" ! HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

112TH CONGRESS

1st Session 

REPORT

112–110 

DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE 

APPROPRIATIONS BILL, 2012 

R E P O R T 

OF THE

COMMITTEE ON APPROPRIATIONS 

together with 

ADDITIONAL VIEWS 

[TO ACCOMPANY H.R. 2219]

JUNE 16, 2011.—Committed to the Committee of the Whole House on 

the State of the Union and ordered to be printed 


tjames on DSKG8SOYB1PROD with REPORTSE:\Seals\Congress.#13
DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE APPROPRIATIONS BILL, 2012 


tjames on DSKG8SOYB1PROD with REPORTS
U.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE

WASHINGTON : 

1 

66–874 

" ! HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

112TH CONGRESS

1st Session 

REPORT

2011

112–110 

DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE 

APPROPRIATIONS BILL, 2012 

R E P O R T 

OF THE

COMMITTEE ON APPROPRIATIONS 

together with 

ADDITIONAL VIEWS 

[TO ACCOMPANY H.R. 2219]

JUNE 16, 2011.—Committed to the Committee of the Whole House on 

the State of the Union and ordered to be printed 


tjames on DSKG8SOYB1PROD with REPORTSE:\Seals\Congress.#13

tjames on DSKG8SOYB1PROD with REPORTS
(III) 

C O N T E N T S 

Page 

Bill Totals ................................................................................................................. 1 

Committee Budget Review Process ........................................................................ 3 

Introduction .............................................................................................................. 3 

Funding Increases ................................................................................................... 3 

Committee Recommendations by Major Category ................................................ 3 

Active, Reserve and National Guard Military Personnel .............................. 3 

Operation and Maintenance ............................................................................ 4 

Procurement ...................................................................................................... 4 

Research, Development, Test and Evaluation ............................................... 5 

Special Operations Command Unfunded Requirements ............................... 6 

Defense Health Program .................................................................................. 6 

Classified Programs .......................................................................................... 6 

Forces to be Supported ............................................................................................ 7 

Department of the Army .................................................................................. 7 

Department of the Navy .................................................................................. 8 

Department of the Air Force ........................................................................... 9 

TITLE I. MILITARY PERSONNEL ....................................................................... 11 

Military Personnel Overview ........................................................................... 13 

Summary of End Strength ........................................................................ 13 

Overall Active End Strength .................................................................... 13 

Overall Selected Reserve End Strength .................................................. 13 

Full-Time Support Strengths ................................................................... 14 

Military Personnel Transfer Authority .................................................... 14 

High Risk Personnel Program Protective Service Details ..................... 15 

Suicide Prevention Training and Outreach ............................................. 16 

Veterans Unemployment .......................................................................... 16 

Military Personnel, Army ................................................................................ 16 

Military Personnel, Navy ................................................................................. 20 

Military Personnel, Marine Corps ................................................................... 24 

Military Personnel, Air Force .......................................................................... 28 

Creech Air Force Base Incentive Pay ...................................................... 32 

Reserve Personnel, Army ................................................................................. 32 

Reserve Personnel, Navy ................................................................................. 35 

Reserve Personnel, Marine Corps ................................................................... 38 

Reserve Personnel, Air Force .......................................................................... 41 

National Guard Personnel, Army .................................................................... 44 

National Guard Personnel, Air Force ............................................................. 47 

TITLE II. OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE ................................................... 51 

Efficiency Initiatives ........................................................................................ 53 

Civilian Personnel Pay ..................................................................................... 53 

Contractor Logistics Support ........................................................................... 53 

Military Information Support Operations ...................................................... 55 

Telecommunications Expense Management ................................................... 56 

Corrosion Control Material for Asphalt Preservation of Airfield Facilities . 57 


tjames on DSKG8SOYB1PROD with REPORTS
Page

IV 

TITLE II. OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE —Continued 

Civil-Military Training Exercises .................................................................... 57 

Energy Requirements ....................................................................................... 57 

Higher Education Training .............................................................................. 57 

Transportation Protective Services ................................................................. 58 

Operation and Maintenance Reprogrammings .............................................. 58 

Operation and Maintenance Budget Execution Data .................................... 59 

Operation and Maintenance, Army ................................................................. 59 

Unique Identity ......................................................................................... 64 

Facility Demolition to Promote Personnel Safety ................................... 64 

Operation and Maintenance, Navy ................................................................. 64 

Overhead Costs at Naval Shipyards ........................................................ 69 

Next Generation Enterprise Network ..................................................... 69 

Advanced Education .................................................................................. 70 

Operation and Maintenance, Marine Corps ................................................... 70 

Operation and Maintenance, Air Force .......................................................... 74 

Visibility of Depot Maintenance Funding ............................................... 80 

Canine Explosive Detection Capabilities ................................................. 80 

Quick Reaction Capability ........................................................................ 80 

Operation and Maintenance, Defense-Wide ................................................... 81 

Common Food Management System ........................................................ 85 

Operation and Maintenance, Army Reserve .................................................. 85 

Operation and Maintenance, Navy Reserve ................................................... 88 

Operation and Maintenance, Marine Corps Reserve ..................................... 91 

Operation and Maintenance, Air Force Reserve ............................................ 93 

Operation and Maintenance, Army National Guard ..................................... 96 

Operation and Maintenance, Air National Guard ......................................... 100 

Overseas Contingency Operations Transfer Fund ......................................... 103 

United States Court of Appeals for the Armed Forces .................................. 103 

Environmental Restoration, Army .................................................................. 103 

Environmental Restoration, Navy ................................................................... 103 

Environmental Restoration, Air Force ............................................................ 103 

Environmental Restoration, Defense-Wide .................................................... 103 

Environmental Restoration, Formerly Used Defense Sites .......................... 104 

Contract Oversight and Transparency .................................................... 104 

Overseas Humanitarian, Disaster, and Civic Aid .......................................... 105 

Cooperative Threat Reduction Account .......................................................... 105 

Department of Defense Acquisition Workforce Development Fund ............. 105 

Acquisition Workforce Development Fund .............................................. 105 

TITLE III. PROCUREMENT .................................................................................. 107 

Advanced Medium Range Air to Air Missile ........................................... 109 

Joint Strike Fighter .................................................................................. 109 

National Guard Aviation .......................................................................... 109 

Common Data Link ................................................................................... 109 

Special Interest Items ............................................................................... 110 

Reprogramming Guidance for Acquisition Accounts .............................. 110 

Reprogramming Reporting Requirements ............................................... 111 

Funding Increases ..................................................................................... 111 

Classified Annex ........................................................................................ 111 

Aircraft Procurement, Army ............................................................................ 111 

Enhanced Medium Altitude Reconnaissance and Surveillance System .......................................................................................................... 115 

Missile Procurement, Army ............................................................................. 115 

Procurement of Weapons and Tracked Combat Vehicles, Army .................. 118 

M1 Tank ..................................................................................................... 122 


tjames on DSKG8SOYB1PROD with REPORTS
Page

V 

TITLE III. PROCUREMENT—Continued 

Procurement of Ammunition, Army ................................................................ 123 

Other Procurement, Army ............................................................................... 127 

Aircraft Procurement, Navy ............................................................................ 136 

V–22 Osprey .............................................................................................. 143 

Firescout ..................................................................................................... 143 

Weapons Procurement, Navy ........................................................................... 144 

Procurement of Ammunition, Navy and Marine Corps ................................. 148 

Shipbuilding and Conversion, Navy ................................................................ 152 

Littoral Combat Ship ................................................................................ 155 

Shipbuilding Oversight ............................................................................. 155 

Other Procurement, Navy ................................................................................ 155 

Procurement, Marine Corps ............................................................................. 167 

Aircraft Procurement, Air Force ...................................................................... 173 

MQ–9 Reaper Unmanned Aerial Vehicle ................................................ 180 

Initial Spares and Repair Parts ............................................................... 180 

Missile Procurement, Air Force ....................................................................... 180 

Space Acquisition and the Evolutionary Acquisition for Space Efficiency Proposal ....................................................................................... 185 

Procurement of Ammunition, Air Force ......................................................... 186 

Other Procurement, Air Force ......................................................................... 189 

Procurement, Defense-Wide ............................................................................. 194 

Special Operations Command Aviation Foreign Internal Defense Program ........................................................................................................ 200 

Defense Production Act Purchases .................................................................. 200 

Rare Earth Materials ................................................................................ 201 

TITLE IV. RESEARCH, DEVELOPMENT, TEST AND EVALUATION ........... 203 

Medium Extended Air Defense System ................................................... 205 

Historically Black Colleges and Universities and Minority Institutions ........................................................................................................ 205 

Light Tactical Wheeled Vehicles .............................................................. 205 

Department of Defense and Service Cyber Activities and Virtual 

Major Force Program ............................................................................. 207 

Information Security ................................................................................. 208 

Corrosion Prevention and Control ........................................................... 208 

Integrated Weapons and Armament Specialty Site for Guns and Ammunition ................................................................................................. 209 

Test Facilities ............................................................................................ 209 

Special Interest Items ............................................................................... 209 

Reprogramming Guidance for Acquisition Accounts .............................. 210 

Reprogramming Reporting Requirements ............................................... 210 

Research, Development, Test and Evaluation, Army .................................... 210 

Ground Combat Vehicle ............................................................................ 220 

Sustainable Manufacturing ...................................................................... 220 

Environmental Quality Technology ......................................................... 220 

Helicopter Situational Awareness ............................................................ 220 

M1 Abrams Tank Engine Improvements ................................................ 221 

Research, Development, Test and Evaluation, Navy ..................................... 221 

Surface Combatant Topside Superstructure Cracking ........................... 232 

Bone Marrow Registry .............................................................................. 232 

Critical Archived Data .............................................................................. 232 

Research, Development, Test and Evaluation, Air Force .............................. 233 

KC–46A Change Reporting ....................................................................... 243 

Rapid Attack, Identification, Detection, and Reporting System ............ 243 

Small and Disadvantaged Businesses ..................................................... 243 


tjames on DSKG8SOYB1PROD with REPORTS
Page

VI 

TITLE IV. RESEARCH, DEVELOPMENT, TEST AND EVALUATION—Continued 

Research, Development, Test and Evaluation, Defense-Wide ...................... 243 

Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency ......................................... 253 

U.S.-Israeli Short-Range Ballistic Missile Defense ................................ 253 

Emerging Capabilities Technology Development ................................... 253 

Operational Test and Evaluation, Defense .................................................... 253 

TITLE V. REVOLVING AND MANAGEMENT FUNDS ..................................... 255 

Defense Working Capital Funds ..................................................................... 255 

National Defense Sealift Fund ........................................................................ 255 

TITLE VI. OTHER DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE PROGRAMS ...................... 257 

Defense Health Program .................................................................................. 257 

Defense Health Program Reprogramming Procedures ........................... 260 

Carryover ................................................................................................... 260 

Peer-Reviewed Cancer Research Program .............................................. 260 

Prescription Medication ............................................................................ 261 

Peer-Reviewed Lung Cancer Research Program .................................... 261 

Tri-Service Patient Acuity Staff Scheduling Program ........................... 261 

Joint Warfighter Medical Research Program .......................................... 262 

Integration of Health Services with Department of Veterans Affairs .. 262 

Chemical Agents and Munitions Destruction, Defense ................................. 263 

Tooele Chemical Agent Disposal Facility ................................................ 265 

Drug Interdiction and Counter-Drug Activities, Defense ............................. 265 

National Guard Counter-Drug Program ................................................. 267 

Prescription Drug Testing ........................................................................ 267 

Joint Improvised Explosive Device Defeat Fund ........................................... 268 

Joint Urgent Operational Needs Fund ........................................................... 268 

Office of the Inspector General ........................................................................ 268 

TITLE VII. RELATED AGENCIES ....................................................................... 271 

National and Military Intelligence Programs ................................................ 271 

Classified Annex ............................................................................................... 271 

Central Intelligence Agency Retirement and Disability System Fund ........ 271 

Intelligence Community Management Account ............................................. 271 

TITLE VIII. GENERAL PROVISIONS .................................................................. 273 

TITLE IX. OVERSEAS CONTINGENCY OPERATIONS .................................... 283 

Committee Recommendation ........................................................................... 283 

Reporting Requirements .................................................................................. 283 

Base Budgeting for Contingencies .................................................................. 283 

Afghanistan Report .......................................................................................... 284 

Human Rights Abuses ...................................................................................... 284 

Military Personnel ............................................................................................ 284 

Operation and Maintenance ............................................................................ 290 

Overstatement of Fiscal Year 2012 Requirements ................................. 297 

Commander’s Emergency Response Program ......................................... 298 

Procurement ...................................................................................................... 298 

National Guard and Reserve Equipment ................................................ 311 

Mine Resistant Ambush Protected (MRAP) and Mine Resistant Ambush Protected All Terrain Vehicles (M–ATV) .................................... 311 

Research, Development, Test and Evaluation ............................................... 311 

ISR Innovations ......................................................................................... 314 

Revolving and Management Funds ................................................................. 314 

Defense Working Capital Funds .............................................................. 314 

Other Department of Defense Programs ........................................................ 314 

Defense Health Program .......................................................................... 314 

Drug Interdiction and Counter-Drug Activities, Defense ...................... 316 


tjames on DSKG8SOYB1PROD with REPORTS
Page

VII 

TITLE IX. OVERSEAS CONTINGENCY OPERATIONS—Continued 

Other Department of Defense Programs—Continued 

Joint Improvised Explosive Device Defeat Fund .................................... 318 

Office of the Inspector General ................................................................ 318 

Joint Urgent Operational Needs Fund .................................................... 318 

General Provisions ........................................................................................... 318 

TITLE X. ADDITIONAL GENERAL PROVISIONS ............................................. 321 

HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES REPORTING REQUIREMENTS ................ 321 

Changes in the Application of Existing Law .................................................. 321 

Appropriations Not Authorized By Law ......................................................... 332 

Transfer of Funds ............................................................................................. 335 

Rescissions ........................................................................................................ 337 

Transfer of Unexpended Balances .................................................................. 337 

Statement of General Performance Goals and Objectives ............................ 337 

Constitutional Authority .................................................................................. 338 

Compliance with Rule XIII, Cl. 3(e) (Ramseyer Rule) ................................... 338 

Earmark Disclosure Statement ....................................................................... 338 

Comparison with the Budget Resolution ........................................................ 338 

Five-Year Outlay Projections ........................................................................... 339 

Financial Assistance to State and Local Governments ................................. 339 

Full Committee Votes ...................................................................................... 339 

Comparative Statement of New Budget Authority ........................................ 340 

Additional Views ............................................................................................... 353 


tjames on DSKG8SOYB1PROD with REPORTS

tjames on DSKG8SOYB1PROD with REPORTS
112TH CONGRESS REPORT " ! HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 1st Session 112–110 

DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE APPROPRIATIONS BILL, 2012 

JUNE 16, 2011.—Committed to the Committee of the Whole House on the State of 

the Union and ordered to be printed 

Mr. YOUNG of Florida, from the Committee on Appropriations, 

submitted the following 

R E P O R T 

together with 

ADDITIONAL VIEWS 

[To accompany H.R. 2219] 

The Committee on Appropriations submits the following report in 

explanation of the accompanying bill making appropriations for the 

Department of Defense, and for other purposes, for the fiscal year 

ending September 30, 2012. 

BILL TOTALS

Appropriations for most military functions of the Department of 

Defense are provided for in the accompanying bill for fiscal year 

2012. This bill does not provide appropriations for military construction, military family housing, civil defense, and military nuclear warheads, for which requirements are considered in connection with other appropriations Acts. 

The President’s fiscal year 2012 budget request for activities 

funded in the Department of Defense Appropriations Act totals 

$538,940,292,000 in new budget obligational authority for the base 

military bill. 


tjames on DSKG8SOYB1PROD with REPORTS
2 


tjames on DSKG8SOYB1PROD with REPORTSInsert offset folio 01 here 66365A.001
3 

COMMITTEE BUDGET REVIEW PROCESS

During its review of the fiscal year 2012 budget request and execution of appropriations for fiscal year 2011, the Subcommittee on 

Defense held a total of nine hearings, three formal Subcommittee 

briefings, and numerous informal member and staff briefings during the period of February 2011 to May 2011. Testimony received 

by the Subcommittee totaled 808 pages of transcript. Hearings 

were held in open session, except when the security classification 

of the material to be discussed presented no alternative but to conduct those hearings in executive or closed session. 

INTRODUCTION

The Committee recommendation for the fiscal year 2012 Department of Defense base budget is $530,024,959,000, which is 

$8,915,333,000 below the request. The Committee recommendation 

for overseas contingency operations is $118,684,277,000, which is 

$841,526,000 above the request. This increase is mostly attributable to the transfer of the Pakistan Counterinsurgency Fund 

from the Subcommittee on State/Foreign Operations to the Subcommittee on Defense. 

To reach the reduced base allocation, the Subcommittee has reviewed in detail the budget request and found areas and programs 

where reductions are possible without adversely impacting the 

warfighter or modernization and readiness efforts. Examples of 

such reductions include: programs which have been terminated or 

restructured since the budget was submitted, savings from favorable contract pricing adjustments, contract/schedule delays resulting in fiscal year 2012 savings, unjustified cost increases or funding 

requested ahead of need, anticipated or historical under execution, 

rescissions of unneeded prior year funds, and reductions that are 

authorized in the House passed fiscal year 2012 National Defense 

Authorization Act. Additionally, within this allocation, the Committee has focused on addressing Service identified unfunded requirements, including the Special Operations Command, and restoring unrealistic efficiencies included in the budget request. 

FUNDING INCREASES

The Committee directs that the funding increases outlined in the 

tables for each appropriation account shall be provided only for the 

specific purposes indicated in the tables. 

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS BY MAJOR CATEGORY

ACTIVE, RESERVE, AND NATIONAL GUARD MILITARY PERSONNEL

In title I of the bill, the Committee recommends a total of 

$132,092,225,000 for active, reserve, and National Guard military 

personnel, a decrease of $4,316,000 below the budget request, and 

an increase of $5,352,469,000 above the fiscal year 2011 enacted 

level. The recommendation supports the request to increase basic 

pay for all military personnel by 1.6 percent, effective January 1, 

2012. The Committee also recommends full funding to support the 

requested end strength levels for active duty and Selected Reserve 

personnel. 


tjames on DSKG8SOYB1PROD with REPORTS
4 

OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE

In title II of the bill, the Committee recommends a total of 

$169,979,661,000 for operation and maintenance support to the 

Services and other Department of Defense entities, a decrease of 

$779,652,000 below the budget request, and an increase of 

$4,419,537,000 above the fiscal year 2011 enacted level. The recommendation will robustly fund operational training programs in 

fiscal year 2012. Requests for unit and depot level maintenance; facilities sustainment, restoration and modernization; and base operations support programs have been fully supported. 

PROCUREMENT

In title III of the bill, the Committee recommends a total of 

$107,581,474,000 for procurement. 

Major initiatives and modifications include: 

$15,674,000 for the Enhanced Medium Altitude Reconnaissance 

and Surveillance Systems program, $523,900,000 below the President’s request. 

$1,325,666,000 for the procurement of 71 UH–60 Blackhawk Helicopters, the same as the President’s request. 

$1,305,360,000 for the procurement of 47 CH–47 Chinook Helicopters, the same as the President’s request. 

$658,798,000 for the procurement of 36 MQ–1 Unmanned Aerial 

Vehicles, the same as the President’s request. 

$662,231,000 for the procurement of 88 Patriot PAC–3 missiles, 

the same as the President’s request. 

$453,329,000 for the procurement of additional M1A2 SEP upgraded Abrams tanks, an increase of $272,000,000 above the President’s request. 

$432,936,000 for the procurement of Family of Medium Tactical 

Vehicles, the same as the President’s request. 

$627,294,000 for the procurement of Family of Heavy Tactical 

Vehicles, the same as the President’s request. 

$1,001,596,000 for the procurement of 12 EA–18G Growler electronic attack aircraft, $77,768,000 below the President’s request. 

$2,303,264,000 for the procurement of 28 F/A–18E/F Super Hornet Tactical aircraft, $63,488,000 below the President’s request. 

$2,008,851,000 for the procurement of 11 P–8A Poseidon Multimission aircraft, $10,000,000 below the President’s request. 

$680,686,000 for the procurement of 25 UH–1Y/AH–1Z Helicopters, $19,620,000 below the President’s request. 

$5,930,644,000 for the procurement of 32 F–35 Lightning Aircraft: six Short Take-off and Vertical Landing variants for the Marine Corps, seven Carrier variants for the Navy, and 19 Conventional variants for the Air Force. 

$15,125,493,000 in Navy Shipbuilding and Conversion and the 

National Defense Sealift Fund for the procurement of ten Navy 

ships including one DDG–51 Guided Missile Destroyer, two SSN– 

774 Attack Submarines, four Littoral Combat Ships, one Intra-theater Connector Ship, one LPD–17 Amphibious Transport Dock, and 

one Mobile Landing Platform. 

$1,096,714,000 for the procurement of eleven C/HC/MC/AC–130J 

aircraft. 


tjames on DSKG8SOYB1PROD with REPORTS
5 

$479,896,000 for the procurement of nine C–27J Joint Cargo Aircraft. 

$2,549,682,000 for the procurement of 30 MV–22 and five CV–22 

Osprey aircraft. 

$323,964,000 for the procurement of three Global Hawk Unmanned Aerial Vehicles. 

$699,012,000 for the procurement of 48 MQ–9 Reaper Unmanned 

Aerial Vehicles, $114,080,000 below the President’s request. 

$158,549,000 for the procurement of nine Light Attack Armed 

Reconnaissance aircraft. 

$803,745,000 for the procurement of two Wideband Global System satellites, $335,000,000 above the President’s request. 

$107,689,000 for Global Positioning System IIF production readiness, $40,000,000 above the President’s request. 

$1,566,200,000 for the procurement of four Evolved Expendable 

Launch Vehicles, $174,022,000 below the President’s request. 

$164,489,000 for the procurement of additional communication 

equipment and electronics for Special Operations Forces, 

$77,000,000 above the President’s request. 

$148,459,000 for the procurement of tactical radio systems for 

Special Operations Forces, $72,000,000 above the President’s request. 

$70,899,000 for the procurement of combatant craft systems for 

Special Operations forces, $64,000,000 above the President’s request. 

RESEARCH, DEVELOPMENT, TEST AND EVALUATION

In title IV of the bill, the Committee recommends a total of 

$73,009,469,000 for research, development, test and evaluation. 

Major initiatives and modifications include: 

$297,955,000 for the development of the Warfighter Information 

Network—Tactical, the same as the President’s request. 

$768,053,000 for the development of the Manned Ground Vehicle 

Ground Combat Vehicle, $116,334,000 below the President’s request. 

$50,000,000 for the development of survivability enhancements 

in High Mobility Multi-Purpose Wheeled Vehicles, $50,000,000 

above the President’s request. 

$257,105,000 for the development of the Medium Extended Air 

Defense System, $149,500,000 below the President’s request. 

$1,320,009,000 for the continuation of the development of the replacement for the Ohio class ballistic missile submarine, the same 

as the President’s request. 

$110,994,000 for the continued development of the E–2D Advanced Hawkeye aircraft, the same as the President’s request. 

$635,146,000 for the continued development of the Joint Tactical 

Radio System, $53,000,000 below the President’s request. 

$2,708,228,000 for the continued development of the F–35 Lightning Joint Strike Fighter aircraft, $75,748,000 below the President’s request. 

$632,713,000 for the continued development of the Multi-mission 

Maritime Aircraft, $10,000,000 above the President’s request. 

$297,023,000 for the development of a new penetrating bomber, 

$100,000,000 above the President’s request. 


tjames on DSKG8SOYB1PROD with REPORTS
6 

$877,084,000 for the development of the Next Generation Aerial 

Refueling Aircraft. 

$225,000,000 for the development of the Defense Weather Satellite System, $219,900,000 below the President’s request. 

$621,629,000 for the continued development of the Space Based 

Infrared Satellite system, the same as the President’s request. 

$350,889,000, for the development of the Global Positioning System III operational control segment, $48,000,000 below the President’s request. 

$138,729,000 for the development of the Family of Advanced Beyond Line-of-Sight-Terminals (FAB–T), $100,000,000 below the 

President’s request and offset by an increase of $50,000,000 for the 

development of FAB–T alternatives. 

$2,884,920,000 for the Defense Advanced Research Projects 

Agency, $100,000,000 below the President’s request due to realignment of accounts. 

$235,700,000 for the Israeli Cooperative Program, $129,600,000 

above the President’s request. 

SPECIAL OPERATIONS COMMAND UNFUNDED REQUIREMENTS

The Committee provides $239,000,000 above the budget request 

for unfunded requirements for the Special Operations Command. 

The Committee encourages the Secretary of Defense to continue to 

robustly fund the Special Operations Command in future budget 

submissions. Furthermore, the Committee encourages the Secretary of Defense, in coordination with the Commander, Special 

Operations Command to fully support and fund the Theater Special 

Operations Commands. 

DEFENSE HEALTH PROGRAM

The Committee recommends a total of $32,317,459,000 for the 

Defense Health Program to support worldwide medical and dental 

services for active forces and other eligible beneficiaries, an increase of $118,689,000 above the budget request and an increase 

of $935,261,000 above the fiscal year 2011 enacted level. 

The Committee recommends funding to augment the request for 

enduring Traumatic Brain Injury and Psychological Health and 

Wounded, Ill, and Injured requirements. To address these challenges of the Defense Health Program, the Committee recommends 

the following: 

Traumatic Brain Injury and Psychological Health Research ............. $125,000,000 

Peer-Reviewed Spinal Cord Research .................................................. $9,600,000 

Peer-Reviewed Orthopedic Research .................................................... $30,000,000 

Hemorrhage Control Research ............................................................. $10,000,000 

Restorative Transplantation Research ................................................. $15,000,000 

CLASSIFIED PROGRAMS

As described elsewhere in this report, the Committee’s budget reviews are published in a separate, detailed, and comprehensive 

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


tjames on DSKG8SOYB1PROD with REPORTS
7 

FORCES TO BE SUPPORTED

DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY

The fiscal year 2012 budget request is designed to support the 

Army’s continuing transformation of its Operating Forces to a modular design. Completing modular transformation is indicative of a 

unit’s completion of initial reorganization and re-equipping to a 

modular design and is not an indicator of readiness (fully manned, 

trained, or equipped) or availability for deployment. Units are currently manned and equipped in accordance with the Army Force 

Generation Model, which prioritizes personnel fill and equipment 

fielding in a resource constrained environment to ensure deploying 

units have all equipment required to accomplish their assigned 

missions. 

By the end of fiscal year 2012, the Active Component Modular 

Force will include six Army Service Component Command headquarters and one Army Component headquarters assigned to U.S. 

Forces Korea, four Corps headquarters, ten Division headquarters, 

44 Brigade Combat Teams, and 38 Multi-Functional Support Brigades. Active Component structure yet to be transformed to a modular design is one Brigade Combat Team. By the end of fiscal year 

2012, the Army Modular Force structure in the Army National 

Guard and the U.S. Army Reserve will include eight Army National Guard division headquarters, 28 Brigade Combat Teams, 

and 60 Multi-Functional Support Brigades (48 Army National 

Guard and 1,2 Army Reserve). These forces are the key elements 

of the minimum capabilities needed to execute the National Military Strategy and to meet enduring defense needs of the Global 

Force Demand. By fiscal year 2013, the Army Modular force conversion will be complete. 

A summary of the major forces follows: 

Fiscal year 

FY10 FY11 FY12 

Active Component Forces: 

Headquarters (Legacy Structure): 

Army HQs ............................................................................................................................ 1 0 0 

Corps HQs ........................................................................................................................... 1 1 1 

Headquarters Total ...................................................................................................................... 2 1 1 

Divisions (Legacy Structure): 

Armored ............................................................................................................................... 1 1 1 

Divisions Total ............................................................................................................................. 1 1 1 

Non Divisional Combat Units: 

Separate Brigades .............................................................................................................. 2 2 2 

Non Divisional Combat Units Total ............................................................................................. 2 2 2 

Transformed Modular Forces: 

Modular Theater Army HQs ................................................................................................. 4 6 6 

Modular Corps HQs ............................................................................................................. 3 3 4 

Modular Division HQs ......................................................................................................... 9 10 10 

Heavy Brigade Combat Team ............................................................................................. 17 16 16 

Infantry Brigade Combat Team .......................................................................................... 20 20 20 

Stryker Brigade Combat Team ............................................................................................ 6 7 8 

Theater Aviation Brigade HQ .............................................................................................. 1 1 1 

Combat Aviation Brigade .................................................................................................... 12 12 13 

Sustainment Brigade HQ .................................................................................................... 13 13 13 

Fires Brigade ....................................................................................................................... 5 6 7 


tjames on DSKG8SOYB1PROD with REPORTS
8 

Fiscal year 

FY10 FY11 FY12 

Maneuver Enhancement Brigade HQ .................................................................................. 3 2 2 

Battlefield Surveillance Brigade ......................................................................................... 3 3 3 

Transformed Forces Total ............................................................................................................ 96 96 103 

Army National Guard Forces: 

Transformed Modular Forces: 

Modular Division HQs ......................................................................................................... 8 8 8 

Heavy Brigade Combat Team ............................................................................................. 6 7 7 

Infantry Brigade Combat Team .......................................................................................... 7 16 20 

Stryker Brigade Combat Team ............................................................................................ 1 1 1 

Theater Aviation Brigade HQ .............................................................................................. 5 5 5 

Combat Aviation Brigade .................................................................................................... 8 8 8 

Sustainment Brigade HQ .................................................................................................... 9 10 10 

Fires Brigade ....................................................................................................................... 7 7 7 

Maneuver Enhancement Brigade HQ .................................................................................. 14 16 16 

Battlefield Surveillance Brigade ......................................................................................... 6 7 7 

Transformed Forces Total ............................................................................................................ 71 71 89 

U.S. Army Reserve Forces: 

Transformed Modular Forces: 

Theater Aviation Brigade HQ .............................................................................................. 1 1 1 

Sustainment Brigade HQ .................................................................................................... 9 9 9

Maneuver Enhancement Brigade HQ .................................................................................. 3 3 3 

Transformed Forces Total ............................................................................................................ 13 13 13 

DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY

The fiscal year 2012 budget request supports battle forces which 

will total 288 ships at the end of fiscal year 2012, including 14 fleet 

ballistic missile submarines, 11 aircraft carriers, 19 support ships, 

nine Reserve ships, 244 other battle force ships, 1,682 Navy/Marine 

Corps tactical/ASW aircraft, 601 Undergraduate Training aircraft, 

517 Fleet Air Training aircraft, 225 Fleet Air Support aircraft, 266 

Reserve aircraft, and 274 aircraft in the pipeline. 

A summary of the major forces follows: 

Fiscal year 

2010 2011 2012 

Strategic Forces: ..................................................................................................... 14 14 14 

Fleet Ballistic Missile Submarines ................................................................ 14 14 14 

General Purpose: ..................................................................................................... 257 252 255 

Aircraft Carriers ............................................................................................. 11 11 11 

Surface Combatants ...................................................................................... 112 112 111 

Submarines (attack) ...................................................................................... 53 53 54 

Guided Missile (SSGN) Submarines ............................................................... 4 4 4 

Amphibious Warfare Ships ............................................................................ 31 29 30 

Combat Logistics Ships ................................................................................. 32 29 31 

Mine Warfare .................................................................................................. 14 14 14 

Support Forces: ....................................................................................................... 17 18 19 

Support Ships ................................................................................................ 17 18 19 

Mobilization Cat. A (Reserve) ................................................................................. 9 7 7 

Surface Combatants ...................................................................................... 9 7 7 

Mine Warfare .................................................................................................. 0 0 0 

Total Ships, Battleforce ............................................................................. 288 284 288 

Auxiliaries/Sea Lift Forces: ..................................................................................... 89 90 92 

Costal Defense (Patrol Combatants) ............................................................. 10 10 13 

Maritime Preposition ...................................................................................... 16 17 18 

MSC Reduced Operating Status .................................................................... 14 14 13 

Ready Reserve Force ...................................................................................... 49 49 48 


tjames on DSKG8SOYB1PROD with REPORTS
9 

Fiscal year 

2010 2011 2012 

Naval Aircraft: 

Primary Authorized (plus pipe) ...................................................................... 3,544 3,558 3,564 

Authorized Pipeline ............................................................................... 274 279 274 

Tactical/ASW Aircraft ............................................................................ 1,632 1,668 1,682 

Fleet Air Training .................................................................................. 506 499 517 

Fleet Air Support ................................................................................... 219 224 225 

Training (Undergraduate) ..................................................................... 642 615 601 

Reserves ................................................................................................ 271 273 266 

Naval Personnel: 

Active: 

Navy ...................................................................................................... *328,303 *328,700 **325,700 

Marine Corps ......................................................................................... 202,441 202,100 202,100 

Reserves Navy: 

SELRES/Drilling Reserve ....................................................................... 54,200 54,812 55,863 

Fulltime Support ................................................................................... 10,806 10,688 10,337 

Navy Reserves Total .................................................................................. 65,006 65,500 66,200 

Reserves Marine Corps: 

SELRES/Drilling Reserve ....................................................................... 37,016 37,339 37,339 

Fulltime Support ................................................................................... 2,206 2,261 2,261 

Marine Corps Reserves Total .................................................................... 39,222 39,600 39,600 

*FY2010/2011 includes 4,400 non-core IA requested for temporary IA OCO missions. 

**FY2012 includes 3,836 non-core IA requested for temporary IA OCO missions. 

DEPARTMENT OF THE AIR FORCE

The fiscal year 2012 Air Force budget request is designed to support active, Guard, and reserve forces, including 61 combat coded 

fighter and attack squadrons and nine combat coded strategic 

bomber squadrons. The Inter-Continental Ballistic Missile force 

maintains 495 launch facilities/control centers with 450 Minuteman 

missiles. The budget also supports the critical airlift mission, including 26 active duty airlift squadrons. To accomplish the Air 

Force mission, the fiscal year 2012 budget supports a total force 

end strength of 693,099 (includes active duty, civilians, Guard, and 

reserve. 

