees a business case
assessment before making a procurement decision regarding the
individual carbine program. The committee has yet to receive
this business case assessment. Therefore, the committee is
concerned that the amount of procurement funding requested for
new carbines is too high given the individual carbine program's
current down-select and evaluation schedule as well as the
requirement to provide a business case assessment.
The committee recommends $48.8 million, a decrease of $22.0
million for new carbine weapons, for the carbine program. The
committee also recommends $10.3 million, the full amount of the
request, for M4 carbine modifications.
M9 product improvement strategy
The budget request contained $0.3 million for the M9 pistol
program.
The committee notes that the M9 pistol has been a reliable
pistol with consistent and reasonable life-cycle costs. The
committee understands that the development of a requirement to
replace the M9 pistol has been slowed by budget constraints and
system capability debates over the need for a replacement. The
committee is aware that the Marine Corps has upgraded the M9
pistol with a series of product improvements that has extended
the life-cycle of the program and improved the weapon's
capabilities. The committee believes that the Secretary of the
Army and the Secretary of the Air Force should consider
pursuing a similar product improvement program for their
respective service's M9 pistol inventory based on the Marine
Corps' experience and lessons learned. The committee expects
that any product improvement program be managed and executed
through a full and open competitive process.
The committee recommends $0.3 million, the full amount of
the request, for the M9 pistol program.

Procurement of Ammunition, Army

Overview

The budget request for fiscal year 2014 contained $1.5
billion for Procurement of Ammunition, Army. The committee
recommends authorization of $1.4 billion, a decrease of $74.5
million, for fiscal year 2014.
The committee recommendations for the fiscal year 2014
Procurement of Ammunition, Army program are identified in
division D of this Act.

Items of Special Interest

Acquisition strategy for 40mm ammunition
The budget request contained $55.8 million in procurement
of ammunition, Army for 40mm cartridges.
The committee is concerned that the budget request for 40mm
ammunition may disrupt 40mm cartridge production due to the
potential changes in allocation between variants of 40mm
cartridges. Therefore, the committee directs the Secretary of
the Army to submit a report by February 15, 2014 to the
congressional defense committees that provides a five year
funding estimate and annual production profile for each 40mm
cartridge variant, detailed information on proposed new
variants, estimated production quantities, the associated
acquisition strategies, strategies to avoid potential
production gaps or workforce disruptions, and development and
production schedules.
The committee recommends $55.8 million for procurement of
40mm cartridges.

Other Procurement, Army

Overview

The budget request for fiscal year 2014 contained $6.5
billion for Other Procurement, Army. The committee recommends
authorization of $6.4 billion, a decrease of $54.3 million, for
fiscal year 2014.
The committee recommendations for the fiscal year 2014
Other Procurement, Army program are identified in division D of
this Act.

Items of Special Interest

Army unmanned ground vehicle upgrades
The committee notes that over the past 10 years, the Army
has procured more than 5,000 unmanned ground vehicles (UGVs) of
various sizes and for numerous missions. The committee also
notes that if modified, many of these UGVs could support
engineering, military police, and chemical-biological-
radiological-nuclear missions, as well as gives them uses in
domestic support scenarios. However, the committee is concerned
that the Army has not transitioned many of its UGV programs to
base budget programs-of-record. For example, the PackBot and
Talon systems continue to be managed primarily through Overseas
Contingency Operations funding outside the Army's normal
upgrade programs. The committee believes that the continued ad
hoc nature of the UGV programs will not allow for proper
sustainment and upgrades in the future. Therefore, the
committee encourages the Secretary of the Army to establish a
formal acquisition program for fiscal year 2015 to properly
facilitate repair, maintenance, and upgrades of the Army's
UGVs. The program should comply with current Federal
Acquisition Regulations and should be funded through budget
lines for research, development, test, and evaluation,
procurement, and modifications.
Civil Support Team information management needs
The committee is aware that the National Guard Bureau
Weapons of Mass Destruction Civil Support Teams (WMD CST)
currently field an information management system that provides
a common operating picture, promotes information sharing and
real-time collaboration in an emergency situation, and supports
the CST mission of assisting and advising first responders and
facilitating communications with other Federal resources. The
committee has noted that it believes this system should be
expanded to follow-on forces, such as the Chemical, Biological,
Radiological, Nuclear, and High-Explosive Enhanced Response
Force Package and Homeland Defense Response Force units.
However, this has not yet occurred to date. Therefore, the
committee directs the Assistant Secretary of Defense for
Homeland Defense and Americas' Security Affairs to provide a
briefing to the Committee on Armed Services of the House of
Representatives within 90 days after the date of the enactment
of this Act on the information management system needs of the
Department of Defense WMD response forces, including the needs
of both Active and Reserve Components.
Criteria on the Recertification and Quantity of GEM-Ts
The committee is aware that the Patriot Guidance Enhanced
Missile Tactical (GEM-T) missile provides an affordable, but
critical, capability within the Patriot missile family that
includes a complementary interceptor to the Patriot Advanced
Capability-3 (PAC-3) and PAC-3 Missile Segment Enhancement
(MSE). At approximately $0.5 million per missile, the GEM-T
provides a lower cost option to PAC-3 when used against the
same threat and can make possible saving the PAC-3 inventory
for other threats.
The committee encourages the Army to undertake a GEM-T
recertification program when the GEM-T missile certification
requires renewal in fiscal year 2015. The committee is aware
GEM-T recertification could provide an additional 20 years of
service life for the GEM-T missiles the Army believes it
requires for its future interceptor inventory. The committee
believes such recertification could also promote
interoperatibility with allies in Asia and the Arabian Gulf,
and it could enable an interceptor mix and inventory that more
comprehensively addresses known threats in both quantity and
characteristic.
The committee is concerned that the missile inventory, both
currently maintained and planned, does not take into account
the full range of threats facing forward deployed forces; nor
does it reflect the fiscal constraints the Army is likely to
face in both procurement and research & development in the
future. Therefore, the committee directs the Secretary of the
Army to provide a report to the congressional defense
committees not later than October 15, 2013, on current and
planned missile inventories, namely GEM-T. This report should
review the proposed inventory criteria and quantity of GEM-T
recertification. Additionally, it should include a cost-benefit
analysis, including an assessment of whether or not
recertification meets an Army requirement in a cost-effective
manner, to address the full range of threats, including short
range ballistic missiles, as well as sustainment and
procurement costs of the recertified missiles. This report
should be submitted in unclassified form with a classified
annex as necessary.
Gunshot detection systems
The committee believes that gunshot detection systems have
proven to be critical part of force protection of military
personnel in Operation Enduring Freedom (OEF) and Operation
Iraqi Freedom (OIF). The committee notes that in response to
joint urgent operational needs, these systems were rapidly
fielded, in many cases, for use by soldiers and marines
conducting mounted and dismounted operations in OEF and OIF.
The committee is aware that these systems proved particularly
effective in the sniper detection mission. The committee
encourages the Chief of Staff of the Army and the Commandant of
the Marine Corps to continue to resource and transition gunshot
detection systems to official programs of record in order to
continue to develop, test, and field Individual, Vehicle, and
Helicopter-borne gunshot detection systems.
Joint Tactical Radio System Manpack radio production strategy
The budget request contained $382.9 million in other
procurement, Army for procurement of Joint Tactical Radio
System (JTRS) radios. Of this amount, $323.7 million was for
procurement of 2,648 JTRS Manpack radios.
The committee notes that the amount of competition in the
JTRS program has increased dramatically over the past 3 years.
Specifically, the committee notes that the Army is now planning
full and open competition for production of each element of the
JTRS program, including the JTRS small airborne networking
radio, the JTRS small airborne link 16 terminal, the mid-tier
networking vehicular radio, the JTRS handheld ``rifleman''
radio, and the JTRS ``Manpack'' radio.
The committee also supports the Army's efforts to create a
more flexible radio acquisition approach that allows multiple
vendors to offer the best available communications technology
to meet Army requirements in accordance with Federal
Acquisition Regulations. The committee believes that such an
approach may reduce cost through competition, and encourage
private sector innovation at little or no cost to the
Government. The committee notes that this approach is very
different from the Army's traditional, ``winner takes all''
approach to radio competitions in the past, which usually
resulted in a sole-source, multi-decade contract arrangements.
The committee notes with concern, however, that the Army
still has not provided the congressional defense committees
formal acquisition strategies that would document the planned
awards for JTRS radios. The committee understands that in the
case of the Manpack radio the Army may award a single vendor a
5-year contract for full rate production. While such a strategy
does provide incentive for manufacturers to reduce radio
prices, the committee believes that such an award could
discourage losing vendors from competing again in the future.
Therefore, the committee encourages the Army to consider
alternative JTRS Manpack acquisition strategies that would
maintain two or more vendors in full rate production for no
more than 3 years before the next round of competition if the
business case analysis is in the best interest to the
warfighter and taxpayer. Such a strategy could balance the need
to maintain efficient and cost effective radio production with
continued competition and technology improvement.
While the committee continues to support full and open
competition for tactical radio systems, the committee also
cautions the Army against sacrificing critical warfighter
requirements to include size, weight, security protocols and
life cycle cost of radios. The burden of winning any
competition should fall on the manufacturer which must offer a
proposal that is compliant with the Army's stated requirements.
In addition, the committee encourages the Army to avoid
procuring tactical radio systems that operate on proprietary
waveforms, have not been tested by the Director, Operational
Test and Evaluation, and that have not been or are not procured
through full and open competition.
The committee recommends $382.9 million, the full amount of
the request, for JTRS radios.
Patriot Modernization Costs
The committee notes that the Army's Air and Missile Defense
Strategy signed in September 2012 by the Secretary of the Army
and Chief of Staff acknowledge that current Air and Missile
Defense forces must be transformed due proliferated ballistic
missiles growing in sophistication and growing threats from
cruise missiles and unmanned aerial systems. Furthermore, the
strategy reaffirms the need for 360-degree surveillance and
fire control, a smaller and more expeditionary force, and
integration of networked sensors and weapons. The strategy also
stresses the need for modem, modular open architectures and
admits that the Army's ability to defeat missile threats is
complicated by the decision not to procure the Medium Extended
Area Defense System (MEADS).
The committee is concerned that the alternatively proposed
Patriot 30-year strategic modernization strategy is a
significant expense, does not sufficiently address acknowledged
air and missile defense capability gaps and includes no
discernible intent to harvest the flight tested, modem,
technically mature 360-degree sensors, 360-degree lightweight
launchers, and battle manager software developed under MEADS,
for which the US taxpayer has expended in excess of $2.4
billion. The draft Patriot modernization strategy proposes
spending in excess of $1.0 billion over the next 5 years mostly
on sole-source contracts, while deferring development and
fielding of expeditionary 360-degree capability until 2029-
2034.
Due to declining defense budgets, and consistent with the
Department's better buying power initiatives, the committee
therefore believes it is premature to commit to the Patriot
modernization strategy without a comprehensive and independent
life cycle cost analysis of the Patriot 30-year modernization
strategy.
The committee directs the Congressional Budget Office to
provide a report to the congressional defense committees not
later than November 30, 2013, on an analysis of the estimated
development and procurement costs associated with the Patriot
modernization including integration activities to enable
network operations and testing. Such analysis shall also
include estimates of:
(1) Unit Level Personnel: The direct costs of all
operator, maintenance, and other support personnel at
operating units (or at maintenance and support units
that are organizationally related and adjacent to the
operating units);
(2) Unit Operations: The unit level consumption costs
of operating materials such as fuel, electricity,
expendable stores, training munitions, and other
operating materials. Also to be included are costs of
any unit-funded support activities, training devices,
or simulator operations that uniquely support an
operational unit, temporary additional duty/temporary
duty associated with the unit's normal concept of
operations, and other unit-funded services;
(3) Maintenance: The costs of labor (outside of the
scope of unit level) and materials at all levels of
maintenance in support of the primary system,
simulators, training devices, and associated support
equipment (this includes intermediate maintenance,
depot support, and contractor support). Additionally,
the cost of contractor labor, materials, and overhead
incurred in providing all or part of the logistics
support to a weapon system;
(4) Sustaining Support: Costs for support services
provided by centrally managed support activities
external to the units that own the operating systems
and that can be identified to a specific system
(excludes costs that must be arbitrarily allocated);
(5) Continuing System Improvements: The costs of
hardware and software updates that occur after
deployment of a system that improve the system's
safety, reliability, maintainability, or performance
characteristics to enable the system to meet its basic
operational requirements throughout its life. (Costs
for system improvement identified as part of the
acquisition strategy or a pre-planned product
improvement program and included in the acquisition
cost estimate are not included. Also, any improvements
of sufficient dollar value that would qualify as
distinct major defense acquisition programs are not
included.); and
(6) Indirect Support: Installation and personnel
support costs that cannot be directly related to the
units and personnel that operate and support the system
being analyzed.
Personal protection equipment acquisition strategy
The committee encourages the Secretary of Defense to
reconsider its acquisition process for personal protection
equipment (PPE), to include body armor. Given the warfighter's
experiences during operations in the Republic of Iraq and the
Islamic Republic of Afghanistan, the committee notes that PPE,
in particular body armor, constitutes an essential part of
``warfighter equipment;'' and therefore, it should be treated
differently than other, more prosaic consumables, such as socks
and undershirts, that are included in the Defense Logistics
Agency operation and maintenance (O&M) accounts.
The committee encourages the Department to consider
adhering to ``best value'' performance standards in soliciting
and evaluating proposals for PPE contracts rather than using
lowest priced, technically acceptable (LPTA) contract vehicles.
The committee believes that categorizing PPE as ``O&M'' may
decrease commercial interest in pursuing long-term commitments
to developing next-generation PPE technology that could
increase capability while also decreasing weight. The committee
also notes that previous national defense authorization acts
have directed the Department to establish dedicated research,
development, test, and evaluation and procurement line items
for body armor. The committee is disappointed that the
Department has not sufficiently implemented congressional
direction regarding this matter.

Aircraft Procurement, Navy

Overview

The budget request for fiscal year 2014 contained $17.9
billion for Aircraft Procurement, Navy. The committee
recommends authorization of $18.0 billion, an increase of $30.0
million, for fiscal year 2014.
The committee recommendations for the fiscal year 2014
Aircraft Procurement, Navy program are identified in division D
of this Act.

Items of Special Interest

F/A-18E/F advance procurement
The budget request contained no funds for advance
procurement of F/A-18E/F aircraft. The F/A-18E/F is a naval
strike fighter aircraft designed for both air-to-air and air-
to-ground missions.
The committee notes that the Department of the Navy's
strike fighter shortfall forecast has decreased from last
year's predicted 56 aircraft in fiscal year 2025 to a
prediction of 18 aircraft in fiscal year 2023 for fiscal year
2014. However, the committee understands that these revised
shortfall numbers are based on a decreased projected rate of F/
A-18 utilization, successful high flight hour inspections on
the fleet of F/A-18A through F/A-18D aircraft that would extend
their useful flight hours to 9,000, and a service life
extension program for 150 F/A-18A through D aircraft that would
extend the useful flight hours of those aircraft to 10,000. The
committee further notes that the Department of the Navy
considers its plan to maintain the required strike fighter
inventory with some risk, and the committee believes that a
fiscal year 2015 procurement of additional F/A-18E/F aircraft,
which have a useful life of 9,000 hours, would reduce the
Department of the Navy's risk in maintaining the required
inventory of strike fighter aircraft.
Therefore, the committee recommends an increase of $75.0
million for advance procurement of F/A-18E/F aircraft and
encourages the Department of the Navy to budget for 24
additional F/A-18E/F aircraft in fiscal year 2015.
MQ-8 Fire Scout
The budget request contained $48.7 million for MQ-8
research, development, test and evaluation, and $61.0 million
for the procurement of one MQ-8 Fire Scout vertical take-off
and landing unmanned aerial vehicle (VTUAV).
The MQ-8 Fire Scout VTUAV provides real-time and non-real
time intelligence, surveillance, and reconnaissance (ISR) data
to tactical users without the use of manned aircraft or
reliance on limited theater or national assets. The committee
understands that the MQ-8 has successfully flown over 4,187
hours in support of the Afghanistan ISR Task Force and that MQ-
8 maritime ISR support to special operations forces continues
aboard the USS Bradley and USS Roberts in fiscal year 2013. The
committee also understands that future weapons and radar
capabilities are being integrated into the MQ-8 to meet U.S.
Central Command Naval Component urgent operational needs.
Additionally, the committee notes that the Department of the
Navy plans to procure 34 MQ-8 VTUAVs between fiscal years 2012-
18 to support U.S. Africa Command joint emergent operational
needs.
The committee views the MQ-8 VTUAV as a critical ISR asset
and encourages the Department of the Navy to fully execute its
fiscal year 2014 and Future Years Defense Program plans for
procurement and development of the MQ-8.

Weapons Procurement, Navy

Overview

The budget request for fiscal year 2014 contained $3.1
billion for Weapons Procurement, Navy. The committee recommends
authorization of $3.1 billion, a decrease of $14.1 million, for
fiscal year 2014.
The committee recommendations for the fiscal year 2014
Weapons Procurement, Navy program are identified in division D
of this Act.

Procurement of Ammunition, Navy and Marine Corps

Overview

The budget request for fiscal year 2014 contained $589.3
million for Procurement of Ammunition, Navy and Marine Corps.
The committee recommends authorization of $589.3 million, no
change to the budget request, for fiscal year 2014.
The committee recommendations for the fiscal year 2014
Procurement of Ammunition, Navy and Marine Corps program are
identified in division D of this Act.

Shipbuilding and Conversion, Navy

Overview

The budget request for fiscal year 2014 contained $14.0
billion for Shipbuilding and Conversion, Navy. The committee
recommends authorization of $15.0 billion, an increase of
$934.3 million, for fiscal year 2014.
The committee recommendations for the fiscal year 2014
Shipbuilding and Conversion, Navy program are identified in
division D of this Act.

Items of Special Interest

Air and Missile Defense Radar deployment on naval vessels

The Navy has reported that the Air and Missile Defense
Radar (AMDR) suite is being developed to fulfill Integrated Air
and Missile Defense requirements for multiple ship classes.
This suite consists of an S-band radar (AMDR-S), an X-band
radar and a Radar Suite Controller. AMDR would provide multi-
mission capabilities, simultaneously supporting long-range,
exoatmospheric detection, tracking and discrimination of
ballistic missiles, as well as Area and Self Defense against
air and surface threats. For the ballistic missile defense
capability, increased radar sensitivity and bandwidth over
current radar systems are needed to detect, track, and support
engagements of advanced ballistic missile threats at the
required ranges, concurrent with Area and Self Defense against
Air and Surface threats. For the Area Air Defense and Self
Defense capability, increased sensitivity and clutter
capability is needed to detect, react to, and engage stressing
Very Low Observable/Very Low Flyer threats in the presence of
heavy land, sea, and rain clutter.
According to the Government Accountability Office report
``Assessments of Selected Weapons Programs'' (GAO-13-294SP)
from March 2013, ``the Navy plans to install a 14-foot variant
of AMDR on Flight III DDG 51s starting in 2019. According to
draft AMDR documents, a 14-foot radar is needed to meet
threshold requirements, but an over 20-foot radar is required
to fully meet the Navy's desired integrated air and missile
defense needs.''
The committee supports the continued development of the
AMDR capability, but is concerned about the physical
limitations associated with the future deployment of this
capability on the Arleigh Burke-class Destroyer Flight III.
Therefore, the committee directs the Secretary of the Navy to
submit a report to the congressional defense committees by
March 1, 2014, that addresses the following:
(1) The capability requirements associated with the
AMDR;
(2) Required space, cooling and electrical
distribution upgrades necessary to support AMDR on the
Arleigh Burke-class Destroyer Flight III;
(3) An assessment as to whether the limitations
associated with the Arleigh Burke-class Destroyer
Flight III will negatively impact the deployment on
AMDR;
(4) An assessment of the deployment of AMDR on other
naval platforms including the San Antonio-class
Amphibious Transport Dock; and
(5) An assessment of the expansion capacity of the
Arleigh Burke-class Destroyer Flight III to support
further spiral development associated with future
weapons.

Joint High Speed Vessel report

According to the Navy's fiscal year 2014 budget
documentation, the Joint High Speed Vessel is being procured as
an intra-theater sealift asset. However, the committee has
observed growing indications from Department of the Navy
leadership that the Joint High Speed Vessel will serve as much
more than a troop transport vessel. Therefore, the committee
directs the Secretary of the Navy to provide a report to the
congressional defense committees not later than March 1, 2014,
on the following items:
(1) A complete list of existing required operational
capabilities for the JHSV approved by the Joint
Requirements Oversight Council (JROC);
(2) The number of vessels to be allocated to each
combatant commander area of responsibility under that
plan;
(3) The overseas basing plan to fulfill combatant
commander requirements and how dispersal of the vessels
will affect each of the JROC-approved operational
capability requirements; and
(4) An assessment of the future options for
additional missions to be fulfilled by the Joint High
Speed Vessel and their operational benefits to include
the following missions: mine countermeasure operations;
joint task force command and control; intelligence,
surveillance and reconnaissance; counter-piracy
operations; counter-drug operations; and counter-
smuggling operations.

Littoral Combat Ship radar capabilities

The committee is concerned that the Littoral Combat Ship
(LCS) radars are not being optimally used to provide maximum
protection. The USS Independence variant's radar can rapidly
and accurately detect and track small, fast-moving targets at
all altitudes; small surface targets in severe clutter; and
rockets, artillery, and mortars launched from shore-based
threats. The radar also can perform air and surface
surveillance, target identification for weapon systems, and
high-resolution splash spotting. The radar has successfully
demonstrated simultaneous detection and tracking of air,
surface (swarming small boats) and mortar targets in the
world's most challenging littoral environments. To ensure that
the LCS program fully leverages the various capabilities of its
modern radar technologies to protect this new class of ship,
the committee encourages the Department of the Navy to fully
utilize the capabilities provided by the current LCS radar
suite and ensure that the embarked crew is fully trained on the
radar's capabilities. Furthermore, the committee directs the
Secretary of the Navy to provide a report to the congressional
defense committees by March 3, 2014, on the steps the Navy has
taken to enhance LCS sailors' training on the radar's full
range of capabilities.

Littoral Combat Ship (LCS) oversight

The committee notes the Navy plans to acquire 52 Littoral
Combat Ship seaframes and 64 mission packages at a cost of
approximately $40.0 billion through 2035. Littoral Combat Ships
1-16 are under contract, and Littoral Combat Ships 17-24 are
pending authorization. The committee further notes that the
Navy's acquisition strategy for the Littoral Combat Ship
seaframes has changed several times and continues to evolve as
the Navy approaches its next major planned contract award in
fiscal year 2016. The Navy has indicated that 10 of the 64
planned mission modules will be procured before the seaframe
Milestone B and that this milestone continues to be delayed due
to lack of an approved test plan and acquisition program
baseline. The Navy expects to procure more than half of the
Surface Warfare and Mine Counter Measure modules before it
demonstrates they meet minimum requirements. The committee has
significant concerns regarding the levels of concurrency
associated with the mission modules and the expected delivery
of the Littoral Combat Ship seaframes. This dichotomy in
capability development appears excessive and the committee
believes it should be better aligned to ensure future success
of this program.
Therefore, the committee directs the Comptroller General of
the United States to prepare a report to the congressional
defense committees by March 30, 2014 on the current status of
the Littoral Combat Ship program. This report should assess the
following:
(1) Seaframe production and testing, including: (a)
Seaframe developmental test activities and changes made
to correct deficiencies identified during testing to
date; (b) Weight management for both seaframe variants;
(c) Planned Navy surrogate damage and survivability
tests using aluminum structures; (d) Progress made in
implementing commonality across both variants;
(2) Mission module development and testing, including
developmental test activities and changes made to
correct deficiencies identified during testing to date;
(3) Lessons learned and knowledge gained to date from
the Singapore deployment;
(4) Results of Navy technical and requirements
studies and any recommendations for changes to the
design and/or capabilities of either current or future
LCS;
(5) Navy studies, assessments, or potential plans to
acquire the Joint High Speed Vessel to operate in
conjunction with LCS or perform similar missions; and
(6) Role of LCS Council in acquisition oversight and
decision-making.

Long-range plan for the construction of naval vessels

Pursuant to section 231 of title 10, United States Code,
the Secretary of Defense provided the annual long-range plan
for the construction of naval vessels on May 10, 2013, as
informed by the Future Years Defense Program (FYDP) for fiscal
years 2014-18. The Secretary also indicated that a force
structure of ``about 300 ships'' would be necessary to support
ongoing naval operations. The Secretary further highlights the
``resourcing challenges outside the FYDP largely due to
investment requirements associated with the SSBN(X) program''.
The Secretary acknowledges that these ship construction
pressures will precipitate higher fiscal requirements in the
mid-term planning period (fiscal years 2024-33) requiring an
annual investment of $19.8 billion per year in fiscal year 2013
constant dollars.
The committee supports a robust shipbuilding plan that
invests in the near and long term needs of our Navy, and
considers the recapitalization of the SSBN fleet a challenging
but necessary strategic priority. However, the committee is
concerned that the Navy's ship construction accounts will face
significant pressure in supporting long term ship requirements
while also resourcing the Ohio-class replacement ballistic
missile submarine program. The committee also believes that a
significant increase to the ship construction accounts is
unsustainable in times of budget challenges. The Congressional
Budget Office has estimated that the average ship construction
investment over the last 30 years, in current dollars, is $16.0
billion. Therefore, to better understand the significance
associated with even sustaining the current ship construction
investment throughout the long-range plan, the committee
directs the Secretary of the Navy to provide a report to the
congressional defense committee by March 1, 2014, that provides
an update to the long plan for the construction of naval
vessels based on $16.0 billion across the entirety of the long-
range plan and to assess the corresponding reductions in the
shipbuilding plan. The Secretary of the Navy should also
provide an assessment of this investment in terms of the health
associated with the industrial base, as well as a discussion of
alternative strategies for the Navy and Congress to consider in
alleviating any shortfalls between this assessment and the May
10 report.

Navy Close-in Weapon System (CIWS) modernization

The committee is aware of a backlog of overhauls and
reliability, maintainability, and availability, (RMA) kits for
ship self-defense systems including the Navy's Close-in Weapon
System (CIWS). The committee is aware that CIWS is a last line
of defense against missiles, rockets and mortars for the
preponderance of naval vessels including cruisers, destroyers,
and aircraft carriers. The committee also remains concerned
about credible threats posed to sailors and marines that rely
on these systems for protection in a time of heightened
operational tempo. The committee directs the Secretary of the
Navy to deliver a briefing no later than December 31, 2013 to
the House Armed Services Committee which details the current
situation pertaining to overhauls and RMA kits and efforts
address the backlog of these systems.

Navy fleet oilers

The committee understands that most of the Navy's current
fleet oilers are single-hulled, and in 2010, the Navy announced
plans to recapitalize fleet oilers with construction of modern,
double-hulled ships while leveraging commercial technologies.
While the Navy announced plans to start procurement of the new
TAO(X) oiler-class in fiscal year 2014, the Navy's fiscal year
2013 and fiscal year 2014 budgets have postponed procurement of
the TAO(X) fleet oiler until fiscal year 2016.
However, the committee is concerned that the Navy budget
plans show no Advance Procurement (AP) funding in fiscal year
2014 or fiscal year 2015 toward long lead-time material and
components for the first TAO(X), and budget plans reflect a gap
year between procurement of the first and second ships. Both
actions, unless addressed, are likely to lead to higher costs
and delayed delivery of required TAO(X) ships. The committee
encourages the Navy and the Department of Defense to allocate
fiscal year 2015 funds for AP of long-lead time material and
components for the first TAO(X) ship in fiscal year 2016 and to
look for ways to eliminate the gap year between first and
second ships.

Use of fixed-price incentive fee contracts for ship construction
contracts

The Navy has a history of moving from cost-plus to fixed-
price incentive fee (FPIF) contracts after acquiring the first
few ships of the class. While fixed-price contracts are
generally less risky for the U.S. Government, the committee is
concerned about continued cost growth under the FPIF contracts.
FPIF contracts are intended to allow the U.S. Government to
acquire needed items at lower costs, and with improved delivery
or technical performance, by relating the amount of profit or
fee to the contractor's performance. In particular, two
specific intended outcomes of using incentive contracts are to
motivate contractor efforts and to discourage contractor
inefficiency and waste. The committee is particularly
interested in understanding whether the Navy's use of FPIF
contracts for shipbuilding are achieving the intended benefits
to the U.S. Government.
Therefore, the committee directs the Comptroller General of
the United States to submit a report to the congressional
defense committees by March 1, 2014, that assesses the
following:
(1) To what extent has the Navy entered into FPIF
contracts for shipbuilding over the past 5-years? To
what extent have other contract types been used,
including firm-fixed-price?
(2) What factors does the Navy consider in making
decisions about contract type for shipbuilding
programs, and what is the role of the program office,
contracting officer, and others in these decisions?
(3) For selected recent shipbuilding acquisitions,
how has risk been apportioned between the government
and the contractor in FPIF contract sharelines?
Practically speaking, how has the risk apportionment
compared to that under a cost-plus incentive fee
contract?
(4) Have the Navy's FPIF contracts served, as
intended, to motivate shipbuilding contractors to
improve performance and reduce inefficiencies? What
visibility does the Navy have into these intended
outcomes?

Other Procurement, Navy

Overview

The budget request for fiscal year 2014 contained $6.3
billion for Other Procurement, Navy. The committee recommends
authorization of $6.2 billion, a decrease of $26.2 million, for
fiscal year 2014.
The committee recommendations for the fiscal year 2014
Other Procurement, Navy program are identified in division D of
this Act.

Procurement, Marine Corps

Overview

The budget request for fiscal year 2014 contained $1.3
billion for Procurement, Marine Corps. The committee recommends
authorization of $1.3 billion, no change to the budget request,
for fiscal year 2014.
The committee recommendations for the fiscal year 2014
Procurement, Marine Corps program are identified in division D
of this Act.

Aircraft Procurement, Air Force

Overview

The budget request for fiscal year 2014 contained $11.4
billion for Aircraft Procurement, Air Force. The committee
recommends authorization of $11.7 billion, an increase of
$310.2 million, for fiscal year 2014.
The committee recommendations for the fiscal year 2014
Aircraft Procurement, Air Force program are identified in
division D of this Act.

Items of Special Interest

A-10 oxygen delivery systems modernization

The budget request contained $47.6 million for A-10
aircraft modifications.
The committee supports ongoing modernization of A-10 oxygen
delivery systems with On-Board Oxygen Generation Systems
(OBOGS). The committee notes that liquid oxygen-based systems
are manpower intensive and require significant maintenance and
support equipment. The committee is also concerned that the Air
Force, at times, must rely upon foreign sources of liquid
oxygen when A-10 aircraft are deployed. The committee
understands that retrofitting the remaining A-10 aircraft
within the Active Duty and Reserve Components that have yet to
be modernized with OBOGS could produce significant cost savings
over the service life of the aircraft. Therefore, the committee
encourages the Air Force to continue conversion of liquid
oxygen-based systems to OBOGS in the A-10 fleet.
The committee recommends $47.6 million, the full amount of
the request, for A-10 aircraft modifications.

B-52 Bomber modernization programs

The budget request contains $12.6 million in PE 101113F for
B-52 Combat Network Communications Technology (CONECT)
development and $87.2 million for B-52 CONECT procurement of 10
kits, but no funds for the B-52 Strategic Radar Replacement
(SRR) program.
The B-52 SRR program replaces the current B-52 fielded in
the 1960s and then upgraded in the 1970s and 1980s. Although
modified several times, it has never been totally replaced, and
several parts of the system remain from the original design,
such as the antenna reflector, feed, and casting. Although
sustainable through the current service life of the B-52, the
legacy radar system mean-time-between-failure continues to
degrade and sustainment costs are expected to significantly
increase after 2017. The SRR program is a radar replacement
program that may take advantage of the advanced capabilities of
modern non-developmental radars, maximizing commonality with
other platforms. The B-52 SRR program would integrate, test,
and field a modern radar system, which supports all weather
targeting and navigation to support the requirements of keeping
the B-52 combat capable for its extended service life. However,
the SRR program was terminated in the budget request for fiscal
year 2013 due to Air Force budget constraints and the need to
fund other, higher priorities. Although the committee
understands that affordability concerns was the primary driver
for the SRR program termination, it is unclear to the committee
how the Secretary of the Air Force intends to afford the legacy
radar system knowing that sustainment costs are predicted to
significantly increase after 2017. The committee encourages the
Secretary of the Air Force to develop and implement an
affordability strategy for maintaining radar capability on the
B-52 aircraft through its predicted service-life of 2040 and to
communicate that strategy to the congressional defense
committees soon after the affordability strategy is developed.
Regarding the previously terminated B-52 CONECT program in
the budget request for fiscal year 2013, the committee supports
the Secretary's decision reinstating the program in the fiscal
year 2014 budget request. However, the committee is concerned
with the current plan to only fund and modernize 28 of 76 total
aircraft with CONECT capability. The committee reminds the
Secretary that section 137 of the National Defense
Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2008 (Public Law 110-181)
requires the Secretary to maintain all B-52 aircraft in a
common capability configuration. Realizing that the committee
in the future may have to address not retaining the nuclear
capability for a certain number of B-52 in order to comply with
New START requirements, the committee intends to provide no
flexibility for not maintaining B-52 aircraft in a common
conventional capability configuration. A dissimilar capability
configuration adds complexity to supply chain management,
aircrew certification, training and employment, and would
inherently complicate combatant commander operational planning
and execution by having to account for dissimilar aircraft
capabilities.

Battlefield airborne communications node

The committee notes that the battlefield airborne
communications node (BACN) system was initially developed to
meet an urgent warfighter need. The committee further notes
that since its fielding, BACN has provided critical
communications and information sharing capability between
different tactical data and voice networks in support of
operations in the Republic of Iraq and the Islamic Republic of
Afghanistan. The committee believes that the BACN is a needed
capability for the future and encourages the Department of the
Air Force to continue its effort to transition the BACN to a
traditional program of record in fiscal year 2015.

C-130H Avionics and Propulsion System Modernization and Upgrade
Programs

The budget request contained no funds for continuing low
rate initial production of the C-130 Avionics Modernization
Program (AMP) for C-130H aircraft and $0.4 million in PE
401115F for C-130 airlift squadrons, but no funds for C-130H
propulsion system upgrades.
The committee is disappointed that the Secretary of the Air
Force invested nearly $1.5 billion of taxpayer dollars for
engineering, manufacturing, development, and testing of the C-
130 AMP program and has entered Low Rate Initial Production,
but has no plans to continue procurement and installation of C-
130 AMP onto legacy C-130H aircraft. The Secretary also has no
plans to modernize or upgrade the C-130H propulsion system in
order to increase reliability, capability, fuel efficiency and
on-wing time of the engine, as well as decrease the overall
cost and maintenance burden of the current propulsion system.
The Secretary has not articulated to the committee a coherent
plan for fleet-wide recapitalization of the C-130H fleet or how
they plan to maintain medium-sized intra-theater airlift
capacity and capability within both the Active and Reserve
Components. Knowing that the majority of the C-130H fleet
resides within the Reserve Components of the Air Force and that
the C-130H should remain reliable, capable, and relevant to
meeting current and future warfighter needs, the committee is
concerned with the lack of initiative that the Secretary has
taken with regard to the modernization and upgrade of C-130H
aircraft. The committee also notes that through cost reduction
initiatives and efficiencies gained in the C-130 AMP program
over the past year, the cost data that the Secretary used as
justification for canceling the C-130 AMP program in the budget
request is no longer relevant.
Therefore, the committee recommends $26.4 million, an
increase of $26.0 million, in PE 401115F for C-130H propulsion
system propeller upgrades; $74.3 million, an increase of $15.7
million, for C-130H propulsion system engine upgrades; and
$47.3 million, an increase of $47.3 million, for continued
procurement of 8 C-130 AMP kits and installation onto C-130H
aircraft. Elsewhere in this title, the committee includes a
provision that would preserve the nearly $1.5 billion taxpayer
investment in the C-130 AMP program and would prohibit the
Secretary from canceling the C-130 AMP program. Finally, the
committee directs the Secretary of the Air Force to immediately
obligate authorized appropriations provided in fiscal year 2012
and fiscal year 2013 to preserve the cost reduction initiatives
and efficiencies gained in the C-130 AMP program over the past
year.

Global Hawk Block 30 aircraft

The budget request contained $202.5 million in aircraft
procurement, Air Force and research, development, test and
evaluation, Air Force, for development and upgrade of Global
Hawk unmanned aircraft. The budget request also contained $22.2
million in operation and maintenance, Air Force, for continued
operation of Global Hawk unmanned aircraft.
In section 154 of the National Defense Authorization Act
for Fiscal Year 2013 (Public Law 112-239), Congress prohibited
the proposed retirement of Global Hawk Block 30 unmanned
aircraft while also mandating their continued operations
through 2014 to meet combatant command intelligence,
surveillance, and reconnaissance (ISR) operations. In the
committee report (H. Rept. 112-479) accompanying the National
Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2013, the committee
stated that this legislation was based on the committee's
desire to maintain ISR capability to meet ever-increasing
combatant command ISR needs, avoid the retirement of brand new
aircraft procured at a cost of more than $100.0 million each,
and support the Department of Defense's new strategy that
requires long-duration, long-range ISR assets. The committee
believes that even after the war in the Republic of Iraq and
transition to a reduced U.S. military presence in the Islamic
Republic of Afghanistan, long-range ISR aircraft will be in
more demand, not less. The committee notes that as the number
of Global Hawk missions in Afghanistan has declined missions in
support of U.S. Africa Command, U.S. Central Command, and U.S.
Pacific Command have increased. The committee believes that
this is due to ongoing and growing demand for ISR of all kinds.
While the committee was pleased to see that the Air Force
did request funding for Global Hawk Block 30 operations in the
budget request for fiscal year 2014, the committee remains
concerned that the Air Force is not fully committed to
retaining much needed ISR capability, and Global Hawk Block 30
aircraft in particular. As a result, the committee supports
further extending Global Hawk operations through 2016 and
expects the Air Force to maintain Global Hawk operations and
support infrastructure, including active duty and reserve
units, through at least this timeframe. Additionally,
consistent with its position for fiscal year 2013, the
committee expects the Secretary of the Air Force to fully
execute the fiscal year 2012 Global Hawk Block 30 program,
including the procurement of 3 additional aircraft, in
accordance with the National Defense Authorization Act for
Fiscal Year 2012 (Public Law 112-81) and the Consolidated
Appropriations Act, 2012 (Public Law 112-74).

MQ-9 Reaper remotely piloted aircraft

The budget request contained $272.2 million in Aircraft
Procurement, Air Force for procurement of 12 MQ-9 Reaper
remotely piloted aircraft (RPA) systems and $45.3 million for
initial spares and repair parts for MQ-9 Reapers. The budget
request also contained $30.0 million in research, development,
test, and evaluation, Air Force, for the extended range
capability for MQ-9 Reapers.
The National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2013
(Public Law 112-239) authorized procurement of 36 new MQ-9
Reapers and associated ground equipment in an effort to
accelerate fielding of the upgraded Block 5 version of the MQ-9
Reaper and meet the Air Force's objective for increasing
intelligence, surveillance, and reconnaissance (ISR)
capability. This represented an increase of 12 aircraft above
the fiscal year 2013 budget request. The committee is
concerned, however, that in response to this action, the Air
Force chose to reduce the number of MQ-9 Reaper aircraft in the
budget request for fiscal year 2014 from 24 to 12 aircraft.
The committee believes that the Air Force must continue to
aggressively invest in ISR aircraft. The committee notes that
even when the Air Force achieves its current goal of supporting
65 combat air patrols of MQ-1 Predator and MQ-9 Reaper RPAs,
there will be significant unmet demand for ISR capability
worldwide. While the committee understands the Air Force's
desire to transition away from RPAs that are only capable of
operating in permissive threat environments, it believes that
the daily demand for both traditional ISR and strike missions
in support of global counter-terrorism operations will not
decline for many years. Furthermore, the Air Force's efforts to
increase the operational range and endurance of the baseline
MQ-9 Reaper will expand their utility (when accounting for
basing constraints) and further increase demand for these
platforms. Finally, the committee seeks to sustain the
industrial base for remotely piloted aircraft to ensure that it
will be available to build the next generation of RPA systems.
The committee recommends $352.2 million, an increase of
$80.0 million, in aircraft procurement, Air Force for
procurement of 18 MQ-9 Reaper RPA systems. The committee also
recommends $56.3 million, an increase of $11.0 million, in
aircraft procurement, Air Force, for initial spares and repair
parts for these aircraft. The committee expects the Air Force
to place all of the funding provided on contract for new MQ-9
aircraft and associated ground equipment during fiscal year
2014.

Upgraded ejection seats

The budget request contained no funds for the procurement
of upgraded ejection seats for B-2 and F-16 aircraft.
The committee understands that aircraft aging and heavy
operations tempo have produced fatigue and corrosion in legacy
ejection seat designs which were designed and procured by the
Department of the Air Force in the mid-1970s. The committee
further understands that the incorporation of modern helmet
mounted displays creates significant risk to pilot survival
during high speed ejections because the aerodynamic forces of
high-speed ejections could lift the modern helmet off the pilot
and generate high neck tension loads. Today's state-of-the-art
upgraded ejection seats can effectively address these risks
while at the same time providing significantly improved ease of
maintenance and increased aircraft availability.
Therefore, the committee encourages the Department of the
Air Force to begin replacing the 1970s-designed ejection seats
equipped in most legacy fighter and bomber aircraft with a low
cost approach that would emphasize a form, fit, and function
solution requiring minimal qualification in legacy Department
of the Air Force aircraft. The committee believes that
minimizing sustainment life-cycle costs through commonality
with currently-fielded components should also be included as a
prime determinant in selecting the upgraded ejection seat, and
that the B-2 and the F-16 aircraft, which would require the
least effort toward flight-worthy qualification of a new
ejection seat, should be given upgrade priority.

Procurement of Ammunition, Air Force

Overview

The budget request for fiscal year 2014 contained $759.4
million for Procurement of Ammunition, Air Force. The committee
recommends authorization of $759.4 million, no change to the
budget request, for fiscal year 2014.
The committee recommendations for the fiscal year 2014
Procurement of Ammunition, Air Force program are identified in
division D of this Act.

Missile Procurement, Air Force

Overview

The budget request for fiscal year 2014 contained $5.3
billion for Missile Procurement, Air Force. The committee
recommends authorization of $5.3 billion, a decrease of $0.7
million, for fiscal year 2014.
The committee recommendations for the fiscal year 2014
Missile Procurement, Air Force program are identified in
division D of this Act.

Other Procurement, Air Force

Overview

The budget request for fiscal year 2014 contained $16.8
billion for Other Procurement, Air Force. The committee
recommends authorization of $16.8 billion, no change to the
budget request, for fiscal year 2014.
The committee recommendations for the fiscal year 2014
Other Procurement, Air Force program are identified in division
D of this Act.

Items of Special Interest

Remotely Piloted Aircraft Squadron Operations Centers for the Air
National Guard

The budget request contained no funds for Remotely Piloted
Aircraft Squadron Operations Centers (RSOC) for the Air
National Guard.
The committee notes that the Air Force fiscal year 2013
force structure changes approved by the committee included
plans to create numerous MQ-1 and MQ-9 remotely piloted
aircraft remote-split operations and targeting squadrons in the
Air National Guard. However, the committee notes with concern
that the Consolidated and Further Continuing Appropriations
Act, 2013 (Public Law 113-6) did not include sufficient funding
to begin acquiring the ground-based equipment necessary to
stand up these units. Specifically, the committee understands
that to reach full capability these units will need fully
modernized RSOCs, and that the infrastructure provided by the
RSOC supports hosting up to five ground control stations,
intelligence analysts, weather personnel, and other critical
personnel required for full operations.
The committee encourages the Air Force, starting by the
fiscal year 2015 budget request, to fully fund RSOC and other
equipment required to stand up fully modernized Air National
Guard MQ-1 and MQ-9 remote-split operations and targeting
units.

Procurement, Defense-Wide

Overview

The budget request for fiscal year 2014 contained $4.5
billion for Procurement, Defense-Wide. The committee recommends
authorization of $4.6 billion, an increase of $107.0 million,
for fiscal year 2014.
The committee recommendations for the fiscal year 2014
Procurement, Defense-Wide program are identified in division D
of this Act.

Items of Special Interest

Concurrent fielding of equipment for the Army National Guard and Air
National Guard

The budget request contained $2.7 billion for National
Guard equipment modernization.
The National Guard and Reserve Components are no longer
considered a ``strategic reserve,'' and are now regarded as an
``operational'' force. Since September 2001, over 860,000
members of the National Guard and Reserve Components have been
mobilized and served on Active Duty in support of Operation
Noble Eagle, Operation Enduring Freedom, Operation Iraqi
Freedom, and Operation New Dawn, of whom over 900 have been
killed in action. Domestically, over 50,000 members of the
National Guard responded to Hurricane Katrina and, more
recently, more than 7,000 members of the National Guard and
Reserve Components mobilized in support of Hurricane Sandy.
Recognizing the importance of an operational reserve force
and the imperative to equip the National Guard and Reserve
Components with modernized equipment, in recent years, the
committee authorized funding for additional equipment for the
Reserve Components to address chronic shortfalls in Army
National Guard (ARNG) and Air National Guard (ANG) equipment
inventories. Since 2007, Congress has provided approximately
$9.2 billion in the National Guard and Reserve Equipment
Account to address this issue, in addition to other targeted
funding increases. As a result of these funding increases and
sustained investment in the ARNG and ANG, both components are
currently at historic highs in terms of equipment-on-hand, with
the ARNG at 87 percent and the ANG at 91 percent.
However, the committee notes that some of the equipment
counted as on-hand is substitute or less-capable versions of
the required equipment. The committee acknowledges that the
National Guard faces mounting challenges regarding how to
replace worn out equipment, legacy equipment that is becoming
obsolete or irrelevant, and equipment that is aging through
normal wear-and-tear. In addition, long-term gaps in funding
remain. The ``National Guard and Reserve Equipment Report for
Fiscal Year 2014'' identified an almost $29.7 billion shortfall
for the ARNG for fully modernized equipment, approximately 26.6
percent of the total requirement. The report also found a $8.8
billion shortfall for the ANG for fully modernized equipment,
which is 14.5 percent of the total requirement. Furthermore,
the committee is concerned that these shortfalls may not be
addressed based on current Army and Air Force procurement and
fielding plans. For example, the committee understands that
plans for fielding major weapons systems for the ANG, including
the F-35 aircraft, remain far in the future. For the ARNG,
fielding of the UH-60M and CH-47F helicopters are planned to
stretch out over several decades.
The committee recommends that the Army and the Air Force
reexamine their funding and fielding plans for all National
Guard equipment procurement and that they re-balance those
plans to provide the ARNG and the ANG with new equipment
concurrent with fielding to Active Duty units. The committee
believes that using the National Guard as an operational force,
with planned rotations and mobilizations, makes it imperative
that National Guard units be provided the necessary resources
to man, equip, sustain, and train.
The committee recommends $2.7 billion, the full amount
requested, for National Guard equipment modernization.

Joint Urgent Operational Needs Fund

The budget request contained $98.8 million for the Joint
Urgent Operational Needs (JUON) Fund.
The Office of the Secretary of Defense and the military
services have established a number of organizations and
programs to respond to requests from units in Operation Iraqi
Freedom, Operation New Dawn, and Operation Enduring Freedom
(OEF), units supporting other combatant commands, and from
combatant commanders to rapidly develop and field solutions to
a variety of capabilities, including development and transition
of new technologies to the warfighter; support for Joint
Experimentation Range Complexes; counter-improvised explosive
detection and destroy; and intelligence, surveillance, and
reconnaissance sensors and systems. The committee notes each of
these programs requests amounts for unspecified purposes for
hundreds of projects in anticipation of requests from OEF
units, other units in other combatant commands, and combatant
commanders. The committee believes that this request lacks
proper justification and is duplicative with other requests for
rapid acquisition capabilities to address urgent operational
needs.
The committee appreciates that the Department of Defense
must find ways to rapidly fund urgent needs to address near-
term and high-risk scenarios. As such, Congress provided the
Department with Rapid Acquisition Authority in section 806(c)
of the Bob Stump National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal
Year 2003 (Public Law 107-314), as amended by section 811 of
the Ronald W. Reagan National Defense Authorization Act for
Fiscal Year 2005 (Public Law 108-375) and section 803 of the
Ike Skelton National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year
2011 (Public Law 111-383) which provides the Secretary of
Defense $200.0 million in authority, per fiscal year, to waive
any statute hindering quick response to immediate warfighter
capability requirements in response to combat fatalities. The
committee understands the Department has rarely used this
authority.
The committee recommends no funds, a decrease of $98.8
million, for the JUON Fund.

Multiyear procurement authority for ground-based interceptors

Elsewhere in this Act, the committee includes a provision
concerning authority for the Director, Missile Defense Agency
to enter into 1 or more multiyear contracts, beginning in
fiscal year 2014, for the procurement of 14 ground-based
interceptors and authority for advanced procurement associated
with these ground-based interceptors.
The committee notes that the Congressional Budget Office
has estimated that this provision would result in savings of 10
percent for the Department of Defense on the price of a ground-
based interceptor, and that buying these interceptors under the
current Missile Defense Agency plan of 14 interceptors under 7
annual contracts of 2 per-year would cost about $200.0 million
more than a single multiyear contract.

LEGISLATIVE PROVISIONS

Subtitle A--Authorization of Appropriations

Section 101--Authorization of Appropriations

This section would authorize appropriations for Procurement
at the levels identified in section 4101 of division D of this
Act.

Subtitle B--Army Programs

Section 111--Limitation on Availability of Funds for Stryker Vehicle
Program

This section would limit the obligation of procurement
funds of the Stryker program to not more than 75 percent of the
fiscal year 2014 requested amount until the Secretary of the
Army submits to the congressional defense committees a report
on the Stryker vehicle spare parts inventory.

Subtitle C--Navy Programs

Section 121--Multiyear Procurement Authority for E-2D Aircraft Program

This section would permit the Secretary of the Navy to
procure up to 32 E-2D aircraft utilizing multiyear procurement
authority for fiscal years 2014-18.

Section 122--Cost Limitation for CVN-78 Aircraft Carriers

This section would amend the statutory cost cap for the
aircraft carrier designated as CVN-78 that was imposed by
subsection (a)(1) of section 122 of the John Warner National
Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2007 (Public Law 109-
364). The cost cap for CVN-78 is currently $11.755 billion,
having been adjusted by the Secretary of the Navy in 2010 using
the authority granted by subsection (b) of section 122 of
Public Law 109-364. This section would raise the cost cap to
the Program Manager's most likely Estimate at Completion, as
reported in the 2011 Selected Acquisition Report, to $12.9
billion. This section would also update the cost cap associated
with CVN-79 and later Ford-class aircraft carriers.
The committee notes the receipt of a report to Congress
required by section 124 of the National Defense Authorization
Act for Fiscal Year 2013 (Public Law 112-239) that provides
cost-saving details that the Navy intends to incorporate into
the acquisition strategy to provide better cost stability in
CVN-78 and eventual incorporation into CVN-79 procurement
process.
The committee remains concerned about the continued
escalation in costs associated with Gerald R. Ford-class
aircraft carrier and the negative consequences associated with
this continued escalation on the entirety of the ship
construction accounts. This escalation, when taken in the
context of the 30-year shipbuilding plan that includes
significant costs associated with the Ohio-class ballistic
missile submarine replacement, is unsustainable.

Subtitle D--Air Force Programs

Section 131--Multiyear Procurement Authority for Multiple Variants of
the C-130J Aircraft Program

This section would permit the Secretary of the Air Force to
procure multiple variants of the C-130J baseline aircraft
utilizing multiyear procurement authority for fiscal years
2014-18.

Section 132--Prohibition on Cancellation or Modification of Avionics
Modernization Program for C-130 Aircraft

This section would prohibit the Secretary of the Air Force
from terminating the legacy C-130H Avionics Modernization
Program.

Section 133--Retirement of KC-135R Aircraft

This section would permit the Secretary of the Air Force to
remove KC-135E aerial refueling aircraft from flyable storage,
which would permit the Secretary to utilize parts and
components of retired KC-135E aircraft to enter the supply
chain for maintaining and sustaining KC-135R aerial refueling
aircraft. This section would also require the Secretary to
maintain any retired KC-135R aircraft in a flyable condition
that would permit recall to active flying service in the
Department of the Air Force. This section would also permit the
Secretary of the Air Force, on a ``one-for-one'' basis, to
remove KC-135R aircraft from the flyable storage requirement
for each new KC-46A aircraft delivered to the Department of the
Air Force.

Section 134--Competition for Evolved Expendable Launch Vehicle
Providers

This section would require the Secretary of the Air Force
to develop and implement a plan to ensure the fair evaluation
of competing contractors in awarding a contract to a certified
evolved expendable launch vehicle provider. This plan would
include descriptions of how the following areas would be
addressed in the evaluation: the proposed cost, schedule, and
performance; mission assurance activities; the manner in which
the contractor will operate under the Federal Acquisition
Regulation; the effect of other contracts in which the
contractor is entered into with the Federal Government, such as
the evolved expendable launch vehicle launch capability and the
space station commercial resupply services contracts; and any
other areas determined appropriate by the Secretary.
This section would also require that the Secretary submit a
report to Congress not later than 90 days after the date of the
enactment of this Act that includes the aforementioned plan or
provide a briefing to the appropriate congressional committees
on the plan. After the Secretary provides the report or
briefing to Congress, the Comptroller General of the United
States shall conduct a review of the plan.

Subtitle E--Defense-Wide, Joint, and Multiservice Matters

Section 141--Multiyear Procurement Authority for Ground-based
Interceptors

The section would provide the Director, Missile Defense
Agency with authority to enter into 1 or more multiyear
contracts, beginning in fiscal year 2014, for the procurement
of 14 ground-based interceptors. This section would also
provide authority for advanced procurement associated with
these ground-based interceptors. This section would also
require that such contracts include a requirement that they be
subject to the availability of appropriation for these
purposes.

Section 142--Multiyear Procurement Authority for Tactical Wheeled
Vehicles

This section would authorize the Secretary of Defense to
enter into a 5-year pilot program for the multiyear procurement
of tactical wheeled vehicles. This section would also require
the Secretary to submit to the congressional defense committees
within 180 days after the date of the enactment of this Act,
their intent to award such a contract, and if not,
justification for not pursuing the pilot program. If the
program is implemented, this section would also direct the
Secretary of Defense to submit, as part of the Department's
justification materials in support of the President's annual
budget request, detailed information on the status, progress,
and challenges associated with implementation of the pilot
program.
The committee notes that the Department of the Army, the
Department of the Navy, and the Department of the Air Force
have validated requirements for tactical wheeled vehicles. The
committee also notes that the Department of Defense has
procured certain tactical wheeled vehicles, including the
Family of Medium Tactical Vehicles, the Medium Tactical Wheeled
Vehicle Replacement, and the Family of Heavy Tactical Vehicles,
through multiyear procurement contracts and achieved
significant cost savings.

Section 143--Limitation on Availability of Funds for Retirement of RQ-4
Global Hawk Unmanned Aircraft Systems

This section would limit the use of funds to retire Global
Hawk Block 30 unmanned aircraft systems and would require the
Secretary of the Air Force to take all actions necessary to
maintain the operational capability of the RQ-4 Block 30 Global
Hawk through December 31, 2016.

Section 144--Personal Protection Equipment Procurement

This section would require the Secretary of Defense to
ensure that within each military service procurement account, a
separate procurement budget line item is designated for
personal protection equipment (PPE) investment and funding
transparency.

Section 145--Repeal of Certain F-35 Reporting Requirements

This section would amend section 122 of the Ike Skelton
National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2011 (Public
Law 111-383) by striking subsection (b), and re-designating
subsection (c) as subsection (b).

Section 146--Study on Procurement of Personal Protection Equipment

This section would authorize the Secretary of Defense to
enter into a contract with a federally funded research and
development center (FFRDC) to conduct a study to identify and
assess alternative and effective means for stimulating
competition and innovation in the personal protection equipment
industrial base, to include body armor. This section would also
require that within 180 days after the date of the enactment of
this Act, the FFRDC shall submit to the Secretary of Defense a
report detailing the findings and recommendations from the
study. In addition, the Secretary shall submit to the
congressional defense committees a report on the findings and
recommendations of the FFRDC study, along with the complete
study.

TITLE II--RESEARCH, DEVELOPMENT, TEST, AND EVALUATION

OVERVIEW

The budget request for fiscal year 2014 contained $67.5
billion for research, development, test, and evaluation. This
represents a $2.8 billion decrease over the amount authorized
for fiscal year 2013.
The committee recommends $68.0 billion, an increase of
$559.2 million to the budget request.
The committee recommendations for the fiscal year 2014
research, development, test, and evaluation program are
identified in division D of this Act.

Research, Development, Test, and Evaluation, Army

Overview

The budget request contained $7.9 billion for research,
development, test, and evaluation, Army. The committee
recommends $7.9 billion, a decrease of $47.0 million to the
budget request.
The committee recommendations for the fiscal year 2014
research, development, test, and evaluation, Army program are
identified in division D of this Act.

Items of Special Interest

Active protection system research and development

The committee notes that as a result of the removal of a
requirement for an active protection system (APS) on the Army's
Ground Combat Vehicle that the budget request included no
funding for APS research and development. The committee is
concerned that this lack of investment may soon create a
critical capability gap for Army combat vehicles due to the
rapid proliferation of advanced anti-tank guided missiles and
next-generation rocket propelled grenades. The committee notes
that there are numerous types of APS available, including some
that have already been fielded on operational vehicles in other
countries. Therefore, the committee encourages the Army to
establish and fund a program to conduct APS research and
development starting in the fiscal year 2015 budget request.

Army advanced multi-purpose tank round program

The budget request contained $30.6 million in PE 63639A for
tank and medium caliber ammunition research and development. Of
this amount, no funding was requested for the Advanced Multi-
Purpose (AMP) 120mm round program.
The committee notes that in response to an urgent need, the
Marine Corps has initiated procurement of a new multi-purpose,
high-explosive (MPHE) 120mm round for M1A1 Abrams tanks. The
committee understands that this MPHE round has a data link
allowing the crew to select different fuse settings, including
point detonation, delay, and airburst, which combines the
effects of several current rounds into one. The committee
believes that this round could potentially also fulfill some of
the Army's requirements for the Advanced Multi-Purpose 120mm
round program, which went through initial testing in 2006 and
may begin further development in fiscal year 2015. The
committee encourages the Army to assess the current capability
of the Marine Corps' MPHE round to potentially meet AMP
requirements in order to potentially save funding and avoid
starting a redundant program.
The committee recommends $30.6 million, the full amount
requested, in PE 63639A for tank and medium caliber ammunition
development.

Army air and missile defense

The committee is concerned that the Army's air and missile
defense units may not have the capacity and capabilities to
address threats in current and future anti-access, area denial
environments. The committee believes that the Army should be
prepared to provide missile and air defenses for both static
locations and maneuvering forces inside a region facing a
sophisticated A2/AD threat. The committee believes that
mobility and creative employment concepts are vital to the
future success of Army air and missile defenses. The committee
also believes that the Army should seek to exercise its air and
missile defense capabilities with allies in Asia Pacific region
on a regular basis in order to enhance our capabilities and
encourage our allies to develop more comprehensive air and
missile defense systems.

Army cargo unmanned aerial system

The committee notes that the Marine Corps is conducting a
successful demonstration using an unmanned aerial system (UAS)
to move cargo loads of up to 4,500 pounds in remote areas of
the Islamic Republic of Afghanistan. The system in question has
been deployed for 15 months to-date. The use of this cargo UAS
has reduced the need to use manned aircraft or vehicles to
provide supplies to remote operating locations, thus providing
substantial force protection benefits.
The committee is concerned that the Army, despite having
very similar logistical challenges, does not have a cargo UAS
program. Therefore, the committee directs the Secretary of the
Army to submit a report to the congressional defense
committees, by February 15, 2014, assessing the potential
utility of an Army cargo UAS. Specifically, the report should
address:
(1) How cargo UAS capabilities could be incorporated
into the Army's logistics operations from point-of-
supply through delivery to point-of-need;
(2) An estimate of the cost to procure, operate, and
sustain cargo UAS in comparison to using manned
rotorcraft for the same missions; and
(3) Any additional operational or logistical impacts
to the Army of fielding a cargo UAS.

Army directed energy testing

The committee is aware of the U.S. Army's current test
effort through the Solid State Laser Testbed (SSLT) program, to
examine the utility of directed energy technology as a
supplement to current capabilities for force protection of
rocket, artillery, and mortar threats. The committee stresses
the importance of directed energy research and encourages the
Army's continuation of those efforts. Therefore, the committee
directs the Secretary of the Army to brief the Committees on
Armed Services of the Senate and the House of Representatives
within 90 days after the date of the enactment of this Act on
SSLT program efforts. The briefing should include the
following:
(1) Overview and results of the test campaign;
(2) The current status of plans to incorporate
directed energy as a supplement to, or replacement for,
the current counter-rocket, artillery, and mortar
program of the Army;
(3) The projected mission utility based on current
test results including the number of directed energy
systems required to replace existing systems;
(4) Potential advantages and disadvantages in regards
to magazine depth and associated costs; and
(5) Any logistical or operational challenges that
remain to be addressed prior to deployment of a
directed energy system, including satellite and
aircraft interference as well as the maintenance of
sophisticated laser technology in austere environments.

Army modernization strategy for tactical communications waveforms

The committee supports the Army's efforts to provide
additional tactical network communications capability to the
individual soldier. The committee believes that building a
high-capacity, secure tactical Internet system will be useful
in a range of military operations and will also enhance the
warfighter's ability to communicate, survive, and fight. The
committee notes that the Joint Tactical Radio System and the
Warfighter Information Network-Tactical programs are both
critical parts to building the tactical Internet system and
continues to support both programs.
The committee also notes that thus far, the Army has chosen
to develop and use waveforms unique to the military for
transmitting data, including the High-capacity Network Waveform
(HNW), the Wideband Networking Waveform (WNW), and the Soldier
Radio Waveform (SRW). While it recognizes the needs for this
technology, the committee also encourages the Army to expand
its research and development efforts to better leverage
commercial wireless technology waveforms, such as second
generation, third generation, and fourth generation long-term
evolution cellular phone waveforms. The committee believes that
these efforts could result in substantial savings for the Army
by taking advantage of the vast amount of private sector
research and development that already exists, both in terms of
hardware and software technology. Therefore, the committee
encourages the Army to develop commercial waveforms for
tactical communications that are compliant with the 3rd
Generation Partnership Project and other applicable industry
standards to the extent it is practical given military and
security requirements.

