" ! SENATE 109TH CONGRESS

1st Session 

REPORT

109–69 

Calendar No. 102 

NATIONAL DEFENSE AUTHORIZATION 

ACT FOR FISCAL YEAR 2006 

R E P O R T 

[TO ACCOMPANY S. 1042]

ON

AUTHORIZING APPROPRIATIONS FOR FISCAL YEAR 2006 FOR MILITARY ACTIVITIES OF THE DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE, FOR MILITARY CONSTRUCTION, AND FOR DEFENSE ACTIVITIES OF THE 

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY, TO PRESCRIBE PERSONNEL 

STRENGTHS FOR SUCH FISCAL YEAR FOR THE ARMED FORCES, 

AND FOR OTHER PURPOSES 

COMMITTEE ON ARMED SERVICES 

UNITED STATES SENATE 

MAY 17, 2005.—Ordered to be printed 

★ (Star Print) 


E:\Seals\Congress.#13
NATIONAL DEFENSE AUTHORIZATION ACT FOR FISCAL YEAR 2006 

U.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE

WASHINGTON : 

1 

21–326 ★ (Star Print) 

" ! SENATE 109TH CONGRESS

1st Session 

REPORT

2005

109–69 

Calendar No. 102 

NATIONAL DEFENSE AUTHORIZATION 

ACT FOR FISCAL YEAR 2006 

R E P O R T 

[TO ACCOMPANY S. 1042]

ON

AUTHORIZING APPROPRIATIONS FOR FISCAL YEAR 2006 FOR MILITARY ACTIVITIES OF THE DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE, FOR MILITARY CONSTRUCTION, AND FOR DEFENSE ACTIVITIES OF THE 

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY, TO PRESCRIBE PERSONNEL 

STRENGTHS FOR SUCH FISCAL YEAR FOR THE ARMED FORCES, 

AND FOR OTHER PURPOSES 

COMMITTEE ON ARMED SERVICES 

UNITED STATES SENATE 

MAY 17, 2005.—Ordered to be printed 


E:\Seals\Congress.#13
(II) 

COMMITTEE ON ARMED SERVICES 

(109th Congress, 1st Session) 

JOHN WARNER, Virginia, Chairman 

JOHN MCCAIN, Arizona 

JAMES M. INHOFE, Oklahoma 

PAT ROBERTS, Kansas 

JEFF SESSIONS, Alabama 

SUSAN M. COLLINS, Maine 

JOHN ENSIGN, Nevada 

JAMES M. TALENT, Missouri 

SAXBY CHAMBLISS, Georgia 

LINDSEY O. GRAHAM, South Carolina 

ELIZABETH DOLE, North Carolina 

JOHN CORNYN, Texas 

JOHN THUNE, South Dakota 

CARL LEVIN, Michigan 

EDWARD M. KENNEDY, Massachusetts 

ROBERT C. BYRD, West Virginia 

JOSEPH I. LIEBERMAN, Connecticut 

JACK REED, Rhode Island 

DANIEL K. AKAKA, Hawaii 

BILL NELSON, Florida 

E. BENJAMIN NELSON, Nebraska 

MARK DAYTON, Minnesota 

EVAN BAYH, Indiana 

HILLARY RODHAM CLINTON, New York 

JUDITH A. ANSLEY, Staff Director 

RICHARD D. DEBOBES, Democratic Staff Director 

(III) 

C O N T E N T S 

Page 

Purpose of the Bill ................................................................................................... 1 

Committee overview and recommendations .......................................................... 2 

Explanation of funding summary .................................................................... 8 

Division A—Department of Defense Authorizations ............................................ 17 

Title I—Procurement ............................................................................................... 17 

Subtitle A—Authorization of Appropriations ................................................. 17 

Explanation of tables ................................................................................ 17 

Subtitle B—Army Programs ............................................................................ 19 

Multiyear procurement authority for AH–64D Apache attack helicopter block II conversions (sec. 111) ................................................... 38 

Multiyear procurement authority for modernized target acquisition 

designation/pilot night vision sensors for AH–64D Apache attack 

helicopters (sec. 112) .............................................................................. 38 

Multiyear procurement authority for utility helicopters (sec. 113) ....... 38 

Missile Procurement, Army ............................................................................. 39 

Advanced precision kill weapon system .................................................. 39 

Weapons and Tracked Vehicles ....................................................................... 39 

Lightweight 155 millimeter Howitzer ..................................................... 39 

Army Ammunition ............................................................................................ 39 

M1028 120mm tank cartridge .................................................................. 39 

Modern demolition initiator ..................................................................... 39 

Rapid wall breaching kit ........................................................................... 40 

Ammunition peculiar equipment outloading modules ............................ 40 

Provision of industrial facilities ............................................................... 40 

Conventional ammunition demilitarization ............................................ 40 

Other Procurement, Army ............................................................................... 41 

Movement tracking system ....................................................................... 41 

Night vision devices .................................................................................. 42 

Modular causeway system ........................................................................ 42 

Subtitle C—Navy Programs ............................................................................ 42 

Prohibition on acquisition of next generation destroyer (DD(X)) 

through a single naval shipyard (sec. 121) .......................................... 66 

Split funding authorization for CVN–78 aircraft carrier (sec. 122) ...... 66 

LHA replacement (LHA(R)) ship (sec. 123) ............................................. 67 

Refueling and complex overhaul of the USS ‘‘Carl Vinson’’ (sec. 124) .. 67 

Navy Aircraft .................................................................................................... 68 

C–40A procurement .................................................................................. 68 

Advanced targeting pods ........................................................................... 68 

Night targeting system upgrade .............................................................. 68 

H–53 modifications .................................................................................... 68 

SH–60 armed helicopter ........................................................................... 69 

EP–3 aircraft electronic attack ................................................................ 69 

P–3 aircraft modifications ......................................................................... 69 

Navy Weapons .................................................................................................. 70 

AIM–9X captive air training missile ....................................................... 70 

Weapons industrial facilities .................................................................... 70 

Gun mount modifications ......................................................................... 70 

Navy and Marine Corps Ammunition ............................................................. 70 

M795 155mm high explosive cartridge .................................................... 70 

Time fuze blasting igniter ........................................................................ 70 

Shipbuilding ...................................................................................................... 71 

DD(X) destroyer program ......................................................................... 71 

DDG–51 Arleigh Burke-class destroyer modernization program .......... 71 

Other Procurement, Navy ................................................................................ 72 

Page

IV 

Title I—Procurement—Continued 

Other Procurement, Navy—Continued 

High performance metal fiber brushes for shipboard motors and generators ..................................................................................................... 72 

Items less than 5.0 million ....................................................................... 72 

Littoral combat ship mission modules ..................................................... 72 

Submarine acoustic modernization installation ...................................... 73 

Surface sonar dome window ..................................................................... 73 

Surface electronic warfare improvement program ................................. 73 

Weapons range support equipment ......................................................... 73 

Maritime domain awareness .................................................................... 73 

Rolling airframe missile launcher system ............................................... 74 

NULKA anti-ship missile decoy ............................................................... 74 

Submarine training device modifications ................................................ 74 

Command support equipment .................................................................. 74 

Navy medical automated information technology insertion .................. 75 

Marine Corps Procurement .............................................................................. 75 

Modification kits ........................................................................................ 75 

Rapid deploying interoperable shelter systems ...................................... 75 

United Stated Marine Corps continuity of operations ........................... 76 

Subtitle D—Air Force Programs ..................................................................... 76 

Multiyear procurement authority for C–17 aircraft (sec. 131) .............. 91 

Prohibition on retirement of KC–135E aircraft (sec. 132) ..................... 91 

Use of Tanker Replacement Transfer Fund for modernization of aerial refueling tankers (sec. 133) ............................................................. 91 

Prohibition on retirement of F–117 aircraft (sec. 134) ........................... 92 

Prohibition on retirement of C–130E/H tactical airlift aircraft (sec. 

135) ......................................................................................................... 92 

Procurement of C–130J/KC–130J aircraft after fiscal year 2005 (sec. 

136) ......................................................................................................... 92 

Aircraft for performance of aeromedical evacuations (sec. 137) ............ 93 

Air Force Aircraft ............................................................................................. 93 

F–15E procurement ................................................................................... 93 

C–130J/KC–130 multiyear procurement restoration .............................. 94 

B–1 digital communication improvements .............................................. 94 

C–5 aircraft avionics modernization program ......................................... 95 

C–130E/H aircraft modifications .............................................................. 95 

KC–135 global air traffic management ................................................... 95 

E–8C joint surveillance and target attack radar system reengining .... 95 

Advanced targeting pods ........................................................................... 96 

Air Force Missiles ............................................................................................. 96 

Minuteman III mods for propulsion replacement program ................... 96 

Other Air Force Procurement .......................................................................... 96 

Halvorsen loader ....................................................................................... 96 

Distributed common ground system components ................................... 97 

Joint threat emitters ................................................................................. 97 

Subtitle E—Other Matters .............................................................................. 97 

Advanced SEAL Delivery System (sec. 151) ........................................... 104 

Defense-wide Programs .................................................................................... 105 

MH–47 infrared engine exhaust suppressor ........................................... 105 

Time delayed firing device/sympathetic detonators ............................... 106 

Multi-band inter/intra team radio ........................................................... 106 

Multi-band multi-mission radio ............................................................... 106 

Joint threat warning system .................................................................... 107 

Rucksack portable unmanned aerial vehicle ........................................... 107 

Military mail screening equipment .......................................................... 107 

Automatic Chemical Agent Detector and Alarm .................................... 108 

Items of Special Interest .................................................................................. 108 

Army multi-band inter/intra team radio system .................................... 108 

Cooperative engagement capability ......................................................... 108 

F/A–22 aircraft .......................................................................................... 109 

Intra-theater airlift ................................................................................... 109 

Littoral combat ship .................................................................................. 110 

Maritime prepositioning force, future ...................................................... 110 

Transmission enterprise program ............................................................ 111 

Title II—Research, Development, Test, and Evaluation ...................................... 113 

Explanation of tables ................................................................................ 113 

Page

V 

Title II—Research, Development, Test, and Evaluation—Continued 

Subtitle A—Authorization of Appropriations ................................................. 115 

Science and Technology ............................................................................ 115 

Subtitle B—Program Requirements, Restrictions, and Limitations ............ 116 

Contract for the procurement of Future Combat System (sec. 211) ..... 116 

Joint field experiment on stability and support operations (sec. 212) .. 116 

Subtitle C—Ballistic Missile Defense ............................................................. 117 

One-year extension of Comptroller General assessments of ballistic 

missile defense programs (sec. 221) ..................................................... 117 

Fielding of Ballistic Missile Defense Capabilities (sec. 222) .................. 117 

Plans for test and evaluation of operational capability of the ballistic 

missile defense system (sec. 223) ......................................................... 118 

Subtitle D—High-Performance Defense Manufacturing Technology Research and Development .............................................................................. 118 

High performance defense manufacturing technology research and 

development (sec. 230) ........................................................................... 118 

Subtitle E—Other Matters .............................................................................. 119 

Expansion of eligibility for leadership of Department of Defense Test 

Resource Management Center (sec. 241) ............................................. 119 

Technology transition (sec. 242) ............................................................... 119 

Prevention, mitigation, and treatment of blast injuries (sec. 243) ........ 120 

Additional Matters of Interest ......................................................................... 121 

Army ........................................................................................................... 121 

Army basic research ........................................................................... 135 

Document exploitation ....................................................................... 135 

Army university research .................................................................. 135 

Advanced mine detection and blast mitigation ............................... 136 

Army small airship ............................................................................ 136 

Detection and neutralization of improved explosive devices .......... 136 

Real-time laser threat warning development .................................. 137 

Army unmanned systems initiative .................................................. 137 

Technology enhancement for area protection .................................. 137 

Multifunctional robot platform ......................................................... 137 

Combat vehicle and automotive technology ..................................... 137 

Gun barrel coatings ............................................................................ 138 

Active coatings technology ................................................................. 138 

Sonic rarefaction wave gun technology ............................................ 138 

Ultra wide band sensors .................................................................... 138 

Army man-portable power ................................................................. 139 

Flexible Display Initiative ................................................................. 139 

Ultra wideband chipset ...................................................................... 139 

Biosecurity research for food safety .................................................. 140 

Army medicine for mitigation and treatment of blast injuries ...... 140 

Bio-defense detection and treatment ................................................ 141 

Posttraumatic stress disorder diagnostic tools ................................ 141 

Surgical safety system ....................................................................... 142 

Human operator performance research ............................................ 142 

Wireless and digital medical improvements .................................... 142 

Reconfigurable tooling systems ......................................................... 142 

Rotorcraft system monitoring ............................................................ 142 

Unmanned tactical combat vehicles ................................................. 143 

Midrange Munition ............................................................................ 143 

Nanotechnology manufacturing ........................................................ 143 

Abrams track improvement ............................................................... 143 

Combat vehicle advanced development ............................................ 144 

Coordinated training .......................................................................... 144 

Advanced simulated training ............................................................ 144 

Explosive demilitarization ................................................................. 144 

Alternative fuel supplies .................................................................... 145 

Stryker vehicle active protection system demonstration ................ 145 

Advanced structures and composites ................................................ 145 

Army command and control visualization system ........................... 146 

Interactive modeling and simulation management ......................... 146 

Next generation interceptor materials ............................................. 146 

Long loiter sensor and communications platform ........................... 146 

Architecture Analysis Program ......................................................... 147 

Single Integrated Space Picture ....................................................... 147 

Page

VI 

Title II—Research, Development, Test, and Evaluation—Continued 

Additional Matters of Interest—Continued 

Army—Continued 

Casting Emission Reduction Program .............................................. 147 

Advanced Army medical systems ...................................................... 148 

Joint tactical radio system ................................................................ 148 

Tactical vehicle modifications ........................................................... 149 

Future tactical truck system ............................................................. 149 

Protected simulation and test link ................................................... 150 

Unmanned aerial vehicle ice protection ........................................... 150 

High performance computing research ............................................ 150 

Retinal/iris multimodal biometrics technology for secure identification ............................................................................................. 150 

Army manufacturing technologies .................................................... 151 

Navy ........................................................................................................... 151 

Navy university research ................................................................... 163 

Navy science and technology outreach ............................................. 163 

Free electron laser ............................................................................. 163 

Littoral and undersea security .......................................................... 164 

Nanomagnetic materials .................................................................... 164 

Polymeric aircraft components .......................................................... 164 

Small watercraft propulsion demonstrator ...................................... 164 

Advanced combat headborne system ................................................ 164 

Critical area protection systems ....................................................... 165 

SensorNet ........................................................................................... 165 

Space research .................................................................................... 165 

Automated video threat recognition ................................................. 165 

Multifunctional composite structures ............................................... 165 

Portable water bio-defense ................................................................ 166 

Seabasing research ............................................................................ 166 

Gallium nitride radio frequency power ............................................ 166 

Integrated littoral sensor network .................................................... 166 

Coordination and integration of unmanned system teams ............. 166 

Information sharing for intelligence, surveillance and reconnaissance ................................................................................................ 167 

Force protection advanced technology .............................................. 167 

Improved shipboard combat information center .............................. 168 

Warfighter sustainment advanced technology ................................. 168 

Navy persistent surveillance ............................................................. 169 

Armored patrol vehicle ...................................................................... 169 

Laser integrated target engagement system ................................... 169 

Water purification system ................................................................. 169 

Modeling and simulation for urban operations ............................... 170 

Surface Navy integrated undersea tactical technology ................... 170 

Shipboard system component development ..................................... 170 

Improved surface vessel torpedo launcher ....................................... 171 

Guided missile submarine conversion .............................................. 171 

Advanced submarine system development ...................................... 171 

Regenerative filtration technology .................................................... 172 

Marine Corps ground and supporting arms systems ...................... 172 

Marine mammal detection and mitigation ....................................... 174 

Navy logistics common operating picture ........................................ 174 

Automatic radar periscope detection and discrimination ............... 174 

DD(X) destroyer integrated propulsion system ............................... 174 

Affordable towed array construction ................................................ 175 

New Design SSN ................................................................................ 175 

Submarine tactical warfare system .................................................. 175 

Autonomous unmanned surface vessel ............................................. 176 

NULKA anti-ship missile decoy development ................................. 176 

Navy medical research ....................................................................... 176 

Shared Reconnaissance Pod logistics support .................................. 177 

Marine Corps communications systems ........................................... 177 

Marine Corps ground combat and supporting arms systems ......... 178 

Battlefield management system ........................................................ 178 

RQ–8B Firescout vertical takeoff and landing unmanned aerial 

vehicle .............................................................................................. 179 

Distributed common ground system—Navy ..................................... 179 

National shipbuilding research program—advanced shipbuilding 

enterprise ........................................................................................ 179 

Page

VII 

Title II—Research, Development, Test, and Evaluation—Continued 

Additional Matters of Interest—Continued 

Air Force .................................................................................................... 180 

Air Force basic science ....................................................................... 194 

Secure, assured information sharing ................................................ 194 

Blast resistant barriers ...................................................................... 194 

Air Force materials research ............................................................. 194 

Nano-technologies for chemical and biological defense ................... 195 

Hypersonics engine research and integration .................................. 195 

Space technology ................................................................................ 195 

Adaptive optics research .................................................................... 196 

Integrated spacecraft engineering tool ............................................. 196 

Laser eye protection ........................................................................... 196 

Metals affordability initiative ........................................................... 197 

Aerospace propulsion and power technologies ................................. 197 

Versatile affordable advanced turbine engines ................................ 197 

Ballistic missile technology ............................................................... 197 

AC coupled interconnect .................................................................... 198 

Energy cells for defense and intelligence applications .................... 198 

Radically Segmented launch vehicle ................................................ 198 

Thin film amorphous solar arrays .................................................... 198 

High Accuracy Network Determination System .............................. 199 

Laser threat warning attack reporting ............................................ 199 

Enable network centric warfare ........................................................ 199 

Military satellite communications .................................................... 200 

Space Radar ........................................................................................ 200 

Tactical satellite demonstrations ...................................................... 201 

Robust nuclear earth penetrator ....................................................... 202 

Space control test capabilities ........................................................... 202 

FPS–16 radar mobilization and upgrade ......................................... 203 

Ballistic missile range safety technology ......................................... 203 

A–10 aircraft propulsion improvements ........................................... 203 

Information systems security research ............................................ 203 

Viper Strike munition for Predator .................................................. 204 

S-band radar ....................................................................................... 204 

Space-Based Space Surveillance ....................................................... 204 

Nano-materials manufacturing ......................................................... 204 

Air Force support systems ................................................................. 205 

Personnel and pay information technology systems ....................... 205 

Defense-wide .............................................................................................. 206 

Focus center research program ......................................................... 220 

Superstructural particle evaluation .................................................. 220 

Chemical and biological defense applied research .......................... 220 

Mustard gas antidote ......................................................................... 221 

Tactical technology ............................................................................. 221 

Human performance in hazardous environments ........................... 221 

Technology Support Working Group ................................................ 221 

Radiation detection technology ......................................................... 222 

Ballistic missile defense reductions .................................................. 222 

Massively parallel optical interconnects .......................................... 223 

Missile technology .............................................................................. 223 

Anthrax and plague oral vaccine research and development ......... 223 

Miniaturized RAMAN chemical identification system .................... 223 

Diminishing manufacturing sources ................................................. 224 

Vehicle fuel cell program ................................................................... 224 

Advanced electronics .......................................................................... 224 

Small scale systems packaging ......................................................... 224 

Advanced ferrite antenna .................................................................. 225 

Communications and control alert framework ................................ 225 

Flexible JP–8 military fuel certification ........................................... 225 

Prevention and detection of cyber threats ....................................... 225 

Simulation center upgrade ................................................................ 226 

Land warfare technology ................................................................... 226 

Network centric warfare technology ................................................. 226 

Sensor technology ............................................................................... 226 

Advanced tactical laser ...................................................................... 227 

Mark V patrol boat replacement craft prototype ............................. 227 

Special operations portable power source program ......................... 227 

Page

VIII 

Title II—Research, Development, Test, and Evaluation—Continued 

Additional Matters of Interest—Continued 

Defense-wide—Continued 

Voice activated handheld translator ................................................. 228 

Aegis ballistic missile defense ........................................................... 228 

Ground-based midcourse ballistic missile defense .......................... 229 

Miniaturized carbon monoxide oxidation technology ...................... 229 

Airborne Infrared System .................................................................. 230 

Kinetic Energy Interceptor ................................................................ 230 

Military mail screening system development and demonstration . 231 

UAV systems and operations validation program ........................... 231 

Foreign supplier assessment center ................................................. 231 

Operationally responsive space payloads ......................................... 231 

Industrial preparedness ..................................................................... 232 

Special operations wireless management and control project ........ 232 

Maritime unmanned aerial vehicle sensor ....................................... 233 

Lightweight portable solar panels .................................................... 233 

Items of Special Interest .................................................................................. 233 

Canopy hard-coats ..................................................................................... 233 

CH–53X helicopter development .............................................................. 234 

Construction of Navy Research Vessels .................................................. 234 

Department of Defense computer science research ................................ 235 

Unmanned aerial vehicles for resupply missions ................................... 235 

Title III—Operation and Maintenance .................................................................. 237 

Explanation of tables ................................................................................ 237 

Subtitle A—Authorization of Appropriations ................................................. 275 

Subtitle B—Environmental Provisions ........................................................... 275 

Elimination and simplification of certain items required in the annual report on environmental quality programs and other environmental activities (sec. 311) .................................................................... 275 

Payment of certain private cleanup costs in connection with the 

Defense Environmental Restoration Program (sec. 312) .................... 275 

Subtitle C—Other Matters .............................................................................. 276 

Aircraft carriers (sec. 321) ........................................................................ 276 

Limitation on transition of funding for east coast shipyards from 

funding through Navy working capital fund to direct funding (sec. 

322) ......................................................................................................... 277 

Use of funds from National Defense Sealift Fund to exercise purchase 

options on maritime prepositioning ship vessels (sec. 323) ................ 277 

Purchase and destruction of weapons overseas (sec. 324) ..................... 278 

Increase in maximum contract amount for procurement of supplies 

and services from exchange stores outside the United States (sec. 

325) ......................................................................................................... 278 

Extension of authority to provide logistics support and services for 

weapon systems contractors (sec. 326) ................................................. 278 

Army training strategy (sec. 327) ............................................................ 279 

Limitations on financial management improvement and audit initiatives within the Department of Defense (sec. 328) ............................. 279 

Study on use of ethanol fuel (sec. 329) .................................................... 280 

Budget Items ..................................................................................................... 281 

Other Defense Programs ........................................................................... 281 

Enhanced vision ................................................................................. 281 

Assembled Chemical Weapons Alternatives Program .................... 281 

Army ........................................................................................................... 282 

Advanced combat helmet with modular integrated communications headset ................................................................................... 282 

Army training ..................................................................................... 283 

Corrosion prevention and control ..................................................... 284 

Facility sustainment, restoration, and modernization for the 

Army ................................................................................................ 285 

Quadruple specialty containers ......................................................... 285 

Department of Defense foreign language training .......................... 285 

Army civilian intern program ........................................................... 286 

Unattended ground sensors ............................................................... 286 

Information assurance vulnerability alert cell ................................ 286 

Aviation and missile life cycle management pilot program ............ 286 

Army excess carryover ....................................................................... 287 

Audits of Department of Defense financial statements .................. 287 

Page

IX 

Title III—Operation and Maintenance—Continued 

Budget Items—Continued 

Army—Continued 

Civilian personnel pay in excess of requirements ........................... 288 

Defense Information System Network ............................................. 288 

Working capital funds ........................................................................ 288 

Navy ........................................................................................................... 289 

NULKA decoy cartridge ..................................................................... 289 

Stainless steel sanitary spaces .......................................................... 289 

Manufacturing Technical Assistance and Production Program ..... 289 

Electric start system .......................................................................... 290 

Marine gas turbine photonic sensors ................................................ 290 

Mark-45 gun system overhauls ......................................................... 290 

Facility sustainment, restoration, and modernization for the 

Navy ................................................................................................. 290 

Marine Corps ............................................................................................. 291 

Acclimate high performance undergarments ................................... 291 

Combat casualty care equipment upgrades ..................................... 291 

Family of mountain cold weather clothing and equipment ............ 291 

Portable tent lighting ......................................................................... 291 

Ultra-light Camouflage Net System ................................................. 291 

Supplemental communications and electrical utility support to 

U.S. Marine Corps Network Operations Center .......................... 292 

Air Force .................................................................................................... 292 

Bomber deployable phase maintenance kits .................................... 292 

Robust Nuclear Earth Penetrator ..................................................... 292 

Joint protection enterprise network ................................................. 292 

Joint task force north ........................................................................ 293 

Mobile consolidated command center ............................................... 293 

Mobility Air Force depot maintenance ............................................. 293 

Homeland Security/Homeland Defense Education Consortium ..... 294 

Defense-Wide ............................................................................................. 295 

Counseling and assistance to military families ............................... 295 

Increased support for child care for military families ..................... 295 

Funding for Office of Economic Adjustment .................................... 296 

Capital Security Cost Sharing .......................................................... 296 

Information assurance scholarship program ................................... 296 

Increased funding for conservation buffer zones ............................. 297 

Citizen-Soldier Support Program ...................................................... 297 

Parents as Teachers ........................................................................... 298 

Military to civilian conversions ......................................................... 298 

Army Reserve ............................................................................................ 299 

Army Reserve components cold weather clothing ........................... 299 

Air Force Reserve ...................................................................................... 299 

Air Force Reserve mobility Air Force depot maintenance .............. 299 

Army National Guard ............................................................................... 299 

Communicator Automated Emergency Notification System .......... 299 

Virtual battlefield system one ........................................................... 299 

Chemical, Biological, Radiological, Nuclear and High Yield Explosive Enhanced Response Force Package Teams ...................... 300 

Air National Guard ................................................................................... 301 

Air National Guard mobility Air Force depot maintenance ........... 301 

Transfer Accounts ..................................................................................... 301 

Funding for Formerly Used Defense Sites ....................................... 301 

Item of Special Interest .................................................................................... 301 

Defense Information System Network Access Transport Services ........ 301 

Test to improve the quality of agricultural produce available in commissary stores ........................................................................................ 302 

Title IV—Military Personnel Authorizations ........................................................ 303 

Subtitle A—Active Forces ................................................................................ 303 

End strengths for active forces (sec. 401) ................................................ 303 

Revision of permanent active duty end strength minimum levels 

(sec. 402) ................................................................................................. 304 

Subtitle B—Reserve Forces ............................................................................. 304 

End strengths for Selected Reserve (sec. 411) ........................................ 304 

End strengths for Reserves on active duty in support of the Reserves 

(sec. 412) ................................................................................................. 305 

End strengths for military technicians (dual status) (sec. 413) ............ 305 

Page

X 

Title IV—Military Personnel Authorizations—Continued 

Subtitle B—Reserve Forces—Continued 

Fiscal year 2006 limitations on non-dual status technicians (sec. 414) 305 

Subtitle C—Authorizations of Appropriations ............................................... 306 

Authorization of appropriations for military personnel (sec. 421) ........ 306 

Armed Forces Retirement Home (sec. 422) ............................................. 306 

Title V—Military Personnel Policy ......................................................................... 309 

Subtitle A—Officer Personnel Policy .............................................................. 309 

Exclusion of general and flag officers on leave pending separation 

or retirement from computation of active duty officers for general 

and flag officer distribution and strength limitations (sec. 501) ....... 309 

Expansion of joint duty assignments for Reserve component general 

and flag officers (sec. 502) ..................................................................... 309 

Deadline for receipt by promotion selection boards of correspondence 

from eligible officers (sec. 503) ............................................................. 309 

Furnishing to promotion selection boards of adverse information on 

officers eligible for promotion to certain senior grades (sec. 504) ...... 310 

Grades of the Judge Advocates General (sec. 505) ................................. 310 

Temporary extension of authority to reduce minimum length of commissioned service for voluntary retirement as an officer (sec. 506) .. 310 

Modification of strength in grade limitations applicable to Reserve 

flag officers in active status (sec. 507) ................................................. 311 

Uniform authority for deferment of separation of Reserve general 

and flag officers for age (sec. 508) ........................................................ 311 

Subtitle B—Enlisted Personnel Policy ............................................................ 311 

Uniform citizenship or residency requirements for enlistment in the 

Armed Forces (sec. 521) ........................................................................ 311 

Subtitle C—Reserve Component Personnel Matters ..................................... 312 

Requirements for physical examinations and medical and dental 

readiness for members of the Selected Reserve not on active duty 

(sec. 531) ................................................................................................. 312 

Repeal of limitation on amount of financial assistance under Reserve 

Officers’ Training Corps scholarship program (sec. 532) .................... 312 

Procedures for suspending financial assistance and subsistence allowance for senior ROTC cadets and midshipmen on the basis of 

health-related conditions (sec. 533) ...................................................... 312 

Increase in maximum number of Army Reserve and Army National 

Guard cadets under Reserve Officers’ Training Corps (sec. 534) ...... 313 

Modification of educational assistance for Reserves supporting contingency and other operations (sec. 535) .................................................. 313 

Repeal of limitation on authority to redesignate the Naval Reserve 

as the Navy Reserve (sec. 536) ............................................................. 313 

Performance by reserve component personnel of operational test and 

evaluation and training relating to new equipment (sec. 537) .......... 314 

Subtitle D—Military Justice and Related Matters ........................................ 314 

Modification of periods of prosecution by courts-martial for murder, 

rape, and child abuse (sec. 551) ............................................................ 314 

Establishment of offense of stalking (sec. 552) ....................................... 315 

Clarification of authority of military legal assistance counsel (sec. 

553) ......................................................................................................... 315 

Administrative censures of members of the Armed Forces (sec. 554) .. 316 

Reports by officers and senior enlisted personnel of matters relating 

to violations or alleged violations of criminal law (sec. 555) .............. 316 

Subtitle E—Military Service Academies ......................................................... 317 

Authority to retain permanent military professors at the Naval Academy after more than 30 years of service (sec. 561) ............................. 317 

Subtitle F—Administrative Matters ............................................................... 317 

Clarification of leave accrual for members assigned to a deployable 

ship or mobile unit or other duty (sec. 571) ........................................ 317 

Limitation on conversion of military medical and dental billets to 

civilian positions (sec. 572) ................................................................... 318 

Subtitle G—Defense Dependents Education Matters .................................... 318 

Expansion of authorized enrollment in Department of Defense dependents schools overseas (sec. 581) .................................................... 318 

Assistance to local educational agencies with significant enrollment 

increases in military dependent students due to troop relocations, 

creation of new units, and realignments under BRAC (sec. 582) ...... 318 

Page

XI 

Title V—Military Personnel Policy—Continued 

Subtitle G—Defense Dependents Education Matters—Continued 

Assistance to local educational agencies that benefit dependents of 

members of the Armed Forces and Department of Defense civilian 

employees (sec. 583) ............................................................................... 319 

Impact aid for children with severe disabilities (sec. 584) ..................... 319 

Subtitle H—Other Matters .............................................................................. 319 

Policy and procedures on casualty assistance to survivors of military 

decedents (sec. 591) ............................................................................... 319 

Modification and enhancement of mission and authorities of the 

Naval Postgraduate School (sec. 592) .................................................. 320 

Expansion and enhancement of authority to present recognition 

items for recruitment and retention purposes (sec. 593) .................... 320 

Requirement for regulations on policies and procedures on personal 

commercial solicitations on Department of Defense installations 

(sec. 594) ................................................................................................. 321 

Federal assistance for State programs under the National Guard 

Youth Challenge program (sec. 595) .................................................... 322 

Items of Special Interest ........................................................................... 322 

Air Force Future Total Force Planning ............................................ 322 

Opportunity for general or flag officer review of involuntary administrative separation of victims of sexual assault and protection against reprisals for victim advocates ................................... 323 

Premium conversion/flexible spending account options for service 

members .......................................................................................... 323 

Western Governors University .......................................................... 324 

Title VI—Compensation and Other Personnel Benefits ....................................... 325 

Subtitle A—Pay and Allowances ..................................................................... 325 

Eligibility for additional pay of permanent military professors at 

United States Naval Academy with over 36 years of service (sec. 

601) ......................................................................................................... 325 

Enhanced authority for agency contributions for members of the 

Armed Forces participating in the Thrift Savings Plan (sec. 602) .... 325 

Permanent authority for supplemental subsistence allowance for lowincome members with dependents (sec. 603) ....................................... 325 

Modification of pay considered as saved pay upon appointment of 

an enlisted member as an officer (sec. 604) ......................................... 326 

Subtitle B—Bonuses and Special and Incentive Pays ................................... 326 

One-year extension of certain bonus and special pay authorities for 

Reserve forces (sec. 611) ........................................................................ 326 

One-year extension of certain bonus and special pay authorities for 

certain health care professionals (sec. 612) ......................................... 326 

One-year extension of special pay and bonus authorities for nuclear 

officers (sec. 613) .................................................................................... 326 

One-year extension of other bonus and special pay authorities (sec. 

614) ......................................................................................................... 326 

Payment and repayment of assignment incentive pay (sec. 615) .......... 327 

Increase in amount of selective reenlistment bonus for certain senior 

supervisory nuclear qualified enlisted personnel (sec. 616) ............... 327 

Consolidation and modification of bonuses for affiliation or enlistment in the Selected Reserve (sec. 617) ............................................... 327 

Expansion and enhancement of special pay for enlisted members 

of the Selected Reserve assigned to certain high priority units 

(sec. 618) ................................................................................................. 328 

Retention incentive bonus for members of the Selected Reserve qualified in a critical military skill or specialty (sec. 619) ......................... 328 

Termination of limitation on duration of payment of imminent danger special pay during hospitalization (sec. 620) ................................ 328 

Authority for retroactive payment of imminent danger special pay 

(sec. 621) ................................................................................................. 328 

Authority to pay foreign language proficiency pay to members on 

active duty as a bonus (sec. 622) .......................................................... 329 

Incentive bonus for transfer between the Armed Forces (sec. 623) ...... 329 

Subtitle C—Travel and Transportation Allowances ...................................... 329 

Transportation of family members in connection with the repatriation 

of service members or civilian employees held captive (sec. 631) ...... 329 

Subtitle D—Retired Pay and Survivor Benefits ............................................ 330 

Page

XII 

Title VI—Compensation and Other Personnel Benefits—Continued 

Subtitle D—Retired Pay and Survivor Benefits—Continued 

Enhancement of death gratuity and life insurance benefits for deaths 

from combat-related causes or causes incurred in combat operations or areas (sec. 641) ....................................................................... 330 

Subtitle E—Other Matters .............................................................................. 330 

Payment of expenses of members of the Armed Forces to obtain 

professional credentials (sec. 651) ........................................................ 330 

Pilot program on contributions to Thrift Savings Plan for initial 

enlistees in the Armed Forces (sec. 652) .............................................. 331 

Title VII—Health Care ............................................................................................ 333 

Subtitle A—Benefits Matters .......................................................................... 333 

Clarification of eligibility of Reserve officers for health care pending 

active duty following issuance of orders to active duty (sec. 701) ..... 333 

Limitation on deductible and copayment requirements for nursing 

home residents under the pharmacy benefits program (sec. 702) ..... 333 

Eligibility of surviving active duty spouses of deceased members for 

enrollment as dependents in a TRICARE dental plan (sec. 703) ...... 333 

Increased period of continued TRICARE Prime coverage of children 

of members of the uniformed services who die while serving on 

active duty for a period of more than 30 days (sec. 704) .................... 333 

Subtitle B—Planning, Programming, and Management ............................... 334 

TRICARE Standard coordinators in TRICARE regional offices (sec. 

711) ......................................................................................................... 334 

Report on delivery of health care benefits through military health 

care system (sec. 712) ............................................................................ 334 

Comptroller General report on differential payments to children’s 

hospitals for health care for children dependents under TRICARE 

(sec. 713) ................................................................................................. 335 

Repeal of requirement for Comptroller General reviews of certain 

Department of Defense-Department of Veterans Affairs projects 

on sharing of health care resources (sec. 714) ..................................... 335 

Surveys on TRICARE standard (sec. 715) ............................................... 335 

Modification of health care quality information and technology enhancement report requirements (sec. 716) .......................................... 336 

Modification of authorities relating to patient care reporting and 

management system (sec. 717) ............................................................. 336 

Subtitle C—Other Matters .............................................................................. 336 

Report on adverse health events associated with use of anti-malarial 

drugs (sec. 731) ...................................................................................... 336 

Pilot projects on early diagnosis and treatment of Post Traumatic 

Stress Disorder and other mental health conditions (sec. 732) ......... 336 

Items of Special Interest .................................................................................. 337 

Active-duty medical extension .................................................................. 337 

Comptroller General study of adequacy of TRICARE reimbursement 

for obstetrical, gynecological, and pediatric services .......................... 338 

Increased awareness for families of TRICARE mental health benefits 

and the need for appropriate mental health services for families 

overseas .................................................................................................. 338 

Specialty health care services referrals and authorizations .................. 339 

Title VIII—Acquisition Policy, Acquisition Management, and Related Matters 341 

Overview .................................................................................................... 341 

Subtitle A—Acquisition Policy and Management .......................................... 349 

Internal controls for procurements on behalf of the Department of 

Defense (sec. 801) .................................................................................. 349 

Contract Support Acquisition Centers (sec. 802) .................................... 349 

Authority to enter into acquisition and cross-servicing agreements 

with regional organizations of which the United States is not a 

member (sec. 803) .................................................................................. 350 

Requirement for authorization for procurement of major weapon systems as commercial items (sec. 804) .................................................... 351 

Report on service surcharges for purchases made for military departments through other Department of Defense agencies (sec. 805) ...... 351 

Review of defense acquisition structures (sec. 806) ................................ 351 

Subtitle B—Defense Industrial Base Matters ................................................ 352 

Clarification of exception from Buy American requirements for procurement of perishable food for establishments outside the United 

States (sec. 811) ..................................................................................... 352 

Page

XIII 

Title VIII—Acquisition Policy, Acquisition Management, and Related Matters—Continued 

Subtitle B—Defense Industrial Base Matters—Continued 

Conditional waiver of domestic source or content requirements for 

certain countries with reciprocal procurement agreements with the 

United States (sec. 812) ........................................................................ 352 

Consistency with United States obligations under trade agreements 

(sec. 813) ................................................................................................. 353 

Identification of areas of research and development effort for purposes of the Small Business Innovative Research program (sec. 

814) ......................................................................................................... 353 

Subtitle C—Defense Contractor Matters ........................................................ 353 

Requirements for defense contractors relating to certain former Department of Defense officials (sec. 821) ............................................... 353 

Review of certain contractor ethics matters (sec. 822) ........................... 354 

Contract fraud risk assessment (sec. 823) ............................................... 355 

Subtitle D—Defense Acquisition Workforce Matters .................................... 356 

Availability of funds in Acquisition Workforce Training Fund for 

defense acquisition workforce improvements (sec. 831) ..................... 356 

Limitation and reinvestment authority relating to reduction of the 

defense acquisition and support workforce (sec. 832) ......................... 356 

Technical amendments relating to defense acquisition workforce improvements (sec. 833) ............................................................................ 356 

Subtitle E—Other Matters .............................................................................. 357 

Extension of contract goal for small disadvantaged business and certain institutions of higher education (sec. 841) ................................... 357 

Codification and modification of limitation on modification of military 

equipment within five years of retirement or disposal (sec. 842) ...... 357 

Clarification of rapid acquisition authority to respond to combat 

emergencies (sec. 843) ........................................................................... 357 

Modification of authority to carry out certain prototype projects (sec. 

844) ......................................................................................................... 357 

Extension of certain authorities on contracting with employers of 

persons with disabilities (sec. 845) ....................................................... 358 

Items of Special Interest ...................................................................................... 358 

Commercial satellite bandwidth .............................................................. 358 

Defense trade data .................................................................................... 359 

Department of Defense anti-tamper program ......................................... 359 

Industrial base issues ............................................................................... 360 

Implementation of authority to enter energy savings performance 

contracts ................................................................................................. 360 

National technology and industrial base considerations ........................ 361 

Title IX—Department of Defense Organization and Management ..................... 363 

Subtitle A—Duties and Functions of Department of Defense Officers and 

Organizations ................................................................................................ 363 

Directors of small business programs (sec. 901) ..................................... 363 

Executive agent for acquisition of capabilities to defend the homeland 

against missiles and other low-altitude aircraft (sec. 902) ................ 363 

Subtitle B—Space Activities ............................................................................ 364 

Advisory committee on Department of Defense requirements for 

space control (Sec. 911) ......................................................................... 364 

Subtitle C—Other Matters .............................................................................. 365 

Acceptance of gifts and donations for Department of Defense regional 

centers for security studies (sec. 921) .................................................. 365 

Operational files of the Defense Intelligence Agency (sec. 922) ............ 365 

Prohibition on implementation of certain orders and guidance on 

functions and duties of the General Council and the Judge Advocate General of the Air Force (sec. 923) ............................................... 365 

Title X—General Provisions .................................................................................... 367 

Subtitle A—Financial Matters ........................................................................ 367 

Transfer authority (sec. 1001) .................................................................. 367 

Incorporation of classified annex (sec. 1002) ........................................... 367 

United States contribution to NATO common-funded budgets in fiscal 

year 2006 (sec. 1003) ............................................................................. 367 

Reduction in certain authorizations due to savings relating to lower 

inflation (sec. 1004) ................................................................................ 367 

Authorization of supplemental appropriations for fiscal year 2005 

(sec. 1005) ............................................................................................... 367 

Page

XIV 

Title X—General Provisions—Continued 

Subtitle A—Financial Matters—Continued 

Increase in fiscal year 2005 transfer authority (sec. 1006) .................... 368 

Monthly disbursement to States of state income tax voluntarily withheld from retired or retained pay (sec. 1007) ...................................... 368 

Reestablishment of limitation on payment of facilities charges assessed by Department of State (sec. 1008) .......................................... 368 

Subtitle B—Naval Vessels and Shipyards ...................................................... 368 

Transfer of battleship (sec. 1021) ............................................................. 368 

Conveyance of Navy Drydock, Jacksonville, Florida (sec. 1022) ........... 369 

Subtitle C—Counterdrug Matters ................................................................... 369 

Use of unmanned aerial vehicles for United States border reconnaissance (sec. 1031) .................................................................................... 369 

Use of counterdrug funds for certain counterterrorism operations 

(sec. 1032) ............................................................................................... 370 

Support for counterdrug activities through bases of operation and 

training facilities in Afghanistan (sec. 1033) ....................................... 370 

Subtitle D—Reports and Studies .................................................................... 371 

Modification of frequency of submittal of Joint Warfighting Science 

and Technology Plan (sec. 1041) ........................................................... 371 

Review and assessment of Defense Base Act insurance (sec. 1042) ..... 371 

Comptroller General report on corrosion prevention and mitigation 

programs of the Department of Defense (sec. 1043) ........................... 371 

Subtitle E—Technical Amendments ............................................................... 372 

Technical amendments relating to certain provisions of environmental defense laws (sec. 1051) ........................................................... 372 

Subtitle F—Military Mail Matters .................................................................. 372 

Safe delivery of mail in the military mail system (sec. 1061) ............... 372 

Delivery of mail addressed to any service member (sec. 1062) ............. 374 

Subtitle G—Other Matters .............................................................................. 374 

Policy on role of military medical and behavioral science personnel 

in interrogation of detainees (sec. 1071) .............................................. 374 

Clarification of authority to issue security regulations and orders 

under Internal Security Act of 1950 (sec. 1072) .................................. 375 

Items of Special Interest .................................................................................. 375 

Strategic Seaports ..................................................................................... 375 

Title XI—Department of Defense Civilian Personnel Policy ................................ 377 

Extension of authority for voluntary separations in reductions in 

force (sec. 1101) ...................................................................................... 377 

Compensatory time off for certain nonappropriated fund employees 

(sec. 1102) ............................................................................................... 377 

Extension of authority to pay severance payments in lump sums 

(sec. 1103) ............................................................................................... 377 

Continuation of Federal Employee Health Benefits program eligibility 

(sec. 1104) ............................................................................................... 377 

Permanent and enhanced authority for Science, Mathematics, and 

Research for Transformation (SMART) defense education program 

(sec. 1105) ............................................................................................... 378 

Item of Special Interest .................................................................................... 378 

Comptroller General Report on policy concerning Department of Defense civilians deployed in support of contingency operations ........... 378 

Title XII—Matters Relating to Other Nations ...................................................... 381 

Commanders’ Emergency Response Program (sec. 1201) ...................... 381 

Enhancement and expansion of authority to provide humanitarian 

and civic assistance (sec. 1202) ............................................................. 381 

Modification of geographic limitation on payment of personnel expenses under bilateral or regional cooperation programs (sec. 

1203) ....................................................................................................... 382 

Payment of travel expenses of coalition liaison officers (sec. 1204) ...... 382 

Title XIII—Cooperative Threat Reduction with States of the Former Soviet 

Union ..................................................................................................................... 383 

Specification of Cooperative Threat Reduction programs and funds 

(sec. 1301) ............................................................................................... 383 

Funding allocations (sec. 1302) ................................................................ 383 

Permanent waiver of restrictions on use of funds for threat reduction 

in states of the former Soviet Union (sec. 1303) ................................. 383 

Modification of authority to use Cooperative Threat Reduction funds 

outside the former Soviet Union (sec. 1304) ........................................ 383 

Page

XV 

Title XIII—Cooperative Threat Reduction with States of the Former Soviet 

Union—Continued 

Repeal of requirement for annual Comptroller General assessment 

of annual Department of Defense report on activities and assistance under Cooperative Threat Reduction programs (sec. 1305) ...... 384 

Title XIV—Authorization for Supplemental Appropriations for Iraq, Afghanistan, and the Global War on Terrorism ............................................................. 385 

Overview .................................................................................................... 385 

Summary table of authorization .............................................................. 385 

Purpose (sec. 1401) .................................................................................... 392 

Designation as emergency amounts (sec. 1402) ...................................... 392 

Army procurement (sec. 1403) .................................................................. 392 

Navy and Marine Corps procurement (sec. 1404) .................................. 393 

Air Force procurement (sec. 1405) ........................................................... 393 

Operation and Maintenance (sec. 1406) .................................................. 393 

Defense Health Program (sec. 1407) ........................................................ 393 

Military personnel (sec. 1408) .................................................................. 393 

Iraq Freedom Fund (sec. 1409) ................................................................ 393 

Transfer authority (sec. 1410) .................................................................. 394 

Budget Items ..................................................................................................... 394 

UH–60 Black Hawk helicopters ............................................................... 394 

UH–60 Black Hawk helicopter modifications ......................................... 395 

M107 sniper rifle ....................................................................................... 395 

Rapid fielding initiative ............................................................................ 395 

Night vision enhancements ...................................................................... 395 

Lightweight laser designation rangefinder ............................................. 396 

Mounted battle command on the move ................................................... 396 

UH–1Y helicopters .................................................................................... 397 

EA–6B ICAP III ......................................................................................... 397 

Low band transmitters for EA–6B aircraft ............................................. 397 

CH–53E Helicopter Night Vision Systems .............................................. 398 

Hellfire missiles ......................................................................................... 398 

Small arms ................................................................................................. 398 

Pioneer tactical unmanned aerial vehicle ............................................... 398 

Dual mode laser guided training bombs .................................................. 399 

Small arms and landing party ammunition ............................................ 399 

M80/M62 7.62mm cartridge ..................................................................... 399 

.50 caliber link armor piercing cartridge with tracer ............................. 399 

M430 40mm high explosive dual purpose ............................................... 400 

M830A1 120mm high explosive with tracer cartridge ........................... 400 

XM1028 120mm tank cartridge ............................................................... 400 

M72A7 66mm high explosive rocket ........................................................ 400 

MK154 non-electric detonator .................................................................. 400 

M762A1 electronic time fuze .................................................................... 401 

M782 multi-option fuze for artillery ........................................................ 401 

Explosive ordnance disposal equipment allowance for naval coastal 

warfare units .......................................................................................... 401 

Amphibious equipment allowance for naval coastal warfare units ....... 401 

Equipment and trainer for maritime interdiction operations ................ 402 

High mobility artillery rocket system ...................................................... 402 

AN/TPS–59(V3) radar system array rebuild ........................................... 402 

Enhanced position location reporting system ......................................... 403 

Explosive ordnance disposal equipment .................................................. 403 

C–5 aircraft missile warning system upgrade ........................................ 403 

C–17 aircraft infrared countermeasures ................................................. 404 

Mobile approach control system ............................................................... 404 

Body armor ................................................................................................ 404 

Expanded maritime interdiction operations training and outfitting .... 405 

Small caliber weapons and mounts repair and replacement ................. 405 

Field medical equipment ........................................................................... 405 

M1A1 tank depot maintenance ................................................................ 406 

Division B—Military Construction Authorizations ............................................... 407 

Explanation of funding tables .................................................................. 407 

Short title (sec. 2001) ................................................................................ 429 

Title XXI—Army ...................................................................................................... 431 

Summary .................................................................................................... 431 

Authorized Army construction and land acquisition projects (sec. 

2101) ....................................................................................................... 431 

Page

XVI 

Title XXI—Army—Continued 

Family housing (sec. 2102) ....................................................................... 431 

Improvements to military family housing units (sec. 2103) .................. 431 

Authorization of appropriations, Army (sec. 2104) ................................. 431 

Items of Special Interest .................................................................................. 432 

Report on permanent facilities for new Army units ............................... 432 

Title XXII—Navy ..................................................................................................... 435 

Summary .................................................................................................... 435 

Authorized Navy construction and land acquisition projects (sec. 

2201) ....................................................................................................... 435 

Family housing (sec. 2202) ....................................................................... 435 

Improvements to military family housing units (sec. 2203) .................. 436 

Authorization of appropriations, Navy (sec. 2204) ................................. 436 

Modification of authority to carry out certain fiscal year 2004 project 

(sec. 2205) ............................................................................................... 436 

Modification of authority to carry out certain fiscal year 2005 projects 

(sec. 2206) ............................................................................................... 436 

Hockmuth Hall, Marine Corps Base Quantico, Virginia ....................... 436 

Title XXIII—Air Force ............................................................................................. 437 

Summary .................................................................................................... 437 

Authorized Air Force construction and land acquisition projects (sec. 

2301) ....................................................................................................... 437 

Family housing (sec. 2302) ....................................................................... 438 

Improvements to military family housing units (sec. 2303) .................. 438 

Authorization of appropriations, Air Force (sec. 2304) .......................... 438 

Items of Special Interest .................................................................................. 438 

Planning and design, Air Force ................................................................ 438 

Title XXIV—Defense Agencies ................................................................................ 439 

Summary .................................................................................................... 439 

Authorized defense agencies construction and land acquisition 

projects (sec. 2401) ................................................................................. 439 

Energy conservation projects (sec. 2402) ................................................. 439 

Authorization of appropriations, defense agencies (sec. 2403) .............. 440 

Title XXV—North Atlantic Treaty Organization Security Investment Program ...................................................................................................................... 441 

Summary .................................................................................................... 441 

Authorized NATO construction and land acquisition projects (sec. 

2501) ....................................................................................................... 441 

Authorization of appropriations, NATO (sec. 2502) ............................... 441 

Title XXVI—Guard and Reserve Forces Facilities ................................................ 443 

Summary .................................................................................................... 443 

Authorized Guard and Reserve construction and land acquisition 

projects (sec. 2601) ................................................................................. 443 

Items of Special Interest .................................................................................. 443 

Unspecified minor construction, Army National Guard ......................... 443 

Unspecified minor construction, Air National Guard ............................. 443 

Planning and design, Army National Guard .......................................... 443 

Title XXVII—Expiration and Extension of Authorizations .................................. 445 

Expiration of authorizations and amounts required to be specified 

by law (sec. 2701) ................................................................................... 445 

Extension of authorizations of certain fiscal year 2003 projects (sec. 

2702) ....................................................................................................... 445 

Extension of authorizations of certain fiscal year 2002 projects (sec. 

2703) ....................................................................................................... 445 

Effective date (sec. 2704) .......................................................................... 445 

Title XXVIII—General Provisions .......................................................................... 447 

Subtitle A—Military Construction Program and Military Family ............... 447 

Housing Changes ....................................................................................... 447 

Increase in thresholds for unspecified minor military construction 

projects (sec. 2801) ................................................................................. 447 

Modification of cost variation authority (sec. 2802) ............................... 447 

Department of Defense housing funds (sec. 2803) .................................. 447 

Temporary authority to use minor military construction authority 

for construction of child development centers (sec. 2804) .................. 448 

Inapplicability to child development centers of restriction on authority to acquire or construct ancillary supporting facilities (sec. 2805) 448 

Authority to carry out exchanges of facilities including associated 

utilities, equipment, and furnishings (sec. 2806) ................................ 449 

Page

XVII 

Title XXVIII—General Provisions—Continued 

Subtitle A—Military Construction Program and Military Family—Continued 

Increase in number of family housing units in Korea authorized 

for lease by the Army at maximum amount (sec. 2807) ..................... 449 

Subtitle B—Real Property and Facilities Administration ............................. 449 

Authority to lease non-excess property of Department of Defense 

field activities (sec. 2821) ...................................................................... 449 

Modified criteria for agreements to limit encroachments and other 

constraints on military training, testing and operations (sec. 2822) . 449 

Subtitle C—Land Conveyances ....................................................................... 450 

Part I—Army Conveyances ...................................................................... 450 

Land conveyance, Helena, Montana (sec. 2841) ..................................... 450 

Land conveyance, Army Reserve center, Bothell, Washington (sec. 

2842) ....................................................................................................... 450 

Part II—Air Force Conveyances ............................................................... 451 

Acquisition of build-to-lease family housing at Eielson Air Force 

Base, Alaska (sec. 2861) ........................................................................ 451 

Subtitle D—Other Matters .............................................................................. 451 

Reorganization and technical improvement of codified laws applicable 

to real property of the Department of Defense (sec. 2881) ................. 451 

Report on application of force protection an anti-terrorism standards 

to leased facilities (sec. 2882) ............................................................... 451 

Construction at Fort Buchanan, Puerto Rico, for Reserve components 

(sec. 2883) ............................................................................................... 452 

Authority to use Papago Park Military Reservation, Arizona, for general military purposes (sec. 2884) ........................................................ 452 

One-year extension of Department of Defense laboratory revitalization program (sec. 2885) ........................................................................ 452 

Sense of Congress on establishment of Bakers Creek memorial (sec. 

2886) ....................................................................................................... 453 

Items of Special Interest .................................................................................. 453 

Report on host nation agreements for overseas installations ................ 453 

Training facilities for military operations in urban terrain .................. 454 

Relocation of Reserve component military units at Lambert International Airport, St. Louis, Missouri ................................................... 454 

Division C—Department of Energy National Security Authorizations and 

Other Authorizations ........................................................................................... 457 

Title XXXI—Department of Energy National Security Programs ....................... 457 

Overview .................................................................................................... 457 

Subtitle A—National Security Programs Authorizations .............................. 478 

National Nuclear Security Administration (sec. 3101) .......................... 478 

Weapons activities ..................................................................................... 478 

Directed stockpile work ............................................................................. 478 

Campaigns ................................................................................................. 478 

Readiness in the technical base ............................................................... 478 

Secure transportation asset ...................................................................... 479 

Safeguards and security ........................................................................... 479 

Facilities and infrastructure ..................................................................... 479 

Defense Nuclear Nonproliferation Program ............................................ 480 

Naval Reactors .......................................................................................... 481 

Office of Administrator ............................................................................. 481 

Environmental Projects and Operations ................................................. 481 

Reliable replacement warhead ................................................................. 482 

Robust nuclear earth penetrator .............................................................. 482 

Defense environmental management (sec. 3102) .................................... 483 

Defense site acceleration completion ....................................................... 483 

Defense environmental services ............................................................... 483 

Other defense activities(sec. 3103) ........................................................... 484 

Security and Safety Performance Assurance .......................................... 484 

Environment, Safety and Health ............................................................. 484 

Office of Legacy Management .................................................................. 484 

Nuclear Energy .......................................................................................... 484 

Defense Related Administrative Support ................................................ 485 

Office of Hearings and Appeals ................................................................ 485 

Energy security and assurance ................................................................ 485 

Defense nuclear waste disposal (sec. 3104) ............................................. 485 

Subtitle B—Other Matters .............................................................................. 485 

Page

XVIII 

Title XXXI—Department of Energy National Security Programs—Continued 

Subtitle B—Other Matters—Continued 

Report on compliance with design basis threat (sec. 3105) ................... 485 

Cost estimate for Waste Treatment and Immobilization Plant project, 

Hanford Site, Richland, Washington (sec. 3106) ................................. 486 

Report on international border security programs (sec. 3107) .............. 486 

Items of Special Interest .................................................................................. 487 

National security implications of the Rare Isotope Accelerator ............ 487 

Role of the Kansas City Plant .................................................................. 488 

Title XXXII—Defense Nuclear Facilities Safety Board ........................................ 489 

Authorization (sec. 3201) .......................................................................... 489 

Title XXXIII—National Defense Stockpile .............................................. 491 

Revisions to required receipt objectives for previously authorized disposals from the National Defense Stockpile (sec. 3301) ..................... 491 

Legislative Requirements ........................................................................................ 491 

Departmental Recommendations ............................................................. 491 

Committee Action ...................................................................................... 491 

Congressional Budget Office Cost Estimate ............................................ 491 

Regulatory Impact ..................................................................................... 491 

Changes in Existing Law .......................................................................... 491 

Calendar No. 102 

109TH CONGRESS REPORT " ! SENATE 1st Session 109–69 

AUTHORIZING APPROPRIATIONS FOR FISCAL YEAR 2006 FOR MILITARY 

ACTIVITIES OF THE DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE, FOR MILITARY CONSTRUCTION, AND FOR DEFENSE ACTIVITIES OF THE DEPARTMENT OF 

ENERGY, TO PRESCRIBE PERSONNEL STRENGTHS FOR SUCH FISCAL 

YEAR FOR THE ARMED FORCES, AND FOR OTHER PURPOSES 

MAY 17, 2005.—Ordered to be printed 

Mr. WARNER, from the Committee on Armed Services, 

submitted the following 

R E P O R T 

[To accompany S. 1042] 

The Committee on Armed Services reports favorably an original 

bill to authorize appropriations during the fiscal year 2006 for military activities of the Department of Defense, for military construction, and for defense activities of the Department of Energy, to prescribe personnel strengths for such fiscal year for the Armed 

Forces, and for other purposes, and recommends that the bill do 

pass. 

PURPOSE OF THE BILL 

This bill would: 

(1) authorize appropriations for (a) procurement, (b) research, development, test and evaluation, (c) operation and 

maintenance and the revolving and management funds of the 

Department of Defense for fiscal year 2006; 

(2) authorize the personnel end strengths for each military 

active duty component of the Armed Forces for fiscal year 

2005; 

(3) authorize the personnel end strengths for the Selected 

Reserve of each of the Reserve components of the Armed 

Forces for fiscal year 2006; 

(4) impose certain reporting requirements; 

(5) impose certain limitations with regard to specific procurement and research, development, test and evaluation actions 

and manpower strengths; provide certain additional legislative 

authority, and make certain changes to existing law; 

2 

(6) authorize appropriations for military construction programs of the Department of Defense for fiscal year 2006; and 

(7) authorize appropriations for national security programs 

of the Department of Energy for fiscal year 2006. 

Committee overview and recommendations 

The past three and one-half years have been a time of great successes and enormous challenges for the U.S. Armed Forces. The 

mission of the men and women in uniform to defend the nation has 

never been executed with better skill or dedication on the battlefield. The rapid successes of Operation Enduring Freedom in Afghanistan and Operation Iraqi Freedom have evolved into the hard 

work of counter-insurgency, reconstruction, and stability operations 

necessary to achieve peace and security in these troubled regions. 

Such important work brings new challenges associated with the extraordinarily high operational tempo on people and equipment, the 

technological challenges of countering asymmetric threats such as 

improvised explosive devices, the demands of transforming the 

Armed Forces for future threats, and the responsibility of the nation to properly care for those who volunteer to serve—Active, Reserve, National Guard, and retired—and their families. 

The National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2006 addresses these challenges. This bill is being considered by the committee at a time when the United States continues to lead a coalition of nations to defeat terrorism globally and to defend freedom 

and democracy. Hundreds of thousands of soldiers, sailors, airmen, 

Marines, and Coast Guardsmen—Active, Reserve, and National 

Guard—countless civilians who support military, diplomatic, and 

humanitarian operations have served, and more are serving valiantly in Iraq, Afghanistan, and other locations to secure hard-won 

military successes and to preserve peace and freedom. Successful 

elections in Iraq and Afghanistan in the past year are testament 

to the yearning of the people of those nations for a voice in their 

own destiny, the willingness of the United States to assist, and the 

professionalism of the brave Americans who volunteer to serve in 

uniform. The U.S. Armed Forces, serving around the world, are 

truly the first line of defense in the security of the U.S. homeland. 

The committee is ever mindful of the risks members of the U.S. 

Armed Forces face every day, and of the many sacrifices made by 

the families and communities that support them. Our men and 

women in uniform have been asked to do much in the past year, 

and they have responded in the finest traditions of the generations 

of Americans that preceded them. Tragically, many members of the 

U.S. Armed Forces, as well as a number of civilian employees and 

contractors of the Department of Defense have been killed in service to their country, and many more have been wounded. On behalf 

of a grateful nation, the committee is committed to ensuring that 

those who have sacrificed so much will not be forgotten and will 

receive the care and support that they deserve. The American people are proud of their Armed Forces for what they have accomplished, for their selfless sacrifices, and for the manner in which 

they represent American values and the generosity of America. 

While recent successes have proven the value of past investment 

in the people and the equipment of the U.S. Armed Forces, there 

is no room for complacency. A recurring lesson of history is that naVerDate Aug 04 2004 15:24 May 25, 2005 Jkt 021326 PO 00000 Frm 00022 Fmt 6659 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\SR069.XXX SR069
3 

tional security threats are ever-changing and persistent. Victory 

and success must be accompanied by vigilance. Such vigilance 

takes the form of readiness of today’s forces and preparation for future threats to the security of the United States, its interests, and 

its allies. 

Since the beginning of the 109th Congress, the Committee on 

Armed Services of the Senate has conducted 35 hearings and received numerous policy and operational briefings on the President’s 

budget request for fiscal year 2006 and related defense issues. As 

a result of these deliberations, the committee identified seven priorities to guide its work on the National Defense Authorization Act 

for Fiscal Year 2006: 

(1) Provide our men and women in uniform with the resources, training, technology, equipment, and authorities they 

need to win the global war on terrorism, with particular focus 

on supporting the conduct of military operations in Iraq and 

Afghanistan. 

(2) Enhance the ability of the Department of Defense to fulfill its homeland defense responsibilities by providing the resources and authorities necessary for the Department to assist 

in protecting our nation against all current and anticipated 

forms of attack. 

(3) Provide the resources and authorities needed to rapidly 

acquire the full range of force protection capabilities for deployed forces. 

(4) Continue the committee’s commitment to improve the 

quality of life for those who serve—Active, Reserve, National 

Guard, and retired—and their families; enhance incentives to 

recruit and retain those who volunteer to serve in the Armed 

Forces; provide the best possible care and rehabilitation services for those who bear the wounds of combat; and ensure generous support for the survivors of those military personnel 

killed in defense of our Nation. 

(5) Sustain the readiness of our Armed Forces to conduct 

military operations against all current and anticipated threats. 

(6) Support the Department’s efforts to develop the innovative, forward-looking capabilities necessary to modernize and 

transform the Armed Forces to successfully counter current 

and future threats, particularly by enhancing our technology in 

areas such as unmanned systems, personal protection systems, 

and measures to counter improvised explosive devices. 

(7) Continue active committee oversight of Department programs and operations, particularly in the areas of acquisition 

reform and contract management, to ensure proper stewardship of taxpayers’ dollars. 

In order to fund these priorities, the committee recommends 

$441.6 billion in budget authority for defense programs for fiscal 

year 2006, an increase of $21.0 billion—or 3.1 percent in real 

terms—above the amount authorized by the Congress for fiscal 

year 2005. The committee’s recommendations include: $78.2 billion 

in procurement funding, a $1.5 billion increase above the President’s budget request; $69.8 billion in funding for research, development, test, and evaluation, a $0.4 million increase over the requested level; and $109.2 billion for military personnel, a $237 million increase over the requested level. The committee’s recVerDate Aug 04 2004 15:24 May 25, 2005 Jkt 021326 PO 00000 Frm 00023 Fmt 6659 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\SR069.XXX SR069
4 

ommendation also includes budget authority for $50.0 billion in 

emergency supplemental funding in fiscal year 2006 to cover costs 

of military operations in Iraq, Afghanistan, and the global war on 

terrorism. 

The committee’s first priority was to provide the Department of 

Defense with the resources and authorities it needs to win the global war on terrorism. In these areas, the committee authorizes an 

increase of almost $600.0 million over the budget request. Funding 

highlights for ground forces include: $2.9 billion for new helicopters 

and helicopter modifications, in order to get needed lift and attack 

helicopters to troops in the field and $878.4 million to continue procuring the Stryker armored vehicles that are proving so valuable 

in military operations in Iraq. To improve the ability of special operations forces, a major component of the war on terror, the committee authorized an increase of $84.5 million above the President’s budget request to accelerate the availability of important 

new capabilities. For naval forces, the committee authorized an increase of $336.7 million to the Shipbuilding and Conversion, Navy, 

account for a total of $9.1 billion to accelerate development of the 

CVN–78 aircraft carrier, the LHA(R) amphibious ship, and the second DD(X) destroyer of the class, as well as authorizing the four 

ships in the President’s budget request. For air forces, the committee supported the President’s budget request funding levels for 

major aircraft acquisition programs. The committee provided for 

the continued funding of the C–130J aircraft multiyear contract 

and added $37.7 million for the procurement of center wing box assemblies for C–130E/H aircraft to improve the availability of these 

important intra-theater lift assets. 

To enhance the Department’s homeland defense capabilities, the 

committee added $48.8 million above the President’s budget request including: an additional $19.8 million to provide expanded 

capabilities for the Weapons of Mass Destruction-Civil Support 

teams that provide the Department support to local and regional 

first responders in every State and territory of the United States 

and an additional $20.0 million for cybersecurity research. The 

committee also authorized an additional $60.0 million for development and fielding of chemical and biological agent detection and 

protection technologies, that have application for both homeland 

defense and for protection of deployed forces. To protect America 

from missile threats, the committee authorized $8.8 billion for ballistic missile defense, and reemphasized the need to develop defenses against cruise missiles, unmanned aerial vehicles, and other 

low-altitude air threats. 

To address the force protection needs of deployed U.S. forces, the 

committee authorized over $1.4 billion for various programs to protect personnel, vehicles, and installations, including: $344.2 million 

for up-armored HMMWV’s and armor kits for other wheeled vehicles, an increase of $120.0 million above the requested amount; and 

an additional $500.0 million for research, development, and fielding 

of technologies to counter improvised explosive devices; and added 

$117.8 million for individual body armor. The committee is fully 

supportive of the Department of Defense efforts to improve the 

force protection capabilities available to deployed forces and will 

work closely with the Department of Defense and the military servVerDate Aug 04 2004 15:24 May 25, 2005 Jkt 021326 PO 00000 Frm 00024 Fmt 6659 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\SR069.XXX SR069
5 

ices to ensure that all requirements to improve force protection are 

fully funded. 

The committee is committed to continuing to improve the quality 

of life of the men and women in uniform—Active, Reserve, National 

Guard, and retired—and their families. The proposed bill would authorize a 3.1 percent across-the-board pay raise for all uniformed 

service personnel. The committee has increased the death gratuity 

payable to survivors of military decedents to $100,000 when the 

death occurs under combat-related conditions or in designated combat zones. Additionally, the committee authorized an increase in 

the maximum Servicemembers’ Group Life Insurance benefit from 

$250,000 to $400,000. 

The committee has authorized full funding for the defense health 

program, and is committed to ensuring that there is no erosion in 

quality health care for all beneficiaries. To this end, the committee 

authorizes an additional $82.2 million to ensure the medical readiness of the Reserve components. The committee is pleased that the 

Department has taken steps to implement the full range of health 

care benefits for members of Reserve components and their families—both before and after deployment—that was authorized in the 

Ronald W. Reagan National Defense Authorization Act for 2005 

(Public Law 108–375). 

An important aspect of quality of life for service members are the 

benefits and services available to family members. The committee 

recognizes the tremendous dedication and sacrifices of military 

family members who share in every way in the successes, accomplishments, and hardships of the members of the Armed Forces. 

The committee supports all of the benefits for family members contained in the President’s budget request and authorizes an increase 

of $70.0 million to further enhance support for military families, 

particularly with regard to additional child care services. 

The quality of combat medicine has improved dramatically since 

World War II, the Korean Conflict, and Vietnam. More service 

members now survive the initial wounds of war, and it is important 

that the best possible care and rehabilitative services are available 

for those wounded in combat. The bill would authorize various provisions that recognize the evolving nature of battlefield medicine, 

the long-term needs of seriously wounded survivors and combat 

veterans, and the social and fiscal support responsibilities of the 

nation to the survivors of those who make the ultimate sacrifice. 

The committee is concerned about the challenges of recruiting 

and retaining volunteers for the Active and Reserve component 

force in a wartime environment. In addition to the quality of life 

improvements already discussed, the committee has authorized a 

variety of incentives and bonuses for Active Duty and Reserve component personnel, and will continue to work closely with the Department of Defense and the military services to ensure that they 

have the resources and authorities they need to recruit and retain 

a high quality volunteer force. 

The committee recognizes that U.S. ground forces in general, and 

the U.S. Army in particular, have experienced a high operational 

tempo for an extended period. The bill recommended by the committee authorizes an increase in active-duty end strength for the 

Army of 20,000 personnel in fiscal year 2006, for an end strength 

level of 522,400. The active-duty end strength for the U.S. Marine 

6 

Corps is maintained at 178,000, equal to the end strength authorized for fiscal year 2005, and 3,000 above the President’s budget request. The bill supports the end strength levels of the other military services for both Active and Reserve components recommended 

by the President, and includes an increase of 85 National Guard 

personnel to man augmentation elements to the Weapons of Mass 

Destruction—Civil Support Teams. The committee supports the initiatives by the Army to reorganize their combat formations into 

modular brigade sized units to provide more combat formations and 

a more deployable, flexible force. The administration requested $12.1 billion for military construc- tion and family housing, including $1.9 billion to initiate activities 

required to carry out the results of the 2005 Base Realignment and 

Closure Commission recommendations. The committee recommendations include certain adjustments to provide prudent investment in overseas locations and increased investment in installations in the United States. Among the funding adjustments made 

by the committee are increases of over $120.0 million in critical unfunded projects identified by the military services, and an additional $187.0 million to fund improvements to facilities supporting 

National Guard and reserve forces needs. 

Over the past several years, the committee has worked with the 

Department to ensure that necessary modernization, transformation, and long-range research were maintained, even in times 

of high operational tempo. The committee continues its support for 

these transformational activities, authorizing $3.4 billion for the 

Army’s Future Combat System development; $115.4 million for tactical UAV’s that have proven so valuable in recent military operations; and $10.9 billion for defense science and technology programs, an increase of over $400.0 million above the President’s 

budget request, that are the foundation for future capabilities. The 

committee remains committed to the goals it set for the Department five years ago to have one-third of deep strike aircraft unmanned combat systems by the year 2010, and one-third of the 

ground combat vehicles unmanned by the year 2015. 

The committee takes its oversight responsibilities over the Department of Defense and defense related activities of the Department of Energy very seriously. The bill contains several provisions 

designed to improve management and oversight of Department of 

Defense acquisition programs. These provisions would increase the 

size and quality of the acquisition workforce, strengthen defense 

ethics programs, and reduce the risk of contract fraud. In addition, 

the bill would expand the authority of the Secretary of Defense to 

rapidly acquire capabilities to ensure that our deployed troops can 

quickly get needed equipment. 

The committee is particularly concerned about the state of the 

current shipbuilding program. The committee does not believe that 

the current or projected level of funding for shipbuilding is adequate to build the numbers of ships that will allow the Navy to 

perform its global missions or to sustain an increasingly fragile industrial base. The founding fathers were specific in the United 

States Constitution that it is the duty of Congress to ‘‘maintain’’ a 

Navy. They had the foresight to realize that a Navy cannot be 

quickly constituted, or reconstituted. That is as true today as it 

was over two centuries ago. If the United States is to remain a 

7 

global power, it must have a global presence. As a maritime nation, 

that presence is often displayed in the form of naval ships, not only 

through ensuring open sea lines of communication and trade in 

international waters, but also through the inherently diplomatic 

mission of visiting foreign ports and ‘‘showing the flag’’. 

The Navy currently has only 288 ships in the fleet. This is the 

smallest number of ships in the Navy since before the start of the 

Second World War. It is true that these ships possess capabilities 

far greater than those of the past, but global presence demands 

sufficient numbers of ships as well as the capabilities possessed by 

those ships. 

Numerous officials have testified before this committee that shipbuilding must become a subject of national debate. They have testified that the Department of Defense, the Congress, and the shipbuilders need to engage in this debate. Low shipbuilding rates have 

resulted in increased costs for ships, as recently documented by the 

Government Accountability Office. These increased costs have 

translated into even lower shipbuilding rates. The committee believes this downward spiral needs to be reversed. To accomplish 

this, the committee believes that significantly higher funding is required in the shipbuilding budget. That funding must be stable, 

and some degree of flexibility is required in the funding mechanisms for shipbuilding to allow for efficient management while visibility remains to allow for sufficient oversight. 

The committee believes that the shipbuilding budget must be reviewed by the administration as a matter of the utmost urgency in 

the coming year. The committee recommends that the President 

consider establishing a special shipbuilding fund, which would be 

funded apart from the normal give and take within the Department of Defense budget process, to dedicate a sustained amount of 

funding for the construction of naval ships. The Congressional 

Budget Office estimates, based on testimony before the committee, 

that the amount of funding necessary to maintain a Navy of appropriate size and capability to deter any potential adversaries and 

meet U.S. global commitments is at least $15.0 billion a year, and 

that it needs to be sustained at that level for a period of 10 to 15 

years. 

America has much to be thankful for in terms of the patriotic 

young Americans who volunteer to serve and who have individually 

and collectively performed with such professionalism and distinction in defense of the United States. The efforts of the U.S. Armed 

Forces have been remarkable, but they are not without cost—the 

loss of priceless lives that must be honored and remembered; the 

responsibility to care for the survivors and their families; the cost 

of ongoing operations and related refurbishment or replacement of 

heavily used equipment; and the responsibility to ensure that those 

who serve, and their families, receive the quality of life and benefits they have earned and deserve. As a nation at war against enemies who have attacked our homeland and who seek to impose 

the tyranny of their beliefs on others, Americans understand their 

responsibility to defeat the scourge of terrorism at any cost to ensure the security of America. 

The U.S. Armed Forces are the best trained, best equipped, and 

most experienced military force in the world today. To ensure the 

security of America, the excellence of this force must be sustained, 

8 

modernized, and transformed. The committee believes that the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2006 prudently 

addresses the defense needs of the United States, recognizes the 

service and sacrifice of our men and women in uniform and their 

families, provides the resources needed to win the global war on 

terrorism, and makes the necessary investments to provide for the 

security of the nation in the future. 

Explanation of funding summary 

The administration’s budget request for the national defense function of the federal budget for fiscal year 2006 was $435.9 billion. According to the estimating procedures used by the Congressional Budget Office (CBO), the budget implication of the amount 

requested was $441.6 billion. The funding summary table that follows uses the budget authority as calculated by CBO. 

The following table summarizes both the direct authorizations 

and equivalent budget authority levels for fiscal year 2006 defense 

programs. The columns relating to the authorization request do not 

include funding for the following items: Concurrent Receipt Accrual 

Payments to the Military Retirement Fund; military construction 

authorizations provided in prior years; and other portions of the defense budget that are not within the jurisdiction of this committee, 

or that do not require an annual authorization. 

Funding for all programs in the national defense function is reflected in the columns related to the budget authority request and 

the total budget authority implication of the authorizations in this 

report. 

The committee recommends funding for national defense pro- grams totaling $441.6 billion in budget authority. This funding 

level is consistent with the budget authority level of $441.6 billion 

for the national defense function recommended in the Concurrent 

Resolution on the Budget for Fiscal Year 2006 (H. Con. Res. 95), 

which was adopted on April 28, 2005. 

9 


Insert graphic folio 38 SR69.001
10 


Insert graphic folio 39 SR69.002
11 


Insert graphic folio 40 SR69.003
12 


Insert graphic folio 41 SR69.004
13 


Insert graphic folio 42 SR69.005
14 


Insert graphic folio 43 SR69.006
15 


Insert graphic folio 44 SR69.007
(17) 

DIVISION A—DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE 

AUTHORIZATIONS 

TITLE I—PROCUREMENT 

Subtitle A—Authorization of Appropriations 

Explanation of tables 

The following tables provide the program-level detailed guidance 

for the funding authorized in title I of this Act. The tables also display the funding requested by the administration in the fiscal year 

2006 budget request for procurement programs, and indicate those 

programs for which the committee either increased or decreased 

the requested amounts. As in the past, the administration may not 

exceed the authorized amounts (as set forth in the tables or, if unchanged from the administration request, as set forth in budget 

justification documents of the Department of Defense), without a 

reprogramming action in accordance with established procedures. 

Unless noted in this report, funding changes to the budget request 

are made without prejudice. 

18 


Insert graphic folio 46 SR69.008
19 

Subtitle B—Army Programs 

20 


Insert graphic folio 048 SR69.009
21 


Insert graphic folio 049 SR69.010
22 


Insert graphic folio 050 SR69.011
23 


Insert graphic folio 051 SR69.012
24 


Insert graphic folio 052 SR69.013
25 


Insert graphic folio 053 SR69.014
26 


Insert graphic folio 054 SR69.015
27 


Insert graphic folio 055 SR69.016
28 


Insert graphic folio 056 SR69.017
29 


Insert graphic folio 057 SR69.018
30 


Insert graphic folio 058 SR69.019
31 


Insert graphic folio 059 SR69.020
32 


Insert graphic folio 060 SR69.021
33 


Insert graphic folio 061 SR69.022
34 


Insert graphic folio 062 SR69.023
35 


Insert graphic folio 063 SR69.024
36 


Insert graphic folio 064 SR69.025
37 


Insert graphic folio 065 SR69.026
38 

Multiyear procurement authority for AH–64D Apache attack 

helicopter block II conversions (sec. 111) 

The committee recommends a provision that would provide authority to the Secretary of the Army to enter into a multiyear contract for AH–64 Apache attack helicopter Block II Conversions. The 

committee commends the Army for its commitment to Army aviation modernization by reinvesting the resources made available by 

the Comanche termination. 

This provision provides authorization for the third multiyear procurement for the conversion of AH–64A Apache helicopters to the 

‘‘D’’ model Apache. Multiyear one delivered 232 AH–64D helicopters from fiscal years 1996 through 2002 and a second multiyear 

will complete delivery of an additional 269 AH–64D helicopters in 

fiscal year 2006. The committee understands that the Army will 

convert an additional 96 AH–64A helicopters with the multiyear 

procurement authority granted by this provision. Previous 

multiyear procurement contracts have yielded significant savings 

and the committee anticipates that a third multiyear will yield savings as well. 

Multiyear procurement authority for modernized target acquisition designation/pilot night vision sensors for AH– 

64D Apache attack helicopters (sec. 112) 

The committee recommends a provision that would provide authority to the Secretary of the Army to enter into a multiyear procurement contract for the Modernized Target Acquisition Designation Sight/Pilot Night Vision Sensor (MTADS) for Apache helicopters. MTADS will be incorporated into and integrated into the 

program to convert AH–64A Apaches to the ‘‘D’’ model Apache. 

MTADS provides a Second Generation Forward (SGF) Looking Infrared (FLIR) sensor suite for the Army’s fleet of Apache aircraft. 

The SGF system enhances the Apache pilot’s ability to engage targets during night operations and adverse weather conditions, improves reliability, and reduces operations and support costs. 

Multiyear procurement authority for utility helicopters (sec. 

113) 

The committee recommends a provision that would provide authority to the Secretary of the Army to enter into a multiyear contract for the procurement of UH–60M Black Hawk utility helicopters and, acting as the executive agent for the Department of 

the Navy, enter into a multiyear contract for the procurement of 

MH–60S Sea Hawk utility helicopters. 

The budget request included $505.7 million for the procurement 

of 41 UH–60M Black Hawk helicopters; $24.7 million for the advanced procurement of UH–60 Black Hawk helicopters; $453.4 million for the procurement of 26 MH–60S Sea Hawk helicopters; and 

$125.7 million for the advanced procurement of MH–60S Sea Hawk 

helicopters under a multiyear procurement program. 

The committee notes that based on a comparison of estimated 

prices for five single year contracts with the estimated price for one 

5 year multiyear for the UH–60M airframe over fiscal years 2007– 

2011, there is a savings of approximately $304.2 million. A similar 

39 

analysis of the MH–60S airframe shows an estimated savings of 

$94.6 million. The committee also notes that the current UH–60M 

and MH–60S budget requests are based on a follow-on multiyear 

contract beginning in fiscal year 2007. 

The committee believes that the Congress should provide the 

Secretary of the Army with the authority to obtain these savings, 

and encourages the Secretary of Defense to review other current 

and planned helicopter programs for similar efficiencies through 

joint service multiyear procurements. 

Missile Procurement, Army 

Advanced precision kill weapon system 

The budget request included $34.1 million in Missile Procurement, Army (MPA), for the procurement of 600 Advanced Precision 

Kill Weapon Systems (APKWS). The committee understands the 

APKWS program was restructured on April 4, 2005, because the 

contractor was under-performing in the areas of cost, schedule, and 

performance; and APKWS would not have met the defined user requirement. The committee recommends a decrease of $5.0 million 

in MPA to procure 135 fewer missiles, for a total authorization of 

$29.1 million. 

Weapons and Tracked Vehicles 

Lightweight 155 millimeter Howitzer 

The budget request included $46.8 million in Weapons and 

Tracked Combat Vehicles, Army (WTCV), for the Lightweight 155 

millimeter (LW–155) towed Howitzer, a joint U.S. Marine Corps 

(USMC)/Army program. In the Ronald W. Reagan National Defense 

Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2005 (Public Law 108–375), the 

Congress authorized a multiyear procurement contract as the program entered into a low rate initial production phase of the program. The Army requires additional LW–155s for the 7th Stryker 

Brigade Combat Team. This item is on the Chief of Staff of the 

Army’s unfunded priorities list. The committee recommends an increase of $32.4 million in WTCV for additional LW–155s, for a total 

authorization of $79.2 million in WTCV. 

Army Ammunition 

M1028 120mm tank cartridge 

The budget request included $8.3 million in Procurement of Ammunition, Army (PAA), for the M1028 120mm tank cartridge. The 

committee notes the utility of the M1028 in improving the M1A1 

Main Battle Tank’s urban warfare capability and improving tank 

survivability against massed assaulting infantry with hand held 

anti-tank and automatic weapons. The M1028 is currently funded 

to achieve 75 percent of the total war reserve requirement. The 

committee recommends an increase of $5.5 million in PAA for the 

M1028 to excel the acquisition of the M1028mm tank cartridge. 