FY10 FY11 FY12 

Strategic Airlift Squadrons: 

Active ........................................................................................................................................... 16 16 16 

Guard ........................................................................................................................................... 6 6 6 

Reserve ......................................................................................................................................... 16 16 16 

Tactical Airlift Squadrons: 

Active ........................................................................................................................................... 10 10 10 

Guard ........................................................................................................................................... 20 20 21 

Reserve ......................................................................................................................................... 9 9 9 

A summary of the major forces follows: 

Fiscal year 

2010 2011 2012 

USAF Fighter and Attack Squadrons (Active, ANG, AFRC) ................................................................... 73 61 61 

Active ........................................................................................................................................... 39 33 32 

ANG .............................................................................................................................................. 30 24 25 

AFRC ............................................................................................................................................. 4 4 4 

Strategic Bomber Squadrons (Active) .................................................................................................. 8 9 9* 

Strategic Bomber Squadrons (AFRC) .................................................................................................... 1 0 0* 

Flight Test Units (DT and OT Units with assigned aircraft) ............................................................... 12 12 12** 

Fighter .......................................................................................................................................... 9 9 9** 

Bomber ......................................................................................................................................... 3 3 3 

ICBM Operational Launch Facilities/Control Centers ........................................................................... 495 495 495 


tjames on DSKG8SOYB1PROD with REPORTS
10 

Fiscal year 

2010 2011 2012 

ICBM Missile Inventory ......................................................................................................................... 450 450 450 

USAF Airlift Squadrons (Active): 

Strategic Airlift Squadrons .......................................................................................................... 15 15 15 ** 

Tactical Airlift Squadrons ............................................................................................................ 9 8 8 ** 

Total Active Airlift Squadrons ................................................................................................. 24 23 23 ** 

Total Air Force Aircraft Inventory ............................................................................................ 5,688 5,566 5,292 

* FY10 transition of Active and AFRC squadrons reflected in FY11 numbers 

** Numbers of Squadrons above reflect combat coded units only (i.e. no training or test info except where noted) 

End Strength *FY10 **FY11 **FY12 

Active Duty .............................................................................................................. 334,196 332,200 332,800 

Reserve Component ................................................................................................ 177,795 177,900 178,100 

Air National Guard ......................................................................................... 107,676 106,700 106,700 

Air Force Reserve ........................................................................................... 70,119 71,200 71,400 

* FY10 includes actual end strength numbers 

** FY11 and FY12 includes programmed end strength numbers as of FY11 PB and as of FY12 PB, and FY12 active duty end strength includes 4,000 Air Force Academy cadets 


tjames on DSKG8SOYB1PROD with REPORTS
(11) 

TITLE I 

MILITARY PERSONNEL 

The fiscal year 2012 budget request for programs funded in title 

I of the Committee bill, Military Personnel, is $132,096,541,000 in 

new budget authority. These appropriations finance basic, incentive, and special pays for active, reserve and National Guard personnel, and Academy cadets; retired pay accrual; housing, subsistence, and other allowances; recruitment and retention initiatives; 

permanent change of station costs; and other military personnel 

costs such as survivor, unemployment, and education benefits. A 

summary of appropriations provided in title I, Military Personnel, 

follows: 


tjames on DSKG8SOYB1PROD with REPORTS
12 


tjames on DSKG8SOYB1PROD with REPORTSInsert offset folio 02 here 66365A.002
13 

MILITARY PERSONNEL OVERVIEW

The Committee recommendation provides $132,092,225,000 for 

the military personnel accounts and continues to increase funding 

for military pay and allowances, recruitment and retention initiatives, and overall quality of life programs for active duty, reserve, 

and National Guard personnel. The recommendation fully supports 

the resource requirements needed to maintain the requested end 

strength levels for fiscal year 2012. The recommendation also provides funding to increase basic pay for all military personnel by 

1.6 percent, effective January 1, 2012. The Committee continues to 

support and encourage constructive evaluations of recruitment and 

retention programs, bonus and special pay incentives, and personnel benefit programs for military personnel for fiscal year 2012. 

The Committee remains supportive of programs intended to enhance the morale and quality of life for our military personnel and 

their families. 

SUMMARY OF END STRENGTH

The fiscal year 2012 budget request includes a decrease of 2,400 

in total end strength for the active forces and an increase of 900 

in end strength for the Selected Reserve as compared to the fiscal 

year 2011 authorized levels. The following tables summarize the 

Committee recommendations for end strength levels, both in the 

aggregate and for each active and Selected Reserve component. 

OVERALL ACTIVE END STRENGTH

Fiscal year 2011 estimate .................................................................. 1,410,400 

Fiscal year 2012 budget request ....................................................... 1,408,000 

Fiscal year 2012 recommendation ..................................................... 1,408,000 

Compared with fiscal year 2011 ................................................. ¥2,400 

Compared with fiscal year 2012 budget request ...................... – – 

OVERALL SELECTED RESERVE END STRENGTH

Fiscal year 2011 estimate .................................................................. 846,200 

Fiscal year 2012 budget request ....................................................... 847,100 

Fiscal year 2012 recommendation ..................................................... 847,100 

Compared with fiscal year 2011 ................................................. +900 

Compared with fiscal year 2012 budget request ...................... – – 

SUMMARY OF MILITARY PERSONNEL END STRENGTH

Fiscal year 

2011 

authorized 

Fiscal year 2012 

Budget 

request 

Recommendation 

Change 

from 

request 

Change 

from 

FY2011 

Active Forces (End Strength): 

Army ..................................................................... 547,400 547,400 547,400 — — 

Navy ...................................................................... 328,700 325,700 325,700 — ¥3,000 

Marine Corps ........................................................ 202,100 202,100 202,100 — — 

Air Force ............................................................... 332,200 332,800 332,800 — 600 

Total Active Forces ...................................... 1,410,400 1,408,000 1,408,000 — ¥2,400 

Guard and Reserve Forces (End Strength): 

Army Reserve ........................................................ 205,000 205,000 205,000 — — 

Navy Reserve ........................................................ 65,500 66,200 66,200 — 700 

Marine Corps Reserve .......................................... 39,600 39,600 39,600 — — 

Air Force Reserve ................................................. 71,200 71,400 71,400 — 200 

Army National Guard ............................................ 358,200 358,200 358,200 — — 

Air National Guard ............................................... 106,700 106,700 106,700 — — 


tjames on DSKG8SOYB1PROD with REPORTS
14 

Fiscal year 

2011 

authorized 

Fiscal year 2012 

Budget 

request 

Recommendation 

Change 

from 

request 

Change 

from 

FY2011 

Total, Selected Reserve ............................... 846,200 847,100 847,100 — 900 

Total, Military Personnel ............................................... 2,256,600 2,255,100 2,255,100 — ¥1,500 

FULL-TIME SUPPORT STRENGTHS

There are four categories of full-time support in the National 

Guard and reserve components: military (civilian) technicians, Active Guard and Reserve (AGR), non-technician civilians, and active 

component personnel. 

Full-time support personnel organize, recruit, train, maintain, 

and administer the reserve components. Military (civilian) technicians directly support units and are critical to helping units maintain readiness and meet the wartime mission of the Army and Air 

Force. 

The following table summarizes National Guard and reserve fulltime support end strengths: 

SUMMARY OF GUARD AND RESERVE FULL-TIME SUPPORT

Fiscal year 2011 

authorized 

Fiscal year 2012 

Budget 

request 

Recommenda- tion 

Change 

from 

request 

Change 

from 

FY2011 

Army Reserve: 

AGR ....................................................................... 16,261 16,261 16,261 — — 

Technicians .......................................................... 8,395 8,395 8,395 — — 

Navy Reserve: 

AR ......................................................................... 10,688 10,337 10,337 — ¥351 

Marine Corps Reserve: 

AR ......................................................................... 2,261 2,261 2,261 — — 

Air Force Reserve: 

AGR ....................................................................... 2,992 2,662 2,662 — ¥330 

Technicians .......................................................... 10,720 10,777 10,777 — 57 

Army National Guard: 

AGR ....................................................................... 32,060 32,060 32,060 — — 

Technicians .......................................................... 27,210 27,210 27,210 — — 

Air National Guard: 

AGR ....................................................................... 14,584 14,833 14,833 — 249 

Technicians .......................................................... 22,394 22,509 22,509 — 115 

Totals: 

AGR/AR ................................................................. 78,846 78,414 78,414 — ¥432 

Technicians .......................................................... 68,719 68,891 68,891 — 172 

Total Full-Time Support .............................. 147,565 147,305 147,305 — ¥260 

MILITARY PERSONNEL TRANSFER AUTHORITY

The recommendation includes a new provision to provide the Department of Defense with the authority to carry over up to one percent of the amounts appropriated for the military personnel accounts under title I from fiscal year 2012 to fiscal year 2013. Since 

2001, the Department has had 11 violations of the Anti-deficiency 

Act in the military personnel accounts. The Committee has repeatedly expressed its concern over the Department’s failure to adequately budget for military personnel. The Committee recognizes 


tjames on DSKG8SOYB1PROD with REPORTS
15 

that the entitlement based nature of the military personnel accounts and the sizable volume of obligations in the last quarter of 

the fiscal year create a unique budgeting challenge for the Department. The Committee commends the Department’s efforts to improve its budgeting and oversight of the military personnel accounts by improving its cost models and obligation methods and by 

establishing formal management oversight of budget execution. The 

Committee believes the additional flexibility provided by the new 

provision should enable the Department to better manage the military personnel appropriation and avoid further Anti-deficiency Act 

violations. The authority provided is limited only to transfers within the military personnel appropriation. The Department should 

not request authority for reprogramming for other requirements in 

other appropriation accounts. 

HIGH RISK PERSONNEL PROGRAM PROTECTIVE SERVICE DETAILS

The Department of Defense High Risk Personnel Program provides protective service details for physical protection and personal 

security to Department of Defense personnel in high risk billets 

facing potential threats both domestically and overseas. It does not 

apply to combat zones or expeditionary operations. In addition, protection is provided to certain foreign senior military officials and 

dignitaries visiting the United States on official business. Protective service details are provided primarily by active duty servicemembers. 

The number of Department of Defense personnel requiring protection and the number of personnel assigned to provide protective 

services has declined since 2005. In 2009, an independent review 

of Department of Defense security measures implemented post September 11, 2001 recommended standardizing the following methods 

to determine high risk billets: risk assessments to determine protection levels, levels of protection needed when traveling overseas, 

levels of protection needed for similar positions, and size of security 

details necessary for the High Risk Personnel Program. The review 

found that the number of personnel assigned to protection details 

could be reduced significantly from current levels, which would 

both provide significant savings to the program and enable 

servicemembers to be reassigned to other critical security functions. 

The Department has acknowledged the need to reform the program, but the matter has been under review for over a year, and 

the Department has yet to act on the recommendations. 

The Committee is concerned that protective service details have 

become viewed as a status symbol for Department personnel, and 

that decisions to provide service details are based on position rather than potential threat or risk level. The Committee directs the 

Secretary of Defense to implement the report recommendations, including the standardization of levels of protection for like positions, 

size of personnel protection details, risk assessments used to determine protection levels, and levels of protection needed for travel 

outside of the United States. The Secretary of Defense should direct reductions in protective service details where appropriate and 

based on the recommendations of the report. Additionally, the Secretary of Defense is directed to submit a report to the congressional 

defense committees on the implementation of the report and status 


tjames on DSKG8SOYB1PROD with REPORTS
16 

of the High Risk Personnel Program, not later than 120 days after 

enactment of this Act. This report should include the Secretary’s 

recommendation for the number of personnel and personnel positions to be assigned protective service details as well as the number of personnel recommended to be assigned to provide those protective service details. 

SUICIDE PREVENTION TRAINING AND OUTREACH

Suicide remains a very serious problem in the Services, particularly in the National Guard and reserve components. From calendar year 2009 to 2010, the National Guard and reserve components saw the number of suicides increase dramatically. National 

Guard and reserve personnel are often geographically isolated from 

their units and may not have the constant interaction with their 

peers and guidance from their chain of command that their active 

duty counterparts experience. The Committee acknowledges the 

steps the Services have taken to implement suicide prevention 

training and outreach efforts and to lower the rate of suicide 

among servicemembers. In addition, the Committee recognizes the 

important role the Yellow Ribbon program plays in helping National Guardsmen and reservists transition to civilian life upon returning from deployments. The Committee is aware that suicide remains a problem among servicemembers who have never deployed 

as well as those who have deployed once or multiple times. The 

Committee believes that more must be done to identify potential 

at-risk soldiers and to improve prevention and outreach efforts. 

The Committee urges the Services to continue to make suicide prevention a key priority and to regularly update the Committee on 

the actions being taken. 

VETERANS UNEMPLOYMENT

The Committee is deeply concerned about the rate of unemployment facing Service personnel who have returned from the wars in 

Iraq and Afghanistan. Nationwide 873,000 veterans are unemployed, and amongst Post-9/11 veterans the unemployment rate is 

10.9 percent, or 214,000 Post-9/11 veterans. Post-9/11 veterans age 

18–24 suffer the highest unemployment rate of any veteran group, 

26.8 percent, with 50,000 unemployed. 

Not later than 60 days after enactment of this Act, the Secretary 

of Defense, in coordination with the Secretary of Veterans Affairs, 

is directed to submit a report in writing to the congressional defense committees on recommendations for programmatic, regulatory, legislative, and administrative actions that can be taken to 

address this national crisis. 

MILITARY PERSONNEL, ARMY 

Fiscal year 2011 appropriation .......................................................... $41,403,653,000 

Fiscal year 2012 budget request ....................................................... 43,596,949,000 

Committee recommendation .............................................................. 43,859,709,000 

Change from budget request ............................................................. 262,760,000 

The Committee recommends an appropriation of $43,859,709,000 

for Military Personnel, Army. The total amount recommended in 

the bill will provide the following program in fiscal year 2012: 


tjames on DSKG8SOYB1PROD with REPORTS
17 


tjames on DSKG8SOYB1PROD with REPORTSInsert offset folio 03 66365A.003
18 


tjames on DSKG8SOYB1PROD with REPORTSInsert offset folio 04 66365A.004
19 


tjames on DSKG8SOYB1PROD with REPORTSInsert offset folio 05 66365A.005
20 

MILITARY PERSONNEL, NAVY 

Fiscal year 2011 appropriation .......................................................... $25,912,449,000 

Fiscal year 2012 budget request ....................................................... 27,154,384,000 

Committee recommendation .............................................................. 27,141,334,000 

Change from budget request ............................................................. ¥13,050,000 

The Committee recommends an appropriation of $27,141,334,000 

for Military Personnel, Navy. The total amount recommended in 

the bill will provide the following program in fiscal year 2012: 


tjames on DSKG8SOYB1PROD with REPORTS
21 


tjames on DSKG8SOYB1PROD with REPORTSInsert graphic folio 06 66365A.006
22 


tjames on DSKG8SOYB1PROD with REPORTSInsert graphic folio 07 66365A.007
23 


tjames on DSKG8SOYB1PROD with REPORTSInsert graphic folio 08 66365A.008
24 

MILITARY PERSONNEL, MARINE CORPS 

Fiscal year 2011 appropriation .......................................................... $13,210,161,000 

Fiscal year 2012 budget request ....................................................... 13,573,546,000 

Committee recommendation .............................................................. 13,480,436,000 

Change from budget request ............................................................. ¥93,110,000 

The Committee recommends an appropriation of $13,480,436,000 

for Military Personnel, Marine Corps. The total amount recommended in the bill will provide the following program in fiscal 

year 2012: 


tjames on DSKG8SOYB1PROD with REPORTS
25 


tjames on DSKG8SOYB1PROD with REPORTSInsert graphic folio 009 66365A.009
26 


tjames on DSKG8SOYB1PROD with REPORTSInsert graphic folio 010 66365A.010
27 


tjames on DSKG8SOYB1PROD with REPORTSInsert graphic folio 011 66365A.011
28 

MILITARY PERSONNEL, AIR FORCE 

Fiscal year 2011 appropriation .......................................................... $27,105,755,000 

Fiscal year 2012 budget request ....................................................... 28,304,432,000 

Committee recommendation .............................................................. 28,264,646,000 

Change from budget request ............................................................. ¥39,786,000 

The Committee recommends an appropriation of $28,264,646,000 

for Military Personnel, Air Force. The total amount recommended 

in the bill will provide the following program in fiscal year 2012: 


tjames on DSKG8SOYB1PROD with REPORTS
29 


tjames on DSKG8SOYB1PROD with REPORTSInsert graphic folio 012 66365A.012
30 


tjames on DSKG8SOYB1PROD with REPORTSInsert graphic folio 013 66365A.013
31 


tjames on DSKG8SOYB1PROD with REPORTSInsert graphic folio 014 66365A.014
32 

CREECH AIR FORCE BASE INCENTIVE PAY

The Bob Stump National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal 

Year 2003 authorized the Service secretaries to pay a monthly incentive to servicemembers serving in designated assignments. The 

Senate report accompanying the Act noted that this pay had significant potential to provide an incentive for servicemembers to volunteer for the most challenging duty stations and enhance the ability of the Services to fill key billets with the best qualified personnel. 

In fiscal year 2008, the Air Force authorized Creech Assignment 

Incentive Pay for personnel assigned to Creech Air Force Base, Nevada to support manning of the Remotely Piloted Aircraft mission. 

The Air Force described the pay as necessary because Creech Air 

Force Base was an austere location with limited infrastructure. 

Airmen stationed at Creech are eligible to receive $300 per month 

for the first 36 months and $750 per month for service beyond 36 

months. Since Creech Assignment Incentive Pay has been authorized, new facilities have been built, and conditions at the base have 

improved. In addition, the Air Force has since authorized an additional Assignment Incentive Pay for operators of Remotely Piloted 

Aircraft, many of whom are stationed at Creech. The Air Force estimates that 534 officers and 333 enlisted members will receive 

both Creech Assignment Incentive Pay and Remotely Piloted Aircraft Pay in fiscal year 2011 at a cost of $4,500,000 to the Department. 

The Committee is concerned that the Air Force has not adequately reviewed its use of special pays to ensure that incentives 

are focused on key missions and current needs. The Committee is 

concerned that Creech Assignment Incentive Pay exemplifies a situation in which special pays are seen as entitlements similar to 

basic pay and allowances, rather than incentives to be utilized 

when necessary to fill critical recruiting and retention needs. 

The Committee is pleased to learn that the Secretary of Defense 

is reviewing Creech Assignment Incentive Pay and has stated that 

it will not be extended beyond December 31, 2011 without substantive and compelling econometric analysis to validate continuation. Therefore, the recommendation provides funding for Creech 

Assignment Incentive Pay through December 31, 2011, in accordance with the Secretary’s decision. The Committee urges all the 

Services to regularly review and evaluate their Special Pays programs to ensure that special pays and bonuses are being used only 

when needed to fill critical recruiting and retention needs. 

RESERVE PERSONNEL, ARMY 

Fiscal year 2011 appropriation .......................................................... $4,333,165,000 

Fiscal year 2012 budget request ....................................................... 4,386,077,000 

Committee recommendation .............................................................. 4,333,507,000 

Change from budget request ............................................................. ¥52,570,000 

The Committee recommends an appropriation of $4,333,507,000 

for Reserve Personnel, Army. The total amount recommended in 

the bill will provide the following program in fiscal year 2012: 


tjames on DSKG8SOYB1PROD with REPORTS
33 


tjames on DSKG8SOYB1PROD with REPORTSInsert graphic folio 015 66365A.015
34 


tjames on DSKG8SOYB1PROD with REPORTSInsert graphic folio 016 66365A.016
35 

RESERVE PERSONNEL, NAVY 

Fiscal year 2011 appropriation .......................................................... $1,940,191,000 

Fiscal year 2012 budget request ....................................................... 1,960,634,000 

Committee recommendation .............................................................. 1,948,544,000 

Change from budget request ............................................................. ¥12,090,000 

The Committee recommends an appropriation of $1,948,544,000 

for Reserve Personnel, Navy. The total amount recommended in 

the bill will provide the following program in fiscal year 2012: 


tjames on DSKG8SOYB1PROD with REPORTS
36 


tjames on DSKG8SOYB1PROD with REPORTSInsert graphic folio 017 66365A.017
37 


tjames on DSKG8SOYB1PROD with REPORTSInsert graphic folio 018 66365A.018
38 

RESERVE PERSONNEL, MARINE CORPS 

Fiscal year 2011 appropriation .......................................................... $612,191,000 

Fiscal year 2012 budget request ....................................................... 653,212,000 

Committee recommendation .............................................................. 645,422,000 

Change from budget request ............................................................. ¥7,790,000 

The Committee recommends an appropriation of $645,422,000 for 

Reserve Personnel, Marine Corps. The total amount recommended 

in the bill will provide the following program in fiscal year 2012: 


tjames on DSKG8SOYB1PROD with REPORTS
39 


tjames on DSKG8SOYB1PROD with REPORTSInsert graphic folio 019 66365A.019
40 


tjames on DSKG8SOYB1PROD with REPORTSInsert graphic folio 020 66365A.020
41 

RESERVE PERSONNEL, AIR FORCE 

Fiscal year 2011 appropriation .......................................................... $1,650,797,000 

Fiscal year 2012 budget request ....................................................... 1,729,823,000 

Committee recommendation .............................................................. 1,711,653,000 

Change from budget request ............................................................. ¥18,170,000 

The Committee recommends an appropriation of $1,711,653,000 

for Reserve Personnel, Air Force. The total amount recommended 

in the bill will provide the following program in fiscal year 2012: 


tjames on DSKG8SOYB1PROD with REPORTS
42 


tjames on DSKG8SOYB1PROD with REPORTSInsert graphic folio 021 66365A.021
43 


tjames on DSKG8SOYB1PROD with REPORTSInsert graphic folio 022 66365A.022
44 

NATIONAL GUARD PERSONNEL, ARMY 

Fiscal year 2011 appropriation .......................................................... $7,511,296,000 

Fiscal year 2012 budget request ....................................................... 7,623,335,000 

Committee recommendation .............................................................. 7,607,345,000 

Change from budget request ............................................................. ¥15,990,000 

The Committee recommends an appropriation of $7,607,345,000 

for National Guard Personnel, Army. The total amount recommended in the bill will provide the following program in fiscal 

year 2012: 


tjames on DSKG8SOYB1PROD with REPORTS
45 


tjames on DSKG8SOYB1PROD with REPORTSInsert graphic folio 023 66365A.023
46 


tjames on DSKG8SOYB1PROD with REPORTSInsert graphic folio 024 66365A.024
47 

NATIONAL GUARD PERSONNEL, AIR FORCE 

Fiscal year 2011 appropriation .......................................................... $3,060,098,000 

Fiscal year 2012 budget request ....................................................... 3,114,149,000 

Committee recommendation .............................................................. 3,099,629,000 

Change from budget request ............................................................. ¥14,520,000 

The Committee recommends an appropriation of $3,099,629,000 

for National Guard Personnel, Air Force. The total amount recommended in the bill will provide the following program in fiscal 

year 2012: 


tjames on DSKG8SOYB1PROD with REPORTS
48 


tjames on DSKG8SOYB1PROD with REPORTSInsert graphic folio 025 66365A.025
49 


tjames on DSKG8SOYB1PROD with REPORTSInsert graphic folio 026 66365A.026

tjames on DSKG8SOYB1PROD with REPORTS
(51) 

TITLE II 

OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE 

The fiscal year 2012 budget request for programs funded in title 

II of the Committee bill, Operation and Maintenance, is 

$170,759,313,000 in new budget authority. These appropriations finance the costs of operating and maintaining the Armed Forces, including the reserve components and related support activities of 

the Department of Defense. Included is pay for civilians, services 

for maintenance of equipment and fuel, supplies, and spare parts 

for weapons and equipment. Financial requirements are influenced 

by many factors, including force levels such as the number of aircraft squadrons, Army and Marine Corps divisions, installations, 

military personnel end strength and deployments, rates of operational activity, and the quantity, complexity, and age of equipment such as aircraft, ships, missiles, and tanks. 

The table below summarizes the Committee’s recommendations. 


tjames on DSKG8SOYB1PROD with REPORTS
52 


tjames on DSKG8SOYB1PROD with REPORTSInsert graphic colio 027 66365A.027
53 

EFFICIENCY INITIATIVES

One of the major themes of the Department’s fiscal year 2012 

budget submission has been the generation of efficiency savings by 

reduced overhead costs and improved business practices. The Department’s fiscal year 2012 budget request includes 

$10,700,000,000 in efficiency savings and the Department’s program plan includes $100,200,000,000 in efficiency savings over the 

five year period from 2012 through 2016. While the Committee applauds the Department’s attempt to reduce costs through efficiencies, the Committee finds that the majority of these savings 

have been taken in the broad categories of better business practices 

and reorganizations and believes that such savings often times 

never materialize. 

Further, upon a careful examination of the budget request, the 

Committee is dismayed to discover several instances where no action is necessary to achieve the specified efficiency savings underway or planned. For example, the budget request assumes a savings of $250,000,000 in fiscal year 2012 by eliminating 400 internally generated reports. However, the Committee has repeatedly 

requested a list of these reports which will be eliminated, as well 

as an explanation of the derivation of the savings estimate, but the 

Department has yet to supply the list or explain the derivation of 

the estimate. 

More troubling were instances in which underfunding valid requirements were claimed as efficiencies. For example, the Services 

were directed to underfund base facility sustainment requirements 

and claim this reduction as infrastructure savings. In total, the 

Committee has identified $884,700,000 in unrealistic efficiencies. 

In this instance, the Committee specifically identified the error and 

restored funding. The Committee urges the Secretary of Defense to 

reassess the efficiency savings estimates, restore funding when required, and develop contingency plans to mitigate the effect on operations and readiness if the savings do not materialize. 

CIVILIAN PERSONNEL PAY

The Department has not responded to the Committee’s repeated 

requests for a monthly report of the number of civilian personnel 

end strength by appropriation account. Therefore, the bill includes 

a general provision which requires such a report be submitted to 

the congressional defense committees. 

Further, the budget request includes discrepancies among the 

Services in the price growth budgeted for civilian personnel pay. 

The Under Secretary of Defense (Comptroller) is directed to ensure 

consistency across the Department for civilian personnel pay rates 

in future budget submissions. 

CONTRACTOR LOGISTICS SUPPORT

Although there is no uniform definition of Contractor Logistics 

Support (CLS) throughout the Department of Defense, it is broadly 

defined as contracted weapon system sustainment that occurs over 

the life of the weapon system. Examples of CLS include contractor 

provided aircraft and engine overhaul, repair and replenishment of 

parts, sustaining engineering, and supply chain management. The 


tjames on DSKG8SOYB1PROD with REPORTS
54 

Committee has numerous concerns with the Department of Defense’s increasing reliance on CLS: actual costs are not known, CLS 

cost growth far outpaces overall operation and maintenance cost 

growth for no discernable reason, and contract oversight is inadequate. 

The cost of CLS is not discreetly visible in the Department’s 

budget request, and there is no central collection of CLS costs anywhere in the Department. The Committee has asked for a report 

of CLS costs from the Services, and each Service has a varying degree of ability to report these costs. The Army reported CLS costs 

by year for fiscal years 2008 to 2012, by program, with a footnote 

of programs for which CLS costs were not known. The CLS funds 

that the Army was able to identify in the fiscal year 2012 budget 

request total $3,597,382,000. The Navy reported actual CLS costs 

for fiscal years 2009 and 2010, estimated costs for fiscal year 2011, 

and the CLS funding requested for fiscal year 2012, by program. 

The CLS funding in the Navy’s fiscal year 2012 budget request totals $6,142,486,843. The Air Force has no clear definition of CLS 

so while the Air Force has reported CLS costs by year for fiscal 

years 2008 to 2012, by program, it is not clear that these costs are 

accurate. The CLS funds that the Air Force identified in the fiscal 

year 2012 budget request total $6,304,400,000. 

The RAND Corporation also had difficulty identifying Air Force 

CLS costs. A 2009 RAND Corporation Report titled, ‘‘Contractor 

Logistics Support in the U.S. Air Force’’ which had been requested 

by the Air Force states: 

‘‘The Air Force does not collect detailed or uniform data on 

CLS costs. Air Force Total Ownership Cost (AFTOC), the official Air Force operation and support management information 

system, contains only total CLS costs per program and offers 

no further detail. For insight into CLS tasks and costs, we had 

to rely on CLS brochures, which are budget-requirement documents that provide estimated costs for the fiscal year in which 

they are prepared and budget requests for future years. One 

of the implications for cost analysts of the data limitations is 

that the CLS costs will not be recorded in AFTOC in the appropriate operation and support Cost Analysis Improvement 

Group (CAIG) cost element, and the detailed commodity transaction costs for consumables and depot-level repairables will 

not be recorded because these transactions are conducted outside of the government supply system.’’ 

While actual CLS costs are not known, they appear to be substantial and increasing at a rate which outpaces overall growth of 

the operation and maintenance accounts for no apparent reason. 

The CLS costs as reported by the Services increase by 

$3,010,500,000 (twenty-three percent) from fiscal year 2009 to 

2012. Over the same time period, operation and maintenance funding grows by only ten percent. The Services have yet to explain the 

reason that CLS cost growth outpaces the overall growth of operation and maintenance funding. 

While the Department of Defense has increasingly relied on CLS 

for weapon system sustainment contracts, the acquisition workforce 

and number of contract managers has not kept pace. Further, in 

conjunction with the move toward CLS, the Department is also 


tjames on DSKG8SOYB1PROD with REPORTS
55 

adopting performance based logistics (PBLs) in which program 

managers establish flexible performance and funding ranges to link 

contract incentives to sustainment goals such as weapon system 

availability. However, even under a PBL contract, seventy-five to 

ninety percent of the contract cost is fixed and only ten to twentyfive percent can vary based on performance. Finally, some performance goals appear lax; for example, certain aircraft CLS contracts 

set aircraft availability goals of only sixty percent, and award fees 

are granted if aircraft availability exceeds this goal. Additionally, 

the Committee is aware of instances in which CLS contracts are essentially sole source contracts with the original equipment manufacturer on weapon systems for which the government does not 

own the technical data and therefore the contractor need not worry 

about realistic competition in order to be awarded the CLS contracts. Finally, the Committee is concerned that in some instances 

‘‘inherently governmental’’ and ‘‘critical functions’’ have been performed by private sector CLS contractors. The RAND Corporation 

report cited above states, ‘‘The increasing use of public-private 

partnership arrangements . . . in which organic depots perform 

work that contractors plan and supervise . . . blurs the distinction 

among tasks.’’ 

For these reasons, the Committee strongly urges the Department 

to carefully look at the management and oversight of Contractor 

Logistics Support and expects that the Department will find efficiencies, cost savings, and cost avoidances through better management of CLS. The Committee has adjusted funding accordingly. 

MILITARY INFORMATION SUPPORT OPERATIONS

The budget request includes $300,570,000 for fiscal year 2012 

Department of Defense Information Operations programs. Of this 

amount, $120,570,000 is requested as base funding and 

$180,000,000 is requested as Overseas Contingency Operations 

funding. The Committee’s recommendation reduces the total request by $123,995,000. The allocation of funds by Combatant Command and funding levels for certain programs is specifically delineated in the classified annex to this report. These delineations shall 

be considered a congressional special interest item and any deviations from the allocations are subject to sections 8005, 8006, and 

9002 of this Act. 

The Committee’s recommendation provides no funding within the 

base for these activities and instead provides for these activities 

within the Overseas Contingency Operations funding as these activities do not reflect an enduring military requirement. The Committee remains concerned that many of the activities being conducted under the guise of ‘‘information operations’’ or ‘‘military information support operations’’ do not represent traditional or appropriate military roles or responsibilities. Many of the activities 

being funded under information operations are duplicative of, or 

operate at cross purposes with, other federal agencies’ activities, 

particularly the Department of State. Finally, based on the Department of Defense’s significant usage of contractors to plan and execute these programs, the Committee questions whether the Department has the technical expertise or capacity to effectively manage 

and execute these types of programs in a cost effective manner. In 


tjames on DSKG8SOYB1PROD with REPORTS
56 

an era of declining budgets, the Committee does not believe that 

the Department can afford to fund activities that do not fulfill core 

military requirements and are more appropriately funded by those 

other federal agencies which are statutorily authorized and traditionally charged with developing and administering such programs. 

Additionally, the Committee remains concerned that the official 

budget justification materials do not include the level of detailed 

information necessary to provide proper analysis and oversight of 

the activities funded under Information Operations. The Committee directs the Secretary of Defense to develop a format for improving the budget submission for fiscal year 2013 for these programs. 

In the interim, not later than 30 days after enactment of this 

Act, the Secretary of Defense is directed to submit a report in writing to the House and Senate Appropriations Committees detailing 

the proposed execution of the funding provided for these programs. 

This report shall include: the program name, activity, description 

of service, target audience, goals/objectives, attribution, measures 

of effectiveness, prior year obligations and expenditures, and the 

estimated budget for year of execution. The report shall include an 

annex for the inclusion of necessary explanatory and supporting 

classified information. Such a report, and the delineation of each 

program, project and activity, shall serve as the basis for reprogramming in accordance with section 8006 of this Act. 

TELECOMMUNICATIONS EXPENSE MANAGEMENT

The Committee has observed the rapidly growing use of mobile 

communications and computing devices across all of the military 

Services and commands within the Department. The Committee is 

concerned that the thousands of mobile devices each require a wide 

assortment of significant long-term network service commitments 

to telecommunications industry service providers. Additionally, the 

Committee believes this rapidly growing number of telecom services poses a serious cost and accountability management challenge 

to service telecom management operations that are still using manual or outdated cost management systems, resulting in the potential for significant unnecessary and inaccurate telecom service costs 

to users within the Department. 

Further, it is not clear that the systems in place to manage 

telecom services and the inventory of communication and computing devices are managed as efficiently as possible. The Committee recommends that the Secretary of Defense find efficiencies 

through methods such as independent or third party verification to 

ensure the government is not paying for services it does not need 

or does not actually use, and/or the use of commercially available 

telecom expense management systems used by Fortune 500 companies. The use of such management solutions can significantly reduce costs, in some cases saving as much as thirty percent annually. Modern telecommunications expense management systems 

monitor daily business processes in detail, to include purchasing 

and managing telephone and communications inventories and services for phone lines, phones, wireless devices, wireless services, and 

internet services. 


tjames on DSKG8SOYB1PROD with REPORTS
57 

The Committee directs in Section 8117 of the bill that the Secretary of Defense complete a study and assessment of the feasibility of using commercial off-the-shelf (COTS) telecommunication 

expense management solutions to improve enterprise visibility over 

the Department’s telecommunications expenses and identify possible efficiencies in this growing technological area. Further, the 

Secretary is directed to provide the results of this report to the congressional defense committees not later than March 1, 2012. The 

report shall include an implementation plan to pilot this capability 

and demonstrate how the Department might begin to utilize COTS 

expense management solutions and whether the technology might 

be implemented throughout the Department. 

CORROSION CONTROL MATERIAL FOR ASPHALT PRESERVATION OF

AIRFIELD FACILITIES

In fiscal year 2005, the Office of Naval Research conducted an 

evaluation of asphalt preservation seal coatings on Department of 

Defense and Federal Aviation Administration airfields. Since that 

time, both Army and Air Force pavement specialists have evaluated asphalt preservation seal coats and preservation processes. 

The Committee urges the Department to robustly fund a program 

whereby mission-critical asphalt pavement, such as airfield runways, are systematically subjected to the preservation methods and 

materials recently proven effective in an extended test and evaluation study. 

CIVIL-MILITARY TRAINING EXERCISES

The Committee finds that civil-military training can simultaneously enhance military readiness while meeting civil needs of the 

communities where the units train. Therefore, the Committee has 

fully funded the Department’s requirement for such training exercises in fiscal year 2012. 

ENERGY REQUIREMENTS

The Committee strongly supports efforts to reduce the Department’s dependence on fossil fuels, increase the supply of renewable 

energy, and develop energy technology that will make servicemen 

and women safer and more effective in the field. According to the 

Department, for every 24 fuel convoys that go into Afghanistan and 

Iraq, one warfighter is killed or wounded and for every extra dollar 

in the price of a barrel of oil, the Department’s fuel costs increase 

by $130 million. The Committee is deeply concerned with the strategic, fiscal, tactical and human costs associated with the Department’s energy needs and recognizes that investments are necessary 

to mitigate these challenges. Accordingly, the Committee directs 

the Secretary of Defense to report to the congressional defense committees within 90 days on the funding and programming included 

in the Fiscal Year 2012 budget and the Future Years Defense Plan 

to address energy requirements. 