Combat vehicle fuel efficiency engine development

The committee applauds the recent efforts of the Department
of the Army to improve the fuel efficiency of the M1 Abrams
tank. These efforts offer improved cost savings for the
Department as well as increased operating capabilities. The
committee encourages the Army to consider modern diesel
technology for future applications into combat vehicles which
would also take into account total life cycle costs.

Continued development of vehicle underbody protection systems

The committee recognizes the continued threat improvised
explosive devices (IEDs) pose to ground combat and tactical
vehicles. The committee encourages the Secretary of the Army to
continue to study underbody vulnerabilities to combat and
tactical vehicles posed by IEDs, in particular the high
mobility, multi-purpose wheeled vehicle. The committee
encourages the Secretary of the Army to continue to test and
develop solutions that would improve survivability of vehicle
underbodies, to include protective systems for fuel tanks and
fuel bladders. The committee believes that there should be an
emphasis on low-cost solutions that reduce the possibility of a
post-blast fire while minimizing engineering changes to the
vehicle. The committee also recognizes the recent advances in
light composite materials with self-healing capabilities and
encourages the Secretary of the Army to evaluate their use in
new production vehicle programs and current vehicle
recapitalization programs.

Fabric-based respiratory protective equipment

The committee notes that section 313 of the National
Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2013 (Public Law 112-
239) identified concern regarding soldier and civilian
personnel exposure to environmental hazards, including burn
pits, dust and sand, hazardous materials and waste. The
committee notes that service members who are deployed lack a
flexible and wearable system to protect them from inhaled
hazards, and therefore have to often resort to using shirts or
other cloth to cover their faces in dusty or smoky
environments. While the committee is aware of current Army
filter-based protective equipment, such as gas masks, there are
also potential fabric-based solutions to these hazards that are
wearable variants of the material already used by the Army. The
committee understands that these fabric-based solutions could
be used to mitigate a significant amount of soldier exposure to
the potentially hazardous effects of inhaling sand, dust,
smoke, and pollutants, such as diesel exhaust and lead.
Therefore, the committee directs the Secretary of the Army
to submit a report to the congressional defense committees by
February 15, 2014, evaluating the potential utility of fabric-
based solutions to address soldier exposure to inhalation of
sand, dust, smoke, and pollutants.

Improved turbine engine program

The budget request contained $81.0 million in PE 63003A for
aviation advanced technology.
The committee continues to support the operational and
performance goals of the Improved Turbine Engine Program (ITEP)
which includes a 50-percent increase in engine power and a 25-
percent fuel savings. The committee understands that ITEP is
designed to provide longer life, improved maintainability, and
reduced costs to meet the operational requirements for the
Army's current and next-generation vertical lift aircraft.
The committee recognizes and commends the Army for
establishing a firm requirement for the ITEP engine and for
successful completion of the Material Development Decision in
2012. The Army should continue to fund competitive prototyping
at a minimum through milestone B. The committee believes that
further competing to a preliminary flight rating test (PFRT)
milestone, or preferably through a flight demonstration of each
competing engine, will control costs, reduce programmatic risk
and modeling/simulation shortfalls. Further, the committee
believes maintaining competition through PFRT or beyond will
allow the Army to make a more informed selection for an engine
that will be in the operational force for decades. Selecting
the appropriate point at which to down select to a single
engine contractor is a crucial step to ensure the taxpayers and
Department of Defense get the best value in investment and
performance. Therefore the committee encourages the Army to
take both competitive engines at a minimum through PFRT, and
preferably through flight demonstration, to control development
and program cost, mitigate technical risk, validate performance
and ensure the warfighter receives the best possible solution.
The committee recommends $81.0 million, the full amount
requested, in PE 63003A for aviation advanced technology.

Innovative approaches in wound care research

The committee is aware that the Department of Defense has
identified a key research requirement for improved techniques
for wound care, particularly for combat-related trauma. The
committee notes that there is preliminary data that suggests
that plasma technologies have the potential for promoting wound
healing by de-activating pathogens in the wound, stopping
bleeding without damage to healthy tissue, and other effects
that lead to rapid healing and tissue regeneration. The
committee recognizes that further experimentation is essential
to demonstrate the potential benefit of this technology, as
well as to satisfy regulatory requirements of the Food and Drug
Administration. Therefore, the committee encourages the
Telemedicine and Advanced Technology Research Center to
evaluate short-pulsed electric discharge plasma technology for
potential use in military wound care settings.

Joint Air-to-Ground Missile program

The budget request contained $15.1 million in PE 65450A for
Joint Air-to-Ground Missile (JAGM) research and development.
The committee continues to support the JAGM program based
on the need for a replacement to the Hellfire missile program
that provides an all-weather, long-range moving target
capability. In addition, the continuation of the JAGM program
would help sustain the tactical missile industrial base.
Missile technology remains an area of asymmetric advantage for
the United States that the committee believes must be retained.
The committee notes that the Army restructured the JAGM
program to use an incremental approach starting in fiscal year
2012. Specifically, the Army decided to pursue only a ``dual
mode'' seeker with limited capability as part of Increment 1 of
the new acquisition strategy, with milestone B planned in
fiscal year 2015. As part of this milestone B, the committee
understands that the Army may decide to retain only one
contractor during the engineering and manufacturing development
(EMD) phase for JAGM Increment 1. The committee is concerned
that such an approach could prematurely narrow the Army's
technology options and increase the risk that the JAGM program
would never fully meet the requirements validated in 2012 by
the Joint Requirements Oversight Council. As a result, the
committee encourages the Army to retain two contractors during
Increment 1 EMD. The committee believes that employing an
approach that retains competition during Increment 1 EMD would
help lower costs and ensure the best possible weapon system
performance. The committee directs the Secretary of the Army to
provide a briefing to the House Committee on Armed Services by
February 15, 2014, that details the funding required to
maintain two contractors during JAGM Increment 1 EMD.
The committee recommends $15.1 million, the full amount
requested, in PE 65450A for JAGM research and development.

Joint Land Attack Cruise Missile Defense Elevated Netted Sensor System

The budget request contained $98.5 million in PE 12419A for
the Joint Land Attack Cruise Missile Defense Elevated Netted
Sensor System (JLENS).
The committee notes that in January 2012, the Army decided
to not procure any JLENS orbits. However, the committee
understands that the Army has used elements of the two orbits
built during system development for additional testing and
capability demonstration purposes. The committee notes that in
September 2012, the Army and Navy executed a joint live-fire
event to demonstrate Naval Integrated Fire Control-Counter Air
capability. In a December 2012 demonstration, JLENS showed its
potential capability to track and detect ballistic missiles and
large caliber rockets during their ascent phase. These
successful demonstrations illustrate that JLENS could provide
U.S. forces a significant operational advantage in areas like
the Strait of Hormuz, the Republic of Korea, and elsewhere.
Given these demonstration events, and the significant threat
posed by cruise missiles, small boats, and ballistic missiles,
the committee expects the Army to use the funding authorized in
fiscal year 2014 to proceed with plans to conduct additional
system demonstration efforts. The committee also notes,
however, that the Army has now dropped plans for an initial
operational test in fiscal year 2014. Absent realistic test
events, the committee is not convinced that JLENS warrants any
further development.
The committee recommends $68.5 million, a decrease of $30.0
million, in PE 12419A for the JLENS. With the funds provided,
the committee expects the Army to prioritize additional
demonstration events planned for fiscal year 2014.

M4 Carbine powered rail system

The committee has a long record of supporting Army research
efforts aimed at reducing soldier equipment weight. The
committee notes that the Army conducted a $2.7 million small
business innovation research (SBIR) program starting in 2012
that sought to develop a soldier-carried electrical power
solution integrated into the M4 carbine.
The purpose of this competitively awarded SBIR program was
to provide more soldier power at less weight. The committee
understands that the system has now been developed and tested,
and that it has the potential to reduce weight carried by
soldiers in the form of batteries and provide an integrated
data transfer capability for M4 carbine accessories. However,
the committee notes with concern that the Army has not yet
decided to proceed to the next step with this program.
As the Army continues it's evaluation, the committee
encourages the Army to proceed with an expanded user evaluation
of this system to ensure that it has sufficient information to
determine whether or not it warrants further development. The
committee expects that should the Army decide to continue
development of this system that any long term procurement
decision will be based on full and open competition.

Man-portable electronic warfare

The committee is aware that current and future adversaries
will continue to use radio-controlled improvised explosive
devices (IED) and standard radio tactics to coordinate attacks
on our troops and personnel. In many cases, forward-deployed
small units and military intelligence units do not have small,
compact, lightweight electronic warfare (EW) systems capable of
responding to these threats. The committee believes that what
is needed is a next generation, compact, tactical EW system
that provides more adequate soldier protection from wireless
threats, target finding, and combat situational awareness is a
man-portable unit.
The committee is also aware that the Department has
significant investments in new EW capabilities, including Army
investments to develop a small soldier-worn package for
counter-IED, threat avoidance, and intelligence gathering
capabilities. The committee recognizes that such a system for
dismounted tactical combat operations will have great utility
to all of the military services and agencies, including the
special forces and military intelligence communities. The
committee encourages the Department to continue development of
such EW systems and to pursue deployment as rapidly as is
practicable.

Modeling and simulation for advanced materials

The committee recognizes the importance of utilizing
virtual reality and modeling and simulation tools to provide
cutting-edge, cost-effective training and technology
development for the Nation's warfighters. Leveraging these
technologies is an especially relevant adjunct to live training
given the future of declining defense budgets. The committee is
pleased with the U.S. Army Research Laboratory's implementation
of virtual reality centers as a coordinated effort to broaden
use of virtual training methods. These centers include the use
of a variety of training tools that give the warfighter and
developers alike, a realistic training experience that
contributes to improved readiness and system effectiveness.
These centers will also allow for technology development
through modeling and simulations prior to real product
development.
The committee believes that centers like the Center for
Cold Spray Research and Development, which simulates material
and process development for technologies such as munitions
enhancements, would benefit from increased utilization of
virtual reality and modeling and simulations tools. Therefore,
the committee encourages the Army to continue its development
and application of modeling and simulation concepts, tools and
investments in order to maintain robust, cost-effective
training capabilities.

Modular protective systems for wheeled vehicles

The committee understands that restoring equipment
readiness is a key element of the Army and the Marine Corps
equipment reset process. In current combat operations, vehicle
and aircraft usage rates are several times greater than
peacetime rates and the harsh environment also takes a toll on
equipment, especially the Army and the Marine Corps's ground
combat tactical vehicle fleets. The committee recognizes the
critical need to repair, recapitalize, and replace damaged or
worn out combat and tactical vehicles after 12 years of high
operational tempo in Operation Enduring Freedom (OEF) and
Operation Iraqi Freedom (OIF). The committee also notes there
is a critical requirement to continue to modernize the combat
and tactical vehicle fleets. The committee supports ongoing
modernization programs such as the Joint Light Tactical vehicle
program, and the Ground Combat Vehicle program as being
essential for long-term modernization of these fleets.
The committee understands the Army and the Marine Corps are
developing long-term acquisition strategies for their
respective combat and tactical vehicle fleets. The committee
expects these strategies to include a long-term armoring
strategy component that would adopt the lessons learned from
OEF and OIF regarding the need for improved survivability for
all vehicles. As the Army and the Marine Corps begin to
recapitalize their vehicle fleets, the committee encourages
both services to consider the cost and operational benefits of
using modular, scalable protection kits as part of any long-
term modernization plan and armoring strategy.

Multi-mission electronic warfare

Enemy communications, jammers, improvised explosive device
triggers, and radar systems are constantly changing and
becoming more and more difficult to counter. The proliferation
of unmanned vehicles has also expanded the scope of electronic
warfare (EW) threats facing our country today. The committee
believes that in order to address these evolving threats, the
next generation EW system must be designed to perform multiple
types of EW missions such as detection and attack of modern
equipment, coordination with tactical communications,
intelligence gathering, differentiation of ground from air
targets, and direction finding (DF).
The committee is aware that the Army Intelligence and
Information Warfare Directorate is developing such an advanced
technology. This technology will provide our warfighers with
multi-mission integrated EW for high speed DF, advanced
jamming, and signals intelligence all in one package. The
committee recommends that the Secretary of Defense fully
support this research and development effort and where
possible, accelerate its deployment.

Nano-scale electronics and materials

The committee is aware of the potential benefits of
electronics and other nanomaterials engineered at the nano-
scale, including reduced size, weight, power consumption and
other electrical properties. The committee is also aware that
the Army Research Laboratory (ARL) supports work in this area
to ensure warfighter benefits from the most advanced nano-
enabled technologies, such as microchip-based energetics with
controlled combustion reactions, carbon and organic conductor-
based printable electronics, solar cells and high-energy
density capacitors, nano-engineered integrated sensors for
chemical, biological, and nuclear threat detection, and
nanomaterial-based heat transfer and thermal management
systems. The committee encourages the Army to continue
investment in further developing these technologies incubated
at ARL.

Night vision systems engineering development

The budget request contained $43.4 million in PE 64710A for
night vision systems engineering development.
The committee notes that over the past 12 years the Army
has invested significant levels of funding in thermal sights
and other advanced night vision devices for small arms weapons.
The committee understands that additional upgrades to existing
night vision devices may be possible through development and
modification of clip-on retrofits, which could enhance optical
device performance without the need to procure entirely new
devices. Therefore, the committee encourages the Army to
consider funding efforts to evaluate and develop such retrofits
as part of its overall night vision systems research,
development, test, and evaluation efforts. The committee
expects that any future development effort would be pursued
through full and open competition.
The committee recommends $43.4 million, the full amount
requested, in PE 64710A, for night vision systems engineering
development.

Regenerative and rehabilitative engineering

The committee is aware that the human toll of 12 years of
war has resulted in casualties that have maimed, disfigured and
debilitated thousands of service members. The committee is also
aware that the Department of Defense has funded numerous
medical research activities to improve the tactical combat
casualty care of service members, as well as supporting the
longer-term health needs of the military. Emerging areas of
regenerative engineering and rehabilitative medicine are
transforming military medical care and are quickly
transitioning into the public health care sector.
The committee applauds efforts, such as the Armed Forces
Institute of Regenerative Medicine (AFIRM) as a means to
innovate in these emerging areas. AFIRM was established as a
multi-institutional, interdisciplinary network including
military institutions working closely with medical and research
universities to develop advanced treatment options for severely
wounded servicemen and women, such as face and limb transplants
and burn treatment. The committee encourages the Department to
continue to adequately fund AFIRM, and to continue researching,
piloting and transitioning new techniques for regenerative and
rehabilitative health care that will support both military
members and the civilian population at-large.

Stryker survivability systems integration program

The budget request contained $50.0 million in PE 63653A for
Stryker vehicle research, development, test, and evaluation
(RDT&E).
The committee supports the Army's plans for ongoing RDT&E
for the Stryker vehicle. The committee notes that even with the
procurement of a third brigade set of upgraded ``double V''
Stryker vehicles that the Army will have six brigade sets of
less well-protected ``flat bottom'' Stryker vehicles. As a
result, the committee supports innovative efforts to increase
the protection level of these vehicles. In particular, the
committee continues to support the ongoing program executive
officer (PEO) ground systems Stryker vehicle survivability
systems integration study program. The committee notes that
this program is intended to deliver several integration studies
reviewing the potential for adding occupant centric
survivability technologies to the Stryker vehicle. The
committee understands that these kit-based solutions could be
installed during depot reset or in the field, providing maximum
flexibility to the Army. The committee encourages PEO ground
systems and the program manager Stryker to use Stryker RDT&E
and modifications funds to develop and install technologies
from this effort that enhance Stryker occupant safety.
The committee recommends $50.0 million, the full amount
requested, in PE 63653A for Stryker vehicle RDT&E.

Tactical vehicle armor development program

The committee understands the tactical vehicle armor
development (TVAD) program consists of the development and
maturation of a lightweight, affordable ceramic/composite
opaque armor solution for tactical wheeled vehicle (TWV)
ballistic threats, to include improvised explosive devices. The
committee recognizes that although lightweight solutions for
these threats exist, these solutions have been cost prohibitive
for the TWV fleet because of high material prices and/or
inefficient production manufacturing processes. The committee
understands the goal of the TVAD program is to design a
lightweight, affordable solution that utilizes low cost
materials in a manner that is easy to transition the end
product from prototype to full rate production at an affordable
cost. The committee supports this effort, however the committee
is concerned that the Army is inadequately funding this
critical initiative. The committee encourages the Secretary of
the Army to fully fund this program across the Future Years
Defense Program.

Thermal injury protection in combat and tactical vehicles

The committee understands that the U.S. Army Tank
Automotive Research, Development and Engineering Center
(TARDEC) has established an occupant centric survivability
program, with a goal of examining technologies that can
significantly protect against vehicle occupant casualties. The
committee supports this effort.
In the committee report (H. Rept. 112-479) accompanying the
National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2013, the
committee directed the Director, TARDEC to provide a report to
the congressional defense committees that outlined the status
of the Army's evaluation of occupant centric survivability
systems for combat and tactical vehicles. The committee has
reviewed the report and has concerns regarding the development
and application of systems that could be used to prevent
thermal injury. The committee notes that technologies like fuel
containment, fire retardants, fire suppression, fire
prevention, and personal fire protection may improve occupant
safety as well as vehicle survivability. These technologies are
currently being applied in a limited scope. While the committee
commends this effort, it believes that additional analysis over
current thermal injury survivability requirements is still
required.
The committee directs the Director, U.S. Army Tank
Automotive Research, Development and Engineering Center to
provide a briefing to the Senate Committee on Armed Services
and the House Committee on Armed Services within 60 days after
the date of the enactment of this Act that outlines the
advisability and feasibility of establishing objective and
threshold survivability operational requirements for thermal
injury prevention in ground combat and tactical vehicles. The
committee expects the briefing to include, but not be limited
to: fuel containment; fire retardants; fire prevention; fire
suppression; and personal protection.

Third generation forward-looking infrared sensors

The committee notes that second generation forward-looking
infrared (FLIR) sensors currently deployed across the Army are
a critical capability that provides U.S. forces significant
advantages in combat. However, the committee understands that
countermeasures continue to evolve that could degrade and
potentially overmatch second generation FLIR capabilities. In
addition, second generation FLIR technology is now 20-years old
and is at risk of becoming obsolete. The committee believes the
Army must continue to invest in third generation FLIR
development and fielding, and that doing so requires the
sustainability of the U.S. FLIR industrial base to meet the
Army's next generation FLIR requirements.
Therefore, the committee directs the Secretary of the Army
to submit a report to the congressional defense committees by
February 15, 2014, that outlines the state of FLIR technology
and requirements for ground systems including, but not limited
to, the Ground Combat Vehicle program. The report should also
include the Army's specific annual investment strategy to
sustain the U.S. FLIR industrial base and to develop and
produce third generation FLIR sensors.

Ultra Lightweight Reconnaissance Robotic capability

The committee understands that the Army has identified an
operational need for an Ultra Lightweight Reconnaissance
Robotics (ULRR) capability for forward deployed units currently
operating in overseas contingency operations. The committee
supports and encourages the rapid fielding of this capability
to forward deployed forces and also directs the Secretary of
the Army to provide a report to the congressional defense
committees by December 31, 2013 on the advisability and
feasibility of incorporating this capability as part of an
enduring requirement for all active and reserve component
units.

Use of simulation technology in medical training

The committee appreciates the Department of Defense's work
to reduce the use of live animals in combat trauma training
courses when appropriate as detailed in the report to Congress
on the ``Strategy to Transition to Use of Human-Based Methods
for Certain Medical Training''. The committee acknowledges the
Department of Defense's significant investment over the past
decade in the development of simulation technology and shares
its commitment to improve and modernize the training of
military medical personnel without degradation to combat trauma
care. A 2009 Department report projected that validated
simulators for most ``high volume/high value'' medical
procedures could be developed by 2014. The most recent report
provides an updated and estimated timeline to 2017 and beyond.
As such, the committee encourages the Department to continue a
transition to human-based methods and to further refine the
timeline for the replacement of the use of live animals in
combat trauma training courses when appropriate, and where
modern validated simulators are able to provide equally
effective training that achieves established combat casualty
survival rates without degradation to combat trauma care.

Research, Development, Test, and Evaluation, Navy

Overview

The budget request contained $15.9 billion for research,
development, test, and evaluation, Navy. The committee
recommends $16.0 billion, an increase of $58.1 million to the
budget request.
The committee recommendations for the fiscal year 2014
research, development, test, and evaluation, Navy are
identified in division D of this Act.

Items of Special Interest

Acoustic intelligence collection capability

The committee believes that the ability to obtain acoustic
intelligence on foreign submarines is a critical national
security need. Specifically, the committee believes that it
should be a priority to develop technology that is capable of
burying undersea cables beneath the seabed, and that the
development of this technology to the fleet could result in
significant cost savings to the Navy. The committee encourages
the Office of Naval Research to consider funding initiatives
that could lead to development of a low-cost Array Burial
Vehicle capable of installing acoustic intelligence systems,
and which could be equipped with a real-time control system
which provides shipboard operators information necessary to
safely, reliably, and efficiently install complex multi-branch
undersea cable systems.

Augmentation of ultra high frequency communications satellite systems
using near space technologies

The committee is concerned that the Navy's constellation of
ultra-high frequency (UHF) communication satellites and
associated user terminals may not meet the tactical
communications needs of the Department in the near future. This
concern is based on the committee's belief that the current
constellation of UHF satellites, the Ultra-High Frequency
Follow-On program, is aging, fragile, and may be increasingly
subject to sudden failures.
The committee notes that the Mobile User Objective System
(MUOS) satellite system, which is intended to provide increased
capability in this area, has been delayed. However, the
committee is aware of alternative technologies that could
potentially be used by the Navy, in concert with the MUOS
program, to close potential gaps in tactical UHF
communications.
Specifically, the committee notes the potential
capabilities of high-altitude, near space systems, such as
balloons, to bolster and complement existing UHF networks.
Therefore, the committee directs the Secretary of the Navy to
provide a briefing to the committee, no later than October 1,
2013, on a review of existing high-altitude, near space
technologies that could provide additional UHF capacity and
outline the approximate cost, schedule, and feasibility of
acquiring this additional capacity.

Carrier-based unmanned air vehicle system testing and development

The budget request contained $21.0 million in PE 64402N for
the Unmanned Combat Air System (UCAS), and $146.7 million in PE
64404N for the Unmanned Carrier-launched Airborne Surveillance
and Strike (UCLASS) system.
The committee has noted in the past that the Secretary of
the Navy has not fully leveraged technology development
activities in the UCAS program that would reduce UCLASS program
risk. The committee is aware that the Secretary of the Navy has
again reduced the planned scope of technology development
activities in fiscal year 2014 for the UCAS program by deleting
the requirement for the X-47B aircraft to demonstrate unmanned
autonomous aerial refueling from an airborne tanker, thereby
increasing the development risk in the UCLASS program. The
committee disagrees with the Secretary's approach to the UCAS
program and disagrees with increasing the concurrency and
developmental risk being sewn into the acquisition strategy of
the UCLASS program.
Therefore, the committee recommends $41.0 million, an
increase of $20.0 million, in PE 64402N for the UCAS program.
Elsewhere in this title, the committee includes a provision
that would require the Secretary of the Navy to demonstrate
unmanned autonomous aerial refueling with the X-47B UCAS
aircraft, and another provision that would prohibit the Under
Secretary of Defense for Acquisition, Technology, and Logistics
from approving a milestone A technology development contract
award for the UCLASS program until 30 days after the Under
Secretary certifies to the congressional defense committees
that the software and system engineering designs for the
control system and connectivity segment and the aircraft
carrier segment of the UCLASS system can achieve, at a low
level of integration risk, successful compatibility and
operability with the air vehicle segment planned for selection
at milestone A contract award.

Cognitive wireless networks for naval applications

The committee recognizes that the increasing complexity of
computing and telecommunications devices is providing emerging
opportunities to improve and streamline Department of Defense
processes. The committee notes that new methods for leveraging
cognitive wireless networking systems will empower the ability
of the Department to carry out diverse applications in new
ways, as well as opening up the possibilities for entirely new
applications. The committee encourages the Department to invest
in research supporting the development and maturation of
cognitive networking applications, such as environmental
infrastructure and human health monitoring, ad-hoc networks
using commercial mobile phones, smart camera networks, mobile
cloud computing, and smart utility networks.
One area where the committee believes that improvements in
cognitive wireless networking might be helpful is in naval ship
machinery systems. The committee is aware that ships of the
near future will have increased complexity in design and
operation, as well as interaction and inter-dependencies with
other systems. At the same time, demands for shipboard
resources are expected to exceed installed capacity, requiring
complex optimization of allocation to shipboard loads. The
committee believes that the development and implementation of a
new generation of automatic control and communications on
ships, including wireless networks, will allow for increased
capacity with reduced manning.

Marine Corps unmanned airborne electronic attack systems

The committee notes that the Marine Corps plans to
transition from using EA-6B Prowler aircraft as its primary
airborne electronic warfare platform to a combination of F-35B
Lightening II aircraft with built-in electronic warfare
capability and other aircraft carrying electronic warfare pods.
While the committee supports this plan, it also encourages the
Marine Corps to develop electronic warfare capability for
unmanned aerial systems (UAS). The committee believes a network
of electronic warfare systems that combines manned and unmanned
platforms would provide increased performance and flexibility
for operational commanders.
Therefore, the committee directs the Commandant of the
Marine Corps to provide a classified report to the
congressional defense committees by February 15, 2014, that
outlines the potential advantages and disadvantages of the use
of UAS for electronic warfare, and any current plans the Marine
Corps has to develop such systems. The report should also
address, but not be limited to, estimated acquisition and
operating costs, crew safety, and mission effectiveness of
potential unmanned systems compared to available manned
airborne electronic warfare systems.

Maritime Laser Weapon System

The committee applauds the Navy's efforts in directed
energy research and encourages the continuation of those
efforts. The committee is also encouraged by the recent
decision to deploy the Laser Weapon System (LaWS) for further
testing and evaluation on the USS Ponce, in a stressing
maritime environment. The committee believes such operational
testing is necessary to work out the technical challenges
inherent in directed energy systems, in addition to identifying
potential integration and policy challenges that might prove to
be impediments to transitioning these types of systems to the
fleet. Additionally, the committee recognizes that the Navy is
developing other advanced technologies which will present
similar integration challenges, in particular with regards to
power generation, storage, and delivery. The committee
encourages the Navy to begin developing a broadly applicable
strategy for addressing these power challenges in order to
facilitate technology integration onto naval vessels in the
future. Furthermore, the committee directs the Secretary of the
Navy to provide a briefing to the Committees on Armed Services
of the Senate and the House of Representatives within 90 days
after the date of the enactment of this Act on the testing
efforts related to the LaWS deployment. The briefing should
include:
(1) An overview of the test campaign plans and
success criteria;
(2) Details of weapon system use and performance;
(3) A comparison of system performance with
conventional weapons systems;
(4) A discussion of the associated power requirements
with a comparison of the anticipated power requirements
for other advanced weapons systems; and
(5) Unforeseen challenges associated with system
maintenance and longevity in a maritime environment.

Multi-Stage Supersonic Target development program

The budget request contains $53.0 million in PE 64258N for
aerial target system development. Of this amount, $33.1 million
was requested for the Multi-Stage Supersonic Target (MSST)
development program.
The MSST emulates a threat adversary three-stage anti-ship
cruise missile that has a subsonic bus vehicle which will
separate during its terminal phase of flight from a supersonic
sprint stage vehicle that will continue its flight to impact.
The fielded MSST system will provide threat representation and
will identify deficiencies in shipboard air defense systems.
In the committee report (H. Rept. 110-652) accompanying the
National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2009, the
committee directed the Secretary of the Navy to notify the
congressional defense committees if the MSST program's
estimated Initial Operating Capability (IOC) is delayed more
than 90 days, or if the costs associated with the program
exceeds 10 percent of programmed funding. On February 8, 2012,
the Secretary of the Navy notified the congressional defense
committees that the MSST program would exceed the original
acquisition program baseline cost by more than 10 percent, and
in June 2012, the MSST prototype experienced a flight test
failure which required the Secretary to put development efforts
on hold. On April 18, 2013, the Secretary subsequently notified
the congressional defense committees that a new IOC date of May
2016, instead of December 2014, has been established.
The committee recognizes the challenges associated with the
development of a new threat target system given the assessed
complexity and capabilities of the actual threat missile. But
the committee also remains concerned that the Navy still does
not have a threat representative target fielded in order to
assess vulnerabilities and susceptibilities of naval air
defense systems, as well as assess the effectiveness of
potential countermeasures that could be developed to defend
against an MSST threat.
Therefore, the committee encourages the Secretary to
maintain a robust and fully resourced MSST development strategy
and encourages the Secretary to provide the committee frequent
updates as the MSST program progresses toward its May 2016, IOC
milestone.

Offensive anti-surface warfare weapon development

The budget request contained $136.0 million in PE 64786N
for offensive anti-surface warfare weapon development.
In 2009, the U.S. Pacific Fleet validated an Urgent
Operational Needs Statement for an over-the-horizon surface
warfare missile that can be launched from aircraft or surface
vessels and strike well-defended, moving maritime targets
without reliance on external inputs. This need is even more
relevant today and is critical to meeting national security
objectives and rebalance to the Asia-Pacific region. The
committee supports the Secretary of the Navy's pursuit for the
rapid development and deployment of a long-range, anti-ship
missile that is capable of penetrating sophisticated enemy air-
defense systems from long range. It should be capable of
operating autonomously in a denied signal environment, without
relying on input of intelligence, surveillance, and
reconnaissance or global positioning system signals.
However, the committee notes recent inconsistencies with
the Department of Defense's acquisition strategy for this type
of air-launched/surface-launched missile capability.
Furthermore, the current effort does not appear to be
consistent with the budget documentation materials provided
with the submission of the President's fiscal year 2014 budget
to Congress, and the committee understands that the Department
of Defense has revised the acquisition strategy since the
President's budget submission.
The committee recommends $136.0 million, the full amount
requested, in PE 64786N for offensive anti-surface warfare
weapon development, and calls into question the Secretary's
ability to execute $86.0 million of those funds in fiscal year
2014 for product-development activities prior to achieving a
milestone A for the program.
The committee directs the Secretary of the Navy, the
Director of Cost Assessment and Program Evaluation, and the
Undersecretary of Defense for Acquisition, Technology and
Logistics to submit to the defense committees by September 30,
2013, the most recent OASuW Analysis of Alternatives completed
by the Department of Defense.
The committee also directs the Secretary of the Navy to
provide to the defense committees by September 30, 2013, a
report that: (1) outlines the Secretary's near-, mid-, and
long-term capability and acquisition roadmaps for maintaining
air-launched and surface-launched offensive anti-surface
warfare weapon capabilities within the Department of Defense;
(2) describes capability gaps and shortfalls of the Navy
regarding current and future OASuW capabilities; (3) any
supporting analysis that have informed the Secretary's roadmap;
(4) any on-going technology experimentation, engineering,
product development, or modification efforts within the
Department of Defense that would enhance the Secretary's
ability to develop and field future OASuW capabilities, and an
assessment of the maturity and associated risks of those
technologies and efforts; and, (5) updated budget estimates and
life-cycle funding estimates of the Department of Defense
required to develop, engineer, manufacture, test, field and
sustain new or modified air-launched and surface-launched OASuW
missile capabilities in the planned roadmaps. The report may
contain a classified annex.

Precision Extended Range Munition Program

The budget request contained $139.6 million in PE 26623M
for Marine Corps Ground Combat/Supporting Arms systems. Of this
amount, the budget request contained $11.9 million for the
development of the precision extended range munition (PERM)
program.
The committee notes that the Marine Corps is seeking to
spend $84.5 million between fiscal years 2013-18 to develop and
field the PERM, which is a global positioning system (GPS)
guided 120mm mortar round with a threshold range of between 12-
16 kilometers. The committee also notes that the Army has
already fielded a very similar GPS-guided 120mm mortar round,
the XM-395 as part of its Accelerated Precision Mortar
Initiative. In addition, the committee is aware that the Army's
XM-395 has already demonstrated a circular error probable of
less than 10 meters, which is twice the threshold accuracy
requirement for the PERM program. Since the Army has already
fielded this round as an urgent materiel release, and many
other more accurate joint fires are available to engage targets
in the range of the PERM, the committee believes that the
Marine Corps' PERM program is redundant, and that modifying or
fielding the Army's existing XM-395 instead would ensure that
Marines have precision mortar capability as soon as possible.
The committee recommends $6.9 million, a decrease of $5.0
million, in PE 26623M for research and development of the PERM
program.

Prepositioned expeditionary assistance kits

The committee notes that in 2011, the Marine Corps
conducted an operational demonstration and joint capability
technology demonstration (JCTD) with U.S. Southern Command to
evaluate prepositioned expeditionary assistance kits (PEAK).
The Marine Corps report on this evaluation stated the objective
of the PEAK JCTD was to demonstrate and transition an array of
capabilities for field distributed essential services including
potable water, power, communications and situational awareness.
The kits made maximum use of commercial, off-the-shelf
technology renewable source power generation. The report
concluded that the demonstration was a success and showed the
potential of the PEAK kits to provide essential field services
in an austere environment when operated by U.S. military
personnel working with host nation forces. Based on this
successful demonstration, the committee encourages the Marine
Corps to consider initiation of a competitive development
program for a PEAK kit that could allow expeditionary forces to
provide effective and efficient operation beyond 72 hours after
a disaster event.

Service Life Extension of Navy Auxiliary General Purpose Oceanographic
Research vessels

The budget request contained $45.7 million in PE 62435N for
the Ocean Warfighting Environment Applied Research program.
For academic research, the Navy operates and maintains
Auxiliary General Purpose Oceanographic Research (AGOR)
vessels. Three of these vessels require a mid-life overhaul,
partial funding for which was provided in the Consolidated and
Further Continuing Appropriations Act, 2013 (Public Law 113-6).
The committee notes that funding provided to date does not
fully support all of the items that the Navy has determined are
necessary to fully extend the life of these AGOR ships to 40-45
years.
Accordingly, the committee recommends $63.7 million, an
increase of $18.0 million, in PE 62435N for Ocean Warfighting
Environment Applied Research, to procure the entirety of a mid-
life overhaul. The committee notes that the inclusion of this
authorization of appropriations is predicated on merit-based
selection procedures in accordance with the requirements of
section 2304(k) and 2374 of title 10, United States Code, or on
competitive procedures.

Unmanned Underwater Vehicle

The budget request contained $852.9 million in PE 63561N
for the Advanced Submarines System Development program.
To maintain undersea dominance in maritime regions of
significant economic and military importance to the United
States, the Navy requires disruptive technologies that can be
rapidly developed, demonstrated, evaluated, and fielded to
counter expanding undersea capabilities by peer and near-peer
maritime nations and to extend the Navy's reach and
persistence. The committee is concerned that under the current
acquisition plan, the Navy will not have the new technologies
it needs to meet these requirements until after 2020. By
accelerating the integration of Unmanned Undersea Vehicles and
other autonomous undersea technologies and payloads into
Undersea Warfare, it will expand the technology base and more
rapidly provide warfighting options that are not currently
achievable.
Accordingly, the committee recommends $874.9, an increase
of $22.0 million, in PE 63561N for Advanced Submarine Systems
Development in order to support innovative development,
demonstration, evaluation, and fielding of promising undersea
technologies for the delivery of new and needed capability to
the undersea domain.
The committee notes that the inclusion of this
authorization of appropriations is predicated on merit-based
selection procedures in accordance with the requirements of
sections 2304(k) and 2374 of title 10, United States Code, or
on competitive procedures.

Research, Development, Test, and Evaluation, Air Force

Overview

The budget request contained $25.7 billion for research,
development, test, and evaluation, Air Force. The committee
recommends $25.7 billion, an increase of $76.0 million to the
budget request.
The committee recommendations for the fiscal year 2014
research, development, test and evaluation, Air Force program
are identified in division D of this Act.

Items of Special Interest

Adaptive engine technology development

The committee is aware that the Air Force Research Lab has
a significant demonstration project underway to mature
technologies that combine the capabilities for high-speed
thrust from fighter engines with the increased fuel efficiency
of a long-distance, subsonic engine, known as the Adaptive
Engine Technology Development (AETD) program. Such efforts are
necessary to provide needed capabilities for future air
vehicles, as well as to maintain science and technology
programs that will sustain the military aircraft engine
industrial base until development of the next generation of
aircraft begins.
Furthermore, the committee is aware that in testimony
before the Senate Committee on Armed Services in 2012, Air
Force officials stated that AETD is purely a technology
maturation program and is not a new ``alternate engine''
program for the F-35 Joint Strike Fighter. While the committee
is aware that the performance specifications for the AETD
engine are structured around propulsion requirements for the F-
35 Joint Strike Fighter, the AETD program is not limited to any
particular form factor that would directly transition into an
existing aircraft program.
While the committee believes it is logical to incorporate
technology derived from AETD for incorporation into the F-35,
the committee does not expect AETD to result in a design for an
entirely new engine for the F-35. The committee encourages the
Air Force to continue to focus AETD on technology maturation
and new approaches for significant fuel savings that will
support future generations of aircraft engines.

Aircraft engine component laser peening

The budget request contained $139.4 million in PE 27268F
for the aircraft engine component improvement program.
In the committee report (H. Rept. 112-78) accompanying the
National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2012, the
committee noted that laser peening technology had the potential
to save significant funds through the reduction of fatigue
failure, stress corrosion cracking, and component shape
corrections in a wide range of military equipment, including
aircraft. The committee believes that the Air Force should
consider use of aircraft engine component improvement program
funds to examine the potential benefits of laser peening for F-
135 engine components in order to see if reliability could be
improved and if engine life-cycle costs could be reduced.
The committee recommends $139.4 million, the full amount
requested, in PE 27268F for the aircraft engine component
improvement program.

F-35 aircraft program

The budget request contained $1.9 billion in PEs 64800F,
64800N, and 64800M for development of the F-35 aircraft. The
budget request also contained $5.5 billion in Aircraft
Procurement, Air Force and Aircraft Procurement, Navy for
procurement of 19 F-35As, 6 F-35Bs, and 4 F-35Cs.
The F-35 aircraft program is the largest acquisition
program within the Department of Defense, with a current
planned procurement of 2,443 aircraft for the Navy, the Marine
Corps, and the Air Force to meet fifth generation U.S. fighter
requirements. The committee continues to support the
requirement for fifth generation fighter aircraft due to
projected increases in the effectiveness and quantities of
threat anti-aircraft ground systems and adversary aircraft and
their associated air-to-air weapons. The committee notes that
without advanced fifth generation aircraft that the United
States may be significantly limited in its ability to project
power in the future.
The F-35 program is approximately 34 percent through its
flight test program which is planned to be completed in the
first quarter of fiscal year 2018. The committee notes that the
F-35 program executive officer believes the F-35 program is now
on a realistic baseline with slow, but steady progress being
made. The committee also notes that the F-35 program executive
officer has identified the software development for the final
development software block, known as block 3F, as an area with
some risk remaining. At a hearing held by the Subcommittee on
Tactical Air and Land Forces on April 17, 2013, the witness
from Government Accountability Office also identified block 3F
software as an area of risk because of its complexity. The
committee shares this concern. Accordingly, elsewhere in this
Act, the committee recommends a provision that would require
the Under Secretary of Defense for Acquisition, Technology, and
Logistics to establish an independent team consisting of
subject matter experts to review the development of F-35
software and to submit a report to the congressional defense
committees by March 3, 2014.

Global Positioning System Next Generation Operational Control System

The budget request contained $383.5 million in PE 63423F
for the Next Generation Operational Control System (OCX) for
the Global Positioning System (GPS).
GPS provides positioning, velocity, and timing to military
and civilian users worldwide. OCX will replace the current
Operational Control System, maintaining backwards compatibility
with the existing satellite constellation and enabling new
modernized capabilities onboard the newer satellites. In
addition, OCX will provide command and control of new
capabilities, such as increased anti-jamming resistance,
associated with the new GPS III family of satellites.
The committee recommends $383.5 million, the full amount of
the request, in PE 63423F for the Next Generation Operational
Control System program.

Hypersonic test facilities

The committee recognizes the importance that hypersonic
technologies will play in meeting the defense needs of the
future. As with any new technology, developing and maintaining
the appropriate facility to conduct full-scale testing is a
necessary precondition to effective technology development
efforts. Thus, the committee supports a hypersonic program that
develops the necessary workforce and testing facilities to
support the research and ultimate deployment of a variety of
hypersonic capabilities.
The committee reiterates the concerns it raised about the
state of hypersonic testing facilities in the committee report
(H. Rept. 112-479) accompanying the National Defense
Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2013, as well as by the
conferees in the conference report (H. Rept. 112-705)
accompanying the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal
Year 2013. The committee also awaits the results of the study
on the ability of national test and evaluation capabilities to
support maturation hypersonic technologies for future defense
systems required by section 1071 of the National Defense
Authorization Act of Fiscal Year 2013 (Public Law 112-239).
Until such time as that report is delivered, the committee
expects the Department of Defense to leverage existing
capabilities within the Federal Government and not build new
capabilities until a clear need has been established.

In-space solar electric propulsion

The committee believes that there may be enhanced utility
for in-space solar electric propulsion (SEP) technology for
national security space applications, especially as launch
costs increase and weight requirements for satellites become
more stringent. The committee believes that this technology may
lead to reduced launch costs, enhanced payload capability,
longer mission duration, and also provide risk mitigation
redundancy. In particular, this technology proved valuable in
mitigating some of the difficulties in getting the first
Advanced Extremely High-Frequency payload to safely and
successfully reach its intended orbit without reducing mission
life for the payload, after unexpected launch problems caused
technical challenges and nearly a year's delay.
Therefore, the committee directs the Secretary of the Air
Force, in consultation with the Director of the National
Reconnaissance Office and the Administrator of the National
Aeronautics and Space Administration, to brief the
congressional defense committees, the congressional
intelligence committees, the Senate Committee on Commerce,
Science, and Transportation, and the House Committee on
Science, Space and Technology, by December 15, 2013, on current
and planned efforts to use SEP technology for national security
space missions. In addition, the briefing should address the
investments across the U.S. Government in further development
of SEP technology as a possible means to save costs and extend
satellite mission duration.

Joint Space Operations Center Mission System

The committee notes the importance of the Joint Space
Operations Center Mission System (JMS) program in providing
integrated, net-centric space situational awareness and command
and control capabilities. The committee commends the Air Force
on the significant advances it has made in fully deploying
Increment 1 of JMS. Increment 1 provides: a service-oriented
architecture with enhanced integration and display of space
order of battle; improved high interest event tracking;
dynamically configurable user-defined operating picture; and
several web-based, space situational awareness tools to aid
space operators in performing mission analysis.
The committee recognizes the efforts of the Air Force to
leverage existing or easily-modified Government and commercial
applications as noted in the committee report (H. Rept. 112-
479) accompanying the National Defense Authorization Act for
Fiscal Year 2013. However, the committee is concerned that the
current schedule does not fully take advantage of the potential
for incremental upgrades to on-ramp the appropriate existing
capabilities in the most expeditious manner. Therefore, the
committee directs the Secretary of the Air Force to certify
that the acquisition strategy for the Joint Space Operations
Center Mission System program fully incorporates existing,
mature technology products, based on warfighter requirements,
in order to replace the legacy system in the most expeditious
manner, utilizing efficient testing and validation methods. The
Secretary should submit the certification to the congressional
defense committees within 90 days after the date of the
enactment of this Act.
The committee supports the Air Force's efforts to provide
increased and advanced space situational awareness capabilities
to the Joint Space Operations Center to address current and
future threats to our national space assets.

Joint Surveillance Target Attack Radar System

The committee notes that the joint surveillance target
attack radar system (JSTARS) aircraft and sensors are rapidly
aging and in need of multiple, costly upgrades in order to
maintain operational JSTARS capability in the future. The
committee believes that the Department of the Air Force
understands the challenges of maintaining the JSTARS aircraft
and sensors, and notes that it has conducted an analysis of
alternatives (AOA) to evaluate potential replacement platforms
for the aging E-8C JSTARS aircraft which has concluded that a
modern business jet using a fourth generation sensor system
would be the preferred JSTARS replacement alternative. The
committee understands that the business jet solution would
provide substantial future cost savings, improve capabilities
with more advanced sensors, and is readily available in the
near term. Unfortunately, the budget request for fiscal year
2014 did not include any funds for replacing the JSTARS
aircraft or sensors, and the committee is concerned that the
critical JSTARS mission may not be accomplished if the
Department of the Air Force does not replace the JSTARS
aircraft in the near term.
Since the committee believes that the battle management
command and control and ground moving target indicator missions
performed by the Department of the Air Force JSTARS aircraft
are critical to meet requirements of the National Military
Strategy, the committee encourages the Department to begin a
program to replace the JSTARS aircraft as soon as possible, but
not later than in its budget request for fiscal year 2015.

Liquid rocket engine technology

The committee is pleased to learn of the combined U.S. Air
Force and National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA)
investment in rocket engine technologies being demonstrated
under the Space Launch System Advanced Booster Engineering
Demonstration and Risk Reduction program. The existing Air
Force Research Laboratory Hydrocarbon Boost technology program
provides the underpinnings of this partnership between the Air
Force and NASA on next generation advanced rocket booster
technology. Moreover, this Air Force-NASA partnership is a
model for maximizing limited taxpayer dollars in an austere
fiscal environment.
The committee commends the Air Force and NASA and
encourages the Air Force and NASA to sustain investment in this
synergistic approach to develop and demonstrate rocket
propulsion technology. Additionally, the committee recommends
the Air Force seek future opportunities to engage in
cooperative efforts with NASA for the development of rocket
propulsion systems.

Metals Affordability Initiative

The budget request contained $39.6 million in PE 63112F for
advanced materials for weapons systems. Of this amount, $2.7
million was requested for the Metals Affordability Initiative
(MAI).
The committee notes that the MAI is a public-private
partnership that includes the entire domestic specialty
aerospace metals industrial manufacturing base. Air Force
participation with MAI has resulted in significant improvement
in the manufacture of specialty metals for aerospace
applications, including aluminum, beryllium, nickel-based
superalloys and titanium. Because of the widespread uses and
needs for the Department of Defense, the committee encourages
the Air Force to engage with the other military departments and
agencies to ensure they are able to leverage MAI for their
specific needs. In addition, the committee encourages the
Deputy Assistant Secretary of Defense for Manufacturing and
Industrial Base Policy to examine the MAI partnership model to
determine if it might be relevant for the newly established
Industrial Base Sustainment Fund.
The committee recommends $49.6 million, an increase of
$10.0 million, in PE 63112F for the MAI program.

Operationally Responsive Space

The budget request contained no funds in PE 64857F for the
Operationally Responsive Space (ORS) program.
The committee is disappointed with the Department's de
facto proposal to terminate ORS, and is concerned that there is
no enduring plan to address urgent military operational
requirements for space support and reconstitution. The
committee fully supports the ORS program to meet warfighter
needs.
This is the second straight year that the Department has
proposed to terminate the ORS program and to transfer the
remaining efforts to other existing space programs. The
proposed termination is not in accordance with section 2273a of
title 10, United States Code, which provides that ``the
Secretary of Defense shall ensure that, within budget program
elements for space programs of the Department of Defense, that
there is a separate, dedicated program element for
operationally responsive space.'' The committee notes the
Department's previous efforts to repeal the statutory
requirement for ORS have been denied.
Further, the committee recognizes there are urgent
warfighter space needs that the ORS program may help address.
For instance, in 2012, U.S. Africa Command (USAFRICOM) required
operationally critical and expedited service for satellite
communications bandwidth to cover a wide geographic coverage.
At the time, the Department assessed that the only option to
meet USAFRICOM's needs was to obtain a lease through a Chinese
company with significant ownership interest from the Chinese
government. After a year elapsed, the lease was renewed because
the Department failed to take other measures, such as engaging
the ORS office to address USAFRICOM's urgent requirements.
The committee notes that it has not received the detailed
strategic plan, directed in the committee report (H. Rept. 112-
479) accompanying the National Defense Authorization Act for
Fiscal Year 2013, regarding how the Air Force will implement
the mission of the ORS program as laid out in section 2273a of
title 10, United States Code. Current law states the mission of
ORS is to: (1) contribute to the development of low-cost, rapid
reaction payloads, space busses, space lift, and launch control
capabilities, in order to fulfill joint military operational
requirements for on-demand space support and reconstitution;
and (2) coordinate and execute operationally responsive space
efforts across the Department of Defense with respect to
planning, acquisition, and operations. The plan should address
the required funding for implementing this mission and how it
will preserve this program's alternative approach to space
acquisition.
Therefore, the committee rejects the Department's de facto
proposal to terminate the ORS program.

Overhead Persistent Infrared processing and exploitation

The budget request contained $352.5 million in PE 64441F
for the Space-Based Infrared Systems (SBIRS) program. Of this
amount, $22.5 million was requested for data exploitation.
The committee recognizes the tremendous value and
significant investments in overhead persistent infrared (OPIR)
systems. On March 19, 2013, the U.S. Air Force launched the
second SBIRS satellite into geosynchronous orbit. This
satellite joins other SBIRS assets currently in orbit,
including another geosynchronous satellite and two hosted
payloads in a highly elliptical orbit.
The committee notes that the Department of Defense and the
intelligence community have opportunities for additional
exploitation of OPIR to support areas such as missile warning,
missile defense, technical intelligence, and battlespace
awareness. During the fiscal year 2014 budget request hearing
for national security space activities, the Commander of Air
Force Space Command was asked about SBIRS exploitation and
responded that, ``We have not even scratched the surface, I
think, of the potential that's there. We have another sensor
that we haven't fully exploited yet as part of that satellite.
We're doing a good job on the scanning sensor. The staring
sensor, which has much better fidelity, we really haven't fully
wrung out yet, because we've been so focused on getting the
scanning sensor calibrated and certified.''
As an example, the committee believes that further data
exploitation has the potential to enhance the effectiveness of
the United States ballistic missile defense systems,
particularly with the additional sensor data from the recent
launch of the second SBIRS geosynchronous satellite.
The committee remains concerned about the current schedule
for full performance of SBIRS. Despite the first SBIRS
geosynchronous satellite being launched on May 7, 2011, the
system won't be fully utilized until fiscal year 2018. Full
performance, which is driven by the ground segment schedule,
includes final software tuning, algorithm integration, real-
time data fusion, and automated tasking and cueing. The
committee urges the Department to make further efforts to
accelerate the schedule of the full performance of the SBIRS
system.
The committee recommends $42.5 million, an increase of
$20.0 million, in PE 64441F for further data exploitation of
the Space-Based Infrared Systems.

Secure wireless networking applications

The committee recognizes that the Department has a number
of requirements across all of the military services for new
secure, short-range, wireless networking technologies, which
would have wide-ranging, multi-service applications. For
example, forward deployed forces could reduce size, weight,
power and cabling requirements for necessary communications
equipment, as well as for on-board aircraft and vehicles. The
committee is aware that the Air Force is pursuing this kind of
technology through its Secure/Covert Wireless Network Program,
and believes such technology could reduce operations and
maintenance costs for the Government each year. The committee
encourages the Air Force to look at opportunities to transition
this kind of technology throughout the force as quickly as it
becomes available, and to share lessons from this program with
other services and agencies of the Department of Defense.

Sense and avoid research for MQ-1 and MQ-9 remotely piloted aircraft

The budget request contained $128.3 million in PE 25219F
for research, development, test and evaluation of MQ-9 Reaper
remotely piloted aircraft (RPA). Of this amount, no funds were
requested for research and development of sense and avoid
capability.
The committee notes that the Air Force intends to
eventually base some amount of the overall fleet of MQ-1 and
MQ-9 RPAs in the United States in the future, and that many of
these aircraft will be operated by Air National Guard units
with Title 32 responsibilities. In addition, the committee
notes that operations of any such aircraft will be
significantly limited by domestic Federal Aviation
Administration rules. Specifically, the committee understands
that absent any sense and avoid capability that MQ-1 and MQ-9
aircraft could be largely restricted to restricted military
airspace, which would greatly limit their potential use in
support of domestic authorities in the event of a natural
disaster or other domestic emergency. As a result, the
committee encourages the Air Force to examine options for a
sense and avoid capability for MQ-1 and MQ-9 RPAs, and to
include a sense and avoid research and development effort in
future year budget requests.
The committee recommends $128.3 million in PE 25219F, the
full amount requested, for research, development, test and
evaluation of MQ-9 RPAs.

Space Fence

The budget request contained $377.7 million in PE 64425F
for Space Fence activities.
The committee recognizes the importance of the U.S. Air
Force Space Situational Awareness (SSA) Space Fence program.
The existing Air Force Space Surveillance System is a very high
frequency-band system developed in the 1960s to detect space
objects in low earth orbit. This system is reaching its end-of-
life and will be replaced with the Space Fence program.
The committee is aware that the Space Fence will consist of
up to two ground-based radars, which will provide timely
detection of small space objects, primarily in low earth orbit.
It will expand uncued detection and tracking capacity over the
current system by an order of magnitude. The first Space Fence
radar site is planned to be put on Kwajalein Island in the
Republic of the Marshall Islands, with initial operational
capability planned for fiscal year 2017.
The committee recommends $377.7 million, the full amount
requested, in PE 64425F for Space Fence activities in order to
support a full operational capability by 2020.

Trusted autonomy for Unmanned Aerial Systems

The committee notes that increasing congested airspace will
require current and future unmanned aerial systems (UAS) of all
sizes the ability to operate safely and effectively in close
proximity to other unmanned, as well as manned aircraft. As
national security operations increasingly require expanded use
of small, affordable UAS, the committee is concerned that the
military will continue to be constrained from training in the
National Airspace System due to the lack of a validated,
effective Airborne Sense and Avoid (ABSAA) capability. The
committee is aware that the services have demonstrated some
recent advances in technology in which flight testing has
demonstrated a highly reliable ABSAA capability. The committee
encourages the Department of Defense to continue pursuing such
technology efforts, such as those carried out by the Combating
Terrorism Technology Support Office, in order to allow for
significantly expanded ABSAA operational testing.

Unmanned Aerial Systems Development

The committee continues to encourage investment for
unmanned aerial system (UAS) acquisition and research and
development. The committee notes that the U.S. military will
continue to use UAS for intelligence, surveillance, and
reconnaissance missions, as well as weapons delivery platforms.
The committee also understands that current UAS platforms are
primarily used in permissive environments, however future
operations may require UAS platforms to operate in non-
permissive environments. The committee is aware these systems
have improved situational awareness and reduced many of the
emotional hazards inherent in air and ground combat, thus
decreasing the likelihood of causing civilian noncombatant
casualties.
The Subcommittee on Tactical Air and Land Forces held a
field hearing on April 23, 2013, that reviewed UAS
modernization and technology investment. As a result of the
hearing, the committee notes that the migration of UAS aircraft
and sensor technology to the civilian sector could provide for
greater competition, innovations in technology for both
civilian and military missions, and could eventually decrease
costs for both the government and private sectors. The
committee also notes with concern that the budget request is
procuring 234 fewer UAS than fiscal year 2013.
The committee encourages the Secretary of the Air Force to
pursue development of technologies which would support advances
in UAS development to include developing UAS for use in non-
permissive environments, and encourage the Secretary of the Air
Force to work collaboratively with the Federal Aviation
Administration and National Aeronautics and Space
Administration to support the integration of UAS into the
National Airspace System.

Wide area surveillance strategy

The budget request contained $37.8 million in PE 35206 for
development of airborne reconnaissance systems, but contained
no funding for development of Gorgon Stare.
Gorgon Stare is the Department of the Air Force's only
operational persistent day and night wide-area motion imagery
(WAMI) capability. The committee understands the Blue Devil
experimental WAMI and multi-discipline system has been
terminated. The committee notes that Gorgon Stare was initially
fielded as a podded quick reaction WAMI capability in response
to the Joint Requirements Oversight Council Memorandum 106-08,
to provide near real-time surveillance of city-sized areas. The
committee further notes that the podded system approach allows
for integration onto multiple aircraft types and the open
systems architecture allows for insertion of multiple
collection sensors. Accordingly, the committee believes that
Gorgon Stare is the logical program to recapitalize the
technologies, capabilities, and lessons learned from Blue
Devil, and that the Air Force should evolve Gorgon Stare into
an operational multi-discipline WAMI and near-vertical
direction finding signals intelligence system leveraging Blue
Devil ground processing, exploitation, and dissemination, as
well as Gorgon Stare resources and lessons learned to achieve a
persistent multi-discipline intelligence, surveillance, and
reconnaissance capability.
The committee also notes that the budget request for fiscal
year 2013 included a projection of $112.4 million for further
development of Gorgon Stare in fiscal year 2014. The
termination of the Blue Devil system and no funds for Gorgon
Stare in fiscal year 2014 raises a committee concern that the
Department of the Air Force does not have a well-considered and
funded plan to develop and field a fused multi-disciplined
intelligence, surveillance and reconnaissance capability to
support Army, Marine Corps, and Special Operations Forces in
the future. Therefore, the committee directs the Under
Secretary of Defense for Intelligence, in coordination with the
Secretary of the Air Force, to provide a report to the
congressional defense committees, the Permanent Select
Committee on Intelligence of the House of Representatives, and
the Select Committee on Intelligence of the Senate by February
14, 2014, on the strategy for developing a multi-discipline
intelligence, surveillance, and reconnaissance capability with
integrated wide area surveillance and near vertical direction
finding signals intelligence capabilities.
The committee recommends $37.8 million, the amount of the
budget request, in PE 35206 for airborne reconnaissance
systems.

Wideband Global Satellite communications

The budget request contained $38.4 million in PE 33600F for
the Wideband Global Satellite (WGS) communications system.
The committee notes the importance of the military
satellite communications architecture, such as the operational
WGS system. WGS provides flexible, high-capacity communications
for the Department of Defense as well as other national and
international partners. These critical communications may be
susceptible to electromagnetic jamming from foreign
adversaries. The committee notes that there may be low-risk
upgrades that can address these emerging threats and encourages
the Air Force to fully evaluate the best method(s) to protect
this critical capability.
The committee recommends $38.4 million, the full amount of
the request, in PE 33600F for the Wideband Global Satellite
communications system.

Research, Development, Test, and Evaluation, Defense-Wide

Overview

The budget request contained $17.7 billion for research,
development, test, and evaluation, Defense-Wide. The committee
recommends $18.1 billion, an increase of $472.1 million to the
budget request.
The committee recommendations for the fiscal year 2014
research, development, test, and evaluation, Defense-Wide
program are identified in division D of this Act.

Items of Special Interest

Advanced sensor application program

The committee is aware that the Department faces a number
of irregular threats that are not well suited for the array of
sensors developed and optimized for observing more conventional
adversary threats. For example, narcotics trafficking and other
smuggling in the U.S. Southern Command (USSOUTHCOM) area of
responsibility poses a significant challenge for that combatant
command, with global spillover effects. Recently, the
Commander, U.S. Southern Command testified that through the
efforts of USSOUTHCOM and regional partners, 152 metric tons of
cocaine have been seized, representing over three billion
dollars of potential revenue that could have supported
transnational criminal organization, cartel violence in Mexico,
and the destabilization of our Central American neighbors. The
committee recognizes that such smuggling activities, fueled by
the development of semi-submersible vehicles and safe havens in
foreign sovereign territory unfriendly to the United States,
can imperil the security of our homeland, as well as support
global terrorism. The ability to counter these irregular
threats, which require dedicated sensors, platforms and
processing capability designed to counter those threats, is
compounded by the effects of budget sequestration and fiscal
austerity, which have reduced the deployment of aircraft to
South America that would have been utilized to support
counternarcotics missions in the region and train partner
security forces. The committee believes that newly developed
manned and unmanned air and surface platforms might be capable
of employing innovative new intelligence, surveillance and
reconnaissance sensor systems focused on these target sets. The
committee encourages the Department of Defense to examine
smaller, more affordable platforms that could host or launch
such systems to improve detection, tracking, targeting and
engagement of irregular threats as part of the Advanced Sensor
Application Program.

Aegis Ballistic Missile Defense System

The budget request contained $937.5 million in PE 63892C
for the Aegis Ballistic Missile Defense System (BMDS).
The Aegis BMDS is the world's most proven naval missile
defense system and the sea-based element of the U.S. Ballistic
Missile Defense System. Aegis BMD plays an active role in
protecting the United States and U.S. deployed forces from
enemy ballistic missile attack. The Aegis BMD system has been
included in the Administration's Phased Adaptive Approach to
European Defense and has undergone an extensive and successful
testing regime. The budget request included funding to meet
significant capability and test milestones related to the
evolution of the Aegis Weapons System and the test and
deployment of new missile defense capabilities, including
Launch on Remote technology.
The committee recommends $937.5 million, the full amount of
the request, in PE 63892C for Aegis Ballistic Missile Defense.
Request for multi-year procurement authority for Standard
Missile-3 Block IB beginning in FY15
The committee notes the successful FTM-19 flight test on
May 16, 2013, which again demonstrated the robust design and
performance of the Standard Missile-3 Block IB missile. With
over $4.0 billion programmed for this missile across the FYDP,
the committee strongly encourages the Department to request
multi-year procurement authority for SM-3 Block IB beginning in
fiscal year 2015.
The committee notes there could be savings in a multi-year
procurement, such a contractual arrangement for SM-3 Block IB
could yield savings equivalent to an entire additional year of
production at current planned rates. The Department is directed
to report to the congressional defense committees by December
31, 2013, with a recommendation on whether SM-3 Block IB could
use multi-year or advanced procurement authority beginning in
fiscal year 2015. If such authorities are requested, an
estimate of what cost savings would accrue shall be required.
Service Life Extension Program for Standard Missile-3 Block
IA missile interceptor
The committee is aware that the United States has completed
procurement of additional Standard Missile-3 block IA
interceptors and is planning to begin procurement of the block
IB interceptor, which has a more capable seeker than the IA
interceptor.
The committee is also aware that the United States has
acquired a substantial inventory of block IA interceptors, many
of which will soon begin to reach the end-of-design-life. The
committee is aware that the Missile Defense Agency (MDA) is
currently studying whether and how to conduct a service life
extension program (SLEP) of the block IA interceptor and such a
program could extend the lifetime of this substantial inventory
of block IA missiles by approximately fifty percent.
The committee believes such a SLEP should therefore be
carefully studied and, if the results are promising, such a
program should be promptly carried out. The committee believes
that by carrying out this SLEP, MDA could come closer to
meeting the requirements of the combatant commanders for
missile interceptor inventory.
Standard Missile-3 Block IB ballistic missile interceptor
The committee is aware that the Standard Missile-3 (SM-3)
block IB program will be transitioning from development to
production in the next calendar year, after several delays. The
committee is eager that the combatant commanders receive the
block IB missile, which will be more capable than the IA
missile that is presently the mainstay of the Aegis ballistic
missile defense system fleet. Combatant commanders continue to
state their demand for additional assets in theater to support
ballistic missile defense mission requirements.
According to the Missile Defense Agency, it will procure 52
of these improved missile interceptors in fiscal year 2014, and
72 missiles per year each year through the fiscal year 2014
Future Years Defense Program. The committee supports this
procurement.
The committee is aware of the challenges moving to
procurement and the challenges of significantly increasing
delivery quantities. The committee expects to be informed of
any challenges meeting the increased production rate. The
committee also expects to be informed of the progress of the
FTM-19, 21, and 22 tests, which are required to get the IB
missile certified for full rate production. The committee is
eager to see full rate production when these maritime flight
test events are successfully completed.