Modern demolition initiator 

The budget request included no funding in Procurement Ammunition, Army (PAA), for the modern demolition initiator (MDI). The 

40 

committee notes that MDIs are non-electric detonators used to initiate munitions and explosives. The benefits of MDI include safety 

in the modern electronic battle space, high reliability, interoperability with existing fielded demolition systems, and lethality. The 

committee recommends an increase of $1.9 million in PAA for 

MDIs. 

Rapid wall breaching kit 

The budget request included no funding in Procurement Ammunition, Army (PAA), for the rapid wall breaching kit. The committee notes that rapid wall breaching kits are one-man portable 

devices capable of creating man-sized holes in triple brick masonry 

or double reinforced concrete structural walls. The committee recommends an increase of $3.0 million in PAA for rapid wall breaching kits. 

Ammunition peculiar equipment outloading modules 

The budget request included no funding for ammunition peculiar 

equipment outloading modules. The committee notes that a modern 

robotic-controlled strategic ammunition outloading module could be 

capable of supporting current readiness requirements while increasing ammunition plant safety, security, and capacity. Army officials report that a design exists for modernizing current 

outloading capabilities with robotic-controlled technologies at ammunition plants. The committee recommends an increase of $8.0 

million in PAA for ammunition peculiar equipment outloading 

modules. 

Provision of industrial facilities 

The budget request included $33.5 million in Procurement of Ammunition, Army (PAA), for the provision of industrial facilities, including the establishment, augmentation, and modernization of 

ammunition production capabilities. The committee notes that this 

represents an 18 percent reduction in this account from the funding level requested for fiscal year 2005. Additional funding for the 

provision of industrial facilities has been identified on the Chief of 

Staff of the Army unfunded priorities list. 

The committee recommends an increase of $82.4 million in PAA 

for the provision of industrial facilities, as follows: $40.0 million to 

reduce the risk of production loss in acid concentration and nitrocellulose; $22.4 million for small-caliber ammunition production facilities modernization; $10.0 million to continue facility modernization initiated in fiscal year 2003 with environmentally sound insensitive-munitions (IM) manufacturing and precision load, assemble, 

and pack capability required to produce munitions with current 

and future IM type mix-cast-cure, melt-load and press-able explosive formulations; and $10.0 million to modernize HMX/RDX nitrate explosive formulation capabilities for use in U.S. precision 

guided weapons production. 

Conventional ammunition demilitarization 

The budget request included $102.9 million in Procurement of 

Ammunition, Army (PAA), for conventional ammunition demilitarization, including $19.5 million for missile demilitarization. The 

41 

committee is concerned with the resourcing of the Army’s strategic 

plan for conventional ammunition disposal, including the 

resourcing of missile recycling. The committee notes that the missile recycling center (MRC) energetics processing module (EPM) is 

an important component of the Army’s missile demilitarization 

plan. The committee recommends an increase of $10.0 million in 

PAA for the MRC EPM. 

The disposal of excess conventional ammunition is an integral 

phase of the life-cycle management of conventional ammunition. 

The Army 2004 report, ‘‘Strategic Plan: Demilitarization FY2005– 

2011,’’ outlines a series of goals and milestones to reduce the excess 

conventional ammunition stockpile to manageable levels in future 

years: 100,000 short tons for ammunition and 30,000 missiles. In 

fiscal year 2005, the excess conventional ammunition stockpile includes at least 431,700 short tons of conventional ammunition and 

77,566 missiles. 

The committee notes that current projections indicate that the 

excess conventional ammunition disposal stockpile and the excess 

missile inventory are expected to continue to increase and exceed 

546,000 short tons and 125,000 missiles, respectively, by fiscal year 

2011. In addition, Army officials note that current projections for 

the growth rate of the excess stockpile do not include pending decisions related to the disposal of munitions in the War Reserve 

Stockpile, Allies–Korea and disposal of conventional mines. Therefore, the projection of the excess conventional ammunition stockpile 

in 2011 may be significantly understated. 

The committee believes that failing to identify accurately the 

magnitude of the excess conventional ammunition stockpile and 

failing to reduce the excess conventional ammunition stockpile will 

present problems, including impeding access to needed ammunition 

in support of ongoing contingency operations, and increased risk 

and costs related to the security and sustainment of excess conventional ammunition. Therefore, the committee directs the Secretary 

of the Army to review and update the strategic plan for disposal 

of excess conventional ammunition and to report to the committee 

any changes that result from that review. In addition, the committee urges the Department of Defense Comptroller to fund disposal of conventional ammunition demilitarization to attain manageable stockpile levels outlined in the Army’s strategic plan to the 

maximum extent possible. 

Other Procurement, Army 

Movement tracking system 

The budget request included $207.1 million in Other Procurement, Army (OPA), for the Family of Heavy Tactical Vehicles, including $27.6 million for the Movement Tracking System (MTS). 

MTS provides commanders with the capability to communicate 

with and track the location of vehicles. The committee understands 

that the MTS has provided valuable communications and vehicle 

location information during Operation Iraqi Freedom. The committee notes that the Chief of Staff of the Army has identified additional funding for MTS devices for the 7th Stryker Brigade Combat 

Team on his unfunded priorities list. The committee recommends 

42 

an increase of $1.6 million in OPA for MTS, for a total authorization of $208.7 million. 

Night vision devices 

The budget request included $164.7 million in Other Procure- ment, Army (OPA), for night vision devices, including $76.9 million 

for the procurement of AN/PVS–14 night vision devices and $20.0 

million for the procurement of enhanced night vision goggles 

(ENVG). These devices increase situational awareness, mobility, 

and lethality during low-light and nighttime operations. Additionally, the ENVG consists of a state-of-the-art, enhanced 3rd Generation image intensifier sensor, an uncooled long-wave infrared camera, and a miniature display to provide high resolution fused imagery to the individual soldier. Additional funding for these items 

is on the Chief of Staff of the Army’s unfunded priorities list. The 

committee recommends an increase of $20.2 million in OPA, for additional night vision devices. 

Modular causeway system 

The budget request included $2.0 million in Other Procurement, 

Army (OPA), for causeway systems. The modular causeway system 

(MCS) is an assemblage of interoperable and interchangeable components, which constitute the Army’s primary means of augmenting existing port facilities or conducting joint logistics over the 

shore (JLOTS). JLOTS, in particular, will be significant as the concept of sea-basing matures. The committee recommends an increase of $15.0 million in OPA for the MCS. 

Subtitle C—Navy Programs 

43 


Insert graphic folio 73 SR69.027
44 


Insert graphic folio 74 SR69.028
45 


Insert graphic folio 75 SR69.029
46 


Insert graphic folio 76 SR69.030
47 


Insert graphic folio 77 SR69.031
48 


Insert graphic folio 78 SR69.032
49 


Insert graphic folio 79 SR69.033
50 


Insert graphic folio 80 SR69.034
51 


Insert graphic folio 81 SR69.035
52 


Insert graphic folio 82 SR69.036
53 


Insert graphic folio 83 SR69.037
54 


Insert graphic folio 84 SR69.038
55 


Insert graphic folio 85 SR69.039
56 


Insert graphic folio 86 SR69.040
57 


Insert graphic folio 87 SR69.041
58 


Insert graphic folio 88 SR69.042
59 


Insert graphic folio 89 SR69.043
60 


Insert graphic folio 90 SR69.044
61 


Insert graphic folio 91 SR69.045
62 


Insert graphic folio 92 SR69.046
63 


Insert graphic folio 93 SR69.047
64 


Insert graphic folio 94 SR69.048
65 


Insert graphic folio 95 SR69.049
66 

Prohibition on acquisition of next generation destroyer 

(DD(X)) through a single naval shipyard (sec. 121) 

The committee recommends a provision that would prohibit a 

winner take all acquisition strategy for the next generation destroyer (DD(X)) program. The provision would define a winner take 

all acquisition strategy, in relation to this program, as one which 

would procure, including design and construction, these destroyers 

through a single shipyard. 

In the Future Years Defense Program (FYDP) presented with the 

fiscal year 2005 budget request, construction of more than one 

DD(X) a year was to have started in fiscal year 2007. The FYDP 

presented with the fiscal year 2006 budget request indicates that 

only one DD(X) a year will be procured in each year from fiscal 

years 2007 through 2011. This reduced procurement profile represents at least the third significant change for the DD(X) program 

in recent years. Additionally, the Secretary of the Navy has recently delivered an interim long-range plan for the construction of 

Naval vessels to Congress. This plan outlines a range of needed 

ships, with eight to 12 DD(X) destroyers establishing the range for 

that ship. 

The committee is aware that the Navy has proposed a change in 

acquisition strategy for DD(X) due to the reduced procurement profile. The proposed change is to conduct a winner-take-all competition for the DD(X)-class of ships between the two shipyards which 

build surface combatants. 

The committee is concerned with the sharp decline projected in 

the number of ships in the Navy, the low number of major combatants scheduled for construction, and the negative consequences for 

the U. S. shipbuilding industrial base that could result if a winnertake-all strategy for DD(X) were pursued. The committee believes 

that there is an unacceptable risk if the shipbuilding industry sizes 

itself to where only one surface combatant a year is being built. 

The committee urges the Navy to plan to build more than one 

major surface combatant ship a year as soon as possible. If fewer 

DD(X) destroyers are required, then acceleration of the follow-on 

surface combatant, the CG(X), should be pursued. 

Elsewhere in this report, the committee recommends additional 

funding for advance procurement of the second DD(X) destroyer at 

the second shipyard. 

Split funding authorization for CVN–78 aircraft carrier (sec. 

122) 

The committee recommends a provision that would authorize the 

Secretary of the Navy to enter into a contract to fund the detail design and construction of the aircraft carrier designated CVN–78 

with the Shipbuilding & Conversion, Navy (SCN) account, with 

funding split over fiscal years 2007, 2008, 2009, and 2010. The budget request includes $564.9 million in SCN for the carrier replacement program, specifically for advance procurement of 

the CVN–78. The CVN–78 will be a new class of aircraft carrier, 

incorporating numerous new technologies. This budget request reflects the second one-year slip in the program in recent years. This 

slip would cause a delay in the delivery of the CVN–78 until fiscal 

year 2015, with the ship it is scheduled to replace, the USS EnterVerDate Aug 04 2004 15:24 May 25, 2005 Jkt 021326 PO 00000 Frm 00086 Fmt 6601 Sfmt 6601 E:\HR\OC\SR069.XXX SR069
67 

prise (CVN–65), scheduled to be decommissioned in fiscal year 

2013. Additionally, this slip translates into a cost growth for CVN– 

78 of approximately $400.0 million, according to the Navy. 

The committee is concerned about this delay. The committee has 

been told there is no technical reason for the delay, but that the 

delay was driven by budget considerations. Both the Secretary of 

the Navy and the Chief of Naval operations testified that large capital assets such as aircraft carriers are difficult to fund under the 

traditional full-funding policy, and that more flexible methods of 

funding must be found and used. The program of record for CVN– 

78 has the detail design and construction funding split between two 

years. This provision would authorize that same funding to be split 

over four years, thereby allowing needed funding flexibility. The 

committee directs the Navy to provide an updated funding profile, 

fully funding the remaining costs of the ship from fiscal years 2007 

through 2010, with delivery of the fiscal year 2007 budget request. 

The committee is aware that the program requires additional 

funding in fiscal year 2006 to avoid this one-year delay. Therefore, 

the committee recommends an increase of $86.7 million in SCN for 

CVN–78. 

LHA replacement (LHA(R)) ship (sec. 123) 

The committee recommends a provision that would authorize to 

be appropriated $325.4 million for design, advance procurement, 

and advance construction of the first LHA replacement (LHA(R)) 

ship, and would allow the Secretary of the Navy to enter into a 

contract for this purpose in fiscal year 2006. 

The provision would also authorize the Secretary of the Navy to 

enter into a contract for the detail design and construction of the 

LHA(R) in fiscal year 2007, with funds authorized in fiscal years 

2007 and 2008, subject to the availability of appropriations for 

LHA(R) in each of those fiscal years. 

The budget request included $150.4 million in Shipbuilding & 

Conversion, Navy (SCN), for the design, advance procurement, and 

advance construction of the LHA(R) amphibious assault ship. The 

LHA(R)-class will be the functional replacement for the LHA–1 

class of amphibious assault ships, which is nearing the end of its 

service life. The Chief of Naval Operations has included additional 

funding for LHA(R) as the number one priority on his unfunded 

priorities list. The committee understands that additional funding 

would accelerate delivery of and reduce the acquisition cost of this 

ship, and recommends an increase of $175.0 million in SCN for the 

LHA(R). 

Refueling and complex overhaul of the USS ‘‘Carl Vinson’’ 

(sec. 124) 

The committee recommends a provision that would authorize the 

Secretary of the Navy to enter into a contract in fiscal year 2006 

for the nuclear refueling and complex overhaul of the USS Carl 

Vinson (CVN–70). The provision would authorize $1,493.6 million 

to be appropriated as the first increment in the incremental funding planned for this refueling. The provision would also stipulate 

that any obligation of the United States to make a payment under 

68 

the contract after fiscal year 2006 is subject to the availability of 

appropriations for that purpose. 

Navy Aircraft 

C–40A procurement 

The budget request included $10.3 million in Aircraft Procurement, Navy (APN), for C–40A site activation, but included no funding for the procurement of C–40A aircraft. 

The C–40A replaces aging C–9 aircraft and provides improved 

time critical logistics support. Procurement of the C–40A is included on the Chief of Naval Operations’ unfunded priorities list. 

The committee recommends an increase of $77.9 million in APN for 

the procurement of one C–40A aircraft. 

Advanced targeting pods 

The budget request included $422.4 million in Aircraft Procurement, Navy (APN), for modifications to the F/A–18 aircraft, but included no funding for LITENING advanced targeting pods (ATPs) 

for the F/A–18D aircraft. The LITENING ATP will supplement and 

replace the current targeting pod with a new system that provides 

increased combat effectiveness across several mission areas. The 

procurement of LITENING ATP is included on the Commandant of 

the Marine Corps’ unfunded priorities list. The committee recommends an increase of $40.0 million in APN for the procurement 

of 24 LITENING ATPs for the F/A–18D aircraft. 

Night targeting system upgrade 

The budget request included $307.5 million in Aircraft Procurement, Navy (APN), for UH–1Y utility and AH–1Z attack helicopters, but no funding for the procurement of night targeting system (NTS) upgrades. The current AH–1W NTS uses Generation I 

Forward Looking Infrared (FLIR) and requires an upgrade to the 

Generation III FLIR, which would significantly improve the ability 

of the AH–1W helicopter to fight at night and during low visibility 

conditions as well as improve reliability by replacing obsolete parts. 

The committee notes that the Commandant of the Marine Corps 

has identified additional funding for NTS upgrades on his unfunded priorities list. The committee recommends an increase of 

$7.8 million in APN for the NTS upgrades, for a total authorization 

of $315.3 million. 

H–53 modifications 

The budget request included $14.9 million in Aircraft Procurement, Navy (APN), but no funding for engine air particle separators (EAPS) barrier filters nor for crash-attenuating crew chief 

seats for the H–53 series helicopter. 

The current H–53 EAPS suffers heavy wear and tear from preflight and maintenance requirements. The Navy is conducting a 

trade study to develop conceptual barrier filter alternatives for the 

H–53 series of helicopters. The committee notes that the results of 

this effort will require non-recurring engineering to incorporate a 

new EAPS barrier filter type separator into the H–53 series heliVerDate Aug 04 2004 15:24 May 25, 2005 Jkt 021326 PO 00000 Frm 00088 Fmt 6601 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\SR069.XXX SR069
69 

copters. The committee understands that new EAPS will result in 

lower maintenance costs and improved engine performance. 

The committee also understands that the procurement and installation of crash-attenuating seats for both pilots in the H–53 series helicopter is ongoing. However, the crew chief is not provided 

with a crash-attenuating seat. The committee notes the lack of 

crashworthy seats for crew chiefs exposes them to higher risk of injury or death in the event of a hard landing or crash. The Department of the Navy has programmed for the procurement of 222 

crashworthy seats in fiscal year 2011. The committee believes that 

this safety issue needs to be addressed immediately. 

The committee notes that the Commandant of the Marine Corps 

has identified additional funding for H–53 EAPS barrier filters and 

crash-attenuation crew chief seats on his unfunded priorities list. 

The committee recommends an increase of $5.0 million for non-recurring engineering for EAPS barrier filters and $6.5 million to 

procure 222 crash-attenuating crew chief seats, for a total authorization of $26.4 million in APN. 

SH–60 armed helicopter 

The budget request included $12.4 million in Aircraft Procurement, Navy (APN), for modifications to the SH–60 helicopter, including $7.6 million for kits to arm the helicopter. Navy helicopters, stationed aboard aircraft carriers and surface combatants, 

are being used to support operations in the global war on terror. 

These operations include armed reconnaissance, and additional 

funding for kits is included on the Chief of Naval Operations’ unfunded priorities list. The committee recommends an increase of 

$7.6 million in APN for the procurement of additional armed helicopter kits. 

EP–3 aircraft electronic attack 

The budget request included $55.1 million in Aircraft Procurement, Navy (APN), for modifications to the EP–3 aircraft. The EP– 

3 is a land-based, long-range aircraft, with electronic intercept devices for detection and tracking of enemy radars and communications. The EP–3 aircraft has been designated a high demand, lowdensity asset by the Joint Chiefs of Staff. Additional funding for 

USQ–146 communications electronic attack systems for the EP–3 

aircraft has been requested on the Chief of Naval Operations’ unfunded priorities list. The committee recommends an increase of 

$13.0 million in APN for the procurement of USQ–146 electronic 

attack systems for the EP–3 aircraft. 

P–3 aircraft modifications 

The budget request included $163.3 million in Aircraft Procurement, Navy (APN), for modifications to the P–3 aircraft, including 

$11.9 million for the procurement and installation of anti-surface 

warfare improvement (AIP) program kits. AIP greatly expands the 

P–3 aircraft’s capabilities to operate in the littorals with the addition of advanced technology sensors, expanded communications, upgraded weapon delivery capabilities, and improved operator situational awareness. The committee recommends an increase of $7.0 

70 

million in APN for the procurement and installation of additional 

AIP kits for the P–3 aircraft. 

Navy Weapons 

AIM–9X captive air training missile 

The budget request included $37.9 million in Weapons Procurement, Navy (WPN), for the procurement of 165 AIM–9X Sidewinder 

short range air-to-air missiles, including $7.2 million for the procurement of 44 AIM–9X captive air training missiles (CATM). The 

Sidewinder is the Navy and Marine Corps’ primary short range airto-air weapon, and the advanced capabilities of AIM–9X require a 

high level of aircrew proficiency. There is currently an inventory 

shortfall of AIM–9X CATMs to support three F/A–18E/F squadrons, 

and the procurement of additional AIM–9X CATMs is included on 

the Chief of Naval Operations’ and the Commandant of the Marine 

Corps’ unfunded priorities lists. The committee recommends an increase of $7.6 million in WPN for the procurement of 46 additional 

AIM–9X CATMs. 

Weapons industrial facilities 

The budget request included $4.1 million in Weapons Procurement, Navy (WPN), for various activities at government-owned, 

contractor-operated weapons industrial facilities, but included no 

funding for facilities restoration at the Navy Industrial Reserve 

Ordnance Plant, Allegany Ballistics Laboratory (ABL). Some of 

these facilities have exceeded their useful life and deteriorated beyond safe operations. The committee recommends an increase of 

$20.0 million in WPN for the facilities restoration program at ABL. 

Gun mount modifications 

The budget request included $84.1 million in Weapons Procurement, Navy (WPN), for modifications to gun mounts on naval ships, 

and included $1.3 million for modifications to upgrade MK45 gun 

mounts to the Mod 4 configuration on guided missile destroyers. 

The MK45 gun is also used on Navy cruisers, and the Navy has 

a program to modernize its cruisers using this gun. The committee 

recommends an increase of $14.0 million in WPN for upgrading 

cruiser MK45 gun mounts to the Mod 4 configuration. 

Navy and Marine Corps Ammunition 

M795 155mm high explosive cartridge 

The budget request included $5.2 million in Procurement of Ammunition, Navy and Marine Corps (PANMC), for the M795 155mm 

high-explosive cartridge. Additional funding for the M795 155mm 

high-explosive cartridge has been identified on the Commandant of 

the Marine Corps unfunded priorities list. The committee recommends an increase of $15.0 million in PANMC for the M795. 

Time fuze blasting igniter 

The budget request included $770,000 in Procurement of Ammunition, Navy and Marine Corps (PANMC), for the time fuze blasting igniter. The budget request will achieve 40 percent of the apVerDate Aug 04 2004 15:24 May 25, 2005 Jkt 021326 PO 00000 Frm 00090 Fmt 6601 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\SR069.XXX SR069
71 

proved acquisition object (AAO) for this item. Additional funding 

for the time fuze blasting igniter has been identified on the Commandant of the Marine Corps unfunded priorities list. The committee recommends an increase of $5.0 million in PANMC for the 

time fuze blasting igniter. 

Shipbuilding 

DD(X) destroyer program 

The budget request included $716.0 million in Shipbuilding & 

Conversion, Navy (SCN), for advance procurement for the DD(X) 

destroyer program. Of this amount, $666.0 million is for advance 

procurement of the lead ship of the class, and $50.0 million is for 

advance procurement of the second ship of the class. These advance 

procurement funds are required to procure material to maintain 

ship construction schedules and for transition to detail design efforts. 

In fiscal year 2005, $84.4 million was authorized and appropriated for the design and advance procurement requirements associated with construction of the second ship at an alternative second 

source shipyard. The committee recommends an increase of $50.0 

million in SCN to be used only for advance procurement of the second ship of the DD(X) class at the second shipyard. 

DDG–51 Arleigh Burke-class destroyer modernization program 

The budget request included no funding for the DDG–51 Arleigh 

Burke-class destroyer modernization program. Section 121 of the 

Ronald W. Reagan National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal 

Year 2005 (Public Law 108–375) required the Navy to submit a report on this modernization program, and authorized and appropriated $50.0 million to initiate this program in fiscal year 2005. 

The report was delivered in March 2005, and shows the potential 

for significant reductions in the size of the crew through technology 

insertion. The plan outlined in the report is to implement the modernization initiatives on the last two ships of the class, DDG–111 

and DDG–112, which will be delivered in fiscal year 2010, before 

beginning a backfit on the oldest ships of the class starting with 

DDG–51. The financial analysis shows that a life-cycle savings of 

$712.0 million could be achieved if this plan is implemented, primarily due to reduced crew size, while also achieving the additional 

benefits of: (1) improved situational awareness; (2) increased survivability; (3) improved maintainability; (4) increased commonality; 

(5) eliminated obsolete parts; (6) improved training; and (7) improved quality of life. 

The committee believes this program requires continued funding 

in the near-term for the modernization effort, and recommends an 

increase of $25.0 million in Shipbuilding & Conversion, Navy, for 

the DDG–51 modernization program. 

72 

Other Procurement, Navy 

High performance metal fiber brushes for shipboard motors 

and generators 

The budget request included $19.9 million in Other Procurement, 

Navy (OPN), for submarine support equipment, but included no 

funding for high performance metal brushes for shipboard motors 

and generators. Metal fiber brushes have demonstrated the capability to significantly enhance performance and reduce maintenance 

costs for motors and generators. The committee recommends an increase of $4.5 million in OPN for the continuing procurement of 

high performance metal fiber brushes. 

Items less than $5.0 million 

The budget request included $134.0 million in Other Procure- ment, Navy (OPN), for shipboard equipment items of less than $5.0 

million. 

The budget request included no funding for the advanced control 

monitoring system. This system will update older, analog style 

shipboard controls with modern software-based applications and 

sensors for enhanced control and observation of critical shipboard 

systems. The committee recommends an increase of $4.0 million in 

OPN for the advanced control monitoring system. 

The budget request included no funding for shaft lubricating 

pumps on the Landing Ship Dock 41/49 (LSD–41/49) class of amphibious ships. The current mechanical shaft seal pumps on these 

vessels are requiring maintenance at increasing costs. The committee is aware that the Navy could realize a return on investment 

within three years through the installation of canned lube pumps 

on three older LSD 41/49–class ships and on a submarine tender. 

The committee recommends an increase of $4.0 million in OPN for 

the procurement and installation of canned lube pumps to replace 

the mechanical shaft seal pumps. 

The budget request included no funding for modifications to aircraft carrier elevators. The existing aircraft elevator stanchion and 

platform lockbar systems are subject to corrosion, binding, and 

component failure. Replacement of these components with modern 

control systems would enhance aircraft carrier operations while reducing maintenance and manpower costs. The committee recommends an increase of $5.7 million in OPN for a variety of aircraft carrier elevator modifications. 

The committee recommends a total increase of $13.7 million in 

OPN for shipboard equipment items of less than $5.0 million, for 

a total authorization of $147.7 million. 

Littoral combat ship mission modules 

The budget request included $36.8 million in Other Procurement, 

Navy (OPN), for mission modules for the littoral combat ship 

(LCS). These mission modules will enable the LCS to operate in the 

littorals by providing capability in the mine warfare, small boat 

neutralization, and anti-submarine warfare missions. 

The budget request did not include funding for a spare engine for 

the first ship of the class, which will use the MT30 marine gas turbine engine. If there were a main engine casualty after delivery of 

73 

the ship, much valuable time would be lost in the testing and validation of its concept of operations without a spare engine. The committee recommends an increase of $8.6 million in OPN for a spare 

MT30 marine gas turbine engine for the LCS. 

Submarine acoustic modernization installation 

The budget request included $226.9 million in Other Procurement, Navy (OPN), for submarine acoustics, which funds all future 

upgrades of acoustic-rapid commercial, off-the-shelf insertion (A– 

RCI) equipment. A–RCI is a multi-phased, evolutionary development effort to maintain acoustic superiority for in-service submarines. Additional funding for installation of A–RCI has been requested on the Chief of Naval Operations’ unfunded priorities list. 

The committee recommends an increase of $5.0 million in OPN for 

submarine acoustic modernization A–RCI installation. 

Surface sonar dome window 

The budget request included $14.0 million in Other Procurement, 

Navy (OPN), for undersea warfare support equipment, including 

$1.1 million for surface ship sonar domes and windows. The Navy 

has been developing a new design sonar dome based on a newer 

composite material. The first sonar dome using these materials 

failed under the extreme pressure test. The causes for this failure 

have been identified and the design modified. The committee recommends an increase of $5.0 million in OPN for the surface sonar 

dome window. 

Surface electronic warfare improvement program 

The budget request included $25.1 million in Other Procurement, 

Navy (OPN), for the procurement of AN/SLQ–32 electronic warfare 

equipment for surface ships. The AN/SLQ–32 consists of five configurations and performs the missions of early detection, analyses, 

threat warning, and protection from anti-ship missiles. The committee recommends an increase of $5.0 million in OPN to accelerate procurement of AN/SLQ–32 equipment. 

Weapons range support equipment 

The budget request included $46.6 million in Other Procurement, 

Navy (OPN) for the procurement of equipment to implement the 

Navy fleet training range instrumentation training plan, but included no funding for the continued procurement of the multi-spectral threat emitter (MTES) or the joint threat emitter (JTE). 

The proliferation of lethal surface to air missiles and anti-aircraft 

artillery presents a clear threat to the warfighter. Threat emitters 

replicate the electronic signatures of these threats on training 

ranges. The committee recommends an increase of $6.0 million for 

the procurement of MTES and an increase of $6.0 million for the 

procurement of JTE, a total increase of $12.0 million in OPN for 

weapons range support equipment. 

Maritime domain awareness 

The budget request included $6.1 million in Other Procurement, 

Navy (OPN), for the naval fires control system. The committee is 

aware of the direction from the Secretary of Defense to prioritize 

74 

efforts to develop a capability that would provide maritime domain 

awareness similar to that provided for air traffic awareness. The 

committee believes that integration of existing systems could be 

used to aid in achieving this capability. The integration of the distributed common ground system for the Navy with joint harbor operation centers would assist in providing fused data to establish a 

common operating picture of coastal areas for both the Navy and 

the Coast Guard. The committee recommends an increase of $5.0 

million in OPN to prototype this capability for evaluation of its contribution to establishing maritime domain awareness. 

Rolling airframe missile launcher system 

The budget request included $17.5 million in Other Procurement, 

Navy (OPN), for the rolling airframe missile (RAM) launcher system, but included no funding for the continued integration of the 

RAM with the close-in weapons system, known as SeaRAM. The 

Navy had originally planned to equip its guided missile frigates 

with this capability to provide a layered self-defense for the ships. 

The committee does not agree with the decision to discontinue the 

procurement of SeaRAM for the frigates unless there is another 

more capable system to provide defense. The committee recommends an increase of $18.0 million in OPN to procure two 

SeaRAM systems for installation on guided missile frigates to 

evaluate its effectiveness. 

NULKA anti-ship missile decoy 

The budget request included $40.4 million in Other Procurement, 

Navy (OPN), for the procurement of 12 NULKA anti-ship missile 

decoy systems and 31 NULKA decoys. The NULKA decoy is a 

quick reaction offboard electronic countermeasure to defeat advanced radar homing anti-ship missiles. 

The committee is aware that the minimum sustaining rate for 

the production of NULKA decoys is 67 decoys a year, and that the 

procurement of additional NULKA decoys is requested on the Chief 

of Naval Operations’ unfunded priorities list. Raising the procurement rate to the minimum sustaining rate would lower the unit 

cost from $450,000 to less than $250,000. The committee recommends an increase of $9.0 million in OPN for the procurement 

of 36 additional NULKA decoys. 

Submarine training device modifications 

The budget request included $31.8 million in Other Procurement, 

Navy (OPN), for submarine training device modifications, but included no funding for logic-based software to expand the distribution and capability of performance support systems (PSSs). The 

Navy is beginning to use these electronic PSSs to enhance training 

opportunities for deployed forces. The committee recommends an 

increase of $4.0 million in OPN for integration of these PSSs across 

the fast attack submarine community. 

Command support equipment 

The budget request included $60.8 million in Other Procurement, 

Navy (OPN), for command support equipment, but included no 

75 

funding to procure man overboard indicator (MOBI) systems or to 

improve the electronic military personnel records system (EMPRS). 

The MOBI system provides devices, which are worn by sailors 

aboard ship, to allow rescue forces to respond quickly in the event 

a sailor falls overboard. The committee is aware that the Naval 

Safety Center has recommended to the Naval Sea Systems Command that MOBI systems should be deployed throughout the fleet. 

In the Ronald W. Reagan National Defense Authorization Act for 

Fiscal Year 2005, the Senate report accompanying S. 2400 (S. Rept. 

108–260) directed the Secretary of the Navy to submit a report to 

the congressional defense committees, with the submission of the 

fiscal year 2006 budget request, on plans to implement the Safety 

Center’s recommendations. The committee has not yet received the 

report. The committee believes MOBI will not only save lives, but 

will also reduce the time spent searching for sailors who have fallen overboard. The committee recommends an increase of $9.1 million in OPN to procure additional MOBI systems. 

EMPRS is the Navy’s personnel records management system 

that contains information on more than 3.8 million personnel. The 

committee recommends an increase of $6.5 million in OPN for 

EMPRS to improve data storage and enhance information technologies, for a total increase in OPN of $15.6 million for command 

support equipment. 

Navy medical automated information technology insertion 

The budget request included $8.8 million in Other Procurement, 

Navy (OPN), for medical support equipment, which provides funding for the Fleet Hospital program whose mission is to provide 

comprehensive medical support to the fleet and fleet Marine forces 

engaged in combat operations. Automated information technology 

can be used to track medical materiel, surgical instruments, biomedical support equipment, and common support equipment for expeditionary medical forces consisting of deployable hospitals and 

hospital ships. The committee recommends an increase of $3.0 million in OPN for Navy medical automated information technology 

insertion. 

Marine Corps Procurement 

Modification kits 

The budget request included no funding in Procurement, Marine 

Corps (PMC), for weapons and weapon systems modification kits, 

but no funding for modification kits for the MK–19 grenade machine gun. Since the fielding of the MK–19, various enhancements 

have been developed that greatly improve the operational reliability, readiness, safety, and maintainability of the MK–19 weapon system. The committee recommends an increase of $2.0 million 

in PMC for the procurement of MK–19 modification kits, for a total 

authorization of $2.0 million in PMC. 

Rapid deploying interoperable shelter systems 

The budget request included $952,000 in Procurement, Marine 

Corps (PMC), for unit operations centers, but no funding for the 

rapid deploying interoperable shelter system (RDISS). The core inVerDate Aug 04 2004 15:24 May 25, 2005 Jkt 021326 PO 00000 Frm 00095 Fmt 6601 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\SR069.XXX SR069
76 

frastructure component of the Marine Expeditionary Force (MEF) 

command operations center (COC) is the RDISS together with associated power generation and environmental control equipment. The 

RDISS provides a rapidly deployable, easily set up, and dependable 

shelter for the conduct of command and control in a high intensity 

combat environment. A MEF urgent universal needs statement requested the development of a mobile, rapidly deployable, highly integrated MEF and division-level COC. The Marine Corps has procured COCs in fiscal year 2005, but requires additional funding to 

procure and integrate RDISS in support of the COC. The committee recommends an increase of $4.8 million in PMC, for the 

RDISS and integration of RDISS into the COC, for a total authorization of $5.8 million. 

United Stated Marine Corps continuity of operations 

The budget request included $17.8 million in Procurement, Marine Corps (PMC), for communication/electronics infrastructure 

support, including $3.4 million for the United States Marine Corps 

(USMC) Continuity of Operations (COOP) Program. The USMC 

COOP provides an additional layer of defense for Marine Corps’ 

tactical computer networks. The committee notes that the Commandant of the Marine Corps has identified additional funding for 

the USMC COOP on his unfunded priorities list. The committee believes that the Marine Corps must improve its ability to protect 

Marine Corps’ networks by increasing computer network storage, 

improving network security, and reducing the number of legacy 

networks. The committee recommends an increase of $2.2 million 

in PMC, for the USMC COOP, for a total authorization of $20.2 

million in PMC. 

Subtitle D—Air Force Programs 

77 


Insert graphic folio 110 SR69.050
78 


Insert graphic folio 111 SR69.051
79 


Insert graphic folio 112 SR69.052
80 


Insert graphic folio 113 SR69.053
81 


Insert graphic folio 114 SR69.054
82 


Insert graphic folio 115 SR69.055
83 


Insert graphic folio 116 SR69.056
84 


Insert graphic folio 117 SR69.057
85 


Insert graphic folio 118 SR69.058
86 


Insert graphic folio 119 SR69.059
87 


Insert graphic folio 120 SR69.060
88 


Insert graphic folio 121 SR69.061
89 


Insert graphic folio 122 SR69.062
90 


Insert graphic folio 123 SR69.063
91 

Multiyear procurement authority for C–17 aircraft (sec. 131) 

The committee recommends a provision that would authorize the 

Secretary of the Air Force to exercise the option on the existing C– 

17 multiyear procurement contract for the procurement of up to 42 

additional C–17 aircraft, in accordance with section 2306b of title 

10, United States Code. The existing multiyear procurement was 

authorized by section 131 of the National Defense Authorization 

Act for Fiscal Year 2002 (Public Law 107–107). The provision 

would require the Secretary of Defense, prior to the exercise of the 

contract option, to certify to the congressional defense committees 

that the procurement of these additional C–17 aircraft is consistent 

with the results of the Mobility Capabilities Study to be completed 

in fiscal year 2005. 

Prohibition on retirement of KC–135E aircraft (sec. 132) 

The committee recommends a provision that would prohibit the 

Secretary of the Air Force from retiring any KC–135E aerial refueling aircraft in fiscal year 2006. 

Section 134(b) of the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2004 (Public Law 108–136) required that an analysis of 

alternatives (AOA) on meeting aerial refueling requirements be 

conducted and delivered to the congressional defense committees by 

March 1, 2004. In a letter to the congressional defense committees 

on February 24, 2004, the Acting Under Secretary of Defense for 

Acquisition, Technology and Logistics provided the guidance that 

will be used for the conduct of the AOA. On February 27, 2004, the 

Secretary of the Air Force sent a letter to the committee stating the 

AOA would be completed in fiscal year 2005. 

The budget request included a plan to retire 49 KC–135Es in fiscal year 2006. The committee believes it is premature to retire any 

KC–135Es until the AOA is completed and the Secretary of Defense has presented to the congressional defense committees a comprehensive plan for the recapitalization and modernization of the 

aerial refueling fleet. 

Use of Tanker Replacement Transfer Fund for modernization of aerial refueling tankers (sec. 133) 

The committee recommends a provision that would allow the use 

of funds in the Tanker Replacement Transfer Fund, which was established by section 8132 of the Department of Defense Appropriations Act for Fiscal Year 2005 (Public Law 108–287), for the modernization of existing aerial refueling tankers, if the modernization 

of such tankers is consistent with the results of the analysis of alternatives for meeting the aerial refueling requirements of the Air 

Force, as required by section 134(b) of the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2004 (Public Law 108–136). The use 

of funds under this provision would be in addition to the use of 

funds for a tanker acquisition program. Activities that contribute 

to the modernization of existing aerial refueling tankers could include a variety of modifications and upgrades to KC–135E/R aircraft that are consistent with the analysis of alternatives for meeting the aerial refueling requirements of the Air Force. 

92 

Prohibition on retirement of F–117 aircraft (sec. 134) 

The committee recommends a provision that would prohibit the 

Air Force from retiring any F–117 aircraft in fiscal year 2006. The 

committee budget request included a proposal to retire 10 F–117 

aircraft. The F–117 remains the only stealthy tactical aircraft capable of delivering certain precision munitions currently in the inventory. The committee believes it is premature to retire any F–117 

aircraft at this time. 

Prohibition on retirement of C–130E/H tactical airlift aircraft (sec. 135) 

The committee recommends a provision that would prohibit the 

Secretary of the Air Force from retiring any C–130E/H tactical airlift aircraft in fiscal year 2006. 

The committee believes it would be premature to retire any C– 

130 aircraft until the results of the Mobility Capabilities Study, 

which is to be completed in fiscal year 2005, are known and intratheater airlift requirements are determined. 

Procurement of C–130J/KC–130J aircraft after fiscal year 

2005 (sec. 136) 

The committee recommends a provision that would require the 

Secretary of the Air Force to procure any C–130J/KC–135 aircraft 

after fiscal year 2005 through a negotiated contract under Part 15 

of the Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR), relating to the acquisition of items under a negotiated contract (48 C.F.R. 15.000 et 

seq.), including a multiyear contract for such aircraft continuing in 

force from a fiscal year before fiscal year 2006. 

The Air Force designated the C–130J aircraft as a commercial 

item in 1995 on the basis that the aircraft was a modification of 

commercial C–130 aircraft configurations that had been certified by 

the Federal Aviation Administration. Section 4(12) of the Office of 

Federal Procurement Policy Act (41 U.S.C. 403) defines commercial 

items to include modified commercial items, as long as the modifications are either ‘‘minor modifications’’ or modifications of a type 

customarily available in the commercial marketplace. The Air 

Force designated the C–130J as a commercial item and determined 

that there would be a 95 percent commonality between the C–130J 

and the civilian commercial version of the plane and modifications 

from the commercial version would be minor. 

However, the Department of Defense Inspector General has reported that the C–130J included features not customarily available 

in the commercial marketplace, such as aerial delivery (cargo and 

paratroop), defensive systems, secure voice communication, station 

keeping, night vision, imaging, and satellite communication. The 

Director, Operational Test and Evaluation has found that the combat delivery variant of the C–130J has more than 70 percent new 

development and system integration relative to commercial 

versions of the C–130. 

The committee believes that the Air Force original decision to 

procure the C–130J as a commercial item unnecessarily limited 

cost oversight by the government by denying the government access to certified cost or pricing data from the manufacturer. The 

committee believes that an agreement to change the terms and conVerDate Aug 04 2004 15:24 May 25, 2005 Jkt 021326 PO 00000 Frm 00112 Fmt 6601 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\SR069.XXX SR069
93 

ditions of the existing C–130J contract from a commercial item contract to a standard defense contract is necessary to provide the government the oversight it needs to procure aircraft that are operationally effective and operationally suitable at a fair price. 

The committee notes that the Air Force has announced its intent 

to renegotiate this contract to a FAR Part 15 contract. This provision is intended to support that decision. 

Aircraft for performance of aeromedical evacuations (sec. 

137) 

The committee recommends a provision that would require the 

Secretary of the Air Force to procure aircraft for the purpose of providing aeromedical evacuation services to severely injured or ill 

personnel. The provision would require the aircraft to be capable 

of non-stop transatlantic flights, and be equipped with current 

aeromedical support facilities. The provision would ensure that the 

dedicated mission of the aircraft is aeromedical evacuation. The 

provision would authorize $200.0 million to be appropriated for the 

procurement of up to two fully-equipped aircraft to perform the 

aeromedical evacuation mission. 

Previously, the Air Force had dedicated C–9A aircraft for the 

aeromedical evacuation mission. The Air Force directed that all of 

these C–9A dedicated aeromedical evacuation aircraft be retired by 

2004, and the last C–9A aeromedical evacuation mission in the continental United States was flown on August 11, 2003. 

The committee has been informed by wounded military personnel 

that the use of organic cargo aircraft for medical evacuation has resulted in unnecessary suffering. The committee believes the large 

cargo and aerial refueling aircraft currently being used for 

aeromedical evacuation are not suited for the support of severely 

wounded or severely ill patients. 

The committee has been informed by health care providers that 

they have had difficulty controlling pain experienced by wounded 

patients during the course of extended flights. Many victims of 

multiple injuries require highly sophisticated electronic monitoring 

equipment, some of which is incompatible with the electrical power 

source of the transport aircraft. 

Increasingly the practice for victims of blast injury is to delay 

closure of major wounds until the patient arrives at a medical facility capable of providing tertiary care. Poor lighting, rapid changes 

in temperature, and differentials in atmospheric pressures are also 

of concern, particularly for those patients with traumatic head 

wounds. The committee believes that all of these concerns could be 

addressed by acquisition of dedicated aeromedical evacuation aircraft. 

The committee recommends an increase of $200.0 million in Aircraft Procurement, Air Force, for the procurement of up to two 

dedicated aeromedical evacuation aircraft. 

Air Force Aircraft 

F–15E procurement 

The budget request included no funding in Aircraft Procurement, 

Air Force (APAF), for the procurement of F–15E attrition reserve 

94 

aircraft. The F–15E is a dual-role fighter designed to perform airto-air and air-to-ground missions. The procurement of F–15E attrition reserve aircraft is included on the Air Force Chief of Staff’s unfunded priorities list. The committee recommends an increase of 

$65.0 million in APAF for the procurement of F–15E aircraft. 

C–130J/KC–130 multiyear procurement restoration 

The budget request included $99.0 million in Aircraft Procurement, Air Force (APAF), but included no funding to procure C– 

130J tactical airlift aircraft and no funding for advance procurement. The budget request included $1,092.7 million in Aircraft Procurement, Navy (APN), for the procurement of 12 KC–130J aerial 

refueling aircraft, but included no funding for advance procurement. The budget request would terminate the C–130J multiyear 

procurement (MYP) contract that was authorized by the Bob 

Stump National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2003 

(Public Law 107–314). In a May 10, 2005, letter to the Chairman 

of the Committee on Armed Services of the Senate, the Secretary 

of Defense indicated his intent to reverse his decision to terminate 

the C–130J multiyear contract because of contract termination 

costs. Additionally, the Secretary informed the Chairman in this 

letter that a budget amendment for fiscal year 2006 would not be 

required to accomplish this goal. 

The committee does not agree that a budget amendment is not 

necessary. Since there is no new information from the Department 

of Defense on the funding profile and numbers of aircraft by variant for C–130Js in fiscal year 2006, the committee exercised its discretion concerning the proper mix of these aircraft. The committee 

recommends an increase of $645.0 million in APAF for the procurement of nine C–130J tactical airlift aircraft, and $90.0 million in 

APAF for C–130J advance procurement. The committee also recommends a decrease of $781.0 million in APN, leaving sufficient 

funds for the procurement of four KC–130J aerial refueling aircraft, and an increase of $46.0 million in APN for KC–130J advance procurement. 

B–1 digital communication improvements 

The budget request included $13.5 million in Aircraft Procurement, Air Force (APAF), for post production support to the B–1 aircraft and $132.5 million in PE 64226F for B–1 capability improvements, but included no funding for the procurement and installation of the B–1 digital communication improvement. The B–1 digital communication improvement program preserves critical combat 

capability by providing Demand Assigned Multiple Access (DAMA)- 

compliant satellite data access for responsive in-flight mission and 

target changes. The existing temporary Combat Track II (CTII) radios are not DAMA compliant and will lose satellite access after fiscal year 2007. Procurement of the B–1 digital communication improvement is included on the Air Force Chief of Staff’s unfunded 

priorities list. The committee recommends an increase of $18.0 million in APAF and an increase of $8.0 million in PE 64226F for the 

procurement and installation of the B–1 digital communication improvement. 

95 

C–5 aircraft avionics modernization program 

The budget request included $71.1 million in Aircraft Procurement, Air Force (APAF), for modifications to the C–5 aircraft, including $69.3 million to continue the C–5 avionics modernization 

program (AMP). AMP upgrades the C–5 cockpit, installs communications, navigation and safety/air traffic management equipment, 

and replaces unreliable cockpit avionics. To accelerate this program, the committee recommends an increase of $20.0 million in 

APAF for C–5 AMP. 

C–130E/H aircraft modifications 

The budget request included $185.7 million in Aircraft Procurement, Air Force (APAF), for the procurement of aircraft modifications to the C–130, including $50.6 million for the procurement of 

Avionics Modernization Program (AMP) modifications and $7.1 million for the procurement and installation of one C–130 Center Wing 

Box (CWB) with expired service life. 

The AMP provides full Global Air Traffic Management and Navigation Safety compliant aircraft. The committee recommends an increase of $12.0 million in APAF for the procurement of AMP for C– 

130E/H aircraft. 

The CWB replacement increases the service life of the C–130. 

The Air Force has recently removed from service 30 C–130Es with 

CWBs whose service life has expired. Procurement of CWBs is included on the Air Force Chief of Staff’s unfunded priorities list. The 

committee recommends an increase of $37.7 million in APAF for 

the procurement of CWBs for C–130E/H aircraft, for a total authorization of $235.4 million in APAF for the C–130E/H aircraft. 

KC–135 global air traffic management 

The budget request included $88.8 million in Aircraft Procurement, Air Force (APAF), for modifications to the C–135 and KC– 

135 aircraft, including $77.7 million for the procurement of Global 

Air Traffic Management (GATM) modifications. The GATM modification includes avionics upgrades, wiring interfaces, and associated preparation activities for added communications, navigation, 

and surveillance equipment needed for operations in oceanic airspace where there are reduced spacing requirements between aircraft. To accelerate this program, the committee recommends an increase of $10.0 million in APAF for the procurement of additional 

KC–135 GATM modifications. 

E–8C joint surveillance and target attack radar system 

reengining 

The budget request included $15.5 million in Aircraft Procurement, Air Force (APAF), for the procurement of aircraft modifications to the E–8C aircraft, but included no funding for reengining 

the E–8C aircraft. 

The reengining of the E–8C would provide significant improvements in reliability and performance over current TF33–102C engines and also reduce total life cycle costs. The reengining of the 

E–8C aircraft is included on the Air Force Chief of Staff’s unfunded 

priorities list. The committee recommends an increase of $44.4 million in APAF for the procurement of non-recurring engineering acVerDate Aug 04 2004 15:24 May 25, 2005 Jkt 021326 PO 00000 Frm 00115 Fmt 6601 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\SR069.XXX SR069
96 

tivities required to initiate a reengining program to install JT8D 

engines on the E–8C aircraft. 

Advanced targeting pods 

The budget request included $644.2 million in Aircraft Procurement, Air Force (APAF), for the procurement of aircraft support 

equipment and facilities, including $40.8 million for the procurement of advanced targeting pods (ATPs). The ATP will supplement 

and replace the current targeting pod with a new system that provides increased combat effectiveness across several mission areas. 

The LITENING ATP is currently in use by the Active Duty, Air 

National Guard, and Air Force Reserve Command. The Combat Air 

Force is over 100 ATPs short of the requirement to equip legacy 

aircraft, and the procurement of additional ATPs is included on the 

Chief of Staff of the Air Force’s unfunded priorities list. The committee recommends an increase of $96.6 million in APAF for the 

procurement of 66 additional LITENING ATPs. 

Air Force Missiles 

Minuteman III mods for propulsion replacement program 

The budget request included $672.6 million in PE 11213F, Missile Procurement Air Force (MPAF), of which $289.7 million is for 

the Intercontinental Ballistic Missile propulsion replacement program. The committee notes that the Department of Defense’s diversion of funds away from this program will result in procurement 

of fewer motors in fiscal year 2006, resulting in an inefficient rate 

of production with consequent cost increases. The committee further notes that this program is contained on the Chief of Staff of 

the Air Force’s unfunded priorities list. 

The committee recommends an increase of $10.0 million in PE 

11213F for MPAF to be used for the propulsion replacement program for the Minuteman III ICBM force. 

Other Air Force Procurement 

Halvorsen loader 

The budget request included $16.3 million in Other Procurement, 

Air Force (OPAF), for the Halvorsen loader, a state- of-the-art handler for off/on loading aircraft cargo. Currently, 44 Halvorsen loaders are supporting Operation Iraqi Freedom, seven Halvorsen loaders are supporting Operation Enduring Freedom, and eight were 

used to support tsunami relief operations. Additional funding for 

Halvorsen loaders is on the Chief Staff of the Air Force’s unfunded 

priorities list. The committee recommends an increase of $8.2 million in OPAF for the procurement of 12 Halvorsen loaders, for a 

total authorization of $24.5 million. 

The committee understands that the Future Years Defense Program calls for buying a total of 385 Halvorsen loaders. However, 

the Air Force could ultimately buy as many as 512 Halvorsen loaders, if the Air Force were to decide to replace all of the existing 

25,000 pound class (25K) loaders in the force. Given that the 

Halvorsen loader is more capable and more easily maintained than 

the 25K loaders it is replacing, the committee encourages the Air 

97 

Force to review its procurement plans. If the Air Force were to decide to buy more Halvorsen loaders, the committee believes that 

the Air Force should investigate whether there might be significant 

savings achievable if the Air Force were to acquire those loaders 

under a multiyear procurement contract. 

Distributed common ground system components 

The budget request included $1.5 million in Other Procurement, 

Air Force (OPAF), for Intelligence Communications Equipment, but 

did not include funding to continue fielding of the jumbo digital 

transit cased system (J–DTS) components of the distributed common ground system (DCGS). 

J–DTS is a component of the DCGS architecture that enables 

users in remote locations to receive imagery and other intelligence 

information from a variety of intelligence collection platforms, including Global Hawk, Predator, and U–2 aircraft. In some cases, 

remote users are able to actually control the sensors on the intelligence platform. Fielding of J–DTS to additional Air Force intelligence squadrons will enable multiple units to participate in realworld intelligence operations on a daily basis; provide better training to more Air Force intelligence specialists; and reduce the high 

operational tempo on the limited number of intelligence squadrons 

currently equipped to receive intelligence information in remote locations. 

The committee recommends an increase of $12.5 million in 

OPAF, for Intelligence Communications Equipment, to field additional J–DTS equipment to Air Force intelligence squadrons. 

Joint threat emitters 

The budget request included $36.1 million in Other Procurement, Air Force (OPAF), for combat training ranges, including $17.5 million for joint threat emitters. The joint threat emitter (JTE) system 

simulates electronic combat signals and is designed to provide realistic electronic warfare training for pilots and aircrew members. 

The JTE replaces older, maintenance intensive threat emitters, and 

is specifically designed to allow for ‘‘spiral’’ upgrades to ensure future threats are quickly integrated into the system. JTE has proven to be an effective training tool to prepare pilots for combat. Additional funding for JTE is included on the Air Force Chief of 

Staff’s unfunded priorities list. The committee recommends an increase of $4.5 million in OPAF for the accelerated procurement of 

joint threat emitters. 

Subtitle E—Other Matters 

98 


Insert graphic folio 133 SR69.064
99 


Insert graphic folio 134 SR69.065
100 


Insert graphic folio 135 SR69.066
101 


Insert graphic folio 136 SR69.067
102 


Insert graphic folio 137 SR69.068
103 


Insert graphic folio 138 SR69.069
104 

Advanced SEAL Delivery System (sec. 151) 

The committee recommends a provision that would limit the 

availability of funds for advance procurement of a pressure hull 

and other long lead items associated with building the second Advanced SEAL Delivery System (ASDS) until 30 days after the Secretary of Defense certifies to the congressional defense committees 

that the Under Secretary of Defense for Acquisition, Technology 

and Logistics has made a favorable Milestone C decision regarding 

the ASDS program. 

The ASDS is a miniature, combatant submarine being developed 

for the infiltration and exfiltration of naval special operations 

forces. Unlike current underwater delivery systems, ASDS would 

transport Navy SEALs over longer distances in a dry environment, 

enhancing the operators’ ability to accomplish their mission once 

ashore. 

Significant technical and cost growth problems have plagued this 

program since its inception. For the past six years, the committee 

has expressed increasing concern about the cost of this system and 

the significant performance shortfalls the program has exhibited. 

At the urging of the committee, the Department of Defense designated ASDS as an Acquisition Category I program in 2003, and 

is exercising milestone decision authority to assess the future of 

this program. 

The first ASDS underwent an operational evaluation (OPEVAL), 

starting in April 2003, to determine the effectiveness and suitability of the boat for use in combat. The OPEVAL results were 

promising, but revealed significant performance shortfalls. As a result, the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2004 

(Public Law 108–136) prohibited expenditure of advance procurement funds for items associated with the second ASDS until after 

a favorable Milestone C decision, and a detailed report from the 

Secretary of Defense. In the Fall of 2004, the Commander, U.S. 

Special Operations Command, in consultation with the Assistant 

Secretary of the Navy for Research, Development and Acquisition, 

conducted a major program review; requested a delay in the Milestone C review and related advance procurement until the first 

quarter of fiscal year 2006; indicated his desire and the willingness 

of the prime contractor to restructure the program to a firm, fixedprice contract for future boats; and established the requirement for 

an additional period of operational test and evaluation in the 

fourth quarter of fiscal year 2005, prior to a Milestone C decision. 

The ASDS program has achieved some progress over the past 

year in addressing remaining technical challenges associated with 

development. Most acoustical challenges have been addressed and 

a plan has been developed to address the remaining issues. Problems associated with the current battery technology have been 

mitigated, and a new, more promising lithium-ion battery technology will be installed on the boat in May 2005. Structural and 

maintenance challenges associated with the tail assembly of the 

ASDS appear to have been resolved with the redesign of the tail 

section. 

The requirement for an ASDS remains critical for our special operations forces. The Under Secretary of Defense for Acquisition, 

Technology, and Logistics will determine in the Milestone C review 

105 

if the current ASDS program meets operational requirements, 

whether the ASDS program should continue, and what contractual 

adjustments are warranted. 

While encouraged by recent progress, the committee remains concerned about the technical challenges and cost growth that have occurred in the ASDS program. The Milestone C decision has been 

postponed until December 2005, following a final operational test 

and evaluation. The committee opposes the commitment of fiscal 

year 2006 advance procurement funding prior to a favorable Milestone C decision and a comprehensive report from the Secretary of 

Defense. The committee reiterates the requirement for the Secretary of Defense to notify the congressional defense committees of 

the results of the Milestone C decision on ASDS, and to include in 

his report: a detailed summary of the program’s revised cost estimate and future cost estimates, as validated by the Cost Analysis 

and Improvement Group; a detailed acquisition strategy; and a 

plan to demonstrate realistic solutions to key technical and performance problems identified during testing and operations. 

The provision would also direct the Comptroller General to review the adequacy of the final operational test and evaluation plan 

developed by the Navy, review the results of the operational test, 

and update the March 2003 Comptroller General Report (GAO–03– 

442), ‘‘Defense Acquisition, Advanced SEAL Delivery System Program Needs Increased Oversight.’’ 

The committee directs that no amount of the $71.7 million authorized to be appropriated for advance procurement of ASDS in 

fiscal year 2006 be obligated or expended until after a favorable 

Milestone C decision, as certified to the congressional defense committees in the required Secretary report. 

Defense-wide Programs 

MH–47 infrared engine exhaust suppressor 

The budget request included $129.7 million in Procurement, Defense-wide (PDW), for Special Operations Forces (SOF), Rotary 

Wing Upgrades, but did not include funding to complete fielding of 

infrared engine exhaust suppressor sets for U.S. Army MH–47E/D 

(IES–47) special operations aircraft. 

The MH–47 Chinook aircraft has proven to be a critical workhorse in the global war on terrorism, providing heavy lift, even at 

high operating altitudes. While a durable system, the MH–47 is 

vulnerable to heat-seeking weapons. Installation of infrared exhaust suppressors significantly reduces this vulnerability. U.S. 

Special Operations Command (SOCOM) has a requirement for 61 

IES–47 sets to equip all MH–47E/D aircraft, plus four spares for 

a total of 65 sets. Currently, 45 sets are scheduled for procurement, 

leaving 20 sets yet to be funded. Fully equipping the MH–47E/D 

fleet is the highest priority of the Commander, SOCOM, for additional funding. 

The committee recommends an increase of $7.7 million in PDW, 

for SOF, Rotary Wing Upgrades, to complete fielding of the 20 remaining IES–47 sets. 

106 

Time delayed firing device/sympathetic detonators 

The budget request included $11.2 million in Procurement, Defense-wide (PDW), for Special Operations Forces (SOF), Ordnance 

Acquisition, including $1.4 million for time delayed firing device/ 

sympathetic detonators (TDFD/SYDET), but did not include enough 

funding to fully replenish the inventory, particularly with regard to 

having sufficient munitions to train new operators. 

TDFD/SYDET is a time delayed detonating device that greatly 

enhances the capabilities and efficiency of SOF operators conducting offensive military operations. Sufficient supplies are required to ensure operators have the best possible detonators for actual missions and that the detonator is available to instructors 

training new SOF operators. TDFD/SYDET is one of the highest 

priorities of the Commander, U.S. Special Operations Command, 

for additional funding. 

The committee recommends an increase of $11.0 million in PDW, 

for SOF Ordnance Acquisition, to procure an additional 5,500 

TDFD/SYDET units for SOF operators and trainers. 

Multi-band inter/intra team radio 

The budget request included $69.9 million in Procurement, Defense-wide (PDW), for Special Operations Forces (SOF), Communications Equipment and Electronics, but did not include funding 

to complete fielding of the multi-band inter/intra team radio 

(MBITR). 

The MBITR AN/PRC–148 radio system provides SOF teams the 

ability to communicate over a variety of frequencies utilizing a single handheld radio with embedded security. The MBITR replaces 

numerous fixed frequency radios and related batteries and replacement parts, resulting in a significant reduction in the combat load 

of SOF operators. Continued fielding of the MBITR radio system is 

one of the highest priorities of the Commander, U.S. Special Operations Command, for additional funding. 

The committee recommends an increase of $13.5 million in PDW, 

for SOF Communications Equipment and Electronics, to field an 

additional 1,131 MBITR radios to SOF operators. 

Multi-band multi-mission radio 

The budget request included $69.9 million in Procurement, Defense-wide (PDW), for Special Operations Forces (SOF), Communications Equipment and Electronics, including $1.4 million for the 

multi-band multi-mission radio (MBMMR) system, but did not include sufficient funding to enable fielding of this important communications capability to deploying SOF units. 

The MBMMR radio system provides voice and data capability 

over a variety of frequencies, and can operate in local or satellite 

communications modes. This radio enables SOF teams to utilize 

one radio to communicate with a variety of military and other organizations and replaces the variety of radios currently needed to accomplish required communications responsibilities. Continued fielding of the MBMMR radio system is one of the highest priorities of 

the Commander, U.S. Special Operations Command, for additional 

funding. 

107 

The committee recommends an increase of $16.5 million in PDW, 

for SOF Communications Equipment and Electronics, to field an 

additional 500 MBMMR radios to SOF teams. 

Joint threat warning system 

The budget request included $16.3 million in Procurement, Defense-wide (PDW), for Special Operations Forces (SOF), Intelligence Systems, to begin procurement of the Joint Threat Warning 

System (JTWS), but the amount requested will only equip a small 

portion of special operations forces with this much improved threat 

warning capability for ground, air, and maritime forces. 

The JTWS is a modular, lightweight ground signals intelligence 

system that can be mounted on a variety of SOF delivery platforms, providing threat warning, situational awareness, and enhanced force protection for SOF elements. JTWS is an evolutionary 

acquisition program that builds upon previous efforts to separately 

acquire similar warning systems for air, ground, and maritime applications. Accelerating the procurement of this capability is one of 

the highest priorities of the Commander, U.S. Special Operations 

Command, for additional funding. The committee recommends an increase of $12.0 million in PDW, 

for SOF Intelligence Systems, to procure additional ground, air, 

and maritime JTWS systems. 

Rucksack portable unmanned aerial vehicle 

The budget request included $20.2 million in Procurement, Defense-wide (PDW), for Special Operations Forces (SOF), Small 

Arms and Weapons, for the rucksack portable unmanned aerial vehicle (RPUAV), but did not include enough funding to fully meet 

the operational needs of the Commander, U.S. Special Operations 

Command (SOCOM), for fiscal year 2006. 

The RPUAV is a man-portable unmanned aerial vehicle system 

that can be transported, launched, controlled, and recovered by a 

single SOF operator. The RPUAV provides small SOF teams with 

an important reconnaissance, surveillance, and target acquisition 

asset, and greatly enhances their situational awareness and force 

protection. The RPUAV is one of the highest priorities of the Commander, SOCOM, for additional funding. 

The committee recommends an increase of $3.3 million in PDW, 

for SOF, Small Arms and Weapons, to procure an additional 19 

RPUAV systems to meet fiscal year 2006 requirements. 

Military mail screening equipment 

The budget request included $143.8 million in Procurement, Defense-wide (PDW), for the chemical/biological installation force protection program. The committee recommends an increase of $10.2 

million in PDW for the chemical/biological installation force protection program, to begin the procurement and fielding of chemical 

and biological agent detection and sampling equipment to establish 

a robust capability to screen military mail at 62 sites (three mail 

transfer centers, three distribution centers outside the continental 

United States, and 56 military post offices). This increase would 

also provide for augmentation of current laboratory analytical capability to provide the capacity necessary to process the increased volVerDate Aug 04 2004 15:24 May 25, 2005 Jkt 021326 PO 00000 Frm 00127 Fmt 6601 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\SR069.XXX SR069
108 

ume of samples from the new sites. Additional analytical capability, supported by a robust quality assurance and quality control 

program, would maintain the current Chemical Biological Defense 

Program laboratory standard, which would ensure confidence in 

the sampling results from the additional sites. 

Elsewhere in this report, the committee recommends a provision 

that would require the Secretary of Defense to promptly develop 

and implement a plan to ensure that mail within the military mail 

system is safe for delivery, to include the screening of all mail in 

order to detect the presence of biological, chemical or radiological 

weapons, agents or pathogens, or explosive devices. The committee 

recommends authorizing additional funding for this purpose in fiscal year 2006 to ensure that resources are available to begin implementation of the plan as soon as possible. 

Automatic Chemical Agent Detector and Alarm 

The budget request included $258.3 million in Procurement, Defense-Wide (PDW), for contamination avoidance equipment. The requested funding supports the procurement of chemical and biological detection, warning and reporting, and reconnaissance systems, 

such as the Automatic Chemical Agent Detector and Alarm 

(ACADA). The committee notes that a number of Active Duty Army 

and National Guard units are deployed worldwide in support of 

military operations. These units must have the best possible defense against chemical threats. The committee recommends an increase of $16.0 million in PDW to meet procurement shortfalls in 

fielding ACADA systems. 

ITEMS OF SPECIAL INTEREST 

Army multi-band inter/intra team radio system 

The committee is concerned with the limited industrial capacity 

to produce and deliver large quantities of hand-held, secure Type1 multi-band inter/intra team radio systems (MBITR) required for 

Operations Iraqi Freedom and Enduring Freedom. Currently, the 

Army has only one source for the MBITR radio. The committee believes that a second source for the acquisition of MBITR radios 

would address existing shortfalls, accelerate fielding, and ensure an 

ongoing supply of these critical systems. 

The committee directs the Secretary of the Army to study the 

feasibility and the costs and benefits of providing for the participation of a second source in the production of MBITR radios. The Secretary will provide a report of this study to the congressional defense committees no later than March 1, 2006. 

Cooperative engagement capability 

In the statement of managers accompanying the Strom Thurmond National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 1999 

(Public Law 105–261), the conferees directed the Secretary of the 

Navy to report to the congressional defense committees at least 

quarterly on interoperability problems among cooperative engagement capability (CEC) and other combat direction systems. The report was also to contain planned solutions. 

109 

The committee has recently received the 24th consecutive report 

on CEC and combat direction system interoperability. The committee is satisfied that the Navy is now well aware of the potential 

interoperability problems that this system was facing, and has developed plans and programs to manage the interoperability risks in 

the future. Therefore, the committee does not believe that the Secretary of the Navy should continue to report on the interoperability 

problems of CEC with combat direction systems. 

F/A–22 aircraft 

The budget request included $3.2 billion in Aircraft Procurement, 

Air Force, for the procurement of 24 F/A–22 combat aircraft, and 

an increment of $65.5 million in PE 27138F to procure one dedicated test aircraft, for a total of 25 F/A–22 Raptor aircraft. 

The committee has been notified of the results of the dedicated 

initial operational test and evaluation (DIOT&E) that was conducted on the F/A–22. While the DIOT&E report determined the F/ 

A–22 aircraft to be operationally effective in the air supremacy 

mission, the committee is concerned that the aircraft was determined to be not operationally suitable. One discrepancy of particular concern is the inadequate ground cooling for avionics in 

high temperature conditions. The committee believes this discrepancy must be corrected before the F/A–22 aircraft design could be 

considered stable. The committee also notes that tests to demonstrate the limited air-to-ground attack capability of the F/A–22 

included in the current design were not conducted during the 

DIOT&E, but are scheduled for follow-on testing beginning in July 

2005. 

The committee notes that the situation with late delivery of F/ 

A–22 aircraft addressed in previous years is improving, but the 

committee remains concerned that the program is still behind the 

original contract schedule. 

The committee will continue to closely monitor developments 

with the testing and production deliveries of the F/A–22 aircraft. 

Intra-theater airlift 

The Department of Defense has not yet briefed the congressional 

defense committees on the results of the Mobility Capabilities 

Study (MCS). The Secretary of Defense directed that this study be 

accomplished to update the results of the Mobility Requirements 

Study for Fiscal Year 2005 (MRS–05), which was completed in fiscal year 2001. This update is required to address the new National 

Military Strategy. One component of the MCS is expected to be a 

review of intra-theater airlift capacity. 

The committee believes that decisions on the modernization and 

recapitalization of the fleet of intra-theater airlift aircraft should be 

based on the results of the MCS. The committee directs the Secretary to submit a report to the congressional defense committees 

no later than December 1, 2005, that identifies the options available to meet any identified shortfalls in intra-theater airlift capacity. Before an option to start a new program to meet any intra-theater airlift shortfall is initiated, the committee directs the Secretary to ensure that an analysis of alternatives is conducted. 

110 

Littoral combat ship 

The Navy recently completed construction of the experimental 

littoral craft and has been authorized to procure one flight 0 littoral combat ship (LCS). Funding for the second flight 0 vessel 

from the second contractor team is included in the fiscal year 2006 

budget request. These ships were intended to provide experience 

upon which the Navy would base decisions on how to proceed with 

acquisition of flight 1 LCS vessels, now scheduled to begin in fiscal 

year 2008. 

The original plan put forth by the Navy implied that the contracts for flight 1 vessels would be awarded competitively. The 

Navy now appears to be changing the acquisition approach to narrowing the selection of flight 1 proposals to a selection from between the two successful bidders for the flight 0 program. The committee understands that this could be the most convenient approach from an administrative standpoint, but is concerned that 

this would discourage other potential contractor teams from continuing work to mature concepts and technologies for potential implementation on later LCS vessels. 

Therefore, the committee directs the Navy to report to the congressional defense committees at the same time as the submission 

of the fiscal year 2007 budget on its acquisition strategy for the 

flight 1 portion of the LCS program. That report should provide details on the testing and experimentation that the Navy intends to 

conduct prior to awarding the flight 1 contracts; the acquisition 

strategy for acquiring flight 1 vessels, including any reasons for 

having changed that strategy if it has changed; and the Navy’s 

plans for transitioning technologies from other Navy research and 

development activities, with particular emphasis on technologies 

being developed in the DD(X) program that may be appropriate for 

applying to the LCS program. 

Maritime prepositioning force, future 

The committee is concerned about whether the concept of sea 

basing is technically feasible and fiscally prudent. The committee 

is also concerned that the requirement for sea basing has not been 

refined beyond a concept of operations. The premise for the requirement for the sea base is that access to ports or bases ashore may 

be denied, or that sea basing will reduce vulnerabilities of large logistics bases ashore. The sea base concept is that a large ground 

force can be assembled at sea, delivered on the surface and the air 

to an area of conflict, and subsequently sustained from the sea 

base. The Navy is touting the centerpiece of the sea base as being 

the Maritime Prepositioning Force, Future (MPF(F)). The Mission 

Need Statement for MPF(F) was approved by the Joint Requirements Oversight Council in May 2001, yet the Department of Defense is still trying to define key performance parameters. The 

budget request included $66.3 million in PE 48042N for the purpose of developing enabling technologies for MPF(F). 

Enabling technologies include landing platforms, ship-to-ship 

cargo transfer, automated cargo handling, underway replenishment 

in heavy seas, and others. The committee believes it is important 

to ensure these technologies can actually support the movement of 

supplies and equipment in heavy seas, at a rate that will actually 

111 

sustain a ground force engaged in combat, before the country 

makes large investments in MPF(F) ships. 

The Navy has made a number of proposals in this budget request. One is to build only one surface combatant and one submarine a year through the years included in the Future Years Defense Program (FYDP). Another is to delay the completion of the 

first ship of the new class of aircraft carrier, the CVN–78, for the 

second time in two years. Finally, the Navy has proposed to reduce 

the force of active aircraft carriers from 12 to 11. In testimony before the Subcommittee on Seapower of the Committee on Armed 

Services, one witness who represented the shipbuilding industry 

stated that the single most important factor in controlling costs of 

ships was to offer program stability. Constantly changing budgets, 

acquisition strategies, and procurement profiles are as disruptive to 

maintaining cost and schedule stability as constantly changing 

technical requirements. The Navy’s shipbuilding budget is already 

underfunded, and the addition of a new platform could only make 

the situation worse. 

Section 1022(a)(1) of the Bob Stump National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2003 (Public Law 107–314) requires the 

Secretary of Defense to report to the Committees on Armed Services of the Senate and the House of Representatives that funding 

is adequate to support a 30 year shipbuilding plan, with a discussion of the necessary naval vessel force structure to meet the National Security Strategy of the United States or the most recent 

Quadrennial Defense Review. The Navy has submitted an interim 

30 year shipbuilding plan, which does not yet appear to be endorsed by the Department, and does not appear to be fully funded 

in the FYDP. In written testimony before the Subcommittee on 

Seapower of the Committee on Armed Services, a Congressional 

Research Service analyst describes this plan in the following way: 

‘‘The March 2005 report does not present a 30 year shipbuilding 

plan. Instead, it presents a 30 year projection of potential Navy 

force levels from which potential annual shipbuilding rates can be 

only partially inferred.’’ The force structures in the Navy plan are 

for either 260 ships or 325 ships, both of which include MPF(F) 

ships, which are intended to enable the sea basing concept. While 

the committee recommends authorization of the budget request for 

$66.3 million in PE 48042N for development of technologies for 

MPF(F), the committee believes that the Navy should not proceed 

to a shipbuilding program for MPF(F) before the requirements for 

MPF(F) are more refined, and that enabling technologies have 

demonstrated a high probability of achieving successful operations. 

Transmission Enterprise Program 

The committee notes that the Army has taken action to implement the Transmission Enterprise Program (TEP), an effort to stabilize U.S. combat vehicle transmission production, while continuing to meet needs driven by the Iraq war. The committee further notes that the fiscal year 2006 budget request included no 

funding specifically dedicated to the TEP. The committee commends the Army for its efforts to implement the program and encourages the Army to continue funding the TEP in fiscal year 2006. 

(113) 

TITLE II—RESEARCH, DEVELOPMENT, TEST, AND 

EVALUATION 

Explanation of tables 

The following tables provide the program-level detailed guidance 

for the funding authorized in title II of this Act. The tables also 

display the funding requested by the administration in the fiscal 

year 2006 budget request for research, development, test and evaluation programs, and indicate those programs for which the committee either increased or decreased the requested amounts. As in 

the past, the administration may not exceed the authorized 

amounts (as set forth in the tables or, if unchanged from the administration request, as set forth in budget justification documents 

of the Department of Defense), without a reprogramming action in 

accordance with established procedures. Unless noted in this report, funding changes to the budget request are made without prejudice. 

114 


Insert graphic folio 150 SR69.070
115 

Subtitle A—Authorization of Appropriations 

Science and technology 

The committee notes the critical role that investments in defense 

science and technology (S&T) and basic research play in developing 

the revolutionary military capabilities of the future. These programs also train the next generation of U.S. scientists, engineers, 

and technology entrepreneurs who will maintain complex weapons 

and defense systems and who will assist in solving future national 

security challenges. The committee remains concerned about the 

overall funding level for defense science and research. The committee notes that the fiscal year 2006 budget request for S&T is 

below the previous year’s requested level. If in any year from fiscal 

year 2001 to 2009 the budget request for these research programs 

does not increase by 2 percent over inflation, the National Defense 

Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2000 (Public Law 106–65) requires the Department of Defense to certify the impact of the S&T 

budget on national security and to initiate a Defense Science Board 

study assessing the impact of the proposed budget on defense technology and the national defense. 

The committee notes that the recent National Research Council 

report entitled ‘‘Assessment of Department of Defense Basic Research’’ contained a number of findings and recommendations. The 

report found that ‘‘in real terms the resources provided for Department of Defense basic research have declined substantially over the 

past decade.’’ The report also found that there has been a recent 

deemphasis on ‘‘unfettered exploration’’ in the basic research program, which ‘‘historically has been a critical enabler of the most 

important breakthroughs in military capabilities.’’ The committee 

is troubled by the lack of support for real innovative work at the 

Department, which could have serious consequences for the development of necessary future military capabilities. Therefore, the 

committee recommends an increase of over $30.0 million in the Department’s basic research accounts. 

The committee notes that the National Research Council report 

also made a number of recommendations to improve the execution 

of the basic research program. The committee directs the Secretary 

of Defense to provide a report to the congressional defense committees no later than March 1, 2006, which evaluates the National Research Council recommendations to improve the Department’s 

basic research program, and details a plan and schedule for the implementation of appropriate recommendations. 

Finally, the committee has provided increases in the S&T program to support specific focus areas in fiscal year 2006, including: 

close to $50.0 million for unmanned systems; approximately $63.0 

million for power technology advances; nearly $116.0 million for 

force protection, transformational technologies, and training innovations; $42.0 million in manufacturing research and process technologies; over $105.0 million to support counterterrorism efforts; 

and $68.0 million for combat casualty care and military medicine, 

including a targeted $40.0 million for prevention, mitigation, and 

treatment of blast injuries. 

116 

Subtitle B—Program Requirements, Restrictions, and 

Limitations 

Contract for the procurement of Future Combat System 

(sec. 211) 

The committee recommends a provision that would require the 

Secretary of the Army to ensure that the Future Combat System 

(FCS), including all projects and equipment that are a part of the 

FCS program, be developed and procured through a contract under 

the authority of Part 15 of the Federal Acquisition Regulation 

(FAR), relating to acquisition of items by negotiated contract (48 

C.F.R. 15.000 et seq.) rather than through a contract under the authority of section 845 of the National Defense Authorization Act for 

Fiscal Year 2004 (Public Law 108–136, 10 U.S.C. 2371 note). 

The committee has expressed concern regarding the Army’s use 

of an ‘‘other transaction authority’’ (OTA) contract vehicle to manage the FCS program. The committee does not believe that the 

$20.9 billion agreement entered between the Army and the Lead 

Systems Integrator for the FCS program is consistent with the language and intent of section 845 authority. Section 845 authority is 

intended to be used for limited prototype projects, particularly 

those in which the Department of Defense seeks to engage nontraditional defense contractors that may be averse to the requirements imposed by a standard Department contract. 

The committee notes that the Army has announced its intent to 

renegotiate this contract to a FAR Part 15 contract. This provision 

is intended to support that decision. 

Joint field experiment on stability and support operations 

(sec. 212) 

The committee recommends a provision that would require the 

Secretary of Defense to conduct a joint field experiment focused on 

the transition from major combat operations to stability and support operations required to restore security, provide for immediate 

humanitarian needs, and begin the reconstruction activities necessary to assist a host nation in achieving self-sufficiency. The committee expects that responsibility for the conduct of the joint field 

experiment would be delegated to the Commander, U.S. Joint 

Forces Command. 

Recent experience in Iraq and Afghanistan has highlighted the 

importance of planning and training U.S. personnel to prepare for 

the conduct and support of stability operations in post-conflict situations. The Defense Science Board 2004 Summer Study entitled 

‘‘Transition to and from Hostilities’’ identified the challenges the 

United States will face in its future stabilization and reconstruction 

efforts, and offered recommendations for enhancing U.S. effectiveness across the spectrum of activities from peacetime through stabilization and reconstruction. These recommendations focused on 

management discipline and on building and maintaining certain 

fundamental capabilities, now lacking, that are critical to success 

in stability and support operations. 

In response to recent experience and the Defense Science Board 

study, the Secretary is taking steps to place greater emphasis on 

the stability operations mission in the Department of Defense planVerDate Aug 04 2004 15:24 May 25, 2005 Jkt 021326 PO 00000 Frm 00136 Fmt 6601 Sfmt 6601 E:\HR\OC\SR069.XXX SR069
117 

ning and guidance so that the mission is fully integrated across all 

Department of Defense activities. The committee commends the 

initiative the Secretary has taken to date and urges him to continue to give this effort a high priority, to include sufficient resources, senior-level management attention, and outreach efforts to 

other agencies and departments of the U.S. Government who play 

important roles in stability and support activities. 

The committee notes the establishment within the Department of 

State of the Office of the Coordinator for Reconstruction and Stabilization whose mission is to lead, coordinate, and institutionalize 

U.S. Government civilian capacity to prevent or prepare for postconflict situations; and to help stabilize and reconstruct societies in 

transition from conflict or civil strife, so these societies can reach 

a sustainable path toward peace, democracy, and a market economy. The committee commends the Department of Defense’s active 

support of and cooperation with this new office in the Department 

of State, and urges the Department of Defense to continue to deepen its coordination with the Department of State on planning for 

and participating in post-conflict stability operations and reconstruction efforts. 

The committee believes that a joint field experiment will provide 

valuable insights for the Department of Defense as it endeavors to 

integrate stability and support operations into mainstream military 

operations and doctrine. The committee is concerned, however, that 

the Department of Defense is only one element of stability and support activities in the post-conflict environment. The committee 

strongly urges the participation of other departments and agencies 

of the U.S. Government, as well as coalition partners, in both the 

conduct of the joint field experiment and the formulation of recommendations to ensure that a comprehensive U.S. Government 

and coalition approach to future stability and support activities is 

developed. 

The committee directs that costs associated with the conduct of 

this joint field experiment shall be paid from the amount authorized to be appropriated for joint experimentation, PE63727N, in fiscal year 2006. 

Subtitle C—Ballistic Missile Defense 

One-year extension of Comptroller General assessments of 

ballistic missile defense programs (sec. 221) 

The committee recommends a provision that would extend until 

fiscal year 2007 the requirement for the Comptroller General to 

provide an assessment of the extent to which the Missile Defense 

Agency achieved the goals established for that fiscal year for each 

ballistic missile defense program of the Department of Defense. 

The provision would also modify the submittal date from February 

15 to March 15 to provide additional time to complete this requirement. 

Fielding of Ballistic Missile Defense Capabilities (sec. 222) 

The committee recommends a provision that would authorize the 

use of funds, authorized to be appropriated for fiscal year 2006 or 

2007 for research, development, test, and evaluation for the Missile 

118 

Defense Agency, for the development and fielding of ballistic missile defense capabilities. 

Plans for test and evaluation of operational capability of the 

ballistic missile defense system (sec. 223) 

The committee recommends a provision that would direct the appropriate joint and service operational test and evaluation components of the Department of Defense, in coordination with the Missile Defense Agency, to prepare a plan to test, evaluate, and characterize the operational capability of block 2006 and subsequent 

blocks of the ballistic missile defense system. Each plan prepared 

under this provision shall be appropriate for the level of technological maturity of the block to be tested, and shall be subject to 

the review and approval of the Director of Operational Test and 

Evaluation (DOT&E). Additionally, DOT&E shall provide a report 

at the conclusion of testing for each block of the ballistic missile defense system containing an assessment as to whether or not such 

testing was adequate to evaluate the operational capability of the 

block and a characterization as to the operational effectiveness, 

suitability, and survivability of the block capability, as appropriate 

for the level of technological maturity of the block to be tested. 

Subtitle D—High-Performance Defense Manufacturing 

Technology Research and Development 

High performance defense manufacturing technology research and development (sec. 230) 

The committee recommends a set of provisions that would require the Under Secretary of Defense for Acquisition, Technology 

and Logistics to identify advanced manufacturing processes and 

techniques whose utilization would result in significant productivity and efficiency gains in the defense manufacturing base. The 

provision would direct the Under Secretary to pursue the development of innovative manufacturing processes and advanced technologies and to facilitate the creation of extended production enterprises, which leverage information technology and innovative organizational models. 

In addition, the provision would direct the Under Secretary to 

take appropriate actions, such as establishment of agreements with 

relevant Department of Defense components, including the Joint 

Defense Manufacturing Technology Panel, to accelerate transition 

of transformational processes and technologies from science and 

technology to the defense manufacturing base. The provision would 

also direct the Under Secretary to develop and implement a set of 

activities to continuously identify and utilize improvements in innovative manufacturing processes and to diffuse best practices to industry. This may include taking steps to identify incentives for 

adoption of manufacturing advances in the industrial base. 

Finally, to ensure that technology efforts in industry are well coordinated with future defense technology requirements, the Under 

Secretary may initiate one or more technology roadmapping exercises. These roadmaps would be developed jointly with industry, 

and would plan the development and adoption of manufacturing 

processes and technologies needed for future defense capabilities. 

119 

Subtitle E—Other Matters 

Expansion of eligibility for leadership of Department of Defense Test Resource Management Center (sec. 241) 

The committee recommends a provision that would eliminate the 

requirement that the director and the deputy director of the Defense Test Resource Management Center be selected by the Secretary of Defense from among current and former civilian and military employees of the Department of Defense. Under this provision, 

candidates should be chosen based on their experience with test 

and evaluation programs regardless of employment history with 

the Department. 