HIGHER EDUCATION TRAINING

The Committee encourages the Department of Defense to support 

the training of Weapons of Mass Destruction nonproliferation speVerDate Mar 15 2010 05:13 Jun 17, 2011 Jkt 066874 PO 00000 Frm 00067 Fmt 6601 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\HR110.XXX HR110

tjames on DSKG8SOYB1PROD with REPORTS
58 

cialists at U.S. institutions of higher education. The Department 

should cooperate with colleges and universities to expand the curricula offering in this field of study. Emphasis should also be 

placed on institutions that would provide on-the-job nonproliferation training and internship activities on campuses and at U.S. 

government agencies. 

TRANSPORTATION PROTECTIVE SERVICES

The Committee believes that once the DOD Inspector General’s 

review of the Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR) concerning 

freight contracts is concluded the results of that review should be 

considered before DOD makes procurement changes affecting 

Transportation Protective Services (TPS). The Committee therefore 

instructs DOD to postpone the shift to FAR until the Inspector 

General’s report is completed. 

OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE REPROGRAMMINGS

The Committee recommends a provision identical to the provision enacted in fiscal year 2009 that requires the Department of 

Defense to submit the DD Form 1414, Base for Reprogramming Actions, for each of the fiscal year 2012 appropriation accounts not 

later than 60 days after the enactment of this Act. This provision 

prohibits the Department from executing any reprogramming or 

transfer of funds for any purpose other than originally appropriated until the aforementioned report is submitted to the House 

and Senate Appropriations Committees. 

The Committee directs that proposed transfers of funds between O–1 budget activities in excess of $15,000,000 be subject to the normal prior approval reprogramming procedures. In addition, the Department should follow prior approval reprogramming procedures 

for transfers in excess of $15,000,000 out of the following budget 

subactivities: 

Army: 

Maneuver units 

Modular support brigades 

Land forces operations support 

Force readiness operations support 

Land forces depot maintenance 

Base operations support 

Facilities Sustainment, Repair, and Modernization 

Navy: 

Aircraft depot maintenance 

Ship depot maintenance 

Facilities Sustainment, Repair, and Modernization 

Marine Corps: 

Depot maintenance 

Facilities Sustainment, Repair, and Modernization 

Air Force: 

Operating Forces depot maintenance 

Mobilization depot maintenance 

Training and Recruiting depot maintenance 

Administration and Servicewide depot maintenance 

Primary combat forces 

Combat enhancement forces 


tjames on DSKG8SOYB1PROD with REPORTS
59 

Combat communications 

Facilities Sustainment, Repair, and Modernization 

Operation and Maintenance, Army National Guard: 

Other Personnel Support/Recruiting and Advertising 

With respect to Operation and Maintenance, Defense-Wide, proposed transfers of funds to or from the levels specified for defense 

agencies in excess of $l5,000,000 shall be subject to prior approval 

reprogramming procedures. 

OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE BUDGET EXECUTION DATA

The Committee directs the Secretary of Defense to continue to 

provide the congressional defense committees with quarterly budget execution data. Such data should be provided not later than 45 

days past the close of each quarter for the fiscal year and should 

be provided for each O–1 budget activity, activity group, and subactivity group for each of the active, defense-wide, reserve and National Guard components. For each O–1 budget activity, activity 

group, and subactivity group, these reports should include the 

budget request and actual obligation amount, the distribution of 

unallocated congressional adjustments to the budget request, all 

adjustments made by the Department of Defense in establishing 

the Base for Reprogramming (DD Form 1414) report, all adjustments resulting from below threshold reprogrammings, and all adjustments resulting from prior approval reprogramming requests. 

OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE, ARMY 

Fiscal year 2011 appropriation .......................................................... $33,306,117,000 

Fiscal year 2012 budget request ....................................................... 34,735,216,000 

Committee recommendation .............................................................. 34,581,321,000 

Change from budget request ............................................................. ¥153,895,000 

The Committee recommends an appropriation of $34,581,321,000 

for Operation and Maintenance, Army. The total amount recommended in the bill will provide the following program in fiscal 

year 2012: 


tjames on DSKG8SOYB1PROD with REPORTS
60 


tjames on DSKG8SOYB1PROD with REPORTSInsert graphic folio 028 66365A.028
61 


tjames on DSKG8SOYB1PROD with REPORTSInsert graphic folio 029 66365A.029
62 


tjames on DSKG8SOYB1PROD with REPORTSInsert graphic folio 030 66365A.030
63 


tjames on DSKG8SOYB1PROD with REPORTSInsert graphic folio 012 66365A.031
64 

UNIQUE IDENTITY

The Automated Biometric Identification System (ABIS) was originally implemented to collect and track biometric information taken 

from Improvised Explosive Devices in Iraq and Afghanistan. Since 

then, the Army has shared ABIS data with other federal agencies 

as a member of the Unique Identity program. The Unique Identity 

program was established to collect 10-print biometric information 

from travelers to the United States; share and compare biometric 

information collected and held by the Army in the ABIS, the Department of Justice Integrated Automated Fingerprint Identification System, as well as other law enforcement agencies; and enhance multi-modal capabilities for all users. In the past three 

years, the Army has become an increasingly significant partner in 

this effort. 

The Committee is pleased with the excellent coordination and cooperation among federal agencies in enhancing interoperability, accelerating the response times, and sharing biometric information 

for national security and law enforcement purposes. 

The Committee finds that the ABIS program has an enduring requirement and therefore shifts $26,200,000 from the Army’s Overseas Contingency Operations budget request to the Army’s baseline 

funding account and increases funding for ABIS by $3,800,000. The 

Committee directs the Secretary of the Army to work with federal 

agency counterparts to continue providing quarterly briefings on 

the progress made in implementing system interoperability, operational impacts resulting from remaining gaps, and steps being 

taken to close such gaps. 

FACILITY DEMOLITION TO PROMOTE PERSONNEL SAFETY

As written earlier in this report, the Committee restores funding 

to correct a funding shortfall of $884,700,000, including 

$278,000,000 in Army base operations, caused by unrealistic efficiency savings reductions assumed in the fiscal year 2012 budget 

request. The Committee also encourages full funding of Facilities 

Sustainment, Restoration, and Modernization projects for high priority demolition projects to promote personnel safety on Army installations. 

OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE, NAVY 

Fiscal year 2011 appropriation .......................................................... $37,809,239,000 

Fiscal year 2012 budget request ....................................................... 39,364,688,000 

Committee recommendation .............................................................. 39,385,685,000 

Change from budget request ............................................................. 20,997,000 

The Committee recommends an appropriation of $39,385,685,000 

for Operation and Maintenance, Navy. The total amount recommended in the bill will provide the following program in fiscal 

year 2012: 


tjames on DSKG8SOYB1PROD with REPORTS
65 


tjames on DSKG8SOYB1PROD with REPORTSInsert graphic folio 032 66365A.032
66 


tjames on DSKG8SOYB1PROD with REPORTSInsert graphic folio 033 66365A.033
67 


tjames on DSKG8SOYB1PROD with REPORTSInsert graphic folio 034 66365A.034
68 


tjames on DSKG8SOYB1PROD with REPORTSInsert graphic folio 013 66365A.035
69 

OVERHEAD COSTS AT NAVAL SHIPYARDS

The Navy owns and operates four shipyards: the Norfolk Naval 

Shipyard in Portsmouth, Virginia; the Portsmouth Naval Shipyard 

in Kittery, Maine; the Puget Sound Naval Shipyard in Bremerton, 

Washington; and the Pearl Harbor Naval Shipyard in Pearl Harbor, Hawaii. From the 1950s until very recently, the Navy financed 

these shipyards through the Navy Working Capital Fund (NWCF). 

Under the NWCF’s revolving-fund approach, the shipyards set 

prices for maintenance and repair services that were intended to 

cover their full operating costs, and the Navy’s Atlantic and Pacific 

Fleets as well as its other customers paid for those services out of 

their appropriated funds. The benefits of the NWCF financing is 

that costs are transparent and there is an incentive for efficient operations in order to keep cost to the customers competitively low. 

In recent years, the Navy has changed the mechanism it uses to 

fund each of the shipyards by shifting from the NWCF to direct appropriations, a financing mechanism known as mission funding. 

That lack of transparency and efficiency incentives has resulted 

in large overhead costs. An examination of the Navy’s detailed 

budget justification indicates that the difference in percentage of 

Naval Shipyard overhead funding between shipyards is significant. 

Overhead rates range from twenty-nine percent at the Norfolk 

Naval Shipyard to forty-three percent at the Pearl Harbor Naval 

Shipyard, as displayed below: 

Pearl 

Harbor 

Puget 

Sound Portsmouth Norfolk 

Direct costs ($s millions) .................................................................................. 340 912 388 720 

Overhead costs ($s millions) ............................................................................. 259 426 190 296 

Shipyard Funding ($s millions) ................................................................ 599 1,339 579 1,016 

.

Percentage of direct ........................................................................................... 57% 68% 67% 71% 

Percentage of overhead ..................................................................................... 43% 32% 33% 29% 

The Committee is concerned that the overhead costs are excessive and is puzzled by the wide disparity. The recommendation adjusts funding to reduce overhead costs such that they do not exceed 

the Norfolk Naval Shipyard’s rate of twenty-nine percent. These 

funds have been redistributed from overhead to depot maintenance 

funding. The Committee recommends that the Secretary of the 

Navy carefully review Naval Shipyard operations and eliminate all 

unnecessary overhead costs. 

NEXT GENERATION ENTERPRISE NETWORK

The Committee has concerns with the Navy’s proposed program 

to transition from the Navy Marine Corps Intranet (NMCI) to its 

Next Generation Enterprise Network (NGEN). A March 2011 Government Accountability Office (GAO) study of the program questioned the Navy’s current acquisition approach and recommended 

that the Navy immediately limit further investment in Next Generation Enterprise Network pending a comprehensive review of the 

acquisition strategy. In the study, the GAO determined the Navy’s 

current acquisition strategy is $4,700,000,000 more costly and introduces more risk than other alternatives. In addition, Next GenVerDate Mar 15 2010 05:13 Jun 17, 2011 Jkt 066874 PO 00000 Frm 00079 Fmt 6601 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\HR110.XXX HR110

tjames on DSKG8SOYB1PROD with REPORTS
70 

eration Enterprise Network program execution has not been based 

on the kind of reliably derived integrated master schedule that is 

essential to overall program success. The Navy’s fiscal year 2012 budget requests $1,737,000,000 for 

the Next Generation Enterprise Network. The Committee believes 

that greater oversight of the program is required by the Office of 

the Secretary of Defense. Given the scope and nature of the program’s significance to the Navy’s operational and cybersecurity capabilities, it is important that action is taken to ensure that risks 

and costs have been fully addressed. Accordingly, the Committee 

recommends that the Secretary of Defense conduct an Independent 

Cost Estimate (ICE) of the Navy’s NGEN acquisition strategy and 

a risk analysis of the impact that program transition from the 

Navy and Marine Corps Intranet to NGEN will have on network 

support to Navy and Marine Corps operations. 

ADVANCED EDUCATION

The Committee has long recognized the value of advanced education in science and technology to support improved combat effectiveness of U.S. military forces. Therefore, the Committee has fully 

funded the Navy’s fiscal year 2012 request for the Naval Postgraduate School. 

OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE, MARINE CORPS 

Fiscal year 2011 appropriation .......................................................... $5,539,740,000 

Fiscal year 2012 budget request ....................................................... 5,960,437,000 

Committee recommendation .............................................................. 6,036,996,000 

Change from budget request ............................................................. 76,559,000 

The Committee recommends an appropriation of $6,036,996,000 

for Operation and Maintenance, Marine Corps. The total amount 

recommended in the bill will provide the following program in fiscal year 2012: 


tjames on DSKG8SOYB1PROD with REPORTS
71 


tjames on DSKG8SOYB1PROD with REPORTSInsert graphic folio 036 66365A.036
72 


tjames on DSKG8SOYB1PROD with REPORTSInsert graphic folio 037 66365A.037
73 


tjames on DSKG8SOYB1PROD with REPORTSInsert graphic folio 014 66365A.038
74 

OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE, AIR FORCE 

Fiscal year 2011 appropriation .......................................................... $36,062,989,000 

Fiscal year 2012 budget request ....................................................... 36,195,133,000 

Committee recommendation .............................................................. 36,065,107,000 

Change from budget request ............................................................. ¥130,026,000 

The Committee recommends an appropriation of $36,065,107,000 

for Operation and Maintenance, Air Force. The total amount recommended in the bill will provide the following program in fiscal 

year 2012: 


tjames on DSKG8SOYB1PROD with REPORTS
75 


tjames on DSKG8SOYB1PROD with REPORTSInsert graphic folio 039 66365A.039
76 


tjames on DSKG8SOYB1PROD with REPORTSInsert graphic folio 040 66365A.040
77 


tjames on DSKG8SOYB1PROD with REPORTSInsert graphic folio 041 66365A.041
78 


tjames on DSKG8SOYB1PROD with REPORTSInsert graphic folio 042 66365A.042
79 


tjames on DSKG8SOYB1PROD with REPORTSInsert graphic folio 015 66365A.043
80 

VISIBILITY OF DEPOT MAINTENANCE FUNDING

The Air Force has not properly justified $6,398,905,000 of depot 

maintenance funding contained in the Air Force’s fiscal year 2012 

budget request by not correctly reflecting the requested funding for 

weapon system depot maintenance in depot maintenance funding 

lines. The Air Force justification material displays $2,598,441,000 

for weapon system depot maintenance on the following fiscal year 

2012 budget exhibits: 

—O–1 ‘‘O&M Funding by Budget Activity, Activity Group, 

and Subactivity Group’’; 

—OP–5 ‘‘Detail by Subactivity Group’’; and 

—OP–30 ‘‘Depot Maintenance Program.’’ 

However, the OP–32 ‘‘Summary of Price and Program Changes’’ 

and the ‘‘Appendix to the Budget of the U.S Government, FY2012’’ 

indicates that the Air Force’s fiscal year 2012 budget request contains $8,997,346,000 for weapon system depot maintenance, a difference of $6,398,905,000. Further, the Committee notes that, as 

well as understating the depot maintenance funding request by 

$6,398,905,000, the OP–30 ‘‘Depot Maintenance Program’’ budget 

exhibit contains additional errors. 

In addition to the serious concern that the Air Force’s depot 

maintenance funding request is not fully justified, the Committee 

is deeply concerned that lack of visibility of depot maintenance 

funding is an obstacle to effective management. Proper management of the depot maintenance program is critical to military readiness. Therefore, the Committee identifies and consolidates all 

depot maintenance funding contained in the Air Force’s fiscal year 

2012 budget request in the ‘‘Depot Maintenance’’ Subactivity 

Group, and adjusts funding to reflect the improved management of 

the depot maintenance program that can occur with central visibility of all depot maintenance funding. 

CANINE EXPLOSIVE DETECTION CAPABILITIES

The Department of Defense’s use of canines to help locate and 

clear Improvised Explosive Devices has been highly successful and 

has contributed to the success of the counterinsurgency mission. 

The Committee urges the Secretary of the Air Force, the executive 

agent for the military working dog program, to robustly fund the 

canine explosive detection capabilities program, continue training 

military working dog handlers and their dogs, and deploy trained 

dog handlers and their dogs to Afghanistan to find buried improvised explosive devices. 

QUICK REACTION CAPABILITY

The Committee finds that the Quick Reaction Capability systems 

have significantly enhanced the effectiveness of the Air Force’s 

military operations in the U.S. Central Command. The Committee 

recommends that the Air Force seek a waiver to Section 2401 of 

Title 10 United States Code regarding the lease of aircraft, so that 

these systems can continue to be deployed in direct support of combat operations. 


tjames on DSKG8SOYB1PROD with REPORTS
81 

OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE, DEFENSE-WIDE 

Fiscal year 2011 appropriation .......................................................... $30,210,810,000 

Fiscal year 2012 budget request ....................................................... 30,940,409,000 

Committee recommendation .............................................................. 30,682,265,000 

Change from budget request ............................................................. ¥258,144,000 

The Committee recommends an appropriation of $30,682,265,000, 

for Operation and Maintenance, Defense-Wide. The total amount 

recommended in the bill will provide the following program in fiscal year 2012: 


tjames on DSKG8SOYB1PROD with REPORTS
82 


tjames on DSKG8SOYB1PROD with REPORTSInsert offset folio 044 here 66365A.044
83 


tjames on DSKG8SOYB1PROD with REPORTSInsert offset folio 045 here 66365A.045
84 


tjames on DSKG8SOYB1PROD with REPORTSInsert offset folio 016 here 66365A.046
85 

COMMON FOOD MANAGEMENT SYSTEM

The Committee understands that the Common Food Management System (CFMS) will offer one integrated food management 

system across the Armed Services, replacing the unique services 

that are currently utilized by each of the services, and are in need 

of modernization. The Committee also understands that significant 

progress has been made in the implementation of the CFMS since 

the program was restructured in 2010, and supports the Defense 

Logistics Agency’s efforts to fully deploy the system by fiscal year 

2015. Accordingly, the Committee directs the Defense Logistics 

Agency to provide a report within 60 days of enactment of this Act 

on the status of CFMS, including any obstacles that may prevent 

or impede deployment, the steps being taken to resolve those 

issues, and a timeline for full deployment. The Committee also requests that the Defense Logistics Agency provide to the Committee 

a copy of any recent reports which analyze the cost-effectiveness of 

the CFMS program. 

OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE, ARMY RESERVE 

Fiscal year 2011 appropriation .......................................................... $2,840,427,000 

Fiscal year 2012 budget request ....................................................... 3,109,176,000 

Committee recommendation .............................................................. 3,047,033,000 

Change from budget request ............................................................. ¥62,143,000 

The Committee recommends an appropriation of $3,047,033,000 

for Operation and Maintenance, Army Reserve. The total amount 

recommended in the bill will provide the following program in fiscal year 2012: 


tjames on DSKG8SOYB1PROD with REPORTS
86 


tjames on DSKG8SOYB1PROD with REPORTSInsert offset folio 047 here 66365A.047
87 


tjames on DSKG8SOYB1PROD with REPORTSInsert offset folio 017 here 66365A.048
88 

OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE, NAVY RESERVE 

Fiscal year 2011 appropriation .......................................................... $1,344,264,000 

Fiscal year 2012 budget request ....................................................... 1,323,134,000 

Committee recommendation .............................................................. 1,323,134,000 

Change from budget request ............................................................. – – 

The Committee recommends an appropriation of $1,323,134,000 

for Operation and Maintenance, Navy Reserve. The total amount 

recommended in the bill will provide the following program in fiscal year 2012: 


tjames on DSKG8SOYB1PROD with REPORTS
89 


tjames on DSKG8SOYB1PROD with REPORTSInsert offset folio 049 here 66365A.049
90 


tjames on DSKG8SOYB1PROD with REPORTSInsert offset folio 050 here 66365A.050
91 

OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE, MARINE CORPS RESERVE 

Fiscal year 2011 appropriation .......................................................... $275,484,000 

Fiscal year 2012 budget request ....................................................... 271,443,000 

Committee recommendation .............................................................. 271,443,000 

Change from budget request ............................................................. – – 

The Committee recommends an appropriation of $271,443,000 for 

Operation and Maintenance, Marine Corps Reserve. The total 

amount recommended in the bill will provide the following program 

in fiscal year 2012: 


tjames on DSKG8SOYB1PROD with REPORTS
92 


tjames on DSKG8SOYB1PROD with REPORTSInsert offset folio 051 here 66365A.051
93 

OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE, AIR FORCE RESERVE 

Fiscal year 2011 appropriation .......................................................... $3,291,027,000 

Fiscal year 2012 budget request ....................................................... 3,274,359,000 

Committee recommendation .............................................................. 3,310,459,000 

Change from budget request ............................................................. 36,100,000 

The Committee recommends an appropriation of $3,310,459,000 

for Operation and Maintenance, Air Force Reserve. The total 

amount recommended in the bill will provide the following program 

in fiscal year 2012: 


tjames on DSKG8SOYB1PROD with REPORTS
94 


tjames on DSKG8SOYB1PROD with REPORTSInsert offset folio 052 here 66365A.052
95 


tjames on DSKG8SOYB1PROD with REPORTSInsert offset folio 053 here 66365A.053
96 

OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE, ARMY NATIONAL GUARD 

Fiscal year 2011 appropriation .......................................................... $6,454,624,000 

Fiscal year 2012 budget request ....................................................... 7,041,432,000 

Committee recommendation .............................................................. 6,979,232,000 

Change from budget request ............................................................. ¥62,200,000 

The Committee recommends an appropriation of $6,979,232,000 

for Operation and Maintenance, Army National Guard. The total 

amount recommended in the bill will provide the following program 

in fiscal year 2012: 


tjames on DSKG8SOYB1PROD with REPORTS
97 


tjames on DSKG8SOYB1PROD with REPORTSInsert offset folio 054 here 66365A.054
98 


tjames on DSKG8SOYB1PROD with REPORTSInsert offset folio 055 here 66365A.055
99 


tjames on DSKG8SOYB1PROD with REPORTSInsert offset folio 056 here 66365A.056
100 

OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE, AIR NATIONAL GUARD 

Fiscal year 2011 appropriation .......................................................... $5,963,839,000 

Fiscal year 2012 budget request ....................................................... 6,136,280,000 

Committee recommendation .............................................................. 6,094,380,000 

Change from budget request ............................................................. ¥41,900,000 

The Committee recommends an appropriation of $6,094,380,000 

for Operation and Maintenance, Air National Guard. The total 

amount recommended in the bill will provide the following program 

in fiscal year 2012: 


tjames on DSKG8SOYB1PROD with REPORTS
101 


tjames on DSKG8SOYB1PROD with REPORTSInsert offset folio 057 here 66365A.057
102 


tjames on DSKG8SOYB1PROD with REPORTSInsert offset folio 018 here 66365A.058
103 

OVERSEAS CONTINGENCY OPERATIONS TRANSFER FUND 

Fiscal year 2011 appropriation .......................................................... – – 

Fiscal year 2012 budget request ....................................................... $5,000,000 

Committee recommendation .............................................................. – – 

Change from budget request ............................................................. ¥5,000,000 

The Committee recommends no appropriation for the Overseas 

Contingency Operations Transfer Account given the account’s unobligated balance and lack of justification. 

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE ARMED 

FORCES 

Fiscal year 2011 appropriation .......................................................... $14,068,000 

Fiscal year 2012 budget request ....................................................... 13,861,000 

Committee recommendation .............................................................. 13,861,000 

Change from budget request ............................................................. – – 

The Committee recommends an appropriation of $13,861,000 for 

the United States Court of Appeals for the Armed Forces. 

ENVIRONMENTAL RESTORATION, ARMY 

Fiscal year 2011 appropriation .......................................................... $464,581,000 

Fiscal year 2012 budget request ....................................................... 346,031,000 

Committee recommendation .............................................................. 346,031,000 

Change from budget request ............................................................. – – 

The Committee recommends an appropriation of $346,031,000 for 

Environmental Restoration, Army. 

ENVIRONMENTAL RESTORATION, NAVY 

Fiscal year 2011 appropriation .......................................................... $304,867,000 

Fiscal year 2012 budget request ....................................................... 308,668,000 

Committee recommendation .............................................................. 308,668,000 

Change from budget request ............................................................. – – 

The Committee recommends an appropriation of $308,668,000 for 

Environmental Restoration, Navy. 

ENVIRONMENTAL RESTORATION, AIR FORCE 

Fiscal year 2011 appropriation .......................................................... $502,653,000 

Fiscal year 2012 budget request ....................................................... 525,453,000 

Committee recommendation .............................................................. 525,453,000 

Change from budget request ............................................................. – – 

The Committee recommends an appropriation of $525,453,000 for 

Environmental Restoration, Air Force. 

ENVIRONMENTAL RESTORATION, DEFENSE-WIDE 

Fiscal year 2011 appropriation .......................................................... $10,744,000 

Fiscal year 2012 budget request ....................................................... 10,716,000 

Committee recommendation .............................................................. 10,716,000 

Change from budget request ............................................................. – – 

The Committee recommends an appropriation of $10,716,000 for 

Environmental Restoration, Defense-Wide. 


tjames on DSKG8SOYB1PROD with REPORTS
104 

ENVIRONMENTAL RESTORATION, FORMERLY USED 

DEFENSE SITES 

Fiscal year 2011 appropriation .......................................................... $316,546,000 

Fiscal year 2012 budget request ....................................................... 276,495,000 

Committee recommendation .............................................................. 276,495,000 

Change from budget request ............................................................. – – 

The Committee recommends an appropriation of $276,495,000 for 

Environmental Restoration, Formerly Used Defense Sites. 

CONTRACT OVERSIGHT AND TRANSPARENCY

The Department of Defense Environmental Restoration program 

provides for the identification, investigation, and cleanup of contamination and military munitions associated with activities at active military installations located in the continental United States, 

Hawaii, Alaska, Puerto Rico, and Guam, as well as Formerly Used 

Defense Sites. According to the Department, the Environmental 

Restoration program currently oversees 34,058 sites on 1,907 current and closing sites and 2,691 former defense sites. The Committee has provided the Environmental Restoration program with 

over $14,000,000,000 since fiscal year 2002 to fulfill its cleanup responsibility. The identification, investigation, and cleanup of sites 

are accomplished primarily through contracted services. 

Over the last six years, the Committee has repeatedly directed 

the Secretary of Defense to improve accountability and management of contracted services. Despite this direction, not even the 

most basic information regarding the Environmental Restoration 

program contracts for fiscal year 2012 or prior years has been provided. Responsibility for contracts is spread across individual sites 

and installations, and the Department appears to have limited 

knowledge of how funding is spent or deliverables are met across 

the program. The Department is unable to provide information regarding the number of program contracts funded in a given fiscal 

year, contract costs in a given fiscal year, or how much of the funding provided is directed to cleanup versus oversight, administrative 

costs, and overhead. Further, the Department is unable to respond 

to queries regarding contract deliverables, fee structures, contract 

requirements, or the number of sole source contracts awarded. 

The Committee is concerned by the lack of accountability and 

oversight of the Environmental Restoration program contracted 

services. The budget justification materials provide very little visibility into the program and therefore preclude the Committee from 

exercising proper congressional oversight of the program. The Committee directs the Secretary of Defense to implement measures to 

improve management of the program and to institute a process by 

which oversight can be conducted of the contracting process, including, but not limited to, contract deliverables, fee structures, management and overhead costs, and the competitive bidding process. 

Additionally, the Secretary of Defense is directed to submit a report 

to the congressional defense committees, not later than 180 days 

after enactment of this Act, on the management and process improvements being implemented. This report should include the following information: the number of program contracts funded by fiscal year, contract costs in a given year, requirements for contracts, 


tjames on DSKG8SOYB1PROD with REPORTS
105 

contract deliverables, fee structures, administrative and overhead 

costs, oversight costs, competitive bidding processes, and duration 

of contracts. 

OVERSEAS HUMANITARIAN, DISASTER, AND CIVIC AID 

Fiscal year 2011 appropriation .......................................................... $108,032,000 

Fiscal year 2012 budget request ....................................................... 107,662,000 

Committee recommendation .............................................................. 107,662,000 

Change from budget request ............................................................. – – 

The Committee recommends an appropriation of $107,662,000 for 

Overseas Humanitarian, Disaster, and Civic Aid. 

COOPERATIVE THREAT REDUCTION ACCOUNT 

Fiscal year 2011 appropriation .......................................................... $522,512,000 

Fiscal year 2012 budget request ....................................................... 508,219,000 

Committee recommendation .............................................................. 508,219,000 

Change from budget request ............................................................. – – 

The Committee recommends an appropriation of $508,219,000 for 

the Cooperative Threat Reduction Account. 

DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE ACQUISITION WORKFORCE 

DEVELOPMENT FUND 

Fiscal year 2011 appropriation .......................................................... $217,561,000 

Fiscal year 2012 budget request ....................................................... 305,501,000 

Committee recommendation .............................................................. 105,501,000 

Change from budget request ............................................................. ¥200,000,000 

The Committee recommends an appropriation of $105,501,000 for 

the Department of Defense Acquisition Workforce Development 

Fund. 

ACQUISITION WORKFORCE DEVELOPMENT FUND

The acquisition workforce development fund was established to 

increase the end strength and quality of the Department’s acquisition workforce. The effort is financed with a myriad of funding to 

include direct appropriated funding and a taxing of other appropriated funds. Since its inception, the fund has executed only a portion of the total funding available in any given fiscal year. The 

forecast for fiscal year 2011 is no exception. The Department plans 

to carry over approximately $346,000,000 of funding available in 

fiscal year 2011 to fiscal year 2012. The Committee understands 

that the Department is developing a proposal to reduce the statutory required amounts available by fiscal year and fully supports 

this proposal. This proposal is especially timely in the face of likely 

decreasing budgets and acquisitions. Therefore, the recommendation provides $105,501,000, a decrease of $200,000,000 below the 

request. 


tjames on DSKG8SOYB1PROD with REPORTS

tjames on DSKG8SOYB1PROD with REPORTS
(107) 

TITLE III 

PROCUREMENT 

The fiscal year 2012 Department of Defense procurement budget 

request totals $114,365,617,000. The table below summarizes the 

budget estimates and the Committee’s recommendations. 


tjames on DSKG8SOYB1PROD with REPORTS
108 


tjames on DSKG8SOYB1PROD with REPORTSInsert offset folio 059 here 66365A.059
109 

ADVANCED MEDIUM RANGE AIR TO AIR MISSILE

The AIM–120D Advanced Medium Range Air to Air Missile 

(AMRAAM) program is the next generation all-weather, all-environment radar guided missile, developed jointly by the Navy and 

Air Force. This newest variant of the AMRAAM will provide improved navigation and guidance, improving overall missile performance and effectiveness. This complex development effort has resulted in testing problems and delays in missile production. Currently, missile production is experiencing a growing backlog of 

more than 100 missiles and the fiscal year 2011 production contract has been delayed. The fiscal year 2011 budget request assumed that the 2011 production contract would award in February 

2011, but the most recent information from the Department indicates the contract will award as late as August 2011, making a 

schedule slip into fiscal year 2012 more likely. Therefore, the recommendation removes 161 missiles and $172,358,000 from Weapons Procurement, Navy, and 218 missiles and $262,242,000 from 

Missile Procurement, Air Force. The Committee finds that the combination of the delayed fiscal year 2011 contract and the lag in production allows the requested fiscal year 2012 funding to be used for 

higher priorities. 

JOINT STRIKE FIGHTER

The Committee remains committed to the success of the F–35 

Joint Strike Fighter (JSF) program. The recommendation provides 

funding for the procurement of 32 JSF aircraft, the same as the 

President’s request. Additionally, with the exception of $75,748,000 

for the premature development of the Block IV mission system software, the recommendation provides funding at the requested level 

for the continuation of the development effort for the aircraft. 

The Committee understands the importance of this program to 

the future of the Nation’s tactical aircraft inventory and our future 

national security. The F–35 will provide the United States and our 

allies the advanced sensor, precision strike, firepower, and stealth 

capabilities that are required well into the future. 

The F–35B variant, which will be flown by the Marine Corps, has 

shown a very positive trend in flight testing thus far in fiscal year 

2011 relative to its accomplishments in fiscal year 2010. Accordingly, the Committee encourages the Secretary of Defense to continue to closely monitor the progress of the F–35B test program 

and increase the production of the F–35B variant if the positive 

trend continues. 

The Committee will continue to provide strong support and oversight for the JSF program and is committed to working with the 

Secretary of Defense to ensure the success of this program. 

NATIONAL GUARD AVIATION

The Committee is concerned that the Department of Defense has 

failed to adequately consider the role of the National Guard in its 

long term plans for the procurement and stationing of both fixedwing and rotary-wing aviation assets. The Committee is aware that 

a combination of factors, including delays in the Joint Strike Fighter program, aircraft retirements, base realignment and closure acVerDate Mar 15 2010 05:13 Jun 17, 2011 Jkt 066874 PO 00000 Frm 00119 Fmt 6601 Sfmt 6601 E:\HR\OC\HR110.XXX HR110

tjames on DSKG8SOYB1PROD with REPORTS
110 

tions, individual aircraft reassignments, and decisions such as the 

truncation of C–27 Joint Cargo Aircraft acquisition, render uncertain the futures of various Guard aviation units and call into question the commitment of the Department and the Services to ensure 

that National Guard aviation remains an integral component of the 

national security and homeland defense strategies. The Committee 

therefore directs the Secretary of Defense, in coordination with the 

Secretaries of the Army and Air Force and the Chief of the National Guard Bureau, to submit not later than 180 days after enactment of this Act a report regarding the Department’s future 

plans for National Guard aviation. This report shall include, but 

not be limited to, the present laydown of Guard aviation assets and 

units, projected retirement or divestiture dates for aircraft assigned 

to Guard units, projected delivery and initial operational capability 

dates for new aircraft that will be assigned to Guard units, and the 

identification of unique or preponderant aviation skill sets and mission capabilities within the Guard. 

COMMON DATA LINK

Common Data Link (CDL) is the multi-service program to define 

and upgrade the Department of Defense standard for line of sight 

wideband data links used by all intelligence, surveillance, and reconnaissance platforms. CDL provides the largest bandwidth data 

link within the Department and is a critical enabler for the dissemination of signals, imagery, and measurements and signatures 

intelligence. The Committee is concerned that proprietary terminal 

control interfaces are inhibiting competition in CDL procurement, 

with potential loss in cost savings and foregone capability. The 

Committee urges the Department to utilize all available means of 

preserving options for competitive sourcing of CDL systems and to 

communicate the need for such competition to the system program 

offices responsible for CDL procurement. 

SPECIAL INTEREST ITEMS

Items for which additional funds have been provided as shown in 

the project level tables or in paragraphs using the phrase ‘‘only for’’ 

or ‘‘only to’’ in this report are congressional special interest items 

for the purpose of the Base for Reprogramming (DD Form 1414). 

Each of these items must be carried on the DD Form 1414 at the 

stated amount specifically addressed in the committee report. 

These items remain special interest items whether or not they are 

repeated in a subsequent conference report. 

REPROGRAMMING GUIDANCE FOR ACQUISITION ACCOUNTS

It is the intent of the Congress that the program baseline for reprogramming funds reflects all approved adjustment actions: the 

initial appropriation as well as any rescissions, supplemental appropriations, and approved Department of Defense Form 1415 

reprogrammings. The Secretary of Defense is directed to ensure 

that financial management regulations incorporate approved reprogramming actions as an adjustment to the base for reprogramming value. 


tjames on DSKG8SOYB1PROD with REPORTS
111 

The Committee directs the Department of Defense to continue to 

follow the reprogramming guidance specified in the report accompanying the House version of the fiscal year 2006 Department of 

Defense Appropriations Act (H.R. 109–119). Specifically, the dollar 

threshold for reprogramming funds will remain at $20,000,000 for 

procurement and $10,000,000 for research, development, test and 

evaluation. The Department shall continue to follow the limitation 

that prior approval reprogrammings are set at either the specified 

dollar threshold or twenty percent of the procurement or research, 

development, test and evaluation line, whichever is less. The percentage change limitation applies to both program increases and 

decreases. Additionally, this percentage change applies to the program base value at the time the below threshold movement of 

funds is executed. These thresholds are cumulative from the base 

for reprogramming value as modified by any adjustment action. 

Therefore, if the combined value of transfers into or out of a procurement (P–1) or research, development, test and evaluation (R– 

1) line exceeds the identified threshold, the Department of Defense 

must submit a prior approval reprogramming to the congressional 

defense committees. In addition, guidelines on the application of 

prior approval reprogramming procedures for congressional special 

interest items are established elsewhere in this report. 