Airborne weapons layer

The committee is aware that the Missile Defense Agency and
the U.S. Air Force have been conducting a cost benefit analysis
to assess the feasibility of the airborne weapons layer
concept, which would use modified missile interceptors or air-
to-air missiles for certain missile defense missions early in a
threat ballistic missile's flight profile.
The committee is also aware that, in the committee reports
(S. Rept. 112-196 and S. Rept. 112-077), the Committee on
Appropriations of the U.S. Senate directed the Missile Defense
Agency and the Air Force to conduct this study, and its results
are now well overdue. The committee urges the Missile Defense
Agency and the Air Force to quickly complete this study and
brief the congressional defense committees on the results.
The committee believes that an effective and affordable
boost phase missile defense program would contribute to the
goal of deploying an effective layered ballistic missile
defense system. The committee notes the technical and cost
challenges associated with boost phase missile defense,
including those noted by the National Academy of Sciences in
its study last year; the committee references the absence of a
boost phase missile defense program of record elsewhere in this
report.

Army Navy/Transportable Radar Surveillance Model 2 Radars

The budget request contained $62.0 million in PE 63884C for
Ballistic Missile Defense System (BMDS) AN/TPY-2 Radars. The
budget request would fund the acquisition of initial spares for
the current radar units.
The committee is aware that the AN/TPY-2 radar is among the
most powerful sensors in the ballistic missile defense system
sensor architecture. The radar is capable of being employed in
a forward-based mode or as part of a Terminal High Altitude
Area Defense (THAAD) system. AN/TPY-2 radars are deployed in
the Republic of Turkey, the State of Israel, Japan, and
elsewhere to support the warfighter and are providing
significant sensor coverage that contributes to regional and
homeland missile defense.
The committee is also aware that the fiscal year 2013
budget request reduced the procurement of the AN/TPY-2 radar
from 17 to 11 units. However, in the National Defense
Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2013 and the Consolidated and
Further Continuing Appropriations Act, 2013 (Public Law 113-6),
funds were provided to procure a 12th AN/TPY-2 radar. The
committee encourages the Missile Defense Agency to continue to
examine the requirement from combatant commanders and the
proper quantity of AN/TPY-2 radars that should be deployed in a
forward-based mode and for THAAD battery deployments.
The committee recommends $62.0 million, the full amount
requested, in PE 63884C for BMDS AN/TPY-2 Radars.

Ballistic Missile Defense Technology

Missile defense directed energy application development
The budget request contained $309.2 million in PE 63175C
for Ballistic Missile Defense Technology; of this amount, $43.5
million is for Weapons Technology, Laser Development.
The committee is aware that the budget request would
support next-generation high-energy laser development, as well
as would enable new kinetic interceptor technology. According
to budget justification materials, the budget request would
also enable the conduct of experiments using high-altitude,
low-mach platforms, including the Phantom Eye unmanned aerial
vehicle, to validate directed energy modeling. Further, the
request would support laboratory concept development of Diode-
Pumped Alkali Laser technology and other technologies.
The committee supports this work and its potential for
significant breakthroughs in missile defense sensor and
ballistic missile kill technology. The committee is concerned
that the focus of the Missile Defense Agency's (MDA) work may
have tilted too far from defeat and destruction of ballistic
missiles, and recommends that the Missile Defense Agency not
lose sight of these development options. The committee notes
the recent test successes by the U.S. Army High Energy Laser
Systems Test Facility at White Sands Missile Range, New Mexico,
and the previous test successes of the Airborne Laser, while
being aware of the technical and cost challenges of that
system.
The committee further encourages the Director, Missile
Defense Agency to provide more detail on the division between
directed energy sensor work and directed energy ballistic
missile defeat and destruction work as part of the fiscal year
2015 budget submission. Additionally, the Director is
encouraged to evaluate moving directed energy work out of the
Ballistic Missile Defense Technology office and into MDA
program offices geared towards delivery of capabilities to the
warfighter.
The committee recommends $43.5 million, the amount of the
request, in PE 63175C for Weapons Technology, Laser
Development.
Solid Divert and Attitude Control System
The budget request contained $309.2 million in PE 63175C
for Ballistic Missile Defense Technology. Of this amount, $24.0
million was requested for the continued development, post SM-3
IIB termination, of an enhanced Solid Divert and Attitude
Control System (SDACS).
In the committee report (H. Rept. 112-479) accompanying the
National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2013, the
committee expressed its concerns about the possibility of
relying on a single provider of SDACS technology. The committee
is pleased that, with the termination of the SM-3 IIB, the
Missile Defense Agency is taking steps to ensure there is an
additional opportunity for diversity in the industrial base for
this critical technology.
The committee recommends $24.0 million, the full amount
requested, in PE 63175C for development of Solid Divert and
Attitude Control System technology.

Ballistic missile threat analysis

The committee understands the global threat environment
involving ballistic missiles is increasing, and the recent
actions of the Democratic People's Republic of Korea, the
Syrian Arab Republic, and the Islamic Republic of Iran
demonstrate the continued need to fund ballistic missile
intelligence. The National Air and Space Intelligence Center is
the primary Department of Defense producer of foreign aerospace
intelligence and is the Department's best resource on foreign
long-range ballistic missiles. Likewise, the Missile and Space
Intelligence Center is the primary intelligence component for
the Department on the threat of short-range ballistic missiles
to U.S. forces its allies, including the North Atlantic Treaty
Organization.
The committee directs the Director, Defense Intelligence
Agency, in coordination with the Director of National
Intelligence, to submit a report to the congressional defense
committees and the congressional intelligence committees within
180 days after the date of the enactment of this Act, that
identifies the ballistic missile threats to the United States,
its allies, and its deployed forces, as well as the gaps in our
understanding of those threats. The committee further directs
the Director to include an explanation for how the Defense
Intelligence Agency intends to close the gaps identified in the
report.

Common Kill Vehicle for missile defense

The budget request contained $309.2 million in PE 63175C
for Ballistic Missile Defense Technology. Of this amount, $70.0
million was requested for the Common Kill Vehicle Technology
(CKVT) program.
The committee is aware that approximately $20.0 million of
the funds appropriated for the Standard Missile 3 block IIB
program in fiscal year 2013 are to be redirected to the CKVT
program by the Missile Defense Agency (MDA).
The committee understands that MDA's intention for the CKVT
program is to: enable the consolidation of the development of
kill vehicles; develop a modular, open kill vehicle
architecture; transition a more capable kill vehicle to the
Ground-based Interceptor and the Standard Missile 3; and evolve
to a multiple kill vehicle payload. The committee supports
these developmental goals.
The committee is also aware that, pursuant to section 225
of the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2013
(Public Law 112-239), the Missile Defense Agency is developing
a plan for a next generation exo-atmospheric kill vehicle.
Section 225 also requires the Director, Missile Defense Agency
to submit to the congressional defense committees a report on
the plan.
The committee finds that the budget justification material
regarding the CKVT program was insufficient, lacked necessary
details, and should be further revised to include a date for
initial operating capability, as well as a plan to transition
to a development program based on full and open competition in
time to support current and future interceptor procurement. The
committee directs the Missile Defense Agency to provide a
briefing to the congressional defense committees on such
information by July 31, 2013, as well as for it to be included
in the report required by section 225 of Public Law 112-239.
In addition, the committee directs the Director, Missile
Defense Agency to determine an alternate program element (PE)
in the fiscal year 2015 budget submission to fund the Common
Kill Vehicle Technology and Capability Development program. It
should balance the Ground-based Midcourse Defense system
equities in a potential Common Kill Vehicle Technology and
Capability Development program, as well as those possessed by
the Aegis ballistic missile defense program. In addition, the
committee recommends a new PE for fiscal year 2014.
The committee recommends no funds, a decrease of $70.0
million, in PE 63175C for the Common Kill Vehicle Technology
program. Further, the committee recommends $70.0 million, an
increase of $70.0 million, in a new PE for the Common Kill
Vehicle Technology and Capability Development program.

Conventional Prompt Global Strike

The budget request contained $65.4 million in PE 64165D8Z
for Conventional Prompt Global Strike Capability (CPGS)
development.
The fiscal year 2014 budget request is $45.0 million less
than last year's budget request and nearly $135.0 million less
than the amount appropriated for fiscal year 2013 in the
Consolidated and Further Continuing Appropriations Act, 2013
(Public Law 113-6).
The committee notes that in his statement before the
committee on March 5, 2013, the Commander, U.S. Strategic
Command (STRATCOM), testified that, ``[t]oday, the only prompt
global strike capability to engage potentially time-sensitive,
fleeting targets continues to be ballistic missile systems
armed with nuclear weapons. We continue to require a deployed
conventional prompt strike capability to provide the President
a range of flexible military options to address a small number
of highest-value targets, including in an anti-access and area
denial environment.''
The committee is concerned that the budget request does not
provide sufficient resources to develop and field a capability
for which the combatant commander has testified there exists a
requirement. The committee is aware that given sequestration,
potential fiscal year 2013 reprogramming actions, and other
matters, the department has yet to be able to fully determine
budget impacts to many of its programs. The committee
encourages the Department to provide a more detailed plan for
the fiscal year 2014 request for PE 64165D8Z, including a plan
for acquiring CPGS capability with a specific date of initial
operating capability and the date at which there is a likely to
be a Material Development Decision.
The committee notes that many of the technologies under
consideration by the Department of Defense are dependent on
acquisition decisions involving other programs that may not
occur until the middle of the next decade or that depend on
breakthroughs in low technology readiness level programs. The
committee is aware, however, that there are near-term threats
for which CPGS capabilities could be especially useful,
especially with the proliferation of mobile ballistic missile
capability, including involving regional actors, if it can be
developed and deployed in an effective and affordable manner.
The committee encourages the Department to consider what near-
term CPGS capability should be considered to meet these near-
term challenges and it expects to see that consideration
reflected in the fiscal year 2015 budget request. The committee
is interested to see the results of the upcoming second test of
the Advanced Hypersonic Weapon, which was successfully tested
in 2012.
The committee recommends $65.4 million in PE 64165D8Z for
the Prompt Global Strike Capability Development.
Defense Science Board recommendations on Deterrent Response
Capabilities
The committee is aware that the Defense Science Board (DSB)
completed its report ``Resilient Military Systems and the
Advanced Cyber Threat'' in January 2013. As part of that
review, the committee noted that the DSB made several
observations relevant to U.S. deterrent response capabilities
in the face of severe and/or catastrophic cyber attacks on the
United States.
First, the committee is aware that the DSB concluded that
the severity of certain types of cyber threats added further
reason for a non-nuclear conventional strike capability. The
committee continues to support expeditious development of
conventional prompt global strike capabilities, as well as the
supporting doctrinal and concept development to guide potential
employment, and states its views on conventional prompt global
strike in another section of this report.
In addition, the DSB observed that, ``[p]resumably one
would characterize a catastrophic Tier V-VI adversary cyber
attack on the United States as `extreme circumstances' in the
public language of the 2010 NPR, so that is not precluded in
the stated policy, but it is not explicitly mentioned.'' The
committee encourages the Department to consider cyber in the
Nation's deterrence doctrine, including better articulation of
what circumstances might fall within the ``extreme
circumstances'' language of the 2010 Nuclear Posture Review.
Based on the findings of the DSB, the committee is
concerned that the United States should make further progress
in developing response options and capabilities to support a
full-spectrum cyber deterrence strategy, including the
potential leverage of both conventional and nuclear
capabilities. Additionally, the committee awaits the response
from the Department on their views of the DSB's findings and
recommendations, as promised during the March 13, 2013, hearing
with the Department of Defense Chief Information Officer and
the Commander, U.S. Cyber Command. The committee encourages the
Department to consider all of these concerns as they draft
their response.

Defense research in remote sensing

The committee supports domestic university research in
remote sensing including remote sensing systems, cutting edge
remote sensing data analysis methodologies, and techniques that
use remotely sensed data for a wide variety of applications
relevant to the Defense community. Consistent with the National
Academies report, ``Priorities for GEOINT Research at the
National Geospatial-Intelligence Agency'', the committee
encourages the Department of Defense to consider funding remote
sensing research in areas such as sensor systems,
phenomenology, analytical techniques, image processing,
collection strategies or tasking, imagery science, polarimetry,
and hyperspectral science.

Detection and threat identification technologies

The committee is aware that the Defense Threat Reduction
Agency continues to have a strong partnership with each of the
services as well as with U.S. Special Operations Command to
develop and field technologies that reduce, counter and
eliminate the threat of chemical, biological, radiological,
nuclear and high-yield explosive materials (CBRNE). The
committee remains concerned about credible threats posed by
state and non-state actors in their attempts to acquire and
weaponize CBRNE materials for use against the United States and
its allies. Therefore, the committee encourages the Defense
Threat Reduction Agency to continue the development,
demonstration and deployment of innovative and emerging
detection and threat identification technologies to ensure
prompt transition of validated capabilities to address national
security requirements.
The committee directs the Director, Defense Threat
Reduction Agency to provide a briefing to the Committees on
Armed Services of the Senate and the House of Representatives
by December 31, 2013, on their efforts to advance and make
operational a light-weight, person-portable CBRNE detection and
analysis device.

Distributed Common Ground System enterprise

The committee is aware that the Distributed Common Ground
System (DCGS) is a family of systems fielded across the
military departments and other partners to provide an
integrated architecture for all intelligence systems. DCGS is
the current program of record for intelligence analytic,
processing and dissemination capabilities for tactical and
operational users. The committee is also aware that the ``DCGS
Enterprise,'' as the family of systems is known, has been under
development and deployment for a number of years, and the cost,
schedule and requirements continue to grow without keeping pace
with the demands of the users or the current state of the art
in technology.
To better understand those challenges, the committee
requested the Comptroller General of the United States to
review the DCGS Enterprise. The review found that ``unlike a
traditional weapon system acquisition, the DCGS Enterprise by
its very nature has no clear end point and relies on a complex
governance structure under a `community of the willing'
approach. This governance structure has had some success . . .
however, not all of the services have kept pace in developing
their systems and implementing improved interoperability
standards that are available.''
Therefore, the committee directs the Under Secretary of
Defense for Acquisition, Technology, and Logistics, in
coordination with the Under Secretary of Defense for
Intelligence, to submit a report to the Committees on Armed
Services of the Senate and the House of Representatives within
1-year after the date of the enactment of this Act on the
information sharing framework and implementation plan for the
DCGS Enterprise. The report should include:
(1) The framework, including clearly defined criteria
and metrics, to assess progress and outcomes pertaining
to the level and quality of information sharing taking
place across the DCGS Enterprise and its effect on
intelligence operations;
(2) The applicability of this framework to non-DCGS
Enterprise systems;
(3) An implementation plan that defines the way
forward for getting to the desired end state for the
DCGS Enterprise and articulates how the military
services will be held accountable for doing their part
in acquiring the systems necessary to achieve the end
state. The plan should include the overall
requirements, technologies, acquisition strategies,
time frames, and investments needed by each of the
military services to complete development and fielding
of DCGS capabilities.

Electro Magnetic Rail Gun for Missile Defense

The committee notes that the U.S. Navy has been conducting
long-term research into electromagnetic railgun technology to
support naval surface fire support missions. The committee is
aware that pursuant to section 243 of the National Defense
Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2012 (Public Law 112-81), the
Secretary of the Navy provided an unclassified and classified
report on the development, future deployment, and operational
challenges of this technology. The committee is also aware that
the Assistant Secretary of the Navy for Research, Development,
and Acquisition wrote in response to this reporting requirement
that, ``[p]reliminary analysis shows that a tactical railgun .
. . has the potential to provide lethal effectiveness . . . for
antiship ballistic missile defense.'' The committee
acknowledges significant challenges ahead in developing,
integrating, and deploying such technology, as with many
technology development programs.
Additionally, the committee is aware that the Department
has established a new effort within the Strategic Capabilities
Office in the Office of the Secretary of Defense to leverage
the Navy's program to explore the development a land-based
railgun. As noted in the committee report (H. Rept. 112-479)
for the National Defense Authorization Act of Fiscal Year 2013,
the committee is interested in the potential utility in
accelerating some electromagnetic railgun efforts for land-
based area defense.
The committee finds these developments encouraging, and
urges the Director, Missile Defense Agency to examine these
activities in order to determine their potential application,
if they can provide additional capability, to broader ballistic
missile defense missions of the Missile Defense Agency.

Enhancing participation at minority-serving universities and
institutions

The budget request contained $30.9 million in PE 61228D8Z
for supporting the development of research and scientific
capabilities, including scientific professionals, for
Historically Black Colleges and Universities and Minority
Serving Institutions.
The committee is encouraged to see that the Department of
Defense (DOD) is firmly committed to vigorous efforts to
enhance the capability of our nation's Historically Black
Colleges and Universities and Minority-Serving Institutions
(HBCU/MI), as defined under title III and title V of the Higher
Education Act of 1965 (Public Law 89-329), to perform leading
edge research supporting national security requirements.
The committee is aware that the Assistant Secretary of
Defense for Research and Engineering (ASD(R&E)) issued guidance
on December 2, 2011, calling for the re-invigoration of the
relationship between the Department and the HBCU/MIs. As part
of that guidance, the ASD(R&E) called on the components of the
Department to:
(1) Maintain statistics on success rates for HBCU/MIs
under competitive funding opportunities;
(2) Increase awareness of these institutions for
participation in all DOD-sponsored activities;
(3) Encourage use of Intergovernmental Personnel Act
agreements or other personnel-detail mechanisms with
HBCU/MIs to more effectively connect with their talent
base; and
(4) Ensure HBCU/MI facility are recruited to serve on
scholarship, fellowship, and research review panels.
The committee encourages the Department to socialize this
guidance across the enterprise, and to collect the necessary
supporting data to ensure adherence to this policy.
The committee is also aware that there has been confusion
over the current authorities related to the HBCU/MI program of
the Department of Defense. The committee reiterates the current
authority is intended to provide the basis for a program that
recognizes the unique status and attributes of ``covered
institutions,'' as defined in section 2362(e), title 10, United
States Code. The committee is concerned that some organizations
within the Department have incorrectly interpreted the new
statutory basis for the program in section 2362(e), title 10,
United States Code. The committee believes that the
Department's approach to the HBCU/MI program should not include
aspects of the program as it existed under any prior authority,
including the use of any form of funding goal or required
percentage of overall funding. In addition, the Department
should not include HBCU/MIs when determining goals or
accomplishments under the requirements of the Small Business
Act (Public Law 95-507), as amended, regardless of any legacy
coverage in regulations or local policies. The committee
believes HBCUs/MIs should be treated as institutions of higher
education and as a special subset of such institutions, not
considered as small or small disadvantaged businesses.
The committee applauds the Department's decision to move
the HBCU/MI budget line into a basic research account. Such a
move provides greater flexibility for the Department to carry
out STEM activities across the continuum. The committee
encourages the Department to evaluate and consider supporting
established activities that foster the best and brightest
underrepresented high school students into pursuing STEM fields
that would support national security requirements.
The committee recommends $35.9 million, an increase of $5.0
million, in PE 61228D8Z for Historically Black Colleges and
Universities and Minority Serving Institutions.

Foreign directed energy threats to U.S. military systems

The committee recognizes the importance of directed energy
technology as a means to maintain an asymmetric operational and
cost advantage over our adversaries. The committee, however, is
aware that the United States is not the only nation which is
pursuing this technology and is therefore concerned regarding
the ability of the United States to maintain an advantage over
potential adversaries should they employ similar technologies
against U.S. forces.
Therefore, the committee directs the Secretary of Defense
to provide a briefing to the Committees on Armed Services of
the Senate and the House of Representatives within 180 days
after the date of the enactment of this Act, on foreign
directed energy threats and U.S. vulnerabilities to those
threats. The briefing should consist of two sections. The first
section should provide details regarding potential threats,
current and projected, to U.S. military systems due to foreign
directed energy weapons including high-energy lasers and high-
power microwave systems. The Secretary of Defense should
consult with the Director of National Intelligence regarding
the information content of this section. The second section
should discuss vulnerabilities of U.S. systems posed by foreign
directed energy efforts, and the Department's initiatives to
mitigate these vulnerabilities. The briefing should include a
description of science and technology development efforts for
directed energy countermeasures, as well a description of any
technologies which are currently in use. The briefing should
also address both tactical and strategic assets as well as
efforts to protect U.S. personnel against directed energy
attacks. The briefing should also identify any known technology
gaps in directed energy countermeasures and any plans to
address those gaps.

Future missile defense sensor architectures

The committee is aware of the decision by the Department of
Defense to terminate the Precision Tracking Space System, which
it addresses in another section of this report. The committee
also discusses the terrestrial AN/TPY-2 radar system in another
section of this report.
In the committee report (H. Rept. 112-479) to accompany the
National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2013, the
committee also discussed the operational status of the Sea-
based X-band radar as well as the employment of the Ground
Based Radar Prototype (GBR-P) presently deployed at Kwajalein
Atoll. The committee has been focused on the centrality of a
robust missile defense sensor architecture in its oversight of
budget requests for missile defense in previous fiscal years.
The committee is therefore pleased that the Missile Defense
Agency and U.S. Strategic Command (USSTRATCOM), in consultation
with U.S. Northern Command (USNORTHCOM), are engaged in a study
to examine the near- and far-term direction of U.S. missile
defense sensor architectures, including the role for
terrestrial radar sensors, airborne sensors, and persistent
overhead sensors. The committee believes consideration should
be given for balancing the employment of scarce available
resources, noting the availability of the SBX radar for
potential stationary employment off the west coast and the GBR-
P on the east coast. The committee welcomes the leadership of
the Director, Missile Defense Agency, the Commanders of
USSTRATCOM and USNORTHCOM in undertaking this study, especially
as gaps have become clear against the North Korean and future
Iranian ballistic missile threats. The committee expects to
receive a briefing on the outcome of this study and to
understand the implications for fiscal years 2013, 2014, 2015
and beyond. The committee expects to be supportive of closing
the previously mentioned sensor gaps.

Ground-based midcourse defense system

The budget request contained $1.0 billion in PE 63882C for
the ground-based midcourse defense (GMD) system.
The budget request would provide for Capability Enhancement
(CE) 2 Enhanced Kill Vehicle (EKV) Return to Intercept
activities; interceptor reliability enhancements; sustainment
of the weapons system; return to Ground-based Interceptor (GBI)
deliveries, which were suspended after the intercept test
failure of Flight Test GMD (FTG) 06 and 06-a; and, Missile
Field (MF) 1 refurbishment. The committee states its views and
concerns about the plan for MF-1 refurbishment elsewhere in
this report.
Elsewhere in this Act, the committee also recommends an
increase of $107.0 million to support advance procurement of
long-lead items (specifically, 14 booster motor sets) in fiscal
year 2014. The committee supports the decision by the Director,
Missile Defense Agency to procure additional GBIs after a
successful intercept flight. The committee is aware that
Controlled Test Vehicle (CTV) test 01--CTV-01--was successfully
completed on January 26, 2013. The committee supports the CE-2
intercept test, FTG-06b, as a critical step after the two
flight test failures in 2010, and notes that this test is
currently scheduled for December 2013. The committee encourages
the Director to take all appropriate steps to prevent a further
slip in this test.
The committee commends the investigation of the 2010 test
failures and the rigorous return to flight plan. The committee
awaits FTG-07 planned to occur in May 2013, which will be the
first intercept test of the CE-1 EKV since 2008. The committee
notes the Director, Missile Defense Agency is planning to
undertake a pace of at least one intercept test per year of the
GMD system, and supports this planned increased rate of
testing. The committee agrees with this goal and believes this
is the minimum level of testing required for the GMD system to
ensure full confidence, including by the Commander, U.S.
Northern Command in the homeland missile defense capability.
The committee is also aware that in the March 15, 2013,
announcement on the U.S. missile defense strategy, the
Secretary of Defense stated the Department would procure 14 new
GBIs at a rate of 2 per year starting in fiscal year 2016. The
committee notes that this appears to be a low-rate procurement
plan and unnecessarily expensive given a known quantity of
missiles to be procured. The committee believes there is
efficiency through long-lead procurement and other efficiencies
of scale, especially in the event of a successful test of the
CE-II interceptor in late calendar year 2013. The committee
supports the Director's planned efforts to examine how to
increase efficiencies of scale and reduce costs, and includes a
provision elsewhere in this Act that would enable the Director
to more cost-effectively procure these GBIs.
The committee encourages plans by the Director, Missile
Defense Agency and the Commander, U.S. Northern Command to
consult and examine the appropriate mix of two- and three-stage
GBIs for the additional procurements as it understands there
are different and complementary capabilities of these two GBI
configurations.
The committee recommends $1.0 billion, the amount of the
request, in PE 63882C for the ground-based midcourse defense
system.

East Coast missile defense site

The budget request contained no funds for the design,
engineering, or construction of an East Coast missile defense
site, including for the conduct of the Environmental Impact
Statement (EIS) process as required by section 227 of the
National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2013 (Public
Law 112-239).
The committee believes such a site is critical to the
defense of the United States. The committee is concerned that
funding for the EIS process to implement section 227 is not
included in the budget request, and notes that the Missile
Defense Agency intends to treat it as an unfunded requirement.
The committee also notes that section 227 does not require the
Director, Missile Defense Agency to down-select to only a
single site by the end of this year.
The committee recommends $140.4 million in PE 63882C, for
site activities related to the development and deployment of an
East Coast missile defense site, as follows: $10.2 million for
site activities; $25.0 million for site planning and design
related to site concept and master plan development for design
work; and $35.0 million for ground system development. The
committee notes that remaining funds should be spent by the
Director, Missile Defense Agency to accelerate site activities.

Fort Greely Missile Field 1

The budget request contained $82.0 million in PE 63882C to
initiate the refurbishment, upgrade, and for other improvements
to Missile Field 1 at Fort Greely, Alaska.
The committee is pleased with the budget request, as it
adheres to the recommendation made in the committee report (H.
Rept. 112-479) to accompany the National Defense Authorization
Act for Fiscal Year 2013. The committee is aware this
refurbishment is required to fully implement the March 15,
2013, announcement by the Secretary of Defense to emplace an
additional 14 Ground-based interceptors (GBIs) at Fort Greely.
The committee encourages the Director, Missile Defense
Agency, when planning and undertaking the refurbishment of the
missile field, to ensure that no action is taken that would
prevent or complicate any additional emplacements of GBIs at
Fort Greely in the future given the unique emplacement of
interceptors at that field at the present time. The committee
expects that if the Director determines that additional
resources are required in fiscal years 2014-15, to refurbish
the missile field that he will communicate the same to the
congressional defense committees.
The committee recommends $82.0 million, the full amount of
the request, in PE 63882C for refurbishment, upgrade, and other
improvements to Missile Field 1 at Fort Greely.
Two-stage Interceptor for Ground-based Midcourse Defense
In the Administration's 2009 Ballistic Missile Defense
Review, the continued development of the two-stage GBI was
considered a hedge against the advancing threat. The committee
notes that a two-stage variant of the Ground-based interceptor
provides significant additional homeland defense performance
and robustness against emerging threat capabilities by
improving the battle-space capability through shorter
engagement times. The committee also understands the value of
deploying a mixture of two-stage and three-stage GBIs to the
existing GBI missile fields for enhanced homeland defense.
The committee is concerned that the planned two-stage
intercept flight test in 2014, FTG-08, will test a two-stage
missile that cannot be operationally deployed. The committee
directs the Missile Defense Agency to provide a briefing to the
committee prior to FTG-08 detailing the improvements necessary,
cost and feasibility, to test a two-stage missile that can be
operationally deployed.

High-powered microwave applications

The committee is aware the Department of Defense has been
examining applications for use of high-powered microwave (HPM)
systems to counter electronics and non-kinetically affect
adversaries on the future battle ground. For example, the Air
Force has been demonstrating a Counter-Electronics High Power
Microwave Advanced Missile Project through the Joint Capability
Technology Demonstration, successfully completing that effort
in fall of 2012. The committee is also aware that the Navy has
explored applications for using high-powered microwave systems
to combat the electronics in improvised explosive devices in
order to pre-detonate those systems.
The committee encourages the Department to continue
investing in the development of both the capabilities for
attack tools using HPM, as well as the operational concepts for
how those systems might be employed. The committee recommends
that the Department examine more closely such issues as:
possible effects of HPM weapons on targets such as integrated
air defense systems, sensors, battle management networks, and
other high-value, electronics-based military systems; assess
the funding needs to transition existing developmental HPM
technologies to a cruise missile-based weapon, as well as
development of new approaches and delivery mechanisms; and,
estimates of the time required for development and deployment
of near-term and longer-term capabilities.

Highly integrated photonics

The committee recognizes the importance of highly
integrated photonics (HIP) technology for Department of Defense
applications. For example, modern military aircraft can have
miles of heavily shielded copper wire cables that connect a
multitude of components, resulting in both increased weight and
limited bandwidth capability. The committee believes that HIP
technology has the potential to provide for next-generation
network architectures and processing capabilities, while
dramatically reducing life cycle costs. The committee is aware
that the Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency, in
conjunction with the Naval Air Systems Command, has an
initiative underway to further demonstrate HIP technology that
facilitates building or upgrading military aircraft and other
aerospace platforms with a fiber-optic networking
infrastructure that will offer many capabilities well beyond
those of currently used copper- and multi-mode-fiber-based
technologies. The committee encourages the Department to
continue pursuing sustained development of HIP across the
future years defense plan.

Human-computer interaction

The committee understands that the application of emerging
neuroscience techniques, such as the use of non-invasive brain
measurement called functional near-infrared spectroscopy, are
leading to a better understanding of human-computer
interaction. The committee is aware that the use of such
techniques to passively study the brain, coupled with new
neuroergonomic and human factors research, have the potential
to lead to better methods for training cyber operators that
would reduce the human errors, improved input devices for
machine control, and potential applications for using brain
measurement as a means for future biometric identification. The
committee encourages the Department of Defense to continue
investing in basic research to further explore and expand the
understanding of functional near-infrared spectroscopy
techniques, and their applications for defense needs.

Improving military medical innovation

The committee commends the Department of Defense for its
innovative medical research and development program, which
supports a combination of private sector, academic and in-house
initiatives. The committee believes that this foundation could
be further improved by examining means to augment this base
program with a self-sustaining, equity sharing mechanism to
enable continued health care advancements despite decreasing
federal budgets. Therefore, the committee directs the Secretary
of Defense to provide a briefing to the Committee on Armed
Services of the House of Representatives within 180 days after
the enactment of this Act on the feasibility of establishing a
federally supported, self-sustaining investment entity to
support military medical innovation.

Individual equipment for female servicemembers

The committee notes that in January 2013, the Secretary of
Defense announced a new policy regarding the eligibility of
female servicemembers to serve in certain combat positions in
which they were previously prohibited. The committee is
concerned that despite the reality of female servicemembers
serving in combat for many years, the military services have
been slow to field individual equipment that is properly sized,
weighted, and designed for use by female servicemembers. The
committee believes that it is important that the Department of
Defense ensure that female servicemembers have the equipment
and clothing tailored to the physical requirements of women in
order to operate effectively and not be hampered by equipment
that is ill-fitting, uncomfortable, and potentially harmful
during operations in the field.
In the committee report (H. Rept. 112-479) accompanying the
National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2013, the
committee noted that it is aware of the concerns expressed by
female members of the Armed Forces deployed in support of
Operation New Dawn and Operation Enduring Freedom that the
current interceptor body armor system's design may not be as
ergonomically effective for female soldiers. As a result, the
committee directed the Secretary of the Army to conduct an
assessment as to whether there is an operational need to tailor
the interceptor body armor systems fielded to female
servicemembers specifically for the physical requirements of
women. The committee expects to receive this assessment in July
2013. The committee understands the Army has begun fielding
improved outer tactical vests specifically designed for female
servicemembers, and that the Army has created and tested 13
female-specific coat sizes and 13 female-specific trouser sizes
through the Army Combat Uniform-Alternate program that it will
begin fielding in May 2013. The committee commends the Army for
taking these actions and expects similar actions by the other
military services.
Similar to the report referenced above, the committee
directs the Secretary of Defense to provide a report to the
congressional defense committee by February 15, 2014, that
details the Department's programs to develop and field
individual equipment that is properly sized, weighted, and
designed to accommodate its use by women across all of the
military services. In particular, the report should include,
but not be limited to, plans to provide a greater range of
clothing sizes for women servicemembers, the potential utility
of rucksack frames and other carrying equipment designed
specifically for women, as well as the advisability and
feasibility of providing all female servicemembers with female
urinary diversion devices as part of their standard issued set
of personal equipment.

Inner-aural communications hearing protection capability development

The committee is concerned that hearing loss continues to
remain one of the most prevalent long-term injuries for
military personnel. As such, in the committee report (H. Rept.
112-479) accompanying the National Defense Authorization Act
for Fiscal Year 2013, the committee directed the Under
Secretary of Defense for Acquisition, Technology, and Logistics
to provide a briefing to the congressional defense committees
on the current efforts of the Department of Defense in
developing technology to reduce military service-related
hearing loss. The committee understands this briefing is still
being developed and looks forward to receiving it in July 2013.
The committee believes that the military services should
consider additional investment in such technology. The
committee encourages the Secretary of Defense, in coordination
with the service chiefs, to develop a comprehensive policy for
hearing protection and hearing enhancement across the military
services in order to: (1) ensure all members of the military
services are equipped with communications equipment that does
not interfere with or prohibit the use of hearing protection;
(2) reduce impediments to operational readiness that derive
from hearing loss; and (3) reduce the number of service-
connected disabilities resulting from inadequate hearing
protection.

Iron Dome short-range rocket defense

The budget request contained $220.3 million in PE 28866C
for the Iron Dome short-range rocket defense system.
The committee has supported the Iron Dome system since its
inception. The committee is aware of the tremendous success of
the Iron Dome system in defeating threat rockets fire at the
State of Israel from the Gaza Strip in late 2012. The committee
is aware that the Iron Dome system intercepted over 85 percent
of the rockets launched from the Gaza Strip against defended
areas in Israel, and is pleased with its success.
The committee associates itself with the remarks of former-
Secretary of Defense Leon Panetta in December 2012 regarding
the system: ``Iron Dome performed, I think it's fair to say,
remarkably well during the recent escalation . . . Iron Dome
does not start wars; it helps prevent wars.''
The committee recommends $220.3 million, the full amount
requested, in PE 28866C for the Iron Dome short-range rocket
defense system. The committee believes the Director, Missile
Defense Agency and the Under Secretary of Defense for
Acquisition, Technology and Logistics, in consultation with the
Israeli Missile Defense Organization, should use up to 50
percent of this amount for production of Iron Dome components
by U.S. industry in the United States to meet Israel's defense
requirements consistent with each Nation's laws, regulations,
and procedures. The committee believes co-production of parts
and components can and should be done in a manner that will
maximize interceptor and battery deliveries for Israeli defense
needs.

Israeli Cooperative Missile Defense Systems

The budget request contained $95.7 million in PE 63913C for
Israeli Cooperative Missile Defense Programs. Of this amount,
$52.6 million was requested for the Israeli Upper Tier program
known as Arrow 3; $10.6 million was requested for the Israeli
Arrow Program; and, $32.5 million was requested for the Short-
range Ballistic Missile Defense Program, also known as the
David's Sling Weapons System.
The committee is aware that the United States has no closer
ally in the Middle East than the State of Israel. The committee
is also aware that the threat of ballistic missile attack on
Israel is rising. The committee believes this threat must be
met with the unequivocal support of the United States.
The committee recommends $268.7 million, an increase of
$173.0 million, in PE 63913C for Israeli Cooperative missile
defense programs, the same level recommended in fiscal year
2013. The committee recommends this increase be provided as
follows: $117.2 million for the David's Sling; $22.1 million
for the Arrow 3 program; and $33.7 million for the Israeli
Arrow program. The committee recommends funding and policies
regarding the Iron Dome system elsewhere in this report.

Medical research information sharing

The committee supports the breadth of medical research
being conducted within the Department of Defense and the
promising results of such research. However, the committee is
concerned that compartmentalization of data, whether by
military service or injury mechanism, may unnecessarily limit
the efficacy of limited research dollars. History has shown
that many medical breakthroughs, such as penicillin, are often
the product of research in fields indirectly related to
medicine. The committee believes that the emerging field of big
data analytics could provide useful tools to support the
development of new capabilities through greater exposure of
data and research results. Therefore, the committee directs the
Department to provide a briefing within 180 days after the date
of enactment of the Act on how best to promote information
sharing across the medical research community through the use
of big data analytics, while preserving anonymity and privacy
protection, and allowing patients, subjects, and researchers to
opt-in or opt-out of specific research studies. The briefing
should also address whether establishing a single Department-
wide clearing house for medical research data would be an
effective means for accomplishing this goal.

Microscale liquid plasmas

The committee recognizes the importance of systems to allow
for the operation of defense electronics in harsh environmental
conditions, which must be impervious to radiation or damaging
electromagnetic pulses. The committee is encouraged with the
advancements the Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency
(DARPA) has made in this area working with non-thermal
microscale liquid plasmas (MLP) in demonstrating the ability of
these electronics and signal processing devices to withstand
damaging electromagnetic pulses and operate in extreme pressure
and radiation environments. The committee recognizes that MLP
may have application in other areas, such as the development of
novel plasma actuators for aerodynamic control to improve
performance of high-speed fixed-wing aircraft and rotorcraft.
The committee encourages DARPA to continue this research to
provide applications that can be used on various platforms to
protect our military hardware against extreme pressure and
radiation.
Missile defense cooperation with Japan
The committee is aware that the United States has more than
20 international missile defense partners, plus the North
Atlantic Treaty Organization. Of these, few have undertaken a
more cooperative missile defense program with the United States
than the Government of Japan.
This cooperation includes hosting missile defense radars,
deploying Aegis ballistic missile defense sensor and shooter
ships, and sharing the multi-billion dollar development of the
Standard Missile 3 (SM-3) IIA missile, which is planned to be
deployed by 2018. Upon completion of this cooperative program,
the SM-3 IIA will be the most sophisticated missile interceptor
deployed on any country's ships, with the capability to engage
many intermediate-range ballistic missile types.
The committee was pleased when the Secretary of Defense
announced on March 15, 2013, that, ``[w]ith the support of the
Japanese Government, we are planning to deploy an additional
radar in Japan.'' The committee is aware that this radar
placement was in consideration for over a year.
The committee considers it a testament to the strength of
the U.S.-Japan alliance that the Government of Japan has agreed
to host this second radar on its territory. The committee
expects that with the addition of the second Army Navy/
Transportable Radar Surveillance-model 2 (AN/TPY-2) radar unit,
the Missile Defense Agency and the Department of Defense will
have an opportunity to examine how best to bore sight these two
radars to ensure maximum support for the regional and homeland
missile defense missions. The committee is encouraged by this
virtually unparalleled cooperation and support from Japan. The
committee would welcome more such U.S.-Japanese missile defense
cooperation in the future.
Additionally, the committee encourages Japan to consider
the proposal articulated by the Chairman, Joint Chiefs of Staff
to seek a ``collaborative, trilateral ballistic missile defense
architecture.'' The committee believes such an architecture
could redound to the benefit of the three allied states to
provide additional defensive capabilities against shared
regional threats, including the Democratic People's Republic of
Korea.

Mitochondrial research

The committee is aware that the Department of Defense has
an interest in research related to mitochondrial disease and
mitochondrial function. For example, the U.S. Army Research
Office's life sciences program includes support for efforts
that focus on mitochondrial regulation and biogenesis, and
biomolecular power generation. Similarly, as the committee has
previously noted, there is a growing body of evidence
indicating that traumatic brain injury-related impairments may
be the result of damage to human cell mitochondria and that an
enhanced understanding of the functioning of post-injury
mitochondria may help drive the development of therapeutic
interventions that could delay or prevent additional
impairment. The committee continues to encourage the Department
to support mitochondrial research through its medical research
activities in the various services.

Modeling and simulation concurrency

The committee is aware that modeling and simulation tools
can provide powerful planning and training capabilities to
expose our forces to the complexities and uncertainties of
combat before ever leaving home station. The use of simulation
training has yielded a military that is better trained, more
capable, and more confident as compared to units that do not
have access to modern simulation training devices. The
committee believes that simulation training can be a cost
effective means by which units can improve combat readiness,
tactical decision-making skills and ultimately save lives.
Furthermore, the committee believes that a key to the
effectiveness of simulation training is ensuring that training
devices maintain concurrency with the capabilities and features
of their counterpart operational systems and platforms. The
committee is aware that maintaining concurrency using
traditional funding approaches remains challenging in the
current fiscal environment and is likely to become more so in
the future. To ensure the greatest efficiency and effectiveness
in our military today, the committee encourages the Department
of Defense to consider using its existing flexibility to
utilize ``training as service'' contracting as one approach to
support operational readiness and maintain system concurrency.
The committee believes that the Department could meet the
training challenges of the future in a fiscally austere
environment by leveraging simulation training that is a
combination of both Government owned and operated simulators,
coupled with simulation training services provided by a
academia and industry.

Modeling and simulation grand challenges

The committee recognizes the value of modeling and
simulation (M&S) to a wide range of activities within the
Department of Defense. The committee believes that the
Department could do more to harness the entrepreneurial and
innovative spirit of industry, academia, and the organic
research and engineering resources of the Department to
facilitate progress in the state of the art for M&S. The
committee recognizes that the issuance of grand challenges have
been effective in other areas, such as the Grand, Urban and
Balloon Challenges of the Defense Advanced Research Projects
Agency. The committee encourages the Department to develop and
promulgate a set of M&S Grand Challenges for the research
community that would:
(1) Support increased inter-agency coordination;
(2) Improve efficiency and interoperability of
specific M&S tools, as well as to replace, improve, or
provide efficiencies to existing activities of the
Department;
(3) Eeinvigorate use of simulation-based acquisition
as an enterprise-wide strategy, including by using
modeling and simulation for performing analyses of
alternatives for major defense acquisition programs;
(4) Lower the operations and support costs of the
Department; and
(5) Support risk mitigation activities.

National Defense Education Program

The budget request contained $84.3 million in PE 61120D8Z
for the National Defense Education Program (NDEP) for the
purposes of attracting, engaging, and developing current and
future generations of science, technology, engineering, and
mathematics (STEM) talent to benefit the Department of Defense.
Of this amount, $48.7 million was requested for the Science,
Mathematics, and Research for Transformation (SMART) program,
$35.6 million was requested for the National Security Science
and Engineering Faculty Fellowship (NSSEFF) program, but no
funds were requested for pre-kindergarten-to-12th grade (PK-12)
STEM educational programs.
The committee cannot stress enough that the recruitment,
retention and development of an experienced, technical
workforce is a critical national security requirement for the
Department of Defense and that these efforts must start at the
earliest stages of the STEM pipeline. The committee also
stresses that growth in STEM fields is important for the
general economic health and competitiveness of the nation, but
due to the special security requirements of Department of
Defense employees, this need is especially acute.
The committee understands that as the demand for a diverse,
highly skilled scientific and technical military and civilian
defense workforce grows, the Department will need to continue
to invest in strengthening local defense communities by
enhancing student engagement in STEM initiatives that support
the Department's research areas. The committee understands that
NDEP K-12:
(1) Builds student interest in STEM fields and
disciplines and in careers specific to the Department;
(2) Develops defense-relevant science, engineering
and mathematics skills; and
(3) Provides a future talent pool to fulfill the
Department's demand for highly skilled STEM
professionals by increasing access to authentic STEM
experiences.
The committee recommends $89.3 million, an increase of $5.0
million, in PE 61120D8Z for the National Defense Education
Program. Of these funds, the committee recommends $48.7
million, the requested amount for the SMART; $25.6 million for
NSSEFF, a decrease of $10.0 million; and $15.0 million for PK-
12 programs, an increase of $15.0 million. Of the funds request
for PK-12, the committee recommends the Department use some of
the funds to carry out STEM activities that will support school
districts with high concentrations of military dependent
families. Such activities should include a focus on increasing
teacher effectiveness as well as student achievement.

Next generation Aegis missile--Standard Missile 3 block IIB

The committee is aware that on March 15, 2013, the
Secretary of Defense announced that the Administration would
propose to restructure the Standard Missile (SM) 3 block IIB
program in the budget request for fiscal year 2014. The Missile
Defense Agency has made it clear that this decision was driven
by congressional reductions in technology development in fiscal
years 2012-13, as well as technical challenges related to the
projected capability of the missile and related to sea-basing
the prospective missile interceptor.
The committee is also aware that the Government and its
industry partners both made significant investments in the
development of the SM-3 IIB missile. The committee believes
that it would be imprudent and short-sighted to walk away from
these investments and to leave no program of record for the
continued improvement of the SM-3 system. The committee
encourages the Missile Defense Agency to use these investments
as much as possible to improve and inform the development of
the Aegis ballistic missile defense system SM-3 IIA
interceptor, planned to be fielded in fiscal year 2018, as well
as a follow-on system. Therefore, the committee directs the
Director, Missile Defense Agency to provide a briefing to the
congressional defense committees by November 15, 2013, on the
potential for a concept development program for leveraging the
investments made in the SM-3 IIB program by the United States
and industry to continue to improve the SM-3 IIA missile
through an evolved or iterative variant, for example an SM-3
IIA+.

Non-Lethal directed energy applications

The committee reiterates its support for the expeditious
development and fielding of non-lethal technologies and
capabilities, which can not only limit civilian casualties in
irregular warfare and contingency operations but have
applicability across the full range of military operations. In
particular, active denial technologies offer numerous
opportunities for defusing crisis situations in volatile
environments. The committee supports the findings of the
Accountability Review Board, which concluded that ``the lack of
non-lethal crowd control options . . . precluded a more
vigorous defense'' of the U.S. consulate in Benghazi, Libya and
which recommended that the State Department ``rapidly and
routinely'' identify and procure ``additional options for non-
lethal deterrents in high-risk, high-threats posts.''
However, the committee notes that the lack of a clearly
defined policy regarding the deployment of directed energy
technologies has been a contributing factor to the decision not
to deploy systems such as the Active Denial System. Interim
guidance issued by the Under Secretary of Defense for Policy
regarding the operational employment of directed energy weapons
acknowledges the benefits of directed energy technology and
supports its continued development, but stops short of
authorizing the use of new directed energy weapons without
undergoing a comprehensive review and approval process intended
to ensure an acceptable risk of collateral damage and
inadvertent casualties to personnel. The committee recognizes
the importance of a thorough examination of these issues,
however it is concerned that the acceptance criteria imposed in
this process still appears to be ambiguous and ill-defined, and
therefore may stifle the development of, and support for,
promising technologies. Accordingly, the committee directs the
Secretary of Defense to provide a briefing to the Committees on
Armed Services of the Senate and the House of Representatives
within 90 days of the enactment of this Act which identifies
the policy, technology, and acquisition issues that have
impeded the development, fielding, and employment of active
denial systems in operational theaters where U.S. forces are
currently engaged; and clarifies the specific policy
requirements that must be met before directed energy weapons
may be employed in both counter-materiel and counter-personnel
applications.

Non-profit research institutions

The committee is aware that non-profit research
institutions are critical components of the research ecosystem,
and offer tremendous capabilities to the research and
development portfolios of the Department of Defense and other
Federal agencies. The committee is aware the Department is
examining ways to better utilize their unique capabilities and
expertise, especially in the area of transitioning innovation
to commercialization. Additionally, the committee understands
that the Department is evaluating how to better utilize the
special authorities within the Defense Federal Acquisition
Regulations in order to better leverage the capabilities of the
non-profit research community. The committee believes this is
especially important in a time of fiscal austerity and
uncertainty, and encourages the continued discussion between
the Department and the non-profit research community.

Open architecture systems

The committee notes that under the direction of the Under
Secretary of Defense for Acquisition, Technology and Logistics
(USD/ATL) in 2009, the Unmanned Aircraft Systems (UAS) Task
Force chartered the UAS Common Segment (UCS) Working Group,
which has developed a common, open and scalable reference
architecture for control of unmanned aircraft systems. Despite
this effort and past encouragement from Congress, the services
have continued, in some cases, to procure proprietary and
closed architecture unmanned systems and ground control
segments resulting in higher costs, fragmented and disjointed
operations, and reduced operational effectiveness. Therefore,
the committee encourages the Secretary of Defense, in
consultation with the Joint Chiefs of Staff, and coordinating
with the services to require all future UAS groups two through
five ground control stations be compliant with the most recent
Office of the Secretary of Defense UCS reference architecture.
The committee also notes that both the Government
Accountability Office (GAO) and USD/ATL have identified an open
systems approach as a potential enabler for increasing
competition and reducing costs on major weapons system
acquisition programs. GAO recently reported that an open
systems approach is characterized as having a modular design
with open standards for key interfaces. While the Department
would reap the most benefits from adopting an open systems
approach at the start of development, the committee further
notes that both the GAO and USD/ATL believe that in certain
circumstances, where appropriate, it may be more cost effective
and efficient to convert proprietary systems to open systems
even after they have been fielded. The committee believes that
the Department of Defense has the potential to benefit from the
use of an open systems approach for weapons systems acquisition
programs. Accordingly, the committee directs that the Under
Secretary of Defense for Acquisition, Technology and Logistics
provide a report to the congressional defense committees by
March 3, 2014, that:
(1) Assesses the costs and benefits of using an open
systems approach for manned and unmanned aircraft
acquisition programs;
(2) Identifies the specific plan the Department of
Defense will use for implementing an open systems
approach for new manned and unmanned aircraft
acquisition programs;
(3) Assesses the costs and benefits of converting
existing proprietary manned and unmanned systems to
open systems; and
(4) Recommends any implementing legislation for
congressional consideration.
The committee also directs the Comptroller General to study
the use of best practices for using open systems in product
development. The study should identify better ways of
incorporating an open systems approach from the start of new
acquisition programs, analyze challenges that the Department of
Defense may have in implementing these practices in its weapons
acquisition programs, and provide potential solutions to these
challenges, including potential policy changes. The Comptroller
General should provide a briefing to the House Committee on
Armed Services on the findings by February 3, 2014.
Potential missile defense cooperation with the Republic of
Korea
The committee is aware that the Missile Defense Agency
(MDA) and the Republic of Korea are conducting phased studies
of ballistic missile defense architecture options for that
country. The committee is encouraged by this effort as it
represents an additional example of cooperation in missile
defense development between the United States and its allies.
As the phased studies come to a conclusion, the committee
encourages the Government of South Korea to consider purchasing
U.S. missile defense technology that could provide proven
solutions to the ballistic missile challenges that it is
confronting and allow interoperability between South Korea and
the United States. Additionally, the committee encourages South
Korea to think about the proposal of the Chairman, Joint Chiefs
of Staff to seek a ``collaborative, trilateral ballistic
missile defense architecture.'' The committee believes such an
architecture could redound to the benefit of the three allied
states to provide additional defensive capabilities against
shared regional threats, including the Democratic People's
Republic of Korea.

Precision Tracking Space System

The committee is aware that the Missile Defense Agency
(MDA) has proposed terminating the Precision Tracking Space
System (PTSS) in the fiscal year 2014 budget request. The
committee agrees with the Department's judgment that the
termination is the appropriate action in view of the rising
cost and acquisition uncertainties of this system, both
prominent explanations for the committee's actions in the
committee reports (H. Rept. 112-78 and H. Rept. 112-479) as
well as in section 224 of the National Defense Authorization
Act for Fiscal Year 2013 (Public Law 112-239).
The committee views the termination of PTSS as an
opportunity for the Department of Defense. The committee is
aware that PTSS follows on the heels of the Space Tracking and
Surveillance System (STSS) as a missile defense space sensor
architecture that hasn't been operationally deployed. The
committee believes that a persistent overhead sensor system is
a must for the ballistic missile defense system.
The committee notes the priority of improving
discrimination, and is encouraged by the MDA plan for an
Integrated Space Layer Study and the joint MDA-Strategic
Command ``vision study'' initiated by the Commander, U.S.
Strategic Command, on which the committee provides further
views elsewhere in this report. The committee expects to be
briefed this summer upon the conclusion of the post-PTSS
scoping study as well as to be kept informed of the progress
and interim findings and conclusions of the Integrated Space
Layer Study.
The committee expects the Director to ensure that the
taxpayer investments made in the PTSS system will not be lost
or wasted and that the cutting edge sensor work being done on
this system will be leveraged into a follow-on program that
could be recommended by the aforementioned space sensor study.
Elsewhere in this Act, the committee includes a provision that
would require an analysis of alternatives on the Integrated
Space Layer Study in order to ensure that future MDA plans do
not follow PTSS and STSS into failure.

Quantum information science

The committee is aware that research into quantum scale
effects offer great potential for the storage, processing and
communication of information, including for a wide range of
applications that include weak-signal sensing and imaging to
quantum computing and cryptography. The committee recognizes
that quantum information science offers potentially disruptive
new technologies for national security needs, but that recent
advances in quantum communications have resulted in some early
commercial products.
In the committee report (H. Rept. 111-166) accompanying the
National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2010, the
committee directed a review of quantum computing research
within the Department of Defense. This report indicated that in
fiscal year 2010, the Department had an investment between
$50.0 and 55.0 million per year, which represented 30-40
percent of the Federal investment in this area. Most of these
projects were funded as single university investigator
projects, but also included some Multidisciplinary University
Research Initiatives.
The committee encourages the Department to sustain its
investment in quantum information science research, especially
in such areas as the development of novel quantum devices
superconducting circuit technology for the purpose of quantum
measurement and improving understanding of issues that are
fundamental to quantum sensing and quantum computing. The
committee believes that such efforts are needed to maintain the
Nation's technological leadership internationally.

Report on boost phase missile defense options

Elsewhere in this report, the committee notes that it is
aware that there is presently no boost phase missile defense
program of record in the Ballistic Missile Defense System
architecture planned by the Missile Defense Agency (MDA). The
committee is aware that the Kinetic Energy Interceptor and the
Airborne Laser were terminated in fiscal year 2009, though
there were notable successes, as well as challenges, by both
developmental programs. The committee notes that such an
absence means the United States is currently not pursuing one
of the three central layers of missile defense architecture.
The committee is also aware of the findings of the National
Academy of Sciences in its report, ``Making Sense of Ballistic
Missile Defense: An Assessment of Concepts and Systems for U.S.
Boost-Phase Missile Defense in Comparison to Other
Alternatives,'' which concludes, by relying on its own
``notional data,'' that boost-phase defense ``could be
technically possible in some instances but operationally and
economically impractical for almost all missions.'' The
committee is aware of the significant advantages, and the
difficulties of intercepting a threat ballistic missile in the
boost phase, including those articulated by the National
Academy of Sciences report.
Therefore, the committee directs the Director, Missile
Defense Agency to provide a report to the the congressional
defense committees by October 15, 2013, that assess the
findings of the National Academy of Sciences study and the
options that the Director believes the Missile Defense Agency
should consider in an analysis of alternatives or other study
that could inform a boost phase missile defense program as part
of the budget request for fiscal year 2015.

Report on HALT/HASS Testing of Ballistic Missile Defense Systems and
Components

The committee continues to be concerned by issues of
reliability in the design and development of critical ballistic
missile defense (BMD) system components and subcomponents as
well as the potential for counterfeit parts to enter into the
missile defense supply chain.
Effective utilization of modern methods and equipment for
highly accelerated life testing and highly accelerated stress
screening (HALT/HASS) during early design stages has been
demonstrated to yield significant improvements in reliability
and more effective product designs, as well as cost savings.
Through modern HALT/BASS testing, key components and
subcomponents are subjected to overstresses, revealing latent
design flaws (including those based on the use of faulty or
counterfeit parts) that can go undetected with legacy testing
approaches.
Therefore, the committee directs the Director, Missile
Defense Agency, to conduct an assessment of the value,
feasibility, and cost of greater utilization of modern HALT /
HASS testing equipment and processes to shorten design and
development timelines, reduce system and component testing and
lifecycle costs, and enhance reliability of critical missile
defense systems and components. In addition, the assessment
should consider whether and to what extent greater utilization
of modern HALT/HASS testing equipment and processes could help
address the growing problem of detecting and preventing the
introduction of counterfeit parts into critical missile defense
systems, components, and subcomponents. Additionally, based on
the findings of this assessment, the Director should provide
the committees his recommendations regarding use of HALT/HAS.
The committee directs that the results of this assessment be
briefed to the congressional defense committees by not later
than January 15, 2014.

Ribonucleic acid technology research

The committee recognizes that the Department of Defense
faces a significant challenge with infectious diseases, which
hospitalize more service members each year than are wounded in
combat. The committee is aware that the Defense Advanced
Research Projects Agency (DARPA) has initiated a program to
address treatment for infectious diseases based on techniques
utilizing ribonucleic acid (RNA). That program focuses on
encoding an element of an antigen or antibody on an RNA
molecule to initiate the desired immune response. The committee
encourages the Department to continue this and similar
research, and to look at opportunities to expand this research
into new areas such as equipment that enable RNA target
characterization, software development for in silico screening
of molecule libraries against RNA targets, and assay
development for in vitro high throughput screening and
validation.

Soft biometrics for non-cooperative identification of personnel

The committee notes that the Department of Defense has
developed and acquired biometric capabilities that rely
primarily on fingerprint and iris recognition, but are
increasingly including additional modalities such as facial
recognition or identification of latent deoxyribonucleic acid
material. The current generation of biometric identification
devices is also primarily focused on cooperative sampling of
target populations, which require samples to be taken by
service members deployed in potentially dangerous environments.
The committee understands that there are also additional
``soft'' biometrics, such as gait, keystroke, or analysis of
body markings, which could also be useful in identifying
specific individuals, and could be done from greater stand-off
distances. The committee notes that some research has been
conducted by the Air Force Research Laboratory, as well as
other civilian research agencies to better characterize the
utility and operational challenges of such modalities, but that
the current biometrics architecture does not yet integrate any
of these capabilities. The committee encourages the Department
to examine all biometric modalities as it develops its future
biometrics architecture.

Special operations technology development

The Special Operations Technology Development program
enables U.S. Special Operations Command (USSOCOM) to conduct
studies and develop laboratory prototypes for applied research
and advanced technology development, as well as leverage other
organizations' technology projects. Similarly, the Special
Operations Advanced Technology Development program delivers
emerging technologies into the hands of Special Operations
Forces, through the rapid prototyping and advanced
demonstrations of these new technologies in realistic
operational environments. The committee believes that these
programs are vital tools that develop and rapidly deliver
special operations specific technology to support special
operations forces (SOF) in emerging as well as existing
requirements. The committee believes that these programs would
benefit from a formalized collaboration between USSOCOM and
trusted academia, which in turn would serve as a catalyst to
advance the introduction of new technologies that would
contribute to SOF mission areas.

Standardization of directed energy weapon systems characterization

The committee is aware of several research, development,
test, and evaluation (RDT&E) programs which pursue the
development and eventual deployment of directed energy weapon
systems. The committee understands the importance of the
services and defense agencies' ability to leverage RDT&E
investments whenever possible to maximize the mutual benefit of
these investments. Therefore, the committee encourages the
services and defense agencies to continue to work
synergistically in the development of these systems whenever
possible. However, the committee is concerned about the
inconsistency of definition of system performance among the
different programs which make comparison of technologies and
identification of leveraging opportunities between programs
difficult. System descriptors such as ``beam quality'' for
laser systems have multiple definitions within the directed
energy community at large, and are not directly comparable
between different systems. Some descriptors may only be
applicable to a limited subset of missions and therefore
inhibit the extrapolation of system performance to other
missions. The ability to perform such comparisons is vital in
the assessment of the different laser technologies
applicability for missions of national interest.
Therefore, the committee directs the Secretary of Defense
to develop a common set of parameters to describe directed
energy weapon system performance with standardized definitions
to be employed on all Department of Defense directed energy
programs. The committee further directs the Secretary of
Defense to submit a report to the Committees on Armed Services
of the Senate and the House of Representatives within 12 months
after the date of the enactment of this Act, which provides the
rationale behind directed energy weapon system performance
definitions.

Synthetic protein development

The committee is aware that the U.S. Army's Walter Reed
Institute of Research (WRAIR) has established a collaborative
research and development agreement (CRADA) to examine a new
biochemical process that would prevent bacteria from responding
to their environment and becoming harmful. This new process
relies upon use of a protein molecule as a roadblock or
`switch' to disrupt the behaviors bacteria use to become
virulent. The committee believes that this new discovery could
have widespread implications to help reduce combat wound
casualties caused by infection. The antimicrobial process has
an added advantage over traditional antibiotics currently in
use in that the switch mechanism makes it extremely difficult
for bacteria to do an ``end run'' around the process as can
happen with some traditional antibiotic-resistant microbes. The
committee applauds WRAIR's efforts with this potentially life-
saving research and expects the Secretary of Defense and the
Department's medical research enterprise to fully support this
important new therapeutic approach.