Technology transition (sec. 242) 

The committee recommends a provision that would clarify the 

role of the Technology Transition Council, which was established in 

the Bob Stump National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 

2003 (Public Law 107–314) to provide advice and assistance to the 

manager of the Technology Transition Initiative. The provision 

would stipulate the duty of the council to support the Undersecretary of Defense for Acquisition, Technology and Logistics in the development of policies to facilitate the rapid transition of technologies from the science and technology base into acquisition programs. The Council would provide advice and support to all technology transition efforts. The provision would require the Secretary 

of Defense, working through the Technology Transition Council, to 

submit a report to the congressional defense committees outlining 

a strategy for technology transition and detailing the impact of internal Department of Defense processes and regulations on technology transition efforts. The report would also make recommendations for improvement of technology transition and for elimination 

of any identified impediments. The report shall be submitted with 

the fiscal year 2007 budget request. 

The committee is concerned that the council has been focused on 

one transition program, and has not met at the principal-level frequently enough to provide advice and leadership on technology 

transition programs across the Department. The committee believes the council should meet at least semi-annually at the principal-level, if it is to adequately fulfill its mission. 

The budget for technology transition has grown by 23 percent in 

the last four years. During this same time period, the Department 

created additional programs to rapidly field new capabilities and 

equipment. Test and evaluation has been accelerated to accommodate immediate needs. Taken together, these developments underscore the importance of an active, senior Technology Transition 

Council. Senior leadership attention should focus on ensuring success of these technology transition programs, identifying and overcoming barriers to utilization of the most innovative solutions and 

recommending any needed policy direction for the test and evaluation process. 

120 

Prevention, mitigation, and treatment of blast injuries (sec. 

243) 

The committee recommends a provision that would require the 

Secretary of Defense to designate a senior official as the executive 

agent to coordinate and manage a joint service comprehensive blast 

injury prevention, mitigation, and treatment program. The provision would require review and assessment of a coordinated, department-wide research effort to include: blast characterization; modeling and simulation of safe stand-off distances; ‘‘detect and defeat’’ 

capabilities; and armor design and material testing for blast, ballistic, and fire protection. The provision would also require design 

of a comprehensive flexible armor system and support for emerging 

military medical technologies, devices, and treatments specific to 

blast injuries. 

The provision would require the executive agent to: 

(1) conduct studies of blast injury, with an emphasis on traumatic brain injury; 

(2) develop improved clinical treatment and diagnostic protocols; 

(3) develop integrated treatment approaches for service 

members who suffer multiple injuries from blast; 

(4) conduct three or more pilot projects to study the incidence 

in returning soldiers of traumatic brain injury; 

(5) develop protocols for medical tracking of members for up 

to five years following blast injury; and 

(6) refine and improve educational interventions for blast injury survivors and their families. 

It is the committee’s intent that the Departments of Defense and 

Veterans Affairs’ Head Injury Project at Walter Reed Army Medical 

Center lead clinical and diagnostic services required by this provision. 

The provision would also require: (1) the establishment of a 

training program for medical and non-medical personnel on the 

prevention, mitigation, and treatment of blast injuries intended to 

improve field and clinical training on early identification of blast 

injury; and (2) the expansion of treatment programs, including 

those at the Departments of Defense and Veterans Affairs’ Brain 

Injury Center, intended to enhance the evaluation and care of 

members of the Armed Forces with consequence of blast injury, especially traumatic brain injury. 

The provision would further require the Secretary to submit a report to the congressional defense committees by February 15, 2007. 

The report would include: (1) a description of Department of Defense activities and efforts to improve the prevention, mitigation, 

and treatment of blast injuries; (2) a consolidated budget presentation on these programs; (3) a description of capability gaps in addressing blast injuries; (4) an explanation of collaborative work 

with other agencies, departments, and governments; (5) a description of efforts to disseminate blast injury research and treatment 

efforts; and (6) an update on the development status of comprehensive personnel protection systems. 

The committee notes the change in historical patterns of wounding in the global war on terrorism due to the proliferation of blast 

weapons. High velocity gun shot wounds, once the predominant 

121 

cause of military casualties, represent less than 10 percent of 

wounds today. Advances in military medicine, protective equipment, and highly successful training efforts have led to the highest 

survival rates in military history, making treatment and care, especially for new or poorly understood injuries, important. 

Over one-third of all U.S. injuries in Operation Iraqi Freedom 

and close to half of fatalities are the result of blasts. Multiple site 

injuries from blasts are common. Over 60 percent of head and neck 

injuries are the result of blasts. The committee believes it is time 

to focus attention and resources on a coordinated approach to addressing the blast threat from the beginning—pre-detonation defeat—through the end—full understanding of blast injuries and appropriate diagnosis, treatment, and care. The committee recommends an increase of over $40.0 million in 

targeted research, development, test and evaluation program elements for accelerated work specific to confronting blast injury prevention, mitigation, and treatment challenges. The committee also 

recommends an increase of $20.0 million in the Defense Health 

Program to facilitate expansion of clinical trials, treatments, and 

studies required by this provision. 

Additional Matters of Interest 

Army 

122 


Insert graphic folio 160 SR69.071
123 


Insert graphic folio 161 SR69.072
124 


Insert graphic folio 162 SR69.073
125 


Insert graphic folio 163 SR69.074
126 


Insert graphic folio 164 SR69.075
127 


Insert graphic folio 165 SR69.076
128 


Insert graphic folio 166 SR69.077
129 


Insert graphic folio 167 SR69.078
130 


Insert graphic folio 168 SR69.079
131 


Insert graphic folio 169 SR69.080
132 


Insert graphic folio 170 SR69.081
133 


Insert graphic folio 171 SR69.082
134 


Insert graphic folio 172 SR69.083
135 

Army basic research 

The budget request included $137.9 million in PE 61102A, for defense research sciences. The committee is concerned with the long 

term viability of the defense research program, especially those efforts geared at developing innovative solutions to address emerging 

and future challenges. Ongoing work in the areas of materials and 

composites for flexible armor, neuroscience, textiles with embedded 

sensors, efficient vehicle operations, and basic terrain analysis 

modeling and simulation are a few of the many research examples 

that contribute to meeting the needs of the warfighter. The committee recommends an increase of $12.5 million in PE 61102A for 

expansion of Army basic science, including $2.5 million for research 

in brain imaging deception detection; $2.0 million for moldable fabric armor to increase force protection options; $2.0 million for functionally integrated reactive surface technologies to develop protective, intelligent, and adaptive textiles; $2.0 million to enable transition of low temperature vehicle research; $3.0 million for desert 

terrain analysis research; and $1.0 million for advanced ground vehicle reliability research. 

Document exploitation 

The budget request included no funding for Research, Development, Test, and Evaluation, Army, for Security Defense Research 

Sciences, in PE 61102A, for development of advanced document exploitation equipment. 

Portable, rugged document exploitation equipment is currently 

not widely available to military personnel operating in deployed, 

austere environments. The technology exists to develop lightweight 

equipment that can scan documents, quickly search for important 

information in native languages, and transmit potentially valuable 

documents back to exploitation facilities quickly, thus providing 

battlefield commanders with rapid exploitation of captured information. Recent experiences in Afghanistan and Iraq have demonstrated the value of such capabilities and the requirement for additional, improved capabilities. 

The committee recommends an increase of $5.0 million in PE 

61102A, to continue development, product improvement, and fielding of portable document exploitation systems. 

Army university research 

The budget request included $82.0 million in PE 61104A, for university and industry research centers. Significant advances in materials technologies, materials processing, and secure communications require continued fundamental research to serve as the building blocks for Army future combat systems. The committee recommends an increase of $6.5 million in PE 61104A for university 

research, including $2.0 million for strategic defense systems manufacturing technology basic research; $2.5 million for expanded 

continuation of the nanotubes optimized for lightweight exceptional 

strength composite project; $2.0 million for integrated systems in 

sensing, imaging, and communications research to provide secure 

optical connections. 

136 

Advanced mine detection and blast mitigation 

The budget request included $17.6 million in PE 62105A, for materials technology. Army materials research efforts in blast resistant structures, composites, and the equipment to test them contribute to immediate and long term force protection needs. The 

committee recommends an increase of $5.0 million in PE 62105A 

for expansion of promising materials technology research, including 

$3.0 million for advanced mine detection and blast mitigation and 

$2.0 million for lightweight blast containment vessel development, 

improved computational simulation capabilities, and early testing 

of optimized vessel designs. 

Army small airship 

The budget request included $32.1 million in PE 62120A, for sensors and electronic survivability. Asymmetric threats and unpredictable battlefields increase the importance of sensors in spotting 

and preventing hostile action and in targeting assets. An adaptive, 

modular, autonomous vehicle capable of operating in a variety of 

environments and performing various functions during a single 

mission should provide the warfighter with an important stand off 

tool. 

The committee recommends an increase of $3.0 million in PE 

62120A to provide focused attention on solving some of the technical challenges involved in autonomous control, adaptability between tethered and untethered flight, and load exchange for a 

small airship surveillance system. 

Detection and neutralization of improved explosive devices 

The budget request included $32.1 million in PE 62120A, for sensors and electronics survivability and $49.5 million in PE 62782N, 

for mine and expeditionary warfare applied research. The Department of Defense is pursuing a broad short and long term research 

effort to confront the threat posed by improvised explosive devices 

(IEDs). Substantial achievements made in the areas of sensors, 

jammers, and pre detonation devices support current operations. As 

efforts continue to move solutions to the field as quickly as possible, an additional avenue of exploration is underway to invent 

more comprehensive tools for IED neutralization. Many IEDs are 

remotely initiated using inexpensive commercial electronics. These 

control mechanisms may all be subject to a low level of electricity 

leakage, which could be detected at a considerable distance with 

special equipment. 

The committee supports the Department’s efforts to explore alternative and imaginative approaches to combating the IED threat 

in the long-term. The committee recommends an increase of $2.0 

million in PE 62120A to accelerate development of an innovative 

remote sensor monitoring technology designed to lead to a mobile 

test bed for advanced stand-off detection of explosives. The committee further recommends an increase of $3.0 million in PE 

62782N for development of a field prototype detection and neutralization device. 

137 

Real-time laser threat warning development 

The budget request included $19.1 million in PE 62270A, for 

electronic warfare technology. The Army supports key goals in the 

area of battlespace survivability and acquisition of enemy targets 

under this account. The ability to detect heat seeking missiles and 

those guided by lasers with real-time location of the laser source 

and identification of the source characteristics would enhance missile countermeasure efforts. The committee recommends an increase in PE 62270A of $4.0 million to continue development of a 

prototype to field test a high performance, low cost laser threat 

warning and missile countermeasure system utilizing MEMS-based 

beam steering technology. 

Army unmanned systems initiative 

The budget request included $62.5 million in PE 62303A, for missile technology. As use of unmanned aerial vehicles increases, integration tools, testing processes, and training procedures must keep 

pace. The committee recommends an increase of $5.0 million in PE 

62303A for an unmanned systems initiative and expanded testing 

of unmanned vehicles and teams of vehicles during long, autonomous flights. The program would also develop airspace management procedures for vehicles with different payloads, and would 

provide joint training for control of vehicle weapons assignments 

and on the use of communication protocols. 

Technology enhancement for area protection 

The budget request included $62.5 million in PE 62303A for missile technology. The committee is aware that the Army has identified the enhanced area air defense system (EAADS) as the key element in defending against rockets, artillery and mortars, as well as 

unmanned aerial vehicles and cruise missiles. While the Army continues to develop radar elements to support EAADS, the committee 

is aware of the need to evolve the systems integration tools and 

technologies necessary to operate a comprehensive battlefield system to address the threat. 

The committee recommends an increase of $5.0 million in PE 

62303A for the enhanced area protection and survivability science 

and technology program to develop technologies to be integrated 

into force protection systems to support EAADS requirements, as 

well as near-term force protection for Operation Iraqi Freedom. 

Multifunctional robot platform 

The budget request included $16.0 million in PE 62308A, for advanced concepts and simulations. Various robotic platforms with 

force protection applications under development by the Army show 

promise in addressing sniper, mortar, and rocket propelled grenade 

threats. The committee recommends an increase of $3.0 million in 

PE 62308A for rapid integration of optical technology and advanced 

acoustic detection and direction finding hardware into the robot enhanced detection outpost with lasers platform (RedOwl). 

Combat vehicle and automotive technology 

The budget request included $64.9 million in PE 62601A, for 

combat vehicle and automotive technology. Component technologies 

138 

explored under this account support the Army’s current and future 

combat and tactical vehicle fleets. Present engine systems fail to 

provide adequate measurement and data retrieval necessary to increase engine efficiency, resulting in faster fuel burn rates. The committee recommends an increase of $3.5 million in PE 

62601A for development of advanced electric drives designed to result in easily replaceable, quiet, robust engines with greater power 

density and torque. The committee further recommends an increase of $6.0 million in 

PE 62601A to address the needs of the Department of Defense for 

alternative fuels and fundamental research on robotic ground vehicles. Specifically, the committee recommends increases of $3.0 million for a defense transportation energy research project focused on 

military use of advanced fuels; and $3.0 million for unmanned vehicle control technologies to increase control, vision, and navigation 

systems in robotic ground vehicles. 

Gun barrel coatings 

The budget request included $49.2 million in PE 62618A, for ballistics technology. Gun barrel wear accounts for nearly 80 percent 

of annual armament costs. Hard ceramic coatings such as titanium 

nitride could increase the wear and the life of such armaments by 

as much as five to eight times over current processes, with a projected proportionate reduction in armament costs. The committee 

recommends an increase of $2.0 million in PE 62618A for the development of hard, wear-resistant coatings for the inside surfaces 

of gun barrels. 

Active coatings technology 

The budget request included $37.8 million in PE 62624A, for 

weapons and munitions technology. Selected research in the areas 

of advanced, adaptable armor and coatings to protect personnel and 

equipment from ballistic and blast threats is approaching the testing phase. The committee recommends an increase of $3.5 million 

in PE 62624A for research and development of longer lasting, costeffective coatings that adapt to conditions in real-time. 

Sonic rarefaction wave gun technology 

The budget request included $37.8 million in PE 62624A, for 

weapons and munitions technology. The Army’s plan to acquire 

lighter, faster, more expeditionary vehicles affects requirements for 

vehicle-mounted weapons systems. The committee recommends an 

increase of $2.5 million in PE 62624A for the rarefaction wave gun. 

This gun shows potential for 50 percent weight and heat reductions 

and 75 percent reduced recoil while at the same time maintaining 

current muzzle energy. 

Ultra wideband sensors 

The budget request included $37.8 million in PE 62624A, for 

weapons and munitions technology. Today’s military faces battlefields in neighborhoods, small towns, and cities as often as in open 

deserts, forests, or jungles. Advanced sensors and imaging resolution combined with unmanned platforms make possible extended 

visibility and situational awareness. One current challenge to 

139 

achieving full battlespace awareness involves through-the-wall 

sight. The committee recommends an increase of $2.0 million in PE 

62624A for advanced research on a hand-portable through-wall 

radar system. 

Army man-portable power 

The budget request included $39.6 million in PE 62705A, for 

electronics and electronic devices. The Army needs battery systems 

to deliver reliable, lightweight, constant and, when needed, high 

surge power, especially for the dismounted soldier. The zinc air 

battery system has the potential to provide at least twice the energy density as other battery systems and up to 4 times or more 

the high discharge or constant power rate as common battery systems. 

The committee recommends an increase of $8.0 million in PE 

62705A for accelerated advances in man-portable power, including 

$3.0 million to develop prototype designs for the zinc air battery; 

$2.0 million for a portable solid oxide fuel cell power generation 

demonstrator capable of using JP–8 fuel; and $3.0 million for a hybrid advanced soldier power system that, when coupled with device-specific adapters, would power existing and legacy gear for 72- 

hour autonomous missions. 

Flexible Display Initiative 

The budget request includes $39.6 million in PE 62705A, for electronics and electronic devices, including $5.0 million, for the Flexible Display Center. Equipment, materials, and technology on flexible displays and microelectronics facilitate creation of next generation communication products, which are key to the Army’s transformation efforts. The Army’s planned funding for flexible display 

research is insufficient for the manufacturing capability necessary 

to support the Army’s stated goals for displays and does not include 

a tools and materials component. The competitively bid, peer-reviewed Flexible Display Initiative achieves a 62 percent industry 

cost share in leveraging the Army’s research funding. The committee recommends an increase of $4.0 million in PE 62705A for 

the Flexible Display Initiative to undertake additional materials 

and manufacturing technology projects aimed at ensuring the 

Army meets flexible display goals in a timely manner. 

Ultra wideband chipset 

The budget request included $21.8 million in PE 62782A, for 

command, control, and communications technology. The Army invested in ultra wideband radio technology with the potential to provide extremely covert communications platforms, situational awareness, and through-wall and ground penetrating radar. The developed technology, which is compatible with, but not dependent on 

current and future communication systems, requires transition 

funds for integration and pre-production prototyping. The committee recommends an increase of $2.0 million in PE 62782A for 

transition of the ultra wideband radio frequency chipset to meet 

Army power consumption, range, and bit rate requirements. 

140 

Biosecurity research for food safety 

The budget request included $21.7 million in PE 62786A, for 

warfighter technology, but no funding for food security and safety 

monitoring capabilities. The Army must protect the U.S. military’s 

food supply and associated supply chain infrastructures. Technologies to rapidly and reliably detect food contaminants would 

positively impact soldier health, performance, and effectiveness. 

The committee recommends an increase of $2.5 million in PE 

62786A for development of methods and equipment to detect realtime biohazards in the food supply. 

Army medicine for mitigation and treatment of blast injuries 

The budget request included $74.7 million in PE 62787A, for medical technology and $45.2 million in PE 63002A, for medical advanced technology. Care for uniformed personnel, including adaptation to changing wound patterns and long-term quality of life for 

injured combat veterans, are key priorities for the committee and 

are the focus of a Blast Injury Prevention, Mitigation, and Treatment Initiative under section 243 of this Act. 

The committee recommends a series of increases in PE 62787A 

and PE 63002A to advance emerging, life saving medical technologies and to accelerate testing, trials, and production of new devices and treatments. Specifically, the committee recommends 

project increases in PE 62787A totaling $9.8 million and in PE 

63002A totaling $18.0 million for the following projects. 

Under PE 62787A, the committee recommends: 

(1) $2.6 million for a biofoam bleeding sealant for battlefield 

trauma for further development of existing protein hydrogel 

technology and acceleration of approval to field the product to 

forward surgical teams; (2) $1.2 million for non-linting silver antimicrobial wound 

dressing technology that would combine infection protection 

and fluid transport over a period of days for use in forward locations or in the event that medical care is not readily available; (3) $2.0 million for the hemorrhage control (Chitosan) dressing, to support an Army unfunded need to conduct research on 

internal application of the bandage; (4) $1.0 million for warfighter face and eye injury protection 

and a two-year accelerated development process to test performance of a new composite face shield; and 

(5) $3.0 million to augment Army work in characterization of 

armor for blast, ballistic, and fire protection. 

Under PE 63002A, the committee recommends: 

(1) $3.0 million for advanced tissue engineering techniques 

to rapidly deploy replacement blood vessels and other tissues, 

which have been demonstrated to form new cell layers in a 

matter of hours, compared to days or weeks under current 

treatments; 

(2) $2.0 million for advances in solider treatment regeneration and the science of regenerative medicine to explore novel 

approaches to restoration of biological function after injury and 

the science of tissue engineering, cellular therapies, bio-surVerDate Aug 04 2004 15:24 May 25, 2005 Jkt 021326 PO 00000 Frm 00160 Fmt 6601 Sfmt 6601 E:\HR\OC\SR069.XXX SR069
141 

gery, and artificial and bio-hybrid organ devices to reduce mortality and morbidity from battlefield injuries; (3) $4.0 million for acute care of blast effects and head injuries including a focused effort on research and data collection 

specific to blast injuries involving concussions and persistent 

symptoms; (4) $3.0 million for accelerated research and approval of forward use of recombinant activated factor VII by medics at the 

point of injury to greatly increase survival times prior to surgery; (5) $1.0 million for the advanced development of the composite warfighter face and eye protection; (6) $2.0 million for applied emergency hypothermia research 

to support innovative suspended animation and delayed resuscitation treatment directed at saving those severely injured in 

combat; and 

(7) $3.0 million for continued development of the fibrogen 

bandage. 

Bio-defense detection and treatment 

The budget request included $74.7 million in PE 62787A, for medical technology and $45.2 million in PE 63003A, for medical advanced technology. The Army needs easy-to-use devices to reliably 

detect the presence of bio-warfare agents. Upon detection and identification, the Army also requires new medicines to protect military 

personnel from biological agents. The committee recommends an 

increase of $3.0 million in PE 62787A for accelerated research and 

development of a colorimetric biosensor device that would provide 

deployed units with a rapid, one-step, disposable bacterial pathogen detector. The committee further recommends an increase of $2.0 million in 

PE 62787A for enhanced research on a bio-defense gene knockout 

technology designed to enable treatment and prevention regimes 

against bio-warfare agents. The proposed technology would improve 

current, single-agent defenses and would counter agents possessing 

drug resistant or other bio-engineered features. 

Finally, the committee recommends an increase of $5.0 million in 

PE 63002A for bio-defense medical technologies; $3.0 million for expansion of research to apply alternative vaccine delivery technologies to combination treatments against anthrax, plague, toxic 

shock, and botulism; and $2.0 million for continued research and 

timely clinical trials on the surgical wound disinfection and biological agents project. 

Posttraumatic stress disorder diagnostic tools 

The budget request included $74.7 million in PE 62787A, for 

medical technology. Accurate and timely diagnosis of posttraumatic 

stress disorder (PTSD) supports recovery and a higher quality of 

life for combat veterans. Additional basic research, early clinical 

trials, and development of predictive tools lead to accurate identification of PTSD conditions and would assist medical personnel in 

distinguishing posttraumatic stress from traumatic brain injuries. 

The committee recommends an increase of $1.0 million in PE 

62787A for PTSD research. 

142 

Surgical safety system 

The budget request included $74.7 million in PE 62787A, for 

medical technology. One of many areas of exploration for improved 

combat medical care involves advanced information technologies for 

remote monitoring and improved patient management in deployed 

surgical environments. The committee recommends an increase of 

$2.0 million in PE 62787A for the surgical safety system to support 

goals of the Army’s Operating Room of the Future concept. 

Human operator performance research 

The budget request included $45.2 million in PE 63003A, for 

medical advanced technology. Soldiers confront numerous risk factors and toxic agents present in military environments. The committee recommends an increase of $3.0 million in PE 63003A for 

a program to assess, develop, and advance computer-based testing 

technologies. The resulting diagnostic capabilities would determine 

human reactions to proposed toxic agent treatments and countermeasures. 

Wireless and digital medical improvements 

The budget request included $45.2 million in PE 63002A, for 

medical advanced technology, but no funding for acceleration of 

wireless capabilities and records digitization. The use of wireless 

networks and computerized medical files reduces time spent by 

military medical personnel in processing, accessing, and updating 

medical records. Development of a wireless, adaptable network 

would accelerate accurate and efficient patient care, reduce errors, 

and facilitate transfer of medical records. 

The committee recommends an increase in PE 63002A of $1.4 

million for a pilot program to implement use of wireless medical 

records at Walter Reed Medical Center. The committee further recommends increases of $1.0 million in PE 63002A for the untethered 

healthcare project and development of technologies to facilitate remote triage and improve casualty status and assessment and $2.0 

million for expanded diagnosis through digital imaging recognition. 

This research will produce digitally accessible files to help attending physicians accelerate the diagnosis and treatment of service 

members in-theater and in medical care facilities. 

Reconfigurable tooling systems 

The budget request included $48.3 million in PE 63003A, for advanced aviation technology. Many Army aircraft and unmanned 

aerial vehicles contain components composed of fiber-reinforced materials. When these parts require repair, delays in maintenance 

and availability of replacements adversely affect readiness. The 

committee recommends an increase of $2.0 million in PE 63003A 

for completion of a portable, reconfigurable tooling system capable 

of creating the specific repair tools and aviation composite materials at the maintenance site. 

Rotorcraft system monitoring 

The budget request included $48.3 million in PE 63003A, for 

aviation advanced technology. Helicopters play an important role in 

support, relief, and combat missions throughout the world. Timely 

143 

improvement of maintenance techniques, procedures, and automatic optimized digital engine controls are critical to supporting 

the increased use of and reliance on these platforms. The committee recommends an increase of $5.5 million in PE 63003A, including $1.5 million for integrated rotorcraft system monitoring 

and $4.0 million for the universal control-full authority digital engine control project. 

Unmanned tactical combat vehicles 

The budget request included $48.2 million in PE 63003A, for 

aviation advanced technology and $82.5 million in PE 63114N, for 

power projection advanced technology, but no funding for a prototype unmanned combat aerial vehicle designed specifically for 

emergency rapid response. The committee is aware of the nearterm requirement for a cost-effective, survivable, tactical unmanned combat aerial vehicle (UCAV) capable of reaching conflict 

areas in a timely manner, engaging and destroying targets of opportunity, providing overhead coverage at trouble spots, such as 

roadside ambushes, and operating without runways or launch 

mechanisms. The committee recommends an increase in PE 

63003A of $7.9 million and in PE 63114N of $1.0 million to address 

this requirement through construction of two proof of principle Excalibur demonstrators. 

Mid-range munition 

The budget request included $74.9 million in PE 63004A, for 

weapons and munitions advanced technology, including $10.0 million for the mid-range munition. The committee recommends an increase of $6.0 million in PE 63004A to accelerate development of 

the mid-range munition to meet targeted prototyping, demonstration, and fielding time frames. 

Nanotechnology manufacturing 

The budget request included $74.9 million in PE 63004A, for 

weapons and munitions advanced technology. Research efforts to 

produce composite structures and new materials constructed from 

the nano-scale for weapons, munitions, and fire control applications 

will require unique, efficient manufacturing processes. The committee recommends an increase of $3.0 million in PE 63004A for 

nanotechnology manufacturing. 

Abrams track improvement 

The budget request included $142.9 million in PE 63005A, for 

combat vehicle and automotive advanced technology. The Army 

strives to reduce life cycle costs and maintenance requirements 

while increasing reliability for mission critical hardware such as 

the Abrams tank, even as operations in current theaters tax mechanical limits. The committee recommends an increase of $3.0 

million in PE 63005A for production and qualification testing of a 

new Abrams track, which could reduce life cycle costs by 20 percent 

while increasing reliability, availability, and maintainability of the 

component and the equipment. 

144 

Combat vehicle advanced development 

The budget request included $142.9 million in PE 63005A, for 

combat vehicle and automotive advanced technology. The committee recommends an increase of $26.0 million in PE 63005A for 

the expanded development of automotive technologies in support of 

Army transformation goals for a lighter, more lethal force with 

heightened security and survivability. Specifically, the committee 

recommends increases of: $4.0 million for advanced thermal management; $2.0 million for a collaborative approach to a non-line-ofsight cannon and mortar; $3.0 million for a composite armored cab; 

$2.0 million for fastening and joining research; $2.0 million for 

power electronic systems research; $5.0 million for hydraulic hybrid 

vehicle technology; $2.0 million for next generation nontactical vehicle propulsion; $3.0 million for solid oxide fuel cell materials and 

manufacturing; and $3.0 million for an anti-ballistic windshield 

armor designed for rapid installation, better operator visibility, and 

higher levels of projectile protection. 

Coordinated training 

The budget request included $6.8 million in PE 63007A, for manpower, personnel, and training advanced technology. The Army is 

working to ensure that the ‘‘human component’’ of warfighting 

keeps pace with the transformation in systems, weapons, equipment, and requirements. Development of more effective collective 

training methods, which include a standardized program to capture 

the latest lessons learned from current combat operations, would 

reduce the time required for training and practicing critical new 

skills. The committee recommends an increase of $3.0 million in PE 

63007A for continued development of the battle command team 

training program and incorporation of realistic, relevant, and timely practice events for use by commanders and battle staff. 

Advanced simulated training 

The budget request included $20.0 million in PE 63015A, for 

next generation training and simulation systems. The joint fires 

and effects training system typifies leading edge simulator technology currently in use. The committee commends the Army for its 

innovative approach to highly immersive and successful training 

and simulation environments. Realistic training has been credited 

in part with a reduction in casualty rates as troops preparing for 

deployment learn from those who are in theater or who are just returning. The committee recommends an increase of $3.5 million in PE 

63015A for development of additional, deployable modules for the 

joint fires and effects training system. The committee further recommends an increase of $3.5 million in PE 63015A for the final 

phase of the CAVE automatic virtual environment project to 

produce a fully self-sustaining visualization laboratory in support 

of environmental science research and military training for desert 

conditions. 

Explosive demilitarization 

The budget request included $9.9 million in PE 63103A, for explosive demilitarization technology. The Army supports programs 

145 

under this account to develop safe, efficient, environmentally-compliant technologies to enhance existing methods for munitions resource recovery, recycling, and treatment. The committee recommends an increase of $1.0 million in PE 63103A for development 

of a demilitarization approach that incorporates an innovative solid 

fuel feed technology with a modified reactor. 

Alternative fuel supplies 

The budget request included $6.3 million in PE 63125A, for combating terrorism technology development. Adequate, reliable, and 

cost-efficient fuel supplies are important for military operations in 

changing environments with logistical supply chain challenges. 

Portable, alternative fuel systems continue to offer possible longterm solutions, if successfully configured to meet military requirements. The committee recommends an increase of $4.0 million in 

PE 63125A for continued development of advanced mobile 

microgrid fueler systems to demonstrate innovations in converting 

biomass to synthetic gas or synfuel. The advanced fueler system 

would complement the ongoing Army Advanced Mobile Microgrid 

program, and would provide a reduced logistical footprint when deployed and backup power in case of grid failure. 

Stryker vehicle active protection system demonstration 

The budget request included $70.1 million in PE 63313A for missile and rocket advanced technology development, including $5.0 

million for integration of the close-in active protection system 

(CIAPS) into the High Mobility Multipurpose Wheeled Vehicle 

(HMMWV), but no funding for CIAPS integration into a Stryker vehicle. In fiscal year 2005, the Army demonstrated that a prototype 

CIAPS mounted on a light armored vehicle could defeat rocket propelled grenades (RPGs). The committee supports any initiative that 

fields systems that provides additional force protection capabilities 

to our troops. HMMWVs and Stryker vehicles deployed to Operation Iraqi Freedom require RPG protection. The committee understands that the need and opportunity for integrating CIAPS technology on Stryker emerged after planning for the fiscal year budget 

request was completed. The committee recommends an increase of 

$12.0 million in PE 63313A for a Stryker active protection system, 

for a total authorization of $82.1 million in PE 63313A. 

Advanced structures and composites 

The budget request included $7.3 million in PE 63734A, for military engineering advanced technology. Early in a military deployment, the majority of military personnel live in soft shelters or 

tents. In current conflicts, nearly every position is vulnerable to attack. The Army is exploring lightweight, affordable, rapidly 

deployable, forward construction methods that provide ballistic protection. The committee recommends an increase of $3.0 million in 

PE 63734A to accelerate solutions that employ hybrid wood and advanced fiber material and structure systems to combine cost efficiency, ease of assembly, and ballistic protection. 

146 

Army command and control visualization system 

The budget request included $14.6 million in PE 63305A for 

Army system integration (non space), but no funding for interactive 

modeling and simulation management capabilities. 

The committee notes that effective modeling and simulation is 

necessary for the development of missile defense and other military 

capabilities. Next generation architectural solutions for command 

and control and situational awareness are now being developed. 

The committee recognizes that funding could be used to mature 

technology and continue to combine government furnished components and commercial, off-the-shelf products to support the 

warfighter from the classroom to the field. The committee recommends an increase of $3.0 million in PE 

63305A to support continued development of interactive modeling 

and simulation management capabilities of the Army Space and 

Missile Defense Command to support the warfighter. 

Interactive modeling and simulation management 

The budget request included $14.6 million in PE 63305A for missile defense systems integration, but no funding for interactive 

modeling and simulation management capability. 

The committee notes that effective modeling and simulation is 

essential to the development of missile defense and other military 

capabilities. Likewise, a process to coordinate and manage activities related to the verification and validation of modeling and simulation tools is needed to support these capabilities. The committee recommends an increase of $2.0 million in PE 

63305A for development of technologies and processes to support 

verification and validation of modeling and simulation. 

Next generation interceptor materials 

The budget request included $14.6 million in PE 63305A for 

Army missile defense system integration, but no funding for next 

generation interceptor (NGI) materials research. 

Next generation ballistic missile interceptors will be designed to 

intercept longer range and more complex threats. To intercept complex threats, lightweight and highly maneuverable kill vehicles are 

required. The NGI materials research program proposes developing 

both a lightweight composite missile launcher and an advanced 

composite kill vehicle airframe. The Department of the Army and 

the Missile Defense Agency has assessed this item to have high 

military value. The committee recommends an increase of $5.0 million in PE 

63305A for next generation interceptor materials research for development of lightweight composite missile launchers and advanced 

composite kill vehicle airframes. 

Long loiter sensor and communications platform 

The budget request included $9.3 million in PE 63308A for Army 

missile defense system integration, but no funding for near-space 

long loiter sensor and communications. 

The Army currently maintains a fleet of unmanned aerial vehicles (UAVs) that utilize Air Force space-borne sensors and communications devices to provide direct surveillance and reconnaissance 

147 

support to the warfighter in theater. The committee understands 

that a near-space long loiter craft able to continually view the entire theater of operations could provide significant operational cost 

savings by decreasing the numbers of UAVs and other sensors necessary for reconnaissance, surveillance, and blue force tracking. 

The committee recommends an increase of $5.0 million in PE 

63308A to refine the requirements, conduct concept evaluations, 

and develop integrated test beds to assess the capabilities of programs related to sensor payloads for near-space long loitering craft. 

Architecture Analysis Program 

The budget request included $81.0 million in PE 63327A for air 

and missile defense system engineering, but no funding for the Air, 

Space, and Missile Defense Architecture Analysis Program (A3P). 

A3P is a modeling and simulation effort to assist in the systems 

analysis of air, space, and missile defense capabilities to provide an 

effective defense against cruise missiles, unmanned aerial vehicles, 

aircraft, rockets, artillery, and ballistic missiles of all ranges. The 

committee recognizes that these simulation capabilities are necessary to support air, space, and missile defense efforts across a 

broad spectrum of military operations from major theater wars to 

homeland security. 

The committee recommends an increase of $2.0 million in PE 

63327A for A3P to support air, space, and missile defense modeling 

and simulation. 

Single Integrated Space Picture 

The budget request included $83.1 million in PE 63327A for Air 

and Missile Defense Systems Engineering, of which $15.0 million 

is for the Single Integrated Space Picture (SISP) program. 

SISP is an initiative within the Combatant Commanders Integrated Command and Control System program to provide an integrated picture of space capabilities, threats, and operations. The 

committee notes that the Army Missile and Space initiative has included work to develop decision support software for use by space 

operators in support of joint operations center commanders. The 

software is designed to receive and integrate information from multiple sources, providing a consolidated picture to improve space situational awareness. The committee recommends an addition of 

$2.0 million in PE 63327A for the continued development, production, and field demonstration of this software. 

Casting Emissions Reduction Program 

The budget request included $5.17 million in PE 63779A for environmental quality technology demonstration/validation, but no 

funding for the Casting Emissions Reduction Program (CERP). The 

CERP is validating advanced materials and processes for the reduction of hazardous emissions from foundry operations, advancing 

emission measurement methods for the Department of Defense and 

related industries, and is supporting lightweight metals technology 

transfer to fulfill military requirements. The committee recommends funding CERP to continue to improve manufacturing 

technologies used to produce casting materials such as aluminum 

148 

and titanium to assist the Army in achieving its goal of becoming 

a lighter, more highly-mobile fighting force. The committee recommends an increase of $6.2 million in PE 

63779A for the CERP. 

Advanced Army medical systems 

The budget request included $10.1 million in PE 63807A, for 

medical systems advanced development. The committee recommends an increase of $4.5 million in PE 63807A to accelerate 

deployment of medical treatments to mitigate blast injuries. Specifically, the committee recommends an increase of $1.0 million for 

an Army requirement to pursue approval of the intravenous fluids 

warming system; $2.5 million to produce a safe, portable oxygen 

system for patients during evacuations; and $1.0 million to extend 

the shelf life of red blood cells by 6 weeks. 

Joint Tactical Radio System 

The budget request included a total of $923.7 million for the 

Joint Tactical Radio System (JTRS) development across the Department of Defense. JTRS is intended to provide seamless, realtime communications among warfighters—through voice, data, and 

video—within and across the services through software programmable radio technology. Service requirements are ‘‘clustered’’ so 

that similar requirements can be met with a single acquisition effort. The lead service for each acquisition effort serves as the cluster manager. The Army is the manager for JTRS clusters 1 and 5 

radios; the Special Operations Command is the manager for cluster 

2 radios; and the Navy and Air Force are the managers for cluster 

3 and 4 radios, respectively. In March 2005, the Department restructured the JTRS program to include a new Joint Program Executive Office (PEO), which will coordinate JTRS development. The budget request included $156.7 million in PE 64280A, for 

JTRS waveform development and Program Management Office 

(PMO) activities; $393.1 million in PE 64805A, including $375.0 

million for JTRS cluster 1 and JTRS cluster 5 hardware development; and $23.5 million in PE 64201A for JTRS aviation hardware 

development and integration. This funding supports Army JTRS 

responsibilities as the Joint Program Management Office and clusters 1 and 5 manager. 

The committee has supported the JTRS program in the past and 

continues to believe that a software programmable radio is achievable despite the technical challenges associated thus far with JTRS 

program development. However, the committee is concerned about 

recent events regarding JTRS. 

a. The program faces a 30-month delay due to a JTRS hardware redesign to meet National Security Agency certification 

requirements. 

b. On January 14, 2005, the Deputy Under Secretary of Defense for Acquisition, Technology and Logistics, issued a partial ‘‘stop work’’ order to the JTRS cluster 1 contractor so that 

the contractor could focus the program on the early operational 

assessment of the program’s maturity and capabilities. 

c. On April 25, 2005, the JTRS cluster 1 contractor was 

issued a ‘‘show cause’’ letter indicating the JTRS program 

149 

would be terminated in 30 days unless the contractor could 

satisfactorily answer questions regarding cost, performance, 

and schedule. 

The committee believes that the stop work and potential contract 

termination actions will require a significant amount of time for 

resolution and will require a JTRS program restructure or rebaseline. Therefore, the committee recommends a decrease of $39.4 million in PE 64280A for a total authorization of $117.3 million; a decrease of $193.9 million in PE 64805A for cluster 1 and cluster 5 

radio development to reflect a ‘‘stop work’’ order; and a decrease of 

$75.0 million in PE 64805A for cluster 1 radio development, for a 

total authorization of $124.2 million for PE 64805A, including 

$106.1 million for JTRS cluster 1 and JTRS cluster 5 hardware development. 

The Department of Defense Appropriations Act for Fiscal Year 2005 (Public Law 108–287) appropriated $111.5 million for the procurement of JTRS cluster 1 radios, originally intended to be procured under a low rate initial procurement contract for a first quarter fiscal year 2007 multi-service operational test and evaluation. 

Based on recent events, these fund cannot be executed as appropriated. The committee encourages the Department of Defense to 

request reprogramming of fiscal year 2005 JTRS procurement 

funding into PE 64280A to continue development of the JTRS 

waveform and common operating environment and architecture so 

as not to affect the development and fielding of other JTRS clusters. The committee is concerned that the Department has not 

placed sufficient emphasis and funding on developing new antenna 

technologies and should make this a priority when the JTRS program is restructured. 

Tactical vehicle modifications 

The budget request included no funding in PE 64642A, for light 

tactical wheeled vehicle development. The Army’s current operation 

tempo demands that advances in lightweight materials, advanced 

load handling, intelligent control systems, ballistic protection systems, embedded diagnostics, and suspension systems be developed 

and spiraled into the field as soon as possible. The committee recommends an increase of $5.0 million in PE 64642A for the research 

and development of spiral technologies for the wheeled tactical vehicle fleet, for a total authorization of $5.0 million. 

Future tactical truck system 

The budget request included $3.4 million in PE 64622A, for family of heavy tactical vehicle development, which conducts system 

development and demonstration of heavy tactical vehicles to support combat and combat support missions. 

The budget request included $1.0 million in PE 62601A, for the 

Future Tactical Truck System (FTTS). The committee understands 

that a key enabler of the Army’s tactical wheeled vehicle strategy 

is the Expedited Modernization Initiative Procedure process, an initiative designed to identify and use industry’s investments in advanced technologies. The EMIP process will be conducted in parallel with the FTTS Advanced Concept Technology Demonstration 

(ACTD) that will assess key technologies and emerging service 

150 

sustainment concepts to help develop the requirements for Army 

and Marine Corps trucks of the future, as well as to identify advanced technologies that also address current tactical wheeled vehicle needs. The committee recommends an increase of $10.0 million in PE 64622A for the FTTS ACTD, for a total authorization 

of $13.4 million. 

Protected simulation and test link 

The budget request included $288.8 million in PE 64869A for Patriot/MEADS combined aggregate program, but no funding for the 

protected simulation and test link (PSTL). 

The United States is currently engaged in a cooperative developmental effort with Germany and Italy to modernize the Patriot/ 

MEADS missile defense system. Current United States technology 

protection rules dictate that simulation models associated with critical U.S. technology not be released to foreign partners. The committee notes that PSTL is a software application that will provide 

the capability for protected simulation models to interact with 

those models that can be shared with international partners, thereby facilitating the design and development of the Patriot/MEADS 

system as an international joint venture. The committee recommends an increase of $1.0 million in PE 

64869A for PSTL. 

Unmanned aerial vehicle ice protection 

The budget request included $10.9 million in PE 64258A, for target systems development. As unmanned aerial vehicles (UAVs) fly 

further, longer, and higher, they confront some of the same challenges as manned aircraft. The committee supports programs designed to address current in-flight icing protection shortfalls with 

low-weight, low-cost, low-power options made specifically for installation on current and future UAV configurations. The committee 

recommends an increase of $3.0 million in PE 64258A for fabrication and testing of a self-activated, automatic deicing system for 

UAVs. 

High performance computing research 

The budget request included $32.3 million in PE 65803A, for 

technical information activities. Use of computer simulation tools 

allows for the rapid analysis of alternative designs for armor, structures, specialized weapons, and aircraft components. Faster and 

more accurate modeling of potential structural improvements and 

composite material performance could lead to stronger and more 

flexible force protection systems for personnel and equipment. The 

committee recommends an increase of $6.0 million in PE 65803A 

for advances in high performance computing research and improved simulations to evaluate the blast resistance of structures 

and armor. 

Retinal/iris multimodal biometrics technology for secure 

identification 

The budget request included $22.9 million in Research, Development, Test, and Evaluation, Army, in PE 33140A, for Information 

Systems Security Program, but included no funding for continued 

151 

research on retinal/iris multimodal biometrics (RIMB) technology 

for secure identification. 

RIMB technology has shown promise as an enhanced form of secure identification to protect information systems from unauthorized users. The committee recommends an increase of $1.0 million 

in PE 33140A, for the continued development of RIMB technology, 

consistent with the short- and long-term technology development, 

deployment, and integration goals of the Department of Defense for 

biometric identification systems. 

Army manufacturing technologies 

The budget request included $68.5 million in PE 78045A, for enditem industrial preparedness activities. As the Army continues to 

transform to a flexible, expeditionary force, logistical support for 

existing systems must be maintained and improved. Methods and 

processes designed to ensure sustained operational capability of 

weapons and support systems must move into the ‘‘virtual’’ world 

as many original parts and maintenance suppliers no longer exist. 

The Army can not afford to cope with manpower and time drains 

imposed by long logistical chains. The committee recommends an 

increase of $2.0 million in PE 78045A, to support the virtual parts 

program, which will form a one-stop virtual engineering production 

environment to assist in ensuring the sustained operational capability of weapons and support systems. The committee further recommends an increase of $10.5 million 

in PE 78045A, to accelerate packaging, processing, and manufacturing systems. Specific precision manufacturing requirements 

exist on turbine engines, which use advanced alloys and ceramic 

materials that conventional machine techniques and tools fail to 

process. The committee recommends an increase of $3.5 million for 

the super-pulse laser processing technology. The committee recommends an increase of $4.0 million for the manufacturing system 

demonstration, and $3.0 million for packaging and interconnection 

technology to reduce the weight and cost of electronic and 

optoelectric subsystems and for the adaptation of emerging technologies. 

And finally, the committee notes that the strength-weight ratio 

of titanium makes it an ideal material for use in Army manned 

ground vehicles. The committee recognizes that this material also 

poses challenges as it is difficult, time consuming, and expensive 

to process. The committee recommends an increase of $4.5 million 

in PE 78045A for accelerated development of an advanced modeling 

technology for titanium machining. Use of advanced software to 

simulate a virtual machining environment could enable increased 

processing speeds and deeper cuts, resulting in faster production of 

titanium parts to meet Army requirements for survivable manned 

ground vehicles. 

Navy 

152 


Insert graphic folio 195 SR69.084
153 


Insert graphic folio 541 SR69.205
154 


Insert graphic folio 196 SR69.085
155 


Insert graphic folio 197 SR69.086
156 


Insert graphic folio 198 SR69.087
157 


Insert graphic folio 199 SR69.088
158 


Insert graphic folio 200 SR69.089
159 


Insert graphic folio 201 SR69.090
160 


Insert graphic folio 202 SR69.091
161 


Insert graphic folio 203 SR69.092
162 


Insert graphic folio 204 SR69.093
163 


Insert graphic folio 205 SR69.094
164 


Insert graphic folio 206 SR69.095
165 

Navy university research 

The budget request included $75.9 million in PE 61103N, for university research initiatives. The committee is concerned with the 

low priority placed on long-term research on naval sciences by the 

Department of Defense. The development of faster, more efficient, 

and durable systems for the naval environment requires increases 

in targeted research on multifunctional advanced composites, innovative sensors technology, advanced engineered materials, and 

blast resistant composites. These research projects have the potential to address current threats by providing energy absorbing ship 

hulls, blast resistant grid and foam stiffened structures, and advanced remote sensing at higher resolutions. Additional basic 

science in the pursuit of breakthroughs at the intersection of engineering, computer science, and neuroscience shows promise in providing seamless control of unmanned systems. 

The committee recommends an increase of $8.0 million in PE 

61103N for university basic defense research, including $2.5 million to accelerate exploration of multifunctional materials; $2.5 million for advanced remote sensing; $1.0 million for blast and impact 

resistant composites; and $2.0 million for neural engineering for 

human-machine interfaces. 

Navy science and technology outreach 

The budget request included $15.5 million in PE 61152N, for InHouse Laboratory Independent Research, which supports intramural Navy research and efforts to revitalize the workforce for key 

science and technology capabilities. As many future military systems continue to increase in technological complexity, a robust 

workforce with discipline-specific scientific skills and knowledge is 

necessary. The Navy’s special needs in areas such as ocean 

sciences, advanced materials, and electronics will be met through 

the participation of current Navy laboratory personnel in training 

and mentoring the next generation of scientists and engineers. 

Training researchers and innovators is a long-term project requiring near-term attention. 

The committee recommends an increase in PE 61152N of $3.0 

million to support continuation of a pilot program—Naval Research 

Science and Technology for America’s Readiness (N–Star). N–Star 

leverages the resources and expertise available in Navy facilities to 

engage and mentor students who have science and engineering aptitude and interests. 

Free electron laser 

The budget request included $94.4 million in PE 62114N, for 

power projection applied research, including $10.0 million for directed energy and the free electron laser. The committee recommends an increase of $5.0 million in PE 62114N for accelerated 

research and development of high power free electron laser (FEL) 

devices based on the successful demonstration of high power FELs 

using energy recovered from the super-conducting accelerator technology. The Navy identified free electron lasers as a possible future 

directed energy weapon for the defense of Navy assets. 

166 

Littoral and undersea security 

The budget request included $101.7 million in PE 62123N, for 

force protection applied research. Navy ships and infrastructure 

are vulnerable to attack from suicide divers and other asymmetric 

hazards. Existing systems to detect and defeat such threats require 

constant monitoring and fixed installations. Research programs exploring alternatives, such as high frequency passive acoustic arrays 

and special cameras and sensors, have the potential to provide 

automatically monitored, easily constructed, portable, and reliable 

systems. The committee recommends an increase of $4.3 million in 

PE 62123N for exploration of undersea security options, including 

$2.0 million for development of a prototype real-time high frequency acoustic processor and $2.3 million for undersea perimeter 

security technologies. 

Nanomagnetic materials 

The budget request included $101.7 million in PE 62123N, for 

force protection applied research. Future naval capabilities such as 

the electric warship require significant amounts of electric power 

for propulsion, on-board power consumption, and ship-based use of 

power by military aircraft. The Navy needs new technology solutions capable of meeting the demanding performance requirements 

of high power density machines and power electronics. Current 

electrical power systems use magnetic materials developed for 

lower power demand functions. The committee recommends an increase of $2.0 million in PE 62123N for development of nano-engineered materials with unprecedented magnetic properties, mechanical strength, and temperature capabilities. 

Polymeric aircraft components 

The budget request included $101.7 million in PE 62123N, for 

force protection applied research. Polymeric aircraft components 

provide the Navy with an option for lower cost, lightweight aircraft. 

The committee recommends an increase of $2.0 million in PE 

62123N to support the Navy’s efforts to develop technologies for 

production of polymeric aircraft components. 

Small watercraft propulsion demonstrator 

The budget request included $101.7 million in PE 62123N, for 

force protection applied research. The Navy requires a fast, unmanned watercraft to launch and recover unmanned underwater 

vehicles in hostile environments. The committee recommends an 

increase of $3.0 million in PE 62123N for research on and fabrication of a small watercraft propulsion demonstrator with a 60-knot 

retrieval capability. 

Advanced combat headborne system 

The budget request included $37.6 million in PE 62131M, for Marine Corps landing force technology and $56.4 million in PE 

63640M, for Marine Corps advanced technology demonstrations. As 

part of an initiative in blast injury prevention, mitigation, and 

treatment, the committee recommends an increase of $1.0 million 

in PE 62131M and $1.0 million in PE 63640M to meet a Marine 

Corps requirement to expand and accelerate the research and deVerDate Aug 04 2004 15:24 May 25, 2005 Jkt 021326 PO 00000 Frm 00186 Fmt 6601 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\SR069.XXX SR069
167 

sign of an advanced integrated combat headborne system. The redesigned system would improve form, fit, and function; and increase protection to the eye, face, neck, and head, while maintaining comfort, communications integration, and weight reduction. 

Critical area protection systems 

The budget request included $57.7 million in PE 62235N, for 

common picture applied research. The committee recommends an 

increase of $2.0 million in PE 63235N for critical area protection 

systems for high resolution situational awareness to support 

antiterrorism and force protection missions. These systems could 

provide land-based antiterrorism and force protection units with 

persistent surveillance capabilities and a common operating picture. 

SensorNet 

The budget request included $57.7 million in PE 62235N, for 

common picture applied research. The U.S. Government, the nation’s laboratories, and industry are showing progress in developing 

and improving sensing capabilities. Full utilization of these capabilities requires communication and research on and development 

of a prototype information architecture for connection of sensors. 

The committee recommends an increase of $12.0 million in PE 

62235N for continuation of SensorNet, a project to demonstrate 

sensor-linking within an installation and from facility to facility. 

Space research 

The budget request included $57.7 million in PE 62235N, for 

common picture applied research. The committee recommends a reduction of $7.5 million in this account for a newly initiated program of space research as part of the Innovative Naval Prototype 

program. The committee believes that new space research efforts 

should be carefully coordinated with other space programs in the 

Department of Defense and should be consistent with the overall 

Department Space Science and Technology Strategy. 

Automated video threat recognition 

The budget request included $82.8 million in PE 62236N, for 

warfighter sustainment applied research. The accelerated need for 

persistent surveillance in a variety of situations led the Navy to increase emphasis on alternatives to active radars. Video, as a passive sensor, could serve threat detection needs for naval facilities, 

ports, and other areas in which even the most alert human sentry 

may fail to identify every approaching danger. The committee recommends an increase in PE 62236N of $2.5 million for transition 

of a successfully completed Phase II Small Business Innovative Research program to develop an automated video surveillance threat 

recognition algorithm. 

Multifunctional composite structures 

The budget request included $82.8 million in PE 62236N, for 

warfighter sustainment applied research. The Navy’s increased interest in using advanced composites for ship construction is designed to produce components with reduced electronic and acoustic 

168 

signatures and lower total ownership costs. Existing and developing composite material technologies present an opportunity to 

enhance seaframe speed, agility, safety, and tactical advantage. 

The committee recommends an increase of $3.5 million in PE 

62236N for development of new systems and techniques for the 

rapid implementation of multifunctional composite structures. 

Portable water bio-defense 

The budget request included $82.9 million in PE 62236N, for 

warfighter sustainment applied research. Current biological warfare detector technology applicable to water analysis is generally 

large, stationary, and time consuming. The committee recommends 

an increase of $3.0 million in PE 62236N for a rapid, portable, accurate detection capability for biological warfare agents in water. 

Seabasing research 

The budget request included $82.9 million in PE 62236N, for 

warfighter sustainment applied research, including a new start of 

$13.9 million for seabasing research. The committee recommends a 

reduction of $5.0 million in this account for the newly initiated research program on seabasing technologies. The committee is concerned that this new program is not well defined to support 

seabasing concepts of operation, which are still under development 

by the Navy. 

Gallium nitride radio frequency power 

The budget request included $47.3 million in PE 62271N, for 

radio frequency (RF) systems applied research. The Department of 

Defense requires enhanced RF power performance for a range of 

current and next generation systems, including surface naval radars, airborne communications systems, airborne radars, and electronics. Gallium nitride RF power has the potential to provide 

higher power density, higher temperature operation, and increased 

bandwidth, compared to current RF technologies. The committee 

recommends an increase of $2.0 million in PE 62271N for gallium 

nitride RF power technologies. 

Integrated littoral sensor network 

The budget request included $71.5 million in PE 62435N, for 

force protection advanced technology, but no funding specifically for 

testing of a portable suite of sensors to counter water borne and 

other hazards in the littorals. Detection, characterization, and location of man-made and natural waterborne hazards and threats, including pathogens and toxins, is an immediate national security 

need. The committee recommends an increase in PE 62435N of 

$2.5 million for generation of a set of tools with portable sensors 

designed to improve accuracy and timeliness of short- and longterm detection of hazards in coastal waters and ports. 

Coordination and integration of unmanned system teams 

The budget request included $49.5 million in PE 62782N, for 

mine and expeditionary warfare applied research. As unmanned 

systems continue to evolve and perform more dangerous and time 

consuming tasks on behalf of the warfighter, such systems must 

169 

work individually, or in groups, in a manner that does not place 

an additional burden on the operator. Increased fundamental 

science and engineering focused on the tough problems of enabling 

autonomous cooperation within different groups of unmanned vehicles would ensure these tools reach expected potential as assets to 

the warfighter. The committee recommends an increase in PE 

62782N of $3.0 million for work to integrate and coordinate teams 

of unmanned vehicles. 

Information sharing for intelligence, surveillance and reconnaissance 

The budget request included $82.5 million in PE 63114N, for 

power projection advanced technology. The Navy possesses the 

technology to effectively target and destroy fixed assets using global position system guided weapons. This capability is limited by 

target concealment or motion. Real-time tracking, precision location, and in-flight command and control of weapons systems continue to pose problems. The committee recommends an increase of $3.0 million in PE 

63114N to accelerate research and development of a robust airborne and ground information processing architecture. The system 

would support multiple-source and simultaneous collection of data 

for aircraft on intelligence, surveillance, reconnaissance, targeting, 

and engagement (ISRTE) operations. The architecture would have 

the capacity to handle numerous and different electronic files such 

as large imagery files, geographical information, intelligence reports, and data received from multiple platforms and would advance an important aspect of the Navy intelligence, surveillance, 

and reconnaissance plan for engagement of mobile targets. 

Force protection advanced technology 

The budget request included $71.5 million in PE 63123N for 

forced protection advanced technology. This program addresses applied research associated with providing the capability of platform 

and force protection technologies for all naval platforms. 

The budget request included no funding for wireless sensor technology for the intelligent monitoring of the health of shipboard 

equipment and machinery. This is a key component to reduce 

workloads, and it could be inserted into one of the programmed sea 

trials for newly delivered ships. The committee recommends an increase of $2.0 million in PE 63123N to develop, install, and support 

a number of intelligent component health monitoring systems in a 

sea trial. 

The budget request included no funding for development of a mobile manufacturing and repair cell. This cell would reduce operating and support costs while maintaining equipment readiness in 

theater. It could be deployed by ship and large ground vehicles, and 

would provide precision, on-demand manufacturing of critical parts. 

The committee recommends an increase of $5.0 million in PE 

63123N for the development of a mobile manufacturing and repair 

cell. 

The budget request included no funding for the continued development of wide bandgap semiconductor substrate materials. These 

materials offer capability for higher power and higher frequency 

170 

operation in high temperature environments across a broad spectrum of applications. The committee recommends an increase of 

$8.0 million in PE 63123N for the continued development of wide 

bandgap semiconductor substrate materials. 

The budget request included no funding for a small, light system 

for small arms acoustic and infrared flash detection and remote 

threat response to enemy small arms fire against our Marines. The 

committee recommends an increase of $3.9 million in PE 63123N 

to develop a prototype and test such a system. 

The budget request included no funding for the continued design 

and risk assessment and development of prototypes for high temperature superconducting (HTS) generators. The reduced size of 

HTS generators would increase flexibility in ship architecture, provide enhanced power density and transient response, and improve 

overall ship performance and survivability. The committee recommends an increase of $5.0 million in PE 63123N for the continued development of HTS generators. 

The budget request included no funding for the continued development of a ship service fuel cell (SSFC). An advanced prototype 

fuel cell power system demonstrator has been developed. Additional 

performance characterization of the demonstrator is required, followed by endurance and latent defect testing at the DD(X) landbased engineering site. The committee recommends an increase of 

$6.0 million in PE 63123N for the continued development of a 

SSFC. 

The committee recommends a total authorization of $101.4 million in PE 63123N for force protection advanced technology. 

Improved shipboard combat information center 

The budget request included $60.6 million in PE 63235N, for 

common picture advanced technology. Command Information Center (CIC) duty officers receive large quantities of critical data, especially during combat operations. They must comprehend and process this information quickly. The committee recommends an increase of $4.0 million in PE 63235N for near-term development of 

an improved shipboard CIC and to demonstrate integration of 

emerging technologies in automation to improve operations for 

multiple current and future platform designs. 

Warfighter sustainment advanced technology 

The budget request included $68.5 million in PE 63236N for the 

development of warfighter sustainment advanced technology, but 

included no funding for body armor development or for automated 

container and cargo handling systems. 

While protective vests have saved many lives, there is a requirement for flexible, lightweight, full body armor that will protect 

limbs as well. The committee recommends an increase of $3.0 million in PE 63236N for the development of full body protective apparel. 

The Navy and Marine Corps continue to develop a concept of operations for sea basing. One of the technical hurdles that must be 

achieved to turn this concept into reality is the transfer of cargo 

at sea, in varying sea states. There have been some subscale technologies tested as small business innovative research programs, 

171 

but this needs to evolve to full-scale testing of automated container 

and cargo handling systems. The committee recommends an increase of $4.0 million in PE 63236N for the development of automated container and cargo handling systems. The committee recommends a total authorization of $75.5 million 

in PE 63236N. 

Navy persistent surveillance 

The budget request included $70.1 million in PE 63271N, for 

radio frequency (RF) systems advanced development. Real-time 

precision target radar supports the Navy’s time critical strike mission. The committee recommends an increase of $3.0 million in PE 

63721N to fully configure the APY–6 radar to meet broad area 

maritime surveillance and other emerging unmanned aerial vehicle 

requirements. 

The Navy pursues electronic attack (EA) capabilities for a variety 

of missions with air, sea, and land applications. The Department 

of Defense Unmanned Aerial Vehicle Roadmap recommends development and operational assessment of an unmanned combat aerial 

vehicle capable of performing several missions including EA. To 

augment existing systems while extending the life of current lowdensity/high-demand electronic attack assets, the committee recommends an increase of $3.0 million in PE 63271N for an acceleration of joint unmanned aerial vehicle electronic attack capabilities. 

Armored patrol vehicle 

The budget request included $56.4 million in PE 63640M, for 

Marine Corps advanced technology demonstrations. Additional research to capture emerging technologies in the areas of mobility, 

materials, power generation, propulsion, survivability, durability, 

signature reduction, and modularity will speed protection systems 

for an expanded class of vehicles. The committee recommends an 

increase of $3.0 million in PE 63640M for initial development of an 

armored patrol vehicle to address threats posed by blast, projectiles, and shock waves. 

Laser integrated target engagement system 

The budget request included $56.4 million in PE 63640M, for 

Marine Corps advanced technology demonstrations. The committee 

recommends an increase of $5.2 million in PE 63640M for a Marine 

Corps unfunded requirement to modify the laser integrated target 

engagement system (LITES). The program would finance one prototype and laboratory testing of a Marine Corps version of the Air 

Force forward air controllers capability. 

Water purification system 

The budget request included $56.4 million in PE 63640M, for 

Marine Corps advanced technology demonstrations. Air deliverable, 

high capacity water purification systems meet a critical need during all military missions. Research on high efficiency, compact technology will help alleviate the significant logistical burden of transporting water. The committee recommends an increase in PE 

63640M of $7.0 million for final development and production of expeditionary warfare water purification systems. 

172 

Modeling and simulation for urban operations 

The budget request included $187.9 million in Research, Development, Test, and Evaluation, Navy, for Joint Experimentation, in 

PE 63727N, but did not include sufficient funding to continue development of the modeling and simulation for urban operations 

program. The committee notes that such a capability is of great importance to battlefield commanders facing complex urban environments such as that faced by U.S. Armed Forces in Fallujah, Iraq 

last year. Preliminary work has been initiated on such a capability 

with promising results, both for battlefield commanders and for defense and homeland security officials charged with planning for 

consequence management of potential terrorist attacks on the 

homeland. The modeling and simulation for urban operations program is the second highest priority of the Commander, U.S. Joint 

Forces Command, for additional funding. 

The committee recommends an increase of $9.9 million in PE 

63727N, to continue development of the modeling and simulation 

for urban operations program. 

Surface Navy integrated undersea tactical technology 

The budget request included $122.1 million in PE 63502N for 

surface and shallow water mine countermeasures, but included no 

funding for the surface Navy integrated undersea tactical technology (SNIUTT) program. SNIUTT would provide surface ship 

mine countermeasures sonar operators with the simulated training 

necessary to recognize mine-like contacts. This concept was originally used by aviation mine countermeasures sonar operators, and 

SNIUTT would leverage this former program. The committee recommends an increase of $2.0 million in PE 63502N for SNIUTT. 

Shipboard system component development 

The budget request included $22.2 million in PE 63513N for 

shipboard system component development, including $9.2 million 

for the development of integrated power systems. The budget request included no funding specifically for either the amorphous 

metal permanent magnet generator (PMG) set or the high temperature superconductor alternating current (HTS–AC) synchronous 

marine propulsion motor. 

An amorphous metal PMG would reduce both weight and size 

when compared to conventional generator sets. Additional funding 

would upscale the current 30 kilowatt prototype to 750 kilowatts. 

The committee recommends an increase of $1.5 million in PE 

63513N for the amorphous metal PMG. 

A 36.5 megawatt HTS–AC synchronous marine propulsion prototype motor is being fabricated and tested. A follow-on effort can be 

initiated to modify the motor and power electronic drive system designs to meet the evolving specifications of the Navy’s newest surface combatants. The committee recommends an increase of $8.0 

million in PE 63513N for the continued development of the HTS– 

AC synchronous marine propulsion motor. 

The committee recommends a total authorization of $31.7 million 

in PE 63513N. 

173 

Improved surface vessel torpedo launcher 

The budget request included $17.3 million in PE 63553N for antisubmarine warfare advanced development, but included no funding 

for the improved surface vessel torpedo launcher. This launcher 

would use an automotive airbag inflator launch concept in a new 

launcher, contoured into the deck of future ships. Additional funding would allow testing of the production model of the breech replacement version of the launcher. The committee recommends an 

increase of $4.5 million in PE 63553N for the advanced development of the improved surface vessel torpedo launcher. 

Guided missile submarine conversion 

The budget request included $24.0 million in PE 63559N for design work for guided missile submarines (SSGN). Four former 

Ohio-class ballistic submarines are currently being converted into 

this new class of submarine, which will have the capability to provide covert striking power against targets ashore and to covertly 

deliver and support an expeditionary force on land. 

One of the most promising technologies for the SSGNs will be the 

ability to deploy unmanned undersea vehicles. To capitalize on the 

experimentation to demonstrate feasibility that has already been 

completed, additional funding is required to develop and experiment with the requisite stowage, launch, and recovery systems to 

gain understanding of ship integration technologies. The large displacement mission reconfigurable unmanned undersea vehicle (LD– 

MRUUV) would provide flexibility to deploy new payloads and sensors. The committee recommends an increase of $20.0 million in PE 

63559N for integration of LD–MRUUV into the SSGN as part of 

the conversion program. 

Advanced submarine system development 

The budget request included $163.0 million in PE 63562N for ad- vanced submarine system development. Of this amount, $50.0 million is for the design of a future undersea superiority system alternative to the reduced submarine program to include consideration 

of new propulsion systems. The committee is aware that this effort 

was directed by the Department of Defense shortly before submission of the budget request, and that it was also directed that these 

funds not just be added to existing systems. No specific plans on 

the use of these funds have been provided to the committee. 

The committee has received a study on Fleet Platform Architecture that was prepared by the Office of Force Transformation in response to section 216 of the National Defense Authorization Act for 

Fiscal Year 2004 (Public Law 108–136), and is aware that this 

study recommends investigating alternate propulsion systems for 

submarines. 

In written testimony before the Subcommittee on Seapower of 

the Committee on Armed Services, the Congressional Research 

Service addressed alternate propulsion systems for submarines. 

The air-independent propulsion equipped non-nuclear-powered submarine would offer increased low speed submerged endurance over 

the conventional diesel-electric, but comparable submerged endurance at high speed. The testimony concluded that these alternatives to nuclear-powered submarines are not well suited for subVerDate Aug 04 2004 15:24 May 25, 2005 Jkt 021326 PO 00000 Frm 00193 Fmt 6601 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\SR069.XXX SR069
174 

marine missions that require: (1) long, completely stealthy transits 

from home port to the theater of operation; (2) submerged periods 

in the theater of operation lasting more than two or three weeks; 

or (3) submerged periods in the theater of operation lasting more 

than a few hours or days that involve moving the submarine at 

something more than low speed. The committee is concerned with 

the reduced capabilities and lack of operational flexibility the submarine forces would possess with these new propulsion systems. 

The committee is also aware of and supports the ‘‘Tango Bravo’’ 

program, being conducted jointly by the Navy and the Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency (DARPA). The technologies being 

investigated in this program include shaftless propulsion and 

weapons external to the pressure hull, all of which could contribute 

to a smaller, less expensive nuclear-powered submarine with capabilities equivalent to those of the Virginia-class submarine. 

Numerous analyses have supported an attack submarine force of 

at least 55 boats. However, the Secretary of the Navy, in an interim report to Congress on the annual long-range plan for the construction of naval vessels, projects that the number of attack submarines required in the future will be between 37 and 41 boats. 

The committee is concerned that this reduced number of submarines will fall short of the number required by the combatant 

commanders. The committee believes that funds at this time 

should be directed at the class of submarines currently in production, and that the production rate should be increased above that 

shown in the Future Years Defense Program as soon as possible. 

The committee recommends a decrease of $40.0 million in PE 

63562N, specifically in the future undersea superiority system 

project for development of propulsion alternatives, and that the remaining funding be used to complement the development of technologies being investigated in the Tango Bravo program by 

DARPA. 

Regenerative filtration technology 

The budget request included $253.7 million in PE 63611M for the 

Expeditionary Fighting Vehicle (EFV), but no funding for regenerative filtration technology. Recent advances in nuclear, biological, 

and chemical filtration technology have brought about the development of regenerative systems that use canisters with chemical beds 

that can be used and cleaned while the vehicle is operating. Current technology requires filter replacement in a secure environment. In fiscal year 2005, the Marine Corps completed Phase I of 

the plan to develop a regenerative filtration system for the EFV, 

which will provide three units of the prototype system for testing. 

Phase II of this project consists of the completion of the system development and demonstration phase of the project. The committee 

recommends an increase of $8.5 million in PE 63611M for acceleration of Phase II of regenerative filtration technology development, 

for a total authorization of $262.2 million. 

Marine Corps ground and supporting arms systems 

The budget request included $500,000 in PE 63635M, for the development of the follow-on to shoulder-launched multi-purpose asVerDate Aug 04 2004 15:24 May 25, 2005 Jkt 021326 PO 00000 Frm 00194 Fmt 6601 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\SR069.XXX SR069
175 

sault weapon (FOTS), but no funding for the development of nonlethal weapons nor a sniper detection system. 

The FOTS program will qualify and field an accurate, shoulderfired, assault weapon designed to defeat a variety of ground targets 

on the battlefield, particularly in urban environments like those 

encountered by Marine Corps forces engaged in Operation Iraqi 

Freedom and Operation Enduring Freedom. FOTS will replace the 

Shoulder-Launched Multi-Purpose Assault Weapon, which has 

been in the Marine Corps inventory for over 20 years. The committee believes the Marine Corps needs to accelerate the development of this weapon system. 

Nonlethal weapon development includes research in support of 

clearing facilities with novel technology and nonlethal and scalable 

weaponization. These initiatives aim to minimize collateral damage 

to infrastructure and personnel, while neutralizing facilities and 

the threats that might be posed to these facilities and the personnel that occupy them. Additionally, an urban operations environmental laboratory will provide assessment and analysis of the 

affects of nonlethal technologies to ensure minimum environmental 

and collateral damage when used in urban activities. The committee believes that the Marine Corps must have a broad range of 

responses to contain and manage emerging threats before, during, 

and after conflict, and with minimum collateral damage. Therefore, 

the committee supports these initiatives. 

The Marine Corps requires a means to locate hostile fire to address survivability for forces in urban environments such as Iraq. 

No existing system can locate sources of sniper fire quickly and dependably. However, the committee believes that technology exists 

to develop a system that uses a thermal source-of-fire indicator to 

pinpoint the location from which a shot has been fired. 

The committee notes that the Commandant of the Marine Corps 

has identified additional funding for FOTS development, nonlethal 

weapon development, and a sniper detection system development 

on his unfunded priorities list. 

The committee recommends the following: 

(1) an increase of $14.0 for FOTS development; 

(2) an increase of $5.5 million for the nonlethal weapons 

urban operations laboratory to expand the assessment, analysis, neutralization, and development of capabilities to ensure 

minimum environmental and collateral damage with nontraditional and traditional capabilities; 

(3) an increase of $2.9 million to conduct research in support 

of clearing facilities with novel technology; 

(4) an increase of $2.6 million for nonlethal technology 

weaponization to conduct additional research, education, and 

training to meet the goals of modern nonlethal and scalable options for Marine Corps forces deployed around the world; and 

(5) an increase of $7.4 million to develop an anti- sniper infrared targeting system. 

The committee recommends a total authorization of $32.9 million 

in PE 63635M. 

176 

Marine mammal detection and mitigation 

The budget request included $4.54 million in PE 63721N, for environmental protection. The committee notes that there continues 

to be intense interest in the issue of sonar and other sound impacts 

on marine mammals. Research of this type will increase the scientific body of knowledge necessary to maintain the combat training necessary for military readiness while also protecting marine 

mammals. Better systems to detect marine mammals will aid in 

development of systems and procedures to mitigate potential impacts. Data collected from such systems will also be invaluable in 

better understanding migration routes, population densities, and 

habits. 

The committee recommends an increase of $5.0 million in PE 

63721N for marine mammal detection and mitigation. 

Navy logistics common operating picture 

The budget request included $51.2 million in PE 64231N for the 

Tactical Command System, but contained no funding for the Navy 

logistics common operating picture (LOGCOP). Navy LOGCOP is a 

logistics decision support and management tool based on predictive 

software technology that was developed under a Navy-sponsored 

small business innovative research program. The committee recommends an increase of $2.0 million in PE 64231N for the development of Navy LOGCOP. 

Automatic radar periscope detection and discrimination 

The budget request included $29.5 million in PE 64261N for acoustic search sensors, including $12.2 million for the automatic 

radar periscope detection and discrimination (ARPDD) project. 

ARPDD provides a fully automated periscope detection, classification, and tracking capability to reliably detect periscopes and masts 

in complex, cluttered environments. The committee recommends an 

increase of $3.0 million in PE 64621N to accelerate the ARPDD 

project. 

DD(X) destroyer integrated propulsion system 

The budget request included $1,114.8 million in PE 64300N for 

DD(X) destroyer total ship systems engineering. The budget request included no funding for completing the development of the integrated power system for this ship, since final developmental testing of the integrated power system is expected to be completed in 

fiscal year 2005 prior to the ship’s critical design review and the 

subsequent transition of funding to the Shipbuilding & Conversion, 

Navy account for detail design. 

In proof of concept tests prior to shipment to the Navy’s landbased test facility, the primary propulsion motor planned for the 

integrated power system, the permanent magnet motor (PMM), experienced a failure. The failure was determined to be caused by insulation, resulting in damage to the stators of the motor. To maintain schedule to meet the ship critical design review, the Navy has 

decided to fall back to an alternate propulsion motor, the advanced 

induction motor (AIM), for demonstration at the land-based test facility. Use of the AIM would add 300 tons to the weight of the 

DD(X). Funding is not adequate to pursue both technologies. 

177 

The committee believes that continued development of the PMM 

is warranted, if not for incorporation in the lead ship, for incorporation in following ships. The committee recommends an increase of 

$10.0 million in PE 64300N for continued development and testing 

of the PMM for the DD(X) destroyer. 

Affordable towed array construction 

The budget request included $95.5 million in PE 64503N for submarine systems equipment development, but included no funding 

for the continued development of new, highly reliable, low cost fiber 

optic towed arrays. Funding is required to accelerate system performance verification testing, demonstrate array architectural flexibility, implement automated manufacturing equipment, and qualify 

commercial suppliers. The committee recommends an increase of 

$6.0 million in PE 64503N for the development of affordable towed 

array construction. 

New Design SSN 

The budget request included $155.8 million in PE 64558N for the 

continuing development of the Virginia-class submarine. The development efforts in this program are to evaluate a broad range of 

system and technology alternatives to directly support and enhance 

the mission capability of this class of submarine. 

The budget request included no funding to develop the multi-mission module concept, with the focus to identify flexible payload concepts. The committee believes that the baseline Virginia-class design allows for integration of innovative payloads and sensors, 

which would enhance its capability. The committee recommends an 

increase of $30.0 million in PE 63558N for multi-mission module 

development. 

The budget request included no funding to develop a large aperture bow array for the Virginia-class submarine. This array has the 

potential to allow for the rapid insertion and spiral development of 

future sensor technologies, increasing sonar performance at a lower 

cost than the current spherical array. The committee recommends 

an increase of $10.0 million in PE 64558N for development of a 

large aperture bow array. 

The budget request included no funding to transition the small 

business innovative research programs for advanced processing 

builds and multipurpose processor rapid commercial, off-the shelf 

insertion. Transition of these efforts would lead to an infrastructure for the Virginia-class submarine that could support insertion 

of network-centric intelligence, surveillance, and reconnaissance. 

The committee recommends an increase of $4.0 million in PE 

64558N for network-centric capability technology insertion. 

The committee recommends a total authorization of $199.8 million in PE 64558N. 

Submarine tactical warfare system 

The budget request included $40.7 million in PE 64562N for submarine tactical warfare systems development. This program develops commercial, off-the-shelf based software and hardware upgrades to integrate improved weapons and tactical control capabilities for all submarine classes. 

178 

The budget request included no funding specifically for the insertion of common open architecture technology. Open architecture is 

key to enabling timely weapons system software upgrades. The 

committee recommends an increase of $3.5 million in PE 64562N 

for submarine common open architecture technology insertion. 

The budget request included no funding to initiate the development of the automated submarine command and control center. 

This development would reduce the number of personnel necessary 

for submarine attack center operations. The committee recommends an increase of $3.5 million in PE 64562N for development of the automated submarine command and control center. 

The committee recommends a total authorization of $47.7 million 

in PE 64562N. 

Autonomous unmanned surface vessel 

The budget request included $45.9 million in PE 64755N for detection and control for ship self-defense, but included no funding 

for the continued development of the autonomous unmanned surface vessel (AUSV), which is being developed as a concept demonstrator for potential anti-terrorism force protection missions and to 

protect harbors and coastal facilities. The committee recommends 

an increase of $5.2 million in PE 64755N for the continued development of the AUSV. 

NULKA anti-ship missile decoy development 

The budget request included $24.0 million in PE 64757N for de- velopment of soft kill technologies for ship self-defense and $1.0 

million for the continuing development of the NULKA decoy. 

NULKA is an offboard, active decoy designed to counter a wide variety of present and future radar-guided anti-ship missiles. Continued development of NULKA is necessary to counter anti-ship missiles that may migrate to other frequency bands or use dual mode 

seekers. The committee recommends an increase of $9.0 million in 

PE 64757N for the continued development of the NULKA decoy. 

Navy medical research 

The budget request included $7.2 million in PE 64771N, for medical development. The Department of Defense medical research 

continues to produce results in the form of vaccines and treatments 

to address the threat posed by biological weapons and naturally occurring illnesses in areas of military operation. Enhanced distribution techniques and more efficient delivery of treatments would further reduce logistical and personnel requirements, while increasing 

protection. The committee recommends an increase of $3.5 million 

in PE 64771N for non-invasive vectored vaccine research to explore 

a new approach to production of a consistent, highly immunogenic, 

and easily manufactured and administered vaccine. 

Research on methods to prevent and address severe blood loss 

due to combat injuries challenges both the Army and Navy medical 

communities. Various blood preservation developments combined 

with innovations in blood loss treatments and blood replacement 

therapies yield life saving advances. Additional work in these areas 

would reduce treatment side effects and prolong the viability of 

blood substitutes. The committee recommends an increase of $9.0 

179 

million in PE 64771N, including $3.0 million to facilitate hemostatic therapy trials; $2.0 million for advanced research and development to improve the QuickClot treatment for internal use; and 

$4.0 million for evaluation of the safety and efficacy of a room and 

elevated temperature stable hemoglobin-based oxygen carrier. 

Shared Reconnaissance Pod logistics support 

The budget request included $88.7 million in PE 24136N for F/ 

A–18 improvements, but included no funding for Shared Reconnaissance Pod (SHARP) logistics support. The SHARP system is an 

electro-optical/infrared system that is capable of collecting longand medium-range imagery and can record or data link the imagery to provide the combatant commander information with which 

to identify possible targets. The development of logistics support for 

21 SHARP systems—including interactive electronic technical 

manuals, completion of specific tasks associated with the Automated Maintenance Environment, and fleet aircrew and maintenance training curricula and maintenance training aids—are required for SHARP to achieve full operational capability. SHARP logistics support is included on the Chief of Naval Operations’ unfunded priorities list. The committee recommends an increase of 

$3.2 million in PE 24136N for SHARP logistics support. 

Marine Corps communications systems 

The budget request included $237.1 million in PE 26313M, for communications systems development, including $18.3 million for 

the development of the ground/air task orientated radar (G/ATOR) 

and $5.8 million for the development of the distributed common 

ground/surface system (DCGS). The budget request included no 

funding for the Critical Infrastructure Protection Center (CIPC). 

The G/ATOR program is a single material solution for the MultiRole Radar System (MRRS) and Ground Weapons Locator Radar 

(GWLR) requirements that replaces and consolidates the capability 

of numerous legacy radars, including the AN/TPS–63 air surveillance, AN/MPQ–62 force control, AN/TPS–73 air traffic control, and 

AN/UPS–3 air defense radar systems. Current radar performance 

does not meet operational forces’ requirements. Additional funding 

for G/ATOR development is on the Commandant of the Marine 

Corps’ unfunded priorities list. The committee recommends an increase of $3.5 million in PE 26313M for G/ATOR. 

The DCGS is a collection of service systems that will contribute 

to joint and combined war fighter needs for intelligence, surveillance and reconnaissance support. The DCGS integrated backbone 

(DIB) is the architecture that will tie the services’ DCGS systems 

together into one family of systems. The committee notes that the 

Marine Corps portion of the DCGS has not been integrated into the 

DIB. The committee recommends an increase of $4.8 million in PE 

26313M to complete integration efforts. 

The mission of CIPC is to foster system security engineering solutions for critical infrastructure protection by integrating information operations, emergency management, and other critical infrastructure protection initiatives. The committee notes that the Marine Corps has an ongoing requirement to perform information systems security functions that could be addressed by the CIPC. The 

180 

committee recommends an increase of $3.5 million in PE 26313M, 

for information system security development. The committee recommends a total authorization of $248.9 million in PE 26313M. 

Marine Corps ground combat and supporting arms systems 

The budget request included $48.4 million in PE 26623M for the 

development of Marine Corps ground combat and supporting arms 

systems, including $1.8 million for the Family of Raid and Reconnaissance equipment program and $7.1 million for the Expeditionary Fire Support System (EFSS), but no funding for the Light 

Armored Vehicle (LAV) Sense and Respond Support System. 

EFSS will be the primary indirect fire support system for the 

vertical assault element of the ship-to-objective maneuver force and 

is intended to fill the third ‘‘leg’’ of the Marine Corps’ indirect fires 

triad, complementing longer-range systems such as the M777 

155mm lightweight towed Howitzer and the High Mobility Artillery 

Rocket System. Munition development lags equipment development. Additional funding for EFSS is on the Commandant of the 

Marine Corps’ unfunded priorities list. The committee recommends 

an increase of $11.0 million to modify existing munitions from the 

family of 120mm rifled mortar rounds for use with EFSS. 

The Family of Raid and Reconnaissance equipment program supports the research, development, and procurement actions for multiple airborne and specialized reconnaissance-related programs. 

Without a flexible multi-mission support platform, the Marine 

Corps cannot take full advantage of its recent investment in the 

Underwater Reconnaissance Capability (URC). URC consists of an 

advanced diver propulsion device, state-of-the-art hydrographic 

mapping equipment, and other critical maritime reconnaissance 

equipment to include the Multi-Role Intermediate Support Craft 

(MRISC), a replacement for the outdated and inefficient Combat 

Rubber Raiding Craft. The Marine Corps is currently evaluating 

commercial, off-the-shelf variants and additional funding would accelerate that evaluation. The committee recommends an increase of 

$9.5 million for the MRISC. 

For the last two years, the Marine Corps has been studying the 

creation of a Sense and Respond Support System to monitor overall 

system health of the LAV. The Marine Corps needs to develop the 

technology to embed a variety of sensors in metal parts of the LAV. 

