" ! HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 110TH CONGRESS

1st Session 

REPORT

110–279 

DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE 

APPROPRIATIONS BILL, 2008 

R E P O R T 

OF THE

COMMITTEE ON APPROPRIATIONS 

[TO ACCOMPANY H.R. 3222]

JULY 30, 2007.—Committed to the Committee of the Whole House on 

the State of the Union and ordered to be printed 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGE:\Seals\Congress.#13
DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE APPROPRIATIONS BILL, 2008 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARING
U.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE

WASHINGTON : 

1 

36–903 

" ! HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 110TH CONGRESS

1st Session 

REPORT

2007

110–279 

DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE 

APPROPRIATIONS BILL, 2008 

R E P O R T 

OF THE

COMMITTEE ON APPROPRIATIONS 

[TO ACCOMPANY H.R. 3222]

JULY 30, 2007.—Committed to the Committee of the Whole House on 

the State of the Union and ordered to be printed 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGE:\Seals\Congress.#13

cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARING
(III) 

C O N T E N T S 

Page 

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

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

Select Intelligence Oversight Panel ........................................... 3 

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

Stability in the Middle East ....................................................... 7 

Fiscal Management ..................................................................... 8 

Contracted Services and Acquisition Management .................. 11 

Member Requests ........................................................................ 14 

Committee Recommendations by Major Category .................... 15 

Active and Reserve and National Guard Military Personnel .. 15 

Operation and Maintenance ................................................ 15 

Procurement ......................................................................... 16 

Research, Development, Test and Evaluation ................... 17 

Classified Programs ............................................................. 18 

Forces To Be Supported .............................................................. 18 

Department of the Army ..................................................... 18 

Department of the Navy ...................................................... 20 

Department of the Air Force ............................................... 21 

Defense Health Program ..................................................... 21 

TITLE I. MILITARY PERSONNEL ...................................... 23 

Military Personnel Overview .............................................. 25 

Summary of End Strength ........................................... 25 

Overall Active End Strength ....................................... 25 

Overall Selected Reserve End Strength ...................... 25 

Full-Time Support End Strength ................................ 26 

Guard and Reserve Full-Time End Strength ............. 26 

Grow-The-Force Initiative ............................................ 27 

Boots-On-The-Ground and Cost of War Reporting .... 27 

Reserve Component Budget Submissions ................... 28 

Paid Inactive Duty Training (IDT) Travel .................. 28 

Military Personnel, Army .................................................... 29 

Military Personnel, Navy .................................................... 34 

Military Personnel, Marine Corps ...................................... 39 

Military Personnel, Air Force ............................................. 44 

Reserve Personnel, Army .................................................... 49 

Reserve Personnel, Navy ..................................................... 53 

Reserve Personnel, Marine Corps ....................................... 57 

Reserve Personnel, Air Force .............................................. 61 

National Guard Personnel, Army ....................................... 65 

National Guard Personnel, Air Force ................................. 69 

TITLE II. OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE ................. 73 

Force Structure ............................................................. 75 

Training Tempo ............................................................ 75 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARING
Page

IV 

Recommended Operation and Maintenance Funding 

Levels ......................................................................... 75 

Operational Training Program Funding ..................... 76 

Impact of Rebasing ....................................................... 76 

Support to Global Repositioning of Forces ................. 76 

Perimeter Security Force Protection and Other Facility Security Improvements ................................... 81 

Support to Military Families ....................................... 81 

Family Advocacy Programs .......................................... 82 

Childcare Centers ......................................................... 83 

Department of Defense Dependents Education 

(DODEA) .................................................................... 83 

Operation and Maintenance Reprogrammings .......... 83 

Operation and Maintenance Budget Execution Data 84 

Operation and Maintenance, Army .................................... 84 

Unjustified Program Growth ....................................... 94 

Status of Resource and Training System .................... 94 

Fact of Life Adjustments .............................................. 94 

Civilian Personnel Strength ......................................... 94 

Common Logistics Operating Environment ............... 94 

Scanning Technology to Accelerate Reset ................... 95 

Western Hemisphere Institute for Security Cooperation ............................................................................. 95 

Working Capital Fund Cash Transfer ........................ 95 

Operation and Maintenance, Navy ..................................... 96 

Navy Shore Infrastructure Transportation ................ 103 

NPS Laboratory Modernization ................................... 103 

Civilian Personnel Strength ......................................... 103 

Operation and Maintenance, Marine Corps ...................... 103 

Resource Realignment ..................................................... 109 

Operation and Maintenance, Air Force .............................. 109 

Portable Illumination System ...................................... 116 

Civilian Personnel Strength ......................................... 116 

Working Capital Fund Cash Transfer ........................ 116 

Excess On-Order Inventory .......................................... 116 

Overstatement of Facilities Sustainment, Restoration and Maintenance Requirements ...................... 117 

Operation and Maintenance, Defense-Wide ...................... 117 

Special Operations Command ...................................... 125 

Defense Legal Services Agency (Office of Military 

Commissions) ............................................................. 125 

Department of Defense Dependents Education (Exceptional Family Member Services) ......................... 125 

Defense Security Cooperation Agency (Global Train 

and Equip) ................................................................. 125 

Defense Security Service .............................................. 126 

Office of the Secretary of Defense ............................... 126 

Office of the Deputy Undersecretary of Defense ........ 127 

Cadet and Midshipman Social Representation and 

Diversity at the Service Academies ......................... 128 

Department of Defense Energy Security Task Force . 128 

Operation and Maintenance, Army Reserve ...................... 128 

Operation and Maintenance, Navy Reserve ...................... 132 

Operation and Maintenance, Marine Corps Reserve ........ 137 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARING
Page

V 

Operation and Maintenance, Air Force Reserve ............... 141 

Operation and Maintenance, Army National Guard ........ 145 

Process Refinement and Implementation Initiative 

(PRI) for National Guard Joint Conus Communications Support Environment (JCCSE) ............... 151 

Operation and Maintenance, Air National Guard ............ 151 

Overseas Contingency Operations Transfer Account ........ 155 

United States Court of Appeals for the Armed Forces ..... 155 

Environmental Restoration, Army ..................................... 155 

Environmental Restoration, Navy ...................................... 155 

Environmental Restoration, Air Force ............................... 155 

Environmental Restoration, Defense-Wide ........................ 156 

Environmental Restoration, Formerly Used Defense 

Sites ................................................................................... 156 

Overseas Humanitarian, Disaster, and Civic Aid ............. 156 

Former Soviet Union Threat Reduction Account .............. 156 

Strategic Offensive Arms Elimination (Russia) ......... 157 

Nuclear Weapons Storage Facility (Russia) ............... 157 

Chemical Weapons Destruction (Russia) .................... 157 

WMD Proliferation Prevention (Former Soviet 

Union) ........................................................................ 158 

New Initiatives .............................................................. 158 

Unobligated Balances from Prior Years ..................... 158 

TITLE III. PROCUREMENT .................................................. 159 

Grow-the-Army and Marine Corps .............................. 161 

Joint Strike Fighter Production .................................. 161 

Acquisition and Management of Unmanned Aerial 

Systems ...................................................................... 162 

Military Tires ................................................................ 162 

Reset and Modernization ............................................. 163 

Special Interest Items .................................................. 163 

Reprogramming Guidance for Acquisition Accounts . 163 

Reprogramming Reporting Requirements .................. 164 

Funding Increases ........................................................ 164 

Classified Annex ........................................................... 164 

Aircraft Procurement, Army ............................................... 164 

Armed Reconnaissance Helicopter .............................. 169 

Joint Cargo Aircraft ...................................................... 169 

Light Utility Helicopter ................................................ 169 

Missile Procurement, Army ................................................. 170 

Procurement of Weapons and Tracked Combat Vehicles, 

Army .................................................................................. 174 

Stryker ........................................................................... 180 

Procurement of Ammunition, Army ................................... 180 

Other Procurement, Army ................................................... 185 

Bridge to Future Networks .......................................... 202 

Joint High Speed Vessel ............................................... 202 

HMMWV ........................................................................ 202 

Heavy Expanded Mobile Tactical Truck Extended 

Service Program ........................................................ 202 

Night Vision Thermal Weapons Sight ........................ 203 

Tactical Operations Centers ........................................ 203 

Field Medical Equipment Line .................................... 203 

Aircraft Procurement, Navy ................................................ 203 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARING
Page

VI 

UH–1Y/AH–1Z .............................................................. 210 

E–2D .............................................................................. 210 

Vertical Take-Off Unmanned Aerial Vehicle .............. 210 

F–18 Series .................................................................... 210 

P–3 Series ...................................................................... 211 

Spares ............................................................................ 211 

Weapons Procurement, Navy .............................................. 211 

Conventional Trident Modification .............................. 216 

Advanced Anti-Radiation Guided Missile ................... 216 

Procurement of Ammunition, Navy and Marine Corps .... 216 

Shipbuilding and Conversion, Navy ................................... 223 

Shipbuilding .................................................................. 227 

Virginia Class Submarine ............................................ 228 

LPD–17 .......................................................................... 228 

Carrier Replacement .................................................... 228 

Littoral Combat Ship .................................................... 229 

DDG–1000 Advance Procurement ............................... 229 

DDG–1000 ..................................................................... 230 

Littoral Combat Ship Outfitting .................................. 230 

Leasing of Foreign Built Ships .................................... 230 

Ship Insulation ............................................................. 231 

Other Procurement, Navy ................................................... 231 

Integrated Submarine Imaging System ...................... 242 

Cruiser Modernization Program .................................. 242 

ASW Enhancements ..................................................... 242 

Littoral Combat Ship Mission Modules ...................... 242 

Submarine Support Equipment ................................... 243 

Q–70 Family of Display Systems ................................. 243 

Man Overboard Indicator Program ............................. 243 

Enhanced Detection Adjunct Processor ...................... 244 

Procurement, Marine Corps ................................................ 244 

Range Transrormation Initiative ................................ 255 

Aircraft Procurement, Air Force ......................................... 255 

C–17 Production ............................................................ 262 

Global Hawk .................................................................. 262 

B–2 Radar Modernization ............................................ 262 

Missile Procurement, Air Force .......................................... 263 

Joint Air to Surface Standoff Missile (JASSM) .......... 268 

Advanced Extremely High Frequency Program ......... 268 

Procurement of Ammunition, Air Force ............................. 268 

Flares ............................................................................. 272 

Other Procurement, Air Force ............................................ 272 

Procurement, Defense-Wide ................................................ 279 

National Guard and Reserve Equipment ........................... 285 

Defense Production Act Purchases ..................................... 285 

Beryllium Supply Industrial Base ............................... 286 

TITLE IV. RESEARCH, DEVELOPMENT, TEST AND 

EVALUATION ........................................................................ 287 

Cruise Missile Defense ................................................. 289 

Joint Common Missile/Joint Air-to-Ground Missile ... 289 

Small Business Technology Insertion ......................... 290 

Special Interest Items .................................................. 291 

Reprogramming Guidance for Acquisition Accounts . 291 

Research, Development, Test and Evaluation, Army ....... 291 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARING
Page

VII 

Future Combat Systems ............................................... 319 

Tactical Metal Fabrication System (TAC FAB) .......... 319 

Warfighter Information Network-Tactical .................. 320 

Global Combat Support System-Army ........................ 320 

Hybrid Propellant for Medium and Large Caliber 

Ammunition ............................................................... 320 

Rapid Response System for Active Protection of 

Ground and Air Vehicles .......................................... 321 

Research of Advanced Communications Technologies ...................................................................... 321 

Tactical Wheeled Vehicle Composite Component 

Weight Reduction Program ...................................... 321 

Neurotoxin Exposure Treatment Research Program 

(NETRP) ..................................................................... 321 

Pain and Neuroscience Center Research Program .... 322 

Sustaining Support for Ongoing Operations .............. 322 

Undersea UXO Cleanup ............................................... 322 

Advanced Affordable Turbine Engine (AATE) ........... 322 

CVP Design ................................................................... 323 

National Eye Evaluation and Research Network ...... 323 

Research, Development, Test and Evaluation, Navy ........ 323 

Bone Marrow Registry .................................................. 343 

Innovative Methods for Shipbuilding Construction ... 343 

System Open Architecture/Small Business Technology Insertion ......................................................... 343 

Unique Identification of Tangible Items ..................... 344 

Research, Development, Test and Evaluation, Air Force . 344 

KC–135 Tanker Replacement ...................................... 360 

Joint Strike Fighter F–136 Engine Development ...... 360 

Joint Strike Fighter Development ............................... 360 

Personnel Recovery Systems (CSAR–X) ..................... 361 

Joint Stars Syers Demonstration ................................ 361 

Space Programs ............................................................ 361 

Space Situational Awareness and Operationally Responsive Space ........................................................... 362 

Space Radar .................................................................. 363 

Ballistic Missile Range Safety Technology ................. 363 

MEDSTARS Integration with the Global Combat 

Support System ......................................................... 364 

Wide Area Surveillance Radar Integration on Joint 

Stars ........................................................................... 364 

Research, Development, Test and Evaluation, DefenseWide ................................................................................... 364 

Missile Defense Agency ................................................ 382 

Reporting Requirements ....................................... 382 

Block Structure ...................................................... 382 

European Component ............................................ 382 

Space Tracking and Surveillance System 

(STSS) ................................................................. 383 

Undefinitized Contracts ........................................ 383 

Kinetic Energy Interceptor ................................... 383 

Airborne Laser (ABL) ............................................ 384 

Airborne Laser Lessons Learned .......................... 384 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARING
Page

VIII 

Command and Control, Battle Management and 

Communications (C2BMC) Program ................ 384 

Aegis Ballistic Missile Defense System ............... 385 

Multiple Kill Vehicle ............................................. 385 

Asymmetric Missile Defense ................................. 385 

Fissile Material Detection Research .................... 386 

Special Operations Command ...................................... 386 

Chemical and Biological Defense Program ................. 386 

Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency ............. 387 

Advance Development Initiative ................................. 387 

FirstLink—IEE (Technology Transition Line) ........... 387 

WMD Medical Countermeasures ................................. 387 

Operational Test and Evaluation, Defense ........................ 388 

TITLE V. REVOLVING AND MANAGEMENT FUNDS .... 390 

Defense Working Capital Funds ......................................... 390 

National Defense Sealift Fund ............................................ 390 

T–AKE Acquisition ....................................................... 390 

Defense Coalition Support Fund ........................................ 391 

TITLE VI. OTHER DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE PROGRAMS .................................................................................... 393 

Defense Health Program ..................................................... 393 

Traumatic Brain Injury (TBI) ...................................... 398 

Post Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD) ..................... 398 

Electronic Health Information Sharing ...................... 399 

Defense Enrollment Eligibility Reporting System 

(DEERS) ..................................................................... 400 

Diabetes Research ........................................................ 400 

Wounded Warrior Assistance ....................................... 400 

Warriors in Transition ................................................. 401 

Military Treatment Facilities Usage of Red Cross 

Volunteer Physicians ................................................ 402 

Orthopedic Injury Research ......................................... 402 

Vision Research ............................................................. 402 

Preventative Medicine and Surveillance .................... 403 

Embedded Metal Fragment Registry .......................... 403 

Limited Access to Military Treatment Facilities in 

Rural Areas ................................................................ 404 

Reduction of Carryover Percentage ............................. 404 

Review of TRICARE Co-Pays ...................................... 404 

Chemical Agents and Munitions Destruction, Army ........ 404 

Drug Interdiction and Counter-Drug Activities, Defense . 405 

Joint Improvised Explosive Device Defeat Fund ............... 407 

Rapid Acquisition Fund ....................................................... 409 

Office of the Inspector General ........................................... 409 

TITLE VII. RELATED AGENCIES ....................................... 410 

National and Military Intelligence Programs .................... 410 

Classified Annex ........................................................... 410 

Central Intelligence Agency Retirement and Disability 

System Fund ..................................................................... 410 

Intelligence Community Management Account ................. 411 

TITLE VIII. GENERAL PROVISIONS ................................. 412 

HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES REPORTING REQUIREMENTS ....................................................................... 419 

Changes in the Application of Existing Law ..................... 419 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARING
Page

IX 

Appropriations Not Authorized By Law ............................ 429 

Transfer of Funds ................................................................ 432 

Rescissions ............................................................................ 432 

Compliance With Rule XIII, CL. 3(e) (Ramseyer Rule) .... 433 

Statement of General Performance Goals and Objectives 433 

Constitutional Authority ..................................................... 433 

Comparison with the Budget Resolution ........................... 433 

Five-Year Outlay Projections .............................................. 434 

Financial Assistance to State and Local Governments .... 434 

Earmarks .............................................................................. 434 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARING

cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARING
110TH CONGRESS REPORT " ! HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 1st Session 110–279 

DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE APPROPRIATIONS BILL, 2008 

JULY 30, 2007.—Committed to the Committee of the Whole House on the State of 

the Union and ordered to be printed 

Mr. MURTHA of Pennsylvania, from the Committee on 

Appropriations, submitted the following 

R E P O R T 

[To accompany H.R. 3222] 

The Committee on Appropriations submits the following report in 

explanation of the accompanying bill making appropriations for the 

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

ending September 30, 2008. 

BILL TOTALS

Appropriations for most military functions of the Department of 

Defense are provided for in the accompanying bill for the fiscal 

year 2008. This bill does not provide appropriations for military 

construction, military family housing, civil defense, and military 

nuclear warheads, for which requirements are considered in connection with other appropriations Acts. This bill again provides appropriations for Basic Allowance for Housing; the Defense Health 

Program; Facilities Sustainment, Restoration, and Modernization 

(FSRM); and environmental restoration programs consistent with 

the Committee’s reorganization at the beginning of the 110th Congress. 

The President’s fiscal year 2008 budget request for activities 

funded in the Department of Defense Appropriations Act totals 

$463,143,300,000 in new budget obligational authority for the base 

military bill. The amounts recommended by the Committee in the 

accompanying bill total $459,594,495,000 in new budget authority, 

a decrease of $3,548,805,000 below the budget estimate, and 

$39,722,516,000 above the sums made available for the Department of Defense for fiscal year 2007, excluding emergency supplemental appropriations. 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARING
2 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 016 HR279.001
3 

The Committee recommendation does not include supplemental 

emergency appropriations requested by the President for fiscal year 

2008 contingency operations related to the global war on terror. 

The Committee has deferred consideration of this matter to a 

later date. During the Committee’s deliberations on the fiscal year 

2008 war supplemental, the following issues will be considered: • Funding for additional C–17 cargo aircraft • Funding for Mine Resistant Ambush Protected vehicles • Shortfalls in funding for the Defense Health Program created by the so-called ‘‘efficiency wedge’’ • Shortfalls in Basic Allowance for Housing • Funding for additional Blackhawk MEDEVAC helicopters • Funding for the Department’s Global Train and Equip program • Funding for our strategic reserve’s readiness and equipment reset and recapitalization 

COMMITTEE BUDGET REVIEW PROCESS

During its review of the fiscal year 2008 budget request and execution of appropriations for fiscal year 2007, the Subcommittee on 

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

SELECT INTELLIGENCE OVERSIGHT PANEL

House Resolution 35 established the Select Intelligence Oversight 

Panel (Select Panel). The Select Panel has the goals of executing 

greater focus and better oversight on intelligence programs. The 

resolution indicates that the Panel shall review and study on a continuing basis budget requests for and execution of intelligence activities. In the course of conducting its review, the Panel has held 

six hearings to date totaling over 400 pages of testimony on the 

major components of the National and Military Intelligence programs. In addition, the Panel heard worldwide threat briefings presented by the Director of National Intelligence and the Director of 

the Central Intelligence Agency, and has received periodic intelligence updates on regional topics. 

The Panel’s responsibilities include preparing a report to the Defense Subcommittee on Appropriations on an annual basis containing budgetary and oversight observations and recommendations for use in preparation of the classified annex accompanying 

the Defense Appropriations bill. This report was transmitted with 

classified attachments to the Defense Appropriations Subcommittee 

on July 11, 2007. The recommendations contained therein were 

used by the Defense Subcommittee in developing the classified 

annex accompanying this bill. 

INTRODUCTION

Our national conscience is justifiably focused on the wars in Iraq 

and Afghanistan. The Committee and the country are deeply grateVerDate Aug 31 2005 08:25 Jul 31, 2007 Jkt 036903 PO 00000 Frm 00015 Fmt 6659 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\HR279.005 HR279

cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARING
4 

ful for and inspired by the dedication, service, and sacrifice of our 

men and women in uniform, their families, and those who support 

them. Yet, we cannot let this concentrated national focus distract 

our attention from the needs of our service members and their families here at home, and the imperative to prepare our forces for current and future conflicts. This is the challenge facing the Committee today, and our Nation for the foreseeable future. 

To address that challenge, the Committee’s recommendations 

achieve a balance between preparing units for near-term deployments, supporting our military members and their families, and 

modernizing our forces to meet future threats. Highlights of the 

Committee’s recommendations are as follows: 

Supporting our Troops and their Families.—First and foremost, 

the Committee recommends robust funding for programs important 

to the health, well-being, and readiness of our forces. In addition, 

the Committee proposes several initiatives that address issues 

raised by troops, their families, and Department of Defense officials 

in testimony before the Committee, and discovered through visits 

to military bases in the United States and overseas. • Funding of about $2,200,000,000 is recommended to cover the 

full cost of a 3.5% military pay raise, as approved in the House 

version of the Fiscal Year 2008 National Defense Authorization 

bill. • Under their ‘‘Grow-the-Force’’ initiatives, the Army and Marine 

Corps propose to add 7,000 and 5,000 new troops, respectively. The 

personnel costs of these increases are fully covered in the bill, as 

are the associated equipping and outfitting costs. For the Army 

alone, the equipping costs amount to more than $4,000,000,000 and 

for the Marine Corps, the equipping costs amount to more than 

$2,000,000,000. • Home-stationing training, optempo, and flying-hour costs are 

funded at robust levels. All told, the Committee’s recommendations 

provide for a 13% increase in funding for these activities over last 

year’s level. 

• The military services’ force structure and basing infrastructure 

are in a state of transition. The Army, in particular, has been 

forced to manage significant changes in force structure (known as 

Army Modularity), base closures, and a global repositioning of 

forces, all while meeting the demands of war. Based on information 

provided by the Army, the Committee recommends an important 

new initiative to assist the service in meeting this challenge. The 

Committee proposes adding $1,232,400,000 to the Army’s facilities 

sustainment and restoration budget request to offset the growing 

infrastructure costs associated with the global repositioning of its 

forces. These funds will be used to fix barracks, improve child care 

facilities, and enhance community services at Army bases throughout the United States, Europe, and Korea. This funding will only 

partially cover the Army’s needs. As such, the Committee will address additional infrastructure cost requirements during consideration of the fiscal year 2008 emergency supplemental request. Further, the Committee intends to work with all the military services 

to better understand and respond to their basing and infrastructure needs during this time of significant upheaval. 

• Another initiative proposed by the Committee directly responds to the needs of our military families. Total funding of 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARING
5 

$2,915,800,000 is recommended for the military’s family advocacy 

programs, childcare centers, and dependent’s education programs. This amount is an increase of $558,400,000 over the Administration’s request, with the lion’s share of the increase allocated to 

DoD’s family advocacy programs. This program provides counseling, education, and support to military families affected by the 

demands of war, and episodes of child or spouse abuse. • The Committee’s recommendations continue its long tradition 

of supporting the Department’s health programs. The Committee 

proposes several initiatives and additional funding to address 

health care issues raised over the past year, including improving 

the Department’s health record-keeping and fostering better coordination between DoD and the Department of Veterans Affairs, enhancing preventative medicine programs, and advancing military 

medical research. • Protecting our forces abroad must be matched with a commitment to protect our forces and their families here at home. Thus, 

the Committee proposes a new initiative to enhance the security of 

military bases in the United States. Funding of $268,100,000 is allocated for perimeter security force protection and related facility 

security improvements, an increase of $141,900,000 over the President’s budget request. These funds will be used to erect better perimeter fencing, provide more secure entry and exit controls, and 

improve situational awareness and response capabilities at military 

bases and hospitals. 

Preparing for the Future.—In 1796, President George Washington counseled the Nation to be, ‘‘Taking care always to keep ourselves by suitable establishments on a respectable defensive posture.’’ The Committee’s recommendations abide by that counsel, 

providing robust funding for weapons systems purchases and research programs designed to meet future threats. • The Committee supports full funding, as requested, for key 

weapons procurements, including the F–22 and F–35 tactical fighter aircraft programs. 

• Increases above the President’s request are allocated for development programs that address ‘‘asymmetric’’ threats from weapons 

of mass destruction and cruise missiles. Additional funding of 

$15,000,000 is provided to pursue cruise missile defense; 

$25,000,000 for chemical and biological defense research programs; 

$26,500,000 for fissile material detection research and $50,000,000 

for the former Soviet Union Threat Reduction account to counter 

weapons proliferation. 

• To support the Army’s evolution to a larger, more lethal, and 

more rapidly deployable force, the Committee recommends adding 

funding of $1,102,000,000 to outfit a new, eighth Stryker brigade. 

• Testimony before the Committee revealed that our National 

Guard and Reserve forces continue to suffer from equipment shortfalls. To address this need, the Committee recommends providing 

an additional $925,000,000 to purchase Guard and Reserve equipment. These additional funds will enhance these forces’ ability to 

meet overseas deployment demands, as well as to respond to natural disasters here at home. 

Economic Stability.—Fostering economic stability in DoD’s weapons modernization programs has been a consistent theme of the 

Committee. Analyses completed in recent years about DoD’s acquiVerDate Aug 31 2005 08:25 Jul 31, 2007 Jkt 036903 PO 00000 Frm 00017 Fmt 6659 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\HR279.005 HR279

cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARING
6 

sition program all conclude that, without improving stability in 

these programs, it’s quite likely that the military will not be able 

to achieve the numbers of weapons systems required to equip current force structure at the estimated costs. As such, the Committee 

is proposing a series of recommendations that would help stabilize 

certain programs by adding funds and/or adjusting procurement or 

development schedules. 

• The Navy’s shipbuilding program has been beset by planning 

and resource instability for several years running, resulting in 

ever-increasing costs to the American taxpayer. Clearly, at current 

production rates and price levels, the Navy will be unable to meet 

its force structure requirements in the future. The Committee has 

responded by providing funds for an additional five ships. To purchase these ships, the Committee recommends adding a total of 

$3,698,000,000 above the Navy’s request for shipbuilding and sealift. 

• The success of the Department’s Joint Strike Fighter (F–35) 

program is critical to our Nation’s ability to field a modern, capable 

fighter aircraft fleet for decades to come. To maintain stability in 

this program—and limit the potential for cost increases over time—

the Committee recommends an increase of $200,000,000 for F–35 

production enhancements. These funds are to be used to outfit facilities with the latest in production line equipment and work-flow 

technology. In addition, the Committee recommends including 

$480,000,000 to continue development of an alternative engine for 

this aircraft, thereby ensuring a competitive base for engine production. 

Accountability.—The Committee’s fiduciary responsibility to the 

American taxpayer requires holding accountable organizations, officials, and programs that have performed poorly. Moreover, wasted 

resources and procedural abuses ultimately come at the expense of 

our military men and women. The Committee focused attention on 

the following issues: 

• Fiscal discipline: For some time, the Committee has raised 

concerns about the challenges facing the Department’s financial 

managers. Some argue that fiscal discipline within the Department 

has eroded over time, severely constraining the Department’s senior officials and the Congress’ program and financial oversight. Regarding this matter, the Committee proposes several important initiatives to improve DoD’s fiscal discipline and Congressional oversight. These initiatives are described later in this report. 

• Contracting Out: The Committee also has registered concern 

about the Department’s unabated appetite for contracting out services and functions once performed by military members or DoD civilians. Though clearly necessary to offset reductions in military 

and civilian personnel levels that occurred over time, the Committee believes that the Department has failed to manage adequately and oversee the growth in, and cost-effectiveness of, contracting out. It is also clear that the majority of DoD’s service contractors has performed and will continue to perform well. Yet, 

abuses by some organizations, coupled with DoD’s lack of an effective contractor management and oversight regime, has cast a pall 

over the service contractor community writ large. This must be reversed. The Committee recommends strong steps to do so. In anVerDate Aug 31 2005 08:25 Jul 31, 2007 Jkt 036903 PO 00000 Frm 00018 Fmt 6659 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\HR279.005 HR279

cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARING
7 

other section of this report, the Committee’s recommendations for 

improving contract oversight are described. • Troubled procurement programs: Several of the Department’s 

major weapons acquisition programs have experienced considerable 

cost growth and/or poor execution. For each of these programs—including the Navy’s Littoral Combat Ship, the Air Force’s combat 

search and rescue helicopter, and several unclassified and classified satellite purchases—the Committee recommends significant 

adjustments to the Pentagon’s request. • Basic research: In testimony received by the Committee, and 

through information provided by the Department and third-party 

groups, the Committee learned that the percent of basic research 

funding allocated to Department and research organizations’ overhead costs has grown to unwarranted levels. To reverse this trend 

and ensure that the Department’s basic research dollars are being 

used for the purposes intended by Congress, the Committee recommends a general provision limiting the percentage of overhead 

costs that can be covered in basic research contracts. 

Improving military readiness, addressing the toll of war on our 

forces, and preparing them for future conflicts require a national 

commitment to provide adequate resources for the Department of 

Defense and intelligence community now and in the future. The 

Committee’s efforts reflect its strong commitment to our men and 

women in uniform, their families, and those individuals and organizations working in support of them. 

STABILITY IN THE MIDDLE EAST

At this time in our Nation’s history, no measure providing funding for the Department of Defense can be considered outside the 

context of the Iraq war. As the Committee has endeavored to strike 

a balance between supporting our forces’ needs today and for the 

future, it also has been mindful that the evolution of the United 

States’ military presence in the Middle East will have a significant 

effect on how our forces are to be structured, readied and resourced 

in the years to come. 

All would agree that achieving stability in the Middle East is an 

enduring U.S. national security goal. Attaining that goal will require fully employing all elements of U.S. power: diplomacy, economic support and military might. While much has been written 

about the need for the United States to refocus its diplomatic and 

economic support activities in and around Iraq, there apparently 

has been little thought given to or explanation of what the longterm U.S. military presence in the region may be. 

The reliance on the U.S. military alone to achieve ‘‘victory’’ in 

Iraq, without a coordinated diplomatic and economic aid plan, has 

left our forces weakened and with little strategic reserve to address 

other threats to our country. Moreover, the recent ‘‘surge’’ in deployments to Iraq has exacerbated the demands on our ground 

forces, with little evidence thus far that the increased troop numbers in theater have notably improved the security and stability of 

that country. Yet, the strains on our military are clearly evident: 

units across-the-board have had their tours of duty extended to 15 

months while those back home struggle to meet deployment deadlines for lack of personnel and equipment; the costs of recruiting 

and retaining soldiers continue to spiral upward, even as standards 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARING
8 

have been lowered to meet monthly recruiting goals; and, each appearance before Congress by senior military and DoD officials 

brings new and higher estimates of the costs for rehabilitating our 

forces once they return home. 

Lessening the strains on the military forces can only be accomplished by relinquishing our overwhelming reliance on them to stabilize and secure Iraq. But doing so must occur in conjunction with 

an understanding of and consensus on the broader, more strategic 

interests of the United States in the Middle East. 

FISCAL MANAGEMENT

For some time now, the Committee has expressed considerable 

concern over an erosion of DoD’s fiscal discipline. That erosion is 

reflected primarily in the Department’s use of emergency supplemental funding to cover what were once considered to be base 

budget costs, particularly weapons modernization and force structure costs. In this bill, the Committee has endeavored to begin restoring traditional funding criteria to these respective appropriations matters. Thus, recommendations for this fiscal year 2008 Defense Appropriations bill focus on non-incremental war costs and 

preparing for future threats by funding enduring personnel benefits, force structure initiatives (such as Army modularity and 

‘‘Grow-the-Force’’ programs), infrastructure improvements, homestation training, and weapons modernization programs. The Committee’s deliberations on the fiscal year 2008 war supplemental, 

however, will be tailored to funding those programs and incremental costs that are arguably related to the war efforts. Satisfying 

these criteria requires the shifting of funds between the base bill 

and supplemental requests. As such, the Committee recommends 

deferring consideration of certain funding requests made for the 

base fiscal year 2008 Defense bill to the emergency supplemental. 

Conversely, the Committee recommends that certain programs requested by the Administration in its fiscal year 2008 Global War 

on Terror emergency supplemental receive funding in this legislation as such items are more appropriately funded in the base budget. 

Further, the Committee believes that seeking funding for weapons modernization programs and enduring force structure transformations in emergency supplemental requests conveniently 

eludes the procedural mechanisms designed to ensure that the 

most important priorities are resourced. There can be no doubt that 

the Department’s financial officers have faced considerable challenges in managing both the war and base budgets. Nonetheless, 

a fiscal ‘‘flabbiness’’ has infected the Defense budgeting process—

a situation that must be corrected. To ensure that sound budgetary 

and fiscal procedures are re-invigorated, the Committee recommends a general provision that requires the Department to include all funding for both non-war and war-related activities in the 

President’s fiscal year 2009 annual Defense budget request. 

Planning, Programming and Budgeting System (PPBS).—For 

over 40 years, the Department of Defense followed the Planning, 

Programming and Budgeting System (PPBS) as the process for assessing and prioritizing requirements and allocating resources. The 

PPBS process established long-range national security planning objectives, analyzed the costs and benefits of alternative programs 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARING
9 

that would meet those objectives, and translated programs into 

budget proposals. The improvements that PPBS offered over previous budgeting processes were that: (1) it emphasized objectives, 

focusing less on changes from the prior-year budget and more on 

long-term objectives, and (2) it linked planning and budgeting. 

PPBS instilled a process that clearly defined a procedure for distributing available resources equitably among competing programs. 

Beginning in 2003, the PPBS process has been significantly altered, splintering planning into two phases and requiring that the 

program and budget reviews occur simultaneously. The process 

changes were ill-conceived and have had significant and lasting adverse implications. Today, sequential steps to plan adequately or 

refine a plan into budget-level detail do not exist. Further, conducting a simultaneous program and budget review eliminate the 

inherent discipline in the process which force resource allocation 

decisions to occur deliberatively, resulting in unnecessary confusion 

and wasted effort. The time and attention required to harmonize 

simultaneous program and budget reviews detract from the Department’s ability to scrutinize fully its fiscal requirements. As a result: 

—the focus on program objectives has diminished; —the inextricable link between planning and budgeting has 

been severely damaged; —reliance on funds transfers and reprogrammings within 

DoD have grown significantly, often correcting inadequacies 

that should have been identified earlier in the Department’s 

internal review process with the purpose being to fix holes in 

key programs originally created during the DoD budget review; —supplemental requests and the Department’s reliance on 

them have grown and increasingly resemble base budget requests; and lastly, —Congress is forced to make increasingly difficult funding 

decisions in the absence of a rigorous budget review by the Department. 

Accordingly, the Committee recommends that the Secretary of 

Defense institute a process for assessing and prioritizing requirements and allocating resources which is supportive of thorough, deliberative program and budget review and more fully utilize the efforts of the dedicated and talented DoD civil servants. The Committees recommendation includes several directions to address the 

budget execution process within the Department, as discussed 

below. 

Re-baselining.—Generally accepted reprogramming procedures 

and those procedures outlined in the Department of Defense Financial Management Regulation require the approval of Congress prior 

to transferring operation and maintenance funding in excess of 

$15,000,000 from those levels appropriated by Congress. However, 

through a ‘‘rebaselining’’ process or ‘‘free move’’, the Department 

has transferred excessive amounts of funds—a total of 

$2,500,000,000 in fiscal year 2007—without the approval of Congress. This re-baselining process, as it has evolved, vitiates Congressionally approved resource allocations provided in annual appropriations Acts, impedes the ability of Congress to perform its 

oversight responsibilities, and abrogates Congressional intent. 

Moreover, the Committee notes that the Department has failed to 

comply with certain reprogramming requirements as they relate to 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARING
10 

specific subactivity groups within the Operation and Maintenance 

appropriations. These actions reflect a continuing erosion of fiscal 

discipline within the Department of Defense. Accordingly, the Committee directs the Department to cease the reallocation of funds 

through a re-baselining procedure, and further directs the Department to comply fully with the reprogramming procedures contained 

in this report. The Committee remains cognizant of the need for 

the Department to re-align certain appropriations and commits to 

work with the Department to address these concerns. 

Base for Reprogramming Actions.—The Committee notes that the 

Department was not able to provide in a timely manner the Base 

for Reprogramming Actions report, or DD form 1414, for the current fiscal year. This report is to be provided to the House and Senate Committees on Appropriations soon after the enactment of the 

annual appropriations Act to establish the baseline from which the 

Department is to execute its programs. The report also serves as 

the benchmark from which Congress and the Committee can assess 

all transfers and reprogrammings. However, the DD 1414 was not 

submitted to the Committees on Appropriations until nearly nine 

months after the fiscal year had commenced and after the Department had submitted over $700,000,000 in reprogramming requests 

requiring Congressional approval. When the report was submitted, 

it was incomplete, omitting each of the active services’ operation 

and maintenance accounts. Moreover, it excluded a ‘‘re-baselining’’ or realignment in excess of $2,500,000,000 in operation and maintenance funds from activities for which they were originally appropriated. The Committee believes that such funds management is 

unacceptable and suggests that the Department does not execute 

its programs consistent with Congressional direction. Accordingly, 

the Committee has recommended a general provision that requires 

the Department to submit the DD 1414 within 60 days after the 

enactment of the Act. In addition, the provision prohibits the Department from executing any reprogramming or transfer of funds 

for any purpose other than originally appropriated until the aforementioned report is submitted to the Committees of Appropriations 

of the Senate and the House of Representatives. 

Items or subactivities for which funds have been specifically provided in an appropriations Act (including joint resolutions providing continuing appropriations), accompanying reports of the 

House and Senate Committees on Appropriations, or accompanying 

conference reports and joint explanatory statements of the committee of conference shall be carried in the Base for Reprogramming Actions (DD form 1414), irrespective of whether or not the report uses the phrases ‘‘only for’’ or ‘‘only to’’. 