Technology harvesting of the Medium Extended Air Defense System

The committee is aware that one of the frequent
justifications for completion of the Medium Extended Air
Defense System (MEADS) Proof of Concept (PoC) was the
harvesting of specific technologies for the modernization of
the Patriot air and missile defense system. For example, in a
letter to the congressional defense committees from then-
Secretary of Defense, Leon Panetta, on November 30, 2012, the
Secretary stated, ``[t]he U.S. Army is already considering ways
to link the knowledge gained from the tri-national MEADS PoC
program to its future air and missile development plans.'' With
the final funding of the MEADS PoC, the committee is anxious to
learn what technologies will be harvested for Patriot
modernization, at what date in the modernization program, and
at what cost to take advantage of the significant U.S. taxpayer
investment in PoC.
The committee was disappointed to learn that the Army would
not include this information in the report required by section
226 of the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year
2013 (Public Law 112-239). The committee understands the Army
is interested in evaluating potential technology harvesting as
part of the assessment of the results of the upcoming FT-2
test, but it believes such evaluation is central to the intent
of the requirement under section 226. Therefore, the committee
directs the Secretary of the Army to provide an evaluation to
the congressional defense committees within 180 days after the
completion of FT-2, or February 15, 2014, whichever comes
later, of MEADS technology harvesting opportunities based on
the report directed by section 226 of Public Law 112-239. This
report should also include: 1) A review of current Army and
joint requirements to which MEADS technology might be applied;
2) The Army's timeline for completion of an Analysis of
Alternatives to these technologies; and 3) An overview of the
Army's planned competitive milestones in the acquisition
strategy.

Tele-medicine applications for ophthalmic injury

The committee is aware that the Department of Defense is
developing capabilities that would provide telemedicine and
remote physiological monitoring for casualty care of deployed
forces. The committee recognizes that such telemedicine
capabilities can provide useful reach-back support for complex
injuries, especially for sensitive organs where combat medics
and surgeons may not have in-depth specialty training, such as
ophthalmic injuries. The committee encourages the Department to
experiment with and examine ways to utilize emerging
telemedicine capabilities to allow for consultation with
outside experts or specialty institutions to provide soldiers
on the battlefield with access to high quality, tertiary
ophthalmic care for complex and difficult eye injuries. The
committee believes that partnering with subject matter experts
could provide direct, real-time consultation between
geographically-dispersed military and civilian ophthalmologists
for urgent, complex ophthalmic diagnostic and surgical
problems, as well as allow conferencing for complicated but
less urgent patient management decisions.

Terminal High Altitude Area Defense System

The committee is aware that the Department of Defense has
deployed the first operational Terminal High Altitude Area
Defense (THAAD) system battery to Guam for its defense from the
North Korean threat. The committee is gratified to see this
capability operationally deployed providing missile defense
protection to U.S. warfighters and U.S. territory.
The committee is also aware that the fiscal year 2013
budget request reduced the procurement of THAAD batteries from
nine to six. The committee is not aware of any diminution of
warfighter requirement for this capability. The committee
encourages the Missile Defense Agency and the Missile Defense
Executive Board to continually reexamine the availability of
resources and the warfighter requirement for the THAAD system
and to ensure future budget requests in future fiscal years
seek to increase the number of THAAD batteries that will be
procured by the United States. The committee also encourages
the Missile Defense Agency, subject to the availability of
resources, to ensure that THAAD interceptor procurement is
matched and paced to the procurement and availability of THAAD
batteries. The committee noted both of these concerns in 2012
as part of the committee report (H. Rept. 112-479) to accompany
the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2013.
The committee commends the Department of Defense for its
robust missile defense cooperation with the United Arab
Emirates. The committee is aware that ongoing and prospective
foreign military sales with the United Arab Emirates, including
the THAAD system, will greatly expand the U.S.-allied
interoperable missile defense architecture to deal with
regional threats. At the same time, the sales will produce
significant cost-savings to the United States for its THAAD
program.

Three dimensional integrated circuits

The committee is aware that the pressure to place more
functionality on increasingly smaller integrated circuits is a
challenge the Department of Defense is faced with as it tried
to place more processing power on smaller platforms, such as
unmanned systems and signal new sensors. The committee is also
aware that the development of three dimensional integrated
circuits (3D ICs), which allow for functionality to be stacked
onto circuits and provide both horizontal and vertical
functionality, holds promise for defense applications. The
committee is concerned that recent microelectronics strategies
from the Department have not addressed the role 3D ICs might
fill, nor the gaps that might exist in commercially developed
3D ICs and where Department of Defense investment may be
needed.The committee encourages the Department to
comprehensively evaluate the place 3D ICs might fit in the
Department's overall microelectronics strategy to understand
how they might best be used to the benefit of defense systems.

U.S. Special Operations Command undersea systems strategy

The undersea systems strategy of the U.S. Special
Operations Command (USSOCOM) has been a subject of focus by the
committee over the past several national defense authorization
acts. The committee believes that the research and development
phase has reached a point of stability, which validates the
progress of USSOCOM and their communication with Congress in a
joint endeavor to provide warfighters with unmatched
clandestine maneuverability in denied maritime areas.
Increased authorization from the congressional defense
committees for fiscal year 2013 afforded additional resources
for dry combat submersible development of a near-term prototype
that will give USSOCOM new capability. The dry variant will
afford increased range and alleviate the human factors that are
unavoidable while operating wet submersibles in cold
environments on a long-distance commute to an objective. It is
the intent of this committee to continue supporting and
tracking with great interest the progress of a dry variant
capable of deploying from multiple platforms to include a
submarine.
Additionally, section 156 of the National Defense
Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2013 (Public Law 112-239)
mandated reporting requirements for the Shallow Water Combat
Submersible Program and continued coordination between USSOCOM
and the Assistant Secretary of Defense for Special Operations
and Low-Intensity Conflict. The committee looks forward to
receiving these mandated reports and reaffirms the need for
continued communication with the congressional defense
committees to ensure programmatic success across the undersea
systems enterprise and program.

Vertical Lift Consortium

The committee understands that the Vertical Lift Consortium
(VLC) is an open and competitive forum that leverages all
sectors of the vertical lift aircraft community to encourage
teaming of innovative small business and non-traditional
contractors with major defense firms and academia. In the
committee report (H. Rept. 112-479) to accompany the National
Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2013, the committee
directed the Under Secretary of Defense for Acquisition,
Technology, and Logistics to submit a report to the
congressional defense committees providing the status of the
Department's engagement with the VLC on related technology
requirements and development strategies for next-generation
vertical lift aircraft.
The committee notes that the required report was delivered
to the congressional defense committees on May 13, 2013. The
committee agrees with the Department's assessment that the VLC
is an integral part of the future vertical lift initiative and
supports VLC members continued opportunities to compete and
participate in prototype technology projects for next
generation vertical lift aircraft. The committee recognizes
incremental improvements or upgrades to current Department
rotorcraft will not fully meet future Joint service operational
requirements. The committee supports the development of future
vertical lift aircraft and encourages the Department to expand
the prototyping program to include vertical lift aircraft.

Operational Test and Evaluation, Defense

Overview

The budget request contained $186.3 million for operational
test and evaluation, Defense. The committee recommends $186.3
million, no change to the budget request, for fiscal year 2014.
The committee recommendations for the fiscal year 2014
operational test and evaluation, Defense program are identified
in division D of this Act.

Items of Special Interest

Assessment of the Army Distributed Common Ground System

The committee shares numerous concerns related to the
performance and program management of the Distributed Common
Ground System-Army (DCGS-A) program. The committee has
endeavored to better understand those concerns and find ways to
integrate lessons learned to improve the DCGS-A program as it
moves forward. The committee awaits the report required by
section 923 of the National Defense Authorization Act of Fiscal
Year 2013 (Public Law 112-239), as well as a review by the
General Accountability Office. Elsewhere in this bill, the
committee directs further actions to improve visibility into
the DCGS enterprise, and updates in key areas of performance.
The committee strives to continue improving its
understanding and assessment of key attributes of DCGS-A, and
therefore directs the Director of Operational Test and
Evaluation (DOT&E) to review the DCGS-A program and submit a
report to the congressional defense committees by September 27,
2013. That report shall include the following:
(1) An assessment of the ability of the system to
synchronize data across separate locations around the
world in disconnected, interrupted or low-bandwidth
data environments, including use of cloud edge nodes,
and to manage and enrich data collaboratively across
the enterprise into a fused common operational picture;
(2) An analysis of how the Tactical Entity Databases
(TED) are synchronized;
(3) An assessment of the system to meet the data
interoperability standards set by the intelligence
community.
Furthermore, the committee directs the Under Secretary of
Defense for Intelligence, in coordination with Performance
Assessment and Root Cause Analysis office, to provide a
briefing by October 18, 2013 providing an additional assessment
of the DOT&E report. This report shall include an assessment of
the results of the DOT&E report, including comments on any
recommendations made; and an analysis of how the lessons
learned from the Republic of Iraq and the Islamic Republic of
Afghanistan were incorporated into DCGS-A, including the
ability of the system to respond to joint urgent operational
needs.

Test and evaluation capabilities for electromagnetic pulse
vulnerabilities

The committee is aware that an electromagnetic pulse (EMP),
both man-made and naturally occurring, as well as high-powered
microwave (HPM) systems poses a significant challenge to the
assurance of critical Department of Defense missions and
assets. The committee recognizes that adequate test and
evaluation facilities and capabilities are needed to maintain
the standards for individual systems, as well as the networking
of systems and infrastructure of the Department.
The committee is concerned that the Department has not
adequately invested in the underlying infrastructure needed to
support these test and evaluation capabilities, as well as the
modeling and simulation tools required to support combatant
commanders, war games, military exercises and other
assessments. Therefore, the committee directs the Director,
Test Resource Management Center to provide a briefing to the
Committee on Armed Services of the House of Representatives
within 90 days after the date of the enactment of this Act, on
the test and evaluation capabilities to support identification
and mitigation of EMP and HPM vulnerabilities to the
Department. The briefing should include identification of the
existing capabilities and their sustainment levels, as well as
identification of any gaps in those capabilities.

LEGISLATIVE PROVISIONS

Subtitle A--Authorization of Appropriations

Section 201--Authorization of Appropriations

This section would authorize appropriations for research,
development, test, and evaluation at the levels identified in
section 4201 of division D of this Act.

Subtitle B--Program Requirements, Restrictions, and Limitations

Section 211--Limitation on Availability of Funds for Ground Combat
Vehicle Engineering and Manufacturing Phase

This section would prohibit the Army from obligating post-
Milestone B funds for the Ground Combat Vehicle (GCV) program
until the Secretary of the Army submits a report to the
congressional defense committees.
The committee supports the Army's need to modernize its
ground forces equipment. The GCV is one of the Army's top
priorities and will eventually replace the Bradley Fighting
Vehicle. The committee expects the Army to execute an
acquisition strategy that meets the needs of the warfighter and
minimizes the risk to the Government. The Army's recent
acquisition strategy is to down select to one contractor at the
beginning of the Engineering, Manufacturing, and Development
(EMD) phase instead of funding two contractors until the end of
the EMD. The committee notes that officials from the Government
Accountability Office have testified before the committee on
numerous occasions that weapon system programs that enter EMD
too early without enough ``knowledge'' can pose a significant
risk to the Government. ``Knowledge'' is defined as the
combination of technology maturity, a thorough understand of
requirements, and realistic cost estimates. The committee
expects the Army to ensure that it has enough ``knowledge''
before it down selects to one contractor in order to minimize
the cost, schedule, and performance risk to the Government and
the taxpayer.

Section 212--Limitation on Milestone A Activities for Unmanned Carrier-
Launched Airborne Surveillance and Strike System Program

This section would prohibit the Under Secretary of Defense
for Acquisition, Technology, and Logistics from approving a
Milestone A technology development contract award for the
Unmanned Carrier-Launched Airborne Surveillance and Strike
(UCLASS) program until 30 days after the Under Secretary
certifies to the congressional defense committees that the
software and system engineering designs for the control system
and connectivity segment and the aircraft carrier segment of
the UCLASS system can achieve, at a low level of integration
risk, successful compatibility and operability with the air
vehicle segment planned for selection at Milestone A contract
award.

Section 213--Limitation on Availability of Funds for Air Force
Logistics Transformation

This section would restrict the obligation and expenditure
of Air Force procurement and research, development, test, and
evaluation funds for logistics information technology programs
until 30 days after the date on which the Secretary of the Air
Force submits to the congressional defense committees a report
on the modernization and update of Air Force logistics
information technology systems following the cancellation of
the expeditionary combat support system.

Section 214--Limitation on Availability of Funds for Defensive
Cyberspace Operations of the Air Force

This section would limit the funds the Air Force may
obligate or expend for Defensive Cyberspace Operations in
Program Element 0202088F to not more than 90 percent until a
period of 30 days after the date on which the Secretary of the
Air Force submits a report to the congressional defense
committees detailing the Air Force's plan for sustainment of
the Application Software Assurance Center of Excellence across
the Future Years Defense Program.

Section 215--Limitation on Availability of Funds for Precision Extended
Range Munition Program

This section would limit obligation of 50 percent of fiscal
year 2014 funds for the precision extended range munition
(PERM) program. This section would include a waiver for the
Under Secretary of Defense for Acquisition, Technology, and
Logistics pending written certification to the congressional
defense committees.

Section 216--Limitation on the Availability of Funds for the Program
Manager for Biometrics of the Department of Defense

This section would restrict the obligation or expenditure
of funds for fiscal year 2014 for research, development, test,
and evaluation by the Department of Defense program manager for
biometrics for future biometric architectures or systems to not
more than 75 percent for a period of 30 days after the date on
which the Secretary of Defense submits a report to the
congressional defense committees assessing the future program
structure for biometrics oversight and execution and
architectural requirements for biometrics enabling capability.

Section 217--Unmanned Combat Air System Demonstration Testing
Requirement

This section would require the Secretary of the Navy to
demonstrate unmanned, autonomous aerial refueling testing and
evaluation with the X-47B aircraft.

Section 218--Long-Range Standoff Weapon Requirement

This section would require the Secretary of the Air Force
to develop a follow-on air-launched cruise missile to the AGM-
86 that achieves initial operating capability for both
conventional and nuclear missions by not later than 2030 and is
certified for internal carriage and employment for both
conventional and nuclear missions on the next-generation long-
range strike bomber by not later than 2034.

Section 219--Review of Software Development for F-35 Aircraft

This section would require the Under Secretary of Defense
for Acquisition, Technology, and Logistics to establish an
independent team consisting of subject matter experts to review
the development of software for the F-35 aircraft program, and
to submit a report to the congressional defense committees by
March 3, 2014.
The committee continues to support the F-35 development and
procurement program, and believes a software development review
by the Department will ensure that the F-35 program remains on
schedule to provide a fifth generation capability in support of
our national security strategy.

Section 220--Evaluation and Assessment of the Distributed Common Ground
Station

This section would require that beginning in fiscal year
2015, future budget submissions include separate project codes
for each capability component within each program element for
each service version of the distributed common ground station.
Furthermore, this section would require the Under Secretary of
Defense for Acquisition, Technology, and Logistics to conduct
an analysis of commercial link analysis tools that could be
used to meet the requirements of each of the service versions
of the Distributed Common Ground Station program; and if one or
more commercial link analysis tools are found to meet the
requirements of the program, the responsible service secretary
shall initiate a request for proposals.

Section 221--Requirement to Complete Individual Carbine Testing

This section would require the Secretary of the Army to
complete all required tests, user evaluations, and business
case assessments for the individual carbine program and report
those results to the congressional defense committees upon
completion.

Section 222--Establishment of Funding Line and Fielding Plan for Navy
Laser Weapon System

This section would ensure that future defense budgets
submitted to Congress for fiscal years 2018-28 include a
funding line and fielding plan for a Navy laser weapon system.
In the event that the state of the technology does not warrant
a program of record, the Secretary of the Navy can waive the
requirements of this section by providing written justification
for that decision.

Section 223--Sense of Congress on Importance of Aligning Common Missile
Compartment of Ohio-Class Replacement Program with the United Kingdom's
Vanguard Successor Program

This section would make a series of findings and express
the sense of Congress regarding the importance of aligning the
common missile compartment of the Ohio-class ballistic missile
submarine program with the Vanguard-class successor program of
the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland.
The Polaris Sales Agreement of 1963 has been a cornerstone
of the U.S. alliance with the United Kingdom for 50 years and
has brought significant benefits to both parties. Under a 1982
extension of the agreement, the United Kingdom purchases the
Trident missile system from the United States for use in its
submarines. Both Nations will field the Trident II/D5 strategic
weapon system in their respective next generation of
submarines. These new submarines will share a common missile
compartment that is currently being developing through a cost-
shared program conducted by the Navy. In fiscal year 2013, the
Navy delayed the Ohio-class replacement program by 2 years due
to fiscal constraints, but decided to keep the common missile
program on the original schedule to meet its obligation to
provide the compartment to the United Kingdom in time for
insertion into the Vanguard-class successor. The committee
applauds this decision and encourages the Secretary of Defense
and the Secretary of the Navy to continue to prioritize the
common missile compartment such that it stays aligned with the
Vanguard-successor program. The committee believes that keeping
this common missile compartment program aligned with the
Vanguard-successor program is critical to ensuring the United
States fulfills its longstanding obligation to a crucial ally.

Section 224--Sense of Congress on Counter-electronics High Power
Microwave Missile Project

This section would express the sense of Congress that the
results of the counter-electronics high power microwave missile
project should be considered as part of any analysis of
alternatives for development of a high power microwave weapon,
but could also be used as a near-term capability for combatant
commanders should a requirement emerge.

Subtitle C--Missile Defense Programs

Section 231--Prohibition on Use of Funds For MEADS Program

This section would provide that none of the funds
authorized to be appropriated by this Act or otherwise made
available for fiscal year 2014 for the Department of Defense
may be obligated or expended for the Medium Extended Air
Defense System (MEADS).
This section would also provide that the Secretary of
Defense may not carry out technology harvesting from the MEADS
system until 120 days after the Secretary of the Army provides
the congressional defense committees a report on matters
related to Army requirements for MEADS technologies, and other
matters.

Section 232--Additional Missile Defense Site in the United States for
Optimized Protection of the Homeland

This section would require the Missile Defense Agency to
construct and make operational in fiscal year 2018 an
additional homeland missile defense site capable of protecting
the homeland to deal more effectively with the long-range
ballistic missile threat from the Middle East. This section
would be carried out while continuing to meet the requirement
to prepare environmental impact statements and a contingency
plan under section 227 of the National Defense Authorization
Act for Fiscal Year 2013 (Public Law 112-239) for the missile
defense sites in that section. This section would require the
Director, Missile Defense Agency to submit a report to Congress
on such missile defense site, including an estimate of the
funding to be required for construction and deployment.

Section 233--Limitation on Removal of Missile Defense Equipment from
East Asia

This section would state that it is the policy of the
United States that the missile defenses of the United States
defend the United States, its allies, and deployed forces
against a multitude of threats, including multiple regional
actors. This section would also limit the use of funds to
remove U.S. missile defense capabilities from East Asia until
180 days after the date that the President has certified that
nuclear weapons and ballistic missile threats to U.S. allies
have been verifiably eliminated, and, the President has
consulted such allies. This section would provide that the
President may waive such certification if he determines that it
is in the national security interest of the United States and
he provides an unclassified explanation, in writing, detailing
the basis for his determination. This section would exclude
Aegis ballistic missile defense equipped cruisers and
destroyers from this requirement.

Section 234--Improvements to Acquisition Accountability Reports on
Ballistic Missile Defense System

This section would amend section 225 of title 10, United
States Code, to include a requirement that the Director,
Missile Defense Agency include in the annual Ballistic Missile
Defense System Accountability Report certain operation and
support costs, and statements as to the quality estimate level
of each cost estimate as well as the steps the Director will
take to ensure these estimates reach the ``high-quality
estimate'' level established by the Comptroller General of the
United States.

Section 235--Analysis of Alternatives for Successor to Precision
Tracking Space System

The section would strike section 224 of the National
Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2013 (Public Law 112-
239) and replace it with an updated analysis of alternatives
requirement to reflect the termination of the Precision
Tracking Space System in the President's request for fiscal
year 2014.
The committee notes that this section would require the
Director of the Missile Defense Agency to consider the opinions
of private industry in carrying out the analysis of
alternatives. The committee considers this requirement to
necessitate only listening to the input of industry members
that have long-standing and proven experience in the often
difficult world of space acquisitions.

Section 236--Plan To Improve Organic Kill Assessment Capability of the
Ground-Based Midcourse Defense System

This section would require the Director, Missile Defense
Agency and the Commander, U.S. Northern Command, in
consultation with the Commander, U.S. Strategic Command, to
jointly develop options to achieve an organic kill assessment
capability for the Ground-based Midcourse Defense (GMD) system
by December 31, 2019, and a plan to deploy such capability in
at least some of the upcoming acquisition of new Ground-based
Interceptor missiles.
This section would also require the Director and the
Commander, U.S. Northern Command, in consultation with the
Commander, U.S. Strategic Command, to jointly develop a plan
for an interim capability for improved hit assessment for the
GMD system that can be integrated into near-term Enhanced Kill
Vehicle upgrades and refurbishments.
This section would require these plans be submitted to the
congressional defense committees by March 15, 2014.

Section 237--Availability of Funds for Iron Dome Short-Range Rocket
Defense Program

This section would authorize the obligation of $15.0
million for enhancing the capability for producing the Iron
Dome short-range rocket defense system in the United States,
including for infrastructure, tooling, transferring data,
special test equipment, and related components.

Section 238--NATO and the Phased, Adaptive Approach to Missile Defense
in Europe

This section would require, not later than 60 days after
the date of enactment of this Act, that the President shall
consult with the North Atlantic Council and the Secretary
General of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) on the
funding of the Phased, Adaptive Approach to missile defense in
Europe to establish a plan for NATO to provide at least 50
percent of the costs of operations and maintenance, and
infrastructure, of Phase I of that system.
This section would further require the President to use the
NATO Military Common-Funded Resources process to seek at least
50 percent funding support of the costs for Phases II and III
of that missile defense system. This section would also require
the Secretary of Defense, if he determines it useful, to seek
establishment by NATO of a common pool of Aegis Standard
Missile 3 missile interceptors.

Section 239--Sense of Congress on Procurement of Capability Enhancement
II Exoatmospheric Kill Vehicle

This section would state the sense of Congress that the
Department of Defense should not procure a Capability
Enhancement II exoatmospheric kill vehicle for deployment until
after the date on which a successful operational flight test
has occurred, unless such procurement is for test assets or to
maintain a warm line for the industrial base.

Section 240--Sense of Congress on 30th Anniversary of the Strategic
Defense Initiative

This section would express the Sense of the Congress on the
30th Anniversary of the Strategic Defense Initiative.

Subtitle D--Reports

Section 251--Annual Comptroller General Report on the Amphibious Combat
Vehicle Acquisition Program

This section would require the Comptroller General of the
United States to conduct an annual review of the Amphibious
Combat Vehicle acquisition program and provide the results of
the review to the congressional defense committees by March 1,
2014, and annually thereafter through 2018.

Section 252--Report on Strategy To Improve Body Armor

This section would require the Secretary of Defense to
submit a comprehensive research and development (R&D) strategy
for achieving significant weight reductions for both hard and
soft body armor components to the congressional defense
committees within 180 days after the date of the enactment of
this Act.
Section 125 of the Ike Skelton National Defense
Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2011 (Public Law 111-383)
required a federally funded research and development center
(FFRDC) to generate a technical report on ways to lighten
current body armor systems. The report and FFRDC analysis found
that the only way to achieve significant reductions, 20 percent
and higher, without sacrificing safety and survivability would
be through robust, sustained R&D funding over a number of years
that focuses on developing new materials, as well as pursuing a
modular, tailorable approach to body armor systems.
The committee expects the Secretary's strategy to include
but not be limited to: (1) costs, schedules, and performance
requirements for all solutions currently under development for
body armor weight reduction, R&D funding profiles for these
solutions; (2) solutions and materials currently under
evaluation by the Department, the feasibility and technology
readiness levels of these materials and solutions, resourcing
strategy for future initiatives; (3) how the Department is
considering a ``systems of system'' approach to include modular
and tailorable solutions for weight reduction efforts; and (4)
all courses of action being considered to coordinate weight
reduction initiatives for body armor among the military
services.

Section 253--Report on Main Battle Tank Fuel Efficiency Initiative

This section would require the Secretary of the Army to
submit a report to the congressional defense committees on an
investment strategy to accelerate fuel efficiency improvements
to the engine and transmission of the M1 Abrams tank.

Section 254--Report on Powered Rail System

This section would require the Secretary of Defense to
provide a report to the congressional defense committees within
90 days after the date of the enactment of this Act that
comprehensively reviews and compares powered rail systems for
the M4 Carbine program.

Subtitle E--Other Matters

Section 261--Establishment of Cryptographic Modernization Review and
Advisory Board

This section would require the Secretary of Defense to
establish a senior-level body, to be known as the Cryptographic
Modernization Review and Advisory Board, to assess and advise
the cryptographic modernization activities of the Department of
Defense.

Section 262--Clarification of Eligibility of a State to Participate in
Defense Experimental Program to Stimulate Competitive Research

This section would modify the eligibility requirements for
the Defense Experimental Program to Stimulate Competitive
Research to include states that are also eligible under section
113 of the National Science Foundation Authorization Act of
1988 (42 U.S.C. 1862g).

Section 263--Extension and Expansion of Mechanisms to Provide Funds for
Defense Laboratories for Research and Development of Technologies for
Military Missions

This section would modify section 219 of the Duncan Hunter
National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2009 (10
U.S.C. 2358 note) by allowing funds for infrastructure
revitalization projects to be available until expended. Use of
such authority must be reported to the congressional defense
committees with the total cost of the project before it
commenced. Total cost of individual projects may not exceed
$4,000,000. Funds under this authority may be accumulated only
after the date of enactment of this Act and may be accumulated
for not more than five years. This section would extend section
219 authority to September 2020.

Section 264--Extension of Authority to Award Prizes for Advanced
Technology Achievements

This section would extend the authority of the Department
of Defense to award prizes for advanced technology achievements
until September 30, 2018.

Section 265--Five-Year Extension of Pilot Program to Include Technology
Protection Features During Research and Development of Certain Defense
Systems

The section would extend the pilot program established by
section 243 of the Ike Skelton National Defense Authorization
Act for Fiscal Year 2011 (Public Law 111-383), as amended by
section 252 of the National Defense Authorization Act for
Fiscal Year 2012 (Public Law 112-81), from October 1, 2015, to
October 1, 2020.

Section 266--Briefing on Power and Energy Research Conducted at
University Affiliated Research Centers

This section would require the Secretary of Defense to
brief the Committees on Armed Services of the Senate and the
House of Representatives on power and energy research conducted
at university affiliated research centers.

TITLE III--OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE

OVERVIEW

At a time when Air Force combat-coded squadrons are
grounded; when Navy carrier strike group presence in the Middle
East has been reduced; when Army collective training rotations
above the company level have been cancelled; when depot-level
and field-level maintenance have been deferred and reduced in
all the military services; and when base operating services and
facilities sustainment have been reduced, all due to the
impacts of sequestration, the bill would authorize $174.6
billion for operation and maintenance, including additional
funding for operational tempo, flying hour programs, facilities
sustainment, corrosion prevention, control, and mitigation,
depot maintenance, and joint and coalition exercises.
Additionally, the bill would authorize $67.1 billion in
operation and maintenance funding for Overseas Contingency
Operations, with $4.2 billion in additional funding for depot-
level maintenance, fuel costs, and equipment spares and reset.
During the past 12 years, the Army--Active, Guard, and
Reserve--has deployed more than 1.1 million soldiers to combat
with more than 4,500 soldiers making the ultimate sacrifice.
Another 32,000 soldiers have been wounded, 9,000 of whom
require long-term care. In that time, soldiers have earned more
than 14,000 awards for valor to include seven Medals of Honor
and 22 Distinguished Service Crosses. After more than a decade
of protracted counterinsurgency operations and cyclic combat
operations in the Middle East, the Army must find a way to
return to full-spectrum operations, reset and reconstitute the
force, responsibly draw down operations in the Islamic Republic
of Afghanistan, and fully develop its role under the new
Defense Strategic Guidance despite tighter budgets and the
compounding challenges of sequestration, and with a smaller
force structure.
The Navy faced a $4.5 billion shortfall in its fiscal year
2013 operation and maintenance accounts which was further
exacerbated by unanticipated bills resulting from rising fuel
prices. In February, the Navy deferred deployment of the
nuclear aircraft carrier the USS Truman to the Persian Gulf and
reduced its carrier presence to 1.0. In March, the Navy
cancelled five ship deployments and next-to-deploy forces are
also being affected in that two carrier air wings have reduced
monthly training to the ``tactical hard deck,'' the minimum
level of training required to maintain basic air proficiency
and the ability to safely operate the aircraft. As ship and
aircraft maintenance availabilities are reduced or outright
cancelled, the Navy will be challenged to reconstitute
requirements in the very near future due to lack of capacity at
its shipyards. Ultimately, this results in significantly
shorter service life for the assets, particularly when coupled
with the impacts of the sustained surge in recent years which
has taxed both equipment and personnel at rates significantly
higher than anticipated. The tenuous progress the Navy has made
over the past two years to reverse degraded surface fleet
material readiness threatens to be undone by sequestration.
Despite slight improvements in Marine Corps readiness
levels following the drawdown of forces in the Republic of Iraq
and the ongoing drawdown from Afghanistan, the Marine Corps
will be challenged to meet global commitments, reconstitute its
force and equipment, and sustain high operational tempo as it
downsizes to 182,000 personnel and faces a nearly $1.0 billion
funding cut. The challenges will be compounded by the need to
support new, important missions such as the forward deployment
of a special Marine Air Ground Task Force in Spain to support
U.S. Africa Command and the expansion of critical legacy
missions such as the Marine Security Guard program slated to
grow to protect an increasing number of embassies in high-risk
areas around the globe.
Air Force officials told the committee that ``allowing the
Air Force to slip to a lower state of readiness, [thus]
requiring a long buildup to regain full combat effectiveness,
negates the essential strategic advantages of airpower and puts
joint forces at risk.'' One-third of Air Force fighter and
bomber forces are currently standing down, and more and more
pilots are not ready or trained and qualified to meet
operational mission requirements such as those on the Korean
peninsula where the Air Force and Army work as critical
partners to assure peace and stability.
The operation and maintenance funding authorized by this
title seeks to address many areas of concern for depleted force
readiness levels and related high levels of assumed risk, and
makes several requests of the Department of Defense to report
on plans to achieve full-spectrum readiness. The bill attempts
to address the readiness shortfalls exacerbated by
sequestration and choices driven by what Secretary of Defense
Chuck Hagel described during the Department of Defense's fiscal
year budget rollout as a necessary component of a
``comprehensive deficit reduction plan.''

ITEMS OF SPECIAL INTEREST

Budget Request Adjustments

Office of Economic Adjustment

The budget request includes $371.6 million for the Office
of Economic Adjustment (OEA) to provide assistance to states
and communities that are affected by Department of Defense
changes, including the Department's Base Closure and
Realignment (BRAC) actions. Of these amounts, $273.3 million
was requested for Guam civilian water and wastewater
infrastructure improvements. The committee remains supportive
of the Department of Defense requirements to provide support
for civilian infrastructure funding on Guam. The infrastructure
is needed to support and sustain the current and future
military growth on Guam. The budget request includes $246.0
million for upgrades to the Northern District Wastewater
Treatment Plant and the Hagatna Wastewater Treatment Plant to
full secondary treatment, as well as $19.8 million to address
critical wastewater collection system deficiencies and $7.5
million for technical support and project development.
The committee notes that the Fiscal Year 2013 Consolidated
Appropriations Act (Public Law 113-6) eliminated authorization
for transfer of $119.3 million in OEA funding, making the
funding for fiscal year 2013 not executable. As a result, the
Department of Defense was unable to make initial investments in
the wastewater system, also making the full fiscal year 2014
request not executable. Accordingly, the committee recommends a
funding level in fiscal year 2014 of $217.7 million, a
reduction of $153.9 million for the Office of Economic
Adjustment. Funding authorized shall include $119.3 million for
civilian improvements on Guam, consisting of $55.0 million for
phase 1 improvements at the Northern District Wastewater
Treatment Plant, $51.4 million for water system distribution
system repairs and replacements, and $12.9 million for a
Regional Public Health Laboratory.

Logistics and Sustainment Issues

Air Force Fuel Leak Maintenance Efficiencies

It is the committee's understanding that aircraft readiness
is regularly challenged by fuel leaks and that current
procedures for identifying and repairing these leaks is both
costly and inefficient. Furthermore, the committee is aware
that the Air Force Research Laboratory has undertaken an
independent evaluation of alternative, commercially available
technologies that yield more accurate, timely, and cost-saving
results for identifying, sealing, curing and validating leak
repairs. The committee is encouraged by the Air Force's pursuit
of greater efficiencies in the fuel leak maintenance process
and the promise it holds for achieving savings and a higher
rate of aircraft readiness across the fleet. As such, the
committee encourages the Air Force to fully implement approved
commercially available technologies to reduce aircraft downtime
caused by fuel leaks, and to increase life-cycle savings across
the full-spectrum fuel leak detection and repair process.

Anti-corrosion Protective Covers for Military Hardware

The committee continues to push the Department of Defense
to confront its hardware corrosion challenge. Corrosion remains
the largest preventable cost to the U.S. military, a cost which
exceeds $23.0 billion per year. Corrosion results in decreased
readiness, increased manpower requirements, and significantly
higher life-cycle sustainment costs. In the current budget
environment, it is critical that the Department of Defense
focus on affordable sustainment of its hardware. Failing to
protect the Department of Defense's hardware from the
preventable problem of corrosion leaves hardware susceptible to
the damage and degradation associated with exposure to heat,
dust, ultraviolet rays, and moisture. The committee encourages
the military services to follow the lead of the Department of
the Navy and set a comprehensive, service-wide strategy to
mitigate corrosion that includes fielding more waterproof,
breathable anti-corrosive cover technologies that have been
shown to significantly reduce corrosion and have demonstrated
effectiveness in overseas contingency operations and at units'
home stations. The committee encourages the military services
to incorporate commercially available capabilities in
developing requirements for low-cost protective covers that
provide protection from water and particulate intrusion;
elimination of microclimates in covered objects; mold and
mildew protection; ultraviolet ray resistance; flexure and
handling ability in extreme climates; and durability.

Army Logisticians

The committee recognizes that the projection of power, the
deterrence of threats, the response to crises, and the
protection of strategic U.S. interests requires a robust set of
logistics capabilities. The committee believes that the U.S.
Army, in order to sustain its presence across vast distances,
must be supported by a logistics infrastructure commensurate
with the missions it undertakes. The committee also recognizes
that logistics support is critical to currently deployed combat
units and those which may be deployed in a future contingency.
The committee believes that the United States cannot be allowed
to lose the capacity to both surge and sustain military forces
across considerable distances for extended periods of time,
which requires a robust set of logistics capabilities.

Comptroller General Littoral Combat System Sustainment Review

The committee notes the critical nature of the Littoral
Combat Ship (LCS) program and the importance of the initial
deployment of the USS Freedom to the Republic of Singapore to
test and refine operational support and sustainment concepts.
The LCS class takes a unique approach to maintenance which
relies heavily on contractor-provided maintenance in contrast
to other Navy ship classes, which typically use the Navy's
organic capabilities and U.S. shipyards to provide maintenance.
The Navy established an LCS Council to address major concerns
raised by several Navy reports on problems with the LCS's
manning, training, and maintenance concepts, among other
issues. This council has developed a plan of action with
milestones to bring high-level attention to resolving these
issues as the LCS class is introduced into the surface
combatant fleet. Given the central role of the LCS for the
future of the surface fleet, the committee has concerns about
the Navy's long-term sustainment plan. Therefore, the committee
directs the Comptroller General of the United States to analyze
and review:
(1) Plans to collect and analyze data during the USS
Freedom's Singapore deployment, as well as any mid-
point or final reports of lessons learned from the
deployment;
(2) Projected costs associated with providing
preventive and depot maintenance including, but not
limited to, an analysis of the alternatives considered
in the use of contractor fly-away maintenance teams and
U.S. Government and commercial shipyards;
(3) Progress on meeting targets established in the
LCS plan of action and milestones;
(4) Lifecycle cost estimates for the variants of the
LCS and their associated mission modules compared with
other Navy ship classes; and
(5) Any other issue that the Comptroller General
determines appropriate with respect to the sustainment
of the LCS platform and its associated mission modules,
including modifications and improvements to reduce
long-term sustainment costs and improve efficiencies.
The committee directs the Comptroller General of the United
States to provide to the congressional defense committees a
preliminary briefing by March 3, 2014, on the above factors,
with a report or reports to follow by May 30, 2014.

Continuous Technology Refreshment

The Ike Skelton National Defense Authorization Act for
Fiscal Year 2011 (Public Law 111-383) provided expanded
authority to the Department of Defense to foster use of
technology-enhanced maintenance capabilities with Working
Capital funds. The accompanying Joint Explanatory Statement
(Committee Print 5) specifically discussed Continuous
Technology Refreshment (CTR), which is a proven post-production
sustainment acquisition strategy to acquire technologically
improved replacement parts and to significantly reduce long-
term ownership costs. The committee notes that the Army
Aviation and Missile Life Cycle Command is projected to achieve
$254.0 million in sustainment cost savings over a 10-year
period on just a limited a set of legacy helicopter parts. The
committee is concerned that the Department of Defense has been
slow to implement robust CTR programs, to expand their use
beyond this one Army command, and to take full advantage of the
Working Capital authorities provided in law which have become
much more important due to national budget pressures.
The committee directs the Under Secretary of Defense for
Acquisition, Technology, and Logistics to brief the
congressional defense committees, not later than April 30,
2014, on the Department's Continuous Technology Refreshment
initiatives for improving the quality and significantly
lowering the cost of replacement parts for Department weapon
systems. The briefing should address:
(1) The guidance provided to the military services on
the use of Working Capital authorities for technology-
enabled maintenance capabilities;
(2) Information on the results achieved to date from
developing modern parts to replace obsolete legacy
parts using CTR with the resulting associated estimated
cost savings; and
(3) The plans of each military department and
appropriate Defense agencies to develop and implement
CTR acquisition strategies in fiscal year 2014 for
obsolete parts most likely to achieve significant cost
savings.

Defense Logistics Agency Roles and Missions Assessment

The committee is concerned that the 2005 Base Realignment
and Closure Commission process may have placed the Defense
Logistics Agency (DLA) in roles and assigned missions outside
its core competencies which may be resulting in suboptimal
support of its customers. In particular, the committee is
concerned about the operational and readiness impacts to
customers of DLA's continued challenges in effectively managing
the supply chain. The committee notes that supply chain
management, supply inventories, materiel distribution, and
asset visibility, in particular, continue to be ``high risk''
areas within the Department of Defense, according the 2013
Government Accountability Office's High Risk Report. While the
committee notes the significant progress DLA has made in
reducing excess inventory and improving its business processes,
the committee has been made aware of persistent challenges in
the timely provision of specialized, low-quantity parts and
supply chain management, which the committee believes could be
a result of a misalignment of roles and missions.
Therefore, the committee directs the Secretary of Defense
to conduct an assessment of the roles and missions of the DLA.
The assessment may, at the election of the Secretary, be
conducted by a federally funded research and development center
(FFRDC) or an independent, non-governmental institute which is
described in section 501(c)(3) of the Internal Revenue Code of
1986 and exempt from tax under section 501(a) of such Code, and
has recognized credentials and expertise in national security
and military affairs appropriate for the assessment. The
assessment should include, but not be limited to, the
following:
(1) An examination of the roles and missions
currently assigned to the DLA;
(2) An assessment of the DLA's ability (resources,
structure, workforce, etc.) to adequately accomplish
those roles and missions outside of DLA-Energy;
(3) Identification of any DLA functions, roles,
missions, activities, or initiatives that could be more
efficiently performed by the military departments or
other defense agencies;
(4) A transition plan for any activities recommended
for migration;
(5) An assessment of functions, roles, missions,
activities, or initiatives that could be most
efficiently performed by DLA that are currently
performed by other military departments or defense
agencies; and
(6) Any other recommendations on ways the DLA could
further improve its support to customers, management
practices, demand forecasting, its use of modeling to
determine the optimal number and inventory management.
The committee directs the Secretary of Defense to deliver
this assessment in conjunction with the annual budget
submission for fiscal year 2015. Further, to enable the
committee to provide the necessary oversight, the committee
directs the Department to brief the congressional defense
committees on the strategy within 30 days of its delivery to
Congress.

Disposition of Retrograded Equipment from Afghanistan

As the Department continues the drawdown of U.S. forces
from Afghanistan, the committee is aware of continued interest
by local communities, law enforcement agencies, and other
eligible domestic entities in the reuse of excess defense
articles.
The committee supports close coordination between the
Department and the National Association of State Agencies for
Surplus Property in connecting interested eligible domestic
entities with surplus military equipment at no cost to the
government. However, in conducting oversight on the progress of
drawdown in Afghanistan, the committee believes that the
Department can do more to provide real-time information on the
availability, location, and condition of surplus materials
available to interested eligible entities.
The committee therefore directs the Secretary of Defense to
brief the congressional defense committees no later than
October 1, 2013, on the Department's plans to make excess
defense articles from the drawdown in Afghanistan available to
eligible domestic entities at no cost to the government. This
briefing shall specifically include planned improvements to
real-time information sharing with interested eligible parties
regarding what equipment might be available, when, where, and
in what condition.

F-35 Sustainment Plan

The committee recognizes the importance of the F-35 Joint
Strike Fighter Program to our national defense. This advanced
fighter aircraft will replace a variety of existing aircraft in
the Air Force, the Navy, and the Marine Corps. In 2012, the
Department of Defense reported that sustainment of the F-35
aircraft fleet could cost more than $1.0 trillion (in then-year
dollars) over the planned 30-year service life. However, the
Department has said that it is actively engaged in evaluating
opportunities to reduce life-cycle sustainment costs based on
concerns about the affordability of the program. Past
experience has shown that decisions made during the development
of a weapon system can influence, positively or negatively, the
cost of sustaining that system over its life cycle. Considering
the magnitude of the estimated sustainment costs for the F-35,
the committee is concerned about whether the Department has
established comprehensive sustainment plans, developed
appropriate cost analyses, and identified potential options to
control and/or minimize future sustainment costs for the
aircraft program. Given the fiscal uncertainties facing the
Department and growing concerns related to the affordability of
the F-35's long-term sustainment costs, the committee directs
the Government Accountability Office (GAO) to review the
Department's ongoing F-35 sustainment planning efforts. This
review should include:
(1) The extent to which the Department has developed
comprehensive sustainment plans, including a Life-Cycle
Sustainment Plan, and regularly updated these plans to
reflect program changes;
(2) The extent to which the Department has utilized
appropriate analyses of operating and support costs,
including a business case analysis, to evaluate the
full range of sustainment options available for the F-
35 program;
(3) The extent to which the Department is pursuing
additional opportunities, such as competition for
sustainment contracts, to reduce long-term sustainment
costs; and
(4) Any other issues that the Comptroller General
determines appropriate with respect to the sustainment
of the F-35.
The committee directs the Comptroller General of the United
States to provide a preliminary briefing by March 14, 2014, on
the above factors, with a report or reports to follow.

Item Unique Identification and Automated Information and Data Capture

The committee is aware that numerous Government
Accountability Office audits have found that significant
improvements are needed in the tracking, management, and
accountability for assets deployed across the Department of
Defense. The committee believes that Item Unique Identification
(IUID), Radio Frequency Identification (RFID), biometrics, and
other automated information and data capture (AIDC)
technologies have the potential for realizing significant cost
savings and improving management of defense equipment and
supplies throughout their life cycles. Further, the committee
judges that the use of the implementing technologies can secure
supply-item data for logistics and engineering analysis;
improve item intelligence for operational warfighter planning;
upgrade access to historical item data across life cycles;
lower total life cycle cost of items acquired and managed; save
taxpayer funding through improved productivity, efficiency,
maintenance, and logistical planning; and combat the growing
problem of counterfeit parts in the military supply chain.
The committee understands that in 2003, the Department of
Defense initiated the IUID initiative, which requires the
marking and tracking of assets deployed throughout the Armed
Forces or in the possession of Department contractors, but
implementation has been fragmented, incomplete, and not
enforced. The committee believes the Department of Defense must
improve its efforts to capture meaningful data and optimize the
benefits of Item Unique Identification and other AIDC
initiatives to include the investment of sufficient resources
and continued training and leadership.
Therefore, the committee directs the Secretary of Defense
to promulgate rules and regulations sufficient to enforce
compliance with section 252.211-7003 (entitled ``Item
Identification and Valuation'') of the Defense Supplement to
the Federal Acquisition Regulation, on Item Unique
Identification, which requires unique identification for all
delivered items meeting the standards set forth in the
regulation.
In addition, the committee directs the Secretary of Defense
to provide a briefing to the congressional defense committees
by January 31, 2014, on current compliance rates with section
252.211-7003 of the Defense Supplement to the Federal
Acquisition Regulation, measures being taken to improve
compliance, and a projected date for full compliance.

Laser Peening Technology

In the committee report (H. Rept. 112-78) accompanying the
National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2012, the
committee noted that ``laser peening technology, a surface
enhancement processing treatment for metals, has achieved
considerable success in commercial aerospace and power-
generation applications, reducing costs by enabling
improvements in the metal structure and mitigating high-cycle
fatigue failures of a system, thus extending the system's
lifetime.'' In that report the committee also encouraged the
Department of Defense ``to examine the potential cost savings
that may be derived from adopting this technology broadly
across the military services, particularly for use on engines,
aircraft structures, land vehicles and weapon systems.''
However, the committee is concerned that some military
departments have not fully explored the use of such
technologies to reduce costs associated with problems of
fatigue failure, stress corrosion cracking, and component shape
corrections. The committee further encourages the Department to
explore such technologies for use in aircraft engines to slow
the rate of replacement of highly stressed components and
parts.

Logistical Support to the Department of Defense

The committee is concerned with the current downsizing at
the General Services Administration's (GSA) Eastern
Distribution Center (EDC) and its impact on military readiness.
As described by the General Services Administration (GSA), the
EDC ``provides an integrated pipeline that sustains GSA's armed
forces and civilian customers around the world with innovative
and tailored logistics services that are ever improving in
terms of cost, timeliness, and relative value.'' It has been
estimated that 75 percent of shipments from the Eastern
Distribution Center are for Department of Defense purposes. The
committee encourages the Department of Defense to examine the
important work at this facility to ensure the EDC maintains its
ability to sustain the readiness of our Armed Forces.

Long-term Investment Plan for Land, Facilities, and Equipment of Former
Guam Ship Repair Facility

In testimony before the committee in April 2013, the Chief
of Naval Operations highlighted the importance of a ship repair
capability on Guam to support increased naval operations in the
western Pacific region as key to the national security
strategy. The committee understands that maintaining a depot-
level ship repair capability on Guam will require significant
investment. The committee is concerned that the Navy has been
unable to provide a detailed investment plan for upgrading and
modernizing the former Navy ship repair facility on Guam. The
committee notes that a failed long-term lease approach would
have required private industry to provide capital improvements
estimated at nearly $150.0 million. Therefore, the committee
anticipates that a similar level of investment would be needed
by the Navy to provide the necessary depot-level repair
capability for the western Pacific region. The committee
believes that improvements to these facilities will be critical
to ensuring the long-term viability of a depot-level ship
repair capability in the western Pacific.
Therefore, the committee directs the Secretary of the Navy,
in coordination with the Chief of Naval Operations, to submit
to the congressional defense committees no later than December
31, 2013, a long-term investment plan for the land, facilities,
and equipment of the former Guam ship repair facility. The plan
should include:
(1) A description of how the Secretary of the Navy
will prioritize the improvements made to land,
facilities, and equipment under the plan, including an
explanation and estimated cost and schedule for each
such improvement; and
(2) An identification of the accounts from which
funds will be used for such improvements.

Navy Fleet Readiness

The committee is pleased with the U.S. Navy's progress in
reversing the years of degraded surface fleet readiness trends.
The Navy has made progress in documenting the existing
shortfalls and maintenance requirements through its development
of Class Maintenance Plans and Technical Foundation Papers to
identify specific requirements by hull. However, to supplement
its organic capability, the committee notes the Navy's success
has been partially reliant on external support to address its
knowledge gaps and prepare the assets for operations.
Engineering Readiness Assessment Teams (ERATs), manned in part
by retired Navy master chiefs, have complemented the organic
capacity with their unique expertise to assist ships' crews in
best practices, safe operation of ship systems, and
identification, documentation, and repair of failed equipment
and broken systems. With decades of experience, the teams' goal
is to improve readiness by providing younger sailors with
critical institutional knowledge, mentorship, technical help,
quality control, and environmental program compliance. The
committee recognizes the importance of this relationship and
the invaluable contribution. However, the committee encourages
the Navy to institutionalize these lessons learned in its
training process.
In light of constrained fiscal resources, the committee
recognizes the Navy could potentially lose traction on the
success it has achieved to date, due to the impact of a
sustained surge and lack of time and resources to support
required maintenance. Therefore, the committee encourages the
Navy to continue to provide the necessary funding and
expertise, through a complement of organic and private sector
capacity, to sustain the progress in surface ship readiness,
reduce lifecycle maintenance costs, and improve warfighting
readiness at lower total ownership cost to reach expected
service life.

Submarine Propeller Repair and Overhaul

The committee notes that the Navy has indicated that
``funding requirements for propeller repair and overhauls are
estimated based on historical and current year expenditures''
and that ``sustaining out-year funding for Ready for Issue
(RFI) spare propellers at required levels would help maintain
inventory and limit risk to readiness.'' The Navy has indicated
that lower-than-targeted levels of healthy RFI propellers pose
``medium to high risk to attack and strategic submarine
operational readiness.'' The committee further notes that the
Navy continues to request partial funding to support this
effort in the Overseas Contingency Operations account. The
committee encourages the Navy to identify the necessary funds
to ensure an adequate supply of ready propellers when
projecting Future Years Defense Program base budget requests.

Readiness Issues

Advanced Situational Awareness Training

The committee understands that the Army has successfully
incorporated a module to train deploying units to detect
changes in human behavior through Advanced Situational
Awareness Training (ASAT). The committee commends the Army for
its leadership in developing and broadening soldier training in
this area and is encouraged by the reported benefits of
increased situational awareness, improved effectiveness in
positive identification of threats, reduced time to gain a
decisive advantage, enhanced use of existing optical equipment,
and reduction of civilian casualties. The committee believes
this type of training imparts enduring and important skills at
both the individual and unit level, and represents a cost-
effective method for training soldiers across a broad range of
military operations.

Combat Training Centers

The committee recognizes the important role that national
combat training centers play in producing combat-ready forces.
The committee further recognizes that these centers provide an
important resource for other Government agencies, allies, and
both conventional and special operations forces. Therefore, the
committee urges the Department of Defense to closely examine
how such centers can serve as a model for future operational
readiness and training, and work to ensure their long-term
viability by providing appropriate resources and adequate
staffing.

Comptroller General Encroachment Study

The committee is concerned about military readiness and
preserving the Department of Defense's ability to train and
operate in the air, at sea, and on land. U.S. military force
readiness is directly dependent on many factors, including
realistic training for a variety of missions in myriad
environments worldwide. An important component of military
readiness is timely and routine access to training ranges that
permit realistic training without hindrance from activities
that can limit access to, encroach upon, or at times compromise
security of the ranges. The Government Accountability Office
(GAO) previously reported in ``Military Training: Compliance
With Environmental Laws Affects Some Training Activities, but
DOD Has Not Made a Sound Business Case for Additional
Environmental Exemptions'' (GAO-08-407) that the requirement to
comply with environmental laws has affected some training
activities and how they are conducted. Specifically, the GAO
found some instances where training activities were cancelled,
postponed, or modified in order to address environmental
requirements. While the GAO also reported at the time that
readiness data did not indicate an impact on readiness from
these instances, it also reported that the Department was
developing systems to measure the impact.
Limitations on access to training ranges and encroachment
of national security interests can take many forms:
(1) Environmental limitations, both land- and sea-
based, involve endangered species that may be present
through nesting or migration at or near training
ranges.
(2) Urban encroachment can consist of commercial or
residential construction in the civilian economy in
proximity to or adjacent to military bases.
(3) Encroachment from energy-generation projects can
occur both adjacent to installations and also in the
Outer Continental Shelf, potentially affecting the
military's ability to train and operate both on
installations and at sea. The installation of renewable
energy-generation facilities, including wind turbines
and solar power facilities, can be incompatible with
the installations' missions.
(4) Competition for the electromagnetic spectrum
through the proliferation of consumer demand for
wireless devices, including smart phones and tablet
computers, and the associated data-intensive
applications, is increasingly conflicting with the
Department's need to use the electromagnetic spectrum
for modern military training and assurance of proper
functioning of some weapon systems.
(5) National security interests may be threatened
when range security becomes a concern based on the
nature of the encroachment. For example, ocean
observing systems may be used for marine mammal and
weather research, climate research, tsunami warning/
verification, and seismic/earthquake monitoring. The
littoral nature of Navy training ranges, and the unique
types of activity that occur there, make the ranges
valuable for data gathering in each of those
categories. However, the open nature of the high seas
also makes it possible for data to be gathered that may
exploit an operational vulnerability. Similarly, land-
based development can lead to security concerns due to
incompatible development adjacent to or in near
proximity to ranges and ownership of such development
that raises security concerns.
The Department's actions to prevent or mitigate the
impediments to realistic training are vital to ensuring
adequate range access and ensuring U.S. forces remain at a high
state of readiness. However, the committee wants to ensure that
the Department is effectively preventing or mitigating these
restrictions to ensure that U.S. force readiness remains high.
Therefore, the committee directs the Comptroller General of the
United States to undertake a review of the Department's
activities to prevent or mitigate environmental limitations and
man-made encroachment, and ensure adequate security of training
ranges and operations. At a minimum, this study should address
the following:
(1) What are the types of restrictions, and how do
they affect the Department's ability to train and
operate?
(2) What authorities does the Department have, or
need, to be able to protect its ability to train and
operate?
(3) To what extent has the Department identified
restrictions on its air-, land-, and sea-based training
ranges, and how has the Department prevented or
mitigated such restrictions?
(4) How does the Department collaborate with local
governments, private companies, and/or other federal
agencies to protect its ability to train and operate?
And, what areas require improvement?
(5) How effective are the Department's systems to
measure the effects of environmental limitations and
man-made encroachment and to what extent do
opportunities exist to improve these systems?
(6) What options does the Department have to mitigate
impacts of environmental limitations and man-made
encroachment, and at what cost?
(7) How does the Department identify and mitigate any
relevant security issues related to training range
restrictions?
(8) Which ranges are at highest risk? And, which
ranges should be the highest priority to protect from
encroachment due to unique training environments and/or
ability to minimize electromagnetic spectrum
interference?
The committee further directs the Comptroller General to
submit a report to the congressional defense committees by
March 3, 2014, on the findings of the study.

GAO Review of DOD Readiness and Risks

With the drawdown of forces first from the Republic of
Iraq, and now from the Islamic Republic of Afghanistan the
military has faced a new set of challenges as it plans for an
uncertain future with less resources. In its January 2012
strategic guidance, Sustaining U.S. Global Leadership:
Priorities for 21st Century Defense and related documents, DOD
called for a smaller, lighter, flexible joint force able to
conduct a full range of activities but no longer sized to
conduct large and protracted stability operations. It also
called for a rebalancing of forces to the Asia Pacific region
along with the Middle East and several other changes. In March
2013, the Secretary of Defense directed the Deputy Secretary of
Defense to work with the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff
to conduct a Strategic Choice and Management Review to examine
the choices that underlie the defense strategy, posture, and
investments, including all past assumptions and systems. Shifts
in strategy or assumptions can have a material impact on the
way DOD portrays its readiness and the risks it faces.
To help inform the committee's oversight and its
consideration of the Department's budget request, the committee
directs the Comptroller General of the United States to review
DOD's readiness and the risks the department faces and to
report the results of this review to the congressional defense
committees. The review should specifically address:
(1) The current and historical readiness status of
each of the military services including any trends in
reported readiness;
(2) The current and historical readiness status of
each of the current geographic and functional combatant
commands, including any trends in reported readiness;
(3) The key factors that impact readiness, and how
these factors contributed to any reported changes in
readiness between March 1, 2013, when sequestration
went into effect, and the December 2013 readiness
reports; and
(4) Changes in strategic and military risk levels
between 2011 and 2014, including any changes in the way
the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff evaluates and
reports strategic and military risks.
In reporting on these four elements, the Comptroller
General may take a phased approach, reporting on elements (1),
(2), and (3) by March 15, 2014 and reporting on element (4) 45
days after DOD delivers the annual Chairman's Risk Assessment
and, if applicable, the Secretary of Defense's Risk Mitigation
plan to the congressional defense committees.

Identification of Foreign-Language Competency

The committee recognizes that foreign-language training is
expensive and time-consuming. If there is a need to surge
skills in a particular language, the place to start is with
people who already demonstrate proficiency in the needed
language. This promotes efficiency and lowers training costs by
making use of language knowledge already acquired by service
members. To provide decision-makers with greater visibility of
the language skills and cultural knowledge of service members
that could inform force management processes, the committee
recommends that the Secretary of Defense direct the Secretaries
of the military services to query service members returning
from deployment to a non-English-speaking country regarding
language skills acquired or improved while deployed, and to
allow service members to rate their own competence in speaking,
oral understanding, reading, and/or writing a foreign language,
using a language proficiency self-assessment scale like the one
used to assess proficiency standards throughout the U.S.
Government. Additionally, the committee recommends that the
Secretary of Defense direct the military services to allow a
service member who acquired a speaking knowledge of a language
to be tested on oral proficiency alone. The data collected from
these language competency self-assessments and tests should be
made accessible to service commanders and others who need to
identify a pool of potential candidates for advanced language
training to meet force management requirements.

Missile Defense Capabilities for Guam

The committee recognizes the strategic importance of
providing ballistic missile defense for Guam and the current
U.S. assets based there. The committee further recognizes that
as part of bilateral negotiations with the Government of Japan,
the U.S. military presence on the island and the need to
protect it from a missile threat are projected to increase. The
committee notes that the Final Environmental Impact Statement
on the Guam and Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands
Military Relocation contains a recommendation to base an Army
Air and Missile Defense Task Force (AMDTF) on Guam as part of
the realignment of U.S. Marines from Okinawa, Japan, to Guam.
The committee also notes the actions of the Department of
Defense of temporarily stationing a Terminal High-Altitude Area
Defense (THAAD) missile defense capability on Guam to respond
to immediate threats of missile launches from the Democratic
People's Republic of Korea toward U.S. military assets on Guam.
The committee is concerned that despite projected growth in
the U.S. military population on Guam and the President's new
Defense Strategic Guidance focusing on the U.S. Pacific Command
area of responsibility, the Army has not provided any resources
for the basing of an AMDTF or other missile defense capability
on Guam in the current year budget proposal or in the Future
Years Defense Program. The committee is aware that Aegis-based
missile defense capabilities or other land-based missile
defense capabilities also could, if required, provide coverage
and defense for assets on Guam. Therefore, the committee
directs the Secretary of Defense, in coordination with the
appropriate military services, to brief the committee by
December 1, 2013, on:
(1) Any analysis the Department of Defense has
conducted to determine which missile-defense capability
or capabilities are best suited for the defense of Guam
and the recommendations from that analysis;
(2) The Department's timeline for resourcing and
establishing an AMDTF or other missile-defense
capability on or for Guam, including the number of
required personnel billets and costs;
(3) An assessment of which component of the
military--Active or Reserve--would be most appropriate
to support the mission, either fully or partially; and
(4) A description of permanent and other missile
defense capabilities in the Asia-Pacific region that
could provide protection to U.S. military assets on
Guam.

Navy Expeditionary Combat Command

The committee recognizes the important contribution of the
Navy Expeditionary Combat Command (NECC) as a scalable force
that facilitates securing strategic access and global freedom
of action. Specifically, the Naval Construction Battalion plays
a critical role in support of operating forces through efforts
such as construction of roads, bridges, bunkers, airfields, and
logistics bases in addition to civic action projects. The
committee is concerned that the Navy's planned force-structure
reduction of 8,000 positions could hinder the strategic
capabilities of the Navy. The Naval Construction Battalion
represents approximately 50 percent of the total NECC manpower,
and as a high-demand, low-density asset, the committee
encourages the Navy to consider the important contribution of
these forces.

Military Ocean Terminal Concord

The committee is concerned about the readiness status of
the Military Ocean Terminal Concord (MOTCO), California. The
port's net explosive weight limitation, combined with its other
facilities such as magazines, rail lines, piers, and staging
areas, gives it the capacity to handle common user ordnance
load-out requirements for the military services and combatant
commanders during wartime and contingency operations.
Consequently, it is a key national asset essential to military
readiness, and the committee recognizes its need to be
maintained.
The Government Accountability Office in its May 13, 2013,
report ``Defense Logistics: The Department of Defense's Report
on Strategic Seaports Addressed All Congressionally Directed
Elements,'' cited significant deficiencies that impair the
port's capability to support required missions. Information
provided to the committee by the Department of the Army, which
is responsible for the operation and maintenance of MOTCO,
indicates port facilities and equipment need major
rehabilitation and modernization. While the Army has been
directed by internal Department of Defense documents to fund
equipment and facility improvements and pier replacements, the
committee notes these efforts will not return the port to full
operational status until 2018 at the earliest.
Because the lack of this critical mobility infrastructure
could delay support of operational plans, the committee directs
the Comptroller General of the United States to provide to the
congressional defense committees an assessment of:
(1) The current physical condition of Military Ocean
Terminal Concord;
(2) The ability of the port to successfully execute
mission requirements of the military services and the
combatant commanders;
(3) The repairs required to bring the port to full
mission capability, to include total cost and timeline
and options to expedite the timeline;
(4) The risk associated with failing to make
equipment and facility improvements and pier
replacements in a timely fashion; and
(5) Options available to mitigate any shortfalls,
including munitions supply, load-out, and
transportation options, and potential statutory or
regulatory waivers.
As part of the assessment, the Comptroller General shall
consult with the combatant commanders regarding their
operational requirements. The report shall be submitted no
later than December 31, 2013, and may be submitted in a
classified format if necessary.
The committee also directs the Secretary of the Army to
provide to the congressional defense committees a summary of
the current equipment and facilities conditions MOTCO. The
report shall include: a status of the Environmental Impact
Statement; a projects list identifying requirements necessary
to address infrastructure deficiencies by fiscal year and
funding amounts required; the design initiation associated with
the project list; and a time line for completion of the
infrastructure improvements. This report shall be submitted to
the congressional defense committees no later than September
30, 2013. The report may be submitted in a classified format if
necessary.