Successful implementation of this technology will decrease maintenance ‘‘down’’ time, increase readiness, and be a better predictor of 

vehicle life throughout its life cycle. The committee recommends an 

increase of $4.0 million for development of a LAV SRSS. 

The committee recommends a total authorization of $72.9 million 

in PE 26623M. 

Battlefield management system 

The budget request included $10.5 million in PE 26624M, for the 

development of combat service support equipment, but no funding 

for the battlefield management system (BMS). The committee understands that the Marine Corps is currently exploring ways to improve situational awareness for Marine Corps armored ground vehicles and mechanized infantry at the platoon, company, and batVerDate Aug 04 2004 15:24 May 25, 2005 Jkt 021326 PO 00000 Frm 00200 Fmt 6601 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\SR069.XXX SR069
181 

talion level by providing target acquisition, fire coordination, sensor-to-shooter target management, mounted navigation, and instant dissemination of situational awareness information. The Marine Corps is ready to initiate Phase II of the program which will 

address Phase I technical issues of integrating BMS into the M1A1 

Tank and the Amphibious Assault Vehicle. The committee recommends an increase of $1.5 million in PE 26624M for BMS development, for a total authorization of $12.0 million. 

RQ–8B Firescout vertical takeoff and landing unmanned 

aerial vehicle 

The budget request included $77.6 million in PE 35204N for the development of tactical unmanned aerial vehicles, including $60.1 

million for the development of the RQ–8B Firescout vertical takeoff 

and landing unmanned aerial vehicle (VTUAV). The Firescout 

VTUAV was designed to provide real-time intelligence, surveillance, and reconnaissance data to tactical users. A Firescout system is composed of three air vehicles, sensors, and control systems. 

The Firescout VTUAV will be common to the three modules to be 

incorporated on the Littoral Combat Ship (LCS). Additional funding for the Firescout VTUAV was included on the Chief of Naval 

Operations’ unfunded priorities list to support the first LCS deliveries. 

The committee recommends an increase of $39.0 million in PE 

35204N to procure six additional Firescout air vehicles and sensor 

packages to support the completion of developmental and operational testing and integration with the first deliveries of LCS. 

Distributed common ground system—Navy 

The budget request included $12.4 million in PE 35208N for development of the distributed common ground system for the Navy 

(DCGS–N), but included no funding for integration of the advanced 

field artillery tactical data system (AFATDS), which provides automated command and control for the firepower aboard Navy ships. 

The converged architecture enabled by DCGS–N provides unparalleled flexibility to the warfighter and rapid response capability 

against relocatable, time critical targets. Currently, fire control information must be manually transferred between DCGS–N and 

AFATDS. The committee recommends an increase of $3.2 million 

in PE 35208N for the integration of AFATDS into the DCGS–N architecture. 

National shipbuilding research program—advanced shipbuilding enterprise 

The budget request included no funding in PE 78730N for maritime technology. In recent years, funding provided by this line was 

used for the national shipbuilding research program—advanced 

shipbuilding enterprise (NSRP–ASE). This enterprise is a collaborative effort between the Navy and industry, which has yielded 

new processes and techniques that reduce the cost of building and 

repairing ships. The program has already documented a positive 

return on investment. 

Section 242 of the Ronald W. Reagan National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2005 (Public Law 108–375) expressed 

182 

the sense of the Congress that the Secretary of Defense should continue to fund this program at a sustaining level. With a shrinking 

industrial base for shipbuilding already driving higher costs, this 

type of initiative is essential to providing efficiencies. The committee believes it is shortsighted not to invest in improved processes that would reduce the cost of shipbuilding. The committee 

recommends an increase of $10.0 million in PE 78730N for the 

NSRP–ASE. 

Air Force 

183 


Insert graphic folio 229 SR69.096
184 


Insert graphic folio 230 SR69.097
185 


Insert graphic folio 231 SR69.098
186 


Insert graphic folio 232 SR69.099
187 


Insert graphic folio 233 SR69.100
188 


Insert graphic folio 234 SR69.101
189 


Insert graphic folio 235 SR69.102
190 


Insert graphic folio 236 SR69.103
191 


Insert graphic folio 237 SR69.104
192 


Insert graphic folio 238 SR69.105
193 


Insert graphic folio 239 SR69.106
194 


Insert graphic folio 240 SR69.107
195 


Insert graphic folio 241 SR69.108
196 

Air Force basic science 

The budget request included $223.9 million in PE 61102F, for Air 

Force defense research sciences. Innovative work supported by the 

Air Force basic research accounts is key to ensuring that our military has future capabilities and equipment to meet emerging 

threats. Applications such as air combat systems and ground support optoelectronics have foundations in novel nanomaterials used 

for the development of optical devices which are, in turn, components of information processing systems. The ability to quickly, securely, and reliably process information enables information dominance, one of a number of broad defense objectives. The committee 

recommends an increase of $2.5 million in PE 61102F, for 

nanophotonic components, the building blocks of electronic materials in a number of aircraft, ship, and soldier systems. 

Air Force missions in the areas of reducing time to target and 

rapid response to global threats require basic and applied research 

on missile propulsion systems. Research on hypersonic engine designs have produced some early results over the last year. Design 

tools to predict and monitor performance of propulsion and control 

systems are needed, as are trained experts to move promising research forward. The committee recommends an increase of $4.0 

million in PE 61102F to expand basic hypersonics research and to 

develop a strong academic program in hypersonics flow physics. 

Secure, assured information sharing 

The budget request included $105.0 million in PE 61103F, for 

university research initiatives. Air Force university research supports defense related basic science in a wide range of scientific and 

engineering disciplines important to maintaining U.S. military 

technology superiority. One basic science pursuit of increasing significance involves investigation into information management in 

the ‘‘need to know’’ and ‘‘need to share’’ environments. The committee recommends an increase of $2.5 million in PE 61103F to expand research on novel approaches to information sharing requirements and to address policies, procedures, and technology to meet 

differing security protection levels and requirements. 

Blast resistant barriers 

The budget request included $74.2 million in PE 62102F, for materials research. The committee supports research focused on the 

development of materials, composites, and structural designs to 

protect personnel and equipment from the threat of vehicle borne 

and other explosive device delivery methods. A variety of commercial and ‘‘makeshift’’ barricades currently provide protection to 

bases, facilities, and structures in the homeland and abroad. The 

committee recommends an increase of $4.0 million in PE 62102F 

for research and development of blast resistant barriers, including 

engineering of materials for different structural designs, testing, 

and establishment of blast barrier standards. 

Air Force materials research 

The budget request included $74.2 million in PE 62102F, for materials research. The committee recommends an increase of $1.0 

million in PE 62102F for nano-particle materials coating research. 

197 

This research has the potential to develop advanced aeronautical 

coatings to improve the reliability and corrosion resistance of Air 

Force platforms. 

The Department of Defense has a need for improved, affordable 

aerospace structures. Composite materials offer the potential for 

cost and weight savings along with improved air and space vehicle 

performance. The committee recommends an increase of $2.0 million in PE 62102F for accelerated development of complex composite structures for manned and unmanned air vehicles. 

Nano-technologies for chemical and biological defense 

The budget request included $79.4 million in PE 62202F, for 

human effectiveness applied research. Progress has been made in 

development of multiple-step processes for the detection, identification, and neutralization of single biological agents. A system capable of executing all three steps at once for a wide range of bioagents, in different environments, would add value to existing capabilities. The committee recommends an increase of $1.0 million 

in PE 62202F to augment ongoing research on the use of pulsed 

power plasma produced nano-particles to detect, identify, and defeat pathogens in a one-step process. 

Hypersonics engine research and integration 

The budget request included $107.5 million in PE 62203F, for aerospace propulsion, including $18.9 million for advanced aerospace propulsion technologies and hypersonic weapons and aircraft 

concepts. The committee notes that the X–43A successfully 

achieved Mach 9.8 during test flights last year, and believes that 

the joint Air Force and National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) X–43 effort represents an important technology 

pathway to achieving a hypersonic operational capability. The committee recommends an increase of $12.0 million in PE 

62203F to support a more aggressive hypersonics scramjet research 

program, to facilitate additional ground testing of the X–43 engine, 

and to evaluate initial concepts for integration of engine and vehicle designs. The committee strongly encourages NASA and the Air 

Force to work jointly on this program and to support the multi-engine demonstrator in future budget requests. 

The committee notes that magnetohydrodynamics (MHD) may 

have applications when integrated with hypersonic vehicles now 

under development. The committee believes a better understanding 

of the advantages of the technology, the technical challenges to its 

use, and the potential for incorporation into hypersonic vehicle designs would be beneficial. The committee directs the Secretary of 

Defense, in coordination with the Administrator of the National 

Aeronautics and Space Administration, to provide a report to the 

congressional defense committees, by March 15, 2006, surveying 

both classified and unclassified MHD research conducted in the 

past and provide recommendations on whether military applications may be derived from MHD technology. 

Space technology 

The budget request included $84.5 million in PE 62601F, for 

space technology. In response to Department of Defense guidance, 

198 

the Air Force research community embarked on an effort to support the space dominance mission. Integration of multiple functions 

into single space structures capable of autonomous fabrication and 

assembly represents a key focus of investigation in this area. Nanoreinforced structural space systems and advanced multifunctional 

space structures show promise in facilitating major improvements 

in space structure utility and performance. The committee recommends an increase of $2.0 million in PE 62601F for expanded 

research in both of these structural areas and for examination of 

concepts for weight and cost reduction of space structural systems. 

The committee further recommends an increase of $6.0 million in 

PE 62601F, including $3.0 million for the deployable space structures experiment, a general effort to lower the cost of spacecraft by 

instituting commonality and modularity in the construction of satellites; and $3.0 million for integrated control for autonomous space 

systems, a program focused on development of advanced satellite 

control and measurement technologies needed to operate Air Force 

space and airbreathing systems. 

Adaptive optics research 

The budget request included $37.7 million in PE 62605F, for directed energy research. Advanced digital communications allow for 

high levels of data transfer and rapid processing of visual images 

in support of network centric warfare. The Air Force has been 

doing work with lasers to expand communications bandwidth and 

to increase digital communication capabilities. The committee recommends an increase of $3.0 million in PE 62605F to accelerate 

this work and to support adaptive optics research for laser communications systems. 

Integrated spacecraft engineering tool 

The budget request included $60.9 million in PE 63401F for Advanced Spacecraft Technology, but no funding for the integrated 

spacecraft engineering tool (ISET). 

ISET would be used to build software models to enable satellite 

system designers, builders, and operators to accurately and reliably 

model and predict the performance of space systems. This would 

provide significant cost savings in the development and integration 

of future satellite systems and aid in the analysis of alternatives 

for prospective space systems. 

The committee recommends an increase of $3.0 million in PE 

63401F to develop, demonstrate, and validate an integrated spacecraft engineering tool—to support rapid prototyping, and to collaborate research, development, testing, and evaluation of advanced 

spacecraft and aerospace vehicles. 

Laser eye protection 

The budget request included $36.7 million in PE 63112F, for advanced materials for weapon systems. The committee recommends 

an increase of $5.0 million in PE 63112F to address an Air Force 

requirement for laser eye protection. 

199 

Metals affordability initiative 

The budget request included $36.7 million in PE 63112F, for advanced materials for weapons systems. The committee recommends 

an increase of $2.0 million in PE 63112F for unfunded priority Air 

Force research on specialty aerospace metals as part of the Metals 

Affordability Initiative. This type of research could lead to cheaper 

and higher performance aerospace metals and alloys, which will 

contribute significantly to future military air and space capabilities. 

Aerospace propulsion and power technologies 

The budget request included $77.3 million in PE 63216F, for 

aerospace propulsion and power technology. Traditional oil lubrication of propulsion and power systems carries operation and maintenance costs that could be avoided through the use of alternative 

technologies. The committee recommends an increase in PE 63216F 

of $3.0 million to advance the more electric gas turbine research to 

a technology readiness level for prototype development and testing. 

Application of this technology could improve performance, reliability, and cost-effectiveness of propulsion and power systems by 

replacing oil lubrication with magnetic and electrical components 

in gas turbine engines. 

The Air Force is pursuing research on reusable high-speed turbine engines for a hypersonic cruise missile. The Air Force Science 

and Technology unfunded priority list includes a request for additional research on a Mach 4+ turbine engine for rapid long-range 

strike and operational responsive space lift. The committee recommends an increase of $10.0 million in PE 63216F for the advanced supersonics cruise missile, to meet the Air Force unfunded 

requirement in this area and to accelerate and expand ground demonstrations to include critical integration technologies such as the 

supersonic inlet, exhaust nozzle and afterburner subsystems. 

Versatile affordable advanced turbine engines 

The budget request included $77.3 million in PE 63216F, for 

aerospace propulsion and power technologies. The Versatile Affordable Advanced Turbine Engine (VAATE) program is a joint program between the Departments of Defense and Energy, the National Aeronautics and Space Administration, and industry to develop, demonstrate, and transition advanced, multiuse turbine engine technologies. The committee recommends an increase of $2.5 

million in PE 63216F to meet Air Force requirements for accelerated development of these technologies that could be key to the 

evolution of long-endurance, high efficiency engines for emerging 

unmanned aerial combat systems. 

Ballistic missile technology 

The budget request included $60.9 million in PE 63401F for advanced spacecraft technology. 

The committee is aware of the need to develop common advanced 

guidance technology applicable to Air Force and Navy strategic ballistic missile systems and future space vehicles. These efforts support capabilities needed to fulfill validated requirements for landbased strategic deterrence and prompt global strike. 

200 

The committee recommends an increase in $5.0 million in PE 

63401F for advanced technology demonstrations in guidance and 

control, flight computers, vehicle structures, and range safety technology. 

AC coupled interconnect 

The budget request included $60.9 million in PE 63401F, for advanced spacecraft technology. 

The committee notes that the Air Force has been exploring ways 

for satellites to operate more effectively on the limited power offered by solar cells. AC coupled interconnect is a new technique 

that would provide for the connecting of electronic chips in computer and electronic equipment at more efficient rates. In 2004, a 

key demonstration of this technology resulted in chips communicating with each other at 6 GHz. Additional funding would 

produce a complete technology for connecting electronic chips for all 

fields of application, including satellites. 

The committee recommends an increase of $3.0 million in PE 

63401F for AC coupled interconnect development. 

Energy cells for defense and intelligence applications 

The budget request included $60.9 million in PE 603401F, for advanced spacecraft technology, but no funding for the development 

of Beta Energy Cells (BEC). 

The committee understands that BEC can be used to charge batteries and super capacitors to greatly extend the operational life of 

critical military and intelligence systems. 

The committee recommends an increase of $3.0 million in PE 

603401F to complete the development phase of BEC research and 

make prototype products available to defense and intelligence 

users. 

Radically Segmented Launch Vehicle 

The budget request included $61.0 in PE 63401F, for advanced 

spacecraft technology, but no funding for the Radically Segmented 

Launch Vehicle (RSLV) 

The RSLV program addresses a broad range of Department of 

Defense mission requirements for low-cost, routine, and responsive 

space launch. Program development and risk reduction for responsive space launch is currently performed under a joint Air Force, 

National Air and Space Administration, and Defense Advanced Research Project Agency program management arrangement. The 

committee is supportive of efforts to acquire an operationally responsive space capability to support the warfighter. 

The committee recommends an increase of $4.0 million in PE 

63401F to perform engineering development, prototype hardware 

fabrication, and ground testing of the RSLV for the purpose of mitigating technical risk and validating cost savings potential. 

Thin film amorphous solar arrays 

The budget request included $60.9 million in PE 63401F, for advanced spacecraft technology, but no funding for thin film amorphous solar arrays. 

201 

The committee is aware of the need to reduce the cost of satellite 

launches, which is driven to a large extent by the weight of satellite payloads. The committee believes research on thin film amorphous solar arrays has the potential to produce solar arrays that 

are significantly less expensive, lighter, and more efficient than 

current solar arrays. The committee recommends an increase of $10.0 million in PE 

63401F for thin film amorphous solar array research and development. 

High Accuracy Network Determination System 

The budget request included $5.8 million in PE 63444F, for the 

Maui space surveillance system, but no funding for the High Accuracy Network Determination System (HANDS). 

The Air Force satellite control network maintains careful management of satellites that perform missions of crucial importance to 

national security, such as detecting ballistic missile launches 

against the United States as well as space launches and nuclear 

detonations. HANDS technology has the potential to increase the 

accuracy of the data gathered in support of this mission. The committee recommends an increase of $5.0 million in PE 

63444F to research, develop, and demonstrate capabilities of 

HANDS technology. 

Laser threat warning attack reporting 

The budget request included $53.4 million in PE 63500F, for the 

multidisciplinary advanced development space program. 

The committee notes that U.S. space systems are becoming increasingly vulnerable to deliberate hostile or intrusive attacks from 

lasers deployed by foreign governments and terrorist groups. The 

purpose of the laser threat warning attack reporting (LTWAR) for 

space program is to develop electro-optical sensors capable of detecting such laser radiation incidents on space systems. The committee recommends an increase of $5.0 million in PE 

63500F to accelerate the LTWAR. 

Enable network centric warfare 

The budget request included $30.1 million in Research, Development, Test, and Evaluation, Air Force, for Command, Control, 

Communications, and Intelligence Advanced Development, but included no funding for science and technology efforts to continue development and fielding of advanced capabilities that will facilitate 

the ability of air platforms to engage in airborne networking and 

improve their ability to participate in network centric operations. 

The enable network centric warfare program is an urgent need 

requirement that was identified by the Commander, U.S. Central 

Command (CENTCOM), after the fiscal year 2006 President’s 

budget request had been submitted. The concept of network centric 

warfare is being implemented within the Department of Defense, 

but challenges remain in developing the capabilities to fully enable 

airborne platforms to be integrated into network centric operations. 

This integration effort is expected to result in a reliable, secure, 

and assured network centric communications infrastructure for 

ground mobile and airborne platforms that will improve the ability 

202 

of battlefield commanders to see the battlespace and coordinate the 

use of weapons systems. The committee recommends an increase of $3.2 million in PE 

63789F, to accelerate development and fielding of operational airborne networking equipment for network centric operations and 

more quickly meet the urgent need requirement of the Commander, 

U.S. CENTCOM. 

Military satellite communications 

The budget request included $835.8 million in PE 63845F, for the 

Transformational Satellite Communications system (TSAT) and 

$665.3 million in PE 63430F, for the Advanced Extremely High 

Frequency (AEHF) system. 

The committee recognizes the increasing importance of communications to net-centric military operations and remains supportive 

of the TSAT effort to provide substantial increases in bandwidth to 

the military and intelligence user. The committee notes, however, 

that while TSAT has been an acquisition program since January 

2004, only one of its seven critical technologies is mature, according 

to the Government Accountability Office’s 2005 assessment of 

major weapon programs. 

The committee has been concerned that the technical risks in the 

program are very high given the state of critical technology development. In hearings before Congress in 2004 and 2005, thenUnder Secretary of the Air Force, Peter Teets, acknowledged that 

if the TSAT program were to experience unanticipated problems, 

the Air Force would adjust its strategy by taking ‘‘acquisition offramps.’’ These off-ramps or back-up technologies are associated 

with critical technologies from the Advanced Extremely High Frequency (AEHF) satellite program. 

Given the technological risks associated with TSAT, the committee recommends that the Air Force provide funding to the 

AEHF program for the development and procurement of a fourth 

AEHF satellite. The committee directs the Air Force to focus TSAT 

funding and development efforts primarily on those activities directly related to maturing critical technologies. Finally, the committee recommends that the Air Force consider incorporating available maturing TSAT technologies into the fourth AEHF satellite, if 

feasible. This approach is in accordance with the Department of 

Defense’s updated space acquisition policy, which states that evolutionary acquisition is the preferred strategy for rapid acquisition of 

mature technology for the user. Procuring a fourth, incrementally 

enhanced AEHF satellite could serve to shorten the time in moving 

from AEHF to TSAT capabilities as well as reduce the overall risks 

in achieving TSAT capabilities. 

In accordance with these recommendations, the committee recommends a decrease of $200.0 million in PE 63845F for TSAT and 

an increase of $100.0 million in PE 63430F for AEHF. 

Space radar 

The budget request included $225.8 million in PE 63858F, for 

space radar (SR). 

In the statement of managers accompanying the Ronald W. 

Reagan National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2005 

203 

(Public Law 108–375), the conferees expressed the view that while 

they were strongly supportive of radar satellites, the Air Force cost 

estimates for the notional space based radar (SBR) architecture, as 

presented in the fiscal year 2005 budget request, made the system 

potentially unaffordable. The conferees noted that affordability 

would be dependent on the development of a single radar satellite 

system to meet both military and intelligence community needs 

and the integration of the space-based radar into an architecture 

consisting of other intelligence, surveillance, and reconnaissance 

(ISR) capabilities. Consequently, the Department of Defense was 

directed to restructure the SBR effort to focus on continued technology maturation, architectural analysis, and system evolution. 

The committee believes that while the Air Force has taken steps 

to address congressional concerns, the restructured space radar 

(SR) program still lacks sufficient programmatic and cost definition. The committee welcomes realignment of the SR program 

budget to focus on early development and demonstration of ground 

infrastructure and ground capabilities that may have benefits beyond the space radar program. While the committee supports a 

demonstration project to help validate technology readiness and ascertain costs for the objective system, the committee questions the 

Air Force decision to pursue an on-orbit demonstration as opposed 

to an earlier, less costly airborne experiment. Moreover, the inability of the Air Force to provide a firm cost estimate for the demonstration project illustrates the uncertainty of the approach. 

While the joint memorandum on the space radar program signed 

by the Secretary of Defense and the Director of Central Intelligence 

on January 13, 2005, is a welcome sign, the lack of agreement on 

a specific cost share for the program is an indication that much has 

yet to be decided before Congress can provide its full support for 

this program. Finally, the committee notes that two important reports to Congress, addressing various options for the space-based 

radar architecture and key features of an ISR system-of-systems 

architecture, have yet to be completed and received by this committee—another indication that Department plans for space radar 

remain uncertain. 

The committee recommends a decrease of $75.0 million in PE 

63858F, and strongly urges the Department to consider an airborne 

demonstration in fiscal year 2006 or early fiscal year 2007 to inform a Key Decision Point B decision for the objective Space Radar 

program as soon as possible. The committee directs the Secretary 

of Defense to provide a report to the congressional defense committees by January 15, 2006, on the Department’s plan for the objective Space Radar program, including associated costs. Finally, the 

committee recommends that the Department seek solid commitments from the Director of National Intelligence regarding cost and 

requirements sharing for space radar before the fiscal year 2007 

budget request submission. 

Tactical satellite demonstrations 

The budget request included $23.5 million in PE 64855F for operationally responsive launch, but no funding for tactical satellite 

demonstrations. 

204 

The U.S. space transportation policy of January 6, 2005, directs 

the government to demonstrate before 2010 an initial capability for 

operationally responsive access to and use of space to support national security requirements. The Air Force is pursuing a joint 

warfighting space concept to provide prompt space support for the 

warfighter by rapidly launching rockets with small, militarily useful satellites that would be controlled by the warfighter. The objective is to develop tactical satellites that could be stored and, when 

directed, launched and ready to support operations within a few 

days compared to the two-year lead time that is currently needed 

for satellite launches. The committee has been supportive of this 

concept as a way to improve space support to the warfighter and 

reduce the cost and development time for military space systems. 

The Air Force and other service partners have funded the first satellite experiment and most of the satellite work for the second joint 

warfighting space satellite, JWS–2, (otherwise known as TacSat–3) 

but no funds are currently budgeted for other important demonstration pieces, including the launch. The committee notes that 

the Chief of Staff of the Air Force’s unfunded priorities list includes 

a $13.5 million request for this purpose. 

The committee recommends an increase of $10.0 million in PE 

64855F to fund the launch and range costs for JWS–2, and one 

year of satellite operations. 

Robust nuclear earth penetrator 

The budget request included $15.2 million in PE 64222F for development of nuclear weapons support, including $1.0 million for 

the development of nuclear weapons and counterproliferation technologies to support joint Air Force and National Nuclear Security 

Administration efforts associated with logistics and aircraft integration for the Robust Nuclear Earth Penetrator (RNEP). The committee notes that the evaluation of RNEP feasibility by the Department of Energy is not scheduled to be completed prior to 2007. 

Therefore, the committee recommends a decrease of $1.0 million in 

PE 64222F for efforts associated with logistics and aircraft integration for the RNEP. 

Space control test capabilities 

The budget request included $24.7 million in PE 64421F, for Air 

Force counterspace systems. 

The ‘‘National Space Policy’’ of September 1996 specifies that the 

United States will develop, operate, and maintain space control capabilities to ensure freedom of action in space and, if directed, deny 

such freedom of action to adversaries. The committee recognizes 

that continuing development by the Army Aviation and Missile Research, Development and Engineering Center of software applications used to integrate offensive and defensive space control systems into a single system-of-systems simulated testbed could contribute to near-term capabilities for space control and situational 

awareness. 

The committee recommends an increase of $6.0 million in PE 

64421F for continued test and development of command and control capabilities for ground-based space control assets. 

205 

FPS–16 radar mobilization and upgrade 

The budget request included $55.3 million in PE 64759F, for 

major test and evaluation investments. The committee recommends 

an increase of $5.0 million in PE 64759F for upgrade and mobilization of an additional fixed positioning system (FPS)–16 radar. Updating the radar with fully digital electronics would increase reliability, decrease maintenance time and cost, and enhance radar 

performance and data products. Mobilization of the radar will facilitate flexibility and increase optimal tracking coverage. 

Ballistic missile range safety technology 

The budget request included $13.8 million in PE 65860F for the 

rocket systems launch program, but no funding for ballistic missile 

range safety technology (BMRST). 

The committee is aware that BMRST is a global positioning system based launch range safety system that has the potential to 

provide significant technical and reliability advantages and cost 

savings over current radar systems. The committee notes that several launch ranges have requested BMRST systems for local range 

certification as well as down-range reentry support. 

The committee recommends an increase of $15.0 million in PE 

65860F to support expanded BMRST system capability, critical certification, and testing requirements. 

A–10 aircraft propulsion improvements 

The budget request included $51.8 million in PE 27131F for the 

continued development of the A–10 aircraft; including $33.9 million 

for A–10 propulsion improvements. The Air Force intends to operate this aircraft until fiscal year 2028; and aircrews have continued 

to rank propulsion as a major operational deficiency. The committee recommends an increase of $25.0 million in PE 27131F to 

continue the propulsion modernization effort for the A–10 aircraft. 

Information systems security research 

The budget request included $109.3 million in PE 33140F, for the 

information systems security program. A recent National Defense 

University report entitled ‘‘Information Assurance: Trends in 

Vulnerabilities, Threats and Technologies’’ noted that a series of internal and external studies and policy pronouncements from the 

Department of Defense over the last two decades contains a basic 

premise, that: ‘‘the explosive changes in information technology 

would transform the future of military operations. The benefits of 

this change have been well documented but its potential 

vulnerabilities have been less commonly described—or addressed 

for corrective action.’’ To augment the Department’s work in developing solutions to information security vulnerabilities and to review associated legal and regulatory issues, the committee recommends an increase of $3.0 million in PE 33140F, including $2.0 

million for infrastructure assurance and security research conducted in collaboration with the Air Intelligence Agency and $1.0 

million for homeland defense threat information studies and analysis of the legal and regulatory challenges involved in cyber security. 

206 

Viper Strike munition for Predator 

The budget request included $61.0 million in Research, Development, Test, and Evaluation, Air Force, for Predator UAV, in PE 

35219F, for the continued development of the Predator unmanned 

aerial vehicle system, but did not include additional funding for the 

development of the Viper Strike lightweight precision munition 

that can be integrated onto the Predator air frame. The Viper 

Strike precision munition represents a transformational capability, 

providing pinpoint accuracy against moving, stationary, and armored targets, even in low visibility environments. The Viper 

Strike is an important step forward in linking powerful sensors to 

precision munitions to allow the rapid engagement of high-value 

targets on the complex 21st century battlefield. Funding would 

allow fielding of this important capability in the global war on terrorism to battlefield commanders in fiscal year 2006, while the Air 

Force establishes a program of record for future years. The committee recommends an increase of $5.0 million in PE 

35219F, for development and early fielding of 55 Viper Strike precision munitions. 

S-band radar 

The budget request included $151.1 million in PE 35910F for 

spacetrack, but no funding for the S-band radar. 

The S-band sensor system detects and tracks all low-earth orbiting objects and is the only planned system capable of providing the 

information required for space situational awareness and space 

control. Air Force funding reductions to the space surveillance system, of which S-band radar is an important component, led to 

eliminating funding for S-band radar in the fiscal year 2006 budget 

request. The committee understands it is the intention of the Air 

Force to continue funding this program in fiscal years 2008 to 

2011. The committee believes, therefore, that additional funding 

will accelerate deployment and mitigate additional system costs. The committee recommends an increase of $10.0 million in PE 

35910F for the S-band radar project. 

Space-Based Space Surveillance 

The budget request included $151.1 million in PE 35910F, for spacetrack, of which $114.2 million is for the Space-Based Space 

Surveillance (SBSS) program. 

The SBSS is a sensor that will conduct deep space and low- earth 

orbit surveillance in support of U.S. space control and situational 

awareness requirements. The committee notes that funding cuts in 

fiscal year 2005 delayed the SBSS launch for one year from 2008 

to 2009, causing a potential gap in space surveillance capabilities. 

Additional funding for SBSS was included in the Air Force Chief 

of Staff’s unfunded priorities list. The committee recommends an increase of $15.0 million in PE 

35910F for SBSS to purchase long-lead hardware to support assembly, integration, and testing in fiscal year 2006. 

Nano-materials manufacturing 

The budget request included $36.9 million in PE 78011F, for industrial preparedness. As research advances lead to robust comVerDate Aug 04 2004 15:24 May 25, 2005 Jkt 021326 PO 00000 Frm 00226 Fmt 6601 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\SR069.XXX SR069
207 

posite material designs assembled from the nano-scale level, manufacturing processes must develop in parallel to expedite production 

and use of new structures. The committee recommends an increase 

in PE 78011F of $4.0 million for nano-materials manufacturing. 

Air Force support systems 

The budget request included $10.3 million in PE 78611F, for support systems development. Fuel tank coatings require periodic inspection for adhesion and corrosion and may demand removal and 

reapplication. Current procedures are costly as well as hazardous 

to maintenance personnel. The committee recommends an increase 

of $2.9 million in PE 78611F to complete development of a semiautonomous robot that would replace personnel in the dangerous 

work inside aircraft fuel tanks and would provide cost savings, particularly in the maintenance of legacy aircraft. 

The Department of Defense’s pursuit of ‘‘cradle to grave’’ weapon 

systems management shows promise in improving supply chains 

and logistics. The committee recommends an increase of $3.0 million in PE 78611F for an aging aircraft logistics management integrated data environment. The integrated system would enable an 

‘‘as-is’’ depiction of the C–5/C–17 weapons systems at any given 

point in time. Logistics and supply chain decision- making improvements support cost savings and increased levels of readiness. The committee further recommends an increase of $1.0 million in 

PE 78611F for the aircraft systems and support infrastructure 

project and for research into five specific focus areas: structure and 

materials; avionics, electronics and software; information technology; environmental compliance; and depot industrial processes. 

Personnel and pay information technology systems 

The committee understands that the Department of Defense 

plans to begin implementing its Defense Integrated Military 

Human Resources System (DIMHRS) for personnel and pay in fiscal year 2006. In development since 1998, this program is intended, 

in part, to address long-standing problems with military personnel 

pay. These problems have only been exacerbated in recent years by 

the call-up of numerous reservists and guardsman to serve in the 

ongoing global war on terrorism. The DIMHRS implementation 

plan for a single consolidated military personnel and pay system 

across the entire Department is a laudable goal, long overdue, and 

one which the committee supports. 

The first phase of the DIMHRS implementation begins in fiscal 

year 2006 with the Army, and is planned to continue through the 

end of fiscal year 2007. Additional phases, or ‘‘spirals,’’ are still 

under development. However, the committee is concerned that the 

program is under funded by $49.0 million in fiscal year 2006. 

The committee has also been briefed on a separate effort planned 

within the Air Force to enhance their legacy personnel and pay system, called Personnel Service Delivery (PSD). This proposed system 

appears to duplicate many of the features and attributes of the 

DIMHRS system already under development. Additionally, the 

PSD program has not yet received certification from the Secretary 

of Defense, as required by section 332 of the Ronald W. Reagan National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2005 (Public Law 

208 

108–375). The budget request included $16.4 million in PE 91220F 

and $25.6 million in Operation and Maintenance, Air Force, for the 

Air Force’s PSD effort. 

The committee is concerned that the Air Force is continuing to 

invest in efforts that duplicate DIMHRS. Therefore, the committee 

recommends a reduction in PE 91220F, of $16.4 million; and a reduction in Operation and Maintenance, Air Force, of $25.6 million 

to eliminate funding for the PSD effort. The committee also recommends an increase in Operation and Maintenance, Defensewide, of $49.0 million for the DIMHRS program. 

Defense-wide 

209 


Insert graphic folio 258 SR69.109
210 


Insert graphic folio 259 SR69.110
211 


Insert graphic folio 260 SR69.111
212 


Insert graphic folio 261 SR69.112
213 


Insert graphic folio 262 SR69.113
214 


Insert graphic folio 263 SR69.114
215 


Insert graphic folio 264 SR69.115
216 


Insert graphic folio 265 SR69.116
217 


Insert graphic folio 266 SR69.117
218 


Insert graphic folio 267 SR69.118
219 


Insert graphic folio 268 SR69.119
220 


Insert graphic folio 269 SR69.120
221 


Insert graphic folio 270 SR69.121
222 

Focus center research program 

The budget request included no funding in PE 60111D8Z, for 

government/industry co-sponsorship of university research. The committee recommends an increase of $4.0 million in PE 

60111D8Z for a component of the focus center research program 

managed by the Director, Defense Research and Engineering. This 

partnership achieved successful transition of technologies to advance capabilities of weapons systems, radars, missile seekers, and 

information networks. The program also supports microelectronics 

research and training of future scientists and engineers. 

Superstructural particle evaluation 

The budget request included $72.5 million in PE 61384BP, for 

chemical and biological defense basic research. Basic science challenges continue to plague efforts to develop comprehensive methods 

for countering threats posed by chemical and biological warfare 

agents. The committee commends the Department of Defense for 

supporting basic research to address both the chemical and biological threat, and recommends an increase of $1.85 million in PE 

61384BP to accelerate promising work in superstructural particle 

evaluation and characterization with targeted reaction analysis 

(SPECTRA). This program would allow for testing of agents at the 

cellular level and the possible rapid development of a series of bioprotection substances. These protection methods could improve survivability and alleviate symptoms of exposure to chemical and biological warfare agents. 

Chemical and biological defense applied research 

The budget request included $187.8 million in PE 62384BP, for 

chemical and biological defense applied research. The Department 

of Defense requires improved prediction models for timely monitoring of exposure to different chemical warfare agents and toxic 

industrial chemicals. The committee recommends an increase of 

$1.2 million in PE 62384BP for an automated man-in-simulant-test 

(MIST) program to facilitate testing and development of a new generation of protective clothing. The new testing capability would 

allow for reliable reproduction of the same test and would lower 

test operating costs and shorten the time between tests. 

The Department requires a flexible analytical tool for bio-defense 

to support force protection and intelligence and threat assessment 

activities. The committee recommends an increase of $5.0 million 

in PE 62384BP for continuing research into the development of 

multipurpose bio-defense immuno-arrays. The immuno-arrays 

would allow for rapid, inexpensive characterization of new and 

novel pathogens and expedited development of countermeasures to 

biological threats, thereby enhancing force protection and threat 

assessment capabilities. 

Current chemical and biological protective suits used by the military have deficiencies, including limited life; limited moisture vapor 

permeability; and the need for post-contamination containment. 

The committee recommends an increase of $2.0 million in PE 

62384BP for development and demonstration of self-decontaminating prototype chemical and biological protective suits, which 

would address some of these limitations. 

223 

One of the objectives of the applied chemical and biological research program is to develop lightweight, effective, and fast agent 

detectors for widespread use. The committee recommends an increase of $2.0 million in PE 62384BP for research and development 

of a portable chemical/biological sensor system using quartz crystal 

microbalance technology. Such a system would have potential application for autonomous vehicles and individual soldiers. 

Mustard gas antidote 

The budget request included $21.5 million in PE 62384BP, for 

medical chemical defense applied research. This program emphasizes the prevention of chemical casualties and addresses capability 

gaps in the area of prophylaxes for chemical warfare agents. The 

committee recommends an increase of $3.0 million in PE 62384BP 

for mustard gas antidote research. The committee commends the 

Department of Defense for current research focused on a mustard 

gas antidote using signal transduction inhibition antioxidant 

liposomes (STIMAL), and notes that STIMAL research has demonstrated the ability to substantially reduce or eliminate the effects 

of a range of chemical and biological weapons. 

Tactical technology 

The budget request included $361.6 million in PE 62702E, for 

tactical technology. The committee recommends a decrease of 

$33.02 million in PE 62702E, including decreases of $6.8 million in 

unjustified growth for two missile programs—agile interceptor and 

guided projectiles; $3.42 million from the riverine crawler underwater vehicle, which would duplicate similar unmanned systems already under development; and $4.8 million from the newly initiated preconflict anticipation and shaping program, which does not 

contain sufficient justification. 

Human performance in hazardous environments 

The budget request included $206.5 million in PE 62716BR, for 

weapons of mass destruction (WMD) defeat, but no funds for a central repository of information on human vulnerabilities to, and performance in, adverse environments which result from weapons’ effects. Command authorities need information regarding immediate 

occupational health and environmental safety implications to protect forces conducting and supporting military operations. The committee recommends an increase of $1.0 million in PE 62716BR for 

demonstration and validation of emerging products, which would 

provide information on human performance in hazardous environments. 

Technology Support Working Group 

The budget request included $55.3 million in PE 63122D8Z for 

combating terrorism technology support. The Technology Support 

Working Group (TSWG) manages efforts under this account that 

focus on interagency rapid prototyping research and development 

programs for combating terrorism technologies in response to user 

requirements. 

Current threats underscore the need to protect bridges, tunnels, 

oil pipelines, and other critical infrastructures against exposure to 

224 

attack. Design engineers lack the basic structural response data for 

retrofit and new construction for many of these unique and important structures. The committee recommends an increase of $8.0 

million for a defense against explosive effects program to close existing capability gaps, to develop infrastructure protection guidelines, and to validate and enhance existing and new analytical tools 

for use by armed services and homeland defense officials. 

Genetic engineering of bio-agents may provide a powerful countermeasure to bio-detection systems currently in use and in development, and may also increase vaccine and therapy defeat capabilities. The committee recommends an increase of $3.0 million in PE 

63122D8Z for the bio-engineered agent assessment tool, which has 

the potential to deliver a unique set of real-time chemical and biological identification and analysis capabilities, to address the threat 

of biological terrorism which employs engineered agents. 

The committee recommends an increase of $2.0 million in PE 

63122D8Z for the development of fuel cell technologies for continuity of operations missions. Fuel cell technology has potential 

advantages over traditional backup power options as it could provide continuous, low maintenance, extended operation, and is useable in confined spaces. 

Radiation detection technology 

The budget request included $6.6 million in PE 63160BR for proliferation prevention and defeat radiation detection technology. The 

committee recommends an increase of $3.0 million in PE 63160BR 

for procuring glass scintillation fiber radiation detectors and developing new portable applications, including backpack detectors, panels for aircraft, and detectors included in clothing systems. The 

committee further recommends an increase of $1.0 million in PE 

63160BR for the development of a state-of-the-art radiation portal 

monitor using High Purity Germanium technology that will surpass the performance and accuracy of portal monitors currently in 

use. The committee notes the importance of developing higher quality, more cost-effective nuclear radiation detectors to enhance our 

ability to detect and identify hazardous materials that pose a proliferation threat. 

Ballistic missile defense reductions 

The budget request included $136.3 million in PE 63175C for 

ballistic missile defense technology; $455.2 million in PE 63889C 

for ballistic missile defense products; $447.0 million in PE 63890C 

for ballistic missile defense systems core; and $345.0 million in PE 

63891C for special programs—MDA. The committee notes that 

within each of these program elements there is funding specified 

for activities in fiscal year 2008 and beyond that lack sufficient 

budget justification. 

The committee recommends a decrease of $25.0 million in PE 

63175C for ballistic missile defense technology; a decrease of $30.0 

million in PE 63889C for ballistic missile defense products; a decrease of $30.0 million in PE 63890C for ballistic missile defense 

systems core; and a decrease of $50.0 million in PE 63891C for special programs—MDA. 

225 

Massively parallel optical interconnects 

The budget request included $136.0 million in PE 63175C for 

ballistic missile defense technology. 

Massively parallel optical interconnects for micro-satellite data 

communications is an advanced technology that would greatly increase the reliability and precision of satellite guidance for advanced tactical missiles. The committee is aware of the key role 

played by satellite guided-precision munitions during Operation 

Iraqi Freedom, and supports efforts to improve upon this capability 

in a timely manner. 

The committee recommends an increase of $2.0 million in PE 

63175C to enable the technology associated with massively parallel 

optical interconnects to advance to the deployment stage. 

Missile technology 

The budget request included $75.9 million in PE 63286E, for advanced aerospace systems. The committee recommends a decrease 

of $6.4 million in PE 63286E for the Long Gun program. The committee notes that this project duplicates the Navy’s affordable 

weapon system effort, which is not yet part of long-range Navy acquisition plans. There is no validated requirement for the effort 

and no funding programmed in the Navy budget to transition the 

technology. 

Anthrax and plague oral vaccine research and development 

The budget request included $63.1 million in PE 63384BP, for 

advanced technology development specific to medical bio-defense. 

The committee supports the Department of Defense’s efforts under 

this account to develop and test safe and effective prophylaxes and 

therapies for pre- and post-exposure to biological threats and 

agents. The committee recommends an increase of $3.75 million in 

PE 63384BP for Phase I clinical trials and initial production of the 

oral anthrax plague vaccine. This effort parallels the Department’s 

plague vaccine development program and may provide superior 

protection against pneumonic plague. 

Miniaturized RAMAN chemical identification system 

The budget request included $164.5 million in PE 63384BP, for 

the chemical and biological defense advanced technology program. 

The ability to rapidly characterize substances such as explosives, 

chemical agents, toxic industrial chemicals, narcotics, and other 

hazardous materials under a variety of conditions poses difficult 

challenges. Combining real-time, reliable sensing and identification 

techniques into a hand-held device has been an even more complicated task. 

The committee recommends an increase of $4.0 million in PE 

63384BP for accelerated development of a small, lightweight chemical identification system, which uses the RAMAN spectroscopy 

technology. These additional resources are intended to ensure a 

power supply that lasts nearly twice as long as currently available, 

in a device that is under one quarter the weight but which maintains the substance identification speed of larger stationary machines. 

226 

Diminishing manufacturing sources 

The budget request included $22.4 million in PE 63712S, for general logistics research and development technology demonstrations. 

The military faces challenges in maintaining a supply of replacement and repair parts for legacy systems, a costly problem with 

readiness implications and no coordinated solution. The committee 

recommends an increase of $1.5 million in PE 63712S for continuation of a project designed to create a single repository of information for addressing the diminishing manufacturing source problem. 

The Department of Defense needs a capability to develop and 

evaluate methods and processes for manufacturing printed circuit 

boards with buried passive components and other advanced technologies relevant to warfighter needs. The committee recommends 

an increase of $3.0 million in PE 63712S for the embedded passives 

research and development test bed to enable advanced domestic capability in the military crucial technology area of electronic systems. 

The committee further recommends an increase of $3.0 million in 

PE 63712S to support the manufacturing supply chain and for increased involvement of small- and medium-sized firms in meeting 

surge production requirements. 

Vehicle fuel cell program 

The budget request included $22.4 million in PE 63712S, for general logistics research and development technology demonstrations. 

A recent Defense Logistics Agency (DLA) report entitled ‘‘Potential 

Use of Hydrogen as a Defense Logistics Fuel’’ noted that hydrogen 

power may offer benefits to the warfighter such as stealth and 

sustainment and could provide multiple potential sources of fuel. 

The committee recommends an increase of $7.0 million in PE 

63712S for acceleration of the Department of Defense vehicle fuel 

cell program, particularly in development of a hydrogen logistics 

fuel for use in both tactical and nontactical military vehicles. Consistent with the recommendations made by DLA, the committee directs the Secretary of Defense to establish a Hydrogen Logistics 

Initiative to develop a comprehensive and integrated strategy and 

plan for the appropriate use of hydrogen and acquisition of hydrogen to meet Department requirements for the future. 

Advanced electronics 

The budget request included $214.4 million in PE 63739E, for ad- vanced electronics. The committee recommends a decrease of $10.0 

million in PE 63739E, including decreases of $3.0 million from the 

combat optical fiber technology program, which requires additional 

fundamental research prior to developmental work; $5.0 million 

from the networked microsystems program; and $2.0 million from 

the visible short wave infra-red photon counting project. These programs are new starts in fiscal year 2006. The committee recommends spending levels more appropriate for the start-up year of 

such programs. 

Small scale systems packaging 

The budget request included $214.4 million in PE 63739E, for advanced electronics technology. Small scale systems, devices and 

227 

interconnections on the order of micro- and nano-scale in size are 

becoming more frequent components in military systems. Research 

on individual components shows promise, but efforts at integration 

of small scale components systems are not keeping pace with advances in research. The committee recommends an increase of $2.0 

million in PE 63739E to address challenges in packaging small 

scale components into systems. 

Advanced ferrite antenna 

The budget request included $163.6 million in PE 63750D8Z, for 

advanced concept technology demonstrations. Use of the advanced 

ferrite antenna would allow replacement of large antennas and reduction of the antenna footprint. The committee recommends an increase of $2.0 million in PE 63750D8Z for crossed field radiation 

technology to test the advanced ferrite antenna to meet Navy and 

military standards. 

Communications and control alert framework 

The budget request included $163.6 million in PE 63750D8Z, for 

advanced concept technology demonstrations. The Department of 

Defense’s complex command and control structure poses management challenges critical to the successful prosecution of any single 

mission. Important collaborations with other agencies and governments create further complications. The layers of permission for 

sharing of information, combined with time-sensitive needs to disseminate data across networks and between operating domains, 

presents an ideal project for exploration by the advanced concepts 

technology demonstration process. The committee recommends an increase of $4.7 million in PE 

63750D8Z to bridge the gap between initial research on the command and control alert framework system and full accomplishment 

of design objectives for testing of a comprehensive, flexible datasharing system. The alert system would allow local data managers 

to control information access and would enable participants to filter 

data streams and reduce information overload. 

Flexible JP–8 military fuel certification 

The budget request included $163.6 million in PE 63750D8Z, for 

advanced concept technology demonstrations. The Department of 

Defense continues to support efforts aimed at near- and far-term 

solutions for energy sources, particularly those for transportation. 

One such research program involves development of a clean jet fuel 

source. In support of efforts to examine new forms of energy and 

to meet the Department’s clean fuel targets, the committee recommends an increase of $18.0 million in PE 63750D8Z for final 

certification of a flexible JP–8 military fuel pilot program to facilitate transition to an advanced concept technology demonstration. 

Prevention and detection of cyber threats 

The budget request included $189.8 million in PE 63755D8Z, for 

the high performance computing modernization program. The 

President’s Information Technology Advisory Committee noted in a 

February 2005 report entitled ‘‘Cyber Security: A Crisis of 

Prioritization’’ that ‘‘the information technology infrastructure of 

228 

the United States, which is now vital for communication, commerce, and control of our physical infrastructure, is highly vulnerable to terrorist and criminal attacks.’’ The Department of Defense 

uses networks to communicate with bases, research facilities, and 

other installations. These networks are vulnerable to a number of 

types of attack that could be used to break into communication 

lines and to substitute false information for authentic commands. 

The committee recommends an increase of $1.5 million in PE 

63755D8Z to support increased research into addressing cyberbased emerging threats and growing challenges presented by various forms of computer-facilitated attack. 

Simulation center upgrade 

The budget request included $189.8 million in PE 63755D8Z, for 

the high performance computing modernization program. The Department of Defense must possess the latest, state-of-the-art computing equipment and capabilities, particularly for the processing 

and storage of classified data. While the Department has requested 

funds to operate facilities charged with development, testing, and 

integration of strategic defense technologies and simulations, no 

funding is requested for equipment upgrades. The committee recommends an increase of $3.5 million in PE 63755D8Z for upgrades 

to the Space and Missile Defense Command simulation center to 

meet computational demands for end-to-end simulation, testing, 

and evaluation of advanced interceptors and sensors. 

Land warfare technology 

The budget request included $139.1 million in PE 63764E, for 

land warfare technology. The committee recommends a decrease of 

$47.0 million in PE 63764E due to unjustified program growth and 

excessive funding levels for new starts. Specifically, the committee 

recommends decreases of $15.0 million in the future combat systems support program, which would have increased by 66 percent 

in one year under the budget request; $6.0 million in the multimodal missile program, for which $12.4 million was requested for 

a program in the concept stage; $6.0 million from a non-lethal 

weapons program new start, which should more closely follow the 

needs of the Joint Non-Lethal Weapons Directorate; and $6.0 million from the tactical urban operations program, to promote an effort more focused specifically on the particular needs of the urban 

warfighter. 

Network centric warfare technology 

The budget request included $136.9 million in PE 63766E, for 

network centric warfare technology. The committee recommends a 

decrease of $3.0 million in PE 63766E from the multi-dimensional 

mobility robot program, a newly initiated program that duplicates 

other unmanned ground equipment development programs. 

Sensor technology 

The budget request included $189.5 million in PE 63767E, for 

sensor technology. The committee recommends a decrease of $5.0 

million in PE 63767E from the network centric sensing engageVerDate Aug 04 2004 15:24 May 25, 2005 Jkt 021326 PO 00000 Frm 00248 Fmt 6601 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\SR069.XXX SR069
229 

ment programs, due to unjustified program growth and duplication 

of ongoing sensor integration work. 

Advanced tactical laser 

The budget request included $61.8 million in Research, Development, Test, and Evaluation, Defense-wide, for Special Operations 

Advanced Technology Development, in PE 116407BB, for continuing development of the advanced tactical laser (ATL). 

The ATL Advanced Concepts Technology Demonstration is a 

long-standing effort to weaponize directed energy technology into 

an existing tactical platform. While a potentially promising concept, the program has faced formidable technical challenges and 

continues to encounter new challenges, especially in the area of 

power generation to satisfy the high energy requirements to power 

the weapon system. Proposed funding for the program has increased considerably in fiscal year 2006, and is inconsistent with 

the technical challenges remaining to be solved before the program 

can move forward. 

The committee recommends a decrease of $15.0 million in 

PE116407BB, while the goals of the program are realigned and remaining technical challenges associated with the advanced tactical 

laser program are addressed. 

Mark V patrol boat replacement craft prototype 

The budget request included $104.3 million in Research, Development, Test, and Evaluation, Defense-wide, for Special Operations 

Advanced Technology Development, in PE 116402BB, but did not 

include funding to complete the development, testing, and evaluation of the Mark V patrol boat replacement craft prototype. 

The Mark V patrol boat is an important component of the Naval 

Special Warfare Command’s overall special operations capabilities, 

but has proven to be very hard on the special operators who operate the boat or utilize it for insertion and extraction of special operations forces. The incidence of stress fractures and spinal injuries 

associated with the rough ride of a Mark V operating in medium 

to heavy seas has been very high. The Commander, U.S. Special 

Operations Command, has expressed concerns and initiated actions 

to improve the performance of the current Mark V through the introduction of shock-mitigating seats and to begin development of a 

replacement craft. A new design has been developed and a prototype craft incorporating composite technologies, shock-mitigation 

techniques, and improved hull design is near completion. Additional funding is required to complete testing, and evaluation of the 

prototype craft. 

The committee recommends an increase of $1.5 million in PE 

116402BB, for final development, testing, and evaluation of the 

Mark V patrol boat replacement craft prototype. 

Special operations portable power source program 

The budget request did not include funding for the development 

of solid oxide fuel cell systems for special operators. Such systems 

are designed to reduce the weight burden of batteries by a factor 

of 10. Current battery systems are large and heavy, burdening the 

230 

logistical chain, and limiting operators and the flight ranges of 

their unmanned aerial vehicles. 

The committee recommends an increase of $5.0 million in Research, Development, Test, and Evaluation, Defense-wide, for Special Operations Advanced Technology Development, in PE 

116402BB, for the portable power source program. 

Voice activated handheld translator 

The budget request did not include funding for the development 

of a voice activated handheld translator for special operations 

forces. This technology, deployed in Afghanistan in 2002, allows 

special operators to communicate with local populations when they 

do not speak the local language or have a reliable linguist with 

them. Research is required to refine, test, and demonstrate the 

translator capabilities, including two-way translation. The committee recommends an increase of $2.3 million in Research, Development, Test, and Evaluation, Defense-wide, for Special Operations Advanced Technology Development, in PE 

116408BB, for development of a voice activated handheld translator. 

Aegis ballistic missile defense 

The budget request included $3.3 billion in PE 63882C for the 

ballistic missile defense midcourse defense segment, of which approximately $811.2 million is included for the Aegis ballistic missile defense (BMD) system. 

The Aegis BMD element is intended to provide U.S. surface combatants the capability to detect, track, intercept, and destroy shortto intermediate-range ballistic missiles in the ascent, midcourse, 

and terminal phases of flight. The committee notes that the Aegis 

BMD system has demonstrated capability through a rigorous test 

program that includes five out of six successful flight intercepts of 

short-range ballistic missiles between 2002 and 2005, with the last 

test conducted under operationally realistic conditions. 

Aegis BMD will provide missile defense protection for U.S. deployed forces, allies, and friends against the most imminent 

threats. The Commander, U.S. Pacific Command testified in March 

2005 before the Committee on Armed Services that: (1) the threat 

posed by ballistic missiles in his area of responsibility is growing; 

(2) a capability to protect our forces with an effective tiered system 

against ballistic missiles remains ‘‘a key capability for the future 

and is a top priority for development;’’ and (3) our production inventory of PAC–3s and SM–3 missiles ‘‘must pace the increasing 

threat.’’ 

The committee recommends an increase of $75.0 million in PE 

63882C for improvements to the Aegis BMD system and to accelerate production of SM–3 missiles. The committee makes these recommendations in light of the successful Aegis BMD test program 

and mindful of the importance of keeping pace with the growing 

threat. The committee directs that these funds be used to: (1) purchase long-lead materials for the Aegis BMD signal processor to 

provide significant system discrimination capabilities against missiles with separating warheads; (2) purchase additional test equipment necessary to accelerate SM–3 missile production rates; (3) 

231 

provide long-lead funding for an additional 15 SM–3 missiles to 

begin delivery in fiscal year 2007; (4) accelerate implementation of 

the engage-on-remote and launch-on-remote upgrades; and (5) accelerate integration of the two-color seeker for the SM–3 kill vehicle. 

Ground-based midcourse ballistic missile defense 

The budget request included $3.3 billion in PE 63882C for the 

ballistic missile defense midcourse segment, of which approximately $2.3 billion is for the ground-based midcourse defense 

(GMD) segment to cover continued development, ground and flight 

testing, fielding, and support. 

Consistent with the National Missile Defense Act of 1999 (Public 

Law 106–38), the committee continues to support fielding of the 

GMD element as part of the missile defense test bed and for use 

in an emergency. The committee notes that the Commander, U.S. 

Strategic Command, and the Department of Defense Director for 

Operational Test and Evaluation endorse this dual-use approach 

for continuing development and fielding of this important defensive 

capability. 

The committee is aware of the successful flight intercept tests 

achieved by the developmental prototype ground-based interceptor 

over the past five years. The committee is concerned, however, 

about the inability of the Missile Defense Agency (MDA) to complete two recent GMD flight tests, using the operationally configured interceptor, as well as the lengthy turnaround time for GMD 

tests. This seems to indicate, according to the acting Director for 

Operational Test and Evaluation, that ‘‘there is a quality problem.’’ 

The committee commends the Director of the MDA for establishing 

an Independent Review Team to assess recent test failures and to 

improve mission assurance. According to the preliminary findings 

of the review team, as recounted by the Director of MDA during 

an April 7, 2005, hearing of the Subcommittee on Strategic Forces 

of the Committee on Armed Services, MDA needs to pay greater attention to the test certification process and devote more resources 

to integrated ground testing. 

The committee recommends an increase of $100.0 million in PE 

63882C specifically to enhance the testing program for the GMD 

element in accordance with the findings of the Independent Review 

Team. The committee directs that these funds be used toward purchases of additional ground test missile units, enhanced integrated 

ground test capabilities, more comprehensive component testing, 

and other items for GMD testing. The Director of the MDA is to 

provide a report to the congressional defense committees by January 15, 2006, indicating specifically how this increase will be allocated. 

Miniaturized carbon monoxide oxidation technology 

The budget request included $100.8 million in PE 63884BP, for 

chemical and biological defense advanced technology demonstrations. Urban and other combat environments often produce situations in which warfighters confront fire and carbon monoxide (CO) 

threats such as in caves, bunkers, tunnels, burning oil wells, aircraft, vehicles, or structures and buildings. The Department of DeVerDate Aug 04 2004 15:24 May 25, 2005 Jkt 021326 PO 00000 Frm 00251 Fmt 6601 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\SR069.XXX SR069
232 

fense currently lacks gas mask canisters or small escape devices 

that contain CO filters and protection. A small, lightweight, longlasting CO removal technology would increase protection and utility of existing systems and would add value to new systems under 

development. The committee recommends an increase of $4.3 million in PE 63884BP to complete testing, development, and evaluation of the Mini-COT technology to meet the Department of Defense’s need for CO protection. 

Airborne Infrared System 

The budget request included $529.8 million in PE 63884C for 

ballistic missile defense sensors, but no funding for the Airborne 

Infrared System (AIRS). 

AIRS is a system of infrared and visible sensors, a surveillance 

radar and adjunct data processing and storage that can track ballistic missiles and their warheads in all phases of flight. The committee believes that such a system, if and when deployed, could 

provide important test, operational, and technical intelligence capabilities in support of ballistic missile defense. 

The committee recommends an increase of $10.0 million in PE 

63884C for AIRS research and development. This increase will 

allow the Missile Defense Agency to proceed with final engineering 

development and ‘‘in-line’’ demonstrations of system connectivity, a 

closed loop fire control system, and prototype design for integration 

on manned or unmanned vehicles. 

Kinetic Energy Interceptor 

The budget request included $229.7 million in PE 63886C for 

Ballistic Missile Defense System Interceptors, of which $218.7 million is for Kinetic Energy Interceptor (KEI) block 2010/2012. 

The committee notes that the KEI effort has been restructured 

to serve as risk mitigation for the Airborne Laser (ABL), which has 

been chosen as the primary boost-phase intercept program. Accordingly, the Missile Defense Agency (MDA) has reduced funding for 

KEI by approximately $883.0 million in fiscal year 2006 and $5.0 

billion over fiscal years 2006–2009. MDA has built into the KEI 

program a one-year delay in first flight to fiscal year 2008 in order 

to focus efforts on demonstrating critical technologies and reducing 

development risks. This new flight test date coincides with the 

plans of the MDA for a lethal shoot down of a target missile with 

ABL. The committee understands that should ABL fail to demonstrate a lethal shoot down in fiscal year 2008, a decision could 

be made at that point to switch to KEI as the primary boost-phase 

interceptor. 

In light of the decision by the MDA to focus on ABL as the prime 

boost-phase defense system, the committee believes the funding request for KEI risk reduction efforts is excessive. The committee recommends a decrease of $50.0 million in PE 63886C for KEI; and 

recommends that remaining funds be directed toward reducing 

high-risk technology challenges in the areas of booster thrust, differentiating between plume and missile hard body, and thrust vector control. 

233 

Military mail screening system development and demonstration 

The budget request included $280.9 million in PE 604384BP for 

chemical/biological defense system development and demonstration. 

The committee recommends an increase of $1.8 million in PE 

604384BP to validate system design and performance for fielded 

chemical agent detection and biological agent sampling systems to 

be used at military mail centers and post offices. 

Elsewhere in this report, the committee recommends a provision 

that would require the Secretary of Defense to promptly develop 

and implement a plan to ensure that mail within the military mail 

system is safe for delivery, to include the screening of all mail in 

order to detect the presence of biological, chemical or radiological 

weapons, agents or pathogens, or explosive devices. The committee 

recommends authorizing additional funding for this purpose in fiscal year 2006 to ensure that resources are available to begin implementation of the plan as soon as possible. 

UAV systems and operations validation program 

The budget request included $128.8 million in PE 64940D8Z, for 

central test and evaluation investment development. Testing of unmanned aerial vehicles (UAVs) for autonomous control and safety 

in piloted airspace would allow for full operational use of these systems in evolving battlefields that require both manned and unmanned air support. The committee recommends an increase of 

$5.0 million in PE 64940D8Z for UAV systems and operations validation program to facilitate short- and long-range flight testing of 

autonomous systems. 

Foreign supplier assessment center 

The budget request included $35.7 million in Research, Development, Test, and Evaluation, Defense-wide, for foreign comparative 

testing, but did not include funding for the Foreign Supplier Assessment Center (FSAC) concept. 

The FSAC concept was established to assess potential foreign 

suppliers wanting to provide products and services, including components for weapon systems, automation hardware, and various 

forms of software to the Department of Defense. The FSAC is fulfilling a critical need to identify and categorize potential foreign 

suppliers; conduct tests and evaluation of products and services for 

appropriate security purposes; and develop recommendations and 

risk mitigation plans. However, the full requirement to assess foreign supplier of critical defense components will not be realized 

without significant additional investment. 

The committee recommends an increase of $10.0 million in PE 

65710D8Z, for the continued expansion and operation of the FSAC 

concept. 

Operationally responsive space payloads 

The budget request included $19.9 million in PE 65799D8Z for 

the Office of Force Transformation in the Office of the Secretary of 

Defense. 

As noted in the Senate report accompanying S. 2400 (S. Rept. 

108–260) of the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 

234 

2005, the committee believes that acquisition of inexpensive launch 

vehicles and smaller satellites provide the promise of enhancing 

the effectiveness of U.S. military and intelligence space operations 

and mitigating some of the long-standing development problems 

that have afflicted U.S. space programs over the past decade. In 

support of this effort, OFT has sponsored the development of experimental satellites intended to demonstrate the rapid design and 

fabrication of operationally useful satellite payloads. 

The committee notes that insufficient funding is requested for 

fiscal year 2006 to continue development of a modular, standard 

bus and complete the experimentation necessary to demonstrate 

tactical satellite capabilities. The committee recommends an increase of $20.0 million dollars in PE 65799D8Z for the development 

of operationally responsive payloads, to include funding for payloads, satellite busses, integration, command and control, and joint 

warfighter experimentation. 

Section 913 of the Ronald W. Reagan National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2005 (Public Law 108–375) directed the 

Secretary of Defense to create a separate, dedicated program element for operationally responsive national security payloads and 

buses. The committee notes that such a program element was not 

included in the fiscal year 2006 budget request, but has subsequently been created by the Department of Defense as PE 

62001D8Z with the title: joint operational small satellites. The 

committee fully expects that the $20.0 million increase in PE 

65799D8Z will be applied toward PE 62001D8Z for the funding of 

responsive satellites to provide direct support to the joint operational and tactical level warfighter. 

Industrial preparedness 

The budget request included $18.2 million in PE 78011S, for industrial preparedness. The committee notes that the laser additive 

manufacturing process rapidly produced titanium wing pylons to 

replace aluminum parts, which experienced mechanical problems 

during sustained combat operations. The committee recommends 

an increase of $5.0 million in PE 78011S for application of the laser 

additive manufacturing process to repair parts and to produce new 

parts for other aerospace-grade components that face similar degradation. The current processes and materials used for production 

of these parts are time consuming, expensive, and require long-lead 

times, which may negatively impact readiness. 

The committee further recommends an increase of $1.5 million in 

PE 78011S for research on improved manufacturing processes for 

defense-related technologies, including sensors, energy systems, 

and nanotechnology. 

Special operations wireless management and control project 

The budget request included $33.2 million in Research, Development, Test, and Evaluation, Defense-wide, for Special Operations 

Intelligence Systems Development, in PE 116405BB, including 

$11.7 million for the Joint Threat Warning System (JTWS), but did 

not include funding to develop new capabilities for the JTWS in the 

evolving wireless communications environment. 

235 

The special operations wireless management and control project 

will continue development of capabilities that can be integrated 

into the JTWS to provide special operations forces with tactical capabilities to maintain situational awareness of the wireless communications environment being used by potential adversaries. The 

JTWS is one of the highest priorities for the Commander, U.S. Special Operations Command, for additional funding. 

The committee recommends an increase of $2.5 million in PE 

116405BB, to continue development of a wireless management and 

control capability for the JTWS. 

Maritime unmanned aerial vehicle sensor 

The budget request included $66.3 million in Research, Development, Test, and Evaluation, Defense-wide, for Special Operations 

Forces (SOF) Operational Enhancements, in PE 116408BB, but did 

not include funding to develop new sensor capabilities for the maritime unmanned aerial vehicle (MUAV). 

An urgent requirement for a new signals intelligence sensor for 

the MUAV was validated after submission of the fiscal year 2006 

President’s budget request. This sensor would provide a critical 

new capability for the MUAV and enhance the operational effectiveness of SOF. This MUAV is one of the highest priorities of the 

Commander, U.S. Special Operations Command, for additional 

funding. 

The committee recommends an increase of $4.9 million in PE 

116408BB, for the development of a MUAV sensor. 

Lightweight portable solar panels 

The budget request did not include funding for lightweight portable solar panels. These flexible lightweight panels serve as portable chargers, converting sunlight to electricity to keep batteries 

constantly charged. This eliminates the need for operators to carry 

heavy battery packs during emergency and remote operations. The 

rugged folding panels are easy to carry and deploy, and they provide power even if damaged, or employed in partial shade. 

The committee recommends an increase of $2.5 million in Research, Development, Test, and Evaluation, Defense-wide, for Special Operations Forces Operational Enhancements, in PE 

116408BB, for lightweight solar panels. 

Items of Special Interest 

Canopy hard-coats 

The committee believes that industry has made a marked advancement in the development of canopy hard-coats that may significantly extend the life and reduce the cost of canopies used on 

naval aircraft. Therefore, the committee urges the Secretary of the 

Navy to accelerate the testing of new canopy hard-coats currently 

in development under the auspices of the Patuxent Naval Air Station Materials Laboratory. Furthermore, the committee directs the 

Secretary to evaluate these hard-coats on canopies provided by 

Navy canopy suppliers. 

236 

CH–53X helicopter development 

The committee recognizes the essential contribution that heavylift assets make both in wartime and peacetime and is concerned 

by the intense usage of current assets in Afghanistan, the Horn of 

Africa, and Iraq. In 2003, an independent analysis of alternatives 

concluded that a program to remanufacture the existing aircraft 

would cause the Navy to shut down one-third of the Marine Corps 

heavy-lift squadrons for up to 5 years due to the number of aircraft 

that would be diverted from fleet squadrons to the remanufacturing 

program. The Navy decided to pursue a new production strategy in 

accordance with that recommendation. 

The Joint Requirements Oversight Council approved a CH–53X 

operational requirements document on December 9, 2004. Marine 

Corps witnesses testified before the Committee on Armed Services 

that the CH–53X is an urgent warfighting requirement, that all alternatives have been analyzed, and that there are no other suitable 

alternatives to new manufacture of the CH–53X. 

The committee supports the requirement for CH–53X new production program but has concerns regarding program execution 

and schedule. The Department of Defense Appropriations Act for 

Fiscal Year 2005 (Public Law 108–287) appropriated $102.3 million 

for a risk reduction initiative in the CH–53X development program. 

Since March 18, 2005, the Assistant Secretary of the Navy for Research, Development, and Acquisition (ASN (RDA)) has released 

roughly $50.0 million of these funds. The ASN (RDA) is withholding the remaining funds until an independent review team can 

assess whether the funding in the Future Years Defense Program 

is sufficient to execute the CH–53X program. 

The committee supports this program. However, the committee is 

concerned that the Navy is not moving aggressively to execute risk 

reduction actions, thus potentially delaying the fielding of this critical system. The committee also appreciates the concerns expressed 

by the ASN (RDA) about program affordability. The committee, 

therefore, encourages the Navy to move expeditiously to resolve 

these concerns and to release the remaining $52.3 million in risk 

reduction funding so that the requested fiscal year 2006 program 

can be completed. 

Construction of Navy Research Vessels 

The budget request included $356.9 million in PE 61153N, for defense research sciences, including $4.0 million for design of the 

next generation of ocean research vessels for the University National Ocean Laboratory (UNOLS) fleet. The academic research 

community uses UNOLS to conduct experiments and research for 

the Navy. The committee is concerned with the Navy’s plans to 

fund the construction of academic research vessels in the basic 

science account in fiscal year 2007. While the ocean class research 

vessel, a key research tool, provides the Navy with a robust understanding of its battlespace, such diversion of research funds would 

adversely affect the goals of the innovative research account. 

The committee authorizes the $4.0 million requested in PE 

61153N for design of the new research vessel in fiscal year 2006, 

but directs the Navy to request the planned $25.0 million in fiscal 

year 2007 for ship construction funds in the Navy Shipbuilding and 

237 

Conversion account. The committee expects that the Navy will continue to use the Shipbuilding and Conversion account to provide for 

the recapitalization of ocean class research vessels in the Future 

Years Defense Program. 

Department of Defense computer science research 

The committee is concerned that the Department of Defense is 

reducing its investment in long-term computer science research, 

without due consideration of the potential negative ramifications of 

such reductions on the development of next generation networking, 

information technology, and information assurance systems on 

which our military will depend in the future. The committee notes 

that the President’s Information Technology Advisory Committee 

and the Defense Science Board have both released reports this year 

that call attention to the potential impacts of reduced funding on 

the part of the Department in fundamental computer science. 

The committee directs the Undersecretary of Defense for Acquisition, Logistics and Technology to carefully examine the long-term 

practical and policy implications of the Department’s investment 

strategy for computing research and to provide the outcome of this 

review to the congressional defense committees with the fiscal year 

2007 budget request. The review should include an explanation of 

the Department’s role in the overall federal computing research 

portfolio and a review of the Department’s structure and investment plan for these programs. 

Unmanned aerial vehicles for resupply missions 

The committee notes that dedicated unmanned aerial vehicles for 

movement of equipment and supplies could support Army expeditionary forces while reducing logistics, procurement, and operational costs. The committee directs the Secretary of the Army to 

provide to the congressional defense committees by April 1, 2006, 

a report on the requirements, technical feasibility, and cost of integrating unmanned aerial vehicles for resupply into its future force 

unmanned aviation concepts. 

(239) 

TITLE III—OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE 

Explanation of tables 

The following tables provide the program-level detailed guidance 

for the funding authorized in title III of this Act. The tables also 

display the funding requested by the administration in the fiscal 

year 2006 budget request for operation and maintenance programs, 

and indicate those programs for which the committee either increased or decreased the requested amounts. As in the past, the administration may not exceed the authorized amounts (as set forth 

in the tables or, if unchanged from the administration request, as 

set forth in budget justification documents of the Department of 

Defense), without a reprogramming action in accordance with established procedures. Unless noted in this report, funding changes 

to the budget request are made without prejudice. 

240 


Insert graphic folio 291 SR69.122
241 


Insert graphic folio 292 SR69.123
242 


Insert graphic folio 293 SR69.124
243 


Insert graphic folio 294 SR69.125
244 


Insert graphic folio 295 SR69.126
245 


Insert graphic folio 296 SR69.127
246 


Insert graphic folio 297 SR69.128
247 


Insert graphic folio 298 SR69.129
248 


Insert graphic folio 299 SR69.130
249 


Insert graphic folio 300 SR69.131
250 


Insert graphic folio 301 SR69.132
251 


Insert graphic folio 302 SR69.133
252 


Insert graphic folio 303 SR69.134
253 


Insert graphic folio 304 SR69.135
254 


Insert graphic folio 305 SR69.136
255 


Insert graphic folio 306 SR69.137
256 


Insert graphic folio 307 SR69.138
257 


Insert graphic folio 308 SR69.139
258 


Insert graphic folio 309 SR69.140
259 


Insert graphic folio 310 SR69.141
260 


Insert graphic folio 311 SR69.142
261 


Insert graphic folio 312 SR69.143
262 


Insert graphic folio 313 SR69.144
263 


Insert graphic folio 314 SR69.145
264 


Insert graphic folio 315 SR69.146
265 


Insert graphic folio 316 SR69.147
266 


Insert graphic folio 317 SR69.148
267 


Insert graphic folio 318 SR69.149
268 


Insert graphic folio 319 SR69.150
269 


Insert graphic folio 320 SR69.151
270 


Insert graphic folio 321 SR69.152
271 


Insert graphic folio 322 SR69.153
272 


Insert graphic folio 323 SR69.154
273 


Insert graphic folio 324 SR69.155
274 


Insert graphic folio 325 SR69.156
275 


Insert graphic folio 326 SR69.157
276 


Insert graphic folio 327 SR69.158
277 

Subtitle A—Authorization of Appropriations 

Subtitle B—Environmental Provisions 

Elimination and simplification of certain items required in 

the annual report on environmental quality programs 

and other environmental activities (sec. 311) 

The committee recommends a provision that would modify section 2706 of title 10, United States Code, to eliminate and simplify 

portions of the annual report on environmental quality programs 

and other environmental activities. The recommended changes 

would remove the requirement to list planned or ongoing projects 

which exceed $1.5 million dollars. The reporting of fines and penalties against the Department of Defense would be simplified to a 

trend analysis and a list of all such fines or penalties that exceed 

$500,000. The recommended changes would also simplify the reporting of the amounts expended and expected to be expended for 

environmental activities overseas. 

The committee believes that these modifications will make the 

gathering and reporting of the data less burdensome and more efficient while still maintaining the necessary detail to ensure adequate oversight. 

Payment of certain private cleanup costs in connection with 

the Defense Environmental Restoration Program (sec. 

312) 

The committee recommends a provision that would allow the Secretary of Defense to execute environmental restoration agreements 

with owners of covenant properties. Under section 120(h) of the 

Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act (CERCLA) of 1980, title 42, United States Code section 

9620(h), the United States is required to provide a deed covenant 

guaranteeing it will perform remediation of contamination discovered after a property transfer. Therefore, the Department of Defense has permanent, irrevocable liability for cleanup of any contamination on former Department property that was unknown and 

discovered after the transfer. However, there is no current authority for the Department to pay a land owner their costs for undertaking remedial action on their own. 

Currently, when an owner discovers contamination on their covenant property, they must notify the service from which they purchased the covenant property. The services then respond to each 

covenant property in the order of risk and health-based 

prioritization. This leaves many landowners without an efficient 

remedy and the potential burden and cost of pursuing a remedy in 

court. The owner may be forced to choose this latter approach if 

they have already cleaned up the covenant property, and they are 

seeking to be reimbursed. This approach can be more expensive to 

U.S. taxpayers, since the covenant property owner may cleanup the 

site to standards beyond what is necessary or appropriate and then 

seek full reimbursement in the courts. 

The committee recognizes that potential land purchasers, such as 

developers, are becoming increasingly apprehensive about purchasing former Department property. This may threaten the sucVerDate Aug 04 2004 15:24 May 25, 2005 Jkt 021326 PO 00000 Frm 00297 Fmt 6601 Sfmt 6601 E:\HR\OC\SR069.XXX SR069
278 

cessful transfer of the Department’s inventory after the 2005 Base 

Realignment and Closure round and frustrate economic redevelopment efforts. This provision would allow the Department to enter 

into agreements with the owners of covenant property. The covenant property owner can accept the agreement or not, at their discretion. The agreement would set out the process the landowner 

would follow if contamination is later found on the covenant property. The agreement would resolve such issues as: notice to the 

Federal Government, time limits to reply, cleanup standards to be 

used (although the agreement may not change the cleanup standards applicable to the site as established by law), and the reimbursement process. 

Subtitle C—Other Matters 

Aircraft carriers (sec. 321) 

The committee recommends a provision that would make $288.0 

million of Operation & Maintenance, Navy (OMN) from this or any 

other act, for fiscal years 2005 and 2006, available only for repair 

and maintenance to extend the life of the USS John F. Kennedy. 

The provision would also prohibit the Secretary of the Navy from 

reducing the number of active aircraft carriers in the Navy below 

12 until the later of: (1) 180 days after the next Quadrennial Defense Review is delivered to Congress; or (2) the date on which the 

Secretary of Defense, in consultation with the Chairman of the 

Joint Chiefs of Staff, certifies to the congressional defense committees that such agreements have been entered into to provide port 

facilities for the permanent forward deployment of the number of 

aircraft carriers necessary in the Pacific Command (PACOM) area 

of responsibility (AOR) to fulfill PACOM roles and missions, including agreements for the forward deployment of a nuclear aircraft 

carrier after the retirement of the current two conventional aircraft 

carriers. The provision would also define an active aircraft carrier 

to include an aircraft carrier that is temporarily unavailable for 

worldwide deployment due to routine or scheduled maintenance. 

The committee is concerned that the Navy’s decision to reduce 

the number of aircraft carriers from 12 to 11 was not based on 

careful and thorough analysis, but rather was budget-driven. In 

testimony before the Committee on Armed Services in February 

2005, the Chief of Naval Operations testified that when he first 

submitted the proposed Navy budget for fiscal year 2006, it included 12 aircraft carriers. Further, the last two Quadrennial Defense Reviews, in 1997 and 2001, both supported a force structure 

of 12 aircraft carriers. The reduction to 11 aircraft carriers was 

made after the Office of Management and Budget directed a budget 

cut for the Department of Defense. 

The committee is also aware of the importance of permanent forward deployment of at least one aircraft carrier in the PACOM 

AOR. The USS Kitty Hawk, permanently forward deployed in 

Yokosuka, Japan, is scheduled for retirement in fiscal year 2008. 

The only other conventionally-powered aircraft carrier is the USS 

John F. Kennedy. The USS John F. Kennedy was scheduled to 

begin a complex overhaul (COH) maintenance period in fiscal year 

2005, and funds for this COH were authorized and appropriated in 

279 

fiscal year 2005 for this purpose. The ongoing Integrated Global 

Presence and Basing Strategy review might also expand the permanent forward deployment requirements for aircraft carriers, particularly in the PACOM AOR. 

The committee believes it is prudent for the USS John F. Kennedy to receive its COH and that 12 aircraft carriers remain in the 

U.S. Navy until such time as an in-depth analysis is conducted and 

forward-basing agreements are reached. 

Limitation on transition of funding for east coast shipyards 

from funding through Navy working capital fund to direct funding (sec. 322) 

The committee recommends a provision that would limit the Secretary of the Navy from using direct funding for east coast Naval 

shipyards. The Navy would be required to continue funding these 

shipyards through the Navy Working Capital Fund until the later 

of 6 months after the congressional defense committees receive a 

complete report on the use of direct funding at the Puget Sound 

Naval Shipyard, or October 1, 2006. 

During fiscal year 2003, the Navy changed the way workload was 

budgeted and paid for at the Puget Sound Naval Shipyard, despite 

the committee’s concerns, as outlined in the Senate report accompanying S. 1050 (S. Rpt. 108–46) of the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2004. The committee understands that 

the Navy intends to transition the east coast shipyards out of the 

Working Capital Fund and begin direct, or mission, funding in the 

near future. However, the effects of the transition of the Puget 

Sound Naval Shipyard out of the Navy’s Working Capital Fund 

have not been adequately studied. While it appears that consolidating intermediate level and depot maintenance activities may 

have economic benefits, the Navy has not fully examined the Puget 

Sound pilot program. 

Before any action is taken with regard to changing funding for 

the east coast shipyards, the committee requires that the Secretary 

shall submit to the congressional defense committees a study describing the lessons learned and costs and benefits of transferring 

the Puget Sound Naval Shipyard to direct funding. 

Use of funds from National Defense Sealift Fund to exercise 

purchase options on maritime prepositioning ship vessels (sec. 323) 

The committee recommends a provision that would authorize the 

Secretary of Defense to obligate and expend any funds in the National Defense Sealift Fund to exercise options to purchase those 

three maritime prepositioning ships (MPS) whose current charters 

expire in calendar year 2009. This authorization is granted notwithstanding the provisions of section 2218(f)1 of title 10, United 

States Code. 

The budget request included $1,648.5 million for the National 

Defense Sealift Fund, including $749.8 million for the buyout of 13 

MPS leases in fiscal year 2006. 

The committee notes that the time remaining on the leases of 

these 13 ships varies between four and six years, and does not see 

the urgency of buying out all of the leases at this time. The comVerDate Aug 04 2004 15:24 May 25, 2005 Jkt 021326 PO 00000 Frm 00299 Fmt 6601 Sfmt 6601 E:\HR\OC\SR069.XXX SR069
280 

mittee recommends buyouts of only those leases that expire in calendar year 2009, and recommends a decrease of $637.2 million 

from the National Defense Sealift Fund. The committee recommends an increase of $127.6 million in Operation and Maintenance, Navy, for the continued lease of the other 10 MPS vessels. 

Purchase and destruction of weapons overseas (sec. 324) 

The committee recommends a provision that would authorize the 

use of Department of Defense operation and maintenance funds to 

purchase weapons overseas from any person, foreign government, 

international organization, or other entity, for the purpose of protecting U.S. forces engaged in military operations overseas. The 

provision would permit the destruction of the purchased weapons. 

The provision would also require the Secretary of Defense to 

promptly notify the congressional defense committees of any use of 

this authority. 

This provision would clarify the authority of the Department to 

purchase weapons in foreign countries where U.S. Armed Forces 

are engaged in military operations, when such a program is undertaken for force protection purposes. Providing this authority would 

eliminate the need for the Department to use its ‘‘emergency and 

extraordinary expense’’ authority to fund such programs. The committee believes that providing clear statutory authority to the Department to conduct such programs is desirable, given the security 

environment in Afghanistan and Iraq and the need to respond 

promptly to similar threats elsewhere in prosecuting the global war 

on terrorism. 

Increase in maximum contract amount for procurement of 

supplies and services from exchange stores outside the 

United States (sec. 325) 

The committee recommends a provision that would increase from 

$50,000 to $100,000 the dollar limit for purchases by defense entities from military exchanges for goods and services outside the 

United States. This proposal would help ensure a readily available 

source of supplies for military entities, especially during times of 

emergency. 

Extension of authority to provide logistics support and services for weapon systems contractors (sec. 326) 

The committee recommends a provision that would extend by 3 

years the authority under section 365 of the Bob Stump National 

Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2003 (Public Law 107– 

314) by which the Defense Logistics Agency could provide logistics 

support and services to a contractor in support of its performance 

on a contract for the construction, modification, or maintenance of 

a weapons system. The authority granted expires on September 30, 

2007. Section 365 required the Secretary of Defense to issue regulations before the granted authority could be used; and these regulations currently are in the process of being finalized. Moving the expiration date to 2010 would correspond to the original 5-year pilot 

period envisioned under section 365. 