New starts.—The Committee recommends a general provision 

that prohibits the initiation of a new start program through a reprogramming of funds unless such program must be undertaken 

immediately in the interest of national security and only after written notification to the congressional defense committees. The use of 

reprogramming authorities to initiate new starts should be used 

seldomly, and if at all, only in times of national emergency. Starting new programs through the use of reprogramming authorities in 

the year of execution creates additional funding requirements in 

the ensuing budget year, and rarely does the Administration submit budget amendments to reallocate its funding requirements reVerDate Aug 31 2005 08:25 Jul 31, 2007 Jkt 036903 PO 00000 Frm 00022 Fmt 6659 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\HR279.005 HR279

cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARING
11 

flecting the new fiscal realities created by the new program starts. 

As such, the Committee’s ability to review fully the program’s costeffectiveness and mission utility vis-a`-vis other military programs 

is denied. The Committee notes that the fiscal year omnibus 2007 

reprogramming includes new starts totaling nearly $110,000,000. 

The Committee is not pleased with the Department’s increasing 

use of its reprogramming authorities to initiate new program 

starts, and accordingly, directs the Department not to use reprogramming authorities provided in this Act to initiate new programs unless such programs are emergency requirements. 

General transfer authority (GTA).—A provision is recommended, 

consistent with previous appropriations Acts, providing for the 

transfer of funds for higher priority items, based on unforeseen 

military requirements than those for which originally appropriated. 

This authority has been included annually to respond to unanticipated requirements that were not known at the time the budget 

was developed and after which time appropriations were enacted. 

This authority has grown significantly over the past several years, 

from $2,000,000,000 in fiscal years 1997 through 2001, rising precipitously in fiscal year 2005 to $6,185,000,000. In fiscal year 2007, 

the GTA was $4,500,000,000 and the Department has requested 

$5,000,000,000 in GTA for fiscal year 2008. While the waging of 

war certainly has increased the need for flexibility in executing the 

Department’s resources, the Committee fears that the Department 

has come to rely on reprogramming and transfer authority in lieu 

of a thoughtful and deliberative budget formulation and fiscal management process. In an effort to restore fiscal management to the 

Department, while allowing for the flexibility in executing appropriations for a nation at war, the Committee recommends for fiscal 

year 2008 general transfer authority of $3,200,000,000, the same 

level as provided in fiscal year 2004 after adjustments to reflect 

GTA as a percent of total appropriations. 

Reprogrammings for Operation and Maintenance Accounts.—Beginning in fiscal year 2008, the Committee imposes new accountability and reprogramming guidelines for programs, projects and 

activities within the Operation and Maintenance appropriations. 

The Committee believes that such revisions are necessary given the 

unique nature of activities funded within these appropriations continuing concerns about force readiness, and recent budget execution 

within these accounts. The specific revisions are addressed later in 

this report in Title II, Operation and Maintenance. 

CONTRACTED SERVICES AND ACQUISITION MANAGEMENT

A year ago, the Committee expressed concern about the increasing costs of operating our military forces. To gain better insight 

about the factors generating an increase in operation and maintenance costs, the Committee directed, in House Report 109–504, 

that the Government Accountability Office (GAO) prepare a comprehensive analysis of contracting out services, as well as other factors that may be driving up costs. GAO found that between the 

years 2000 to 2005, the cost of operation and maintenance service 

contracts increased more than 73 percent. Over the same period, 

DoD civilian pay costs increased 28 percent, and total DoD pay 

costs went up by 34 percent. However, despite the growing and 

seemingly unconstrained reliance on contractors to accomplish 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARING
12 

DoD’s mission, no system of accountability for contract service cost 

or performance has been established. 

The Committee is frustrated by the lack of accountability and 

management of contracted services. DoD has increasingly relied on 

private sector contractors, rather than uniformed or DoD civilian 

personnel, to perform operation and maintenance-related work 

such as logistics, facilities maintenance, base operations support; 

information technology services; and administrative support. But, 

responsibility for acquiring services within DoD is spread among 

individual military commands, weapon system program offices, or 

functional units on military bases. This decentralized management 

results in little visibility at either the DoD or military department 

level over the totality of DoD’s use of contractors to provide services. GAO recently found that DoD only had reviewed proposed acquisitions accounting for less than 3 percent of the funds obligated 

for services in fiscal year 2005, and DoD was in a poor position to 

regularly identify opportunities to leverage buying power or otherwise change existing practices. 

Focused management attention.—The Committee contends that 

DoD is not providing sufficient management oversight to improve 

the acquisition and management of contractor services. Tens of billions of dollars are expended for contract services each year. Management of contract services should be among DoD’s top priorities. 

The Committee believes that the Department must improve management of contract services by instituting clear accountability 

mechanisms; instituting unambiguous and short chains of command to the most-senior decision makers; and improving the tracking and reporting of contract service costs, and management of contract service performance. 

Increased contractor oversight.—The Committee directs the Department to provide more robust staffing of contractor management 

and oversight personnel. It is clear that DoD currently lacks the 

means to provide proper oversight of its service contracts, in part 

because of an insufficient number of contract oversight personnel. 

While the spending for contracted services has grown, the size of 

DoD’s workforce, including its contracting and acquisition workforce, has been decreased significantly. For example, the Defense 

Contract Management Agency’s (DCMA) workforce has been reduced by over 50 percent between the period 2000 to 2005, making 

it more difficult for DCMA to provide thorough and meaningful 

oversight of the Department’s increasing reliance on contracted 

services. 

The Committee recommends adding funds for additional DoD civilian personnel to provide enhanced contract-service management 

and oversight. Further, the Committee added funds for the temporary assignment of 600 General Services Administration contract 

specialists on a reimbursable basis. The Committee provides the 

following for contract-service management and oversight. 

[$ in thousands] 

Committee 

recommended 

Defense Contract Audit Agency ...................................................................................................................... +$12,000,000 

Defense Contract Management Agency ......................................................................................................... +17,000,000 

Defense Inspector General ............................................................................................................................. +24,000,000 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARING
13 

[$ in thousands] 

Committee 

recommended 

Reimbursable GSA Assistance ....................................................................................................................... +21,000,000 

Minimum Standards for Contracted Security Service Personnel.— DoD relies heavily on contracted security, both in the theaters of 

operation as well as at home. The Committee is particularly concerned that the oversight and administration of contracted security 

services is woefully inadequate. This lack of oversight seemingly 

has resulted in few, if any, operational standards and rules-of-engagement to which contracted security organizations and individuals must adhere. As such, the Committee directs the Secretary of 

Defense to develop, no later than 90 days after the passage of this 

Act, uniform minimum personnel standards for all contract personnel operating under contracts, subcontracts or task orders performing work that includes private security functions. The standards, at a minimum, must include determinations about contractors using personnel with criminal histories, must determine the 

eligibility of all private contract personnel to possess and carry firearms, and determine what assessments of medical and mental fitness of contracted security personnel must be undertaken. The Secretary of Defense should develop a mechanism for contract accountability that specifies consequences for noncompliance with the personnel standards, including fines, denial of contractual obligations 

or contract rescission. Finally, the Secretary is directed to establish 

a clear set of rules-of-engagement for all contracted security personnel operating in the Iraq and Afghanistan theaters of operations. The Secretary shall submit the prescribed standards to the 

congressional defense committees once the 90-day period referenced 

above is completed. 

Improving the Acquisition Workforce.—The Committee directs 

that the Undersecretary of Defense for Acquisition, Technology, 

and Logistics submit, within 90 days of enactment of this Act, a report to the congressional defense committees analyzing the current 

acquisition workforce personnel needs and the tools to recruit and 

retain a workforce best positioned to provide appropriate contract 

management and oversight of contractor performance. The report 

should identify the most urgent shortages in the current acquisition workforce. The report should also recommend revisions to the 

Department’s Strategic Human Capital Plan geared to enhancing 

the Department’s ability to recruit and retain high performing acquisition and contracting personnel and overcome obstacles to the 

expedited hiring of talented acquisition professionals. 

Enhancing Access to Small Business.—The Committee is concerned about the access of small businesses to Department of Defense contracting and procurement. Moreover, the Committee recognizes that harvesting mature innovative technologies from the 

Small Business Innovative Research (SBIR) programs has resulted 

in cost avoidance and savings in Defense Department acquisition 

programs. SBIRs have been invaluable in reintroducing competition and developing better capabilities for the warfighter. For example, efforts such as open architecture technologies and improved 

manufacturing processes championed by small businesses should 

reduce acquisition costs and ensure that the military services can 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARING
14 

continue to support weapons systems once they become operational. 

In order to facilitate entry into the defense market by small businesses, the Committee recommends providing a total of 

$100,000,000 more than requested for the Department’s SBIR program. These funds are allocated as follows: $25,000,000 is recommended for the Army’s Future Combat System to enhance small 

business participation in that program; $25,000,000 is allocated to 

each of the Navy’s surface ship and submarine research and development activities for the SBIR program; and, $25,000,000 is provided to enhance small business participation in the Joint Strike 

Fighter program. 

Further, the Committee directs the Director of the Department 

of Defense Office of Small Business Contracting to submit, no later 

than June 1, 2008, a report to the congressional defense committees which identifies the impediments to small business owners to 

contracting or subcontracting with the Department, including, but 

not limited to, an analysis of the small business threshold size; 

small business contract bundling; distribution of small business 

subcontracts between professional service and research and development; the transition from SBIR II programs to procurement; the 

impact of the Departments vendor pay system on small businesses; 

and the effectiveness of the mentor-prote ́ge ́ program. The report 

should identify any impediments to the successes of businesses that 

graduate from the small business qualifications and offer recommendations to support the transition of small businesses to middle-sized businesses. 

Improvements in the management of contract services need not 

take years to implement; rather, with intent leadership and executive attention, considerable efficiencies can be achieved in the nearterm. Accordingly, the Committee recommendations reduce the Department’s funding requests for contracted services in the operation 

and maintenance budgets by five percent, recognizing contract 

service efficiencies and savings with enhanced oversight. 

MEMBER REQUESTS

Projects.—Congress has made significant reforms in the way it 

reviews funding for the Federal government—reforms which the 

Committee takes very seriously as it executes its constitutional authority. Earmarking or directed spending of Federal dollars does 

not begin with Congress. It begins with the Executive Branch. Provided as merely an example, the following was submitted by the 

Administration: 

Installation Number of 

projects Budget estimate 

Fort Meade ............................................................................................................................... 2 $60,000,000 

Fort Sam Houston .................................................................................................................... 1 20,840,000 

Norfolk Naval Shipyard ............................................................................................................ 2 26,824,000 

Charleston Air Force Base ....................................................................................................... 5 26,200,000 

The Administration, in selecting these projects, goes through a 

process that is the functional equivalent of earmarking. These 10 

projects, totaling $133,864,000, are rolled up with thousands of 

similar projects into a larger budget activity, essentially hidden 

within the request. However, when the Committee reviews the 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARING
15 

budget request, it goes through a process of rigorous analysis and 

may alter or modify this list to reflect additional priorities. 

The Executive Branch also engages in another practice which 

steers or directs money to specific entities or purposes through a 

process of contracting out various activities and services. In many 

important work locations, the number of people working for contractors exceeds the number of Federal employees in the same 

building or location. Many of these, in fact, are non-competitive or 

sole-sourced. When added together, the Executive Branch steers or 

directs far greater spending to specific projects or corporations than 

is directed or earmarked by Congress. And the practice of non-competitive contracting has exploded in the past five years. The Committee has expressed, in no uncertain terms, its opinion of how the 

Department of Defense has not properly managed this effort elsewhere in this report. 

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS BY MAJOR CATEGORY

ACTIVE, RESERVE AND NATIONAL GUARD MILITARY PERSONNEL

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

$105,017,776,000 for active, Reserve and National Guard military 

personnel, a decrease of $385,922,000 below the budget request, 

and $5,154,899,000 above the fiscal year 2007 enacted level. The 

Committee has provided $310,000,000 above the request to increase basic pay for all military personnel by 3.5 percent, effective 

January 1, 2008. This represents an increase of 0.5 percent over 

the President’s request. The Committee also recommends full funding to support the requested end strength levels for active duty and 

Selected Reserve personnel, including over $1,041,000,000 to increase the end strength of the Army by 7,000; the Army National 

Guard by 1,300; and the Marine Corps by 5,000. 

The Committee has transferred $364,000,000 from Research, Development, Test and Evaluation, Air Force into Military Personnel, 

Air Force to address what the Committee believes is a chronic force 

structure problem. Also, the Committee has deferred consideration, 

without prejudice, of certain special pays that it believes would be 

more appropriate to consider within the fiscal year 2008 Global 

War on Terror supplemental. 

OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE

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

$137,135,127,000 for operation and maintenance support to the 

military services and other Department of Defense entities, a reduction of $5,718,890,000 from the fiscal year 2008 budget request, 

and an increase of $9,846,320,000 above the amount appropriated 

for fiscal year 2007. 

The Committee’s recommendation increases funding for operational training over the level appropriated for peacetime training 

and operations in 2007. The additional funding will robustly fund 

the operational training programs, supporting an increased training operating tempo in 2008 for the Army, Navy and Marine Corps. 

Funds not needed for home station activities due to units being deployed for military operations in Afghanistan and Iraq have been 

realigned for support of continuing combat and peacekeeping operVerDate Aug 31 2005 08:25 Jul 31, 2007 Jkt 036903 PO 00000 Frm 00027 Fmt 6659 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\HR279.005 HR279

cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARING
16 

ations in Afghanistan and Iraq. Requests for unit and depot level 

maintenance program funding have been fully supported. 

In addition, the Committee provides additional operating funds 

for family advocacy, childcare centers and dependent education to 

support military families. The Committee also supports anti-terrorism force protection by adding funds for perimeter security to 

protect DoD installations, facilities, and personnel. Finally, significant amounts are added to support the Army’s global repositioning 

and force structure efforts. 

PROCUREMENT

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

$99,608,169,000 for procurement, an increase of $18,697,413,000 

over the amount appropriated for fiscal year 2007. 

Major initiatives and modifications include: 

• $770,751,000, the President’s request, for the procurement of 

52 Blackhawk Helicopters, for baseline and Grow-the-Army requirements. 

• $569,993,000, the President’s request, for baseline and Growthe-Army requirements, to procure 2 additional Patriot battalions, 

plus upgrades for 3 other battalions. 

• No procurement funding for the Armed Reconnaissance Helicopter, instead of $468,259,000 requested in the President’s budget. 

• $472,907,000, the President’s request, for the procurement of 

108 Patriot Advanced Capability 3 (PAC–3) surface-to-air missiles 

and 6 Enhanced Launcher Electronic Systems. 

• $235,865,000, the President’s request, for the procurement of 

57 High Mobility Artillery Rocket Systems, launchers, trainers, and 

support equipment. 

• $1,912,884,000 for the procurement of Stryker vehicles, including an additional $1,102,000,000 for an eighth Stryker brigade. 

• $1,266,010,000 for the procurement of 18 EA–18G Growler 

electronic attack aircraft. 

• $2,042,049,000 for the procurement of 24 F/A–18E/F Super 

Hornet tactical aircraft. 

• $2,410,800,000, the President’s request, for the procurement of 

12 F–35 Lightning II Aircraft, 6 Short Take-off and Vertical Landing variants for the Marine Corps and 6 Conventional variants for 

the Air Force. 

• $2,212,500,000, the President’s request, for the procurement of 

26 V–22 aircraft, 21 MV–22 variants for the Marine Corps and 5 

CV–22 variants for the Air Force. 

• $15,303,820,000 in Navy Shipbuilding and Conversion, 

$1,647,000,000 above the President’s request for the procurement 

of 5 Navy ships including 2 LPD–17 Amphibious Transport Docks, 

1 SSN–774 Attack Submarine, 1 CVN–78 Aircraft Carrier, and 1 

Littoral Combat Ship. Additionally, this funding provides for the 

second increment of funding for 2 DDG–1000 Guided Missile Destroyers and 1 LHA–6 Amphibious Assault Ship and for the advance procurement of long lead items for 2 SSN–774 Attack Submarines. 

• $1,866,000,000 in the National Defense Sealift Fund for the 

procurement of 4 T–AKE Auxiliary Dry Cargo/Ammunition Ships, 

$1,410,000,000 above the President’s request. 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARING
17 

• $3,152,700,000, the President’s request, for the procurement of 

20 F–22 Raptor aircraft. • $403,005,000 for the procurement of 3 Global Hawk unmanned 

aerial vehicles. • $325,183,000, the President’s request, for the procurement of 1 

Wideband Gapfiller Communications Satellite. • $1,101,691,000 for the procurement of 4 Evolved Expendable 

Launch Vehicles. • $277,999,000, the President’s request, for the procurement of 

24 Predator unmanned aerial vehicles. • $58,470,000, the President’s request, for the procurement of 4 

Reaper unmanned aerial vehicles. • $125,000,000 for advance procurement of a fourth advanced 

EHF communications satellite. • $558,253,000 for Chemical and Biological Defense Programs, an increase of $41,344,000 from fiscal year 2007 levels and a net 

increase of $9,500,000 from the budget request. • $1,818,852,000 for Special Operations Command, an increase of $202,578,000 from fiscal year 2007 levels and a net decrease of 

$2,297,000 from the budget request. 

RESEARCH, DEVELOPMENT, TEST AND EVALUATION

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

$76,231,440,000 for research, development, test and evaluation, an 

increase of $1,114,246,000 from the fiscal year 2008 budget request 

and an increase of $509,836,000 over the amount appropriated for 

fiscal year 2007. 

Major initiatives and modifications include: 

• $8,497,934,000 for missile defense programs, a decrease of $883,416,000 from fiscal year 2007 levels and a net decrease of 

$297,992,000 from the budget request; within this amount, an increase of $57,000,000 above the request is provided for sea-based 

mid-course defense to include $15,000,000 to continue work on 

asymmetric missile defense issues, $70,000,000 above the request 

for missile defense programs in cooperation with Israel, and 

$150,000,000 above the request for Kinetic Energy Interceptor. 

• $3,157,118,000 for the development of the Future Combat System, $406,300,000 below the President’s request. 

• $356,296,000, an increase of $134,000,000 above the President’s request, for the development of the Warfighter Information 

Network—Tactical system. 

• $129,310,000, an increase of $47,000,000 above the President’s 

request, for the Armed Reconnaissance Helicopter program development. 

• $3,035,222,000 for the Defense Advance Research Projects 

Agency, a decrease of $80,088,000 from fiscal year 2007 levels and 

a net decrease of $50,395,000 from the budget request. 

• $372,146,000, the President’s request, for Patriot/MEADS system development. 

• $288,220,000, the President’s request, for the development of 

the Expeditionary Fighting Vehicle. 

• $808,993,000, the President’s request, for the continued development of the E–2D Advanced Hawkeye aircraft. 

• $274,699,000 for the continued development of the EA–18G 

electronic attack aircraft. 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARING
18 

• $230,971,000 for the continued development of the VH–71A 

Presidential Helicopter. • $630,544,000 for continuing development of the DDG–1000 

Guided Missile Destroyer program. • $4,146,256,000 for the continued development of the F–35 

Lightning Joint Strike Fighter aircraft, $705,000,000 above the 

President’s request. • $603,179,000, the President’s request, for the continued development of the Advanced Extremely High Frequency communication 

satellite system. • $963,585,000, the President’s request, for the continued development of the Transformational Satellite Communication system. • $260,501,000 for the development of the Global Hawk unmanned aerial vehicles. • $186,000,000 for Space Radar in the Air Force, a reduction and 

transfer from the classified budget request for this program. • $75,877,000 for the Alternative Infrared Satellite System, a re- duction of $155,000,000 from the budget request. • $507,226,000 for the Global Positioning System III, a reduction of $80,000,000 from the budget request. • $1,133,596,000 for Chemical and Biological Defense Programs, 

an increase of $152,412,000 from fiscal year 2007 levels and a net 

increase of $112,100,000 from the budget request. 

• $442,137,000 for Special Operations Command, a decrease of 

$111,922,000 from fiscal year 2007 levels and a net increase of 

$70,859,000 from the budget request. 

CLASSIFIED PROGRAMS

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

in the classified annex accompanying this report. 

FORCES TO BE SUPPORTED

DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY

The fiscal year 2008 budget request is designed to support the 

Army’s continuing transformation of its Operating Force to a Modular Design. By the end of fiscal year 2008, the Active Component 

transformed force will include 4 Army Service Component Command Headquarters, 1 Corps Headquarters, 9 Division Headquarters, 38 Brigade Combat Teams and 34 multi-functional support brigades. Additionally, the Active Component will have begun 

transformation of two more Brigade Combat Teams. Active Component structure yet to be transformed includes 2 Army Service Component Command Headquarters, 2 Corps Headquarters, 1 Division 

Headquarters, 8 Brigade Combat Teams and 6 multi-functional 

support brigades. By the end of fiscal year 2008, transformed force 

structure in the Army National Guard (ARNG) and the U.S. Army 

Reserve (USAR) will include 6 ARNG Division Headquarters and 

54 multi-functional Support Brigades (44 ARNG and 10 USAR). 

Additionally, the ARNG will have begun conversion of 28 Brigade 

Combat Teams (the first 7 Brigade Combat Teams will complete 

transformation in fiscal year 2009). Reserve Component forces yet 

to be transformed include 10 multi-functional support brigades (7 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARING
19 

ARNG and 3 USAR). These forces are the key elements of the minimum capabilities needed to execute the National Military Strategy 

and to meet enduring defense needs of the Global Force Demand. 

By fiscal year 2013, the transformed Army will include 6 Army 

Service Component Command Headquarters and 3 Corps Headquarters in the Active Component, 18 Division Headquarters (10 

Active and 8 ARNG), 76 Brigade Combat Teams (48 Active, 28 

ARNG) and 104 multi-functional support brigades (40 Active, 51 

ARNG, and 13 USAR). A summary of the major forces follows: 

FY06 FY07 FY08 

Active Component Forces 

Headquarters: 

Army HQs ............................................................................................................................... 4 4 2 

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

Headquarters Total ....................................................................................................... ............ ............ ............

Divisions (Legacy Structure): 

Airborne .................................................................................................................................. 0 0 0 

Air Assault ............................................................................................................................. 0 0 0 

Light ....................................................................................................................................... 0 0 0 

Infantry ................................................................................................................................... 0 0 0 

Mechanized ............................................................................................................................ 1 1 0 

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

Divisions Total .............................................................................................................. 2 2 1 

Transformed Modular Forces: 

Modular Theater Army HQs .................................................................................................... 1 2 4 

Modular Corps HQs ................................................................................................................ 0 0 1 

Modular Division HQs ............................................................................................................ 8 8 9 

Heavy Brigade Combat Team (HBCT) .................................................................................... * 13 * 14 * 15

Infantry Brigade Combat Team (IBCT) .................................................................................. 15 17 18 

Stryker Brigade Combat Team (SBCT) .................................................................................. 3 4 5 

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

Combat Aviation Brigade ....................................................................................................... 8 11 11 

Sustainment Brigade HQ ....................................................................................................... 8 11 13 

Fires Brigade .......................................................................................................................... 3 5 5 

Maneuver Enhancement Brigade HQ ..................................................................................... 1 1 2 

Battle Field Surveillance Brigade .......................................................................................... 1 1 2 

Transformed Forces Total ............................................................................................. 62 75 86 

Army National Guard (ARNG) Forces 

Divisions (Legacy Structure): 

Light ....................................................................................................................................... 1 0 0 

Infantry ................................................................................................................................... 0 0 0 

Mechanized ............................................................................................................................ 3 1 0 

Armored .................................................................................................................................. 1 1 0 

Medium .................................................................................................................................. 0 0 0 

Division Total ................................................................................................................ 5 2 0 

Non Divisional Combat Units: 

Separate Brigades ................................................................................................................. 10 6 0 

Non Divisional Combat Units Total .............................................................................. 10 6 0 

Transformed Modular Forces: 

Modular Theater Army HQs .................................................................................................... 0 0 0 

Modular Division HQs ............................................................................................................ 3 6 8 

Heavy Brigade Combat Team (HBCT) .................................................................................... 0 0 0 

Infantry Brigade Combat Team (IBCT) .................................................................................. 0 0 0 

Stryker Brigade Combat Team (SBCT) .................................................................................. 0 0 0 

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

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

Sustainment Brigade HQ ....................................................................................................... 5 6 9 

Fires Brigade .......................................................................................................................... 1 2 7 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARING
20 

FY06 FY07 FY08 

Maneuver Enhancement Brigade HQ ..................................................................................... 3 4 12 

Battle Field Surveillance Brigade .......................................................................................... 0 0 3 

Transformed Forces Total ............................................................................................. 25 31 52 

U.S. Army Reserve (USAR) Forces 

Transformed Modular Forces: 

Theater Aviation Brigade HQ ................................................................................................. 0 0 1 

Sustainment Brigade HQ ....................................................................................................... 3 4 7 

Maneuver Enhancement Brigade HQ ..................................................................................... 1 0 2 

Transformed Forces Total ............................................................................................. 4 4 10 

*HBCT includes armored cavalry regiment. 

DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY

The fiscal year 2008 budget request supports battle forces totaling 286 ships at the end of fiscal year 2008, including 14 fleet ballistic missile submarines; 11 aircraft carriers; 17 Support ships; 11 

Reserve ships; 233 other battle forces ships; 1,708 Navy/Marine 

Corps tactical/ASW aircraft; 743 Undergraduate Training aircraft; 

461 Fleet Air Training aircraft; 285 Fleet Air Support aircraft; 328 

Reserve aircraft and 195 in the pipeline. 

A summary of the major forces follows: 

FY 2006 FY 2007 FY 2008 

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

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

General Purpose ........................................................................ 250 248 255 

Aircraft Carriers ............................................................... 12 11 11 

Surface Combatants ........................................................ 101 105 111 

Submarines (attack) ........................................................ 54 52 52 

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

Amphibious Warfare Ships .............................................. 33 31 32 

Combat Logistics Ships ................................................... 30 31 31 

Mine Warfare .................................................................... 16 14 14 

Support Forces .......................................................................... 16 17 17 

Support Ships ........................................................................... 16 17 17 

Mobilization Cat. A (Reserve) ................................. 14 13 11 

Note: The reserve ships below are included in the 

ship count above 

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

Amphibious Warfare Ships ..................................... 0 0 0 

Mine Warfare ........................................................... 5 4 2 

Total Ships, Battleforce ................................. 280 279 286 

Prepositioning Ships (O&M, Navy): ........................................... 17 17 17 

Maritime Preposition ........................................................ 16 16 16 

USPACOM Ammo Prepo .................................................... 1 1 1 

Surge Ships (National Defense Sealift Fund)* ........................ 71 67 67 

Aviation Logistics Support ............................................... 2 2 2 

Hospital Ships .................................................................. 2 2 2 

Fast Sealift Ships ............................................................ 8 8 8 

Ready Reserve Force Ships .............................................. 48 44 44 

Large Medium-Speed RORO Ships .................................. 11 11 11 

Naval Aircraft 

Primary Authorized (plus Pipe) ........................................ 4,100 3,750 3,720 

Authorized Pipeline .......................................................... 489 193 195 

Tactical/ASW Aircraft ....................................................... 1,786 1,730 1,708 

Fleet Air Training ............................................................. 454 460 461 

Fleet Air Support .............................................................. 271 270 285 

Training (Undergraduate) ................................................ 730 736 743 

Reserve ............................................................................. 370 361 328 

* Note: Surge ships are maintained in a Reduced Operating Status (ROS) from four to thirty days. The number of days indicates the time from ship activation until the ship is available for tasking. Only ROS–4 and ROS–5 ships are considered in the surge capacity below. 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARING
21 

DEPARTMENT OF THE AIR FORCE

The fiscal year 2008 Air Force budget request is designed to support active, guard, and reserve forces, including 75 combat coded 

fighter and attack squadrons and 9 combat coded strategic bomber 

squadrons. The ICBM force maintains 495 launch facilities/control 

centers with 450 Minuteman missiles. The budget also supports 

our critical airlift mission, including 24 active duty airlift squadrons. To accomplish the Air Force mission, the 2008 budget supports a total force end strength of 502,800. 

A summary of the major forces follows: 

Fiscal year—

2006 2007 2008 

Summary of Major Forces: 

USAF Fighter and Attack Squadrons (Active, ANG, 

AFRC) ........................................................................... 87 85 75 

Active ...................................................................... 45 45 40 

ANG ......................................................................... 37 36 32 

AFRC ........................................................................ 5 4 3 

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

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

Flight Test Units (DT and OT Units with assigned aircraft) ............................................................................ 10 12 12 

Fighter ..................................................................... 7 9 9 

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

ICBM Operational Launch Facilities/Control Centers ...... 550 495 495 

ICBM Missile Inventory .................................................... 500 450 450 

USAF Airlift Squadrons (Active): 

Strategic Airlift Squadrons .............................................. 14 15 15 

Tactical Airlift Squadrons ................................................ 9 9 9 

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

Total Air Force Aircraft Inventory .............................................. 5,792 5,662 5,688 

Note.—Numbers of squadrons above reflect combat coded units only (i.e., no training or test info except where noted). 

DEFENSE HEALTH PROGRAM

The Commitee recommends a total of $22,957,184,000 for the Defense Health Program to support worldwide medical and dental 

services for active forces and other eligible beneficiaries, 

$416,060,000 above the fiscal year 2008 budget request and 

$1,740,184,000 above the amount appropriated for fiscal year 2007. 

To address the challenges of the Defense Health Program, the 

Committee recommends: 

• $1,905,014,000 to fill the shortfall created by Congress not 

having approved the Department’s proposed fee increases, 

making the Defense Health Program whole for fiscal year 

2008; 

• $66,000,000 for wounded warrior assistance; 

• $23,260,000 for preventive medicine and surveillance; 

• Fully funds the budget requests for vaccine research and 

development and the budget request of $100,000,000 for avian 

influenza. 

In addition, the Committee: • Directs the Department of Defense to update the Physical 

Disability Evaluation System; • Directs the Department of Defense to establish electronic 

medical record interoperability with the Department of Veterans Affairs; and 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARING
22 

• Directs the review of TRICARE co-pays. 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARING
(23) 

TITLE I 

MILITARY PERSONNEL 

The fiscal year 2008 budget request for programs funded in Title 

I of the Committee bill, Military Personnel, is $105,403,698,000 in 

new budget authority, which is an increase of $5,540,821,000 above 

the amount appropriated for fiscal year 2007. The accompanying 

bill recommends $105,017,776,000 for fiscal year 2008, which is an 

increase of $5,154,899,000 above the amount appropriated for fiscal 

year 2007, and $385,922,000 less than the request for fiscal year 

2008. These appropriations finance basic, incentive and special 

pays for active, Reserve and National Guard personnel, and Academy cadets; retired pay accrual; housing, subsistence and other allowances; recruitment and retention initiatives; permanent change 

of station (PCS) costs; and other military personnel costs such as 

survivor, unemployment, and education benefits. A summary of appropriations provided in Title I, Military Personnel, follows: 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARING
24 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 03 36323A.002
25 

MILITARY PERSONNEL OVERVIEW

The Committee recommendation provides $105,017,776,000 for 

Military Personnel accounts and continues to increase funding for 

military pay and allowances, recruitment and retention initiatives, 

and overall quality of life programs for active duty, Reserve and 

National Guard personnel. The budget request proposes to increase 

basic pay for all personnel by three percent. The Committee recommendation provides approximately $2,200,000,000, or 

$310,000,000 above the request, to increase basic pay for all military personnel by 3.5 percent, effective January 1, 2008. This recommendation also supports fully the resource requirements needed 

to achieve the requested end strength levels for fiscal year 2008. 

The Committee continues to support and encourage constructive 

enhancements to recruitment and retention programs, bonus and 

special pay incentives, and benefit programs for military personnel 

for fiscal year 2008. The Committee fully funds the ‘‘Families First 

Initiative’’, a newly established program that ensures the Full Replacement Value (FRV) for property lost or damaged beyond repair 

in conjunction with a permanent change of station move. The Committee continues to be supportive of any programs intended to enhance the morale and quality of life for our military personnel and 

their families. 

SUMMARY OF END STRENGTH

The fiscal year 2008 budget request includes a decrease of 2,800 

in total end strength for the active forces and a decrease of 9,900 

in end strength for the Selected Reserve from the fiscal year 2007 

authorized levels. However, the budget proposes to increase the 

Army end strength by 7,000; the Army National Guard end 

strength by 1,300; and the Marine Corps end strength by 5,000. 

The Committee recommendation fully supports these increases. 

The following tables summarize the Committee recommendations 

for end strength levels, both in the aggregate and for each active 

and Selected Reserve component. Explanations of changes from the 

budget request appear later in this section. 

OVERALL ACTIVE END STRENGTH

Fiscal year 2007 estimate .................................................................. 1,329,200 

Fiscal year 2008 budget request ....................................................... 1,326,400 

Fiscal year 2008 recommendation ..................................................... 1,326,400 

Compared with Fiscal year 2007 ............................................... ¥2,800 

Compared with Fiscal year 2008 budget request ..................... – – –

OVERALL SELECTED RESERVE END STRENGTH

Fiscal year 2007 estimate .................................................................. 847,800 

Fiscal year 2008 budget request ....................................................... 837,900 

Fiscal year 2008 recommendation ..................................................... 837,900 

Compared with Fiscal year 2007 ............................................... ¥9,900 

Compared with Fiscal year 2008 budget request ..................... – – –

Fiscal year 2008 

FY 2007 estimate Budget request Recommendation Change from request 

Active Forces (end strength): 

Army .............................................. 482,400 489,400 489,400 —

Navy .............................................. 337,600 328,400 328,400 —


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARING
26 

Fiscal year 2008 

FY 2007 estimate Budget request Recommendation Change from request 

Marine Corps ................................. 175,000 180,000 180,000 —

Air Force ........................................ 334,200 328,600 328,600 —

Total, Active Forces .............. 1,329,200 1,326,400 1,326,400 —

Guard and Reserve Forces (end 

strength): 

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

Navy Reserve ................................. 71,300 67,800 67,800 —

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

Air Force Reserve .......................... 74,900 67,500 67,500 —

Army National Guard .................... 350,000 351,300 351,300 —

Air National Guard ........................ 107,000 106,700 106,700 —

Total, Guard and Reserve 

Forces .............................. 847,800 837,900 837,900 —

Total, Military Personnel ........................ 2,177,000 2,164,300 2,164,300 —

FULL-TIME SUPPORT END STRENGTH

There are four categories of full-time support in the Guard and 

Reserve components: civilian technicians, Active Guard and Reserve (AGR), non-technician civilians, and active component personnel. 

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

and administer the Reserve components. Civilian (Military) technicians directly support units, and are very important to help units 

maintain readiness and meet the wartime mission of the Army and 

Air Force. 

The following table summarizes Guard and Reserve full-time 

support end strength: 

GUARD AND RESERVE FULL-TIME END STRENGTH

Fiscal year 2008 

FY 2007 estimate Budget request Recommendation Change from request 

Army Reserve: 

AGR ............................................... 15,416 15,870 15,870 —

Technicians ................................... 8,507 8,844 8,844 —

Navy Reserve: 

AR .................................................. 12,565 11,579 11,579 —

Marine Corps Reserve: 

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

Air Force Reserve: 

AGR ............................................... 2,707 2,721 2,721 —

Technicians ................................... 10,214 9,999 9,999 —

Army National Guard: 

AGR ............................................... 28,216 29,204 29,204 —

Technicians ................................... 27,128 28,102 28,102 —

Air National Guard: 

AGR ............................................... 13,206 13,936 13,936 —

Technicians ................................... 23,605 22,903 22,903 —

Totals: 

AGR/AR .......................................... 73,732 73,595 73,595 —

Technicians ................................... 68,670 69,976 69,976 —

Totals: ....................................... 142,402 143,571 143,571 —


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARING
27 

GROW-THE-FORCE INITIATIVE

The Committee recommendation provides approximately 

$1,041,000,000 in Military Personnel accounts to support the first 

installment of the ‘‘Grow-the-Force’’ initiative, fully funding the requested end strength increase of 7,000 Soldiers; 1,300 Army National Guardsmen; and 5,000 Marines. The Committee expects that 

the fiscal year 2009 baseline budget will include the necessary resources throughout the Pentagon’s Future Year Defense Program 

to meet end strength and over strength objectives. 

The Committee is concerned, however, about continued programmed manpower reductions in both the Navy and Air Force, especially since these services play vital supporting roles in the conflicts overseas. In hearings before the Committee, both the Secretary of Defense and the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff expressed a need to review these programmed manpower reductions. 

The Committee expects the Department to keep the Committee informed of any change in manpower resulting from this review. 

On the basis of these manpower reductions, the Air Force, in particular, moved to recapitalize its weapon systems and aircraft fleet 

at the expense of its personnel budget. In fact, the Air Force assumed significant risk in its permanent change of station (PCS) 

policy, as reflected in the budget request for fiscal year 2008. Accession, training, operational, and rotational travel are essential for 

quality of life and professional development, as well as force multipliers for airmen supporting the war effort. Moreover, mid-level 

and command-grade officer retention, force development, and professional advancement setbacks are likely to intensify as the Air 

Force moves from the customary 2 to 3 year rotational schedule to 

one of 4 years. The Air Force cannot wait to address this matter. 

Therefore, the Committee recommendation reallocates 

$364,000,000 into Military Personnel, Air Force, Budget Activity 5 

from Research, Development, Test and Evaluation, Air Force, and 

directs the Secretary of the Air Force to conduct a thorough review 

of its PCS policy and provide a report to the Committees on Appropriations of the House of Representatives and the Senate not later 

than December 14, 2007, explaining the nature of this shortfall and 

any corrective policy or funding actions necessary to address the 

issue. 

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

The Committee believes there is a continuing need for accurate 

and timely information on actual/estimated costs and deployment 

numbers associated with Operation Iraqi Freedom (OIF) and Operation Enduring Freedom (OEF). Therefore, not later than the 10th 

day of each month following the enactment of this Act, the Committee directs the Secretary of Defense to submit to the congressional defense committees a ‘‘Boots-on-the-Ground’’ report providing, for the most recent month for which data is available, the 

total number of troops deployed in support of OIF and OEF, further delineated by service and component (active, Reserve or National Guard); and a monthly estimate for the three-month period 

following the date such report is submitted, which provides an estimate of the total number of troops expected to be deployed in supVerDate Aug 31 2005 08:25 Jul 31, 2007 Jkt 036903 PO 00000 Frm 00039 Fmt 6601 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\HR279.005 HR279

cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARING
28 

port of OIF and OEF, further delineated by service and component 

(active, Reserve or National Guard). This report may be submitted 

in classified form. 