Report on Career Progression of U.S. Army and U.S. Marine Corps
Advisory Personnel

For the past several years, the U.S. Army and U.S. Marine
Corps have been providing forces to support security force
assistance missions in the Islamic Republic of Afghanistan and
other locations around the world. To conduct these missions,
the services have relied on a number of non-doctrinal
approaches. For example, in Afghanistan, the U.S. Army and U.S.
Marine Corps have increasingly relied on larger units, such as
brigade combat teams, to provide advisory teams. In addition,
the U.S. Army is beginning to execute its regionally aligned
force concept, which aligns specific brigades to specific
regions and calls for the deployment of small groups of leaders
to conduct security force assistance activities while the rest
of the unit remains at the home station.
The committee is concerned about the career implications
for U.S. Army and U.S. Marine Corps personnel assigned to
security force assistance-related activities as well as the
ability of these units to conduct these activities while
maintaining readiness requirements. Therefore, the committee
directs the Comptroller General of the United States to examine
and report to the congressional defense committees by April 1,
2014, on the impact of the U.S. Army's and U.S. Marine Corps'
approaches to the security force assistance mission, including:
(1) To what extent the U.S. Army and U.S. Marine
Corps have policies or procedures to identify personnel
with advising or other security force assistance-
related skills and experience;
(2) To what extent the assignment of U.S. Army and
U.S. Marine Corps officer and senior enlisted personnel
to advising or other security force assistance-related
activities has affected the career progression of these
individuals, including opportunities for command
positions, promotions, or other career development
opportunities; and
(3) What impact, if any, the U.S. Army and U.S.
Marine Corps' approaches of relying on units to provide
personnel for advising and other security force
assistance-related activities have had on the units'
ability to maintain readiness.

Sustainable Range Planning

The committee notes that section 2802 of the National
Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2013 (Public Law 112-
239) requires the Department of Defense to provide installation
master plans for a period not to exceed 10 years that, among
other things, shall address sustainable range planning. The
committee is aware that the Department of Defense submits the
annual Sustainable Range Report, prepares Integrated Natural
Resources Management Plans for military installations, and
works with other Federal, State, and local government entities,
Indian tribes, non-governmental organizations to address
situations both on and in the vicinity of military
installations and ranges that impact the ability of the
Department to perform its mission. These efforts are essential
to avoiding or reducing encroachment, sustaining military
readiness, and ensuring the continued viability of military
test and training ranges. The committee encourages the
Department to leverage these existing sustainable range
planning efforts as an integral part of installation master
plans.

Water Egress Training

The committee recognizes the need to ensure that the
Department of Defense provides its rotary-wing aviators with
the best survivability training available. The committee is
concerned that not all services have the facilities and
capabilities necessary to ensure adequate training and
throughput. The committee believes that a reassessment of the
Department's capabilities is especially important given the new
defense strategic guidance shifting departmental focus to the
Pacific Rim.
The committee directs the Comptroller General of the United
States to conduct a formal assessment and report back to the
congressional defense committees, not later than April 1, 2014,
on the state of the Department's rotary-wing water egress
training capabilities. At a minimum, this assessment should
include:
(1) Training facilities and infrastructure;
(2) Disparities and commonalities among the military
departments;
(3) Current training capacity and its adequacy to
meet future requirements; and
(4) Any capacity shortfalls in meeting water egress
training requirements.

Other Matters

Concerns Related to Fuel Rate Determinations

The committee continues to be concerned with the
insufficient funding of fuel within the operation and
maintenance accounts based on inadequate fuel rate
determinations by the Department of Defense and the Defense
Logistics Agency (DLA) within the Defense Working Capital Fund
(DWCF). In fiscal year 2012, $1.0 billion was reprogrammed from
other accounts to the DWCF to support cash balances within the
fund and to avoid increasing the cost charged to the Department
of Defense customer as a result of fully burdened costs for
fuel exceeding budget estimates. In fiscal year 2013, the
Department requested an additional $1.4 billion be reprogrammed
to cover costs not captured in the budgeted fuel rates. The
committee believes these significant reprogramming requests
were due to the Department underestimating the fully burdened
cost of procuring and distributing refined fuel. The committee
is aware that the Office of Management and Budget provides the
Department with a budgeted price per crude barrel (an estimated
projection of the market rate) from which the Department builds
the fully burdened rate charged to customers. However,
estimates of the fully burdened rate have been well short of
the market rates, requiring reprogramming or price adjustments
during the fiscal year to maintain solvency within the fund.
This will perpetuate into fiscal year 2014, as Department
officials have stated that the shortfalls relating to the cost
of refined fuel have not been resolved within the current
budget request. This practice of poor estimation disrupts
congressional oversight, promulgates faulty budgeting
practices, and leaves the readiness of the military services at
risk in the year of execution.
Based on the current budgeted rate for refined fuel, the
Government Accountability Office has estimated that funds in
fiscal year 2014 are understated by approximately $536.0
million, which would generate significant shortfalls in the
operation and maintenance accounts if the Department raises
rates during the fiscal year. The committee encourages the
Department to revise processes for fuel rate determination to
better capture market indicators for refined fuel pursuant to
section 1105 of title 31, United States Code, prior to
submission of the President's budget request for fiscal year
2015. In the interim, the committee has recommended
authorization of additional funds to support the anticipated
shortfalls due to the inadequate budgeted rate for 2014.
Furthermore, if the Department fails to reform its
budgeting practices related to fuel rates, and subsequently
requests a reprogramming due to shortfalls within the DWCF
specifically tied to the fully burdened costs of refining fuel,
the committee will not look favorably upon such a request.

Department of Defense Travel Restrictions

The committee commends the Department of Defense's efforts
to promote efficiency and reduce expenses. The committee
further commends the Department's efforts to increase scrutiny
on travel, training, and conference spending by elevating
approval authority and implementing a tiered approval
structure. However, the committee is concerned that designated
approval authorities may be subjectively restricting travel to
specific geographic locations, and that these determinations
are a product of perception rather than cost efficiencies or
misalignment with training requirements, professional military
education, or support to combatant commanders. As such, the
committee encourages the Department to continue its efforts to
increase scrutiny and accountability of travel, training, and
conference spending, but recommends that the Department not
prohibit travel to specific geographical locations without
case-by-case consideration and to develop objective guidance
and accounting measures for approving travel, training, and
conference spending.

Navy Arctic Roadmap

The committee continues to be concerned about the
Department of Defense's resources and preparedness for
accessing, operating in, and protecting national interests in
the Arctic. The Navy currently estimates that between 2020 and
2030, the Arctic could be ice free for one month during the
summer which may lead to an increase in trans-Arctic passage
for vessels seeking to reduce transit distance by utilizing the
Northern Sea Route and the Northwest Passage. The Navy's
Strategic Objectives for the Arctic was signed in May 2010 and
is referred to in both the Navy Arctic Capabilities Based
Assessment, approved in September 2011, and the Navy Arctic
Environmental Capabilities Based Assessment, approved in
December 2012. Those objectives include ensuring Navy forces
are capable and ready, contributing to the safety, stability
and security in the region, safeguarding U.S. maritime
interests, protecting critical infrastructure and key resources
in the Arctic, and strengthening and fostering new cooperative
relationships in the region. As a global Nation, the United
States needs to ensure that the Navy is adequately prepared to
preserve U.S. national security interests and collaborate with
other Arctic nations if and when the region will be open for
passage with increased traffic.
The committee recognizes the importance of transparency of
action without seeking to militarize the region. Therefore, the
committee directs the Secretary of the Navy to provide a
roadmap for future activities and costs for training and
operating in the Arctic. This roadmap should be a derivative of
the National Security Strategy, and shall identify proposed
exercises (including table top exercises), to include the
frequency, cost, and a more detailed investment strategy across
the Program Objective Memorandum through fiscal years 2020 to
support a timeframe leading to increased operations in the
region between 2020 to 2030. Additionally, the Navy should
include details regarding international forums in which they
participate. The committee further directs the Secretary of the
Navy to provide this roadmap to the congressional defense
committees by February 28, 2014.
North Atlantic Treaty Organization Special Operations
Headquarters
The budget request for fiscal year 2014 included $31.2
million in operation and maintenance, Defense-wide, for the
North Atlantic Treaty Organization Special Operations
Headquarters (NSHQ). The committee notes that this request
reflects a transfer of NSHQ authorized funding from operation
and maintenance, Army, to operation and maintenance, Defense-
wide. The committee does not support this transfer and as such
maintains the NSHQ authorization within operation and
maintenance, Army.
Operations and Maintenance of the Ballistic Missile Defense
System
The committee is concerned with the increasing share of the
Missile Defense Agency (MDA) budget being consumed by
operations and maintenance. According to MDA budget documents,
this will amount to $1.47 billion over the fiscal year 2014
Future Years Defense Program (FYDP); these costs are increasing
over the fiscal year 2014 FYDP.
The committee is aware that former Deputy Secretary of
Defense William Lynn issued a Memorandum for Secretaries of the
military departments on June 10, 2011, that established funding
responsibilities for the Ballistic Missile Defense System
(BMDS). Under this memorandum, the MDA will fund sustainment of
BMDS-specific mission equipment and initial spares, as well as
the first 2 years of operations of BMDS-specific mission
equipment.
The committee understands that with the maturation of
missile defense systems, the MDA and the military departments
are grappling for the first time with the division of
responsibility in these long-term operations and maintenance
costs; the now operational Terminal High Altitude Area Defense
system, which was deployed to Guam as of April 21, 2013, is one
example.
The committee expects to be kept informed of any difficulty
in the appropriate division of operations and maintenance
funding responsibility between MDA and the military
departments.

Weather Data and Modeling

The committee is aware that weather forecasting plays a
vital role in mission readiness, and that the Department of
Defense has taken steps to improve its forecasting. However,
weather models are only as effective as the underlying data
which inform them. The military relies largely on weather
balloons for data gathering. Further, the committee is aware of
recent advances in data gathering methods already in use in the
private sector which promise to deliver more accurate data, and
thus, more precise forecasts.
In an asymmetric warfare environment, inclement or
unanticipated weather phenomena can have a dramatic impact on
U.S. and coalition forces, especially with regard to air
superiority and special operations. Therefore, the committee
directs the Secretary of Defense to provide to the Committees
on Armed Services of the House of Representatives and the
Senate a brief on existing commercial meteorological data
gathering technologies, their adaptability to military usage,
practicality in a combat environment, and accuracy of data. The
brief should also include estimated costs associated with
acquisition, maintenance, and licensing, where applicable, of
these commercially available technologies.

LEGISLATIVE PROVISIONS

Subtitle A--Authorization of Appropriations

Section 301--Operation and Maintenance Funding

This section would authorize appropriations for operation
and maintenance activities at the levels identified in section
4301 of division D of this Act.

Subtitle B--Energy and Environment

Section 311--Deadline for Submission of Reports on Proposed Budgets for
Activities Relating to Operational Energy Strategy

This section would modify amend section 138c(e) of title
10, United States Code, to revise the date of submission for
the report on the proposed budgets for that fiscal year that
were not certified.

Section 312--Facilitation of Interagency Cooperation in Conservation
Programs of the Departments of Defense, Agriculture, and Interior to
Avoid or Reduce Adverse Impacts on Military Readiness Activities

This section would amend section 2684a of title 10, United
States Code, to permit a recipient of funds under the Sikes Act
to be able to use the funds for matching funds or cost-sharing
requirements of conservation programs. This section would also
expire the authority on October 1, 2019, but permit any
agreements that were entered into prior to September 30, 2019
to continue according to its terms and conditions.

Section 313--Reauthorization of Sikes Act

This section would extend the authority of the Sikes Act
through 2019.

Section 314--Cooperative Agreements Under Sikes Act for Land Management
Related to Department of Defense Readiness Activities

This section would amend section 103A of the Sikes Act,
section 670c-1 of title 16, United States Code, to permit lump
sum payment and accrual of interest used for the purposes of
the original agreement. This section would also permit the
cooperative agreements to be used to acquire property or
services for the direct benefit or use of the United States
Government, and sets limitations on agreements that are not on
military installations. Finally, this section would also expire
the authority on October 1, 2019, but permit any agreements
that were entered into prior to September 30, 2019 to continue
according to its terms and conditions.

Section 315--Exclusions from Definition of ``Chemical Substance'' under
Toxic Substances Control Act

This section would modify section 2602(2)(B) of title 15,
United States Code, to add to the exclusions any component of
any article including shot, bullets and other projectiles,
propellants when manufactured for or used in such an article,
and primers.

Section 316--Exemption of Department of Defense from Alternative Fuel
Procurement Requirement

This section would amend section 526 of the Energy
Independence and Security Act (Section 42 of United States Code
17142) to exempt the Department of Defense from the
requirements related to contracts for alternative or synthetic
fuel in that section.

Section 317--Clarification of Prohibition on Disposing of Waste in
Open-Air Burn Pits

This section would codify the definition of covered waste
as it relates to the requirements established by section 317 of
the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2010
(Public Law 111-84; title 10 of United States Code 2701 note).

Section 318--Limitation on Plan, Design, Refurbishing, or Construction
of Biofuels Refineries

This section would require the Department of Defense to
obtain a congressional authorization before entering into a
contract for the planning, design, refurbishing, or
construction of a biofuels refinery.

Section 319--Limitation on Procurement of Biofuels

This section would limit the Department of Defense's
ability to purchase or produce biofuels until the earlier of
either the date on which the Budget Control Act of 2011 is no
longer in effect, or the date on which the cost of biofuel is
equal to the cost of conventional fuels. This section would
provide an exception for biofuel test and certification and
research and development.

Subtitle C--Logistics and Sustainment

Section 321--Littoral Combat Ship Strategic Sustainment Plan

This section would direct the Secretary of the Navy to
create a Strategic Sustainment Plan for the Littoral Combat
Ship and submit this plan to the congressional defense
committees not later than 120 days after the date of the
enactment of this Act.

Section 322--Review of Critical Manufacturing Capabilities within Army
Arsenals

This section would require the Secretary of Defense to
review current and expected manufacturing requirements across
the Department of Defense to identify critical manufacturing
capabilities which could be executed by Government-owned
arsenals, and to brief the results of the review to the
congressional defense committees.
The committee supports efforts to improve utilization of
Army arsenals by the military services and Defense agencies.
The committee encourages greater use of Army arsenals across
the Department of Defense to meet manufacturing requirements
and applauds efforts to increase visibility of the
manufacturing capabilities provided by Army arsenals in order
to support national security requirements.

Section 323--Inclusion of Army Arsenals Capabilities in Solicitations

This section would require Program Executive Officers and
Program Managers to solicit information from Government-owned
arsenals when undertaking a make-or-buy analysis, notify
Government-owned arsenals of the requirement, and allow
arsenals that have the capability to fulfill a manufacturing
requirement to submit a proposal for the requirement.
The committee notes that in addition to directly soliciting
information from the arsenals, Program Executive Officers and
Program Managers may utilize the Materiel Enterprise
Capabilities Database (MEC-D) and other organic industrial base
enterprise-wide capabilities information. The committee notes
that utilization of the MEC-D provides quick access to organic
industrial base capabilities information and assists in
consideration of manufacturing and repair requirements. The
committee commends the Army for development of the MEC-D and
encourages its use.

Subtitle D--Reports

Section 331--Additional Reporting Requirements Relating to Personnel
and Unit Readiness

This section would amend the report required under section
482 of title 10, United States Code, to require the Secretary
of Defense to report to the congressional defense committees on
the ability of the geographic and functional combatant
commanders to successfully meet their respective contingency
and operational plans and key mission essential tasks. This
section would also require the report to include an assessment
by the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff of the level of
risk incurred by using contract support in contingency
operations. In addition, this section adds a quarterly
readiness reporting requirement for the defense combat support
agencies to section 482 of title 10, United States Code. These
reports would have to include readiness trends and indicators
and an assessment of an agency's ability to execute formal
operational plans and to support contingency operations.
The committee is concerned that it does not receive
comprehensive reporting on the geographic and functional
combatant commanders' ability to successfully execute the full
range of their respective operational and contingency plans.
The committee believes that absent this information, its
ability to make informed oversight decisions regarding the
readiness of U.S. forces may be degraded. The committee
understands that this lack of visibility may be, in part, due
to classification issues. The committee encourages the
Secretary of Defense to submit multiple annexes as required to
provide complete and timely readiness information to the
congressional defense committees.
The committee is also concerned that it lacks visibility on
the readiness of the various combat support agencies. These
agencies are a key readiness enabler, and the inability to
understand how they contribute to military readiness limits the
ability of Congress to provide effective oversight of military
readiness.

Section 332--Repeal of Annual Comptroller General Report on Army
Progress

This section would repeal the requirement that the
Comptroller General of the United States report on the Army's
progress in moving to a modular force design as the Army has
completed the transition.

Section 333--Revision to Requirement for Annual Submission of
Information Regarding Information Technology Capital Assets

This section would amend the Bob Stump National Defense
Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2003 (Public Law 107-314; 10
U.S.C. 221 note) to align Department of Defense high-threshold
information technology Capital Asset reporting with the
Department's Major Automated Information Systems reporting and
its Exhibit 300 reporting to the Office of Management and
Budget.

Subtitle E--Limitations and Extensions of Authority

Section 341--Limitation on Reduction of Force Structure at Lajes Air
Force Base, Azores

This section would prohibit the Secretary of the Air Force
from reducing the force structure at Lajes Air Force Base,
Azores, based on the force structure in existence on October 1,
2013, until the Secretary of Defense briefs the congressional
defense committees. This brief shall specifically assess the
efficacy of Lajes Air Force Base, Azores in support of the
United States overseas force posture.

Section 342--Prohibition on Performance of Department of Defense Flight
Demonstration Teams Outside the United States

This section would place a 2 year moratorium on the
Department of Defense use of funds for airshows outside the
United States.

Subtitle F--Other Matters

Section 351--Requirement to Establish Policy on Joint Combat Uniforms

This section would establish as national policy a
requirement for all the U.S. military services to use a joint
combat camouflage uniform, with certain exceptions.
The committee notes that the Department of Defense has not
complied with section 352 of the National Defense Authorization
Act for Fiscal Year 2010 (Public Law 111-84) which required the
military departments to establish joint criteria for future
ground combat uniforms. Rather than continue on a course that
does not, as the Government Accountability Office reported,
meet statutory requirements for the development of service-
unique uniforms that provide service members equivalent levels
of performance and protection nor minimize risk to individuals
operating in the joint battle space, the committee instead
adopts a path that would provide standardization and economies
of scale while at the same time ensuring new uniforms are
joint, effective, compatible with troops' personal equipment,
and suitable to operational needs.

TITLE IV--MILITARY PERSONNEL AUTHORIZATIONS

OVERVIEW

Although the committee supports the President's fiscal year
2014 budget request for end strength for the Active and Reserve
Components, it continues to have concerns with the amount and
pace of reductions over the next 3 years and the impact this
will have on force structure. The budget request reduces the
Active Duty end strength authorizations by little more than
40,000 from the fiscal year 2013 authorized levels. However,
the actual reduction levels will be closer to 15,000 since the
Army will end fiscal year 2013 at approximately 530,000 (about
22,000 below the fiscal year 2013 authorized levels) and the
Marine Corps will end the year at approximately 193,000 (about
4,300 below the fiscal year 2013 authorized levels). The Army
and Marine Corps requests are within the minimum levels on end
strength prescribed in section 402 of the National Defense
Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2013 (Public Law 112-239).
The Air Force will make minimum reductions in its Active
Component. The Navy has a slight growth of 900 sailors from its
fiscal year 2013 authorization, but remains undermanned by
almost 4,000 sailors, well below minimum end strength levels.
While the Navy believes that it will achieve its authorized end
strength at the end of fiscal year 2013, that has yet to be
seen, and could continue to impact the Navy's ability to meet
force structure requirements in fiscal year 2014.
The budget request includes a reduction of 8,100 for the
Reserve Components. The Army National Guard (4,000) and the
Navy Reserve (3,400) make up the majority of the reductions.
Both requests are consistent with the fiscal year 2013 end
strength reduction plan submitted with last year's budget
request. The Air National Guard and the Air Force Reserve have
minimal reductions pending the results of the National
Commission on the Structure of the Air Force.
The committee remains concerned that unfettered reductions
in end strength will have a detrimental impact on force
structure and, ultimately, operational mission capability and
capacity among the services. The committee recognizes that the
Army and Marine Corps have implemented planned end strength
reductions over the next several years, and cautions the
services not to abruptly change this course of action and break
faith with those who have served this Nation in war.

ITEMS OF SPECIAL INTEREST

Operational Reserves

The committee understands that the Army and Air Force are
reducing end strength and rebalancing force structure in
response to the drawdown in the Islamic Republic of
Afghanistan, reduced budgets, and the effects of sequestration.
However, as has been stated in previous years, the committee
remains concerned with increased potential reductions in the
Reserve Components, specifically for the Army and the Air
Force. The Reserve Components have been and remain an integral
capability of the total force that must continue to be embraced
as an operational reserve through periodic mobilization for
real-world missions. Such employment sustains the skills and
competencies to enable the Reserve Components to respond to
crises or combat requirements in a timely manner. As the focus
shifts from Afghanistan, the potential for persistent conflict
remains. Thus, the committee continues to encourage the
Secretary of Defense and the military services to ensure
rigorous analysis is used when assessing the capabilities of
the total force. Such analysis should be conducted if further
reductions to force structure are necessary, and should include
an assessment of the ability to meet the requirements of the
combatant commands and those of the Federal Government and the
States for homeland security and natural disasters.

LEGISLATIVE PROVISIONS

Subtitle A--Active Forces

Section 401--End Strengths for Active Forces

This section would authorize the following end strengths
for Active Duty personnel of the Armed Forces as of September
30, 2014:

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
FY 2014 Change from
---------------------------------------------
Service FY 2013 Committee
Authorized Request Recom- FY 2014 FY 2013
mendation Request Authorized
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Army.................................................. 552,100 520,000 520,000 0 -32,100
Navy.................................................. 322,700 323,600 323,600 0 900
USMC.................................................. 197,300 190,200 190,200 0 -7,100
Air Force............................................. 329,460 327,600 327,600 0 -1,860
---------------------------------------------------------
DOD................................................. 1,401,560 1,361,400 1,361,400 0 -40,160
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Section 402--Revision in Permanent Active Duty End Strength Minimum
Levels

This section would establish new minimum Active Duty end
strengths for the Army, Navy, Marine Corps, and Air Force as of
September 30, 2014. The committee recommends 520,000 as the
minimum Active Duty end strength for the Army, 323,600 as the
minimum Active Duty end strength for the Navy, 190,200 as the
minimum Active Duty end strength for the Marine Corps, and
327,600 as the minimum Active Duty end strength for the Air
Force.

Subtitle B--Reserve Forces

Section 411--End Strengths for Selected Reserve

This section would authorize the following end strengths
for Selected Reserve personnel, including the end strength for
Reserves on Active Duty in support of the Reserves, as of
September 30, 2014:

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
FY 2014 Change from
--------------------------------------------
Service FY 2013 Committee
Authorized Request Recom- FY 2014 FY 2013
mendation Request Authorized
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Army National Guard.................................... 358,200 354,200 354,200 0 -4,000
Army Reserve........................................... 205,000 205,000 205,000 0 0
Navy Reserve........................................... 62,500 59,100 59,100 0 -3,400
Marine Corps Reserve................................... 39,600 39,600 39,600 0 0
Air National Guard..................................... 105,700 105,400 105,400 0 -300
Air Force Reserve...................................... 70,880 70,400 70,400 0 -480
--------------------------------------------------------
DOD Total............................................ 841,880 833,700 833,700 0 -8,180
Coast Guard Reserve.................................... 9,000 9,000 9,000 0 0
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Section 412--End Strengths for Reserves on Active Duty in Support of
the Reserves

This section would authorize the following end strengths
for Reserves on Active Duty in support of the Reserves as of
September 30, 2014:

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
FY 2014 Change from
--------------------------------------------
Service FY 2013 Committee
Authorized Request Recom- FY 2014 FY 2013
mendation Request Authorized
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Army National Guard.................................... 32,060 32,060 32,060 0 0
Army Reserve........................................... 16,277 16,261 16,261 0 -16
Naval Reserve.......................................... 10,114 10,159 10,159 0 45
Marine Corps Reserve................................... 2,261 2,261 2,261 0 0
Air National Guard..................................... 14,765 14,734 14,734 0 -31
Air Force Reserve...................................... 2,888 2,911 2,911 0 23
--------------------------------------------------------
DOD Total............................................ 78,365 78,386 78,386 0 21
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Section 413-- End Strengths for Military Technicians (Dual Status)

This section would authorize the following end strengths
for military technicians (dual status) as of September 30,
2014:

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
FY 2014 Change from
--------------------------------------------
Service FY 2013 Committee
Authorized Request Recom- FY 2014 FY 2013
mendation Request Authorized
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Army National Guard.................................... 27,210 27,210 27,210 0 0
Army Reserve........................................... 8,395 8,395 8,395 0 0
Air National Guard..................................... 22,180 21,875 21,875 0 -305
Air Force Reserve...................................... 10,400 10,429 10,429 0 29
--------------------------------------------------------
DOD Total............................................ 68,185 67,909 67,909 0 -276
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Section 414--Fiscal Year 2014 Limitation on Number of Non-Dual Status
Technicians

This section would establish the maximum end strengths for
the Reserve Components of the Army and Air Force for non-dual
status technicians as of September 30, 2014:

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
FY 2014 Change from
--------------------------------------------
Service FY 2013 Committee
Authorized Request Recom- FY 2014 FY 2013
mendation Request Authorized
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Army National Guard.................................... 1,600 1,600 1,600 0 0
Air National Guard..................................... 350 350 350 0 0
Army Reserve........................................... 595 595 595 0 0
Air Force Reserve...................................... 90 90 90 0 0
--------------------------------------------------------
DOD Total............................................ 2,635 2,635 2,635 0 0
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Section 415--Maximum Number of Reserve Personnel Authorized To Be on
Active Duty for Operational Support

This section would authorize, as required by section 115(b)
of title 10, United States Code, the maximum number of Reserve
Component personnel who may be on Active Duty or full-time
National Guard duty during fiscal year 2014 to provide
operational support. The personnel authorized here do not count
against the end strengths authorized by section 401 or section
412 of this Act unless the duration on Active Duty exceeds the
limitations in section 115(b)(2) of title 10, United States
Code.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
FY 2014 Change from
--------------------------------------------
Service FY 2013 Committee
Authorized Request Recom- FY 2014 FY 2013
mendation Request Authorized
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Army National Guard.................................... 17,000 17,000 17,000 0 0
Army Reserve........................................... 13,000 13,000 13,000 0 0
Naval Reserve.......................................... 6,200 6,200 6,200 0 0
Marine Corps Reserve................................... 3,000 3,000 3,000 0 0
Air National Guard..................................... 16,000 16,000 16,000 0 0
Air Force Reserve...................................... 14,000 14,000 14,000 0 0
--------------------------------------------------------
DOD Total............................................ 69,200 69,200 69,200 0 0
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Subtitle C--Authorization of Appropriations

Section 421--Military Personnel

This section would authorize appropriations for military
personnel at the levels identified in the funding table in
section 4401 of division D of this Act.

TITLE V--MILITARY PERSONNEL POLICY

OVERVIEW

The committee has taken a number of actions to address
areas of concern. With regard to military justice, the
committee fundamentally reformed the way that the Department of
Defense must address sexual assault in the Uniform Code of
Military Justice and provides significant additional support to
victims of this terrible crime. Specifically, with regard to
the Uniform Code of Military Justice, the committee limited the
convening authority's discretion to change a court-martial
finding and sentence; eliminated the 5-year statute of
limitations on trial by court-martial for sexual assault and
sexual assault of a child; and, established dismissal (for
officers) and dishonorable discharge (for enlisted personnel)
as the mandatory minimum sentence for service members convicted
by court-marital of rape, sexual assault, forcible sodomy, or
attempts at those offenses. To improve support to victims, the
committee mandated that each of the Armed Services establish
Victims' Counsels to provide dedicated legal assistance to
victims of sex-related crimes. Furthermore, the committee
expanded whistleblower protections by adding reports of rape,
sexual assault, or other sexual misconduct as protected
communications by members of the Armed Forces with Members of
Congress or an Inspector General.
A number of initiatives reflected the committee's concerns
about the number of general and flag officers serving at a time
when military manpower is being reduced. Thus, the committee
reduced the number of general and flag officers on Active Duty,
mandated a review of the requirements and authorizations for
Reserve Component general and flag officers in an active
status, and directed the Comptroller General to assess trends
in the costs of general and flag officers on Active Duty.
In support of military families, the committee authorized
the Commander of the U.S. Special Operations Command to conduct
family support pilot programs for the immediate family members
of military personnel assigned to Special Operations Forces.
The committee also authorized transitional compensation and
other benefits for dependents of retirement eligible service
members who are separated from military service for violation
of the Uniform Code of Military Justice.
With regard to the Reserve Components, the committee
established a 180-day minimum notification requirement for
members of the Reserve Components before deployment to or
cancellation of a deployment to a contingency operation.
Furthermore, out of concern for the time that Reserve Component
members were spending in the disability evaluation system, the
committee directed a review of the Integrated Disability
Evaluation System.
Finally, the committee adopted the Stolen Valor Act, which
would make it a crime to fraudulently claim to be a recipient
of certain decorations or medals with the intent to obtain
money, property, or other tangible benefits.

ITEMS OF SPECIAL INTEREST

Air Force Education Programs

Air Education and Training Command (AETC) provides basic
military training, initial and advanced technical training,
flying training, and professional military and degree-granting
education. The committee recognizes the importance of defense-
and technical-focused education and is concerned that, as
budget pressures force the services to reevaluate their
priorities, AETC may be forced to shift resources to training
and reduce its commitment to professional and technical degree-
granting education. Such action could have long term
implications on the professionalism of the Air Force. Section
245 of the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year
2013 (Public Law 112-239) required the National Research
Council to review specialized degree-granting graduate programs
of the Department of Defense in science, technology,
engineering, mathematics and management. The report required a
review of existing organizational structures, including
reporting chains, to manage the graduate education needs within
the military departments. Until the committee receives this
report, the committee encourages the Air Force to continue its
traditional emphasis on education and maintain its Air Force
education programs.

Assessing the Trend in Costs of General and Flag Officers on Active
Duty

While the committee understands efforts are underway in the
Department of Defense, the Joint Staff, and the military
services to control the numbers of general and flag officers on
Active Duty, the committee is concerned about the costs
associated with sustaining that general and flag officer
population as the size of the military forces decreases.
According to the Department of Defense, there were 917 general
and flag officers on Active Duty in fiscal year 2013. To better
understand the costs of maintaining a sizable senior military
officer population, the committee directs the Comptroller
General of the United States to assess the trends in costs from
fiscal year 2001 through fiscal year 2013 of the general and
flag officers of the Armed Forces on Active Duty for each
fiscal year. The Comptroller General shall provide the
assessment to the Senate Committee on Armed Services and the
House Committee on Armed Services no later than April 15, 2014.
In making this assessment, the Comptroller General shall,
as a minimum, assess both the direct and support costs
associated with general and flag officers. In assessing the
direct costs, the Comptroller General shall include basic pay,
basic allowance for subsistence, basic allowance for housing
and, to the extent practicable, the tax advantage associated
with those allowances; and, all other compensation paid to
general or flag officers as reflected on military leave and
earnings statements; the travel and per diem costs of such
officers; the official entertainment and representation
expenditures of such officers; and, other direct costs the
Comptroller General, in coordination with the committee,
determines to be appropriate. For support costs, the assessment
shall include the direct costs, as described above, of all
officer and enlisted aides assigned to or supporting general or
flag officers; the travel and per diem costs of such aides; the
annual expenditures for military housing provided the general
and flag officers; and other support costs the Comptroller
General, in coordination with the committee, determines to be
appropriate.

Clarification of Conferees Statement on the Assignments of Military
Officers as Academic Instructors at Military Service Academies as Joint
Duty Assignments

The committee recognizes that the conferee statement
contained in Sense of Senate on inclusion of assignments as
academic instructors at the military service academies as joint
duty assignments, on page 758 of the conference report (H.
Rept. 112-705) accompanying the National Defense Authorization
Act for Fiscal Year 2013, is contrary to section 668 of title
10, United States Code. The committee recognizes that the
Secretary of Defense must adhere to the requirements in law and
that the law takes precedence over directive report language
contained in a conference report. Therefore, the committee
seeks to clarify for the Secretary of Defense that he must
comply with section 668 of title 10, United States Code, when
determining joint duty assignment designations in accordance
with section 661 of title 10, United States Code.
The committee recognizes that the directive report language
in the conference report stemmed from concern that Naval
officers with expertise in military science and humanities may
be deterred from service on the faculty of the United States
Naval Academy (USNA) due to their inability to obtain promotion
opportunities and joint duty credit requirements in the course
of their career. To ensure that the USNA continues to attract
and retain mature and skilled instructors with successful Navy
careers, the committee directs the Secretary of the Navy to
assess the barriers faced by instructors at the USNA and to
develop a plan to mitigate those challenges, including ways to
achieve expanded promotion opportunities and joint duty
assignments. This plan shall include assignment policies to
ensure the highest quality Naval officers who seek assignments
as USNA instructors remain competitive for promotion and that
the Navy has a method for ensuring the quality of instructors
assigned to the academy is not degraded. The committee directs
the Secretary of the Navy to submit the findings and plan to
the Committees on Armed Services of the Senate and the House of
Representatives by April 1, 2014.

Community-Based Youth Organizations

The committee commends the numerous community-based youth
organizations, such as the Boys & Girls Clubs of America, and
others that have stepped forward to support military children
and dependents. Children of military personnel face many
challenges stemming from frequent moves due to changes in
permanent stationing, to dealing with a deployed parent or
parents, trying to support an injured, ill or wounded parent
who is recovering, or from losing a parent. Community-based
youth organizations provide needed support to our military
families. These organizations are valuable assets in providing
consistent and stable education and prevention programs that
constitute positive experiences in the development of our
military children. While the Department of Defense is
confronting difficult decisions as the budgets decline, the
committee urges the Department to continue to partner with
community-based youth organizations to provide youth education
and development programs for military children.

Comptroller General Review of Recommendations to Prevent Sexual
Misconduct at Lackland Air Force Base and Other Basic and Technical
Training Facilities

The sexual misconduct by Military Training Instructors
(MTIs) at Lackland Air Force Base, San Antonio, Texas has been
one of the largest sexual misconduct investigations within the
military with nearly 60 victims from basic and technical
training. To date, over 32 MTIs have been investigated and 18
have been convicted. While the cases continue to be prosecuted,
the Air Force undertook a significant effort to understand the
circumstances that lead to this environment, and what steps
needed to be taken to correct the situation and prevent such
assaults from occurring in the future. A Command-Directed
Investigation led to 46 recommendations, of which the Air Force
proposed to implement 45. In addition, the Air Force conducted
an investigation focused on senior leadership and organization
actions in response to the delayed reporting of sexual assault
allegations. The committee remains focused on efforts to ensure
that such sexual misconduct does not occur at basic military
training or technical training bases across the Department of
Defense. Therefore, the committee directs the Comptroller
General of the United States to review the actions taken by the
Air Force as a result of the investigations in order to provide
a status of the recommendations; to assess the effectiveness of
the implemented recommendations; and to conduct an assessment
of best practices from among the services that can be shared to
prevent sexual misconduct at basic and technical training. The
review should also identify challenges and other potential
improvements or recommendations for services to review to
prevent sexual misconduct from occurring at basic and technical
training bases. The Comptroller General of the United States
shall submit the results of the review by April 1, 2014, to the
Committees on Armed Services of the Senate and the House of
Representatives.

Consistency Among Exceptional Family Member Programs

The 2013 Annual Report to Congress on the Department of
Defense Military Family Readiness Council, as required by
section 1781a of Title 10, United States Code, contained a
number of recommendations to improve support to military
families, such as establishing evaluation criteria to ensure
that programs are effective based on outcome measurements that
are aligned with program objectives. The Council also
recommended that the services standardize their Exceptional
Family Member Program (EFMP) offerings to ensure parity across
the services, the need for which have become apparent at joint
bases. While the committee supports efforts to improve parity
and standardization of the services provided under EFMP, the
committee urges the services and the Department to work
together to ensure that such standardization and parity does
not result in the minimization of program offerings to EFMP
families.

Disposition of Remains by Host Nations

The committee recognizes that there are instances in which
a host nation under Status of Forces Agreements may require the
retention of the remains of a service member killed while
stationed overseas. However, the committee believes that the
services have a responsibility to ensure that such remains are
returned as quickly as reasonably possible while complying with
the terms of the Status of Forces Agreement. The committee
understands there are Status of Forces Agreements that do not
address or include specific regulations or guidance on mortuary
affairs. Therefore, the committee urges the Department of
Defense to work with the Department of State to review this
issue and determine whether inclusion of such guidance and
regulation, including providing technical assistance, will help
to ensure the expeditious return of service members remains
when the Department of State updates Status of Forces
Agreements with host nations. Further, the committee directs
the Secretary of Defense to brief the committee on Armed Forces
of the Senate and the House of Representatives, not later than
December 31, 2014, on the results of the review conducted with
the Department of State.

Domestic Violence and Child Abuse

The committee recognizes the improvements the Department of
Defense and the services have made over the past several years
to address domestic violence and child abuse among the force.
However, the committee remains concerned that the stress on the
force continues to take its toll and may be manifested in
increasing incidents of domestic violence, child abuse, and
neglect. The committee appreciates the actions the Department
has taken to address the recommendations of the Comptroller
General of the United States, which were included in the
``Report to Congressional Defense Committees on Improvements to
Department of Defense Domestic Violence Program'', dated April
2012. These actions included hiring additional Domestic Abuse
Victim Advocates; expansion of the New Parent Support Home
Visitation Program; hiring of additional clinical providers and
staff to oversee programs and personnel; implementation and
tracking of chaplain domestic violence training; and
development of a formalized oversight framework for domestic
violence programs to improve management and delivery of
services. The committee understands that the Department is
moving forward on an incident-based reporting system that would
accurately track domestic violence incident, and recommends
that the system also be able to track child abuse incidents as
well. The committee looks forward to the update on the status
of recommendations in the near future.

Department of Defense Efforts To Ensure Operation of Current
Prohibition on Accrual of Interest on Direct Student Loans of Members
of the Armed Forces Receiving Imminent Danger Pay

The committee is strongly supportive of the current
prohibition on accrual of interest for service members serving
in a combat zone. However, the committee is concerned that lack
of information regarding this benefit and the administrative
burden placed on service members in order to receive it may be
preventing more members of the armed services from
participating. Therefore, the committee directs the Secretary
of Defense to ensure that all service members, when assigned to
duty in an area for which special pay is available, are made
aware of the benefits provided under section 455(o) of the
Higher Education Act of 1965 (20 U.S.C. 1087e(o)), and include
this information in the out-processing checklist, briefings and
counseling that all deploying service members receive.

Foreign Exchange Program for Reserve Officer Training Corps Cadets and
Critical Military Language Training

The committee commends the Army for establishing a Reserve
Officer Training Corps (ROTC) cadet foreign exchange program
that provides cadets an unprecedented and valuable training
opportunity in a non-contingency, deployed environment to learn
foreign cultures and languages. The committee understands that
the program is relatively new and is still maturing; however,
the committee remains concerned in several areas. First, there
is a lack of consistency in the programs among the various
foreign nations. Second, efforts to develop greater
coordination with the various combatant commands (COCOMs) are
disjointed. Third, it is unclear to the committee that the
overall mission and goals of the program are in step with the
security cooperation strategy. The committee urges the Army,
the Office of the Secretary of Defense, and the Office of the
Joint Chiefs of Staff to provide greater oversight and support
of this important leadership development program to ensure that
it is meeting the needs of the cadets, the service, and the
missions of the COCOMs. The Department of Defense has
highlighted over the past decade, and more recently in the
fiscal year 2014 budget submission, the strategic importance of
language and cultural programs in order to build international
partnerships as well as the successful outcomes across the full
spectrum of operations. The committee believes the ROTC cadet
foreign exchange program, as well as the use of Language
Training Centers at accredited universities in support of the
Defense Language Transformation Roadmap, National Security
Education Program, and the Civilian Linguist Reserve Corps, are
instrumental in achieving the Secretary of Defense's goals.

Fully Burdened Life Cycle Cost of Military Personnel

The committee applauds the Department of Defense's efforts
to standardize costing models for Active Duty and civilian
personnel across the Department. The committee understands the
Secretary of Defense is finalizing a Department of Defense
Instruction to formalize the policy, as well as implement a
costing tool, Full Cost of Manpower (FCoM), to reduce the
myriad of calculations required under current guidelines and
reduce errors in costing of Active Duty and civilian personnel.
The committee is encouraged by the Department's effort to
expand this model to include the full cost of reserve manpower
as well. As fiscal pressures become the focus in operational
planning and force structure development, it is crucial to
understand the cost of the total force in order for leaders to
make informed decisions to fulfill combatant commander
requirements, as well as homeland defense and natural disaster
response. The committee directs the Secretary of Defense to
incorporate at a minimum all of the existing elements of the
FCoM tool for the reserve model and encourages the Secretary to
include as many comparable factors between the Active Duty and
Reserve Component in the FCoM tool as possible to ensure the
most efficient use of resources and manpower.
The committee directs the Secretary of Defense to report to
the Committees on Armed Services of the Senate and the House of
Representatives no later than 180 days after implementation of
the reserve costing model. The report shall include an
explanation of the elements required in the costing model; the
criteria used to determine the elements; how the reserve model
compares to the model used for Active Duty; and a comparison of
the cost of a similar Active and Reserve unit for each of the
services, including the training and mobilization costs of the
Reserve unit, with the assumption that an operational Reserve
unit will mobilize and deploy once every 5 years, and an Active
Duty unit will mobilize and deploy once every 3 years as
required by current policy.

Mental Health Professional on a Physical Evaluation Board

The committee continues to have concerns with the
Department of Defense's evaluation of service member physical
evaluation board cases that may involve post-traumatic stress
disorder, traumatic brain injury or other mental health
conditions. The committee encourages the Secretary of Defense
to ensure that a behavioral health professional is included as
a member of the board on any physical evaluation board that
considers issues of post-traumatic stress disorder, traumatic
brain injury, or other mental health conditions. The behavioral
health professional should normally take the place of the
medical member of the board, unless as a result of the health
related issues before the board, the board would benefit from
the presence of both a behavioral health professional and
medical member. In this context a behavioral health
professional means a clinical psychologist, psychiatrist,
licensed clinical social worker, or psychiatric advanced
practice registered nurse.

National Support for Service Members, Veterans, Retirees and their
Families

The committee recognizes that after more than a decade of
war, the Department of Defense and the services have undertaken
many initiatives to address the myriad of issues that have been
brought to the forefront, such as ensuring the appropriate
amounts of equipment and training are available, improving
medical evacuations from theater, new treatment for post-
traumatic stress and traumatic brain injury, building
resiliency among the force and family members, and improving
transition assistance programs for service members back into
civilian communities. While the committee commends the services
for their recent efforts to enhance and improve programs and
policies that strengthen the resilience of the force, there
still remain gaps in the Nation's support for and recognition
of service members and their families. When less than 1 percent
of the population of our society serves in uniform, it is
important for the civilian communities in which they live,
work, and return, to understand the challenges uniformed
members confront in their service to our Nation. To address
these gaps, the committee believes there has to be not only a
whole-of-government approach, but also a national approach to
improve the myriad of programs that are available to service
members, retirees, veterans, and their families through the
Government and many civilian organizations and communities.
There needs to be an improved recognition of the sacrifices
this small population endures for our Nation. The committee
urges the Department of Defense to continue to work with
Federal, state, local, and non-profit organizations to expand
the network of support to ensure not only a whole-of-government
approach to supporting and recognizing our Armed Forces but a
national effort.

Navy Sea Cadet Corps Sustainment

The committee recognizes the U.S. Naval Sea Cadet Corps as
an exemplary, cost effective program that assists the U.S. Navy
by creating a favorable image of the U.S. Navy on the part of
American youth and ensuring a high-quality source of future
sailors for both enlisted and commissioned service. To ensure
the viability of this valuable program, the Secretary of the
Navy is strongly urged to ensure that the program is fully
funded for fiscal year 2014, and beyond. This amount should
take into consideration additional funds that may be necessary
as a result of program growth and annual inflation as
determined by the U.S. Navy, in conjunction with the U.S. Naval
Sea Cadet Corps.

Relocation Assistance Program Resource Access Review

The committee is concerned with the availability and access
to resources provided by the Department of Defense's relocation
assistance program to members of the Armed Forces.
Acknowledging that some of these services are inherently
governmental, the committee, in light of the constrained
current and future budgets, directs the Secretary of Defense to
report to the Committees on Armed Services of the Senate and
the House of Representatives on the current relocation services
provided by the Department, and how those services are
fulfilling the provision under section 1056 of title 10, United
States Code. Included in this report should be an evaluation of
whether the present system, including a review of applicable
Federal regulations, is utilizing the best practices from both
governmental and nongovernmental agencies, and incorporating
innovative ideas that allow for the most current, easily
accessible, and accurate local area information and services to
be provided to service members and their families in the most
cost effective manner. The report should be provided to the
Committees on Armed Services of the Senate and the House of
Representatives within 120 days after the date of the enactment
of this Act.

Reserve Component Temporary Duty Assignments

The committee has concerns with the Department of Defense's
use of permanent change of station (PCS) orders in lieu of
temporary duty orders for Reserve Component members (not
including Active Guard and Reserve when activated). Current
Department of Defense directives set 180 days as the limit for
temporary duty orders. Beyond 180 days, the orders become PCS
orders. The committee is concerned that the services have taken
advantage of these rules when mobilizing some reservists by
either calling them to Active Duty through PCS orders for 181
days or changing the orders from temporary duty to PCS after
the member has taken the assignment. This practice, when
selectively applied to reservists mobilized for temporary duty
from a high cost-of-living area to a low cost-of-living area,
allows the services to save money at the expense of the service
members and their families. The committee encourages the
Secretary of Defense to ensure that if a Reserve Component
member receives temporary duty orders, the orders are not
changed to PCS orders without required notification and
processing. This will protect members of the Reserve Component
by ensuring that they are compensated appropriately during
their Active Duty service. Furthermore, it will ensure they are
able to maintain, without disruption, their full-time
households.

Review of Programs for Male Victims of Sexual Assault in the U.S.
Military

In 2010, the Department of Veterans Affairs reported that
approximately 1 in 100 service men indicated that they
experienced sexual trauma in the military. During that same
year, the veteran health facilities documented 244,074
occasions in which male veterans were provided military sexual
trauma-related outpatient care. In its latest Report on Sexual
Assault in the Military Services, the Department of Defense
estimates that only about 14% of its service members who are
sexually assaulted report that they were a victim of this
crime. Reporting a sexual assault is difficult for any victim,
but for males in the military, it may be especially daunting.
The committee is concerned that the DOD has not focused on
efforts to assist male service members to ensure victims
receive the specialized care that may be needed. Therefore, the
committee directs the Comptroller General of the United States
to undertake a review to determine to what extent (1) does the
culture of the U.S. military pose unique challenges for
preventing and responding to sexual assaults of male service
members, (2) what steps the DOD has taken steps to address the
incidence of and response to male service members who are
sexually assaulted, and (3) whether the DOD established
policies and protocols for the provision of medical and mental
healthcare to address sexual trauma given the unique
requirements for male victims of sexual assault. The
Comptroller General shall submit the results of the review by
May 30, 2014.

Suicides and Military Families

Over a decade of conflict has contributed to an increase in
suicides among military members. Efforts by the Department of
Defense to combat suicide among military members continue;
however, what is less known is the impact on military families.
The committee is concerned that there may be a corresponding
increase in suicides among immediate family members. Currently,
the Department of the Army is the only service that attempts to
track the number of military dependents that commit suicide.
Yet, such collection and validation remains a challenge for the
Army. Suicide among the force has a direct impact on military
readiness, and suicide among dependents can have a direct
impact on individual readiness. Therefore, the committee
directs the Secretary of Defense to review the ability of the
services to collect information and perform analysis on suicide
among immediate family members as part of their suicide
information retention and analysis. The Secretary shall submit
a report on the feasibility, including the potential costs, of
collecting and retaining such data to the Committees on Armed
Services of the Senate and the House of Representatives by
April 1, 2014.

Support for the Interstate Compact on Educational Opportunity for
Military Children

The committee understands the challenges that military
dependent children face when they move, as a result of military
orders, from one local educational agency and school district
to another. For that reason, the committee supported the
Interstate Compact on Educational Opportunity for Military
Children, as originally expressed in section 539 of the
National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2010 (Public
Law 111-84). The committee reaffirms its support for the
compact and encourages the Secretary of Defense to work with
the remaining non-signatory states to join the Interstate
Compact on Educational Opportunity for Military Children.

Transition Assistance Program

The committee applauds the Department of Defense's revamped
Transition Assistance Program to provide assistance to career
ready military members transitioning for a career or education
following military separation. The new Transition-Goals, Plans,
Success (Transition-GPS) is an enhanced program established to
assist members with their transition as the military draws
down. Transition-GPS gives the Department the flexibility and
authorities required to execute its role in providing
information, counseling, tools, and training for service
members to transition from the military. The committee
encourages the Secretary of Defense to continuously improve and
build the program by, among other things, partnering with the
education community for opportunities to increase interest in
Science, Technology, Engineering and Mathematics (STEM)
education and medical programs; and with the veterans community
to allow for valuable feedback from recently separated veterans
to be incorporated into the program. The committee also
supports the Administration's Information Technology (IT)
Training and Certification Partnership that will allow service
members to obtain IT certifications before they transition from
military service, and the new grant program that will allow
service members with health care experience to pursue a career
in nursing. The committee also encourages the Secretary to use
existing authorities to continue to partner with private
industry, vocational and technical training centers, and state
and professional licensing and credentialing agencies to assist
military personnel in obtaining technical skills, licenses, or
credentials applicable to their military skill as well as post
military employment opportunities. The committee looks forward
to the results of, and report on, the pilot program on receipt
of civilian credentialing for skills required for Military
Occupational Specialties required by section 558 of the
National Defense Authorization Act for 2012 (Public Law 112-
81).

Tuition Assistance

The committee recognizes the important value Military
Tuition Assistance provides the All-Volunteer Force. An
educated force provides increased capability to an already
dynamic and highly technical military. The committee supports
efforts to afford opportunities to service members to further
increase their education while in the military. The committee
is concerned that the increased fiscal pressures will impact
the viability of the Tuition Assistance Program in the long-
term, if the Department of Defense and the military services do
not put into place measures to control rising costs. Therefore,
requiring service oversight of individual education plans and
the use of cost share methods is reasonable action that the
services can take to ensure Federal resources are spent
efficiently, and ensure that service members maintain a vested
interest in their education. The committee also supports
efforts by the secretaries concerned to execute their programs
to the needs of the individual service, recognizing that how
each service views the use of tuition assistance differs based
on culture, training, and retention requirements. A Department-
wide policy, while worthy, may not be the most efficient or
effective method of managing this program. Therefore, the
committee encourages the Secretary of Defense to maintain
flexibility in prescribed regulations and policies to allow the
Secretaries of the military departments to execute and maintain
a tuition assistance program that will remain viable during a
period of budget constraints without impacting the
opportunities of deserving service members.

U.S. Special Operations Command Educational Initiatives

The committee supports U.S. Special Operations Command
(USSOCOM) education initiatives that provide Special Operations
Forces (SOF) with additional professional military education
opportunities that serve to professionalize the force. While
the committee supports these initiatives, it expects the
educational opportunities to address requirements unique to SOF
and that they will not duplicate educational opportunities
provided by the military services unless the utilization tour
required by the services for that educational opportunity
proves burdensome for the SOF student. The committee is aware
that USSOCOM is in the process of formalizing educational
agreements with the Secretaries of the military departments to
ensure effective coordination and to establish a process to
formalize SOF education requirements.
The committee is pleased with this coordination, encourages
a rapid coordination process, and looks forward to continued
dialogue on the future of SOF education initiatives. Therefore,
the committee directs the Chairman, Joint Chiefs of Staff, in
coordination with the Commander, U.S. Special Operations
Command, to provide a briefing to the congressional defense
committees within 90 days after the date of the enactment of
this Act, outlining all SOF-unique educational requirements,
recommendations for meeting those requirements, and how the
proposed USSOCOM educational initiatives compare to service-
offered educational opportunities.

Use of Radio in Department of Defense Advertising

The Department of Defense spent $450.1 million in
advertising in fiscal year 2012. The focus of the Department's
commercial advertising expenditures were recruiting and
reaching influencers. A review of advertising expenditures
shows that the Department spends less than 2 percent of its
advertising budget on radio, compared to the 10.1 percent the
average national commercial advertiser usually spends. Radio
reaches 92 percent of all Americans each week. Thus, the broad
reach of radio makes it an effective media vehicle to utilize
to reach both recruits and influencers. Radio reaches diverse
racial and ethnic communities in our Nation, because there are
many stations and networks that target these diverse
communities. The committee encourages the Department to examine
its commercial advertising expenditures to determine whether
greater utilization of radio to reach a larger target audience
among diverse communities would be cost-effective.

Yellow Ribbon Reintegration Program

The committee commends the Department of Defense Yellow
Ribbon Reintegration Program Office for its efforts over the
past 5 years to assist the military services by providing
information, support, and best practices to maintain a ready
Reserve Component with stronger and more resilient service
members and families. As the Nation reduces its overseas
commitment in the Islamic Republic of Afghanistan, the
committee believes there will continue to be a requirement for
the utilization and mobilization of the Reserves in support of
combatant commanders and contingency operations for the
foreseeable future. Therefore, the committee recommends that
the Secretary of Defense ensure that the Yellow Ribbon
Reintegration Program remains current, flexible, and viable by
maintaining the appropriate expertise, knowledge, and resources
in order to meet the requirements of the National Defense
Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2008 (Public Law 110-181), as
amended, to support the operational reserves.

LEGISLATIVE PROVISIONS

Subtitle A--Officer Personnel Policy Generally

Section 501--Limitations on Number of General and Flag Officers on
Active Duty

This section would reduce by 14 the total of the number of
general and flag officers authorized to be on Active Duty in
the military services, and by 10 the number of general and flag
officers authorized to be assigned to joint duty assignments.
The reductions would take effect on October 1, 2014. The
committee is aware that reductions in the number of general and
flag officers are proceeding as a result of previously directed
actions by the Secretary of Defense. For example, based on data
provided by the Department of Defense, there were 889 general
and flag officers on Active Duty in 2001. That number grew to
971 in 2011, but will decrease to 908 in 2013 and is projected
to be 869 in 2016. Given both the projected decrease and the
known reductions in active end strength, the committee believes
the reductions required by this section are prudent.

Subtitle B--Reserve Component Management

Section 511--Minimum Notification Requirements for Members of Reserve
Components Before Deployment or Cancellation of Deployment Related to a
Contingency Operation

This section would require the service secretaries to
provide Reserve Component members or units notification 120
days in advance of being ordered to deployment or being
notified that such deployment has been canceled, postponed, or
otherwise altered. If the service secretary fails to meet the
120-day notification requirement, the Secretary of the military
service must submit, within 30 days after the date of the
failure, written notification to the Committees on Armed
Services of the Senate and the House of Representatives
explaining the reason for not meeting the required minimum
notification and the units and members of the Reserve Component
affected.

Section 512--Information to be Provided to Boards Considering Officers
for Selective Early Removal from Reserve Active-Status List

This section would amend Section 14704 of title 10, United
States Code, by aligning the statutory procedures for a board
convened to consider officers with sufficient qualifying
service for early removal from the reserve active-status list
with the procedures required for an Active Duty selective early
retirement board. The statutes governing Active Duty selective
early retirement boards, sections 638 and 638a of title 10,
U.S. Code, provide the Secretary of the military department
concerned discretion to limit the zone of officers eligible for
selective early retirement based on date of rank and to exclude
officers with approved voluntary or involuntary retirements
from consideration. The proposed amendment would extend this
authority to reserve selective early removal boards.

Section 513--Temporary Authority to Maintain Active Status and Inactive
Status Lists of Members in the Inactive National Guard

This section would provide temporary authority for the
Secretary of the Army and the Secretary of the Air Force to
maintain an active status and an inactive status list of
members in the inactive National Guard. This section would also
limit the number of members that may be carried on the active
list of the inactive National Guard to no more than 4,000 at
any one time. This section would also require the Secretary of
Defense to commission an independent study to evaluate the
effectiveness of using an active status list for the inactive
National Guard to improve the readiness of the Army and Air
National Guard. The study would also assess the impact of using
the temporary authority with personnel who have permanent
profiles and are non-deployable to improve the time necessary
to complete the Integrated Disability Evaluation System (IDES)
process. The temporary authority under this provision is
available between October 1, 2013, and December 31, 2018. Prior
to implementation of the authority provided by this section,
the Secretary of Defense would be required to submit to the
Committees on Armed Services of the Senate and the House of
Representatives the implementation guidance to execute this
authority. The Secretary of Defense would also be required to
submit to the Committees on Armed Services of the Senate and
the House of Representatives the results of the study required
by this section within 180 days of the completion of the study.

Section 514--Review of Requirements and Authorizations for Reserve
Component General and Flag Officers in an Active Status

This section would require the Secretary of Defense to
report the findings and recommendations of a review of the
requirements for Reserve Component general and flag officers in
an active status. The section would require the report to be
provided to the Committees on Armed Services of the Senate and
the House of Representatives not later than 18 months after the
date of the enactment of this Act. The Secretary of Defense's
efficiencies review in 2011 projected that such a review would
be completed by the end of 2012. However, a lack of funding and
incomplete Reserve Component force structure and organizational
studies postponed the review. Under current law, 422 such
officers are authorized. They are in addition to the Reserve
Component general and flag officers on Active Duty and in
addition to those general officers serving in the National
Guard Bureau or as adjutants general in the Army and Air
National Guard. The committee has provided funding for this
study in the tables accompanying this Act.

Section 515--Feasibility Study on Establishing a Unit of the national
Guard in American Samoa and in the Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana
Islands

This section would require the Secretary of Defense to
conduct a study to determine the feasibility of establishing a
unit of the National Guard in American Samoa and a unit of the
National Guard in the Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana
Islands.

Subtitle C--General Service Authorities

Section 521--Review of Integrated Disability Evaluation System

This section would require the Secretary of Defense to
conduct a review of the backlog of Reserve Component cases in
the Integrated Disability Evaluation System and consider
improvements to the system, and to submit a report on the
results of the review to the Committees on Armed Services of
the Senate and the House of Representatives within 180 days
after the date of the enactment of this Act.

Section 522--Compliance Requirements for Organizational Climate
Assessments

This section would require verification and tracking of the
organizational climate assessments mandated as part of the
Department of Defense sexual assault prevention and response
program, as required by section 572(a)(3) of the National
Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2013 (Public Law 112-
239). This section would also require the Secretary of Defense
to submit a report to the Committees on Armed Services of the
Senate and the House of Representatives not later than 90 days
after the date of the enactment of this Act on the progress in
developing, and estimated completion of, a tracking system to
ensure compliance.

Section 523--Command Responsibility and Accountability for Remains of
Members of the Army, Navy, Air Force, and Marine Corps Who Die Outside
the United States

This section would require the Secretary of Defense to
ensure that there is a continuous military command
responsibility and accountability for the remains of each
deceased member of the military services who died outside of
the United States.

Section 524--Contents of Transition Assistance Program

This section would amend section 1144 of title 10, United
States Code, by requiring information about disability-related
employment and education protections to be provided to service
members during the transition assistance program. This section
would also require any member who plans to use educational
assistance entitlements under title 38 to receive instruction
on an overview of those entitlements, courses in post-secondary
education appropriate for the member and compatible with the
member's goals, and how to finance the member's education.
Implementation of this section would occur not later than April
1, 2015. In addition, this section would require, within 270
days after the date of the enactment of this Act, that the
Secretary of Veterans Affairs submit to the Committees on
Veterans' Affairs of the Senate and the House of
Representatives and the Committees on Armed Services of the
Senate and the House of Representatives the results of a
feasibility study of providing instruction described in
subsection (b) of section 1142 of title 10, United States Code,
at all overseas locations.

Section 525--Procedures for Judicial Review of Military Personnel
Decisions Relating to Correction of Military Records

This section would establish procedures for judicial review
for any final decision regarding records correction made under
sections 1034(f) or (g) and section 1552 of title 10, United
States Code, by requiring the service member to exhaust
administrative relief procedures before seeking judicial review
for correction of military records or decisions granted by the
boards for the correction of military records. Additionally,
this section would require that service members be notified of
their right to judicial review and of the statutory time limits
associated with judicial review of correction board decisions.

Section 526--Establishment And Use of Consistent Definition of Gender-
Neutral Occupational Standard For Military Career Designators

This section would amend section 543 of the National
Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 1994 (Public Law 103-
160) by adding definitions for gender-neutral occupational
standard and military career designator. This section would
also consistently apply the gender-neutral occupational
standard and military career designator throughout the amended
section.

Section 527--Expansion and Enhancement of Authorities Relating To
Protected Communications of Members of The Armed Forces and Prohibited
Retaliatory Actions

This section would add rape, sexual assault, or other
sexual misconduct to the protected communications by members of
the Armed Forces with Members of Congress or an Inspector
General. In addition, this section would clarify that a
communication would not be excluded from protections because of
the time, place, method off communication, or the motivation of
the individual providing information. Further, this section
would require a determination as to whether a prohibited
personnel action took place and recommendations for the
disposition of the complaint be included in a report of the
investigation. This section would require the Secretary of the
military department to take disciplinary action against an
individual who commits a prohibited personnel action and to
correct the record of the person experiencing a prohibited
personnel action. This section would also establish as the
burden of proof for any investigation by an Inspector General
or review by the secretary concerned to be that specified in
section 1221(e) of title 5, United States Code.