281 

Army training strategy (sec. 327) 

In order to increase flexibility, responsiveness, jointness, and 

versatility, the Army is reorganizing the Active and Reserve component force structure into a brigade-based force. According to the 

Army, this initiative, referred to as ‘‘Modularity,’’ will ensure landforce dominance across the full spectrum of contemporary and future operations. The Army anticipates completing reorganization of 

combat brigades by 2007 and the reorganization of functional supporting brigades sometime thereafter. 

The committee notes, however, that the current unit training 

strategy and the resources that support that strategy continue to 

be division-based. For example, the current capacity of the combat 

training centers does not meet the planned requirements for a brigade-based force that will have at least 82 maneuver brigades and 

an additional number of functional supporting brigades to be determined by the Army. 

A clear unit training strategy, with well-defined goals and requirements, for the Modular force is essential in order to ensure 

Army readiness. Therefore, the committee recommends a provision 

that would direct the Secretary of the Army to develop and implement a training strategy for the Modular force. The provision 

would also require the Secretary to submit a report to the congressional defense committees not later than one year after the date of 

enactment of this Act on the requirements to be fulfilled in order 

to implement the Army’s training strategy for the Modular force. 

The report shall include the following: (1) a discussion of the training strategy, including a description of performance goals and 

metrics; (2) a discussion and description of the training range requirements necessary to implement the training strategy; (3) a discussion and description of the training aids, devices, simulations, 

and simulators necessary to implement the training strategy; (4) a 

list of the funding requirements, itemized by fiscal year and specified in a format consistent with the Future Years Defense Program 

to accompany the President’s budget, necessary to resource range 

requirements and necessary to provide training aids, devices, simulations, and simulators; (5) a schedule for the implementation of 

the training strategy; and (6) a discussion of the challenges that 

the Army anticipates in the implementation of the training strategy. 

Finally, the provision would direct the Comptroller General to 

monitor the implementation of the training strategy and to submit 

a report to the congressional defense committees not later than 18 

months after the date of the enactment of this Act. The report shall 

contain an assessment of the progress of the Army to implement 

the training strategy. 

Limitations on financial management improvement and 

audit initiatives within the Department of Defense (sec. 

328) 

The committee recommends a provision that would prohibit the 

Department of Defense from obligating or expending any funds for 

activities related to the Department’s financial management improvement effort until the Secretary of Defense submits to the congressional defense committees an integrated and comprehensive fiVerDate Aug 04 2004 15:24 May 25, 2005 Jkt 021326 PO 00000 Frm 00301 Fmt 6601 Sfmt 6601 E:\HR\OC\SR069.XXX SR069
282 

nancial management plan and a determination that each activity 

proposed to be funded would likely result in real and sustainable 

improvements in the Department’s financial management systems 

and controls. 

The committee believes that the most effective way to fix the Department’s financial management problems is to attack the problems at the root, by fixing the Department’s business systems and 

processes so that they provide timely, reliable, and complete data 

for management purposes. Although senior Department officials 

have consistently agreed with this assessment, the Department has 

requested hundreds of millions of dollars to hire auditors, with the 

stated objective of achieving an auditable financial statement by 

fiscal year 2007—long before the Department will be able to address the problems with its business systems and processes. 

By requiring that the Department pursue audit activities only in 

accordance with a comprehensive financial management improvement plan that coordinates such activities with needed systems improvements, the provision recommended by the committee would 

ensure that the Department first addresses the underlying problems with its systems and processes. 

Study on use of ethanol fuel (sec. 329) 

The committee recommends a provision that would direct the 

Secretary of Defense to conduct a study on the use of ethanol fuel 

in the military services and defense agencies. The study shall include: an evaluation of the historical use of ethanol fuel by the 

military services and defense agencies, including the quantity of 

ethanol fuel procured by the Department of Defense for the services and defense agencies during the five-year period ending on the 

date of the study; a forecast of ethanol fuel requirements for the 

military services and defense agencies for fiscal years 2007 through 

2012; an assessment of the current and future commercial availability of ethanol fuel, to include production, storage, transportation, distribution, and commercial sale of such fuel; an assessment of the use by the military services and defense agencies of the 

ethanol fuel commercial infrastructure; a review of the actions of 

the Department to coordinate with State, local and private entities 

to support the expansion and use by the military services and defense agencies of public access alternative fuel refueling stations 

that are accessible to the public; and an assessment of the existing 

fueling infrastructure on military installations in the United 

States, including storage and distribution capabilities, which could 

be adapted or converted to the delivery of ethanol fuel use, the cost 

of such conversion, and the feasibility and advisability of such conversion. The provision would direct the Secretary to submit a report on the results of the study to the congressional defense committees not later than February 1, 2006. 

The committee notes that Department policy provides for the acquisition of alternative fuel vehicles, including ethanol fuel-capable 

vehicles. The committee also notes that ethanol fuel consumption 

by the military services and defense agencies increased by 25 percent from fiscal year 2003 to 2004. Despite this increase, the committee is concerned that there are a number of challenges that may 

be limiting the availability of ethanol fuel for the military services 

283 

and defense agencies. As a result, the Department may not be fully 

achieving reductions in petroleum consumption with the 25,000 

ethanol fuel-capable vehicles in the Department’s inventory. 

BUDGET ITEMS 

Other Defense Programs 

Enhanced vision 

The budget request included no funding in PE63115HP, for enhanced vision technology for the Defense Health Program. The 

committee is aware that the Surgeon General of the Air Force has 

a requirement for application of enhanced vision technology to provide improved visual capability to military pilots in the form of goggles or glasses. Enhanced vision technology has been shown to be 

capable of improving human vision capability beyond 20/20, potentially to the theoretical limits of human vision. 

The committee recommends an increase of $5.0 million in 

PE63115HP for enhanced vision technology for the Defense Health 

Program. The committee expects that this increase will be used for 

extension of proven enhanced vision technology for military aerospace applications. 

Assembled Chemical Weapons Alternatives Program 

The budget request included $33.0 million for the Assembled 

Chemical Weapons Alternatives (ACWA) Chemical Demilitarization 

research and development program. The committee recommends an 

increase of $20.0 million to accelerate work on the ACWA Chemical 

Demilitarization research and development program for the Pueblo 

Chemical Agent-Destruction Pilot Plant and the Blue Grass Chemical Agent-Destruction Pilot Plant. 

The committee is troubled by the inconsistent and frequently 

changing programmatic guidance that has been provided by the 

Under Secretary of Defense for Acquisition, Technology and Logistics to the Secretary of the Army and the program manager for the 

ACWA program over the last two years, resulting in cost increases 

and schedule delays. The committee notes its satisfaction with the 

April 15, 2005, memo from the Under Secretary of Defense for Acquisition, Technology and Logistics in which he directed the release 

of fiscal year 2005 ACWA funds to the ACWA program manager. 

He also directed that the ACWA program manager determine expeditiously the most prudent design approach to maximize the opportunity to meet the Chemical Weapons Convention (CWC) extended 

100% destruction deadline. 

The committee is dissatisfied with the Department of Defense’s 

oversight and management of the entire chemical weapons demilitarization program. A series of reports by the Government Accountability Office have concluded that the program is not meeting its 

goals and objectives because of its bifurcated management, lack of 

a comprehensive strategy, and an inadequate funding stream. 

The committee is increasingly concerned that the budget request 

for the entire chemical demilitarization program does not provide 

sufficient funding to ensure that the United States will meet its 

treaty obligations under the CWC to completely destroy the U.S. 

284 

chemical weapons stockpile by April 2012 at the latest. In addition, 

any delay in execution of this program unnecessarily prolongs the 

safety and environmental risks to local communities, and the possibility that a chemical weapons storage site could be the object of 

a terrorist attack or attempt to acquire chemical weapons. 

In light of these concerns, section 931 of the Ronald W. Reagan 

National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2005 (Public 

Law 108–375) directed the Under Secretary for Acquisition, Technology and Logistics and the Secretary of the Army to jointly prepare a strategic plan for future activities for destruction of the 

United States’ stockpile of lethal chemical agents and munitions. 

The plan is to include realistic budgeting for stockpile destruction 

and related support programs; contingency planning for foreseeable 

or anticipated problems; and a management approach and associated actions that will address compliance with the obligations of 

the United States under the CWC and that take full advantage of 

opportunities to accelerate destruction of the stockpile. The committee notes that the plan, which was required to be submitted 

with the President’s budget for fiscal year 2006, is overdue. The 

committee directs that the plan be provided expeditiously. 

The committee believes that, due to the international legal obligations the United States has assumed pursuant to the CWC, senior administration officials at the Department of Defense, the National Security Council, the Department of State, and the Office of 

Management and Budget must give this matter increased attention 

now, while there is still time to make the adjustments necessary 

to put the program back on track. In particular, this means ensuring that the President’s future years budget requests include sufficient funding to accomplish the mission of destroying the chemical 

weapons stockpile safely and on schedule to meet the treaty 

timelines. The Congress has made clear its willingness to consider 

requests for increased funding necessary to meet this goal. At the 

same time, the committee expects the Department of Defense to 

improve management and oversight of the program. 

Finally, the committee notes that the support of local communities where the destruction activities are being, or will be, undertaken is essential to the Department of Defense’s ability to achieve 

the 100% destruction of the U.S. chemical weapons stockpile by 

2012. Therefore, the committee urges the Department to make 

every effort to consult with and take into account the views of local 

communities when making significant programmatic decisions that 

might impact those communities. 

Army 

Advanced combat helmet with modular integrated communications headset 

The budget request included $1.9 billion in Operation and Maintenance, Army (OMA), for land forces operations support, including 

$750,000 for the advanced combat helmet with the modular integrated communications headset. The committee notes that the utility of the advanced combat helmet with modular integrated communications headset has been demonstrated under combat conditions and enhances the personal protection of the individual solVerDate Aug 04 2004 15:24 May 25, 2005 Jkt 021326 PO 00000 Frm 00304 Fmt 6601 Sfmt 6601 E:\HR\OC\SR069.XXX SR069
285 

dier. The Army has completed approximately 50 percent of the approved acquisition object of the advanced combat helmet with modular integrated communications. The committee recommends an increase of $20.0 million in OMA for the advanced combat helmet 

with modular integrated communications headset. 

Army training 

The budget request included $758.8M in Operation and Maintenance, Army (OMA), for training support systems. The committee 

notes that the Army is making every effort to maximize training 

at homestation prior to deployment in support of contingency operations. Therefore, the committee recommends an increase of $90.8 

million in OMA for training support systems. 

Army officials note that the conversion to a brigade-based force 

while preparing for deployment in support of contingency operations has presented a number of challenges to training units in 

ensuring deployment preparedness. The Army has acted to ensure 

training readiness by capitalizing on resources available at both 

the combat training centers (CTCs) and homestations. In fiscal 

year 2005, for example, the Army increased the number of rotations at the CTCs by 20 percent and increased the size of each rotation by 30 percent. 

The committee notes, however, that the increases in rotations at 

the CTCs have had secondary effects. National Training Center instructors, for example, noted a decrease in the proficiency level of 

Third Infantry Division companies and platoons during their rotation, which the instructors attributed to limited training time at 

homestation. Two brigades of the 101st Air Assault Division, were 

required to advance their combat training schedules by 4 and 6 

months, causing turbulence to planned homestation training in 

preparation for a CTC rotation. Officials at the Joint Readiness 

Training Center (JRTC) noted that the time staff was able to dedicate to planning and preparing final training events for Army units 

at JRTC had decreased by nearly 50 percent. The newly-formed 

brigade of the 10th Mountain Division garrisoned at Fort Polk is 

limited from fully using training ranges at Fort Polk because of the 

increase in the number of visiting units using the ranges for JRTC 

rotations. 

The second approach to unit training implemented by the Army 

in 2005 was to complete unit training at homestation. In February 

2005, the First Brigade Combat Team (1BCT) of the 82nd Airborne 

Division completed unit training at their homestation, Fort Bragg. 

As a result, the 1BCT was able to spend more time preparing for 

final training events and preparing equipment for deployment. The 

unit also was able to reapply approximately $10 million, the cost 

to transport equipment to a combat training center, to high priority 

brigade requirements. Army leadership stated that the final training event at Fort Bragg equaled, and in many cases exceeded, the 

training experience at a CTC. 

The committee understands the challenges to unit training that 

the Army is addressing, including the impact of accommodating 

both implementation of a brigade-based organization and preparation for deployment. The committee believes that the Army will be 

better prepared to address these challenges if the following actions 

286 

are taken. First, as addressed elsewhere in this report, the Army 

should develop and implement a training strategy for the brigadebased organization. Second, the Army should continue to fully 

maximize the limited amount of time and other resources available 

to units preparing for deployment, converting to brigade-based organization, or both, by completing training events at homestation 

to the maximum extent possible. 

To increase the availability of resources at homestation, the committee recommends an increase of $90.8 for training operations and 

training enablers, as follows: $73.7 for homestation range operations; $7.7 million for the virtual combat convoy trainer; $3.9 million for the battle command training capability; $3.0 million for 

cognitive air defense simulators; $1.0 million for grenade range improvements; and, $1.5 million for range fiber optic local area network (LAN) installation. 

Corrosion prevention and control 

The budget request included $615.1 million in Operation and 

Maintenance, Army (OMA), for land forces systems readiness and 

$416.5 million in Operation and Maintenance, Marine Corps 

(OMMC), for field logistics support. The committee supports the efforts of the Army and the Marine Corps to sustain their robust and 

comprehensive corrosion control programs. The committee also 

notes the work of the Marine Corps to assemble and deploy Corrosion Assessment Teams (CAT) and to implement the advanced 

vapor corrosion inhibitor delivery system (AAD–VCI). To date, the 

CATs, for example, have assessed, classified, and documented more 

than 23,000 pieces of ground combat equipment in five corrosion 

condition categories. The committee continues to support the efforts 

of both services to address corrosion in their vehicles and other 

equipment. Therefore, the committee recommends an increase of 

$8.0 million in OMA and $9.3 million in OMMC to support corrosion prevention, including $4.8 million for Marine Corps CATs; $2.0 

million for Marine Corps corrosion prevention and control programs; and $2.5 million for AAD–VCI. 

The committee believes that each of the military services may 

benefit from a review of the corrosion mitigation programs implemented by other military services. The committee notes, for example, that the Army National Guard has mitigated corrosion and 

subsequently achieved significant cost savings through the Controlled Humidity Preservation Program (CHP). The CHP is a tiered 

approach to corrosion prevention and is used for several weapon 

systems, including combat vehicles and missile systems. Army National Guard officials report investment returns ranging from fourto-one to as high as eleven-to-one on the various weapon systems. 

The committee believes that corrosion prevention and control programs with demonstrated utility, such as the CHP, could offer 

similar benefits for the other services. The committee urges the Department of Defense’s senior designated official for corrosion policy 

to ensure that the services coordinate their prevention and control 

programs to avoid duplication of effort. 

287 

Facility sustainment, restoration, and modernization for the 

Army 

The budget request included $1,825.5 million in Operations and 

Maintenance, Army (OMA), Operating Forces, for Facility 

Sustainment, Restoration, and Modernization (FSRM). This account is used by the Army to fund critical maintenance, repairs, 

and renovations of military facilities and infrastructure. The 

amount in the budget request equates to 92 percent of the total fiscal year 2006 FSRM requirement for the Army, 3 percent less than 

the budget goal established by the Department of Defense for this 

account. 

On April 5, 2005, the Government Accountability Office released 

an issue paper entitled ‘‘Budget Justification Review: Operations 

and Maintenance Trends’’ that reviewed the Army’s execution of 

the FSRM account. Their analysis concluded that an average of 29 

percent of the funds authorized by Congress in fiscal year 2003 and 

2004 for this account were not obligated for their intended purpose, 

but rather transferred to other operations and maintenance accounts. 

The Army announced a goal on March 22, 2005, to obligate funds 

for FSRM at 90 percent of validated requirements. Therefore, the 

committee recommends a decrease of $33.8 million in OMA to meet 

the Army’s goal of funding 90 percent of the requirements for the 

FSRM account. The committee directs the Army to request funding 

for the FSRM account in future year budgets at an amount intended to be obligated for the purpose authorized by Congress, and 

to discontinue the practice of transferring FSRM funding to other 

operations and maintenance accounts. 

Quadruple specialty containers 

The budget request included $248.2 million in Operation and 

Maintenance, Army (OMA), for strategic mobilization. The committee notes that the Army deploys quadruple specialty containers 

(QUADCONS) at key power projection platforms for early deploying units. This equipment has been particularly well used in support of ongoing contingency operations. The committee recommends 

an increase of $6.0 million in OMA for QUADCONS. 

Department of Defense foreign language training 

The budget request included $1.0 million for the Defense Language Institute in Operations and Maintenance, Army (OMA), specifically for satellite communications language training activities 

(SCOLA). 

SCOLA is a unique satellite-based language training activity 

that provides television programming in a variety of languages 

from around the world. Language students and seasoned linguists 

have found this augmentation of their normal language training to 

be very helpful. SCOLA also has an Internet-based streaming video 

capability that greatly increases the availability of this training 

medium to military and civilian linguists, virtually anywhere they 

can obtain an Internet connection. In addition, SCOLA is developing a digital archive that will allow users anywhere to review 

and sort language training information on demand. The development of these capabilities will make SCOLA training assistance 

288 

much more widely available, but requires additional investment. 

The committee is concerned that even after three years of encouragement from the Congress, and in an operational environment 

where the value of language training is of great importance to the 

nation, the Department of Defense has not fully funded the innovative language training concepts that can help sustain and significantly improve the skills of military and civilian linguists in the 

Department. The committee recommends an increase of $6.0 million in OMA, 

for the Defense Language Institute, for funding of SCOLA related 

training activities. 

Army civilian intern program 

The budget request included $l54.2 million in Operation and 

Maintenance, Army (OMA), for civilian education and training, including funding for the Army civilian intern program. The committee notes that the requested level of funding for the intern program represents an increase of $51.7 million over the fiscal year 

2005 level. The committee believes that the Army has failed to provide justification for this increase. The committee recommends a 

decrease of $51.7 million in OMA for the intern program. 

Unattended ground sensors 

The budget request included $919.8 million in Operation and Maintenance, Army (OMA), for Security Programs, including $1.7 

million for unattended ground sensors (UGS). The committee notes 

that the Army is fielding a new UGS as a quick reaction capability 

in support of Operation Iraqi Freedom for area and force protection. The UGS will serve as an intrusion detection system, as well 

as provide target classification, target recognition, target identification, and target dynamics, enhancing the security of U.S. ground 

forces and their ability to rapidly engage threat forces. The committee recommends an increase of $5.0 million in OMA, for UGS. 

Information assurance vulnerability alert cell 

The budget request included $389.7 million in Operation and 

Maintenance, Army (OMA), for logistics support acitivies. The committee notes the importance of employing Army logistics systems, 

such as the Standard Army Management Information System, with 

security safeguards. The Information Assurance Vulnerability Alert 

(IAVA) Cell is designed to provide such safeguards, including information security analysis and response capabilities. The committee 

recommends an increase of $3.0 million in OMA for the IAVA Cell. 

Aviation and missile life cycle management pilot program 

The budget request included $606.6 million in Operation and 

Maintenance, Army (OMA), for administration activities. The committee notes the utility of electronic business (e-business) portals in 

weapon systems product life cycle management. The program manager (PM) for Aviation Systems has successfully used the Army 

Aviation Fleet Logistics Management e-business portal for such 

purposes. The committee understands that extending life cycle 

management technologies to the end-user may further enhance 

management efficiencies. The committee notes that a complete asVerDate Aug 04 2004 15:24 May 25, 2005 Jkt 021326 PO 00000 Frm 00308 Fmt 6601 Sfmt 6601 E:\HR\OC\SR069.XXX SR069
289 

sessment of the utility of extending life cycle management to the 

end-user has yet to be completed. Therefore, the committee recommends an increase of $3.0 million in OMA to extend life cycle 

management capabilities from PM Aviation Systems to the enduser and directs that these funds be used to conduct a pilot program only. 

In addition, the committee directs the Secretary of the Army to 

conduct a study on the effectiveness of the pilot program in supporting the goals of life cycle management for PM Aviation Systems. The committee directs the Secretary to report the results of 

the study to the congressional defense committees by March 31, 

2006. 

Army excess carryover 

The Army’s working capital fund budget request included $3.1 billion in new orders and $1.0 billion in calculated depot maintenance carryover—the dollar value of depot maintenance work that 

has been ordered, but not yet completed at the end of a fiscal year. 

In June 2004, the Department of Defense’s Comptroller provided 

the services new written guidance concerning calculation of carryover. The previous guidance was that a service could ‘‘carryover’’ no 

more than the equivalent of 3 months of workload from one fiscal 

year to the next. The new methodology for calculating carryover, in 

which the Government Accountability Office (GAO) participated, 

includes an analytically-based carryover standard based on actual 

expenditures. While the new method is more analytically sound, 

the committee is concerned with the Army’s execution of the methodology. 

The Army continues to manage to an operation and maintenance 

expenditure rate 5 to 10 percentage points lower than the other 

services, allowing them to carryover significantly more workload at 

the end of a fiscal year. The committee recommends that, upon the 

completion of an ongoing study by the GAO on this discrepancy, 

the Department provide the services amended guidance concerning 

carryover calculations. 

The committee also recommends that the Department use one 

rate for all of the services. 

The committee is concerned that the Army’s use of a different 

rate is not an effective cash management technique. By allocating 

funds to workload that will not be executable in fiscal year 2006, 

the lower rate restricts the Department from better using funds for 

more immediate, higher priority matters. 

The committee recommends a decrease of $94.7 million in Operation and Maintenance, Army, to reflect funds in the Army Working Capital Fund that cannot be expended in fiscal year 2006 due 

to the Army’s excess depot maintenance carryover. 

Audits of Department of Defense financial statements 

The budget request included $200.0 million in the service’s operation and maintenance accounts for the audits of defense financial 

statements. The Government Accountability Office testified on 

April 13, 2005, before the Subcommittee on Readiness and Management Support of the Committee on Armed Services that spending 

on audits before the Department has financial management sysVerDate Aug 04 2004 15:24 May 25, 2005 Jkt 021326 PO 00000 Frm 00309 Fmt 6601 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\SR069.XXX SR069
290 

tems in place to support such audits is not the best use of limited 

resources. The committee expects that the auditors hired by the 

Department of Defense Inspector General in fiscal year 2005 for 

audits of defense financial statements will be used in fiscal year 

2006 for other auditing and investigation purposes. The committee 

recommends a reduction of $200.0 million to the service’s operation 

and maintenance accounts, as follows: 

Operation and Maintenance, Army—$70.0 million; 

Operation and Maintenance, Navy—$65.0 million; and 

Operation and Maintenance, Air Force—$65.0 million. 

Civilian personnel pay in excess of requirements 

The budget request included $53.5 billion for civilian personnel 

pay in fiscal year 2006. Based on an analysis of the services’ end 

strength data for civilian personnel as of April 29, 2005, the Government Accountability Office (GAO) projects that the Army and 

Navy/Marine Corps’ civilian personnel costs are overstated for fiscal year 2006 by $189.0 million. The committee recommends reducing the operation and maintenance accounts by $189.0 million, as 

follows: 

Army—$17.0 million; and 

Navy/Marine Corps—$172.0 million. 

Defense Information System Network 

The committee understands that the Defense Information System 

Network (DISN)—the Department of Defense’s backbone for providing data, video, and voice services—will establish a new pricing 

structure in fiscal year 2006 for billing the individual services for 

usage. While supportive of the proposed simplified structure, the 

committee is concerned about the conflicting and contradictory 

budget justification materials in DISN that accompanied the President’s budget submission. As initially briefed to the committee, the 

simplified structure entails a decentralization of funds from the Defense Information Systems Agency (DISA) to the individual services. In turn, the services then pay a ‘‘subscription fee’’ for DISN 

usage. However, budget justification materials provided to the committee from the Office of the Secretary of Defense, DISA, and the 

individual services do not lay out this reallocation in any trackable, 

logical manner. The committee recommends reducing the Department’s operation and maintenance accounts by $95.0 million, as follows: 

Operation and Maintenance, Army—$25.0 million; 

Operation and Maintenance, Navy—$25.0 million; 

Operation and Maintenance, Air Force—$25.0 million; and 

Operation and Maintenance, Defense Information System 

Agency—$20.0 million. 

Working capital funds 

The budget request included $3.1 billion in discretionary spending for defense working capital funds. These working capital funds 

serve a vital role in providing financial transaction flexibility for 

critical defense customer support activities. When working capital 

funds produce an annual net operating result involving a surplus— 

revenues exceeding expenses—consideration should be given to adVerDate Aug 04 2004 15:24 May 25, 2005 Jkt 021326 PO 00000 Frm 00310 Fmt 6601 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\SR069.XXX SR069
291 

justing customer rates in future years. Working capital funds that 

do not appropriately return surplus funds to the supported departments, commands, and agencies through rate-change mechanisms 

artificially inflate the cost of support and deprive the supported 

units of limited resources. In many cases, the global war on terrorism has created increased work flow in and out of working capital funds annually over scheduled peacetime projections. 

In previous years, the committee has urged the Department of 

Defense to anticipate the increased workload being experienced 

within the working capital funds and to budget accordingly. While 

some agencies and services have begun to take these additional 

revenue and expenses into account, the Army, Air Force, and Defense Information System Agency (DISA) still are not doing so. 

Consequently, end of year positive operating balances and excess 

cash balances continue to grow for these working capital funds. 

The current projections of net operating result for fiscal year 

2006 for the Army, Air Force, and DISA are based, in part, on artificially low revenue estimates. As higher revenues are realized, the 

working capital funds will continue to maintain large, positive operating balances and excess cash balances. To ensure proper management of the funds, the committee recommends reducing excess 

balances within these working capital fund accounts by $252.9 million, as follows: Army, $124.7 million; Air Force, $85.5 million; and 

DISA, $42.7 million. 

Navy 

NULKA decoy cartridge 

The budget request included $588.4 million in Operation and 

Maintenance, Navy (OMN), for ship operational support and training. The committee notes the Navy requirement to recertify Mark– 

234 NULKA electronic decoys every 3 years. The committee recommends an increase of $2.7 million in OMN for NULKA maintenance and recertification. 

Stainless steel sanitary spaces 

The budget request included $4.0 billion in Operation and Maintenance, Navy (OMN), for ship depot maintenance. The committee 

notes that the Stainless Steel Sanitary Space (S4) is being installed 

on ships during repair or overhaul periods. The S4 consists of corrosion prevention materials and coatings, which reduce maintenance requirements and increase quality of life for ships’ company. 

The committee recommends an increase of $4.5 million in OMN to 

sustain the S4 installation rate. 

Manufacturing Technical Assistance and Production Program 

The budget request included $298.1 million in Operation and 

Maintenance, Navy (OMN), for combat communications, including 

funding for Space and Naval Warfare Systems Command 

(SPAWAR) activities. The committee notes that the Manufacturing 

Technical Assistance and Production Program (MTAPP) continues 

to be a key program for integration of small businesses into the 

292 

military supply chain. The committee recommends an increase of 

$4.0 million in OMN for SPAWAR MTAPP. 

Electric start system 

The budget request included $173.0 million in Operation and 

Maintenance, Navy (OMN), for equipment maintenance. The committee notes that performance models have demonstrated that improved reliability and lower maintenance costs could be achieved 

with electric start technology. Electric start system technology is 

now available for installation on marine gas turbine engines, including power plants on Ticonderoga-class cruisers and Arliegh 

Burke-class destroyers. The committee recommends an increase of 

$8.0 million in OMN for electric start system upgrades. 

Marine gas turbine photonic sensors 

The budget request included $173.0 million in Operation and 

Maintenance, Navy (OMN), for equipment maintenance. The committee understands that more accurate monitoring of gas turbine 

plant performance and operating parameters is an important element of the Navy’s Conditioned Based Maintenance (CBM) program. The committee recommends an increase of $3.0 million in 

OMN for marine gas turbine photonic sensors in support of the 

CBM program. 

Mark-45 gun system overhauls 

The budget request included $473.6 million in Operation and 

Maintenance, Navy (OMN), for weapons maintenance, including 

funding for the overhaul of Mark-45 (Mk-45) gun systems. The 

committee notes that the Mk-45 continues to be the Navy’s primary 

battery on cruisers and destroyers. The committee recommends an 

increase of $16.0 million in OMN for Mk-45 gun system overhauls. 

Facility sustainment, restoration, and modernization for the 

Navy 

The budget request included $1,345.0 million in Operations and 

Maintenance, Navy (OMN), Operating Forces, for Facility 

Sustainment, Restoration, and Modernization (FSRM). This account is used by the Navy to fund critical maintenance, repairs and 

renovations of military facilities and infrastructure. The amount in 

the budget request equates to 95 percent of the total fiscal year 

2006 FSRM requirement for the Navy, which meets the budget 

goal established by the Department of Defense for this account. 

On April 5, 2005, the Government Accountability Office released 

an issue paper entitled ‘‘Budget Justification Review: Operations 

and Maintenance Trends’’ that reviewed the Navy’s execution of 

the FSRM account. Their analysis concluded that 23 percent of the 

funds authorized by Congress in fiscal year 2004 for this account 

were not obligated for their intended purpose, but transferred to 

other operations and maintenance accounts. 

The committee recommends a decrease of $26.2 million in OMN 

to reflect the anticipated obligation amount in fiscal year 2006. 

Furthermore, the committee directs the Department of the Navy to 

request funding for the FSRM account in future year budgets at an 

amount intended to be obligated for the purpose authorized by ConVerDate Aug 04 2004 15:24 May 25, 2005 Jkt 021326 PO 00000 Frm 00312 Fmt 6601 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\SR069.XXX SR069
293 

gress, and to discontinue the practice of transferring FSRM funding to other operations and maintenance accounts. 

Marine Corps 

Acclimate high performance undergarments 

The budget request included no funding in Operation and Maintenance, Marine Corps (OMMC), for acclimate high performance 

undergarments. The committee notes that the Commandant of the 

Marine Corps continues to support the initiative to make improvements in form, fit, and function of Marine clothing and accessories. 

Acclimate high performance undergarments allow Marines to adapt 

to all environments using one type of undergarment system. The 

committee recommends an increase of $2.5 million in OMMC for 

acclimate high performance undergarments. 

Combat casualty care equipment upgrades 

The budget request included no funding in Operation and Maintenance, Marine Corps (OMMC), for combat casualty care equipment upgrades. The committee notes that the Marine Corps assesses combat casualty care equipment upgrades as high military 

value and has an identified shortfall of 458 units against the approved acquisition object (AAO). The committee recommends an increase of $5.2 million in OMMC for combat casualty care equipment upgrades to fulfill the AAO. 

Family of mountain cold weather clothing and equipment 

The budget request included $7.5 milllion in Operation and 

Maintenance, Marine Corps (OMMC), for the family of mountain 

cold weather clothing and equipment. Additional funding for the 

family of mountain cold weather clothing and equipment has been 

identified on the Commandant of the Marine Corps unfunded priorities list, including the All Purpose Environmental Clothing System 

(APECS). The committee recommends an increase of $8.0 million 

in OMMC for APECS. 

Portable tent lighting 

The budget request included no funding in Operation and Maintenance, Marine Corps (OMMC), for portable tent lighting. The 

committee notes that Marine Corps portable tent lighting is 

electro-magnetic interference hardened to prevent compromising 

periperal electronics and computers. Additional funding for portable tent lighting has been identified on the Commandant of the 

Marine Corps unfunded priorities list. The committee recommends 

an increase of $2.0 million in OMMC for portable tent lighting. 

Ultra-light Camouflage Net System 

The budget request included no funding in Operation and Maintenance, Marine Corps (OMMC), for the Ultra-light Camouflage 

Net System (ULCANS). The committee notes that ULCANS greatly 

enhances the ability of combat troops and support units to conceal 

military target signatures of weapons, vehicles, and semi-permanent positions in situations where natural cover or concealment 

may be absent or inadequate. Additional funding for ULCANS has 

294 

been identified on the Commandant of the Marine Corps unfunded 

priorities list. The committee recommends an increase of $8.0 million in OMMC for ULCANS. 

Supplemental communications and electrical utility support 

to U.S. Marine Corps Network Operations Center 

The budget request included no funding in Operation and Maintenance, Marine Corps, to extend and improve base information 

technology and electric infrastructure to meet requirements of the 

network operations center currently under construction and other 

facilities at the U.S. Marine Corps Base at Quantico, Virginia. 

There is a requirement for $2.1 million to complete construction of 

the Marine Corps network operations center that begun last year. 

Without this additional funding, the Marine Corps communications 

and warfighting capabilities will be degraded. 

The committee recommends an increase in Operation and Maintenance, Marine Corps, of $2.1 million to extend and improve base 

information technology and electrical infrastructure to meet requirements of the network operations center and other facilities. 

Air Force 

Bomber deployable phase maintenance kits 

The budget request included no funding in Operation and Maintenance, Air Force (OMAF), for B–52 or B–1 bomber deployable 

phase maintenance kits. The committee notes that the global war 

on terrorism has increased the requirement for Air Force aircraft, 

including bombers, to operate from forward operating locations. Additional funding for B–52 and B–1 bomber deployable phase maintenance kits has been identified on the Chief of Staff of the Air 

Force unfunded priorities list in order to increase bomber availability in theater. The committee recommends an increase of $86.0 

million in OMAF for bomber deployable phase maintenance kits, as 

follows: $34.0 million for B–1 aircraft and $52.0 million for B–52 

aircraft. 

Robust Nuclear Earth Penetrator 

The budget request included $3.5 million in Operation and Maintenance, Air Force (OMAF), for the development of a preliminary 

design and risk assessment of a navigation, guidance, and control 

unit for the Robust Nuclear Earth Penetrator (RNEP), and for an 

assessment of the integration and requirements of such a unit for 

carriage on the B–2 bomber. The committee notes that the evaluation of RNEP feasibility by the Department of Energy is not scheduled to be completed prior to 2007. Therefore, the committee recommends a decrease of $3.5 million in OMAF. 

Joint protection enterprise network 

The budget request included no funding in the Operations and 

Maintenance, Air Force (OMAF) account for the joint protection enterprise network (JPEN). The Department of Defense requires 

standardized and timely submission of Threat and Local Observation Notices (TALON) and Suspicious Activity Reports (SAR) across 

components and commands. The Commander, U.S. Northern ComVerDate Aug 04 2004 15:24 May 25, 2005 Jkt 021326 PO 00000 Frm 00314 Fmt 6601 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\SR069.XXX SR069
295 

mand, has identified funding shortfalls for the operations and 

maintenance of JPEN, which provides this capability. The committee recommends an increase of $3.6 million in OMAF to address 

this funding shortfall and to support system upgrades, enhanced 

functionality, and expanded information sharing capabilities for 

JPEN. 

Joint task force north 

The budget request included $4.5 million in the Operations and 

Maintenance, Air Force (OMAF) account for Joint Task Force 

North (JTF–N). In September 2004, Commander, U.S. Northern 

Command (NORTHCOM), assigned JTF–N a full homeland defense 

and civil support mission. This new mission transforms JFT–N into 

an operational, proactive, transnational threat-focused organization 

driven by actionable intelligence. The Commander, NORTHCOM, 

has identified funding shortfalls for the operation of the task force. 

The task force must maintain operational readiness and participation in efforts such as the recently concluded 3 month, multiagency 

Operation Winter Freeze border security project. The successful operation took place on the northeast border during a period of 

heightened security. The committee recommends an increase of 

$6.0 million in OMAF to support basic operational requirements; 

equipment and personnel for the JTF–N; and to continue projects 

focused on proactive situational awareness, decision superiority, 

theater security cooperation, and other initiatives required under 

the new homeland defense and civil support mission. 

Mobile consolidated command center 

The budget request included $14.9 million in the Operations and 

Maintenance, Air Force (OMAF) account for the mobile consolidated command center (MCCC). The MCCC is a rapidly deployable, 

vehicle-based command and control center designed to provide commanders with tactical warning, military force direction, and consequence management during periods of heightened security alerts 

or increased national readiness levels. The Commander, U.S. 

Northern Command, has identified funding shortfalls for the operations and maintenance of MCCC. 

The committee recommends an increase of $6.2 million in OMAF 

to address this shortfall and to fully sustain and support the operation of the MCCC. Uninterrupted operation of the MCCC would 

ensure the availability of continuous communication links to the 

military chain of command in a crisis and would allow for prolonged independent operation as necessary. 

Mobility Air Force depot maintenance 

The budget request included $2.5 billion in Operation and Maintenance, Air Force (OMAF), for depot maintenance programs, including $287.8 million for KC–135 depot maintenance and $87.5 

million for C–130 depot maintenance. The KC–135 and C–130 are 

venerable, combat-tested aircraft. Manned with talented, dedicated 

mobility Air Force crews, these aircraft continue to demonstrate 

their essential contributions to the global war on terrorism. Additional funding for KC–135 depot maintenance and for C–130 depot 

maintenance has been identified on the Chief of Staff of the Air 

296 

Force unfunded priorities list. The committee, therefore, recommends an increase of $96.6 million in OMAF, including $59.0 

million for KC–135 depot maintenance and $37.6 million for C–130 

depot maintenance funding to address immediate safety of flight 

issues and to sustain the long-term readiness of mobility air forces. 

The committee is concerned with the level of funding provided for 

KC–135 depot maintenance, given the results of previous Air Force 

studies, ongoing efforts to mitigate corrosion, and continuing challenges related to the future force structure of tanker aircraft. The 

Tanker Requirement Study for Fiscal Year 2005, supported by the 

KC–135 Economic Service Life study, concluded that the Air Force 

should apply additional resources for KC–135 depot maintenance in 

order to increase depot throughput and to maximize available operational aircraft. The committee finds, however, that the budget request included funding for only 47 percent of the requirement for 

KC–135 air frame maintenance and only 58 percent of the total 

depot maintenance requirement for KC–135 aircraft. The committee, therefore, recommends additional funding for KC–135 depot 

maintenance to maintain a viable depot maintenance program and 

address continuing challenges. 

The committee notes that recent changes to the C–130J acquisition program and the discovery of advanced fatigue in the center 

wing box of the current inventory of C–130 aircraft present challenges to the readiness of the C–130 fleet. Program changes and 

advanced wing fatigue were not anticipated when the C–130 depot 

maintenance program for fiscal year 2006 was prepared. The committee notes that as a result of center wing box fatigue, the Air 

Force has grounded 30 aircraft and has imposed restrictions on an 

additional 60 aircraft. The committee, therefore, recommends an 

increase in depot maintenance funding to address immediate C– 

130 center wing box safety of flight issues and to ensure the availability of mission capable aircraft to support intra-theater, tactical 

air lift operational requirements. 

The committee notes that this additional funding is one part of 

an overall initiative by the committee to provide additional funding 

for KC–135 and C–130 readiness. 

Homeland Security/Homeland Defense Education Consortium 

The budget request included no funding in the Operations and 

Maintenance, Air Force (OMAF) account to continue the U.S. 

Northern Command (NORTHCOM) Homeland Security/Homeland 

Defense Education Consortium (HSDEC). The committee recommends an increase of $1.0 million in OMAF to enable 

NORTHCOM to continue and expand HSDEC. As homeland security and homeland defense roles and missions are further defined, 

it is important that educational curriculums designed to train personnel in these areas adhere to standards, and that the Department of Defense, through NORTHCOM, participates in establishing the criteria for such standards. An expanded program 

would increase the role of NORTHCOM in setting education and 

research priorities and would further training, information sharing, 

and targeted projects, particularly in cyber and biodefense. 

297 

Defense-Wide 

Counseling and assistance to military families 

The budget request included $42.0 million in Operation and 

Maintenance, Defense-wide (OMDW), for non-medical counseling 

and $179.0 million for family assistance centers across all military 

departments. Recent studies, including the National Military Family Association’s ‘‘Serving the Home Front’’ analysis and the Army 

Family Action Plan, show significantly increased demand for assistance to families due to the changing nature of military service 

since September 11, 2001. 

The committee recommends an increase of $30.0 million in 

OMDW for increased assistance to military families, including nonmedical, preventive mental health counseling, including assistance 

to families of the Guard and Reserve. The committee expects the 

increased funding to support non-medical counseling services available through the Department of Defense’s Military One-Source program, which provides up to six face-to-face counseling visits for individual and family needs, both in the continental United States 

and overseas. The committee further directs that additional funds 

be applied to reducing the shortfall of funding for family assistance 

centers serving the Army National Guard, Air Force National 

Guard Wings, Air Force Reserve, and Army Reserve. 

Increased support for child care for military families 

The budget request included a total of $440.0 million for child 

care services for all military services, including $174.0 for the 

Army; $95.0 for Navy; $151.0 for Air Force; and $20.0 for the Marine Corps. The committee believes that additional funds are needed to meet the documented requirement for more than 38,000 additional child care spaces for military families. The committee is concerned that the Department of Defense has an ongoing deficiency 

in the availability of child care services, which has increased significantly in the past two years and which adds a substantial burden to the families of deployed military members. 

The committee recommends an increase of $40.0 million in Operations and Maintenance, Defense-wide (OMDW) for child care services for military families, including the families of mobilized Guard 

and Reserve members. 

The committee intends that the increased funding will be used 

for the following purposes: 

(1) construction of temporary facilities at military installations with high deployment rates that are experiencing an increase in births, based on authority provided elsewhere in this 

report. This new authority would increase the threshold for use 

of minor military construction authority for unspecified minor 

construction projects to construct child development centers; 

and 

(2) support for public-private partnerships to provide incentives for providers on and off military installations to offer support to military families. 

The committee acknowledges that the demand for child care 

services exceeds availability both in the continental United States 

298 

and overseas, and is a top quality of life concern among military 

personnel. 

Funding for Office of Economic Adjustment 

The budget request included $30.0 million in Operations and 

Maintenance, Defense-wide (OMDW), Administration and Servicewide Activities, for the Office of Economic Adjustment (OEA). The 

committee recommends additional funding of $60 million in OMDW 

to allow the OEA to provide planning assistance to local communities affected by the closure or realignment of military installations resulting from the 2005 Defense Base Closure and Realignment (BRAC) round. 

The OEA provides comprehensive planning and organizational 

assistance to communities, regions, and States adversely impacted 

by BRAC. Civilian reuse of a former military installation is often 

the single most important opportunity for an affected community to 

overcome the specific impacts of a closure or realignment, while 

building upon a community’s strengths and opportunities. OEA anticipates start-up obligations that will average $1.0 million per 

community grant in fiscal year 2006 for local staff to coordinate the 

community’s response and to develop realistic reuse plans and community strategies. OEA grants will also be used to establish physical and environmental baseline conditions, to study market-feasible reuses, and to plan for potential zoning actions and public improvements. 

Capital security cost sharing 

The budget request included $61.3 million in Operation and 

Maintenance, Defense-wide, for capital security cost sharing. The 

committee recommends a decrease of $61.3 million for capital security cost sharing. 

Elsewhere in this report, the committee recommends a provision 

that would permit funds appropriated to the Department of Defense to be transferred to the Department of State as payment for 

a fee charged by the Department of State for maintenance, upgrade, or construction of U.S. diplomatic facilities, only to the extent that the amount charged in any given year exceeds the total 

amount of unreimbursed costs incurred by the Department of Defense during that year in providing goods and services to the Department of State. The committee anticipates that in fiscal year 

2006 the Department of Defense will provide unreimbursed goods 

and services to the Department of State valued in excess of $61.3 

million; therefore, the Department of Defense will not need the 

money included in the budget request for the capital security cost 

sharing program. 

Information assurance scholarship program 

The budget request included $5.5 million in Operations and 

Maintenance, Defense-wide (OMDW), for the information assurance 

scholarship program. The committee recommends an increase of 

$3.0 million in OMDW for this program. The Department of Defense requires experts in the areas of information security, assurance, and architecture. Increased funding for these scholarships 

299 

will allow the Department to educate and train additional students 

in fiscal year 2006. 

The committee’s commitment to ensuring an adequate and 

skilled workforce to support the Department’s complex information 

assurance and security challenges led to the creation of this scholarship program in the Floyd D. Spence National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2001 (Public Law 106–398). The committee continues to strongly support the program and commends 

the Department for successful recruitment of quality educational 

institutions and perspective students to participate in this important endeavor. 

Increased funding for conservation buffer zones 

The budget request included $20.0 million in Operations and 

Maintenance, Defense-wide, for implementation of conservation 

buffer zones around military facilities under the Department of Defense’s Readiness and Environmental Protection Initiative. The 

committee recommends an increase of $20.0 million to accelerate 

the Readiness and Environmental Protection Initiative. 

The committee believes that limiting the development or use of 

property that would be incompatible with the mission of an installation, and preserving habitat that is compatible with environmental requirements and which may also serve to eliminate or relieve current or anticipated environmental restrictions on the use 

of military installations, should be a high priority for the Department. The Department should pursue opportunities to avoid encroachment by urban growth and development through partnership 

agreements with eligible entities. The committee directs that in allocating the funding provided for the Department’s Readiness and 

Environmental Protection Initiative, the Department should give 

priority to projects that have been characterized by the Army as 

benefitting high priority training sites and identified as having the 

greatest potential to reduce or prevent encroachment through the 

implementation of a compatible use buffer zone, such as projects 

that are part of the Army’s Compatible Use Buffer Program at the 

following locations: Fort Campbell, KY; Fort Carson, CO; Fort A. 

P. Hill, VA; Fort Hood, TX; Fort Sill, OK and Camp Ripley, MN. 

Citizen-Soldier Support Program 

The budget request included no funding in Operation and Maintenance, Defense-wide (OMDW), for the Citizen-Soldier Support 

Program. The committee is aware that the Citizen-Soldier Support 

Program is improving and augmenting family readiness programs 

for families of the Reserve and Guard. This program is providing 

expert assistance to reserve families in remote areas in which military installations and the services these installations offer do not 

exist. The committee believes that there is an ongoing need for 

such assistance to military families. 

The committee recommends an increase of $2.0 million in 

OMDW to expand services provided by the Citizen-Soldier Support 

Program. 

300 

Parents as Teachers 

The budget request included no funding in Operation and Maintenance, Defense-wide (OMDW), for the Parents as Teachers program. The committee believes that additional funding is needed to 

expand a program that provides assistance to military families 

through providing instructional assistance to parents of pre-school 

children. 

The committee authorizes the increase in order to initiate a demonstration program at up to five military installations, to be identified in conjunction with the Department of Defense, at which there 

is a large concentration of military families experiencing high deployment rates and large numbers of children from birth to five 

years of age. The committee acknowledges that the Parents as 

Teachers program has been successfully supporting military families under nondefense sponsorship at Fort Leonard Wood, Missouri; 

Fort Leavenworth, Kansas; Fort Riley, Kansas; and Fort Hood, 

Texas; and expects that funding would support continued operation 

of these highly successful programs as well. 

The committee believes that the Parents as Teachers program 

can provide a valuable service to military families, based on voluntary participation, through providing instructional assistance to 

parents of pre-school children. The committee recommends an increase of $1.0 million in OMDW for the Parents as Teachers program. 

Military to civilian conversions 

The budget request included $1.4 billion in Operation and Maintenance, Army (OMA); Operation and Maintenance, Navy (OMN); 

Operation and Maintenance, Marine Corps (OMMC); Operation 

and Maintenance, Air Force (OMAF); and Operation and Maintenance, Defense-wide (OMDW) for conversion of 6,434 military positions to 11,573 civilian positions during fiscal year 2006. The committee is concerned that the Department of Defense has not provided adequate information on the funding requirements and execution data for military to civilian conversions. 

According to an April 29, 2005, analysis by the Government Accountability Office (GAO), the Office of the Secretary of Defense 

and service budget officials acknowledge that they are unable to 

provide a clear methodology to calculate the Department’s budget 

cost estimates for replacing military positions with civilians in fiscal year 2006. According to the GAO analysis, Department officials 

also acknowledged that the services have not determined the federal civilian employee and contractor mix for these conversions. 

The GAO analysis stated: ‘‘Without determining this mix, DoD can 

not be certain whether it accurately estimated its need for staffing 

resources and the funds to pay for such resources in its fiscal year 

2006 budget.’’ 

The committee concurs with this assessment regarding the lack 

of clarity on the budget requirements for achieving conversion of 

military billets to civilians or contractors. The committee believes 

that military-to-civilian conversions should be reviewed and validated by the Secretary of Defense to ensure that such requirements 

are formulated in a consistent manner; that there is an availability 

of qualified civilian employees; and that the mix of Department ciVerDate Aug 04 2004 15:24 May 25, 2005 Jkt 021326 PO 00000 Frm 00320 Fmt 6601 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\SR069.XXX SR069
301 

vilians and contractors is more clearly understood. Therefore, the 

committee recommends a decrease of $285.0 million for military to 

civilian conversions, as follows: 

Operation and Maintenance, Army (OMA)—$90.0 million; 

Operation and Maintenance, Navy (OMN)—$90.0 million; 

Operation and Maintenance, Air Force (OMAF)—$90.0 million; and Operation and Maintenance, Defense-wide (OMDW)—$15.0 

million. 

Army Reserve 

Army Reserve components cold weather clothing 

The budget request included no funding in Operation and Maintenance, Army Reserve (OMAR), or Operation and Maintenance, 

Army National Guard (OMARNG), for the Extended Cold Weather 

Clothing System (ECWCS). According to Reserve component officials, the ECWCS program is critical to unit mission and training 

requirements in all regions and in all deployments. The committee 

recommends an increase of $4.0 million for the ECWCS, as follows: 

$2.0 million in OMAR and $2.0 million in OMARNG. 

Air Force Reserve 

Air Force Reserve mobility Air Force depot maintenance 

The budget request included $377.8 million in Operation and 

Maintenance, Air Force Reserve (OMAFR), for mobility Air Force 

(MAF) depot maintenance programs, including $74.0 million for 

KC-135 depot maintenance and $96.6 million for C–130 depot 

maintenance. The committee recommends an increase of $58.0 million in OMAFR for Air Force Reserve MAF depot maintenance, as 

follows: $53.7 million for KC–135 depot maintenance, $4.3 million 

for C–130 depot maintenance, including inspection and repair of 

the center wing box. 

Elsewhere in this report, the committee notes that this additional funding is one part of an overall initiative to address immediate safety of flight issues and to sustain the long-term readiness 

of mobility air forces. 

Army National Guard 

Communicator Automated Emergency Notification System 

The budget request included no funding for the Communicator 

Automated Emergency Notification System (CAENS). The committee notes that the CAEN, a component of the Emergency Mass 

Notification System, provides timely and effective notification of 

emergencies to soldiers supporting contingency operations within 

the homeland and at deployed locations worldwide. The committee 

recommends an increase of $2.5 million in OMARNG for CAENS. 

Virtual battlefield system one 

The budget request included no funding in Operation and Maintenance, Army National Guard (OMARNG), for the virtual battlefield system one (VBS1). The committee notes that VSB1 is specifically designed to meet the training objectives of small infantry unit 

302 

operations. The committee understands that the Army National 

Guard initiated fielding of the VSB1 in response to an urgent training requirement in support of deploying units. VSB1 is currently 

part of the predeployment training package at many Army National Guard mobilization sites. The committee recommends an increase of $8.0 million in OMARNG for VBS1. 

Chemical, Biological, Radiological, Nuclear and High Yield 

Explosive Enhanced Response Force Package Teams 

The budget request included no funding for National Guard 

Chemical, Biological, Radiological, Nuclear and High Yield Explosive (CBRNE) Enhanced Response Force Package (NG CERFP) 

teams. The committee recommends an increase of $19.8 million for 

this program. Of that amount, the committee recommends an increase of $9.5 million to establish five additional NG CERFP 

teams, and an increase of $10.3 million to provide sustainment 

funding for the 12 existing NG CERFP teams. The committee directs that the $9.5 million for the five additional NG CERFP teams be allocated as follows: Operations and 

Maintenance, Army National Guard, $4.0 million; Operations and 

Maintenance, Air National Guard, $2.3 million; National Guard 

Personnel, Army, $1.6 million; and Military Personnel, Air National Guard, $1.6 million. 

The committee directs that the $10.3 million for sustainment for 

the 12 existing NG CERFPs be allocated as follows: Operations and 

Maintenance, Army National Guard, $1.8 million; Operations and 

Maintenance, Air National Guard, $1.1 million; National Guard 

Personnel, Army, $3.7 million; and Military Personnel, Air National Guard, $3.7 million. 

The NG CERFP pilot program was initiated in fiscal year 2004 

and has proven to be a valuable asset for federal and state authorities. Twelve NG CERFP teams were funded through fiscal year 

2005 as a proof of concept demonstration. These NG CERFP teams 

are capable of performing mass decontamination and triage/emergency medical treatment, and locating and extracting victims from 

an incident ‘‘hot zone.’’ The NG CERFP teams provide follow-on 

forces in support of the National Guard’s Weapons of Mass Destruction Civil Support Teams (WMD-CSTs), whose mission is to 

support civil authorities at a domestic CBRNE incident site by 

identifying CBRNE agents/substances, assessing current and projected consequences, and advising on response measures. The NG 

CERFP teams deploy subsequently, within 4–24 hours after a disaster, to provide additional capabilities in support of civil or military authorities in conducting consequence management operations. 

The original 12 CERFP teams are located in each of the 10 Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) regions, with two additional teams placed to cover larger geographic areas. Continued 

funding for the 12 original NG CERFP teams will ensure that they 

are available to assist local authorities in major disasters. These 

existing teams would also benefit from the purchase of additional 

equipment including medical supplies, extraction equipment, and 

special outfits with ancillary assemblies for hot zones. The committee believes that the five additional teams will provide enVerDate Aug 04 2004 15:24 May 25, 2005 Jkt 021326 PO 00000 Frm 00322 Fmt 6601 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\SR069.XXX SR069
303 

hanced capabilities for response to a chemical, biological, radiological, or nuclear attack or event. 

Air National Guard 

Air National Guard mobility Air Force depot maintenance 

The budget request included $612.8 million in Operation and 

Maintenance, Air National Guard (OMANG), for mobility Air Force 

(MAF) depot maintenance programs, including $221.7 million for 

KC–135 depot maintenance and $93.7 million for C–130 depot 

maintenance. The committee recommends an increase of $45.5 million in OMANG for Air Force National Guard MAF depot maintenance, as follows: $35.8 million for KC–135 depot maintenance and 

$9.7 million for C–130 depot maintenance. 

Elsewhere in this report, the committee notes that this additional funding is one part of an overall initiative to address immediate safety of flight issues and to sustain the long-term readiness 

of mobility air forces. 

Transfer Accounts 

Funding for Formerly Used Defense Sites 

The budget request included $221.9 million for cleanup of Formerly Used Defense Sites (FUDS). The committee notes that the 

budgeted amount is below the level authorized and appropriated 

for this program in fiscal year 2005, even though the scope and 

challenges of FUDS cleanup remain substantial. The committee 

recommends an increase of $40.0 million for FUDS cleanup. The 

committee expects the Department of Defense to demonstrate its 

commitment to FUDS cleanup by increasing the amount of funding 

budgeted for this effort in the outyears. 

ITEM OF SPECIAL INTEREST 

Defense Information System Network Access Transport 

Services 

The committee notes that the Defense Information Systems 

Agency (DISA) is in the process of acquiring additional network access to connect remote Department of Defense locations to terrestrial networks that are part of a component of the Global Information Grid (GIG), known as the GIG Bandwidth Expansion (GIGBE). This will provide the Department with a high speed fiber optic 

network that will greatly enhance network centric operations. 

The committee is concerned that DISA is moving forward with 

an acquisition plan to acquire this connectivity through a Defense 

Information System Network Access Transport Services (DATS) 

contract without a complete analysis of the costs and capabilities 

associated with all possible alternative strategies. In a briefing to 

the committee by DISA personnel, they reported that the underlying assumptions behind the analysis of alternatives (AoA)—accomplished internally by DISA, of whether to purchase or lease 

fiber optic connectivity, did not include cost as a factor. The committee also understands that DISA has not solicited sufficient 

input from industry. The committee understands that the Office of 

the Secretary of Defense for Program Analysis and Evaluation, an 

304 

independent analysis group within the Office of the Secretary of 

Defense, has voiced concerns about the DISA-planned approach for 

over a year. The committee directs the Congressional Budget Office 

to undertake a review of the AoA and underlying assumptions 

being prepared by DISA and report its findings to the committee 

by March 1, 2006. 

Test to improve the quality of agricultural produce available in commissary stores 

The committee is aware that the Defense Commissary Agency 

has initiated a test program to improve the quality of agricultural 

produce, particularly fruits and vegetables available to patrons of 

military commissary stores. The test employs web-based ordering 

techniques and is designed to reduce average times for the receipt 

of produce and to improve administrative processing. The test also 

affords greater opportunities for small businesses to become providers to commissary stores. 

The committee believes that the adoption of modern business 

practices such as these will improve the quality of produce available at commissary stores, and encourages the Department of Defense to move forward to implement such best practices throughout 

the commissary system. The committee directs the Secretary of Defense to report to the congressional defense committees by April 1, 

2006, on its progress in implementation of improved business practices designed to result in better quality produce at Department 

Commissary stores. 

(305) 

TITLE IV—MILITARY PERSONNEL AUTHORIZATIONS 

Subtitle A—Active Forces 

End strengths for active forces (sec. 401) 

The committee recommends a provision that would authorize active duty end strengths for fiscal year 2006, as shown below: 

Fiscal year— 

2005 

authorization 

2006 

request 

2006 

recommendation 

Army .......................................................................................... 502,400 482,400 522,400 

Navy .......................................................................................... 365,900 352,700 352,700 

Marine Corps ............................................................................. 178,000 175,000 178,000 

Air Force .................................................................................... 359,700 357,400 357,400 

The Ronald W. Reagan National Defense Authorization Act for 

Fiscal Year 2005 (Public Law 108–375) authorized active duty end 

strength for the Army at 502,400 and 178,000 for the Marine 

Corps. Additional authority was also provided in section 403 of that 

Act to increase active duty end strength for the Army by up to 

30,000 and increase Marine Corps active duty end strength by up 

to 9,000 above the fiscal year 2004 authorized levels of 482,400 and 

175,000, respectively, during fiscal years 2005 through 2009. 

The committee notes that the Army and the Marine Corps continue to provide substantial forces in support of operations in Iraq 

and Afghanistan, and that the Reserve components comprise approximately 40 percent of the troops in theater. The Army is simultaneously engaged in major organizational changes intended to increase combat power and flexibility by creating more modular units 

of deployment at the combat brigade level, and is also working to 

rebalance critical skills and units between the active and Reserve 

component forces. 

Because of these continuing demands, the Army currently estimates that its active duty end strength for fiscal year 2006 will be 

522,400. The Marine Corps believes that its active duty end 

strength for fiscal year 2005 will be about 178,000. The Commandant of the Marine Corps has testified before the Committee 

on Armed Services that an increase in end strength is not required 

for fiscal year 2006. 

The committee believes that achieving an active duty end 

strength above 522,400 in fiscal year 2006 would be difficult for the 

Army given the challenges the Army faces in recruiting and retention. The committee also believes that broad use of stop-loss authority to meet higher end strength requirements would have negative impacts on recruiting, retention, and the public’s perception of 

military service. The committee believes the Army should make 

every effort to reduce the number of personnel retained under stopVerDate Aug 04 2004 15:24 May 25, 2005 Jkt 021326 PO 00000 Frm 00325 Fmt 6601 Sfmt 6601 E:\HR\OC\SR069.XXX SR069
306 

loss authority, consistent with maximum combat unit cohesion and 

readiness. 

For the reasons set forth above, the committee recommends an 

active duty end strength for the Army at 522,400 and 178,000 for 

the Marine Corps for fiscal year 2006. This reflects an increase of 

20,000 from the authorized level for the Army for fiscal year 2005 

and an increase of 40,000 from the requested level for fiscal year 

2006. The recommended level for the Marine Corps is equal to the 

authorized level in fiscal year 2005 and is an increase of 3,000 from 

the requested level for fiscal year 2006. The committee has recommended funding to support these higher end strength levels in 

title XIV of this Act. The recommended active duty end strength 

for the Navy is decreased by 13,200 and the recommended active 

duty end strength for the Air Force is decreased by 2,300, as requested. 

Revision of permanent active duty end strength minimum 

levels (sec. 402) 

The committee recommends a provision that would establish 

minimum active duty end strengths for the Army, Navy, Marine 

Corps, and Air Force as of September 30, 2006, as shown below. 

These minimum end strengths reflect the committee recommendations in section 401 of this report. The minimum end strength requirements reflect an increase of 20,000 for the Army and a decrease of 13,200 for the Navy and 2,300 for the Air Force. The minimum end strength requirement for the Marine Corps remains 

equal to the level established for fiscal year 2005. 

Fiscal year— 

2005 

authorization 

2006 

recommendation 

Army ................................................................. 502,400 522,400 

Navy ................................................................. 365,900 352,700 

Marine Corps ................................................... 178,000 178,000 

Air Force ........................................................... 359,700 357,400 

Subtitle B—Reserve Forces 

End strengths for Selected Reserve (sec. 411) 

The committee recommends a provision that would authorize Selected Reserve end strengths for fiscal year 2006, as shown below: 

Fiscal year— 

2005 

authorization 

2006 

request 

2006 

recommendation 

The Army National Guard of the United States ....................... 350,000 350,000 350,000 

The Army Reserve ..................................................................... 205,000 205,000 205,000 

The Naval Reserve .................................................................... 83,400 73,100 73,100 

The Marine Corps Reserve ........................................................ 39,600 39,600 39,600 

The Air National Guard of the United States ........................... 106,800 106,800 106,800 

The Air Force Reserve ............................................................... 76,100 74,000 74,000 

The Coast Guard Reserve ......................................................... 10,000 10,000 10,000 

307 

End strengths for Reserves on active duty in support of the 

Reserves (sec. 412) 

The committee recommends a provision that would authorize 

full-time support end strengths for fiscal year 2006, as shown 

below: 

Fiscal year— 

2005 

request 

2006 

recommendation 

2006 

authorization 

The Army National Guard of the United States ....................... 26,602 27,345 27,396 

The Army Reserve ..................................................................... 14,970 15,270 15,270 

The Naval Reserve .................................................................... 14,152 13,392 13,392 

The Marine Corps Reserve ........................................................ 2,261 2,261 2,261 

The Air National Guard of the United States ........................... 12,253 13,089 13,123 

The Air Force Reserve ............................................................... 1,900 2,290 2,290 

The committee recommends increases of 794 in the Army National Guard, 300 in the Army Reserve, 870 in the Air National 

Guard, and 390 in the Air Force Reserve. The committee supports 

increases in full-time support manning needed to increase readiness, particularly in view of the major role played by the Reserve 

and National Guard in ongoing operations in the global war on terrorism. 

In addition to the budget request, the recommended end 

strengths include: 51 active duty members of the Army National 

Guard and 34 active duty members of the Air National Guard for 

sustainment of the 12 existing and creation of five additional National Guard Chemical, Biological, Radiological, Nuclear and High 

Yield Explosive (CBRNE) Enhanced Response Force Package 

teams. The committee also recommends a decrease of 760 in the 

Naval Reserve consistent with reductions in both active Navy and 

Naval Reserve end strength. 

The committee recommends an end strength for the Marine 

Corps Reserve equal to the fiscal year 2005 level, consistent with 

the budget request. 

End strengths for military technicians (dual status) (sec. 

413) 

The committee recommends a provision that would authorize end 

strengths for military technicians (dual status) for fiscal year 2006, 

as shown below: 

Fiscal year— 

2005 

authorization 

2006 

request 

2006 

recommendation 

The Army National Guard of the United States ....................... 25,076 25,563 25,563 

The Army Reserve ..................................................................... 7,299 7,649 7,649 

The Air National Guard of the United States ........................... 22,956 22,971 22,971 

The Air Force Reserve ............................................................... 9,954 9,852 9,852 

Fiscal year 2006 limitations on non-dual status technicians 

(sec. 414) 

The committee recommends a provision that would establish numerical limits on the number of non-dual status technicians who 

308 

may be employed in the Department of Defense as of September 

30, 2006, as shown below: 

Fiscal year— 

2005 authorization 2006 

request 

2006 recommendation 

The Army National Guard of the United States ....................... 1,600 1,600 1,600 

The Army Reserve ..................................................................... 795 695 695 

The Air National Guard of the United States ........................... 350 350 350 

The Air Force Reserve ............................................................... 90 90 90 

Subtitle C—Authorizations of Appropriations 

Authorization of appropriations for military personnel (sec. 

421) 

The committee recommends a provision that would authorize a total of $109.2 billion for military personnel for fiscal year 2006, an 

increase of $236.9 million above the budget request. This includes: 

(1) $220.0 million for increases in Servicemembers’ Group Life Insurance and death gratuity levels; (2) $10.6 million for increases in 

Army and Air National Guard full-time support personnel to sustain the existing 12 and create five additional National Guard 

Chemical, Biological, Radiological, Nuclear and High Yield Explosive Enhanced Response Force Package teams; (3) $6.0 million for 

continued payment throughout a period of hospitalization of special 

pay for duty subject to hostile fire or imminent danger; and (4) $0.3 

million for additional personnel costs related to the exclusion of 

general and flag officers on terminal leave from grade limits. 

Armed Forces Retirement Home (sec. 422) 

The committee recommends a provision that would authorize $58.3 million to be appropriated for fiscal year 2006 from the 

Armed Forces Retirement Home Trust Fund for the operation and 

maintenance of the Armed Forces Retirement Home. 

The committee is concerned that there are a number of complaints from residents of the Armed Forces Retirement Home that 

generally revolve around changes made in medical care, and that 

greater focus should be placed on these concerns. 

The committee directs that the annual Performance and Accountability Report of the Armed Forces Retirement Home will include, 

in this and in all subsequent fiscal years, a report on the quality 

and access to health care for all residents of the home, and any 

changes in the level and type of care provided in each location. The 

report will describe the level and scope of services provided to all 

residents and will also include the results of independent accreditation surveys conducted by the Joint Commission on the Accreditation of Healthcare Organizations. 

Additionally, to further communication between residents and 

management and to ensure that the voices of residents are heard, 

the committee directs the Secretary of Defense to conduct an annual survey of resident satisfaction. The survey will be developed 

with the involvement of the resident advisory committees and 

major functional committees, and will include questions relating to 

satisfaction with health care, facilities, and support services. All 

residents shall be invited to participate in the annual survey. The 

309 

survey format shall be consistent over time in order to reveal 

trends and indicators in satisfaction. The result and outcome of 

each annual resident survey will be reported in the Armed Forces 

Retirement Home’s Performance and Accountability Report beginning in fiscal year 2007 and every year thereafter. 

The committee expects that other resident suggestions will also 

be considered by the management of the home, including frequent 

meetings with residents and resident advisory councils, new resident questionnaires, as well as surveys of residents who chose to 

leave the Armed Forces Retirement Home for any reason. 

(311) 

TITLE V—MILITARY PERSONNEL POLICY 

Subtitle A—Officer Personnel Policy 

Exclusion of general and flag officers on leave pending separation or retirement from computation of active duty 

officers for general and flag officer distribution and 

strength limitations (sec. 501) 

The committee recommends a provision that would amend sections 525 and 526 of title 10, United States Code, to exclude from 

consideration in determining the distribution limitations and the 

total number of general or flag officers of an armed force on active 

duty, officers in the grade of brigadier general or rear admiral 

(lower half) or above who are on leave pending separation, retirement, or release from active duty. This provision would only be applicable during the 60–day period beginning on the date of the commencement of leave of such officer. The committee believes that officers in general and flag officer grades who have commenced terminal leave should not be counted against existing limits on total 

numbers of officers. The committee expects that this provision 

would effectively reduce the incidence and duration of frocking of 

general and flag officers, and provide assistance to the services in 

filling general and flag officer billets. 

Expansion of joint duty assignments for Reserve component 

general and flag officers (sec. 502) 

The committee recommends a provision that would amend section 526(b)(2)(A) of title 10, United States Code, to increase from 

10 to 11 the number of Reserve general or flag officer positions that 

may be assigned on the staffs of the commanders of the unified and 

specified combatant commanders. The provision would also authorize the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff to assign Reserve general or flag officers under section 526(b)(2)(A) to the Joint Staff. 

The committee believes that the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of 

Staff has effectively assigned Reserve component general and flag 

officers under this authority, and that an additional position on the 

Joint Staff is needed to assist in performing missions related to 

homeland defense, anti-terrorism, force protection, and military assistance to civil authorities. 

Deadline for receipt by promotion selection boards of correspondence from eligible officers (sec. 503) 

The committee recommends a provision that would amend sections 614 and 14106 of title 10, United States Code, to specify that 

officers eligible for consideration by a promotion selection board 

may send a written communication to the board, to arrive not later 

than the date before the board convenes. 

312 

Existing law provides that officers eligible for consideration may 

send written communications, to arrive not later than the date the 

promotion selection board convenes. This creates the potential that 

selection boards will have reviewed, briefed, and acted upon the 

record of an officer on the first day of board proceedings before 

written communications have been received. The committee believes this change will ensure greater efficiency in promotion selection board procedures, and that an effective date of March 1, 2006, 

will provide sufficient time for the services to issue appropriate notice to officers eligible for promotion. 

Furnishing to promotion selection boards of adverse information on officers eligible for promotion to certain senior grades (sec. 504) 

The committee recommends a provision that would amend section 615 of title 10, United States Code, to require that substantiated adverse information be provided to promotion selection 

boards considering Active and Reserve component officers for promotion to the grade of lieutenant colonel, or commander in the case 

of the Navy, or above. Under current law, the decision to provide 

promotion selection boards with substantiated adverse findings and 

conclusions from officially documented investigations or inquiries is 

subject to the discretion of the service secretaries, and unless previously made part of the official record such information is not routinely presented. The committee believes that promotion selection 

boards responsible for selecting the ‘‘best qualified’’ future senior 

leaders of the military services should evaluate such information 

and should be provided with adverse documentation as part of 

their deliberative process. 

Grades of the Judge Advocates General (sec. 505) 

The committee recommends a provision that would raise the 

statutory grades of the Judge Advocates General of the Army, 

Navy, and Air Force to lieutenant general or vice admiral, as appropriate. These three officers would be in addition to the numbers 

that would otherwise be permitted for their Armed Forces for officers serving on active duty in grades above major general or rear 

admiral, as the case may be. 

The greatly increased operations tempo of the Armed Forces has 

resulted in an increase in the need for legal advice from uniformed 

judge advocates in such areas as operational law, international 

law, the law governing occupied territory, the Geneva Conventions, 

and related matters. In addition, the system of military justice, administered by the Judge Advocates General, has taken on increased 

importance. This provision recognizes these developments and the 

vital importance of the duties of these officers in today’s Armed 

Forces. 

Temporary extension of authority to reduce minimum 

length of commissioned service for voluntary retirement 

as an officer (sec. 506) 

The committee recommends a provision that would amend sections 3911, 6323, and 8911 of title 10, United States Code, to authorize reduction in the amount of time from 10 to 8 years that a 

313 

regular or Reserve officer who has prior enlisted service must serve 

as a commissioned officer in order to retire as a commissioned officer. The committee believes that lowering the amount of active 

service to 8 years would encourage more highly qualified petty officers and non-commissioned officers to consider applying for a commission. The committee also views this change as assisting in force 

shaping by enabling a limited number of officers, primarily in overmanned officer communities, to voluntarily choose retirement in 

the highest grade achieved. This reduction from 10 to 8 years was 

in effect from 1990 through 2001 and, under this provision, would 

remain in effect from the date of enactment of this Act through December 31, 2008. 

Modification of strength in grade limitations applicable to 

Reserve flag officers in active status (sec. 507) 

The committee recommends a provision that would amend section 12004 of title 10, United States Code, to reduce by four the 

number of required Naval Reserve flag officers in medical designators and by one the number of flag officers in the Supply Corps and 

to increase by five the number of Naval Reserve line officers. 

The committee recognizes that additional Reserve flag officers in 

line and restricted line specialties are needed to meet operational 

requirements. The committee continues to view the allocation of 

line and staff corps Naval Reserve flag officers in section 12004 as 

a valuable means of ensuring sound officer community management and effective integration of the Active and Reserve components of the Navy. 

Uniform authority for deferment of separation of Reserve 

general and flag officers for age (sec. 508) 

The committee recommends a provision that would amend section 14512 of title 10, United States Code, to make uniform among 

each of the services the conditions under which the authority to 

defer retirement until age 64 of up to 10 reserve flag or general officers per service may be exercised. Under existing law, the Army 

and Air Force are limited to exercising this authority in the case 

of officers occupying certain billets. The committee believes removing this condition for the Army and Air Force will afford necessary 

flexibility in retaining key Army and Air Force senior Reserve officers possessing essential experience and skills. 

Subtitle B—Enlisted Personnel Policy 

Uniform citizenship or residency requirements for enlistment in the Armed Forces (sec. 521) 

The committee recommends a provision that would amend section 504 of title 10, United States Code, to codify and uniformly 

apply existing practices of the military services regarding eligibility 

of individuals who are not citizens of the United States to enlist 

into the Armed Forces. 

314 

Subtitle C—Reserve component Personnel Matters 

Requirements for physical examinations and medical and 

dental readiness for members of the Selected Reserve 

not on active duty (sec. 531) 

The committee recommends a provision that would require an 

annual physical examination for members of the Selected Reserve. 

The provision would also require an annual report to the secretary 

concerned which documents the medical and dental readiness of 

the Reserve member to perform military duties. 

The committee is concerned that there are continuing reports of 

Reserve members who are unable to deploy as a result of disqualifying physical or dental conditions. When this occurs, it erodes the 

readiness of units to perform their military mission. The committee 

recognizes that the requirement for an annual physical examination is more frequent than the existing five-year requirement. However, the committee believes that rigorous discipline to ensure medical and dental readiness is essential. Drilling members of the Reserve and National Guard are not seen by military physicians as 

frequently as their Active-Duty counterparts and thus will benefit 

from an annual physical examination. 

Repeal of limitation on amount of financial assistance under 

Reserve Officers’ Training Corps scholarship program 

(sec. 532) 

The committee recommends a provision that would amend sections 2107 and 2107a of title 10, United States Code, to authorize 

the service secretaries to pay the costs of room and board for Reserve Officers’ Training Corps (ROTC) cadets who are receiving 

scholarships when those costs exceed the cumulative cost of tuition, 

fees, books, and laboratory expenses. This provision offers additional flexibility to managers of ROTC programs in meeting the 

specific financial needs of participating students, and will assist the 

Army in achieving a planned 15 percent increase in Senior ROTC 

participation. 

Procedures for suspending financial assistance and subsistence allowance for senior ROTC cadets and midshipmen 

of the basis of health-related conditions (sec. 533) 

The committee recommends a provision that would amend section 2107 of title 10, United States Code, to require that the Secretary of Defense prescribe policies and procedures to ensure fairness and medically based decision making prior to suspension of financial assistance for senior Reserve Officers’ Training Corps 

(ROTC) cadets and midshipmen under section 2107 of title 10, 

United States Code, and monthly subsistence allowance under section 209 of title 37, United States Code. 

While the practices of each of the services regarding medical 

leaves of absence for cadets and midshipmen on ROTC scholarship 

have varied, each of the services and the Defense Finance and Accounting Service must incorporate and adhere to essential administrative due process before suspending or terminating ROTC scholarships following health-related incidents. As noted in the statement of managers accompanying section 555 of the Ronald W. 

315 

Reagan National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2005 

(Public Law 108–375), the committee expects the services to 

promptly implement uniform procedures prescribed by the Secretary of Defense for medical leaves of absence that will ensure 

medical officer evaluation under a prescribed standard of review 

prior to involuntary suspension of ROTC benefits for medical reasons. 

Increase in maximum number of Army Reserve and Army 

National Guard cadets under Reserve Officers’ Training 

Corps (sec. 534) 

The committee recommends a provision that would amend section 2107a of title 10, United States Code, to double the number 

of Reserve Officers’ Training Corps (ROTC) cadets who would be 

authorized to perform their obligated service in the Army Reserve 

and Army National Guard. This provision would encourage more 

members of the Army Reserve and National Guard to enter ROTC 

while attending college, and assist in meeting the need for additional company grade officers in the Army Reserve and Army National Guard. 

Modification of educational assistance for Reserves supporting contingency and other operations (sec. 535) 

The committee recommends a provision that would modify section 16163 of title 10, United States Code, pertaining to educational assistance for Reserves supporting contingency and other 

operations. The change would clarify that the Secretary of Veterans 

Affairs would prescribe the form and manner of an eligible member’s election among multiple educational benefits. The Department 

of Veterans Affairs administers the educational programs and the 

eligible members’ claims for assistance. 

The committee also recommends a modification of section 16165 

of title 10, United States Code, that would allow a member of the 

Selected Reserve, who incurs a short break (not to exceed 90 days) 

from service in the Selected Reserve, to continue to be eligible to 

receive educational assistance under regulations prescribed by the 

Secretary of Defense, if that member continues to serve in the 

Ready Reserve. This would allow members who desire to shift Reserve components or to transfer to a new unit the opportunity to 

do so without jeopardizing their educational benefit under this section. This would also allow a person who has separated from the 

Selected Reserve to remain eligible for this benefit if they rejoin 

the Selected Reserve within the time indicated, provided the individual remains in the Ready Reserve during the break in Selected 

Reserve service. 

Repeal of limitation on authority to redesignate the Naval 

Reserve as the Navy Reserve (sec. 536) 

The committee recommends a provision that would amend section 517(a) of the Ronald W. Reagan National Defense Authorization Act of Fiscal Year 2005 (Public Law 108–375) to eliminate the 

requirement that implementation of the Secretary of the Navy’s decision to redesignate the Naval Reserve not take place before the 

date that is 180 days after the date on which the Secretary submits 

316 

recommended conforming legislation. On April 29, 2005, the President approved the redesignation of the U. S. Naval Reserve as the 

U. S. Navy Reserve. The committee supports prompt implementation of this change, and directs the Secretary of the Navy to comply 

with the requirement to submit conforming legislation no later 

than August 1, 2005. 

Performance by Reserve component personnel of operational test and evaluation and training relating to new 

equipment (sec. 537) 

The committee recommends a provision that would authorize the 

Secretary of the Army to carry out a pilot program through September 2010 to evaluate the feasibility and advisability of utilizing 

members of the Reserve components of the Army, rather than contractor personnel, to perform test, evaluation, and new equipment 

training, and related activities. Under this authority, up to $10.0 

million, in any fiscal year of funds available to the Army for 

multiyear purposes in appropriations for Research, Development, 

Test, and Evaluation and for procurement, may be transferred to 

a Reserve component military personnel account in the amounts 

necessary to reimburse that account for the costs of military pay 

and allowances of reservists participating in this program. 

Relying on soldiers to perform developmental testing could prove 

beneficial in providing soldier feedback earlier in the development 

cycle, enabling program managers to identify potential problems 

and required engineering changes sooner, reducing cost increases 

and delays, and providing soldiers with hands-on experience in new 

and emerging systems. 

Use of multiyear Research, Development, Test, and Evaluation 

funds and procurement funds to reimburse the pay, allowances, 

and expenses of Reserve component members could prove to be a 

practical and efficient means to achieve the benefits of soldier involvement in testing and evaluation functions. 

Subtitle D—Military Justice and Related Matters 

Modification of periods of prosecution by courts-martial for 

murder, rape, and child abuse (sec. 551) 

The committee recommends a provision that would amend Article 43 of the Uniform Code of Military Justice (10 U.S.C. 843) to: 

(1) clarify that all murders are included in the class of offenses that 

has an unlimited statute of limitations; (2) include rape in that 

class of offenses; and (3) modify the statute of limitations for child 

abuse offenses. 

The National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2004 

(Public Law 108–136) amended article 43 to provide that certain 

enumerated child abuse offenses could be tried by court-martial if 

sworn charges and specifications were received before the child attained the age of 25 years. The analogous federal statute of limitations, section 3283 of title 18, United States Code, simply provides 

that the limitation is equal to the life of the child. 

This provision would conform the limitation in article 43 to the 

federal statute, with one modification. It has been argued that the 

intent of Congress to lengthen the limitation in section 3283 would 

317 

be undercut in cases where the child died early, whether as a result of the abuse or not. In order to avoid this problem, the committee recommends a provision that would set the limitation at the 

life of the victim or five years after the offense, whichever is greater. 

Finally, the provision would include kidnapping and certain aggravated offenses under title 18 of the United States Code in the 

category of child abuse offenses to which the extended statute of 

limitations would apply. 

Establishment of offense of stalking (sec. 552) 

The committee recommends a provision that would amend the 

Uniform Code of Military Justice (chapter 47 of title 10, United 

States Code) to establish stalking as a separate offense under the 

code. Stalking is presently punishable under article 134 of the code 

(10 U.S.C. 934), if the government can prove conduct amounting to 

stalking, as well as proving that the conduct was prejudicial to 

good order and discipline. The offense may also be punished under 

article 93 of the code (10 U.S.C. 893) if the victim is subject to the 

orders of the accused. The provision would authorize prosecution of 

stalking within the compass of a single punitive article of the code, 

without the necessity of proving prejudice to good order and discipline under article 134 and without the subordination required by 

article 93. Every State and the District of Columbia has enacted 

some form of stalking legislation. 

The provision is patterned after the Model Antistalking Code for 

the States developed by the National Criminal Justice Association 

for the Department of Justice. Approximately half the States have 

enacted statutes based in whole or in part on this model code. The 

provision would require a course of conduct, including repeatedly 

maintaining visual or physical proximity to the victim; and threatening or otherwise placing the victim or the victim’s immediate 

family in reasonable fear of death or bodily harm, including but not 

limited to sexual assault. 

Clarification of authority of military legal assistance counsel (sec. 553) 

The committee recommends a provision that would amend section 1044 of title 10, United States Code, to provide that judge advocates or civilian attorneys who are authorized to provide military 

legal assistance to military personnel and their dependents may do 

so without regard to the licensing requirements of the State in 

which the assistance is rendered. 

While legal assistance has been provided under service regulations for decades, and was explicitly authorized in section 1044 of 

title 10 in 1984, questions have been raised by some as to whether 

attorneys providing such assistance outside the States in which 

they are licensed are engaging in the unauthorized practice of law. 

This provision would codify the long-accepted practice with respect 

to the provision of legal assistance. 

318 

Administrative censures of members of the Armed Forces 

(sec. 554) 

The committee recommends a provision that would authorize the 

Secretary of Defense and the service secretaries to issue administrative censures in writing to members of the Armed Forces. An administrative censure is a statement of adverse opinion or criticism 

with respect to the conduct or performance of duty by a military 

member. Such administrative censures would be final when issued. 

Under controlling regulations issued by the Secretary of Defense, 

such censures could be made part of the member’s official record 

and, if this option is exercised, should be subject to notice to the 

member with the right of rebuttal. The issuance of an administrative censure by the Secretary of Defense and the service secretaries 

would not be subject to appeal. 

The committee notes that the Secretary of Defense and the secretaries of the military departments possess inherent authority separate from, but fully consistent with Article 15 of the Uniform Code 

of Military Justice, to administratively censure members of the 

Armed Forces. The Department of the Navy, by regulation in its 

Manual of the Judge Advocate General, has long articulated the 

authority of the Secretary of the Navy to administratively censure 

members. Nonetheless, the committee believes that a specific grant 

of this authority to the Secretary of Defense and the service secretaries with a requirement for the Secretary of Defense to issue controlling regulations will provide a uniform standard throughout the 

Department of Defense and provide an important means for civilian leaders to ensure accountability. 