REPROGRAMMING REPORTING REQUIREMENTS

The Committee directs the Under Secretary of Defense (Comptroller) to continue to provide the congressional defense committees 

quarterly, spreadsheet-based DD Form 1416 reports for Service 

and defense-wide accounts in titles III and IV of this Act as required in the statement of the managers accompanying the Department of Defense Appropriations Act, 2006. 

FUNDING INCREASES

The Committee directs that the funding increases outlined in 

these tables shall be provided only for the specific purposes indicated in the tables. 

CLASSIFIED ANNEX

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

AIRCRAFT PROCUREMENT, ARMY 

Fiscal year 2011 appropriation .......................................................... $5,254,791,000 

Fiscal year 2012 budget request ....................................................... 7,061,381,000 

Committee recommendation .............................................................. 6,487,481,000 

Change from budget request ............................................................. ¥573,900,000 

This appropriation finances acquisition of tactical and utility airplanes and helicopters, including associated electronics, electronic 

warfare equipment for in-service aircraft, ground support equipment, components and parts such as spare engines, transmission 

gear boxes, and sensor equipment. It also funds related training devices such as combat flight simulators and production base support. 

The total amount recommended in the bill will provide the following program in fiscal year 2012: 


tjames on DSKG8SOYB1PROD with REPORTS
112 


tjames on DSKG8SOYB1PROD with REPORTSInsert offset folio 60 here 66365A.060
113 


tjames on DSKG8SOYB1PROD with REPORTSInsert offset folio 61 here 66365A.061
114 


tjames on DSKG8SOYB1PROD with REPORTSInsert offset folio 62 here 66365A.062
115 

ENHANCED MEDIUM ALTITUDE RECONNAISSANCE AND SURVEILLANCE

SYSTEM

The budget request includes $539,574,000 for the procurement of 

18 Enhanced Medium Altitude Reconnaissance and Surveillance 

Systems. However, the Committee is aware of delays in this program that have resulted in a planned Milestone C decision and 

Low Rate Initial Production award very late in the fourth quarter 

of fiscal year 2012. The Committee understands that the press of 

events needed to be completed in advance of a Milestone C Low 

Rate Initial Production decision could very likely slip the contract 

award to fiscal year 2013. The Committee supports this surveillance and reconnaissance program and the capability that it brings 

to the operating forces to detect, locate, identify, and track surface 

targets in day or night and in most weather; however, due to the 

significant schedule slip the Committee recommends funding of 

$15,674,000 for the Enhanced Medium Altitude Reconnaissance 

and Surveillance System. The recommendation is a reduction of 

$523,900,000 below the request. 

MISSILE PROCUREMENT, ARMY 

Fiscal year 2011 appropriation .......................................................... $1,570,108,000 

Fiscal year 2012 budget request ....................................................... 1,478,718,000 

Committee recommendation .............................................................. 1,464,223,000 

Change from budget request ............................................................. ¥14,495,000 

This appropriation finances the acquisition of surface-to-air, surface-to-surface, air-to-surface, and anti-tank/assault missile systems. Also included are major components, modifications, targets, 

test equipment, and production base support. 

The total amount recommended in the bill will provide the following program in fiscal year 2012: 


tjames on DSKG8SOYB1PROD with REPORTS
116 


tjames on DSKG8SOYB1PROD with REPORTSInsert offset folio 63 here 66365A.063
117 


tjames on DSKG8SOYB1PROD with REPORTSInsert offset folio 64 here 66365A.064
118 

PROCUREMENT OF WEAPONS AND TRACKED COMBAT 

VEHICLES, ARMY 

Fiscal year 2011 appropriation .......................................................... $1,461,086,000 

Fiscal year 2012 budget request ....................................................... 1,933,512,000 

Committee recommendation .............................................................. 2,178,886,000 

Change from budget request ............................................................. 245,374,000 

This appropriation finances the acquisition of tanks, personnel 

and cargo carriers, fighting vehicles, tracked recovery vehicles, selfpropelled and towed howitzers, machine guns, mortars, modification of in-service equipment, initial spares, and production base 

support. 

The total amount recommended in the bill will provide the following program in fiscal year 2012: 


tjames on DSKG8SOYB1PROD with REPORTS
119 


tjames on DSKG8SOYB1PROD with REPORTSInsert offset folio 65 here 66365A.065
120 


tjames on DSKG8SOYB1PROD with REPORTSInsert offset folio 66 here 66365A.066
121 


tjames on DSKG8SOYB1PROD with REPORTSInsert offset folio 67 here 66365A.067
122 

M1 TANK

The Committee is aware that the Army has been producing two 

variants of the M1 Abrams Tank. The production of M1A1SA (Situational Awareness) Tanks is scheduled to end in July 2011. M1A2 

SEP (System Enhancement Package) production ends in June 

2013. At that point in time, the Army would have 17 active component Brigade Combat Teams with M1A2 SEP Tanks and Bradley 

A3 Infantry Fighting Vehicles. All but one Army National Guard 

brigade would continue with M1A1SA Tanks and M2 ODS (Operation Desert Storm) SA Bradleys. The Army would have 1,547 

M1A2SEP Tanks in active component units plus one Army National Guard brigade, and 791 M1A1 Tanks, all in Army National 

Guard units. The production lines would be shut down and the 

workforce would disperse and relocate. 

From that time, the Army would not have access to a warm tank 

assembly line. The capability to respond quickly to unexpected requirements would be limited. The process for the Army and contractors to hire the necessary workers that are skilled in the production of heavy armored equipment would be arduous. Additional 

challenges would arise in re-establishing the supply chain that 

would provide parts and components. 

The Committee understands that the Army intends to restart a 

tank line in 2016, in order to again modernize the tank fleet. The 

Committee recognizes that the Army is comparing the costs and 

benefits of keeping the tank line in operation at a minimum sustaining rate versus the costs of shutting down the production facility, performing sustaining maintenance, and restarting the line in 

order to produce a new tank beginning in approximately three 

years. 

The Committee is aware that the Army and the prime contractor 

differ significantly in their estimates of the costs to shut down and 

restart the tank line. Estimates also vary regarding the minimum 

production rate that would be needed for the continued production 

of tanks to be less costly than shut down. The Committee understands that the Army and the prime contractor are reviewing their 

cost estimates in order to make an informed decision. 

The Committee believes that in addition to the analysis of production costs, the Army must consider the benefit of equipping the 

tank units of both the active duty Army units and Army National 

Guard units with the same, most capable tank. Recent deployment 

requirements for National Guard units have shown that in the 

force generation and rotation process, there may be very little time 

to issue new equipment and train on individual and collective 

skills. The M1A1SA is a very good tank. The M1A2SEP is a better 

tank. Some key upgrades in the M1A2SEP are: a Commander’s 

Independent Thermal Viewer, crew and equipment cooling, digital 

technology, Integrated Battle Command System, and improved 

armor. The Committee notes that the Army has in recent years 

worked to reshape Army units into modular organizations which 

could be reassigned quickly based on the needs of commanders in 

the area of combat operations. Having all tank units operating the 

same tank would facilitate the organization of units for combat. 

Training, logistics, and communications would be improved. 


tjames on DSKG8SOYB1PROD with REPORTS
123 

The Committee is aware that the Army is evaluating alternative 

courses of action to determine the optimal course of action in order 

to receive the best value in return for spending a significant 

amount of appropriated funds. The Committee understands that 

the issue is complex and worthy of a detailed analysis. Accordingly, 

the Committee recommends additional funding in the amount of 

$272,000,000 for the continued procurement of M1A2SEP Tanks in 

fiscal year 2012. 

The Committee directs the Secretary of the Army to provide a report on the Army’s plan for the additional funds to include the distribution plan for the additional tanks that will be procured and 

the plan for sustainment of the tank production line going forward. 

The report should be submitted to the congressional defense committees not later than 60 days after enactment of this Act. 

PROCUREMENT OF AMMUNITION, ARMY 

Fiscal year 2011 appropriation .......................................................... $1,847,066,000 

Fiscal year 2012 budget request ....................................................... 1,992,625,000 

Committee recommendation .............................................................. 1,952,625,000 

Change from budget request ............................................................. ¥40,000,000 

This appropriation finances the acquisition of ammunition, modification of in-service stock, and related production base support including the maintenance, expansion, and modernization of industrial facilities and equipment. 

The total amount recommended in the bill will provide the following program in fiscal year 2012: 


tjames on DSKG8SOYB1PROD with REPORTS
124 


tjames on DSKG8SOYB1PROD with REPORTSInsert offset folio 68 here 66365A.068
125 


tjames on DSKG8SOYB1PROD with REPORTSInsert offset folio 69 here 66365A.069
126 


tjames on DSKG8SOYB1PROD with REPORTSInsert offset folio 70 here 66365A.070
127 

OTHER PROCUREMENT, ARMY 

Fiscal year 2011 appropriation .......................................................... $8,145,665,000 

Fiscal year 2012 budget request ....................................................... 9,682,592,000 

Committee recommendation .............................................................. 9,371,952,000 

Change from budget request ............................................................. ¥310,640,000 

This appropriation finances the acquisition of tactical and commercial vehicles, including trucks, semi-trailers, and trailers of all 

types to provide mobility and utility support to field forces and the 

worldwide logistical system; communications and electronic equipment of all types to provide fixed, semi-fixed, and mobile strategic 

and tactical communications; and other support equipment, generators and power units, material handling equipment, medical support equipment, special equipment for user testing, and non-system 

training devices. In each of these activities, funds are also included 

for the modification of in-service equipment, investment spares and 

repair parts, and production base support. 

The total program recommended in the bill will provide the following in fiscal year 2012: 


tjames on DSKG8SOYB1PROD with REPORTS
128 


tjames on DSKG8SOYB1PROD with REPORTSInsert offset folio 71 here 66365A.071
129 


tjames on DSKG8SOYB1PROD with REPORTSInsert offset folio 72 here 66365A.072
130 


tjames on DSKG8SOYB1PROD with REPORTSInsert offset folio 73 here 66365A.073
131 


tjames on DSKG8SOYB1PROD with REPORTSInsert offset folio 74 here 66365A.074
132 


tjames on DSKG8SOYB1PROD with REPORTSInsert offset folio 75 here 66365A.075
133 


tjames on DSKG8SOYB1PROD with REPORTSInsert offset folio 76 here 66365A.076
134 


tjames on DSKG8SOYB1PROD with REPORTSInsert offset folio 77 here 66365A.077
135 


tjames on DSKG8SOYB1PROD with REPORTSInsert offset folio 78 here 66365A.078
136 

AIRCRAFT PROCUREMENT, NAVY 

Fiscal year 2011 appropriation .......................................................... $16,170,868,000 

Fiscal year 2012 budget request ....................................................... 18,587,033,000 

Committee recommendation .............................................................. 17,804,750,000 

Change from budget request ............................................................. ¥782,283,000 

This appropriation provides funds for the procurement of aircraft 

and related support equipment and programs; flight simulators; 

equipment to modify in-service aircraft to extend their service life, 

eliminate safety hazards and improve aircraft operational effectiveness; and spare parts and ground support equipment for all end 

items procured by this appropriation. 

The total program recommended in this bill will provide the following in fiscal year 2012: 


tjames on DSKG8SOYB1PROD with REPORTS
137 


tjames on DSKG8SOYB1PROD with REPORTSInsert offset folio 79 here 66365A.079
138 


tjames on DSKG8SOYB1PROD with REPORTSInsert offset folio 80 here 66365A.080
139 


tjames on DSKG8SOYB1PROD with REPORTSInsert offset folio 81 here 66365A.081
140 


tjames on DSKG8SOYB1PROD with REPORTSInsert offset folio 82 here 66365A.082
141 


tjames on DSKG8SOYB1PROD with REPORTSInsert offset folio 83 here 66365A.083
142 


tjames on DSKG8SOYB1PROD with REPORTSInsert offset folio 84 here 66365A.084
143 

V–22 OSPREY

Fiscal year 2012 marks the final year of the successful V–22 

multiyear procurement effort conducted by the Navy and Air Force. 

Multiyear procurements are advantageous in that they provide savings and program stability to platforms when compared to annual 

procurements. The drawback is that they reduce available budgetary flexibility. The Committee believes that if a platform meets 

the established criteria for a multiyear procurement and there is 

a high probability that the platform will be purchased for the period of the multiyear procurement, a multiyear procurement provides the best value for the taxpayer. The Committee believes that 

the performance of the V–22 Osprey aircraft has laid to rest all 

doubts about its operational effectiveness. The aircraft has been 

successfully deployed to forward operating areas since 2007 and 

most recently was instrumental in the recovery of a downed Air 

Force pilot during the Libya conflict. In view of the continuing need 

for sustained procurement of the V–22, the Committee urges the 

Department of Defense to consider a request for authority for a 

new multiyear procurement contract in the fiscal year 2013 budget. 

FIRESCOUT

The vision for the MQ–8B Firescout vertical take-off and landing 

unmanned aerial vehicle (UAV) is to provide intelligence, surveillance, and reconnaissance data to tactical users. The original primary mission of the Firescout was to be an air asset for the Littoral Combat Ship (LCS). The Navy chose this platform for the 

LCS largely to take advantage of possible synergies with the 

Army’s Future Combat Systems (FCS) program, despite the aircraft’s relatively short range. After Firescout was chosen as the 

UAV for the LCS, the Army terminated the UAV portion of the 

FCS, thus negating any possible synergies (as well as cost efficiencies) between the two Services. Since that time, the Navy has 

taken delivery of fourteen aircraft, placed another twelve aircraft 

under contract, and is in negotiations for yet another three aircraft. 

Ironically, included in this total are eight aircraft originally purchased for the Army as part of the FCS program. All told, the Navy 

possesses (or will possess) 29 Firescout aircraft. Although the Navy 

is actively searching for other roles and missions for this program, 

its primary mission remains as an asset for the LCS program, 

which has delivered a total of two ships and has another six under 

contract. Because of the relatively short range of the MQ–8B and 

the desired expansion of its roles and missions, the Navy is considering the procurement of an extended range maritime unmanned 

aerial vehicle and is also requesting funding to develop a medium 

range maritime unmanned aerial system that is projected to become operational later this decade. 

The Committee supports the Navy’s plan to move to a longer 

range maritime unmanned aerial vehicle, and the recommendation 

fully funds the Navy’s request for development funding for this effort. Additionally, the Committee believes the current and projected 

inventory of MQ–8B Firescout vehicles is sufficient to meet the 

near term Navy requirements for the LCS and any additional near 

term roles and missions that may be generated by the Navy until 


tjames on DSKG8SOYB1PROD with REPORTS
144 

the longer range variant is available. Therefore, the recommendation provides $76,516,000 for the Firescout procurement program, 

a reduction of $115,470,000 and twelve aircraft. 

WEAPONS PROCUREMENT, NAVY 

Fiscal year 2011 appropriation .......................................................... $3,221,957,000 

Fiscal year 2012 budget request ....................................................... 3,408,478,000 

Committee recommendation .............................................................. 2,975,749,000 

Change from budget request ............................................................. ¥432,729,000 

This appropriation provides funds for the procurement of strategic and tactical missiles, target drones, torpedoes, guns, associated support equipment, and modification of in-service missiles, 

torpedoes, and guns. 

The total amount recommended in the bill will provide the following program in fiscal year 2012: 


tjames on DSKG8SOYB1PROD with REPORTS
145 


tjames on DSKG8SOYB1PROD with REPORTSInsert offset folio 85 here 66365A.085
146 


tjames on DSKG8SOYB1PROD with REPORTSInsert offset folio 86 here 66365A.086
147 


tjames on DSKG8SOYB1PROD with REPORTSInsert offset folio 87 here 66365A.087
148 

PROCUREMENT OF AMMUNITION, NAVY AND MARINE 

CORPS 

Fiscal year 2011 appropriation .......................................................... $790,527,000 

Fiscal year 2012 budget request ....................................................... 719,952,000 

Committee recommendation .............................................................. 633,048,000 

Change from budget request ............................................................. ¥86,904,000 

This appropriation finances the acquisition of ammunition, ammunition modernization, and ammunition-related material for the 

Navy and Marine Corps. 

The total program recommended in the bill will provide the following in fiscal year 2012: 


tjames on DSKG8SOYB1PROD with REPORTS
149 


tjames on DSKG8SOYB1PROD with REPORTSInsert offset folio 88 here 66365A.088
150 


tjames on DSKG8SOYB1PROD with REPORTSInsert offset folio 89 here 66365A.089
151 


tjames on DSKG8SOYB1PROD with REPORTSInsert offset folio 90 here 66365A.090
152 

SHIPBUILDING AND CONVERSION, NAVY 

Fiscal year 2011 appropriation .......................................................... $15,366,658,000 

Fiscal year 2012 budget request ....................................................... 14,928,921,000 

Committee recommendation .............................................................. 14,725,493,000 

Change from budget request ............................................................. ¥203,428,000 

This appropriation provides funds for the construction of new 

ships and the purchase and conversion of existing ships, including 

hull, mechanical and electrical equipment, electronics, guns, torpedo and missile launching systems, and communication systems. 

The total program recommended in the bill will provide the following in fiscal year 2012: 


tjames on DSKG8SOYB1PROD with REPORTS
153 


tjames on DSKG8SOYB1PROD with REPORTSInsert offset folio 91 here 66365A.091
154 


tjames on DSKG8SOYB1PROD with REPORTSInsert offset folio 92 here 66365A.092
155 

LITTORAL COMBAT SHIP

The Navy has requested funding in the fiscal year 2012 budget 

for the construction of four Littoral Combat Ships. The Navy recently negotiated a five-year 20 ship contract with industry for this 

platform. The contract achieved extremely attractive pricing for the 

Navy and demonstrated the positive effect that competition can 

have on contract negotiations. Following the award of the contract, 

the Navy adjusted the Littoral Combat Ship budget to account for 

the new pricing that will be achieved on the program. However, the 

fiscal year 2012 request contains funding that is in excess to what 

is required for ship construction. Therefore, the recommendation 

reduces the request by $47,000,000 to properly price the Littoral 

Combat Ship construction program. 

SHIPBUILDING OVERSIGHT

The Committee understands that a number of issues related to 

quality have recently been identified on Navy ships. Most recently, 

a failed weld joint caused structural damage to a mast mounted antenna on an Arleigh Burke-class destroyer. Incorrect installation of 

key subsystems on several Virginia-class submarines required corrections to avoid jeopardizing the mission performance of the submarines. Faulty welds were identified on a number of ship classes, 

including at least four aircraft carriers. Additionally, several issues 

have arisen regarding the LPD–17 class of amphibious transport 

dock ships. These issues were severe enough to cause the USS San 

Antonio to miss a scheduled deployment. 

The Committee directs the Comptroller General to review the 

Navy’s process for quality assurance in shipbuilding. This review 

should identify the extent to which quality assurance processes 

identified known quality problems, including an examination of 

what analyses the Navy has performed and what actions have been 

taken to address identified problems. The review should also examine the extent to which the American Bureau of Shipbuilding plays 

a role in quality assurance in Navy shipbuilding and how this role 

complements or duplicates reviews conducted by Navy Supervisor 

of Shipbuilding and Conversion personnel. As part of this analysis, 

a comparison should be made between the Navy, commercial shipbuilders, and commercial ship buyers’ approaches to quality assurance. The results of this review should be provided to the congressional defense committees not later than 180 days after enactment 

of this Act. 

OTHER PROCUREMENT, NAVY 

Fiscal year 2011 appropriation .......................................................... $5,804,963,000 

Fiscal year 2012 budget request ....................................................... 6,285,451,000 

Committee recommendation .............................................................. 5,996,459,000 

Change from budget request ............................................................. ¥288,992,000 

This appropriation provides funds for the procurement of major 

equipment and weapons other than ships, aircraft, missiles, and 

torpedoes. Such equipment ranges from the latest electronic sensors for updates of naval forces, to trucks, training equipment, and 

spare parts. 


tjames on DSKG8SOYB1PROD with REPORTS
156 

The total program recommended in the bill will provide the following in fiscal year 2012: 


tjames on DSKG8SOYB1PROD with REPORTS
157 


tjames on DSKG8SOYB1PROD with REPORTSInsert offset folio 093 here 66365A.093
158 


tjames on DSKG8SOYB1PROD with REPORTSInsert offset folio 094 here 66365A.094
159 


tjames on DSKG8SOYB1PROD with REPORTSInsert offset folio 095 here 66365A.095
160 


tjames on DSKG8SOYB1PROD with REPORTSInsert offset folio 096 here 66365A.096
161 


tjames on DSKG8SOYB1PROD with REPORTSInsert offset folio 097 here 66365A.097
162 


tjames on DSKG8SOYB1PROD with REPORTSInsert offset folio 098 here 66365A.098
163 


tjames on DSKG8SOYB1PROD with REPORTSInsert offset folio 099 here 66365A.099
164 


tjames on DSKG8SOYB1PROD with REPORTSInsert offset folio 100 here 66365A.100
165 


tjames on DSKG8SOYB1PROD with REPORTSInsert offset folio 101 here 66365A.101
166 


tjames on DSKG8SOYB1PROD with REPORTSInsert offset folio 102 here 66365A.102
167 

PROCUREMENT, MARINE CORPS 

Fiscal year 2011 appropriation .......................................................... $1,236,436,000 

Fiscal year 2012 budget request ....................................................... 1,391,602,000 

Committee recommendation .............................................................. 1,453,602,000 

Change from budget request ............................................................. 62,000,000 

This appropriation provides funds for the procurement, production, and modification of equipment, supplies, materials, and spare 

parts. 

The total program recommended in the bill will provide the following in fiscal year 2012: 


tjames on DSKG8SOYB1PROD with REPORTS
168 


tjames on DSKG8SOYB1PROD with REPORTSInsert offset folio 103 here 66365A.103
169 


tjames on DSKG8SOYB1PROD with REPORTSInsert offset folio 104 here 66365A.104
170 


tjames on DSKG8SOYB1PROD with REPORTSInsert offset folio 105 here 66365A.105
171 


tjames on DSKG8SOYB1PROD with REPORTSInsert offset folio 106 here 66365A.106
172 


tjames on DSKG8SOYB1PROD with REPORTSInsert offset folio 107 here 66365A.107
173 

AIRCRAFT PROCUREMENT, AIR FORCE 

Fiscal year 2011 appropriation .......................................................... $13,483,739,000 

Fiscal year 2012 budget request ....................................................... 14,082,527,000 

Committee recommendation .............................................................. 13,987,613,000 

Change from budget request ............................................................. ¥94,914,000 

This appropriation provides for the procurement of aircraft, and 

for modification of in-service aircraft to improve safety and enhance 

operational effectiveness. It also provides for initial spares and 

other support equipment to include aerospace ground equipment 

and industrial facilities. In addition, funds are provided for the procurement of flight training simulators to increase combat readiness 

and to provide for more economical training. 

The total program recommended in the bill will provide the following in fiscal year 2012: 


tjames on DSKG8SOYB1PROD with REPORTS
174 


tjames on DSKG8SOYB1PROD with REPORTSInsert offset folio 108 here 66365A.108
175 


tjames on DSKG8SOYB1PROD with REPORTSInsert offset folio 109 here 66365A.109
176 


tjames on DSKG8SOYB1PROD with REPORTSInsert offset folio 110 here 66365A.110
177 


tjames on DSKG8SOYB1PROD with REPORTSInsert offset folio 111 here 66365A.111
178 


tjames on DSKG8SOYB1PROD with REPORTSInsert offset folio 112 here 66365A.112
179 


tjames on DSKG8SOYB1PROD with REPORTSInsert offset folio 113 here 66365A.113
180 

MQ–9 REAPER UNMANNED AERIAL VEHICLE

The Air Force requested $813,092,000 for the procurement of 48 

MQ–9 Reaper unmanned aerial vehicles and associated equipment 

and $181,302,000 for MQ–9 modifications, in furtherance of the 

Secretary of Defense’s goal to achieve 65 MQ-class combat air patrols (CAP) in theater by the end of fiscal year 2013. The Committee’s recommendation supports the request with the following adjustments. First, the Air Force’s funding request assumed a transition to the Block 5 configuration with a high-definition upgrade 

and increased power generation. The Committee finds that Block 

5 initial operational testing and evaluation will be delayed from fiscal year 2013 to 2014, with a resultant slip in the full rate production decision. Given the present stage of Block 5 development and 

the fact that Block 1 aircraft will satisfy the Secretary of Defense’s 

CAP goal, the Committee has adjusted the request by $84,600,000 

to the Block 1 estimated pricing. Second, the Committee has reduced funding by $29,480,000 for procurement of ASIP–2C sensors, 

due to an unrealistically compressed and concurrent schedule that 

envisions proceeding from a Milestone B decision (delayed from fiscal year 2011) through a Milestone C and Low Rate Initial Production decision within fiscal year 2012, even as flight testing continues into fiscal year 2013. Third, the Committee has eliminated 

$31,558,000 for Block 5 field modification funds from the MQ–9 

modifications line as early to need. These adjustments will allow 

Block 5 development to proceed while ensuring that the CAP objective is met to support operations in theater. 

INITIAL SPARES AND REPAIR PARTS

The Committee notes the Air Force’s slow execution of funds for 

initial spares and repair parts. Recent information indicates that 

the present obligation rate for fiscal year 2010 funds is below sixty 

percent, even though the current fiscal year 2010 funding level of 

approximately $413,000,000 is far below the fiscal year 2012 request of $1,030,364,000, indicating that a substantial portion of 

this program is being funded ahead of need. The Committee’s recommendation therefore reduces the funding for initial spares and 

repair parts by approximately ten percent, or $103,000,000, to account for this low execution rate. The Committee directs the Air 

Force to apply this reduction as necessary to individual systems. 

MISSILE PROCUREMENT, AIR FORCE 

Fiscal year 2011 appropriation .......................................................... $5,424,764,000 

Fiscal year 2012 budget request ....................................................... 6,074,017,000 

Committee recommendation .............................................................. 5,689,998,000 

Change from budget request ............................................................. ¥384,019,000 

This appropriation provides for procurement, installation, and 

checkout of strategic ballistic and other missiles, modification of inservice missiles, and initial spares for missile systems. It also provides for operational space systems, boosters, payloads, drones, associated ground equipment, non-recurring maintenance of industrial facilities, machine tool modernization, and special program 

support. 


tjames on DSKG8SOYB1PROD with REPORTS
181 

The total program recommended in the bill will provide the following in fiscal year 2012: 


tjames on DSKG8SOYB1PROD with REPORTS
182 


tjames on DSKG8SOYB1PROD with REPORTSInsert offset folio 114 here 66365A.114
183 


tjames on DSKG8SOYB1PROD with REPORTSInsert offset folio 115 here 66365A.115
184 


tjames on DSKG8SOYB1PROD with REPORTSInsert offset folio 116 here 66365A.116
185 

SPACE ACQUISITION AND THE EVOLUTIONARY ACQUISITION FOR SPACE

EFFICIENCY PROPOSAL

After two decades of troubled space acquisition, the national security space portfolio seems to be emerging from a period of programmatic excuses based on flawed acquisition strategies, poor cost 

estimating, and reliance on immature technologies. A myriad of 

reasons has contributed to the decline of space acquisition, not the 

least of which was the Department of Defense turning over space 

program management to contractors in an effort to reduce cost and 

improve efficiency. The United States has been fortunate that the 

legacy space systems have been robust enough to survive the numerous acquisition delays of the past decade. Additionally, when 

new systems have actually become operational they have, for the 

most part, been successful on orbit despite problems that may have 

occurred in the development phase. 

Over the past decade, various attempts for alternative systems 

have been suggested and in some cases funded. Several of those attempts included the parallel development of alternative systems or 

technologies. These systems were advertised as being less expensive, more capable, and less risky. In each case, these alternative 

systems were terminated due to cost or complexity. The Department believed space acquisition would improve because they wanted it to improve. The development of systems to operate in the 

harsh environment of space is a non-trivial matter and cannot be 

made less complex simply because one wishes it so. Unfortunately, 

the Department once again appears to be headed in this direction. 

Over the past five years, the Congress has urged the Department 

to consider block buys of satellites that were evolved from previous 

designs. This year the request includes a new proposal for space acquisition called the Evolutionary Acquisition for Space Efficiency 

(EASE). The Committee is disappointed that the Executive branch 

developed this concept without input from the Legislative branch. 

This is especially alarming since the entire space acquisition budget assumes the approval of this latest funding scheme. As a proposed course of action, the theory of EASE has merit, but the implementation details are woefully lacking. There are three main 

issues that disturb the Committee: the use of advance appropriations, the lack of detail with regards to the Capabilities/Affordability Insertion Program (CAIP), and the lack of vision for what 

lies beyond the current block buy of Advanced Extremely High Frequency (AEHF) satellites and the Space Based Infrared System 

(SBIRS) satellites. 

The Committee does not approve the acquisition plan using the 

advance appropriations concept. The Committee understands the 

funding dilemma but is disappointed that the Department will not 

dedicate resources to fully fund its space programs, and instead is 

willing to rely on a budgeting gimmick. Further, there is no clear 

definition for the funds associated with the CAIP. The Committee 

is concerned that the concept for evolution of capabilities will be hijacked by the technology enthusiasts within the Department. 

Therefore, none of the funds appropriated to the CAIP are to be obligated until the Secretary of Defense delivers a technology insertion development plan for the technologies to be pursued for evoVerDate Mar 15 2010 05:13 Jun 17, 2011 Jkt 066874 PO 00000 Frm 00195 Fmt 6601 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\HR110.XXX HR110

tjames on DSKG8SOYB1PROD with REPORTS
186 

lution onto future increments of the AEHF protected military satellite communications system and the SBIRS missile warning system. This plan should include information regarding cost, schedule, 

performance, and current technology readiness level details for 

each technology. In addition, the Secretary of Defense is directed 

that any funding appropriated for the CAIP will use the following 

funding structure for the capabilities pursued: No more than three 

percent of the total funding may be used for studies, no more than 

seven percent may be used for parts obsolescence, no more than 

five percent may be used for the development of technology that 

has a technology readiness level less than or equal to three, no 

more than fifteen percent may be used for technology that has a 

technology readiness level between four and six, and the remaining 

seventy percent will be used on technology that has a technology 

readiness level greater than six. The Committee expects that the 

technology being pursued in the CAIP be specific efforts and not 

dedicated to common subsystems (for example, battery enhancements, solar arrays, and micro-electronics). Finally, none of the 

funds appropriated for either the CAIP or the procurement of 

AEHF or SBIRS shall be obligated until the Secretary of Defense 

delivers the 15-year space strategic plan to the congressional defense committees and has received in writing from each of the committees that it has reviewed the plan. 

The Committee fully supports the idea of reinvestment of savings 

accrued from the incremental funding of the AEHF 5/6 satellites 

and the SBIRS 5/6 satellites into the evolution of the next generation of satellite systems. However, the Committee will not support 

a repeat of the acquisition failures and associated problems of the 

last two decades. Therefore, if more than thirty percent of design 

changes are proposed for the follow-on blocks of AEHF and SBIRS 

satellites (exempting parts obsolescence), the Secretary of Defense 

will consider that program a new start program and shall have the 

Director, Office of the Secretary of Defense, Cost Assessment and 

Program Evaluation perform a full cost estimate to include both recurring and non-recurring costs as well as total life-cycle costs. Additionally, a performance assessment and a technology readiness 

assessment that compares the risk of the new alternative program 

to the legacy program shall be accomplished. 

PROCUREMENT OF AMMUNITION, AIR FORCE 

Fiscal year 2011 appropriation .......................................................... $731,487,000 

Fiscal year 2012 budget request ....................................................... 539,065,000 

Committee recommendation .............................................................. 522,565,000 

Change from budget request ............................................................. ¥16,500,000 

This appropriation finances the acquisition of ammunition, modifications, spares, weapons, and other ammunition-related items for 

the Air Force. 

The total program recommended in the bill will provide the following in fiscal year 2012: 


tjames on DSKG8SOYB1PROD with REPORTS
187 


tjames on DSKG8SOYB1PROD with REPORTSInsert offset folio 117 here 66365A.117
188 


tjames on DSKG8SOYB1PROD with REPORTSInsert offset folio 118 here 66365A.118
189 

OTHER PROCUREMENT, AIR FORCE 

Fiscal year 2011 appropriation .......................................................... $17,568,091,000 

Fiscal year 2012 budget request ....................................................... 17,602,036,000 

Committee recommendation .............................................................. 17,260,619,000 

Change from budget request ............................................................. ¥341,417,000 

This appropriation provides for the procurement of weapon systems and equipment other than aircraft and missiles. Included are 

vehicles, electronic and telecommunications systems for command 

and control of operational forces, and ground support equipment for 

weapon systems and supporting structure. 

The total program recommended in the bill will provide the following in fiscal year 2012: 


tjames on DSKG8SOYB1PROD with REPORTS
190 


tjames on DSKG8SOYB1PROD with REPORTSInsert offset folio 119 here 66365A.119
191 


tjames on DSKG8SOYB1PROD with REPORTSInsert offset folio 120 here 66365A.120
192 


tjames on DSKG8SOYB1PROD with REPORTSInsert offset folio 121 here 66365A.121
193 


tjames on DSKG8SOYB1PROD with REPORTSInsert offset folio 122 here 66365A.122
194 

PROCUREMENT, DEFENSE-WIDE 

Fiscal year 2011 appropriation .......................................................... $4,009,321,000 

Fiscal year 2012 budget request ....................................................... 5,365,248,000 

Committee recommendation .............................................................. 5,046,447,000 

Change from budget request ............................................................. ¥318,801,000 

This appropriation provides funds for the procurement, production, and modification of equipment, supplies, materials, and spare 

parts. 

The total program recommended in the bill will provide the following in fiscal year 2012: 


tjames on DSKG8SOYB1PROD with REPORTS
195 


tjames on DSKG8SOYB1PROD with REPORTSInsert offset folio 123 here 66365A.123
196 


tjames on DSKG8SOYB1PROD with REPORTSInsert offset folio 124 here 66365A.124
197 


tjames on DSKG8SOYB1PROD with REPORTSInsert offset folio 125 here 66365A.125
198 


tjames on DSKG8SOYB1PROD with REPORTSInsert offset folio 126 here 66365A.126
199 


tjames on DSKG8SOYB1PROD with REPORTSInsert offset folio 127 here 66365A.127
200 

SPECIAL OPERATIONS COMMAND AVIATION FOREIGN INTERNAL

DEFENSE PROGRAM

The Committee is concerned with the new Aviation Foreign Internal Defense program under the Special Operations Command, 

and recommends reducing the operation and maintenance request 

by $17,607,000 and the procurement request by $79,986,000. Further, the Committee prohibits the Special Operations Command 

from obligating any funds available for fiscal year 2012 until 30 

days after the required report has been submitted to the congressional defense committees. The Committee directs the Commander 

of the Special Operations Command to provide a report not later 

than January 15, 2012 to the congressional defense committees on 

the program, strategies, and goals of the Aviation Foreign Internal 

Defense program. The report shall include an overall description of 

the program including its goals and proposed metrics of performance successes; the results of an analysis of alternatives and efficiencies review conducted prior to fiscal year 2012 with respect to 

a contract awarded for the Aviation Foreign Internal Defense program; an explanation of plans or business case analyses justifying 

new procurements rather than leased platforms, including an explanation of any efficiencies and savings; and a comprehensive 

strategy outlining and justifying the overall projected growth of the 

Aviation Foreign Internal Defense program to satisfy the increased 

requirements of the commanders of the geographic combatant commands. 