Section 528--Applicability of Medical Examination Requirement Regarding
Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder or Traumatic Brain Injury to Proceedings
Under the Uniform Code of Military Justice

This section would strike subsection (c) of section 1177 of
title 10, United States Code. Subsection (c) allows a military
service an exception to the requirement for a medical
examination in connection with the administrative discharge of
a service member, diagnosed with or reasonably asserting post-
traumatic stress disorder or traumatic brain injury, who is
facing court-martial or proceedings under the Uniform Code of
Military Justice. By taking this action, the committee ensures
that service members are not disadvantaged due to combat
related injuries.

Section 529--Protection of the Religious Freedom of Military Chaplains
to Close a Prayer Outside of a Religious Service According to the
Traditions, Expressions, and Religious Exercises of the Endorsing Faith
Group

This section would permit chaplains in the Armed Forces to
close a prayer, outside of a religious service, according to
the traditions, expressions, and religious exercises of the
chaplain's endorsing faith group.

Section 530--Expansion and Implementation of Protections of Rights of
Conscience of Members of the Armed Forces and Chaplains of Such Members

This section would amend section 533 of the National
Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2013 (Public Law 112-
239), which mandates the accommodation of the beliefs of a
service member that stem from the member's conscience, moral
principles, or religious beliefs and prohibits adverse action
against a service member for those beliefs. This section would
expand the accommodation and prohibition against adverse action
to a member's actions and speech. Furthermore, this section
would change the standard that would trigger disciplinary
action from beliefs, speech, or action that threaten good order
and discipline to beliefs, speech, or action that actually harm
good order and discipline. Finally, this section would require
that the Secretary of Defense issue regulations to implement
section 533 within 120 days after the date of the enactment of
this Act.

Section 530A--Service Members' Accountability, Rights, and
Responsibilities Training

This section would establish a set of rights and
responsibilities for each member of the Armed Services, and
would require the Secretary of Defense to establish a formal
means for a service member to acknowledge those rights and
responsibilities at certain times in a member's military
career.

Section 530B--Inspector General of the Department of Defense Review of
Separation of Members of the Armed Forces who Made Unrestricted Reports
of Sexual Assault.

This section would require the Inspector General of the
Department of Defense to conduct a review to identify all
members of the Armed Forces who, since January 1, 2002, were
separated from the Armed Forces after making an unrestricted
report of sexual assault. The review would seek to determine
the circumstances of and the grounds for the separation and
whether the separation was in retaliation or influenced by the
unrestricted report. The Inspector General would then submit a
report to the Committees on Armed Services of the Senate and
the House of Representatives concerning the results of the
review.

Section 530C--Report on Data and Information Collected in Connection
with Department of Defense Review of Laws, Policies, and Regulations
Restricting Service of Female Members of the Armed Forces

This section would require the Secretary of Defense to
submit a report containing the results and data produced by the
review required by section 535 of the Ike Skelton National
Defense Authorization Act For Fiscal Year 2011 (Public Law 111-
383), not later than 30 days after the date of the enactment of
this Act, to the Committees on Armed Services of the Senate and
the House of Representatives.

Section 530D--Sense of Congress Regarding the Women in Service
Implementation Plan

This section would express the sense of Congress that no
later than September 2015, the Secretaries of the military
departments should develop, review, and validate occupational
standards in order to assess and assign members of the Armed
Forces to units, including Special Operations Forces, and
should complete all assessments by January 1, 2016.

Subtitle D--Military Justice and Legal Matters, Including Sexual
Assault Prevention and Response

Section 531--Limitations on Convening Authority Discretion Regarding
Court-Martial Findings and Sentence

This section would amend section 860 of title 10, United
States Code, to remove the command prerogative and sole
discretion of the court-martial convening authority with regard
to the findings and sentence of a court-martial. Specifically,
with regard to the findings of a court-martial, this section
would prohibit the convening authority from dismissing a
finding, or from reducing a guilty finding to guilty of a
lesser included offense, except for qualifying offenses. This
section would define a qualifying offense as any in which the
maximum sentence for the offense does not exceed 2 years and
the adjudged court-martial sentence does not include dismissal,
a dishonorable or bad-conduct discharge, or confinement for
more than 6 months. This section would exclude any offense
under section 920, Rape and Sexual Assault, of title 10, United
States Code, from being a qualifying offense.
With regard to sentences, this section would prohibit, with
some exceptions, the convening authority from reducing,
disapproving, commuting, or suspending a mandatory minimum
sentence, or an adjudged sentence of confinement or a punitive
discharge. With regard to those exceptions, when the accused
has provided substantial assistance in the investigation or
prosecution of another person and upon the recommendation of
the trial counsel, this section would allow the convening
authority to reduce a sentence below a mandatory minimum
sentence, to reduce a confinement sentence, or to disapprove,
commute, or suspend the adjudged sentence in whole or in part.
This section would also permit the convening authority to
reduce, dismiss, or suspend an adjudged sentence of confinement
as part of a plea bargain, if a mandatory minimum sentence does
not exist. Furthermore, when an adjudged sentence includes
punishments in addition to the mandatory minimum sentence, this
section would permit the convening authority to modify,
disapprove, commute, or suspend those additional punishments.
Finally, this section would require that if the convening
authority acted to change a finding or sentence, then the
convening authority's written rationale for the action would be
provided at the same time and made part of the record of trial.

Section 532--Elimination of Five-Year Statute of Limitations on Trial
By Court-Martial for Additional Offenses Involving Sex-Related Crimes

This section would add sexual assault and sexual assault of
a child, offenses covered respectively by section 920(b) and
section 920b(b) of title 10, United States Code, to the list of
offenses in the Uniform Code of Military Justice that may be
tried and punished at any time without limitation. This section
would apply to offenses committed on or after the date of the
enactment of this Act.

Section 533--Discharge or Dismissal for Certain Sex-Related Offenses
and Trial of Offenses by General Courts-Martial

This section would establish dismissal (for officers,
commissioned warrant officers, cadets, and midshipmen) or
dishonorable discharge (for enlisted personnel and warrant
officers who are not commissioned) as the mandatory minimum
sentence for a person subject to the Uniform Code of Military
Justice who is convicted by court-martial of rape, sexual
assault, forcible sodomy, or an attempt to commit those
offenses. Given such mandatory minimum sentences, this section
would also limit jurisdiction for trial of the cited offenses
to only a general court-martial. The changes to the Uniform
Code of Military Justice made by this section would be
effective 180 days after the date of the enactment of this Act
and apply to offenses committed after that date. This section
would also require the independent Response Systems Panel
established by section 576(a)(1) of the National Defense
Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2013 (Public Law 112-239) to
assess the appropriateness of establishing additional mandatory
minimum sentences for other offenses under the Uniform Code of
Military Justice. Furthermore, this section would require the
independent Judicial Proceedings Panel established by section
576(a)(2) of Public Law 112-239 to assess the implementation
and effect of mandatory minimum sentences established by this
section.

Section 534--Regulations Regarding Consideration of Application for
Permanent Change of Station or Unit Transfer by Victims of Sexual
Assault

This section would require the Secretary concerned to issue
regulations to provide for timely determination and action on
an application for consideration of a change of station or unit
transfer submitted by a member of the Armed Forces serving on
Active Duty who is a victim of sexual assault.

Section 535--Consideration of Need for, and Authority to Provide for,
Temporary Administrative Reassignment or Removal of a Member on Active
Duty Who is Accused of Committing a Sexual Assault or Related Offense

This section would authorize the Secretary concerned to
provide guidance for commanders regarding authority for
temporary reassignment or removal of an individual from a
position of authority who is alleged to have committed a sexual
assault or other sex-related offense under section 920, 920a,
920b or 920c of title 10, United States Code. Further, this
section would require the Secretary of Defense to include
information on the use of such authority as part of training
for new and prospective commanders.

Section 536--Victims' Counsel for Victims of Sex-Related Offenses and
Related Provisions

This section would require Victims' Counsels, who would be
qualified and specially trained lawyers in each of the Armed
Forces, to be made available to provide legal assistance to
victims of sex-related offenses, which include rape and sexual
assault, stalking, and rape and sexual assault of a child. The
legal assistance authorized by this section would include
accompanying the victim at any proceedings related to the
reporting, military investigation, and military prosecution of
the sex-related offense, as well as legal consultation on the
military justice system, the potential criminal liability of
the victim stemming from the sex-related offense, the Victim
Witness Assistance Program, potential civil litigation by the
victim, medical support, and mental health counseling. This
section would allow the victim the option of declining the
assistance without prejudicing a later decision to seek such
assistance. This section would require Victim's Counsels to be
available within 180 days after the date of the enactment of
this Act. This section would also require the Secretary of
Defense, in coordination with the Secretary of Homeland
Security, to provide the Committees on Armed Services of the
Senate and the House of Representatives with a report on how
the Armed Forces will implement this section. The report would
be due within 90 days after the date of the enactment of this
Act. Furthermore, this section would require the independent
Response Systems Panel, established by section 576(a)(1) of the
National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2013 (Public
Law 112-239) to assess whether the legal assistance authorized
by this section should be expanded to include legal standing to
represent the victim during investigative and military justice
proceedings. Finally, this section would task the independent
Judicial Proceedings Panel established by section 576(a)(2) of
the cited public law to assess the implementation and effect of
the Victims' Counsel program established by this section.

Section 537--Inspector General Investigation of Allegations of
Retaliatory Personnel Actions Taken in Response to Making Protected
Communications Regarding Sexual Assault

The section would add rape, sexual assault, or other sexual
misconduct to the protected communications of members of the
Armed Forces with Members of Congress or an Inspector General.

Section 538--Secretary Defense Report on Role of Commanders in Military
Justice Process

This section would require the Secretary of Defense to
assess the current role and authorities of commanders in the
administration of military justice and the investigation,
prosecution, and adjudication of offenses under the Uniform
Code of Military Justice. This section would also require the
Secretary to report the assessment, together with his
recommendation whether the role and authorities of commanders
should be further modified or repealed, to the Committees on
Armed Services of the Senate and the House of Representatives
within 90 days after the date of the enactment of this Act.

Section 539--Review and Policy Regarding Department of Defense
Investigative Practices in Response to Allegations of Sex-Related
Offenses

This section would require the Secretary of Defense, within
180 days after the date of the enactment of this Act, to review
of the practices of military criminal investigative
organizations regarding the investigation of alleged sex-
related offenses involving members of the Armed Forces. The
review would include an assessment of the extent to which the
investigative organizations make a recommendation on whether an
allegation of a sex-related offense appears founded or
unfounded. This section would also require the Secretary to
develop a uniform policy regarding the use of case
determinations by the investigative organizations to record the
results of the investigation of a sex-related offense. In
developing the policy the Secretary shall consider the
feasibility of adopting case determination methods used by non-
military law enforcement agencies.

Section 540--Uniform Training and Education Programs for Sexual Assault
Prevention and Response Program

This section would require the Secretary of Defense to
develop a uniform curriculum, to include lesson plans, to
ensure that sexual assault prevention and response training and
education for members of the Armed Forces are uniform across
the Department of Defense.

Section 541--Development of Selection Criteria for Assignment as Sexual
Assault Response and Prevention Program Managers, Sexual Assault
Response Coordinators, and Sexual Assault Victim Advocates

This section would require the Secretary of Defense to
establish selection qualifications for members of the Armed
Forces or civilian employees for assignment to duty as Sexual
Assault Response and Prevention Program Managers, Sexual
Assault Response Coordinators, and Sexual Assault Victim
Advocates. In addition, this section would require the
Secretary of each military department to assign at least one
Sexual Assault Nurse Examiners-Adult/Adolescent to each brigade
or equivalent unless the Secretary of Defense determines that
it is more practicable and effective for assignment to other
units. This section would also require that personnel assigned
as Sexual Assault Nurse Examiners-Adult/Adolescent be members
of the Armed Forces or civilian employees of the Department of
Defense. Further, this section would require the Sexual Assault
Nurse Examiners-Adult/Adolescent be trained and certified.

Section 542--Extension of Crime Victims' Rights to Victims of Offenses
Under the Uniform Code of Military Justice

This section would set out the rights of a person who was a
victim of an offense under the Uniform Code of Military
Justice. The articulated rights and procedures are similar, but
not identical to those set forth in section 3771 of title 18,
United States Code. The section would also require that, within
1 year of the date of the enactment of this Act, the Secretary
of Defense would not only submit to the President recommended
changes to the Manual for Courts-Martial needed to carry out
this section, but would also prescribe regulations to promote
compliance with the section. Finally, the section would task
the independent panel established by the Secretary of Defense
under section 576(a)(1) of the National Defense Authorization
Act for Fiscal Year 2013 (Public Law 112-239) to assess the
feasibility and appropriateness of incorporating into the
Uniform Code of Military Justice additional crime victims'
rights set out in section 3771, but not incorporated into the
Uniform Code of Military Justice by this section.

Section 543--Defense Counsel Interview of Complaining Witnesses in
Presence of Counsel for the Complaining Witnesses or a Sexual Assault
Victim Advocate

This section would require that if the defense counsel in
connection with proceedings under the Uniform Code of Military
Justice desires to interview a complaining witness, then the
request for the interview must be placed through the trial
counsel. Furthermore, if the defense counsel interviews the
complaining witness, the section would require that the
interview take place in the presence of the counsel for the
witness or a Sexual Assault Victim Advocate.

Section 544--Participation by Complaining Witness in Clemency Phase of
Courts-Martial Process

This section would enable a complaining witness, who is a
person who has suffered a direct physical, emotional, or
pecuniary harm as a result of the commission of an offense, to
submit matters for consideration by the convening authority
following a court-martial and prior to the convening authority
taking action on the findings or sentence of that court-
martial.

Section 545--Eight-Day Incident Reporting Requirement in Response to
Unrestricted Report of Sexual Assault in Which the Victim is a Member
of the Armed Forces

This section would require the Secretary of Defense to
establish a policy for a written incident report, by a person
designated by the Secretary, to detail the actions taken or in
progress to provide the victim of a sexual assault the
necessary care and support, to refer the alleged assault to the
proper military criminal investigative organization, and to
provide initial notification to the chain of command above the
unit in which the victim served, when such notification had not
already taken place. This section would require the incident
report to be provided within 8 days of the unrestricted report
of a sexual assault. Furthermore, this section would require
that the Secretary of Defense prescribe regulations to carry
out the policy within 180 days of the date of the enactment of
this Act.

Section 546--Amendment to Manual for Courts-Martial to Eliminate
Considerations Relating to Character and Military Service of Accused in
Initial Disposition of Sex-Related Offenses

This section would require the Secretary of Defense, within
180 days of the date of the enactment of this Act, to recommend
to the President a change to the Manual for Courts-Martial that
would strike the words ``the character and the military service
of the accused'' from the list of factors contained in the
manual's Rule 306, Initial Disposition, when that rule was
applied to sex-related offenses.

Section 547--Inclusion of Letter of Reprimands, Nonpunitive Letter of
Reprimands and Counseling Statements

This section, in order to provide increased visibility to
commanders and to identify and prevent trends of unacceptable
behavior at an early stage, would direct the Secretary of
Defense to require commanders to include letters of reprimand,
nonpunitive letters of action, and counseling statements
involving substantiated cases of sexual harassment or sexual
assault in the performance evaluation of a member of the Armed
Forces.

Section 548--Enhanced Protections for Prospective Members and New
Members of the Armed Forces During Entry-Level Processing and Training

This section would require the Secretary of Defense to
establish and maintain a policy that uniformly defines and
prescribes what constitutes an inappropriate and prohibited
relationship, communication, conduct, or contact, including
when such an action is consensual, between certain members of
the Armed Forces, such as recruiters, military personnel
assigned to a military entrance processing center, or drill
instructors in basic training centers, and a prospective member
of the Armed Forces or a member undergoing entry-level
processing or training. This section would also require that
substantiated violations of the policy by a member would result
in the member being automatically processed for administrative
separation from military service. Finally, this section would
require the Secretary of Defense to propose an amendment to the
Uniform Code of Military Justice that would address violations
of the policy.

Section 549--Independent Reviews and Assessments of Uniform Code of
Military Justice and Judicial Proceedings of Sexual Assault Cases

This section would require the independent panel
established under section 576(a)(1) of the National Defense
Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2013 (Public Law 112-239) to
assess the impact, if any, that removing from the chain of
command the disposition authority for charges preferred under
the Uniform Code of Military Justice would have on overall
reporting and prosecution of sexual assault cases. This section
would also require the independent panel to review the report
of the Secretary of Defense, which is mandated by section 538
of this Act, on the role of military commanders in the military
justice system. Finally, this section would require the
independent panel to render its report of findings and
recommendations within 1 year of the panel's first meeting.

Section 550--Review of the Office of Diversity Management and Equal
Opportunity Role in Sexual Harassment Cases

This section would require the Secretary of Defense to
conduct a review of the Office of Diversity Management and
Equal Opportunity for the purposes of identifying resource and
personnel gaps in the office, the role of the office in sexual
harassment cases, and evaluating how the office works with the
Sexual Assault Prevention and Response Office to address sexual
assault in the Armed Forces.

Subtitle E--Military Family Readiness

Section 551--Department of Defense Recognition of Spouses of Members of
the Armed Forces Who Serve in Combat Zones

This section would require the design of a spouse-of-a-
combat veteran lapel button, approved by the Secretary of
Defense, to identify and recognize the spouse of a member of
the Armed Forces who is serving or has served in a combat zone
for a period of more than 30 days. In addition, this section
would authorize the Secretary concerned to use appropriated
funds to procure spouse-of-a-combat-veteran lapel buttons and
to provide for their presentation to eligible spouses of
members.

Section 552--Protection of Child Custody Arrangements For Parents Who
Are Members of the Armed Forces

This section would amend title II of the Service Members
Civil Relief Act (50 U.S.C. app. 521) to require a court that
issued a temporary custody order based solely on the deployment
or anticipated deployment of a service member to reinstate the
custody order that was in effect immediately preceding the
temporary order, unless the court finds reinstatement is not in
the best interest of the child. This section would also
prohibit a court from using deployment or the possibility of
deployment as the sole factor when determining the best
interest of a child.

Section 553--Treatment of Relocation of Members of the Armed Forces for
Active Duty for Purposes of Mortgage Refinancing

This section would amend section 303 of the Servicemembers
Civil Relief Act to expand certain mortgage protections for
service members, surviving spouses, and veterans; to make
knowing violations of these protections a criminal offense; and
to increase civil penalties for violations of these
protections.

Section 554--Family Support Programs for Immediate Family Members of
Members of the Armed Forces Assigned to Special Operations Forces

This section would authorize the Commander, United States
Special Operations Command, consistent with regulations that
the Secretary of Defense may prescribe, to conduct up to three
pilot programs to assess the feasibility and benefits of
providing family support activities for the immediate family
members of the Armed Forces assigned to special operations
forces. This section would require that family support programs
provided by pilot programs not duplicate those family support
programs being provided by the Secretary of a military
department. This section also would authorize the pilot
programs for fiscal years 2014 through 2016. It is the
committee's intent is that any pilot program initiated under
this section be completed by the end of fiscal year 2016. The
section would also limit to $5.0 million the amount that may be
spent on the pilot programs in a fiscal year, and require the
Commander, United States Special Operations Command to provide
a report to the congressional defense committees within 180
days of the completion of a pilot program initiated under this
section.

Subtitle F--Education and Training Opportunities and Administration

Section 561--Inclusion of Freely Associated States within Scope of
Junior Reserve Officers' Training Corps Program

This section would amend section 2031(a) of title 10,
United States Code, to authorize the Secretary of a military
department to establish and maintain a unit of the Junior
Reserve Officers' Training Corps at a secondary education
institution in the Freely Associated States, if the conditions
of section 2031(b) of title 10, United States Code, are met.

Section 562--Improved Climate Assessments and Dissemination and
Tracking of Results

This section would direct the Secretary of Defense to
ensure that the results of command climate assessments are
provided to the relevant commander and the next higher level of
command. This section would also require the Secretary to
include in the performance evaluation of a commander evidence
of compliance with the requirements for conducting climate
assessments. Additionally, this section would require the
Inspector General of the Department of Defense to develop a
system to track command compliance. Unit commanders would be
required to develop a compliance report that will include an
overview of the unit members' concerns, data showing how the
leadership is perceived and a detailed plan on how leadership
will address unit concerns.

Section 563--Service-wide 360 Assessments

This section would require the Secretaries of the military
departments to develop an assessment program modeled after the
current Department of the Army Multi-Source Assessment and
Feedback program (``360-degree approach'') including individual
counseling as part of the performance evaluation process.

Section 564--Health Welfare Inspections

This section would require the Secretary of each military
department to conduct health and welfare inspections on a
monthly basis to ensure and maintain security, military
readiness, and good order and discipline.

Section 565--Review of Security of Military Installations, Including
Barracks and multi-family residences.

This section would direct the Secretary of Defense to
conduct a review of security measures on military installations
specifically with regard to barracks and multi-family housing
units. Elements of the study would include identifying security
gaps on military installations, evaluating the feasibility and
effectiveness of 24-hour electronic monitoring or placing
security guards at points of entry to barracks and military
family housing.

Section 566--Enhancement of Mechanisms to Correlate Skills and Training
for Military Occupational Specialties with Skills and Training
Required for Civilian Certification and Licenses

This section would require the Secretaries of the military
departments to make information on civilian credentialing
opportunities available to members of the Armed Forces,
including during the transition assistance program. This
section would also require the Secretaries of the military
departments to make available to accredited civilian
credentialing agencies information on military courses and
skills.

Section 567--Use of Educational Assistance for Courses in Pursuit of
Civilian Certifications or Licenses

This section would amend section 2015 of title 10, United
States Code, by placing limitations on when educational
assistance may be used to pursue civilian certifications and
licenses. This section would also authorize the use of
educational assistance authorities under sections 2007, 2015,
106A, 2183, 1606 and 1607 of title 10, United States Code, to
pursue civilian certifications and licenses.

Subtitle G--Defense Dependents' Education

Section 571--Continuation of Authority To Assist Local Educational
Agencies that Benefit Dependents of Members of the Armed Forces and
Department of Defense Civilian Employees

This section would authorize $20.0 million for continuation
of the Department of Defense assistance program to local
educational agencies (LEAs) that are impacted by the enrollment
of dependent children of military members and Department
civilian employees. This section would also authorize $5.0
million for assistance to LEAs with significant changes in
enrollment of school-aged dependents of military members and
civilian employees due to base closures, force structure
changes, or force relocations. Furthermore, this section would
extend the authority for assistance to LEAs impacted by base
closures, force structure changes, or force relocations by 1
year to September 30, 2015.

Section 572--Support for Efforts to Improve Academic Achievement and
Transition of Military Dependent Students

This section would authorize the Secretary of Defense to
provide grant assistance to non-profit organizations that
provide services to improve the academic achievement of
military dependent students, including those non-profit
organizations whose programs focus on increasing the civic
responsibility of military dependent students and their
understanding of the Federal Government through direct exposure
to the Government.

Section 573--Treatment of Tuition Payments Received for Virtual
Elementary and Secondary Education Component of Department of Defense
Education Program

This section would amend section 2164(l) of title 10,
United States Code, to allow the Secretary of Defense to retain
the tuition payments made by participants in the Department of
Defense virtual elementary and secondary education programs.
The retained tuition would be used to provide support for the
virtual education programs authorized by section 2164(l).

Subtitle H--Decorations and Awards

Section 581--Fraudulent Representations about Receipt of Military
Decorations or Medals

This section would amend title 18, United States Code, to
make fraudulently claiming to be a recipient of certain
decorations or medals with the intent to obtain money,
property, or other tangible benefits a crime.

Section 582--Repeal of Limitation on Number of Medals of Honor That May
Be Awarded to the same Member of the Armed Forces

This section would authorize a service member to receive a
Medal of Honor for each subsequent valorous act that results in
the award of a Medal of Honor.

Section 583--Standardization of Time-Limits for Recommending and
Awarding Medal of Honor, Distinguished-Service Cross, Navy Cross, Air
Force Cross, and Distinguished-Service Medal

This section would modify the Army and Air Force time
limits to 3 years for recommending and 5 years for awarding a
soldier or airman a Medal of Honor, Service Cross, or
Distinguished-Service Medal, thereby standardizing those limits
for all services.

Section 584--Recodification and Revision of Army, Navy, Air Force, and
Coast Guard Medal of Honor Roll Requirements

This section would require the Secretaries of the Army,
Navy, Air Force, and the Secretary of the Department in which
the Coast Guard is operating to establish and maintain a Medal
of Honor Roll and enter the name of each person on the roll who
has served on Active Duty in the Armed Forces and who has been
awarded the Medal of Honor. This section would also require the
Secretary concerned to furnish the Secretary of Veterans
Affairs a certified copy of each certification of enrollment.
This section would repeal sections 1560 and 1561 of title 38,
United States Code.

Section 585--Treatment of Victims of the Attacks at Recruiting Station
in Little Rock, Arkansas, and at Fort Hood, Texas

This section would require the Secretary of the military
department concerned to award the Purple Heart to members of
the Armed Forces who were killed or wounded in the attacks that
occurred at the recruiting station in Little Rock, Arkansas, on
June 1, 2009, and at Fort Hood, Texas, on November 5, 2009.
Furthermore, this section would deem the members of the Armed
Forces killed or wounded in those attacks to have been killed
or injured in a combat zone and the Department of Defense
civilians to have been killed or wounded in a contingency
operation. The effect would be to make those members and
civilians eligible for additional monetary benefits.

Section 586--Retroactive Award of Army Combat Action Badge

This section would authorize the Secretary of the Army to
award the Army Combat Action Badge to a person who, while a
member of the Army, participated in combat during which the
person personally engaged, or was personnally engaged by, the
enemy at any time during the period beginning on December 7,
1941, and ending on September 18, 2001.

Section 587--Report on Navy Review, Findings, and Actions Pertaining to
Medal of Honor Nomination of Marine Corps Sergeant Rafael Peralta

This section would require the Secretary of the Navy to
submit a report on the Navy review, findings, and actions
pertaining to the Medal of Honor nomination of Sergeant Rafael
Peralta to the Committees on Armed Services of the Senate and
the House of Representatives.

Section 588--Authorization For Award Of The Distinguished-Service Cross
To Sergeant First Class Robert F. Keiser For Acts Of Valor During The
Korean War

This section would waive the statutory time limitation
under section 3144 of title 10, United States Code, to
authorize the Secretary of the Army to award the Distinguished
Service Cross to Robert F. Keiser, who served in the United
States Army during the Korean War. The committee takes this
action based on the written confirmation by the Secretary of
the Army that the actions of Robert F. Keiser merit the award
of the Distinguished Service Cross.

Subtitle I--Other Matters

Section 591--Revision of Specified Senior Military Colleges to Reflect
Consolidation of North Georgia College and State University and
Gainesville State College

This section would amend section 2111a(f) of title 10,
United States Code, to reflect the name change of North Georgia
College and State University to The University of North
Georgia.

Section 592--Authority to Enter into Concessions Contracts at Army
National Military Cemeteries

This section would authorize the Secretary of the Army to
enter into concession contracts for transportation,
interpretative, and other services in support of visitors at
Arlington National Cemetery and the United States Soldiers' and
Airmen's Home National Cemetery. This section would also
require that each concession contract include terms that the
Secretary determines are necessary to ensure the protection,
dignity, and solemnity of the cemetery at which services are
provided. Furthermore, the section would prohibit the Secretary
of the Army from instituting a concession contract for
operation of the gift shop at Arlington National Cemetery
without subsequent authorization. In providing for
transportation services at Arlington National Cemetery, the
committee directs the Secretary of the Army to ensure that
service provides visitors with access to the Custis Lee
Mansion.

Section 593--Commission on Military Behavioral Health and Disciplinary
Issues

This section would establish a 10-member commission to
study whether the Department of Defenses' mechanisms for
disciplinary action adequately address the impact of service-
connected mental disorders and traumatic brain injury.
Specifically, this section would require the examination of
those members diagnosed with or reasonably asserting post-
traumatic stress disorder or traumatic brain injury that have
been deployed overseas in support of a contingency operation
during the previous 24 months, and how that injury or
deployment may constitute matters in extenuation that relate to
the basis for administrative separation under conditions other
than honorable or the overall characterization of service of
the member as other than honorable.

Section 594--Commission on Service to the Nation

This section would establish a commission to be known as
the ``Commission on Service to the Nation'' to study the
effects of warfare on members of the Armed Forces, their
families, and communities, and the gaps between the military
and the rest of civilian society.

TITLE VI--COMPENSATION AND OTHER PERSONNEL BENEFITS

OVERVIEW

The committee continues to believe that robust and flexible
compensation programs are central to maintaining a high-
quality, All-Volunteer, combat-ready force. Accordingly, the
committee supports a 1.8 percent military pay raise for fiscal
year 2014, in accordance with current law, in order for
military pay raises to keep pace with the pay increases in the
private sector as measured by the Employment Cost Index. The
committee believes that future pay-raise proposals that are
below the Employment Cost Index may have long term affects on
the recruiting and retention of a high-quality All-Volunteer
Force. Additionally, to sustain the All-Volunteer Force, the
committee recommends that the authorities for a wide array of
bonuses, special and incentive pays, and other compensation
benefits set to expire on December 31, 2013, be extended for an
additional year.

ITEMS OF SPECIAL INTEREST

Military Exchanges, Commissaries, and Morale, Welfare, and Recreation
Activities

The committee considers the military exchanges,
commissaries, and the morale, welfare and recreation (MWR)
activities to be quality of life benefits that are important to
the welfare of military communities around the world and key
factors in maintaining the All-Volunteer Force. The committee
remains concerned that the growing fiscal pressures on the
Department of Defense and the military services will increase
efforts to reduce or divert to other priorities the minimal
amount of appropriated funding the military resale community
receives. Such a reduction would reduce the benefit to patrons
and dividends to MRW activities, and adversely impact the
quality of life for service members and their families. The
committee commends the commissaries for being forward-leaning
in reducing overhead costs and increasing internal efficiencies
to maintain the benefit for military and retiree patrons with
reduced appropriated funding. The committee encourages the
military resale community and MWR activities to continue to
refine their business processes and create efficiencies in
order to reduce the reliance on appropriated funding, and
maintain and protect the important quality of life benefit
these programs have brought to the service members and their
families.

LEGISLATIVE PROVISIONS

Subtitle A--Pay and Allowances

Section 601--Extension of Authority to Provide Temporary Increase in
Rates of Basic Allowance for Housing Under Certain Circumstances

This section would extend for 1 year the authority of the
Secretary of Defense to temporarily increase the rate of basic
allowance for housing in areas impacted by natural disasters or
experiencing a sudden influx of personnel.

Subtitle B--Bonuses and Special and Incentive Pays

Section 611--One-Year Extension of Certain Bonus and Special Pay
Authorities for Reserve Forces

This section would extend the authority for the Selected
Reserve reenlistment bonus, the Selected Reserve affiliation or
enlistment bonus, special pay for enlisted members assigned to
certain high-priority units, the Ready Reserve enlistment bonus
for persons without prior service, the Ready Reserve enlistment
and reenlistment bonus for persons with prior service, the
Selected Reserve enlistment and reenlistment bonus for persons
with prior service, income replacement payments for Reserve
Component members experiencing extended and frequent
mobilization for Active Duty service, and the authority to
reimburse travel expenses for inactive duty training outside of
normal commuting distance until December 31, 2014.

Section 612--One-Year Extension of Certain Bonus and Special Pay
Authorities for Health Care Professionals

This section would extend the authority for the nurse
officer candidate accession program, repayment of educational
loans for certain health professionals who serve in the
Selected Reserve, the accession and retention bonuses for
psychologists, the accession bonus for registered nurses, the
incentive special pay for nurse anesthetists, the special pay
for Selected Reserve health care professionals in critically
short wartime specialties, the accession bonus for dental
officers, the accession bonus for pharmacy officers, the
accession bonus for medical officers in critically short
wartime specialties, and the accession bonus for dental
specialist officers in critically short wartime specialties
until December 31, 2014.

Section 613--One-Year Extension of Special Pay and Bonus Authorities
for Nuclear Officers

This section would extend the authority for the special pay
for nuclear-qualified officers extending a period of active
service, nuclear career accession bonus, and the nuclear career
annual incentive bonus until December 31, 2014.

Section 614--One-Year Extension of Authorities Relating to Title 37
Consolidated Special Pay, Incentive Pay, and Bonus Authorities

This section would extend the general bonus authority for
enlisted members, the general bonus authority for officers, the
special bonus and incentive pay authority for nuclear officers,
special aviation incentive pay and bonus authorities, the
special health professions incentive pay and bonus authorities,
hazardous duty pay, assignment pay or special duty pay, skill
incentive pay or proficiency bonus, and the retention bonus for
members with critical military skills or assigned to high-
priority units until December 31, 2014.

Section 615--One-Year Extension of Authorities Relating to Payment of
Other Title 37 Bonuses and Special Pays

This section would extend the authority for the aviation
officer retention bonus, assignment incentive pay, the
reenlistment bonus for active members, the enlistment bonus for
active members, the accession bonus for new officers in
critical skills, the incentive bonus for conversion to military
occupational specialty to ease personnel shortage, the
incentive bonus for transfer between Armed Forces, and the
accession bonus for officer candidates until December 31, 2014.

Section 616--One-Year Extension of Authority to Provide Incentive Pay
for Members of Precommissioning Programs Pursuing Foreign Language
Proficiency

This section would authorize payment of incentive pay for
members of pre-commissioning programs who are pursuing foreign
language proficiency.

Section 617--Authority to Provide Bonus to Certain Cadets and
Midshipmen Enrolled in the Senior Reserve Officers' Training Corps

This section would extend from December 31, 2012, until
December 31, 2015, the authority for a student attending the
senior Reserve Officers' Training Corps Leaders Course, who
executes a written agreement to accept a commission or an
appointment as an Officer of the Armed Forces and to serve on
Active Duty, to receive a bonus.

Subtitle C--Disability, Retired Pay, Survivor, and Transitional
Benefits

Section 621--Transitional Compensation and Other Benefits for
Dependents of Certain Members Separated for Violation of the Uniform
Code of Military Justice

This section would amend section 1059 of title 10, United
States Code, to authorize the provision of transitional
compensation and other benefits for the dependent of a member
of the Armed Forces when the member, after completing more than
20 years of service, is separated from the Armed Forces because
of a violation of the Uniform Code of Military Justice and
forfeits all pay and allowances.

Section 622--Prevention of Retired Pay Inversion for Members Whose
Retired Pay is Computed Using High-Three Average

This section would clarify the application of the Tower
amendment, section 1401a(f) of title 10, United States Code, to
the computation of retired pay for service members who first
entered military service on or after September 8, 1980. The
Tower amendment was enacted in 1975 to prevent the loss of
military retired pay for members who were eligible to retire
earlier than their actual retirement date under the Final Pay
Retirement System. The High-36 Retirement System enacted in
1980 obviated the need for application of the Tower amendment.
This section would clarify that Tower amendment does not apply
in the application of the High-36 retirement calculations, but
will continue to be used when calculating retired pay under the
Final Pay Retirement System.

Subtitle D--Commissary and Nonappropriated Fund Instrumentality
Benefits and Operations

Section 631--Expansion of Protection of Employees of Nonappropriated
Fund Instrumentalities from Reprisals

This section would amend section 1587(b) of title 10,
United States Code, to include ``threaten to take'' as an
adverse personnel action. This amendment would bring
whistleblower protections for non-appropriated fund
instrumentality employees in line with protections afforded to
members of the Armed Forces.

Section 632--Purchase of Sustainable Products, Local Food Products, and
Recyclable Materials for Resale in Commissary and Exchange Store
Systems

This section would require the governing body giving
oversight and management direction to the military exchange and
commissary systems in accordance with section 2481(c) of title
10, United States Code, to establish guidelines for the
identification of fresh meat, poultry, seafood, produce, and
other products raised or produced through sustainable methods
that are not harmful to the ecology. This section would require
the guidelines to be established not later than 2 years from
the date of the enactment of this Act. The committee believes
the guidelines should consider the impact of implementing
sustainable product policies on the cost of goods and the
pricing of the products offered to patrons. This section would
also require the governing body to establish, not later than
September 30, 2018, goals for all exchange and commissary
stores to purchase sustainable products, local food products,
and recyclable materials.

Section 633--Correction of Obsolete References to Certain
Nonappropriated Fund Instrumentalities

This section would amend section 2105(c) of title 5, United
States Code, to strike obsolete Nonappropriated Fund
Instrumentalities references to the Army and Air Force Motion
Picture Service and Navy Ships Stores Ashore, and update with
an accurate title of the Navy Ships Store Program.

Subtitle E--Other Matters

Section 641--Authority to Provide Certain Expenses for Care and
Disposition of Human Remains Retained by the Department of Defense for
Forensic Pathology Investigation

This section would amend sections 1481 and 1482 of title
10, United States Code, to authorize the Secretaries of the
military departments to pay for expenses incident to death for
certain decedents whose deaths are investigated by the Armed
Forces Medical Examiner System (AFMES) under section 1471 of
title 10, United States Code, when payment of such expenses is
not otherwise authorized by law. Currently, when the AFMES
removes decedent remains to a Department of Defense mortuary
for a forensic pathology investigation pursuant to section
1471, title 10, United States Code, some decedent's next of kin
must pay for the mortuary services, including transportation
costs, which may otherwise not be available under section 1482
of title 10, at the conclusion of the investigation.

Section 642--Provision of Status Under Law by Honoring Certain Members
of the Reserve Components as Veterans

This section would honor as veterans those retired members
of the Reserve Components who, because of age, are not yet
eligible to receive retired pay. This honorary designation as a
veteran would not entitle the retiree to any benefit.

Section 643--Survey of Military Pay and Benefits Preferences

This section would require the Secretary of Defense to
carry out an anonymous survey of random members of the Armed
Forces regarding pay and benefits, including the value that
members place on forms of compensation, relative to one
another, including basic pay, allowances for housing, bonuses
and special pay, healthcare benefits, and retirement pay.

TITLE VII--HEALTH CARE PROVISIONS

OVERVIEW

The committee continues to strongly support a high-quality
and cost-effective military health system that provides members
of the Armed Forces, retirees, survivors, and their families
access to quality health care. The committee remains committed
to ensuring service members and their families have access to
mental health care and that every opportunity is utilized to
screen service members for mental health conditions and
traumatic brain injury. In that regard, the committee mandated
periodic mental health assessments for all service members
serving on Active Duty and increased the frequency of mental
health assessments for deployed personnel. The committee also
required the Department of Defense to conduct research focused
on drug development to halt neurodegeneration following
traumatic brain injury. To further the committee's focus on
addressing suicide by members of the Armed Forces, the
Department is authorized to carry out collaborative programs to
respond to suicide and combat stress, substance addiction,
risk-taking behaviors, and family violence.

ITEMS OF SPECIAL INTEREST

Additional Therapeutic Treatment Activities Available Under Exceptional
Care Health Option

The committee directs the Secretary of Defense to explore
the possibility of providing additional rehabilitative
therapies pursuant to subsection (a)(17) of section 1077 of
title 10, United States Code, or through inclusion within the
Exceptional Care Health Option (ECHO) program to expand the
utilization of non-traditional modalities, including a horse,
balance board, ball, bolster, and bench. The Secretary is
required to brief the Committees on Armed Services of the
Senate and the House of Representatives by April 1, 2014, on
the results of his review to expand additional therapeutic
treatment activities.

Administration of Blood Products On-board U.S. Medical Evacuation
Aircraft

The committee recognizes the major advances in military
medicine that have significantly reduced the mortality rate
among combat wounded personnel. The most critical time to
respond to battlefield casualties remains the first hour after
injury, the so-called golden hour. The committee recognizes
that the military services have committed tremendous resources
and training in order to provide service members the best
possible treatment at the point of injury. The committee is
aware of a recent demonstration project conducted by a limited
number of Army MEDEVAC aviation components in the Islamic
Republic of Afghanistan to administer blood products to injured
soldiers during the soldiers' en-route medical care and
movement to a medical facility. Preliminary data suggest that
these in-flight blood transfusions have greatly increased the
probability of survival for injured soldiers. The committee
understands the Army as a result has expanded this capability
across MEDEVAC units in the operational area. The committee is
interested in understanding the underpinning analysis that was
conducted to support this change. Therefore, the committee
directs the Secretary of the Army to provide a briefing to the
House Committee on Armed Services within 180 days after the
date of the enactment of this Act on the program, including the
timeline toward outfitting MEDEVAC aviation units with blood
products to improve en-route patient care.

Alcohol Abuse Prevention Programs

The committee is encouraged that the Department of Defense
and the military services recognize the deleterious effects of
alcohol abuse on service members, families and military
readiness. However, the committee remains concerned with the
incidence of alcohol abuse by members of the military and their
families. The committee believes that applying best practices
across the military services may allow for more effective
alcohol abuse prevention programs. Therefore, the committee
directs the Secretaries of the military services, within 90
days after the date of the enactment of this Act, to submit to
the congressional defense committees, a report on alcohol abuse
prevention programs to include a cost benefit analysis
detailing the most effective methods for preventing alcohol
abuse.

Department of Defense and Early Autism Diagnosis and Intervention for
Military Families

The committee commends the Department of Defense for its
continued efforts to ensure that military families have access
to autism diagnosis, intervention, and treatment services. The
committee encourages the Department to continue to assist
military families with autistic children to receive the full
and expanding range of evidence-based intervention and
treatment approaches. In addition, the committee directs the
Secretary of Defense to ensure that sufficient priority is
given to efforts to provide services specifically for autistic
children of military families living in rural or under-served
communities.

Efforts to Advance Lower Extremity Prosthetics and Orthotics

Improvised Explosive Devices (IEDs) have been the number
one threat to the men and women who have served and are
currently serving in contingency operations in the Middle East.
The committee understands that the incidence of significant
traumatic injuries to lower extremities as a result of IED
blasts has led to innovative and improved care of these
injuries. Recognizing that lower extremity injuries often
require long-term and continuous care, the committee encourages
the Secretary of Defense to continue looking for new and
innovative prosthetic and orthopedic technologies to assist
service members adapting to these significant injuries. The
committee directs the Secretary of Defense, in consultation
with the Secretary of Veterans Affairs, to report to the
Committees on Armed Services of the Senate and the House of
Representatives on the Department of Defense's effort to
advance lower extremity prosthetics and orthotics, and the
process by which such advancements are made available to
members of the Armed Forces in a timely manner. This report
should also include information on research efforts and funding
for powered prosthetics and orthotics for service members with
a lower extremity amputation or other lower extremity injuries
with limb salvage. The Secretary of Defense shall submit the
report within 120 days after the date of the enactment of this
Act.

Efforts to Improve Treatment for Post Traumatic Stress and Traumatic
Brain Injury

The committee recognizes that the Department of Defense has
made great strides in research and development of Post
Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD) and Traumatic Brain Injury
(TBI) over the past decade. The current budget climate will
have an impact on continued research and development efforts
and the committee urges the Department to consider a systems
medicine approach that will better leverage the limited
resources that will be available in the future. Systems
medicine promotes a comprehensive, inter-disciplinary approach
that includes clinical care, professional education, and the
interaction between genetics, the external environment, and
individual behaviors to focus on prevention of diseases. Many
large research universities and hospitals have found that
employing systems medicine has made tremendous progress on
informing its research efforts. The committee believes that
such a comprehensive approach may improve the research and
development of PTSD and TBI to better support our service
members.

Healthy Base Initiative

The committee recognizes that a healthy and fit force is
essential as service members must be physically prepared to
deploy in a moment's notice, often to locations that are
extremely austere and with demanding conditions. The committee
commends the Department of Defense for initiating its Healthy
Base Initiative (HBI) demonstration program which promotes and
supports the overall health and wellness of service members,
families, and civilians through improved nutritional choices,
increased physical activity, obesity reduction and control, and
efforts to decrease tobacco use. In addition, the committee
commends the Department of the Army for initiating the
Performance Triad designed to improve stamina, readiness and
health through enhanced activity and improved nutrition and
sleep. The committee believes that supporting healthy lifestyle
choices will positively impact troop and family readiness and
may result in an overall increase in the health of service
members and their families.

Military Health System Governance Reform Report

The committee received the March 2013 report of the
Department of Defense on the Military Health System governance
reform implementation plan as required by the National Defense
Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2013 (Public Law 112-239).
That public law required that the report provide detailed goals
that were to be achieved while carrying out reforms. Those
reforms included improving clinical and business practices and
reducing costs, infrastructure, and personnel. The report also
required a detailed schedule for meeting the goals. While the
goals for the reform of the Military Health System included in
the report address the statutory requirements, the report does
not clearly describe the linkage of the goals to the
responsibilities of the newly established Defense Heath Agency.
In addition, the report neither provides the information to
understand how the Department developed its goals, nor did the
report provide a detailed schedule as required. The
establishment of a Defense Health Agency is a major
transformation, and its success is dependent upon greater
system integration. The committee remains concerned that the
Defense Health Agency could result in greater costs and
personnel expenditures if the goals are not clearly linked to
the roles and responsibilities of the Agency, and if a complete
schedule is not clearly linked to the goals. Therefore, the
committee directs the Secretary of Defense to address the
shortcomings identified above with the required elements of the
report that is due not later than June 30, 2013, or by separate
letter to the committee within 30 days of the latter suspense.

Report on Prostate Cancer Imaging Research

The committee notes the encouragement to the Department of
Defense to intensify research on the advancement of prostate
imaging technologies that is contained on page 180 of House
Report 112-479, the report accompanying the National Defense
Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2013 (H.R. 4310). The
committee directs the Secretary of Defense to provide a
briefing to the Committees on Armed Service of the Senate and
the House of Representatives on research either conducted by or
funded by the Department of Defense to advance technology for
the detection of prostate cancer.

Report on Provider Referrals for Ancillary Services Under TRICARE

The committee remains concerned with the long term
viability of the TRICARE benefit for service members and their
families. In that regard the committee is committed to ensuring
that adequate protections are in place to make certain that the
Department of Defense is not paying excessive costs for
ancillary services through referrals by TRICARE providers.
Therefore, the committee directs the Secretary of Defense, no
later than April 1, 2014, to report to the committee on Armed
Services of the Senate and the House of Representatives on the
policies and procedures in place to avoid paying excessive
costs for provider referred ancillary services under TRICARE
and the effectiveness of such policies and procedures in
avoiding excessive costs.

Review of the Military Health System Medical Training Consolidation

The Services established a memorandum of agreement for the
governance of the recently established Medical Education and
Training Campus (METC) in 2011. The establishment of METC
consolidated the Department of Defense's five enlisted medical
training campuses at one location in San Antonio, Texas and,
according to the Department of Defense, over half of its
programs of instruction. While the Department has reported it
realized savings from this effort, it remains unclear if there
are additional efficiencies to be gained in medical training
consolidation. Further, it is unclear whether the individual
programs of instruction have been consolidated into a joint
program of instruction. Therefore, the committee directs the
Comptroller General of the United States to review the
consolidation of the Department of Defense's medical training.
The review should include at an minimum: (1) the extent to
which enlisted and officer medical training have been
consolidated and standardized and what, if any, financial
savings has the Department achieved; (2) the extent to which
there are further opportunities for consolidation of enlisted
medical training; (3) the extent to which the Department has
examined consolidation of officer medical training, including
an estimate of potential financial savings; and (4) an
assessment of the lessons learned from the Medical Education
and Training Campus consolidation that could apply to future
consolidation efforts in the military health system's
governance. The Comptroller General shall submit the results of
the review no later than April 18, 2014 to the Committees on
Armed Services of the Senate and the House of Representatives.

Therapeutic Service Dog Training Program

The committee is aware that recovering service members in
treatment at the National Intrepid Center of Excellence (NICoE)
and Walter Reed National Military Medical Center are reporting
improvement in their symptoms of Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder
(PTSD) and Traumatic Brain Injury (TBI) when participating in
the service dog training programs currently operating in those
facilities. In addition, clinical observations support the
benefits of this animal-assisted therapy modality to
psychologically injured service members, including: decreased
depressive symptoms, improved emotional regulation, improved
sleep patterns, a greater sense of purpose, better
reintegration into their communities, pain reduction, and
improved parenting skills. The committee urges the Secretary of
Defense to consider making this promising new therapeutic
intervention more available to service members suffering from
the invisible wounds of PTSD and TBI. Therefore, the committee
directs the Secretary of Defense to conduct such studies as may
be necessary to evaluate the efficacy of service dog training
as an adjunctive treatment for PTSD and TBI and to maximize the
therapeutic benefits to recovering members who participate in
the programs. The committee further directs the Secretary to
provide a report not later than March 1, 2015 to update the
congressional defense committees on this research.

Trauma Clinical Research Repository

The committee recognizes that trauma-related deaths impact
our military services, as well as the general civilian
population. The committee understands that advancements in
trauma care are the results of research conducted across the
public-private spectrum by Federal, academic, and private
institutions. The life-saving impact of this research can be
seen on the battlefield and in civilian trauma. However, in an
era of constrained medical research budgets and a shrinking
defense budget, it is imperative that trauma research funding
be used efficiently and for the greatest good. The committee
believes that to continue the advancement in trauma care the
collective research data should be maintained centrally so it
can be accessed by both public and private researchers for
future use. A trauma clinical research repository would provide
an opportunity to make widely available the data resulting from
current and future clinical trauma research in both the
military and civilian sectors that could lead to significant
advances in treatment and improved outcomes in both the
military and civilian populations. Therefore, the committee
encourages the Department of Defense to work with other Federal
agencies and the private sector to establish a trauma clinical
research repository to share and maximize critical trauma
research data.

LEGISLATIVE PROVISIONS

Subtitle A--Improvements to Health Benefits

Section 701--Mental Health Assessments for Members of the Armed Forces

This section would amend section 1074m of title 10, United
States Code, to require the Secretary of Defense to provide
person-to-person mental health screenings once during each 180-
day period in which a member is deployed.

Section 702--Periodic Mental Health Assessments for Members of the
Armed Forces

This section would require the Secretary of Defense to
provide periodic mental health assessments to each member of
the Armed Forces serving on Active Duty.

Subtitle B--Health Care Administration

Section 711--Future Availability of TRICARE Prime for Certain
Beneficiaries Enrolled in TRICARE Prime

This section would authorize a one time opt-in to TRICARE
Prime for beneficiaries who are eligible for TRICARE Prime as
of September 30, 2013, provided the beneficiary remains in the
same ZIP Code as the ZIP Code the beneficiary resided in at the
time of the opt-in, notwithstanding eligibility for enrollment
based on the location at which the beneficiary resides.

Section 712--Cooperative Health Care Agreements Between the Military
Departments and Non-Military Health Care Entities

This section would permit the Secretaries of the military
departments to establish cooperative health care arrangements
and agreements between military installations and local and
regional non-military health care entities.

Section 713--Limitation on Availability of Funds for Integrated
Electronic Health Record Program

This section would limit the amount of funds the Secretary
of Defense may obligate or expend for procurement, or research,
development, test and evaluation of the integrated electronic
health record until 30 days after the date that the Secretary
submits a report detailing an analysis of alternatives for the
plan of the Secretary to proceed with such program.

Section 714--Pilot Program on Increased Third-Party Collection
Reimbursements in Military Medical Treatment Facilities

This section would require the Secretary of Defense to
conduct a pilot program for 3 years at military installations
to assess the feasibility of using revenue-cycle management
processes, including cash flow management and accounts-
receivable processes to increase amounts collected by military
treatment facilities from third party payers. The Secretary of
Defense would be required to submit a report of the results of
the pilot program to the congressional defense committees
within 180 days after completion of the pilot program.

Subtitle C--Other Matters

Section 721--Display of Budget Information for Embedded Mental Health
Providers of the Reserve Components

This section would require the Secretary of Defense to
include in the documents that support the President's annual
budget, a budget justification display for embedded mental
health providers of the Reserve Components that includes the
amount for each component.

Section 722--Authority of Uniformed Services University of Health
Sciences to Enter Into Contracts and Agreements and Make Grants to
Other Nonprofit Entities

This section would clarify the authority of the Secretary
of Defense, with regard to the Uniformed Services University of
Health Sciences, to enter into contracts and agreements and
make grants to nonprofit entities.

Section 723--Mental Health Support for Military Personnel and Families

This section would require the Secretary of Defense to
carry out collaborative programs to respond to suicide and
combat stress related arrest rates of members of the Armed
Forces as well as to train Active Duty members to recognize and
respond to combat stress disorder, suicide risk, substance
addiction, risk taking behaviors, and family violence.

Section 724--Research Regarding Hydrocephalus

This section would authorize the Secretary of Defense to
consider selecting research projects relating to hydrocephalus
under the Peer Review Medical Research Program.

Section 725--Traumatic Brain Injury Research

This section would require the Secretary of Defense to
carry out research, test, and evaluation activities regarding
drug development to halt neurodegeneration following traumatic
brain injury.

TITLE VIII--ACQUISITION POLICY, ACQUISITION MANAGEMENT, AND RELATED
MATTERS

ITEMS OF SPECIAL INTEREST

Advanced Technical Exploitation Program

The committee is aware the National Air and Space
Intelligence Center (NASIC) is seeking to alter the acquisition
strategy for the follow-on contract for the Advanced Technical
Exploitation Program (ATEP). The committee is also aware that
the objective of this follow-on contract, referred to as ATEP
II, is ``to provide contract services to support the NASIC
mission in Geospatial Intelligence (GEOINT) and non-nuclear
Measurement and Signature Intelligence (MASINT) Tasking,
Collection, Processing, Exploitation, and Dissemination
activities. This includes up to 24x7 intelligence operations,
reach-back advanced data exploitation support, and cutting-edge
GEOINT and MASINT research and development for NASIC and
mission partners throughout the Department of Defense and
intelligence communities.''
The committee is also aware that the Air Force intends to
use a lowest price, technically acceptable (LPTA) acquisition
strategy for ATEP II and is planning to set this contract aside
for small business concerns. The committee is concerned that
the scope, scale, complexity and mission criticality of this
work is inappropriate for an LPTA source selection and may not
be well-suited for small business participation at the prime
contract level. When those strategies are combined and used to
procure complex, mission critical services, the risk of
acquisition failure rises.
Therefore, the committee directs the Under Secretary of
Defense for Acquisition, Technology, and Logistics to examine
the Air Force's acquisition strategy related to provision of
these services and to provide a briefing to the House Committee
on Armed Services by October 1, 2013, that includes a detailed
description of the following: (1) the acquisition strategy; (2)
rationale and justification for using such strategy; (3)
summary of market research methodology and findings performed
during the development of the acquisition strategy; (4)
assessment of risks related to such strategy; and (5) a
description of the management and oversight structure necessary
to ensure successful performance of the contracted activity
throughout the period of performance.

Commercial Items Pricing Information

The committee remains confident that sections 2379 and
2306a(d) of title 10, United States Code, provide the
Department of Defense with adequate authority for obtaining
cost and pricing information to evaluate the price
reasonableness of certain commercial items that are procured to
support a major system, and the committee looks forward to
issuance of the guidance mandated by section 831 of the
National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2013 (Public
Law 112-239) on use of that authority. The committee notes that
inconsistent use of the authority granted by sections 2379 and
2306a(d) within the Department of Defense continues to foster
uncertainty among vendors, as recently evidenced by factors
leading to the corrective action taken by the Department of the
Army in amending its solicitation for overhaul services for
certain fuel pumps in light of a protest filed with the
Government Accountability Office. The committee expects that
the Department of Defense's forthcoming guidance and the plan
of action for training and developing the acquisition
workforce, also required by section 831 of Public Law 112-239,
will address inconsistencies in exercising the authority
granted by sections 2379 and 2306a(d) to avert further
complications in contracting for commercial items.

Competition in Air Force Network-Centric Solutions Contracts

The committee is aware of reports that the Air Force may be
inappropriately using sole source and brand name procurement
solicitations and contract awards in the Network-Centric
Solutions (NETCENTS), Air Force contract vehicles. The
committee is concerned that these decisions may be negatively
impacting competition between NETCENTS-1 and NETCENTS-2
contract vehicles. Therefore, the committee directs the Under
Secretary of Defense for Acquisition, Technology and Logistics
to review NETCENTS vehicles and provide a briefing to the
Committee on Armed Services of the House of Representatives
within 60 days after the date of the enactment of this Act. The
review should detail the Air Force's use of ``sole source'' and
``brand name only'' procurement solicitations and contract
awards under NETCENTS-1 and NETCENTS-2 contracts, as well as
the extent to which the Air Force met the statutory
requirements of Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR) 6.303 and/
or FAR 16.505, as applicable. The review should also detail
remedial steps to be taken when the requirements of FAR 6.303
and/or FAR 16.505 have not been met, as applicable.

Implementation of Requirement for Designation of a Lead Inspector
General for Certain Contingency Operations

The committee applauds the work done by the Special
Inspector General for Iraq Reconstruction (SIGIR) and the
Special Inspector General for Afghanistan Reconstruction
(SIGAR). Both have done much to provide independent and
objective oversight of reconstruction projects and activities
through the conduct of audits and investigations. The committee
believes they have promoted efficiency and effectiveness in
reconstruction programs and have detected and prevented waste,
fraud, and abuse. They have also provided valuable
recommendations to promote economy, efficiency, and
effectiveness during contingency operations and have aided the
development of policies to prevent and detect waste, fraud, and
abuse during those operations. However, the committee notes
that SIGIR was not established by law until October 2004 and
SIGAR was not established by law until January 2008, years and
months after the United States began contingency operations and
reconstruction activities in the Republic of Iraq and the
Islamic Republic of Afghanistan.
The committee recognizes that future contingency operations
will likely be heavily reliant on contractors, including
contracts for the procurement of locally available goods and
services, to support and assist the U.S. mission in such
operations, and therefore certain contingency operations could
benefit from the designation of a lead Inspector General (IG)
early in the operation. As a result, the National Defense
Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2013 (Public Law 112-239)
included a provision, section 848, which requires the
designation of a lead IG for overseas contingency operations
not later than 30 days after the commencement of certain
military operations.
The committee is aware that the offices of the Inspectors
General of the Department of Defense, the Department of State,
and the United States Agency for International Development
(USAID) have initiated preliminary interagency discussions on
the implementation of section 848. The committee applauds this
effort and recognizes that development of a framework for
section 848 implementation is a complex and challenging
endeavor. Such challenges include establishing a process for
requesting funding to support the activities of the lead IG
once a contingency operation is declared; resourcing and
manpower considerations, including the ability to surge when
needed; maintaining a workforce that is skilled and trained to
conduct IG responsibilities in a wide variety of potential
contingency operations; and keeping open lines of communication
so as to foster relationships between the three agencies'
Inspectors General during peacetime.
Therefore, the committee encourages the Inspectors General
of the Department of Defense, the Department of State, and
USAID to establish a memorandum of agreement that would serve
as a framework for implementation of section 848 and execution
of the responsibilities described therein. The committee
requests to be kept informed of progress and notified of
obstacles related to the implementation of section 848.
Furthermore, the committee specifically requests to be notified
of the need for any changes to law or regulation in order to
better enhance oversight of future contingency operations.

Online Reverse Auctions

The committee is aware that the military services have been
increasingly utilizing online reverse auctions for the
procurement of certain commodities and simple services. This
procurement strategy, when used effectively and appropriately,
can result in savings to the Federal Government versus
estimated prices. According to Federal Times, Naval Supply
Systems Command recently piloted a reverse auction program,
saving approximately $2.0 million in the first year of the
program.
In view of the serious fiscal challenges facing the
Department of Defense, acquisitions strategies which provide
the same level of goods and service to the warfighter at
reduced costs to the taxpayer are commendable. The committee
would encourage the services to consider increasing their use
of reverse auctions for certain types of acquisitions that lend
themselves to this model and meet this standard, but to also
review their own studies, including that of the Corps of
Engineers, that may provide additional guidance regarding the
best utilization of this procurement methodology.

Report on Operational Contract Support in Afghanistan

The Department of Defense has begun its drawdown of troops
and equipment from the Islamic Republic of Afghanistan. For the
past 11 years, the Department of Defense has spent billions of
dollars on operational contract support in Afghanistan and
continues to employ over 100,000 U.S. personnel, third country
nationals, and Afghans as contractor employees in Afghanistan.
Additionally, there is potentially a large amount of
contractor-managed Government-owned equipment in Afghanistan,
which must also be disposed. The Comptroller General of the
United States' previous work on the drawdown of U.S. troops in
the Republic of Iraq highlighted the difficulties the
Department of Defense had in planning and executing the
drawdown of contractors from Iraq. The drawdown of contractors
in Afghanistan is likely to be more complex than that which the
Department of Defense faced in Iraq due to continuing combat
operations and the need to plan operational contract support
for the post-2014 advise and assist mission.
Therefore, the committee directs the Comptroller General of
the United States to provide a report to the Committees on
Armed Services of the Senate and the House of Representatives
by January 10, 2014, that reviews the processes and procedures
that the Department of Defense is using to plan and execute the
drawdown of contractors and their equipment in Afghanistan. The
committee is particularly concerned with how the Department of
Defense is ensuring that its contractor drawdown is done in the
most cost-effective manner. The report should include, but is
not limited to, the following:
(1) How the Department is applying operational
contract support lessons learned as it begins its
drawdown of contractors and their equipment in
Afghanistan;
(2) How the Department and U.S. Forces-Afghanistan
have established processes and procedures to draw down
its contractor workforce and associated equipment and
the extent to which these processes are synchronized
with established milestones and other guidance;
(3) How the Department is using cost and other
information to help ensure it is making cost-effective
operational contract support drawdown decisions,
including decisions on the disposition of contractor-
managed, Government-owned equipment;
(4) How the Department has taken actions to ensure
that there are sufficient personnel in place to oversee
contractors as it reduces the number of military forces
in Afghanistan; and
(5) How the Department and U.S. Forces-Afghanistan
have planned for the use of contractors after December
31, 2014, and the extent to which the Department has
considered post-2014 contractor requirements and costs
in such planning.