Reports by officers and senior enlisted personnel of matters 

relating to violations or alleged violations of criminal 

law (sec. 555) 

The committee recommends a provision that would direct the 

Secretary of Defense to prescribe regulations by January 1, 2006, 

that would require active duty and reserve officers and senior noncommissioned officers and petty officers above the grade of E-6 to 

report to appropriate military authority their arrest, investigation, 

charging, detention, adjudication, conviction, or any other legal 

finding of culpability for offenses other than minor traffic violations. 

Imposing a duty to report such involvement, at the earliest possible time after its occurrence, would avoid situations in which information material to an officer’s or senior enlisted member’s duties 

and assignments is concealed and individual and unit readiness 

may be adversely affected. Additionally, the services must be informed of information that is potentially relevant to adjudications 

of security clearances and determinations of administrative and 

statutory selection boards. The committee trusts that members covered by this provision generally adhere to this standard as a matter of personal integrity and responsibility; however, the committee 

believes that the duty to report this information in a timely manner should be unequivocally stated in regulations in order to ensure compliance. 

This provision would also require the Secretary of Defense to prescribe procedures to ensure that information relating to the inciVerDate Aug 04 2004 15:24 May 25, 2005 Jkt 021326 PO 00000 Frm 00338 Fmt 6601 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\SR069.XXX SR069
319 

dents described above is timely forwarded to the parent service of 

the officer or senior enlisted member involved in order to avoid instances in which incidents committed on one service’s installations 

are not reported to the parent service of the officer or senior enlisted member. 

Subtitle E—Military Service Academies 

Authority to retain permanent military professors at the 

Naval Academy after more than 30 years of service (sec. 

561) 

The committee recommends a provision that would authorize the 

Secretary of the Navy, upon recommendation from the Superintendent of the Naval Academy and concurrence with the Chief of 

Naval Operations, to continue on active duty permanent military 

professors at the Naval Academy beyond the normal statutory retirement for years of service for their grade. Permanent military 

professors in the grade of O–5, who are retained on active duty beyond 28 years of service, would remain eligible for promotion to the 

grade of O–6. 

The committee believes that the Secretary of the Navy should 

have authority to retain certain exceptional permanent military 

professors at the Naval Academy on active duty beyond their statutory retirement, similar to the authority that the Secretary of the 

Army and the Secretary of the Air Force currently possess with regard to permanent professors at their respective academies. The 

committee also believes that permanent military professors in the 

grade of O–5, who are retained beyond 28 years of service, should 

remain eligible for promotion to the grade of O–6. 

Permanent military professors on active duty at the Naval Academy are highly educated and represent a significant investment in 

a valuable and highly sought after resource. The Secretary of the 

Navy should have the authority to retain exceptional permanent 

military professors who have extensive college-level teaching experience, a doctorate, and military experience, who will benefit the 

mission of the Naval Academy. 

Subtitle F—Administrative Matters 

Clarification of leave accrual for members assigned to a 

deployable ship or mobile unit or other duty (sec. 571) 

The committee recommends a provision that would amend section 701 of title 10, United States Code, to clarify and expand eligibility for members assigned to a deployable ship, mobile unit, or 

other designated duty to retain accumulated leave at the end of a 

fiscal year. The committee intends by this provision that military 

members who serve on extended operational deployments and perform arduous duty in support of the global war on terrorism, and 

who are impeded in their ability to take annual leave, should be 

permitted to accrue up to 120 days of leave. Limitation on conversion of military medical and dental billets to civilian positions (sec. 

572) 

320 

Limitation on conversion of military medical and dental billets to civilian positions (sec. 572) 

The committee recommends a provision that would limit conversion of any military medical or dental billet to a civilian position 

until 90 days after the Secretary of Defense certifies to the congressional defense committees that: (1) conversion does not lead to an 

increase in civilian health care costs; (2) the conversion has been 

subjected to review in light of joint medical and dental requirements of the uniformed services; and (3) market surveys conducted 

in areas affected by such conversion suggest that there are available qualified civilian providers to replace military medical and 

dental personnel. 

The committee is concerned that no credible plan exists for conversion of military medical and dental billets to civilian positions 

across the military health care system. It has been reported that 

one service, for example, is converting military medical assets for 

which there are shortfalls in another service. Additionally, the committee has learned that, in some areas affected by military to civilian conversions, civilian markets have not been able to respond to 

military requirements for civilian health and dental providers, 

largely due to salary disparities. 

The committee is concerned that the Department of Defense has 

not considered all of the factors, including joint warfighting requirements and civilian compensation that are necessary to effect 

a rational reshaping of active duty and reserve military billets in 

the medical and dental fields. The committee is concerned that the 

failure of the Department to meet the requirement contained in 

section 595 of the statement of managers accompanying the Ronald 

W. Reagan National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 

2005 (Public Law 108–375), which required the Secretary to report 

no later than 90 days following enactment on the plans of each 

military department for military and dental military-to-civilian 

conversions, is further evidence of the absence of a comprehensive 

and rational plan. 

Subtitle G—Defense Dependents Education Matters 

Expansion of authorized enrollment in Department of Defense dependents schools overseas (sec. 581) 

The committee recommends a provision that would authorize the 

Secretary of Defense to provide tuition-free enrollment in Department of Defense dependents schools overseas for the children of 

full-time, locally-hired U.S. citizens. It is the committee’s intent 

that this authority be utilized in an equitable manner in any overseas location based on the requirements of the combatant commander. 

Assistance to local educational agencies with significant enrollment increases in military dependent students due 

to troop relocations, creation of new units, and realignments under BRAC (sec. 582) 

The committee recommends a provision that would authorize 

$15.0 million annually in Operation and Maintenance, Defensewide activities, for fiscal years 2006, 2007, and 2008 for special asVerDate Aug 04 2004 15:24 May 25, 2005 Jkt 021326 PO 00000 Frm 00340 Fmt 6601 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\SR069.XXX SR069
321 

sistance to local educational agencies that experience an increase 

in student dependents of service members and Department of Defense civilian employees as a result of global rebasing, the creation 

or activation of new military units, or base realignment and closures. The program would assist local education agencies that experience an increase of 250 or more military and Department of 

Defense civilian dependent students to make necessary infrastructure adjustments in a timely manner. 

Assistance to local educational agencies that benefit dependents of members of the Armed Forces and Department of Defense civilian employees (sec. 583) 

The committee recommends a provision that would authorize 

$30.0 million in Operation and Maintenance, Defense-wide activities, for continuation of the Department of Defense’s assistance program to local educational agencies that benefit dependents of service members and Department civilian employees. 

Impact aid for children with severe disabilities (sec. 584) 

The committee recommends a provision that would authorize 

$5.0 million in Operation and Maintenance, Defense-wide, for impact aid payments for children with disabilities under section 

8003(d) of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act of 1965 

(20 U.S.C. 7703(d)), using the formula set forth in section 363 of 

the Floyd D. Spence National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal 

Year 2001 (Public Law 106–398), for continuation of the Department of Defense’s assistance program to local educational agencies 

that benefit dependents with severe disabilities. 

Subtitle H—Other Matters 

Policy and procedures on casualty assistance to survivors of 

military decedents (sec. 591) 

The committee recommends a provision that would require the 

Secretary of Defense by January 1, 2006, to develop and promulgate a comprehensive policy on the provision of casualty assistance 

to survivors and next of kin of members of the Armed Forces who 

die during their military service. 

The policy shall include elements that the committee believes 

should, to the maximum extent possible, reflect uniform casualty 

assistance procedures and practices to be employed by the services, 

including: (1) initial notification of death to primary and secondary 

next of kin and any subsequent notifications; (2) transportation and 

disposition of remains of military decedents; (3) qualifications, assignment, training, duties, supervision, and accountability for the 

performance of casualty assistance responsibilities; (4) the relief or 

transfer of casualty assistance officers, including notifications to 

survivors and next of kin of the reassignment to other duties; (5) 

centralized case management procedures for casualty assistance by 

each military department; (6) the provision of personalized information on benefits available to survivors; (7) the provision of financial counseling; (8) a process for registering and responding to complaints; (9) liaison with the Department of Veterans Affairs and the 

Social Security Administration in order to ensure prompt resolution 

322 

of issues; and (10) data collection and surveys aimed at ensuring 

the needs of survivors are identified and, whenever possible, addressed. 

The committee recognizes that the military services place great 

importance on casualty notification and assistance and that personnel assigned casualty assistance duty have provided timely, sensitive, and responsive service to survivors of military decedents in 

the vast majority of cases. Testimony received in hearings conducted by the Committee on Armed Services of the Senate and the 

Committee on Veterans’ Affairs of the Senate in February 2005 established, however, that the complexity of federal benefit programs 

and the duration of the period in which survivors require assistance demand a uniform policy and coordinated efforts by the services, the Office of the Secretary of Defense, and other federal agencies responsible for providing assistance to survivors and next of 

kin of military personnel killed while serving their nation. 

Modification and enhancement of mission and authorities of 

the Naval Postgraduate School (sec. 592) 

The committee recommends a provision that would amend section 7041 of title 10, United States Code, to modify the mission of 

the Naval Postgraduate School to include professional education 

and a combat-related focus to the purposes of education at the institution. 

The committee believes that the mission of the Naval Postgraduate School should include a greater emphasis on advanced instruction and professional and technical education to enhance combat effectiveness in support of national security, rather than merely 

advanced instruction and technical education of commissioned officers ‘‘in their practical and theoretical duties’’ as reflected in the 

existing mission statement in section 7041 of title 10, United 

States Code. 

The committee also recommends a modification of section 7045 of 

title 10, United States Code, to allow the Secretary of the Navy to 

permit eligible enlisted members of the Armed Forces to receive instruction from the Naval Postgraduate School in certificate programs and courses required for the performance of their duties. 

The committee believes that highly qualified and carefully 

screened enlisted personnel may also benefit from instruction at 

the Naval Postgraduate School in graduate level, nondegree certificate programs and courses required for the performance of their 

duties. To the extent that the existing facility and faculty at the 

Naval Postgraduate School can be utilized to provide such education, this authority represents an efficient use of educational resources. 

Expansion and enhancement of authority to present recognition items for recruitment and retention purposes 

(sec. 593) 

The committee recommends a provision that would amend chapter 134 of title 10, United States Code, to authorize the procurement and award of recognition items to Active Duty and Reserve 

military personnel, family members, and certain other individuals 

under prescribed conditions. 

323 

Section 520 of the Ronald W. Reagan National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2005 (Public Law 108–375) authorized 

through December 31, 2005, the award of recognition items, such 

as coins, medals, trophies, badges, flags, posters, paintings, or 

other similar items to members of the Army Reserve, Army National Guard, and Air National Guard. The committee believes that 

this authority has proven valuable during time of war in enabling 

commands to appropriately express appreciation for the dedicated 

service and sacrifices of individual members, family members, and 

others who have served and supported the Armed Forces, and that 

this authority should be extended to all Active and Reserve components through December 31, 2007. The committee expects the implementing regulations to include reasonable limitations to prevent 

excessive expenditures of funds under this authority. 

Requirement for regulations on policies and procedures on 

personal commercial solicitations on Department of Defense installations (sec. 594) 

The committee recommends a provision that would require the 

Department of Defense, not later than January 1, 2006, to prescribe regulations, or modify existing regulations, relating to commercial solicitation including the sale of life insurance and securities, on Department of Defense installations. 

The committee notes that the Department has been attempting 

for over two years to revise Department of Defense Directive 1344.7 

entitled ‘‘Personal Commercial Solicitation on DOD Installations,’’ 

which is set forth in part 43 of title 32 of the Code of Federal Regulations. The proposed policy, which was published in the Federal 

Register of April 19, 2005, represents a substantial improvement 

over the current directive policy by establishing specific prohibitions and procedures aimed at preventing abusive sales tactics by 

commercial agents. For example, the proposed policy would: (1) require reporting of violations to higher headquarters and direct the 

Under Secretary of Defense for Personnel and Readiness to maintain and make available to installation commanders the current 

master file of all individual agents, dealers, and companies who 

have their privileges withdrawn at any Department installation; (2) 

permit insurers to solicit on Department installations only if they 

are licensed under the insurance laws of the State in which the installation is located; (3) prohibit Department personnel from representing any insurer or acting as an agent of an insurer in any 

official or business capacity with or without compensation; (4) prohibit the use of an agent as a participant in any service- sponsored 

education or orientation program; and (5) set limits on advertising 

and solicitation of personal contact information in connection with 

commercial sponsorship of Department morale, welfare, and recreation programs or events. 

The committee believes that the repeal of previous provisions relating to the Department commercial solicitation policy in previous 

authorization and appropriations acts is necessary to allow the Department to implement changes at the earliest possible time with 

the objective of promoting the welfare of Department personnel as 

consumers and in order to prevent abuses of service members by 

private commercial interests. 

324 

Federal assistance for State programs under the National 

Guard Youth Challenge program (sec. 595) 

The committee recommends a provision that would amend section 509(d) of title 32, United States Code, to phase in over 3 years 

a change in the federal to state matching funds ratio for the National Guard Youth Challenge program. The provision would increase the amount of federal funds that may be provided in fiscal 

year 2006 to not more than 65 percent of a State program’s operating costs; 70 percent in fiscal year 2007; and 75 percent in fiscal 

year 2008 and each subsequent fiscal year. The provision would 

also authorize an additional $15.0 million in Operations and Maintenance, Defense-wide, for the National Guard Youth Challenge 

program. 

Items of Special Interest 

Air Force future total force planning 

In section 587 of the Ronald W. Reagan National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2005 (Public Law 108–375), the 

committee directed a report by the Air Force describing the manner 

in which current blended wings are functioning and the current 

and future plans of the Air Force to implement the blended wing 

concept. 

The Air Force’s report focused on the experience of the Air 

Force’s only blended wing, the 116th Air Control Wing located at 

Robins Air Force Base, Georgia, which operates the E–8C Joint 

Surveillance Target Attack Radar System. The Air Force concluded 

that the 116th Air Control Wing had achieved a significant number 

of operational successes since its inception in 2002. Most significantly the Wing deployed successfully in support of Operations 

Iraqi Freedom and Enduring Freedom, with personnel days deployed totaling 132,674. The unit conducted 292 combat sorties 

over 3,130 hours with a 96 percent mission effective rate. 

The success of the 116th Air Control Wing is a tribute to the tenacity and dedication of its assigned personnel and their leaders. 

However, this success was achieved despite numerous organizational, administrative, legal, and cultural barriers to true integration of Active Duty and Air National Guard units. The Air Force 

concluded that the challenges of operating a blended wing are substantial enough that future ‘‘blending’’ is not advisable in the current legal environment and that, until the necessary changes are 

in place, reliance should instead be placed on ‘‘associate’’ models 

with units that share the weapon systems of an equipped unit and 

perform the same mission. Even some of these models, however, 

are constrained by legislative and fiscal law limitations. 

The committee supports the Air Force commitment to full integration of the Air Force Reserve and Air National Guard with its 

active forces, and urges the Air Force to continue to refine the various models of integration to maximize readiness, training, and enhanced mission capability. The committee expects the Secretary of 

Defense to promptly work towards addressing the issues identified 

in the Air Force report that present barriers to essential Active and 

Reserve component integration and expects to be advised of the relVerDate Aug 04 2004 15:24 May 25, 2005 Jkt 021326 PO 00000 Frm 00344 Fmt 6601 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\SR069.XXX SR069
325 

evant statutory issues pursuant to making this integration successful. 

Opportunity for general or flag officer review of involuntary 

administrative separation of victims of sexual assault 

and protection against reprisals for victim advocates 

The committee recommends that the Department of Defense consider, as part of its implementation of policies on sexual assault, 

a requirement for victims of sexual assault who are being involuntarily separated from active-duty service to be afforded, on a voluntary basis, an opportunity for a general or flag officer review of 

their case. The committee believes that providing an option to victims of sexual assault for general or flag officer interview and review could be a valuable safeguard on the ultimate disposition of 

such cases within the military departments, especially as newly developed policies and programs on sexual assault are being implemented. 

The committee also recommends that the Department consider 

what additional actions, if any, could be taken to ensure timely and 

adequate protection against reprisal directed at victim advocates, 

to include protection for military members, Department civilian 

employees, Department contractors, and volunteers. 

The committee directs the Secretary of Defense to report to the 

congressional defense committees by March 1, 2006, on the Department’s review of these matters and what actions it considers necessary to address them. 

Premium conversion/flexible spending account options for 

service members 

The committee is concerned that uniformed service members do 

not have access to premium conversion and flexible spending account options that allow pre-tax payment of health and dental insurance premiums and out-of-pocket health care expenses for family member health care needs. The committee is also concerned 

that uniformed service members do not have access to flexible 

spending account options that can be used to purchase child care 

services. The committee directs the Secretary of Defense to provide 

a report to the congressional defense committees by March 1, 2006, 

on a plan to evaluate and implement these programs for uniformed 

service members, including identification of any administrative or 

statutory barriers to achieving their implementation. 

The committee believes that active-duty members and Selected 

Reserve members should be able to use premium conversion to pay 

dental insurance premiums, and Selected Reserve personnel should 

be able to use it to pay TRICARE Reserve Select premiums authorized by the Ronald W. Reagan National Defense Authorization Act 

for Fiscal Year 2005 (Public Law 108–375). The committee believes 

that members should also have access to flexible spending accounts 

for the purpose of paying for child care services. The committee recognizes that Active-Duty and Reserve family members can incur 

out-of-pocket expenses related to dependent care, pharmacy copays, 

TRICARE Standard deductibles and copays, dental care deductibles 

and copays, expenses for eyeglasses and contact lenses, premium 

payments for dental and medical care, and child care. 

326 

Western Governors University 

Western Governors University (WGU),a competency-based institution of higher learning, offers a fully accredited baccalaureate degree based on a direct assessment of student learning, rather than 

on an accumulation of credit hours. WGU, created by 19 Governors 

from America’s Western States, was included in the Higher Education Amendments of 1998 (Public Law 105–244), which made federal financial assistance available to qualified students. WGU currently has four educational projects with the Department of Defense supporting the Air War College, Junior ROTC, Special Operations Command, and Air Force Community Colleges at Maxwell 

Air Force Base. 

The committee commends the Department and WGU for 

partnering to provide educational opportunities for military personnel, and encourages the Department and WGU to explore additional opportunities to expand educational opportunities for service 

members. 

(327) 

TITLE VI—COMPENSATION AND OTHER PERSONNEL 

BENEFITS 

Subtitle A—Pay and Allowances 

Eligibility for additional pay of permanent military professors at United States Naval Academy with over 36 years 

of service (sec. 601) 

The committee recommends a provision that would amend section 203 of title 37, United States Code, to authorize payment of 

additional pay in the amount of $250 a month to permanent military professors at the Naval Academy who have over 36 years of 

service. This additional pay is already authorized for permanent 

professors at the U.S. Military Academy and the Air Force Academy. 

Enhanced authority for agency contributions for members 

of the Armed Forces participating in the Thrift Savings 

Plan (sec. 602) 

The committee recommends a provision that would amend section 211(d) of title 37, United States Code, to authorize service secretaries to make matching contributions to the Thrift Savings Fund 

pursuant to an agreement with an enlisted member covering the 

duration of the member’s initial enlistment. 

The committee believes that expanding the authority of the services to match savings contributions of first term enlistees would encourage habits of financial responsibility among the most junior 

military personnel. A matching contributions program could also 

provide an effective recruiting incentive for young men and women 

who are considering service in the Armed Forces and would be tested through a limited pilot program authorized elsewhere in this 

Act. 

Permanent authority for supplemental subsistence allowance for low-income members with dependents (sec. 603) 

The committee recommends a provision that would amend section 402a of title 37, United States Code, to make permanent the 

authority to pay the supplemental subsistence allowance for low-income members with dependents. The availability of this allowance 

enables increases of up to $500 per month in the basic allowance 

for subsistence for junior enlisted members who would otherwise 

qualify to receive food stamps under state-administered programs. 

Since implementation of this allowance on May 1, 2001, the number of military members who have qualified for food stamps has 

significantly declined. The committee believes this program should 

be made permanent in order to continue to assist in meeting the 

financial needs of junior enlisted personnel and their families. 

328 

Modification of pay considered as saved pay upon appointment of an enlisted member as an officer (sec. 604) 

The committee recommends a provision that would amend section 907 of title 37, United States Code, with respect to ‘‘saved 

pay,’’ or the stabilization of pay and allowances that an enlisted 

member or warrant officer in the grade of W–4 may receive after 

accepting an appointment as a commissioned officer. The provision 

would update and add to the list of special and incentive pays and 

allowances that should be considered in determining the amount of 

pay and allowances of a grade formerly held by an officer who continues to perform the duties creating the eligibility for such pay 

and allowances and may be entitled to saved pay treatment. 

Subtitle B—Bonuses and Special and Incentive Pays 

One-year extension of certain bonus and special pay authorities for Reserve forces (sec. 611) 

The committee recommends a provision that would extend for 

one year the authority to pay the Selected Reserve reenlistment 

bonus, special pay for enlisted members assigned to certain high 

priority units in the Selected Reserve, the Ready Reserve enlistment and reenlistment bonus, and the prior service enlistment 

bonus. Additionally, the provision would authorize payment under 

section 308g(h) of title 37, United States Code, of the non-prior 

service enlistment bonus in elements of the Ready Reserve other 

than the Selected Reserve. The committee notes that the Selected 

Reserve enlistment bonus and the Selected Reserve affiliation 

bonus authorized under sections 308c(e) and 308e(e) of title 10, 

United States Code, respectively, have been amended and renewed 

by other provisions of this Act. 

One-year extension of certain bonus and special pay authorities for certain health care professionals (sec. 612) 

The committee recommends a provision that would extend for 

one year the authority to pay the nurse officer candidate accession 

bonus, the accession bonus for registered nurses, incentive special 

pay for nurse anesthetists, special pay for Selected Reserve health 

professionals in critically short wartime specialties, the accession 

bonus for dental officers, the accession bonus for pharmacy officers, 

and to repay education loans for certain Selected Reserve health 

professionals. 

One-year extension of special pay and bonus authorities for 

nuclear officers (sec. 613) 

The committee recommends a provision that would extend for 

one year the authority to pay the special pay for nuclear-qualified 

officers extending their period of active service, the nuclear career 

accession bonus, and the nuclear career annual incentive bonus. 

One-year extension of other bonus and special pay authorities (sec. 614) 

The committee recommends a provision that would extend for 

one year the authority to pay the aviation officer retention bonus, 

assignment incentive pay, the reenlistment bonus for active memVerDate Aug 04 2004 15:24 May 25, 2005 Jkt 021326 PO 00000 Frm 00348 Fmt 6601 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\SR069.XXX SR069
329 

bers, the enlistment bonus for active members, the retention bonus 

for members with critical military skills, and the accession bonus 

for new officers in critical skills. 

Payment and repayment of assignment incentive pay (sec. 

615) 

The committee recommends a provision that would amend section 307a of title 37, United States Code, to authorize payment of 

assignment incentive pay in a lump sum or in installments pursuant to the terms of a written agreement. The committee believes 

that the ability of the services to offer lump sum or installment 

payments of assignment incentive pay, in addition to existing authority for monthly payments, would offer greater flexibility and, in 

many cases, enhance the attractiveness of this incentive. In all 

cases in which lump sum or installment payments of assignment 

pay are authorized, the provision would require that a written 

agreement be executed. 

Increase in amount of selective reenlistment bonus for certain senior supervisory nuclear qualified enlisted personnel (sec. 616) 

The committee recommends a provision that would amend section 308 of title 37, United States Code, to authorize payment of 

up to $75,000 to an enlisted member of the naval service who has 

completed at least 10, but not more than 14, years of active duty, 

is currently qualified for duty in connection with the supervision, 

operation, and maintenance of naval nuclear propulsion plants, and 

is qualified in a military skill designated as critical by the Secretary of Defense. The committee believes that authorization of this 

increase in the amount of the selective reenlistment bonus for designated nuclear qualified enlisted personnel above the current limit 

of $60,000 is necessary to address shortages and improve retention 

of this class of highly trained and experienced personnel. 

Consolidation and modification of bonuses for affiliation or 

enlistment in the Selected Reserve (sec. 617) 

The committee recommends a provision that would amend section 308c and repeal section 308e of title 37, United States Code, 

in order to consolidate these provisions and authorize an enhanced 

affiliation bonus in an amount not to exceed $10,000 for service in 

the Selected Reserve. 

In section 618 of the Ronald W. Reagan National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2005 (Public Law 108–375), the conferees authorized an increase in the maximum amount of the Selected Reserve enlistment bonus under section 308c to $10,000. 

This enlistment bonus assists the Reserve components in meeting 

their non-prior service recruiting objectives. The committee believes 

that an identical bonus authority is needed to provide an incentive 

to members who are separating from active duty, and who may 

have a continuing military service obligation, to affiliate with the 

Selective Reserve. 

The current affiliation bonus under section 308e of title 37, 

United States Code, is inadequate to encourage members with active-duty experience to affiliate with the Selected Reserve with no 

330 

break in service upon completion of their active-duty obligation. Because of their military training and experience, these individuals 

should be given every reasonable incentive to continue serving in 

the Selected Reserve. 

Expansion and enhancement of special pay for enlisted 

members of the Selected Reserve assigned to certain 

high priority units (sec. 618) 

The committee recommends a provision that would amend section 308d of title 37, United States Code, to increase the amount 

of special pay that may be awarded to members of the Selected Reserve assigned to certain high priority units from $10 to $50 for 

each regular period of instruction or period of appropriate duty. 

The committee believes that increasing this special pay will assist 

in improving manning, including company grade officer shortages, 

in high priority units of the Selected Reserve. 

Retention incentive bonus for members of the Selected Reserve qualified in a critical military skill or specialty 

(sec. 619) 

The committee recommends a provision that would amend chapter 5 of title 37, United States Code, to authorize a retention incentive bonus for members of the Selected Reserve qualified in a critical military skill or specialty. This bonus would offer an effective 

retention incentive for individuals possessing key specialities and 

qualifications in the Selected Reserve, and would be structured 

along the lines of the critical skills retention bonus offered to active-duty personnel under section 323 of title 37, United States 

Code. 

Termination of limitation on duration of payment of imminent danger special pay during hospitalization (sec. 620) 

The committee recommends a provision that would amend section 310 of title 37, United States Code, to extend the period during 

which a member who is hospitalized as a result of injuries or 

wounds incurred as a result of hostile action may continue to receive special pay for duty subject to hostile fire or imminent danger. Under current law, continuation of such special pay is limited 

to three months. The committee believes that eligible members 

should receive special pay for the duration of their hospitalization. 

Authority for retroactive payment of imminent danger special pay (sec. 621) 

The committee recommends a provision that would amend section 310 of title 37, United States Code, to authorize the Secretary 

of Defense to determine the date from which members assigned to 

duty in an area in which the members were subject to the threat 

of physical harm or imminent danger are eligible to receive this 

special pay. This provision would preclude the need for legislation 

authorizing back pay as a consequence of delays within the Department of Defense in determining the eligibility of members for special pay under section 310. The most recent example of such legislation was included in section 620 of the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2004 (Public Law 108–136). 

331 

Authority to pay foreign language proficiency pay to members on active duty as a bonus (sec. 622) 

The committee recommends a provision that would amend section 316 of title 37, United States Code, to authorize payment of 

foreign language proficiency pay to members on active duty as a 

lump sum bonus. In section 620 of the Ronald W. Reagan National 

Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2005 (Public Law 108– 

375) the amount of foreign language proficiency pay was increased 

from $300 to $1,000 per month. The ability to offer a lump sum 

bonus under certain conditions, in an amount not to exceed 

$12,000, would serve to enhance the effectiveness of this incentive 

for members skilled in foreign languages to continue serving on active duty. 

Incentive bonus for transfer between the Armed Forces (sec. 

623) 

The committee recommends a provision that would authorize 

payment of an incentive bonus not to exceed $2,500 to military 

members of the Active and Reserve components who transfer from 

the regular or Reserve component of one service to the regular or 

Reserve component of another service. 

The committee notes that the Navy and Air Force intend to significantly reduce the size of their Active and Reserve components 

in anticipation of force structural changes. At the same time, the 

Army and Marine Corps are experiencing recruiting challenges 

and, in some areas, shortfalls. The committee believes that the experience and skills accrued by military members, combined with 

their possessing required qualifications and continuing motivation 

to serve, should be tapped whenever possible to meet recruiting 

needs. While so called ‘‘blue to green’’ programs to date have experienced some success, the committee believes this bonus has the potential to encourage more individuals to accept the challenges inherent in such changes in service. 

Subtitle C—Travel and Transportation Allowances 

Transportation of family members in connection with the 

repatriation of service members or civilian employees 

held captive (sec. 631) 

The committee recommends a provision that amends chapter 7 of 

title 37, United States Code, and chapter 57 of title 5, United 

States Code, to authorize travel and per diem allowances for up to 

three family members of military personnel or federal civilian employees who have been held captive, as determined by the secretary 

concerned, and who are being repatriated to a site inside or outside 

the United States. This provision ensures that family members of 

repatriated service personnel and civilian employees are able to 

travel to the location of their loved ones upon their return to U.S. 

control. 

332 

Subtitle D—Retired Pay and Survivor Benefits 

Enhancement of death gratuity and life insurance benefits 

for deaths from combat-related causes or causes incurred in combat operations or areas (sec. 641) 

The committee recommends a provision that would amend chapter 75 of title 10, United States Code, effective October 1, 2005, to 

increase the amount of the death gratuity payable under sections 

1475 through 1478 from $12,000 to $100,000 under certain conditions. Payment in the amount of $100,000 to survivors would be 

authorized in the case of a death of a service member on active 

duty which resulted from wounds, injuries, or illnesses incurred 

under the combat-related conditions specified in section 1413a(e)(2) 

of title 10, United States Code, specifically: (1) as a direct result 

of armed conflict; (2) while engaged in hazardous service; (3) in the 

performance of duty under conditions simulating war; or (4) 

through an instrumentality of war. Additionally, the increased 

death gratuity of $100,000 would be payable if the death occurred 

in an operation or area designated as a combat operation or a combat zone, respectively, by the Secretary of Defense. 

The provision would also amend section 1967 of title 38, United 

States Code, to increase from $250,000 to $400,000 the maximum 

amount of coverage available under the Servicemembers’ Group 

Life Insurance (SGLI) program. The provision would also authorize 

the military services to provide up to $150,000 in coverage for 

members who die as a result of wounds, illness, or injury incurred 

while serving in an operation or area that the Secretary designates 

as a combat operation or a zone of combat, respectively. The total 

amount of insurance payable under any circumstances would not 

exceed $400,000. In the case of insured members who are married, 

the provision would require that notice be given to spouses regarding an election by the member to decline coverage under SGLI or 

to choose coverage in an amount less than the maximum amount 

of $400,000. Spouses must also be notified of a redesignation of a 

beneficiary or beneficiaries by an insured member. 

Subtitle E—Other Matters 

Payment of expenses of members of the Armed Forces to obtain professional credentials (sec. 651) 

The committee recommends a provision that would authorize 

payment to members of the Armed Forces for the costs of obtaining 

professional credentials, licenses, and certifications. The committee 

notes that this authority is available to federal civilian employees 

under section 5757 of title 5, United States Code. The military 

services increasingly have come to rely on commercially available 

systems, products, and services with certification standards corresponding to military occupational specialties in order to avoid duplication and costs of training programs. This provision would not 

extend authority to pay military members for the costs of meeting 

basic qualifications for entry into specific communities and professions, e.g., bar examinations and licensing of health professionals. 

333 

Pilot program on contributions to Thrift Savings Plan for 

initial enlistees in the Armed Forces (sec. 652) 

The committee recommends a provision that would require the 

Secretary of the Army to conduct a pilot program in order to assess 

the extent to which contributions by the Army to the Thrift Savings Plan on behalf of first term enlistees would assist in recruiting 

non-prior service enlistees and result in establishing habits of financial responsibility. A separate provision in the act authorizes 

the service secretaries to make matching contributions to the Thrift 

Savings Fund on behalf of first term enlistees under section 211(d) 

of title 37, United States Code. 

The committee expects the Army to develop a pilot program that 

will assist in determining the cost and effectiveness of an enhanced 

‘‘matching funds’’ Thrift Savings Plan option for first term enlistees. While enlistment bonuses and education benefits have proven 

utility in encouraging voluntary service, the committee believes 

that an enhanced Thrift Savings Plan conducted under the provisions of section 211(d) of title 37, United States Code, as revised 

by another provision of this Act, may assist the Army in meeting 

recruiting goals. The committee expects the Army to collect data 

and conduct surveys that will allow a determination as to whether 

a matching funds Thrift Savings Plan has utility as a recruiting incentive and separately as a means to encourage participation in the 

Thrift Savings Plan among individuals who otherwise would not 

participate. 

(335) 

TITLE VII—HEALTH CARE 

Subtitle A—Benefits Matters 

Clarification of eligibility of Reserve officers for health care 

pending active duty following issuance of orders to active duty (sec. 701) 

The committee recommends a technical correction to section 

1074, title 10, United States Code, that would clarify the intent of 

that section to ensure that Reserve Officers’ Training Corps 

(ROTC) graduates have access to military health benefits while 

awaiting active-duty status. This correction would ensure that 

ROTC graduates do not lose their eligibility for health care under 

section l074(a), title 10, United States Code, before they report to 

active duty. 

Limitation on deductible and copayment requirements for 

nursing home residents under the pharmacy benefits 

program (sec. 702) 

The committee recommends a provision that would limit out- ofpocket pharmacy expenses for a beneficiary who is a resident of a 

nursing home and who is required, by state law, to use nursing 

home pharmacy services utilizing prepackaged pharmaceuticals, 

which are not part of the pharmacy network under TRICARE. The 

committee recognizes that there are a small number of individuals 

who would require such assistance, and directs the Department of 

Defense to find the most economical means available to implement 

this provision for those beneficiaries. 

Eligibility of surviving active duty spouses of deceased 

members for enrollment as dependents in a TRICARE 

dental plan (sec. 703) 

The committee recommends a provision that would expand eligibility for survivor benefits under the TRICARE dental plan authorized in section 1076a, title 10, United States Code, to include the 

active duty spouse of a member who dies while on active duty for 

a period of more than 30 days. The provision would extend eligibility to a surviving spouse who, because he or she was also on active duty for a period of more than 30 days, was ineligible to enroll 

in the TRICARE dental plan. 

Increased period of continued TRICARE Prime coverage of 

children of members of the uniformed services who die 

while serving on active duty for a period of more than 

30 days (sec. 704) 

The committee recommends a provision that would extend health 

care coverage under TRICARE Prime for the children of an activeduty service member who dies while on active duty for a period of 

336 

more than 30 days. The provision would authorize any dependent 

child of a deceased service member to continue to receive benefits 

under TRICARE Prime as if the service member parent were still 

alive, and without annual premiums, until the age of 21, or 23 if 

enrolled in an educational program. Under current law, the children of members who die while on active duty retain benefits 

under TRICARE as if the member were still alive for only three 

years, at which time the active-duty benefit is replaced by a benefit 

equal to that for retirees, which has a lower priority for access to 

military treatment facilities and requires an annual enrollment fee 

for TRICARE Prime. The provision would apply to eligible dependent child survivors of members who have died while on active duty 

since October 7, 2001. 

The committee believes that this provision will ensure that families with surviving children will experience no additional financial 

hardship or barriers to needed health care services under 

TRICARE, following the death of an active-duty service member. 

Subtitle B—Planning, Programming, and Management 

TRICARE Standard coordinators in TRICARE regional offices (sec. 711) 

The committee recommends a provision that would require the 

designation of a position in each TRICARE Regional Office for the 

purpose of assisting beneficiaries who use the Standard option 

under TRICARE in identifying providers who will participate in the 

TRICARE program. 

The committee is concerned that there is insufficient focus within 

the Department of Defense on assistance to users of TRICARE 

Standard, as well as outreach to community providers to encourage 

their participation in the TRICARE program. Moreover, despite 

statements by the Department that TRICARE contractors have 

specific mandates to perform this function, none have verified that 

such is the case. Thus, the committee is concerned that the intent 

of Congress, clearly expressed in the National Defense Authorization Act of 2004, to ensure improvements in access to TRICARE 

Standard, has not been fulfilled. The committee continues to receive reports of access problems, which may increase as members 

of the Selected Reserve, who elect coverage under the TRICARE 

Reserve Select Program, add to the demand for TRICARE Standard 

providers in areas not served by a military treatment facility. 

Report on delivery of health care benefits through military 

health care system (sec. 712) 

The committee recommends a provision that would require the 

Secretary of Defense to submit a report on the delivery of health 

care benefits through the military health system. The report would 

contain an analysis of the organization and costs of delivering 

health care benefits to current and retired military personnel and 

their families; an analysis of the costs of ensuring medical readiness; an assessment of the role of health benefits in recruitment 

and retention of members of the Armed Forces; and an assessment 

of the Department of Defense’s experience in recruitment and retention of military and civilian medical and dental personnel. In 

337 

addition, the report would include recommendations for legislative 

or administrative action as the Secretary considers necessary to improve efficiency and quality in the provision of health care benefits 

and to ensure the sustainability of such benefits into the future. 

Comptroller General report on differential payments to children’s hospitals for health care for children dependents 

under TRICARE (sec. 713) 

The committee recommends a provision that would require the 

Comptroller General to study the effectiveness of the system used 

by the Department of Defense to make differential payments to 

children’s hospitals for health care services for severely ill or injured dependent children of members of the uniformed services 

under the TRICARE program. The committee is aware of ongoing 

reports that children’s hospitals are reimbursed for health care 

services at levels that are less than the costs incurred by those hospitals for providing such services. The committee is concerned that 

the amount of the differential payment to children’s hospitals (one 

component of payments to children’s hospitals) has remained unchanged since its introduction in 1992. 

The provision would require a report by the Comptroller General 

not later than May 1, 2006, together with such recommendations 

as the Comptroller General believes appropriate for modifications 

of the current system of differential payments to children’s hospitals. 

Repeal of requirement for Comptroller General reviews of 

certain Department of Defense-Department of Veterans 

Affairs projects on sharing of health care resources (sec. 

714) 

The committee recommends a provision that would repeal certain 

reporting requirements for the Comptroller General on defense and 

veterans affairs health resource sharing projects. The intent of the 

provision is to eliminate detailed reporting on individual sharing 

projects to allow the Comptroller General to focus on measurement 

of efforts by the Secretary of Defense and the Secretary of the Department of Veterans Affairs to institutionalize defense and veterans affairs health resource sharing projects in both health care 

systems. 

Surveys on TRICARE standard (sec. 715) 

The committee recommends a provision that would increase the 

survey questions required under section 723(a) of the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2004 (Public Law 108–136) 

concerning the continued viability of the TRICARE Standard option. The committee is concerned that the surveys carried out by 

the Department of Defense to date have been unable to gather sufficient information to permit better understanding of the availability of civilian medical providers to participate in the Standard 

option of the TRICARE program. 

The committee believes that this provision would ensure that 

surveys capture necessary data on whether providers are aware of 

the TRICARE program, the percentage of their patient populations 

who receive TRICARE benefits, and whether or not civilian proVerDate Aug 04 2004 15:24 May 25, 2005 Jkt 021326 PO 00000 Frm 00357 Fmt 6601 Sfmt 6601 E:\HR\OC\SR069.XXX SR069
338 

viders accept patients or new patients under the Medicare program. 

Modification of health care quality information and technology enhancement report requirements (sec. 716) 

The committee recommends a provision that modifies the annual 

health care quality reporting requirement of the Department of Defense to ensure that it more closely resembles state-of-the-art quality improvement efforts in the civilian sector as well as those developed by other public health agencies. The committee directs the 

Secretary of Defense to undertake a comprehensive review of 

health care quality programs of the Department’s medical programs, to include civilian provider networks, in order to ensure 

that health care quality is monitored in an aggressive manner that 

results in health improvements for all eligible beneficiaries, regardless of age. 

Modification of authorities relating to patient care reporting and management system (sec. 717) 

The committee recommends a provision that would eliminate the 

requirement that the Department of Defense Patient Safety Center 

be located within the Armed Forces Institute of Pathology. In doing 

so, the committee intends to provide the Secretary of Defense 

greater flexibility to manage and consolidate patient safety initiatives for the Department. 

Subtitle C—Other Matters 

Report on adverse health events associated with use of antimalarial drugs (sec. 731) 

The committee recommends a provision that would require the 

Secretary of Defense to conduct a study of adverse health events 

that may be associated with the use of anti-malarial drugs, including mefloquine, also known as Lariam. The study would require 

the participation of epidemiological and clinical researchers outside 

the Department of Defense. It would also require an assessment of 

whether, and to what extent, Lariam may be a risk factor contributing to suicides among members of the Armed Forces. 

The committee is aware of concerns by service members and 

their families that the anti-malarial drug Lariam (mefloquine) may 

have side effects which contribute to serious injury and/or major 

psychiatric disorders. The committee believes that a study will assist the Department in a more complete understanding of the potential effects of Lariam, if any, on military personnel. 

Pilot projects on early diagnosis and treatment of Post 

Traumatic Stress Disorder and other mental health conditions (sec. 732) 

The committee recommends a provision that would require the 

Secretary of Defense to carry out a minimum of three pilot projects 

to evaluate the efficacy of various approaches to improving the capability of the military and civilian primary health care systems to 

provide early diagnosis and treatment of Post Traumatic Stress 

339 

Disorder (PTSD) and other mental health conditions experienced 

by military members returning from combat. 

The provision would require one of the pilot projects to be carried 

out at a military medical facility, which supports a large mobilization and demobilization site in order to evaluate and produce effective diagnostic and treatment approaches for use by primary care 

providers in the military health system. A second pilot would be 

carried out at the location of a National Guard or Reserve unit or 

units located more than 40 miles away from a military installation 

and whose personnel are served primarily by civilian community 

health resources. A third pilot would require the use and evaluation of Internet-based automated tools to aid military and civilian 

health care providers in the diagnosis and treatment of PTSD, as 

well as web-based tools available to family members to assist them 

in the identification of the emerging symptoms. 

Studies of soldiers returning from Operation Enduring Freedom 

and Operation Iraqi Freedom have found that major depression, 

generalized anxiety, or PTSD occurred in as many as 17 percent of 

returning soldiers. Of those who were found to have a mental disorder, including PTSD, only 23 to 40 percent sought mental health 

care. Failure to seek appropriate treatment due to fear of the stigma associated with seeking such care, and the failure of the primary health care system to accurately diagnose PTSD puts service 

members who have been exposed to combat at risk for a worsening 

syndrome that can lead to severe mental illness, or in extreme 

cases, suicide. 

The committee commends the Department of Defense for its recent issuance of a policy requiring additional mental health followup visits from 90 to 180 days after redeployment, but recognizes 

that more needs to be done to increase the capacity of the primary 

health care delivery system to identify and treat mild forms of 

these disorders, such as combat stress or normal depression following separation or reintegration, before these disorders progress 

to the point of requiring referral of the member for specialty mental health care. In addition, tools are needed to assist family members and military unit members in identifying and seeking appropriate resources for care of a member with emerging PTSD or other 

mental health disorder. The committee expects the Secretary to leverage emerging information technology to support the pilot 

projects required by this provision. 

Items of Special Interest 

Active-duty medical extension 

The committee is pleased that the Army has taken steps, 

through the Medical Retention Processing program, to eliminate 

the hardship experienced by injured and ill Reserve component soldiers who have been erroneously removed from active-duty status 

during a period of extended active duty and have lost pay and benefits. The Comptroller General, in a February 2005 report entitled 

‘‘Military Pay: Gaps in Pay and Benefits Create Financial Hardships for Injured Army National Guard and Reserve Soldiers’’, documented cases of Reserve component soldiers who, although entitled to continued pay and health benefits when extended on active 

340 

duty for the purpose of receiving medical care, experienced loss of 

pay and benefits during this crucial time of recovery because their 

active-duty status was not transmitted to the automated systems, 

which ensure timely pay and continued eligibility for benefits. 

The committee directs the Comptroller General to periodically 

monitor implementation of the Medical Retention Processing program as a follow-up to its February 2005 report and submit the results of such follow-up to the congressional defense committees. 

Comptroller General study of adequacy of TRICARE reimbursement for obstetrical, gynecological, and pediatric 

services 

The committee is aware that some doctors and hospitals have declined to participate in the TRICARE program for obstetrical, gynecological, and pediatric services because of claims that reimbursement rates for TRICARE are too low. 

The committee directs the Comptroller General to study the adequacy of reimbursements paid for obstetric, gynecological, and pediatric services to civilian providers in the TRICARE system. In carrying out the study, the Comptroller General shall consider: 

(1) how TRICARE reimbursement rates for obstetrical, gynecological, and pediatric services are determined; (2) how these reimbursement rates compare to comparable rates paid by national 

health care plans offered by the Federal Employees Health Benefits 

Program; and (3) the sufficiency of the Department of Defense’s authority to modify these rates when necessary to ensure access for 

military beneficiaries to high quality health care services. 

The Comptroller General shall submit a report not later than 

April 15, 2006, to the congressional defense committees containing 

the results of the study and any recommendations to improve 

TRICARE provider participation and satisfaction in providing obstetric, gynecological, and pediatric services. 

Increased awareness for families of TRICARE mental health 

benefits and the need for appropriate mental health 

services for families overseas 

The committee is concerned that many military family members, 

including both active and mobilized National Guard and Reserve 

families, do not have adequate information about mental health 

benefits that are authorized under the TRICARE program. In light 

of evidence of the increased need for mental health services, the 

committee directs the Department of Defense to initiate, through 

appropriate command and communications channels, an extensive 

effort to reach all military families with information about mental 

health services that are authorized under the TRICARE program 

and how to access these services through both military and civilian 

providers. These services include outpatient mental health services, 

hospitalization for mental illness, substance abuse treatment, and 

partial hospitalization for therapeutic mental health services. 

Additionally, the committee directs the Department to expand 

appropriate mental health services to family members in overseas 

locations through existing contracting mechanisms, which provide 

culturally and language-appropriate services to families of military 

personnel. The committee understands that military mental health 

341 

resources are appropriately being directed in support of active-duty 

members, both in the field and upon return from deployment, 

which often leaves families in overseas locations without access to 

appropriate and needed mental health services. 

Specialty health care services referrals and authorizations 

The committee is concerned that TRICARE beneficiaries have experienced problems in accessing specialty health care services as a 

result of the failure of the Department of Defense to provide automated support for the process of obtaining referral and authorization for specialty health care services, as promised in the transition 

to new TRICARE contracts. As a result, health care support contractors and military treatment facilities instituted costly manual 

processes that, although necessary, resulted in delays and long 

waiting times on health care information telephone lines for beneficiaries. 

The committee is aware that efforts are now underway to redesign an automated process for obtaining health care referrals and 

authorizations. The committee expects senior-level involvement 

throughout the military health system to ensure its success as rapidly as possible. Further, the committee expects the Department to 

take advantage of best practices in the private sector in specialty 

referral management, including its partners— the U.S. Family 

Health Plans. The committee expects the Department to study successful practices by these plans in specialty referral management 

to ensure that the new system that is being developed will result 

in timely referrals and complete and accurate reporting from specialist to primary care provider, with no disruption or inconvenience to the beneficiary. 

(343) 

TITLE VIII—ACQUISITION POLICY, ACQUISITION 

MANAGEMENT, AND RELATED MATTERS 

Overview 

Introduction. One of the committee’s most important duties is 

to provide oversight over the management of the hundreds of billions of dollars that the Department of Defense spends each year 

on the acquisition of supplies, services, and equipment—everything 

from office supplies to major weapon systems. 

The enactment of the Federal Acquisition Streamlining Act of 

1994 (Public Law 103–355) and the Clinger-Cohen Act in 1996 (as 

codified in chapter 113 of title 40, United States Code) signaled a 

fundamental change in the management of government acquisition 

programs. These statutes: (1) made it easier for federal agencies to 

purchase commercial items; (2) streamlined the processes for making small purchases; (3) eliminated the General Services Administration (GSA) as the gatekeeper for all federal information technology purchases; and (4) opened the door to government-wide acquisition contracts and other flexible multiple-award contracting 

vehicles. 

As a result, the Department of Defense and other federal agencies gained new flexibility to purchase their own information technology products, to rapidly access technologies developed in the 

commercial marketplace, and to focus their attention on the larger 

acquisitions that account for the vast majority of purchasing dollars. These changes, coupled with the procurement ‘‘holiday’’ of the 

1990’s, made it possible for the Department of Defense to save billions of dollars by cutting its acquisition workforce by almost half 

in a period of just 10 years. 

Unfortunately, the increased flexibility provided by acquisition 

reform has not always been used in the best interest of the Department of Defense and the taxpayer. Over the last five years, a series 

of audits of Department of Defense contracts by the Department of 

Defense Inspector General and the Government Accountability Office (GAO) have revealed case after case of inadequate acquisition 

planning, insufficient competition, overpriced contracts, inappropriate expenditures of funds, and lack of attention to contract management. 

As a result, three of the twenty-five high risk areas across the 

federal government (those areas identified by GAO as most susceptible to fraud, waste, and abuse) are directly related to the Department of Defense acquisition system. These are: weapon systems acquisition; contract management; and the management of interagency contracting. Each of these high-risk areas is addressed in 

more detail below. 

The committee has been aware over the last several years of 

emerging problems in each of these areas and has initiated numerous legislative provisions in an effort to direct the Department of 

344 

Defense toward more sound acquisition practices. While this legislation has resulted in some improvement to the Department of Defense’s acquisition processes, serious deficiencies remain in each of 

the high risk areas identified by GAO. 

The committee believes that continuing problems in these high 

risk areas are attributable, in significant part, to inadequate 

human capital planning and continuing reductions in the defense 

acquisition workforce. While it was reasonable to reduce the size of 

the workforce after the enactment of acquisition reform measures 

in the mid–1990’s, these reductions continued even after the procurement holiday of the 1990’s came to an end and even after the 

global war on terrorism brought record levels of procurement expenditures. Moreover, the Department of Defense made these cuts 

in a haphazard way, without giving consideration to the recruitment, training, and career- building needed to ensure the ongoing 

vitality of our acquisition organizations. 

At the same time, emerging government requirements have 

brought forward new challenges such as the acquisition of ‘‘systems 

of systems’’; the coordination of joint service and multinational acquisition programs such as the Joint Strike Fighter; the management of complex software acquisitions; the negotiation of commercial pricing agreements without access to traditional cost or pricing 

data; the development of new performance-based service contracts; 

the oversight of huge time- and-materials contracts; and the management of public-private competitions. Rather than developing 

new skills and new resources to address these new challenges, the 

Department of Defense tried to address them with existing resources using an already undermanned legacy acquisition workforce accustomed to staffing traditional defense procurements in 

the 1980’s and early 1990’s. 

GAO has reported that strategic human capital management remains a high risk area in the federal government because of agencies’ ‘‘long-standing lack of a consistent strategic approach to marshaling, managing, and maintaining the human capital needed to 

maximize government performance and ensure its accountability.’’ 

This problem is particularly acute in the defense acquisition workforce. The Under Secretary of Defense for Acquisition, Technology 

and Logistics explained at an April 13, 2005, hearing before the 

Subcommittee on Readiness and Management Support of the Committee on Armed Services the following: 

I believe we are at the point where any further reductions [in the defense acquisition workforce] will adversely 

impact our ability to successfully execute a growing workload. The numbers are startling. The Defense acquisition 

workforce has been downsized by roughly half since 1990 

while the contract dollars have roughly doubled during the 

same period. * * * 

The Global War on Terrorism and increasing Defense 

budget places greater demands on acquisition workers 

ability to support the warfighter. * * * We need to continue to renew and restore the defense acquisition workforce. We need to ensure that we have the right people in 

the jobs to perform the functions required to support our 

warfighters. Now more than ever, I believe we need to inVerDate Aug 04 2004 15:24 May 25, 2005 Jkt 021326 PO 00000 Frm 00364 Fmt 6601 Sfmt 6601 E:\HR\OC\SR069.XXX SR069
345 

crease the size of the acquisition workforce to handle the 

growing workload, especially as retirements increase in 

the coming years. 

In this title, section 832 would address the problems in the defense acquisition workforce by: (1) giving the Secretary of Defense 

the authority to realign positions in the acquisition workforce to reinvest in higher priority acquisition positions; (2) increasing the 

overall size of the acquisition workforce by 15 percent; and (3) requiring the Secretary to conduct a strategic assessment and develop a human resources strategic plan for the acquisition workforce. 

Department of Defense Weapon Systems Acquisition. 

Twenty years ago, the President’s Blue Ribbon Commission on Defense Management (commonly known as the Packard Commission) 

ushered in an era of acquisition reform with its finding that the 

Department of Defense’s ‘‘weapon systems take too long and cost 

too much to produce.’’ The Packard Commission attributed this 

problem in large part to unrealistic budgeting, ‘‘chronic instability’’ 

in funding, overstated requirements, a dilution of accountability for 

results, duplication of programs, and inadequate testing. 

Many of the recommendations of the Packard Commission report 

have been implemented by Congress and the executive branch. 

These include the creation of the position of the Under Secretary 

of Defense for Acquisition, Technology and Logistics; the flattening 

of the organizational structure for acquisition programs; enhanced 

developmental and operational testing; utilization of multiyear procurement authority; use of performance requirements in lieu of detailed military specifications; and greater use of commercial items. 

Congress significantly streamlined the acquisition laws in the 

1990s and successive administrations have endeavored to eliminate 

unneeded federal and Department of Defense acquisition rules and 

regulations. 

Despite these changes, however, nearly 20 years after the release 

of the Packard Commission report and the enactment of the Goldwater-Nichols Department of Defense Reorganization Act of 1986 

(Public Law 99–433), major weapon systems programs still cost too 

much and take too long to field. 

Why is it that after all of the ‘‘acquisition reforms’’ of the past 

two decades, the Department of Defense has still not been able to 

fix the underlying problems with major weapon system acquisition 

that the Packard Commission identified? The committee believes 

that one answer can be found in the inability of the Department 

to address the budget and program stability issues that were identified by the Packard Commission. Funding and requirements instability continue to drive up costs and delays the eventual fielding 

of new systems. Constant changes in funding and requirements 

lead to continuous changes in acquisition approaches. 

For example, at a recent hearing held by the Subcommittee on 

Seapower of the Committee on Armed Services, representatives 

from the shipbuilding industry testified that the acquisition strategy or procurement profile for the Virginia-class submarine program had changed 12 times in 10 years. Other Department of Defense programs have similar track records. The committee believes 

that the same focus needs to be placed on reforming the defense 

346 

budget and requirements processes as has been placed on reforming the contracting process over the last 20 years. For this reason, 

the committee directs the GAO to review the Department of Defense’s budget and requirements processes and assess how these 

processes can better support program stability in major weapon 

systems acquisition. 

The committee is also concerned that problems with organizational structure, shortfalls in acquisition workforce capabilities, 

and personnel instability continue to undermine the performance of 

major weapon systems programs. The committee believes that the 

Department of Defense should give serious consideration to longer 

tenures for program managers and to taking the steps needed to 

address shortfalls in the Department of Defense’s systems engineering capability and other critical acquisition capabilities. It is 

questionable whether the Department of Defense can effectively 

manage major programs as long as senior officials are changing 

every 18 months and the Department continues to rely almost exclusively on contractors for technical expertise. 

While the Congress cannot legislate good long-term management 

and stewardship of programs, the committee will continue to focus 

attention on issues that will contribute to better program management. In this regard, the committee requested the GAO in January 

2005 to review the authority and responsibilities of program managers and to revisit the issue of program manager tenure. In addition, section 806 in this title would require the Defense Acquisition 

University to review the acquisition organization of the military departments and defense agencies and report to Congress on any deficiencies in those organizations. 

With regard to the acquisition process, the committee believes 

that the Packard Commission correctly emphasized the need for 

technological maturity in the acquisition of major weapon systems. 

Seven years ago, the committee revisited this issue and asked the 

GAO to begin a review comparing the Department of Defense approach to incorporating technology into new products to approaches 

successfully applied in the private sector. GAO found that private 

industry fields new products faster and more successfully because 

they make sure that new technologies have been proven in the laboratory before they try to incorporate them into new products. As 

the Comptroller General explained in his April 13, 2005, testimony: 

Problems occur because Department of Defense’s weapon 

programs do not capture early on the requisite knowledge 

that is needed to efficiently and effectively manage program risks. For example, programs move forward with unrealistic program cost and schedule estimates, lack clearly 

defined and stable requirements, use immature technologies in launching product development, and fail to solidify design and manufacturing processes at appropriate 

junctures in development. 

Over the past several years, the committee has enacted the following legislative initiatives designed to address these problems. 

• Section 804 of the National Defense Authorization Act for 

Fiscal Year 2002 (Public Law 107–107) required the Secretary 

of Defense to report to the congressional defense committees 

347 

any time the Department decides to incorporate into a major 

weapon system a technology that is not yet mature. • Sections 802 and 803 of the Bob Stump National Defense 

Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2003 (Public Law 107–314) 

authorized the Department of Defense to take advantage of 

‘‘spiral’’ development and incremental acquisition techniques, 

which enable the Department to acquire new systems in 

phases, as the technology matures. • Section 804 of the Bob Stump National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2003 and section 801 of the Ronald W. 

Reagan National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 

2005 (Public Law 108–375) required the Department of Defense to focus management attention on problems in the development and acquisition of software, which have frequently resulted in cost overruns and schedule delays in the acquisition 

of major weapon systems. 

The committee is also concerned that the Department of Defense 

has sometimes tried to address acquisition challenges through the 

use of contracting approaches that are not appropriate to major 

weapon systems rather than tackle difficult budgetary, requirements, organizational, and personnel issues. For example, a recent 

series of hearings held by the Subcommittee on AirLand of the 

Committee on Armed Services have highlighted continuing problems resulting from so called ‘‘commercial item strategies’’ used by 

the Department of Defense to acquire major weapon systems. 

While the Department has been able to reduce administrative overhead, commercial item strategies have required foregoing important provisions designed for the protection of the taxpayer in the 

acquisition of major weapon systems, including the Truth in Negotiations Act (TINA) (10 U.S.C. 2306a) and the Cost Accounting 

Standards (CAS). Waiving these provisions limits the government’s 

insight into contractor cost and performance, while doing nothing 

to overcome the programatic and technical challenges faced in developing major systems. 

Reviews by GAO and the Department of Defense Inspector General have found that the Department of Defense has frequently 

waived TINA and CAS requirements without a valid legal basis 

and has failed to conduct adequate price analysis to support price 

reasonableness in cases where these requirements are waived. In 

the case of the proposed Air Force tanker lease, the result was a 

heightened risk of fraud and abuse, which would have significantly 

increased costs to the taxpayer, had the committee not disapproved 

the lease proposal. As a result, the Department has recently decided to restructure two other major defense acquisition programs—the Air Force’s C130J aircraft program and the Army’s Future Combat Systems program—to avoid similar risks. 

Over the past several years, the committee has enacted the following legislative initiatives designed to address such problems. 

• Sections 803 and 808 of the Strom Thurmond National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 1999 (Public Law 105– 

261) tightened the requirements for commercial pricing of defense items. 

• Section 803 of the Floyd D. Spence National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2001 (Public Law 106–398) limVerDate Aug 04 2004 15:24 May 25, 2005 Jkt 021326 PO 00000 Frm 00367 Fmt 6601 Sfmt 6601 E:\HR\OC\SR069.XXX SR069
348 

ited the use of so called ‘‘other transactions’’ to projects in 

which either: (1) at least one nontraditional contractor is participating to significant extent; or (2) the contractor agrees to 

bear at least one-third of the cost of the project. • Section 817 of the Bob Stump National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2003 limited the circumstances in 

which the TINA could be waived and required the Department 

of Defense to report to Congress on all TINA and CAS waivers 

granted for major acquisition programs. • Section 818 of the Ronald W. Reagan National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2005 clarified the applicability 

of TINA to modifications of commercial items that cost in excess of $500,000 and 5 percent of the value of the contract. 

In this title, sections 844 and 804 would build on this record by: (1) prohibiting ‘‘other transactions’’ in excess of $100.0 million and 

ensuring that the Procurement Integrity Act (41 U.S.C. 423) applies to all such transactions; and (2) requiring a specific authorization for the purchase of major weapon systems under procedures 

established for the procurement of commercial items. 

Department of Defense Contract Management. Over the 

last 15 years, the Department of Defense has dramatically increased its reliance on contractor-provided information technology 

and management support services. By some estimates, the Department now spends more on the acquisition of services than it does 

on the acquisition of products, including major weapon systems. 

The Department’s acquisition structure and organization has not 

kept pace with this dramatic change in the expenditure of funds. 

Despite critical reports by GAO and the Department of Defense Inspector General, the Department still has not developed a centralized management structure for the acquisition of services, still has 

not conducted a comprehensive spending analysis of its services 

contracts, and still has not provided its acquisition professionals 

with the training and guidance needed to manage the Department’s service contracts. Rather, the award of services contracts remains dispersed throughout the Department with little management oversight. 

As a result, the Department of Defense has yet to make effective 

use of critical tools, such as performance-based service contracting 

(PBSC) and competitive awards under multiple-award task order 

contracts, to ensure that funds are expended in a cost-effective 

manner. For example, in July 2004, GAO found that Department 

of Defense personnel waived competition requirements for nearly 

half of the task orders reviewed. In March 2005, the Comptroller 

General reported that the Department of Defense failed to conduct 

adequate oversight for 26 of 90 contracts reviewed. Department of 

Defense managers told GAO that contract oversight is ‘‘not always 

a top priority’’ and ‘‘is not given the same importance as getting the 

contract awarded.’’ GAO found that some oversight personnel ‘‘believe they do not have enough time in a normal workday to perform 

surveillance, a factor that may be influenced by declining personnel 

levels in Department of Defense functional offices responsible’’ for 

contract oversight. 

Over the past several years, the committee has enacted the following legislative initiatives designed to address this problem. 

349 

• Section 804 of the National Defense Authorization Act for 

Fiscal Year 2000 (Public Law 106–65) required the issuance of 

government-wide guidance on the appropriate use of task order 

and delivery order contracts. • Section 821 of the Floyd D. Spence National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2001 established a preference 

for PBSC and required the enhanced training of Department of 

Defense acquisition personnel and the establishment of centers 

of excellence in services contracting. • Section 801 of the National Defense Authorization Act for 

Fiscal Year 2002 required the Department to establish a management structure for the procurement of services, a tracking 

system for services contracts, and an approval requirement for 

services contracts that do not use PBSC. • Section 802 of the National Defense Authorization Act for 

Fiscal Year 2002 required the Department to achieve savings 

in its services contracts through the use of spending analyses, 

PBSC, and competitive award of task orders. • Section 803 of the National Defense Authorization Act for 

Fiscal Year 2002 strengthened competition requirements for 

purchases of services through multiple award task order contracts. • Section 805 of the Bob Stump National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2003 established performance goals for 

the Department of Defense’s use of PBSC and competitive task 

orders in its services contracts. 

Section 802 of this title would build on this record by requiring 

each of the military departments to establish a Contract Support 

Acquisition Center to act as the executive agent for the acquisition 

of contract services for the military department. An additional Center would be established to act as a clearinghouse for the acquisition of contract services by the Office of the Secretary of Defense 

and the defense agencies. 

Management of Interagency Contracting. The last decade 

has seen a proliferation of new types of government-wide contracts 

and multi-agency contracts. According to GAO, the GSA alone has 

seen a nearly tenfold increase in interagency contract sales since 

1992, pushing its total sales up to $32 billion in fiscal year 2004. 

Other agencies, such as the Department of the Treasury, the Department of Interior, and the National Institutes of Health, also 

sponsor interagency contracts worth billions of dollars a year. The 

Department of Defense is by far the largest ordering agency under 

these contracts, accounting for 85 percent of the dollars awarded 

under one of the largest GSA programs. 

These contracts, which permit officials of one agency to make 

purchases under contracts entered by other agencies, have provided 

federal agencies rapid access to high-tech commercial products and 

related services. However, these contracts have created a chaotic 

marketplace in which federal agencies are being offered similar 

products under a wide array of contracts, without any easy way of 

comparing between the products. At the same time, the Department of Defense does not have an adequate system to track such 

basic information as who is using these contracts, what they are 

buying, and how much they are paying. 

350 

In too many cases, when one agency uses a contract entered by 

another agency, it appears that neither agency takes responsibility 

for making sure that procurement rules are followed and good 

management sense is applied. As a result, the Department of Defense Inspector General, the GSA Inspector General, and others 

have identified a long series of problems with inter-agency contracts, including lack of acquisition planning, inadequate competition, excessive use of time and materials contracts, improper use of 

expired funds, inappropriate expenditures, and failure to monitor 

contractor performance. 

In the past several years, the committee has enacted the following legislative initiatives designed to address these problems. 

• Section 814 of the Strom Thurmond National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 1999 required approval by a 

contracting officer (or other official specifically designated in 

regulations) for all Department of Defense purchases under 

task order contracts of other federal agencies. 

• Section 804 of the National Defense Authorization Act for 

Fiscal Year 2000 required the issuance of government-wide 

guidance on the appropriate use of government-wide contracts 

and an assessment of the ordering and program practices followed by federal agencies in using GSA contracts. 

• Section 824 of the Bob Stump National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2003 required an assessment of Department of Defense purchases of products and services 

through contracts entered by other federal agencies, including 

the costs and benefits of such purchases. 

• Section 802 of the Ronald W. Reagan National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2005 required a joint review by 

the Department of Defense Inspector General and the GSA Inspector General of the procedures in place to ensure compliance with applicable requirements of law and regulation in Department of Defense purchases through the GSA client support 

centers. 

• Section 854 of the Ronald W. Reagan National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2005 required the Department 

of Defense to establish a process for review and approval of all 

procurements in excess of $100,000 through contracts entered 

by other federal agencies. 

In this title, sections 801 and 805 would build on this record by 

requiring that: (1) the Department of Defense Inspector General 

conduct joint reviews with the Inspector Generals of other relevant 

agencies of all major interagency contracts used by the Department 

of Defense, to ensure that appropriate procedures are in place and 

to ensure compliance with applicable requirements of law and regulation; and (2) the secretary of each military department review 

and report on service surcharges imposed on Department of Defense purchases by other Department of Defense agencies. 

351 

Subtitle A—Acquisition Policy and Management 

Internal controls for procurements on behalf of the Department of Defense (sec. 801) 

The committee recommends a provision that would require the 

Department of Defense Inspector General, in consultation with applicable Inspector’s General of nondefense agencies, to determine 

whether the policies, procedures, and internal controls of nondefense agencies for purchases on behalf of the Department of Defense are adequate to ensure compliance with defense procurement 

requirements of law and regulation. The provision would allow the 

Department to continue contracting after March 15, 2006, with any 

nondefense agency that is making significant progress toward implementing effective policies, procedures, and internal controls. The 

provision would prohibit contracting with nondefense agencies after 

March 15, 2007, if a required second Inspector General review determined that the nondefense agency was not compliant with defense procurement requirements. The provision would also authorize the Under Secretary of Defense for Acquisition, Technology and 

Logistics to continue contracting through a nondefense agency that 

has failed to implement appropriate policies, procedures, and internal controls, if he determines that it is necessary to do so in the 

interest of the Department. 

Contract Support Acquisition Centers (sec. 802) 

The committee recommends a provision that would require the 

secretary of each military department to establish a Contract Support Acquisition Center to act as the executive agent for the acquisition of contract services for that military department. The Secretary of Defense would be required to establish an additional Acquisition Center within the Defense Logistics Agency to act as the 

executive agent for the acquisition of contract services by the defense agencies. 

The committee notes that the budget request includes a reduction of $2.0 billion in funds available for contract support in fiscal 

year 2006 and a total planned reduction of $12.0 billion across the 

Future Years Defense Program. The committee believes that the 

Department of Defense should be able to achieve a significant portion of these savings through the improved use of contract management tools, without having to cut programs or reduce needed services. 

In particular, section 802 of the National Defense Authorization 

Act for Fiscal Year 2002 (Public Law 107–107), as amended, establishes an objective for the Department of Defense to achieve efficiencies in procurements of services through the increased use of: 

(1) performance-based service contracting; (2) competitive procedures for the award of task orders and contracts; and (3) program 

review, spending analyses, and improved management of services 

contracts. Similar steps have enabled private sector companies to 

achieve considerable savings. 

Unfortunately, the goals established in section 802 for competition in services contracting and the use of performance-based services contracting have not been met. Moreover, it appears that the 

Department has yet to undertake the comprehensive program reVerDate Aug 04 2004 15:24 May 25, 2005 Jkt 021326 PO 00000 Frm 00371 Fmt 6601 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\SR069.XXX SR069
352 

view, spending analyses, and improved management of services 

contracts envisioned by section 802. The committee notes that a 

number of civilian agencies (including the Internal Revenue Service, the Department of Agriculture and the U.S. Postal Service) report that they have achieved significant savings through the use of 

spending analyses and strategic sourcing decisions. 

The committee believes that the Department of Defense has been 

unable to achieve comparable savings, in part, because the decentralized nature of the Department of Defense’s services contracting 

and the absence of any organization dedicated to the acquisition of 

contract support hamper efforts to perform spending analyses, 

make strategic sourcing decisions, and institute comprehensive 

management improvements. The provision would address this 

problem by creating an organizational hub for the acquisition of 

contract support services by the military departments and defense 

agencies. 

The provision would also require the Contract Support Acquisition Centers to develop and maintain policies, procedures, and best 

practices guidelines for contract tracking and oversight. The committee notes that the Department of Defense is currently in the 

process of developing a business enterprise architecture and transition plan to guide the modernization of its business systems. The 

committee expects the business systems developed by the Department of Defense to have the capability of tracking basic information about interagency transactions, including the number and dollar value of transactions under each interagency contract vehicle, 

the status of open transactions, the status of funds under interagency transactions (including appropriation type; appropriation 

year; and fund balance received, obligated, expended, and available), and the amount of any funds returned or to be returned to 

the Department of Defense or to the Department of Treasury due 

to the completion or modification of contracts or the expiration of 

funds. 

Authority to enter into acquisition and cross-servicing 

agreements with regional organizations of which the 

United States is not a member (sec. 803) 

The committee recommends a provision that would permit the 

Secretary of Defense to enter into acquisition and cross- servicing 

agreements (ACSA) with regional international organizations of 

which the United States is not a member. Under current law, the 

Secretary may enter into ACSAs only with regional organizations 

of which the United States is a member. 

Acquisition agreements and cross-servicing agreements permit 

the U.S. Armed Forces to obtain specified logistic support from, and 

to provide similar support to, the other party to the agreement on 

a reimbursable basis. Originally designed for and limited to North 

Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) nations and organizations, 

the authority was expanded in 1994 to include certain non-NATO 

nations and regional organizations of which the United States is a 

member. 

The Department of Defense has requested the expansion of this 

authority to be used in cases similar to the 2003 events in Liberia. 

At that time, the U.S. Joint Task Force Liberia was deployed, but 

353 

peacekeeping forces were provided by the Economic Community of 

West African States (ECOWAS)— a regional organization of which 

the United States is not a member. If the United States were permitted to negotiate an ACSA with ECOWAS, the United States 

could have furnished essential logistic support. Instead, other, less 

efficient mechanisms had to be worked out in order to support African peacekeeping forces in Liberia. 

Requirement for authorization for procurement of major 

weapon systems as commercial items (sec. 804) 

The committee recommends a provision that would prohibit the 

purchase of a major weapon system as a commercial item unless 

such purchase is specifically authorized by Congress. 

A recent series of hearings held by the Subcommittee on AirLand 

of the Committee on Armed Services has highlighted continuing 

problems resulting from ‘‘commercial item strategies’’ pursued by 

the Department of Defense over the last decade. Under this approach, the Department has attempted to acquire major weapon 

systems under streamlined procedures intended for the purchase of 

commercial items. Such streamlined procedures do not require application of the Truth in Negotiations Act, the Cost Accounting 

Standards, and other requirements that are otherwise applicable to 

the acquisition of major weapon systems. 

The provision would ensure that acquisition procedures authorized for the acquisition of commercial items are used for true commercial items and not for the purchase of major weapon systems. 

Report on service surcharges for purchases made for military departments through other Department of Defense 

agencies (sec. 805) 

The committee recommends a provision that would require the 

Department of Defense to review and report on service charges imposed on one component of the Department for purchases made 

through another component of the Department. 

Section 854(d) of the Ronald W. Reagan National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2005 (Public Law 108–375) required 

an annual report on service charges imposed on Department purchases by other federal agencies. The provision recommended by 

the committee would extend this requirement to service charges internal to the Department. 

Review of defense acquisition structures (sec. 806) 

The committee recommends a provision that would require the 

Defense Acquisition University, acting under the direction of the 

Under Secretary of Defense for Acquisition, Technology and Logistics, to review and report on the capabilities and shortfalls of the 

acquisition organizations of the military departments and defense 

agencies. The review would place particular emphasis on steps 

needed to improve joint acquisition and acquisition outcomes. 

The review would specifically identify and make recommendations for addressing any gaps, shortfalls, or inadequacies in current 

acquisition organizations that could make it more difficult for these 

organizations to provide high-quality systems to the warfighter on 

a timely and cost-effective basis. The committee is particularly conVerDate Aug 04 2004 15:24 May 25, 2005 Jkt 021326 PO 00000 Frm 00373 Fmt 6601 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\SR069.XXX SR069
354 

cerned that the military departments appear to have divested 

much of their system engineering capability over the last 15 years. 

In addition, the committee is concerned that the Department of Defense has become excessively reliant upon contracts awarded by 

other agencies for the acquisition of services and information technology, and does not appear to have developed the appropriate 

structures and competencies needed to adequately handle these responsibilities. 

At an April 14, 2004, hearing of the Subcommittee on AirLand 

of the Committee on Armed Services, the Acting Secretary of the 

Air Force testified that his department had gone too far in 

downsizing its acquisition organization and had removed critical 

checks and balances from the acquisition process. These problems 

are not unique to the Air Force. Because the problems in the Air 

Force acquisition organization appear to be the most severe, the 

provision would require an interim report on the Air Force acquisition organization not later than one year after the date of enactment of this Act. 

Subtitle B—Defense Industrial Base Matters 

Clarification of exception from Buy American requirements 

for procurement of perishable food for establishments 

outside the United States (sec. 811) 

The committee recommends a provision that would clarify that 

the exception from Buy American requirements for procurement of 

perishable food for establishments outside the United States applies to procurements for an overseas defense facility, even if the 

procurements are not conducted by such a facility. This clarification is necessary because many food purchases for defense facilities 

are now made by prime vendors and other contractors, rather than 

being made by the facilities themselves. 

Conditional waiver of domestic source or content requirements for certain countries with reciprocal procurement 

agreements with the United States (sec. 812) 

The committee recommends a provision that would authorize the 

Secretary of Defense to annually determine whether a foreign country with a reciprocal defense procurement Memorandum of Understanding or agreement with the United States has qualitatively or 

quantitatively increased defense exports to China. If it is determined that no qualitative or quantitative increase has occurred in 

the previous year, the Secretary may on an annual basis waive the 

application of statutory domestic source requirements and domestic 

content requirements, provided that: (1) the application of the requirements would impede the reciprocal procurement of defense 

items under a Memorandum of Understanding between the United 

States and another country; and (2) the other country does not discriminate against items produced in the United States to a greater 

degree than the United States discriminates against items produced in that country. The proposed waiver is identical to the 

standard previously adopted by the Congress for products covered 

by the domestic content restrictions in section 2534 of title 10, 

United States Code. 

355 

Consistency with United States obligations under trade 

agreements (sec. 813) 

The committee recommends a provision that would require that 

no provision of this Act, or any amendment made by this Act, shall 

apply if the Secretary of Defense, in consultation with the Secretary of Commerce, the U.S. Trade Representative, and the Secretary of State, determines that the application of the provision 

would be inconsistent with international trade agreements of the 

United States. 

Identification of areas of research and development effort 

for purposes of the Small Business Innovative Research 

program (sec. 814) 

The committee recommends a provision that would require the 

Secretary of Defense to use criteria and procedures, updated at 

least every four years, in the most current version of the three primary science and technology strategic plans to identify areas of research and development for the Small Business Innovative Research (SBIR) program. The three strategic plans are: the Joint 

Warfighting Science and Technology Plan, the Defense Technology 

Area Plan, and the Basic Research Plan. The provision would ensure participation in the SBIR research topic selection process by 

the immediate customers of defense research, the program managers, and program executive officers. 

The provision would also require the secretaries of the military 

departments to identify successful SBIR Phase II programs for acceleration into Phase III and rapid transition into programs of 

record. All programs identified for rapid transition would first require a written certification from the Secretary of Defense that successful completion of the transition is expected to meet high priority military requirements. 

The committee notes the importance of ensuring transition of 

successful SBIR projects into Department of Defense acquisition 

programs. Acquisition program managers across the Department of 

Defense should be encouraged to utilize the SBIR program in their 

planning, budgeting, and requirements process. The Department of 

Defense should take the steps necessary to improve data collection 

on transition of SBIR projects into Department of Defense acquisition programs, either directly or through integration into systems 

by the prime contractors. The committee believes the Department 

of Defense should encourage the National Research Council’s ongoing study of the SBIR program to address the issue of technology 

transition and, to the extent possible, collect data on the rates of 

transition success for SBIR Phase II projects. 

Subtitle C—Defense Contractor Matters 

Requirements for defense contractors relating to certain 

former Department of Defense officials (sec. 821) 

The committee recommends a provision that would require com- panies that receive defense contracts in excess of $10.0 million 

(other than contracts for the procurement of commercial items) to 

report to the Department of Defense on an annual basis on former 

DOD officials who receive compensation from the contractor. 

356 

At an April 14, 2005, hearing of the Subcommittee on AirLand 

of the Senate Committee on Armed Services, the U.S. Attorney for 

the Eastern District of Virginia testified that it has been difficult 

for him to identify potential ethics violations by former Department 

officials who go to work for defense contractors, because the Department’s records in this area are inadequate. An April 2005 report of the Government Accountability Office (GAO) also concluded 

that monitoring of former Department employees who go to work 

for defense contractors is limited. The report states: 

Neither the Defense Contract Management Agency nor 

the Defense Contract Audit Agency—the agencies responsible for oversight of defense contractor’s operations—had 

assessed the adequacy of contractors’ practices of hiring 

current and former government employees. An independent review of one of DOD’s largest contractors found 

that the company lacked the management controls needed 

to ensure an effective ethics program. Instead, the review 

found that the company relied excessively on employees to 

self-monitor their compliance with post-government employment restrictions. The review concluded that by relying on self-monitoring, the company increased the risk of 

non-compliance, due to either employees’ willful misconduct or failure to understand complex ethics rules. 

The provision should provide a more complete set of records for 

the Department of Defense, the GAO, and others to use in assessing the extent to which former Department employees who go to 

work for defense contractors are in compliance with applicable ethics requirements. 

Review of certain contractor ethics matters (sec. 822) 

The committee recommends a provision that would require the 

Secretary of Defense, in consultation with the Director of the Office 

of Government Ethics (OGE) and the Administrator for Federal 

Procurement Policy, to review ethics issues raised by contractor 

employees performing functions closely associated with inherently 

governmental functions and other contractor employees performing 

functions historically performed by government employees in the 

federal workplace. 

On February 8, 2005, the Acting Director of the OGE requested 

that the Services Acquisition Reform Act (SARA) Advisory Committee conduct an evaluation of ‘‘whether contractor employees 

should be subject to some type of ethics laws, rules or practices designed to prevent conflicts of interest and the appearance of conflicts of interest.’’ The OGE letter explained: 

In recent years, executive branch ethics officials—particularly those from Department of Defense agencies and 

certain civilian agencies—have identified various issues 

and concerns that are a result of the growing presence of 

contractors in the Federal workplace. The issues predominantly relate to the fact that, unlike Government employees, contractor personnel are not subject to a comprehensive set of ethics rules, yet they are often performing some 

of the Government’s most sensitive and critical work. This 

357 

disparity is true even when contractor personnel are working side-by-side with Government employees in the Federal workplace or on the battlefield, and, for all practical 

purposes, may appear to the public to be employees. The 

problem is most likely to occur when contractors perform 

work that historically was considered a federal function, as 

well as when contractors perform functions closely associated with inherently governmental functions. 

Thus, it has been suggested that current laws, regulations and practices may be inadequate to prevent certain 

kinds of conflicts and ethics issues on the part of contractors. For example, Government employees are subject to 

various ‘‘post employment’’ restrictions that prevent them 

from switching sides and representing clients back to the 

government on a matter that they worked on in the Government. In contrast, contractor personnel—even those 

who performed the same or similar work as their Federal 

counterparts—are not subject to similar restrictions after 

they complete work on a contract or obtain work with another contractor. In addition, contractor personnel are not 

uniformly subject to gift rules. For example, a contractor 

performing an agency’s IT function could accept a free 

computer at a company-sponsored user conference or meeting, unless such conduct was prohibited by his company’s 

internal policies. 

The committee supports the OGE request that the SARA Advisory Committee should look into these issues. In addition, the committee believes that Congress would benefit from the views of the 

Secretary, the Director of OGE, and the Administrator for Federal 

Procurement Policy on these issues. The options listed in the legislation for review by the Secretary are the same options proposed 

in the OGE letter. 

Contract fraud risk assessment (sec. 823) 

The committee recommends a provision that would establish a 

risk assessment team to assess the vulnerability of Department of 

Defense contracts to fraud, waste, and abuse and require the Secretary of Defense to develop an action plan to address areas of vulnerability identified by the risk assessment team. 

Recent contracting scandals in the Department of Defense have 

lead the U.S. Attorney for the Eastern District of Virginia to establish a Procurement Fraud Working Group to promote early detection and prevention of procurement fraud through the use of law 

enforcement measures to increase prevention and prosecution of 

fraud-related cases. The committee strongly supports this effort. 

However, the committee believes that more proactive measures can 

be taken by the Department to prevent fraud. A combined approach of active prosecution and proactive Department policies and 

procedures directed at areas of potential vulnerability should be 

constructive in deterring improper contracting practices. 

358 

Subtitle D—Defense Acquisition Workforce Matters 

Availability of funds in Acquisition Workforce Training 

Fund for defense acquisition workforce improvements 

(sec. 831) 

The committee recommends a provision that would amend section 37 of the Office of Federal Procurement Policy Act (41 U.S.C. 

section 433) to allow the defense acquisition workforce to benefit 

from fees collected under inter-agency contracts. 

Section 1412 of the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal 

Year 2004 (Public Law 108–136) amended section 37 to establish 

an Acquisition Workforce Training Fund supporting the training of 

the acquisition workforce. The Department of Defense was excluded from contributing to, or benefitting from, this fund. The provision would delete this exclusion, enabling the defense acquisition 

workforce to benefit from the enhanced training opportunities 

made possible by the fund. 

Limitation and reinvestment authority relating to reduction 

of the defense acquisition and support workforce (sec. 