DEFENSE PRODUCTION ACT PURCHASES 

Fiscal year 2011 appropriation .......................................................... $34,346,000 

Fiscal year 2012 budget request ....................................................... 19,964,000 

Committee recommendation .............................................................. 29,964,000 

Change from budget request ............................................................. 10,000,000 

The Committee recommendation shall be distributed as follows: 

EXPLANATION OF PROJECT LEVEL ADJUSTMENTS 

[In thousands of dollars] 

Budget Request Committee 

Recommended 

Change from 

Reqest 

Defense Production Act: 

Gallium nitride radar and electronic warfare monolithic 

microwave integrated circuits ........................................... 8,373 8,373 

Gallium nitride advanced electronic warfare monolithic 

microwave integrated circuits ........................................... 2,321 2,321 

Lithium ION (LI ION) battery production for space ............... 770 770 

Cadmium zinc telluride substrate production ....................... 1,900 1,900 

Read out integrated circuit foundry improvement and sustainability .......................................................................... 1,200 1,200 

Space qualified solar cell supply chain ................................ 600 600 

Traveling wave tube amplifiers ............................................. 1,310 1,310 

Complementary metal oxide semiconductor focal plan arrays for visible sensors for star trackers ......................... 1,800 1,800 

Advanced projects .................................................................. 1,690 1,690 

Program increase ................................................................... — 10,000 10,000 

Total, Defense Production Act ...................................... 19,964 29,964 10,000 


tjames on DSKG8SOYB1PROD with REPORTS
201 

RARE EARTH MATERIALS

The Committee recognizes the criticality of rare earth materials 

in numerous advanced weapons systems and equipment and understands the importance of having a domestic supply of these critical 

elements. The Committee urges the Secretary of Defense to rebuild 

a rare earth materials supply chain within the United States that 

includes the production of rare earth minerals, oxides, metals, alloys, and permanent magnets. 


tjames on DSKG8SOYB1PROD with REPORTS

tjames on DSKG8SOYB1PROD with REPORTS
(203) 

TITLE IV 

RESEARCH, DEVELOPMENT, TEST AND EVALUATION 

The fiscal year 2012 Department of Defense Research, Development, Test and Evaluation budget request totals $75,325,082,000. 

The accompanying bill recommends $73,009,469,000. The table 

below summarizes the budget estimate and the Committee’s recommendations. 


tjames on DSKG8SOYB1PROD with REPORTS
204 


tjames on DSKG8SOYB1PROD with REPORTSInsert offset folio 128 here 66365A.128
205 

MEDIUM EXTENDED AIR DEFENSE SYSTEM

The budget request proposes $406,605,000 for the Medium Extended Air Defense System (MEADS) program. The Committee recommends funding of $257,105,000, which represents a reduction of 

$149,500,000. The Committee is aware that MEADS is a tri-national co-development program with Germany and Italy. MEADS 

was designed to provide joint and coalition forces, critical assets, 

and defended area protection against multiple and simultaneous 

attacks by short to medium range ballistic missiles, cruise missiles, 

unmanned aerial vehicles, and tactical air-to-surface missiles. The 

Committee is aware that in February 2011 the Secretary of Defense decided not to procure the MEADS system citing cost, schedule, and execution issues. The Committee understands that efforts 

are ongoing to determine the various program options including 

continued development, unilateral termination, and mutual termination. The Committee supports these efforts. The Committee recommendation is based on the Army implementation of a well organized plan with close cooperation between the tri-national members 

and a spending plan that avoids worst case funding situations. 

HISTORICALLY BLACK COLLEGES AND UNIVERSITIES AND MINORITY

INSTITUTIONS

The Committee is concerned that the planned transfer of the Historically Black Colleges and Universities and Minority Institutions 

(HBCU/MI) program from the Office of the Secretary of Defense to 

the Department of the Army will dramatically diminish the effectiveness and scope of the program. The Committee encourages the 

Secretary of Defense to maintain the HBCU/MI program within the 

Office of the Secretary of Defense in future budget submissions. 

Further, the Secretary of Defense is directed to submit a plan of 

action to the congressional defense committees, not later than 120 

days after enactment of this Act, detailing renewed efforts to 

strengthen and expand defense related research activities with the 

Historically Black Colleges and Universities and Minority Institutions. 

LIGHT TACTICAL WHEELED VEHICLES

The Army began fielding High Mobility Multi-Purpose Wheeled 

Vehicles (HMMWV) in the mid 1980s. The vehicle was a significant 

improvement over the Quarter Ton Truck. The HMMWV featured 

increased ground clearance, greater maneuverability, and more 

load carrying capacity. The Committee is aware that the HMMWV 

fleet was used for base operations support and for rear area support in combat zones. HMMWVs were not armored until the beginning of Operation Iraqi Freedom. As the tactics in Iraq evolved to 

include extensive combat patrolling, often in congested urban 

areas, HMMWVs were employed as patrol vehicles or scout vehicles, and a series of progressively better, heavier armor kits were 

installed on HMMWVs. Generally, the kits were shipped to the 

combat theater and installed there. Eventually, the assembly line 

began to produce armored HMMWVs. These armored patrol vehicles provided greatly improved force protection as compared to 

unarmored HMMWVs. However, the increase in protection afforded 


tjames on DSKG8SOYB1PROD with REPORTS
206 

by the additional armor was limited and the additional weight reduced vehicle performance and displaced critical payloads. 

The Committee notes that the Army operates a fleet of approximately 150,000 HMMWVs. The Marine Corps has 24,000 

HMMWVs. The Navy and Air Force have smaller numbers. Based 

on the expected service life of the vehicles, the Services will continue to operate significant numbers of HMMWVs for at least another 20 years. The Army and Marine Corps perform a maintenance reset on their HMMWVs when the vehicles return from deployment, restoring the HMMWVs to a fully operational capability. 

In addition to post-deployment reset, 46,000 of the Army’s older, 

unarmored HMMWVs have been recapitalized through a program 

of rebuilds, repairs, and upgrades that restored those vehicles to a 

zero hours, zero miles status. The Army continues the recapitalization program with attention focused on the armored HMMWVs. 

Additionally, the Army is researching the feasibility and affordability of modernizing armored HMMWVs to achieve an increased 

level of crew protection, through an effort known as the Competitive Recapitalization program. 

As combat continued in Iraq, the numbers of Soldiers and Marines wounded and maimed by Improvised Explosive Devices 

(IEDs) increased. Based on urgent needs statements from Marine 

Corps and Army commanders in Iraq, a joint program office was 

established to qualify and field armored transports that were larger 

and more survivable than the armored HMMWVs. Designated as 

Mine Resistant Ambush Protected (MRAP) vehicles, nearly 27,000 

have been produced, including over 8,000 MRAP All Terrain Vehicles (MATV). The all terrain variants are designed to provide better 

off-road performance in Afghanistan, while providing excellent survivability and significant ground clearance. The MATVs provide a 

level of armor protection that is approximately equivalent to the 

protection found in the smaller of the original MRAPs, which is a 

significant increase in protection above that of an armored 

HMMWV. The Committee commends the Department for continuing to improve, test, and field survivability enhancements for 

all of the HMMWVs, MRAPs, and MATVs. 

The Committee is aware that in a separate effort, the Army, Marine Corps, and Special Operations Command began a program to 

produce a Joint Light Tactical Vehicle (JLTV) to eventually replace 

the HMMWV. The JLTV has been designed and developed as an 

armored vehicle from the inception of the program. The JLTV is expected to provide MRAP-like armor protection, good off-road maneuverability, and substantial payload capability. 

The Committee notes that the JLTV program is intended to 

begin fielding in 2016. The Committee is aware that while the 

JLTV program continues development, the Services operate thousands of HMMWVs and MRAPs. Any calculation regarding how 

many, when, and at what price the Services would purchase JLTVs 

should consider the worth of the battle-tested vehicles that have 

been bought and paid for and on which the Soldiers and Marines 

have trained and fought. Additionally, the military Services and 

manufacturers continue to improve the survivability of the MRAPs, 

MATVs, and HMMWVs. The Committee understands that 

HMMWVs have been made more survivable, but have grown in 


tjames on DSKG8SOYB1PROD with REPORTS
207 

weight, and efforts continue to make MATVs lighter and more maneuverable while sustaining survivability. The Committee notes 

that the operational niche to be filled by the JLTV appears to be 

shrinking. 

The Committee believes that the Department of Defense should 

continue to develop, test, and field survivability upgrades to the 

HMMWV, MRAP, and MATV fleets to counter the challenges presented by small arms, improvised explosive devices, and other 

weapons. The Committee recommends that the Department of Defense continue to evaluate the roles and requirements of the JLTV 

in the tactical wheeled vehicle fleet, seeking advances in technology 

for armor, propulsion, off-road maneuverability, and other areas, 

until such time as it becomes clear that there is a threat to be 

countered for which the JLTV is better suited than HMMWVs, 

MRAPs, or MATVs, or the current fleets of HMMWVs and MRAPs 

are judged to be not economically repairable. 

The fiscal year 2012 budget request for Research, Development, Test and Evaluation, Army includes $172,093,000 for development 

of the JLTV. The Committee recommendation is $147,093,000, a reduction of $25,000,000. For the Marine Corps, the budget request 

in Research, Development, Test and Evaluation, Navy includes 

$39,954,000 for JLTV development. The Committee recommendation is $14,954,000, a reduction of $25,000,000. 

Additionally, the Committee recommendation includes an increase of $50,000,000 in Research, Development, Test and Evaluation, Army, to support continued development and testing for 

HMMWV survivability enhancements. The Committee is aware 

that significant improvements in survivability appear to be feasible 

by the application of blast venting technology, such as the so-called 

blast chimney. These improvements could lead to a HMMWV with 

survivability equal to or better than the MRAP, weight considerably less than predicted for the JLTV, and at a cost significantly 

less than either. 

The Committee expects that future requests for funding for the 

HMMWV and JLTV programs, and the accompanying budget justification material, will describe the capabilities to be provided by 

the various light tactical vehicles. 

DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE AND SERVICE CYBER ACTIVITIES AND

VIRTUAL MAJOR FORCE PROGRAM

The threat to and from the cyber realm has been well documented; however, the resources being expended against the threat 

have not. In order to better evaluate the planning and resourcing 

for Department of Defense cyber activities, the Committee directs 

the Commander, United States Cyber Command, in coordination 

with the Secretary of Defense and each of the Service Secretaries, 

to provide to the congressional defense committees a report that details the following: the goals of the cyber initiative, including cyberspace operations, computer network operations, information assurance, and full spectrum cyber operations for the Department of Defense and the Services; the organizational structure and responsibilities for each of the participants; the various programs and initiatives in the Department of Defense and the Services that are 

supporting the cyber goals outlined with descriptions of how they 


tjames on DSKG8SOYB1PROD with REPORTS
208 

achieve the goals; and the year-to-year funding over the future 

years defense program, cost to complete, and the schedules for each 

of the various programs and initiatives detailed above. Finally, of 

the funds appropriated for the Information Systems Security Program no more than twenty-five percent shall be obligated until this 

report is delivered to the congressional defense committees and the 

committees have acknowledged in writing to the Department of Defense the receipt of the report. 

The Committee also suggests that the Department establish a 

virtual Major Force Program (MFP) to better coordinate and track 

the budgets related to cyber activities. Further, the Committee believes this virtual MFP will provide greater transparency and clarity to achieve the goals of a more secure cyber realm for the national security apparatus. 

INFORMATION SECURITY

The Committee is concerned that the Department of Defense is 

not doing enough to support secure communication and collaboration among businesses throughout the entire Defense Industrial 

Base that face potential threats to operations and supply chains. 

The Committee understands that a large portion of companies in 

the Defense Industrial Base that lack security clearances are not 

being served by current Department of Defense efforts to provide 

threat information, and this could affect their abilities to deliver to 

the warfighter. The Defense Industrial Base is vulnerable to natural and man-made events that can adversely affect their ability to 

conduct business, develop products, and support the warfighter. 

The Committee is aware of existing, secure, commercial services 

that currently provide the capability to distribute sensitive but unclassified threat information to all companies in the Defense Industrial Base, including companies without security clearances. Therefore, the Committee directs the Secretary of Defense to provide a 

report not later than 60 days after enactment of this Act on the collaboration and sharing of sensitive but unclassified threat information across the entire Defense Industrial Base, including any plans 

to leverage commercially available services that meet federally 

mandated security requirements. 

CORROSION PREVENTION AND CONTROL

The Committee remains concerned that the Department of Defense continues to underfund its corrosion mitigation and prevention requirements. Corrosion can reduce mission readiness by limiting asset availability and can also impact the safety of the Nation’s servicemembers. The Committee believes the Department 

should invest more in corrosion prevention and mitigation projects 

in order to better protect the Nation’s investment in its military assets and to control maintenance and replacement costs of weapon 

systems and infrastructure. This investment requires a better understanding of how to prevent, reduce, and treat corrosion by applying the latest research and best practices to the military. The 

Committee urges the Department to utilize the best available data 

and expertise for researching, understanding, controlling, preventing, predicting, and solving corrosion-related problems to minimize the impact that corrosion has on its platforms and assets. 


tjames on DSKG8SOYB1PROD with REPORTS
209 

This data and expertise should be available to all Services and 

agencies within the Department of Defense. 

INTEGRATED WEAPONS AND ARMAMENT SPECIALTY SITE FOR GUNS

AND AMMUNITION

The Committee is aware that the Base Realignment and Closure 

(BRAC) Act, 2005, directed the realignment and consolidation of 

those guns and ammunition facilities that work in weapons and armaments research, development, and acquisition. The Committee 

understands that the realignment established an Integrated Weapons and Armaments Specialty Site for Guns and Ammunition that 

is a joint center of excellence for guns and ammunition research, 

development, and acquisition. Furthermore, BRAC 2005 directed 

the movement of the Services’ guns and ammunition work to the 

center of excellence in weapons and armaments research, development, and acquisition. This consolidation action regarding guns 

and ammunition research, development, and acquisition activities 

in the Army and Navy promotes jointness and leverages technical 

synergy. The Committee is aware of the complex challenges that 

must be overcome in order to accomplish the realignments, consolidations, and closures that are directed in the BRAC process. However, the Committee expects the Department of Defense to proceed 

aggressively to accomplish the directed realignments, consolidations, and closures. The Committee directs that not later than 90 

days after enactment of this Act, the Secretary of the Army shall 

submit to the congressional defense committees a report on the status of implementing the provisions of the BRAC 2005 law regarding the consolidation of guns and ammunition facilities that work 

in weapons and armament research, development, and acquisition. 

The report shall include the following: staffing requirements and 

status, facilities requirements and status, cross service integration 

achieved, and plans for future integration. Further, the Secretary 

of the Army shall, not fewer than 120 days prior to moving any 

mission from the Integrated Weapons and Armament Specialty Site 

for Guns and Ammunition, notify the congressional defense committees in writing of the details for such a move, and an assessment of the impact of any such move on the Integrated Weapons 

and Armament Specialty Site for Guns and Ammunition. 

TEST FACILITIES

The Committee recognizes the critical importance of state of the 

art research and development testing facilities within the Department of Defense, including hypersonic wind tunnel facilities. The 

Committee encourages the Department to continue the use and 

support of these facilities, including improvements to infrastructure 

and capacity as needed. 

SPECIAL INTEREST ITEMS

Items for which additional funds have been provided as shown in 

the project level tables or in paragraphs using the phrase ‘‘only for’’ 

or ‘‘only to’’ in this report are congressional special interest items 

for the purpose of the Base for Reprogramming (DD Form 1414). 

Each of these items must be carried on the DD Form 1414 at the 


tjames on DSKG8SOYB1PROD with REPORTS
210 

stated amount, specifically addressed in the committee report. 

These items remain special interest items whether or not they are 

repeated in a subsequent conference report. 

REPROGRAMMING GUIDANCE FOR ACQUISITION ACCOUNTS

It is the intent of the Congress that the program baseline for reprogramming funds reflects all approved adjustment actions: the 

initial appropriation as well as any rescissions, supplemental appropriations, and approved Department of Defense Form 1415 

reprogrammings. The Secretary of Defense is directed to ensure 

that financial management regulations incorporate approved reprogramming actions as an adjustment to the base for reprogramming value. 

The Committee directs the Department of Defense to continue to 

follow the reprogramming guidance specified in the report accompanying the House version of the fiscal year 2006 Department of 

Defense Appropriations Act (H.R. 109–119). Specifically, the dollar 

threshold for reprogramming funds will remain at $20,000,000 for 

procurement and $10,000,000 for research, development, test and 

evaluation. The Department shall continue to follow the limitation 

that prior approval reprogrammings are set at either the specified 

dollar threshold or twenty percent of the procurement or research, 

development, test and evaluation line, whichever is less. The percentage change limitation applies to both program increases and 

decreases. Additionally, this percentage change applies to the program base value at the time the below threshold movement of 

funds is executed. These thresholds are cumulative from the base 

for reprogramming value as modified by any adjustment action. 

Therefore, if the combined value of transfers into or out of a procurement (P–1) or research, development, test and evaluation (R– 

1) line exceeds the identified threshold, the Department of Defense 

must submit a prior approval reprogramming to the congressional 

defense committees. In addition, guidelines on the application of 

prior approval reprogramming procedures for congressional special 

interest items are established elsewhere in this report. 

REPROGRAMMING REPORTING REQUIREMENTS

The Committee directs the Under Secretary of Defense (Comptroller) to continue to provide the congressional defense committees 

quarterly, spreadsheet-based DD Form 1416 reports for Service 

and defense-wide accounts in titles III and IV of this Act as required in the statement of the managers accompanying the Department of Defense Appropriations Act, 2006. 

RESEARCH, DEVELOPMENT, TEST AND EVALUATION, ARMY 

Fiscal year 2011 appropriation .......................................................... $9,710,998,000 

Fiscal year 2012 budget request ....................................................... 9,683,980,000 

Committee recommendation .............................................................. 9,381,166,000 

Change from budget request ............................................................. ¥302,814,000 

This appropriation finances the research, development, test and 

evaluation activities of the Department of the Army. The total 

amount recommended in the bill will provide the following program 

in fiscal year 2012: 


tjames on DSKG8SOYB1PROD with REPORTS
211 


tjames on DSKG8SOYB1PROD with REPORTSInsert offset folio 130 here 66365A.129
212 


tjames on DSKG8SOYB1PROD with REPORTSInsert offset folio 131 here 66365A.130
213 


tjames on DSKG8SOYB1PROD with REPORTSInsert offset folio 132 here 66365A.131
214 


tjames on DSKG8SOYB1PROD with REPORTSInsert offset folio 133 here 66365A.132
215 


tjames on DSKG8SOYB1PROD with REPORTSInsert offset folio 134 here 66365A.133
216 


tjames on DSKG8SOYB1PROD with REPORTSInsert offset folio 135 here 66365A.134
217 


tjames on DSKG8SOYB1PROD with REPORTSInsert offset folio 136 here 66365A.135
218 


tjames on DSKG8SOYB1PROD with REPORTSInsert offset folio 137 here 66365A.136
219 


tjames on DSKG8SOYB1PROD with REPORTSInsert offset folio 138 here 66365A.137
220 

GROUND COMBAT VEHICLE

The fiscal year 2012 budget request proposes $884,387,000 for 

the Ground Combat Vehicle program. The Committee is aware that 

uncertainty regarding program requirements caused the Army to 

recall, revise, and reissue the request for proposals. The Committee 

believes that the action taken to recall and reissue the request for 

proposals was prudent and will strengthen the program going forward. The Committee notes that various program activities have 

been delayed by approximately eight months, and it is anticipated 

that contract awards originally planned for the fourth quarter of 

fiscal year 2012 will be delayed into fiscal year 2013. The Committee’s recommendation provides $768,053,000, which is a reduction 

of $116,334,000. The Committee continues its strong support for 

the Ground Combat Vehicle program. 

SUSTAINABLE MANUFACTURING

The Committee encourages acceleration of the development of innovative sustainable manufacturing technologies to enable the 

Army and its industrial suppliers to meet the regulatory and policy 

requirements for energy consumption and avoidance of hazardous 

materials in the manufacture and maintenance of its weapon systems. 

ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY TECHNOLOGY

The Committee is advised that the Army’s Environmental Quality Technology program demonstrates and validates technologies in 

energy, environment, and sustainability, for adoption by users 

across the Department of Defense. Technology must be validated 

before potential users will consider adoption, and the Army must 

carefully manage resources in this and other critical mission areas, 

including implementing sustainability plans for military installations in the continental United States. Such plans must meet the 

requirements established for federal agencies to reduce energy consumption, and address priority Department of Defense energy security challenges and net zero energy/water/waste initiatives. The 

Committee appreciates the aggressive approach the Army has demonstrated in addressing environmental quality matters and encourages the Army to allocate the necessary resources to ensure continued progress. 

HELICOPTER SITUATIONAL AWARENESS

The Committee is aware of the high percentage of Army helicopter combat theater losses that are not related to enemy action. 

Instead, the accidents occur due to loss of situational awareness 

during takeoff and landing or other operations in dusty or brownout conditions near the ground. In the Department of Defense Appropriations Act, 2011, the President’s budget request included 

$39,912,000 for Night Vision Advanced Technology. An additional 

amount of $23,100,000 was provided in fiscal year 2011 in order to 

support advances in technology to assist aircrews with improved 

situational awareness. However, progress remains slow and therefore the Committee’s concerns regarding the loss of aircraft, aircrew members, and passengers are undiminished. The Committee 


tjames on DSKG8SOYB1PROD with REPORTS
221 

recommends full funding for the President’s fiscal year 2012 request of $42,414,000. The Committee strongly encourages the Secretary of the Army to seek advanced technology for improved situational awareness for aircrews through full and open competition. 

M1 ABRAMS TANK ENGINE IMPROVEMENTS

The Committee is aware that the turbine engine that powers the 

M1 Abrams tank today is much the same engine as when the 

Abrams was first fielded thirty years ago. During that same time 

period modifications for survivability and lethality have increased 

the weight of the tank by ten tons, pushing the tank to its limits 

for space, weight and power. The Committee understands that M1 

series tanks are expected to remain the center piece for ground 

combat formations for decades. The Committee understands that 

the Secretary of the Army is committed to improving fuel efficiency 

in Army equipment, including combat vehicles. The Committee recommendation for Research, Development, Test and Evaluation, 

Army, line 163, Combat Vehicle Improvement Programs, is 

$53,307,000, the full amount proposed in the President’s request. 

The Committee strongly encourages the Secretary of the Army to 

pursue improvements to the M1 Abrams tank engine, including improvements for reliability and fuel efficiency, using funds available 

in this line, and by providing additional funding as the Secretary 

may determine to be necessary by the normal reprogramming process. 

RESEARCH, DEVELOPMENT, TEST AND EVALUATION, NAVY 

Fiscal year 2011 appropriation .......................................................... $17,736,303,000 

Fiscal year 2012 budget request ....................................................... 17,956,431,000 

Committee recommendation .............................................................. 17,798,950,000 

Change from budget request ............................................................. ¥157,481,000 

This appropriation provides funds for the research, development, 

test and evaluation activities of the Department of the Navy, which 

includes the Marine Corps. The total amount recommended in the 

bill will provide the following program in fiscal year 2012: 


tjames on DSKG8SOYB1PROD with REPORTS
222 


tjames on DSKG8SOYB1PROD with REPORTSInsert offset folio 139 here 66365A.138
223 


tjames on DSKG8SOYB1PROD with REPORTSInsert offset folio 140 here 66365A.139
224 


tjames on DSKG8SOYB1PROD with REPORTSInsert offset folio 141 here 66365A.140
225 


tjames on DSKG8SOYB1PROD with REPORTSInsert offset folio 142 here 66365A.141
226 


tjames on DSKG8SOYB1PROD with REPORTSInsert offset folio 143 here 66365A.142
227 


tjames on DSKG8SOYB1PROD with REPORTSInsert offset folio 144 here 66365A.143
228 


tjames on DSKG8SOYB1PROD with REPORTSInsert offset folio 145 here 66365A.144
229 


tjames on DSKG8SOYB1PROD with REPORTSInsert offset folio 146 here 66365A.145
230 


tjames on DSKG8SOYB1PROD with REPORTSInsert offset folio 147 here 66365A.146
231 


tjames on DSKG8SOYB1PROD with REPORTSInsert offset folio 148 here 66365A.147
232 

SURFACE COMBATANT TOPSIDE SUPERSTRUCTURE CRACKING

The aluminum superstructures in the Navy’s surface combatant 

ships have experienced cracking, resulting in damage and degraded 

platform readiness. The USS Gravely recently experienced structural damage to a mast mounted antenna due to a failed weld on 

the stub mast foundation while the ship was at sea. The Secretary 

of the Navy is directed to submit a report to the congressional defense committees on the severity and impact of aluminum superstructure cracking not later than March 2, 2012. This report should 

include steps the Navy is taking to prevent or mitigate topside 

structure cracking, the practicality of using composite materials 

that will not fatigue or crack, the estimated cost to pursue the use 

of composite topside structures, the benefits and drawbacks (such 

as weight, cost, strength, etc.) of using composite materials as a replacement for topside structures, and a rough order of magnitude 

schedule the Navy believes is possible to incorporate the use of 

composite materials for topside structures on the majority of the 

surface combatant fleet. 

BONE MARROW REGISTRY

The Committee provides $31,500,000 for the Department of the 

Navy, to be administered by the Bone Marrow Registry, also known 

as and referred to within the Naval Medical Research Center as 

the C.W. Bill Young Marrow Donor Recruitment and Research Program. Funds appropriated for the Bone Marrow Registry shall remain available only for the purposes for which they were appropriated and may only be obligated for the Bone Marrow Registry. 

This Department of Defense donor center has recruited more than 

650,000 Department of Defense volunteers and provides more marrow donors per week than any other donor center in the Nation. 

More than 4,100 servicemembers and other Department volunteers 

from this donor center have provided marrow to save the lives of 

patients. The success of this national and international life-saving 

program for military and civilian patients, which now includes 

more than 9,200,000 potential volunteer donors, is admirable. Further, the agencies involved in contingency planning are encouraged 

to continue to include the Bone Marrow Registry in the development and testing of their contingency plans. The Department of 

Defense Form 1414 Base for Reprogramming Actions (DD Form 

1414) shall show this as a congressional special interest item. The 

Department is further directed to release all funds appropriated for 

this purpose to the Bone Marrow Registry not later than 60 days 

after enactment of this Act. 

CRITICAL ARCHIVED DATA

The Committee understands that the Department of the Navy’s 

critical archived data may not comply with the recommended security controls for federal systems established by the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST). The Committee directs 

the Secretary of the Navy to review the state of the Navy’s critical 

archived data and ensure the data meets the NIST security standards. Further, the Secretary of the Navy is directed to report the 


tjames on DSKG8SOYB1PROD with REPORTS
233 

results of this review to the congressional defense committees not 

later than 180 days after enactment of this Act. 

RESEARCH, DEVELOPMENT, TEST AND EVALUATION, 

AIR FORCE 

Fiscal year 2011 appropriation .......................................................... $26,517,405,000 

Fiscal year 2012 budget request ....................................................... 27,737,701,000 

Committee recommendation .............................................................. 26,313,196,000 

Change from budget request ............................................................. ¥1,424,505,000 

This appropriation finances the research, development, test and 

evaluation activities of the Department of the Air Force. The total 

amount recommended in the bill will provide the following program 

in fiscal year 2012: 


tjames on DSKG8SOYB1PROD with REPORTS
234 


tjames on DSKG8SOYB1PROD with REPORTSInsert offset folio 149 here 66365A.148
235 


tjames on DSKG8SOYB1PROD with REPORTSInsert offset folio 150 here 66365A.149
236 


tjames on DSKG8SOYB1PROD with REPORTSInsert offset folio 151 here 66365A.150
237 


tjames on DSKG8SOYB1PROD with REPORTSInsert offset folio 152 here 66365A.151
238 


tjames on DSKG8SOYB1PROD with REPORTSInsert offset folio 153 here 66365A.152
239 


tjames on DSKG8SOYB1PROD with REPORTSInsert offset folio 154 here 66365A.153
240 


tjames on DSKG8SOYB1PROD with REPORTSInsert offset folio 155 here 66365A.154
241 


tjames on DSKG8SOYB1PROD with REPORTSInsert offset folio 156 here 66365A.155
242 


tjames on DSKG8SOYB1PROD with REPORTSInsert offset folio 157 here 66365A.156
243 

KC–46A CHANGE REPORTING

The award for the Air Force’s KC–46A aerial refueling tanker 

was announced on February 24, 2011. The Committee’s recommendation fully funds the request for this vital program. Air 

Force leadership testified before the Committee that efforts would 

be made to ensure that the new tanker will be delivered within 

cost and on schedule. In order to further this approach, the Committee directs the Secretary of the Air Force to report any authorized contract modifications with a cost greater than or equal to 

$5,000,000 to the congressional defense committees not later than 

30 days following the authorization of such change. 

RAPID ATTACK, IDENTIFICATION, DETECTION, AND REPORTING SYSTEM

The Committee recognizes the current and emerging threats 

from jammers to critical satellite communication systems. The 

Rapid Attack, Identification, Detection, and Reporting System 

(RAIDRS) is an integral part of the counterspace capabilities being 

developed by the Air Force for identification and responding to satellite communication interference. The Committee urges the Department of Defense to continue investment in this capability and 

directs the Secretary of Defense to provide a report to the congressional defense committees not later than 180 days after enactment 

of this Act on the evolutionary upgrades planned for future blocks 

of this capability. 

SMALL AND DISADVANTAGED BUSINESSES

The Committee notes the efforts of the Air Force’s Small and Disadvantaged Business Utilization program to reach out to the small 

and disadvantaged business community and broaden the base of 

available suppliers, increasing government access to innovative solutions and technologies. The Committee encourages the Air Force 

to continue to strengthen its small and disadvantaged business outreach efforts. 

RESEARCH, DEVELOPMENT, TEST AND EVALUATION, 

DEFENSE-WIDE 

Fiscal year 2011 appropriation .......................................................... $20,797,412,000 

Fiscal year 2012 budget request ....................................................... 19,755,678,000 

Committee recommendation .............................................................. 19,324,865,000 

Change from budget request ............................................................. ¥430,813,000 

This appropriation provides funds for the research, development, 

test and evaluation activities of the Department of Defense for defense-wide activities. The total amount recommended in the bill 

will provide the following program in fiscal year 2012: 


tjames on DSKG8SOYB1PROD with REPORTS
244 


tjames on DSKG8SOYB1PROD with REPORTSInsert offset folio 158 here 66365A.157
245 


tjames on DSKG8SOYB1PROD with REPORTSInsert offset folio 159 here 66365A.158
246 


tjames on DSKG8SOYB1PROD with REPORTSInsert offset folio 160 here 66365A.159
247 


tjames on DSKG8SOYB1PROD with REPORTSInsert offset folio 161 here 66365A.160
248 


tjames on DSKG8SOYB1PROD with REPORTSInsert offset folio 162 here 66365A.161
249 


tjames on DSKG8SOYB1PROD with REPORTSInsert offset folio 163 here 66365A.162
250 


tjames on DSKG8SOYB1PROD with REPORTSInsert offset folio 164 here 66365A.163
251 


tjames on DSKG8SOYB1PROD with REPORTSInsert offset folio 165 here 66365A.164
252 


tjames on DSKG8SOYB1PROD with REPORTSInsert offset folio 026 here 66365A.165
253 

DEFENSE ADVANCED RESEARCH PROJECTS AGENCY

The Committee supports the leadership initiatives at the Defense 

Advanced Research Projects Agency (DARPA) to better manage the 

execution of funds. DARPA’s mission is to maintain the technological superiority of the U.S. military and prevent technological 

surprise from harming our national security by sponsoring revolutionary, high-payoff research bridging the gap between fundamental discoveries and their military use. DARPA’s ability to research and develop innovative and generation advancing capabilities for the Department of Defense helps the United States maintain technical superiority. Corporate strategies have greatly improved the efficiency of DARPA’s financial execution and ability to 

obligate funds. The Committee has determined that these efficiencies will result in cost reductions of $100,000,000 in fiscal year 

2012. 

Therefore, the Director of DARPA shall provide to the congressional defense committees, not later than 60 days after enactment 

of this Act, a report detailing by program element and project the 

application of each detailed reduction. 

U.S.-ISRAELI SHORT-RANGE BALLISTIC MISSILE DEFENSE

The fiscal year 2012 budget request includes $106,100,000 for 

United States and Israel cooperative ballistic missile defense programs. The United States is co-managing the development of the 

programs to ensure compatibility with U.S. missile defense systems. The Committee recognizes that the threat to Israel from such 

short-range missiles and rockets continues to increase. Therefore, 

the Committee recommends an additional $129,600,000 to accelerate the development of the Israeli Cooperative Program. 

EMERGING CAPABILITIES TECHNOLOGY DEVELOPMENT

The Committee strongly supports the development of emerging 

capabilities through innovative research and development activities, often involving other agencies outside the Department of Defense. Accordingly, the Committee supports the budget request to 

advance technical capabilities in mutual areas of interest through 

partnerships with other federal departments and agencies. Specifically, the Committee supports the use of funds included in the fiscal year 2012 request to address mid-term irregular warfare needs 

that are aligned with the needs of the interagency partners. 

OPERATIONAL TEST AND EVALUATION, DEFENSE 

Fiscal year 2011 appropriation .......................................................... $194,910,000 

Fiscal year 2012 budget request ....................................................... 191,292,000 

Committee recommendation .............................................................. 191,292,000 

Change from budget request ............................................................. – – 

This appropriation provides funds for the operational test and 

evaluation activities of the Department of the Defense. The total 

amount recommended in the bill will provide the following program 

in fiscal year 2012: 


tjames on DSKG8SOYB1PROD with REPORTS
254 


tjames on DSKG8SOYB1PROD with REPORTSInsert offset folio 167 here 66365A.166
(255) 

TITLE V 

REVOLVING AND MANAGEMENT FUNDS 

DEFENSE WORKING CAPITAL FUNDS 

Fiscal year 2011 appropriation .......................................................... $1,434,536,000 

Fiscal year 2012 budget request ....................................................... 1,575,010,000 

Committee recommendation .............................................................. 1,575,010,000 

Change from budget request ............................................................. – – 

This appropriation finances, through the receipt of funded reimbursable orders, the operation of industrial, commercial, and support-type activities such as depot maintenance, supply operations, 

distribution depots, transportation services, Navy research, finance 

and accounting services, information systems, and telecommunication services. Working capital fund accounts use cost accounting 

and business management techniques to provide managers with information that can be used to monitor, control, and minimize costs 

of operations. 

NATIONAL DEFENSE SEALIFT FUND 

Fiscal year 2011 appropriation .......................................................... $1,474,866,000 

Fiscal year 2012 budget request ....................................................... 1,126,384,000 

Committee recommendation .............................................................. 1,100,519,000 

Change from budget request ............................................................. ¥25,865,000 

This appropriation provides funds for the lease, operation, and 

supply of pre-positioning ships, operation of the Ready Reserve 

Force, and acquisition of ships for the Military Sealift Command, 

the Ready Reserve Force, and the Marine Corps. 