Use of Lowest Price, Technically Acceptable Source Selection Processes

The committee applauds recent efforts by the Department of
Defense to cut costs and save taxpayer dollars. These efforts,
such as ``Better Buying Power'' initiatives, seek to achieve
greater efficiencies through affordability, cost control and
the elimination of unproductive processes or bureaucracy. Such
efforts also seek to promote competition. However, the
committee is concerned that this well-intentioned effort by the
Department to lower costs frequently results in the
inappropriate awarding of contracts based on a lowest price,
technically acceptable (LPTA) standard instead of a best-value
tradeoff approach.
According to the Federal Acquisition Regulation, the goal
of the acquisition system is to ``deliver on a timely basis the
best value product or service to the customer, while
maintaining the public's trust and fulfilling public policy
objectives.'' In certain circumstances, pursuing the lowest
cost in the short term can result in significant operational
and financial costs in the long term. In October 2010, the
Government Accountability Office (GAO) issued a report on the
Department's use of best value processes. In that report (GAO-
11-8), GAO found that the Department used a best-value tradeoff
approach for about 70 percent of its new, competitively awarded
contracts in fiscal year 2009. An LPTA approach was used for
about 25 percent of these contracts.
The committee believes that awarding contracts based on an
LPTA basis should not become the default position of the
Department. Instead, careful consideration must be given to
each contract to ensure that there is an appropriate weighing
of cost versus other considerations. When a requirement is well
defined and the risk of poor contract performance is minimal,
it may be appropriate to use price as the primary basis for
awarding a contract. However, when the requirement is complex,
performance risk is high, or failure to perform has significant
consequences (such as in the case of intelligence or private
security services, or development and procurement of personal
protective equipment and critical safety items, or development
of emerging or critical technology), then a best-value tradeoff
approach may be more appropriate.
Therefore, the committee directs the Comptroller General of
the United States to conduct a review of the Department's
recent use of source selection processes, including LPTA. Such
a review should, at a minimum, examine the following:
(1) Guidance and directives, including those of the
military services, related to the use of appropriate
source selection approaches, including LPTA;
(2) Sufficiency of training of the acquisition
workforce (to include training offered at the Defense
Acquisition University) on the appropriate use of
source selection approaches;
(3) Implementation of recent efficiency initiatives,
to include ``Better Buying Power'' initiatives to
influence the use of LPTA source selection procedures;
(4) Risks associated with implementing the reverse
auction method as part of any LPTA approach for the
procurement of critical safety items, personal
protective equipment and other complex technologies;
and
(5) Waiver guidance and frequency of use on contracts
awarded using LPTA procedures.
In conducting the review, the committee encourages the
Comptroller General to obtain the views of defense contractors
to gain insight into how the use of LPTA source selection
procedures affects business decisions and to identify the
unintended consequences, if any, resulting from the use of this
approach. The committee further directs the Comptroller General
to provide the findings of the review, along with
recommendations to improve the Department's contracting
practices, to the congressional defense committees by June 30,
2014.

Utilization of Standardized Services Contract Approval Form

The committee recognizes that the Department of the Army
has promoted compliance with important sourcing and management
laws through the establishment of a Request for Services
Contract Approval Form, which is, essentially, a checklist
which conveniently and concisely integrates those laws in one
form. Accordingly, the committee directs the Under Secretary of
Defense for Acquisition, Technology, and Logistics, in
coordination and consultation with the Under Secretary of
Defense for Personnel and Readiness, to issue policies for
implementing a standard checklist to be completed prior to the
issuance of solicitation for any new service contract or
exercising of any existing contract option for services,
including services provided under a goods contract. In
implementing a standard checklist, the committee directs the
Department to model, to the maximum extent practicable, its
policies and checklist on those already used by the Department
of the Army.

LEGISLATIVE PROVISIONS

Subtitle A--Acquisition Policy and Management

Section 801--Modification of Reporting Requirement for Department of
Defense Business System Acquisition Programs when Initial Operating
Capability is not Achieved within Five-Years of Milestone A Approval

This section would amend the reporting requirement imposed
on defense business systems (DBS) acquisition programs by
section 811 of the John Warner National Defense Authorization
Act for Fiscal Year 2007 (Public Law 109-364) by clarifying the
separate treatment of Major Automated Information Systems
(MAIS) DBS and non-MAIS DBS. Specifically, this section would
clarify that section 811 is inapplicable to MAIS DBS
acquisition programs because such programs are independently
subject to critical change reporting under section 2445c of
title 10, United States Code. This section would also modify
the requirement for non-MAIS DBS reporting a failure to achieve
initial operational capacity (IOC) within 5-years of milestone
A approval from a critical change report to a report to the
Department of Defense pre-certification authority explaining
the causes and circumstances surrounding the failure to achieve
IOC within the required time.

Section 802--Enhanced Transfer of Technology Developed at Department of
Defense Laboratories

This section would establish a 5-year pilot program to
allow Department of Defense (DOD) laboratories to license DOD-
owned intellectual property that may or may not be patented,
and to retain associated royalties consistent with existing
statutes on patent licensing, section 209 of title 35, United
States Code, and royalties, section 3710c of title 15, United
States Code.

Section 803--Extension of Limitation on Aggregate Annual Amount
Available for Contract Services

This section would extend limitations on contract services
under section 808 of the National Defense Authorization Act for
Fiscal Year 2012 (Public Law 111-84), through 2015.

Subtitle B--Amendments to General Contracting Authorities, Procedures,
and Limitations

Section 811--Additional Contractor Responsibilities in Regulations
Relating to Detection and Avoidance of Counterfeit Electronic Parts

This section would amend section 818 of the National
Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2012 (Public Law 112-
81) to provide that the costs associated with the use of
counterfeit electronic parts, and the subsequent cost of rework
or corrective action that may be required to remedy the use or
inclusion of such parts, are allowable costs under Department
of Defense contracts if the counterfeit electronic parts were
procured from an original manufacturer or its authorized
dealer, or from a trusted supplier.

Section 812--Amendments Relating to Detection and Avoidance of
Counterfeit Electronic Parts

This section would amend section 818 of the National
Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2012 (Public Law 112-
81) to expand the conditions under which covered contractors
can qualify for exemption from strict liability associated with
rework and corrective action related to counterfeits of
obsolete electronic parts.
Elsewhere in this Act, the committee includes a section
that would further amend section 818 Public Law 112-81.

Section 813--Government-wide Limitations on Allowable Costs for
Contractor Compensation

This section would amend section 2324(e)(1)(P) of title 10,
United States Code, and section 4304(a) of title 41, United
States Code, to replace the current statutory benchmark
compensation formula used to determine the amount of contractor
compensation that is considered an allowable cost for a federal
contract, with the current compensation benchmark amount for
fiscal year 2013 of $763,209. This section would limit
additional changes to the current compensation baseline to the
U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics Employment Cost Index (ECI).
This section would also make unallowable the entire cost of
compensation for the five most-highly compensated employees of
a contractor that was awarded more than $500.0 million in
federal contracts in the previous fiscal year.
The committee believes the application of the current
formula by the Office of Federal Procurement Policy is flawed,
as it has resulted in an escalation of $422,559, or nearly 225
percent, in the 15 years since the compensation cap was
established in law. The committee does not believe this
escalation reflects the actual adjustments in compensation for
defense contractors over this same period due to inflation and
other market factors. The committee notes that section 1127 of
title 41, United States Code, directs the Administrator for
Federal Procurement Policy to ``review commercially available
surveys of executive compensation and, on the basis of the
results of the review, determine a benchmark compensation
amount to apply for each fiscal year.'' The Administrator is
also directed to consult with the Director of the Defense
Contract Audit Agency and other officials from executive
agencies in making the determination. However, rather than
using all available data and input from appropriate officials
to inform decision-making, it appears that the Administrator
has interpreted the requirements of section 1127 to require
that the benchmark compensation amount be established at an
amount equal to the median amount of the total compensation
(total amount of wages, salary, bonuses and deferred
compensation) accrued over a 12-month period for the top five
highest paid employees in management positions at each home
office and each segment of publicly traded U.S. companies with
annual sales over $50.0 million. According to the Congressional
Budget Office, if the current approach remains in place the
compensation cap could be raised to as high as $1.6 million by
fiscal year 2020.

Section 814--Inclusion of Additional Cost Estimate Information in
Certain Reports

This section would amend section 2432 of title 10, United
States Code, to require that the program's baseline cost
estimate, along with the associated risk curve and sensitivity
of that estimate be provided in the quarterly selected
acquisition reports. In addition, this section would require
that the reports include the current point estimate bounded by
the the low-end and high-end estimates and the associated
sensitivity of those estimates, and identification of the
primary risk parameters associated with that point estimate.
Furthermore, this section would require reporting of estimated
termination liability remaining on the contract. Finally, this
section would amend section 2334(f) of title 10, United States
Code, to require the Director, Cost Assessment and Program
Evaluation, to review the information required by this section
and to include trend information, a summary of findings and
recommendations to improve the cost estimates of the Department
of Defense in the annual report to Congress on cost assessment
activities.

Section 815--Amendment Relating to Compelling Reasons for Waiving
Suspension or Debarment

This section would amend section 2393(b) of title 10,
United States Code, by requiring the Secretary of Defense to
make available on a publicly accessible website any
determination that there is a compelling reason to solicit an
offer from, award a contract to, extend a contract with, or
approve a subcontract with an offeror or contractor that has
been debarred or suspended by a Federal agency.

Section 816--Requirement that Cost or Price to the Federal Government
be Given at Least Equal Importance as Technical or Other Criteria in
Evaluating Competitive Proposals for Defense Contracts

This section would amend section 2305(a)(3) of title 10,
United States Code, to require that the head of an agency of
the Department of Defense, in prescribing the evaluation
factors to be included in each solicitation for competitive
proposals, assign importance to cost or price at least equal to
all evaluation factors other than cost or price when combined.
This section would allow the head of an agency to waive the
requirement, and it would require the Secretary of Defense to
submit to Congress, not later than 180 days after the end of
each fiscal year, a report containing a list of each waiver
issued during the preceding fiscal year.

Section 817--Requirement to Buy American Flags from Domestic Sources

This section would amend section 2533a(b) of title 10,
United States Code, to include ``a flag of the United States of
America'' to the list of items that the Department of Defense
may not procure unless the item is grown, processed, reused, or
produced in the United States.

Subtitle C--Provisions Relating to Contracts in Support of Contingency
Operations in Iraq or Afghanistan

Section 821--Amendments Relating to Prohibition on Contracting with the
Enemy

This section would amend section 841 of the National
Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2012 (Public Law 112-
81), regarding the authority of the Secretary of Defense to
void a contract upon a determination that a foreign entity
performing on the contract is engaged in hostilities against
the United States or its coalition partners, to:
(1) Lower the threshold for covered contracts from
$0.1 million to $0.05 million;
(2) Provide the authority to certain other geographic
combatant commands during a contingency operation as
defined by section 101(a)(13) of title 10, United
States Code; and
(3) Make the authority permanent.

Section 822--Collection of Data Relating to Contracts in Iraq and
Afghanistan

This section would amend section 861 of the National
Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2008 (Public Law 110-
181), as amended, to allow for imposition of a penalty on any
contractor that does not comply with the policies, guidance or
regulations issued pursuant to that section. This section would
also amend section 863 of Public Law 110-181 to require that
the Annual Joint Report on Contracting in Iraq and Afghanistan
include information on any penalties imposed on contractors for
failing to comply with requirements under section 861(e) of
Public Law 110-181.

Subtitle D--Other Matters

Section 831--Extension of Pilot Program on Acquisition of Military
Purpose Non-Developmental Items

This section would amend section 866 of the Ike Skelton
National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2011 (Public
Law 111-383) by extending the program authority to December 31,
2019.
In February 2013, the Under Secretary of Defense for
Acquisition, Technology, and Logistics reported to the
congressional defense committees that the pilot program for
acquisition of military purpose non-developmental items (MPNDI)
had not been used even though the Secretary of Defense
implemented it through the Defense Federal Acquisition
Supplement in June 2011. The committee is aware that there may
be confusion about the requirement in section 866 of Public Law
111-383 for a contract under the MPNDI pilot program to be
awarded using competitive procedures in accordance with chapter
137 of title 10, United States Code. The committee believes
that section 866 of Public Law 111-383 is clear that any
exception to competition requirements provided in the
Competition in Contracting Act (10 U.S.C. 2304) applies to
MPNDI acquisitions because section 2304(c) is part of chapter
137. However, the committee is concerned that the program has
been implemented in a manner that either discourages use of the
MPNDI authority, or infers that section 2304(c) of title 10,
United States Code, does not apply. The committee encourages
the Under Secretary of Defense for Acquisition, Technology, and
Logistics to review the MPNDI implementation guidance and to
clarify that the standard exceptions to competition may be used
as appropriate.
The committee is disappointed that the Department of
Defense has not yet utilized the authorities provided by
section 866 of Public Law 111-383, and it continues to believe
that, if implemented, the MPNDI program could improve rapid
acquisitions of privately-developed, militarily-useful items.
This potential for improvement includes prospects for reducing
costs, eliminating developmental periods, and expanding the
industrial base by including non-traditional contractors.

Section 832--Extension of Authority to Acquire Products and Services
Produced in Countries Along a Major Route of Supply to Afghanistan

This section would amend section 801 of the National
Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2010 (Public Law 111-
84), as amended by section 841 of the National Defense
Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2013 (Public Law 112-239), by
extending the authority to acquire products and services
produced in countries along a major route of supply in the
Islamic Republic of Afghanistan through December 31, 2015.

TITLE IX--DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE ORGANIZATION AND MANAGEMENT

ITEMS OF SPECIAL INTEREST

Air Force Force Structure

The committee recognizes the challenges the U.S. Air Force
confronts as a result of sequestration, a restricted budget
with limited resources to modernize, and an aging aircraft
fleet. The committee believes that the Air Force must remain a
premier fighting force. To this end, the National Defense
Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2013 (Public Law 112-239)
created the National Commission on the Structure of the Air
Force following extensive debate during the last budget cycle
regarding the Air Force's Total Force Plan submitted with the
President's fiscal year 2013 budget request and as revised in
November 2012.
The commission is undertaking a comprehensive study of the
structure of the Air Force to determine whether, and how, the
structure should be modified to best fulfill current and
anticipated mission requirements in a manner consistent with
strategy and available resources. The considerations of the
commission, outlined in section 363(a)(2) of Public Law 112-
239, state that the commission shall give particular
consideration to evaluating a structure that:
(1) Meets current and anticipated requirements of the
combatant commands;
(2) Achieves an appropriate balance between the
regular and Reserve Components, taking advantage of the
unique strengths and capabilities of each;
(3) Ensures that the regular and Reserve Components
have the capacity needed to support current and
anticipated homeland defense and disaster assistance
missions in the United States;
(4) Provides for sufficient numbers of Active Duty
members of the Air Force to provide a base of trained
personnel from which the personnel of the Reserve
Components of the Air Force could be recruited;
(5) Maintains a peacetime rotation force to support
operational tempo goals of 1:2 for active-duty members
of the Air Force and 1:5 for members of the Reserve
Components; and
(6) Maximizes and appropriately balances
affordability, efficiency, effectiveness, capability,
and readiness.
As the committee awaits the report by the commission due by
February 1, 2014, the committee seeks to understand the
measures the Air Force is taking to retrain airmen affected by
the elimination of weapons systems and equipment under the
November 2012 Total Force Plan to ensure mission readiness.
Therefore, the committee directs the Secretary of the Air Force
to provide to the Committees on Armed Services of the Senate
and the House of Representatives, by October 1, 2013, the plan
to transition qualified airmen, whose weapons systems or
positions are being terminated, to new skills and weapons
systems.

Air Force Materiel Command Metrics

The committee notes that the Air Force is undertaking a
significant reorganization of Air Force Materiel Command (AFMC)
that the Secretary of the Air Force indicates will improve
warfighter support, drive standard processes, improve life-
cycle acquisition management, and reduce overhead.
Specifically, the Air Force is reducing more than 1,000
positions across the command at an estimated annual savings of
more than $100.0 million.
As the Air Force implements this reorganization, the
committee expects the Secretary to adhere to the reporting
requirements in section 2687 of title 10, United States Code,
and the reporting requirement in section 2814 of the National
Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2013 (Public Law 112-
239). While the committee agrees it is imperative to generate
efficiencies across the Air Force enterprise, the committee
also believes it is essential to preserve critical functions
and capabilities at AFMC installations.
The committee notes that RAND Project Air Force, in its
2012 report ``Air Force Materiel Command Reorganization
Analysis,'' recommended AFMC develop and use a suite of metrics
to track mission performance against goals. These metrics would
facilitate root-cause analysis of any inefficiencies resulting
from the reorganization. The committee is pleased that AFMC,
through the AFMC corporate governance structure outlined in the
2013 AFMC strategic plan, currently uses these metrics to
monitor progress towards meeting AFMC's enduring priorities.
The committee seeks to better understand how AFMC is
measuring organizational successes and identifying challenges
arising from the new 5-Center construct. Accordingly, the
committee directs the Secretary of the Air Force to adopt an
additional metric which measures progress on AFMC objectives
against a designated pre-reorganization baseline. The committee
also directs the Secretary of the Air Force to submit a report
to the Committees on Armed Services of the Senate and the House
of Representatives by January 1, 2014, on AFMC's internal
metrics. The report should include, but not be limited to,
command metrics, tracking, and data collected as of the report
due date. The report should be submitted quarterly and in an
unclassified form, with a classified annex if necessary.
Updated reports should be submitted to the aforementioned
committees on a quarterly basis through January 1, 2015.

Air Sea Battle Office

The committee is aware that the military services
established the Air Sea Battle (ASB) office in 2012 as a result
of the U.S. Joint Forces Command (USJFCOM) disestablishment.
USJFCOM had an office focused on the Air Sea Battle concept
integration, specifically as it related to requirements,
capability gaps and shortfalls, projects and programs directly
related to effectively employing in an anti-access/area-denial
(A2/AD) contingency operation.
The committee is concerned whether the placement of the
current ASB office outside of the Joint Staff is the most
logical and effective location for integrating ASB concepts
across the services. The committee believes the Secretary of
Defense should evaluate the ASB office to see if it is
accomplishing its goals to enable and prepare the U.S. military
to effectively operate in an A2/AD environment, and whether the
office provides a unique function and perspective or it
duplicates other efforts carried out elsewhere in the
Department of Defense. Therefore, the committee directs the
Secretary of Defense to determine the effectiveness of the ASB
office and whether the office is carrying out a unique function
or duplicates other efforts. Should the Secretary conclude that
the ASB office is effective and non-duplicative of other
efforts, the Secretary should determine whether the ASB office
should continue as is, be modified, or placed within the Joint
Staff. The committee directs the Secretary to brief the House
Committee on Armed Services by January 31, 2014, on the results
of the analysis and the future of the ASB office.

Air Force High Consequence Information Technology Services

The committee is aware that while currently Air Force Space
Command can rapidly contract for mission critical high
consequence information technology needs, new contracting
mechanisms may negatively impact that current capability. The
committee therefore directs the Secretary of the Air Force to
provide a briefing to the Committee on Armed Services of the
House of Representatives by October 1, 2013 on its plan to
preserve and sustain the high consequence, mission critical
information technology services procurement for fiscal year
2014 and beyond. This plan should address how the Air Force,
including Air Force Space Command, will provision for rapidly
contracting for mission critical, high consequence, network
command and control (C2), cyber, nuclear-related, and combatant
commander mission support responsibilities.

Assessment of Cyber Centers of Academic Excellence

The committee is aware that the cyber security and
information assurance manpower needs are growing increasingly
in both total numbers as well as in disciplines where new
skills are needed.
In order to develop an adequate pool of appropriately
skilled individuals, the National Security Agency and the
Department of Homeland Security have jointly established a
program to certify institutions of higher learning that
provides curricula for information assurance education. The
certification program for Centers of Academic Excellence (CAE)
includes a rigorous application and screening process, which
focuses on identifying schools offering a highly technical and
interdisciplinary curriculum. The committee believes that
leveraging CAEs may help the Department of Defense achieve its
near-term goals of increasing the number of qualified cyber
personnel. However, the committee believes that the current
certification program should be assessed to determine its
strengths as well as areas where improvement is needed.
Therefore, the committee directs that the Assistant
Secretary of Defense for Networks and Information Integration/
Chief Information Officer, in consultation with the Secretaries
of the military services and the Director, National Security
Agency, to provide an assessment to the congressional defense
committees within 180 days after the date of the enactment of
this Act, on the National Security Agency/Department of
Homeland Security Centers of Academic Excellence program. The
report should include an assessment of criteria for
certification of institutions, mechanisms for increasing
collaboration between Department of Defense and certified
institutions, and mechanisms for increasing the number of
graduates from CAE-certified institutions into the Department
of Defense's cyber workforce.

Briefing to Congress on ICBM motor stockpile

The committee understands the need for cost savings, but is
concerned about the impact that budget cuts, industry
consolidation, and lack of sufficient and stable demand have
had on the industrial base for strategic solid rocket motors.
The committee believes that a healthy solid rocket motor
industrial base is critical. However, the committee is also
aware of commercial launch systems that use surplus solid-fuel
intercontinental ballistic missile (ICBM) motors, in accordance
with existing laws and restrictions.
Therefore, the Committee directs the Secretary of Defense
to provide, within 180 days of the enactment of this Act, a
briefing to the congressional defense committees on the status
of the surplus ICBM motor stockpile. The briefing should
include, at a minimum, the current inventory of surplus ICBM
motors; a cost-benefit analysis of using surplus ICBM motors
for space launch versus acquisition of new motors, including
potential taxpayer savings and the associated costs such as
surplus motor maintenance, modification for space launch, and
possible destruction; and the potential effects on the solid
rocket motor industrial base as well as on civil, government,
and military launch vehicle markets of adjustments to the
existing laws and restrictions.

Cadastral Geographic Information Systems Inventory

The committee recognizes and supports the efforts of the
Installations and Environment Business Enterprise Integration
(I&E BEI) to modernize the parcel and land inventory or
``cadastral'' records to meet the challenges of the future. The
work accomplished thus far to develop, modernize, and
consolidate the Department of Defense's real property asset
inventory should continue to be a high priority, particularly
given that real property asset management continues to be a GAO
High Risk activity (GAO-13-359T) and the Department of Defense
still cannot accurately account for its real property assets or
the environmental liabilities thereon (GAO-13-271R). The
committee recommends that the Department of Defense I&E BEI
work with other agencies within the Federal Government to
develop a current, accurate, interoperable cadastral geographic
information systems based inventory that eliminates duplicate
and obsolete activities.

Comptroller General Review of the Department of Defense's
Implementation of Civilian Personnel Furloughs

The committee is disappointed that the Department of
Defense waited so late in the fiscal year to explore options
and the potential impact resulting from the required reductions
in spending in accordance with the Budget Control Act of 2011
(Public Law 112-25). The Department's civilian workforce is key
to carrying out its roles and responsibilities. The Department
has announced that it will implement furloughs of the civilian
workforce in order to meet its required reductions. According
to the Secretary of Defense's May 14, 2013, memorandum, certain
civilian employees will be excepted from furloughs. In light of
this, the committee directs the Comptroller General of the
United States to assess what criteria were used in the
determination of which civilian employees to except from
furloughs and how the Department planned for, implemented, and
is monitoring furloughs of the civilian workforce to include
what challenges the Department has faced in its implementation
and cost savings realized. The Comptroller General should
submit the results of the review to the Committees on Armed
Services of the Senate and the House of Representatives by
April 10, 2014.
Further, the committee directs the Secretary of Defense to
submit a report to the congressional defense committees by
December 1, 2013, on the steps that the Department is taking to
minimize any negative impact on the morale of the civilian
workforce and long-term consequences on recruiting and
retention of the civilian workforce.

Comptroller General Review of Department of Defense Cyber Resiliency

The committee notes that the national and economic security
of the United States depends on the ability of the Department
of Defense (DOD) to conduct its mission-essential functions
across a wide range of potential emergencies, including
localized natural disasters and accidents, as well as
technological and/or attack-related emergencies. Historically,
nuclear threats to DOD locations led to the development of
leadership succession plans and identifying alternate work
facilities. However, events such as Hurricane Katrina, have
demonstrated that the need for effective continuity of
operations planning on a broader scope is necessary. Further,
the committee is concerned that as the cyber threat continues
to evolve and escalate, the information systems and networks
upon which the Department's operations and continuity plans are
dependent may become unavailable, infiltrated, and/or
destroyed.
The committee is aware that the Department's Continuity
Program requires the Department to develop continuity of
operations plans that would allow it to conduct its mission-
essential functions under any circumstances across the spectrum
of threats on the assumption that no warning of attack or event
will be received. Such plans should identify, among other
things, information systems and networks that are needed to
execute their plans, and those information systems should have
contingency plans that recognize their support to the ability
to maintain continuity of operations. The Department's
Continuity Program also requires the Department to exercise its
plans to validate planning assumptions and to take action to
address deficiencies that are identified. Given the number of
cyber incidents occurring within the Department and the
sophisticated nature of the threats, the committee is concerned
about the extent to which the Department of Defense has
developed and exercised its continuity of operations plans for
a degraded cyber environment.
Therefore, the committee directs the Comptroller General of
the United States to conduct a review of the Department of
Defense continuity of operations planning for a degraded cyber
environment, and to submit a report on the findings to the
review to the congressional defense committees by January 7,
2014. The review should include the following:
(1) The extent to which the Department has oversight
of DOD component efforts to plan for and conduct
continuity of operations in a degraded cyber
environment;
(2) The extent to which the Department has identified
information systems and networks that are necessary to
support DOD's continuity of operations;
(3) The extent to which the Department has
coordinated its continuity of operations planning
efforts with the Department's information system and
network contingency planning efforts;
(4) The extent to which the Department has exercised
its continuity of operations plans in a cyber degraded
environment through identification and action to
address any deficiencies; and
(5) Any additional matters that the Comptroller
General determines to be relevant.

Comptroller General Review of Conduct of Roles and Missions Analysis

Section 941 of the National Defense Authorization Act for
Fiscal Year 2008 (Public Law 110-181) created section 118b of
title 10, United States Code, which requires a comprehensive
assessment of the roles and missions of the Armed Forces and
the core competencies and capabilities of the Department of
Defense to perform and support such roles and missions. The
committee notes this section contains specific requirements for
the conduct of the Quadrennial Roles and Mission Review (QRMR)
and is disappointed that the Department has failed to fully
comply with the law. By statute, the Secretary of Defense,
after giving appropriate consideration to recommendations of
the Chairman, Joint Chiefs of Staff, is to identify:
(1) The core mission areas of the Armed Forces;
(2) The core competencies and capabilities that are
associated with the performance or support of such core
mission areas;
(3) The elements of the Department that are
responsible for providing the core competencies and
capabilities;
(4) Any gaps in the ability of the elements of the
Department to provide for core competencies and
capabilities;
(5) Any unnecessary duplication of effort; and
(6) A plan to address identified gaps and reduce
unnecessary duplication of effort.
Rather than conduct the QRMR in 2011, as mandated, the
Secretary provided the committee with a summary of the results
of a presidentially-directed strategic review over 5 months
after the deadline for the 2012 QRMR report to Congress. While
the committee is pleased that the Department took steps to
identify strategic interests in an attempt to guide defense
priorities and spending for the coming decade, the strategic
guidance is not a substitute for the QRMR. Furthermore, while
the strategic guidance does broadly identify primary missions
of the U.S. Armed Forces, such as counterterrorism, deterring
and defeating aggression, and projecting power despite anti-
access/area denial challenges, it does not address items (2)
through (6), as noted above and required by section 118b of
title 10, United States Code.
Moreover, section 222 of title 10, United States Code,
requires the Secretary of Defense to submit a future years
mission budget at the same time as, and in addition to, the
submission of the budget pursuant to section 1105 of title 31
for any fiscal year. The future years mission budget is
required to organize the military programs of the Department of
Defense on the basis of both major force programs and the core
mission areas identified under the most recent QRMR. The
committee notes that the Department has also failed to
consistently meet this requirement. In a partial attempt to
comply with it, the Department provided the committee with a
document this year which merely highlighted certain areas of
the budget request for fiscal year 2013 which could be
connected to the primary missions identified in the strategic
guidance.
The committee believes the failure to identify core mission
areas, core competencies, capability gaps, unnecessary
duplications, and plans for addressing any such gaps or
duplications, undermines national security and wastes valuable
defense funds in a time of constrained budgets. The committee
is disappointed that the Department did not leverage the
requirement for the 2012 QRMR as a tool for reducing waste,
while also improving its joint warfighting capability. The
committee is also aware that in March 2013, the Secretary of
Defense announced that the Department would undertake a
``Strategic Choices and Management Review''. While the
committee applauds active leadership on these matters, the
committee notes that title 10 of United States Code, provides
for a detailed and continuous framework for such reviews. The
committee is concerned that although section 118b of title 10,
United States Code, was enacted in January 2008, it appears
that little has been done to improve QRMR processes to enhance
subsequent reviews or to inform the Quadrennial Defense Review,
resulting in the self-initiation of several other duplicative,
short-term reviews by the Department.
Therefore, the committee directs the Comptroller General of
the United States to review the processes used by Secretary of
Defense in the conduct of the 2012 QRMR and the preparation of
the fiscal year 2013 future years mission budget. The
Comptroller should provide a report to the congressional
defense committees by July 1, 2014, on the findings of the
review, along with recommendations for improving the
Department's conduct of future QRMRs and preparation of the
future years mission budget.

Coordination of Cyber and Electronic Warfare Capabilities

The committee notes that significant advances have been
made in both the cyber and electronic warfare (EW) domains. The
committee is aware that there is increasing overlap between
these domains, particularly with the advanced capabilities of
next-generation EW platforms. Therefore, the committee directs
the Secretary of Defense to provide a briefing to the
congressional defense committees within 90 days after the date
of the enactment of this Act, on the status and level of
coordination of research, development, test and evaluation
efforts within the EW and cyber disciplines that bridge, or
have corresponding dependencies, across these fields.

Cost Drivers in the Department of Defense

The committee recognizes that the Department of Defense is
not like a commercial entity, though in many ways it can
benefit from analysis and best practices also present in the
commercial sector. In a time of fiscal austerity, the committee
believes that the Department should do more to understand the
major cost drivers within its business practices in an effort
to contain costs and ensure efficiency. The committee also
recognizes that there will be instances where effectiveness
will be more important than efficiency, and will rightly accept
increased costs for things that it needs, particularly when
they pertain to the security of the Nation or protecting the
life and limb of our service members. The committee believes,
however, that such decisions should be made consciously and
with full understanding of the risks, rewards, and subsequent
costs. The committee encourages the Department to utilize tools
such as the Strategic Management Plan to increase attention and
collection of data on the cost drivers within the business
processes of the Department.

Critical Program Information

The committee is aware that the Department of Defense has
issued guidance related to the protection of critical program
information, including requirements for the development and
implementation of program protection plans for significant
developmental activities where the risk of compromise of that
information would allow an adversary to clone, counter, or
defeat crucial capabilities. However, the committee is
concerned about reports indicating that many recent designs of
weapon systems have been compromised by foreign nation-state
adversaries. For example, as noted elsewhere in this report,
the 2012 Defense Security Service report, ``Targeting
Technology: A Trend Analysis of Reporting from Defense
Industry'', indicated that there are increases in aggressive
cyber collection activities which target cleared contractor
networks in attempts to obtain sensitive U.S. information and
technologies. The committee is also aware that in a January
2013 report, ``Resilient Military Systems and the Advanced
Cyber Threat,'' the Defense Science Board (DSB) observed that
the Department's poor cyber hygiene and lack of personal and
command accountability for cyber actions pose serious threats
to the secure use of defense networks and systems. Furthermore,
the DSB called for development of more effective policies,
operational rules and consequences for breeches of policy,
including the development and tracking of performance measures,
such as tracking of computer security violations.
Therefore, the committee directs the Secretary of Defense
to provide a briefing to the Committees on Armed Services of
the Senate and the House of Representatives by August 1, 2013,
that details the known network cyber intrusions resulting in
compromise of critical program information related to
Department of Defense weapon systems, information systems
development, or other research and development initiatives from
January 1, 2000, until August 1, 2013. The briefing should
include:
(1) Information on the critical program information
that was compromised;
(2) The source of the network that was compromised;
(3) What systems or developmental activities were
compromised; and
(4) The suspected origin of the cyber intrusion.

Cyber Standards Framework

The committee is aware of the recent Executive Order
``Improving Critical Infrastructure Cybersecurity,'' included
language that directs the development of a framework for
reducing cyber risks to critical infrastructure within the next
year. The committee expects that the Cybersecurity Framework,
developed under the leadership of the Director of the National
Institute of Standards and Technology, will incorporate a set
of standards, methodologies, procedures, and processes that
align policy, business, and technological approaches to address
cyber risks, including, where possible, voluntary consensus
standards and industry best practices. The committee encourages
the Secretary of Defense to explore ways in which to
incentivize, wherever possible, the adoption of the
Cybersecurity Framework, such as through contracts and other
agreements with relevant outside vendors and utilities.
Furthermore, the committee directs the Secretary of Defense to
provide a briefing to the congressional defense committees
within 180 days after the date of the enactment of this Act on
actions being considered to encourage adoption of the
Cybersecurity Framework.

Data Management and Protection

The committee is aware that the military departments have
significant requirements for data usage, as well as data and
information protection, for the development, acquisition,
sustainment, maintenance, sale, and final disposition of nearly
all military equipment and services. The committee is concerned
that the combatant commands and the services generally do not
view data management as a military critical function necessary
for the efficient and effective operation of the services, and
thus do not place a high enough priority on the investment of
people or resources to carry out those tasks. The services
spend a significant amount of time and resources on data
collection, cleansing, and organization for individual
acquisition and sustainment programs, but little time is spent
looking at data management at an enterprise level to manage
data standardization and interoperability across networks,
platforms, or domains to ensure entrance of appropriate and
accurate data into support enterprise activities and individual
programs. With the emergence of the Joint Information
Environment (JIE), the committee sees an opportunity for the
Department of Defense to implement a comprehensive, enterprise-
wide capability that will provide for data collection,
management, and protection that can be utilized across the
Department's functional communities for human resources,
finance, logistics, intelligence, and materiel development. The
committee believes such a data management and protection
strategy should be a core tenet in the development and
implementation of the JIE. Furthermore, the committee
encourages the Secretary of Defense and the Secretaries of the
military departments to work with the affected functional
communities to ensure that the JIE provides the data
interoperability, enterprise management, and life cycle
sustainment to maintain the support community, requirements
generators, training forces, warfighters, and materiel
developers throughout the military.

Defense Intelligence Collection Management

The committee recognizes the importance of effective
collection management in the Department of Defense to enable
optimal collection against intelligence targets that are a
priority of the military services and combatant commands. The
committee is aware that the Department identifies a collection
management strategy as the method used by a collection manager
to establish, prioritize, and submit collection requirements in
a deliberate, focused, integrated, and synchronized manner
across multiple intelligence disciplines. The goals of this
strategy are: (1) to identify, allocate, and apply national,
theater and tactical intelligence, surveillance, and
reconnaissance resources and capabilities; (2) to task these
resources, submit requirements, and collect in a way that
effectively and efficiently answers the priority intelligence
requirements; (3) to support analytic intelligence information
shortfalls and gaps; and (4) to support the development of
effective and responsive collection plans to ground the
adaptive planning process.
Based on feedback from the combatant commands, the
committee is concerned that the Department has not established
the proper tools and training to fully enable the most
effective collection and mission management. Therefore, the
committee directs the Under Secretary of Defense for
Intelligence to provide a briefing to the congressional defense
and the congressional intelligence committees by February 1,
2014, on the Department's activities to support effective
intelligence collection management and mission management.

Enterprise Query and Correlation Pilot

The committee applauds the Under Secretary of Defense for
Intelligence for implementing the Enterprise Query and
Correlation Pilot required by section 925 of the National
Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2012 (Public Law 112-
81). The committee supports the goals of this pilot to
demonstrate cross-agency, large scale, distributed information
query and correlation. The committee anticipates that the end
result of this pilot will deliver reusable services with
validated mission utility through the Defense Intelligence
Information Enterprise. The committee encourages the Department
of Defense to continue providing adequate resources for this
effort in order to ensure timely completion and, as applicable,
to incorporate the results into current intelligence systems.

Exploitation of Foreign Commercial Cellular Networks

The committee recognizes that foreign commercial cellular
networks have posed a significant challenge as a source of
command and control for insurgent forces in the Republic of
Iraq and the Islamic Republic of Afghanistan, as well as
providing critical initiation techniques for improvised
explosive devices. The committee understands that U.S. forces
will continue to face similar threats in other parts of the
world and must be positioned with the necessary technologies to
combat these different threat environments. The committee
believes that future force protection will require the ability
to both exploit and defend against modern commercial cellular
networks. The committee encourages the Department of Defense to
examine the various regions within the different geographic
combatant commands to understand the possible threats from the
commercial cellular environment, and to ensure that the
Department has the capabilities to exploit and defend against
any vulnerabilities.

Global Response Force

The committee considers it a national priority to maintain
the capability to rapidly project military power in support of
our national interests. To that end, the committee seeks to
provide the support necessary to maintain a robust
expeditionary capability. A global response force that is ready
to deploy at any time, to any location, by forcible entry, if
required, is a critical element necessary to fulfill the U.S.
national security objectives. A fully capable global response
force provides strategic depth in order to provide effective
crisis response and serves as a creditable deterrent,
supporting diplomatic initiatives and the application of
national power.
The committee urges the Department of Defense to prioritize
the identification of the current operational requirements and
capability gaps for an effective global response force and
ensure that a fully developed joint operational concept is in
place to support the national military strategy. Further, the
committee encourages additional investment in joint training
programs and joint exercises that are necessary to further
develop an effective global response force capability in
accordance with the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Joint
Force 2020 construct.

Guidance on the Use of Borrowed Military Manpower

As the Department of Defense (DOD) makes reductions in its
Total Force workforce composition, military, civilians, and
contractors, the committee is increasingly concerned about the
use of military manpower to perform functions previously
performed by either civilians or contractors. While the
Department of the Navy and the Department of the Air Force have
indicated they do not anticipate wholesale substitutions using
military personnel, the Secretary of the Army, in testimony
before the committee in April 2013, predicted that the Army
could use as many as 8,000 uniformed personnel to fill
positions during the current fiscal year because reduced
funding for training has created time gaps in the duty day and
freed up soldiers for other duties. The committee understands
the need for temporary, limited local command use of military
personnel performing civilian work to accomplish mission
objectives, but the committee notes that use of military
manpower outside the service member's military occupational
specialty poses risks to readiness and training, and raises
issues of unsustainable costs.
Consistent with ``Guidance Related to the Utilization of
Military Manpower to Perform Certain Functions,'' issued March
2, 2012, by the Under Secretary of Defense for Personnel and
Readiness, the committee expects the Department of Defense to
calculate the cost of using military personnel in lieu of
civilian personnel or service contractors to perform non-
military tasks in accordance with Directive Type Memorandum
(DTM)-09-007, ``Estimating and Comparing the Full Costs of
Civilian and Military Manpower and Contract Support'' or any
succeeding guidance. For the purposes of this direction,
military tasks are as defined in DOD Directive 1100.4, DOD
Instruction 1100.22, and any successor or amplifying guidance
as issued by the Under Secretary of Defense for Personnel and
Readiness.
Additionally, the committee directs the Comptroller General
of the United States to review the use of borrowed military
manpower (BMM) and to provide a report to the Committees on
Armed Services of the Senate and the House of Representatives
by April 30, 2014, regarding the impacts on military readiness
and training in fiscal year 2013, including how the Department
weighed operational risks and capabilities and readiness levels
with BMM calculations and decisions. The Comptroller General
also should examine the extent to which manpower costs were
calculated using the DTM 09-00. The committee understands that
the Government Accountability Office is undertaking an
extensive body of work regarding the impacts of sequestration
on the Department of Defense and further directs the
Comptroller General to include the use of BMM as a part of this
effort.

Guidance Regarding the Conversion of Functions Performed by Non-
appropriated Fund Employees

In the committee report (H. Rept. 112-439) accompanying the
National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2013, the
committee directed the Department of Defense to clarify that
the December 2011 guidance entitled Prohibition on Converting
Certain Functions to Contract Performance ``applies as well to
functions performed by Non-Appropriated Fund employees, which
is consistent with section 2461 of title 10, United States
Code.'' Section 2461 ensures that work performed by Department
of Defense civilian employees is not outsourced without first
conducting a formal cost comparison process; the committee
notes that the law includes no exceptions for Non-Appropriated
Fund employees. However, the committee is aware that the
Department has not clarified the guidance and directs the Under
Secretary of Defense for Personnel and Readiness to issue the
clarification guidance by July 8, 2013.

Input into National Intelligence Priorities Framework

The committee continues to support and commend efforts of
the Department of Defense and the intelligence community to
further integrate and coordinate intelligence activities. The
committee believes that as integration continues, it is
essential to periodically assess and ensure that the Department
of Defense and the intelligence community are meeting the
intelligence needs of the warfighter.
Therefore, the committee directs the Chairman, Joints
Chiefs of Staff to submit an assessment to the congressional
defense committees and the congressional intelligence
committees by October 1, 2013, evaluating the extent to which
the coordination process for the National Intelligence
Priorities Framework (NIPF) incorporates the intelligence
priorities of the Joint Staff, the combatant commands, and the
military departments. Such assessment should include a
description of the input from the Joint Staff, the combatant
commands, and the military departments regarding significant
intelligence priorities; the process used to communicate such
input; and the results of such input. The assessment should
also include specific feedback from each of the combatant
commands and military departments regarding the NIPF
coordination process and any recommendations for improving the
input of the Joint Staff, combatant commands, and military
departments to that process.

Integrated Science and Technology Campus for the Defense Intelligence
Agency

The committee recognizes the important role that science
and technology research play in advancing the mission of the
Defense Intelligence Agency (DIA). As threats become
increasingly more complex and sophisticated, DIA science and
technology programs will need to work in synergy and leverage
assets available in the interagency, academic, and industrial
research community to address new interdisciplinary challenges.
The committee believes that the Base Closure and
Realignment (BRAC) 2005 vision of an integrated science and
technology campus for DIA is critical component of its ability
to provide indications and warning of future technology
threats, as well as in-depth analyses that could monitor and
develop countermeasures or mitigation measures for those threat
technologies, as necessary.
Therefore, the committee directs the Under Secretary of
Defense for Intelligence to brief the Committees on Armed
Services of the Senate and the House of Representatives within
120 days after the date of the enactment of this Act, on the
progress of the BRAC 2005 vision. The briefing should address
the following:
(1) How DIA is leveraging other Government agency
expertise to fulfill its mission;
(2) How DIA is utilizing or plans to utilize,
academic, industry, and non-profit research
organization capabilities to enhance its science and
technology focus;
(3) To what extent DIA is at space capacity at its
current facilities;
(4) What facilities have been considered, designed,
or constructed to realize the integrated campus; and
(5) What resources are required to achieve the BRAC
2005 vision.

Intelligence, Surveillance, and Reconnaissance Aircraft Utilization

The committee is concerned that there is a growing divide
between combatant commanders' day-to-day utilization of
airborne intelligence, surveillance, and reconnaissance (ISR)
aircraft and the Department of Defense's current formal
requirements generation process that focuses on meeting
specific contingency plan-related metrics. The committee
believes that non-combat, ``peacetime'' ISR demand is at least
as important, if not more important, than highly speculative
predictions regarding ISR demand during combat operations. For
example, the committee notes that the Air Force's fiscal year
2013 proposal to retire RQ-4 Block 30 Global Hawk aircraft was
based on changes to contingency plan requirements rather than
on daily, ongoing ISR missions and unfulfilled combatant
command ISR needs.
Therefore, the committee directs the Secretary of Defense
to provide a classified briefing to the House Committee on
Armed Services and the House Permanent Select Committee on
Intelligence by November 1, 2013, that includes a detailed
layout of ISR aircraft utilization in fiscal year 2013. The
briefing should address all manned ISR aircraft, and all
unmanned ISR aircraft in the MQ-1/9 and larger class of UAS.
The briefing should specify the number of systems, types of
missions, flight hours, and other operational data.

Non-Perimeter Cyber Defenses

The committee notes that the Department of Defense
continues to make progress in securing its networks from cyber
threats. In order to combat new and evolving threats, the
committee believes that new tactics, techniques, and
technologies will be needed to increase the cyber security of
defense information systems. Recent reports from commercial
computer security firms indicate that U.S. adversaries
increasingly are using techniques that can compromise
``perimeter defenses.'' The committee is concerned that the
Department's cyber security posture will continue to be
weakened without the investigation and implementation of new,
emerging protection technologies.
The committee encourages the Department to look at new
cyber security approaches, such as ``dynamic maneuvering'' or
``moving target'' technologies that can help to proactively
reduce the attack surfaces of the Department and increase
mission resiliency and survivability. The committee is
particularly interested in how these technologies might be
incorporated into existing networks, as well as the future
Joint Information Enterprise. The committee encourages the
Department to examine these technologies and include their
findings in future quarterly cyber operations briefings.

Open-Source Intelligence Utilization

The committee notes that open-source intelligence (OSINT)
is intelligence that is produced from publicly available
information collected, exploited, and disseminated to an
appropriate audience for the purpose of addressing a specific
intelligence requirement. The National Defense Authorization
Act for Fiscal Year 2006 (Public Law 109-163) directed the
Secretary of Defense to develop a strategy for OSINT to be
incorporated into the larger military intelligence strategy.
The committee recognizes that the accessibility of open-source
information has increased significantly in recent years due to
rapid growth of international internet use and consideration as
a global commons. Therefore, the committee directs the Under
Secretary of Defense for Intelligence to provide a briefing to
the congressional defense and the congressional intelligence
committees within 180 days after the date of the enactment of
this Act, on the current status of the OSINT strategy and
operations within the Department of Defense. The briefing
should include the following:
(1) An overview of the current strategy for OSINT
collection, to meet the intelligence priorities of the
military services and combatant commands;
(2) A description of all OSINT activities within the
military services and combatant commands including the
level of coordination and deconfliction between ongoing
joint efforts;
(3) A description of the current level of
coordination with the Director of National Intelligence
Open Source Center;
(4) Gaps in OSINT capabilities within the Department;
(5) Research, development, test and evaluation
efforts in the Department related to collection,
processing and sharing of open-source intelligence; and
(6) Recommendations for future improvements in the
Department's OSINT strategy and efforts.

Pilot to Counter Brokers of Transnational Criminal Organizations

The committee is aware that the complex pathways and
instrumentalities of the global economic system provide both a
source of revenue and backdrop in which to hide for a number of
nation-state and non-state actors. In particular, Transnational
Criminal Organizations (TCOs) have increasingly been able to
use the global economic environment to their advantage. TCOs
have grown more complex over time, and so has our ability to
defeat them, however, this complexity has challenged our
ability to access and use collective information available.
The committee believes that criminal cartel organizations
are hosting themselves in U.S. cities and may be teaming with
terrorists also embedded in the United States to fund terror
networks overseas. These networks provide sustained and
substantial funding to pay operatives, support families,
purchase and traffic weapons, indoctrinate and recruit new
members, train, travel, and bribe officials and also perpetrate
billions of dollars worth of fraud against banks, businesses
and Governments. The list of crimes that the new international
criminal organizations are involved in includes the trafficking
of narcotics, humans, weapons, illegally poached animal
remains, and chemical, biological, and nuclear material.
Disrupting the means and mechanisms through which these
networks move money will significantly disrupt their
operations, but remains the most challenging piece of the
puzzle to unravel.
The key to dissecting these financial networks is to
identify the ``brokers;'' a category of individuals who
facilitates financial activities. Brokers may be employees of a
single TCO, such as a terrorist group or drug cartel, or they
may be independent operators charging variable fees based on
external factors such as interest rates, dollar amount, and
denomination of currency. These individuals may work in
banking, real estate, insurance, own small businesses, or
simply have legitimate access to the financial system. The
information needed to unravel these global networks is
available through various technical, commercial, open source
and Government-owned means, yet require experienced subject
matter experts to ``connect the dots;'' an ability directly
proportional to their access to information across the
community of interest.
Therefore, the committee directs the Under Secretary of
Defense for Intelligence, in coordination with the Under
Secretary of Defense for Policy, to establish a pilot program
to determine the information requirements for identifying and
countering TCO brokers, and to submit a report to the
Committees on Armed Services of the Senate and the House of
Representatives within 1 year after the date of the enactment
of this Act on the results of the pilot program.

Science and Technology Community Intelligence Needs Planning

The committee applauds recent efforts by the Department of
Defense science and technology (S&T) community to reinvigorate
its relationship with the intelligence community. The committee
is aware that in 2010, the Assistant Secretary of Defense for
Research and Engineering drafted an Intelligence Needs Plan in
order to formally convey the S&T communities' intelligence
requirements to the intelligence community. The committee
believes that such efforts are important in order to position
science and technology for the development of capabilities for
new and emerging threat areas. The committee is concerned that
the focus of intelligence activities for the past 10 years has
been primarily focused on near-term, operationally-oriented
support that consequently, the capabilities to do long-term,
open-ended estimations have atrophied. Creating a demand signal
for such analyses would both rebuild needed intelligence skills
and support better S&T planning.
Therefore, the committee directs the Under Secretary of
Defense for Acquisition, Technology, and Logistics, in
coordination with the Under Secretary of Defense for
Intelligence, to provide a briefing to the Committees on Armed
Services of the Senate and the House of Representatives, the
Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence of the House of
Representatives and the Select Committee on Intelligence of the
Senate by February 1, 2014, on the intelligence requirements of
the science and technology community, as well as the process by
which the intelligence community would satisfy those
requirements.

Software Assurance Policy

The committee is aware that the Department of Defense is in
the process of developing a baseline software assurance policy
for the entire life cycle of covered systems in response to
section 933 of the National Defense Authorization Act for
Fiscal Year 2013 (Public Law 112-239). The committee believes
that any such guidance and direction for Department program
managers should conform with internationally recognized,
consensus-based security assurance standards, and should
explore options for accepting both self-certification or third-
party certification for compliance purposes. For example, the
committee believes that this software assurance policy should
be developed in compliance with the Office of Management and
Budget Memorandum for Chief Information Officers and Senior
Procurement Executive's regarding Technology Neutrality dated
January 7, 2011. The committee also believes that any future
software assurance policy that include requirements concerning
Federal participation in the development and use of voluntary
consensus standards should be conducted in accordance with the
National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act of 1995,
section 272 of title 15, United States Code, and the Office of
Management and Budget Circular A-119.

Space Training

The committee notes that the U.S. Strategic Command
(STRATCOM) commissioned a study on the Joint Space Individual
Training and Education Needs Assessment (JSITENA). This study,
which concluded in September 2012, defined and analyzed the
joint space training and education environment and recommended
solutions to existing gaps, shortfalls, and redundancies in
preparation of officers and enlisted personnel to support joint
space missions.
The committee commends STRATCOM on the study and supports
the recommendations identified in the JSITENA which improve
integration, find efficiencies, and identify opportunities to
better meet joint requirements across the services and
combatant commands.

Technical Defense Intelligence Training

The committee supports training for the Defense
intelligence workforce, particularly in the area of technical
intelligence, as a critical investment in national security.
The expansion of advanced sensors and platforms is increasing
the volume of technical intelligence and the demand for
intelligence exploitation. When necessary, based on Government
capacity, the committee encourages the Department of Defense to
consider appropriately cleared non-Government providers of
specialized technical intelligence training if providers can
meet Defense intelligence needs and reduce Government costs.

Training Standards for Department of Defense Cyber Missions

The committee notes that the Department of Defense is in
the process of staffing a number of national cyber forces under
U.S. Cyber Command, including national mission teams, combatant
command mission teams, and cyber protection platoons. The
committee is also aware that as part of this process, the
Department is working to establish a joint standard to provide
some level of standardization and compatibility among forces
being supplied by the military services. The committee
encourages the Department to continue developing these training
standards for cyber forces, but believes that the Department
should consider the scalability and sustainability of such
training. The committee is aware that the Department already
faces serious challenges in building and sustaining its cyber
forces, and the increased demands from U.S. Cyber Command make
that challenge even more acute. Furthermore, the committee
recognizes that the military services already have training
demands to meet their own statutory requirements to man, train
and equip forces for their networks, and that those
requirements must be taken into consideration as well.
The committee is concerned that the process for determining
a joint training standard may be settling on a proposed
standard too quickly, without sufficient analysis to support
the scalability demands on the services. In addition, the
committee believes that such a standard should include an
assessment of the current training and education capabilities
inherent in the services to determine if the current
infrastructure meets the personnel training pipeline, as well
as if there are any gaps that will need to be resourced in the
future. The committee also notes that any standard should
include the means for leveraging commercial standards and
certifications to reduce the burden on departmental
infrastructure.
Therefore, the committee directs the Secretary of Defense
to provide a briefing to the congressional defense committees
within 180 days after the date of the enactment of this Act, on
the cyber force training needs of the Department. The briefing
should include the current and proposed training standard and
the Department's process for expanding the training across the
force. The committee also expects that future quarterly cyber
operations briefings will include updates on the manning and
training metrics for U.S. Cyber Command national mission teams.

Vulnerability of Tactical Data Links in Denied Areas

The committee believes that future conflicts against
threats with anti-access/area-denial capabilities could see
significant threats to U.S. airborne and ground tactical data
links. However, the committee is concerned that many such data
links are not currently designed or funded to operate against a
robust electromagnetic warfare threat. Therefore, the committee
directs the Secretary of Defense, to provide a classified
briefing to the congressional defense committees by October 1,
2013, that describes the potential vulnerabilities of current
and planned tactical data links, along with a summary of
development efforts to address these vulnerabilities.

LEGISLATIVE PROVISIONS

Subtitle A--Department of Defense Management

Section 901--Redesignation of the Department of the Navy as the
Department of the Navy and Marine Corps

This section would re-designate the Department of the Navy
as the Department of the Navy and the Marine Corps and change
the title of its secretary to the Secretary of the Navy and
Marine Corps. This section would formally recognize the
responsibility of the Office of the Secretary of the Navy over
both the Navy and Marine Corps and the Marine Corps' status as
an equal partner with the Navy.

Section 902--Revisions to composition of transition plan for defense
business enterprise architecture

This section would revise the definition for legacy systems
in section 2222 of title 10, United States Code, to align with
the updated business systems investment review process.

Subtitle B--Space Activities

Section 911--National Security Space Satellite Reporting Policy

This section would amend chapter 135 of title 10, United
States Code, to add a notification, required of the Secretary
of Defense, of each attempt by a foreign actor to disrupt,
degrade, or destroy a U.S. national security space capability.
The notification shall be submitted to the appropriate
congressional committees not later than 48 hours after the
Secretary determines that there is reason to believe such
attempt occurred. Not later than 10 days after the date on
which the Secretary determines that there is reason to believe
such attempt occurred, further information should be provided
including the name and a brief description of the national
security space capability that was impacted by such attempt; a
description of the attempt, including the foreign actor, the
date and time of the attempt, and any related capability outage
and the mission impact of such outage; and any other
information considered relevant by the Secretary.
The appropriate committees are defined as the congressional
defense committees, and with respect to a U.S. national
security space capability that is intelligence-related, the
congressional intelligence committees.
The committee notes the Director of National Intelligence's
2013 Statement for the Record Worldwide Threat Assessment that
threats to vital United States space services will increase
during the next decade as disruptive and destructive counter-
space capabilities are developed.

Section 912--National Security Space Defense and Protection

This section would require the Secretary of the Air Force
to enter into an arrangement with the National Research Council
to conduct a review in response to the near-term and long-term
threats to the national security space systems of the United
States. The review should include:
(1) The range of strategic options available to
address such threats, in terms of deterring hostile
actions, defeating hostile actions, or surviving
hostile actions until such actions conclude;
(2) Strategies and plans to counter such threats,
including resilience, reconstitution, disaggregation,
and other appropriate concepts; and
(3) Existing and planned architectures, warfighter
requirements, technology development, systems,
workforce, or other factors related to addressing such
threats.
The National Research Council should also identify
recommend courses of action to address the threats, including
potential barriers or limiting factors in implementing such
courses of action.
This section would also modify section 911(f)(1) of the
National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2008 (10
U.S.C. 2271), to include a description of how the Department of
Defense and the intelligence community plan to provide the
necessary national security capabilities, through alternative
space, airborne, or ground systems, if a foreign actor
degrades, denies access to, or destroys U.S. national security
space capabilities.

Section 913--Space Acquisition Strategy

This section would require the Under Secretary of Defense
for Acquisition, Technology and Logistics, in consultation with
the Chief Information Officer of the Department of Defense, to
establish a strategy for the multi-year procurement of
commercial satellite services to include:
(1) An analysis of financial or other benefits to
multi-year acquisition approaches;
(2) An analysis of the risks associated with such an
approach;
(3) An identification of methods to address planning,
programming, budgeting, and execution challenges to
such an approach, to include consideration of methods
to address potential termination liability or
cancellation costs associated with these types of
contracts;
(4) An identification of any changes needed in the
requirements development and approval processes of the
Department of Defense to facilitate effective and
efficient implementation of such strategy; and,
(5) An identification of any necessary changes to
policy, procedures, regulation, or legislation in order
for such strategy to be successful.
This section would also require the strategy and the
elements supporting it to be provided to the congressional
defense committees by the Under Secretary not later than 180
days after the date of the enactment of this Act.

Section 914--Space Control Mission Report

This section would require the Secretary of Defense to
submit a report to the congressional defense committees on the
space control mission of the Department of Defense.

Section 915--Responsive Launch

This section would require a study by the Department of
Defense Executive Agent for Space on responsive, low-cost
launch efforts to include a review of existing and past
operationally responsive, low-cost launch capabilities; a
technology assessment of various methods to develop an
operationally responsive, low-cost launch capability; and an
assessment of the viability of any other innovative methods,
such as secondary payload adapters on existing launch vehicles.
In addition, this section would require a report from the
Executive Agent for Space regarding the results of the above
mentioned study, as well as a consolidated plan for development
within the Department of an operationally responsive, low-cost
launch capability.
The committee notes that there are multiple ongoing efforts
in the Department, including Air Force, Army, and the Defense
Advanced Research Projects Agency programs. The committee is
concerned that these efforts may be duplicative and are not
fully coordinated across the Department.

Subtitle C--Defense Intelligence and Intelligence-Related Matters

Section 921--Revision of Secretary of Defense Authority to Engage in
Commercial Activities as Security for Intelligence Collection
Activities

This section would amend current statutory authority for
the Secretary of Defense to authorize the conduct of those
commercial activities necessary to provide security for
authorized intelligence collection activities abroad undertaken
by the Department of Defense. This section would:
(1) Delete the requirement that the Secretary of
Defense designate a single office within the Defense
Intelligence Agency to be responsible for the
management and supervision of all commercial activities
authorized by the intelligence commercial activity
statute (10 U.S.C. 431-437);
(2) Change the annual audit requirement to a biennial
audit requirement;
(3) Add the congressional defense committees to the
reporting requirement; and
(4) Insert a definition of ``congressional
intelligence committees'' for purposes of section 437
of title 10, United States Code.

Section 922--Department of Defense Intelligence Priorities

This section would require the Secretary of Defense to
establish a written policy governing the internal coordination
and prioritization of intelligence priorities of the Office of
the Secretary of Defense, the Joint Staff, the combatant
commands, and the military departments to improve
identification of the intelligence needs of the Department of
Defense. This section would also require the Secretary of
Defense to identify any significant intelligence gaps of the
Office of the Secretary of Defense, the Joint Staff, the
combatant commands, and the military departments. The Secretary
would provide a briefing to the congressional defense
committees and the congressional intelligence committees
regarding the policy established under this section and any
identified significant intelligence gaps.

Section 923--Defense Clandestine Service

This section would prohibit the use of 50 percent of the
funds authorized to be appropriated by this Act or otherwise
available to the Department of Defense for fiscal year 2014 for
the Defense Clandestine Service to be obligated or expended for
the Defense Clandestine Service until such time as the
Secretary of Defense certifies to the congressional defense
committees, the Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence of
the House of Representatives, and the Select Committee on
Intelligence of the Senate that the Defense Clandestine Service
is designed primarily to fulfill priorities of the Department
of Defense that are unique to the Department of Defense or
otherwise unmet; and provide unique capabilities to the
intelligence community (as defined in section 3(4) of the
National Security Act of 1947 (50 U.S.C. 401a(4)).
This section would also require the Secretary of Defense
to: design metrics that will be used to ensure that the Defense
Clandestine Service is employed in the manner certified;
provide annual assessments for 5-years based on the metrics
established; submit prompt notifications of any significant
changes; and provide quarterly briefings on deployments and
collection activities.

Section 924--Prohibition on National Intelligence Program Consolidation

This section would prohibit the Secretary of Defense from
using any of the funds authorized to be appropriated or
otherwise available to the Department of Defense to be used
during the period beginning on the date of the enactment of
this Act and ending on December 31, 2014, to execute: the
separation of the portion of the Department of Defense budget
designated as part of the National Intelligence Program from
the rest of the Department of Defense budget; the consolidation
of the portion of the Department of Defense budget designated
as part of the National Intelligence Program within the
Department of Defense budget; or the establishment of a new
appropriations account or appropriations account structure for
such funds.
This section would also require the Secretary of Defense
and the Director of National Intelligence to jointly brief the
congressional defense and intelligence committees not later
than 30 days after enactment of this Act on any planning
relating to future execution that has occurred during the past
two years and any anticipated future planning and related
efforts.
The committee is concerned that the executive branch has
failed to notify the appropriate congressional committees about
its continuing efforts to pursue consolidation of the portion
of the Department of Defense budget designated as part of the
National Intelligence Program.

Subtitle D--Cyberspace-Related Matters

Section 931--Modification of Requirement for Inventory of Department of
Defense Tactical Data Link Systems

This section would modify the current requirement for an
inventory of Department of Defense tactical data link systems
to include an assessment of vulnerabilities that the systems
may encounter in anti-access or area-denial environments.

Section 932--Defense Science Board assessment of United States Cyber
Command

This section would require the Defense Science Board to
conduct an independent assessment of the organization,
missions, and authorities of U.S. Cyber Command.