RESERVE COMPONENT BUDGET SUBMISSIONS

The Committee supports a consolidated budget structure for the 

Reserve Components provided that the reporting requirements as 

set forth in House Report 109–676 are followed. However, as the 

Reserve Components continue their transformation from a strategic 

reserve into that of an operational force, the Committee believes 

greater transparency is needed over total costs for National Guard 

and Reserve servicemembers’ cash compensation, such as basic pay 

and other allowances; noncash compensation, such as health care; 

and deferred compensation and benefits, such as retirement pay 

and health care. In a June 2007 report, the Government Accountability Office (GAO) reports that compensation costs have ‘‘increased 47 percent since 2000, rising from about $13,900,000,000 

in fiscal year 2000 to about $20,500,000,000 in fiscal year 2006.’’

Per capita compensation costs have nearly doubled, cash compensation has increased 19 percent, and deferred compensation costs 

have nearly tripled. The Committee acknowledges the contributions 

made by each of the Reserve Components, but a better understanding of the escalation in these compensation costs is necessary. 

The full cost of providing Reserve compensation is fundamental 

to determine resource allocation, and the Department’s Reserve 

compensation costs are presently found within multiple budgets. 

No single source currently provides this information. The compilation of compensation costs for those reservists who are drilling, 

serving in the Active Guard and Reserve, and who are mobilized, 

into a single source is a crucial first step toward gaining transparency over those costs. The Committee supports GAO’s findings 

and directs the Department to include such detail within the Military Personnel budget justification material beginning in fiscal 

year 2009. 

PAID INACTIVE DUTY TRAINING (IDT) TRAVEL

As an unintended consequence of the 2005 Base Realignment 

and Closure recommendations, some members of the Selected Reserve face significant out-of-pocket travel expenses to drill with 

their home unit. Unlike its active duty counterparts, the Reserve 

Component cannot reassign a unit reservist through Permanent 

Change of Station (PCS) actions. The Committee believes that 

passing these costs to the service member may have a damaging 

effect on unit cohesiveness, recruitment, and the retention of specialty skill sets in the Reserve Component. Therefore, the Committee directs the Department of Defense to include in its fiscal 

year 2009 budget request sufficient funding to assist members of 

the Selected Reserve who are required to perform IDT outside the 

commuting limits of their station. 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARING
29 

MILITARY PERSONNEL, ARMY 

Fiscal year 2007 appropriation .......................................................... $29,813,905,000 

Fiscal year 2008 budget request ....................................................... 31,623,865,000 

Committee recommendation .............................................................. 31,346,005,000 

Change from budget request ............................................................. ¥277,860,000 

The Committee recommends an appropriation of $31,346,005,000 for Military Personnel, Army, which is $1,532,100,000 more than 

the amount provided in fiscal year 2007 and $277,860,000 less than 

the request for fiscal year 2008. 

PROGRAM RECOMMENDED

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


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARING
30 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 04 36323A.003
31 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 05 36323A.004
32 

The adjustments to the budget activities for Military Personnel, 

Army, are shown below: 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARING
33 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 06 36323A.005
34 

MILITARY PERSONNEL, NAVY 

Fiscal year 2007 appropriation .......................................................... $22,776,232,000 

Fiscal year 2008 budget request ....................................................... 23,305,233,000 

Committee recommendation .............................................................. 23,300,801,000 

Change from budget request ............................................................. ¥4,432,000 

The Committee recommends an appropriation of $23,300,801,000 for Military Personnel, Navy, which is $524,569,000 more than the 

amount provided in fiscal year 2007 and $4,432,000 less than the 

request for fiscal year 2008. 

PROGRAM RECOMMENDED

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


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARING
35 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 07 36323A.006
36 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 08 36323A.007
37 

The adjustments to the budget activities for Military Personnel, 

Navy, are shown below: 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARING
38 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 09 36323A.008
39 

MILITARY PERSONNEL, MARINE CORPS 

Fiscal year 2007 appropriation .......................................................... $9,174,714,000 

Fiscal year 2008 budget request ....................................................... 10,278,031,000 

Committee recommendation .............................................................. 10,269,914,000 

Change from budget request ............................................................. ¥8,117,000 

The Committee recommends an appropriation of $10,269,914,000 for Military Personnel, Marine Corps, which is $1,095,200,000 more 

than the amount provided in fiscal year 2007 and $8,117,000 less 

than the request for fiscal year 2008. 

PROGRAM RECOMMENDED

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


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARING
40 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 010 36323A.009
41 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 011 36323A.010
42 

The adjustments to the budget activities for Military Personnel, 

Marine Corps, are shown below: 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARING
43 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 012 36323A.011
44 

MILITARY PERSONNEL, AIR FORCE 

Fiscal year 2007 appropriation .......................................................... $23,564,706,000 

Fiscal year 2008 budget request ....................................................... 24,097,354,000 

Committee recommendation .............................................................. 24,379,214,000 

Change from budget request ............................................................. +281,860,000 

The Committee recommends an appropriation of $24,379,214,000 for Military Personnel, Air Force, which is $814,508,000 more than 

the amount provided in fiscal year 2007 and $281,860,000 more 

than the request for fiscal year 2008. 

PROGRAM RECOMMENDED

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


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARING
45 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 13 36323A.012
46 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 14 36323A.013
47 

The adjustments to the budget activities for Military Personnel, 

Air Force, are shown below: 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARING
48 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 15 36323A.014
49 

RESERVE PERSONNEL, ARMY 

Fiscal year 2007 appropriation .......................................................... $3,364,812,000 

Fiscal year 2008 budget request ....................................................... 3,734,620,000 

Committee recommendation .............................................................. 3,629,620,000 

Change from budget request ............................................................. ¥105,000,000 

The Committee recommends an appropriation of $3,629,620,000 for Reserve Personnel, Army, which is $264,808,000 more than the 

amount provided in fiscal year 2007 and $105,000,000 less than the 

request for fiscal year 2008. 

PROGRAM RECOMMENDED

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


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARING
50 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 16 36323A.015
51 

The adjustments to the budget activities for Reserve Personnel, 

Army, are shown below: 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARING
52 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 17 36323A.016
53 

RESERVE PERSONNEL, NAVY 

Fiscal year 2007 appropriation .......................................................... $1,755,953,000 

Fiscal year 2008 budget request ....................................................... 1,797,685,000 

Committee recommendation .............................................................. 1,776,885,000 

Change from budget request ............................................................. ¥20,800,000 

The Committee recommends an appropriation of $1,776,885,000 for Reserve Personnel, Navy, which is $20,932,000 more than the 

amount provided in fiscal year 2007 and $20,800,000 less than the 

request for fiscal year 2008. 

PROGRAM RECOMMENDED

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


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARING
54 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 18 36323A.017
55 

The adjustments to the budget activities for Reserve Personnel, 

Navy, are shown below: 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARING
56 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 19 36323A.018
57 

RESERVE PERSONNEL, MARINE CORPS 

Fiscal year 2007 appropriation .......................................................... $541,768,000 

Fiscal year 2008 budget request ....................................................... 594,872,000 

Committee recommendation .............................................................. 513,472,000 

Change from budget request ............................................................. ¥81,400,000 

The Committee recommends an appropriation of $513,472,000 for Reserve Personnel, Marine Corps, which is $28,296,000 less than 

the amount provided in fiscal year 2007 and $81,400,000 less than 

the request for fiscal year 2008. 

PROGRAM RECOMMENDED

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


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARING
58 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 20 36323A.019
59 

The adjustments to the budget activities for Reserve Personnel, 

Marine Corps, are shown below: 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARING
60 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 21 36323A.020
61 

RESERVE PERSONNEL, AIR FORCE 

Fiscal year 2007 appropriation .......................................................... $1,335,838,000 

Fiscal year 2008 budget request ....................................................... 1,370,479,000 

Committee recommendation .............................................................. 1,365,679,000 

Change from budget request ............................................................. ¥4,800,000 

The Committee recommends an appropriation of $1,365,679,000 for Reserve Personnel, Air Force, which is $29,841,000 more than 

the amount provided in fiscal year 2007 and $4,800,000 less than 

the request for fiscal year 2008. 

PROGRAM RECOMMENDED

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


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARING
62 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 22 36323A.021
63 

The adjustments to the budget activities for Reserve Personnel, 

Air Force, are shown below: 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARING
64 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 23 36323A.022
65 

NATIONAL GUARD PERSONNEL, ARMY 

Fiscal year 2007 appropriation .......................................................... $5,209,197,000 

Fiscal year 2008 budget request ....................................................... 5,959,149,000 

Committee recommendation .............................................................. 5,815,017,000 

Change from budget request ............................................................. ¥144,132,000 

The Committee recommends an appropriation of $5,815,017,000 

for National Guard Personnel, Army, which is $605,820,000 more 

than the amount provided in fiscal year 2007 and $144,132,000 less 

than the request for fiscal year 2008. 

PROGRAM RECOMMENDED

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


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARING
66 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 24 36323A.023
67 

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


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARING
68 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 25 36323A.024
69 

NATIONAL GUARD PERSONNEL, AIR FORCE 

Fiscal year 2007 appropriation .......................................................... $2,325,752,000 

Fiscal year 2008 budget request ....................................................... 2,642,410,000 

Committee recommendation .............................................................. 2,621,169,000 

Change from budget request ............................................................. ¥21,241,000 

The Committee recommends an appropriation of $2,621,169,000 for National Guard Personnel, Air Force, which is $295,417,000 

more than the amount provided in fiscal year 2007 and $21,241,000 

less than the request for fiscal year 2008. 

PROGRAM RECOMMENDED

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


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARING
70 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 26 36323A.025
71 

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


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARING
72 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 27 36323A.026
(73) 

TITLE II 

OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE 

The fiscal year 2008 budget request for programs funded in title 

II of the Committee bill, Operation and Maintenance, is 

$142,854,017,000 in new budget authority. The accompanying bill 

recommends $137,135,127,000 for fiscal year 2008, which is an increase of $9,846,320,000 above the amount appropriated for fiscal 

year 2007, and $5,718,890,000 less than the request for fiscal year 

2008. These appropriations finance the costs of operating and 

maintaining the Armed Forces, including the reserve components 

and related support activities of the Department of Defense (DoD). 

Included is pay for civilians, services for maintenance of equipment 

and, fuel, supplies, and spare parts for weapons and equipment. Financial requirements are influenced by many factors, including 

force levels such as the number of aircraft squadrons, Army and 

Marine Corps divisions, installations, military personnel strength 

and deployments, rates of operational activity, and the quantity, 

complexity and age of equipment such as aircraft, ships, missiles 

and tanks. The budget request for Operation and Maintenance includes $5,400,000 in price adjustments and program growth of 

nearly $10,000,000,000. 

The table below summarizes the Committee’s recommendations. 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARING
74 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 017 HR279.027
75 

FORCE STRUCTURE

The Army continues to convert to a modular force. Modular Brigade Combat Teams (BCTs) with enabling support brigades are 

more capable, flexible, and deployable than the previous divisionbased structure. The Army plans to increase the number of BCTs 

by 5, to a total of 69, by the end of 2008 (38 active and 28 guard). 

The Army also plans to increase the number of support brigades 

by 35 to total of 193 by the end of 2008 (74 active, 67 guard and 

52 reserve). The Navy supports a force structure of 10 active carrier air wings and 1,292 primary authorized aircraft, 286 battle 

force ships, including 11 aircraft carriers, 52 nuclear attack submarines and 14 missile submarines. The Navy’s implementation of 

the Fleet Response Plan continues in 2008 with the goal of increasing availability of naval assets for duty worldwide. The Marine 

Corps plans to increase military end-strength beginning in 2008 

with the goal of adding three infantry battalions and other support 

forces resulting in three balanced Marine Expeditionary Forces 

(MEFs). The force structure of the Air Force supports 81 Combat 

Wing Equivalents (CWEs). Air Force combat capability is organized 

into 38 Strike wings, 29 Mobility wings, and 14 Intelligence, Surveillance and Reconnaissance (ISR) wings. 

TRAINING TEMPO

The unit training that the U.S. military conducts to support the 

national military strategy is funded by the operation and maintenance accounts. Operational readiness is the state of preparedness 

of a unit to perform the missions for which it is organized or designed. The Committee fully supports the peacetime requirements 

of the military services for readiness training. 

Army training operating tempo is often expressed in terms of 

tank miles driven. The Army’s readiness goal is 846 tank miles per 

year. The Army plans to drive an average of 600 tank miles in 

2007, to include 428 training miles, and 770 tank miles in 2008, 

to include 582 training miles. The Navy’s training tempo is expressed both terms of average number of steaming days per quarter and average number of flying hours per crew. The Navy’s goal 

for deployed forces is 51 steaming days per quarter and an average 

of 18.8 flying hours per crew per month. The Navy plans on steaming 36 days per quarter in 2007 and 45 days per quarter in 2008, 

and plans to fly an average of 17.5 hours per crew per month in 

2007 and 18.7 hours per crew per month in 2008. The Air Force’s 

operational community does not set a training tempo goal, believing that the flying hours reflected in the budget request are adequate to conduct the training which ensures the needed combat capability. In 2007, the Air Force plans to execute an average of 16.5 

hours for bombers and 16.7 hours for fighters. In 2008, the Air 

Force plans to fly an average of 15.5 hours for bombers and 14.4 

hours for fighters. 

RECOMMENDED OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE FUNDING LEVELS

The Committee recommends $7,548,000,000 for peacetime training and operations in fiscal year 2008, an increase of 13 percent 

above inflation. The additional funding will robustly fund the operVerDate Aug 31 2005 08:25 Jul 31, 2007 Jkt 036903 PO 00000 Frm 00087 Fmt 6601 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\HR279.006 HR279

cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARING
76 

ational training programs, supporting an increased training operating tempo in fiscal year 2008 for the Army, Navy and Marine 

Corps. The Air Force’s request included a reduction to the flying 

hour program, a level of risk that the Air Force has determined to 

be manageable. The following table displays operational training 

funding for each of the Services. 

OPERATIONAL TRAINING PROGRAM FUNDING 

[Dollars in thousands] 

2007 Current 

estimate* 

2008 Committee 

recommended 

Change 

(percent) 

Army .......................................................................................... $3,192,000 $3,810,000 +19% 

Navy .......................................................................................... 1,508,000 1,609,000 +7% 

Marine Corps ............................................................................. 465,000 627,000 +35% 

Air Force .................................................................................... 1,540,000 1,502,000 ¥2% 

Total ................................................................................. 6,705,000 7,548,000 +13% 

* Includes expected 2008 cost growth. 

In total, the Committee provides for an increase of $843,341,000 

for operational training program growth, equivalent to nearly 13 

percent growth for the active Services. 

IMPACT OF REBASING

The Committee seeks to ensure that the Army adequately addresses the impact of rebasing activities, particularly as large numbers of servicemembers are restationed from overseas bases to 

bases in the continental United States (CONUS). The Army is 

making significant changes in force structure, base closures, and a 

global repositioning of forces, all while meeting the demands of 

war. The Committee proposes adding $1,232,400,000 to the Army’s 

facilities sustainment and restoration budget request to offset the 

growing infrastructure costs associated with the global repositioning of its forces. The Committee is recommending, without 

modification, the funding levels and facility projects determined by 

the Department of the Army to support global repositioning. These 

funds will be used to fix barracks, improve child care facilities, and 

enhance community services at Army bases throughout the United 

States, Europe and Korea as follows: 

SUPPORT TO GLOBAL REPOSITIONING OF FORCES 

[Dollars in thousands] 

Installation State Project title Amount 

Aberdeen Proving 

Ground.

MD ............. Right-size Army Community Services ......................................... $365 

Aberdeen Proving 

Grounds.

MD ............. Facility Sustainment, Restoration, and Modernization ............... 10,156 

Adelphi (EXX) ............. MD ............. Facility Sustainment, Restoration, and Modernization ............... 476 

AMC ............................ VA .............. Family Readiness Support Assistance ........................................ 40 

Ansbach ...................... Europe ........ Army Community Services Mobilization/Deployment Support ..... 212 

Ansbach ...................... Europe ........ Facility Sustainment, Restoration, and Modernization ............... 38,573 

Area I Garrison (K01) Korea .......... Facility Sustainment, Restoration, and Modernization ............... 4,038 

Area II Garrison (K02) Korea .......... Facility Sustainment, Restoration, and Modernization ............... 5,281 

Area III ........................ Korea .......... Right-size Army Community Services ......................................... 402 

Area III Garrison (K03) Korea .......... Facility Sustainment, Restoration, and Modernization ............... 2,151 

Area IV Garrison (K04) Korea .......... Facility Sustainment, Restoration, and Modernization ............... 1,658 

ARNG .......................... Multi .......... Family Readiness Support Assistance ........................................ 5,310 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARING
77 

SUPPORT TO GLOBAL REPOSITIONING OF FORCES—Continued 

[Dollars in thousands] 

Installation State Project title Amount 

Bamberg ..................... Europe ........ Army Community Services Mobilization/Deployment Support ..... 212 

Bamberg ..................... Europe ........ Facility Sustainment, Restoration, and Modernization ............... 1,620 

Baumholder ................ Europe ........ Army Community Services Mobilization/Deployment Support ..... 142 

BENELUX ..................... Europe ........ Army Community Services Mobilization/Deployment Support ..... 71 

Buchanan ................... PR .............. Facility Sustainment, Restoration, and Modernization ............... 7,108 

Camp Shelby .............. MS .............. Facility Sustainment, Restoration, and Modernization ............... 122 

Camp Zama ............... Japan ......... Army Community Services Mobilization/Deployment Support ..... 71 

Carlisle Barracks 

(E02).

PA .............. Facility Sustainment, Restoration, and Modernization ............... 466 

Chievres (U04) ........... Europe ........ Facility Sustainment, Restoration, and Modernization ............... 1,061 

Dugway ....................... UT .............. Right-size Army Community Services ......................................... 292 

Dugway (O02) ............. UT .............. Facility Sustainment, Restoration, and Modernization ............... 1,203 

EIGHTH US ARMY ....... Korea .......... Family Readiness Support Assistance ........................................ 1,280 

FORSCOM .................... GA .............. Family Readiness Support Assistance ........................................ 20,550 

Fort A P Hill (E14) ..... VA .............. Facility Sustainment, Restoration, and Modernization ............... 630 

Fort Belvoir ................. VA .............. Right-size Army Community Services ......................................... 365 

Fort Belvoir (E13) ....... VA .............. Facility Sustainment, Restoration, and Modernization ............... 8,272 

Fort Benning ............... GA .............. Right-size Army Community Services ......................................... 1,095 

Fort Benning ............... GA .............. Army Community Services Mobilization/Deployment Support ..... 496 

Fort Benning (S01) ..... GA .............. Facility Sustainment, Restoration, and Modernization ............... 114,117 

Fort Bliss .................... TX ............... Right-size Army Community Services ......................................... 1,314

Fort Bliss .................... TX ............... Army Community Services Mobilization/Deployment Support ..... 991 

Fort Bliss (T01) .......... TX ............... Facility Sustainment, Restoration, and Modernization ............... 9,836 

Fort Bragg .................. NC .............. Right-size Army Community Services ......................................... 584 

Fort Bragg .................. NC .............. Army Community Services Mobilization/Deployment Support ..... 708 

Fort Bragg (S02) ........ NC .............. Facility Sustainment, Restoration, and Modernization ............... 33,934 

Fort Campbell ............. KY .............. Army Community Services Mobilization/Deployment Support ..... 637 

Fort Campbell (S04) ... KY .............. Facility Sustainment, Restoration, and Modernization ............... 9,638 

Fort Carson ................. CO .............. Army Community Services Mobilization/Deployment Support ..... 142 

Fort Carson (O01) ...... CO .............. Facility Sustainment, Restoration, and Modernization ............... 47,039 

Fort Dix ....................... NJ ............... Army Community Services Mobilization/Deployment Support ..... 142 

Fort Drum ................... NY .............. Army Community Services Mobilization/Deployment Support ..... 142 

Fort Drum (E04) ......... NY .............. Facility Sustainment, Restoration, and Modernization ............... 32,149 

Fort Eustis/Story ......... VA .............. Army Community Services Mobilization/Deployment Support ..... 496 

Fort Eustis/Story (E05) VA .............. Facility Sustainment, Restoration, and Modernization ............... 3,331 

Fort Gordon ................. GA .............. Right-size Army Community Services ......................................... 657 

Fort Gordon ................. GA .............. Army Community Services Mobilization/Deployment Support ..... 283 

Fort Gordon (S05) ....... GA .............. Facility Sustainment, Restoration, and Modernization ............... 62,743 

Fort Greely (P01) ........ AK .............. Facility Sustainment, Restoration, and Modernization ............... 587 

Fort Hamilton (E16) ... NY .............. Facility Sustainment, Restoration, and Modernization ............... 388 

Fort Hood .................... TX ............... Right-size Army Community Services ......................................... 1,606 

Fort Hood .................... TX ............... Army Community Services Mobilization/Deployment Support ..... 850 

Fort Hood (T02) .......... TX ............... Facility Sustainment, Restoration, and Modernization ............... 41,371 

Fort Huachuca ............ AZ .............. Army Community Services Mobilization/Deployment Support ..... 212 

Fort Huachuca (T03) .. AZ .............. Facility Sustainment, Restoration, and Modernization ............... 15,031 

Fort Irwin .................... CA .............. Right-size Army Community Services ......................................... 803 

Fort Irwin (T04) .......... CA .............. Facility Sustainment, Restoration, and Modernization ............... 9,152 

Fort Jackson ............... SC .............. Right-size Army Community Services ......................................... 1,022 

Fort Jackson ............... SC .............. Army Community Services Mobilization/Deployment Support ..... 496 

Fort Jackson (S06) ..... SC .............. Facility Sustainment, Restoration, and Modernization ............... 54,956 

Fort Knox .................... KY .............. Army Community Services Mobilization/Deployment Support ..... 212 

Fort Knox (S07) .......... KY .............. Facility Sustainment, Restoration, and Modernization ............... 9,956 

Fort L. Wood ............... MO ............. Right-size Army Community Services ......................................... 1,022 

Fort L. Wood ............... MO ............. Army Community Services Mobilization/Deployment Support ..... 496 

Fort Leavenworth ........ KS .............. Right-size Army Community Services ......................................... 584 

Fort Leavenworth ........ KS .............. Army Community Services Mobilization/Deployment Support ..... 283 

Fort Leavenworth 

(O03).

KS .............. Facility Sustainment, Restoration, and Modernization ............... 1,961 

Fort Lee ...................... VA .............. Right-size Army Community Services ......................................... 365 

Fort Lee ...................... VA .............. Army Community Services Mobilization/Deployment Support ..... 496 

Fort Lee (E06) ............ VA .............. Facility Sustainment, Restoration, and Modernization ............... 16,713 

Fort Leonard Wood 

(O04).

MO ............. Facility Sustainment, Restoration, and Modernization ............... 63,663 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARING
78 

SUPPORT TO GLOBAL REPOSITIONING OF FORCES—Continued 

[Dollars in thousands] 

Installation State Project title Amount 

Fort Lewis ................... WA .............. Army Community Services Mobilization/Deployment Support ..... 142 

Fort Lewis (O05) ......... WA .............. Facility Sustainment, Restoration, and Modernization ............... 25,279 

Fort McCoy .................. WI ............... Facility Sustainment, Restoration, and Modernization ............... 630 

Fort McPherson (S08) GA .............. Facility Sustainment, Restoration, and Modernization ............... 1,245 

Fort Meade (E15) ....... MD ............. Facility Sustainment, Restoration, and Modernization ............... 19,445 

Fort Monmouth (E07) NJ ............... Facility Sustainment, Restoration, and Modernization ............... 1,772 

Fort Monroe/Story 

(E08).

VA .............. Facility Sustainment, Restoration, and Modernization ............... 510 

Fort Myer/McNair (E17) VA .............. Facility Sustainment, Restoration, and Modernization ............... 19,511 

Fort Polk ..................... LA ............... Army Community Services Mobilization/Deployment Support ..... 496 

Fort Polk (T05) ........... LA ............... Facility Sustainment, Restoration, and Modernization ............... 22,814 

Fort Richardson .......... AK .............. Army Community Services Mobilization/Deployment Support ..... 283 

Fort Richardson (P03) AK .............. Facility Sustainment, Restoration, and Modernization ............... 12,052 

Fort Riley .................... KS .............. Army Community Services Mobilization/Deployment Support ..... 425 

Fort Riley (O06) .......... KS .............. Facility Sustainment, Restoration, and Modernization ............... 11,751 

Fort Rucker ................. AL ............... Army Community Services Mobilization/Deployment Support ..... 354 

Fort Rucker (S11) ....... AL ............... Facility Sustainment, Restoration, and Modernization ............... 2,319 

Fort S. Houston .......... TX ............... Right-size Army Community Services ......................................... 730 

Fort S. Houston .......... TX ............... Army Community Services Mobilization/Deployment Support ..... 283 

Fort Sam Houston 

(T07).

TX ............... Facility Sustainment, Restoration, and Modernization ............... 9,888 

Fort Shafter (P04) ...... HI ............... Facility Sustainment, Restoration, and Modernization ............... 34,890 

Fort Sill ....................... OK .............. Right-size Army Community Services ......................................... 1,971 

Fort Sill ....................... OK .............. Army Community Services Mobilization/Deployment Support ..... 496 

Fort Sill (T08) ............. OK .............. Facility Sustainment, Restoration, and Modernization ............... 36,117 

Fort Stewart (S12) ...... GA .............. Facility Sustainment, Restoration, and Modernization ............... 22,991 

Fort Stewart/Hunter .... GA .............. Right-size Army Community Services ......................................... 292 

Fort Stewart/Hunter .... GA .............. Army Community Services Mobilization/Deployment Support ..... 425 

Fort Wainwright .......... AK .............. Army Community Services Mobilization/Deployment Support ..... 283 

Fort Wainwright .......... AK .............. Facility Sustainment, Restoration, and Modernization ............... 22,323 

Grafenwoehr ............... Europe ........ Right-size Army Community Services ......................................... 840 

Grafenwoehr ............... Europe ........ Army Community Services Mobilization/Deployment Support ..... 142 

Grafenwoehr (U06) ..... Europe ........ Facility Sustainment, Restoration, and Modernization ............... 19,129 

Hanau Area (U07) ...... Europe ........ Facility Sustainment, Restoration, and Modernization ............... 10,461 

Heidelberg .................. Europe ........ Right-size Army Community Services ......................................... 256 

Heidelberg .................. Europe ........ Army Community Services Mobilization/Deployment Support ..... 71 

Heidelberg (U03) ........ Europe ........ Facility Sustainment, Restoration, and Modernization ............... 62,903 

Hohenfels .................... Europe ........ Right-size Army Community Services ......................................... 402 

Hohenfels .................... Europe ........ Army Community Services Mobilization/Deployment Support ..... 142 

HQ FMWRC ................. VA .............. Army Community Services Mobilization/Deployment Support ..... 425 

INSCOM ....................... VA .............. Family Readiness Support Assistance ........................................ 970 

Japan (P05) ................ Japan ......... Facility Sustainment, Restoration, and Modernization ............... 12,132 

Kaiserslautern ............ Europe ........ Army Community Services Mobilization/Deployment Support ..... 71 

Lexington .................... KY .............. Right-size Army Community Services ......................................... 292 

Mannheim ................... Europe ........ Army Community Services Mobilization/Deployment Support ..... 71 

McAlester .................... OK .............. Right-size Army Community Services ......................................... 292 

McAlester AAP (T93) ... OK .............. Facility Sustainment, Restoration, and Modernization ............... 62 

MEDCOM ..................... VA .............. Family Readiness Support Assistance ........................................ 310 

Miami ......................... FL ............... Right-size Army Community Services ......................................... 438 

Miami (S09) ............... FL ............... Facility Sustainment, Restoration, and Modernization ............... 16 

Natick ......................... MA .............. Right-size Army Community Services ......................................... 292 

Natick (E09) ............... MA .............. Facility Sustainment, Restoration, and Modernization ............... 391 

NETCOM ...................... VA .............. Family Readiness Support Assistance ........................................ 710 

Picatinny ..................... NJ ............... Right-size Army Community Services ......................................... 365 

Picatinny (E10) ........... NJ ............... Facility Sustainment, Restoration, and Modernization ............... 1,865 

Pine Bluff ................... AR .............. Right-size Army Community Services ......................................... 292 

Pine Bluff Arsenal 

(T99).

AK .............. Facility Sustainment, Restoration, and Modernization ............... 2,016 

Presidio of Monterey ... CA .............. Army Community Services Mobilization/Deployment Support ..... 71 

Presidio of Monterey 

(T06).

CA .............. Facility Sustainment, Restoration, and Modernization ............... 8,578 

Red River .................... TX ............... Right-size Army Community Services ......................................... 292 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARING
79 

SUPPORT TO GLOBAL REPOSITIONING OF FORCES—Continued 

[Dollars in thousands] 

Installation State Project title Amount 

Red River Army Depot 

(T90).

TX ............... Facility Sustainment, Restoration, and Modernization ............... 204 

Redstone (S10) ........... AL ............... Facility Sustainment, Restoration, and Modernization ............... 17,257 

Rock Island (O07) ...... IL ................ Facility Sustainment, Restoration, and Modernization ............... 1,746 

Schinnen ..................... Europe ........ Army Community Services Mobilization/Deployment Support ..... 71 

Schofield Barracks ..... HI ............... Right-size Army Community Services ......................................... 1,022 

Schofield Barracks ..... HI ............... Army Community Services Mobilization/Deployment Support ..... 142 

Schweinfurt ................ Europe ........ Army Community Services Mobilization/Deployment Support ..... 212 

Schweinfurt ................ Europe ........ Facility Sustainment, Restoration, and Modernization ............... 5,125 

Selfridge (O08) ........... MI ............... Facility Sustainment, Restoration, and Modernization ............... 1,665 

Sierra .......................... CA .............. Right-size Army Community Services ......................................... 292 

Sierra Army Depot 

(T96).

CA .............. Facility Sustainment, Restoration, and Modernization ............... 1 

Stuttgart ..................... Europe ........ Right-size Army Community Services ......................................... 657 

Stuttgart ..................... Europe ........ Army Community Services Mobilization/Deployment Support ..... 142 

Stuttgart (U01) ........... Europe ........ Facility Sustainment, Restoration, and Modernization ............... 2,224 

THIRD US Army ........... GA .............. Family Readiness Support Assistance ........................................ 180 

Tobyhanna .................. PA .............. Right-size Army Community Services ......................................... 365 

Tooele ......................... UT .............. Right-size Army Community Services ......................................... 292 

Tooele Army Depot 

(O90).

UT .............. Facility Sustainment, Restoration, and Modernization ............... 2,857 

TRADOC ...................... VA .............. Army Community Services Mobilization/Deployment Support ..... 354 

USAR ........................... Multi .......... Family Readiness Support Assistance ........................................ 3,850 

USAREUR .................... Europe ........ Family Readiness Support Assistance ........................................ 2,470 

USARNORTH ................ TX ............... Family Readiness Support Assistance ........................................ 40 

USARPAC .................... Pacific ........ Family Readiness Support Assistance ........................................ 2,350 

USARSOUTH ................ TX ............... Family Readiness Support Assistance ........................................ 40 

USASOC ...................... NC .............. Family Readiness Support Assistance ........................................ 2,170 

Vicenza Area (U02) .... Europe ........ Facility Sustainment, Restoration, and Modernization ............... 5,626 

Vicenza/Livorno ........... Europe ........ Army Community Services Mobilization/Deployment Support ..... 142 

Watervliet ................... NY .............. Right-size Army Community Services ......................................... 292 

Watervliet Arsenal 

(E99).

NY .............. Facility Sustainment, Restoration, and Modernization ............... 10 

West Point (E12) ........ NY .............. Facility Sustainment, Restoration, and Modernization ............... 5,956 

White Sands (T09) ..... NM ............. Facility Sustainment, Restoration, and Modernization ............... 3,433 

Wiesbaden/Mainz ........ Europe ........ Army Community Services Mobilization/Deployment Support ..... 71 

Wuerzburg ................... Europe ........ Right-size Army Community Services ......................................... 694 

Yuma (T10) ................ AZ .............. Facility Sustainment, Restoration, and Modernization ............... 1,423 

Army Reserve .............. Multi .......... Facility Sustainment .................................................................... 23,600 

Army National Guard .. AK .............. Facility Sustainment .................................................................... 743 

Army National Guard .. AL ............... Facility Sustainment .................................................................... 1,101 

Army National Guard .. AR .............. Facility Sustainment .................................................................... 1,428 

Army National Guard .. AR .............. Facility Restoration and Modernization ....................................... 20,861 

Army National Guard .. AZ .............. Facility Sustainment .................................................................... 464 

Army National Guard .. CA .............. Facility Sustainment .................................................................... 3,424 

Army National Guard .. CA .............. Facility Restoration and Modernization ....................................... 1,443 

Army National Guard .. CO .............. Facility Sustainment .................................................................... 302 

Army National Guard .. CO .............. Facility Restoration and Modernization ....................................... 2,153 

Army National Guard .. CT .............. Facility Sustainment .................................................................... 485 

Army National Guard .. CT .............. Facility Restoration and Modernization ....................................... 1,500 

Army National Guard .. DC .............. Facility Sustainment .................................................................... 309 

Army National Guard .. DE .............. Facility Sustainment .................................................................... 193 

Army National Guard .. FL ............... Facility Sustainment .................................................................... 867 

Army National Guard .. FL ............... Facility Restoration and Modernization ....................................... 3,102 

Army National Guard .. GA .............. Facility Sustainment .................................................................... 801 

Army National Guard .. GA .............. Facility Restoration and Modernization ....................................... 1,285 

Army National Guard .. GU .............. Facility Sustainment .................................................................... 108 

Army National Guard .. HI ............... Facility Sustainment .................................................................... 632 

Army National Guard .. IA ............... Facility Sustainment .................................................................... 884 

Army National Guard .. IA ............... Facility Restoration and Modernization ....................................... 11,855 

Army National Guard .. ID ............... Facility Sustainment .................................................................... 932 

Army National Guard .. ID ............... Facility Restoration and Modernization ....................................... 5,138 

Army National Guard .. IL ................ Facility Sustainment .................................................................... 1,161 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARING
80 

SUPPORT TO GLOBAL REPOSITIONING OF FORCES—Continued 

[Dollars in thousands] 

Installation State Project title Amount 

Army National Guard .. IL ................ Facility Restoration and Modernization ....................................... 2,486 

Army National Guard .. IN ............... Facility Sustainment .................................................................... 1,151 

Army National Guard .. KS .............. Facility Sustainment .................................................................... 423 

Army National Guard .. KY .............. Facility Sustainment .................................................................... 530 

Army National Guard .. KY .............. Facility Restoration and Modernization ....................................... 340 

Army National Guard .. LA ............... Facility Sustainment .................................................................... 683 

Army National Guard .. LA ............... Facility Restoration and Modernization ....................................... 26,577 

Army National Guard .. MA .............. Facility Sustainment .................................................................... 1,242 

Army National Guard .. MA .............. Facility Restoration and Modernization ....................................... 358 

Army National Guard .. MD ............. Facility Sustainment .................................................................... 600

Army National Guard .. MD ............. Facility Restoration and Modernization ....................................... 1,400 

Army National Guard .. ME .............. Facility Sustainment .................................................................... 485 

Army National Guard .. MI ............... Facility Sustainment .................................................................... 1,752 

Army National Guard .. MI ............... Facility Restoration and Modernization ....................................... 1,500 

Army National Guard .. MN ............. Facility Sustainment .................................................................... 1,780 

Army National Guard .. MN ............. Facility Restoration and Modernization ....................................... 14,953 

Army National Guard .. MO ............. Facility Sustainment .................................................................... 842

Army National Guard .. MS .............. Facility Sustainment .................................................................... 1,448 

Army National Guard .. MS .............. Facility Restoration and Modernization ....................................... 281 

Army National Guard .. MT .............. Facility Sustainment .................................................................... 496 

Army National Guard .. MT .............. Facility Restoration and Modernization ....................................... 1,920 

Army National Guard .. NC .............. Facility Sustainment .................................................................... 270 

Army National Guard .. NC .............. Facility Restoration and Modernization ....................................... 7,749 

Army National Guard .. ND .............. Facility Sustainment .................................................................... 540 

Army National Guard .. NE .............. Facility Sustainment .................................................................... 489 

Army National Guard .. NH .............. Facility Sustainment .................................................................... 233 

Army National Guard .. NJ ............... Facility Sustainment .................................................................... 877 

Army National Guard .. NJ ............... Facility Restoration and Modernization ....................................... 1,999 

Army National Guard .. NM ............. Facility Sustainment .................................................................... 290

Army National Guard .. NV .............. Facility Sustainment .................................................................... 224 

Army National Guard .. NY .............. Facility Sustainment .................................................................... 1,359 

Army National Guard .. OH .............. Facility Sustainment .................................................................... 661 

Army National Guard .. OH .............. Facility Restoration and Modernization ....................................... 5,750 

Army National Guard .. OK .............. Facility Sustainment .................................................................... 699 

Army National Guard .. OR .............. Facility Sustainment .................................................................... 696 

Army National Guard .. OR .............. Facility Restoration and Modernization ....................................... 2,475 

Army National Guard .. PA .............. Facility Sustainment .................................................................... 1,983 

Army National Guard .. PA .............. Facility Restoration and Modernization ....................................... 22,733 

Army National Guard .. PR .............. Facility Sustainment .................................................................... 663 

Army National Guard .. RI ............... Facility Sustainment .................................................................... 239 

Army National Guard .. SC .............. Facility Sustainment .................................................................... 649 

Army National Guard .. SD .............. Facility Sustainment .................................................................... 371 

Army National Guard .. SD .............. Facility Restoration and Modernization ....................................... 2,927 

Army National Guard .. TN .............. Facility Sustainment .................................................................... 765 

Army National Guard .. TN .............. Facility Restoration and Modernization ....................................... 816 

Army National Guard .. TX ............... Facility Sustainment .................................................................... 1,167 

Army National Guard .. TX ............... Facility Restoration and Modernization ....................................... 812 

Army National Guard .. UT .............. Facility Sustainment .................................................................... 793 

Army National Guard .. VA .............. Facility Sustainment .................................................................... 1,216 

Army National Guard .. VA .............. Facility Restoration and Modernization ....................................... 1,642 

Army National Guard .. VI ............... Facility Sustainment .................................................................... 63 

Army National Guard .. VT ............... Facility Sustainment .................................................................... 330 

Army National Guard .. WA .............. Facility Sustainment .................................................................... 581 

Army National Guard .. WA .............. Facility Restoration and Modernization ....................................... 2,931 

Army National Guard .. WI ............... Facility Sustainment .................................................................... 688 

Army National Guard .. WV .............. Facility Sustainment .................................................................... 521 

Army National Guard .. WV .............. Facility Restoration and Modernization ....................................... 841 

Army National Guard .. WY .............. Facility Sustainment .................................................................... 368 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARING
81 

PERIMETER SECURITY FORCE PROTECTION AND OTHER FACILITY

SECURITY IMPROVEMENTS

Perimeter security is the backbone of the anti-terrorism program 

designed to protect DoD installations, facilities, and people. Without a strong and robust perimeter security system, national security resources and personnel remain vulnerable targets for terrorists. A combination of perimeter fencing, entry controls, barriers, 

and response capabilities form a cost-efficient and effective layered 

defense structure to reduce vulnerability of individuals and property to terrorist acts. The budget request includes $126,200,000 for 

perimeter security. However, the Committee finds that this level 

does not sufficiently mitigate danger to, nor improve the safety and 

security of, DoD personnel and assets. The Committee recommends 

an additional $141,900,000 for perimeter security force protection 

for fiscal year 2008. The recommendation includes security enhancements for rapid, electronic authentication for the physical 

and logic access and interoperability with other Agencies to protect 

DoD bases, schools, hospitals, base housing, churches and childcare 

centers from terrorist attacks. In addition, the Committee recommendation includes funds to meet the combatant commanders’

anti-terrorism/force protection requirements that require immediate attention. The Committee recommendation, by appropriation, 

is detailed below: 

PERIMETER SECURITY FORCE PROTECTION AND OTHER FACILITY SECURITY IMPROVEMENTS 

[Dollars in thousands] 

Request Improved security Committee 

recommendation 

Army .......................................................................................... $32,700 +$30,100 $62,800 

Navy .......................................................................................... 30,500 +29,300 59,800 

Marine Corps ............................................................................. 12,200 +12,400 24,600 

Air Force .................................................................................... 3,100 +3,100 6,200 

Army Guard ............................................................................... 30,700 +21,900 52,600 

Army Reserve ............................................................................ 4,700 +5,300 10,000 

Navy Reserve ............................................................................. 0,700 +1,300 2,000 

DoD IG ....................................................................................... ∗ ∗ 100 

Defense-Wide 1 .......................................................................... 8,900 +37,500 46,400 

Defense Health Program ........................................................... 2,700 +1,000 3,700 

Total ................................................................................. 126,200 141,900 268,100 

∗ less than $100,000. 1 Includes funding for perimeter security force protection, Combating Terrorism Readiness Initiative Fund and Homeland Security Presidential 

Directive-12. 