The total amount recommended in the bill will provide the following program in fiscal year 2012: 

EXPLANATION OF PROJECT LEVEL ADJUSTMENTS 

[In thousands of dollars] 

Budget Request Committee 

Recommended 

Change from 

Request 

Strategic Ship Acquisition .............................................................. 450,026 424,161 ¥25,865 

Revised Mobile Landing Platform Acquisition Strategy ........ — ¥25,865 

DoD Mobilization Assets ................................................................. 318,645 318,645 

Sealift Research and Development ................................................ 48,443 48,443 

Ready Reserve Force Operations and Maintenance ....................... 309,270 309,270 

Total NDSF ............................................................................. 1,126,384 1,100,519 ¥25,865 


tjames on DSKG8SOYB1PROD with REPORTS

tjames on DSKG8SOYB1PROD with REPORTS
(257) 

TITLE VI 

OTHER DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE PROGRAMS 

DEFENSE HEALTH PROGRAM 

Fiscal year 2011 appropriation .......................................................... $31,382,198,000 

Fiscal year 2012 budget request ....................................................... 32,198,770,000 

Committee recommendation .............................................................. 32,317,459,000 

Change from the budget request ....................................................... 118,689,000 

This appropriation funds the Defense Health Program of the Department of Defense. The total amount recommended in the bill 

will provide the following program in fiscal year 2012: 


tjames on DSKG8SOYB1PROD with REPORTS
258 


tjames on DSKG8SOYB1PROD with REPORTSInsert offset folio 168 here 66365A.167
259 


tjames on DSKG8SOYB1PROD with REPORTSInsert offset folio 169 here 66365A.168
260 

DEFENSE HEALTH PROGRAM REPROGRAMMING PROCEDURES

The Committee continues to monitor the transfer or reprogramming of funds from In-house Care to other budget activities within 

operation and maintenance. To limit transfers and continue oversight within the Defense Health Program operation and maintenance account, the Committee has included bill language which 

limits the funds available for Private Sector Care under the 

TRICARE program subject to prior approval reprogramming procedures. In addition, the Committee also designates the funding for 

the In-house Care System as a congressional special interest item, 

as defined elsewhere in this report. Any transfer of funds from the 

In-house Care budget activity into the Private Sector Care budget 

activity or any other budget activity will require the Department 

of Defense to follow prior approval reprogramming procedures. The 

bill language and accompanying report language included by the 

Committee should not be interpreted by the Department as limiting the amount of funds that may be transferred to the direct 

care system from other budget activities within the Defense Health 

Program. 

In addition, the Committee directs the Department of Defense to 

review budget execution data for all of the Defense Health Program 

accounts and to adequately reflect changes to the budget activities 

requested by the Services in future budget submissions. 

CARRYOVER

The Committee provides one percent carryover authority for the 

operation and maintenance funding for fiscal year 2012 and directs 

the Assistant Secretary of Defense (Health Affairs) to submit a detailed spend plan for fiscal year 2011 designated carryover funds 

to the congressional defense committees not later than 30 days 

after enactment of this Act. Given the complex nature of the Defense Health Program, the Committee expects the Department of 

Defense and the Office of Management and Budget to be fiscally responsible in budgeting for the Defense Health Program and to coordinate required justification material submitted to Congress. 

PEER-REVIEWED CANCER RESEARCH PROGRAM

The Committee provides $12,800,000 for a Peer-Reviewed Cancer 

Research Program that would research cancers not addressed in 

the breast, prostate, ovarian, and lung cancer research programs 

currently executed by the Department of Defense, and specifically 

by the U.S. Army Medical Research and Materiel Command. 

The funds provided are directed to be used to conduct research 

in the following areas: melanoma and other skin cancers, pediatric 

brain tumors within the field of childhood cancer research, genetic 

cancer research, pancreatic cancer, kidney cancer, blood cancer, 

colorectal cancer, mesothelioma, and listeria vaccine for infectious 

disease and cancer. 

The funds provided under the Peer-Reviewed Cancer Research 

Program shall only be used for the purposes listed above. The Department of Defense is directed to provide a report not later than 

60 days after enactment of this Act to the congressional defense 

committees on the status of the Peer-Reviewed Cancer Research 


tjames on DSKG8SOYB1PROD with REPORTS
261 

Program. For each research area, the report should include the 

funding amount awarded, the progress of the research, and the relevance of the research for servicemembers and their families. 

PRESCRIPTION MEDICATION

The Committee is concerned that the growing use of pain management prescription medication leads to dependency among 

servicemembers. According to Army reports, the prescription of 

pain management drugs is handled inconsistently at military medical treatment facilities, particularly in theater, where prescription 

data is not always transmitted to the Department of Defense Pharmacy Data Transaction Service. The Committee directs the Secretary of Defense to examine the feasibility of electronically transmitting such data from theater to the Department’s central repository which aims to monitor and track patient usage and physician 

prescribing patterns. The Committee directs the Assistant Secretary of Defense (Health Affairs) to provide a report to the congressional defense committees not later than 60 days after enactment of this Act on the required steps and potential obstacles toward electronic transmission of prescription drug data. The report 

should include the current status of transmitting records of prescription medication from theater, the logistical obstacles that may 

exist, the resources required to ameliorate the problem, and a plan 

of action for establishing a more consistent electronic transmission 

process. Furthermore, the report should include what efforts the 

Department is taking to track prescription drugs that servicemembers obtain in the private sector and the status of cooperation with 

state controlled substance monitoring programs. 

PEER-REVIEWED LUNG CANCER RESEARCH PROGRAM

The Committee provides $10,200,000 for a Peer-Reviewed Lung 

Cancer Research Program. The Committee is concerned by the high 

rate of lung cancer among military personnel and veterans. Lung 

cancer continues to be the most lethal of all cancers, taking more 

lives annually than the next four most prevalent cancers combined. 

The five year survival rate is only fifteen percent. A major contributor to the low survival rate is that more than seventy percent of 

lung cancer diagnoses occur at a late stage. Furthermore, military 

personnel have increased exposure to lung cancer carcinogens and 

are thus more susceptible to lung cancer than the general population. Therefore, the Committee encourages the Secretary of Defense to continue research and early detection programs, including 

community-based translational research, pertaining to lung cancer 

among military personnel and veterans. 

TRI-SERVICE PATIENT ACUITY STAFF SCHEDULING PROGRAM

The Committee is concerned with the ever-increasing Defense 

Health Program operation and maintenance costs and believes that 

the Defense Health Program needs efficiency improvements. Operation and maintenance costs, rising at six to eight percent per year, 

far outpace inflation and are unsustainable in the current budget 

environment. Of particular concern, the Department of Defense has 

delayed implementation of the Tri-Service Patient Acuity Staff 


tjames on DSKG8SOYB1PROD with REPORTS
262 

Scheduling (TS PASS) Program. TS PASS would use new technologies to optimize care delivery, resulting in the most efficient 

use of resources. Therefore, the Committee encourages the Assistant Secretary of Defense (Health Affairs) to establish a ten site 

pilot program under TS PASS to improve patient care workload 

balancing and to mobilize existing healthcare partners with the 

goal of improving the quality and efficiency of the Defense Health 

Program. 

JOINT WARFIGHTER MEDICAL RESEARCH PROGRAM

The Committee provides $50,000,000 for the Defense Health Program to continue funding projects that enhance combat readiness 

and warfighter relevant medical research. The funding shall not be 

used for new projects or for basic research. The funding shall be 

used to continue projects that have shown promise and that will 

potentially yield further medical breakthroughs. The funding shall 

be awarded at the Department’s discretion following a review of 

medical research and development gaps, as well as unfinanced 

medical requirements of the Services. Further, the Committee directs the Assistant Secretary of Defense (Health Affairs) to provide 

a report not later than 120 days after enactment of this Act to the 

congressional defense committees, listing the projects that receive 

funding. The report should include the amount of funding provided 

to each project and a thorough description of each project’s research. 

INTEGRATION OF HEALTH SERVICES WITH DEPARTMENT OF VETERANS

AFFAIRS

The Committee is concerned about the integration of health services of our servicemembers, particularly those serving in the National Guard and reserve components, upon their return from the 

overseas contingency operations in Iraq and Afghanistan. Many regions of the country support Guard and reserve units and yet do 

not have a military base, lack military medical treatment facilities, 

and lack access to specialized health care, particularly behavioral 

and mental health services. The Committee encourages the Secretary of Defense to develop, in conjunction with the Services, the 

National Guard, the reserve components, and the Department of 

Veterans Affairs, a command structure down to individual units 

that will integrate those units and their commanders into regional 

assets of the Department of Veterans Affairs as servicemembers 

transition from the military to the Veterans Affairs healthcare system. Every unit should have a designated health integration services coordinator that would serve as the bridge between the military, TRICARE, Department of Veterans Affairs, and the 

servicemembers. The Secretary of Defense is also encouraged to develop plans for the integration of health records, service records, 

and referral services between the health system providers. The 

Committee directs the Assistant Secretary of Defense (Health Affairs) to provide a report not later than 60 days after enactment 

of this Act to the congressional defense committees, detailing the 

steps the Department of Defense is taking to provide healthcare 

services to our National Guard and reserve components and what 


tjames on DSKG8SOYB1PROD with REPORTS
263 

can be done to improve the access to healthcare in remote areas of 

the country. 

CHEMICAL AGENTS AND MUNITIONS DESTRUCTION, 

DEFENSE 

Fiscal year 2011 appropriation .......................................................... $1,467,307,000 

Fiscal year 2012 budget request ....................................................... 1,554,422,000 

Committee recommendation .............................................................. 1,554,422,000 

Change from budget request ............................................................. – – 

This appropriation funds the Chemical Agents and Munitions 

Destruction activities of the Department of Defense. The Committee recommends an appropriation of $1,554,422,000 

for the Chemical Agents and Munitions Destruction, Defense program. 

The total program recommended in the bill will provide the following in fiscal year 2012: 


tjames on DSKG8SOYB1PROD with REPORTS
264 


tjames on DSKG8SOYB1PROD with REPORTSInsert offset folio 170 here 66365A.169
265 

TOOELE CHEMICAL AGENT DISPOSAL FACILITY

The chemical agent stockpile at Tooele consists of blister and 

nerve agents in several munitions configurations. Disposal operations began in August 1996 and are scheduled for completion in 

fiscal year 2012. As operations near completion, the Committee 

wants to ensure proper planning is occurring for the closure and 

potential reuse of the Tooele Chemical Agent Disposal Facility. The 

Committee therefore directs the Secretary of Defense to submit a 

report to the congressional defense committees not later than 180 

days after enactment of the Act detailing the closure requirements 

and potential reuse of the Tooele Chemical Agent Disposal Facility. 

The Committee encourages the Department to include input and 

participation from government, contractor, and community stakeholders in order to fully ascertain the optimal reuse of the facility. 

In addition, the Committee believes the Department should thoroughly analyze the skill sets that have been developed, examine 

what level of reuse is appropriate and lawful, and identify options 

for future government or commercial use of the site. 

DRUG INTERDICTION AND COUNTER-DRUG ACTIVITIES, 

DEFENSE 

Fiscal year 2011 appropriation .......................................................... $1,156,957,000 

Fiscal year 2012 budget request ....................................................... 1,156,282,000 

Committee recommendation .............................................................. 1,208,147,000 

Change from the budget request ....................................................... 51,865,000 

This appropriation provides funds for Military Personnel; Operation and Maintenance; Procurement; and Research, Development, 

Test, and Evaluation for drug interdiction and counter-drug activities of the Department of Defense to include activities related to 

narcoterrorism. 


tjames on DSKG8SOYB1PROD with REPORTS
266 


tjames on DSKG8SOYB1PROD with REPORTSInsert offset folio 027 here 66365A.170
267 

NATIONAL GUARD COUNTER-DRUG PROGRAM

The Committee’s recommendation includes an additional 

$50,000,000 to fund State-level plans for National Guard activities 

under Section 112 of Title 32, United States Code, and directs the 

Secretary of Defense to submit an expenditure and execution plan 

for the additional funds not later than 60 days after enactment of 

this Act and prior to transfer or obligation. The Department of Defense consistently has failed to provide adequate resources for 

State plans in its budget requests. Congress repeatedly has demonstrated its recognition of the value that National Guard capabilities bring to counter-drug efforts while simultaneously providing 

training and operational experience for Guard personnel. The Committee also notes that the Department has underfunded the five regional counter-drug schools, in the expectation that Congress will 

fund the difference via directed spending items. The Committee 

urges the Secretary of Defense to budget adequate resources for 

both State plans and counter-drug schools to ensure that federal 

counter-drug policy goals are met. 

PRESCRIPTION DRUG TESTING

The Department of Defense’s request includes $23,000,000 to expand prescription drug testing to include hydrocodone and 

benzodiazepine, two drugs commonly prescribed to servicemembers. 

The Department proposes to incrementally increase testing to a 

100 percent rate for these medications and check positive results 

against the TRICARE prescription drug database to identify cases 

of illicit use. The Committee is greatly concerned by survey data 

that indicate a sharp rise in prescription drug abuse within the 

military. At the same time, the Committee notes certain weaknesses within the proposed program. First, the testing will only 

provide a binary positive or negative result, without the ability to 

determine the level of usage. Testing will therefore not identify 

servicemembers who may be abusing medications but have obtained the necessary prescriptions. Second, the TRICARE prescription drug database is not fully reliable, particularly for medications 

prescribed in theater. 

The Committee also believes that the utmost care must be taken 

to ensure that the information derived from testing is used properly. While the Department’s drug testing program already covers 

some prescription pharmaceuticals, the program focuses primarily 

on testing for illicit drugs for the purpose of measuring personnel 

readiness and pursuing disciplinary action when necessary. The 

upward trend in prescription drug abuse is, first and foremost, a 

direct consequence of the extraordinary burdens placed upon the 

force under the high operations tempo of the last decade. Due diligence must be exercised to ensure that cases of prescription drug 

abuse are handled properly by the chain of command, and that 

wounded warriors are not unduly punished for prescription drug 

abuse that may arise from improper medical care. 

The Committee therefore includes language prohibiting the obli- gation of $23,000,000 for expanded prescription drug testing until 

the Secretary of Defense submits an implementation plan including, but not limited to, the following elements: an outreach and 


tjames on DSKG8SOYB1PROD with REPORTS
268 

training program to ensure that commanders will properly utilize 

the information derived from prescription drug testing, including 

awareness of treatment alternatives, the circumstances under 

which disciplinary action is appropriate, and necessary measures to 

safeguard medical privacy; an outreach program to make 

servicemembers aware of the dangers of abusing prescription drugs 

and encouraging them to seek appropriate avenues for treatment; 

and a funding profile for fiscal years 2013 through 2016. 

JOINT IMPROVISED EXPLOSIVE DEVICE DEFEAT FUND 

Fiscal year 2011 appropriation .......................................................... – – 

Fiscal year 2012 budget request ....................................................... $220,634,000 

Committee recommendation .............................................................. 220,634,000 

Change from budget request ............................................................. – – 

This fund provides for the staff and infrastructure of the Joint 

Improvised Explosive Device Defeat Organization. 

The Committee recommends an appropriation of $220,634,000 for 

the Joint Improvised Explosive Device Defeat Fund. The recommendation is the same as the request. 

JOINT URGENT OPERATIONAL NEEDS FUND 

Fiscal year 2011 appropriation .......................................................... – – 

Fiscal year 2012 budget request ....................................................... $100,000,000 

Committee Recommended .................................................................. – – 

Change from budget request ............................................................. ¥100,000,000 

The Committee recommends no appropriation for the Joint Urgent Operational Needs Fund. 

OFFICE OF THE INSPECTOR GENERAL 

Fiscal year 2011 appropriation .......................................................... $306,794,000 

Fiscal year 2012 budget request ....................................................... 289,519,000 

Committee recommendation .............................................................. 346,919,000 

Change from budget request ............................................................. 57,400,000 

The Committee recommends an appropriation of $346,919,000 for 

the Office of the Inspector General. The recommendation is an increase of $57,400,000 above the amount requested and will allow 

the Inspector General to provide additional oversight of Department of Defense contracted services. 

The total program recommended in the bill will provide the following in fiscal year 2012: 


tjames on DSKG8SOYB1PROD with REPORTS
269 


tjames on DSKG8SOYB1PROD with REPORTSInsert offset folio 172 here 66365A.171

tjames on DSKG8SOYB1PROD with REPORTS
(271) 

TITLE VII 

RELATED AGENCIES 

NATIONAL AND MILITARY INTELLIGENCE PROGRAMS

The National Intelligence Program and the Military Intelligence 

Program funded in the Department of Defense Appropriations Act 

consist primarily of resources for the Director of National Intelligence, including the Intelligence Community Management Staff, 

the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA), the Defense Intelligence 

Agency, the National Reconnaissance Office, the National Security 

Agency, the National Geospatial-Intelligence Agency, the intelligence services of the Army, Navy, Air Force, and Marine Corps, 

and the CIA Retirement and Disability fund. 

CLASSIFIED ANNEX

The Committee’s budget reviews are published in a separate, detailed and comprehensive classified annex. The intelligence community, Department of Defense, and other organizations are expected 

to fully comply with the recommendations and directions in the 

classified annex accompanying the Department of Defense Appropriations Act, 2012. 

CENTRAL INTELLIGENCE AGENCY RETIREMENT AND 

DISABILITY SYSTEM FUND 

Fiscal year 2011 appropriation .......................................................... $292,000,000 

Fiscal year 2012 budget request ....................................................... 513,700,000 

Committee recommendation .............................................................. 513,700,000 

Change from request .......................................................................... – – 

This appropriation provides payments of benefits to qualified 

beneficiaries in accordance with the Central Intelligence Agency 

Retirement Act of 1964 for Certain Employees (P.L. 88–643), as 

amended by Public Law 94–522. This statute authorized the establishment of the CIA Retirement and Disability System for certain 

employees and authorized the establishment and maintenance of a 

fund from which benefits would be paid to those beneficiaries. 

The Committee recommends the budget request of $513,700,000 

for the Central Intelligence Agency Retirement and Disability System fund. This is a mandatory account. 

INTELLIGENCE COMMUNITY MANAGEMENT ACCOUNT 

Fiscal year 2011 appropriation .......................................................... $649,732,000 

Fiscal year 2012 budget request ....................................................... 592,213,000 

Committee recommendation .............................................................. 458,225,000 

Change from request .......................................................................... ¥133,988,000 

The Committee recommends $458,225,000 for the Intelligence 

Community Management Account. Of the amount appropriated 


tjames on DSKG8SOYB1PROD with REPORTS
272 

under this heading, $22,000,000 may be transferred to the Executive Office of the President for the Program Manager for Information Sharing. 


tjames on DSKG8SOYB1PROD with REPORTS
(273) 

TITLE VIII 

GENERAL PROVISIONS 

The accompanying bill includes 125 general provisions. Most of 

these provisions were included in the Department of Defense Appropriations Act for fiscal year 2011 and many have been included 

in Defense Appropriations Acts for a number of years. A description of each provision follows. 

Section 8001 provides that no funds made available in this Act 

may be used for publicity or propaganda purposes not authorized 

by Congress. 

Section 8002 has been amended and provides for conditions and 

limitations on the payment of compensation to, or employment of, 

foreign nationals. 

Section 8003 provides that no funds made available in this Act 

may be obligated beyond the end of the fiscal year unless expressly 

provided for a greater period of availability elsewhere in the Act. 

Section 8004 provides a twenty percent limitation on the obligation of funds provided in this Act during the last two months of the 

fiscal year. 

Section 8005 has been amended and provides for the general 

transfer authority of working capital funds to other military functions. 

Section 8006 provides that the tables titled ‘‘Explanation of 

Project Level Adjustments’’ in the Committee report shall be carried out in the manner provided by the tables to the same extent 

as if the tables were included in the text of this Act. 

Section 8007 has been amended and provides for the establishment of a baseline for application of reprogramming and transfer 

authorities for the current fiscal year. 

Section 8008 has been amended and provides for limitations on 

the use and transfer authority of working capital fund cash balances. 

Section 8009 provides that none of the funds appropriated in this 

Act may be used to initiate a special access program without prior 

notification to the congressional defense committees. 

Section 8010 has been amended and provides limitations and 

conditions on the use of funds made available in this Act to initiate 

multiyear contracts. 

Section 8011 provides for the use and obligation of funds for humanitarian and civic assistance costs under chapter 20 of Title 10, 

United States Code. 

Section 8012 has been amended and provides that civilian personnel of the Department may not be managed on the basis of end 

strength or be subject to end strength limitations. 


tjames on DSKG8SOYB1PROD with REPORTS
274 

Section 8013 prohibits funds made available in this Act from 

being used to influence congressional action on any matters pending before the Congress. 

Section 8014 prohibits compensation from being paid to any 

member of the Army who is participating as a full-time student 

and who receives benefits from the Education Benefits Fund when 

time spent as a full-time student is counted toward that member’s 

service commitment. 

Section 8015 has been amended and prohibits the conversion of 

any activity or function performed by civilian employees of the Department of Defense to contractor performance with certain exceptions. 

Section 8016 has been amended and provides for the transfer of 

funds appropriated in title III of this Act for the Department of Defense Pilot Mentor-Prote ́ge ́ Program. 

Section 8017 provides for the Department of Defense to purchase 

anchor and mooring chains manufactured only in the United 

States. 

Section 8018 has been amended and makes permanent the prohibition of funds made available to the Department of Defense from 

being used to demilitarize or dispose of certain surplus firearms 

and small arms ammunition or ammunition components. 

Section 8019 provides a limitation on funds being used for the relocation of any Department of Defense entity into or within the National Capital Region. 

Section 8020 provides for incentive payments authorized by section 504 of the Indian Financing Act of 1974 (25 U.S.C. 1544). 

Section 8021 provides that no funds made available in this Act 

for the Defense Media Activity may be used for national or international political or psychological activities. 

Section 8022 provides for the obligation of funds for purposes 

specified in section 2350j(c) of Title 10, United States Code, in anticipation of receipt of contributions from the Government of Kuwait. 

Section 8023 has been amended and provides funding for the 

Civil Air Patrol Corporation. 

Section 8024 has been amended and prohibits funding to establish new Department of Defense Federally Funded Research and 

Development Centers (FFRDC) and places certain limitations on 

funding provided. 

Section 8025 provides for the Department of Defense to procure 

carbon, alloy, or armor steel plate melted and rolled only in the 

United States and Canada. 

Section 8026 defines the congressional defense committees as 

being the Armed Services Committees and the Subcommittees on 

Defense of the Committees on Appropriations of the House and 

Senate. 

Section 8027 provides for competitions between private firms and 

Department of Defense Depot Maintenance Activities for modification, depot maintenance, and repair of aircraft, vehicles and vessels 

as well as the production of components and other Defense-related 

articles. 

Section 8028 has been amended and provides for revocation of 

blanket waivers of the Buy American Act upon a finding that a 


tjames on DSKG8SOYB1PROD with REPORTS
275 

country has violated a reciprocal trade agreement by discriminating against products produced in the United States that are covered by the agreement. 

Section 8029 provides for the availability of funds contained in 

the Department of Defense Overseas Military Facility Investment 

Recovery Account for purposes specified in section 2921(c)(2) of the 

1991 National Defense Authorization Act. 

Section 8030 provides for the conveyance, without consideration, 

of relocatable housing units that are excess to the needs of the Air 

Force located at Grand Forks Air Force Base, Malmstrom Air Force 

Base, Mountain Home Air Force Base, Ellsworth Air Force Base, 

and Minot Air Force Base to Indian Tribes located in the states of 

Nevada, Idaho, North Dakota, South Dakota, Montana, Oregon, 

Minnesota, and Washington. 

Section 8031 provides authority to use operation and maintenance appropriations to purchase items having an investment item 

unit cost of not more than $250,000. 

Section 8032 has been amended and prohibits the use of Working 

Capital Funds to purchase specified investment items. 

Section 8033 has been amended and provides that none of the 

funds appropriated for the Central Intelligence Agency shall remain available for obligation beyond the current fiscal year except 

for funds appropriated for the Reserve for Contingencies, Working 

Capital Funds, or other certain programs authorized under section 

503 of the National Security Act. 

Section 8034 provides that funds available for the Defense Intelligence Agency may be used for intelligence communications and 

intelligence information systems for the Services, the Unified and 

Specified Commands, and the component commands. 

Section 8035 provides for the availability of funds for the mitigation of environmental impacts on Indian lands resulting from Department of Defense activities. 

Section 8036 provides for the Department of Defense to comply 

with the Buy American Act (chapter 83 of title 41, United States 

Code). 

Section 8037 provides conditions under which contracts for studies, analyses, or consulting services may be entered into without 

competition on the basis of an unsolicited proposal. 

Section 8038 provides for the limitations of funds made available 

in this Act to establish Field Operating Agencies. 

Section 8039 provides grant authorities for the Department of 

Defense acting through the Office of Economic Adjustment. 

(RESCISSIONS)

Section 8040 has been amended and provides for the rescission of $1,080,105,000 from the following programs: 

2002 Appropriations: 

National Defense Sealift Fund: 

Ready Reserve Force .............................................................................................................................................................. $20,444,000 

2003 Appropriations: 

National Defense Sealift Fund: 

Ready Reserve Force .............................................................................................................................................................. 8,500,000 

2004 Appropriations: 

National Defense Sealift Fund: 

Ready Reserve Force .............................................................................................................................................................. 6,500,000 


tjames on DSKG8SOYB1PROD with REPORTS
276 

2010 Appropriations: 

Aircraft Procurement, Navy: 

P–8A ....................................................................................................................................................................................... 90,000,000 

2011 Appropriations: 

Aircraft Procurement, Navy: 

P–8A ....................................................................................................................................................................................... 55,000,000 

Weapons Procurement, Navy: 

Standard Missile Mods ........................................................................................................................................................... 35,427,000 

Procurement of Ammunition, Navy and Marine Corps: 

General Purpose Bombs ......................................................................................................................................................... 8,612,000 

Shipbuilding and Conversion, Navy: 

Littoral Combat Ship AP ........................................................................................................................................................ 110,351,000 

Aircraft Procurement, Air Force: 

C–130J AP .............................................................................................................................................................................. 30,000,000 

Missile Procurement, Air Force: 

GPS III Space Segment .......................................................................................................................................................... 122,500,000 

Other Procurement, Air Force: 

Classified Program ................................................................................................................................................................. 90,000,000 

Procurement, Defense-Wide: 

Classified Program ................................................................................................................................................................. 45,000,000 

Research, Development, Test and Evaluation, Navy: 

Common Mobile Aircrew Restraint System ............................................................................................................................ 5,100,000 

Multi-Purpose Bomb Rack ...................................................................................................................................................... 10,000,000 

FMU–164 Fuze ........................................................................................................................................................................ 19,671,000 

Research, Development, Test and Evaluation, Air Force: 

JSpOC Mission System ........................................................................................................................................................... 50,000,000 

Classified Program ................................................................................................................................................................. 55,000,000 

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

Classified Program ................................................................................................................................................................. 268,000,000 

DARPA Undistributed Rescission ............................................................................................................................................ 50,000,000 

Section 8041 prohibits funds made available in this Act from 

being used to reduce authorized positions for military (civilian) 

technicians of the Army National Guard, Air National Guard, 

Army Reserve, and Air Force Reserve unless such reductions are 

a direct result of a reduction in military force structure. 

Section 8042 provides that none of the funds made available in 

this Act may be obligated or expended for assistance to the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea unless appropriated for that purpose. 

Section 8043 provides for reimbursement to the National Guard 

and reserve when members of the National Guard and reserve provide intelligence or counterintelligence support to the Combatant 

Commands, Defense Agencies, and Joint Intelligence Activities. 

Section 8044 prohibits funds made available in this Act from 

being used to reduce civilian medical and medical support personnel assigned to military treatment facilities below the September 30, 2003, level unless the Service Surgeons General certify 

to the congressional defense committees that it is a responsible 

stewardship of resources to do so. 

Section 8045 prohibits the transfer of Defense and Central Intelligence Agencies’ drug interdiction and counter-drug activity funds 

to other agencies unless specifically provided for in an appropriations law. 

Section 8046 prohibits the use of funds appropriated by this Act 

for the procurement of ball and roller bearings other than those 

produced by a domestic source and of domestic origin. 

Section 8047 prohibits funding for the Department of Defense to 

purchase supercomputers which are not manufactured in the 

United States. 

Section 8048 prohibits the use of funds made available in this or 

any other Act to pay the salary of anyone who approves or implements a transfer of administrative responsibilities or budgetary resources of any program, project, or activity financed by this Act to 


tjames on DSKG8SOYB1PROD with REPORTS
277 

the jurisdiction of another federal agency not financed by this Act 

without expressed authorization of the Congress. 

Section 8049 provides for prior Congressional notification of article transfers to international peacekeeping organizations. 

Section 8050 prohibits the use of funds made available in this 

Act for contractor bonuses from being paid due to business restructuring. 

Section 8051 provides for the transfer of funds to be used to support personnel supporting approved non-traditional defense activities. 

Section 8052 provides for the Department of Defense to dispose 

of negative unliquidated or unexpended balances for expired or 

closed accounts. 

Section 8053 provides conditions for the use of equipment of the 

National Guard Distance Learning Project on a space-available, reimbursable basis. 

Section 8054 provides for the availability of funds provided by 

this Act to implement cost-effective agreements for required heating facility modernization in the Kaiserslautern Military Community, Germany. 

Section 8055 provides for the limitation on the use of funds appropriated in title IV to procure end-items for delivery to military 

forces for operational training, operational use, or inventory requirements. 

Section 8056 prohibits the use of funds made available in this 

Act from being used to approve or license the sale of the F–22A advanced tactical fighter to any foreign government. 

Section 8057 provides for a waiver of the ‘‘Buy America’’ provisions for certain cooperative programs. 

Section 8058 prohibits the use of funds made available in this 

Act to support the training of members of foreign security forces 

who have engaged in gross violations of human rights. 

Section 8059 prohibits the use of funds made available in this 

Act for repairs or maintenance to military family housing units. 

Section 8060 provides obligation authority for new starts for advanced concept technology demonstration projects only after notification to the congressional defense committees. 

Section 8061 provides that the Secretary of Defense shall provide 

a classified quarterly report on certain matters as directed in the 

classified annex accompanying this Act. 

Section 8062 prohibits the use of funds made available to the Department of Defense to provide support to an agency that is more 

than 90 days in arrears in making payments to the Department of 

Defense for goods or services provided on a reimbursable basis. 

Section 8063 provides for the use of National Guard personnel to 

support ground-based elements of the National Ballistic Missile Defense System. 

Section 8064 prohibits the use of funds made available in this 

Act to transfer to any nongovernmental entity ammunition held by 

the Department of Defense that has a center-fire cartridge and is 

designated as ‘‘armor piercing’’ except for demilitarization purposes. 


tjames on DSKG8SOYB1PROD with REPORTS
278 

Section 8065 provides for a waiver by the Chief, National Guard 

Bureau, or his designee for all or part of consideration in cases of 

personal property leases of less than one year. 

Section 8066 prohibits funds made available in this Act from 

being used to purchase alcoholic beverages. 

Section 8067 has been amended and provides for the transfer of 

funds made available in this Act under ‘‘Operation and Maintenance, Army’’ to other activities of the federal government for classified purposes. 

Section 8068 has been amended and provides for the forced 

matching of disbursement and obligations made by the Department 

of Defense in the current fiscal year. 

Section 8069 provides grant authority for the construction and 

furnishing of additional Fisher Houses to meet the needs of military family members when confronted with the illness or hospitalization of an eligible military beneficiary. 

Section 8070 has been amended and provides funding and transfer authority for the Israeli Cooperative Programs. 

Section 8071 prohibits funding from being obligated to modify 

command and control relationships to give Fleet Forces Command 

administrative and operational control of U.S. Navy forces assigned 

to the Pacific Fleet. 

Section 8072 is a new provision that provides for the funding of 

prior year shipbuilding cost increases. 

Section 8073 provides for the noncompetitive appointments of 

certain medical occupational specialties, as prescribed by section 

7403(g) of Title 38, United States Code. 

Section 8074 has been amended and provides that funds made 

available in this Act for intelligence activities are deemed to be specifically authorized by Congress for purposes of section 504 of the 

National Security Act of 1947 until the enactment of the Intelligence Authorization Act for the current fiscal year. 

Section 8075 prohibits the use of funds made available in this 

Act to initiate a new start program without prior written notification. 

Section 8076 has been amended and provides that the budget of 

the President for the subsequent fiscal year shall include separate 

budget justification documents for costs of the United States Armed 

Forces’ participation in contingency operations for the military personnel, operation and maintenance, and procurement accounts. 

Section 8077 prohibits funds made available in this Act from 

being used for the research, development, test, evaluation, procurement, or deployment of nuclear armed interceptors of a missile defense system. 

Section 8078 has been amended and provides the Secretary of 

Defense with the authority to make grants in the amounts specified. 

Section 8079 prohibits funds made available in this Act from 

being used to reduce or disestablish the operation of the 53rd 

Weather Reconnaissance Squadron of the Air Force Reserve. 

Section 8080 prohibits funds made available in this Act from 

being used for the integration of foreign intelligence information 

unless the information has been lawfully collected and processed 

during conduct of authorized foreign intelligence activities. 


tjames on DSKG8SOYB1PROD with REPORTS
279 

Section 8081 provides that at the time members of reserve components of the Armed Forces are called or ordered to active duty, 

each member shall be notified in writing of the expected period 

during which the member will be mobilized. 

Section 8082 provides that the Secretary of Defense may transfer 

funds from any available Department of the Navy appropriation 

under certain conditions to any available Navy ship construction 

appropriation to liquidate costs caused by rate adjustments or 

other economic factors. 

Section 8083 provides for the use of current and expired Shipbuilding and Conversion, Navy subdivisions to reimburse the Judgment Fund. 

Section 8084 prohibits funding from being used to transfer program authority relating to current tactical unmanned aerial vehicles from the Army and requires the Army to retain responsibility 

for and operational control of the MQ–1C Sky Warrior Unmanned 

Aerial Vehicle. 

Section 8085 provides funding under certain conditions for the 

Asia Pacific Regional Initiative Program for the purpose of enabling 

the Pacific Command to execute certain Theater Security Cooperation activities. 

Section 8086 has been amended and prohibits funding provided 

for the Director of National Intelligence beyond the current fiscal 

year, except for funds appropriated for research and technology, 

which shall remain available for the current and the following fiscal years. 

Section 8087 provides for the adjustment of obligations within 

the Shipbuilding and Conversion, Navy appropriation. 

Section 8088 provides that not more than thirty-five percent of 

the funds made available in this Act for environmental remediation 

may be obligated under indefinite delivery/indefinite quantity contracts with a total contract value of $130,000,000 or higher. 

Section 8089 has been amended and requires the Director of National Intelligence to include certain budget exhibits as described 

in the Department of Defense Financial Management Regulation 

with congressional budget justification books. 

Section 8090 has been amended and provides for the creation of 

a major force program category for space for the Future Year Defense Program of the Department of Defense. 

Section 8091 has been amended and provides for the establishment of a baseline for application of reprogramming and transfer 

authorities for the Office of the Director of National Intelligence for 

the current fiscal year. 

Section 8092 is a new provision that places limitations on funding provided for the National Intelligence Program to be available 

for obligation or expenditure through a reprogramming or transfer 

of funds in accordance with section 102A(d) of the National Security Act of 1947 (50 U.S.C. 403–1(d)). 

Section 8093 directs the Director of National Intelligence to follow the Department of Defense format for yearly submissions of 

congressional budget documentation. 