Section 933--Mission Analysis for Cyber Operations of Department of
Defense

This section would require the Secretary of Defense to
conduct a mission analysis of Department of Defense cyber
operations and to provide a report on the results of the
mission analysis to the congressional defense committees. It
would also require the Chief of the National Guard Bureau to
provide an assessment of the role of the National Guard in
supporting Department of Defense cyber missions.
The committee notes that the Defense Science Board recently
completed a report titled Resilient Military Systems and the
Advanced Cyber Threat. In particular, the committee recognizes
the need to address a key recommendation in the report that
would require the Department to determine the mix of cyber,
protected-conventional, and nuclear capabilities necessary for
assured operation in the face of a full-spectrum adversary by
designating a mix of forces necessary to conduct assured
operations, including systems such as penetrating bombers,
submarines with long range cruise missiles, Conventional Prompt
Global Strike (CPGS), and survivable senior leadership command
and control. The committee believes the Department will need to
address this recommendation as it conducts the mission analysis
required by this section.
In addition, the committee is aware that there is interest
from the Department as well as Congress on how best to leverage
the Reserve Component, including the National Guard, in the
Department's organizing construct for cyber operations. While
the committee supports these considerations, it is also
concerned that current legislative proposals to dictate
National Guard units for each of the states and territories is
premature and may be detrimental to the overall national
effort. In addition to the hefty price tag, which is estimated
to be about $400.0 million per year, current proposals only
address National Guard participation and do not include the
Reserve Component. Whereas only the Army and the Air Force have
National Guard units, all of the military services have Reserve
Components that have unique authorities and capabilities that
should be addressed by the national effort. The committee
believes that more time is needed to evaluate full
participation of the Reserve Components, including the
implications and limitations of using National Guard forces in
a ``title 32'' capacity, before broader action is taken. The
committee encourages the Department to examine these issues in
the course of the mission analysis required by this section.

Section 934--Notification of Investigations Related to Compromise of
Critical Program Information

This section would require that the Secretary of Defense
provide written notification to the congressional defense
committees within 30 days of the initiation of any
investigations carried out related to the potential compromise
of Department of Defense critical program information related
to weapon systems and other developmental activities, and
within 30 days of the completion of any such investigations.
Additionally, this section would require a report to be
submitted to the congressional defense committees within 60
days after the date of the enactment of this Act, on all of the
known network cyber intrusions from January 1, 2000, until
August 1, 2013, resulting in compromise of critical program
information.
Elsewhere in this report, the committee would require the
Secretary to provide a briefing on related information.

Section 935--Additional Requirements Relating to the Software Licenses
of the Department of Defense

This section would require the Chief Information Officer of
the Department of Defense to revise the reporting requirements
of section 937 of the National Defense Authorization Act for
2013 (Public Law 112-239; 10 U.S.C. 223 note) to include new
elements that would verify that the format of the process was
verified by an independent third party, implement processes for
validating and reporting registration and deregistration of new
software, and update the timeline for implementation based on
these new requirements.

Subtitle E--Total Force Management

Section 941--Requirement to Ensure Sufficient Levels of Government
Oversight of Functions Closely Associated with Inherently Governmental
Functions

This section would amend sections 129a and 2330a of title
10, United States Code, to ensure that sufficient levels of
government oversight are in place for contracted services and
aligns current Department of Defense policies related to Total
Force Management.

Section 942--Five-Year Requirement for Certification of Appropriate
Manpower Performance

This section would require the Secretary of Defense to
certify that all contractor positions performing inherently
governmental functions have been eliminated.

TITLE X--GENERAL PROVISIONS

ITEMS OF SPECIAL INTEREST

Counter-Drug Activities

Counternarcotics Strategy in Central America

The committee acknowledges the rise of crime and
instability in Central America. In particular, countries such
as the Republic of Honduras and the Republic of Guatemala are
experiencing the brunt of a ``balloon effect'' of illicit
trafficking and networking caused by both the stabilizing of
the Republic of Colombia and the ongoing security issues in the
United Mexican States. Central America now has the highest
murder rates in the world, and is faced with constant violence
and government instability.
The committee recognizes the significant budget constraints
throughout the U.S. Armed Forces. However, the committee also
recognizes the national security implications of turmoil within
the Western Hemisphere. Therefore, the committee supports the
efforts in the region of the Department of Defense and the
Department of State, and more specifically U.S. Southern
Command. An ongoing strategy and vision for partnership with
Central American nations is vital to securing regional safety
and security. Therefore, the committee directs the Secretary of
Defense to provide a briefing to the House Committee on Armed
Services and the House Committee on Foreign Affairs by October
1, 2013, on the Department of Defense's strategy for combating
the corruption, illicit trafficking, and violence in the
Central American region that could affect U.S. national
security. This briefing should outline partnership
opportunities with neighboring nations, current intelligence,
and future metrics of success in the region.

Humanitarian Efforts in U.S. Southern Command

The committee again notes the absence of a hospital ship
deployment to the U.S. Southern Command area of responsibility
for the second consecutive year. The committee also recognizes
the difficult budget environment facing the U.S. Navy and all
military services. As the Department of the Navy weighs its
priorities, the committee notes the vital presence the USNS
Comfort or USNS Mercy bring to nations all over the Western
Hemisphere. Humanitarian missions carried out by hospital ships
are a key tool in developing relationships and partnerships
with the neighbors of the United States.
As a result of the vacuum the lack of humanitarian presence
has created, other nations have stepped in to fill the need,
including the deployment of a Chinese hospital ship in the
Caribbean sea in the fall of 2011. The committee continues to
encourage the Department of the Navy to consider an ongoing
presence in the Caribbean, including a scheduled humanitarian
deployment to the region.

National Guard Bureau Counter-drug Mission

The committee acknowledges the importance of the National
Guard counter-drug mission as a part of ensuring the security
of the U.S. homeland. The National Guard counter-drug mission
is vital to successfully protecting the Nation's borders;
however, the committee is aware of the budget constraints the
National Guard Bureau faces in fully funding and operating its
counter-drug mission.
Therefore, the committee directs the Secretary of Defense
to provide a briefing to the House Committee on Armed Services
by October 1, 2013, regarding the operational capabilities and
future counter-drug mission set of the National Guard. The
briefing should include information on the available resources
and missions of the state partnership programs, border security
initiatives, and counter-drug schools, including any
anticipated gaps in resources. The committee also directs the
Secretary of Defense to submit to the committee, by not later
than 120 days after the date of the enactment of this Act, a
report on the capabilities and policy issues associated with
the counter-drug mission of the National Guard on the
southwestern border of the United States.

Operation Martillo

The committee recognizes that the U.S. Southern Command
mission Operation Martillo has been under way since January
2012. Initially a 6-month operation, Martillo has been extended
indefinitely to combat illicit traffickers by focusing on the
littoral waterways from South America to Central America as a
way to transport narcotics. In the year since the operation
began, confiscation of narcotics and prosecutions of criminals
have risen.
The committee also recognizes the support and partnership
of the 18 partner-nations in making Operation Martillo
successful. As the operation moves forward, the committee
directs the Secretary of Defense to provide a briefing to the
House Committee on Armed Services by October 1, 2013, on
Operation Martillo. The briefing should outline:
(1) The assets being used specifically for the
mission by both U.S. Armed Forces and each partner
nation;
(2) Each partner nation's contributions to the
mission in the form of assets, capabilities, funding,
and manpower;
(3) The mission's future goals in terms of manpower,
funding, and focus and any challenges in meeting such
goals; and
(4) The metrics in place to determine the
effectiveness of the mission over the course of the
next fiscal year.
The committee supports U.S. Southern Command's efforts and
remains committed to the safety and security of the Nation and
the Western Hemisphere.

Transition of Tethered Aerostat Radar System Program

The committee is aware of the transition of the Tethered
Aerostat Radar System (TARS) program from the U.S. Air Force to
the Department of Homeland Security. This transition is under
way only after the U.S. Air Force sent a statement of program
cancellation to the contractor in January 2013. While the
transition to the Department of Homeland Security has been
delayed, the committee notes that the TARS program, which is in
place along the southern border of the continental United
States and the Caribbean, is an important tool in fighting
illicit trafficking across the U.S. border.
The committee encourages both the U.S. Air Force and the
Department of Homeland Security to continue to facilitate a
smooth transition of the TARS program, with the goal of
preventing any gaps in service or capability in the eight
locations. Furthermore, the committee acknowledges the gaps in
maintenance of several of the aerostats. As the Department of
Homeland Security takes over the program by October 1, 2013,
the committee encourages both the Department of Defense and the
Department of Homeland Security to mitigate these maintenance
issues and ensure all eight aerostats are fully functional.
Therefore, the committee directs the Secretary of the Air Force
to provide a briefing to the House Committee on Armed Services
by October 1, 2013, on the status of the transition of the TARS
program, including steps being taken by both departments to
support continuation of coverage.

U.S. Southern Command Assets

The committee recognizes the ongoing budget crisis facing
the Nation's military. As this crisis continues, U.S. Southern
Command, along with all other combatant commands, must
prioritize its missions. In light of the decision by the
Department of the Navy to establish a zero-ship presence in the
Caribbean, other military services will also have to consider
realigning their assets. As U.S. Southern Command moves forward
in its mission set, the committee acknowledges the possibility
of current assets being insufficient to meet the needs of the
mission.
Nevertheless, the committee believes that stability in the
Western Hemisphere is a national security imperative. The
committee encourages the Secretary of Defense to provide the
House Committee on Armed Services with information on any
resultant capability gaps for U.S. Southern Command against the
full spectrum of the command's missions, including the
allocation of forces and assets within the U.S. Southern
Command area of responsibility for the past 5 years, and the
projected availability of forces and assets for fiscal year
2014 within the region.

Other Matters

Assessment of Military Construction Project

The Department of the Air Force is the executive agent
responsible for the design and construction of a $285.0 million
development at the Royal Air Force Croughton, United Kingdom.
This development proposes to provide worldwide communications
to the warfighter across a wide spectrum of operations. The
initial phase of this development is a $12.0 million main gate
complex that is designed to improve traffic congestion and
support the segregation of large vehicles during their
inspection process.
The committee is concerned that the Department has not
completed an assessment of the wide range of options available
to accommodate the mission proposed at the Royal Air Force
Croughton, United Kingdom. Therefore, the committee directs the
Secretary of Defense to submit a report to the congressional
defense committees by September 30, 2013, with the following
information:
(1) Analysis of alternatives, including the strategic
imperative of intelligence functions being performed in
the United Kingdom versus co-locating with the
combatant command headquarters or in the United States;
(2) Analysis of the cost-benefits and efficiencies of
co-locating the intelligence functions of U.S. Africa
Command (USAFRICOM) and European Command (USEUCOM);
(3) Description of direct, indirect, and burden-
sharing contributions by the host nation in the
construction of the new facilities at Royal Air Force
Croughton, United Kingdom;
(4) Description of the method in which the current
requirement is presently being met; why the current
facilities are not sufficient to meet the current
requirement; and how the new proposed facilities will
fully meet the current requirement without requiring an
expansion of either the mission or the newly
constructed facility;
(5) Description of the political, economic, military
and legal requirements that require the functions to be
completed in the current host-nation instead of the
United States or the Federal Republic of Germany;
(6) Description of the current organizational
structure of intelligence components of USAFRICOM and
USEUCOM, including division of labor between United
Kingdom-based staffs and the Germany-based headquarters
and an evaluation of the current mission and staffing
in order to better understand the needed requirements
and resources to accomplish the mission; and
(7) Description of how USEUCOM and USAFRICOM are
implementing and enforcing the appropriate U.S.
Government policies and regulations, including
identification of exceptions, to ensure Royal Air Force
Molesworth-based Department of Defense civilians are
not exceeding the 5-year overseas requirement and are
in compliance with the Living Quarters Allowance
regulations.
Furthermore, the committee recommends no funding, a
reduction of $12 million, for the initial phase of development
at the Royal Air Force Croughton, United Kingdom.

Combatant Command Headquarters Personnel and Resources Requirements

The committee is concerned with the results of the
Government Accountability Office's (GAO) recent report on five
of the six geographic combatant commands. The results of the
report show that the authorized military and civilian positions
and mission support costs for the combatant commands and their
subordinate commands have grown considerably over the last
decade. The GAO report found that the authorized military and
civilian positions increased by almost 50 percent between
fiscal years 2001-12, to approximately 10,100 authorized
positions. Additionally, the report found the mission and
headquarters support costs more than doubled from fiscal years
2007-12, to over $1.1 billion. While the committee recognizes
these figures include the establishment of two new geographic
combatant commands (U.S. Northern Command and U.S. Africa
Command), today's fiscal environment requires stronger
oversight of the combatant commands' resources.
The committee is concerned about the four primary
weaknesses that challenge the Department of Defense's ability
to effectively manage and oversee these combatant commands.
First, the committee is concerned that the Department does not
thoroughly and periodically evaluate the commands' overall
mission and personnel requirements to ensure the commands are
effectively managing their personnel resources to meet their
assigned missions. The committee believes the Department should
conduct periodic evaluations of the combatant commands and
supporting commands, including whether their existing size and
structure is effectively positioned to meet current missions.
Second, the committee is also concerned that the Department
cannot track all the personnel assigned to the combatant
commands and their subordinate commands. The committee believes
the Department should integrate existing systems to identify,
manage, and track all assigned personnel. Third, the committee
is concerned about the lack of visibility and oversight of the
Joint Staff and the combatant commands over the service
component commands. This lack of visibility into personnel and
resources makes it difficult for the Department to determine
whether functions and tasks at the combatant commands are being
duplicated or overlap with the component commands. The
committee believes the Department should develop and implement
a formal process to gather information on the service component
commands to gain better transparency and oversight of these
organizations. Fourth, the committee believes that the services
and combatant commands should provide greater detailed
information on authorized positions and mission funding totals
in their annual operation and budget documents for submission
to Congress.
Therefore, the committee directs the Secretary of Defense,
in coordination with the Chairman, Joint Chiefs of Staff, to
provide a briefing to the House Committee on Armed Services by
November 1, 2013, on any changes to processes and procedures to
address each weakness identified above, including any suggested
changes to law that they believe may be required.

Comptroller General Review of Functional Combatant Commands

The committee again notes that as the challenges to
national security have expanded, the Department of Defense
faces missions of increasing scope, variety, and complexity
around the world. To support these missions, the Department of
Defense has established three functional combatant commands,
each with thousands of personnel, which provide unique
capabilities in support of the Department's other components.
These functional combatant commands are responsible for
specific types of operational support, specifically: U.S.
Transportation Command is responsible for air, land, and sea
transport; U.S. Strategic Command is responsible for strategic
nuclear, space, and other operations, to include cyberspace;
and U.S. Special Operations Command is responsible for
organizing, training, and equipping special operations forces.
In May 2013, the Government Accountability Office reported that
the authorized military and civilian positions and mission
support costs devoted to five of the Department's geographic
combatant commands had grown considerably and that there were
weaknesses in its processes to size and oversee the combatant
commands, to include the functional combatant commands. At a
time of growing economic and fiscal constraints, the committee
believes it is important that the Department of Defense ensure
the functional combatant commands have the appropriate levels
of personnel and resources to effectively meet mission
requirements.
Therefore, the committee directs the Comptroller General of
the United States to conduct a review of the personnel and
resources of the functional combatant commands, supporting
military service component commands, and other assigned task
forces, and to submit a report on the findings to the House
Committee on Armed Services by January 31, 2014. The review
should address the following:
(1) What are the trends in the resources (authorized
positions and mission support costs) devoted to the
functional combatant commands and their service
component commands between fiscal years 2001-12?
(2) To what extent has the Department of Defense
examined the size and structure of the functional
combatant commands for efficiencies?
(3) What, if any, challenges does the Department of
Defense face in appropriately sizing the functional
combatant and their components given their unique
capabilities and global responsibilities?

Comptroller General Review of Medical Countermeasures Against
Genetically Engineered Bio-Terror Agents

The committee recognizes that development and deployment of
safe, effective medical countermeasures against biological
weapons and agents of concern remain an urgent priority for the
U.S. Government. The National Institutes of Health (NIH), under
the direction of the Department of Health and Human Services,
is working with the Department of Homeland Security and the
Department of Defense (DOD), as well as other agencies, to
shape and execute an aggressive research program to develop
more effective medical countermeasures.
The committee notes that since 2007, the Department of
Defense has initiated efforts to strengthen homeland defense
and homeland security by developing broad-spectrum medical
countermeasures against the threat of genetically engineered
bio-terror agents. Additional initiatives that the Department
of Defense is planning include the development of advanced
detection and deterrent technologies and initiatives to
facilitate full-scale civil-military exercises. While the
Department of Defense planned to spend over $1.0 billion on
these initiatives between fiscal years 2007-12, it remains
unclear how it has coordinated its programs to complement those
of the National Institutes of Health and the Department of
Health and Human Services. The degree to which the Department
of Defense has met program goals to improve interagency
planning for complex homeland security contingencies also
remains unclear.
The committee remains committed to a robust medical
research and development program focused on military health
issues, including medical, biological, and chemical defense.
However, to assist the committee in conducting its oversight of
DOD's initiatives to develop medical countermeasures,
coordinate programs, and improve interagency contingency
planning, the committee directs the Comptroller General of the
United States to conduct a comprehensive review of medical
countermeasures against genetically engineered bio-terror
agents, and to submit a report to the congressional defense
committees by March 3, 2014, on the findings and any
recommendations. The report should include, but not be limited
to:
(1) The status of DOD's initiatives to develop
countermeasures for genetically engineered bio-terror
agents and advanced detection and deterrent
technologies;
(2) The extent to which the National Institutes of
Health and the Department of Defense have coordinated
their research programs to ensure efforts are
complementary and not duplicative;
(3) The extent to which the Department of Defense,
the National Institutes of Health, the Department of
Homeland Security and other agencies have planned and
executed full-scale civil-military exercises to improve
interagency coordination;
(4) The cost basis for DOD's various programs and
initiatives to develop countermeasures for genetically
engineered bio-terror agents and related detection and
deterrent technologies; and
(5) The nature and extent of potential program
overlap and duplication with programs of other Federal
agencies that could benefit from consolidations or
improved coordination to achieve cost savings.

Comptroller General Review of Planning and Preparedness for Threats
Posed by Non-Traditional Chemical Agents

The committee notes a growing awareness of the threat posed
by novel chemical weapon agents or toxicants known as Non-
Traditional Agents (NTAs). The 2010 Quadrennial Defense Review
(QDR) states that the globalization of the world's chemical
industry, coupled with scientific breakthroughs, increases the
possibility of NTAs being used against U.S. and allied forces.
Furthermore, the QDR states that the Department of Defense
(DOD) has increased its resources for research and development
of technologies to meet and defeat these emerging threats. NTAs
are allegedly binary nerve agents significantly more lethal
than third-generation chemical weapons, such as VX nerve gas.
The current international agreements regarding chemical
warfare do not adequately control the relatively simple
formulas for NTAs that have been published. Consequently, the
risk of illicit NTA production by various state and non-state
actors is heightened compared to traditional chemical agents.
NTAs could pose a significant threat to DOD personnel as they
may be capable of defeating protective equipment, such as
Mission Oriented Protective Posture masks and suits as well as
evading chemical weapon detection tools. In the past, the
Government Accountability Office has reported that most U.S.
Army units tasked with providing chemical and biological
defense support are not adequately staffed, equipped, or
trained to perform their missions against traditional chemical
agents. The Deparment's preparedness for NTAs may be even more
important given the unique nature of this emerging threat.
To assist the committee in conducting its oversight of the
Department of Defense's increased resources for research and
development of technologies to meet and defeat emerging threats
posed by NTAs, novel chemical weapon agents, or similar
toxicants, the committee directs the Comptroller General of the
United States to conduct a review of the Department of
Defense's planning and preparedness for threats posed by non-
traditional chemical agents, and to submit a report to the
congressional defense committees by March 31, 2014, with the
findings and any recommendations. The report should include,
but not be limited to:
(1) The extent to which the Department of Defense has
conducted an analysis of the threat NTAs pose to DOD
personnel, including the risk posed by bioregulators
capable of inducing profound physiologic effects, and
developed countermeasures, defenses, and mitigation
strategies to address the threat posed by NTAs;
(2) The extent to which DOD's chemical and biological
defense units that are tasked with chemical and
biological defense support to combat units and commands
are adequately staffed, equipped, and trained to deal
with NTAs;
(3) The extent to which DOD's chemical and biological
defense units that are tasked with a homeland defense
mission, especially National Guard and Reserve units,
are adequately staffed, equipped, and trained to deal
with NTAs;
(4) How much the Department is planning to spend in
fiscal year 2014 on research and development of
technologies to address the threat of NTAs, and how
much of an increase in resources this represents over
fiscal year 2013 levels;
(5) The nature and extent of potential counter-NTA
research and development program overlap and
duplication between, for example, defense agencies, the
military services, and national laboratories/federally
funded research and development centers; and
(6) Which counter-NTA programs or efforts could
benefit from consolidations, improved coordination, or
other actions to achieve financial or other benefits,
such as increased efficiencies.

Comptroller General Review of Role of the Army and the Marine Corps in
Access-denied Areas

As U.S. forces draw down from operations in the Republic of
Iraq and the Islamic Republic of Afghanistan, the Department of
Defense is focusing on anti-access/area-denial (A2/AD)
challenges posed by potential adversaries elsewhere around the
globe. The committee believes the Air Sea Battle concept and
other recent publications highlight air, maritime, space, and
cyberspace operations, and appear to rely heavily on Navy and
Air Force assets and capabilities. However, the committee is
concerned that less attention has been paid to the role of the
Army and the Marine Corps in an A2/AD environment. The
committee believes the Army and the Marine Corps, like each of
the services, must be trained, manned, and equipped to respond
to a full spectrum of challenges, consistent with the roles and
missions of each service. However, given the uncertainty
surrounding the role of the Army and the Marine Corps in an A2/
AD environment, the committee directs the Comptroller General
of the United States to conduct an independent review that
evaluates:
(1) Missions envisioned for the Army and the Marine
Corps in an A2/AD environment;
(2) Alternatives being considered by the Department
for meeting such missions;
(3) The operational, cost, and other assumptions
underlying the Department's analyses; and
(4) Steps being taken to align Army and Marine Corps
force structure with emerging A2/AD missions, the cost
implications of the planned actions, and the extent to
which such actions potentially duplicate the
capabilities of other services or limit the ability of
the Army and the Marine Corps to fulfill other
missions.
The committee directs the Comptroller General to submit the
results of the review to the congressional defense committees
by April 15, 2014.

Comptroller General Review of U.S. Central Command Headquarters

The committee notes that since fiscal year 2001, the
resources provided to U.S. Central Command and its supporting
service components have grown dramatically to manage wars in
both the Islamic Republic of Afghanistan and the Republic of
Iraq, including directing U.S. operational forces, supporting
counterinsurgency operations, and assisting host nation
security forces in providing for their own defense. According
to Department of Defense reports provided to Congress, military
and civilian manpower at U.S. Central Command has more than
doubled since fiscal year 2001, not including the contractors
who support the headquarters.
With the drawdown of operational forces in Iraq and the
impending drawdown in Afghanistan, the committee believes it is
important to reexamine the levels of headquarters manpower and
mission support costs needed by U.S. Central Command.
Therefore, the committee directs the Comptroller General of the
United States to conduct as assessment of the following:
(1) The trends in manpower and mission support costs
devoted to the headquarters of U.S. Central Command and
its supporting service component commands since fiscal
year 2001;
(2) The steps the Department of Defense has taken to
date to reexamine the size and structure of the
headquarters of U.S. Central Command and its service
component commands in light of the drawdown of forces
in its area of responsibility and changing U.S.
military strategy; and
(3) The future plans for U.S. Central Command and its
service component commands, including any plans to
maintain headquarters in forward locations such as the
State of Kuwait and the State of Qatar.
The Comptroller General may provide additional information
deemed appropriate to provide the committee insight into the
Department of Defense's plans for the headquarters functions of
the U.S Central Command. The Comptroller General should provide
the preliminary results of the study to the congressional
defense committees by April 15, 2014, with the final report to
follow as soon as practicable thereafter.

Defense Forensic Enterprise

The committee is aware that the Department of Defense has
used expeditionary forensics successfully to identify, target
and disrupt terrorists and enemy combatants in the Republic of
Iraq and the Islamic Republic of Afghanistan. The committee is
also aware that the Department has taken multiple steps towards
establishing an enduring capability in this impactful area. The
Department issued directive 5205.15E in 2011 to establish a
policy regarding the Defense Forensic Enterprise (DFE), which
assigned to the Under Secretary of Defense for Acquisition,
Technology, and Logistics (USD(AT&L)) a number of
responsibilities including the development of a strategic plan
to guide the activities of the DFE. However, given the
important impact of the use of expeditionary forensics for U.S.
counter-terrorism activities, the committee is concerned that
two years after the issuance of directive 5205.15E, the
required strategic plan is not yet finalized. The committee
notes that the U.S. Government Accountability Office (GAO)
recently completed a study on defense forensics, in which it
made several recommendations to facilitate the establishment of
the DFE. Therefore, the committee directs the USD(AT&L) to set
a date by August 30, 2013 to finalize and publish the strategic
plan for the Defense Forensic Enterprise. Furthermore, the
committee directs the USD(AT&L) to provide a briefing to the
Committees on Armed Services of the Senate and the House of
Representatives by March 1, 2014 which describes the actions
being taken to address the recommendations made within the GAO
report on Defense Forensics.

Detailed Report on Defense Efficiencies

The committee notes that over the last 3 fiscal years, the
previous Secretaries of the Department of Defense have
developed budget submissions that contained directed
efficiencies for the Department. However, the policies and
procedures on the implementation of these efficiencies have not
been detailed to Congress. Therefore, the committee directs the
Secretary of Defense to submit a report to the congressional
defense committees by October 1, 2013, on the following:
(1) A detailed accounting of how departmental fiscal
policies, dating from fiscal year 2012 to the present,
support compliance with the discretionary spending
limit applied to the security category in fiscal year
2013 by section 251(c)(2)(A) of the Balanced Budget and
Emergency Deficit Control Act of 1985 (Public Law 99-
177); and
(2) A detailed accounting of how departmental fiscal
policies will support compliance with the discretionary
spending limit applied to the security category for
each of fiscal years 2014-21 by section 251(c)(2) of
Public Law 99-177.

Energy Security Assessments in the Quadrennial Defense Review

The committee notes that the Secretary of Defense is
required every four years to conduct a Quadrennial Defense
Review (QDR), pursuant to section 118 of title 10, United
States Code. The QDR is intended to provide a strategic defense
review of plans necessary to execute successfully the full
range of missions called for in the national defense strategy.
The committee believes an essential element of any defense plan
is the importance of energy security as a fundamental component
of the Department of Defense's ability to project power and
enable combat capability for operations. In the National
Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2012 (Public Law 112-
81), energy security was defined as ``having assured access to
reliable supplies of energy and the ability to protect and
deliver sufficient energy to meet mission essential
requirements.'' Noting that the committee report (H. Rept. 112-
78) accompanying the National Defense Authorization Act for
Fiscal Year 2012 urged the Secretary to conduct a more
comprehensive QDR review, the committee directs the Secretary
of Defense to ensure that the final assessment includes details
regarding the importance of, and funding necessary to achieve,
energy security.

Humanitarian Mine Action and Counter-Improvised Explosive Device
Technologies

The committee remains concerned that the Department of
Defense Humanitarian Mine Action (HMA) program is under-
utilized and under-resourced, to include research, development,
testing, and evaluation efforts. The committee notes that while
the committee has authorized $10.0 million per fiscal year for
this program in the past, the Department of Defense routinely
commits less than $3.0 million per year towards global HMA
requirements. Because of these shortfalls, the committee notes
that HMA programs and projects are unable or unlikely to
contribute to Geographic Combatant Commander theater security
cooperation strategies in a substantive and enduring way, and
that the efforts of the Department of Defense are potentially
out of balance with larger U.S. Government HMA and security
force assistance goals. Furthermore, the Department of Defense
and commercial industry have invested heavily in improvised
explosive device defeating technology over the past decade, and
the committee believes that this technology should be better
utilized within the HMA program.
Therefore, the committee directs the Secretary of Defense,
in coordination with the Secretary of State, to submit a report
to the congressional defense committees within 90 days after
the date of the enactment of this Act, that outlines the
strategic direction of the Department of Defense's HMA program,
to include efforts to improve research, development, test, and
evaluation, and ways to ensure coordination mechanisms exist to
determine whether counter-improvised explosive technology could
be applicable to HMA. In addition, the report should outline
ways to improve interagency coordination with similar programs
under way in the Department of State and the U.S. Agency for
International Development.

Hybrid Airship Technology

The committee is aware that hybrid airship technology has
the potential to provide much needed capability for the
Department of Defense, particularly with regards to cargo lift
and logistics. In the past, the committee has supported the
development and demonstration of hybrid airship technology, and
continues to monitor developments with interest. The committee
is aware of recent developments that have demonstrated
innovative capabilities in airship design and lift.
The committee is also aware, however, that airship
technology still requires additional, more rigorous development
and demonstration. As noted by the Assistant Secretary of
Defense for Research and Engineering, ``current conventional
airships are capable of accommodating payloads of only a few
thousand pounds. In order to achieve the massive payloads
envisioned by air-logistic theorists, significant technical
advances and resource investments must be made.''
The committee continues to support efforts to transition
from rudimentary technology demonstrators to operational
prototypes in relevant environments. The committee encourages
the Air Force and Transportation Command to work with industry
to more fully develop the capability requirements and mission
analysis needed to pursue such an operational prototype.

Nuclear Deterrence Education in the Armed Forces

The committee is aware that the military departments and
the Joint Staff have invested considerable time and attention
into overhauling and improving the instruction provided to
officers and enlisted personnel concerning the U.S. nuclear
deterrent mission.
Following the Minot and Taiwan incidents involving the
improper and unauthorized handling by Air Force personnel of
nuclear weapons and nuclear weapon components, and the
termination by then-Defense Secretary Gates of the Chief of
Staff of the Air Force and the Secretary of the Air Force,
former Secretary of Energy and Defense James Schlesinger
undertook a comprehensive two-phase report on Nuclear Weapons
Management in the Armed Forces.
In announcing the Phase I findings, Secretary Schlesinger
stated that, ``Over the years . . . what has been the long-time
practice during the Cold War and subsequent years of developing
the theory and doctrine of deterrence has more or less
disappeared not only from the Air Force schools, more generally
from military schools . . . the doctrine of deterrence has, to
a large extent, been forgotten.''
The committee has reviewed internal professional military
education reviews of the status of improvements to instruction
in the ``doctrine of deterrence.'' The committee notes that the
services, particularly the Navy, have determined that there are
ongoing challenges and weaknesses in instruction in this
subject matter. The committee also notes that challenges remain
in educating airmen on their role in safeguarding national
security. Educating the warfighters who execute the daily
mission of nuclear deterrence remains a critical element to
ensuring the level of excellence required for the mission.
The committee encourages the services and the Joint Staff
to keep the same level of focus on this subject matter that was
brought to bear by then-Secretary Gates in 2008.

Nuclear Weapons Council and Commonality in Nuclear Forces and Nuclear
Warheads

The committee understands that the Nuclear Weapons Council
has approved a long-term plan to increase the use of common
components and systems across U.S. nuclear delivery systems and
the nuclear stockpile. In the long-term, this approach is
expected to yield significant cost savings, may enable novel
approaches to mitigating risks through deployment of
interoperable warheads that can be utilized on multiple
delivery systems, and may facilitate reductions in the number
of nuclear weapons held in reserve. However, the committee
urges the Department of Defense and the National Nuclear
Security Administration to use caution in implementing this
approach to ensure that commonality does not lead to
unacceptable risk of widespread impacts to the deterrent force,
should a technical risk cause a common component or subsystem
to fail.
To better understand the Nuclear Weapons Council's long-
term plan for interoperability and commonality, the committee
directs the Chairman of the Nuclear Weapons Council, in
coordination with appropriate Members of the Council, to
provide a briefing to the congressional defense committees by
October 31, 2013, on the feasibility, cost savings, benefits,
risks, timelines, impacts on the size of the nuclear weapons
stockpile, and impacts to stockpile stewardship and any
potential need for underground testing associated with the
long-term plan for interoperability and commonality.
Specifically, the briefing should describe:
(1) The Nuclear Weapons Council's approach for
understanding and managing risks associated with
commonality in nuclear delivery systems, nuclear
warheads, and their components;
(2) The Council's methods for evaluating trade-offs
between the risk versus the cost savings of
commonality;
(3) The potential for streamlining the maintenance of
nuclear weapons through interoperability and
commonality; and
(4) The long-term plan for interoperability and
commonality across delivery systems and warheads,
including impacts to workload and capacity in the
nuclear security enterprise.

Personnel Growth at the Office of the Secretary of Defense, Joint
Staff, and the Service Secretariats

The committee notes that the Secretary of Defense is
supported by vast headquarters organizations that have grown
over time, consisting of thousands of personnel in multiple
layers of management. At a time of growing economic and fiscal
constraints, the committee believes it is important that the
Department of Defense ensures that its headquarters personnel
are efficiently aligned with the missions. The committee
believes that the Department must continue to reduce overhead
and improve its business operations, particularly within its
headquarters organizations. Moreover, the committee believes
that this multi-layered structure breeds duplication and
impedes timely decision-making at the Department as well as
responsiveness to Congress.
The Office of the Secretary of Defense (OSD) assists the
Secretary in performing his duties and responsibilities for
oversight, policy development, planning, resource management,
and fiscal and program evaluation at the Department. OSD staff
currently includes more than 2,600 military and civilian
personnel, with an unknown number of supporting contractors,
and these numbers appear to have grown nearly 40 percent since
2001. In addition, the Secretary is supported by the Chairman
of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, whose staff creates and
distributes guidance for combatant forces' unified strategic
direction, among other functions. The Joint Staff now includes
more than 4,200 personnel and has nearly tripled since 2001.
This growth is due, in part, to absorbing some functions from
the now-defunct U.S. Joint Forces Command, but the ``joint
community'' appears to be growing overall. In May 2013, the
Government Accountability Office found that, even excluding
U.S. Central Command, the geographic combatant commands have
grown by nearly 50 percent since 2001. Outside the joint
community, each of the Secretaries of the military departments
has hundreds of military and civilian staff as well as numerous
and proliferating offices supporting them and assisting the
oversight of each of the military services. However, reliable
information about the size of these service organizations is
not readily available, limiting congressional oversight.
Given the need to minimize overhead at the Department of
Defense, the committee directs the Comptroller General of the
United States to conduct a review of the resources devoted to
the Office of the Secretary of Defense, the Joint Staff, and
the military department's secretariats and military staffs. The
Comptroller General should provide a briefing to the House
Committee on Armed Services by April 15, 2014, on the results
of the review. The review should cover the following:
(1) What are the trends in the resources (authorized
positions and mission support costs) devoted to the
Office of the Secretary of Defense, the Joint Staff,
and the military department's secretariats and military
staffs for fiscal years 2001-13?
(2) To what extent does the Department have processes
in place to manage and oversee the resources of these
headquarters organizations, including examining
resources being devoted to contractor support staff?
(3) To what extent has the Department reviewed these
organizations to determine whether overlap or
duplication exists in the types of support being
provided to the Secretary of Defense within or across
these various headquarters organizations and whether
there are opportunities for efficiencies?

Preventing Unfair Trade Practices in Military Equipment Sales

The committee notes that offsets are illegal under many
international trade agreements and generally considered a
violation of the principles of the European Union treaty, with
the exception of certain defense procurements. The committee
believes that any free trade agreement negotiations between the
United States and the European Union should include the issue
of prohibiting offset agreements with respect to the sale of
defense equipment by U.S. companies to European Union member
states that would require U.S. companies to reinvest a
percentage of the value of any resulting contract in the
importing country.

Replacement Plan for E-4B

The Air Force's fleet of E-4B aircraft serve as the
National Airborne Operations Center (NAOC) for the President,
the Secretary of Defense, the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of
Staff, and other senior leaders. According to a 2012 Air Force
fact-sheet, ``in case of national emergency or destruction of
ground command control centers, the aircraft provides a highly
survivable command, control, and communications center to
direct U.S. forces, execute emergency war orders, and
coordinate actions by civil authorities.''
The E-4 fleet first entered service in 1974, and as the
aircraft continues to age, sustainment efforts grow
increasingly difficult and costly. Sustaining the fleet into
the 2020s may become progressively difficult or unmanageable as
commercial airlines continue to retire their fleet of 747-200
aircraft and spare parts and maintenance providers become
unavailable. The committee is also aware of the significant
potential cost of replacing the E-4B aircraft. The Air Force
has not yet developed a plan to replace these critical command
and control aircraft or a sustainable life-extension option.
Therefore, the committee directs the Secretary of the Air
Force, in consultation with the commander, U.S. Strategic
Command, to submit a report to the congressional defense
committees by January 30, 2014, on the Air Force's plan to
replace or sustainably extend the E-4B fleet and its associated
capabilities. The report should contain an assessment of
various potential options, costs, and a schedule for a
replacement program.

Report on Implementation of Acquisition Strategy To Minimize Costs for
Defense Base Act Insurance

Section 843 of the National Defense Authorization Act for
Fiscal Year 2009 (Public Law 110-417) required that the
Secretary of Defense adopt an acquisition strategy for Defense
Base Act (DBA) insurance that minimizes the cost of such
insurance for both the Department and its contractors. It also
required the Department to submit a report to Congress, within
270 days of the law's enactment, on the acquisition strategy
adopted. The committee is aware that the Department, after
having submitted in September 2009 the report required by
section 843, has been working through the steps to implement
its acquisition strategy. The committee notes that several
years have now passed since 2009, and therefore directs the
Secretary of Defense to report to the congressional defense
committees not later than February 1, 2015 on its progress
towards implementing the lower-cost acquisition strategy
required by section 843.

Report on Security Exemptions and Waivers for U.S. Nuclear Forces

The committee commends the Department of Defense for its
sustained commitment to ensuring the security of U.S. nuclear
weapons. In particular, the committee recognizes the efforts
undertaken by the Air Force and the Department of Defense to
bring renewed focus, leadership, and resources to nuclear
weapons security following the grave security incidents seen in
the Air Force in 2006 and 2007. The committee encourages the
Department to sustain continual efforts to improve nuclear
weapons security (operational excellence and a culture of
continual improvement are required). To better understand the
Department's efforts to improve nuclear weapons security, the
committee directs the Secretary of Defense to submit a report
to the congressional defense committees by November 15, 2013,
on efforts to improve nuclear weapons security in the
Department of Defense. In particular, the report should list
any current exemptions or waivers to nuclear weapons security
requirements or guidance, as well as the Department's plans and
timelines for mitigating the risk from, and eventually
eliminating the need for, such exemptions or waivers.

Reporting Pursuant to the War Powers Resolution

Elsewhere in this report, the committee addresses oversight
of sensitive military operations. The committee notes that its
oversight of military operations is in addition to all
reporting pursuant to, or consistent with, section 4 of the War
Powers Resolution (50 U.S.C. 1541 et seq.).

Secure Internet Protocol Router Network for the Congressional Defense
Committees

The Department of Defense maintains a classified Secure
Internet Protocol Router Network (SIPRNET) to provide secure
networking among Department of Defense components, as well as
with selected interagency partners. The committee is aware that
access to the network is available to much of the executive
branch, but to virtually none of the legislative branch of the
U.S. Government. The committee believes that having access to
SIPRNET would improve its ability to conduct oversight of the
Department of Defense, as well as help save funds by
eliminating printing, travel, shipping, and courier costs of
required communications. The committee notes that it is
supplied with the means for secure telephony and believes this
provides a suitable precedent to expand into other methods of
secure collaboration between the Department and Congress.
Therefore, the committee directs the Secretary of Defense
to provide a briefing to the congressional defense committees
by February 1, 2014, on extending SIPRNET access to the
aforementioned committees by December 1, 2014. The briefing
should include an assessment of the operational policies for
implementing SIPRNET, as well as the costs, logistics, security
considerations, and other matters the Secretary deems
pertinent.

Sustainment of Sociocultural Understanding Capabilities

The committee is aware that the Department of Defense has
invested in a number of programs over the past 10 years to
provide increased sociocultural understanding at tactical,
operational and strategic levels. The committee has been
supportive of many of these capabilities, such as the Army's
Human Terrain System, the Secretary of Defense's Minerva
Initiative, and the cross-service Human, Social, Cultural,
Behavioral Modeling program. Each program has served an
important role in filling capability gaps for the Department,
especially with regards to understanding the human dimensions
of the counterinsurgency fights in the Republic of Iraq and the
Islamic Republic of Afghanistan.
However, the committee is concerned that with the drawdown
of forces in Afghanistan and the refocus to the Asia-Pacific
region, there may be a growing sense that some of the
capabilities that proved so useful in the Middle East will be
of little or no value in potential contingencies rooted in the
Asia Pacific region. The committee firmly believes that
sociocultural understanding will remain important in the Middle
East as it grows in importance in Africa and Asia, though needs
will be somewhat different and may require slightly different
instantiations based on the differences in the operational
environment.
Therefore, the committee directs the Secretary of Defense
to submit a report to the congressional defense committees
within 180 days after the date of the enactment of this Act, on
the Department's plans for maintaining and adapting existing
sociocultural capabilities, as well as development for new
capabilities to meet the current strategic guidance. The report
should identify the programs either in development or that have
been deployed that support sociocultural understanding, and
whether they will be sustained across the Future Years Defense
Program. Elements of the report should also identify any
capability gaps that exist based on the recent guidance
shifting the Department's focus to the Asia-Pacific region.

LEGISLATIVE PROVISIONS

Subtitle A--Financial Matters

Section 1001--General Transfer Authority

This section would allow the Secretary of Defense to make
transfers between any amounts of authorizations for fiscal year
2014 in division A of this Act. This section would limit the
total amount transferred under this authority to $3.5 billion.
This section would also require prompt notification to Congress
of each transfer made.

Section 1002--Budgetary Effects of This Act

This section would specify that the budgetary effects of
this Act for purposes of the Statutory Pay-As-You-Go Act of
2010 (Public Law 111-139) will be determined by reference to a
statement submitted for printing in the Congressional Record by
the chairman of the House Committee on the Budget.

Section 1003--Audit of Department of Defense Fiscal Year 2018 Financial
Statements

This section would express the sense of Congress regarding
the Department of Defense's ongoing Financial Improvement and
Audit Readiness process and support the goal of audit readiness
across the Department by 2017. This section would also require
that a full and complete audit takes place for fiscal year
2018.

Section 1004--Authority to Transfer Funds to the National Nuclear
Security Administration to Sustain Nuclear Weapons Modernization

This section would provide the Secretary of Defense the
authority to transfer up to $150.0 million to the nuclear
weapons program of the National Nuclear Security Administration
if the amount authorized to be appropriated or otherwise made
available for that program is less than $8.4 billion (the
amount specified for fiscal year 2014 in the report required by
section 1251 of the National Defense Authorization Act for
Fiscal Year 2010 (Public Law 111-84)).

Subtitle B--Counter-Drug Activities

Section 1011--Extension of Authority to Support Unified Counter-drug
and Counterterrorism Campaign in Colombia

This section would extend, by 1 year, the unified counter-
drug and counterterrorism campaign in the Republic of Colombia
originally authorized by section 1021 of the Ronald W. Reagan
National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2005 (Public
Law 108-375), and most recently amended by section 1013 of the
National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2013 (Public
Law 112-239).

Section 1012--Extension of Authority for Joint Task Forces to Provide
Support to Law Enforcement Agencies Conducting Counterterrorism
Activities

This section would extend, by 1 year, the support for joint
task forces to support law enforcement agencies conducting
counterterrorism activities, as originally authorized by
section 1022(b) of the National Defense Authorization Act for
Fiscal Year 2004 (Public Law 108-136), and most recently
amended by section 1014 of the National Defense Authorization
Act for Fiscal Year 2013 (Public Law 112-239).

Section 1013--Two-Year Extension of Authority to Provide Additional
Support for Counter-drug Activities of Certain Foreign Governments

This section would extend, by 2 years, the authority to
provide support for counter-drug activities of certain foreign
governments, originally authorized by subsection (a)(2) of
section 1033 of the National Defense Authorization Act for
Fiscal Year 1998 (Public Law 105-85), and most recently amended
by section 1006 of the National Defense Authorization Act for
Fiscal Year 2012 (Public Law 112-81).

Section 1014--Sense of Congress Regarding the National Guard Counter-
narcotic Program

This section would express the sense of Congress regarding
the importance of the National Guard Counter Narcotics Program
as a tool in combating drug trafficking into the United States
and the need for continued support and funding of such
programs, especially along the Southwest border.

Subtitle C--Naval Vessels and Shipyards

Section 1021--Clarification of Sole Ownership Resulting from Ship
Donations at No Cost to the Navy

This section would clarify the current ship donation
statute, section 7306 of title 10, United States Code, and
authorize the Secretary of the Navy to donate any vessel
stricken from the Naval Vessel Register.

Section 1022--Availability of Funds for Retirement or Inactivation of
Ticonderoga Class Cruisers or Dock Landing Ships

This section would limit the obligation and expenditure of
funds authorized to be appropriated or otherwise made available
for fiscal year 2014 for the retirement, inactivation, or
storage of a cruiser or dock landing ship. This section would
provide an exception for the retirement of the U.S.S. Denver
(LPD 9).
This section would further provide for transfer authority
for the purpose of providing sufficient appropriations to
support the modernization of seven cruisers. If requested by
the Secretary of Defense, the committee believes the following
transfers should be included: OPN Line 0960, $662.7 million;
OPN Line 2312, $1.8 million; OPN Line 2360, $6.6 million; OPN
Line 2915, $13.7 million; OPN Line 3050, $13.4 million; OPN
Line 3216, $20.8 million; OPN Line 5530, $4.6 million; WPN Line
4223, $91.1 million; and RDTE Line 1447, $100.0 million. The
total transfer authority is $914.7 million.

Section 1023--Repair of Vessels in Foreign Shipyards

This section would amend subsection (a) of section 7310 of
title 10, United States Code, to designate naval vessels that
do not have a homeport to be treated as being homeported in the
United States or Guam with regards to repair and maintenance of
those vessels. Additionally, this section would define the term
voyage repair.

Section 1024--Sense of Congress Regarding a Balanced Future Naval Force

This section would provide the Sense of Congress that
additional funding should be prioritized toward shipbuilding
efforts and that Department of Navy budget projections should
realistically anticipate the true investment to meet force
structure goals.

Section 1025--Authority for Short-term Extension or Renewal of Leases
for Vessels Supporting the Transit Protection System Escort Program

This section would allow the Secretary of the Navy to
extend or renew the lease of not more than four blocking
vessels supporting the Transit Protection System Escort
Program. This section would also require the Secretary, prior
to extending or renewing such a lease, to submit to the
congressional defense committees a notification of the proposed
extension or renewal, along with a detailed description of the
term of the proposed contract and a justification for extending
or renewing the lease, as opposed to obtaining the capability
through purchase of such vessels.
The committee notes that the requirement for the vessels
appears to be an enduring requirement and is aware that the
Secretary is conducting a business case analysis to determine
the most cost-effective manner to obtain the capability
provided by the vessels. The committee awaits the outcome of
this analysis, and it encourages the Secretary to appropriately
address funding for this requirement in the fiscal year 2015
President's budget request.

Subtitle D--Counterterrorism

Section 1030--Clarification of Procedures for Use of Alternate Members
on Military Commissions

This section would clarify procedures for use of alternate
members of military commissions.

Section 1031--Modification of Regional Defense Combating Terrorism
Fellowship Program Reporting Requirement

This section would modify the Regional Defense Combating
Terrorism Fellowship Program to require additional annual
reporting requirements.

Section 1032--Prohibition on Use of Funds To Construct or Modify
Facilities in the United States To House Detainees Transferred from
United States Naval Station, Guantanamo Bay, Cuba

This section would prohibit the Secretary of Defense from
using any of the funds available to the Department of Defense
during the period beginning on the date of the enactment of
this Act and ending on December 31, 2014, to modify or
construct any facility in the United States, its territories,
or possessions to house any detainee transferred from U.S.
Naval Station, Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, for the purposes of
detention or imprisonment in the custody or under the effective
control of the Department of Defense.

Section 1033--Requirements for Certifications Relating to the Transfer
of Detainees at United States Naval Station, Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, to
Foreign Countries and Other Foreign Entities

This section would prohibit the Secretary of Defense from
using any of the funds available to the Department of Defense
(DOD) to transfer or release, beginning on the date of the
enactment of this Act and ending on December 31, 2014,
individuals detained at U.S. Naval Station, Guantanamo Bay,
Cuba, to or within a foreign country or any other foreign
entity. This prohibition would apply unless the Secretary of
Defense, with the concurrence of the Secretary of State and in
consultation with the Director of National Intelligence,
provides a written certification to Congress addressing several
requirements at least 30 days prior to the transfer of any such
individual.
This section would also prohibit the Secretary of Defense
from using any funds for the transfer of any such individual to
the custody or effective control of a foreign country or any
other foreign entity if there is a confirmed case of any
individual transferred from U.S. Naval Station, Guantanamo Bay,
Cuba, to the same country or entity who engaged in terrorist
activity subsequent to their transfer.
This section would allow the Secretary of Defense to waive
the general prohibition against transfers to a foreign country
where there has been a confirmed case of recidivism as well as
two of the requirements for other transfers. In these
instances, the Secretary of Defense must determine that
alternative actions will be taken, that it is not possible to
certify the risks have been completely eliminated, and that
actions taken will substantially mitigate the risk of
recidivism.
This section would require, in the event the Secretary of
Defense uses the waiver, that he provide a report that includes
a copy of the waiver, determination, a statement of the basis
for the determination, a summary of the alternative actions to
be taken, and information on the detainee's record of
cooperation while in DOD custody and any agreements in place to
provide for the detainee's continuing cooperation after
transfer.
This section would also authorize the Secretary, for
purposes of assessing the risk that a detainee will engage in
terrorist activity if released for either a certification or
national security waiver, to give favorable consideration to
any detainee who has cooperated with U.S. intelligence and law
enforcement authorities pursuant to a pre-trial agreement while
in DOD custody, and for whom appropriate agreements and
mechanisms are in place to provide for continued cooperation
with U.S. intelligence and law enforcement authorities
following transfer.

Section 1034--Prohibition on the Use Of Funds for the Transfer or
Release of Individuals Detained at United States Naval Station,
Guantanamo Bay, Cuba

This section would prohibit the use of any amounts
authorized to be appropriated or otherwise made available to
the Department of Defense to be used during the period
beginning on the date of the enactment of this Act and ending
on December 31, 2014, to transfer or release detainees at U.S.
Naval Station, Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, to or within the United
States, its territories, or possessions.

Section 1035--Unclassified Summary of Information Relating to
Individuals Detained at Parwan, Afghanistan

This section would require the Secretary of Defense to make
publicly available an unclassified summary relating to
individuals detained by the Department of Defense at the
Detention Facility at Parwan, Afghanistan pursuant to the
Authorization for Use of Military Force (Public Law 107-40; 50
U.S.C. 1541 note) at any time during the past 2 years who have
been determined to represent an ``enduring security threat'' to
the United States.

Section 1036--Assessment of Affiliates and Adherents of Al-Qaeda
Outside the United States

This section would require an assessment to be conducted by
the President, acting through the Secretary of Defense, of: any
group operating outside the United States that is an affiliate
or adherent of, or otherwise related to, Al Qaeda; a summary of
relevant information relating to each such group; an assessment
of whether each group is part of or substantially supporting Al
Qaeda or the Taliban, or constitutes an associated force that
is engaged in hostilities against the United States or its
coalition partners; and the criteria used to determine the
nature and extent of each group's relationship to Al Qaeda. The
assessment would be required to be submitted to the
congressional defense committees within 120 days after the date
of the enactment of this Act.

Section 1037--Designation of Department of Defense Senior Official for
Facilitating the Transfer of Individuals Detained at United States
Naval Station, Guantanamo Bay, Cuba

This section would require the Secretary of Defense, not
later than 90 days after the date of the enactment of this Act,
to designate a senior Department of Defense official as the
official with principal responsibility for coordination and
management of the transfer of individuals detained at United
States Naval Station, Guantanamo Bay, Cuba. The Secretary of
Defense would also set forth the responsibilities of that
senior official with respect to such transfers.

Section 1038--Rank of Chief Prosecutor and Chief Defense Counsel in
Military Commissions Established to Try Individuals Detained at
Guantanamo

This section would require the chief defense counsel and
chief prosecutor of any military commission established to try
an alien unprivileged enemy belligerent who is detained at
United States Naval Station, Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, to have the
same rank.

Section 1039--Report on Capability of Yemeni Government to Detain,
Rehabilitate, and Prosecute Individuals Detained at Guantanamo who are
Transferred to Yemen

This section would require the Secretary of Defense and the
Secretary of State to jointly submit to the congressional
defense committees, the Committee on Foreign Affairs of the
House of Representatives, and the Committee on Foreign
Relations of the Senate, a report on the capability of the
Republic of Yemen to detain, rehabilitate, and prosecute
individuals transferred there from the Guantanamo Bay Detention
Facility. This section would require such a report to be
submitted not later than 120 days after the date of the
enactment of this Act.

Section 1040--Report on Attachment of Rights to Individuals Detained at
Guantanamo if Transferred to the United States

This section would require the Secretary of Defense and the
Attorney General, not later than 90 days after the date of the
enactment of this Act, to jointly submit to the congressional
defense committees, the Committee on the Judiciary of the
Senate, and the Committee on the Judiciary of the House of
Representatives, a report on whether detainees, if transferred
to the United States from the Guantanamo Bay Detention
Facility, would become eligible for certain immigration-related
relief or additional constitutional rights.

Section 1040A--Summary of Information Relating to Individuals Detained
at Guantanamo who Became Leaders of Foreign Terrorist Groups

This section would require the Secretary of Defense to, not
later than 90 days after the date of the enactment of this Act,
make publicly available a summary of information relating to
individuals who were formerly detained at United States Naval
Station, Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, who have, since being
transferred or released from such detention, become leaders or
involved in the leadership structure of a foreign terrorist
group.

Subtitle E--Sensitive Military Operations

Section 1041--Congressional Notification of Sensitive Military
Operations

This section would require the Secretary of Defense to
promptly submit to the congressional defense committees notice
in writing of any sensitive military operation following such
operation. This section would also require the Secretary of
Defense to establish procedures not later than 60 days after
the date of the enactment of this Act for providing such notice
in a manner consistent with the national security of the United
States and the protection of operational integrity.
The term ``sensitive military operation'' would include
lethal and capture operations conducted by the U.S. Armed
Forces outside of the United States pursuant to the
Authorization for Use of Military Force (Public Law 107-40; 50
U.S.C. 1541 note) or any other authority except a declaration
of war or a specific statutory authorization for the use of
force other than the 2001 authorization.
This section is not intended to create or alter reporting
requirements of any other agency or department outside of the
Department of Defense.

Section 1042--Report on Process for Determining Targets of Lethal
Operations

This section would require the Secretary of Defense to
submit a report within 60 days after the date of the enactment
of this Act containing an explanation of the legal and policy
considerations and approval processes used in determining
whether an individual or group of individuals could be the
target of a lethal operation or capture operation conducted by
the Armed Forces of the United States outside the United
States.

Section 1043--Counterterrorism Operational Briefings

This section would require the Secretary of Defense to
provide quarterly briefings to the congressional defense
committees outlining Department of Defense counterterrorism
operations and related activities. Each briefing would include:
a global update on activity within each geographic combatant
command;

All Congresses 93-116 (1973-2020)
116 (2019-2020)
115 (2017-2018)
114 (2015-2016)
113 (2013-2014)
112 (2011-2012)
111 (2009-2010)
110 (2007-2008)
109 (2005-2006)
108 (2003-2004)
107 (2001-2002)
106 (1999-2000)
105 (1997-1998)
104 (1995-1996)
103 (1993-1994)
102 (1991-1992)
101 (1989-1990)
100 (1987-1988)
99 (1985-1986)
98 (1983-1984)
97 (1981-1982)
96 (1979-1980)
95 (1977-1978)
94 (1975-1976)
93 (1973-1974)

Any Version of Legislation
AS - Amendment Ordered to be Printed
ATH - Agreed to House
ATS - Agreed to Senate
CDH - Committee Discharged House
CDS - Committee Discharged Senate
CPH - Considered and Passed House
CPS - Considered and Passed Senate
EAH - Engrossed Amendment House
EAS - Engrossed Amendment Senate
EH - Engrossed in House
ENR - Enrolled
ES - Engrossed in Senate
FPH - Failed Passage House
HDS - Held at Desk Senate
IH - Introduced in House
IPS - Indefinitely Postponed Senate
IS - Introduced in Senate
LTH - Laid on Table in House
LTS - Laid on Table in Senate
PAP - Printed as Passed
PCS - Placed on Calendar Senate
PCS2 - Placed on Calendar Senate
PP - Public Print
RCH - Reference Change House
RCS - Reference Change Senate
RDS - Received in Senate
RFH - Referred in House
RFS - Referred in Senate
RH - Reported in House
RIH - Referral Instructions House
RS - Reported to Senate
RTH - Referred to Committee House
RTS - Referred to Committee Senate

All Congresses 97-116 (1981-2020)
116 (2019-2020)
115 (2017-2018)
114 (2015-2016)
113 (2013-2014)
112 (2011-2012)
111 (2009-2010)
110 (2007-2008)
109 (2005-2006)
108 (2003-2004)
107 (2001-2002)
106 (1999-2000)
105 (1997-1998)
104 (1995-1996)
103 (1993-1994)
102 (1991-1992)
101 (1989-1990)
100 (1987-1988)
99 (1985-1986)
98 (1983-1984)
97 (1981-1982)

Any State or Territory
Alabama
Alaska
American Samoa
Arizona
Arkansas
California
Colorado
Connecticut
Delaware
District of Columbia
Florida
Georgia
Guam
Hawaii
Idaho
Illinois
Indiana
Iowa
Kansas
Kentucky
Louisiana
Maine
Maryland
Massachusetts
Michigan
Minnesota
Mississippi
Missouri
Montana
Nebraska
Nevada
New Hampshire
New Jersey
New Mexico
New York
North Carolina
North Dakota
Northern Mariana Islands
Ohio
Oklahoma
Oregon
Panama Canal Zone
Pennsylvania
Puerto Rico
Rhode Island
South Carolina
South Dakota
Tennessee
Texas
Utah
Vermont
Virgin Islands
Virginia
Washington
West Virginia
Wisconsin
Wyoming

Any Committee
Agriculture (70th-116th)
Appropriations (70th-116th)
Armed Services (79th-116th)
Budget (93rd-116th)
Education and the Workforce (70th-116th)
Energy and Commerce (70th-116th)
Ethics (90th-116th)
Financial Services (70th-116th)
Foreign Affairs (70th-116th)
Homeland Security (107th-116th)
House Administration (79th-116th)
Intelligence (Permanent) (94th-116th)
Judiciary (70th-116th)
Natural Resources (70th-116th)
Oversight and Government Reform (70th-116th)
Rules (70th-116th)
Science, Space, and Technology (86th-116th)
Small Business (77th-116th)
Transportation and Infrastructure (80th-116th)
Veterans' Affairs (79th-116th)
Ways and Means (70th-116th)

Any State
Alabama
Alaska
American Samoa
Arizona
Arkansas
California
Colorado
Connecticut
Delaware
District of Columbia
Florida
Georgia
Guam
Hawaii
Idaho
Illinois
Indiana
Iowa
Kansas
Kentucky
Louisiana
Maine
Maryland
Massachusetts
Michigan
Minnesota
Mississippi
Missouri
Montana
Nebraska
Nevada
New Hampshire
New Jersey
New Mexico
New York
North Carolina
North Dakota
Northern Mariana Islands
Northern Mariana Islands
Ohio
Oklahoma
Oregon
Panama Canal Zone
Panama Canal Zone
Pennsylvania
Puerto Rico
Rhode Island
South Carolina
South Dakota
Tennessee
Texas
Utah
Vermont
Virgin Islands
Virginia
Washington
West Virginia
Wisconsin
Wyoming

All Congresses 96-116 (1979-2020)
116 (2019-2020)
115 (2017-2018)
114 (2015-2016)
113 (2013-2014)
112 (2011-2012)
111 (2009-2010)
110 (2007-2008)
109 (2005-2006)
108 (2003-2004)
107 (2001-2002)
106 (1999-2000)
105 (1997-1998)
104 (1995-1996)
103 (1993-1994)
102 (1991-1992)
101 (1989-1990)
100 (1987-1988)
99 (1985-1986)
98 (1983-1984)
97 (1981-1982)
96 (1979-1980)

Any Committee
Aging (87th-116th)
Agriculture, Nutrition, and Forestry (70th-116th)
Appropriations (70th-116th)
Armed Services (79th-116th)
Banking, Housing, and Urban Affairs (70th-116th)
Budget (93rd-116th)
Commerce, Science, and Transportation (79th-116th)
Energy and Natural Resources (70th-116th)
Environment and Public Works (79th-116th)
Ethics (88th-116th)
Finance (70th-116th)
Foreign Relations (70th-116th)
Governmental Affairs (70th-116th)
Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions (70th-116th)
Indian Affairs (95th-116th)
Intelligence (94th-116th)
Judiciary (70th-116th)
Rules and Administration (79th-116th)
Small Business and Entrepreneurship (81st-116th)
Veterans' Affairs (91st-116th)

All Congresses 81-116 (1949-2020)
116 (2019-2020)
115 (2017-2018)
114 (2015-2016)
113 (2013-2014)
112 (2011-2012)
111 (2009-2010)
110 (2007-2008)
109 (2005-2006)
108 (2003-2004)
107 (2001-2002)
106 (1999-2000)
105 (1997-1998)
104 (1995-1996)
103 (1993-1994)
102 (1991-1992)
101 (1989-1990)
100 (1987-1988)
99 (1985-1986)
98 (1983-1984)
97 (1981-1982)
96 (1979-1980)
95 (1977-1978)
94 (1975-1976)
93 (1973-1974)
92 (1971-1972)
91 (1969-1970)
90 (1967-1968)
89 (1965-1966)
88 (1963-1964)
87 (1961-1962)
86 (1959-1960)
85 (1957-1958)
84 (1955-1956)
83 (1953-1954)
82 (1951-1952)
81 (1949-1950)

Any Topic
Agriculture
Arms Control
Aviation
Commercial
Consular
Dispute Settlement and Arbitration
Drugs/Illegal Substances
Environment
Extradition
Extradition and Criminal Assistance
Fisheries and Wildlife
Human Rights
Intellectual Property/Copyrights
International Law
International Law and Organization
Investment
Labor
Maritime Boundaries and Claims
Mutual Legal Assistance
Shipping and Marine Pollution
Taxation
Telecommunications
Terrorism
Trademarks/Patents
United Nations