SUPPORT TO MILITARY FAMILIES

The makeup of the military has changed dramatically since the 

advent of the all-volunteer force more than 25 years ago. Where the 

Nation’s force once was largely comprised of single men, today 

nearly half of the men and women in uniform are fathers and 

mothers. Family assistance, reliable childcare and quality education for military dependents has become a military necessity and 

directly affects military retention. These programs are essential to 

the health and welfare of the Nation’s soldiers and their families, 

and the communities in which they live. Accordingly, the Committee recommendation includes nearly $2,916,000,000 for support 

for military families, an increase of $558,413,000 above the budget 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARING
82 

request. The Committee recommendation for these programs is displayed as follows: 

MILITARY FAMILY SUPPORT ACTIVITIES 

[Dollars in thousands] 

Request Expand service Committee 

recommendation 

Family Advocacy programs ....................................................... $232,587 +$438,813 $671,400 

Army childcare centers ............................................................. 251,400 +46,000 297,400 

Navy childcare centers ............................................................. 103,600 +24,000 127,600 

Marine Corps childcare centers ................................................ 21,900 +6,000 27,900 

Air Force childcare centers ....................................................... 147,900 +5,600 153,500 

Dependents education .............................................................. 1,600,800 +38,000 1,638,000 

Total ................................................................................. 2,358,187 +558,413 2,915,800 

FAMILY ADVOCACY PROGRAMS

The Committee recommends a total of $671,400,000 for family 

advocacy programs in fiscal year 2008. The Committee believes the 

additional funding provided will enhance the activities of family advocacy programs (FAP) and provide for children and families managing the difficult challenges of military service. The Committee is 

cognizant of and concerned about the growing need for family members to have access to professional counseling to help alleviate the 

mental stresses associated with deployments. FAP programs also 

provide comprehensive programs for prevention, identification and 

treatment of child and spouse abuse, and provide family assistance 

for severely-injured service members and their families. 

Currently, there are more than 70,000 school-age children, 5 to 

18 years of age, directly affected by the deployment of Guard or Reserve parents who serve in the Global War on Terror. The loss of 

the daily presence of a parent—and parents—in the home and the 

worry about the safety of a deployed parent is a difficult burden 

for children. 

The Committee provides $2,000,000 for Parents as Teachers Heroes at Home, a parent education and family support program for 

young military families. At a time when military families are increasingly impacted by repeat deployment, demands at home and 

the stress of being away, this program brings professional parenting support and child development information right to the 

homes of these young families. The Committee further urges the 

Department of allocate up to $4,000,000 to the T.H.A.N.K.S. USA 

scholarship program from the additional funds provided for the 

family advocacy programs. 

The Committee urges the family advocacy program to support 

such programs as Our Military Kids, an organization that provides 

grants to school-age children (K–12) of deployed and severely injured National Guard and Reserve personnel to cover their fees for 

tutoring, athletic, or fine arts programs, as well as the Military 

Child Education Coalition program, ‘‘Living in the Normal’’. In addition, the Committee supports the expansion of ongoing activities 

that provide counseling, programs, products and services to help 

mitigate the disruption and stress in the military family when a 

service member is deployed, killed or seriously-wounded. 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARING
83 

CHILDCARE CENTERS

Over the past ten years, the Department has made dramatic improvements in the management and operation of child development 

programs for children aged 6 weeks to 12 years old. The efforts to 

improve childcare have been based on the recognition that those 

who make up the force are not only personnel, they are also parents. To perform well under the stresses of a demanding high operating tempo, service members should not be preoccupied with the 

basic well-being of their families. The stresses of multiple deployments and extended hours to support longer duty days result in the 

need for longer childcare center operating hours. The Committee, 

therefore, recommends a total of $606,400,000 for fiscal year 2008, 

an increase of $81,600,000 over the budget request, to expand 

childcare center operating hours and reduce the number of children 

on waiting lists for childcare services. 

DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE DEPENDENTS EDUCATION (DODEA)

The Committee believes that DoDEA schools are an important 

quality of life issue for military families. Accordingly, the Committee recommendation for DoDEA provides an increase in excess 

of $90,000,000 from comparable fiscal year 2007 program levels. 

This significant increase shall support emerging requirements to 

replace aging textbooks and consumable workbooks; reading intervention programs for struggling readers; special contracts associated with increased student enrollment resulting from the residential community initiative at selected bases; teacher development; 

increased staffing to support increased enrollment in foreign languages; enhanced child care programs and child development centers, family centers and voluntary education centers on the Department’s bases; and temporary classroom construction and outfitting 

costs to address the backlog of repair, as well as an increased need 

due to troop deployments and school closures. 

OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE REPROGRAMMINGS

Beginning in fiscal year 2008, the Committee imposes new accountability and reprogramming guidelines for programs, projects 

and activities within the Operation and Maintenance appropriations. The Committee believes that such revisions are necessary 

given the unique nature of activities funded within these appropriations, continuing concerns about force readiness, and recent 

budget execution within these accounts. Specifically, the Committee directs: 

(1) with respect to service operation and maintenance accounts, that the Department shall submit prior approval reprogramming requests to the congressional defense committees for 

proposed transfers of funds in excess of $15,000,000, to or from the 

levels specified for budget activities. In addition, the Department 

should follow prior approval reprogramming procedures for transfers in excess of $15,000,000 out of the following budget subactivities: 

Army: 

Maneuver units 

Modular support brigades 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARING
84 

Land forces operations support 

Force readiness operations support 

Land forces depot maintenance 

Base operations support 

Navy: 

Aircraft depot maintenance 

Ship depot maintenance 

Marine Corps: 

Depot maintenance 

Air Force: 

Primary combat forces 

Combat enhancement forces 

Combat communications 

(2) with respect to Operation and Maintenance, Defense-Wide 

(O&M,DW), that proposed transfers of funds to or from the levels 

specified for programs, projects or activities in excess of 

$10,000,000 or 20 percent, whichever is less, shall be subject to 

prior approval reprogramming procedures. For purposes of the 

O&M,DW account, a program, project or activity shall mean any 

item for which a dollar amount is contained in an appropriations 

Act (including joint resolutions providing continuing appropriations), accompanying reports of the House and Senate Committees 

on Appropriations, or accompanying conference reports and joint 

explanatory statements of the committee of conference or specifically identified in the supplemental material justifying the budget 

request to the Committees on Appropriations of the Senate and the 

House of Representatives. 

OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE BUDGET EXECUTION DATA

The Committee directs the Department of Defense (DoD) to continue to provide the congressional defense committees with quarterly budget execution data. Such data should be provided not later 

than forty-five days past the close of each quarter for the fiscal 

year, and should be provided for each O–1 budget activity, activity 

group, and subactivity group for each of the active, defense-wide, 

reserve and National Guard components. For each O–1 budget activity, activity group, and subactivity group, these reports should 

include the budget request and actual obligations; the DoD distribution of unallocated congressional adjustments to the budget request; all adjustments made by DoD in establishing Base for Reprogramming (DD form 1414) report; all adjustments resulting 

from below threshold reprogrammings; and all adjustments resulting from prior approval reprogramming requests. As discussed earlier in this report, the Committee directs the Department to cease 

the reallocation of funds through a re-baselining procedure. 

OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE, ARMY 

Fiscal year 2007 appropriation .......................................................... $24,208,355,000 

Fiscal year 2008 budget request ....................................................... 28,924,973,000 

Committee recommendation .............................................................. 26,404,495,000 

Change from budget request ............................................................. ¥2,520,478,000 

The Committee recommends an appropriation of $26,404,495,000 

for Operation and Maintenance, Army. The recommendation is an 

increase of $2,196,140,000 above the amount appropriated for fiscal 

year 2007 and $2,520,478,000 less than the fiscal year 2008 request. 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARING
85 

PROGRAM RECOMMENDED

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


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARING
86 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 019 HR279.028
87 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 020 HR279.029
88 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 021 HR279.030
89 

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


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARING
90 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 022 HR279.031
91 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 33 36323A.032
92 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 34 36323A.033
93 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 35 36323A.034
94 

UNJUSTIFIED PROGRAM GROWTH

The Army’s re-baselining of funds in fiscal year 2007 resulted in 

unjustified program growth in its fiscal year 2008 budget request 

of $1,647,400,000. The Army’s fiscal year 2007 budget request for 

base operating support (BOS) was understated and did not reflect 

anticipated costs based on historical budget execution levels. In 

order to finance BOS costs in fiscal year 2007, the Army reduced 

other O&M programs in 26 subactivity groups and redirected funds 

to the BOS program via the ‘‘re-baselining.’’ The fiscal year 2008 

budget request reflects funding for BOS based on historical execution levels. The budget request also increases funding to the 26 

subactivity groups used to finance BOS in fiscal year 2007, but 

does not justify or explain the increase from the level executed in 

fiscal year 2007. Instead the Congressional justification material 

merely notes ‘‘restoral of funds.’’ The Army’s budget request is adjusted in those subactivity groups for which there are not sufficient 

explanations for funding increases above the fiscal year 2007 levels. 

STATUS OF RESOURCE AND TRAINING SYSTEM

The Committee supports the implementation of the Defense 

Readiness Reporting System (DRRS) as the single, capability-based 

readiness reporting system for the Department. The DRRS will be 

fully operational by October of 2007. The Committee is concerned 

that continued use of the Global Status of Resource and Training 

System (GSORTS) for unit readiness reporting is misleading, inaccurate, and inapplicable. Multiple, redundant readiness systems 

are both wasteful and undermine the Department’s ability to ensure timely and accurate information. Furthermore, the Committee 

believes it is duplicative to expend funds on other readiness reporting systems that do not meet the requirements of a capabilitybased system in light of the many demands on the resources of the 

Department. 

FACT OF LIFE ADJUSTMENTS

Subsequent to the submission of the fiscal year 2008 budget request, two Army Prepositioned Sets were provided to support the 

increased troop levels in Iraq. The Army will not incur cost to 

maintain these sets in 2008. The Committee urges replenishing the 

sets as soon as is practicable. 

CIVILIAN PERSONNEL STRENGTH

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

has adjusted funding accordingly. 

COMMON LOGISTICS OPERATING ENVIRONMENT

The Committee provides $4,000,000 to implement the Common 

Logistics Operating Environment (CLOE) enablers on a Brigade. 

This funding will provide capability for ‘‘connecting’’ Army platforms and soldiers to the enterprise and provide the visibility within the Brigade, thereby providing much needed situational awareVerDate Aug 31 2005 08:25 Jul 31, 2007 Jkt 036903 PO 00000 Frm 00106 Fmt 6601 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\HR279.006 HR279

cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARING
95 

ness to the Commander and near real-time status reporting to the 

logistician. 

SCANNING TECHNOLOGY TO ACCELERATE RESET

The Committee is aware that high OPTEMPO is wearing out vehicles and aircraft more quickly than expected, and the Army’s organic depots are experiencing a backlog of systems awaiting reset. 

The Chief of Staff of the Army has testified that he is very concerned about the Army’s degraded non-deployed unit readiness. 

One factor slowing reset efforts is the frequency of undocumented 

modifications resulting in slight differences between vehicles that 

can add days or weeks to reset. A program to use laser scanning 

to determine the exact composition of each vehicle could potentially 

reduce reset time 10 to 14 days which will support a 12-month 

reset turnaround for each system. The Committee, therefore, has 

added $2,000,000 for scanning technology to accelerate reset. 

While today’s military logistics capability is unsurpassed, it still 

falls short on delivering the logistics effect of ensuring the Joint 

Force Commander’s freedom of action. Great strides have been 

made in developing, demonstrating, and fielding effects-based planning and operations capability. Likewise, significant progress has 

been made in the logistics domain in developing condition-based 

maintenance (CBM+) concepts and technologies that will lead to a 

support system capable of delivering the desired effect. The Committee recognizes the need to demonstrate a capability integrating 

logistics intelligence and operations, and supports $4,000,000 in the 

Army’s Operations and Maintenance account to develop the common capabilities needed for the conversion of sensor-based status 

information with decision support tools necessary to convert status 

information to demand messages. 

WESTERN HEMISPHERE INSTITUTE FOR SECURITY COOPERATION

The Committee supports the mandate of the Western Hemisphere Institute for Security Cooperation (the Institute) to be a 

transparent and democratic institution. To promote such transparency and democratic values, the Committee directs the Institute 

to release to the public the names of all students and instructors 

at the Institute for fiscal years 2005 and 2006. The list shall include all names, including but not limited to the first, middle, and 

maternal and paternal surnames, rank, country of origin, courses 

taken or taught, and years of attendance. In all future fiscal years, 

this same information shall be made available and provided to the 

public no later than 60 days after the end of each fiscal year. 

WORKING CAPITAL FUND CASH TRANSFER

The Army Working Capital Fund (AWCF) is a revolving fund 

that relies on sales revenue to finance its operations. It is intended 

to generate adequate revenue to cover the full costs of its operations, and to finance the fund’s continuing operations without fiscal year limitation. The AWCF is intended to operate on a breakeven basis over time. Based on an analysis of cash balance as of 

May 2007, the AWCF has a cash balance of $420,000,000 in excess 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARING
96 

of 10 days of operation. The Committee, therefore, directs a transfer of $420,000,000 to the Operation and Maintenance account. 

OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE, NAVY 

Fiscal year 2007 appropriation .......................................................... $30,954,034,000 

Fiscal year 2007 budget request ....................................................... 33,334,690,000 

Committee recommendation .............................................................. 32,851,468,000 

Change from budget request ............................................................. ¥483,222,000 

The Committee recommends an appropriation of $32,851,468,000 

for Operation and Maintenance, Navy. The recommendation is an 

increase of $1,897,434,000 above the amount appropriated for fiscal 

year 2007 and $483,222,000 less than the fiscal year 2008 request. 

PROGRAM RECOMMENDED

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


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARING
97 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 36 36323A.035
98 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 37 36323A.036
99 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 38 36323A.037
100 

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


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARING
101 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 39 36323A.038
102 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 40 36323A.039
103 

NAVY SHORE INFRASTRUCTURE TRANSFORMATION

The Committee recommends $4,000,000 to accelerate the Navy 

Shore Infrastructure Transformation (NSIT) program. The NSIT 

program enables the Navy to identify opportunities to operate 

shore installations more effectively and efficiently to support fleet 

readiness and surge capability. This funding will allow promising 

ideas for improved operations to be tested and refined in pilot demonstration projects in the Navy Region Northwest prior to implementing them throughout the Navy. 

NPS LABORATORY MODERNIZATION

Modern engineering laboratories are essential to ensure that the 

Naval Postgraduate School’s (NPS) students can analyze future 

warfighting technologies, and gain the education needed to apply 

those technologies to meet emerging U.S. defense requirements. 

Yet, NPS laboratories are outdated. To address this issue, the Committee provides an additional $10,000,000 under this heading to 

modernize NPS’s laboratories and related science and engineering 

library holdings. 

CIVILIAN PERSONNEL STRENGTH

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

OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE, MARINE CORPS 

Fiscal year 2006 appropriation .......................................................... $3,811,437,000 

Fiscal year 2007 budget request ....................................................... 4,961,393,000 

Committee recommendation .............................................................. 4,471,858,000 

Change from budget request ............................................................. ¥489,535,000 

The Committee recommends an appropriation of $4,471,858,000 

for Operation and Maintenance, Marine Corps. The recommendation is an increase of $660,421,000 above the amount appropriated 

for fiscal year 2007 and $489,535,000 less than the fiscal year 2008 

request. 

PROGRAM RECOMMENDED

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


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARING
104 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 023 HR279.040
105 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 024 HR279.041
106 

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


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARING
107 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 025 HR279.042
108 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 044 36323A.043
109 

RESOURCE REALIGNMENT

The Marine Corps budget request includes $754,335,000 to support increases in force structure. Based on further analysis subsequent to the budget submission, the Marine Corps recommended a 

realignment of these funds for executablity. The Committee recommendations reflect that realignment. 

OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE, AIR FORCE 

Fiscal year 2006 appropriation .......................................................... $30,458,947,000 

Fiscal year 2007 budget request ....................................................... 33,655,633,000 

Committee recommendation .............................................................. 31,613,981,000 

Change from budget request ............................................................. ¥2,041,652,000 

The Committee recommends an appropriation of $31,613,981,000 

for Operation and Maintenance, Air Force. The recommendation is 

an increase of $1,155,034,000 above the amount appropriated for 

fiscal year 2007 and $2,041,652,000 less than the fiscal year 2008 

request. 

PROGRAM RECOMMENDED

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


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARING
110 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 045 36323A.044
111 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 046 36323A.045
112 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 047 36323A.046
113 

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


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARING
114 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 048 36323A.047
115 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 049 36323A.048
116 

PORTABLE ILLUMINATION SYSTEM

The Committee notes that ongoing contingency operations have 

increased the requirement for illumination systems to conduct base 

perimeter security, military police security lighting, and night vision goggle compatible lighting. Recent advancements in lighting 

and battery technology have produced far more light-weight, effective and affordable alternatives to the FL–1D floodlight now used 

by the Air Force to meet these requirements. Accordingly, the Committee recommends $10,000,000 for the acquisition of portable illumination systems. 

CIVILIAN PERSONNEL STRENGTH

The Air Force’s civilian personnel strength as of April 2007 and 

projected through the end of 2008 indicates that the Air Force’s 

budget request for civilian personnel is overstated by $163,300,000. 

The Committee has adjusted funding accordingly. 

WORKING CAPITAL FUND CASH TRANSFER

The Air Force Working Capital Fund (AFWCF) is a revolving 

fund that relies on sales revenue to finance its operations. It is intended to generate adequate revenue to cover the full costs of its 

operations, and to finance the fund’s continuing operations without 

fiscal year limitation. The AFWCF is intended to operate on a 

break-even basis over time. Based on an analysis of cash balance 

as of May 2007, the AFWCF has a cash balance of $46,000,000 in 

excess of 10 days of operation. The Committee, therefore, directs a 

transfer $46,000,000 to the Operation and Maintenance account. 

EXCESS ON-ORDER INVENTORY

Recently, the Government Accountability Office reported that the 

Air Force could save billions of dollars by terminating purchases of 

excess inventory of spare parts on order. Inventory that is on order 

is inventory which is not yet in the government’s possession, but 

for which contracts have been awarded, or for which funds have 

been committed. Excess is inventory that is surplus to customer requirements, safety levels on hand to cover contract lead-times, and 

minimum quantities for essential items. Over the period 2002 to 

2005, the Air Force purchased an average of $1,300,000,000 per 

year of excess inventory. 

AIR FORCE ON-ORDER INVENTORY IN EXCESS OF REQUIREMENTS 

Fiscal year $ in thousands 

2005 ............................................................................................................................................................... $1,100,000 

2004 ............................................................................................................................................................... 1,800,000 

2003 ............................................................................................................................................................... 1,500,000 

2002 ............................................................................................................................................................... 800,000 

In response to the GAO’s findings, the DoD agreed that opportunities exist to reduce Air Force on-order inventory by putting measures in place to ensure Air Force inventory management specialists 

are following excess on-order termination procedures. The Committee endorses following excess on-order termination procedures 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARING
117 

and reduces funding for the purchase of inventory in excess of requirements by $650,000,000. 

OVERSTATEMENT OF FACILITIES SUSTAINMENT, RESTORATION AND

MAINTENANCE REQUIREMENTS

The Air Force has overstated Facilities Sustainment, Restoration 

and Maintenace (FSRM) requirements by applying inflation twice; 

once in revaluing plant replacement value and a second time when 

applying OP–32 inflation indices. The Committee, therefore, reduces the Air Force’s request for FSRM by $108,425,000 to correct 

for the overstatement. 

OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE, DEFENSE-WIDE 

Fiscal year 2007 appropriation .................................................... $20,035,185,000 

Fiscal year 2008 budget request ................................................. 22,574,278,000 

Committee recommendation ........................................................ 22,343,180,000 

Change from budget request ....................................................... ¥231,098,000 

The Committee recommends an appropriation of $22,343,180,000, 

for Operation and Maintenance, Defense-Wide. The recommendation is a reduction of $231,098,000 from the budget request, but 

$2,307,995,000 over the fiscal year 2007 enacted appropriation. 

PROGRAM RECOMMENDED

The total amount recommended in the bill will provide for the 

following program in fiscal year 2008: 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARING
118 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 050 36323A.049
119 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 051 36323A.050
120 

The adjustments to Operation and Maintenance, Defense-Wide, 

agencies are shown below: 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARING
121 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 053 36323A.051
122 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 053 36323A.052
123 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 054 36323A.053
124 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 055 36323A.054
125 

SPECIAL OPERATIONS COMMAND

The Committee recommendation includes $3,237,640,000 for the 

Special Operations Command, Operation and Maintenance activities, which is $639,901,000 above fiscal year 2007 enacted levels 

and $40,000,000 below the request. The reductions include 

$10,000,000 from Intelligence and Communications, $10,000,000 

from Management and Headquarters Operations, and a general 

$20,000,000 reduction based on previous unobligated balances. 

DEFENSE LEGAL SERVICES AGENCY

OFFICE OF MILITARY COMMISSIONS

The Committee recommends deferring funding for the Office of 

Military Commissions for future consideration. These costs are 

solely related to the global war on terror and are more appropriately considered in that context. 

DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE DEPENDENTS EDUCATION

EXCEPTIONAL FAMILY MEMBER SERVICES

An exceptional family member is a dependent, regardless of age, 

who requires medical services for a chronic condition; receives ongoing services from a specialist; has mental health concerns, social 

problems, or psychological needs; or receives education services provided on an Individual Education Program or Individual Family 

Services Plan. In 1995, the Department of Defense established the 

Exceptional Family Member Program to identify and serve those 

military members with children in need of special education or 

medical needs. 

At present, over 100,000 children of servicemembers with some 

form of disability live on military bases at home and abroad. 

Alarmingly over the past several years and just within the Marine 

Corps, a several-fold increase in the number of confirmed cases of 

autism has occurred. Similar trends in other conditions, such as attention deficit and hyperactivity disorders, cerebral palsy and 

learning disabilities, have occurred. In any family, these conditions 

place great stress and a financial burden on the parents, but in the 

military family, the hardship is magnified by separation, deployment and combat. The Committee, therefore, directs the Secretary 

to provide appropriate resource guides and information to military 

families, caregivers, education and medical personnel to improve 

competency in specialized educational and medical fields and to improve access to best practices in educational curricula and programs for special needs dependents. 

DEFENSE SECURITY COOPERATION AGENCY

GLOBAL TRAIN AND EQUIP

The Committee has not included $500,000,000 proposed for the 

global train and equip program. In authorizing the program in sections 1206 of the National Defense Act for Fiscal Year 2006 and the 

John Warner National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 

2007, the Congress provided the authority to establish a pilot proVerDate Aug 31 2005 08:25 Jul 31, 2007 Jkt 036903 PO 00000 Frm 00137 Fmt 6602 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\HR279.007 HR279

cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARING
126 

gram, the results of which Congress would take under advisement 

when considering or extending training and equipping authorities 

in the future. In addition, the authorization required the President 

to submit to the Congress a report on the ability of the Department 

of State and the Department of Defense to conduct foreign military 

assistance programs. The Congress has not received that report or 

any indication when such report will be forthcoming. Accordingly, 

since the Administration has failed to comply with existing law and 

has deprived the Congress of the full materials needed to make an 

informed judgment on the longer-term future of the proposal, the 

Committee denies the request for $500,000,000 for the global train 

and equip program and defers consideration of the request until 

the supplemental. 

DEFENSE SECURITY SERVICE

The Committee recommendation includes $422,457,000 for the 

Defense Security Service (DSS), an increase of $50,000,000 over the 

budget request. The DSS plays a crucial role in safeguarding our 

Nation’s security by assuring protection of U.S. and foreign classified information in the possession of industry. The Committee 

notes that over the past several years, DSS experienced significant 

budget shortfalls, in part due to insufficient budgeting within the 

Department, and a six-month lag between the official budget submission and August rate adjustments by the Office of Personnel 

Management (OPM) which precludes reliable budgeting for the sizable premiums and surcharges that OPM may charge for each personnel security investigation. The Committee is not pleased that 

the Office of the Secretary underfunded this office’s critical baseline 

requirements in the fiscal year 2008 budget request, and in doing 

so, exacerbated the office’s ability to address its budgetary problems as it has been directed by this Committee in reports accompanying previous appropriations Acts. To mitigate the effects of 

OPM’s late notice of charges, the Committee recommends a provision that provides that DSS shall pay rates for personnel security 

investigations in fiscal year 2008 that are in effect as of August 1, 

2006. The additional funds recommended by the Committee shall 

be available solely to address critical funding shortfalls in the DSS 

baseline that were unaddressed in the budget request. 

OFFICE OF THE SECRETARY OF DEFENSE

PERSONNEL AND READINESS

COMBATANT COMMANDER’S EXERCISE, ENGAGEMENT AND TRAINING

TRANSFORMATION (CE2T2)

As a result of the Quadrennial Defense Review’s effort to realign 

and consolidate joint exercise programs, the budget request proposed to create a new program, the combatant commander’s exercise, engagement and training transformation program within the 

Office of the Secretary for Defense for Personnel and Readiness. 

This consolidation would functionally transfer funds from existing 

departmental sources, totaling $233,641,000, and include the following activities: 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARING
127 

Joint National Training Capability 

Joint Knowledge Development and Distribution Capability 

Joint Assessment and Enabling Capability 

Joint Warfighting Center at the U.S. Joint Forces Command 

Joint Deployment Training Center 

Combatant Command Headquarters Support 

Joint Training Information Management System 

Joint Training System Specialist Program 

Joint Training Facilitator Program 

The Committee notes, however, that this proposal does not fully 

consolidate all joint training programs. The consolidation excludes 

the joint exercise program funded within the Joint Chiefs of Staff; 

the services’ incremental costs associated with the joint exercise 

program; and the services’ joint national training capability. It does 

contain, however, the costs associated with the planning of the 

joint exercise program by the combatant commanders. 

The Committee believes that all joint training programs should 

be consolidated to achieve full efficiencies and to reduce management and administrative costs associated with the joint training 

portfolio. Therefore, the Committee fully consolidates all joint 

training programs and costs into the Combatant Commander’s Exercise, Engagement and Training Transformation Program and 

provides within the Office of the Secretary of Defense an appropriation of $589,143,000 to be available solely for these purposes. The 

Committee’s action reflects the following adjustments: 

Budget request .................................................................................... $233,641,000 

Recommended transfers: 

Joint exercise program, TJS ....................................................... +245,075,000 

Services joint national training capability ................................ +63,600,000 

Services joint exercise program incremental costs ................... +81,827,000 

Recommended adjustments: 

Anticipated efficiencies and constrained program growth in.

the joint exercise program .......................................................... ¥35,000,000 

TOTAL, CE2T2 ................................................................................... 589,143,000 

The Committee directs the Department, in consolidating the joint 

training portfolio, not to increase administrative overhead costs or 

civilian or military positions associated with the operation and 

management of the joint training portfolio. The Department shall 

provide to the House and Senate Committees on Appropriations 

within 60 days after the enactment of this Act, an analysis of funds 

and personnel transferred to effect the consolidation. 

OFFICE OF THE DEPUTY UNDERSECRETARY OF DEFENSE, 

COMPTROLLER AND CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER

The Committee recommends a total of $41,293,000 for the Office 

of the Deputy Undersecretary of Defense, Comptroller and Chief 

Financial Officer, an increase of $6,320,000 over fiscal year 2007 

appropriations. The increase provided in this Act shall be available 

only for the costs associated with the recruitment, hiring, training, 

retention and pay of qualified professionals in budget execution 

and formulation, and shall be expended without regard to internal 

Department headquarters personnel ceilings. The Committee notes 

that the Office has struggled in fulfilling its mission in budget execution and fiscal management oversight, and has not been fully reVerDate Aug 31 2005 08:25 Jul 31, 2007 Jkt 036903 PO 00000 Frm 00139 Fmt 6602 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\HR279.007 HR279

cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARING
128 

sponsive to the Committee. The additional funds provided herein 

are intended to address these shortcomings. 

ADDITIONAL ITEMS

CADET AND MIDSHIPMAN SOCIAL REPRESENTATION AND DIVERSITY AT

THE SERVICE ACADEMIES

The Secretary of Defense is directed to conduct a comprehensive 

assessment of the recruiting efforts, admissions policies, graduation 

rates and career success rates (i.e., the percentage who graduate 

from each academy, complete their initial service obligation, and 

rank as of the year of the report) in terms of the social representation, particularly with regard to race, religion, sex and national origin, at the service academies. This study should cover the academies’ classes over the last ten years in order to evaluate past 

trends and current standings. The Secretary shall provide the Committee with an action plan detailing ways to improve diversity and 

representation among the Nation’s service academies, as appropriate. The report identified herein shall be submitted to the Committee not later than one year after the enactment of this Act. 

DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE ENERGY SECURITY TASK FORCE

The Committee recognizes the importance of the research and development of alternative and renewable energy sources within the 

Department of Defense (DoD) and believes that the DoD must 

make an increased effort to address energy concerns. The Committee commends the DoD for the establishment of the Defense Energy Security Task Force and is supportive of the initiatives that 

the Task Force has directed the services to undertake. However, 

the Committee remains concerned with the overall lack of support 

within the DoD to establish aggressive goals and timelines to 

achieve increased energy efficiency. The Committee directs the Defense Energy Security Task Force to provide a semi-annual report, 

with the first being delivered no later than March 1, 2008, to the 

congressional defense committees on the initiatives and activities 

that the DoD has undertaken with the goal to promote energy savings and energy efficiency across the Department. 

OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE, ARMY RESERVE 

Fiscal year 2007 appropriation .......................................................... $2,160,214,000 

Fiscal year 2008 budget request ....................................................... 2,508,062,000 

Committee recommendation .............................................................. 2,510,890,000 

Change from budget request ............................................................. +2,828,000 

The Committee recommends an appropriation of $2,510,890,000 

for Operation and Maintenance, Army Reserve. The recommendation is an increase of $2,828,000 over the budget request and an 

increase of $350,676,000 over the fiscal year 2007 enacted appropriation. 

PROGRAM RECOMMENDED

The total amount recommended in the bill will provide for the 

following program in fiscal year 2008: 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARING
129 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 057 36323A.055
130 

The adjustments to Operation and Maintenance, Army Reserve, 

are shown below: 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARING
131 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 058 36323A.056
132 

OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE, NAVY RESERVE 

Fiscal year 2007 appropriation .......................................................... $1,275,764,000 

Fiscal year 2008 budget request ....................................................... 1,186,883,000 

Committee recommendation .............................................................. 1,144,454,000 

Change from budget request ............................................................. ¥42,429,000 

The Committee recommends an appropriation of $1,144,454,000 

for Operation and Maintenance, Navy Reserve. The recommendation is a decrease of $42,429,000 from the budget request and a decrease of $131,310,000 from the fiscal year 2007 enacted appropriation. 

PROGRAM RECOMMENDED

The total amount recommended in the bill will provide for the 

following program in fiscal year 2008: 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARING
133 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 059 36323A.057
134 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 060 36323A.058
135 

The adjustments to Operation and Maintenance, Navy Reserve, 

are shown below: 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARING
136 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 061 36323A.059
137 

OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE, MARINE CORPS RESERVE 

Fiscal year 2007 appropriation .......................................................... $209,036,000 

Fiscal year 2008 budget request ....................................................... 208,637,000 

Committee recommendation .............................................................. 207,087,000 

Change from budget request ............................................................. ¥1,550,000 

The Committee recommends an appropriation of $207,087,000 for 

Operation and Maintenance, Marine Corps Reserve. The recommendation is a decrease of $1,550,000 from the budget request 

and a decrease of $1,949,000 from the fiscal year 2007 enacted appropriation. 

PROGRAM RECOMMENDED

The total amount recommended in the bill will provide for the 

following program in fiscal year 2008: 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARING
138 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 0 62 36323A.060
139 

The adjustments to Operation and Maintenance, Marine Corps, 

Reserve are shown below: 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARING
140 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 063 36323A.061
141 

OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE, AIR FORCE RESERVE 

Fiscal year 2007 appropriation .......................................................... $2,617,601,000 

Fiscal year 2008 budget request ....................................................... 2,692,077,000 

Committee recommendation .............................................................. 2,684,577,000 

Change from budget request ............................................................. ¥7,500,000 

The Committee recommends an appropriation of $2,684,577,000 

for Operation and Maintenance, Air Force Reserve. The recommendation is a decrease of $7,500,000 from the budget request, 

but $66,976,000 over the fiscal year 2007 enacted appropriation. 

PROGRAM RECOMMENDED

The total amount recommended in the bill will provide for the 

following program in fiscal year 2008: 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARING
142 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 064 36323A.062
143 

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


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARING
144 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 065 36323A.063
145 

OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE, ARMY NATIONAL GUARD 

Fiscal year 2007 appropriation .......................................................... $4,711,362,000 

Fiscal year 2008 budget request ....................................................... 5,840,209,000 

Committee recommendation .............................................................. 5,893,843,000 

Change from budget request ............................................................. +53,634,000 

The Committee recommends an appropriation of $5,893,843,000 

for Operation and Maintenance, Army National Guard. The recommendation is an increase of $53,634,000 from the budget request 

and $1,182,481,000 over the fiscal year 2007 enacted appropriation. 

The Committee recommendation transfers funds requested for 

‘‘Grow-the-Force’’ within the detailed lines as supported by briefing 

materials provided during the budget process and as additional information became available to the Committee. 

PROGRAM RECOMMENDED

The total amount recommended in the bill will provide for the 

following program in fiscal year 2008: 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARING
146 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 066 36323A.064
147 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 067 36323A.065
148 

The adjustments to Operation and Maintenance, Army National 

Guard, are shown below: 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARING
149 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 068 36323A.066
150 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 069 36323A.067
151 

PROCESS REFINEMENT AND IMPLEMENTATION INITIATIVE (PRI)

FOR NATIONAL GUARD JOINT CONUS COMMUNICATIONS

SUPPORT ENVIRONMENT (JCCSE)

The National Guard Bureau has identified Joint CONUS Communications Support Environment (JCCSE) Communications Enhancements as one of its top requirements, for which the Committee recommends $1,600,000. The National Guard Bureau has 

stated that funding for furthering the JCCSE Communications enhancements is essential as it enhances the National Guard’s ability 

to support and respond under the homeland defense/civil support 

mission. The Committee supports the National Guard’s efforts to 

enhance this technology, including providing an interface for communications between federal and state agencies concerning incidents involving homeland defense and disaster mitigation. 

OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE, AIR NATIONAL GUARD 

Fiscal year 2007 appropriation .......................................................... $5,009,178,000 

Fiscal year 2008 budget request ....................................................... 5,041,965,000 

Committee recommendation .............................................................. 5,021,077,000 

Change from budget request ............................................................. ¥20,888,000 

The Committee recommends an appropriation of $5,021,077,000 

for Operation and Maintenance, Air National Guard. The recommendation is a decrease of $20,888,000 below the budget request, but $11,899,000 over the fiscal year 2007 enacted appropriation. 

PROGRAM RECOMMENDED

The total amount recommended in the bill will provide for the 

following program in fiscal year 2008: 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARING
152 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 070 36323A.068
153 

The adjustments to Operation and Maintenance, Air National 

Guard, are shown below: 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARING
154 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 071 36323A.069
155 

OVERSEAS CONTINGENCY OPERATIONS TRANSFER 

ACCOUNT 

Fiscal year 2007 appropriation .......................................................... – – –

Fiscal year 2008 budget request ....................................................... $5,000,000 

Committee recommendation .............................................................. – – –

Change from budget request ............................................................. ¥5,000,000 

The Committee recommends no funding for the Overseas Contingency Operations Transfer Account given the account’s unobligated 

balance. The recommendation is the same as provided in fiscal year 

2007. 

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE ARMED 

FORCES 

Fiscal year 2007 appropriation .......................................................... $11,721,000 

Fiscal year 2008 budget request ....................................................... 11,971,000 

Committee recommendation .............................................................. 11,971,000 

Change from budget request ............................................................. – – –

The Committee recommends an appropriation of $11,971,000 for 

the United States Court of Appeals for the Armed Forces. The recommendation is the same level as the budget request and $250,000 

over the fiscal year 2007 enacted appropriation. 

ENVIRONMENTAL RESTORATION, ARMY 

Fiscal year 2007 appropriation .......................................................... $403,786,000 

Fiscal year 2008 budget request ....................................................... 434,879,000 

Committee recommendation .............................................................. 434,879,000 

Change from budget request ............................................................. – – –

The Committee recommends an appropriation of $434,879,000 for 

Environmental Restoration, Army. The recommendation is an increase of $31,093,000 from the amount appropriated in fiscal year 

2007. 

ENVIRONMENTAL RESTORATION, NAVY 

Fiscal year 2007 appropriation .......................................................... $302,222,000 

Fiscal year 2008 budget request ....................................................... 300,591,000 

Committee recommendation .............................................................. 300,591,000 

Change from budget request ............................................................. – – –

The Committee recommends an appropriation of $300,591,000 for 

Environmental Restoration, Navy. The recommendation is a decrease of $1,631,000 from the amount appropriated in fiscal year 

2007. 

ENVIRONMENTAL RESTORATION, AIR FORCE 

Fiscal year 2007 appropriation .......................................................... $402,396,000 

Fiscal year 2008 budget request ....................................................... 458,428,000 

Committee recommendation .............................................................. 458,428,000 

Change from budget request ............................................................. – – –

The Committee recommends an appropriation of $458,428,000 for 

Environmental Restoration, Air Force. The recommendation is an 

increase of $56,032,000 from the amount appropriated in fiscal 

year 2007. 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARING
156 

ENVIRONMENTAL RESTORATION, DEFENSE-WIDE 

Fiscal year 2007 appropriation .......................................................... $27,885,000 

Fiscal year 2008 budget request ....................................................... 12,751,000 

Committee recommendation .............................................................. 12,751,000 

Change from budget request ............................................................. – – –

The Committee recommends an appropriation of $12,751,000 for 

Environmental Restoration, Defense-Wide. The recommendation is 

the same level as requested, a decrease of $15,134,000 from the 

amount appropriated in fiscal year 2007. 

ENVIRONMENTAL RESTORATION, FORMERLY USED 

DEFENSE SITES 

Fiscal year 2007 appropriation .......................................................... $254,352,000 

Fiscal year 2008 budget request ....................................................... 250,249,000 

Committee recommendation .............................................................. 268,249,000 

Change from budget request ............................................................. +18,000,000 

The Committee recommends an appropriation of $268,249,000 for 

Environmental Restoration, Formerly Used Defense Sites. The adjustments to the budget for Environmental Restoration, Formerly 

Used Defense Sites are shown below: 

Restoration of Naval Facility at Centerville Beach ......................... $3,000,000 

Lake Erie/Touissant River Remediation ........................................... 1,000,000 

UXO Remediation ............................................................................... 10,000,000 

Spring Valley Remediation ................................................................ 4,000,000 

OVERSEAS HUMANITARIAN, DISASTER, AND CIVIC AID 

Fiscal year 2007 appropriation .......................................................... $63,204,000 

Fiscal year 2008 budget request ....................................................... 103,300,000 

Committee recommendation .............................................................. 103,300,000 

Change from budget request ............................................................. – – –

The Committee recommends an appropriation of $103,300,000 for 

Overseas Humanitarian, Disaster, and Civic Aid. The recommendation is the same as the budget request and is $40,096,000 over the 

fiscal year 2007 enacted appropriation. The recommendation includes $40,000,000 for foreign disaster relief and emergency response activities, as proposed within the budget request. However, 

the Committee recommends that such funds shall be available 

until expended and be available solely for foreign disaster relief 

and emergency response activities. The budget request proposed 

that such funds be available for two years, the first year of which 

the funds would be for emergency response activities, and thereafter for other program requirements. 

FORMER SOVIET UNION THREAT REDUCTION ACCOUNT 

Fiscal year 2007 appropriation .......................................................... $372,128,000 

Fiscal year 2008 budget request ....................................................... 348,048,000 

Committee recommendation .............................................................. 398,048,000 

Change from budget request ............................................................. +50,000,000 

The Committee recommendation provides a total of $398,048,000 

for fiscal year 2008, an increase of $50,000,000 over the budget request and $25,920,000 over the fiscal year 2007 enacted appropriation. This program, also referred to as the Cooperative Threat Reduction Program, is critical to the national security of the United 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARING
157 

States and must be a national priority. The Committee expects that 

the increased funding provided in this bill will strengthen and expand existing cooperative threat reduction programs and enable 

the Department to develop new programs and projects. 

The following table details the Committee’s funding determinations: 

[Dollars in thousands] 

Major program Budget request Committee recommended 

Strategic offensive arms elimination (R) .................................................................... $77,885 $92,885 

Nuclear weapons storage security (R) ........................................................................ 22,988 39,640 

Nuclear weapons transportation security (R) ............................................................. 37,700 37,700 

Chemical weapons destruction (R) ............................................................................. — 1,000 

Biological threat reduction (FSU) ................................................................................ 144,489 144,489 

WMD proliferation prevention (FSU) ............................................................................ 37,986 47,986 

Defense and military contacts (FSU) .......................................................................... 8,000 8,000 

Other assessments/administrative costs .................................................................... 19,000 19,348 

New initiatives ............................................................................................................. — 7,000 

Total .................................................................................................................... 348,048 398,048 

STRATEGIC OFFENSIVE ARMS ELIMINATION (RUSSIA)

The Committee recommends an additional $15,000,000 over the 

budget request for elimination of two Delta III submarines and associated SS–N–18 missiles in Russia. 

NUCLEAR WEAPONS STORAGE FACILITY (RUSSIA)

The Committee recommends a total of $39,640,000 for nuclear 

weapons storage facility, an increase of $16,652,000 over the request to accelerate nuclear warhead security work pursuant to the 

Bratislava Agreement. The Russian Ministry of Defense requested 

and the United States Government concurred in March 2007 with 

the expressed need for phase II to the Automated Inventory Control and Management System. The first phase of the program was 

built and fielded under the NWSS-Russia program. The Department initiated this program in fiscal year 2007 with direction to 

complete installation concurrent with completion of storage site security upgrades. Phase II will install a capability to automate the 

warhead and component inventories at 13 additional storage sites, 

bringing the total number of storage sites with this capability to 

29, and will include replacing the old computers at the original 

sites. The Committee recommendation provides funding to complete the installation in fiscal year 2008. 

CHEMICAL WEAPONS DESTRUCTION (RUSSIA)

Recently, the Department of Defense and the Government of 

Russia signed an agreement transferring responsibility for the completion of the Shchuch’ye chemical weapons destruction project to 

the Russia government. This agreement recognizes that any funding required over the current budget would be borne by Russia. 

The Committee notes, however, that minor related issues remain 

to be addressed by the parties and that the Department must 

maintain a strong commitment to the project’s completion; mainVerDate Aug 31 2005 08:25 Jul 31, 2007 Jkt 036903 PO 00000 Frm 00169 Fmt 6602 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\HR279.007 HR279

cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARING
158 

tain vigilant oversight of the project; and report project developments to the relevant congressional committees. For these remaining activities, the Committee recommends $1,000,000 in fiscal year 

2008. 

WMD PROLIFERATION PREVENTION (FORMER SOVIET UNION)

The Committee recommends an additional $10,000,000 for the 

Kazakhstan infrastructure project, for which funding requirements 

were not known at the time of the budget preparation. 

NEW INITIATIVES

Within the funds provided, the Committee includes $7,000,000 

for new initiatives outside the scope of existing programs and 

projects for the cooperative threat reduction program to increase 

international security and threat reduction cooperation, and security and elimination of nuclear and chemical weapons and weapons-related materials that pose a threat to United States’ national 

security interests. The Committee directs the Department to work 

closely with the relevant congressional committees in identifying 

and determining new avenues to pursue. The Committee recommendation also includes an additional $348,000 to increase staff 

capacity, capabilities and resources associated with the development of new cooperative threat reduction initiatives. The funding 

is allocated within resources provided for other assessments and 

administrative costs. 

UNOBLIGATED BALANCES FROM PRIOR YEARS

The Committee has learned that the Department continues to 

carry balances of no-year appropriations made as far back as fiscal 

year 1994. While the Department has plans to execute some of 

these balances in fiscal year 2008, the Committee directs program 

managers to expend these appropriations expeditiously on current 

program requirements or risk a rescission of those balances. 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARING
(159) 

TITLE III 

PROCUREMENT 

The fiscal year 2008 Department of Defense procurement budget 

request totals $99,623,010,000. The accompanying bill recommends 

$99,608,169,000. The total amount recommended is a decrease of 

$14,841,000 below the fiscal year 2008 budget estimate and is 

$18,697,413,000 above the total provided for fiscal year 2007. The 

table below summarizes the budget estimates and the Committee’s 

recommendations. 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARING
160 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 026 HR279.070
161 

GROW-THE-ARMY AND MARINE CORPS

The President’s budget request for fiscal year 2008 includes funding for additional personnel and equipment in recognition of 

threats to U.S. security beyond the war on terror in Iraq and Afghanistan. The budget request includes funds to increase force 

structure in both the Army and Marine Corps. Army Active Duty 

permanent end-strength will grow by 7,000 annually starting in fiscal year 2008, until reaching a total increase of 65,000 by fiscal 

year 2012. The number of Active Army Brigade Combat Teams will 

increase from 42 to 48 by fiscal year 2012. Marine Corps endstrength will grow annually by 5,000 starting in fiscal year 2008 

until reaching a total increase of 27,000 by fiscal year 2011. The 

budget request for the Army procurement accounts includes a total 

of $4,083,799,000 to support equipment requirements to grow the 

new Army structure. The funding was placed in five large undistributed lines with specific detailed requirements for the spreading 

of those funds to other lines provided to the Committee in various 

briefing materials. The Marine Corps funding for incremental 

equipment requirements totaled $2,211,625,000, also listed in several large lines in the initial budget justification documents, with 

a detailed line item spread provided later. The Committee transfers 

funds to the detailed lines per the Army and Marine Corps briefing 

materials provided at the beginning of the budget review process. 

Additional changes have been made in various line items as the 

budget review process proceeded and additional information became available to the Committee. Detailed changes are displayed 

in the tables for each appropriation account. In a number of lines, 

funding appears to have been requested for the entire Grow-theForce requirement despite the fact that new units will be formed 

over the time frame 2008 to 2012. The Committee cautions against 

funding ahead of need and encourages the Department of Defense 

to carefully align funding and procurement of additional equipment 

with the schedule for forming and outfitting new units. 

JOINT STRIKE FIGHTER PRODUCTION

In the fiscal year 2008 budget request, the Air Force proposes 

funding for the procurement of six conventional take-off and landing (CTOL) aircraft and the Navy requested funding for procurement of six short take-off and vertical landing (STOVL) aircraft. 

The Committee believes that the development and production of 

the Joint Strike Fighter is at a critical period in the program’s history. Aircraft AA–1 has completed the first phase of flight test, production of development aircraft is ramping up, and all nine of the 

international partners have signed production memoranda of understanding. In addition, the first flight of BF–1, the first of the 

flight test short take-off and vertical landing (STOVL) variants, is 

scheduled for next year. However, as the program matures, assembly of the development aircraft continues to slip from last year’s 

schedule which raises questions about the ability of the contractor 

to meet delivery schedules for the subsequent production lots. The 

Committee also notes that the first flight of BF–1 is a major milestone decision tied to the contract award for the fiscal year 2008 

funds. A slip in the first flight of just a few months could push the 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARING
162 

contract award into fiscal year 2009, making the funds requested 

early-to-need. 

While the Committee continues to be concerned about mounting 

delays in the production of the development aircraft and the potential for BF–l first flight to be delayed, the Air Force and the contractor have made commitments that they will be able to produce 

and deliver aircraft on the current schedule. The Committee expects they will keep these commitments. At this time, any reductions in procurement quantities would cause serious perturbations 

in the program, with impacts extending into future years. The 

Committee believes this is a critical time for the program and in 

an effort to provide support and stability, the Committee fully 

funds the request for production of these aircraft. 

ACQUISITION AND MANAGEMENT OF UNMANNED AERIAL SYSTEMS

The Committee notes that for some time a debate has been ongoing within the Department of Defense on the acquisition and management of unmanned aerial systems. The numbers and types of 

unmanned aerial systems has risen steadily since the beginning of 

the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan with missions expanding from reconnaissance to logistics, to communications relay, and to direct attack. Systems have become more capable and have been better integrated into overall military operations. Part of the growth in utility and combat effectiveness can be attributed to the diverse creative talents of the various military services and defense agencies. 

Conversely, opportunities for improved efficiency and interoperability can be lost in service centric approaches to acquiring and 

employing unmanned air systems. The Committee is aware that 

the Chief of Staff of the Air Force is seeking designation of the Department of the Air Force as executive agent for medium- and 

high-altitude unmanned aerial systems. The Committee is equally 

aware of the unanimous opposition of the other services to the Air 

Force proposal. A careful analysis of unmanned aerial systems acquisition and management by the Office of the Joint Chiefs of Staff 

and the Office of the Secretary of Defense is warranted. The Committee strongly cautions against any changes in current acquisition 

and operating arrangements pertaining to unmanned aerial systems until such time as the analysis is complete and the congressional defense committees have been briefed on any proposed 

changes. 

MILITARY TIRES

The Committee understands that the Base Realignment and Closure Act of 2005 required Commodity Management Privatization of 

tires. The initiative would eliminate redundant supply operations, 

improve supply system responsiveness, and seek cost benefits 

through economies of scale in tire purchases. The Committee also 

understands that a single company was awarded the contract for 

aircraft tires and that company is on the winning team for ground 

vehicle tires. The Committee applauds well managed efforts by the 

Department of Defense to reduce costs and simultaneously improve 

support to military units in all branches of the military. The Committee is concerned, however, that the current contracting arrangement requires a very carefully crafted set of firewalls to ensure 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARING
163 

that the contractor selected to be responsible for day-to-day management of the military tires programs under the Commodity Management Privatization initiative will not receive an unfair advantage in competing for contracts to provide tires to the centrally 

managed program. The Committee strongly encourages the Department of Defense, through its implementing agencies, in future competitions, to enhance oversight and avoid both unfair advantages 

and the appearance of unfair advantages by seeking a program 

management contractor who would not be a competitor to provide 

tires under the tire privatization initiative. 

RESET AND MODERNIZATION

The Committee is concerned with improving accountability and 

oversight of funding provided to the military departments for 

equipment modernization, reset and recapitalization. Accordingly, 

the Committee directs that within 60 days of enactment of this Act, 

the Secretary of Defense shall provide to the congressional defense 

committees a report outlining the assumptions underlying the estimates of reset requirements to repair and replace equipment that 

is worn out or lost in combat. The report shall explain how recapitalization and upgrade requirements are related to war needs rather than ongoing modernization. 

SPECIAL INTEREST ITEMS

Items for which additional funds have been provided as shown in 

the project level tables or in paragraphs using the phrase ‘‘only for’’

or ‘‘only to’’ in this report are congressional interest items for the 

purpose of the Base for Reprogramming (DD 1414). Each of these 

items must be carried on the DD Form 1414 at the stated amount, 

specifically addressed in the conference report. These items remain 

special interest items whether or not they are repeated in a subsequent conference report. 

REPROGRAMMING GUIDANCE FOR ACQUISITION ACCOUNTS

The Committee directs the Department of Defense to continue to 

follow the reprogramming guidance specified in the report accompanying the House version of the fiscal year 2006 Department of 

Defense Appropriations Bill (H.R. 109–119). Specifically, the dollar 

threshold for reprogramming funds will remain at $20,000,000 for 

procurement, and $10,000,000 for research, development, test and 

evaluation. The Department shall continue to follow the limitation 

that prior approval reprogrammings are set at either the specified 

dollar threshold or 20 percent of the procurement or research, development, test and evaluation line, whichever is less. These 

thresholds are cumulative. Therefore, if the combined value of 

transfers into or out of a procurement (P–1) or research, development, test and evaluation (R–1) line exceeds the identified threshold, the Department of Defense must submit a prior approval reprogramming to the congressional defense committees. In addition, 

guidelines on the application of prior approval reprogramming procedures for congressional special interest items are established 

elsewhere in this report. 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARING
164 

REPROGRAMMING REPORTING REQUIREMENTS

The Committee directs the Under Secretary of the Department 

of Defense, Comptroller, to continue to provide the congressional 

defense committees quarterly, spreadsheet-based DD 1416 reports 

for service and defense-wide accounts in titles III and IV of this Act 

as required in the statement of the managers accompanying the 

Conference report on the Department of Defense Appropriations 

Act, 2006. 

FUNDING INCREASES

The Committee directs that the funding increases outlined in 

these tables shall be provided only for the specific purposes indicated in the tables. 

CLASSIFIED ANNEX

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

AIRCRAFT PROCUREMENT, ARMY 

Fiscal year 2007 appropriation .......................................................... $3,502,483,000 

Fiscal year 2008 budget request ....................................................... 4,179,848,000 

Committee recommendation .............................................................. 3,891,539,000 

Change from budget request ............................................................. ¥288,309,000 

This appropriation finances acquisition of tactical and utility airplanes and helicopters, including associated electronics, electronic 

warfare equipment for in-service aircraft, ground support equipment, components and parts such as spare engines, transmission 

gear boxes, and sensor equipment. It also funds related training devices such as combat flight simulators and production base support. 

The Committee recommends an appropriation of $3,891,539,000 

for Aircraft Procurement, Army, which is $389,056,000 more than 

the amount provided in fiscal year 2007 and $288,309,000 less than 

the request for fiscal year 2008. 

PROGRAM RECOMMENDED

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


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARING
165 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 073 36323A.071
166 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 074 36323A.072
167 

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


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARING
168 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 075 36323A.073
169 

ARMED RECONNAISSANCE HELICOPTER

The fiscal year 2008 budget request included $468,259,000 for 

procurement of 37 Armed Reconnaissance Helicopters (ARH). On 

March 21, 2007, the ARH program office released a stop-work order 

as a result of an estimated over target baseline greater than 50 

percent development cost growth and low-rate initial production 

pricing disagreements. The contractor was given 30 days to submit 

a plan which describes the strategy to maximize the contract performance at minimal cost to the Government and convince the 

Army it could complete the contract as intended. Following an 

Army Systems Acquisition Review Council on May 18, 2007, the 

Army decided to continue with the current contractor and the contractor’s revised plan. The Army plan included a program delay of 

approximately one year with first unit equipped date slipping from 

the 4th quarter of fiscal year 2009 to the 4th quarter of fiscal year 

2010. The Committee remains supportive of the Army’s effort to 

field a replacement to the current armed scout helicopter. However, 

the Committee cautions the Army against overly optimistic product-development and integration assumptions and encourages 

greater attention to risk management. The Committee recommendation provides no additional procurement funds to the 

Armed Reconnaissance Helicopter program; transfers $47,000,000 

to Research, Development, Test and Evaluation, Army for the 

Armed Reconnaissance Helicopter program; and transfers 

$31,000,000 to the OH–58D program for procurement of equipment 

necessary to sustain the continued service of the Kiowa Warrior 

fleet. 

JOINT CARGO AIRCRAFT

The Committee recommends $119,443,000 for Joint Cargo Aircraft instead of $157,043,000 as proposed in the budget request. 

The Committee remains fully supportive of the Joint Cargo Aircraft 

program but understands that a source selection award protest has 

been filed which will delay the program between six months and 

one year. The recommended fiscal year 2008 funding will support 

three aircraft and an orderly ramp-up in production. 

LIGHT UTILITY HELICOPTER

The Committee is concerned that the Army Program Objective 

Memorandum (POM) 2008 acquisition schedule does not provide a 

stable production profile for the Light Utility Helicopter, and does 

not capitalize on the successful performance of this program. A 

more rapid and stable procurement plan will fill the Army’s urgent 

requirement sooner by retiring aging and expensive H–1s and H–

58s sooner and thus making available H–60 Blackhawks for the 

global war on terror and other contingency operations sooner. In 

addition, the Army will realize operational cost savings. The Committee strongly encourages the Department of Defense to address 

the programmatic acquisition dips in the POM 2008 funding and 

place the Light Utility Helicopter program on a more rapid and 

stable production profile. 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARING
170 

MISSILE PROCUREMENT, ARMY 

Fiscal year 2007 appropriation .......................................................... $1,278,967,000 

Fiscal year 2008 budget request ....................................................... 1,645,485,000 

Committee recommendation .............................................................. 2,103,102,000 

Change from budget request ............................................................. +457,617,000 

This appropriation finances the acquisition of surface-to-air, surface-to-surface, air-to-surface, and anti-tank/assault missile systems. Also included are major components, modifications, targets, 

test equipment and production base support. The Committee recommends an appropriation of $2,103,102,000 for Missile Procurement, Army, which is $824,135,000 more than 

the amount provided in fiscal year 2007 and $457,617,000 more 

than the request for fiscal year 2008. 

PROGRAM RECOMMENDED

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


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARING
171 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 076 36323A.074
172 

The adjustments to the budget activities for Missile Procurement, 

Army, are shown below: 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARING
173 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 077 36323A.075
174 

PROCUREMENT OF WEAPONS AND TRACKED COMBAT 

VEHICLES, ARMY 

Fiscal year 2007 appropriation .......................................................... $1,906,368,000 

Fiscal year 2008 budget request ....................................................... 3,089,998,000 

Committee recommendation .............................................................. 4,077,189,000 

Change from budget request ............................................................. +987,191,000 

This appropriation finances the acquisition of tanks; personnel 

and cargo carriers; fighting vehicles; tracked recovery vehicles; selfpropelled and towed howitzers; machine guns; mortars; modification of in-service equipment, initial spares; and production base 

support. The Committee recommends an appropriation of $4,077,189,000 

for Procurement of Weapons and Tracked Combat Vehicles, Army, 

which is $2,170,821 more than the amount provided in fiscal year 

2007 and $987,191,000 more than the request for fiscal year 2008. 

PROGRAM RECOMMENDED

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


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARING
175 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 078 36323A.076
176 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 079 36323A.077
177 

The adjustments to the budget activities for Procurement of 

Weapons and Tracked Combat Vehicles, Army, are shown below: 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARING
178 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 080 36323A.078
179 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 081 36323A.079
180 

STRYKER

The Committee commends the Army for the overall success of the 

Stryker program. Strykers have performed well in combat, demonstrating reliability and survivability. The Committee understands that the schedule for the Initial Operational Test and Evaluation for the Stryker Mobile Gun System (MGS) was delayed from 

the second quarter of fiscal year 2007 to the first quarter of fiscal 

year 2008 due to a change in designated test units. Full rate production is to begin in the second quarter of fiscal year 2008. As 

such, the Committee recommends $810,884,000 in base line funding for Stryker, a reduction of $228,100,000 based on the delay in 

Mobile Gun System testing and production. 

Additionally, the Committee has been informed that additional 

Stryker units would greatly benefit the Army’s overall combat 

power, deployability, flexibility and sustainability. The Committee 

notes that one of the Army’s unfunded requirements for fiscal year 

2008 is for additional Strykers for various purposes including for 

maintenance floats and for certain missions in non-Stryker units. 

However, the Committee believes that the greatest increase in 

overall Army readiness can be gained by adding a Stryker brigade 

to the Army force structure. Accordingly, the Committee recommends an additional $1,102,000,000 to procure an Eighth Army 

Stryker brigade, less the Mobile Gun Systems. The Committee directs the Secretary of the Army to provide a report to the congressional defense committees, not later than December 1, 2007, on the 

future force structure of the Army, including the Grow-the-Army 

combat and support units, and the allocation of the Eighth Stryker 

brigade in the total Army force structure. 

PROCUREMENT OF AMMUNITION, ARMY 

Fiscal year 2007 appropriation .......................................................... $1,719,879,000 

Fiscal year 2008 budget request ....................................................... 2,190,576,000 

Committee recommendation .............................................................. 2,215,976,000 

Change from budget request ............................................................. +25,400,000 

This appropriation finances the acquisition of ammunition, modification of in-service stock, and related production base support including the maintenance, expansion, and modernization of industrial facilities and equipment. 

The Committee recommends an appropriation of $2,215,976,000 

for Procurement of Ammunition, Army, which is $496,097,000 more 

than the amount provided in fiscal year 2007 and $25,400,000 more 

than the request for fiscal year 2008. 

PROGRAM RECOMMENDED

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


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARING
181 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 082 36323A.080
182 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 083 36323A.081
183 

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


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARING
184 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 084 36323A.082
185 

OTHER PROCUREMENT, ARMY 

Fiscal year 2007 appropriation .......................................................... $7,004,914,000 

Fiscal year 2008 budget request ....................................................... 12,647,099,000 

Committee recommendation .............................................................. 11,217,945,000 

Change from budget request ............................................................. ¥1,429,154,000 

This appropriation finances the acquisition of (a) tactical and 

commercial vehicles, including trucks, semi-trailers, and trailers of 

all types to provide mobility and utility support to field forces and 

the worldwide logistical system; (b) communications and electronic 

equipment of all types to provide fixed, semi-fixed, and mobile strategic and tactical communications; and (c) other support equipment, generators and power units, material handling equipment, 

medical support equipment, special equipment for user testing, and 

non-system training devices. In each of these activities, funds are 

also included for the modification of in-service equipment, investment spares and repair parts, and production base support. The Committee recommends an appropriation of $11,217,945,000 for Other Procurement, Army, which is $4,213,031,000 more than 

the amount provided in fiscal year 2007 and $1,429,154,000 less 

than the request for fiscal year 2008. 

PROGRAM RECOMMENDED

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


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARING
186 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 027 HR279.083
187 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 028 HR279.084
188 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 029 HR279.085
189 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 030 HR279.086
190 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 031 HR279.087
191 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 032 HR279.088
192 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 033 HR279.089
193 

The adjustments to the budget activities for Other Procurement, 

Army, are shown below: 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARING
194 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 092 36323A.090
195 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 093 36323A.091
196 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 094 36323A.092
197 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 095 36323A.093
198 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 095 36323A.094
199 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 097 36323A.095
200 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 034 HR279.096
201 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 099 36323A.097
202 

BRIDGE TO FUTURE NETWORKS

On March 5, 2007, congressional notification was made of a 

Nunn-McCurdy cost growth breach for the Warfighter Information 

Network—Tactical (WIN–T). On June 5, 2007, the Under Secretary 

of Defense for Acquisition, Technology and Logistics provided to the 

Congress certification that the WIN–T program satisfied the requirements for continuation. The WIN–T program was restructured 

to absorb the Joint Network Node (JNN) program as an Acquisition 

Category 1D Major Defense Acquisition Program. The restructured 

WIN–T program consists of four progressively more capable increments. The budget request for fiscal year 2008 included 

$433,526,000 for Bridge to Future Networks in the base request, 

with an additional $65,562,000 requested for Grow the Army, for 

a total request of $499,088,000. The funds were allocated as follows: $126,742,000 for Area Common User System modernization; 

and $372,346,000 for procurement of JNN. The Army has reevaluated JNN procurement requirements and has requested that 

$134,000,000 be transferred to Research, Development, Test and 

Evaluation, Army, Line 67, for WIN–T program stabilization. The 

Committee supports this transfer and provides a total of 

$368,088,000 procurement funding for Bridge to Future Networks. 

JOINT HIGH SPEED VESSEL

The Committee recommends $76,000,000 in procurement funding 

for the Joint High Speed Vessel program instead of $210,000,000 

as proposed in the budget request. The Committee understands 

that the program requires $60,000,000 for detailed design, and 

$16,000,000 for long lead items in fiscal year 2008. The remainder 

of the funding is not needed until vessel construction begins in fiscal year 2009. 

HMMWV

The Army’s base budget request of $596,627,000, plus $389,782,000 for Grow the Army requirements, totals $986,409,000 

for HMMWVs. Virtually all the HMMWVs requested will be armored variants. The Committee understands that the driving characteristics and emergency egress procedures for the Up-Armored 

HMMWV are vastly different from an un-armored vehicle. The 

Committee strongly encourages the Army to provide Up-Armored 

HMMWVs for home station training once the needs of deployed 

units have been met. The Committee recommends total funding for 

HMMWVs of $987,409,000, which includes an additional 

$1,000,000 for Vehicle Emergency Escape Windows. 

HEAVY EXPANDED MOBILE TACTICAL TRUCK EXTENDED SERVICE

PROGRAM

The Committee recommendation includes $107,499,000 for the 

Heavy Expanded Mobile Tactical Truck Extended Service Program, 

instead of $197,499,000 as proposed in the budget request. The 

Committee believes that additional Heavy Expanded Mobile Tactical Truck Extended Service Program requirements are more properly considered as part of the Global War on Terror supplemental 

request. 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARING
203 

NIGHT VISION THERMAL WEAPONS SIGHT

The Committee recommendation includes $308,024,000 for Night 

Vision Thermal Weapons Sights instead of $333,024,000 as proposed in the base budget request plus Grow-the-Army requirements. The Committee believes that $25,000,000 of the 

$230,607,000 base budget request is more properly considered as 

part of the Global War on Terror supplemental request. 

TACTICAL OPERATIONS CENTERS

The budget request includes $393,883,000 for Tactical Operations 

Centers in the base request. The Committee recommends funding 

of $197,883,000, a reduction of $196,000,000. The Committee notes 

that an additional $263,709,000 is included for Tactical Operations 

Centers in the global war on terror supplemental request. The 

Committee understands that the Army’s Command Post Platform 

program provides much needed improvements and standardization 

to the Army’s tactical command posts. The Command Post Platform 

fielding will ensure that all tactical Army units share similar command and control capabilities, are interoperable, and more easily 

deployed and supported. The Committee supports the Army’s efforts to field a standardized command post configuration to the active and reserve components of the Army. The Committee recommendation will ensure a program which, when combined with 

supplemental funds, will ensure prompt fielding to deploying units 

and a steady fielding program for non-deployed units. 

FIELD MEDICAL EQUIPMENT LINE

The fiscal year 2008 budget request included $20,000,000 in 

Other Procurement, Army for the new combat support hospital capabilities and field medical systems. The Committee believes that 

$20,000,000 for medical field systems is more properly considered 

as part of the Global War on Terror supplemental request. 

AIRCRAFT PROCUREMENT, NAVY 

Fiscal year 2007 appropriation .......................................................... $10,393,316,000 

Fiscal year 2008 budget request ....................................................... 12,747,767,000 

Committee recommendation .............................................................. 12,470,280,000 

Change from budget request ............................................................. ¥277,487,000 

This appropriation provides funds for the procurement of aircraft 

and related support equipment and programs; flight simulators; 

equipment to modify in-service aircraft to extend their service life, 

eliminate safety hazards and improve aircraft operational effectiveness; and spare parts and ground support equipment for all end 

items procured by this appropriation. 

The Committee recommends an appropriation of $12,470,280,000 

for Aircraft Procurement, Navy, which is $2,076,964,000 more than 

the amount provided in fiscal year 2007 and $277,487,000 less than 

the request for fiscal year 2008. 

PROGRAM RECOMMENDED

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


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARING
204 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 035 HR279.098
205 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 101 36323A.099
206 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 102 36323A.100
207 

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


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARING
208 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 103 36323A.101
209 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 104 36323A.102
210 

UH–1Y/AH–1Z

The UH–1Y/AH–1Z budget request for fiscal year 2008 was submitted prior to the approval of the fiscal year 2007 supplemental 

appropriation that approved a ‘‘new build’’ strategy and funding for 

the AH–1Z aircraft. The new build strategy allows aircraft to remain in the fleet during the manufacture of the new aircraft vice 

having to downsize the fleet during the remanufacture of aircraft. 

The aircraft in the fiscal year 2008 budget that would have been 

inducted into the remanufacture line can now be left in the fleet 

until replaced by new build aircraft in the future, allowing the cost 

of these remanufactured aircraft to be allocated towards higher priorities. Therefore, no funding is provided for the remanufacture of 

AH–1Z aircraft, a reduction of $104,000,000. A total of 

$414,475,000 remains available for the UH–1Y/AH–1Z program. 

E–2D

The budget request contains $57,275,000 toward the purchase of 

advance procurement items for the construction of three fiscal year 

2009 E–2D Advanced Hawkeye aircraft. However, $4,700,000 of 

this material can be delivered within the lifetime of the Aircraft 

Procurement, Navy appropriation of thirty-six months, thus being 

inappropriate to fund with advance procurement funds. These 

items should be considered in the fiscal year 2009 budget review, 

the full funding year of these E–2D aircraft. Therefore, the Committee recommendation provides funding in the amount of 

$52,575,000 for the procurement of long lead items for the fiscal 

year 2009 Advanced Hawkeye aircraft, a decrease of $4,700,000. 

VERTICAL TAKE-OFF UNMANNED AERIAL VEHICLE

The Vertical Take-off Unmanned Aerial Vehicle (VTUAV) will 

provide real-time Intelligence, Surveillance and Reconnaissance 

(ISR) data to tactical users without the use of manned aircraft or 

national assets. The VTUAV program will initially satisfy mission 

requirements for the Littoral Combat Ship (LCS). However, the 

LCS program is experiencing significant program delays and only 

three of the six ships appropriated through fiscal year 2007 will actually be constructed. With this slowdown in the LCS program, the 

Committee believes it is prudent to slow the procurement of LCSassociated equipment and therefore provides no funding for the 

three VTUAV aircraft (and associated support equipment) requested in the budget. 

F–18 SERIES

The request includes funding for the procurement of forty structural life management plan (SLMP) modification kits within operational safety improvement program (OSIP) number 11–99. These 

kits have a 24-month lead time to delivery. Ten of these kits are 

being purchased ahead of need as they will not be installed until 

fiscal year 2011, which is well beyond the stated 24-month delivery 

time. Therefore, the Committee recommendation provides funding 

for the 30 modification kits that will be installed in fiscal year 

2010. 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARING
211 

P–3 SERIES

The request includes funding for the procurement of twentyseven special structural inspection kits (within Operational Safety 

Improvement Program number 005–05). The budget request also 

contains installation funding in the amount of $20,000,000 for a 

portion of these kits when the kits themselves will not deliver until 

fiscal year 2009. Since the kits cannot be installed until they actually deliver, this installation funding is budgeted ahead of need and 

the Committee recommendation provides no installation funding 

for them. 

SPARES

The request includes funding in the amount of $85,000,000 for 

the procurement of spares for the F–35 Joint Strike Fighter. Fiscal 

year 2008 marks the initial procurement year for the Marine Corps 

variant of the aircraft and hinges on a flight test currently scheduled to occur late in the fiscal year. Although spares funding typically is budgeted in lockstep with the procurement of the aircraft, 

in this case the Committee believes procurement of JSF spares is 

premature due to the fact that the aircraft procurement contract 

will not be awarded until late in the year. Therefore, the Committee provides no funding for the procurement of F–35 spares. 

WEAPONS PROCUREMENT, NAVY 

Fiscal year 2007 appropriation .......................................................... $2,573,820,000 

Fiscal year 2008 budget request ....................................................... 3,084,387,000 

Committee recommendation .............................................................. 2,928,126,000 

Change from budget request ............................................................. ¥156,261,000 

This appropriation provides funds for the procurement of strategic and tactical missiles, target drones, torpedoes, guns, associated support equipment, and modification of in-service missiles, 

torpedoes, and guns. The Committee recommends an appropriation of $2,928,126,000 

for Weapons Procurement, Navy, which is $354,306,000 more than 

the amount provided in fiscal year 2007 and $156,261,000 less than 

the request for fiscal year 2008. 

PROGRAM RECOMMENDED

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


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARING
212 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 105 36323A.103
213 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 106 36323A.104
214 

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


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARING
215 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 107 36323A.105
216 

CONVENTIONAL TRIDENT MODIFICATION

The Conventional Trident Modification (CTM) effort is being proposed by the Navy and Department of Defense as the quickest near 

term solution to the prompt global strike concept. All told, the 

Navy is requesting $175,434,000 for the CTM effort, $36,000,000 of 

which is funded in Weapons Procurement, Navy for the procurement of missile hardware, $13,000,000 in Other Procurement, Navy 

for the procurement of platform modifications, and the balance of 

$126,434,000 in Research, Development, Test and Evaluation, 

Navy for development efforts. The Committee understands that the 

technologies being developed for the CTM are in large part transferable to other prompt global strike initiatives. Therefore, in an effort to explore all options of prompt global strike in the most efficient manner, the Department of Defense is directed to create a 

prompt global strike program element within the Research, Development, Test, and Evaluation, Defense-Wide appropriation. This 

new program element will be under the cognizance of the Director, 

Defense Research and Engineering. The Committee provides 

$100,000,000 for this new program element for the development of 

such technologies as propulsion and guidance systems, mission 

planning, re-entry vehicle design, modeling and simulation efforts, 

and launch system infrastructure. These efforts will further the Department’s prompt global strike initiative while not limiting the 

Nation to a single option at this early stage in the concept, but still 

allowing for the CTM option or other such options like Advanced 

Hypersonic Weapon in the near future. Additionally, the Department of Defense is directed to submit a report to the Committee 

that discusses the technology thrusts and investment objectives 

and outlines the allocation of funding towards achieving these objectives. This report shall be submitted no later than January 31, 

2008. 