Section 8094 provides a definition of congressional intelligence 

committees. 


tjames on DSKG8SOYB1PROD with REPORTS
280 

Section 8095 directs that the Department continue to report incremental contingency operations costs for Operation New Dawn 

and Operation Enduring Freedom on a monthly basis in the Cost 

of War Execution Report as required by Department of Defense Financial Management Regulation. 

Section 8096 provides the authority to transfer funding from operation and maintenance accounts for the Army, Navy, and Air 

Force to the Fisher Houses and Suites. 

Section 8097 has been amended and provides for the transfer of 

funds by the Director of National Intelligence to other departments 

and agencies for purposes of Government-wide information sharing 

activities. 

Section 8098 provides that operation and maintenance funds may 

be available for the purpose of making remittances to the Defense 

Acquisition Workforce Development Fund. 

Section 8099 provides that any agency receiving funds made 

available in this Act shall post on a public website any report required to be submitted by Congress. 

Section 8100 has been amended and prohibits contractors receiv- ing any federal contract in excess of $1,000,000 from requiring, as 

a condition of employment, that employees or independent contractors agree to resolve through arbitration any claim under title VII 

of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 or tort related to, or arising out of, 

sexual assault or harassment, including assault and battery, intentional infliction of emotional distress, false imprisonment, or negligent hiring, supervision, or retention and to certify that each covered subcontractor do the same. 

Section 8101 prohibits the use of funds to award to a contractor 

or convert to performance by a contractor any functions performed 

by federal employees pursuant to a study conducted under OMB 

Circular A–76. 

Section 8102 has been amended and prohibits any national intelligence program funds to be used for a mission critical or mission 

essential business management information technology system that 

is not registered with the Director of National Intelligence. 

Section 8103 is a new provision to prohibit funding to the Association of Community Organizations for Reform Now (ACORN) or 

its subsidiaries. 

Section 8104 provides funds for transfer to the Joint Department 

ofDefense—Department of Veterans Affairs Medical Facility Demonstration Fund. 

Section 8105 has been amended and requires a report to the congressional defense committees on a plan for documenting the number of full-time contractor employees. 

Section 8106 has been amended and extends the period of time 

during which claims for retroactive stop-loss special pay may be 

submitted. 

Section 8107 has been amended and provides a limitation on the 

number of Senior Executive and General Schedule 15 equivalent 

employees in the Office of the Director of National Intelligence and 

directs that individuals will be selected for Senior Executive positions in a manner consistent with all requirements established in 

statute and all Office of Personnel Management regulations, guidance, and procedures. 


tjames on DSKG8SOYB1PROD with REPORTS
281 

Section 8108 prohibits funding to pay a retired general or flag officer to serve as a senior mentor advising the Department of Defense unless such retired officer files a Standard Form 278 or successor form. 

Section 8109 is a new provision to restrict the cost of heavy and 

light armored vehicles for the physical security of personnel or for 

force protection purposes to $250,000 per vehicle. 

Section 8110 is a new provision to provide the Department of Defense with the authority to obligate up to one percent of the 

amounts appropriated for military personnel accounts under title I 

from one to two fiscal years. 

Section 8111 is a new provision to provide grants to assist the 

civilian population of Guam in response to the military buildup of 

Guam. 

Section 8112 is a new provision to prohibit the Secretary of Defense to operate more than 1,000 parking spaces provided by the 

combination of spaces provided by the BRAC 133 project and the 

lease of spaces in the immediate vicinity. 

Section 8113 is a new provision to prohibit the Secretary of the 

Air Force from transferring Air Force Material Command functions 

until after the Secretary transmits a report to the congressional defense committees. 

Section 8114 is a new provision to require monthly reporting of 

the civilian personnel end strength by appropriation account to the 

congressional defense committees. 

Section 8115 is a new provision to provide an additional amount 

for Research, Development, Test and Evaluation, Army to conduct 

research on alternative energy resources for the deployed forces. 

Section 8116 is a new provision to prohibit funding for the National Intelligence Program or the Military Intelligence Program to 

establish a new Federally Funded Research and Development Center (FFRDC) and places certain limitations on funding provided. 

Section 8117 is a new provision to require the Department to report to the congressional defense committees on the feasibility of 

using commercially available telecommunications expense management solutions. 

Section 8118 is a new provision to prohibit funding to separate 

the National Intelligence Program budget from the Department of 

Defense budget. 

Section 8119 is a new provision to prohibit funding to be used 

for Information Operations/Military Information Support Operations activities. 

Section 8120 is a new provision to provide the Director of National Intelligence with general transfer authority with certain limitations. 

Section 8121 has been amended to reflect current savings from 

revised economic assumptions. 

Section 8122 provides authority to make grants to construct, renovate, repair, or expand elementary and secondary public schools 

on military installations to address capacity or facility condition deficiencies. 

Section 8123 prohibits funding to transfer or release any individual detained at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba into the United States, 


tjames on DSKG8SOYB1PROD with REPORTS
282 

its territories, or possessions. This language is identical to language enacted in Public Law 112–10. 

Section 8124 prohibits funding to transfer any individual detained at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba to a country of origin or other 

foreign country or entity unless the Secretary makes certain certifications. This language is similar to language enacted in Public Law 

112–10. 

Section 8125 prohibits funding to modify any United States facility (other than the facility at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba) to house any 

individual detained at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba. This language is 

similar to language enacted in Public Law 112–10. 

Section 8126 is a new provision to provide funding to conduct an 

assessment of the current and prospective situation on the ground 

in Afghanistan and Pakistan and provide a report on its findings. 

Section 8127 is a new provision to limit the amount of funding 

that may be expended for military musical units. 

Section 8128 is a new provision to require the Secretary of Defense to submit a report regarding the efficiency savings identified 

by the military departments in the defense budget covering fiscal 

years 2012 through 2016 that are to be reinvested in the priorities 

of the military departments. 

Section 8129 is a new provision to prohibit funds from being used 

to enter into a contract, memorandum of understanding or cooperative agreement with, make a grant to, or provide a loan or loan 

guarantee to any corporation with an unpaid federal tax liability. 

Section 8130 is a new provision to prohibit funds from being used 

to enter into a contract, memorandum of understanding or cooperative agreement with, make a grant to, or provide a loan or loan 

guarantee to any corporation that was convicted of a felony criminal violation under any federal law in the past 24 months. 


tjames on DSKG8SOYB1PROD with REPORTS
(283) 

TITLE IX 

OVERSEAS CONTINGENCY OPERATIONS 

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

In title IX, the Committee recommends total new appropriations 

of $118,684,277,000. A detailed review of the Committee’s recommendations for programs funded in this title is provided in the 

following pages. 

REPORTING REQUIREMENTS

The Committee directs the Secretary of Defense to provide a report to the congressional defense committees not later than 30 days 

after enactment of this Act on the allocation of the funds within the 

accounts listed in this title. The Secretary shall submit updated reports 30 days after the end of each fiscal quarter until funds listed 

in this title are no longer available for obligation. The Committee 

directs that these reports shall include: a detailed accounting of obligations and expenditures of appropriations provided in this title 

by program and subactivity group for the continuation of military 

operations in Iraq and Afghanistan and a listing of equipment procured using funds provided in this title. The Committee expects 

that, in order to meet unanticipated requirements, the Department 

of Defense may need to transfer funds within these appropriations 

accounts for purposes other than those specified in this report. The 

Committee directs the Department of Defense to follow normal 

prior approval reprogramming procedures should it be necessary to 

transfer funding between different appropriations accounts in this 

title. 

Additionally, the Committee directs the Department to continue 

to report incremental contingency operations costs for Operation 

Iraqi Freedom and Operation Enduring Freedom on a monthly 

basis in the Cost of War Execution report as required by Department of Defense Financial Management Regulation, Chapter 23, 

Volume 12. The Department is encouraged to do supplementary reporting via the Contingency Operations Status of Funds report but 

shall not terminate or replace the Cost of War Execution report. 

Further, the Committee directs that the reporting requirements 

of section 9010 of Public Law 109–289, the Department of Defense 

Appropriations Act, 2007, regarding military operations and stability in Iraq shall apply to the funds appropriated in this Act. Further, section 609 of Division L of Public Law 110–161 shall also 

apply to the funds appropriated in this Act. 

BASE BUDGETING FOR CONTINGENCIES

The Committee notes that the Department has made progress 

identifying programs and activities previously requested in the 


tjames on DSKG8SOYB1PROD with REPORTS
284 

Overseas Contingency Operations (OCO) budget which are more 

appropriately requested in the base budget. Last year, the Department moved $1.4 billion from the OCO budget to the base budget, 

and this year, the Department moved an additional $4.5 billion 

from the OCO budget to the base budget. 

The Committee is concerned, however, that after nearly ten years 

of continuing operations in Afghanistan, such a large and broad 

OCO request remains designated as emergency. The Committee 

urges the Department to continue to thoroughly scrutinize the 

OCO budget and to report to the congressional defense committees 

not later than 180 days after enactment of this Act on further programs or activities which should move to the base budget, focusing 

specifically on those programs and activities that have been in the 

OCO budget for more than two years. The Committee urges the 

Department to continue to move OCO funding into the base budget 

request, with a goal of funding only unforeseen emergency and incremental costs incurred in direct support of contingency operations in the OCO budget. 

AFGHANISTAN REPORT

Not later than 180 days after enactment of this Act, the Secretary of Defense, in coordination with the Secretary of State, is directed to provide a report to the congressional defense committees 

on the war in Afghanistan. This report shall outline the strategic 

and operational objectives of the United States and discuss 

progress to meet those objectives in terms of governance, security, 

and economic perspectives. The report may be classified if necessary. 

HUMAN RIGHTS ABUSES

The Committee is deeply concerned about the prospect of human 

rights abuses in connection with continuing operations in and 

around Afghanistan, Pakistan, and elsewhere in connection with 

Operation Enduring Freedom. Accordingly, the Committee reminds 

the Department of Defense of the applicability of Section 8058 of 

this bill to funds made available in title ix to include funds made 

available for Coalition Support and funds made available through 

the Pakistan Counterinsurgency Fund. The Committee directs that 

the Secretary of Defense provide a report to the congressional defense committees within 60 days of enactment of this Act, and on 

a quarterly basis thereafter, on any suspected incidents of human 

rights abuses. The report may be submitted in classified form, if 

necessary. 

MILITARY PERSONNEL 

The Committee recommends an additional appropriation of 

$10,813,624,000 for Military Personnel. 

The Committee’s recommendations for each military personnel 

account are shown below: 


tjames on DSKG8SOYB1PROD with REPORTS
285 


tjames on DSKG8SOYB1PROD with REPORTSInsert graphic folio 028 66365A.172
286 


tjames on DSKG8SOYB1PROD with REPORTSInsert graphic folio 029 66365A.173
287 


tjames on DSKG8SOYB1PROD with REPORTSInsert graphic folio 030 66365A.174
288 


tjames on DSKG8SOYB1PROD with REPORTSInsert graphic folio 031 66365A.175
289 


tjames on DSKG8SOYB1PROD with REPORTSInsert graphic folio 032 66365A.176
290 

OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE 

The Committee recommends an additional appropriation of 

$89,815,293,000 for Operation and Maintenance. 

The Committee’s recommendations for each operation and maintenance account are shown below: 


tjames on DSKG8SOYB1PROD with REPORTS
291 


tjames on DSKG8SOYB1PROD with REPORTSInsert graphic folio 033 66365A.177
292 


tjames on DSKG8SOYB1PROD with REPORTSInsert graphic folio 034 66365A.178
293 


tjames on DSKG8SOYB1PROD with REPORTSInsert graphic folio 035 66365A.179
294 


tjames on DSKG8SOYB1PROD with REPORTSInsert graphic folio 036 66365A.180
295 


tjames on DSKG8SOYB1PROD with REPORTSInsert graphic folio 037 66365A.181
296 


tjames on DSKG8SOYB1PROD with REPORTSInsert graphic folio 038 66365A.182
297 

OVERSTATEMENT OF FISCAL YEAR 2012 REQUIREMENTS

The Committee is concerned that the Army’s fiscal year 2012 operation and maintenance request for overseas contingency operations may be significantly overstated in three main areas: transportation, equipment reset, and Logistics Civil Augmentation Program (LOGCAP). Since 2002, the Army’s operation and maintenance request has been largely built from a contingency operations 

cost model. The costing factors and other variables contained in the 

model have evolved and improved over the years. Consequently, it 

can be used to quite accurately estimate the cost of contingency operations and maintenance, if realistic planning assumptions are 

used. 

The Army’s request for transportation funding appears predicated on the erroneous assumption that one hundred percent of the 

supplies transported into Afghanistan would be airlifted. Officials 

in the Department have since acknowledged that this assumption 

is unrealistic. In fact, approximately twenty percent of supplies 

have been, and will continue to be, transported into Afghanistan 

via air. In addition, air transportation is ten times more expensive 

than surface transportation. 

Similarly, equipment reset costs may be significantly overstated 

in the 2012 budget request. Equipment reset is the rebuilding and 

repair of equipment such that the equipment is restored to a zero 

hours, zero miles status, or in other words, as good as new. During 

fiscal year 2010, U.S. Army officials in Camp Arifjan, Kuwait established and instituted significant improvements in the business 

processes and methods for the reset of equipment which resulted 

in significant time savings and substantial cost reductions. In fiscal 

year 2011, the Army revised the reset requirement once the impact 

of the improved business processes was determined and identified 

$1,600,000,000 excess in the fiscal year 2011 Overseas Contingency 

Operations (OCO) request. However, the fiscal year 2012 OCO request was never adjusted for the impact of the business improvements. Instead, the standard Army Material Command costing factors were used, the same assumptions which led to the overstated 

fiscal year 2011 budget request. 

Finally, LOGCAP costs also appear overstated in the 2012 budget request. LOGCAP provides contingency support such as the delivery of food, water, fuel, and spare parts; the operation of 

billeting faculties; and engineering and construction via contract 

with private companies. The reason that LOGCAP costs are overstated appears to be a faulty assumption as to the number of U.S. 

contractors in Afghanistan who require LOGCAP services. In Afghanistan, about eighty percent of the contractors are Afghanis and 

therefore do not require billeting. The Army’s budget request did 

not account for the number of Afghani contractors who do not need 

billeting. 

The Committee remains uncertain of the justification for much of 

the Army’s operation and maintenance budget request, and therefore the Committee recommendation transfers $5,000,000,000 from 

the Army operation and maintenance account to the Overseas Contingency Operation Transfer Fund, providing the Secretary of DeVerDate Mar 15 2010 05:13 Jun 17, 2011 Jkt 066874 PO 00000 Frm 00307 Fmt 6601 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\HR110.XXX HR110

tjames on DSKG8SOYB1PROD with REPORTS
298 

fense flexibility to move these funds to requirements which emerge 

during fiscal year 2012. 

COMMANDER’S EMERGENCY RESPONSE PROGRAM

The bill provides $400,000,000 of the $425,000,000 requested for 

the Commander’s Emergency Response Program (CERP), only for 

Afghanistan. The Department requested $25,000,000 to fund CERP 

projects in Iraq based on a quarterly division of the fiscal year 2011 

appropriation. Funds to deliver CERP projects in Iraq in the first 

fiscal quarter of fiscal year 2012 were not justified to the Committee. The bill also requires the Secretary of Defense to notify the 

congressional defense committees 15 days prior to making CERP 

funds available for any project with an expected total cost of 

$25,000,000 or more. With the development of the Afghanistan Infrastructure Fund, the Committee is encouraged that CERP funds 

will again be focused on small-scale humanitarian and reconstruction projects rather than large-scale construction and development 

projects. 

PROCUREMENT 

The Committee recommends an additional appropriation of 

$13,375,288,000 for Procurement. The Committee’s recommendations for each procurement account are shown below: 


tjames on DSKG8SOYB1PROD with REPORTS
299 


tjames on DSKG8SOYB1PROD with REPORTSInsert offset folio 186 here 66365A.183
300 


tjames on DSKG8SOYB1PROD with REPORTSInsert offset folio 187 here 66365A.184
301 


tjames on DSKG8SOYB1PROD with REPORTSInsert offset folio 188 here 66365A.185
302 


tjames on DSKG8SOYB1PROD with REPORTSInsert offset folio 189 here 66365A.186
303 


tjames on DSKG8SOYB1PROD with REPORTSInsert offset folio 190 here 66365A.187
304 


tjames on DSKG8SOYB1PROD with REPORTSInsert offset folio 191 here 66365A.188
305 


tjames on DSKG8SOYB1PROD with REPORTSInsert offset folio 192 here 66365A.189
306 


tjames on DSKG8SOYB1PROD with REPORTSInsert offset folio 193 here 66365A.190
307 


tjames on DSKG8SOYB1PROD with REPORTSInsert offset folio 194 here 66365A.191
308 


tjames on DSKG8SOYB1PROD with REPORTSInsert offset folio 195 here 66365A.192
309 


tjames on DSKG8SOYB1PROD with REPORTSInsert offset folio 196 here 66365A.193
310 


tjames on DSKG8SOYB1PROD with REPORTSInsert offset folio 197 here 66365A.194
311 

NATIONAL GUARD AND RESERVE EQUIPMENT

The National Guard and reserve forces traditionally receive less 

than a proportionate share of funding to resource the equipment 

needs of each. As a result, the Committee recommends funding for 

the National Guard and reserve forces as follows. 

The Committee recommendation for the National Guard and Reserve Equipment Account is $1,500,000,000. Of that amount, 

$490,000,000 is for the Army National Guard; $490,000,000 for the 

Air National Guard; $220,000,000 for the U.S. Army Reserve; 

$105,000,000 for the Navy Reserve; $90,000,000 for the Marine 

Corps Reserve; and $105,000,000 for the Air Force Reserve to meet 

urgent equipment needs that may arise this fiscal year. 

This funding will allow the Guard and reserve components to 

procure high priority equipment that may be used by these units 

for both their combat missions and their missions in support of 

State governors. This funding will allow the Guard and reserve 

components to procure high priority items such as: Generation 4 

Advanced Targeting Pods, Reduced Size Crashworthy External and 

Extended Range Fuel Systems (RCEFS) for Apaches and Chinooks, 

civil support radios, lightweight airborne recovery systems, simulation training systems, tactical radios, tactical trailers, and field engineering, logistics, and maintenance equipment. 

MINE RESISTANT AMBUSH PROTECTED (MRAP) AND MINE RESISTANT

AMBUSH PROTECTED ALL TERRAIN VEHICLES (M–ATV)

The recommendation provides $3,195,170,000, equal to the request, to address MRAP and M–ATV requirements, as identified by 

the Department. The Department shall continue to adhere to the 

execution and reporting requirements. 

RESEARCH, DEVELOPMENT, TEST AND EVALUATION 

The Committee recommends an additional appropriation of 

$436,758,000 for Research, Development, Test and Evaluation. The 

Committee’s recommendations for each research, development, test 

and evaluation account are shown below: 


tjames on DSKG8SOYB1PROD with REPORTS
312 


tjames on DSKG8SOYB1PROD with REPORTSInsert offset folio 198 here 66365A.195
313 


tjames on DSKG8SOYB1PROD with REPORTSInsert offset folio 199 here 66365A.196
314 

ISR INNOVATIONS

The Committee’s recommendation includes $50,000,000 for the 

Intelligence, Surveillance, and Reconnaissance (ISR) Pilot Program 

initiated in fiscal year 2011. These funds are intended to provide 

a means by which the Secretary of the Air Force may fund projects 

with the potential to provide ‘‘game-changing’’ capabilities to the 

war fighter in both current and future operations at a sustainable 

cost. The Committee directs the Secretary of the Air Force to provide the House and Senate Appropriations Committees a spending 

and execution plan for these funds not later than 60 days after enactment of this Act, and prior to obligation of funds. 

REVOLVING AND MANAGEMENT FUNDS 

DEFENSE WORKING CAPITAL FUNDS 

The Committee recommends an additional appropriation of 

$435,013,000 for the Defense Working Capital Fund accounts. 

OTHER DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE PROGRAMS 

DEFENSE HEALTH PROGRAM 

The Committee recommends an additional appropriation of $1,228,288,000 for the Defense Health Program. 

The Committee’s recommendations for operation and maintenance, procurement, and research, development, test and evaluation are shown below: 


tjames on DSKG8SOYB1PROD with REPORTS
315 


tjames on DSKG8SOYB1PROD with REPORTSInsert offset folio 200 here 66365A.197
316 

DRUG INTERDICTION AND COUNTER-DRUG ACTIVITIES, 

DEFENSE 

The Committee recommends an additional appropriation of 

$469,458,000 for Drug Interdiction and Counter-Drug Activities. 

The Committee’s recommendations for the counter-drug account 

are shown below: 


tjames on DSKG8SOYB1PROD with REPORTS
317 


tjames on DSKG8SOYB1PROD with REPORTSInsert offset folio 201 here 66365A.198
318 

JOINT IMPROVISED EXPLOSIVE DEVICE DEFEAT FUND 

The Committee recommends an additional appropriation of 

$2,577,500,000 for the Joint Improvised Explosive Device Defeat 

Fund. The Committee’s recommendations for the Joint Improvised 

Explosive Device Defeat Fund are shown below: 

EXPLANATION OF PROJECT LEVEL ADJUSTMENTS 

[In thousands of dollars] 

Budget Request Committee 

Recommended 

Change from 

Request 

1 Attack the Network ..................................................................... 1,368,800 1,368,800 0 

2 Defeat the Device ....................................................................... 961,200 961,200 0 

3 Train the Force ............................................................................ 247,500 247,500 0 

Total, Joint Improvised Explosive Device Defeat Fund .......... 2,577,500 2,577,500 0 

OFFICE OF THE INSPECTOR GENERAL 

The Committee recommends an additional appropriation of 

$11,055,000 for the Office of the Inspector General. 

JOINT URGENT OPERATIONAL NEEDS FUND 

The Committee recommends no appropriation for the Joint Urgent Operational Needs Fund. 

GENERAL PROVISIONS 

Title IX contains several general provisions, many of which extend or modify war-related authorities included in previous Acts. A 

brief description of the recommended provisions follows: 

Section 9001 has been amended and provides that funds made 

available in this title are in addition to funds appropriated or otherwise made available for the Department of Defense for the current fiscal year. 

Section 9002 has been amended and provides for general transfer 

authority within title IX. 

Section 9003 has been amended and provides that supervision 

and administration costs associated with a construction project 

funded with appropriations available for operation and maintenance, Afghanistan Infrastructure Fund, or Afghanistan Security 

Forces Fund may be obligated at the time a construction contract 

is awarded. 

Section 9004 has been amended and provides for the procurement of passenger motor vehicles and heavy and light armored vehicles for use by military and civilian employees of the Department 

of Defense in the U.S. Central Command area. 

Section 9005 has been amended and provides for the Commander’s Emergency Response Program, with certain limitations. 

Section 9006 provides lift and sustainment to coalition forces 

supporting military and stability operations in Iraq and Afghanistan. 

Section 9007 bans the establishment of permanent bases in Iraq 

and Afghanistan, and United States control over oil resources. 


tjames on DSKG8SOYB1PROD with REPORTS
319 

Section 9008 prohibits the use of funding in contravention of the 

United Nations Convention Against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment. 

Section 9009 has been amended and provides for a quarterly report on the proposed use of funds for the Afghanistan Security 

Forces Fund, Afghanistan Infrastructure Fund, and Pakistan 

Counterinsurgency Fund on a project-by-project basis. 

Section 9010 is a new provision to provide additional funding for 

outreach and reintegration services under the Yellow Ribbon Reintegration Program. 

Section 9011 provides the authority to use funds made available 

for operation and maintenance to purchase items with a certain investment unit cost. 

Section 9012 has been amended and provides authority to the 

Task Force for Business and Stability Operations in Afghanistan. 

Section 9013 has been amended and provides authority to establish Office of Security Cooperation locations in Iraq. 

Section 9014 limits the obligation or expenditure of funds provided for operation and maintenance until the Secretary of Defense 

submits a report on the number of planned contractor employees 

in the U.S. Central Command. 

Section 9015 is a new provision to require the Secretary of Defense to submit a report related to the Pakistan Counterinsurgency 

Fund. 

Section 9016 is a new provision to place limitations on funding 

used for information operations or military support operations. 

Section 9017 is a new provision to provide for the rescission of $595,000,000 from the following account: 

2011 Appropriations: 

Mine Resistant Ambush Protection Vehicle Fund ........................................................................................................................... $595,000,000 


tjames on DSKG8SOYB1PROD with REPORTS

tjames on DSKG8SOYB1PROD with REPORTS
(321) 

TITLE X 

ADDITIONAL GENERAL PROVISIONS 

Title X contains one new general provision. A brief description of 

the recommended provision follows: 

Section 10001 is a new provision stating that the applicable allocation of new budget authority recommended by the Committee 

does not exceed the amount of proposed new budget authority. 

HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES REPORTING REQUIREMENTS 

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

CHANGES IN THE APPLICATION OF EXISTING LAW

Pursuant to clause 3(f)(1) of rule XIII of the Rules of the House 

of Representatives, the following statements are submitted describing the effect of provisions in the accompanying bill which directly 

or indirectly change the application of existing law. 

Language is included in various parts of the bill to continue ongoing activities which require annual authorization or additional 

legislation, which to date has not been enacted. 

The bill includes a number of provisions which place limitations 

on the use of funds in the bill or change existing limitations and 

which might, under some circumstances, be construed as changing 

the application of law. 

The bill includes a number of provisions, which have been virtually unchanged for many years, that are technically considered 

legislation. 

The bill provides that appropriations shall remain available for 

more than one year for some programs for which the basic authorizing legislation does not presently authorize each extended availability. 

In various places in the bill, the Committee has allocated funds 

within appropriation accounts in order to fund specific programs. 

Changes in the application of existing law found within appropriations headings: 

Language is included that provides not more than $47,026,000 

for the Combatant Commander Initiative Fund. 

Language is included that provides not less than $34,311,000 for 

the Procurement Technical Assistance Cooperative Agreement Program, of which not less than $3,600,000 shall be available for centers. 

Language is included that provides that any transfer authority 

provided under the heading ‘‘Operation and Maintenance, DefenseWide’’ shall be in addition to any other transfer authority provided 

in this Act. 


tjames on DSKG8SOYB1PROD with REPORTS
322 

Language is included for the various Environmental Restoration 

accounts that provides that the Service Secretaries may transfer 

such funds for the purposes of the funds provided under such appropriations headings. 

Language is included that provides for specific construction, acquisition or conversion of vessels under the heading ‘‘Shipbuilding 

and Conversion, Navy’’. 

Language is included that prohibits the use of funds provided 

under ‘‘National Defense Sealift Fund’’ to award new contracts that 

provide for the acquisition of major components unless such components are made in the United States. 

Language is included that provides that the exercise of an option 

in a contract award through the obligation of previously appropriated funds shall not be considered to be the award of a new contract. 

Language is included that provides waiver authority of the Buy 

America provisions under ‘‘National Defense Sealift Fund’’ under 

certain circumstances. 

Language is included that provides that not less than $8,000,000 

of funds provided under ‘‘Defense Health Program’’ shall be available for HIV/AIDS prevention education activities. 

Language is included that provides for the carry-over of one percent of the Operation and Maintenance account under the ‘‘Defense 

Health Program’’. 

Language is included that provides for the transfer of Drug 

Interdiction and Counter-Drug Activities. Such transfer authority 

shall be in addition to other transfer authority provided elsewhere 

in the Act. 

Language is included that requires submission of a plan related 

to prescription drug testing. 

Language is included that allows the Director of the Joint Improvised Explosive Device Defeat Organization to undertake certain 

activities. 

Language is included that requires that within 60 days of enactment of this Act, a plan for the intended management and use of 

the Joint Improvised Explosive Device Defeat Fund is to be provided to the congressional defense committees. 

Language is included that requires the Secretary of Defense to 

submit a report to the congressional defense committees providing 

assessments of the evolving threats, service requirements to 

counter threats, pre-deployment training strategy and funds execution of the Joint Improvised Explosive Device Defeat Fund. 

Language is included under the Joint Improvised Explosive Device Defeat Fund to transfer funds. Such transfer authority shall 

be in addition to other transfer authority provided elsewhere in the 

Act. 

Language is included under the Office of the Inspector General 

providing for the allocation of certain funds. 

Language is included that provides that no funds made available 

in this Act may be used for publicity or propaganda purposes not 

authorized by Congress. 

Language is included that provides for conditions and limitations 

on the payment of compensation to, or employment of, foreign nationals. 


tjames on DSKG8SOYB1PROD with REPORTS
323 

Language is included that provides that no funds made available 

in this Act may be obligated beyond the end of the fiscal year unless express provision for a greater period of availability is provided 

elsewhere in this Act. 

Language is included that provides a 20 percent limitation on the 

obligation of funds provided in this Act during the last two months 

of the fiscal year. 

Language is included that provides for the general transfer authority. 

Language is included that provides for the establishment of a 

baseline for application of reprogramming and transfer authorities 

for fiscal year 2012 and prohibits certain reprogrammings until 

after submission of a report. 

Language is included that provides for limitations on the use and 

transfer authority of working capital fund cash balances. 

Language is included that provides that none of the funds appropriated in this Act may be used to initiate a special access program 

without prior notification to the congressional defense committees. 

Language is included that provides limitations and conditions on 

the use of funds made available in this Act to initiate multi-year 

contracts. 

Language is included that provides for the use and obligation of 

funds for humanitarian and civic assistance costs under Chapter 20 

of title 10, United States Code. 

Language is included that provides that civilian personnel of the 

Department may not be managed on the basis of end strength or 

be subject to end strength limitations. 

Language is included that prohibits funds made available in this 

Act from being used to influence congressional action on any matters pending before the Congress. 

Language is included that prohibits compensation from being 

paid to any member of the Army who is participating as a full-time 

student and who receives benefits from the Education Benefits 

Fund when time spent as a full-time student is counted toward 

that member’s service commitment. 

Language is included that provides for the limitations on the conversion of any activity or function of the Department of Defense to 

contractor performance. 

Language is included that provides for the transfer of funds appropriated in title III of this Act for the Department of Defense 

Pilot Mentor-Prote ́ge ́ Program. 

Language is included that provides for the Department of Defense to purchase anchor and mooring chains manufactured only in 

the United States. 

Language is included that prohibits funds made available to the 

Department of Defense from being used to demilitarize or dispose 

of surplus firearms. 

Language is included that provides a limitation on funds being 

used for the relocation of any Department of Defense entity into or 

within the National Capital Region. 

Language is included that provides for incentive payments authorized by section 504 of the Indian Financing Act of 1974 (25 

U.S.C. 1544). 


tjames on DSKG8SOYB1PROD with REPORTS
324 

Language is included that provides that no funds made available 

in this Act for the Defense Media Activity may be used for national 

or international political or psychological activities. 

Language is included that provides for the obligation of funds for 

purposes specified in section 2350j(c) of title 10, United States 

Code. 

Language is included that provides funding for the Civil Air Patrol Corporation. 

Language is included that provides for the number of staff years 

of technical effort that may be funded for defense Federally Funded 

Research and Development Centers (FFRDC), excluding national 

and military intelligence programs. 

Language is included that provides for the Department of Defense to procure carbon, alloy or armor steel plate melted and 

rolled only in the United States and Canada. 

Language is included that defines congressional defense committees as being the Armed Services Committees and the Subcommittees on Defense of the Committees on Appropriations of the House 

of Representatives and Senate. 

Language is included that provides for competitions between private firms and Department of Defense Depot Maintenance Activities for modification, depot maintenance, and repair of aircraft, vehicles and vessels as well as the production of components and 

other Defense-related articles. 

Language is included that provides for revocation of blanket 

waivers of the Buy American Act upon a finding that a country has 

violated a reciprocal trade agreement by discriminating against 

products produced in the United States that are covered by the 

agreement. 

Language is included that provides for the availability of funds 

for purposes specified in section 2921(c)(2) of the 1991 National Defense Authorization Act, namely facility maintenance and repair 

and environmental restoration at military installations in the 

United States. 

Language is included that provides for the conveyance, without 

consideration, of relocatable housing units located at Grand Forks 

and Minot Air Force Bases to Indian Tribes located in Nevada, 

Idaho, North and South Dakota, Montana, Oregon, Minnesota, and 

Washington. 

Language is included that provides authority to use operation 

and maintenance appropriations to purchase items having an investment item unit cost of not more than $250,000. 

Language is included that prohibits the purchase of specified investment items within the Working Capital Fund. 

Language is included that provides that none of the funds appropriated for the Central Intelligence Agency shall remain available 

for obligation beyond the current fiscal year except for funds appropriated for the Reserve for Contingencies, the Working Capital 

Fund, or other certain programs authorized under section 503 of 

the National Security Act. 

Language is included that provides that funds available for the 

Defense Intelligence Agency may be used for intelligence communications and intelligence information systems for the Services, the 

Unified and Specified Commands, and the component commands. 


tjames on DSKG8SOYB1PROD with REPORTS
325 

Language is included that provides that not less than 

$12,000,000 within ‘‘Operation and Maintenance, Defense-Wide’’ 

shall be for mitigation of environmental impacts on Indian lands. 

Language is included that provides for the Department of Defense to comply with the Buy American Act as defined in chapter 

83 of Title 41. 

Language is included that provides conditions under which contracts for studies, analyses or consulting services may be entered 

into without competition on the basis of an unsolicited proposal. 

Language is included that provides for the limitations of funds 

made available in this Act to establish Field Operating Agencies. 

Language is included that provides grant authorities for the Department of Defense acting through the Office of Economic Adjustment. 

Language is included that provides for the rescission of previously appropriated funds. 

Language is included that prohibits funds made available in this 

Act from being used to reduce authorized positions for military (civilian) technicians of the Army National Guard, Air National 

Guard, Army Reserve and Air Force Reserve unless such reductions are a direct result of a reduction in military force structure. 

Language is included that provides that none of the funds made 

available in this Act may be obligated or expended for assistance 

to the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea unless appropriated 

for that purpose. 

Language is included that provides for reimbursement to the National Guard and Reserve when members of the National Guard 

and Reserve provide intelligence or counterintelligence support to 

the Combatant Commands, Defense Agencies and Joint Intelligence 

Activities. 

Language is included that prohibits funds made available in this 

Act from being used to reduce civilian medical and medical support 

personnel assigned to military treatment facilities below the September 30, 2003, level unless the Service Surgeons General certifies to the congressional defense committees that it is a responsible stewardship of resources to do so. 

Language is included that provides that Defense and Central Intelligence Agencies’ drug interdiction and counter-drug activity 

funds may not be transferred to other agencies unless specifically 

provided in an appropriations law. 

Language is included that prohibits the use of funds appropriated by this Act for the procurement of ball and roller bearings 

other than those produced by a domestic source and of domestic origin. 

Language is included that provides for the Department of Defense to purchase supercomputers manufactured only in the United 

States. 

Language is included that prohibits the use of funds made available in this or any other Act to transfer administrative responsibilities or budgetary resources of any program, project, or activity financed by this Act to the jurisdiction of another Federal agency not 

financed by this Act without expressed authorization of the Congress. 


tjames on DSKG8SOYB1PROD with REPORTS
326 

Language is included that provides for prior Congressional notification of article transfers to international peacekeeping organizations. 

Language is included that prohibits the use of funds made available in this Act for contractor bonuses from being paid due to business restructuring. 

Language is included that provides for the transfer of funds to 

be used to support personnel supporting approved non-traditional 

defense activities. 

Language is included that provides for the Department of Defense to dispose of negative unliquidated or unexpended balances 

for expired or closed accounts. 