832) 

The committee recommends a provision that would require a 15 

percent increase in the defense acquisition and support workforce 

during fiscal years 2006 through 2008. The Secretary of Defense 

would be given the flexibility under this provision to realign positions in the acquisition workforce to reinvest in higher priority acquisition positions. The provision would also require the Secretary 

to conduct a strategic assessment and develop a human resources 

strategic plan for the defense acquisition and support workforce. 

Technical amendments relating to defense acquisition workforce improvements (sec. 833) 

The committee recommends a provision that would make minor 

technical changes to the newly revised Defense Acquisition Workforce Improvement Act (DAWIA), chapter 87 of title 10, United 

States Code, enacted by section 812 of the Ronald W. Reagan National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2005 (Public Law 

108–375). These technical changes are necessary to correct inaccuracies in numbering. 

The committee notes that DAWIA, as amended by section 812, 

specifies which military positions should be designated as critical 

acquisition positions, but gives the Secretary of Defense broad discretion to determine which civilian positions should be so designated. The committee expects the Secretary to use this discretion 

to ensure parallel treatment of military and civilian acquisition officials by designating civilian positions that have a level of responsibility comparable to the military positions that are designated by 

statute. 

359 

Subtitle E—Other Matters 

Extension of contract goal for small disadvantaged business 

and certain institutions of higher education (sec. 841) 

The committee recommends a provision that would extend section 2323 of title 10, United States Code, for three years. Section 

2323 establishes a 5 percent goal for Department of Defense contracting with small disadvantaged businesses and certain institutions of higher education. 

Codification and modification of limitation on modification 

of military equipment within five years of retirement or 

disposal (sec. 842) 

The committee recommends a provision that would prohibit annual expenditures greater than $100,000 to modify an aircraft, 

weapon, ship, or other item of equipment that will be retired or 

otherwise disposed of within 5 years after completion of the modification. The secretary of a military department may waive this restriction if the waiver is necessary on the basis of national security, 

and he so notifies the congressional defense committees in writing. 

Safety modifications will not require waivers. This provision would 

codify and modify the requirements of section 8053 of the Department of Defense Appropriations Act for Fiscal Year 1998 (Public 

Law 105–56) by establishing an annual $100,000 threshold requirement for congressional notice and departmental waiver. 

Clarification of rapid acquisition authority to respond to 

combat emergencies (sec. 843) 

The committee recommends a provision that would amend section 806 of the Bob Stump National Defense Authorization Act for 

Fiscal Year 2003 (Public Law 107–314) to give the Department of 

Defense greater flexibility to address combat emergencies. In particular, the provision would: (1) give the Secretary of Defense authority to address deficiencies that have resulted in combat casualties, even if they are not ‘‘combat capability deficiencies’’ and even 

if they have not resulted in fatalities; (2) permit the Secretary to 

delegate his authority under the section to the Deputy Secretary of 

Defense; and (3) clarify that the category of statutes and regulations that may be waived if necessary to prevent combat casualties 

include domestic source or content restrictions that would inhibit 

or impede the rapid acquisition of needed equipment. 

Modification of authority to carry out certain prototype 

projects (sec. 844) 

The committee recommends a provision that would prohibit the 

Department of Defense from entering into a transaction (other than 

a contract, cooperative agreement, or grant) under the authority of 

section 845 of the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal 

Year 2004 (Public Law 108–136, 10 U.S.C. 2371 note) for a prototype project that is expected to cost in excess of $100.0 million. The 

provision would require the approval of the senior procurement executive for an agency before this authority may be used to enter 

into a transaction that is expected to cost in excess of $20.0 million. 

360 

Section 845 was intended to be used for limited prototype 

projects, particularly those in which the Department seeks to engage nontraditional defense contractors that may be averse to the 

requirements imposed by a standard Department procurement contract. For this reason, the statement of managers accompanying 

the Strom Thurmond National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal 

Year 1999 (Public Law 105–261) states: 

The conferees continue to believe that the section 845 

authority should only be used in the exceptional cases 

where it can be clearly demonstrated that a normal contract or grant will not allow sufficient access to affordable 

technologies. The conferees are especially concerned that 

such authority not be used to circumvent the appropriate 

management controls in the standard acquisition and 

budgeting process. 

Similarly, section 803 of the Floyd D. Spence National Defense 

Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2001 (Public Law 106–348) expressly limited the use of section 845 authority to transactions with 

companies that typically do not do business with the Department 

and to transactions in which costs are shared between the Department and the contractor. 

The committee does not believe that the $20.9 billion agreement 

entered between the Army and the Lead Systems Integrator for the 

Future Combat Systems program was consistent with the language 

and intent of these provisions. For this reason, the committee supports the Army’s decision to restructure its agreement with the 

Lead Systems Integrator as a traditional procurement contract. 

The provision recommended by the committee would ensure that 

section 845 authority is used as intended in the future for limited 

prototype projects, not to circumvent the appropriate management 

controls in the standard acquisition and budgeting process. 

Extension of certain authorities on contracting with employers of persons with disabilities (sec. 845) 

The committee recommends a provision that would extend for 

one year section 853 of the Ronald W. Reagan National Defense 

Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2005 (Public Law 108–375). This 

provision would ensure the continuation and completion of existing 

contracts (including any options) awarded under the Javits-Wagner-O’Day Act (41 U.S.C 46 et seq.) and the Randolph-Sheppard Act 

(20 U.S.C. 107 et seq.) programs for the operation of military troop 

dining facilities, military mess halls, and other similar military 

dining facilities. 

Items of Special Interest 

Commercial satellite bandwidth 

The Government Accountability Office (GAO) issued a report in 

December 2003, at the request of the Subcommittee on Readiness 

and Management Support of the Committee on Armed Services, entitled ‘‘Satellite Communications: Strategic Approach Needed for 

DoD’s Procurement of Commercial Satellite Bandwidth.’’ Section 

803 of the Ronald W. Reagan National Defense Authorization Act 

361 

for Fiscal Year 2005 (Public Law 108–375) required the Secretary 

of Defense to report to Congress on the Department’s procurement 

strategy for commercial communications satellite services, and how 

the Department will address each of the recommendations contained in the GAO report. It is the committee’s understanding that 

the Department’s report will be delivered in June 2005. 

The committee directs the GAO to review the Department’s report to determine the extent to which the recommendations made 

by GAO have been addressed by the Department and report to the 

committee on the results of this assessment within 25 days of the 

release of the Department’s report. 

Defense trade data 

Defense trade impacts several issues of importance to the Department of Defense, including maintaining a healthy supplier 

base, protecting critical technologies, ensuring access to a secure 

supply of defense-related items and services, managing technology 

transfers, and increasing interoperability with allies. A critical element to guide decision-makers on defense trade is access to comprehensive and reliable data. Due to concerns about the potential 

inadequacy of defense trade data, the committee directs the Government Accountability Office (GAO) to identify: (1) Defense trade 

data that is collected and reported by U.S. government agencies; (2) 

the limitations, if any, of that data; and (3) reasonable conclusions 

that can be made about current trends in defense trade based on 

that data. 

The committee is also concerned about the adequacy of data on 

arms sales to China. The European Union’s recent proposal to lift 

its ban on lethal arms sales to China has generated a need for the 

GAO to update its June 1998 report, ‘‘China: Military Imports from 

the United States and the European Union since the 1989 Embargoes.’’ Accordingly, the committee directs the GAO to report on 

arms sales to China over the past five years from the United 

States, European Union member countries, and other major arms 

exporting countries and determine any quantitative or qualitative 

trends in these sales. 

Department of Defense anti-tamper program 

In the Senate Report accompanying S. 1050 (S. Rept. 108–46) to 

the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2004, the 

committee asked the Government Accountability Office (GAO) to 

review the Department of Defense’s anti-tamper program, which is 

designed to protect critical U.S. technologies from risk of exploitation if they are exported, stolen, or lost during combat. The GAO 

reported to the committee in March 2004 and made several recommendations for the Department to improve its anti-tamper program. 

The committee has been informed that the Department has made 

progress in implementing some of GAO’s recommendations but has 

yet to implement others. Specifically, the Department has made 

progress in: (1) Developing a tool to help program managers identify critical technologies in their systems; (2) creating a technology 

database to include anti-tamper technologies and lessons learned; 

(3) sponsoring training for verification teams; (4) funding an indeVerDate Aug 04 2004 15:24 May 25, 2005 Jkt 021326 PO 00000 Frm 00381 Fmt 6601 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\SR069.XXX SR069
362 

pendent study on anti-tamper techniques and general effectiveness; 

and (5) creating more robust verification and validation teams to 

assist programs with anti-tamper implementation and best practices. 

The committee understands that the Department has yet to: (1) 

Implement a newly drafted policy on anti-tamper; (2) develop a 

central review mechanism for consistent identification of similar 

critical technologies across programs; and (3) fully establish a business case that determines whether the current organizational 

structure and resources are adequate to implement anti-tamper 

protection and, if not, determine what other actions are needed to 

mitigate the risk of compromising critical technologies. 

The committee directs the GAO to update its March 2004 report 

to the committee and evaluate the actions the Department has 

taken to date and pursue any necessary follow-up work on the Department’s anti-tamper program. 

Industrial base issues 

In May 2004, the Department of Defense issued a report entitled: 

‘‘Adequacy of U.S. Beryllium Industrial Base to Meet Defense Requirements’’, dated May 2004. This report clearly establishes the 

long-term national security need to ensure a domestic supply of beryllium to meet defense needs. The committee urges the Secretary 

of Defense to include within future years’ budgets a level of funding 

consistent with the report’s findings, which will lead to the development of a cooperative public-private partnership in the domestic 

beryllium industrial base, to include using funding under the Defense Production Act (50 U.S.C. App. section 2061 et seq.), or any 

other means that the Secretary determines as feasible. 

The committee also believes that the Department should review 

whether Defense Production Act funding should be used for (1) a 

silicon carbide armor manufacturing initiative and (2) supporting 

efficient and flexible manufacturing for producing current and future small arms weapons. 

Implementation of authority to enter energy savings performance contracts 

Section 1090 of the Ronald W. Reagan National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2005 (Public Law 108–375) extended 

through the end of fiscal year 2006 the authority for the Department of Defense and other federal agencies to enter energy savings 

performance contracts pursuant to section 802 of the National Energy Policy Act (42 U.S.C. 8287a). 

When properly used, energy savings performance contracts enable the Department and other federal agencies to reduce energy 

and water consumption through infrastructure upgrades, such as 

new thermal storage systems, chillers, boilers, and lights, with no 

out-of-pocket cost at all to the government. In some cases, excess 

savings from energy improvements can even be used to offset other 

base operating support expenses. 

Section 802 of the National Energy Policy Act provides that an 

energy savings performance contract is a contract which provides 

for the contractor to implement energy savings measures in federal 

facilities ‘‘in exchange for a share of any energy savings directly reVerDate Aug 04 2004 15:24 May 25, 2005 Jkt 021326 PO 00000 Frm 00382 Fmt 6601 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\SR069.XXX SR069
363 

sulting from implementation of such measures during the term of 

the contract.’’ The statute further provides that aggregate payments to the contractor ‘‘may not exceed the amount that the agency would have paid for utilities without an energy savings performance contract.’’ 

In December 2004, the Government Accountability Office (GAO) 

reported that on six energy savings performance contracts it reviewed (including three contracts entered by the Department of the 

Navy), aggregate payments to the contractor exceeded energy cost 

savings during the term of the contract. In each case, the GAO 

found that the agencies made significant up-front payments to the 

contractor and then paid the contractor all or virtually all of the 

savings resulting from the contract. As a result, the total of the upfront payments and the regular payments during the term of the 

contract exceeded the amount of the savings. 

The committee is concerned by the appearance that the Department and other federal agencies may have routinely violated the 

requirements of section 802 of the National Energy Policy Act. Accordingly, the committee directs the Secretary of Defense to issue 

guidance to all the Department officials responsible for entering energy savings performance contracts reemphasizing the statutory requirement that the cost of an energy savings performance contract 

be paid entirely out of the energy savings resulting from the contract. 

National technology and industrial base considerations 

The committee notes with concern a number of negative trends 

affecting the ability of the national technology and industrial base 

to meet the long-term national security challenges facing the 

United States. Over the past 20 years, the U.S. aerospace industrial base has declined from 75 competing companies to the present 

‘‘Big Five.’’ This is mainly a result of consolidations and mergers. 

More than 700,000 jobs in the aerospace and defense sector have 

been lost. The average age of defense industry workers is now over 

50, while college enrollment in defense and aerospace-related engineering programs continues to decline. 

The integration of the commercial and military industrial bases, 

so called civil-military integration, has not been as successful as 

many advocates had hoped. While military systems continue to incorporate advanced commercial technology, many commercial systems have often proven difficult to adapt for military uses. Also, 

military technologies have been slow to develop commercial applications. 

The defense industry has found it difficult to use global sales to 

stabilize defense production. Cumbersome export control processes 

often overly restrict American companies from selling defense and 

dual-use products on the international market and discourage 

international cooperation on new aerospace and defense technologies. 

The committee recognizes that private sector manufacturers have 

a responsibility to investors and shareholders to be profitable and 

competitive. Industries supporting national defense must compete 

with other industries in the U.S. economy for investment capital. 

The Department of Defense should consider reviewing profit poliVerDate Aug 04 2004 15:24 May 25, 2005 Jkt 021326 PO 00000 Frm 00383 Fmt 6601 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\SR069.XXX SR069
364 

cies to accurately reflect risk and achieve better performance in defense contracting. 

The Department of Defense, industry, and the Congress must 

work together to ensure that the defense industry continues on the 

path of integration with the commercial sector, remains globally 

competitive, and attracts new generations of scientists, engineers, 

and other skilled workers. To that end, the committee urges the 

Department to work with industry to: (1) Maintain stable federal 

funding for core production capabilities and the critical Research 

Development Test and Evaluation infrastructure supporting defense programs; (2) maintain a stable annual science and technology budget at the Department consistent with the 3 percent goal 

established in legislation, to develop innovative technologies designed to meet future national security threats; (3) work with universities and the defense manufacturing community to develop a 

plan to train and build a skilled aerospace and defense workforce; 

(4) provide appropriate incentives to encourage the participation of 

small businesses and independent entrepreneurs from nondefense 

sectors in the Defense Industrial Base; (5) eliminate obstacles in 

the export licensing process that restrict international sales of defense and dual-use products without providing a corresponding national security benefit; (6) facilitate and encourage international 

joint programs with allies; and (7) promote greater interoperability 

among both defense and commercial defense systems, domestically 

and internationally. 

(365) 

TITLE IX—DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE ORGANIZATION 

AND MANAGEMENT 

Subtitle A—Duties and Functions of Department of Defense 

Officers and Organizations 

Directors of small business programs (sec. 901) 

The committee recommends a provision that would change the 

title of the Department of Defense’s ‘‘Office of Small and Disadvantaged Business Utilization’’ to the ‘‘Office of Small Business Programs’’ to more clearly represent the office’s span of authority. The 

name would not reflect a change in emphasis or support for disadvantaged businesses, but rather would clarify that the Office of 

Small Business Programs has the full range of authority over many 

other small business programs that presently are not reflected in 

the office’s title. The new title would capture the overarching nature of the program, which encompasses the small disadvantaged 

business, service-disabled veteran-owned small business, qualified 

historically underutilized business zone small business, womenowned small business, and the very small business programs. 

Executive agent for acquisition of capabilities to defend the 

homeland against missiles and other low-altitude aircraft (sec. 902) 

The committee recommends a provision that would direct the 

Secretary of Defense to establish an executive agent in the Department of Defense to manage the acquisition of capabilities necessary 

to defend the homeland against cruise missiles, unmanned aerial 

vehicles, and other low-altitude air threats. The provision would require the executive agent to coordinate with the Missile Defense 

Agency, the Joint Theater Air and Missile Defense Organization, 

U.S. Northern Command, U.S. Strategic Command, and other appropriate U.S. government agencies to ensure unity of effort and to 

avoid unnecessary duplication. Additionally, the Secretary is required to submit to the congressional defense committees, no later 

than 180 days after enactment of this Act, a plan for the defense 

of the United States against cruise missiles, unmanned aerial vehicles, and other low-altitude air threats. The Secretary shall coordinate this plan with other Department plans for the defense of the 

homeland against short- to medium-range ballistic missiles. 

The committee has been concerned about the increasing threat 

posed by cruise missiles, unmanned aerial vehicles, and other lowaltitude threats against the United States. Accordingly, Congress 

directed the Secretary, in the National Defense Authorization Act 

for Fiscal Year 2004 (Public Law 108–136), to provide a report on 

the U.S. military’s ability to address these threats. The report entitled ‘‘Cruise Missile Defense,’’ submitted to the Congress in September 2004, addressed the challenges cruise missiles and other 

366 

low-altitude threats pose to the air defense of the United States 

and noted that a comprehensive interagency approach was necessary to address the problem. The report further noted that while 

technology demonstration programs were underway in the Department for homeland airspace surveillance and defense, it would be 

necessary to establish acquisition programs with appropriate funding to acquire capabilities that were successfully demonstrated. 

The committee notes that it is the mission of NORAD, a component of U.S. Northern Command, to defend the United States 

against cruise missiles and other air threats. NORAD is currently 

developing a document under the U.S. Joint Staff’s Joint Capabilities Integration and Development System to define the family-ofsystems capabilities needed to defend the United States against 

low-altitude air threats. The committee understands, however, that 

while U.S. NORTHCOM is responsible for the defense of the homeland against these threats, it does not have the authority or funding to acquire needed capabilities. 

To enhance efforts to protect the homeland from cruise missiles, 

unmanned aerial vehicles, and other low-altitude air threats, the 

committee believes that there should be a single official within the 

Department responsible for coordinating, integrating, funding, and 

acquiring the surveillance and interceptor programs necessary for 

a cohesive defense of the homeland against these threats, and that 

there should be a plan for such defense. Additionally, these efforts 

to defend against low-altitude air threats should be coordinated 

with ongoing Missile Defense Agency efforts to address the shortto medium- range ballistic missile threat to the United States. 

Subtitle B—Space Activities 

Advisory committee on Department of Defense requirements for space control (Sec. 911) 

The committee recommends a provision that would require the 

Secretary of Defense to establish an advisory committee on the current and future space control requirements of the United States, 

including the means of meeting those requirements. 

According to U.S. ‘‘National Space Policy,’’ last promulgated in 

September 1996, the United States will develop, operate, and maintain space control capabilities to ensure freedom of action in space 

and, if directed, deny such freedom of action to adversaries. In 

March 2005, senior administration officials testified before the Subcommittee on Strategic Forces of the Committee on Armed Services 

that this remains official U.S. policy. The space control mission 

area includes three important components: (1) space situational 

awareness; (2) defensive counterspace operations; and (3) offensive 

counterspace operations. 

The committee recognizes the growing reliance of the United 

States on space operations for its security. This reliance creates a 

potential vulnerability should adversaries develop capabilities for 

interdicting or destroying U.S. space assets or ground support infrastructure. The committee is concerned that given the potential 

threats to U.S. and allied space operations, the Department of Defense may not be allocating sufficient funding for space control 

when compared with other military space mission areas. The comVerDate Aug 04 2004 15:24 May 25, 2005 Jkt 021326 PO 00000 Frm 00386 Fmt 6601 Sfmt 6601 E:\HR\OC\SR069.XXX SR069
367 

mittee therefore believes an advisory committee of experts can provide a valuable assessment of current and future space control requirements, to include the adequacy of means for meeting those requirements. 

Subtitle C—Other Matters 

Acceptance of gifts and donations for Department of Defense regional centers for security studies (sec. 921) 

The committee recommends a provision that would provide authority for the Secretary of Defense to accept gifts and donations 

on behalf of each of the Department of Defense regional centers for 

security studies. The provision would define the sources from which 

gifts and donations may be accepted, and criteria for acceptance of 

such gifts and donations. The provision would also establish an account on the books of the Treasury to be known as the Regional 

Centers for Security Studies Account into which monetary donations would be credited and made available for expenditure to defray the costs, or enhance the operation, of the regional centers. 

This provision would consolidate a set of laws into one provision 

that would provide uniform and consistent authority for the Secretary to accept gifts and donations on behalf of each of the Department regional centers for security studies. 

Operational files of the Defense Intelligence Agency (sec. 

922) 

The committee recommends a provision that would authorize the 

Director of the Defense Intelligence Agency (DIA), in coordination 

with the Director of National Intelligence, to exempt specifically defined operational files of certain elements of the DIA from disclosure under the Freedom of Information Act (5 U.S.C. 552). Judicial 

review would be available for allegations of improper withholding 

of material, subject to certain protections for classified material. All 

exempted operational files would be subject to a 10–year review to 

determine whether the protected files should be removed from the 

exempted operational files. This provision would provide DIA with 

protection of its most sensitive operational files. The committee 

notes that such protections are currently authorized for the Central 

Intelligence Agency, the National Security Agency, the National 

Reconnaissance Office, and the National Geospatial Intelligence 

Agency, under title VII of the National Security Act of 1947 (50 

U.S.C. 431 et. seq.). 

Prohibition on implementation of certain orders and guidance on functions and duties of the General Counsel and 

the Judge Advocate General of the Air Force (sec. 923) 

The committee recommends a provision that would prohibit the 

obligation or expenditure of funds authorized to be appropriated by 

the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2006 to implement or enforce either: (1) the order of the Secretary of the Air 

Force, dated May 15, 2003, and entitled ‘‘Functions and Duties of 

the General Counsel and the Judge Advocate General;’’ or (2) any 

internal operating instruction or memorandum issued by the GenVerDate Aug 04 2004 15:24 May 25, 2005 Jkt 021326 PO 00000 Frm 00387 Fmt 6601 Sfmt 6601 E:\HR\OC\SR069.XXX SR069
368 

eral Counsel of the Department of the Air Force in reliance upon 

the Secretary’s May 15, 2003, order. 

Since the enactment of the Goldwater-Nichols Department of Defense Reorganization Act of 1986 (Public Law 99–433), the Congress has strongly supported the existence of separate military and 

civilian staffs in the area of legal services and elsewhere. In section 

574 of the Ronald W. Reagan National Defense Authorization Act 

for Fiscal Year 2005 (Public Law 108–375), the Congress enacted 

explicit protection for the ability of the Judge Advocates General to 

give independent legal advice to the service secretaries and service 

chiefs, and for the ability of judge advocates to give such advice to 

commanders. In the statement of managers accompanying that Act, 

the conferees directed the Secretary of the Air Force to rescind the 

above order, which violated the principles of the Goldwater-Nichols 

Act by elevating the General Counsel to a position of supremacy 

over Air Force legal services. The conferees further directed the 

General Counsel to rescind any operating instructions or memoranda issued in reliance upon the Secretary’s order. Neither of 

these has been done. Accordingly, the committee recommends the 

inclusion of the present provision. 

(369) 

TITLE X—GENERAL PROVISIONS 

Subtitle A—Financial Matters 

Transfer authority (sec. 1001) 

The committee recommends a provision that would provide for 

the transfer of funds authorized in division A of this Act for unforeseen higher priority needs in accordance with normal reprogramming procedures. 

Incorporation of classified annex (sec. 1002) 

The committee recommends a provision that would incorporate 

the classified annex prepared by the Committee on Armed Services 

into the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2006. 

United States contribution to NATO common-funded budgets in fiscal year 2006 (sec. 1003) 

The resolution of ratification for the Protocols to the North Atlantic Treaty of 1949 on the Accession of Poland, Hungary, and the 

Czech Republic contained a provision (section 3(2)(c)(ii)) requiring 

a specific authorization for U.S. payments to the common-funded 

budgets of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) for each 

fiscal year, beginning in fiscal year 1999, in which U.S. payments 

exceed the fiscal year 1998 total. The committee recommends a provision to authorize the U.S. contribution to NATO common-funded 

budgets for fiscal year 2006, including the use of unexpended balances from prior years. 

Reduction in certain authorizations due to savings relating 

to lower inflation (sec. 1004) 

The Department of Defense assumed an inflation rate of 2.1 percent in its fiscal year 2006 budget submission. However, according 

to the Senate Budget Committee’s report (S.Prt 109–18, p. 10) accompanying the Senate Concurrent Resolution of the Budget for FY 

2006 (S.Con.Res. 18), the Congressional Budget Office’s estimate of 

inflation is 0.5 percentage points lower than the administration’s 

estimate for 2006. The savings resulting from lower-than-expected 

inflation for fiscal year 2006 is $1.3 billion. 

Authorization of supplemental appropriations for fiscal year 

2005 (sec. 1005) 

This provision would authorize the supplemental appropriations 

for fiscal year 2005 enacted in the Emergency Supplemental Appropriations Act for Defense, the Global War on Terror, and Tsunami 

Relief, 2005 (Public Law 109–13, as adopted by the House of Representatives on May 5, 2005 and the Senate on May 10, 2005). 

370 

Increase in fiscal year 2005 transfer authority (sec. 1006) 

The committee recommends a provision that would increase fiscal year 2005 transfer authority from $3.5 billion to $6.185 billion 

for transfers among accounts in division A of the Ronald W. 

Reagan National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2005 

(Public Law 108–375) for unforeseen higher priority needs in accordance with normal reprogramming procedures. 

Monthly disbursement to States of state income tax voluntarily withheld from retired or retained pay (sec. 1007) 

The committee recommends a provision that would amend section 1045(a) of title 10, United States Code, to authorize the service 

secretaries, pursuant to an agreement with any State, to disburse 

state income tax on a monthly, vice quarterly, basis that is collected from the monthly retired or retainer pay of any service member or former service member entitled to such pay who voluntarily 

requests such withholding. 

Reestablishment of limitation on payment of facilities 

charges assessed by Department of State (sec. 1008) 

The committee recommends a provision that would permit the 

Secretary of Defense to offset, on an annual basis, any fees charged 

to the Department of Defense by the Department of State for the 

maintenance, upgrade, or construction of U.S. diplomatic facilities 

by the total amount of the unreimbursed costs incurred by the Department of Defense for providing goods and services to the Department of State during that year. 

While the committee recognizes the need to upgrade and construct new diplomatic facilities, the committee opposes the use of 

the capital cost sharing program as a means of accomplishing this 

goal. The capital cost sharing program does not take into account 

the substantial amount of goods and services that the Department 

of Defense provides to the Department of State at no cost. The committee urges the administration to request sufficient funds in future year budget requests to provide for the costs of upgrading or 

constructing U.S. diplomatic facilities. 

Subtitle B—Naval Vessels and Shipyards 

Transfer of battleship (sec. 1021) 

The committee recommends a provision that would authorize the 

Secretary of the Navy to strike the U.S.S. Wisconsin from the 

Naval Register, and transfer it by gift or otherwise, provided that 

the transferee locate the ship in the Commonwealth of Virginia. 

The provision would also stipulate that any costs associated with 

the transfer will be borne by the transferee, notwithstanding section 7306b(d) of title 10, United States Code. 

The committee notes that the U.S.S. Wisconsin is currently 

berthed in the Commonwealth of Virginia, where it is open to the 

general public for tours. The committee expects the Secretary to 

ensure that any group who accepts transfer will use it to promote 

the traditions of the Navy. 

371 

Conveyance of Navy Drydock, Jacksonville, Florida (sec. 

1022) 

The committee recommends a provision that would authorize the 

Secretary of the Navy to convey all right, title, and interest of the 

United States in and to Navy Drydock No. AFDM–7 (the Sustain) 

to Atlantic Marine Property Holding Company, located in Duval 

County, Florida. 

The provision would include the condition that the drydock remain at the facilities of the Atlantic Marine Property Holding Company until September 30, 2010. The provision would also require 

the Atlantic Marine Property Holding Company to pay an amount 

determined by the Secretary to be the fair market value of the drydock. The provision would also authorize the Secretary to require 

any additional terms and conditions determined appropriate to protect the interests of the United States. 

Subtitle C—Counterdrug Matters 

Use of unmanned aerial vehicles for United States border 

reconnaissance (sec. 1031) 

The committee recommends a provision that would amend chapter 18 of title 10, United States Code, to authorize the Secretary 

of Defense to use Department of Defense personnel and equipment 

to conduct aerial reconnaissance within the area of responsibility 

of the U.S. Northern Command (NORTHCOM) with unmanned 

aerial vehicles (UAVs) in order to conduct certain operations. These 

operations would be to detect, monitor, and communicate on the 

movement of air and sea traffic along the U.S. border and on surface traffic that is outside of the geographic boundary of the United 

States or up to 25 miles inside the border of the United States, if 

that traffic was detected outside the boundary of the United States. 

The provision would specify that the purposes of this aerial reconnaissance would be to detect and monitor suspicious air, sea, 

and surface traffic; and to communicate information on such traffic 

to appropriate federal, state, and local law enforcement officials. 

The provision would make funds available to the Department of 

Defense for counterdrug activities available for the other activities 

authorized by this provision. 

The provision would stipulate that any limitations and restrictions under chapter 18, title 10, United States Code, would apply 

with respect to the use of personnel, equipment, and facilities. The 

provision would define the term ‘‘suspicious air, sea, and surface 

traffic’’ as that which is suspected of illegal activities, including activities that would constitute a violation of any provision of law in 

section 374(b)(4)(A) of title 10, United States Code. The provision 

would define state law enforcement officials as including authorized members of the National Guard, operating under authority of 

title 32, United States Code. The provision would require an annual report from the Secretary of Defense to the congressional defense committees that would describe the UAV operations conducted under the authority of this provision for the previous year. 

The committee understands that the Department of Homeland 

Security has initiated its own efforts to use UAVs to patrol the borders of the United States. The authorization for the Department of 

372 

Defense to engage in similar activities should complement, not replace, these efforts by civil authorities to develop their own aerial 

reconnaissance capabilities. The committee urges the Department 

of Defense to provide technical and other assistance to the Department of Homeland Security so that the civil agencies with the primary responsibility for border enforcement will have the robust capabilities necessary to detect, track, investigate, and apprehend illicit cross-border traffic. 

At a hearing of the Committee on Armed Services on March 15, 

2005, the Commander, NORTHCOM, who is the combatant commander charged with the defense of the continental United States, 

stated that he would investigate the potential for UAVs to support 

the homeland security mission along the borders. The authority 

provided by this provision would enable NORTHCOM to more actively participate in defense of U.S. borders, communicating information to trained military National Guardsman and other law enforcement officials who can actively engage those who might want 

to render harm to the United States. 

Use of counterdrug funds for certain counterterrorism operations (sec. 1032) 

The committee recommends a provision that would authorize the 

Department of Defense to utilize funds available for drug interdiction and counterdrug activities in fiscal years 2006 and 2007, as 

well as for the related detection, monitoring, and interdiction of 

terrorists, terrorism-related activities, and other related 

transnational threats on the borders and within the territorial waters of the United States. The committee believes that many narcotics trafficking activities are related to the financing of terrorist 

activities and may also include the illegal infiltration of criminal 

and terrorist elements into the United States. The committee believes that the Department of Defense can make significant contributions to the efforts of the Department of Homeland Security 

and related national, regional, and local law enforcement agencies 

to enhance the security of U.S. borders and territorial waters. 

Support for counterdrug activities through bases of operation and training facilities in Afghanistan (sec. 1033) 

The committee recommends a provision that would clarify section 

1004 of the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 

1991 (Public Law 101–510), as amended, expressly authorizing the 

Secretary of Defense to permit the use of U.S. bases of operation 

or training facilities to facilitate the conduct of counterdrug activities in Afghanistan, including support for counterdrug related Afghan criminal justice activities. The committee understands that 

an effective Afghan legal structure is an essential aspect of a meaningful Afghan counterdrug strategy and supports the request of the 

Department of Defense to provide assistance in all aspects of 

counterdrug activities in Afghanistan, including detection, interdiction, and related criminal justice activities. 

373 

Subtitle D—Reports and Studies 

Modification of frequency of submittal of Joint Warfighting 

Science and Technology Plan (sec. 1041) 

The committee recommends a provision that would permit the 

Secretary of Defense to submit the Joint Warfighting Science and 

Technology Plan to Congress every two years, rather than annually. The comprehensive plan provides key guidance for development of responsive science and technology priorities and should be 

written to coincide with the Department of Defense’s budgeting 

process and major decision-making cycle. 

Review and assessment of Defense Base Act insurance (sec. 

1042) 

The committee recommends a provision that would require the 

Secretary of Defense, in coordination with the Office of Management and Budget, the Department of Labor, the Department of 

State, and the United States Agency for International Development, to review current and future needs, options, and risks associated with Defense Base Act insurance. 

Congress enacted the Defense Base Act (DBA), 41 U.S.C. section 

1651 et seq., in 1941 to provide workers’ compensation to employees of government contractors working at U.S. defense bases overseas. The Government Accountability Office (GAO) has reported 

significant confusion among federal agencies and contractors over 

the application of DBA requirements in Iraq and other overseas locations. 

The Department of Defense recently initiated a one-year pilot 

contract for a single insurer to provide DBA insurance for all Army 

Corps of Engineers contractors performing overseas. While this 

pilot program appears to be a constructive step, the committee believes that further guidance may be required to ensure that DBA 

requirements are clearly understood and consistently applied in a 

manner that provides the greatest benefits to the federal government and its contractor employees overseas. 

Comptroller General report on corrosion prevention and 

mitigation programs of the Department of Defense (sec. 

1043) 

The committee recommends a provision that would direct the 

Comptroller General of the United States to conduct a report on 

the effectiveness of the corrosion prevention and mitigation programs of the Department of Defense. The report shall include assessments of the following: (1) the Department’s November 2004 

‘‘Long-Term Strategy to Reduce Corrosion and the Effects of Corrosion on the Military Equipment and Infrastructure of the Department of Defense’’; (2) the adequacy of the funding requested in the 

budget proposal for fiscal year 2006 and the adequacy of the funding programmed in the associated Future Years Defense Program 

to support that strategy; (3) the adequacy and effectiveness of the 

Department’s organizational structure in implementing that strategy; (4) the progress made to date in establishing common corrosion and corrosion-related metrics, definitions, and procedures 

throughout the Department; (5) the progress made to date in estabVerDate Aug 04 2004 15:24 May 25, 2005 Jkt 021326 PO 00000 Frm 00393 Fmt 6601 Sfmt 6601 E:\HR\OC\SR069.XXX SR069
374 

lishing a baseline estimate of the scope of the Department’s corrosion problem; (6) the extent to which the Department’s strategy has 

been revised to incorporate the recommendations of the October 

2004 Defense Science Board report on corrosion control; (7) the implementation of the Department’s corrosion prevention and mitigation programs during fiscal year 2006; and (8) the Comptroller 

General’s recommendations for addressing any shortfalls or areas 

of potential improvement identified in the course of preparing the 

report. The provision would require the Comptroller General to 

submit the report to the congressional defense committees not later 

than April 1, 2007. 

Section 1067 of the Bob Stump National Defense Authorization 

Act for Fiscal Year 2003 (Public Law 107–314) required the Comptroller General (1) to monitor the implementation of the Department’s long term strategy to reduce corrosion and the effects of corrosion on military equipment and infrastructure and (2) to provide 

an assessment to Congress on the extent to which that strategy has 

been implemented. The Comptroller General’s assessment was provided to the Congress in June 2004. The committee believes that 

a follow-on report by the Comptroller General on Defense Department corrosion program management will support the committee’s 

oversight of corrosion awareness and prevention and the role of the 

Department’s Office of Corrosion Policy and Oversight in departmental planning, programming, and budgeting. The committee believes that the Department should continue to work on efforts to 

realize the large potential savings available from the prevention 

and mitigation of the impact of corrosion. The committee is concerned that the current organizational structure of the Department’s corrosion prevention and mitigation program, and the funding requested for that program, may not allow the Department to 

achieve potential savings in a timely manner. 

Subtitle E—Technical Amendments 

Technical amendments relating to certain provisions of environmental defense laws (sec. 1051) 

The committee recommends a provision that would make technical and conforming changes to the definition of ‘‘military munitions’’ in section 101 of title 10, United States Code, and to the 

cross-reference to ‘‘unexploded ordnance’’ in section 2703 of that 

title. 

Subtitle F—Military Mail Matters 

Safe delivery of mail in the military mail system (sec. 1061) 

The committee recommends a provision that would require the 

Secretary of Defense to promptly develop and implement a plan to 

ensure that the mail within the military mail system is safe for delivery. The plan would provide for the screening of all mail within 

the military mail system in order to detect the presence of biological, chemical or radiological weapons, agents or pathogens, or explosive devices before the mail is delivered to its intended recipients. The provision would require the Secretary to include in the 

fiscal year 2007 budget request and future years defense plan a deVerDate Aug 04 2004 15:24 May 25, 2005 Jkt 021326 PO 00000 Frm 00394 Fmt 6601 Sfmt 6601 E:\HR\OC\SR069.XXX SR069
375 

scription of the amounts required in each fiscal year to carry out 

the plan. 

The provision would also require the Secretary to submit a report 

on the plan to the congressional defense committees within 120 

days of enactment of this Act. The report would include an assessment of any deficiencies in the military mail system with respect 

to safety; the plan developed pursuant to this provision; an estimate of the time and resources required to implement the plan; 

and a description of any delegation within the Department of Defense of responsibility for ensuring that mail within the military 

mail system is safe for delivery. 

The provision would define mail within the military mail system 

as mail that is posted through the Military Post Offices (including 

Army Post Offices and Fleet Post Offices), the Department mail 

centers, military Air Mail Terminals, and military Fleet Mail Centers; any mail or package posted in the United States that is addressed to an unspecified member of the Armed Forces; and any official mail posted by the Department. Mail that has been screened 

for safety for delivery by the U.S. Postal Service (USPS) is excepted. 

The committee believes that the Secretary must elevate the priority of ensuring the safety of the mail within the military mail 

system. Toward that end, the Department should develop uniform 

standards, concepts of operation, tactics, techniques, and procedures for screening against biological, chemical or radiological 

weapons, agents or pathogens, or explosive devices at mail centers. 

An example of the lack of standards or failure to comply with established standards was illustrated in the events surrounding the 

March 14, 2005, detection of anthrax in the Pentagon Remote Delivery Facility (RDF) and a later presumed detection of anthrax in 

a TRICARE mail sorting room. In both cases, established Department protocols were either not followed due to lack of knowledge 

or were ignored. Events at both the RDF and TRICARE facility 

highlight the lack of uniform standards and methods for ensuring 

that the Department mail is safe for delivery. It is apparent that 

to ensure uniformity and avoid errors, a standardized system must 

be developed that provides a reasonable level of capability and imposes uniform standards and methods. There are no current Department requirements for mail centers to operate collectively, either locally or regionally, to provide layers of defense to mitigate 

risk. 

The committee recognizes that there is a large number of military mail delivery nodes and mail centers, and that screening every 

piece of mail entering the system is a challenging task. However, 

most mail entering the Department system goes through centralized sorting and transfer points at which effective monitoring can 

and should be implemented. Because the USPS screens mail that 

it delivers, there is no need for the Department to screen mail 

heading from the Department into the USPS, or mail received 

through and already screened by the USPS. 

Elsewhere in this report, the committee recommends authorizing 

an additional $12.0 million in Procurement and Research, Development, Test and Evaluation funding in fiscal year 2006 for military 

mail screening system development and demonstration, and proVerDate Aug 04 2004 15:24 May 25, 2005 Jkt 021326 PO 00000 Frm 00395 Fmt 6601 Sfmt 6601 E:\HR\OC\SR069.XXX SR069
376 

curement of military mail screening equipment and augmented laboratory testing capabilities. The committee recommends these increases to ensure that resources are available to begin implementation of the plan as soon as possible. 

Delivery of mail addressed to any service member (sec. 

1062) 

The committee recommends a provision that would require the 

Secretary of Defense to carry out a program through which mail 

and packages addressed to any American service member would be 

delivered to deployed members of the Armed Forces overseas. The 

provision would require the Secretary to designate appropriate 

overseas addresses to serve as hubs for the receipt of such mail, 

and would also require that such mail be screened to detect the 

presence of biological, chemical or radiological weapons, agents or 

pathogens, or explosive devices before it is delivered to members of 

the Armed Forces. The provision would require the Secretary to ensure that such mail and packages are widely distributed on an equitable basis, and that information is provided to the public regarding this program. 

The committee’s intent is to establish a program such as that 

originally established in 1967. The Department of Defense worked 

cooperatively to facilitate the delivery of mail addressed to any 

service member until October 30, 2001, when, in response to the 

anthrax attack involving U.S. postal offices, mail to unspecified 

service members was suspended. 

The committee believes that the generosity of the American people in supporting American service members overseas should be encouraged by the Department. The committee acknowledges the 

growth in access to electronic communications and the popularity 

of such communications with American service members, but believes that there is no substitute for a letter or package from home, 

especially for a service member who may not otherwise receive 

such communication. 

The committee is mindful of the importance of ensuring the safe 

delivery of mail in the military mail system. Elsewhere in this report, the committee recommends a provision that would require the 

Secretary to promptly develop and implement a plan to ensure that 

all mail within the military mail system, including mail and packages addressed to unspecified members of the Armed Forces, is 

screened for the presence of biological, chemical or radiological 

weapons, agents or pathogens, or explosive devices to ensure that 

it is safe for delivery. 

Subtitle G—Other Matters 

Policy on role of military medical and behavioral science 

personnel in interrogation of detainees (sec. 1071) 

The committee recommends a provision that would require the 

Secretary of Defense to establish a uniform policy on the role of 

military medical and behavioral science personnel in interrogation 

of persons detained by the Armed Forces. The committee expects 

that in the development of the policy, the Department of Defense 

will seek the views of medical and behavioral health experts outVerDate Aug 04 2004 15:24 May 25, 2005 Jkt 021326 PO 00000 Frm 00396 Fmt 6601 Sfmt 6601 E:\HR\OC\SR069.XXX SR069
377 

side of the Department, including medical and behavioral science 

personnel, physicians, nurses, and psychologists; and scholars in 

medical ethics—scholars with civilian backgrounds. 

The committee is aware that the Assistant Secretary of Defense 

(Health Affairs) has directed a policy review of the role of medical 

personnel in detainee operations, including humane medical treatment of detainees, reporting of alleged abuses, and maintenance of 

medical records. In addition, the committee is aware that the Surgeon General of the Army has directed an assessment of the role 

of medical personnel in detainee operations in Iraq and Afghanistan. The committee is concerned that the February 2005 report of 

Vice Admiral Albert T. Church, III, on Department of Defense detention operations, found that ‘‘since neither the Geneva Conventions nor U. S. military medical doctrine specifically address the 

issue of behavioral science personnel assisting interrogators in developing interrogation strategies, this practice has evolved in an ad 

hoc manner.’’ The committee concurs with the need for clarity on 

the role and status of medical personnel in interrogations, and believes that the Secretary should promptly address this issue. 

Clarification of authority to issue security regulations and 

orders under Internal Security Act of 1950 (sec. 1072) 

The committee recommends a provision that would amend section 21(a) of the Internal Security Act of 1950 (Public Law 81–831; 

50 U.S.C. 797(a)) to authorize delegation of the authority to issue 

security regulations to civilian or military directors. The statute 

presently authorizes the Secretary of Defense to issue such regulations, as well as any military commander designated by the Secretary. The growth of defense agencies and field activities in the 

past 50 years has resulted in more installations and entities being 

headed by civilians or by military personnel who are not ‘‘commanders’’ in the formal sense. The provision would update the statute to recognize this change in organizational structure and enable 

the Secretary to designate either military commanders or military 

or civilian directors, as appropriate, to issue these essential regulations. 

Items of Special Interest 

Strategic seaports 

In a statement for a hearing of the Subcommittee on Seapower 

of the Committee on Armed Services, the Commander, Transportation Command (TRANSCOM), stated that 95 percent of all material for Operation Iraqi Freedom was shipped by sea. This high volume of shipment by sea is consistent with past conflicts. The Mobility Capabilities Study has not yet been received by Congress, but 

is expected to address the role of TRANSCOM as the distribution 

process owner for the Department. A vital part of this distribution 

is the movement of goods and materials to ports of embarkation. 

The committee is concerned that certain ongoing processes within 

the Department may change the current requirements at these 

strategic seaports. The Quadrennial Defense Review could lead to 

changes in force structure. Both the Integrated Global Presence 

378 

and Basing Strategy and the Base Realignment and Closure process could realign where personnel and equipment will be located. 

The committee directs the Secretary of Defense to deliver a report to the congressional defense committees by September 30, 

2006, that includes an examination of projected requirements for 

throughput at strategic seaports, and any improvements required 

for rail facilities and port facilities and any other infrastructure 

necessary to achieve the required throughput. 

(379) 

TITLE XI—DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE CIVILIAN 

PERSONNEL POLICY 

Extension of authority for voluntary separations in reductions in force (sec. 1101) 

The committee recommends a provision that would extend until 

September 30, 2010, the authorities contained in section 3502(f) of 

title 5, United States Code, which govern the order of retention of 

civilian personnel in a reduction in force. This extension is necessary as the Department of Defense prepares for 2005 Base Realignment and Closure. 

Compensatory time off for certain nonappropriated fund 

employees (sec. 1102) 

The committee recommends a provision that would authorize the 

Secretary of Defense to grant nonappropriated fund employees time 

off instead of overtime pay for overtime work, if requested by the 

employee. 

The provision makes available to nonappropriated fund employees the same compensatory time off allowance available to other 

employees as contained in section 5543 of title 5, United States 

Code. 

Extension of authority to pay severance payments in lump 

sums (sec. 1103) 

The committee recommends a provision that would extend until 

October 1, 2010, the authority contained in section 5595(i)(4) of 

title 5, United States Code, for the Secretary of Defense or the secretary of the military department concerned to pay the entire 

amount of an employee’s severance pay in one lump sum. 

This provision is necessary to support force shaping and as the 

Department of Defense prepares for 2005 Base Realignment and 

Closure. 

Continuation of Federal Employee Health Benefits program 

eligibility (sec. 1104) 

The committee recommends a provision that would extend the requirement for the Department of Defense to pay the employer portion of Federal Employee Health Benefit premiums for 18 months 

for employees involuntarily separated, or voluntarily separated 

from a surplus position, due to a reduction in force. This extension 

is necessary as the Department prepares for 2005 Base Realignment and Closure. 

380 

Permanent and enhanced authority for Science, Mathematics, and Research for Transformation (SMART) defense education program (sec. 1105) 

The committee recommends a provision that would modify the 

Science, Mathematics and Research for Transformation (SMART) 

pilot program that was initiated in the Ronald W. Reagan National 

Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2005 (Public Law 108– 

375). The provision would make the program permanent and would 

provide additional authorities to the Department of Defense for implementation. Under the provision, the Department could provide 

fellowship as well as scholarship assistance to individuals pursuing 

technical degrees critical to national security. The provision would 

allow the Department to award financial assistance directly to an 

individual or to an administering entity, reducing the management 

burden on the Department. The provision would modify Section 

1105 of the Ronald W. Reagan National Defense Authorization Act 

for Fiscal Year 2005 (Public Law 108–375) to permit the Department to hire individuals participating in the program, which would 

expedite security clearances and other personnel processes. 

The provision modifies the service requirement to include postgraduation time served in an interim position for up to two years 

as part of the individual’s payback to the Department. Finally, the 

provision clarifies commitments of all program participants to 

repay the Department for financial assistance, if they voluntarily 

choose to drop out of the program, if they fail to maintain satisfactory academic progress, or if they are dropped from the program 

due to misconduct. 

The committee established the SMART pilot scholarship program 

in fiscal year 2005 to address growing deficiencies in the numbers 

and types of scientists and engineers comprising our national security workforce. The committee commends the Department for 

quickly implementing the pilot program and notes that, in just the 

first year, hundreds of qualified individuals submitted applications 

for approximately 30 available scholarships. A permanent SMART 

program would maintain the committee’s original goal of providing 

targeted educational assistance to individuals seeking a baccalaureate or an advanced degree in science and engineering disciplines deemed critical to national security by the Department. 

The committee continues to believe that future U.S. technical 

dominance relies on a rapid, well-managed infusion of defense 

science and engineering personnel who are experts in 21st century 

defense-related critical skills. The committee authorizes the Department’s budget request of $10.3 million for the SMART defense 

education program for fiscal year 2006, which would more than 

double the number of scholarships and fellowships available for the 

next school year. 

Items of Special Interest 

Comptroller General report on policy concerning Department of Defense civilians deployed in support of contingency operations 

The committee understands that the Department of Defense is 

increasingly reliant on civilian employees who volunteer to serve in 

381 

a theater of operation in support of military contingencies. The 

committee recognizes that guidelines and procedures have been established by the Department of Defense, applicable to civilians, 

covering roles, responsibilities, pay, compensation, and support in 

the event of injury or death. The committee believes that a review 

of current policy, procedures, and guidelines regarding civilian employees serving in support of contingency operations is warranted. 

The committee directs the Comptroller General to conduct a review of Department policies concerning deployment of civilian employees in support of contingency operations. The review should include: 

(1) an examination of compliance by Department of Defense 

components with department-wide policies on deployment of civilian employees to Iraq and Afghanistan; 

(2) examination of lessons learned from those deployments 

regarding deployment of Department civilian personnel; 

(3) a comparison of mission, roles, and compensation for Department civilian personnel with those for military personnel; 

and 

(4) such recommendations as the Comptroller General concludes are appropriate regarding policies and benefits for Department civilian employees serving in support of contingency 

operations. 

The committee directs the Comptroller General to deliver the required review to the congressional defense committees by March 1, 

2006. 

(383) 

TITLE XII—MATTERS RELATING TO OTHER NATIONS 

Commanders’ Emergency Response Program (sec. 1201) 

The committee recommends a provision that would authorize the Secretary of Defense to use up to $500.0 million in operations and 

maintenance funding in each of fiscal years 2006 and 2007 for the 

Commanders’ Emergency Response Program (CERP), under which 

commanders in Iraq receive funds for use in small humanitarian 

and reconstruction projects in their areas of responsibility, and for 

a similar program in Afghanistan. The provision would require the 

Secretary to provide quarterly reports to the congressional defense 

committees on the source, allocation, and use of funds pursuant to 

this authority. The committee expects the quarterly reports to include detailed information regarding the amount of funds spent, 

the recipients of the funds, and the specific purposes for which the 

funds were used. 

The committee directs that funds made available pursuant to 

this authority be used in a manner consistent with the CERP guidance that the Under Secretary of Defense (Comptroller) issued in 

a memorandum dated February 18, 2005. This guidance directs 

that CERP funds be used to assist the Iraqi and Afghan people in 

the following representative areas: water and sanitation; food production and distribution; agriculture; electricity; healthcare; education; telecommunications; economic, financial and management 

improvements; transportation; irrigation; rule of law and governance; civic cleanup activities; civic support vehicles; repair of civic 

and cultural facilities; and other urgent humanitarian or reconstruction projects. 

The committee notes that the Ronald W. Reagan National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2005 (Public Law 108–375) 

required the Secretary to submit a report within 120 days of enactment to the Committees on Armed Services of the Senate and the 

House of Representatives identifying all provisions of law that, if 

not waived, would prohibit, restrict, limit, or otherwise constrain 

implementation of the CERP program in Iraq and Afghanistan. 

The committee has not yet received that report and directs that it 

be provided expeditiously. 

Enhancement and expansion of authority to provide humanitarian and civic assistance (sec. 1202) 

The committee recommends a provision that would expand the 

current authority of the Secretary of Defense to provide humanitarian and civic assistance in conjunction with military operations 

to include: (1) an increase to $10.0 million in funding that may be 

used to conduct detection and clearance of landmines and other 

unexploded remnants of war; (2) authority to restore or develop the 

capacity of the host nation’s information and communications infrastructure as necessary to provide basic information and commuVerDate Aug 04 2004 15:24 May 25, 2005 Jkt 021326 PO 00000 Frm 00403 Fmt 6601 Sfmt 6601 E:\HR\OC\SR069.XXX SR069
384 

nications services; and (3) authority to provide training, education, 

and technical assistance related to medical, dental, and veterinary 

care that is provided as part of humanitarian and civic assistance. 

The provision would acknowledge that restoration or development of basic information and communications capacity should be 

considered a fundamental element of humanitarian and civic assistance, and that a functioning information and communications 

infrastructure is vital to the successful conduct of humanitarian 

missions. The provision would also acknowledge that medical, dental, and veterinary care provided to the host nation can be sustained and enhanced by the provision of related education, training, and technical assistance. Finally, the provision would recognize that the cost of equipment for the detection and clearance of 

landmines continues to increase, and that funding to support such 

activities must be periodically adjusted. 

Modification of geographic limitation on payment of personnel expenses under bilateral or regional cooperation 

programs (sec. 1203) 

The committee recommends a provision that would provide flexibility to combatant commanders to pay expenses for personnel from 

developing countries, even if the personnel are from a developing 

country that is not located within a combatant commander’s area 

of responsibility. 

Payment of travel expenses of coalition liaison officers (sec. 

1204) 

The committee recommends a provision that would amend section 1051a, title 10, United States Code, to authorize the Secretary 

of Defense to pay the travel expenses of certain foreign military officers assigned to U.S. combatant commands, component commands, or subordinate operational commands, when that travel is 

directed by the U.S. commander of such command in support of 

U.S. national interests. Additionally, the provision would extend 

the authority to provide administrative and fiscal support to coalition liaison officers through fiscal year 2009. 

The committee acknowledges that contemporary military operations are almost always conducted in conjunction with allied nations and that foreign military officers increasingly play critical 

planning and operational roles within U.S. military headquarters. 

The committee believes that providing reasonable fiscal support to 

certain foreign military officers to facilitate U.S. and coalition military operations is warranted and appropriate. 

(385) 

TITLE XIII—COOPERATIVE THREAT REDUCTION WITH 

STATES OF THE FORMER SOVIET UNION 

Specification of Cooperative Threat Reduction programs 

and funds (sec. 1301) 

The committee recommends a provision that would define the Cooperative Threat Reduction (CTR) programs; define the funds as 

those authorized to be appropriated in section 301 of this Act; and 

authorize the CTR funds to be available for obligation for three fiscal years. 

Funding allocations (sec. 1302) 

The committee recommends a provision that would authorize $415.5 million, the amount included in the budget request, for the 

Cooperative Threat Reduction (CTR) program. This provision would 

also authorize specific amounts for each CTR program element; require notification to Congress 30 days before the Secretary of Defense obligates and expends fiscal year 2006 funds for a purpose 

other than the purposes described in each of the CTR program elements; and provide limited authority to exceed the amount authorized for a specific CTR program element. 

Permanent waiver of restrictions on use of funds for threat 

reduction in states of the former Soviet Union (sec. 

1303) 

The committee recommends a provision that would make permanent the President’s authority to waive, on an annual basis, restrictions and eligibility requirements under the Cooperative Threat Reduction Act of 1993 (22 U.S.C. 5952) and section 502 of the Freedom Support Act (22 U.S.C. 5852). The President’s current authority to waive these restrictions and requirements will expire on September 30, 2005. This provision would retain the requirements 

under the previous authority that, for any year in which a waiver 

is exercised, the President must submit a written certification to 

Congress that the waiver is important to the national security interests of the United States and a report. The report should explain: why a state does not satisfy the eligibility requirements; why 

a waiver is in the U.S. national security interests; and what the 

President’s strategy is for promoting the commitment of that state 

to meeting the eligibility requirements for Cooperative Threat Reduction and Freedom Support Act assistance. 

Modification of authority to use Cooperative Threat Reduction funds outside the former Soviet Union (sec. 1304) 

The committee recommends a provision that would modify the 

authority of the Department of Defense to use Cooperative Threat 

Reduction (CTR) funds outside the former Soviet Union by changing the existing requirement for a presidential determination and 

386 

certification to a requirement for a determination and certification 

made by the Secretary of Defense, with the concurrence of the Secretary of State. The provision would require the Secretary of Defense to notify the congressional defense committees not later than 

15 days before obligating CTR funds pursuant to this authority. 

The committee recommends this provision in order to increase 

the flexibility of the Department of Defense to respond quickly to 

an urgent new requirement for using CTR funds in an important 

nonproliferation project or activity outside of the former Soviet 

Union. 

The committee believes that CTR funds should continue to be 

used primarily for the purpose of reducing weapons of mass destruction and proliferation threats from the states of the former Soviet Union. However, the committee supports the use of CTR funds 

outside of the former Soviet Union in order to address a specific, 

unanticipated and urgent threat, such as the recent use of this authority to assist in the destruction of newly discovered chemical 

weapons stocks in Albania. The committee expects that should a 

project or activity initiated pursuant to this authority require additional funding in future years, that specific project or activity 

would be budgeted for and would appear as a separate CTR program element in the President’s budget request for future fiscal 

years. 

The committee is supportive of the President’s Proliferation Security Initiative (PSI) and urges the Department to establish a separate funding line for that purpose, should it be required. The committee does not believe that PSI activities in states outside of the 

former Soviet Union should be funded with CTR funds as a routine 

matter. 

Repeal of requirement for annual Comptroller General assessment of annual Department of Defense report on 

activities and assistance under Cooperative Threat Reduction programs (sec. 1305) 

The committee recommends a provision that would repeal the requirement for the Comptroller General to provide to Congress an 

assessment of the annual Department of Defense report to Congress on the Cooperative Threat Reduction (CTR) programs. The 

committee has been satisfied with the thoroughness of the Department annual reports on the CTR programs over the past several 

years. The annual assessments from the Comptroller General have 

confirmed that the Department annual reports have been comprehensive and accurate, and have met the requirements of the legislation mandating their submission to Congress. Therefore, the 

committee believes there is no reason to maintain the requirement 

for a Comptroller General assessment of the annual Department 

reports to Congress on the CTR programs. 

(387) 

TITLE XIV—AUTHORIZATION FOR SUPPLEMENTAL APPROPRIATIONS FOR IRAQ, AFGHANISTAN, AND THE 

GLOBAL WAR ON TERRORISM 

Overview 

The committee recommends a supplemental authorization of 

$50.0 billion in funds to be appropriated for fiscal year 2006 to support operations in Iraq, Afghanistan, and the global war on terrorism. The committee notes that H. Con. Res. 95 of the 109th Congress, establishing the congressional budget for the Government for 

fiscal year 2006 and setting forth budgetary levels for fiscal year 

2005 and 2007 through 2010, included $50.0 billion for fiscal year 

2006 in anticipation of additional needs in Iraq, Afghanistan, and 

the global war on terrorism. Providing authorization of these funds 

in advance of need ensures our troops in the field will be given adequate resources to meet ongoing demands of current military operations and any emergent needs of the ongoing global war on terrorism. 

Summary table of authorization 

The following table summarizes authorizations included in this 

title for ongoing operations in Iraq, Afghanistan, and the global 

war on terrorism for fiscal year 2006. 

388 


Insert graphic folio 451 SR69.159
389 


Insert graphic folio 452 SR69.160
390 


Insert graphic folio 453 SR69.161
391 


Insert graphic folio 454 SR69.162
392 


Insert graphic folio 455 SR69.163
393 


Insert graphic folio 456 SR69.164
394 

Purpose (sec. 1401) 

This section would establish this title as an authorization of appropriations for the Department of Defense for fiscal year 2006, in 

addition to the amounts otherwise authorized in this Act $50.0 billion to be available for activities in support of operations in Iraq, 

Afghanistan, and the global war on terrorism. 

Designation as emergency amounts (sec. 1402) 

This section designates the authorization of appropriations in 

this title as an emergency requirement in accordance with H. Con. 

Res. 95 of the 109th Congress. 

Army procurement (sec. 1403) 

This section would authorize an additional $369.8 million for fiscal year 2006 Army procurement. Of these funds, the committee recommends $120.0 million be provided to acquire additional up armored high (UAH) mobility multipurpose wheeled vehicles, wheeled vehicle add-on armor protection, 

or M1151/M1152 high mobility multipurpose wheeled vehicles 

(HMMWV), if the requirement for such vehicles is identified by a 

combatant commander and validated by the Secretary of the Army. 

The committee understands that the M1151/M1152 HMMWV is an 

improved version of the standard HMMWV. The M1151/M1152 

HMMWV has a heavier chassis and improved engine that enable 

the use of removable add-on armor protection that provides the 

Army greater flexibility when deploying units. M1151/M1152 provides the same level of protection as an UAH. 

Providing armored vehicles to our Armed Forces deployed in contingency operations has been an issue of great concern to this committee for the past two years. While the committee acknowledges 

that there were problems in rapidly supplying UAH and add-on 

armor for Army and Marine Corps tactical wheeled vehicles when 

the insurgency began in Iraq in the fall of 2003, the committee also 

commends the Department of Defense for taking aggressive steps 

to satisfy the evolving force protection requirements of U.S. Central 

Command (CENTCOM). 

The Congress also responded quickly to the force protection requirements of CENTCOM. From fiscal year 2003 to fiscal year 

2005, the Congress added $1.9 billion to the President’s requests to 

increase UAH production and almost $1.6 billion to increase the 

production of add-on armor protection for tactical wheeled vehicles 

for the Army and Marine Corps. In the Emergency Supplemental 

Appropriations Act for Defense, the Global War on Terror, and Tsunami Relief Act, 2005 (H.R. 1268, as adopted by the House of Representatives on May 5, 2005 and the Senate on May 10, 2005), the 

Congress added $150.0 million for up-armored HMMWVs and 

$610.9 million for add-on armor for tactical wheeled vehicles. With 

this funding, all current CENTCOM UAH and add-on armor requirements will be addressed. 

The committee understands that UAH and add-on armor requirements are continuously under review. If the Commander, U.S. 

CENTCOM should submit an urgent needs statement for additional UAH or add-on armor, the committee believes that the Secretary should have funds immediately available to address that reVerDate Aug 04 2004 15:24 May 25, 2005 Jkt 021326 PO 00000 Frm 00414 Fmt 6601 Sfmt 6601 E:\HR\OC\SR069.XXX SR069
395 

quirement. The committee recommends an increase of $120.0 million in Other Procurement, Army, to provide the Secretary with the 

flexibility to immediately address any additional CENTCOM requirements for armored vehicles or add-on armor. 

Navy and Marine Corps procurement (sec. 1404) 

This section would authorize an additional $573.8 million for fiscal year 2006 Navy and Marine Corps procurement. 

Air Force procurement (sec. 1405) 

This section would authorize an additional $156.6 million for fiscal year 2006 Air Force procurement. 

Operation and Maintenance (sec. 1406) 

This section would authorize an additional $32.0 billion for fiscal 

year 2006 operation and maintenance programs. Of the additional $22.1 billion authorized for fiscal year 2006 in 

Operation and Maintenance, Army, the committee recommends 

that $200.0 million may be utilized to obtain linguistic support for 

operations in Iraq and Afghanistan. 

The committee is aware of an urgent need for additional linguistic support to military operations in Iraq and Afghanistan. The 

Commander, U.S. Central Command (CENTCOM), has identified 

this shortfall in communications with the Department of Defense 

and in testimony before the committee. The committee urges the 

Department of the Army to address this urgent requirement of the 

Commander, CENTCOM. 

Defense Health Program (sec. 1407) 

This section would authorize an additional $977.8 million to the 

Defense Health Program for operation and maintenance for fiscal 

year 2006. 

Military personnel (sec. 1408) 

This section would authorize an additional $11.6 billion for fiscal 

year 2006 to the Department of Defense for military personnel. As 

described elsewhere in this report, some of this funding provides 

for the additional cost of increased Army and Marine Corps personnel end strength. 

Iraq Freedom Fund (sec. 1409) 

This section would authorize an additional $4.3 billion for an 

Iraqi Freedom Fund to be available until expended for activities in 

support of operations in Iraq, Afghanistan, and the global war on 

terrorism. These funds would be available for transfer to other accounts in this title, subject to a 5 day prior notification to the congressional defense committees. 

Of the amounts provided in this section, not less than $500.0 million is dedicated to the support of activities of the Joint Improvised 

Explosive Device Task Force. The funding provided for the Joint 

Improvised Explosive Device Task Force would ensure the rapid 

development and deployment of intelligence; tactics, techniques 

and procedures (TTP); training; and the associated procurement of 

equipment to counter IEDs in Iraq and Afghanistan. 

396 

The budget request included no funding for the procurement of 

Improvised Explosive Device (IED) countermeasures. The committee has closely monitored the efforts of the Department of Defense to provide force protection capabilities to our soldiers and 

Marines in Iraq and Afghanistan for countering the threat posed 

by IEDs. In October 2003, the Chief of Staff of the Army directed 

the formation of an IED task force to orchestrate Army efforts to 

eliminate IED threats, recommend best available responses, and direct the development and fielding of selected solutions. In June 

2004, the Commander, U.S. Central Command (CENTCOM) asked 

the Secretary of Defense for an integrated Department response to 

the IED threat. On July 12, 2004, the Deputy Secretary of Defense 

approved the establishment of an Army-led Joint IED Defeat Integrated Process Team (IPT), which was organized around the existing Army IED Task Force, to immediately focus all counter-IED efforts within the Department. 

The committee understands that the IPT identifies, prioritizes, 

and resources materiel and non-materiel solutions to the IED 

threat in a coordinated response across the services and the Department. The IPT, augmented by Joint Service staff, performs the 

counter-IED operational mission as the Joint IED Defeat Task 

Force (TF). 

The committee understands that the Joint IED TF has expended 

much effort and funding to provide electronic countermeasure systems for the protection of U.S. convoys in Iraq and is working to 

procure thousands of additional jamming devices. The committee 

also understands that the procurement of current technology must 

be supplemented by the development of new counter-IED devices 

and employment of innovative techniques, tactics and procedures. 

The committee believes that the Joint IED TF should have dedicated funding to facilitate the rapid development of new technology 

and the rapid deployment of current IED countermeasures. 

Transfer authority (sec. 1410) 

This section would provide fiscal year 2006 transfer authority of 

$2.5 billion to the Department of Defense for the authorizations 

contained in this title. 

Budget Items 

UH–60 Black Hawk helicopters 

The budget request included $562.0 million in Aircraft Procurement, Army (APA), for 41 UH–60 Black Hawk helicopters, including $61.0 million for six UH–60 Black Hack helicopters lost in Operation Iraqi Freedom (OIF) and Operation Enduring Freedom 

(OEF). The Army has lost 13 UH–60 Black Hawk helicopters since 

the onset of OIF and OEF. Using October 1, 2004 as a cutoff date, 

the Army requested $50.8 million in the fiscal year 2005 supplemental budget for five UH–60 Black Hawk helicopters lost in OIF 

and OEF. The committee notes that the Army has an unfunded requirement for the replacement of two UH–60 Black Hawk helicopters; therefore, the committee recommends an increase of $20.3 

million in APA, for two additional UH–60 Black Hawk helicopters, 

for a total authorization of $582.3. 

397 

UH–60 Black Hawk helicopter modifications 

The budget request included $33.3 million in Aircraft Procurement, Army (APA), for UH–60 Black Hawk helicopter modifications, but included no funding for HH–60L Black Hawk helicopter 

Medical Evacuation (MEDEVAC) Medical Equipment Packages 

(MEP). The Army has a requirement for 336 HH–60L MEDEVAC 

helicopters, including 156 MEDEVAC helicopters in the Active 

component and 180 MEDEVAC helicopters in the Reserve component, but only 24 HH–60L MEDEVAC helicopters in the inventory 

or scheduled for delivery in fiscal year 2005. The committee understands that the Army is using over 300 UH–60A Black Hawk helicopters without MEP kits to perform MEDEVAC missions, of which 

75 are currently deployed in support of Operations Iraqi Freedom 

and Enduring Freedom. Given the shortfall in MEDEVAC helicopters and the high operational demand, the committee recommends an increase of $50.0 million in APA, for 10 additional 

HH–60L MEP kits, for a total authorization of $83.3 million. 

M107 sniper rifle 

The budget request included $9.7 million in Weapons and 

Tracked Combat Vehicles, Army (WTCV), for the procurement of 

the M–107 .50 caliber sniper rifle. The M107 sniper rifle provides 

a man-portable, material destruction capability that enables sniper 

teams to employ greater destructive force at greater ranges and at 

a higher rate of fire that exceed the terminal effect capability of the 

M24 Sniper Weapon System. The Army has an inventory objective 

of 3,143 M107 sniper weapons but only has 1,300 fielded to soldiers 

in support of Operations Iraqi Freedom and Enduring Freedom. 

Additional funding for the M10 sniper rifle is on the Chief of Staff 

of the Army’s unfunded priorities list. The committee recommends 

an increase of $9.3 million in WTCV, for 774 additional M107 sniper rifles, for a total authorization of $19.0 million. 

Rapid fielding initiative 

The budget request included $15.4 million in Procurement of 

Weapons and Tracked Combat Vehicles Army (WTCV), to procure 

ancillary small arms equipment as part of the Rapid Fielding Initiative (RFI), an Army program to respond quickly to individual 

soldier equipment requirements and to provide soldiers engaged in 

or preparing for Operation Iraqi Freedom and other operations, 

with state-of-the-art individual weapons, clothing, and equipment, 

including radios. Additional funding for this initiative is on the 

Chief of Staff of the Army’s unfunded priorities list. The committee 

continues to support this worthwhile program and remains committed to ensuring that the individual soldier, Active and Reserve, 

is personally equipped for advantage in combat and contingency operations. The committee recommends an increase of $18.5 million 

in WTCV to procure M240B medium machine gun, M249 squad 

automatic weapon, and Soldier Enhancement Program ancillary 

equipment, for a total authorization of $33.9 million for the RFI. 

Night vision enhancements 

The budget request included $247.4 million in Other Procurement, Army (OPA), for the procurement of night vision enhanceVerDate Aug 04 2004 15:24 May 25, 2005 Jkt 021326 PO 00000 Frm 00417 Fmt 6601 Sfmt 6601 E:\HR\OC\SR069.XXX SR069
398 

ments, including $16.6 million for the AN/PAQ–4 laser aiming 

light, $42.9 million for the AN/PVS–6 Mini Eyesafe Laser Infrared 

Observation Set and the Target Acquisition Laser Observation 

Night (TALON) device, and $83.7 million for the night vision thermal weapon sight (TWS). Lessons learned from Operations Iraqi 

Freedom and Enduring Freedom have shown that night vision 

equipment increases survivability and lethality of soldiers in combat and has been used for force protection missions, convoy operations, and perimeter security missions. Additional funding for the 

procurement of AN/PAQ–4 laser aiming lights, TALONs, and TWSs 

has been identified on the Chief of Staff of the Army’s unfunded 

priorities list. The committee recommends an increase of $117.1 

million in OPA for the procurement of 40,182 aiming lights, 712 

TALONs, and 2,528 TWSs, for a total authorization of $364.5 million. 

Lightweight laser designation rangefinder 

The budget request included $12.7 million in Other Procurement, 

Army (OPA), for the procurement of the Lightweight Laser Designation Rangefinder (LLDR), a man-portable, modular system designed for day and night, all weather target acquisition. The LLDR 

meets a critical requirement for precision target location and engagement for artillery fire support teams and is in high demand in 

Operations Iraqi Freedom and Enduring Freedom. Additional funding for LLDR procurement is on the Chief of Staff of the Army’s 

unfunded priorities list. The committee recommends an increase of 

$4.6 million in OPA for the procurement of 15 additional LLDRs, 

for a total authorization of $17.3 million. 

Mounted battle command on the move 

The budget request included $870,000 in Other Procurement, 

Army (OPA), for the Mounted Battle Command on the Move 

(MBCOTM) system, which provides a battle command platform for 

maneuver commanders for echelons from calvary squadron through 

unit of employment. The MBTCOM will be hosted on the Bradley 

Fighting Vehicle, the Stryker Command Vehicle, and the High Mobility Multipurpose Wheeled Vehicle (HMMWV). The MBCOTM 

will provide commanders with an automated tactical command post 

for mobile operations, rather than relying on a fixed site command 

post. The committee understands that the Army intends to field 

this capability in fiscal year 2006 for units deploying to Operation 

Iraqi Freedom. Additional funding for MBCOTM procurement has 

been identified on the Chief of Staff of the Army’s unfunded priorities list. The committee recommends an increase of $30.0 in OPA 

for the procurement of 15 MBTCOM systems to be mounted on the 

HMMWV, for a total authorization of $30.9 million. 

The committee notes that the Marine Corps has a similar initiative for on-the-move communications under the Control On-TheMove Network, Digital Over the Horizon Relay program and encourages the Army-Marine Corps Board to review these programs 

for cooperative development and efficiencies. 

399 

UH–1Y helicopters 

The budget request included $307.5 million in Aircraft Procurement, Navy (APN), for the procurement of UH–1Y and AH–1Z helicopters. There is no UH–1 manufacturing line to build helicopters 

to replace UH–1N helicopters lost in Operations Iraqi Freedom and 

Enduring Freedom. However, the Marine Corps does have a program to acquire new-build UH–1Y helicopters as replacement aircraft. The program is currently in low-rate initial production. The 

Marine Corps needs to replace four aircraft lost during current operations. The committee recommends an increase of $74.0 million 

in APN for four additional UH–1Y helicopters. 

The Marine Corps needs to procure 18 sets of government furnished equipment (GFE) to retain the UH–1N utility helicopters 

until new UH–1Y helicopters are procured. Without this funding, 

the operational force inventory will be reduced by 14 UH–1Ns for 

12 months until UH–1Ys can be delivered. The committee recommends an increase of $10.8 million in APN for UH–1 GFE. 

The committee notes that the procurement of UH–1Y helicopters 

and government furnished equipment are on the Commandant of 

the Marine Corps’ unfunded priorities list. The committee recommends a total authorization of $392.3 million in APN, for the 

procurement of UH–1Y and AH–1Z helicopters. 

EA–6B ICAP III 

The budget request included $120.6 million in Aircraft Procurement, Navy (APN), for modifications to the EA–6B, including $52.2 

million for the procurement of Improved Capabilities III (ICAP III) 

systems modifications. 

The EA–6B is a high-demand, low-density key enabler for joint 

combat operations. The ICAP III systems modification removes 

over 70 aging and unreliable weapons replaceable assemblies 

(WRAs). The procurement of seven additional EA–6B ICAP III kits 

meets the Navy’s minimum requirement for ICAP III equipped 

EA–6B aircraft. Procurement of ICAP III is included on the Chief 

of Naval Operations’ unfunded priorities list. The committee recommends an increase of $73.0 million in APN for the procurement 

of seven additional EA–6B ICAP III kits. 

Low band transmitters for EA–6B aircraft 

The budget request included $120.6 million in Aircraft Procurement, Navy (APN), for modifications to the EA–6B aircraft, including $9.6 million for procurement of low band transmitters. The EA– 

6B is a high-demand, low-density electronic warfare aircraft that is 

being heavily used in the global war on terrorism. The low band 

transmitter gives the EA–6B aircraft expanded jamming capability 

and is more reliable and maintainable than the current system. 

The procurement of additional EA–6B aircraft low band transmitters has been included on the Chief of Naval Operations’ unfunded 

priorities list. The committee recommends an increase of $16.4 million in APN for the procurement of 11 EA–6B aircraft low band 

transmitters to ensure sufficient numbers are available to support 

critical global war on terrorism missions. 

400 

CH–53E Helicopter Night Vision Systems 

The budget request included $14.9 million in Aircraft Procure- ment, Navy, for H–3 helicopter modifications, including $600,000 

for the procurement of CH–53E Helicopter Night Vision System 

(HNVS) Forward Looking Infrared (FLIR) kits. The committee 

notes that, currently, the Marine Corps has 71 FLIRs to share 

among 148 aircraft, with 26 on contract to be delivered in fiscal 

years 2005 and 2006. Another 51 aircraft have FLIR installation 

provisions, but do not have FLIR turrets to install. The HNVS 

FLIR improves the CH–53’s ability to operate in night operations 

in the austere mountainous and desert terrain typical of the U.S. 

Central Command area of operations. Additional funding for HNVS 

FLIR procurement for the CH–53 helicopter is on the Commandant 

of the Marine Corps’ unfunded priorities list. The committee recommends an increase of $9.6 million in APN for the procurement 

of 16 additional HNVS FLIRs, for a total authorization of $24.5 

million. 

Hellfire missiles 

The budget request included no funds in Weapons Procurement, 

Navy (WPN) for the procurement of AGM–114 Hellfire missiles. 

The Hellfire is a laser-guided missile primarily employed against 

point targets by Navy and Marine Corps rotary wing aircraft. Total 

Navy and Marine Corps use of the two variants of Hellfire in the 

global war on terrorism exceeds 900 missiles. The Navy’s intent 

was to replace its inventory of these missiles with the Joint Common Missile, but this program has recently been terminated by the 

Department of Defense, and there is a projected inventory shortage 

of AGM–114 Hellfire missiles for the Marine Corps. Additional 

funding for Hellfire is included on the Chief of Naval Operations’ 

unfunded priorities list. The committee recommends an increase of 

$122.0 million in WPN for the procurement of Hellfire missiles. 

Small arms 

The budget request included $22.6 million in Weapons Procurement, Navy (WPN) for the initial procurement, modernization, 

standardization, and stock replenishment of a wide variety of small 

arms and weapons. Fleet and joint force protection requirements 

have expanded as a result of the global war on terrorism. Explosive 

ordnance disposal teams and naval coastal warfare units, in particular, need small arms for their own protection. Additional funding for small arms has been included on the Chief of Naval Operations’ unfunded priorities list. The committee recommends an increase of $36.8 million in WPN for the procurement of small arms. 

Pioneer tactical unmanned aerial vehicle 

The budget request included $1.9 million in Weapons Procurement, Navy (WPN) for modernization efforts for the Pioneer tactical unmanned aerial vehicle (TUAV). The Pioneer TUAV provides 

near real-time reconnaissance, surveillance, target acquisition, 

combat assessment, and battlefield management within line-ofsight of a ground control station. The Pioneer TUAV is being heavily used in Operation Iraqi Freedom. Additional funding for 12 Pioneer engines and avionics, due to its high usage rates, has been reVerDate Aug 04 2004 15:24 May 25, 2005 Jkt 021326 PO 00000 Frm 00420 Fmt 6601 Sfmt 6601 E:\HR\OC\SR069.XXX SR069
401 

quested on the Chief of Naval Operations’ and the Commandant of 

the Marine Corps’ unfunded priorities list. The committee recommends an increase of $6.7 million in WPN for the procurement 

of engines and avionics for the Pioneer TUAV. 

Dual mode laser guided training bombs 

The budget request included $24.6 million in Procurement of Ammunition, Navy and Marine Corps (PANMC), for dual mode laser 

guided training bombs. The committee notes that the dual mode 

laser guided training bomb improves the use of laser guided bombs 

(LGBs) in combat. The training bomb provides actual hardware for 

aircrews and tactics development at a reduced cost while maintaining inventories of LGBs. The committee recommends an increase of 

$2.0 million in PANMC for dual mode laser guided training practice bombs. 

Small arms and landing party ammunition 

The budget request included $35.6 million in Procurement of Ammunition, Navy and Marine Corps (PANMC), for small arms and 

landing party ammunition. The committee notes that small arms 

training requirements for force protection, homeland defense, maritime interdiction operations, and security force operations have increased by 50 percent since the commencement of the global war 

on terrorism. Additional funding for small arms and landing party 

ammunition has been identified on the Chief of Naval Operations 

unfunded priorities list. The committee recommends an increase of 

$16.0 million in PANMC for small arms and landing party ammunition. 

M80/M62 7.62mm cartridge 

The budget request included $7.9 million in Procurement of Ammunition, Navy and Marine Corps (PANMC), for the Cartridge 

M80 7.62mm four-ball cartridge and one tracer M62 linked. According to Marine Corps officials, this munition is currently experiencing an extremely high rate of use in operations in support of the 

global war on terrorism. Additional funding for the Cartridge M80 

7.62mm four-ball cartridge and one tracer M62 linked has been 

identified on the Commandant of the Marine Corps unfunded priorities list. The committee recommends an increase in PANMC of 

$1.5 million for the M80 7.62mm four-ball cartridge and one tracer 

M62 linked. 

.50 caliber linked armor piercing cartridge with tracer 

The budget request included $28.0 million in Procurement of Ammunition, Navy and Marine Corps (PANMC), for the .50 caliber 

linked armor piercing cartridge with tracer. Additional funding for 

the .50 caliber linked armor piercing cartridge with tracer has been 

identified on the Commandant of the Marine Corps unfunded priorities list. Marine Corps officials also note that this munition is currently experiencing an extremely high rate of use in support of the 

global war on terrorism. The committee recommends an increase of 

$13.0 million in PANMC for the .50 caliber linked armor piercing 

cartridge with tracer. 

402 

M430 40mm high explosive dual purpose 

The budget request included $40.7 million in Procurement of Ammunition, Navy and Marine Corps (PANMC), for the M430 40mm 

high explosive dual purpose cartridge. According to Marine Corps 

officials, this munition is currently experiencing an extremely high 

rate of use in support of the global war on terrorism. Additional 

funding for the M430 40mm high explosive dual purpose cartridge 

has been identified on the Commandant of the Marine Corps unfunded priorities list. The committee recommends an increase of 

$30.0 million in PANMC for the M430 40mm high explosive dual 

purpose cartridge. 

M830A1 120mm high explosive with tracer cartridge 

The budget request included no funding in Procurement of Ammunition, Navy and Marine Corps (PANMC), for the M830A1 

120mm high explosive with tracer cartridge. According to Marine 

Corps officials, this munition is extremely effective against buildings, bunkers, and light armored vehicles and experienced an extremely high usage rate in Operations Iraqi Freedom and Enduring 

Freedom. Additional funding for the M830A1 120mm high explosive with tracer cartridge has been identified on the Commandant 

of the Marine Corps unfunded priorities list in order to replenish 

deleted stocks and ensure proper munitions inventory. The committee recommends an increase of $10.0 million in PANMC for the 

M830A1 120mm high explosive with tracer cartridge. 

XM1028 120mm tank cartridge 

The budget request included no funding in Procurement of Ammunition, Navy and Marine Corps (PANMC), for the XM1028 

120mm tank cartridge. The committee notes the utility of the 

XM1028 120mm canister round in improving the M1A1 Main Battle Tank’s urban warfare capability, improving its survivability 

against massed assaulting infantry with hand held anti-tank and 

automatic weapons. Additional funding for the XM1028 120mm 

tank cartridge has been identified on the Commandant of the Marine Corps unfunded priorities list. The committee recommends an 

increase of $3.0 million in PANMC for the XM1028 120mm tank 

cartridge in support of the Marine Corps’ total munition requirement. 

M72A7 66mm high explosive rocket 

The budget request included no funding in Procurement of Ammunition, Navy and Marine Corps (PANMC), for the M72A7 66mm 

high explosive rocket. According to Marine Corps officials, this munition was recently identified as an urgent requirement in support 

of the global war on terrorism. Additional funding for the M72A7 

66mm high explosive rocket has been identified on the Commandant of the Marine Corps unfunded priorities list. The committee recommends an increase of $11.0 million in PANMC for the 

M72A7 66mm high explosive rocket. 