ADVANCED ANTI-RADIATION GUIDED MISSILE

The Advanced Anti-Radiation Guided Missile (AARGM) is being 

developed to upgrade the legacy AGM–88 High-speed Anti-Radiation Missile (HARM) with multi-mode guidance and targeting capability. The Navy has requested fiscal year 2008 funding for missiles that will be used in the test program as well as $41,302,000 

for the first run of low rate initial production (LRIP) missiles. The 

contract award for the LRIP missiles is predicated on the successful completion of an aggressive developmental testing program. 

This program structure exhibits the classic program concurrency 

that the Committee sees all too often throughout the Department 

of Defense. To reduce program concurrency, the Committee provides no funds for the AARGM LRIP missiles and their associated 

spares. 

PROCUREMENT OF AMMUNITION, NAVY AND MARINE 

CORPS 

Fiscal year 2007 appropriation .......................................................... $767,314,000 

Fiscal year 2008 budget request ....................................................... 760,484,000 

Committee recommendation .............................................................. 1,067,484,000 

Change from budget request ............................................................. +307,000,000 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARING
217 

This appropriation finances the acquisition of ammunition, ammunition modernization, and ammunition-related material for the 

Navy and Marine Corps. The Committee recommends an appropriation of $1,067,484,000 

for Procurement of Ammunition, Navy and Marine Corps, which is 

$300,170,000 more than the amount provided in fiscal year 2007 

and $307,000,000 more than the request for fiscal year 2008. 

PROGRAM RECOMMENDED

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


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARING
218 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 108 36323A.106
219 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 109 36323A.107
220 

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


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARING
221 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 110 36323A.108
222 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 111 36323A.109
223 

SHIPBUILDING AND CONVERSION, NAVY 

Fiscal year 2007 appropriation .......................................................... $10,579,125,000 

Fiscal year 2008 budget request ....................................................... 13,656,120,000 

Committee recommendation .............................................................. 15,303,820,000 

Change from budget request ............................................................. +1,647,700,000 

This appropriation provides funds for the construction of new 

ships and the purchase and conversion of existing ships, including 

hull, mechanical and electrical equipment, electronics, guns, torpedo and missile launching systems, and communication systems. The Committee recommends an appropriation of $15,303,820,000 for Shipbuilding and Conversion, Navy, which is $4,724,695,000 

more than the amount provided in fiscal year 2007 and 

$1,647,700,000 more than the request for fiscal year 2008. 

PROGRAM RECOMMENDED

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


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARING
224 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 112 36323A.110
225 

The adjustments to the budget activities for Shipbuilding and 

Conversion, Navy, are shown below: 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARING
226 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 113 36323A.111
227 

SHIPBUILDING

The Committee is extremely concerned with the current state of 

the Navy shipbuilding program. The Littoral Combat Ship (LCS), 

which will comprise nearly twenty percent of the 313 ship Navy, 

has experienced significant cost growth and delays, and the Navy 

has decreased its near term LCS quantities by three ships, just 

since the submission of the fiscal year 2008 budget. The Committee 

is fearful that if the same type of growth is realized on the DDG–

1000 and carrier replacement programs, the shipbuilding program 

will be put in greater peril. The Nation’s shipbuilders are continuously challenged to maintain a viable industrial base given the low 

ship quantities that the Navy is ordering. The shipbuilding effort 

is desperately in need of stability. The Committee believes that one 

of the biggest factors contributing to the current state of the shipbuilding program is the fact that the Navy encourages ship construction to begin prior to completing the final ship design. Additionally, the Navy shows little discipline in sticking to the design 

once it is complete or nearly complete and orders changes and 

modifications that drive the final cost of the ship upwards. Various 

witnesses, both from the shipbuilding industry and the Navy, in 

hearings before the Committee stated that construction stability 

can be achieved only if construction is not started until the final 

design is complete. Therefore, the Committee directs that future 

construction of ships not begin until the final ship design is complete. The Committee recognizes that this requirement may appear 

to increase the time from funding being appropriated until the delivery of the ship. However, this increase should not be longer than 

the schedule delays caused by the disruptive design changes. Additionally, the probability of completing ships at or near their budgeted cost will significantly increase by having a completed design 

prior to the construction phase. In an effort to achieve these desired results the Committee strongly encourages the Navy to suppress its heavy appetite for changes during construction and accomplish only those design modifications necessary for the successful completion of ship construction or due to safety concerns. Further, the Committee believes that more stability can be gained in 

the shipbuilding program by increasing the throughput of ships 

with proven design and construction processes. Therefore, funding 

is being added to the request for an additional LPD–17 amphibious 

transport dock ship, three additional T–AKE dry cargo/ammunition 

ships (which will buy out the requirement for the Maritime Pre-positioned Force (Future)), and advance procurement for a Virginia 

Class attack submarine. 

As stated previously, the LCS program has been plagued by 

growth and schedule delays. The Committee believes that the best 

course of action for the LCS is to allow the program to stabilize, 

finalize the design, obtain actual program costs, and firm up the 

outyear acquisition strategy. Therefore, funding for only one ship 

(to be combined with funding and material from prior years) is provided for the LCS program. 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARING
228 

VIRGINIA CLASS SUBMARINE

The Virginia Class Submarine program is one of the few Navy 

shipbuilding programs that appears to be on the right track. The 

Committee applauds the teaming relationship between the Navy 

and the construction yards. This relationship has resulted in the 

successful completion of construction after overcoming early problems in the program. However, the remaining challenge in this program is the inability to procure two submarines per year. From the 

outset of the program, the industrial base has been sized to accommodate the construction of two submarines per year. Largely due 

to affordability, the funding for a second submarine has never materialized. However, the Navy seems firmly committed to provide 

funding for the procurement of a second submarine beginning in 

fiscal year 2012. The industry portion of the team is also doing its 

part, by meeting the cost reduction challenge given it by the Navy. 

The cost benchmark of the program is to have a submarine that 

will cost $2,000,000,000 (fiscal year 2005 dollars) when the program begins construction of two submarines per year. Indications 

are that the submarine team is on track to meet that benchmark. 

The program’s second multi-year procurement contract should initiate in fiscal year 2009 and the Virginia Class budget has been 

structured under the assumption that two submarines per year will 

become a reality. In an effort to provide the Navy the opportunity 

to accelerate the procurement of two submarines per year, the 

Committee provides $588,000,000 above the request for the procurement of submarine nuclear and propulsion components as well 

as advance construction items. The Committee directs the Navy to 

make provisions during negotiation of the next multi-year contract 

to accommodate two submarines per year prior to fiscal year 2012, 

in an effort to achieve the best possible pricing arrangements with 

industry. 

LPD–17

The request includes $1,398,922,000 for the procurement of the 

ninth San Antonio Class (LPD–17) Amphibious Transport Dock 

Ship. This ship is the final LPD–17 class ship that the Navy has 

in the budget. The Committee notes that the 313 ship fleet that the 

Navy has stated as a goal requires ten San Antonio Class ships 

and that this tenth ship was the highest priority listed on the 

Navy’s unfunded priority list. In an effort to achieve stability in the 

Navy’s shipbuilding program by increasing throughput and helping 

the Navy meet its stated requirement for LPD–17 Class ships, the 

Committee provides an additional $1,700,000,000 for the procurement of a tenth San Antonio Class Amphibious Transport Dock 

Ship. 

CARRIER REPLACEMENT

The Ship Self Defense System (SSDS) suite of equipment that 

will be installed on board the CVN–78 is a new capability system 

that is still under development. The $99,546,000 estimated cost of 

the system is more than double the cost of the current version of 

SSDS that is being installed on CVN–77 and also LHA–6. While 

the Committee recognizes that an increased capability is bound to 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARING
229 

bear an increased cost, it seems quite unreasonable that an incremental increase in capability will cost more than twice that of the 

current system. Therefore, $79,546,000 is provided for the CVN–78 

SSDS, a decrease of $20,000,000. 

LITTORAL COMBAT SHIP

The Littoral Combat Ship (LCS) was conceived as a low cost, 

flexible, rapidly fielded platform to counter asymmetric littoral 

threats and conduct coastal missions. With a stated requirement of 

55 vessels, the LCS will comprise a significant portion of the 

Navy’s 313 ship fleet. However, this program has been plagued by 

cost growth and schedule delays. Although many variables have 

contributed to this growth, the underlying reason can be attributed 

to concurrency between ship design and ship construction. Through 

fiscal year 2007, the Congress has appropriated funds for the construction of six LCS vessels. The Navy has terminated the contract 

for one of these ships and has proposed using the funding for two 

more ships to pay for cost growth within the program. The end result will be that the funding originally appropriated for six ships 

will actually only procure three vessels. The Committee is disturbed by the revelation that the recent efforts of the Congress to 

improve the Navy’s shipbuilding program via the LCS program 

have not borne fruit. In light of the recent LCS problems, the Committee believes that the best course of action is to allow the program to stabilize, finalize the design, obtain actual program costs, 

and firm up the outyear acquisition strategy. Therefore, the Committee provides $339,482,000 for the procurement of a single LCS, 

a reduction of $571,000,000. This funding is to be combined with 

the materials purchased in prior years for the LCS whose contract 

was terminated, which the Committee understands to be approximately $120,000,000. This allows the Navy to have sufficient funding/materials to purchase a ship at the proposed fiscal year 2008 

LCS cost cap value of $460,000,000. 

DDG–1000 ADVANCE PROCUREMENT

The DDG–1000 Guided Missile Destroyer is being designed as a 

multi-mission surface combatant that is envisioned to be the centerpiece of the future Navy fleet. The request includes funding in 

the amount of $150,886,000 for advance procurement for the fiscal 

year 2009 ship for the purchase of the Integrated Power System 

and Communication Suite. Although this equipment is certainly 

necessary for the construction of the fiscal year 2009 ship, it is 

being requested in fiscal year 2008 for testing to mitigate the risk 

for the first two ships in an effort to maintain the Navy’s acquisition schedule. The Department of Defense’s own Financial Management Regulation (FMR) states that ‘‘Long lead-time procurements 

shall be for components, parts, and material whose lead times are 

greater than the life of the appropriation’’. In this case, lead times 

are well within the life of the appropriation and the items are 

being requested strictly as a risk mitigation effort. The Committee 

believes this to be an improper use of advance procurement funding 

due to lead times of the requested equipment. However, since the 

Committee is already skeptical of the amount of funding budgeted 

for the DDG–1000 lead ships based on the Navy’s track record of 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARING
230 

estimating lead ship costs, the Committee will allow this use of advance procurement in the DDG–1000 program in an effort to minimize further perturbations to the DDG–1000 schedule. The Navy 

is encouraged to review the FMR regarding the proper use of advance procurement funding for future requests. 

DDG–1000

The request includes funding for the procurement of hardware 

for the new dual band radar for installation on the first two ships 

of the class. Although these installations represent the lead installations for this system, the hardware is priced at more than 

$35,000,000 per shipset for the comparable system being installed 

on board the CVN–78. In an effort to reduce this mismatch, the 

DDG–1000 dual band radar funding is reduced by $15,000,000 per 

shipset for the first two ships for a total of $30,000,000. 

LITTORAL COMBAT SHIP OUTFITTING

Outfitting funds are used to acquire on-board repair parts, equipage and other secondary items to fill the ships initial allowances. 

The request includes $4,900,000 in fiscal year 2007 and $4,900,000 

in fiscal year 2008 to satisfy outfitting requirements for LCS–3. 

Since the construction contract for LCS–3 was terminated by the 

Navy, these funds are excess to requirement. The fiscal year 2007 

funds will carry forward and be used to satisfy fiscal year 2008 requirements for other ships. Therefore, the fiscal year 2008 outfitting account is reduced by $9,800,000. Additionally, since the delivery date of LCS–4 has been delayed, the outfitting account also 

contains an excess of $5,000,000 that was appropriated in fiscal 

year 2007 and can now be used to satisfy other ship requirements. 

Therefore, the fiscal year 2008 outfitting program can be reduced 

an additional $5,000,000 to account for this delay. 

LEASING OF FOREIGN BUILT SHIPS

The Committee is concerned with the Navy practice of bypassing 

the intent of the long term capital lease restrictions in the way several foreign built military sealift mission ships are leased. Essentially, these ship leases are entered into on a recurring basis which 

individually meet the intent of the leasing restrictions, but when 

considered cumulatively would violate the spirit and intent of the 

1990 Budget Enforcement Act. The Committee believes this leasing 

practice is harming the Nation’s shipyards and major ship component industrial base by indirectly denying our shipbuilders the opportunity for additional ship construction. The Committee recognizes that the ships leased by the Navy fill an important role that 

must be continued through the near term and into the future. Due 

to the long lead time nature of the shipbuilding industry, ships constructed in the United States could take several years to fill the 

void created if these foreign ships were removed from service by 

statute or other means. However, the Committee strongly believes 

that the American shipbuilders must take advantage of this opportunity. Therefore, the Committee directs the Navy to submit a report that outlines a plan to wean itself off the practice of leasing 

foreign built ships to supplement the fleet and institute the pracVerDate Aug 31 2005 08:25 Jul 31, 2007 Jkt 036903 PO 00000 Frm 00242 Fmt 6601 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\HR279.008 HR279

cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARING
231 

tice of utilizing only American built ships within four years. The 

report should contain plans to use only American built vessels for 

all the needs of the Navy, including the necessary budget and funding plans that may be required to accomplish this. This report 

should be submitted no later than March 31, 2008. 

SHIP INSULATION

The Committee directs the Department of the Navy, in consultation with the National Academy of Sciences (NAS), to assess the 

health effects of respirable, biopersistent manufactured vitreous fibers (MVF) in insulation materials installed on Naval vessels 

under construction, and to submit a report on those effects to the 

Committee no later than January 15, 2008. In a government-funded study pursuant to contracts with the Department of Defense, 

NAS, in its ‘‘Review of the U.S. Navy’s Exposure Standard for Manufactured Vitreous Fibers’’ of 2000, analyzed the Navy’s MVF exposure standard and concluded that ‘‘the Navy’s documentation does 

not provide an adequate assessment of the role of fiber biopersistence in health effects’’. With the installation of alternative insulation material in Naval vessels, the Committee is very concerned 

about the health impacts of respirable, biopersistent MVF in such 

insulation material, and specifically directs the Navy to assess its 

health effects as advised in the 2000 NAS study. 

OTHER PROCUREMENT, NAVY 

Fiscal year 2007 appropriation .......................................................... $4,927,676,000 

Fiscal year 2008 budget request ....................................................... 5,470,412,000 

Committee recommendation .............................................................. 5,298,238,000 

Change from budget request ............................................................. ¥172,174,000 

This appropriation provides funds for the procurement of major 

equipment and weapons other than ships, aircraft, missiles and 

torpedoes. Such equipment ranges from the latest electronic sensors for updates of naval forces, to trucks, training equipment, and 

spare parts. 

The Committee recommends an appropriation of $5,298,238,000 

for Other Procurement, Navy, which is $370,562,000 more than the 

amount provided in fiscal year 2007 and $172,174,000 less than the 

request for fiscal year 2008. 

PROGRAM RECOMMENDED

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


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARING
232 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 036 HR279.112
233 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 037 HR279.113
234 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 038 HR279.114
235 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 039 HR279.115
236 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 040 HR279.116
237 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 041 HR279.117
238 

The adjustments to the budget activities for Other Procurement, 

Navy, are shown below: 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARING
239 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 121 36323A.118
240 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 122 36323A.119
241 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 042 HR279.120
242 

INTEGRATED SUBMARINE IMAGING SYSTEM

The Integrated Submarine Imaging System (ISIS) provides for 

the modernization of submarine imaging systems to improve imaging capabilities in support of ISR requirements. The request includes funding in the amount of $56,198,000 for the procurement 

of thirteen systems and 3 spares. The Navy scheduled the installation of 5 of these systems in fiscal year 2009 and 8 in fiscal year 

2010. The Navy states that the system will deliver fourteen months 

from contract award. With a lead time of fourteen months, the procurement of the 8 systems currently scheduled for installation in 

fiscal year 2010 is ahead of need and can be shifted to fiscal year 

2009. Therefore, $20,698,000 is provided for the procurement of the 

systems and associated spares that will install or be required in fiscal year 2009. 

CRUISER MODERNIZATION PROGRAM

The Cruiser Modernization program provides CG–47 class cruisers with improved warfighting capabilities and extends the mission 

life of the platforms. The request includes funding for the procurement of equipment to be installed during an availability period in 

fiscal year 2011. The specific equipment (SPQ–9B radar, Cooperative Engagement Capability hardware, AEGIS Weapons System 

upgrades, and MK–34 Gun Weapon System hardware) has a 24 

month production lead time. Since the ship availability in fiscal 

year 2011 is a scheduled eleven month availability, the procurement of this equipment in fiscal year 2008 is ahead of need and 

can be deferred until fiscal year 2009. Therefore, no funding is provided to procure equipment for the Cruiser Modernization availability scheduled for fiscal year 2011. 

ASW ENHANCEMENTS

The unfunded priority list provided by the Navy contained a request for Anti-Submarine Warfare (ASW) enhancements to improve 

the ASW capability of the fleet as its fourth highest priority. The 

Committee recognizes the importance of this critical warfighting 

area and strongly supports efforts to improve capability. To that 

end, the Committee provides an additional $29,300,000 for efforts 

such as accelerating DDG–51 class sonar modernization, accelerating the procurement of Common Broadband Advanced Sonar 

System (CBASS) Torpedo Modification Kits, and increased development efforts for the Anti-torpedo Torpedo. 

LITTORAL COMBAT SHIP MISSION MODULES

The Littoral Combat Ship (LCS) is a small surface combatant 

and will operate with the flexibility to be configured with one of a 

variety of three different mission modules depending on the 

tasking. The Navy plan for mission modules is to procure a total 

of 64 LCS modules for the 55 ship class. The request includes 

$80,324,000 for the procurement of two mission modules and associated procurement support as well as $2,900,000 for spare parts. 

At the time of the submission, funding had been appropriated for 

the procurement of six ships and six mission modules through fiscal year 2007. Since the submission of the request, only three of 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARING
243 

these six ships will actually be constructed. The Committee believes the six mission modules purchased in prior years will be 

more than sufficient to satisfy near term LCS requirements considering the reduced near term LCS construction quantity. Therefore, 

no funding is provided for the procurement of LCS mission modules 

and associated spares. 

SUBMARINE SUPPORT EQUIPMENT

The request includes $17,047,000 for the procurement of 7 multifunction modular masts (MMM) for submarines. As a result of 

delays in the development program, the fiscal year 2007 units will 

not actually execute until late in fiscal year 2008. The program’s 

budget takes this long lead time realized in fiscal year 2007 and 

extrapolates it to fiscal year 2008 and beyond. This will result in 

the units scheduled for procurement in fiscal year 2008 not being 

installed until fiscal year 2011. In actuality, these fiscal year 2008 

units will simply award in fiscal year 2009 and deliver in time for 

a fiscal year 2011 installation. Since the MMM units will execute 

in fiscal year 2009, the Committee believes the funding should be 

budgeted in fiscal year 2009. Therefore, no funding is provided for 

the procurement of the MMM in fiscal year 2008. 

Q–70 FAMILY OF DISPLAY SYSTEMS

In the early 1990s, the Committee began investigating the 

Navy’s use of proprietary designs and closed architecture in its display systems. The Committee found this display architecture to be 

costly and operationally limiting in that systems failed to keep up 

with technology advancements associated with commercial off the 

shelf technologies. Consequently, this Committee (and ultimately 

Congress) began funding both research and development and procurement of what is now known as the Q–70 Family of Display 

Systems that is currently in use throughout the fleet on board aircraft, surface ships and submarines. During the ceremonial delivery of the 5000th Q–70 system in 2006, the Navy acknowledged 

that the Q–70’s use of open architecture and commercial off the 

shelf technology has saved the taxpayer nearly $1,600,000,000. The 

Committee applauds the Navy for its efforts and encourages future 

support. In this regard, the Committee provides an additional 

$5,000,000 for the procurement and installation of AN/SPA–25H 

display system refresh kits to further the Navy’s open architecture 

system initiatives. 

MAN OVERBOARD INDICATOR PROGRAM

The Man OverBoard Indicator (MOBI) program was initiated by 

the Congress after being rejected by traditional Navy channels. 

Every year, sailors and marines fall from Navy ships resulting in 

fatalities, serious injuries and the loss of many operational hours 

conducting search and rescue missions. The MOBI allows reduced 

reaction time to overboard incidents, resulting in reduced search 

and rescue time and increased recovery rates. The Committee’s 

support has allowed for installation of MOBI systems on nearly 90 

Navy ships and has been used in the recovery of numerous sailors 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARING
244 

who were in need of rescue or recovery. Therefore, the Committee 

provides $1,000,000 to continue the MOBI progam. 

ENHANCED DETECTION ADJUNCT PROCESSOR

In a July 2003 mission need statement regarding force protection 

capability against asymmetric threats, the Navy states that small 

boats, recreational watercraft, and unmanned service vehicles are 

considered amongst the highest threats to vulnerable targets. This 

is primarily due to the difficulty in detecting these threats in the 

difficult radar environments where they typically operate. The Enhanced Detection Adjunct Processor (EDAP) fulfills the stated Navy 

requirement to protect personnel, equipment and facilities in the 

areas of surface ship defense and port and harbor security. By improving the capability of existing surface search radar systems to 

operate in moderate to high sea states, EDAP will significantly improve a ship’s ability to prevent small boat attacks by identifying 

the threat before an incident occurs. Therefore, the Committee provides $5,000,000 for the procurement of Enhanced Detection Adjunct Processors to upgrade existing surface search radars. 

PROCUREMENT, MARINE CORPS 

Fiscal year 2007 appropriation .......................................................... $894,571,000 

Fiscal year 2008 budget request ....................................................... 2,999,057,000 

Committee recommendation .............................................................. 2,500,882,000 

Change from budget request ............................................................. ¥498,175,000 

This appropriation provides funds for the procurement, production, and modification of equipment, supplies, materials, and spare 

parts. 

The Committee recommends an appropriation of $2,500,882,000 

for Procurement, Marine Corps, which is $1,606,311,000 more than 

the amount provided in fiscal year 2007 and $498,175,000 less than 

the request for fiscal year 2008. 

PROGRAM RECOMMENDED

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


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARING
245 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 124 36323A.121
246 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 125 36323A.122
247 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 126 36323A.123
248 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 127 36323A.124
249 

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


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARING
250 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 128 36323A.125
251 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 129 36323A.126
252 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 130 36323A.127
253 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 131 36323A.128
254 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 132 36323A.129
255 

RANGE TRANSFORMATION INITIATIVE

The Committee recognizes and supports the requirement for a 

large-scale urban warfare training facility to ensure our combat 

forces conduct realistic training prior to deploying overseas. The 

United States Marine Corps is pursuing an initiative to develop an 

urban operations training complex of unprecedented capability. The 

Committee applauds this effort and provided funding in fiscal years 

2006 and 2007 to accelerate this initiative. In fiscal year 2008, the 

Committee provides funding to acquire supporting capabilities to 

maximize the training effectiveness of this large-scale urban warfare training facility. 

AIRCRAFT PROCUREMENT, AIR FORCE 

Fiscal year 2007 appropriation .......................................................... $11,643,356,000 

Fiscal year 2008 budget request ....................................................... $12,393,270,000 

Committee recommendation .............................................................. $11,690,220,000 

Change from budget request ............................................................. ¥703,050,000 

This appropriation provides for the procurement of aircraft, and 

for modification of in-service aircraft to improve safety and enhance 

operational effectiveness. It also provides for initial spares and 

other support equipment to include aerospace ground equipment 

and industrial facilities. In addition, funds are provided for the procurement of flight training simulators to increase combat readiness 

and to provide for more economical training. 

The Committee recommends an appropriation of $11,690,220,000 

for Aircraft Procurement, Air Force, which is $46,864,000 more 

than the amount provided in fiscal year 2007 and $703,050,000 less 

than the request for fiscal year 2008. 

PROGRAM RECOMMENDED

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


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARING
256 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 133 36323A.130
257 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 134 36323A.131
258 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 135 36323A.132
259 

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


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARING
260 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 136 36323A.133
261 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 043 HR279.134
262 

C–17 PRODUCTION

The Committee is aware that $2,400,000,000 for procurement of 

additional C–17 aircraft has been included in title XV of the Housepassed National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2008. 

This title authorizes supplemental appropriations for Operation 

Iraqi Freedom and Operation Enduring Freedom. The Committee 

has not addressed these fiscal year 2008 supplemental funding requirements in this legislation. Rather, the Committee will consider 

these funding requirements in a separate measure at a later time. 

GLOBAL HAWK

The budget request includes $514,005,000 for procurement of five 

Global Hawk air vehicles, sensor payloads, one Ground Segment 

and associated support equipment. The Committee recommends reducing the request by $111,000,000, including two air vehicles. 

The Committee has long been concerned about delays in production of Global Hawk. While a highly capable surveillance platform 

when in operation, delays in the production of the more advanced 

RQ–4B air vehicle continue. In just the last year, delivery of the 

first RQ–4B slipped another three months, which amounts to a fifteen month delay from its initial estimated delivery date. The program continues to struggle with supplier manufacturing problems 

that are significantly impacting production schedules. 

The Committee notes that even if the program were able to deliver Lot 7 aircraft on the current schedule, which history indicates 

is unlikely, one of these aircraft would not deliver until the very 

end of fiscal year 2010 and the last aircraft in the lot would deliver 

in fiscal year 2011. The Committee has traditionally eliminated 

funding for such procurements as early-to-need and believes that, 

by reducing the procurement of air vehicles, it affords the program 

the opportunity to demonstrate an ability to meet production 

timelines. 

B–2 RADAR MODERNIZATION

The currently fielded B–2 radar system, including the radar, defensive management system (DMS) and transponder, operates 

within a portion of the electromagnetic spectrum where the U.S. 

Government is designated as a secondary user. Secondary user status means that the B–2 radar system cannot interfere with primary users. Interference with primary users by a secondary user 

invokes statutory penalties. Due to the planned expansion of primary users in the currently fielded radar system frequency band, 

in the near future the B–2 will no longer be able to operate without 

high probability of interference with primary users. In order to ensure the continued operation of the B–2 weapon system, the B–2 

radar system must be modified to allow operation in another portion of the spectrum where the U.S. Government is guaranteed primary user status. The B–2 radar must vacate its current frequency 

by a classified, near-term date. A program to develop and field a 

new radar system is ongoing. 

The budget request includes $270,649,000 for the procurement of 

eight production radar units. Due to technical maturity problems 

with the radar modernization program’s antenna, the fiscal year 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARING
263 

2007 funds for four production units have been placed on hold and 

will be used for other unrelated efforts. Subsequent to the submission of the fiscal year 2008 budget request, the Air Force acknowledged the impact on production caused by the technical maturity 

problems and requested that the funding for the procurement of 

units requested in the fiscal year 2008 budget be reduced. In addition, the Air Force communicated to the Committee a requirement 

for additional funds supporting the radar’s development program 

beyond what was requested in the fiscal year 2008 budget. Accordingly, the Committee reduces the procurement request by 

$100,000,000, including three radar units. As requested by the Air 

Force, the Committee provides an additional $38,000,000 in Line 

70, Research, Development, Test and Evaluation, Air Force, for the 

ongoing radar development program. 

MISSILE PROCUREMENT, AIR FORCE 

Fiscal year 2007 appropriation .......................................................... $3,914,703,000 

Fiscal year 2008 budget request ....................................................... 5,131,002,000 

Committee recommendation .............................................................. 4,920,959,000 

Change from budget request ............................................................. ¥210,043,000 

This appropriation provides for procurement, installation, and 

checkout of strategic ballistic and other missiles, modification of inservice missiles, and initial spares for missile systems. It also provides for operational space systems, boosters, payloads, drones, associated ground equipment, non-recurring maintenance of industrial facilities, machine tool modernization, and special program 

support. The Committee recommends an appropriation of $4,920,959,000 for Missile Procurement, Air Force, which is $1,006,256,000 more 

than the amount provided in fiscal year 2007 and $210,043,000 less 

than the request for fiscal year 2008. 

PROGRAM RECOMMENDED

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


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARING
264 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 139 36323A.136
265 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 140 36323A.137
266 

The adjustments to the budget activities for Missile Procurement, 

Air Force, are shown below: 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARING
267 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 142 36323A.138
268 

JOINT AIR TO SURFACE STANDOFF MISSILE (JASSM)

The fiscal year 2008 budget request includes $201,125,000 for the 

procurement of 210 Joint Air to Surface Standoff Missiles 

(JASSMs). For several years now the Committee has expressed 

deep reservations about the reliability of this missile. Until recently, multiple test failures indicated that, in its current production configuration, the missile was about as likely to fail a mission 

as it was to succeed. However, during two days of recent flight testing in which four missiles were fired, all four of the missiles failed. 

In addition, in February the program reported a Nunn-McCurdy 

unit cost breach that requires a certification by the Office of the 

Under Secretary of Defense for Acquisition, Technology and Logistics before the program can proceed. That certification has now 

been deferred twice, pending approval of a plan to implement management controls and improve reliability. Recognizing these events, 

the Committee provides $167,125,000 for JASSM procurement, the 

same level as provided in fiscal year 2007, a reduction of 

$34,000,000 from the budget request. 

ADVANCED EXTREMELY HIGH FREQUENCY PROGRAM

The Committee recommends $125,000,000 for Advanced Extremely High Frequency satellite number 4 advanced procurement, 

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

PROCUREMENT OF AMMUNITION, AIR FORCE 

Fiscal year 2007 appropriation .......................................................... $1,054,302,000 

Fiscal year 2008 budget request ....................................................... 868,917,000 

Committee recommendation .............................................................. 342,494,000 

Change from budget request ............................................................. ¥526,423,000 

This appropriation finances the acquisition of ammunition, modifications, spares, weapons, and other ammunition-related items for 

the Air Force. 

The Committee recommends an appropriation of $342,494,000 for 

Procurement of Ammunition, Air Force, which is $711,808,000 less 

than the amount provided in fiscal year 2007 and $526,423,000 less 

than the request for fiscal year 2008. 

PROGRAM RECOMMENDED

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


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARING
269 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 144 36323A.139
270 

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


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARING
271 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 143 36323A.140
272 

FLARES

The fiscal year 2008 budget request includes $274,291,000 for 

procurement of flares. Flares are dispensed from a variety of aircraft to either protect the aircraft by decoying enemy heat-seeking 

missiles or as an illumination source for reconnaissance, target 

marking, emergency night landings or search and rescue. Due to 

ongoing contingency operations, funding for the procurement of 

flares increased $106,050,000 beyond the planned increase from fiscal year 2007 to fiscal year 2008. As such, the Committee defers 

the consideration of these funds until such time that it addresses 

fiscal year 2008 supplemental requirements for ongoing operations. 

OTHER PROCUREMENT, AIR FORCE 

Fiscal year 2007 appropriation .......................................................... $15,493,486,000 

Fiscal year 2008 budget request ....................................................... 15,421,162,000 

Committee recommendation .............................................................. 15,255,186,000 

Change from budget request ............................................................. ¥165,976,000 

This appropriation provides for the procurement of weapon systems and equipment other than aircraft and missiles. Included are 

vehicles, electronic and telecommunications systems for command 

and control of operational forces, and ground support equipment for 

weapon systems and supporting structure. 

The Committee recommends an appropriation of $15,255,186,000 

for Other Procurement, Air Force, which is $238,300,000 less than 

the amount provided in fiscal year 2007 and $165,976,000 less than 

the request for fiscal year 2008. 

PROGRAM RECOMMENDED

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


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARING
273 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 147 36323A.142
274 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 148 36323A.143
275 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 149 36323A.144
276 

The adjustments to the budget activities for Other Procurement, 

Air Force, are shown below: 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARING
277 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 150 36323A.145
278 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 151 36323A.146
279 

PROCUREMENT, DEFENSE-WIDE 

Fiscal year 2007 appropriation .......................................................... $2,903,292,000 

Fiscal year 2008 budget request ....................................................... 3,318,834,000 

Committee recommendation .............................................................. 3,335,637,000 

Change from budget request ............................................................. +16,803,000 

This appropriation provides funds for the procurement, production, and modification of equipment, supplies, materials, and spare 

parts. The Committee recommends an appropriation of $3,335,637,000 for Procurement, Defense-Wide, which is $432,345,000 more than 

the amount provided in fiscal year 2007 and $16,803,000 more than 

the amount requested for fiscal year 2008. 

PROGRAM RECOMMENDED

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


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARING
280 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 044 HR279.147
281 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 045 HR279.148
282 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 046 HR279.149
283 

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


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARING
284 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 047 HR279.150
285 

NATIONAL GUARD AND RESERVE EQUIPMENT 

Fiscal year 2007 appropriation ........................................................ $290,000,000 

Fiscal year 2008 budget request ..................................................... – – – Committee recommendation ............................................................ 925,000,000 

Change from budget request ........................................................... +925,000,000 

The Committee recommends an appropriation of $925,000,000 for National Guard and Reserve Equipment, which is $635,000,000 

more than the amount appropriated in fiscal year 2007 and 

$925,000,000 more than the request for fiscal year 2008. The Committee directs that no less than $700,000,000 be provided to the 

Army National Guard to continue the effort begun in fiscal year 

2007 to meet the ‘‘Essential 10 Equipment Requirements for the 

Global War on Terror’’ as identified by the Chief, National Guard 

Bureau. The Committee has also provided funds for National 

Guard and Reserve equipment consistent with the budget request 

within the procurement accounts as noted in the following table. 

Additionally, the Committee has added funding for Guard and Reserve equipment in excess of the request in several procurement accounts, as described elsewhere in this report. 

[In thousands of dollars] 

Accounts Committee 

recommended; 

Aircraft procurement, Army ............................................................................................................................ $224,844 

Missile Procurement, Army ............................................................................................................................. 307,792 

Procurement of W&TCV, Army ........................................................................................................................ 612,657 

Procurement of Ammunition, Army ................................................................................................................ 310,102 

Other Procurement, Army ............................................................................................................................... 3,041,223 

Aircraft Procurement, Navy ............................................................................................................................ 28,221 

Procurement of Ammo, Navy & Marine Corps ............................................................................................... 222 

Other Procurement, Navy ................................................................................................................................ 23,499 

Procurement, Marine Corps ............................................................................................................................ 99,900 

Aircraft Procurement, Air Force ...................................................................................................................... 807,628 

Procurement of Ammunition, Air Force .......................................................................................................... 162,446 

Other Procurement, Air Force ......................................................................................................................... 142,960 

National Guard & Reserve Equipment ........................................................................................................... 925,000 

TOTAL .............................................................................................................................................................. 6,686,494 

DEFENSE PRODUCTION ACT PURCHASES 

Fiscal year 2007 appropriation .......................................................... $63,184,000 

Fiscal year 2008 budget request ....................................................... 18,592,000 

Committee recommendation .............................................................. 64,092,000 

Change from budget request ............................................................. +45,500,000 

The Committee recommends an appropriation of $64,092,000 for 

Defense Production Act Purchases, which is $908,000 more than 

the amount provided in fiscal year 2007 and $45,500,000 more than 

the request for fiscal year 2008. 

The Committee recommendation shall be distributed as follows: 

Project Amount 

Beryllium Supply Industrial Base ................................................................................................................... $11,500,000 

Lithium Ion Battery Production Initiative ....................................................................................................... 1,089,000 

Blue Force Tracking Production Initiative ...................................................................................................... 2,000,000 

Power & Energy Systems Production Initiative .............................................................................................. 4,000,000 

Rare Earth Magnets Production Initiative ..................................................................................................... 1,986,000 

Traveling Wave Tube Amplifiers for Space .................................................................................................... 2,017,000 

ALON and Spinel Optical Ceramics ............................................................................................................... 3,500,000 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARING
286 

Project Amount 

Production of Affordable Direct Methanol Fuel Cells .................................................................................... 2,000,000 

SWORDS Safety Confirmation Testing ............................................................................................................ 2,000,000 

Photovoltaic Solar Cell Encapsulent Domestic Production Ctr ...................................................................... 1,500,000 

Global Personal Recovery System Single Card Solution ................................................................................ 1,500,000 

Flexible Aerogel Material Supplier Initiative .................................................................................................. 2,000,000 

Low Cost Military GPS .................................................................................................................................... 2,000,000 

Life Cycle Support Center for Unmanned Systems ........................................................................................ 3,000,000 

Vacuum Induction Melting and Vacuum Arc Re-melting Furnace Capacity ................................................. 23,000,000 

Production of Miniature Compressors for Electronics and Personal Cooling ................................................ 1,000,000 

BERYLLIUM SUPPLY INDUSTRIAL BASE

The Committee recommendation includes $11,500,000, an increase of $4,000,000 over the request, for continued efforts to maintain and support the beryllium supply industrial base, including 

the continued design and construction of a new production plant. 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARING
(287) 

TITLE IV 

RESEARCH, DEVELOPMENT, TEST AND EVALUATION 

The fiscal year 2008 Department of Defense Research, Development, Test and Evaluation budget request totals $75,117,194,000. 

The accompanying bill recommends $76,231,440,000. The total 

amount recommended is an increase of $1,114,246,000 above the 

fiscal year 2008 budget estimate and is $509,836,000 above the 

total provided in fiscal year 2007. The table below summarizes the 

budget estimate and the Committee’s recommendations. 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARING
288 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 048 HR279.151
289 

CRUISE MISSILE DEFENSE

The Committee remains concerned about the lack of an integrated defense of the homeland against cruise missile, other lowaltitude aircraft and short range missile attacks. While the Committee endorses the plan for the Commander, United States Strategic Command, to be the Air and Missile Defense Integrating Authority, and for the United States Northern Command to retain responsibility for the Homeland Air and Cruise Missile Defense mission, the Committee believes sufficient progress has not been made 

with respect to developing and fielding the capabilities necessary 

for defense against such threats. To ensure progress toward fielding this critical capability, the Committee directs the Secretary of 

Defense to provide a report to the congressional defense committees 

within 90 days of the enactment of this Act. The report shall include a plan for development of the cruise missile defense capabilities needed, deployment of those capabilities, and integration of 

those capabilities into the ballistic missile defense system when 

feasible. The plan shall specify an organization within the Department of Defense responsible for budgeting for and developing an 

overall architecture definition, acquisition planning, integration 

and testing of recommended deployment options, and execution of 

the acquisition plan. This office will also be responsible for coordinating with U.S. Strategic Command and U.S. Northern Command. 