Language is included that provides conditions for the use of 

equipment of the National Guard Distance Learning Project on a 

space-available, reimbursable basis. 

Language is included that provides for the availability of funds 

provided by this Act to implement cost-effective agreements for required heating facility modernization in the Kaiserslautern Military Community, Germany. 

Language is included that provides for the limitation on the use 

of funds appropriated in title IV to procure end-items for delivery 

to military forces for operational training, operational use or inventory requirements. 

Language is included that prohibits the use of funds made available in this Act to approve or license the sale of the F–22A advanced tactical fighter to any foreign government. 

Language is included that provides for a waiver of the ‘‘Buy 

America’’ provisions for certain cooperative programs. 

Language is included that prohibits the use of funds made available in this Act to support the training of members of foreign security forces who have engaged in gross violations of human rights. 

Language is included that prohibits the use of funds made available in this Act for repairs or maintenance to military family housing units. 

Language is included that provides obligation authority for new 

starts for advanced concept technology demonstration projects only 

after notification to the congressional defense committees. 

Language is included that provides that the Secretary of Defense 

shall provide a classified quarterly report on certain matters as directed in the classified annex accompanying this Act. 

Language is included that prohibits the use of funds made available to the Department of Defense to provide support to an agency 

that is more than 90 days in arrears in making payments to the 

Department of Defense for goods or services provided on a reimbursable basis. 

Language is included that provides for the use of National Guard 

personnel to support ground-based elements of the National Ballistic Missile Defense System. 

Language is included that prohibits the use of funds made available in this Act to transfer to any non-governmental entity ammunition held by the Department of Defense that has a center-fire 

cartridge and is designated as ‘‘armor piercing’’ except for demilitarization purposes. 


tjames on DSKG8SOYB1PROD with REPORTS
327 

Language is included that provides for a waiver by the Chief, National Guard Bureau or his designee for all or part of consideration 

in cases of personal property leases of less than one year. 

Language is included that prohibits funds made available in this 

Act from being used to purchase alcoholic beverages. 

Language is included that provides for the transfer of funds 

made available in this Act under ‘‘Operation and Maintenance, 

Army’’ to other activities of the Federal Government. 

Language is included that has been amended and provides for 

the forced matching of disbursement and obligations made by the 

Department of Defense in fiscal year 2012. 

Language is included that provides grant authority for the construction and furnishing of additional Fisher Houses to meet the 

needs of military family members when confronted with the illness 

or hospitalization of an eligible military beneficiary. 

Language is included that provides funding and transfer authority for the Israeli cooperative program. 

Language is included that provides none of the funds available 

to the Department of Defense may be obligated to modify the command and control relationship to give the Fleet Forces Command 

Administration and Operations Control of U.S. Naval Forces assigned to the Pacific Fleet. 

Language is included that provides for the transfer of funds to 

properly complete prior year shipbuilding programs. 

Language is included that provides for the noncompetitive appointments of certain medical occupational specialties, as prescribed by section 7403(g) of title 38, U.S.C. 

Language is included that provides that funds made available in 

this Act are deemed to be specifically authorized by Congress for 

purposes of section 504 of the National Security Act of 1947. 

Language is included that prohibits the use of funds made available in this Act to initiate a new start program without prior written notification. 

Language is included that provides that the budget request for 

fiscal year 2013 shall include separate budget justification documents for costs of the United States Armed Forces’ participation in 

named operations. 

Language is included that prohibits funds made available in this 

Act from being used for the research, development, test, evaluation, 

procurement or deployment of nuclear armed interceptors of a missile defense system. 

Language is included that provides the Secretary of Defense the 

authority to allocate certain funds if he determines it is in the national interest. 

Language is included that prohibits funds made available in this 

Act from being used to reduce or disestablish the operation of the 

53rd Weather Reconnaissance Squadron of the Air Force Reserve. 

Language is included that prohibits funds made available in this 

Act from being used for the integration of foreign intelligence information unless the information has been lawfully collected and processed during conduct of authorized foreign intelligence activities. 

Language is included that provides that at the time members of 

Reserve components of the Armed Forces are called or ordered to 


tjames on DSKG8SOYB1PROD with REPORTS
328 

active duty, each member shall be notified in writing of the expected period during which the member will be mobilized. 

Language is included that provides that the Secretary of Defense 

may transfer funds from any available Department of the Navy appropriation to any available Navy ship construction appropriation 

to liquidate costs caused by rate adjustments or other economic factors. 

Language is included that provides for the use of current and expired ‘‘Shipbuilding and Conversion, Navy’’ subdivisions to reimburse the Judgment Fund. 

Language is included that prohibits the transfer of program authorities related to tactical unmanned aerial vehicles from the 

Army. 

Language is included that provides for the availability of funds 

for the Asia Pacific Regional Initiative Program. 

Language is included that limits the obligation authority of funds 

provided for the Director of National Intelligence to the current fiscal year except for research and technology which shall remain 

available for two fiscal years. 

Language is included that provides for the adjustment of obligations within the ‘‘Shipbuilding and Conversion, Navy’’ appropriation. 

Language is included that provides that not more than 35 percent of the funds made available in this Act for environmental remediation may be obligated under indefinite delivery/indefinite 

quantity contracts with a total contract value of $130,000,000 or 

higher. 

Language is included that requires the Director of National Intelligence to submit certain information in the congressional budget 

justification books for procurement programs and research, development, test and evaluation projects. 

Language is included that provides for the creation of a major 

force program category for space for the Future Year Defense Program of the Department of Defense. 

Language is included that provides for the establishment of a 

baseline for application of reprogramming and transfer authorities 

for fiscal year 2012 for the National Intelligence Program and prohibits certain reprogrammings until after submission of a report. 

Language is included that provides authority for the reprogramming and transfer of National Intelligence Program funds. 

Language is included that directs the Director of National Intelligence to follow the Department of Defense format for yearly submissions of congressional budget documentation. 

Language is included that defines the congressional intelligence 

committees. 

Language is included that directs the Department of Defense to 

report on the Cost of War Execution Report on a monthly basis. 

Language is included that provides for authority to transfer certain funds for Fisher Houses and Suites. 

Language is included that provides for authority to transfer certain funds from the Intelligence Community Management Account 

to other departments and agencies to facilitate information sharing 

activities. 


tjames on DSKG8SOYB1PROD with REPORTS
329 

Language is included that provides authority to make remittances to the Defense Acquisition Workforce Development Fund in 

accordance with certain statutory requirements. 

Language is included that requires agencies receiving funds in 

the Act to post reports to the Congress on the public website. 

Language is included that provides limitations on the use of 

funds made available in this Act for contracts in excess of 

$1,000,000 for contractors and subcontractors that mandate, as a 

condition of employment, the use of arbitration to resolve certain 

discrimination claims. 

Language is included that provides limitations on the conversion 

of functions performed by federal employees to contractors with 

certain exceptions. 

Language is included that provides limitations on National Intelligence Program funds for certain information technology systems 

until certain conditions are met. 

Language is included that prohibits funding for the Association 

of Community Organizations for Reform Now (ACORN) or its subsidiaries. 

Language is included that provides authority to transfer funds to 

the Joint Department of Defense-Department of Veterans Affairs 

Medical Facility Demonstration Fund in accordance with section 

1704 of Public Law 111–84. 

Language is included that requires submission of a report documenting the number of full-time contractor employees (or its equivalent) as required by law. 

Language is included that provides for the extension of the authority for Stop Loss payments. 

Language is included that provides limitations on the total number of Senior Executive and General Schedule 15 equivalent employees in the Office of the Director of National Intelligence and requires such employees to be selected in accordance with certain 

statutes and Office of Personnel Management procedures. 

Language is included that provides a limitation on funding to 

pay a retired general or flag officer to serve as a mentor to the Department of Defense unless certain public financial disclosure 

forms are filed. 

Language is included that provides authority to purchase heavy 

and light armored vehicles notwithstanding price or other limitations on the purchase of passenger carrying vehicles. 

Language is included that provides authority to obligate up to 1 

percent of Military Personnel funding for two fiscal years. 

Language is included that provides authority to use funds under 

the Operations and Maintenance, Defense-Wide account for activities to assist the civilian population of Guam to prepare for the relocation of military personnel and activities. 

Language is included that provides a limitation on funding to operate more than 1,000 parking spaces for the BRAC 113 project. 

Language is included that provides a limitation on funding to relocate Air Force Material Command until submission of a report. 

Language is included that requires the Department of Defense to 

resume monthly reporting of civilian personnel end strength levels. 

Language is included that provides for the number of staff years 

of technical effort that may be funded for Federally Funded ReVerDate Mar 15 2010 05:13 Jun 17, 2011 Jkt 066874 PO 00000 Frm 00339 Fmt 6601 Sfmt 6601 E:\HR\OC\HR110.XXX HR110

tjames on DSKG8SOYB1PROD with REPORTS
330 

search and Development Centers (FFRDC) under the national and 

military intelligence programs. 

Language is included that requires the Department of Defense to 

study and report on the feasibility of using commercially available 

telecommunications expense management solutions. 

Language is included that provides transfer authority for the Di- rector of National Intelligence of up to $1,000,000,000 subject to 

certain reprogramming and transfer procedures set forth in this 

Act. 

Language is included that reduces funds appropriated in titles II, 

III and IV of this Act based on revised economic assumptions with 

such reductions to be applied on a proportionate basis. 

Language is included that provides authority to make available 

funds through the Office of Economic Adjustment or by transfer to 

the Department of Education for construction, renovation, repair, 

and expansion of public schools on military facilities. 

Language is included that provides a limitation on funds in this 

or any other Act to transfer, release, or assist in the transfer or release of certain detainees held at United States Naval Station, 

Guantanamo Bay, Cuba to or within the United States, its territories, or possessions. 

Language is included that provides a limitation on funds in this 

or any other Act to transfer an individual detained at Guantanamo 

Bay, Cuba to the custody or effective control of the individual’s 

country of origin or any other foreign country or entity until the 

Secretary of Defense submits to the Congress certain certifications. 

Language is included that provides a limitation on funds in this 

or any other Act to modify any facility (other than Guantanamo 

Bay, Cuba) in the United States, its territories, or possession for 

the purposes of detention or imprisonment of any individual currently held at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba. 

Language is included under various accounts designating funds 

available in title IX of this Act as being for the global war on terrorism pursuant to section 301 of H. Con. Res. 34 (112th Congress). 

Language is included that provides limitations on funds under 

Operations and Maintenance, Defense-Wide for the Combatant 

Commander Initiative Fund and certain reimbursements for cooperating nations. 

Language is included that provides authority for an Overseas 

Contingency Operations Transfer Fund. 

Language is included that provides authority for the establishment, operation, and allowable uses of the Afghanistan Infrastructure Fund. 

Language is included that provides authority for the operation 

and allowable uses of the Afghanistan Security Forces Fund. 

Language is included that provides authority for the operation 

and allowable uses of the Pakistan Counterinsurgency Fund. 

Language is included under the National Guard and Reserve 

Equipment account in title IX that requires submission of modernization priority assessments. 

Language is included that provides authority to procure mine resistant ambush protected vehicles. 

Language is included that provides authority to use funds to conduct activities to defeat improvised explosive devices. 


tjames on DSKG8SOYB1PROD with REPORTS
331 

Language is included that provides authority to transfer up to 

$3,000,000,000 made available in title IX of this Act. 

Language is included that provides authority to obligate supervision and administration costs associated with certain construction projects in direct support of overseas contingency operations in 

Afghanistan at the time of contract award. 

Language is included that provides authority to purchase certain 

vehicles, notwithstanding price or other limitations, for use by military and civilian Department of Defense employees in the U.S. 

Central Command area of responsibility. 

Language is included that provides authority and limitations on 

the use of funds for the Commander’s Emergency Response Program. 

Language is included that provides authority to use operations 

and maintenance funding to provide transportation, logistical and 

other support to coalition forces supporting military and stability 

operation in Iraq and Afghanistan. 

Language is included that prohibits the use of funds made available in this Act to establish any permanent military installation or 

base in Iraq or Afghanistan. 

Language is included that prohibits the use of funds made available in this Act to contravene laws enacted or regulations promulgated to implement the United Nations Convention Against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment. 

Language is included that requires the Department of Defense to 

submit quarterly reports regarding the expenditure of funds, on a 

project-by-project basis, provided under the Afghanistan Security 

Forces Fund, the Afghanistan Infrastructure Fund, and the Pakistan Counterinsurgency Fund. 

Language is included that provides authority to purchase items 

having an investment unit cost of not more than $250,000 with certain exceptions. 

Language is included that provides authority for the use of funds 

for the Task Force for Business and Stability Operations in Afghanistan. 

Language is included that provides authority for the use of funds 

for facilities renovation and construction associated with establishing Office of Security Cooperation locations in Iraq. 

Language is included that limits the obligation or expenditure of 

operation and maintenance funds in title IX of this Act until the 

Secretary of Defense submits a report on contractor employees in 

the United States Central Command. 

Language is included that provides a limitation on the obligation 

or expenditure of funds in the Pakistan Counterinsurgency Fund 

until the Secretary of Defense submits a report on the strategy for 

utilization of the Fund and the metrics used to measure progress. 

Language is included that provides a limitation on the amount 

of funding provided in this Act for information operations or military support operations activities. 

Language is included that provides funding to conduct as assessment of the current and prospective situation on the ground in Afghanistan and Pakistan and provide a report on its findings. 


tjames on DSKG8SOYB1PROD with REPORTS
332 

Language is included that limits the amount of funding that may 

be expended for military musical units. 

Language is included that requires the Secretary of Defense to 

submit a report regarding the efficiency savings identified by the 

military departmens in the defense budget covering fiscal years 

2012 through 2016 that are to be reinvested in the priorities of the 

military departments. 

Language is included that prohibits funds made available in this 

Act from being used to enter into a contract, memorandum of understanding or cooperative agreement with, make a grant to, or 

provide a loan or loan guarantee to any corporation with an unpaid 

federal tax liability. 

Language is included that prohibits funds made available in this 

Act from being used to enter into a contract, memorandum of understanding or cooperative agreement with, make a grant to, or 

provide a loan or loan guarantee to any corporation that was convicted of a felony criminal violation under any federal law in the 

past 24 months. 

APPROPRIATIONS NOT AUTHORIZED BY LAW


tjames on DSKG8SOYB1PROD with REPORTS
333 


tjames on DSKG8SOYB1PROD with REPORTSInsert offset folio 059 here 66365A.199
334 


tjames on DSKG8SOYB1PROD with REPORTSInsert offset folio 203 here 66365A.200
335 

TRANSFER OF FUNDS

Pursuant to clause 3(f)(2) of rule XIII of the Rules of the House 

of Representatives, the following is submitted describing the transfer of funds provided in the accompanying bill. 

Language has been included in ‘‘Operation and Maintenance, Defense-Wide’’ which provides for the transfer of funds for certain 

classified activities. 

Language has been included in ‘‘Environmental Restoration, 

Army’’ which provides for the transfer of funds for environmental 

restoration, reduction and recycling of hazardous waste, removal of 

unsafe buildings and debris, or for similar purposes. 

Language has been included in ‘‘Environmental Restoration, 

Navy’’ which provides for the transfer of funds for environmental 

restoration, reduction and recycling of hazardous waste, removal of 

unsafe buildings and debris, or for similar purposes. 

Language has been included in ‘‘Environmental Restoration, Air 

Force’’ which provides for the transfer of funds for environmental 

restoration, reduction and recycling of hazardous waste, removal of 

unsafe buildings and debris, or for similar purposes. 

Language has been included in ‘‘Environmental Restoration, Defense-Wide’’ which provides for the transfer of funds for environmental restoration, reduction and recycling of hazardous waste, removal of unsafe buildings and debris, or for similar purposes. 

Language has been included in ‘‘Environmental Restoration, Formerly Used Defense Sites’’ which provides for the transfer of funds 

for environmental restoration, reduction and recycling of hazardous 

waste, removal of unsafe buildings and debris, or for similar purposes. 

Language has been included in ‘‘Drug Interdiction and CounterDrug Activities, Defense’’ which provides for the transfer of funds 

to other appropriations accounts of the Department of Defense for 

military personnel of the reserve components, for operation and 

maintenance, for procurement, and for research, development, test 

and evaluation. 

Language has been included in ‘‘Joint Improvised Explosive Device Defeat Fund’’ which provides for the transfer of funds for operation and maintenance, procurement, research, development, test 

and evaluation, and Defense Working Capital Funds to accomplish 

the inherent mission of the Joint Improvised Explosive Device Defeat Organization. 

Language has been included in ‘‘General Provisions, Sec. 8005’’ 

which provides for the transfer of working capital funds to other 

appropriations accounts of the Department of Defense for military 

functions between appropriations. 

Language has been included in ‘‘General Provisions, Sec. 8008’’ 

which provides for the transfer of funds between working capital 

funds and the ‘‘Foreign Currency Fluctuations, Defense’’ appropriation accounts. 

Language has been included in ‘‘General Provisions, Sec. 8016’’ 

which provides for the transfer of funds from the Department of 

Defense Pilot Mentor-Prote ́ge ́ Program to any other appropriation 

for the purposes of implementing the Mentor-Prote ́ge ́ Program development assistance agreement. 


tjames on DSKG8SOYB1PROD with REPORTS
336 

Language has been included in ‘‘General Provisions, Sec. 8051’’ 

which provides for the transfer of funds from ‘‘Operation and Maintenance, Defense-Wide’’ to appropriations available for the pay of 

military personnel to be used in support of eligible organizations 

and activities outside the Department of Defense. 

Language has been included in ‘‘General Provisions, Sec. 8067’’ 

which provides for the transfer of funds from ‘‘Operation and Maintenance, Army’’ for the acquisition of real property, construction, 

personal services, and operations related to purposes of this section. 

Language has been included in ‘‘General Provisions, Sec. 8070’’ 

which provides for the transfer of funds from ‘‘Procurement, Defense-Wide’’ and ‘‘Research, Development, Test and Evaluation, Defense-Wide’’ for the Israeli Cooperative Programs. 

Language has been included in ‘‘General Provisions, Sec. 8072’’ 

which provides for the transfer of funds from ‘‘Shipbuilding and 

Conversion, Navy’’ to fund prior year shipbuilding cost increases. 

Language has been included in ‘‘General Provisions, Sec. 8078’’ 

which provides the Secretary of Defense with the authority to make 

grants in amounts specified. 

Language has been included in ‘‘General Provisions, Sec. 8082’’ 

which provides for the transfer of funds for Navy ship construction 

appropriations for the purpose of liquidating necessary changes resulting from inflation, market fluctuations, and rate adjustments. 

Language has been included in ‘‘General Provisions, Sec. 8096’’ 

which provides for the transfer of funds for ‘‘Operation and Maintenance, Army’’, ‘‘Operation and Maintenance, Navy’’, and ‘‘Operation 

and Maintenance, Air Force’’ for Fisher Houses and Suites. 

Language has been included in ‘‘General Provisions, Sec. 8097’’ 

which provides for the transfer of funds for the National Intelligence Program. 

Language has been included in ‘‘General Provisions, Sec. 8104’’ 

which provides for the transfer of funds to the Joint Department 

of Defense—Department of Veterans Affairs Medical Facility Demonstration Fund. 

Language has been included in ‘‘General Provisions, Sec. 8120’’ 

which provides for the transfer of funds to the intelligence community and associated agencies for intelligence functions. 

Language has been included in ‘‘General Provisions, Sec. 8122’’ 

which provides for the transfer of funds from ‘‘Operation and Maintenance, Defense-Wide’’ to construct, renovate, repair, or expand elementary and secondary public schools on military installations to 

address capacity or facility condition deficiencies. 

Language has been included in ‘‘Afghanistan Infrastructure 

Fund’’ which provides for the transfer of funds to the Department 

of State for purposes of undertaking infrastructure projects in Afghanistan. 

Language has been included in ‘‘Afghanistan Security Forces 

Fund’’ which provides for the transfer of funds to provide assistance to the security forces of Afghanistan. 

Language has been included in ‘‘Pakistan Counterinsurgency 

Fund’’ which provides for the transfer of funds to provide assistance to the security forces of Pakistan. 


tjames on DSKG8SOYB1PROD with REPORTS
337 

Language has been included in ‘‘Mine Resistant Ambush Protected Vehicle Fund’’ which provides for the transfer of funds for 

operation and maintenance, procurement, research, development, 

test and evaluation, and defense working capital funds to procure, 

sustain, transport, and field Mine Resistant Ambush Protected vehicles. 

Language has been included in ‘‘Joint Improvised Explosive Device Defeat Fund’’ which provides for the transfer of funds to investigate, develop and provide equipment, supplies, services, training, 

facilities, personnel and funds to assist United States forces in the 

defeat of improvised explosive devices. 

Language has been included in ‘‘General Provisions, Sec. 9002’’ 

which provides for the authority to transfer funds in title IX. 

RESCISSIONS

Pursuant to clause 3(f)(2) of rule XIII of the Rules of the House 

of Representatives, the following table is submitted describing the 

rescissions recommended in the accompanying bill: 

National Defense Sealift Fund, 2002/20XX ............................................................................................................................................. $20,444,000 

National Defense Sealift Fund, 2003/20XX ............................................................................................................................................. 8,500,000 

National Defense Sealift Fund, 2004/20XX ............................................................................................................................................. 6,500,000 

Aircraft Procurement, Navy, 2010/2012 ................................................................................................................................................... 90,000,000 

Aircraft Procurement, Navy, 2011/2013 ................................................................................................................................................... 55,000,000 

Weapons Procurement, Navy, 2011/2013 ................................................................................................................................................ 35,427,000 

Procurement of Ammunition, Navy and Marine Corps, 2011/2013 ......................................................................................................... 8,612,000 

Shipbuilding and Conversion, Navy, 2011/2015 ..................................................................................................................................... 110,351,000 

Aircraft Procurement, Air Force, 2011/2013 ............................................................................................................................................ 30,000,000 

Missile Procurement, Air Force, 2011/2013 ............................................................................................................................................. 122,500,000 

Other Procurement, Air Force, 2011/2013 ............................................................................................................................................... 90,000,000 

Procurement, Defense-Wide, 2011/2013 .................................................................................................................................................. 45,000,000 

Research, Development, Test and Evaluation, Navy, 2011/2012 ............................................................................................................ 34,771,000 

Research, Development, Test and Evaluation, Air Force, 2011/2012 ..................................................................................................... 105,000,000 

Research, Development, Test and Evaluation, Defense-Wide, 2011/2012 .............................................................................................. 318,000,000 

Mine Resistant Ambush Protection Vehicle Fund, 2011/2013 ................................................................................................................ 595,000,000 

TRANSFER OF UNEXPENDED BALANCES

Pursuant to clause 3(f)(2) of rule XIII of the Rules of the House 

of Representatives, the bill contains a general provisions which allows for the transfer of unexpended balances with the Operation 

and Maintenance and Military Personnel accounts to the ‘‘Foreign 

Currency Fluctuation, Defense’’ account to address shortfalls due to 

foreign currency fluctuation. 

STATEMENT OF GENERAL PERFORMANCE GOALS AND OBJECTIVES

Pursuant to clause 3(c)(4) of rule XIII of the Rules of the House 

of Representatives, the following is a statement of general performance goals and objectives for which this measure authorizes funding: 

The Committee on Appropriations considers program performance, including a program’s success in developing and attaining 

outcome-related goals and objectives, in developing funding recommendations. 


tjames on DSKG8SOYB1PROD with REPORTS
338 

CONSTITUTIONAL AUTHORITY

The Committee on Appropriations bases its authority to report 

this legislation from Clause 7 of Section 9 of Article I of the Constitution of the United States of America which states: 

No money shall be drawn from the Treasury but in consequence 

of Appropriations made by law. 

Appropriations contained in this Act are made pursuant to this 

specific power granted by the Constitution. 

COMPLIANCE WITH RULE XIII, CL. 3(e) (RAMSEYER RULE) 

In compliance with clause 3(e) of rule XIII of the Rules of the 

House of Representatives, changes in existing law made by the bill, 

as reported, are shown as follows (existing law proposed to be omitted is enclosed in black brackets, new matter is printed in italics, 

existing law in which no change is proposed is shown in roman): 

SECTION 310 OF THE SUPPLEMENTAL APPROPRIATIONS 

ACT, 2009 

(INCLUDING TRANSFER OF FUNDS)

SEC. 310. (a) * * * 

(b) CLAIMS SUBMISSION REQUIRED.—Claims for retroactive StopLoss Special Pay compensation under this section shall be submitted to the Secretary of the Military Department concerned not 

later than ø2 years¿ 3 years after the date on which the implementing rules of subsection (d) take effect. Notwithstanding any 

other provision of law, the Secretaries of the military departments 

may not pay claims that are submitted more than ø2 years¿ 3 

years after the date on which the implementing rules of subsection 

(d) take effect. 

* * * * * * * 

EARMARK DISCLOSURE STATEMENT

Neither the bill nor the report contains any Congressional earmarks, limited tax benefits, or limited tariff benefits as defined in 

clause 9 of rule XXI. 

COMPARISON WITH THE BUDGET RESOLUTION

Clause 3(c)(2) of rule XIII of the Rules of the House of Representatives requires an explanation of compliance with section 

308(a)(1)(A) of the Congressional Budget and Impoundment Control 

Act of 1974 (Public Law 93–344), as amended requires that the report accompanying a bill providing new budget authority contain a 

statement detailing how that authority compares with the reports 

submitted under section 302 of the Act for the most recently agreed 

to concurrent resolution on the budget for the fiscal year from the 

Committee’s section 302(a) allocation. This information follows: 


tjames on DSKG8SOYB1PROD with REPORTS
339 

[In millions of dollars] 

302(b) Allocation This bill 

Budget authority Outlays Budget authority Outlays 

Comparison of amounts in the bill with Committee allocations to its subcommittees of amounts in the 

Budget Resolution for 2012: 

Discretionary .......................................................... 648,709 654,698 648,709 1 654,698 

Mandatory .............................................................. 514 514 514 514 

1 Includes outlays from prior-year budget authority. 

FIVE-YEAR OUTLAY PROJECTIONS

In compliance with section 308(a)(1)(B) of the Congressional 

Budget and Impoundment Control Act of 1974 (Public Law 93– 

344), as amended, the following table contains five-year projections 

associated with the budget authority provided in the accompanying 

bill. 

[In millions of dollars] 

Projection of outlays associated with the recommendation: 

2012 .............................................................................................. 1 405,257 

2013 .............................................................................................. 157,077 

2014 .............................................................................................. 51,297 

2015 .............................................................................................. 18,670 

2016 and future years ................................................................. 11,733 1 Excludes outlays from prior-year budget authority. 

FINANCIAL ASSISTANCE TO STATE AND LOCAL GOVERNMENTS

In accordance with section 308(a)(1)(C) of the Congressional 

Budget and Impoundment Act of 1974 (Public Law 93–344), as 

amended, no new budget or outlays are provided by the accompanying bill for financial assistance to State and local governments. 

FULL COMMITTEE VOTES

Pursuant to the provisions of clause 3(b) of rule XIII of the House 

of Representatives, the results of each roll call on an amendment 

or on the motion to report, together with the names of those voting 

for and those voting against, are printed below: 

No record votes were ordered during consideration of the bill in 

Committee. 


tjames on DSKG8SOYB1PROD with REPORTS
340 


tjames on DSKG8SOYB1PROD with REPORTSInsert graphic folio 14 HR110.001
341 


tjames on DSKG8SOYB1PROD with REPORTSInsert graphic folio 15 HR110.002
342 


tjames on DSKG8SOYB1PROD with REPORTSInsert graphic folio 16 HR110.003
343 


tjames on DSKG8SOYB1PROD with REPORTSInsert graphic folio 17 HR110.004
344 


tjames on DSKG8SOYB1PROD with REPORTSInsert graphic folio 18 HR110.005
345 


tjames on DSKG8SOYB1PROD with REPORTSInsert graphic folio 19 HR110.006
346 


tjames on DSKG8SOYB1PROD with REPORTSInsert graphic folio 20 HR110.007
347 


tjames on DSKG8SOYB1PROD with REPORTSInsert graphic folio 21 HR110.008
348 


tjames on DSKG8SOYB1PROD with REPORTSInsert graphic folio 22 HR110.009
349 


tjames on DSKG8SOYB1PROD with REPORTSInsert graphic folio 23 HR110.010
350 


tjames on DSKG8SOYB1PROD with REPORTSInsert graphic folio 24 HR110.011
351 


tjames on DSKG8SOYB1PROD with REPORTSInsert graphic folio 25 HR110.012
352 


tjames on DSKG8SOYB1PROD with REPORTSInsert graphic folio 26 HR110.013
(353) 

ADDITIONAL VIEWS 

FY 2012 DOD APPROPRIATIONS BILL 

In this bill, the Committee carried out its Constitutional responsibility to recommend the appropriations necessary to provide for 

the common defense, and I am pleased to say that this work was 

accomplished consistent with the Committee’s longstanding tradition of conducting its work on a collegial and bipartisan basis. 

As we look ahead at the very real budgetary pressures confronting the Nation in coming years and the near term, it seems 

inevitable to me that Congress must review more critically the continuing deployment of U.S. military forces in Afghanistan and attendant military activities in Pakistan. I believe we must reassess 

the extent of U.S. military involvement, and the objectives of U.S. 

foreign policy in Afghanistan and Pakistan, questioning whether 

U.S. national security requires a continued deployment of over 

100,000 U.S. service personnel. 

After a serious review of our security situation, and as we are 

currently confronting the fiscal reality that compels us to seek reductions throughout our budget to reduce the deficit, I have concluded that our Nation should take measures to significantly accelerate the withdrawal of U.S. forces. 

It is clear that the nation has become weary and frustrated by 

the length and cost of the war in Afghanistan. A decade of deployments has cost our Nation dearly; we have suffered the loss of 

more than 1,600 military personnel, and prosecuting the war has 

taken hundreds of billions of dollars from our Treasury. 

This frustration is reflected in waning public support; fewer than 

half of the American people now believe the fight in Afghanistan 

is worth continuing. They recognize the economic burden of the war 

and they understand that a significant cause of the current debt 

crisis can be attributed to the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq. This 

will impact the military as pressure mounts to significantly reduce 

defense spending. This is already reflected in the $9 billion reduction to the defense allocation for fiscal year 2012. In future years, 

as the defense budget continues on a likely path of decline, the resources may not be available to maintain the force structure, and 

concurrently develop and field the technologies needed to address 

emerging strategic threats to U.S. security. The current leadership 

of the Defense Department acknowledges as much, given the efficiencies initiative announced in January 2011 (as part of the fiscal 

year 2012 budget request) which assumes troop reductions and associated savings beginning in fiscal years 2015 and 2016. 

According to the Lisbon Summit Declaration of November 2010, 

the withdrawal of NATO forces and process of transition to full Afghan security responsibility and leadership in some provinces and 

districts is likely to begin in 2011, following a joint Afghan NATO/ 

ISAF assessment. The NATO Declaration also projects that, toward 


tjames on DSKG8SOYB1PROD with REPORTS
354 

the end of 2014, Afghan forces should assume full responsibility for 

security across Afghanistan. However, the NATO Declaration also 

stipulates that this process will be ‘‘condition-based, not calendardriven, and will not equate to withdrawal of ISAF-troops.’’ 

While the NATO Summit suggests the path toward withdrawal, 

events of the past several weeks in Afghanistan and Pakistan call 

for swifter action. Operation Enduring Freedom was initiated to destroy Al Qaeda operations in Afghanistan, and ensure that the 

Taliban government could not provide a safe haven for future operations. The death of Osama bin Laden at the hands of U.S. Special 

Forces in May 2011 clearly alters the underlying reason for the deployment of U.S. forces. More recently, the reported death of Ilyas 

Kashmiri, a high level Al Qaeda operative, underscores that conditions in Afghanistan have changed. In addition to accomplishing 

some of the Nation’s most fundamental objectives, the types of operations that led to these successes call into question the need to 

continue deployments at the current levels. 

And while recent events have changed the context of U.S. operations, there are enduring problems with both the attitude and actions of Afghanistan and Pakistan. In both cases, there is cause to 

question the reliability of these partnerships. 

In Afghanistan, there have always been the problems of government corruption and ineffectiveness outside of Kabul. At the highest levels of government, President Karzai’s re-election in 2009 and 

the Parliamentary election of 2010 were both tainted by fraudulent 

ballots and other irregularities. Elections aside, Afghanistan’s government ranks as one of the most corrupt anywhere in the world. 

Bribery, extortion and embezzlement are the normal state of affairs. A case in point is the Kabul Bank crisis, which began in August 2010. By January of 2011, it was estimated that the bank’s 

reckless practices resulted in losses of about $900 million which 

threatened to collapse the emerging commercial financial system. It 

has also been reported that the Kabul Bank was used to enrich Afghanistan’s political elite. The problem of corruption also extends 

to the Afghan military and police. The performance of the Afghan 

National Security Forces, especially the police, is troubling given 

reports of graft and widespread drug use. 

In Pakistan, the fact that Osama bin Laden was ultimately found 

in Abbottabad, where he had been hiding for years in a compound 

in the immediate proximity of senior Pakistani military officials, 

calls into question either the extent of Pakistani commitment to 

partnership with the U.S. or the competence of Pakistani officials. 

More recently, it has been reported that Pakistani officials may 

have tipped off insurgents about possible raids to be conducted by 

the Pakistani military. It has also been widely reported that Pakistan’s Inter-service Intelligence (ISI) Directorate has extensive 

links to drug dealers and Islamic extremists and has been an active 

source of instability in Pakistan, Afghanistan and throughout the 

immediate region. The ISI helped the Taliban rise to power in the 

1990’s, and the Pakistani government is suspected of turning a 

blind eye to Taliban operating out of Quetta. Although Pakistan 

has received billions of dollars in U.S. military assistance, and has 

assigned a considerable portion of its forces to the Federally Administered Tribal Areas, it has failed to demonstrate in fundaVerDate Mar 15 2010 05:13 Jun 17, 2011 Jkt 066874 PO 00000 Frm 00364 Fmt 6604 Sfmt 6604 E:\HR\OC\HR110.XXX HR110

tjames on DSKG8SOYB1PROD with REPORTS
355 

mental ways a real commitment to partnership with the U.S. in 

pursuing threats to both of our Nations. 

The confluence of circumstances and timing argues strongly, in 

my judgment, for a more expeditious reduction of our presence in 

the region. We should accomplish this objective with some degree 

of caution, guarding against a vacuum similar to the one that occurred at the end of the Soviet occupation in 1989. 

To this end, I believe that the U.S. should pursue its goals in Afghanistan through political means. This has apparently been initiated in the form of talks reported to be taking place between 

Taliban representatives and U.S. officials under sponsorship of the 

German government. As negotiations continue, they must take into 

account the interests of surrounding nations such as Pakistan and 

others to ensure that countries neighboring Afghanistan do not 

fight with one another along sectarian or tribal divides within Afghanistan. Such negotiations should also be backed up by the prospect of either U.S. or international forces to ensure that Afghanistan does not revert back to conditions prior to the Taliban’s defeat. 

While a political solution will require a deliberate and patient 

approach, we should nevertheless begin work within the Congress, 

and with the Administration, to bring deployed forces to a level 

more consistent with a realistic assessment of our national security 

interests and a more realistic assessment of the intentions of Afghanistan and Pakistan. 

NORMAN D. DICKS. 

Æ 


tjames on DSKG8SOYB1PROD with REPORTS