MK154 non-electric detonator 

The budget request included no funding in Procurement of Ammunition, Navy and Marine Corps (PANMC), for the MK154 nonVerDate Aug 04 2004 15:24 May 25, 2005 Jkt 021326 PO 00000 Frm 00422 Fmt 6601 Sfmt 6601 E:\HR\OC\SR069.XXX SR069
403 

electric detonator. The committee notes that the budget request 

procures only 4 percent of the approved acquisition objective (AAO) 

of the MK154 non-electric detonator. The committee believes that 

constrained procurement of the MK 154 non-electric detonator can 

be problematic given the usage rates in support of the global war 

on terrorism. Additional funding for the MK154 non-electric detonator has been identified on the Commandant of the Marine Corps 

unfunded priorities list in order to increase procurement toward 

the AAO and ensure proper munitions inventory. The committee 

recommends an increase of $10.0 million in PANMC for the MK154 

non-electric detonator. 

M762A1 electronic time fuze 

The budget request included no funding in Procurement of Ammunition, Navy and Marine Corps (PANMC), for the M762A1 electronic time fuze. The committee notes that the M762A1 is replacing 

less capable fuzes in the inventory. Additional funding for the 

M762A1 electronic time fuze has been identified on the Commandant of the Marine Corps unfunded priorities list. The committee recommends an increase of $2.0 million in PANMC for the 

M762A1 electronic time fuze. 

M782 multi-option fuze for artillery 

The budget request included $2.2 million in Procurement of Ammunition, Navy and Marine Corps (PANMC), for the M782 multioption fuze for artillery. The committee notes that the M782 multioption fuze for artillery is the replacement for five different types 

of fuzes in the current Marine Corps inventory. Additional funding 

for the M782 multi-option fuze for artillery has been identified on 

the Commandant of the Marine Corps unfunded priorities list. The 

committee recommends an increase of $6.0 million in PANMC for 

the M782 multi-option fuze for artillery. 

Explosive ordnance disposal equipment allowance for naval 

coastal warfare units 

The budget request included $28.4 million in Other Procurement, 

Navy (OPN) for explosive ordnance disposal equipment. Naval 

coastal warfare (NCW) units are being heavily used in the global 

war on terrorism, with NCW mobile inshore undersea warfare 

units providing the security for the oil platforms in much of the 

U.S. Central Command’s area of responsibility. These units have 

certain explosive ordnance disposal equipment shortages, including 

cargo trucks, generators, forklifts, and water trailers. Additional 

funding for this equipment has been requested on the Chief of 

Naval Operations’ unfunded priorities list. The committee recommends an increase of $7.0 million in OPN for explosive ordnance 

disposal equipment for naval coastal warfare units. 

Amphibious equipment allowance for naval coastal warfare 

units 

The budget request included $149.7 million in Other Procurement, Navy (OPN) for amphibious equipment. Naval coastal warfare (NCW) units are being heavily used in the global war on terrorism, with NCW mobile inshore undersea warfare units providing 

404 

the security for the oil platforms in much of the U.S. Central Command’s area of responsibility. These units have identified shortages 

of cargo trucks, generators, forklifts, and water trailers. Additional 

funding for this equipment has been included on the Chief of Naval 

Operations’ unfunded priorities list. The committee recommends an 

increase of $8.3 million in OPN for amphibious equipment for 

naval coastal warfare units. 

Equipment and trainer for maritime interdiction operations 

The budget request included $60.8 million for command support 

equipment in Other Procurement, Navy (OPN). A key mission for 

the Navy in the global war on terrorism has been to conduct maritime interdiction operations (MIO), where naval teams visit, board, 

and search vessels, some of which are non-compliant. Additional 

funding is required to improve the MIO teams’ abilities to protect 

themselves from terrorist-related threats. Additional funding for 

the necessary weapons, body armor, helmets, communications gear, 

breaching and boarding equipment, and medical supplies has been 

requested on the Chief of Naval Operations’ unfunded priorities 

list. The Chief of Naval Operations’ unfunded priorities list also requests additional funding for a visit, board, search and seizure 

trainer (VBSST) at the Navy Center for Anti-terrorism. The committee recommends an increase of $4.3 million in OPN for the procurement of the necessary MIO equipment, and an increase of 

$11.2 million in OPN for the procurement of the VBSTT. 

High mobility artillery rocket system 

The budget request included $176.8 million in Procurement, Marine Corps (PMC), for the High Mobility Artillery Rocket System 

(HIMARS). HIMARS provides Marine forces immediate, precision 

fires with its 24 hour, all weather long-range precision strike capability. The committee understands that with additional funding the 

Marine Corps could accelerate the fielding of a guided munitions 

capability, by procuring Guided Multiple Launch Rocket System 

(GMLRS) rockets. GMLRS rockets are the tactical munitions for 

HIMARS. With these rockets, the Marine Corps could accelerate 

HIMARS fielding within 18 months to support the global war on 

terrorism, particularly Operation Iraqi Freedom. Additional funding for procurement of GMLRS rockets is on the Commandant of 

the Marine Corps’ unfunded priorities list. The committee recommends an increase of $54.4 million in PMC, for the procurement 

of 480 GMLRS rockets, for a total authorization of $231.2 million. 

AN/TPS–59(V3) radar system array rebuild 

The budget request included $12.2 million in Procurement, Marine Corps (PMC), for radar systems, including $5.6 million for the 

rebuild of one AN/TPS–59(V3) radar system array. The AN/TPS– 

59 radar is a critical low-density item being used extensively in 

current global war on terror operations. The AN/TPS–59(V)3 radar 

system is the only long-range, three-dimensional surveillance radar 

in the Marine Corps inventory. The high ops tempo and harsh environmental conditions of Operation Iraqi Freedom have caused antennas to degrade and require additional maintenance. The Marine 

Corps requested funding to rebuild one AN/TPS–59(V3) radar in 

405 

fiscal year 2005, but the requirement remains unfunded. The committee believes that rebuilding two AN/TPS–59(V3) radars will 

allow the Marine Corps to maintain the reliability, availability, and 

maintainability of the radar. Additional funding for the rebuild of 

one additional AN/TPS–59(V3) is on the Commandant of the Marine Corps’ unfunded priorities list. The committee recommends an 

increase of $7.5 million in PMC, for the AN/TPS–59(V3) radar system, for a total authorization of $19.7 million. 

Enhanced position location reporting system 

The budget request included $29.0 million in Procurement, Marine Corps (PMC), for radio systems, but included no funding for 

the Enhanced Position Location Reporting System (EPLRS), a tactical data radio which provides the only dedicated source of wireless data connectivity for tactical Marine Corps units above regimental level of command, extending to battalion and company level 

headquarters. The committee understands that the Joint Tactical 

Radio System (JTRS) was intended to fill this capability gap, but 

the committee recently learned that JTRS development will be delayed for 30 months. The committee understands that additional 

funding would enable the Marine Corps to procure EPLRS radio 

sets, their associated network management platforms, and the increased requirement for EPLRS radio sets throughout Marine operating forces to support the expanded use of Command and Control 

On the Move Network Digital Over the Horizon Relay (CONDOR). 

This item is on the Commandant of the Marine Corps’ unfunded 

priorities list. The committee recommends an increase of $17.9 million in PMC, for the procurement of 425 EPLRS radio sets, for a 

total authorization of $46.9 million. 

The committee strongly encourages the Assistant Secretary of 

Defense for Networks and Information Integration to immediately 

waive JTRS compliance for the procurement of EPLRS radios for 

the Marine Corps. The committee also notes that the Army has a 

similar initiative for on-the-move communications under the 

Mounted Battle Command on the Move program and encourages 

the Army-Marine Corps Board to review these programs for cooperative development and efficiencies. 

Explosive ordnance disposal equipment 

The budget request included $42.6 million in Procurement, Marine Corps (PMC), for explosive ordnance disposal equipment, but 

included no funding for the hardened engineer vehicle. The Marine 

Corps has an immediate need for hardened engineer and explosive 

ordnance disposal (EOD) vehicles with a V-shaped hull designed to 

withstand both anti-personnel and anti-tank mine blasts and an 

nuclear, biological and radiological overpressure system. This item 

is on the Commandant of the Marine Corps’ unfunded priorities 

list. The committee recommends an increase of $9.4 million in PMC 

for hardened engineer vehicles, for a total authorization of $52.0 

million. 

C–5 aircraft missile warning system upgrade 

The budget request included $71.1 million in Aircraft Procurement, Air Force (APAF), for modifications to the C–5 aircraft, but 

406 

included no funding to upgrade the AAR–47 missile warning sets 

(MWSs) on the aircraft. With the proliferation of man-portable air 

defense systems, airlift aircraft are vulnerable to the shoulderlaunched infrared surface-to-air missiles. The AAR–47 MWS is currently installed on 50 C–5B and one C–5A aircraft. An upgrade is 

available to this MWS which would provide a new processor, improved system sensors, a new control indicator unit, and a new 

laser warning detection system. Funding for this upgrade has been 

included on the Chief of Staff of the Air Force’s unfunded priorities 

list. The committee recommends an increase of $7.7 million in 

APAF to upgrade the AAR–47 MWS on the C–5 aircraft. 

C–17 aircraft infrared countermeasures 

The budget request included $260.8 million in Aircraft Procurement, Air Force (APAF), for modifications to the C–17 aircraft, including $84.5 million for the installation of the large aircraft infrared countermeasure system (LAIRCM). This system provides protection against man-portable air defense systems (MANPADS), 

which are widely available and have been used by terrorists in Operations Enduring Freedom and Iraqi Freedom against both military and commercial aircraft. Additional funding for LAIRCM is included on the Chief of Staff of the Air Force’s unfunded priorities 

list. The committee recommends funding this increase of $97.0 million for the procurement of LAIRCM for the C–17 aircraft. 

Mobile approach control system 

The budget request included $16.8 million in Other Procurement, 

Air Force (OPAF), for air traffic control and landing systems, including $11.8 million for the modification and refurbishment of the 

mobile approach control system (MACS), but included no funding 

for the procurement of MACS. MACS is a deployable radar approach control system that provides airspace control and precision 

approach control capability. The committee is concerned that the 

Air Force was unable to provide all of the MACS that were requested during Operations Enduring Freedom and Iraqi Freedom. 

Procurement for MACS has been included on the Chief of Staff of 

the Air Force’s unfunded priorities list. The committee recommends 

funding an increase of $51.9 million in OPAF for the procurement 

of three mobile approach control systems. 

Body armor 

The budget request included $40.0 million in Operation and 

Maintenance, Army (OMA), for body armor, $3.3 million in Operation and Maintenance, Navy (OMN), for body armor, $2.2 million 

in Operation and Maintenance, Marine Corps (OMMC), for body 

armor, but no funding in Operation and Maintenance, Air Force 

(OMAF), for body armor. Body armor, composed of outer tactical 

vests, small armor protective inserts, and deltoid armor protection, 

continues to provide superior personal protection to service members deployed in support of the global war on terrorism. The committee remains committed to ensuring that the individual soldier, 

sailor, airman, and Marine, Active and Reserve, has the equipment 

necessary to ensure individual safety and combat lethality across 

the full spectrum of operations. In addition, the committee believes 

407 

that recent technological advances in protective and safety equipment must be delivered to deployed service members as soon as 

possible. 

The committee recommends an increase of $117.8 million for interceptor body armor or body armor components including: $57.4 

million in OMA for enhanced SAPI plates; $3.1 million in OMN for 

interceptor body armor; $2.4 million in Operation and Maintenance, Navy Reserve (OMNR), for interceptor body armor; and 

$54.9 million in OMAF for deltoid armor protection. The committee 

expects that the Army will ensure the provision of enhanced SAPI 

plates to all members of the U.S. Armed Forces and appropriate civilian personnel deployed in the U.S. Central Command area of responsibility. 

Expanded maritime interdiction operations training and 

outfitting 

The budget request included no funding in Operation and Maintenance, Navy (OMN), for expanded maritime interdiction operations (MIO) training and outfitting. The committee notes that the 

Navy has an urgent requirement to train and outfit the MIO visit, 

board, search and seizure (VBSS) teams of 58 ships deploying in 

support of the global war on terrorism and the Proliferation Security Initiative. Additional funding for expanded MIO training and 

outfitting has been identified on the Chief of Staff of the Army unfunded priorities list. The committee recommends an increase of 

$6.2 million in OMN for expanded maritime interdiction operations 

outfitting. 

Small caliber weapons and mounts repair and replacement 

The budget request included $5.7 million in Operation and Maintenance, Navy (OMN), for the repair or replacement of small caliber weapons and weapon mounts. According to Navy officials, 

there has been a rapid growth in small caliber weaponry 

sustainment requirements due to the global war on terrorism. The 

committee understands that deployments of Naval Coastal Warfare 

personnel in support of Persian Gulf oil platform security and 

Naval Construction Force personnel in support of Iraq and Afghanistan infrastructure development has increased small caliber weapons readiness requirements. Additional funding for the repair or replacement of small caliber weapons and weapon mounts has been 

identified on the Chief of Naval Operations unfunded priorities list. 

The committee recommends an increase of $24.0 million in OMN 

for the repair or replacement of small caliber weaponry and weapon mounts. 

Field medical equipment 

The budget request included $6.5 million in Operation and Maintenance, Marine Corps (OMMC), for field medical equipment. According to Marine Corps officials, current medical inventories, 

which support operating rooms, aid stations, laboratories, and individual units, have been depleted in the conduct of contingency operations. Additional funding for field medical equipment has been 

identified on the Commandant of the Marine Corps unfunded priorVerDate Aug 04 2004 15:24 May 25, 2005 Jkt 021326 PO 00000 Frm 00427 Fmt 6601 Sfmt 6601 E:\HR\OC\SR069.XXX SR069
408 

ities list. The committee recommends an increase of $19.0 million 

in OMMC for field medical equipment. 

M1A1 tank depot maintenance 

The budget request included $9.6 million in Operation and Maintenance, Marine Corps (OMMC), for M1A1 tank depot maintenance. Additional funding for the M1A1 tank depot maintenance 

has been identified on the Commandant of the Marine Corps unfunded priorities list. According to Marine Corps officials, this unfunded priority supports the reset of tanks returning from contingency operations. The committee understands that average usage 

on tanks deployed in support of contingency operations is 3,000 kilometers per year. This is 10 times the quantity of miles historically 

executed in support of peacetime training. The committee also 

notes that the Marine Corps continues to effectively manage depot 

maintenance programs. The committee recommends an increase of 

$40.0 million in OMMC for M1A1 tank depot maintenance. 

(409) 

DIVISION B—MILITARY CONSTRUCTION 

AUTHORIZATIONS 

Explanation of funding tables 

Division B of this Act authorizes funding for military construction projects of the Department of Defense. It includes funding authorizations for the construction and operation of military family 

housing and military construction for the Reserve components, the 

defense agencies, and the North Atlantic Treaty Organization Security Investment program. It also provides authorization for the 

base closure account that funds environmental cleanup and other 

activities associated with the implementation of base closure 

rounds. 

The following tables provide the project-level authorizations for 

the military construction funding authorized in Division B of this 

Act and summarize that funding by account. 

The budget request for fiscal year 2006 included authorization of 

appropriations for military construction and housing programs totaling $12,051,611,000. Of this amount, the budget request included authorization of appropriations for $1,880,466,000 to implement the results of the 2005 Defense Base Closure and Realignment round. The amount authorized for appropriation is included 

in the following table in a line designated Base Realignment & Closure V. 

The committee recommends authorization of appropriations for 

military construction and housing programs totaling 

$12,051,611,000. The total amount authorized for appropriations 

reflects this committee’s commitment to continue a strong investment in the recapitalization of facilities and infrastructure in the 

United States, while continuing to invest prudently in overseas installations that are identified in the Integrated Global Presence 

and Basing Strategy released by the President in September 2004 

as enduring installations with firmly defined, long-term operational 

missions. 

410 


Insert graphic folio 476 SR69.165
411 


Insert graphic folio 477 SR69.166
412 


Insert graphic folio 478 SR69.167
413 


Insert graphic folio 479 SR69.168
414 


Insert graphic folio 480 SR69.169
415 


Insert graphic folio 481 SR69.170
416 


Insert graphic folio 482 SR69.171
417 


Insert graphic folio 483 SR69.172
418 


Insert graphic folio 484 SR69.173
419 


Insert graphic folio 485 SR69.174
420 


Insert graphic folio 486 SR69.175
421 


Insert graphic folio 487 SR69.176
422 


Insert graphic folio 488 SR69.177
423 


Insert graphic folio 489 SR69.178
424 


Insert graphic folio 490 SR69.179
425 


Insert graphic folio 491 SR69.180
426 


Insert graphic folio 492 SR69.181
427 


Insert graphic folio 493 SR69.182
428 


Insert graphic folio 494 SR69.183
429 


Insert graphic folio 495 SR69.184
430 


Insert graphic folio 496 SR69.185
431 

Short title (sec. 2001) 

The committee recommends a provision that would cite Division 

B of this Act as the Military Construction Authorization Act for 

Fiscal Year 2006. 

(433) 

TITLE XXI—ARMY 

Summary 

The budget request included authorization of appropriations of 

$1,480.0 million for military construction and $1,362.6 million for 

family housing for the Army in fiscal year 2006. The committee recommends authorization of appropriations for $1,604.0 million for 

military construction and $1,362.6 million for family housing for 

fiscal year 2006. 

The committee recommends a decrease of $15.0 million to the authorization of appropriations for three projects in Korea due to the 

recent award of similar construction contracts by the Army in 

Korea at amounts substantially less than appropriated by Congress 

in previous fiscal years. The committee anticipates that this trend 

of favorable contract award amounts will continue for the Army in 

fiscal year 2006. 

The committee recommends increasing the authorization of appropriations by $1.8 million for planning and design to complete 

design for the projects added by the committee. 

Authorized Army construction and land acquisition projects 

(sec. 2101) 

This provision contains the list of authorized Army construction 

projects for fiscal year 2006. The authorized amounts are listed on 

an installation-by-installation basis. The State list contained in this 

report is the binding list of the specific projects authorized at each 

location. 

Family housing (sec. 2102) 

This provision would authorize new construction and planning 

and design of family housing units for the Army for fiscal year 

2006. It would also authorize funds for facilities that support family housing, including housing management offices and housing 

maintenance and storage facilities. 

Improvements to military family housing units (sec. 2103) 

This provision would authorize improvements to existing Army 

family housing units for fiscal year 2006. 

Authorization of appropriations, Army (sec. 2104) 

This provision would authorize specific appropriations for each 

line item contained in the Army’s military construction and family 

housing budget for fiscal year 2006. This provision would also provide an overall limit on the amount the Army may spend on military construction projects. 

434 

Items of Special Interest 

Report on permanent facilities for new Army units 

On January 30, 2004, the Office of the Secretary of Defense approved a request by the Chief of Staff of the Army to increase the 

number of active modular Brigade Combat Team Units of Action 

(BCT(UA)) from 33 to 43 between fiscal years 2004 and 2006. On 

July 23, 2004, the Army announced the temporary locations for the 

UA’s listed below, and will recommend permanent stations for the 

units as part of the 2005 round of Base Realignment and Closure 

(BRAC). 

[Dollars in millions] 

Location Personnel increase 

Cost of temporary facilities 

Fort Stewart, Georgia ....................................................................................................................... 1,700 $108.0 

Fort Campbell, Kentucky .................................................................................................................. 3,000 94.7 

Fort Drum, New York ....................................................................................................................... 4,200 188.0 

Fort Benning, Georgia ...................................................................................................................... 3,800 134.5 

Fort Hood, Texas .............................................................................................................................. 5,000 152.8 

Fort Polk, Louisiana ......................................................................................................................... 300 4.8 

Fort Lewis, Washington ................................................................................................................... 3,900 98.8 

Fort Richardson, Alaska .................................................................................................................. 2,600 78.4 

Fort Bliss, Texas .............................................................................................................................. 3,800 131.2 

Fort Riley, Kansas ............................................................................................................................ 3,400 138.5 

Fort Bragg, North Carolina .............................................................................................................. 5,300 152.4 

Fort Carson, Colorado ...................................................................................................................... 3,700 128.5 

Total ................................................................................................................................... 40,700 1,410.6 

In order to support the rapid reorganization of combat units, the 

Secretary of the Army is using emergency authorities pursuant to 

section 2803, title 10, United States Code, to carry out military 

construction projects not otherwise authorized by law. The projects 

install utilities and prepare sites for the purchase and installation 

of temporary facilities to provide barracks and work areas for the 

new UAs. The 19,250 families of service members relocated as part 

of the reorganization are being absorbed within local communities 

in existing schools and into existing installation support facilities, 

such as child development centers and medical centers. 

The temporary facilities, consisting of modular buildings and 

trailers, have a design life of five to seven years, depending on local 

climate. The trailers serving as barracks for permanently assigned 

military personnel have under-sized sleeping areas and gang latrines that do not meet minimal standards established by the Department of Defense for unaccompanied housing. Because the Army 

purchased the trailers as equipment items, no maintenance plan 

has been established, and therefore no funds have been programmed for the sustainment of the trailers. 

The committee is concerned that the Army has not included 

funds to sustain or replace these trailers with permanent facilities 

in their Future Years Defense Plan (FYDP). Therefore, the committee directs the Secretary of the Army to submit to the Committee on Armed Services of the Senate by April 1, 2006, a report 

with the following information: 

(1) an inventory of the temporary facilities installed to meet 

requirements for the establishment of 10 (BCT(UA)); 

435 

(2) an estimate of the scope and costs to maintain the temporary facilities through the end of their current use; 

(3) a proposed time line to replace the temporary facilities 

with permanent facilities; 

(4) a description and cost estimate for construction of permanent facilities required to replace the temporary facilities; 

(5) an assessment by location of the scope and cost to add to 

or alter existing facilities required to support military personnel and their families; 

(6) an assessment of the impact on local communities and actions taken by the Army to address those issues; and 

(7) an estimate of the date that the Army will meet the Department goal to eliminate inadequate unaccompanied housing. 

In addition, the committee directs the Secretary of Defense to report to the Committee on Armed Services of the Senate by February 15, 2006, on the Department’s guidance relating to the procurement and use of temporary facilities to support personnel relocations related to BRAC 2005 and global presence changes. 

(437) 

TITLE XXII—NAVY 

Summary 

The budget request included authorization of appropriations of $1,029.2 million for military construction and $812.6 million for 

family housing for the Navy in fiscal year 2006. The budget request 

also included a proposal to use $92.4 million in prior year unobligated funds authorized for military construction to reduce the request for authorization of appropriation for the Navy in fiscal year 

2006. The committee recommends authorization of appropriations 

of $1,102.7 million for military construction and $815.8 million for 

family housing for fiscal year 2006. 

The committee believes that the Navy should not use annual 

budget requests to carry out the reprogramming of unobligated 

funds from prior years. Therefore, the committee recommends rescinding $92.3 million as a general reduction from prior year authorization of appropriations for military construction and housing 

projects for the Navy. The committee further recommends an authorization of appropriations for seven construction projects at 

their fully authorized amount as shown in the table, FY 2006 Authorization of Appropriations for Military Construction and Family 

Housing. 

The committee recommends deferring the authorization of appro- priations of $13.7 million to construct a bachelor enlisted quarters 

at Naval Base Coronado, California under a pilot program authorized by section 2881a of title 10, United States Code, to enter into 

a public-private venture, until the authority in title 10, United 

States Code, is amended to authorize a fourth pilot project. 

The committee also recommends deferring the authorization of appropriations of $39.0 million to upgrade wharfs, first increment 

at world-wide locations, until final basing arrangements negotiated 

as part of the Integrated Global Presence and Basing Strategy are 

finalized with the host nation. 

The committee recommends increasing the authorization of ap- propriations by $4.0 million for planning and design to complete 

design for the projects added by the committee. 

Authorized Navy construction and land acquisition projects 

(sec. 2201) 

This section contains the list of authorized Navy construction 

projects for fiscal year 2006. The authorized amounts are listed on 

an installation-by-installation basis. The State list contained in this 

report is the binding list of the specific projects authorized at each 

location. 

Family housing (sec. 2202) 

This section would authorize new construction and planning and 

design of family housing units for the Navy for fiscal year 2006. It 

438 

would also authorize funds for facilities that support family housing, including housing management offices and housing maintenance and storage facilities. 

Improvements to military family housing units (sec. 2203) 

This section would authorize improvements to existing Navy and 

Marine Corps family housing units for fiscal year 2006. 

Authorization of appropriations, Navy (sec. 2204) 

This section would authorize specific appropriations for each line 

item in the Navy’s military construction and family housing budget 

for fiscal year 2006. This section also provides an overall limit on 

the amount the Navy may spend on military construction projects. 

Modification of authority to carry out certain fiscal year 

2004 project (sec. 2205) 

The committee recommends a provision that would amend section 2201 of the Military Construction Authorization Act for Fiscal 

Year 2004 (division B of Public Law 108–136) to increase a project 

authorization for Naval Weapons Station Earle, New Jersey. 

Modification of authority to carry out certain fiscal year 

2005 projects (sec. 2206) 

The committee recommends a provision that would amend section 2201 of the Military Construction Authorization Act for Fiscal 

Year 2005 (division B of Public Law 108–375) to increase project 

authorizations at an unspecified world-wide location and at 

Quantico, Virginia. 

Hockmuth Hall, Marine Corps Base Quantico, Virginia 

The budget request included authorization of appropriations of $2.6 million to construct the first increment of an addition to 

Hockmuth Hall at Marine Corps Base Quantico, Virginia. The 

budget request also included authorization for the full requirement 

of $14.2 million for the addition to Hockmuth Hall. 

Section 2807 of the Military Construction Act for Fiscal Year 

2000 (Public Law 106–65) expressed a sense of Congress that, in 

preparing the budget for each fiscal year for military construction 

for submission to Congress under section 1105 of title 31, United 

States Code, the President should request an amount of funds for 

each proposed military construction project that is sufficient to 

produce a complete and usable facility or a complete and usable improvement to an existing facility. The committee notes that in limited instances, large military construction projects with a total cost 

exceeding $50.0 million may be funded in phases consistent with 

established practices for such projects. 

The budget request for the addition to Hockmuth Hall did not 

comply with congressional intent. Therefore, the committee recommends an increase of authorization of appropriations of $1.4 million to construct the first phase of an addition to Hockmuth Hall, 

resulting in a complete and useable facility. The committee further 

directs the Navy to include a request for authorization of appropriations for the full remainder of the military construction requirement for this project in the fiscal year 2007 budget request. 

(439) 

TITLE XXIII—AIR FORCE 

Summary 

The budget request included authorization of appropriations of 

$1,069.6 million for military construction and $2,018.0 million for 

family housing for the Air Force in fiscal year 2006. The committee 

recommends authorization of appropriations of $1,207.4 million for 

military construction and $1,909.9 million for family housing for 

fiscal year 2006. 

The committee recommends deferring authorization of appropriations of $10.0 million to install an erosion control stabilization system at Fourth Cliff Recreation Annex, Massachusetts, until the Air 

Force can justify the military requirement. 

The committee also recommends deferring the authorization of 

appropriations of $45.4 million to construct family housing at 

Spangdahlem Air Base, Germany, until force structure requirements can be finalized within the Integrated Global Presence and 

Basing Strategy. The committee also directs the Air Force to reassess their plan to divest 331 adequate housing units at the former 

Bitburg Air Force Base, Germany, from the Air Force inventory. 

The committee further recommends deferring the authorization 

of appropriations by $48.7 million to replace family housing and 

$11.1 million to improve housing at Bolling Air Force Base, Washington, DC., to allow the Air Force to pursue the replacement of inadequate housing using the alternative authority for the acquisition and improvement of military housing provided in subchapter 

4 of chapter 169, title 10, United States Code. 

The committee recommends decreasing the authorization of appropriations by $7.7 million for two projects in Korea due to the recent award of similar construction contracts by the Air Force in 

Korea at amounts substantially less than appropriated by Congress 

in previous fiscal years. The committee anticipates that this trend 

of favorable contract award amounts will continue for the Air Force 

in fiscal year 2006. 

The committee recommends increasing the authorization of appropriations by $4.7 million for planning and design to complete 

design for the projects added by the committee. 

Authorized Air Force construction and land acquisition 

projects (sec. 2301) 

This section contains the list of authorized Air Force construction 

projects for fiscal year 2006. The authorized amounts are listed on 

an installation-by-installation basis. The State list contained in this 

report is the binding list of the specific projects authorized at each 

location. 

440 

Family housing (sec. 2302) 

This section would authorize new construction and planning and 

design of family housing units for the Air Force for fiscal year 

2006. It would also authorize funds for facilities that support family housing, including housing management offices and housing 

maintenance and storage facilities. 

Improvements to military family housing units (sec. 2303) 

This section would authorize improvements to existing Air Force 

family housing units for fiscal year 2006. 

Authorization of appropriations, Air Force (sec. 2304) 

This section would authorize specific appropriations for each line 

item in the Air Force’s budget for fiscal year 2006. This section 

would also provide an overall limit on the amount the Air Force 

may spend on military construction projects. 

Items of Special Interest 

Planning and design, Air Force 

The committee directs that the amount of $1.6 million, added to 

the authorization of appropriation for planning and design for the 

Air Force, be used to complete the design of a headquarters facility 

for the 70th Intelligence Wing at Fort Meade, Maryland. 

(441) 

TITLE XXIV—DEFENSE AGENCIES 

Summary 

The budget request included authorization of appropriations of 

$1,042.7 million for military construction and $48.9 million for family housing for defense agencies in fiscal year 2006. The committee 

recommends authorization of appropriations for $1,042.7 million for 

military construction and $48.9 million for family housing for fiscal 

year 2006. 

The budget request also included authorization of appropriations 

of $377.8 million to carry out environmental activities related to 

the previous rounds of Base Realignment and Closure (BRAC), and 

authorization of appropriations of $1,880.5 million to initiate the 

decisions of the 2005 BRAC round. 

The budget request included an analysis that, of the $1,880.5 

million for the 2005 BRAC round, $376.0 million would remain unobligated at the end of fiscal year 2006 and would carry over into 

fiscal year 2007. The committee is also aware that the budget request was developed at a time when the Department of Defense of 

Defense anticipated reducing the capacity of military installations 

by 20–25 percent. The Secretary of Defense recently stated that, for 

the 2005 BRAC round, ‘‘the actual number will be less than the 

lower end of that range.’’ 

Also, documents submitted to support the budget request did not 

account for savings to be realized from the cancellation of construction projects authorized in previous years. These savings would be 

available for transfer into the BRAC account in 2006 to augment 

funds for initial BRAC requirements. 

Therefore, the committee recommends a decrease of $376.0 million to the authorization of appropriations to initiate the decisions 

of the 2005 BRAC round. The committee also recommends that no 

funds may be obligated to initiate the decisions of the 2005 BRAC 

round until 21 days after the Secretary submits a report to the congressional defense committees describing the programs, projects, or 

activities to be carried out with funds from this account. 

Authorized defense agencies construction and land acquisition projects (sec. 2401) 

This section contains the list of authorized defense agency construction projects for fiscal year 2006. The authorized amounts are 

listed on an installation-by-installation basis. The State list contained in this report is the binding list of the specific projects authorized at each location. 

Energy conservation projects (sec. 2402) 

This section would authorize the Secretary of Defense to carry 

out energy conservation projects. 

442 

Authorization of appropriations, defense agencies (sec. 

2403) 

This section would authorize specific appropriations for each defense agency military construction program for fiscal year 2006. 

This provision also would provide an overall limit on the amount 

that may be spent on such military construction projects. 

(443) 

TITLE XXV—NORTH ATLANTIC TREATY ORGANIZATION 

SECURITY INVESTMENT PROGRAM 

Summary 

The Department of Defense requested authorization of appropriation of $206.9 million for the North Atlantic Treaty Organization 

Security Investment Program for fiscal year 2006. The committee 

recommends an authorization of appropriation of $206.9 million for 

fiscal year 2006. 

Authorized NATO construction and land acquisition 

projects (sec. 2501) 

This provision would authorize the Secretary of Defense to make 

contributions to the North Atlantic Treaty Organization Security 

Investment Program in an amount equal to the sum of the amount 

specifically authorized in section 2502 of this title and the amount 

of recoupment due to the United States for construction previously 

financed by the United States. 

Authorization of appropriations, NATO (sec. 2502) 

This provision would authorize appropriation of $206.9 million 

for the United States’ contribution to the North Atlantic Treaty Organization Security Investment Program for fiscal year 2006. 

(445) 

TITLE XXVI—GUARD AND RESERVE FORCES FACILITIES 

Summary 

The Department of Defense requested authorization of appropriations of $722.8 million for military construction in fiscal year 2006 

for National Guard and Reserve facilities. The committee recommends authorizations of appropriations for fiscal year 2006 of 

$961.2 million to be distributed as follows: 

Account Millions 

Army National Guard ..................................................................................... $464.7 

Air National Guard ......................................................................................... 245.9 

Army Reserve ................................................................................................... 121.1 

Air Force Reserve ............................................................................................ 79.3 

Naval and Marine Corps Reserve .................................................................. 50.2 

Total ................................................................................................... 961.2 

Authorized Guard and Reserve construction and land acquisition projects (sec. 2601) 

This provision would authorize appropriations for military construction for the National Guard and Reserve by service component 

for fiscal year 2006. The state list contained in this report is the 

binding list of the specific projects authorized at each location. 

Items of Special Interest 

Unspecified minor construction, Army National Guard 

The committee authorizes the Secretary of the Army, using funds 

authorized for unspecified minor construction for the Army National Guard, to construct an addition and alteration to a readiness 

center for $1.5 million at Waterloo, Iowa. 

Unspecified minor construction, Air National Guard 

The committee authorizes the Secretary of the Air Force, using 

funds authorized for unspecified minor construction for the Air National Guard, to construct an addition and alteration to a field 

maintenance shop for $1.5 million at Fort Dodge, Iowa. 

Planning and design, Army National Guard 

The committee directs that the amount of $3.0 million, added to 

the authorization of appropriation for planning and design for the 

Army National Guard, be used to complete the design of a Joint 

Armed Services Reserve Center at Naval Air Station Brunswick, 

Maine. 

(447) 

TITLE XXVII—EXPIRATION AND EXTENSION OF 

AUTHORIZATIONS 

Expiration of authorizations and amounts required to be 

specified by law (sec. 2701) 

This provision would provide that authorizations for military construction projects, repair of real property, land acquisition, family 

housing projects, contributions to the North Atlantic Treaty Organization infrastructure program, and National Guard and Reserve 

military construction projects would expire on October 1, 2008, or 

the date of enactment of an act authorizing funds for military construction for fiscal year 2009, whichever is later. This expiration 

would not apply to authorizations for projects for which appropriated funds have been obligated before October 1, 2008, or the 

date of enactment of an act authorizing funding for military construction for fiscal year 2009, whichever is later. 

Extension of authorizations of certain fiscal year 2003 

projects (sec. 2702) 

This section would extend the authorizations for certain fiscal 

year 2003 military construction projects until October 1, 2006, or 

the date of enactment of an act authorizing funds for military construction for fiscal year 2007, whichever is later. 

Extension of authorizations of certain fiscal year 2002 

projects (sec. 2703) 

This section would extend the authorizations for certain fiscal 

year 2002 military construction projects until October 1, 2006, or 

the date of enactment of an act authorizing funds for military construction for fiscal year 2007, whichever is later. 

Effective date (sec. 2704) 

This provision would provide that titles XXI, XXII, XXIII, XXIV, 

XXV, and XXVI of this Act shall take effect on October 1, 2005, or 

the date of enactment of this Act, whichever is later. 

(449) 

TITLE XXVIII—GENERAL PROVISIONS 

Subtitle A—Military Construction Program and Military 

Family Housing Changes 

Increase in thresholds for unspecified minor military construction projects (sec. 2801) 

The committee recommends a provision that would amend section 2805(a)(1) of title 10, United States Code, by raising the 

threshold of the cost of a construction project authorized by this 

section from $1.5 million to $2.5 million. This provision would also 

raise the threshold of the cost of a construction project intended 

solely to correct a deficiency that is life-threatening, health-threatening, or safety-threatening from $3.0 million to $4.0 million. 

The committee notes that the Government Accountability Office, 

in a report released in February 2004 entitled ‘‘Long-term Challenges in Managing the Military Construction Program’’, estimated 

that construction costs for the military have increased by an average of 41 percent since the thresholds amended in this provision 

were last adjusted. 

Modification of cost variation authority (sec. 2802) 

The committee recommends a provision that would amend section 2853 of title 10, United States Code, to establish a minimum 

amount for which the cost of a military construction project or for 

the construction, improvement, or acquisition of a military family 

housing project cannot vary. This provision would authorize the 

secretary concerned to carry out a project of which the cost varies 

beyond the minimum amount after the secretary concerned notifies 

the congressional defense committees and waits 21 days before carrying out the project. 

Department of Defense housing funds (sec. 2803) 

The committee recommends a provision that would amend section 2883 of title 10, United States Code, to require the Secretary 

of Defense to fund certain acquisitions and improvements of military housing solely through accounts established for that purpose. 

This provision would also amend section 2884 of title 10, United 

States Code, to add a requirement for the Secretary to report to the 

congressional defense committees annually with a summary of the 

funds obligated from defense housing accounts. This provision 

would improve the ability of Congress to account for funds obligated to carry out a contract for the acquisition or construction of 

family housing units using alternative authorities provided under 

subchapter IV of chapter 169, title 10, United States Code. 

450 

Temporary authority to use minor military construction authority for construction of child development centers 

(sec. 2804) 

The committee recommends a provision that would direct the 

Secretary of Defense to carry out a temporary program for the construction of child development centers operated by the Department 

of Defense. This provision would increase the threshold in section 

2805(a)(1) of title 10, United States Code, to $7.0 million for unspecified minor construction projects carried out to construct child 

development centers. This provision would also increase the threshold in section 2805(a)(1) of title 10, United States Code, to $8.0 million if the unspecified minor construction project is intended solely 

to correct a deficiency in a child development center that threatens 

the life, safety, or health of the occupants. This provision would 

also increase other thresholds in section 2805 of title 10, United 

States Code, to ensure continuity of the temporary authority. This 

provision would provide for the expiration of the authority on September 30, 2007. 

This provision would also require the Secretary to establish procedures for the review of each project to be carried out under this 

section, and to report to the congressional defense committees by 

March 1, 2007, with a list and description of the projects carried 

out under this program, as well as recommendations for extension 

of the temporary authority. 

The committee is concerned that the Department has a deficiency 

of approximately 38,000 spaces, equating to 167 child development 

centers, for the care of children of service members between the 

ages of 6 weeks and 5 years. In many cases, a family must wait 

18 months before they can be accommodated at existing centers on 

military installations, resulting in the use of off-base facilities at a 

much greater cost and inconvenience for families. This deficiency 

has increased significantly in the past two years and adds a substantial burden to the families of deployed service members. Aside 

from housing, access to quality child care offered at military installations has become the top quality of life concern among military 

personnel. 

It is the committee’s intent that the authorities provided in this 

provision would be used to increase the options available to the Department to quickly address the shortfall in child development centers with temporary facilities and to transfer existing funds from 

other accounts to construct new centers. 

Inapplicability to child development centers of restriction 

on authority to acquire or construct ancillary supporting facilities (sec. 2805) 

The committee recommends a provision that would amend section 2881(b) of title 10, United States Code, to exempt child development centers from the restriction for ancillary facilities authorized to be constructed using the alternative authority for acquisition and improvements of military housing provided in subchapter 

IV of chapter 169, title 10, United States Code. The committee intends this provision to increase the options available to the Department of Defense to quickly address the shortfall in child development centers by including the construction of permanent facilities 

451 

as part of transactions carried out under the alternative authority 

for acquisition and improvements of military housing. 

In order to enhance the quality of life provided to military members and their families, the committee encourages the Department 

to include the construction and operation of child development centers in all future plans to construct or improve family housing communities. 

Authority to carry out exchanges of facilities including associated utilities, equipment, and furnishings (sec. 2806) 

The committee recommends a provision that would amend section 18240 of title 10, United States Code, to amend the definition 

of ‘‘facility’’ in section 18240 to include utilities, equipment, and 

furnishings required to be installed in a facility. 

Increase in number of family housing units in Korea authorized for lease by the Army at maximum amount (sec. 

2807) 

The committee recommends a provision that would amend section 2828(e)(4) of title 10, United States Code, to increase from 

2,400 to 2,800 the number of family housing units the Secretary of 

the Army may lease in Korea, for which the maximum annual 

lease cost per unit is $35,000. 

The committee recommends this provision in order to allow the 

Secretary to provide leased housing units for military personnel 

and their families that meet the Department of Defense’s guidelines for adequate force protection/anti-terrorism measures in facilities, while supporting the U.S. military force structure and basing 

plans of the Commander, U.S. Forces, Korea. 

Subtitle B—Real Property and Facilities Administration 

Authority to lease non-excess property of Department of Defense field activities (sec. 2821) 

The committee recommends a provision that would amend sections 2667a of title 10, United States Code, to authorize the Secretary of Defense to lease non-excess property that is under the 

control of a Department of Defense field activity. This provision 

would grant field activities the same authorities currently available 

to defense agencies under section 2667a of title 10, United States 

Code. 

Modified criteria for agreements to limit encroachments 

and other constraints on military training, testing and 

operations (sec. 2822) 

The committee recommends a provision that would modify section 2684a of title 10, United States Code, to clarify that agreements to limit encroachments and other constraints on military 

training, testing, and operations authorized under that section may 

include ecologically-related real property and the airspace of a military installation. The provision also requires that agreements initiated after the date of enactment of this Act shall provide for equal 

sharing of the acquisition costs of such property and interests and 

that the acquisition costs of any lesser property interest, such as 

452 

an easement, may not exceed 70 percent of the appraised value of 

the land. 

The committee believes that the authority created in section 

2811 of the Bob Stump National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2003, and codified at section 2684a of title 10, is a potentially useful tool to create mutually beneficial relationships between the Department, State and local governments, and private 

organizations by promoting cooperation in maintaining military 

readiness and meeting environmental goals. 

The committee believes that the changes proposed by this provision will strengthen existing law by clarifying that such cooperative 

conservation agreements may extend to the airspace of the installation and to real estate that conserves species habitat to the Department’s benefit, even if that real estate is not directly adjacent to 

the installation. The committee also believes that the partner entities should, absent circumstances in which the potential impact of 

encroachment or development on the installation’s mission is particularly great, equally share acquisition costs with the Department. 

The committee intends to closely monitor implementation of this 

authority and recommends adding an annual reporting requirement. 

Subtitle C—Land Conveyances 

Part I—Army Conveyances 

Land conveyance, Helena, Montana (sec. 2841) 

The committee recommends a provision that would authorize the 

Secretary of the Army to convey by quitclaim deed to the Helena 

Indian Alliance, a parcel of property consisting of approximately 3 

acres located at the Sheridan Hall Army Reserve Center, Helena, 

Montana for the purpose of supporting Native American health 

care, mental health counseling, and the operation of an educational 

training center. This provision would also require the Secretary to 

seek reimbursement from the Helena Indian Alliance for costs related to the conveyance. 

Land conveyance, Army Reserve center, Bothell, Washington (sec. 2842) 

The committee recommends a provision that would authorize the 

Secretary of the Army to convey, without consideration, to the Snohomish County Fire Protection District #10 a parcel of property 

consisting of approximately 1 acre located at the Army Reserve 

Center, Bothell, Washington for the purpose of permitting the fire 

district to operate a fire station on the property. 

This provision would authorize the Secretary to include a reversionary clause in the terms of the conveyance, in the event the 

property conveyed was not used in accordance with the purpose 

stated in the authorization. This provision would also authorize the 

Secretary to seek reimbursement from the fire district for costs related to the conveyance. 

453 

Part II—Air Force Conveyances 

Acquisition of build-to-lease family housing at Eielson Air 

Force Base, Alaska (sec. 2861) 

The committee recommends a provision that would authorize the 

Secretary of the Air Force, if determined to be in the best economic 

interest of the Air Force, to purchase the entire interest in a family 

housing project consisting of 300 units at Eielson Air Force Base, 

Alaska, which is being leased from a private entity by the Secretary under section 801 of the Military Construction Authorization 

Act for Fiscal Year 1984 (Public Law 98–115). The Secretary would 

be authorized to provide consideration for the project at an amount 

not to exceed fair market value, as determined by the Secretary. 

The authorization provided by this provision is similar to the authorization provided to the Secretary to purchase 366 family housing units at Eielson Air Force Base, Alaska under section 2804 of 

the Military Construction Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 1999 

(Public Law 105–261). The Air Force requires the family housing 

units to be obtained by both purchases to meet the total housing 

requirement for Eielson Air Force Base. 

Subtitle D—Other Matters 

Reorganization and technical improvement of codified laws 

applicable to real property of the Department of Defense (sec. 2881) 

The committee recommends a provision that would amend sections 2663 and 2664 of title 10, United States Code, to consolidate 

and clarify authorities available for real property administration. 

This provision would also repeal sections 2672, 2672a, and 2676 of 

title 10, United States Code, that would be superceded as a result 

of the consolidations. This provision would also amend section 2661 

of title 10, United States Code, to clarify the application of the section to the Pentagon Reservation. 

Report on application of force protection and anti-terrorism 

standards to leased facilities (sec. 2882) 

The committee recommends a provision that would require the 

Secretary of Defense to submit a report to the congressional defense committees no later than May 1, 2006, on the application of 

Department of Defense anti-terrorism/force protection (AT/FP) 

standards to all facilities leased by the Department of Defense, or 

leased by the General Services Administration (GSA) on the Department’s behalf, that house more than 11 personnel in service to, 

or employed by the Department. The report would include: 

(1) a description of all facilities; 

(2) a threat and vulnerability assessment; 

(3) a description of actions to mitigate risk; and 

(4) a description and cost estimate of the actions to be carried out to meet force protection/anti-terrorism standards. 

The committee is committed to ensuring that AT/FP standards 

applied to defense installations to protect military personnel should 

also be applied to leased facilities. The standards, set forth in Unified Facilities Criteria (UFC) 4–010–01, ‘‘DOD Minimum AT StandVerDate Aug 04 2004 15:24 May 25, 2005 Jkt 021326 PO 00000 Frm 00473 Fmt 6601 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\SR069.XXX SR069
454 

ards for Buildings,’’ were established in October 2003 to provide a 

prescriptive set of design conditions in which all leased facilities 

were to be in full compliance by October 2009. No facilities currently leased by the Department or GSA, most of which are in 

highly urban areas, meet the AT/FP standards. Yet, as of this date, 

the Department has not released a plan or investment strategy required to achieve the goal. 

The committee encourages the Department to work with leased 

facility owners to seek options in the management and upgrade of 

existing leased facilities that could mitigate risk to an acceptable 

level, while saving the Department the costs of the relocation of 

personnel. 

Construction at Fort Buchanan, Puerto Rico, for Reserve 

components (sec. 2883) 

The committee recommends a provision that would amend section 1507(b)(2) of the Floyd D. Spence National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2001 (Public Law 106–398) to remove the 

restriction on construction of facilities for Reserve component or 

non-appropriated fund projects. 

Authority to use Papago Park Military Reservation, Arizona, for general military purposes (sec. 2884) 

The committee recommends a provision that would amend section 1 of the Act of April 7, 1930 (46 Stat. 142, chapter 107) to 

change the designation of land reserved for the State of Arizona. 

The Act of April 7, 1930, abolished the Papago Saguaro National 

Monument and reserved specific land for military purposes for use 

by the National Guard of the State of Arizona as a rifle range. This 

provision would designate the use of specific land as a military installation known as the Papago Park Military Reservation, thereby 

allowing the State of Arizona to incorporate other military requirements on the specific land. 

One-year extension of Department of Defense laboratory revitalization program (sec. 2885) 

The committee recommends a provision that would extend by one 

year the authorization provided by section 2891 of the Military 

Construction Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2005 (division B of 

Public Law 108–375) for the Secretary of Defense to carry out a 

program for the revitalization of laboratories operated by the Department of Defense. This provision would provide for the expiration of the authority on September 30, 2006. 

Initial authorization for this program was provided under section 

2892 of the Military Construction Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 

1996 (division B of Public Law 104–106). The authority for the program was extended and amended under section 2871 of the Military Construction Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 1999 (division 

B of Public Law 105–261) and resumed under section 2891 of the 

Military Construction Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2005 (division B of Public Law 108–375). 

The committee intends the extension of the revitalization program for defense laboratories to allow the Secretary of Defense to 

use the increased thresholds in section 2805 of title 10, United 

455 

States Code, to address unique revitalization requirements for defense laboratories which typically cost more than the revitalization 

of comparative-sized military facilities. 

Sense of Congress on establishment of Bakers Creek memorial (sec. 2886) 

The committee recommends a provision that would describe the 

circumstances surrounding the crash at Bakers Creek, Australia, of 

a U.S. B–17C aircraft transporting 6 crew members and 35 servicemen from Mackay, Australia, to Port Moresby, New Guinea, on 

June 14, 1943, and that would express the sense of the Congress 

that the Secretary of the Army may establish an appropriate marker, at a site to be chosen at the discretion of the Secretary, to commemorate the event and the military members who died in that 

tragedy. 

Items of Special Interest 

Report on host nation agreements for overseas installations 

The President released the Integrated Global Presence and Basing Strategy (IGPBS) in August, 2004. Within the strategy a series 

of world-wide military installations, designated as forward operating sites and cooperative security locations, were identified as 

having an ‘‘enduring presence’’ to support both the permanent presence of U.S. military personnel and rotating units for training and 

regional operations. The Department of Defense provided a report 

to Congress on March 3, 2005, which provided an overview by location of the broad purpose, planned capability, estimates of U.S. 

military population, and general facility requirements needed by 

fiscal year 2011. The report noted that ‘‘requirements may change 

as discussions and negotiations with host nations mature and individual investment strategies are finalized.’’ 

The Departments of Defense and State are now in the process of 

negotiating formal agreements with host nations to implement the 

strategy. The agreements will establish the status of U.S. forces, 

funding responsibilities, burden-sharing arrangements, and basing 

plans to include the number of U.S. military personnel to be stationed in the host country. Many of the sites will require a substantial investment of funds for new construction and infrastructure, either to be funded by the host nation, or by the United States, to 

meet the intent of the strategy. 

To ensure a wise use of taxpayer dollars, the committee directs 

the Secretary of Defense to ensure host nation agreements for the 

status of forces, funding responsibilities, and basing plans are secured before including authorization of funds for military construction projects in future President’s budget requests or in future supplemental appropriations requests. In addition, the Secretary shall 

ensure that burden-sharing arrangements are pursued with host 

nations in order to minimize the impact on Department of Defense’s budgets for the support of mutual national security interests. 

The committee also directs the Secretary to establish installation 

development master plans that will cover all facility and infrastructure requirements, total estimated costs, and anticipated funding 

456 

sources before expending funds for new construction and replacement of expeditionary facilities. These plans would serve as essential guides to ensure that priorities are developed with comprehensive designs that guide prudent investment decisions, and that preclude the waste of funds on facilities that do not address long-term 

military requirements. These base development master plans, and 

particularly the extent of permanent facilities for exclusive use by 

U.S. forces, must be established in close cooperation with host nations to avoid planning conflicts and to be able to address mutual 

requirements. 

The committee directs the Secretary to submit to the Committee 

on Armed Services of the Senate not later than April 15, 2006, a 

report that includes the following information for overseas locations: 

(1) a description and status of all host nation agreements established, or in negotiation, for each installation identified in 

the IGPBS as a forward operating site or cooperative security 

locations that will have an enduring presence of U.S. military 

personnel; 

(2) a description of the base development master plan for 

each site or location to include a specific list of facility improvement or construction projects and costs to complete all known 

requirements to support the estimated U.S. military population; and 

(3) an estimate by site or location of the annual cost to operate and sustain the installation. 

Training facilities for military operations in urban terrain 

In the Senate report accompanying S.2514 (S. Rept. 107–151), 

the committee required a report by the Secretary of Defense that 

would establish the requirements within the Department of Defense for facilities that support training for military operations in 

urban terrain (MOUT). 

The committee is aware that the Department study requested by 

the committee is ongoing. At the same time, requirements for new 

MOUT training capabilities, driven by lessons learned during Operation Iraqi Freedom, are increasing within each service. The 

services will continue to address MOUT requirements and expend 

resources independently with minimal coordination and cooperation 

until a comprehensive joint MOUT training plan and investment 

strategy are approved and implemented within the Department. 

The committee is concerned that a critical opportunity to develop 

capabilities for joint training in urban operations is not effectively 

being pursued within the Department. Therefore, the committee directs the Department to complete the required study by November 

1, 2005, and to establish a requirements baseline against which the 

capabilities within each service and across the Department can be 

measured. The committee expects the results of the study to be incorporated into fiscal year 2007 budget decisions. 

Relocation of Reserve component military units at Lambert 

International Airport, St. Louis, Missouri 

The committee is aware of current negotiations between the Secretary of the Air Force, the Secretary of the Navy, and the City of 

457 

St. Louis Airport Authority to support expansion of Lambert International Airport in St. Louis by relocating Reserve component military installations at the airport. The committee is concerned that 

the current location of the 131th Air National Guard Fighter Wing 

and a Navy Marine Corps Reserve Center (NMCRC) may impede 

safe operations of a new runway being constructed at the airport 

and the installation of navigational equipment required by the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) for the new runway. 

Therefore, the committee urges the Secretary of the Air Force 

and the Secretary of the Navy to complete negotiations with the 

airport authority that will result in an agreement to relocate the 

131st Fighter Wing and the NMCRC at the expense of the airport 

authority before the new airport runway is completed in June 2006. 

The agreement should also address the issue of FAA access to the 

military installations prior to the completion of the relocation of the 

military units in order to install Instrument Landing System 

equipment, obstruction lights, and power cables for the new runway 29 CAT III approach. 

(459) 

DIVISION C—DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY NATIONAL SECURITY AUTHORIZATIONS AND OTHER AUTHORIZATIONS 

TITLE XXXI—DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY NATIONAL 

SECURITY PROGRAMS 

Overview 

Title XXXI authorizes appropriations for atomic energy defense 

activities of the Department of Energy (DOE) for fiscal year 2006, 

including: the purchase, construction, and acquisition of plant and 

capital equipment; research and development; nuclear weapons; 

naval nuclear propulsion; environmental restoration and waste 

management; operating expenses; and other expenses necessary to 

carry out the purposes of the Department of Energy Organization 

Act (Public Law 95–91). This title authorizes appropriations in four 

categories, which include National Nuclear Security Administration 

(NNSA); defense environmental management; other defense activities; and defense nuclear waste disposal. 

The budget request for atomic energy defense activities at DOE totaled $16.4 billion, a 1.4 percent decrease below the fiscal year 

2005 appropriated level. Of the total amount requested, $9.4 billion 

is for NNSA, of which $6.6 billion is for weapons activities, $1.6 billion is for defense nuclear nonproliferation activities, $786.0 million 

is for naval reactors, and $343.9 million is for the Office of the Administrator; $6.0 billion is for defense environmental management, 

of which $5.2 billion is for defense site acceleration completion, and 

$831.3 million is for defense environmental services; $636.0 million 

is for other defense activities; $351.4 million is for defense nuclear 

waste disposal; and $12.0 million is for energy supply. The committee recommends $16.4 billion for atomic energy defense activities at DOE, the amount of the budget request. Of the 

amounts authorized for the NNSA, $6.6 billion is for weapons activities, a decrease of $39.8 million below the budget request; $1.6 

billion is for defense nuclear nonproliferation activities, the amount 

of the budget request; $786.0 million is for naval reactors, the 

amount of the budget request; and $343.9 million is for the Office 

of the Administrator, the amount of the budget request. The committee recommends $6.2 billion for the defense environmental management activities, an increase of $174.4 million above the budget 

request. Of the amounts authorized for defense environmental 

management, $5.3 billion is for defense site acceleration completion, an increase of $152.1 million above the budget request; and 

$853.6 million is for defense environmental services, an increase of 

$22.3 million above the budget request. The committee recommends $563.4 million for other defense activities, a reduction of 

$72.6 million below the budget request. The committee recommends $301.4 million for defense nuclear waste disposal, a reVerDate Aug 04 2004 15:24 May 25, 2005 Jkt 021326 PO 00000 Frm 00479 Fmt 6601 Sfmt 6601 E:\HR\OC\SR069.XXX SR069
460 

duction of $50.0 million below the budget request. The committee 

recommends no funds for energy supply, a reduction of $12.0 million. 

The following table summarizes the budget request and the authorizations: 

461 


Insert graphic folio 522 SR69.186
462 


Insert graphic folio 523 SR69.187
463 


Insert graphic folio 524 SR69.188
464 


Insert graphic folio 525 SR69.189
465 


Insert graphic folio 526 SR69.190
466 


Insert graphic folio 527 SR69.191
467 


Insert graphic folio 528 SR69.192
468 


Insert graphic folio 529 SR69.193
469 


Insert graphic folio 530 SR69.194
470 


Insert graphic folio 531 SR69.195
471 


Insert graphic folio 532 SR69.196
472 


Insert graphic folio 533 SR69.197
473 


Insert graphic folio 534 SR69.198
474 


Insert graphic folio 535 SR69.199
475 


Insert graphic folio 536 SR69.200
476 


Insert graphic folio 537 SR69.201
477 


Insert graphic folio 538 SR69.202
478 


Insert graphic folio 539 SR69.203
479 


Insert graphic folio 540 SR69.204
480 

Subtitle A—National Security Programs Authorizations 

National Nuclear Security Administration (sec. 3101) 

The committee recommends a provision that would authorize a total of $9.4 billion for the Department of Energy (DOE) in fiscal 

year 2006 for the National Nuclear Security Administration 

(NNSA) to carry out programs necessary to national security. 

Weapons activities 

The committee recommends $6.6 billion for weapons activities, a $39.8 million reduction below the amount requested in fiscal year 

2006. The committee authorizes the following activities: $1.4 billion 

for directed stockpile work; $2.1 billion for campaigns; $1.7 billion 

for readiness in the technical base; $216.1 million for secure transportation asset; $740.5 million for safeguards and security; and 

$313.5 million for facilities and infrastructure. The budget request 

included $174.4 million for environmental projects and operations. 

The committee recommends no funds for these activities within the 

NNSA. 

Directed stockpile work 

The committee recommends $1.4 billion for directed stockpile 

work, the amount of the budget request. The directed stockpile account supports work directly related to weapons in the stockpile, 

including day-to-day maintenance as well as research, development, engineering, and certification activities to support planned 

life extension programs. This account also includes fabrication and 

assembly of weapons components, feasibility studies, weapons dismantlement and disposal, training, and support equipment. 

Campaigns 

The committee recommends $2.1 billion for campaigns, the 

amount of the budget request. The campaigns focus on science and 

engineering efforts involving the three weapons laboratories, the 

Nevada Test Site, and the weapons plants. Each campaign is focused on a specific activity to support and maintain the nuclear 

stockpile without underground nuclear weapons testing. These efforts maintain and enhance the safety, security, and reliability of 

the existing stockpile. The campaigns are divided into three major 

categories: science campaigns, readiness campaigns, and engineering campaigns. 

Readiness in the technical base 

The committee recommends $1.7 billion in readiness in the technical base and facilities (RTBF), a $68.6 million increase above the 

budget request. This account funds facilities and infrastructure in 

the weapons complex to ensure the operational readiness of the 

complex and includes construction funding for new facilities. 

The $68.6 million increase in RTBF should be used to limit any 

additional deferred maintenance. This amount includes $20.0 million for fire safety and air handling systems, capital equipment upgrades, and infrastructure improvements at the Kansas City Plant, 

which plays a critical role in the warhead life extension programs 

by producing and supporting the non-nuclear components of nuVerDate Aug 04 2004 15:24 May 25, 2005 Jkt 021326 PO 00000 Frm 00500 Fmt 6601 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\SR069.XXX SR069
481 

clear warheads. Additionally, this amount includes $12.0 million to 

accelerate design of the Uranium Processing Facility at the Y–12 

National Security Complex of which $5.0 million is included in 

project 06–D–140 and $25.6 million for operations of facilities for 

maintenance projects, equipment replacements, and the upgrade of 

production bays at the Pantex Plant of which $5.6 million is included in project 05–D–401. 

Secure transportation asset 

The committee recommends $216.1 million for the secure transportation asset, a $4.0 million increase above the budget request. 

The secure transportation asset is responsible for transportation of 

nuclear weapons, weapons materials and components, and other 

materials requiring safe and secure transport. 

The committee notes that demand for secure transportation assets has continued to grow in recent years as sites have identified 

special nuclear material (SNM) excess to program needs and consolidated the storage of these materials in fewer locations. These 

actions can improve the security posture of DOE sites. The committee encourages DOE to continue to identify opportunities and 

accelerate the consolidation of SNM storage at its sites, where appropriate. 

Safeguards and security 

The committee recommends $740.5 million for weapons safe- guards and security, a $32.0 million increase above the budget request. This amount includes $20.0 million for security upgrades at 

the Y–12 National Security Complex and $12.0 million for security 

upgrades at the Pantex Plant. 

The committee notes that DOE has increased the amount of 

funding for safeguards and security in the Future Years Nuclear 

Security Program (FYNSP) in response to the concern raised by the 

committee last year; however, the committee remains concerned 

about the pace of DOE efforts to respond to current postulated 

threats. Further, DOE has not responded aggressively to this committee’s direction from last year to invest in force multiplying construction and technologies to help increase security capabilities. 

The committee has recommended additional funds within the Office of Security and Safety Performance Assessment to accelerate 

the demonstration and deployment of security technology at DOE 

nuclear sites. 

Facilities and infrastructure 

The committee recommends $313.5 million for the Facilities and 

Infrastructure Recapitalization Program (FIRP), a $30.0 million increase above the budget request and the same as the amount appropriated in fiscal year 2005. The additional funding provided 

should be used to complete projects on the approved FIRP integrated project list, including deferred maintenance on heating, ventilating and air conditioning systems at the Y–12 National Security 

Complex and at Sandia National Laboratories; deferred maintenance and electrical system deficiencies at the Pantex Plant and at 

Los Alamos National Laboratory; and for electrical substation 

equipment at the Nevada Test Site. 

482 

The FIRP program will sunset in the year 2011. The FYNSP provided with the budget request projects a 30 percent reduction in 

FIRP funding below the fiscal year 2005 FYNSP. The committee 

does not expect that DOE can meet the FIRP program objective of 

elimination of certain deferred maintenance under the new FYNSP. 

The committee directs DOE to reevaluate FIRP funding and to submit with the fiscal year 2007 budget request a FYNSP sufficient to 

meet program goals by the program sunset date. 

Defense Nuclear Nonproliferation Program 

The committee recommends $1.6 billion for the Defense Nuclear 

Nonproliferation Program, the amount of the budget request. The 

NNSA has management and oversight responsibilities for the nonproliferation programs of the Defense Nuclear Nonproliferation 

Program. The committee recommends funding for these programs, 

as follows: $358.2 million for nonproliferation and verification research and development, an increase of $86.0 million above the 

budget request; $80.2 million for nonproliferation and international 

security; $363.4 million for international nuclear materials protection and cooperation, an increase of $20.0 million above the budget 

request; $37.9 million for global initiatives for proliferation prevention; $20.5 million for highly-enriched uranium transparency implementation; $212.0 million for elimination of weapons-grade plutonium production, an increase of $80.0 million above the budget request; $453.1 million for fissile materials disposition, a decrease of 

$200.0 million below the budget request; and $112.0 million for the 

Global Threat Reduction Initiative, an increase of $14.0 million 

above the budget request. 

The committee notes that continued delays in the commencement 

of construction activities under the fissile materials disposition program make it unlikely that the DOE will be able to fully obligate 

the budget request for that program in fiscal year 2006. The committee remains concerned by the delays in the fissile materials disposition program, as well as in several other cooperative nonproliferation programs with Russia, as a result of a dispute between the United States and Russia over what liability standards 

should apply to the work under the programs. Continued delays in 

the fissile materials disposition program have significant domestic, 

as well as international, ramifications because work at the U.S. 

MOX Fuel Fabrication Facility is being delayed to ensure parallelism with the Russian program. The committee fully supports 

the goals of the MOX program and urges the administration to give 

this matter sustained high-level attention with the aim of resolving 

the dispute as quickly as possible so that reasonable liability standards are established that will be protective of U.S. interests and 

will allow the program to proceed. However, the committee does 

not support the use of program funds for site preparation or equipment procurement for the Russian MOX facility until an agreement 

on liability has been reached. 

The committee believes that the nonproliferation and verification 

research and development program is supporting valuable basic 

and applied research in radiation detection that would benefit from 

the additional resources the committee recommends authorizing for 

this program. The committee notes the creation of the Domestic 

483 

Nuclear Detection Office in the Department of Homeland Security 

and underscores the importance of properly coordinating the work 

of that office with the long-standing efforts and technical expertise 

resident in the DOE in this critical area. The committee further 

understands that the DOE will retain responsibility for the implementation of international nonproliferation programs involving the 

deployment of radiation detection equipment overseas. 

The committee recommends authorizing additional resources for 

the elimination of weapons-grade plutonium production program to 

accelerate the construction of a fossil-fuel power plant at 

Zheleznogorsk in order to meet the goal of shutting down the 

Zheleznogorsk plutonium-producing nuclear reactor by 2011. 

The committee recommends authorizing additional resources for 

the international nuclear materials protection and cooperation program to accelerate security upgrades at Russian Strategic Rocket 

Forces sites, at Russian 12th Main Directorate sites as they become 

available for safety upgrades, and to accelerate the installation of 

equipment at additional Megaports. 

The committee recommends authorizing additional resources for 

the Global Threat Reduction Initiative to accelerate the conversion 

of domestic research reactors so that they are fueled with low-enriched uranium-fuel rather than highly-enriched uranium-fuel, 

which poses a higher proliferation risk. 

Naval Reactors 

The committee recommends $786.0 million for Naval Reactors, 

the amount of the budget request. 

Office of Administrator 

The committee recommends $343.9 million for program direction 

for the NNSA, the amount of the budget request. This account includes program direction funding for all elements of NNSA, except 

for the Naval Reactors Program and the Secure Transportation 

Asset. 

Environmental Projects and Operations 

The budget request included $174.4 million for environmental 

projects and operations. The committee recommends no funds for 

these activities within the NNSA. Congress established the NNSA 

under title 32 of the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal 

Year 2000 (Public Law 106–65) to separate the defense activities 

of DOE from its other disparate missions such as energy research, 

operation of the federal power marketing administrations, and 

cleanup of the Cold War environmental legacy. The environmental 

management program exists for the express purpose of addressing 

the Cold War environmental legacy at DOE sites. Under the Act, 

the Secretary of Energy may transfer any environmental remediation and waste management activity at NNSA nuclear weapons 

production facilities or at NNSA national security laboratories from 

the NNSA to another element of DOE. In providing this authority, 

Congress recognized the possibility that DOE may encounter the 

need to migrate a particular facility, program, or activity out of the 

NNSA should it evolve principally into an environmental cleanup 

activity. This provision allows such activity only to be transferred 

484 

out of the NNSA. In proposing the transfer of environmental management activities into the NNSA, the budget request does not 

comply with the Act. The committee has authorized the activities 

requested under environmental projects and operations within defense environmental management, where they are currently conducted and where they appropriately reside. 

Reliable replacement warhead 

The committee recommends $9.4 million to continue the reliable 

replacement warhead (RRW), the amount of the budget request. 

The committee understands from the testimony of the Administrator of the National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA) 

that the goals of this program are: (1) to increase the security and 

reliability of the nuclear weapons stockpile; (2) to develop replacement components for nuclear warheads that can be more easily 

manufactured with more readily available and more environmentally benign materials; (3) to develop replacements that can be 

introduced into the stockpile with assured high confidence regarding their effect on warhead safety and reliability; (4) to develop 

these replacements on a schedule that would reduce the possibility 

that the United States would ever be faced with the need to conduct a nuclear test in order to diagnose or remedy a reliability 

problem in the current stockpile; (5) to reduce infrastructure costs 

needed to support the stockpile, while increasing the responsiveness of that infrastructure; and (6) to increase confidence in the 

stockpile to a level such that significant, additional reductions in 

numbers of non-deployed ‘‘hedge’’ warheads can be made. 

The committee supports these goals and this modest investment 

in feasibility studies, as described in the NNSA testimony before 

the Subcommittee on Strategic Forces of the Committee on Armed 

Services, with the goal of substantially increasing the safety, security, and reliability of the nuclear weapons stockpile and with the 

ultimate objective of achieving the smallest stockpile consistent 

with our nation’s security. The Administrator of the NNSA shall 

submit to the congressional defense committees, no later than February 6, 2006, a report describing the activities undertaken or 

planned for any RRW funding in fiscal years 2005, 2006, and 2007. 

Robust nuclear earth penetrator 

The committee recommends $4.0 million for the robust nuclear 

earth penetrator (RNEP), the amount of the budget request. Funding is provided to prepare and execute the sled track impact test 

at Sandia National Laboratories on the feasibility of case hardening and target penetration. The committee has received testimony from the Secretary of Defense and the Commander, U.S. 

Strategic Command, on the continued proliferation of hard and 

deeply buried targets and the resulting military utility of completing the RNEP feasibility study. 

The committee notes that section 3117 of the National Defense 

Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2004 (Public Law 108-136) prohibits the Secretary of Energy from commencing the engineering 

development phase (Phase 6.3) of the nuclear weapons development 

process, or any subsequent phase, of a robust nuclear earth peneVerDate Aug 04 2004 15:24 May 25, 2005 Jkt 021326 PO 00000 Frm 00504 Fmt 6601 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\SR069.XXX SR069
485 

trator unless specifically authorized by Congress. The funding requested is for Phase 6.2 feasibility study only. The committee has not included the $4.5 million requested within the Air Force budget for the development of logistics, integration, and hardware requirements for carriage of the RNEP on the 

B–2 aircraft. The committee does not believe that these activities 

are necessary to evaluate the feasibility of RNEP. 

Defense environmental management (sec. 3102) 

The committee recommends a provision that would authorize a total of $6.2 billion for the Department of Energy (DOE) in fiscal 

year 2006 for environmental management (EM) activities, a $174.4 

million increase above the budget request. This amount includes 

$174.4 million for the activities proposed to be funded as environmental projects and operations within the National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA). The National Defense Authorization 

Act of 2000 (Public Law 106–65), which established the NNSA, did 

not grant the Secretary of Energy authority to transfer environmental remediation and waste management activities into the 

NNSA. The committee does not support the transfer into the NNSA 

of legacy environmental liabilities from weapons production during 

the Cold War. The defense environmental management program 

exists to accomplish the express purpose of addressing this legacy. 

Defense site acceleration completion 

The committee recommends $5.3 billion for defense site acceleration completion, an increase of $152.1 million above the budget request. The committee authorizes the following activities: $1.0 billion for 2006 accelerated completions, an increase of $30.5 million 

above the budget request; $2.0 billion for 2012 accelerated completions, an increase of $41.7 million above the budget request; $2.0 

billion for 2035 accelerated completions, an increase of $79.9 million above the budget request; $287.2 million for safeguards and security, the amount of the budget request; and $21.4 million for 

technology development and deployment, the amount of the budget 

request. The committee does not support the requested transfer of 

environmental management activities into the NNSA, and has provided authorization for these activities in the accelerated completion accounts under which they are currently funded. 

The committee is concerned with the pace at which sites under 

the EM program are adopting the measures necessary to come into 

compliance with the new design basis threat. The committee encourages DOE to evaluate promptly all EM sites currently storing 

nuclear materials excess to mission needs and to execute plans to 

move excess materials to consolidated, more highly secure storage 

locations. 

Defense environmental services 

The committee recommends $853.6 million for defense environmental services, an increase of $22.3 million above the budget request. The committee authorizes the following activities: $87.4 million for non-closure environmental activities, the amount of the 

budget request; $66.4 million for community and regulatory support, an increase of $4.4 million above the budget request; $451.0 

486 

million for the federal contribution to the uranium enrichment decontamination and decommissioning fund, the amount of the budget request; and $248.8 million for program direction, an increase of 

$17.9 million above the budget request. The committee does not 

support the requested transfer of environmental management activities into the NNSA, and has provided authorization for these 

activities in the environmental services accounts under which they 

are currently funded. 

Other defense activities (sec. 3103) 

The committee recommends a provision that would authorize 

$563.4 million for the Department of Energy (DOE) for other defense activities, $72.6 million below the budget request. 

Security and Safety Performance Assurance 

The committee recommends $316.1 million for security and safety performance assurance, an increase of $15.0 million above the 

budget request. This increase provides an additional $15.0 million 

for security technology deployment to mitigate security weaknesses, to evaluate how technology may be used to reduce security 

costs, and to adapt technology for physical security applications 

where current technologies are inadequate to meet DOE requirements. The committee encourages DOE to use a portion of these 

additional funds for the demonstration and field testing of promising security technologies. 

The committee notes that security costs have increased rapidly 

as DOE implements needed security upgrades to protect its facilities against the design basis threat issued by DOE in 2004. The 

committee is concerned that DOE is relying disproportionately on 

increasing the number of armed security personnel at each site to 

defeat the new threats. The committee encourages DOE to adopt 

state-of-the-art approaches to guard those targets at greatest risk, 

including the use of technology and innovative deployment strategies for protective forces. 

The Office of Security and Safety Performance Assurance has 

conducted site assistance visits to review security strategies at each 

DOE site. The committee urges DOE to develop a set of effective 

and cost-efficient strategies for protecting against the new design 

basis threat based on these site visits and to promulgate these 

strategies as security guidance throughout the DOE. 

Environment, Safety and Health 

The committee recommends $77.0 million for environment, safety 

and health, the amount of the budget request. 

Office of Legacy Management 

The committee recommends $45.1 million for the Office of Legacy 

Management, the amount of the budget request. 

Nuclear Energy 

The committee recommends $123.9 million for nuclear energy, 

the amount of the budget request. 

487 

Defense Related Administrative Support 

The budget request included $87.6 million for national security 

programs administrative support. The committee recommends no 

funds for these activities. The committee views these administrative support activities as inherently part of the nondefense activities. The committee does not support the use of Atomic Energy Defense funds for nondefense activities. 

Office of Hearings and Appeals 

The committee recommends $4.4 million for the Office of Hearings and Appeals, the amount of the budget request. 

Energy security and assurance 

The budget request included $12.0 million for energy security 

and assurance and program direction within the Office of Electric 

Transmission and Distribution. The Department of Energy continues to request funds for efforts to secure the civilian electricity 

distribution system as an Atomic Energy Defense activity. The 

committee does not support this categorization. These responsibilities constitute a coordinated function between the Departments of 

Energy and Homeland Security related to the civilian energy infrastructure. The committee recommends no funds for these activities. 

The committee does not support using Atomic Energy Defense 

funds for nondefense activities. 

Defense nuclear waste disposal (sec. 3104) 

The committee recommends a provision that would authorize 

$301.4 million for defense nuclear waste disposal, a decrease of 

$50.0 million below the budget request but $72.3 million above the 

amount appropriated in fiscal year 2005. The committee notes that 

the budget request for defense nuclear waste disposal increased by 

270 percent between the fiscal year 2005 and fiscal year 2006 

budget requests. Given the long duration of the development period 

for the geologic repository, the committee encourages the Department of Energy to reduce the volatility of the funding amount requested for defense nuclear waste disposal from year to year. 

Subtitle B—Other Matters 

Report on compliance with design basis threat (sec. 3105) 

The committee recommends a provision that requires the Secretary of Energy, not later than 180 days after the enactment of 

this Act, to submit to the congressional defense committees a report describing plans for upgrading the security posture of the Department of Energy (DOE) and National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA) in response to the design basis threat (DBT) issued 

by the Secretary of Energy in October 2004. The report shall include implementation plans and funding required to achieve compliance with the design basis threat by September 30, 2007, at 

DOE and NNSA sites, which contain nuclear weapons or special 

nuclear material. The report shall also include an evaluation of 

technologies and force deployment strategies to improve security efficiency and effectiveness against threats postulated in the DBT. 

488 

The committee is concerned with the pace of security enhancements at DOE and NNSA sites in the face of threats assessed by 

the intelligence community since the attacks of September 11, 

2001. While both DOE and NNSA have undertaken commendable 

near-term efforts to hire additional security personnel and reinforce 

operational security, longer-term efforts to harden facilities physically and to apply security technology have lagged. The Secretary 

of Energy testified before the committee that full protection against 

the DBT will not be achieved before 2008. The committee encourages DOE to accelerate the achievement of compliance at those 

sites containing assets of gravest concern—nuclear weapons and 

special nuclear material. 

Cost estimate for Waste Treatment and Immobilization 

Plant project, Hanford Site, Richland, Washington (sec. 

3106) 

The committee is aware of significant design changes being made 

at the Waste Treatment Plant (WTP) at the Hanford site near 

Richland, Washington, due in part to increased understanding of 

seismic criteria for the facility. The committee is concerned that the 

approach to this project—one where design and construction take 

place concurrently—may lead to significant cost escalation. Prior to 

the most recent design changes, the total estimated project cost for 

the WTP was approximately $6.0 billion. 

The committee understands that the Department of Energy has 

tasked the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers to update its prior cost 

estimate of the WTP. The committee directs that this effort by the 

Corps of Engineers be expanded to include the development of a 

full independent cost estimate of the Waste Treatment and Immobilization Plant project. The committee directs that the independent cost estimate shall include the total cost to complete the 

project and annual funding required to complete the project, enumerated by year. The independent cost estimate shall include the 

total and annual costs to complete the project for a project completion date in each of the following years: 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014, 

and 2015. The Secretary of Energy shall provide this new cost estimate to the congressional defense committees no later than March 

1, 2006. 

Report on international border security programs (sec. 

3107) 

The committee recommends a provision that would require the 

Secretary of Energy, in consultation with the Secretaries of Defense, State and, as appropriate, Homeland Security, to submit a 

report to the Committees on Armed Services of the Senate and the 

House of Representatives within 120 days after enactment of this 

Act on the management of border security programs in the countries of the former Soviet Union and in other countries. The report 

would include: (1) a description of the roles and responsibilities of 

each U.S. department and agency in international border security 

programs; (2) a description of the interactions and coordination 

among U.S. departments and agencies that are conducting international border security programs; (3) a description of the mechanisms that exist to ensure coordination, avoid duplication, and proVerDate Aug 04 2004 15:24 May 25, 2005 Jkt 021326 PO 00000 Frm 00508 Fmt 6601 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\SR069.XXX SR069
489 

vide a means to resolve conflicts or problems that might arise in 

the implementation of international border security programs; (4) 

a discussion of whether there is existing interagency guidance that 

addresses the roles, interactions, and dispute resolution mechanisms for departments and agencies of the U.S. government that 

are conducting international border security programs, and the 

adequacy of such guidance if it exists; and (5) recommendations to 

improve the coordination and effectiveness of international border 

security programs. 

The committee notes that a January 2005 report of the Government Accountability Office (GAO) entitled ‘‘Weapons of Mass Destruction: Nonproliferation Needs Better Integration’’ identified a 

strong need for government-wide guidance to delineate the roles, 

interactions, and responsibilities of agencies—in particular, the Departments of Energy, Defense, and State—in managing international border security programs. 

The committee further notes that a March 2005 GAO report entitled ‘‘Preventing Nuclear Smuggling: DOE has made limited 

progress in installing radiation detection equipment at highest priority foreign seaports’’ recommends that the Department of Energy 

(DOE) develop a comprehensive long-term plan for the Megaports 

program that would identify criteria for deciding how many and 

which lower priority ports to complete if DOE continues to have 

difficulties initiating work at its highest priority ports, and that 

DOE reevaluate the per port cost estimates and adjust long-term 

cost projections as necessary. The committee understands that 

DOE has revised its port priority model and has begun work on the 

comprehensive plan recommended by the GAO. The Megaports program, the largest border security program of the Department of 

Energy, is a key program to be included in the report required by 

this provision. 

Items of Special Interest 

National security implications of the Rare Isotope Accelerator 

The committee is aware that the Rare Isotope Accelerator (RIA) 

is a high priority civilian science facility under study by the Department of Energy Office of Science. The committee understands 

that RIA would allow precise measurements of nuclear physics phenomena through the development of beams of isotopes that are 10 

to 100 times more powerful than those available today and in many 

cases not available at all. The committee believes such research 

into the fundamental structure of matter may have possible utility 

in the analysis of nuclear weapons physics. 

The committee directs the Secretary of Energy to report to the 

congressional defense committees no later than 90 days after enactment of this Act on the potential utility, if any, of data from the 

RIA on issues concerning national security and on any duplication 

between the potential capability of the RIA and any capabilities 

being developed with atomic energy defense funds. 

490 

Role of the Kansas City Plant 

The committee is aware that the Kansas City Plant continues to 

play an important role in the nuclear weapons activities of the National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA). The mission of the 

Kansas City Plant is the procurement, production, and life-cycle 

support of the non-nuclear components of nuclear warheads. To 

perform this mission, the Kansas City Plant provides precision 

manufacturing, packaging of specialty mechanisms and microelectronics, specialty materials, and leading-edge technologies like high 

speed optical electronic telemetry systems. The Kansas City Plant 

provides an array of mission essential products and services in one 

secure environment, and continues to receive outstanding performance ratings from NNSA in the fulfillment of its award fee contract. 

(491) 

TITLE XXXII—DEFENSE NUCLEAR FACILITIES SAFETY 

BOARD 

Authorization (sec. 3201) 

The committee recommends a provision that would authorize 

$22.0 million for the Defense Nuclear Facilities Safety Board, the 

amount of the budget request. 

(493) 

TITLE XXXIII—NATIONAL DEFENSE STOCKPILE 

Revisions to required receipt objectives for previously authorized disposals from the National Defense Stockpile 

(sec. 3301) 

The committee recommends a provision that would revise authorizations for disposal of current inventories of excess and obsolete 

material in the National Defense Stockpile. 

LEGISLATIVE REQUIREMENTS 

Departmental Recommendations 

By letter dated April 7, 2005, the General Counsel of the Department of Defense forwarded to the President of the Senate proposed 

legislation ‘‘To authorize appropriations for fiscal year 2006 for 

military activities of the Department of Defense, to prescribe military personnel strengths for fiscal year 2006, and for other purposes.’’ The transmittal letter and proposed legislation were officially referred as Executive Communication 1578 to the Committee 

on Armed Services on April 7, 2005. 

Executive Communication 1578 is available for review at the 

committee. 

Committee Action 

The Committee ordered reported a comprehensive original bill 

and a series of original bills for the Department of Defense, military construction and Department of Energy authorizations by 

voice vote. 

There were no rollcall votes on amendments to the bill. 

Congressional Budget Office Cost Estimate 

It was not possible to include the Congressional Budget Office 

cost estimate on this legislation because it was not available at the 

time the report was filed. It will be included in material presented 

during floor debate on the legislation. 

Regulatory Impact 

Paragraph 11(b) of rule XXVI of the Standing Rules of the Senate requires that a report on the regulatory impact of the bill be 

included in the report on the bill. The committee finds that there 

is no regulatory impact in the case of the National Defense Authorization Bill for Fiscal Year 2006. 

Changes in Existing Law 

Pursuant to the provisions of paragraph 12 of rule XXVI of the 

Standing Rules of the Senate, the changes in existing law made by 

494 

certain portions of the bill have not been shown in this section of 

the report because, in the opinion of the committee, it is necessary 

to dispense with showing such changes in order to expedite the 

business of the Senate and reduce the expenditure of funds. 

Æ