In addition, this plan will identify each element of the Department 

of Defense that will be responsible under the plan for individual 

element program acquisition execution in order to achieve an integrated homeland defense capability. The Committee strongly recommends leveraging both the existing ballistic missile defense command and control capabilities where applicable and the ongoing 

asymmetric missile defense architecture definition activity. 

JOINT COMMON MISSILE/JOINT AIR-TO-GROUND MISSILE

The Joint Air-to-Ground Missile (JAGM), formerly known as the 

Joint Common Missile (JCM), is a fixed and rotary wing aviationlaunched missile system that provides advanced line-of-sight and 

non-line-of-sight capabilities, including precision strike, passive, 

and fire-and-forget seeker technologies with increased range and 

lethality. JAGM provides double the range of Hellfire (16,000 v. 

8,000 meters for helicopter launches) allowing flight crews to take 

full advantage of target acquisition and guidance systems. 

The Joint Common Missile (JCM) program was designed to mitigate missile credibility gaps identified by the Joint Capabilities Integration and Development System (JCIDS). The program has performed on schedule and on budget. In December 2004, the Department of Defense terminated the program choosing to assume temporary risk, and rely on less capable legacy missiles, or other guided munitions, which address some of the same targets. In August 

of 2005, the Joint Requirements Oversight Council revalidated the 

requirement for Joint Common Missile. A technology maturation 

effort began in February 2005. In September 2006 the Joint Staff 

published Joint Requirements Oversight Memorandum 185–06, reestablishing the program. The Joint Common Missile has been renamed the Joint Air-to-Ground Missile. On May 14, 2007, the 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARING
290 

Army notified the JCM/JAGM contractor of a ‘‘Limitation of 

Funds’’, that no additional funding would be added to the contract, 

and provided the contractor with close out instructions. The Department of Defense has indicated plans for a JCM/JAGM re-competition. 

Congress added funds in the Department of Defense Appropriations Acts for fiscal years 2006 and 2007 to keep the JCM program 

going, recognizing the advanced capabilities offered by the JCM 

program and also recognizing that the legacy Maverick, Hellfire 

and TOW missiles offered less capability and an aging inventory. 

The fiscal year 2008 budget request includes $53,500,000 in Research, Development, Test and Evaluation, Army; and $15,000,000 

in Research Development, Test and Evaluation, Navy for JAGM. 

The Committee encourages the Department of Defense to continue to pursue the Joint Air-to-Ground Missile program and to 

fully resource the program in order to provide flight crews with a 

weapon system that has greater engagement range, insensitive munitions technology, and improved seeker, warhead and rocket motor 

technologies. The Committee notes with considerable frustration 

that the Department of Defense has poorly managed and finally 

terminated a highly successful program. The Department chose to 

terminate a program with a validated requirement that was performing on cost and schedule, and the Department did not execute 

the additional funding that the Congress provided to continue this 

successful program. 

The Committee recommendation fully funds the fiscal year 2008 

request for Joint Air-to-Ground Missile. The Committee strongly 

encourages the Department of Defense to fully fund the Joint Airto-Ground Missile program in future budget requests. Additionally, 

the Committee directs the Government Accountability Office (GAO) 

to conduct a review of the management by the Department of Defense of the Joint Common Missile program to include program requirements validation; program performance; the decision to terminate the program; subsequent requirements revalidation; the execution of additional funding provided by Congress in order to continue the program; and the decision to re-compete the program 

under a new name, Joint Air-to-Ground Missile. The GAO shall 

provide a report to the congressional defense committees not later 

than January 30, 2008. 

SMALL BUSINESS TECHNOLOGY INSERTION

The Committee notes that several major acquisition programs 

under the purview of the Department of Defense have been 

plagued by cost growth. The Committee is troubled by the seemingly increasing trend in the number of programs that breach the 

Nunn-McCurdy thresholds each year. A clear cut cause for this 

trend is not immediately obvious. The Department often preaches 

transformation and acquisition reform in its acquisition policies 

and procedures, however the cost growth trend continues. The 

Committee recognizes that transformation combined with a smart 

acquisition process should result in affordable and interoperable 

weapon systems and platforms. Open architecture systems are an 

example of a tranformational technology that has resulted in cost 

savings or avoidance to the Department. The Committee believes 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARING
291 

that an untapped source for similar technologies and ideas is the 

small business community which harbors many of the Nation’s innovative thinkers and creative minds. In an effort to tap this 

source for transformational technologies and ideas that should lead 

to cost reduction measures such as improved manufacturing processes, open architecture technologies, software development and a 

host of others, the Committee provides $100,000,000 to the Research and Development accounts of the services. This funding will 

be available only to fund small business efforts for high risk/high 

reward component and technology development for inclusion in the 

major program acquisition process. 

SPECIAL INTEREST ITEMS

Items for which additional funds have been provided as shown in 

the project level tables or in paragraphs using the phrase ‘‘only for’’

or ‘‘only to’’ in this report are congressional interest items for the 

purpose of the Base for Reprogramming (DD 1414). Each of these 

items must be carried on the DD Form 1414 at the stated amount, 

specifically addressed in the conference report. These items remain 

special interest items whether or not they are repeated in a subsequent conference report. 

REPROGRAMMING GUIDANCE FOR ACQUISITION ACCOUNTS

The Committee directs the Department of Defense to continue to 

follow the reprogramming guidance specified in the report accompanying the House version of the fiscal year 2006 Department of 

Defense Appropriations Bill (H.R. 109–110). Specifically, the dollar 

threshold for reprogramming funds will remain at $20,000,000 for 

procurement and $10,000,000 for research, development, test and 

evaluation. The Department shall continue to follow the limitation 

that prior approval reprogrammings are set at either the specified 

dollar threshold or 20 percent of the procurement or research, development, test and evaluation line, whichever is less. These 

thresholds are cumulative. Therefore, if the combined value of 

transfers into or out of a procurement (P–1) or research, development, test and evaluation (R–1) line exceeds the identified threshold, the Department of Defense must submit a prior approval reprogramming to the congressional defense committees. In addition, 

guidelines on the application of prior approval reprogramming procedures for congressional special interest items are established 

elsewhere in this report. 

RESEARCH, DEVELOPMENT, TEST AND EVALUATION, ARMY 

Fiscal year 2007 appropriation .......................................................... $11,054,958,000 

Fiscal year 2008 budget request ....................................................... 10,589,604,000 

Committee recommendation .............................................................. 11,509,540,000 

Change from budget request ............................................................. +919,936,000 

This appropriation finances the research, development, test and 

evaluation activities of the Department of the Army. 

The Committee recommends an appropriation of $11,509,540,000 

for Research, Development, Test and Evaluation, Army, which is 

$454,582,000 more than the amount provided in fiscal year 2007 

and $919,936,000 more than the request for fiscal year 2008. 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARING
292 

PROGRAM RECOMMENDED

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


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARING
293 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 049 here HR279.152
294 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 050 here HR279.153
295 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 051 here HR279.154
296 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 052 here HR279.155
297 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 053 here HR279.156
298 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 054 here HR279.157
299 

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


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARING
300 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 055 here HR279.158
301 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 056 here HR279.159
302 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 165 here 36323A.160
303 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 057 here HR279.161
304 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 058 here HR279.162
305 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 168 here 36323A.163
306 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 059 here HR279.164
307 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 060 here HR279.165
308 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 171 here 36323A.166
309 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 061 here HR279.167
310 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 173 here 36323A.168
311 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 174 here 36323A.169
312 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 175 here 36323A.170
313 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 176 here 36323A.171
314 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 177 here 36323A.172
315 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 178 here 36323A.173
316 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 179 here 36323A.174
317 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 180 here 36323A.175
318 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 181 here 36323A.176
319 

FUTURE COMBAT SYSTEMS

The Army began the Future Combat Systems (FCS) program in 

May 2003 with the aggressive and somewhat risky strategy of defining requirements and maturing technology simultaneously. The 

fiscal year 2008 request includes nearly $3,600,000,000 in research, 

development, test and evaluation funding, an increase of 

$137,000,000 above the fiscal year 2007 appropriated amount. The 

budget request for FCS includes for the first time procurement 

funds in the amount of $99,606,000 for facilitization and long lead 

items. FCS requested fiscal year 2008 funding supports the first of 

three planned technology spin outs which will deliver the benefits 

of FCS technology to other Army elements. Milestone 1 spin outs 

are planned to include Network Capability Integration kits for 

Abrams Tanks, Bradley Fighting Vehicles and HMMWVs. In preparing the fiscal year 2008 request, the Army reduced FCS funding 

by $266,800,000, seeking efficiencies and improved management 

oversight in cost control. The Army also deferred four of the original 18 systems: Class II and Class III unmanned aerial vehicles; 

intelligent munitions systems; and large unmanned ground vehicles. A recurring concern in the program has been the demonstrated levels of technology readiness. However the Government 

Accountability Office reports that about 80 percent of FCS technologies can be assessed as mature, double the number assessed as 

mature a year ago. The Committee remains committed to Army 

force modernization and understands that the centerpiece and primary effort in Army modernization is FCS. The Committee encourages the Army to enhance program stability and achieve advancements in technology to benefit the current and near term force. The 

Committee recommends full funding of $99,606,000 for FCS procurement. The Committee recommends reductions totaling 

$433,800,000 in FCS research, development, test and evaluation 

lines as detailed in the Project Level Adjustment tables. The Committee recommends an additional $25,000,000 for FCS in System 

of Systems Engineering and Program Management for Small Business Technology Insertion. 

TACTICAL METAL FABRICATION SYSTEM (TAC FAB)

The Committee recognizes the successful implementation of the 

Army’s Rapid Manufacturing System, formerly known as Mobile 

Parts Hospital, but is concerned that the program is unable to address the significant need for cast parts for tanks, vehicles, guns 

and other weapons systems. The Committee is aware that Soldiers 

and Marines in Iraq have expressed a need for a mobile foundry, 

co-located with deployed forces. The Committee understands that 

the Tactical Metal Fabrication System would provide a mobile, containerized foundry to serve as companion and complement to the 

Rapid Manufacturing System. The Committee also understands 

that such an asset can significantly contribute to easing current 

reset demands. The Committee, therefore, recommends an additional $3,000,000 in PE 0602601A, Research, Development, Test 

and Evaluation, Army, Combat Vehicle and Automotive Technology, for the Tactical Metal Fabrication System. 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARING
320 

WARFIGHTER INFORMATION NETWORK—TACTICAL

On March 5, 2007, congressional notification was made of a 

Nunn-McCurdy cost growth breach for the Warfighter Information 

Network—Tactical (WIN–T). On June 5, 2007, the Under Secretary 

of Defense for Acquisition, Technology and Logistics provided to the 

Congress certification that the WIN–T program satisfied the requirements for continuation. The WIN–T program was restructured 

to absorb the Joint Network Node (JNN) program as an Acquisition 

Category 1D Major Defense Acquisition Program. The restructured 

WIN–T program consists of four progressively more capable increments. The Committee fully supports the Army’s efforts to stabilize 

the WIN–T and JNN programs through one overarching Acquisition Strategy emphasizing an incremental approach. The Committee understands that each element of the restructured WIN–T/ 

JNN program will report via a separate Selected Acquisition Report for enhanced accountability. The budget request included 

$222,296,000 for WIN–T. The Committee recommends 

$356,296,000, an increase of $134,000,000. The additional funds 

are transferred from Other Procurement, Army line 67 for JNN 

procurement in order to stabilize the WIN–T program and the incremental approach for the combined JNN and WIN–T program. 

GLOBAL COMBAT SUPPORT SYSTEM—ARMY

The Committee recommends $94,689,000 for Global Combat Support System—Army, instead of $129,689,000 as proposed in the 

budget request. GCSS–A is the tactical component of the Single 

Army Logistics Enterprise, and will implement a comprehensive logistics automation solution for deployed units that provides streamlined supply operations, maintenance operations, property accountability and logistics management, and integration procedures. The 

Committee notes, however, that the Army is encountering problems 

in executing the acquisition and test strategies for this program, 

which will likely affect the Army’s ability to execute funds in a 

timely manner. 

HYBRID PROPELLANT FOR MEDIUM AND LARGE CALIBER AMMUNITION

The Committee recommends $8,000,000 in Research, Development, Test and Evaluation, Army, Line 108, only to continue the 

development of a HYBRID propellant to be used in small, medium 

and large caliber munitions. HYBRID propellant combines the 

properties of chemical deterrents with the geometry of perforated 

propellants, resulting in the highest possible ballistic performance 

that can be tailored to meet specific gun applications. This additional funding will allow the Army to qualify the 105mm Artillery 

XM350 HYBRID propellant charge and support the Extended 

Range Guided Munitions propellant testing and shipboard qualification. The XM350 HYBRID propellant charge will replace both 

the M200 and the M67 propellant charges with one propellant due 

to the HYBRID propellant’s flexibility and superior ballistic properties and thereby simplify battlefield management. Furthermore, 

successful implementation of the HYBRID propellant will significantly reduce the Army logistics burden and the corresponding procurement and life cycle costs via the highest possible muzzle velocVerDate Aug 31 2005 08:25 Jul 31, 2007 Jkt 036903 PO 00000 Frm 00332 Fmt 6601 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\HR279.010 HR279

cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARING
321 

ity for extended ranges/lethality, lighter barrels with less recoil and 

extended wear characteristics. 

RAPID RESPONSE SYSTEM FOR ACTIVE PROTECTION OF GROUND AND

AIR VEHICLES

The Committee recommends $5,000,000 in Research, Development, Test and Evaluation, Army, Line 46, only for the Rapid Response System for Active Protection of Ground and Air Vehicles. 

The technology underlying this initiative has been demonstrated as 

part of the Overwatch Advanced Concept Technology Demonstration and the Weapons Surveillance System program. The Committee recognizes the need to extend this technology in order to 

provide a Rapid Response Sensor System for immediate detection, 

warning and cueing as part of an active protection countermeasure 

system for protecting ground and airborne vehicles against projectile and missile threats. This program will provide key advances in 

hostile fire detection and classification in support of air and ground 

vehicle protection and next generation hostile fire detection for 

manned and unmanned platforms. 

RESEARCH OF ADVANCED COMMUNICATIONS TECHNOLOGIES

The Committee recommends $5,000,000 in Research, Development, Test and Evaluation, Army, Line 23, PE 0602782A, only for 

the research of advanced communications technologies for the purpose of providing the Army with enhanced capabilities for secure, 

mobile, networked communications, assured information delivery 

and presentation of information that enables decision making. This 

activity includes but is not limited to Project 779 (C2 and Platform 

Electronic technology) and Project H92 (Communications Technology). 

TACTICAL WHEELED VEHICLE COMPOSITE COMPONENT WEIGHT

REDUCTION PROGRAM

The Committee has provided an additional $3,000,000 in Research, Development, Test and Evaluation, Army, line 33, to design, optimize, fabricate, and test composite components that can 

be applied to the Army’s Family of Medium Tactical Vehicles 

(FMTV) and other interim vehicles in order to decrease weight and 

increase protection. The Army’s Tank Automotive Command has 

completed work with industry to make a lighter and stronger composite hood for the HMMWV as well as other components for light 

vehicle platforms. Technology and processes used in this program 

will be applied to components on FMTV trucks and other vehicles 

that are being created for the purpose of replacing the HMMWV 

in combat situation. Larger logistics trucks have the same weight 

reduction and protection enhancement needs as the HMMWV. 

Such a program will enhance the military’s industrial base and result in an Army fleet of larger and better armored trucks. 

NEUROTOXIN EXPOSURE TREATMENT RESEARCH PROGRAM

The Committee is aware that the United States Army Medical 

Research and Materiel Command (USAMRMC) is conducting excellent research in investigating the underlying biologic mechaisms 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARING
322 

and therapeutic interventions of neuro-degenerative effects caused 

by deployment, environmental, and occupational exposures. Therefore, the Committee recommends $25,000,000 for the continuation 

of this vital research into Parkinson’s and other neurolorical disorders through collabortive work between the military, a non-profit 

organization and an academic laboratory with distinguished scientific credentials in this field. 

PAIN AND NEUROSCIENCE CENTER RESEARCH PROGRAM

The Committee is aware of the exceptional research outcomes of 

the Pain and Neuroscience Center Research Program, including the 

development of protocols for appropriate peripheral nerve block 

catheterization use for severe peripheral limb loss and damage, and 

the development of a comprehensive research, clinical and educational program to address a variety of neurological conditions 

with military and civilian relevance, focusing on acute neurology 

and neuromuscular disorders. The Committee continues to support 

this effort to increase the quality of battlefield and post-deployment 

pain management and neurological care. 

SUSTAINING SUPPORT FOR ONGOING OPERATIONS

The Committee is concerned that the Army’s C4ISR research, development, test and evaluation acquisition and sustainment assets 

are suffering workforce attrition at an unacceptably high rate. To 

ensure the continuity of support for ongoing operations, the Committee provides robust funding for critical C4ISR research and development to ensure that workforce attrition is mitigated. The 

Committee will examine both the reasons for and potential solutions to this attrition problem. 

UNDERSEA UXO CLEANUP

The Committee applauds the Army’s effects to characterize, monitor and clean up undersea munitions off the coast of Oahu. The 

Committee encourages the Army to capitalize on the work being 

done by the University of Hawaii and their partners to conduct investigations and clean up at ocean dumping sites around the 

United States. The Committee believes that the Hawaii Undersea 

Chemical Weapons Assessment Program off Pearl Harbor and the 

coast of Wainae could serve as a template for work at other undersea clean up sites and encourages the Army to monitor project activities for possible use of duplication elsewhere. 

ADVANCED AFFORDABLE TURBINE ENGINE (AATE)

The Committee is aware that the Army recently conducted a 

competition for design and concept demonstration of an advanced 

technology 3000 shaft horsepower turbine engine for the application to H–60 Black Hawks, AH–64 Apaches and other future force 

rotorcraft. The Committe, however, is concerned that the Army’s 

current engine development approach may lead to selecting a single engine supplier prematurely. For these reasons, the Committee 

believes it is imperative for the Army to pursue and alternate engine design and test demonstration from a second manufacturer. 

As such, the Committee directs that, from funds available under 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARING
323 

this heading, $5,000,00 may be used to pursue an alternative 

AATE engine. 

CVP DESIGN

The Committe is aware that the ‘‘CVP Design for Commonality 

Across Platforms and Applications’’ technology, which is designed 

to greatly reduce wear and tear on vehicle transmissions, is proving to be an effective tool to reduce consumption. The Committee 

encourages the Army to provide fundign for this activity in fiscal 

year 2008. 

NATIONAL EYE EVALUATION AND RESEARCH NETWORK

The Committe recognizes the need for a nationwide infrastructure to provide readily accessible evaluation and testing for serious 

retinal injuries and diseases, as well as a central repository for 

clinical trial research data. The Committee directs $3,000,00 to be 

appropriated for use by the National Eye Evaluation and Research 

Network, to be managed by the National Neurovision Research Institute. 

RESEARCH, DEVELOPMENT, TEST AND EVALUATION, NAVY 

Fiscal year 2007 appropriation .......................................................... $18,673,894,000 

Fiscal year 2008 budget request ....................................................... 17,075,536,000 

Committee recommendation .............................................................. 17,718,624,000 

Change from budget request ............................................................. +643,088,000 

This appropriation provides funds for the research, development, 

test and evaluation activities of the Department of the Navy, which 

includes the Marine Corps. 

The Committee recommends an appropriation of $17,718,624,000 

for Research, Development, Test and Evaluation, Navy, which is 

$955,270,000 less than the amount provided in fiscal year 2007 and 

$643,088,000 more than the request for fiscal year 2008. 

PROGRAM RECOMMENDED

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


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARING
324 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 065 here HR279.177
325 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 066 here HR279.178
326 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 067 here HR279.179
327 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 068 here HR279.180
328 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 069 here HR279.181
329 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 070 here HR279.182
330 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 071 here HR279.183
331 

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


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARING
332 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 072 here HR279.184
333 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 073 here HR279.185
334 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 074 here HR279.186
335 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 075 here HR279.187
336 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 076 here HR279.188
337 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 077 here HR279.189
338 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 078 here HR279.190
339 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 079 here HR279.191
340 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 080 here HR279.192
341 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 081 here HR279.193
342 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 082 here HR279.194
343 

BONE MARROW REGISTRY

The Committee provides $31,500,000, to be administered by the 

C.W. Bill Young Bone Marrow Donor Recruitment and Research 

Program, also known and referred to within the Naval Medical Research Center as the Bone Marrow Registry. Funds appropriated 

for the C.W. Bill Young Bone Marrow Donor Recruitment and Research Program shall remain available only for the purposes for 

which they were appropriated, and may only be obligated for the 

C.W. Bill Young Bone Marrow Program. This DoD donor center has 

recruited more than 420,000 DoD volunteers, and provides more 

marrow donors per week than any other donor center in the Nation. More than 2,575 service members and other DoD volunteers 

from this donor center have provided marrow to save the lives of 

patients. The Committee is aware of the continuing success of this 

national and international life-saving program for military contingencies and civilian patients, which now includes more than 

6,600,000 potential volunteer donors. Further, the Committee encourages agencies involved in contingency planning to continue to 

include the C.W. Bill Young Bone Marrow Donor Recruitment and 

Research Program in the development and testing of their contingency plans. DD Form 1414 shall show this as a congressional special interest item, and the Committee directs that all of the funds 

appropriated for this purpose be released to the C.W. Bill Young 

Bone Marrow Recruitment and Research Program within 60 days 

of enactment of the Department of Defense Appropriations Act, 

2008. 

INNOVATIVE METHODS FOR SHIPBUILDING CONSTRUCTION

The Committee supports the Navy’s efforts to design, develop, 

and implement high performance steel sandwich panel construction 

techniques in order to improve quality and performance and to reduce procurement costs for Navy ships. Therefore, the Committee 

provides an additional $2,000,000 to Program Element 0603123N 

for continuing the development and qualification of advanced steel 

sandwich panels for ship construction. 

SYSTEM OPEN ARCHITECTURE/SMALL BUSINESS TECHNOLOGY

INSERTION

While the Committee recognizes that the Navy has made considerable strides in the recent past towards open architecture combat 

systems, the overall effort could certainly be accelerated and improved. The Chief of Naval Operations has stated that after witnessing the cost-effective advantages gained through the Acoustic 

Rapid Commercial off-the-shelf Insertion/Advanced Processor Build 

Program (ARCI/APB) within the submarine community, the Navy 

needs to work to rapidly transition this concept to other acquisition 

programs. The Committee applauds the Navy’s attempt to expand 

the ARCI concept from submarines to other platforms in an effort 

to obtain the same types of advantages and efficiencies now being 

seen in the submarine force. Examples include, but are not limited 

to, modularity, rapid technology insertion, software re-use, improved manufacturing processes, and cost reductions. The Committee believes that a key requirement of tactical systems is the 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARING
344 

sharing of information across networks in a standard, consistent 

method via the use of middleware. Navy Open Architecture doctrine calls for a standard-based, middleware solution to be used for 

data communication. The Committee strongly recommends the use 

of virtualization that will allow disparate systems to co-exist on a 

single computer, thus allowing shipboard computer rooms/processing centers to be smaller in size, consume less power, and provide more processing capability in a more efficient and effective 

way. 

To that end, the Committee believes a valuable resource in this 

area, the small business community, is oftentimes overlooked in 

the hectic world that is the Department’s acquisition process. The 

small business community can provide fresh, creative, and innovative solutions to the Navy’s requirements. Especially in light of cost 

growth recently realized in such ship construction programs as the 

Littoral Combat Ship, the Committee enthusiastically supports efforts to reduce the burgeoning cost of ship acquisition using the 

aforementioned ARCI concept as a blueprint. In an effort to reduce 

the cost of ship acquisition, the Committee provides $25,000,000 in 

program element 0604558N and $25,000,000 in program element 

0603553N to fund small business efforts for high risk/high reward 

components of surface ship and submarine combat system development. 

UNIQUE IDENTIFICATION OF TANGIBLE ITEMS

In 2003, the Department of Defense mandated that by 2010, the 

Services must be able to locate, control, and value assets which 

should lead to lower cost of item management, improved operational readiness, and reduced burden on the workforce through increased productivity and efficiency. To date, no Service or agency 

has developed a single standard approach to meet this mandate. 

The Unique Identification of Tangible Items program will satisfy 

the Department’s mandated requirements for item identification 

and tracking. Therefore, the Committee provides $8,500,000 to accelerate the development of the Unique Identification of Tangible 

Items program. 

RESEARCH, DEVELOPMENT, TEST AND EVALUATION, AIR 

FORCE 

Fiscal year 2007 appropriation .......................................................... $24,516,276,000 

Fiscal year 2008 budget request ....................................................... 26,711,940,000 

Committee recommendation .............................................................. 26,163,917,000 

Change from budget request ............................................................. ¥548,023,000 

This appropriation finances the research, development, test and 

evaluation activities of the Department of the Air Force. 

The Committee recommends an appropriation of $26,163,917,000 

for Research, Development, Test and Evaluation, Air Force, which 

is $1,647,641,000 more than the amount provided in fiscal year 

2007 and $548,023,000 less than the request for fiscal year 2008. 

PROGRAM RECOMMENDED

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


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARING
345 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 083 here HR279.195
346 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 084 here HR279.196
347 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 085 here HR279.197
348 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 086 here HR279.198
349 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 087 here HR279.199
350 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 088 here HR279.200
351 

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


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARING
352 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 089 here HR279.201
353 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 090 here HR279.202
354 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 091 here HR279.203
355 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 210 here 36323A.204
356 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 211 here 36323A.205
357 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 212 here 36323A.206
358 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 213 here 36323A.207
359 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 214 here 36323A.208
360 

KC–135 TANKER REPLACEMENT

The fiscal year 2008 budget request includes $314,454,000 for the 

development of a follow-on tanker to replace the aging KC–135. 

The Committee notes that $70,000,000 was provided in fiscal year 

2007 for systems development and demonstration and a replacement platform selection and that few funds have been obligated. 

Therefore, a substantial amount of the fiscal year 2008 request is 

early to need and would not be executed. Accordingly, the Committee reduces funding provided for the development program by 

$200,000,000. The Committee is very supportive of proceeding with 

the development and procurement of a tanker to replace the KC–

135 and as such has transferred these funds into the Tanker Replacement Transfer Fund. The Secretary of the Air Force may 

transfer these funds from this account only for the purposes of proceeding with a tanker acquisition program. 

JOINT STRIKE FIGHTER F–136 ENGINE DEVELOPMENT

The fiscal year 2008 budget request includes no funding for development of the F–136 as an alternate engine within the Joint 

Strike Fighter program. The Committee recommends $480,000,000 

for this effort. These funds have been added to the Air Force and 

Navy’s respective Joint Strike Fighter development lines. 

The statement of the managers accompanying the conference report on the Defense Appropriations Act for fiscal year 2007 directed 

the Department of Defense to fund the continued development of 

both the F–135 and F–136 engines in the fiscal year 2008 budget 

request. The Committee notes that this direction was disregarded 

by the Office of the Secretary of Defense. In exercising its power 

of the purse, the Committee made the necessary program adjustments to the fiscal year 2008 budget request to fully fund the requirement for this engine development program. The fiscal year 

2009 requirement for the F–136 is estimated to be $350,000,000. 

The Committee again directs the Department of Defense to fully 

fund this development program in the fiscal year 2009 budget submission. 

JOINT STRIKE FIGHTER DEVELOPMENT

Elsewhere in this report, the Committee notes the criticality of 

this period in the Joint Strike Fighter program. The Committee 

has expressed concerns about delays in systems design and development with regard to production of the test aircraft. The Committee believes that additional funding for development efforts at 

this time could help get production of these aircraft back on track 

and prove extremely beneficial to the long-term health of the program. Accordingly, the Committee recommends an additional 

$200,000,000 divided between the Air Force and Navy research and 

development lines to support developmental activities. These funds 

may be used for unfunded information assurance requirements 

driven by current Department of Defense policy updates, or in support of investment into new and more efficient manufacturing techniques that can drive down aircraft cost and production schedule. 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARING
361 

PERSONNEL RECOVERY SYSTEMS (CSAR-X)

The budget request includes $290,059,000 for the development of 

a replacement helicopter for the HH–60 combat search and rescue 

mission. The Committee notes that the contract award for this program is under a bid protest and as such been delayed significantly. 

Accordingly, the Committee reduced funding for the request by 

$100,000,000. 

The Committee is concerned about the selection criteria and 

process by which this program has proceeded to source selection. 

The Committee directs the Secretary of the Air Force to submit a 

report to the congressional defense committees detailing the source 

selection criteria and how they were established. The report shall 

include the significant factors of the Request for Proposal (RFP) 

that determined the source selection, their importance, and how 

each of the respondents to the RFP was rated against those factors. 

The report shall be delivered not later than September 15, 2007. 

JOINT STARS SYERS DEMONSTRATION

The Committee recommends an additional $16,000,000 to develop and conduct a demonstration of the Senior Year Electro-optical Reconnaissance System (SYERS) on a Joint STARS aircraft. 

This funding is provided to address an Air Force requirement for 

combat identification capability on Joint STARS to reduce the sensor-to-shooter timeline. The Joint STARS Operational Requirements Document dated December 2004 requires a Combat Identification (CID) System/Function that entails the process of attaining 

an accurate characterization of detected objects in the joint battle 

space and provides decision quality data to the operator so the 

timely application of military options and weapons resource can 

occur. Demonstrating the integration of an electro-optical sensor on 

the Joint STARS will accelerate the ability to provide a combat 

identification capability to this platform. The current target identification concept of operations is a slow process measured in hours 

dependent on coordination of multiple intelligence, surveillance and 

reconnaissance systems. The Committee believes that just as targeting pods have become huge force multipliers by turning fighter 

jets into non-traditional intelligence, surveillance and reconnaissance assets, the ability of the Joint STARS to not only locate but 

also provide combat identification of ground threats will be a similar advancement and reduce the sensor-to-shooter timeline from 

hours to minutes. 

SPACE PROGRAMS

The combination of space systems and modern weaponry provides today’s armed forces with unprecedented lethality at a reduced risk to the lives of our nation’s soldiers, sailors, airmen and 

marines. The present national security space acquisition system, 

however, is replete with cost overruns and schedule delays to the 

point that some observers have described space acquisition as broken. 

In almost every area of national security space, this year’s budget requests both space programs that have not yet been fielded, 

and at the same time requests alternative, or improved, programs 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARING
362 

for the same mission area. In missile warning, the first Space 

Based Infrared System (SBIRS) has not yet launched, and the Air 

Force is requesting funds for the Alternative Infrared Satellite System (AIRSS) program. In global positioning, the first Global Positioning Satellite (GPS) IIF has not yet launched, and the Air Force 

is requesting funds for the GPS III program. In communications, 

the first Advanced Extremely High Frequency (AEHF) and Wideband Gapfiller Satellite (WGS) satellites have not yet launched, 

and the Air Force is requesting funds for the Transformational Satellite (TSAT) program. The high cost of space acquisition is only increased when the acquisition decision is to cut off a program after 

spending billions of dollars to procure three, two, or even a single 

satellite and to spend billions of dollars to start a new acquisition. 

New programs might look good on paper from a cost and schedule 

standpoint, but that is only because they have not yet entered the 

riskiest periods of a satellite’s life during integration, testing, 

launch, and on-orbit initialization. For all national security space 

programs, a commitment to realistic budgets and schedules that reflects the realities of engineering, manufacturing, launch and the 

harshness of the space environment is necessary. 

The Committee’s review of the Department’s space program has 

led to the conclusion that funding for some of these follow-on systems is requested ahead of need. The Committee recommends 

$75,877,000 for the Alternative Infrared Satellite System, which is 

a reduction of $155,000,000 below the request for fiscal year 2008. 

The Alternative Infrared Satellite System is investigating sensor 

improvements over the current Space Based Infrared System, and 

should continue these research and development efforts. 

The Committee recommends $507,226,000 for the Global Positioning System III, which is a reduction of $80,000,000 below the 

request for fiscal year 2008. The Global Positioning System III acquisition plan includes a selection of a single contractor to build 

eight satellites for block A of the program and a future decision for 

block B and block C, which could include a decision to purchase 

satellites from a different contractor. Additionally, there is debate 

within the Department of Defense regarding the requirements and 

timing for each of the blocks of the program. The current acquisition strategy should be modified in a way that ensures a healthy 

competition for the objective program of block C and maximum 

flexibility for blocks A and B. 

SPACE SITUATIONAL AWARENESS AND OPERATIONALLY RESPONSIVE

SPACE

The Committee recommends $197,604,000 for Space Situational 

Awareness Systems, which is $9,800,000 more than the request for 

upgrades to the Space Fence. In addition, the Committee recommends $62,604,000 for Space Control Technology, which is 

$25,000,000 more than the request for fiscal year 2008. These additional funds are for Self Aware-Space Situational Awareness described in the Air Force unfunded priorities list. 

The Committee is strongly supportive of the ongoing efforts to 

improve space situational awareness, especially in light of the recently successful Chinese anti-satellite test. Accordingly, the Committee has provided these additional funds to improve the efforts 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARING
363 

to understand both natural and man-made threats to space systems. 

The Committee also recommends $107,032,000 for Operationally 

Responsive Space, which is an increase of $20,000,000. Of the 

$20,000,000 increase, $6,100,000 shall be used as described in the 

classified annex. In light of the recent Chinese anti-satellite test, 

the Committee provides these additional funds for efforts associated with responsive launch, payload, and bus development. 

SPACE RADAR

The Committee recommends $186,000,000 for the Space Radar 

program, which is consistent with the fiscal year 2007 level of 

funding and has transferred the funding back to the same Air 

Force Space Radar program element as fiscal year 2007. The Committee remains concerned about the cost, value and maturity of 

planning for the Space Radar program. For example, the Department of Defense and the Intelligence Community have not decided 

on issues such as responsibilities for transitioning to operations 

and integration with other space and ground capabilities. The total 

program cost, estimated by the Congressional Budget Office as $35 

billion to $50 billion, is not affordable, the program has significant 

technical challenges, the moving target indicator mission is currently performed by airborne platforms, and the program is a lower 

priority than other Defense requirements. 

BALLISTIC MISSILE RANGE SAFETY TECHNOLOGY

The budget request includes $15,145,000 in PE 605860F, Rocket 

Systems Launch Program, but does not include funding for the Ballistic Missile Range Safety Technology (BMRST) program. The 

Committee has long supported and continues to support BMRST. 

The Committee recommends $20,145,000 in PE 605860F, an increase of $5,000,000 for BMRST. 

The Committee believes that BMRST has developed the opportunity for a more flexible national launch complex and is disappointed with the lack of effort shown by the Department of the 

Air Force to assess the long term value in this project. As a result, 

the Committee encourages the Department of Defense’s Executive 

Agent (EA) for Space to pursue this opportunity and any other that 

will provide the Nation with minimal and adaptable launch infrastructure requirements, mobile range options, and launch-on-demand capabilities that fully leverage GPS metric tracking and integrated communications relays. The Committee also encourages the 

EA for Space, through the newly established Operationally Responsive Space Office, to explore ways that the BMRST program would 

enable the goals of responsive launch. 

Additionally, the Committee directs the Secretary of the Air 

Force to perform the certification process for the BMRST system on 

the eastern range with respect to full integration of telemetry and 

command destruct capabilities. The Committee directs that of the 

funds available in PE 305182F, Spacelift Range Systems, 

$10,000,000 is restricted from obligation or expenditure until 30 

days after notification to the congressional defense committees of 

the results from the BMRST certification process. 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARING
364 

MEDSTARS INTEGRATION WITH THE GLOBAL COMBAT SUPPORT SYSTEM

The Committee recommends $2,000,000 for MEDSTARS Integration with the Global Combat Support System. As the exposure to 

non-conventional weapons increases, servicemembers need a frontline medical system to enable the rapid relay, monitoring and assessment of the health of the combat force. The MEDSTARS program is the only system that digitally collects information using a 

state-of-the-art digital data tablet system that can integrate with 

the Theater Trauma Registry program and the Global Combat Support System (GCCS). The Committee urges the rapid development 

and deployment of this system to best provide our forces with instant access to health care information and trauma reports. 

WIDE AREA SURVEILLANCE RADAR INTEGRATION ON JOINT STARS

The Committee is concerned about the need for future radar capability enhancements for the Joint STARS fleet and understands 

that the Air Force is considering a plan to transition the wide area 

surveillance (WAS) radar from the E–10 program to Joint STARS. 

The Committee believes the Air Force should prepare a formal cost 

estimate and schedule for a program to integrate the WAS on Joint 

STARS for consideration by the congressional defense committees. 

RESEARCH, DEVELOPMENT, TEST AND EVALUATION, 

DEFENSE-WIDE 

Fiscal year 2007 appropriation .......................................................... $21,291,056,000 

Fiscal year 2008 budget request ....................................................... 20,559,850,000 

Committee recommendation .............................................................. 20,659,095,000 

Change from budget request ............................................................. +99,245,000 

The appropriation provides funds for the research, development, 

test and evaluation activities of the Department of Defense for defense-wide activities. 

The Committee recommends an appropriation of $20,659,095,000 

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

which is $631,961,000 less than the amount provided in fiscal year 

2007 and $99,245,000 more than the amount requested for fiscal 

year 2008. 

PROGRAM RECOMMENDED

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


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARING
365 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 092 HR279.209
366 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 093 HR279.210
367 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 094 HR279.211
368 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 095 HR279.212
369 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 096 HR279.213
370 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 097 HR279.214
371 

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


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARING
372 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 098 HR279.215
373 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 099 HR279.216
374 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 0100 HR279.217
375 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 0101 HR279.218
376 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 0102 HR279.219
377 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 0103 HR279.220
378 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 0104 HR279.221
379 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 0105 HR279.222
380 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 0106 HR279.223
381 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 0107 HR279.224
382 

MISSILE DEFENSE AGENCY

REPORTING REQUIREMENTS

The Committee is concerned that the information currently provided by the Missile Defense Agency (MDA) does not allow Congress to exercise sufficient oversight over the Ballistic Missile Defense programs. Past Congresses have established a framework of 

laws that require program and cost reporting to Congress to help 

exercise this oversight. However, because the Ballistic Missile Defense System (BMDS) has not formally entered DoD’s System Development and Demonstration acquisition phase, which triggers the 

application of a significant portion of these laws, all the information essential for full oversight has not been provided to Congress. 

Therefore, the Committee directs MDA to develop a system-wide 

plan to report according to the spirit of existing acquisition laws to 

improve accountability and transparency of its program. MDA is directed to report for all elements that are effectively in System Development and Demonstration or production corresponding baselines, the results of independent cost estimates performed by the 

Cost Analysis Improvement Group, unit costs, and unit cost 

growth. This direction should not be construed as requiring full 

compliance with DoD Regulation 5000.2. In addition, while developing and fielding the BMDS outside DoD’s normal acquisition 

cycle, MDA should address operational testing by including operational test objectives in developmental tests. The Committee directs that this plan be delivered to the congressional defense committees with the submission of the fiscal year 2009 budget and updated semi-annually. 

BLOCK STRUCTURE

The Committee understands that Missile Defense Agency (MDA) 

is in the process of restructuring its block acquisition approach. 

While the Committee does not wish to define the block approach 

that MDA should follow, it does believe that the new structure 

should include, at a minimum, a longer timeframe in which to complete system-level developmental activities and the manufacture 

and delivery of all assets that compose the block. In addition, the 

block structure adopted should include only those assets that will 

be fielded during the block. 

EUROPEAN COMPONENT

The Department of Defense included $310,000,000 in the fiscal 

year 2008 request for the Ballistic Missile Defense European Component. This request includes funding for the European Interceptor 

site in Poland, a Midcourse Radar in the Czech Republic and the 

fielding of a Forward Based Radar (AN–TPY–2). The cost of the 

proposed program exceeds $4,000,000,000 through fiscal year 2013 

just for the tactical portion of the proposal. These estimates, 

though, do not include costs for barracks, family housing or any 

other costs normally associated with infrastructure of a cantonment area at a military facility. Also, the estimate does not include 

personnel costs for manning the facilities. 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARING
383 

The Committee believes that it is premature to provide full funding for the European Component given the uncertainty surrounding the program as of this writing. Accordingly, the Committee has reduced without prejudice funding of $139,000,00 for 

the missile field construction and the associated equipment. 

SPACE TRACKING AND SURVEILLANCE SYSTEM (STSS)

The budget request includes $331,525,000 for STSS, of which 

$105,789,000 is for the proposed follow-on space system. The Committee recommends $30,720,000 for the follow-on effort. This 

amount, adjusted for inflation, is equal to the amount provided in 

the fiscal year 2007 appropriation. The Committee notes that two 

demonstration satellites will be launched in fiscal year 2008 and 

that exploitation of data from these satellites will allow the Missile 

Defense Agency to develop sensor requirements and a concept of 

operations that will drive the follow-on space system. As a result, 

the Committee believes it is premature to award the follow-on 

space system contract and directs the Missile Defense Agency to 

maintain the current level of effort in pursuit of sensor technology 

development and risk reduction with the remaining follow-on 

funds. 

Additionally, the Committee has provided $2,000,000 for a Federally Funded Research and Development Corporation to conduct an 

analysis of alternatives for a satellite-based capability for infrared 

and visible sensors to provide global tracking of ballistic missiles. 

Further, this analysis should also examine the applicability of the 

STSS demonstration system and the proposed follow-on systems’

ability to perform against the space situational awareness mission 

requirement and other space mission applications. 

UNDEFINITIZED CONTRACTS

The Committee has become aware of the excessive use of un-definitized contracts by the MDA. Based on information obtained by 

the Committee, it is apparent that MDA has not provided the proper oversight of contracting activities within various programs. According to the MDA, the amounts of undefinitized contracts may be 

in excess of $2,700,000,000. While the Committee understands the 

need at times for programs to use this type of contracting mechanism, it is apparent that the MDA has grossly abused it with respect to volume, dollar amounts and the numbers of days to definitize. The Committee directs the MDA to definitize the current contracts in an expedient manner and to minimize the use of the 

mechanism in the future. The Committee further directs the Undersecretary of Defense, Acquisition Technology and Logistics to review contracting procedures at the MDA and provide a report to 

the congressional defense committees within 90 days of enactment 

of this Act detailing a strategy to reduce current, and minimize future, undefinitized contracts in the MDA. 

KINETIC ENERGY INTERCEPTOR

The Committee has included $372,853,000 for the Kinetic Energy 

Interceptor (KEI) program, an increase of $145,354,000 above the 

budget request. In the fiscal year 2008 request, the Missile Defense 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARING
384 

Agency (MDA) reduced the planned funding by $178,009,000 to 

$227,499,000. Additionally, the MDA drastically descoped the program. Even though the KEI program has met each knowledge point 

while remaining on schedule and on budget, it has been used as 

an offset on numerous occasions for other more high risk programs. 

As originally conceived, the KEI mission is as a boost phase defense weapon with mobile capability on land and sea. In the current request, the KEI has been descoped to a booster program 

aimed at replacing the Ground-based Midcourse Interceptor. The 

Committee disagrees with this change and has provided additional 

funding in an effort to accelerate this much-needed capability. 

AIRBORNE LASER (ABL)

The Committee believes that a robust boost intercept capability 

is vital to a layered missile defense system. Further, the Committee notes the technical progress that the Airborne Laser (ABL) 

program has made over the last three years with the early accomplishment of the firing and refurbishment of the high energy laser 

and the continuing flight testing of the associated beam control/fire 

control (BC/FC) system. These technical challenges were accomplished while the program stayed within the government determined schedule and budget. The Committee looks forward to continued strong support and commensurate funding by the Missile 

Defense Agency of ABL. 

AIRBORNE LASER LESSONS LEARNED

The Committee commends the MDA on its continued efforts on 

the Airborne Laser program. While the program has seen many 

technology successes, the Committee is concerned about the transition of these successes to other service programs. The Committee 

directs the Missile Defense Agency to develop a lessons learned 

program for the Airborne Laser program for future use by the Department of Defense. 

COMMAND AND CONTROL, BATTLE MANAGEMENT AND

COMMUNICATIONS (C2BMC) PROGRAM

The Committee recommends $460,703,000 for the Command and 

Control, Battle Management and Communications program. In fiscal year 2006, funding for the C2BMC program was reduced by 

$30,000,000. However, during the year of execution the MDA increased funding for C2BMC by over $50,000,000 by using funds in 

other program elements to back-fill the congressional reduction. 

The Committee in fiscal year 2007 reinstated the fiscal year 2006 

congressional reduction and directed the MDA to fully comply with 

congressional intent by funding C2BMC within program element 

0603889C. In fiscal year 2008, the MDA has chosen to ignore congressional intent by funding C2BMC in the C2BMC program element and has also included $208,000,000 in various other program 

elements. This disregard of congressional intent obfuscates total 

funding allocated to the program. This method of funding also creates impediments to Congress’ fiduciary responsibility to taxpayers 

in providing oversight of the programs. As in previous years, the 

Committee again directs the Missile Defense Agency to fully fund 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARING
385 

C2BMC in the C2BMC program element. If the MDA continues to 

fund C2BMC in multiple different program elements, the Committee will consider all funding outside of the C2BMC program element to be excess to need. If, due to emergent requirements, the 

program needs additional funding during the year of execution, the 

Missile Defense Agency is directed to comply with the reprogramming guidance specified in this report and in the report accompanying the House version of the fiscal year 2007 Department of 

Defense Appropriations bill as it pertains to guidelines allowing 

agencies to reprogram funds from one program element or appropriation to another. 

AEGIS BALLISTIC MISSILE DEFENSE SYSTEM

The Committee commends the MDA for showing progress and 

promise in continued success in its Aegis Ballistic Missile Defense 

System. In this bill, the Committee has included additional funding 

for the continuation of the Open Architecture and Ballistic Missile 

Signal Processor. Additionally, the Committee has included funding 

to upgrade two additional Aegis Destroyers to a Long Range Track 

and Surveillance (LRT&S) and Engage capability specifically for 

the Atlantic Fleet by the end of 2009. The Committee strongly 

urges that MDA refrain from transferring funds out of the Aegis 

program to other missile defense programs; MDA shall fully fund 

and execute the Aegis program as Congress intends. 

MULTIPLE KILL VEHICLE

The Committee has provided $272,151,000 only for the Multiple 

Kill Vehicle (MKV) program. The Committee encourages the Missile Defense Agency to accelerate development and delivery of the 

MKV capability. The Committee designates the MKV program as 

congressional special interest items subject to prior approval reprogramming procedures. 

ASYMMETRIC MISSILE DEFENSE

The Committee has previously noted its concern about and responded to the possibility of an asymmetric missile threat against 

the United States homeland, defined by a terrorist or other nonstate actor lauching a cruise or short-range ballistic missile from 

air or sea-based platforms to the United States’ territory. In fiscal 

years 2006 and 2007, the Committee provided additional funding 

targeted specifically at this potential threat. 

The Committee believes that while the MDA has made valuable 

contributions in conducting studies and analyses and providing recommendations for potential means to address the threats, much 

additional work remains to be done within the U.S. government. As 

a result, the Committee recommends an additional $15,000,000 to 

continue the Missile Defense Agency’s efforts to conduct experiments, develop prototypes, test concepts of operations, and recommend deployment options for an integrated asymmetric missile 

defense capability that would protect population centers. In additional to the current efforts, the Committee directs the MDA to 

conduct an operationally realistic test using sea-based assets. The 

MDA shall develop a recommended architecture and concept of opVerDate Aug 31 2005 08:25 Jul 31, 2007 Jkt 036903 PO 00000 Frm 00397 Fmt 6602 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\HR279.011 HR279

cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARING
386 

erations for homeland asymmetric missile defense to include progressions for spiral technology upgrades that would enhance cruise 

and ballistic missile defense capabilities over time. The Director, 

MDA, in consultation with Commanders, U.S. Northern Command 

and U.S. Strategic Command, shall provide a report to the congressional defense committees not later than March 1, 2008 on results 

of the efforts to date along with a recommended program plan for 

further development, to include recommended knowledge points to 

guide further investment in the critical capability. 

FISSILE MATERIAL DETECTION RESEARCH

The Committee recommends an increase of $26,500,000 for the 

Defense Threat Reduction Agency (DTRA) to accelerate improvements in the detection of improvised fissile material devices. While 

the Department has funded small efforts in the fiscal year 2008 request, the Committee is concerned that the Department is not fully 

addressing this threat by providing the appropriate level of funding. Accordingly, the Committee is providing this funding specifically targeted to increasing the capability of detection of fissile material and allowing for the acceleration of these efforts by several 

years. 

SPECIAL OPERATIONS COMMAND

The Committee recommendation includes $444,637,000 for the 

Special Operations Command. This amount is $109,422,000 below 

the fiscal year 2007 enacted amount and $73,359,000 above the request. Of this amount, an increase of $25,000,000 is included for 

the GPS Extension Program, transferred from the Air Force, 

RDT&E. The funds will enable the Special Operations Command to 

prove the ability to develop and manufacture GPS Extension user 

equipment in a portable device prior to funding future developmental efforts which compete with GPS III anti-jam capabilities. 

The request is to augment the GPS signal using the Iridium constellation of communications satellites for the benefit of SOCOM 

users. The task would be to modify GPS receivers to receive both 

GPS and Iridium signals on a handheld device. 

CHEMICAL AND BIOLOGICAL DEFENSE PROGRAM

The Committee recommends $25,000,000 for the Chemical and 

Biological Defense Program. The Committee commends the Department on the continued execution of the ‘‘Chem-Bio Defense Initiatives Fund’’ and recommends continuing the program within the 

Department’s Chemical and Biological Defense Program. The Committee’s recommendation provides an increase of $25,000,000 for 

this fund. The Secretary of Defense is directed to allocate these 

funds among the programs that yield the greatest gain in our 

chem-bio defensive posture. The Committee further directs that 

funds cannot be obligated for the Chem-Bio Initiative Fund until 

15 days after a report, including a description of projects to be 

funded, is provided to the congressional defense committees. 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARING
387 

DEFENSE ADVANCED RESEARCH PROJECTS AGENCY

The Committee has included $3,035,222,000 for the Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency (DARPA), which is a decrease of 

$50,395,000 from the fiscal year 2008 request and a decrease of 

$80,088,000 from the amount appropriated in fiscal year 2007. 

Based on historic under-execution in several program elements, the 

Committee has reduced funding in the Biological Warfare, Electronics Technology, Advanced Aerospace Systems and Land Warfare Technology program elements. Additionally, the Committee 

has reduced funding for various programs as identified by DARPA 

that have been cancelled subsequent to the submission of the fiscal 

year 2008 budget. 

In the statement of the managers accompanying the Conference 

Report on the Department of Defense Appropriation Act, 2007, the 

conferees expressed concern over the development of the DARPA 

budget submission material and encouraged DARPA to include additional programmatic detail in the fiscal year 2008 budget request. 

DARPA chose not to address these concerns. Therefore, the Committee directs DARPA to provide in future budget justification material more individual programmatic detail, to include budget information, programmatic achievements and goal by fiscal year, as well 

as transition plans. 

ADVANCE DEVELOPMENT INITIATIVE

The Committee includes $50,000,000 for an Advanced Development Initiative Fund. This fund, under the direction of the Director, Defense Research and Engineering (D,DR&E), shall be used to 

resource projects that will enhance the Department’s long-range research and development strategy, as determined by the D,DR&E. 

The Committee has denied funding for various new starts in the 

fiscal year 2008 request due to concern over an apparent lack of relations to and integration into that long-range strategy. A more coordinated approach that targets funds to key development programs should result in a more successful research and development 

effort over time. 

FIRSTLINK—IEE (TECHNOLOGY TRANSITION LINE)

The Committee continues its support for the FirstLink program 

and strongly encourages the Department of Defense to include the 

funding for this program in its fiscal year 2009 budget submission. 

FirstLink has been highly successful at helping the Department 

transfer its technologies as well as generating new revenue through 

the return on investment this activity provides to the Department 

of Defense Laboratories while at the same time making these technologies available for both the military and first responder applications. The Department is urged to make the FirstLink program a 

permanent part of its technology, transition, and acquisition activities. 

WMD MEDICAL COUNTERMEASURES

The Committee recognizes that there remains a signficant threat 

from biological and chemical weapons. It is paramount that better 

medical defensive strategies are developed. It is unlikely that the 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARING
388 

agent of a deployed weapon of mass destructuion can be readily 

identified. Consequently, the DoD is encouraged to develop a multithreat treatment countermeasure that can be used for exposures to 

chemical, biological and radiation exposures. DoD is encouraged to 

seek technologies that would facilities pre-symptomatic real-time 

diagnoses to avoid catastrophic health consequences. 

OPERATIONAL TEST AND EVALUATION, DEFENSE 

Fiscal year 2007 appropriation .......................................................... $185,420,000 

Fiscal year 2008 budget request ....................................................... 180,264,000 

Committee recommendation .............................................................. 180,264,000 

Change from budget request ............................................................. – – –

This appropriation funds the Operational Test and Evaluation 

activities of the Department of Defense. 

The Committee recommends an appropriation of $180,264,000 for 

Operational Test and Evaluation, Defense. The following table provides a summary of the Committee’s recommendation. 

PROGRAM RECOMMENDED

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


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARING
389 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 233 36323A.225
390 

TITLE V 

REVOLVING AND MANAGEMENT FUNDS 

DEFENSE WORKING CAPITAL FUNDS 

Fiscal year 2007 appropriation .......................................................... $1,345,998,000 

Fiscal year 2008 budget request ....................................................... 1,352,746,000 

Committee recommendation .............................................................. 1,352,746,000 

Change from budget request ............................................................. – – –

This appropriation finances, through the receipt of funded reimbursable orders, the operation of industrial, commercial and support-type activities such as depot maintenance, supply operations, 

distribution depots, transportation services, Navy research, finance 

and accounting services, information systems and telecommunication services. Working capital fund accounts use cost accounting 

and business management techniques to provide managers with information that can be used to monitor, control, and minimize costs 

of operations. 

The Committee recommends an appropriation of $1,352,746,000 

for the Defense Working Capital Funds. The recommendation is 

$6,748,000 more than the amount provided in fiscal year 2007 and 

the same as the request for fiscal year 2008. 

NATIONAL DEFENSE SEALIFT FUND 

Fiscal year 2007 appropriation .......................................................... $1,071,932,000 

Fiscal year 2008 budget request ....................................................... 1,079,094,000 

Committee recommendation .............................................................. 2,489,094,000 

Change from budget request ............................................................. +1,410,000,000 

This appropriation provides funds for the lease, operation, and 

supply of pre-positioning ships, operation of the Ready Reserve 

Force, and acquisition of ships for the Military Sealift Command, 

the Ready Reserve Force, and the Marine Corps. 

The Committee recommends an appropriation of $2,489,094,000 

for the National Defense Sealift Fund, which is $1,417,162,000 

more than the amount provided in fiscal year 2007 and 

$1,410,000,000 more than the request for fiscal year 2008. 

T–AKE ACQUISITION

The Lewis and Clark Class of Dry Cargo/Ammunition Ships (T–

AKE) will provide logistic lift capability as a shuttle ship from supply sources to ships at sea. The request includes $456,110,000 for 

the acquisition of the eleventh Lewis and Clark Class T–AKE Dry 

Cargo/Ammunition Ship. In an effort to provide stability to the 

Navy’s shipbuilding program by increasing throughput, the Committee provides $1,866,110,000 for the procurement of 3 additional 

T–AKE ships, which is $1,410,000,000 above the request. In addition to providing stability, this effort satisfies the second highest 

priority on the Navy’s unfunded priority list. This increase will 

allow the Navy to buy out the T–AKE requirement for the Maritime Pre-positioned Force (Future) while at the same time promoting stability to the construction yard and sub-vendors and 

achieving volume efficiencies. 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARING
391 

DEFENSE COALITION SUPPORT FUND 

Fiscal year 2007 appropriation .......................................................... – – –

Fiscal year 2008 budget request ....................................................... $22,000,000 

Committee recommendation .............................................................. – – –

Change from budget request ............................................................. ¥22,000,000 

The budget requests a new appropriation to finance the acquisition of defense articles and defense services in anticipation of their 

temporary use or transfer to eligible foreign countries and international organizations, including the support of coalition or international military stability or counter-terrorism operations. The 

Committee has not included an appropriation of $22,000,000 requested for the Defense Coalition Support fund as this appropriation is unauthorized. 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARING

cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARING
(393) 

TITLE VI 

OTHER DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE PROGRAMS 

DEFENSE HEALTH PROGRAM 

Fiscal year 2007 appropriation .......................................................... $21,217,000,000 

Fiscal year 2008 budget request ....................................................... 22,541,124,000 

Committee recommendation .............................................................. 22,957,184,000 

Change from the budget request ....................................................... +416,060,000 

This appropriation funds the Defense Health Program of the Department of Defense. 

The Committee recommends an appropriation of $22,957,184,000 

for the Defense Health Program, which is $1,740,184,000 more 

than the amount provided in fiscal year 2007 and $416,060,000 

more than the request for fiscal year 2008. 

PROGRAM RECOMMENDED

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


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARING
394 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 234 36323A.226
395 

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


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARING
396 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 235 36323A.227
397 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 236 36323A.228
398 

TRAUMATIC BRAIN INJURY (TBI) 

From the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, traumatic brain injury 

has emerged as a significant cause of morbidity to the war fighter. 

Whether mild, moderate or severe brain trauma, the Committee 

finds that the level of assessment and standard of care provided to 

the injured war fighter is in need of enhancement. Diagnosis, treatment and rehabilitation must be at a level to ensure the best possible outcome is reached. To this end, the Committee recommends 

the development and adherence to specific protocols to address all 

levels of brain injury (mild, moderate and severe) and directs the 

Department of Defense to implement the use of off-the-shelf, computerized, proven technology that generates baseline scores for 

every member of the military to be administered prior to and upon 

return from the war theater. The Department shall create centers 

of excellence to provide specialized treatment and rehabilitation for 

brain injured troops. Such centers already exist in the private sector. The Department of Veterans Affairs and military centers 

should coordinate with civilian centers, to ensure optimal treatments are available throughout the country. Finally, identification 

and use of community-based treatment facilities is essential for a 

seamless transition throughout treatment. 

The vast majority of disabled troops will ultimately return to 

their home communities, which may be remote from specialized 

centers. The identification of local services is crucial to an appropriate rehabilitation plan. The employment of case managers (who 

are frequently trained rehabilitation nurses and used by private insurers) are well suited to find and coordinate appropriate services 

from physicians, therapists and community support personnel. 

Congress provided $450,000,000 in the ‘‘U.S. Troop Readiness, 

Veterans’ Care, Katrina Recovery, and Iraq Accountability Appropriations Act, 2007’’, (Public Law 110–28) for the creation of a dynamic, peer-reviewed research program to identify and employ the 

most current and promising diagnosis, treatment, and rehabilitative tools available. To date, the Committee has not received a plan 

on how these funds will be expended. During the fiscal year 2008 

budget cycle, the Committee received numerous project proposals 

for TBI research. The Committee believes, however, that prior to 

considering these proposals, the Department must first establish 

protocols and standards utilizing the framework discussed above. 

The Committee understands that the Department is aware of 

gaps within TBI treatment methods that need to be addressed, 

which include epidemiology, diagnosis, identification and assessment; protection and prevention treatment; and, clinical management. The Committee directs the Department, in conjunction with 

the Departments of Veterans Affairs, and Health and Human Services, academia and industry, to focus the research that will address 

the gaps that were identified by the Congressionally Directed Medical Research Program. 

POST TRAUMATIC STRESS DISORDER (PTSD)

Survival rates today for servicemembers wounded in combat are 

even higher than earlier in the war due to improved personal protection and better health care. More than 800 soldiers have lost a 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARING
399 

limb; more than 100 have been blinded; and many are disfigured 

by burns or have brain injuries. An estimated 2,000 cases of brain 

injury have been treated, while many less-severe or less-obvious injuries go undetected. The Committee believes there should be an 

active stress prevention component, along with methods of diagnosing and treating stress from the battlefield. Baseline testing 

should be considered for deploying and returning forces. The Committee also believes strongly that the Department of Defense 

should address the shortages of mental health experts in the military and report to the congressional defense committees by January 15, 2008, on the state of mental health experts available across 

the military, both at Military Treatment Facilities as well as the 

availability of care in the private sector. 

The Committee directs the Department of Defense and the Department of Veterans Affairs to study jointly mental health care, 

the onset and nature of Post Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD), 

panic disorder. Also, these departments must improve mental 

health testing and tracking of returning combat duty servicemen, 

to include the Reserve Component. The Department shall report to 

the congressional defense committees on the findings by May 31, 

2008. 

Congress provided $450,000,000 in ‘‘U.S. Troop Readiness, Veterans’ Care, Katrina Recovery, and Iraq Accountability Appropriations Act’’, 2007, (Public Law 110–28), for the creation of a dynamic, peer-reviewed research program on PTSD. To date, the 

Committee has not received a plan on how these funds will be expended. The Committee received numerous project proposals for 

PTSD research. The Committee believes, however, that prior to 

considering these proposals the Department must first establish 

protocols and standards for detection, prevention and treatment of 

PTSD. 

The Committee directs the Department in conjunction with Veterans Affairs, Health and Human Services, academia and industry 

to focus the research that will address the gaps identified by the 

Congressionally Directed Medical Research Program. 

ELECTRONIC HEALTH INFORMATION SHARING

The Committee is extremely dismayed that the Department of 

Defense (DoD) and the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) still 

do not have medical record electronic interoperability. DOD’s 

health care system is comprised of 65 military hospitals, 800 medical and dental clinics in the direct care system and 2,800 network 

facilities with 190,000 network providers in the private or purchased care system. On average a weekly workload consists of 

19,600 in-patient admissions; 642,000 professional out-patient encounters; 102,900 dental sessions; 2.2 million prescriptions and 

2,100 births. These numbers alone show that it is imperative that 

the DOD and VA have interoperability across the continuum—garrison and theater. 

Using off-the-shelf technology may assist the Department in 

bridging the gaps that currently exist between VA and DOD. The 

Committee includes $2,000,000 within Research, Development, 

Test and Evaluation, Army, for the Wireless Electronic Patient 

Records, WPIC Personal Information Center to improve the DeVerDate Aug 31 2005 08:25 Jul 31, 2007 Jkt 036903 PO 00000 Frm 00411 Fmt 6601 Sfmt 6601 E:\HR\OC\HR279.011 HR279

cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARING
400 

partment’s ability to track medical information pertinent to the 

treatment of servicemembers whether in a Military Treatment Facility or on the battlefield. The Committee further directs the Department to use funding provided in the Joint Incentives Fund for 

initiatives that will record-keeping interoperability between the Department of Defense and the Department of Veterans Affairs. 

DEFENSE ENROLLMENT ELIGIBILITY REPORTING SYSTEM (DEERS)

DEERS is a computerized database of military sponsors, families 

and others worldwide who are entitled under the law to TRICARE 

benefits. Active-duty and retired service members are automatically registered in DEERS, but they must take action to register 

their family members and ensure they are correctly entered into 

the database. Mistakes in the DEERS database can cause problems 

with TRICARE claims and benefits. Other complications arise in 

the DEERS system with registration of dual military dependents. 

The system is only able to register the dependent under one of the 

parents, but not both. 

Therefore, the Committee directs the Department of Defense to 

report to the congressional defense committees by January 15, 

2008, on the number of dual military member families currently in 

the military system and on how to correct the inability of the system to register dependents under both parents. The report should 

include the cost estimates for correcting any flaws and deficiencies 

within the system. 

DIABETES RESEARCH

The Committee remains concerned over the increasing number of 

type I and type II diabetes cases in the United States, specifically 

the growing numbers of children, teens and young adults afflicted 

by the disease. Over 50 percent of Americans are overweight and 

30 percent are obese. Ninety percent of type II diabetes is attributed to excess weight. In the Department of Defense alone, there 

are 111,275 known cases of diabetes, with the Air Force having 

43,733 known cases. Also, junior enlisted are four times more likely 

and senior enlisted are three times more likely to have diabetes 

than officers. The health care expenditures associated with treatment of this disease are increasing dramatically. Without proper 

medical care, monitoring and education, diabetes patients will experience significant adverse consequences. Nutrition, early detection, diagnosis and treatment are essential to alleviating this 

trend. Therefore, the Committee has provided $25,000,000 for diabetes research. Of the funds provided, $5,000,000 shall be for type 

I diabetes and $20,000,000 shall be for type II diabetes research. 

WOUNDED WARRIOR ASSISTANCE

This year has been wrought with issues and problems affecting 

the wounded warrior. Much improvement is needed for medical and 

dental care of servicemembers assigned to an outpatient status. 

Continuity of care and support for the wounded servicemembers 

and their families is essential to recovery. As such, the Committee 

provides $66,000,000 for wounded warrior assistance. The funds 

provided will address the need to improve the standard of living for 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARING
401 

the wounded and to improve the administrative systems that support these troops and their families. 

WARRIORS IN TRANSITION

Warriors in transition are defined as troops who meet the qualification for medical hold, medical holdover or active duty medical 

extension, and active component troops who require a medical evaluation board or who have medical needs requiring more than six 

months of treatment. This year has proven that the military’s system for ensuring that its programs to support these warriors in 

transition, namely housing, treating, transitioning, and integrating 

troops after injury, are extremely overburdened and in need of significant improvement. The problems occurred on many levels, from 

failed infrastructure, rehabilitative care, administrative process, 

and policy incongruities between the Department of Defense, the 

Services, and the Department of Veterans Affairs. 

Following the disclosure of these deficiencies, the Department of 

Defense established an independent commission to review current 

rehabilitative care and processes, and the Army Inspector General 

reviewed the Physical Disability System. The results of these reviews highlighted many systemic deficiencies, as noted above. 

The Committee is frustrated that this situation occurred despite 

all of the funding and support that has been provided over the 

years to the Department of Defense to ensure that returning troops 

have access to the best medical treatment and recovery facilities 

possible. Therefore, the Committee directs the Department of Defense to implement the findings of the independent commission and 

the Army Inspector General, and to provide a progress report to 

the congressional defense committees no later than 60 days after 

enactment of this Act regarding their implementation. 

The Committee also directs the Department of Defense to report 

to the congressional defense committees by January 15, 2008, on 

how it plans to update the Physical Disability Evaluation System 

to more accurately reflect the injuries of war. This report should 

include a review of the differences among the Services’ rating systems and the Department of Veterans Affairs system, and provide 

a process for how and when these various rating systems will be 

standardized. 

The Committee is concerned that these reviews also revealed policy variances and differences in Physical Disability personnel training guidelines among the Department of Defense, Department of 

the Army regulatory guidance, and the Department of Veterans Affairs. These reviews also revealed insufficient data management 

systems and information management concerns. 

The issues outlined above, coupled with the increasing number 

of injured troops entering the system, have stressed the Department’s ability to efficiently manage this responsibility. The Committee intends to closely monitor the Department’s progress in addressing these concerns, and directs the Undersecretary of Defense 

for Personnel and Readiness to report quarterly to the congressional defense committees on the status of implementing these improvements, and to notify the congressional defense committees 

promptly if other issues arise. 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARING
402 

MILITARY TREATMENT FACILITIES USAGE OF RED CROSS VOLUNTEER

PHYSICIANS

Across the Nation there is a shortage of care givers in many 

medical fields. The military is facing a similar shortage due to the 

high rates of deploying physicians and specialty physicians. This 

shortage is acute within the Military Treatment Facilities (MTFs). 

Therefore, the Committee directs the Assistant Secretary of Defense for Health Affairs to report to the congressional defense committees by September 15, 2007, that describes the current regulations for allowing volunteer physicians to work in MTFs and what 

changes are needed to ensure that volunteers are used in such facilities across the military. 

ORTHOPEDIC INJURY RESEARCH

Serious limb trauma, vascular injury, major limb tissue damage 

and blood flow disruption contribute heavily to U.S. military casualties. Amputation following battlefield injury now occurs at twice 

the rate of past wars. Recent advances in battlefield medical treatments have focused on reducing time from injury to evacuation and 

treatment, but the consequences of blood flow disruption to damaged limb tissues remain a major cause of permanent disability or 

death among military war fighters. 

Extremity injuries are the number one battlefield injury. Understanding how to prevent, treat, and rapidly recover from orthopedic 

injuries should be a top priority for the Military Health System. 

Further, the Committee believes that dynamic research and treatment is necessary to provide servicemembers the greatest ability to 

recovery from injuries sustained on the battlefield. 

The Committee is concerned that the Institute of Surgical Research is not working with all necessary entities to share data and 

collaborate on research and analysis. The Committee believes that 

every aspect of orthopedic research should be considered, to include 

reducing the negative impact of reduced blood flow. The Committee 

provided funding in the fiscal year 2007 supplemental to address 

this critical issue and expects the Department to use the research 

funds to benefit servicemembers wounded during the global war on 

terror. 

VISION RESEARCH

The Department of the Army continually reassesses new technologies and therapies to address the ocular ailments of combat 

troops. Current ocular research targets the causes, effects and 

treatment of eye damage and disease that, despite different mechanisms and pathogenesis, all have a common end result: degeneration of the critical components of the eye and impairment or loss 

of vision. In order to implement therapeutic strategies to prevent 

or treat visual problems common to servicemembers, the Army 

needs to develop and validate compounds and strategies. The Committee directs the Army to target the various causes and effects of 

visual damage resulting from exposures during combat to elements, 

and damage resulting from Improvised Explosive Devices (IED). 

This research will be used to ensure and sustain combat readiness. 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARING
403 

PREVENTIVE MEDICINE AND SURVEILLANCE

Preventive medicine is the key to sustaining a healthy and ready 

force. The Committee fully supports the budget requests for vaccine 

development and research. The Committee has included additional 

funding for malaria and leishmaniasis vaccine research and fully 

supports the $100,000,000 for avian flu requested for the Defense 

Health Program. 

The Committee also believes that surveillance and an enterprise 

information management system will further protect Department 

of Defense (DoD) personnel. The Committee has included 

$15,660,000 for the Defense Occupational and Environmental 

Health Readiness System (DOEHRS). DOEHRS, once developed, 

will have the capability to document industrial hygiene and environmental health conditions at DoD installations and in the deployed settings. 

DoD lacks a full-spectrum mortality registry, a well-proven public health and preventive medicine tool for decreasing mortality. 

Currently, the Armed Forces Institute of Pathology (AFIP) maintains a registry for all service members who die while on active 

duty, but no other beneficiary category is included. A full-spectrum 

registry would provide critical insight regarding long-term outcomes from military service and environmental exposures. To enhance this registry, the Committee has included $1,500,000 for the 

Department. 

Further, the Armed Forces Health Surveillance Center maintains 

a longitudinal health record for service members: the Defense Medical Surveillance System (DMSS). The Committee has included 

$1,400,000 to automate the collection and transmission of environmental sampling data to DMSS and to expand linkages with various personnel data systems to allow the accurate identification of 

individuals at risk. 

Tracking the immunization status of active duty personnel is an 

essential component of force health protection. Currently, each 

Service utilizes a Service-specific electronic immunization tracking 

system that, depending on the vaccine, may vary significantly with 

centrally-held records. This represents the potential for service 

members receiving excess vaccines, with attendant increased individual risk as well as excess cost to the Department. The Committee has included $4,000,000 for a universal immunization tracking system that would help resolve this liability. 

EMBEDDED METAL FRAGMENT REGISTRY

Military operations in OIF/OEF have increased the number of 

casualties with embedded metal fragments. Current medical practice guidelines often call for leaving such fragments in place unless 

they are clinically contraindicated. Currently, the DoD lacks a sufficient understanding of the toxicological implications of metal fragments. Therefore, the Committee has included $700,000 for DoD to 

develop and implement an Embedded Metal Fragment Registry 

(EMFR) to monitor the health status of all such servicemembers, 

refine medical management guidelines, and more effectively partner with the Department of Veterans Affairs in the on-going care 

of these veterans. 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARING
404 

LIMITED ACCESS TO MILITARY TREATMENT FACILITIES IN RURAL

AREAS

The Committee is encouraged by the Department of Defense’s recent efforts to address the lack of access to care in rural and remote communities. However, the Committee remains concerned 

that, despite these efforts, under-served communities still have difficulty accessing health care services, especially the Guard and Reserve components. Therefore, the Committee encourages the Assistant Secretary of Defense for Health Affairs to redouble the Department’s efforts to expand health care services in areas where military installations are not located. 

REDUCTION OF CARRYOVER PERCENTAGE

The current fiscal year 2006 Defense Health Program (DHP), Operation and Maintenance (O&M) account unobligated balance is 

below the fiscal year 2006–2007 DHP O&M two percent carryover 

threshold authorized in the Fiscal Year 2006 Department of Defense Appropriations Act. The Committee understands that any 

balances not required for pricing adjustments will be reapportioned 

into fiscal year 2007 to be obligated prior to fiscal year end. Therefore, the Committee has reduced the percentage the Department of 

Defense is able to carry over within the Operation and Maintenance account of the Defense Health Program from two to one percent for fiscal year 2008. 

REVIEW OF TRICARE CO-PAYS

For several years now, the Congress has demonstrated its disapproval of increasing co-pays as a method for addressing the rising costs of health care by not enacting legislative proposals made 

by the Department of Defense. 

Civilian employers have studied whether or not covering or 

waiving the cost of drugs can save money over the long term for 

chronic conditions. The Committee directs the Assistant Secretary 

of Defense for Health Affairs to review TRICARE co-pays and determine whether or not elimination of certain co-pays would in the 

long run, be a cost saving measure. The Secretary is to report to 

the congressional defense committees by January 15, 2008, on 

whether any savings could be achieved by eliminating certain copays. 

CHEMICAL AGENTS AND MUNITIONS DESTRUCTION, ARMY 

Fiscal year 2007 appropriation .......................................................... $1,277,304,000 

Fiscal year 2008 budget request ....................................................... 1,455,724,000 

Committee recommendation .............................................................. 1,455,724,000 

Change from budget request ............................................................. – – –

This appropriation funds the Chemical Agents and Munitions 

Destruction activities of the Department of the Army. 

The budget requested $1,455,724,000 for the Chemical Agents 

and Munitions Destruction, Army program, an increase of 

$178,420,000 from the fiscal year 2007 appropriation. The Committee recommends $1,455,724,000, fully funding the budget request. 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARING
405 

PROGRAM RECOMMENDED

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

EXPLANATION OF PROJECT LEVEL ADJUSTMENTS 

[In thousands of dollars] 

Budget request Committee recommended 

Change from 

request 

Chem Demilitarization—O&M .......................................................................... 1,198,086 1,198,086 ......................

Chem Demilitarization—Proc ........................................................................... 36,426 36,426 ......................

Chem Demilitarization—RDTE .......................................................................... 221,212 221,212 ......................

Total, Chem Agents & Munitions Destruction, Army .......................... 1,455,724 1,455,724 ......................

DRUG INTERDICTION AND COUNTER-DRUG ACTIVITIES, 

DEFENSE 

Fiscal year 2007 appropriation .......................................................... $977,632,000 

Fiscal year 2008 budget request ....................................................... 936,822,000 

Committee recommendation .............................................................. 945,772,000 

Change from the budget request ....................................................... +8,950,000 

This appropriation provides funds for Military Personnel; Operation and Maintenance; Procurement; and Research, Development, 

Test and Evaluation for drug interdiction and counter-drug activities of the Department of Defense to include activities related to 

narcoterrorism. 

The Committee recommends an appropriation of $945,772,000 for 

Drug Interdiction and Counter-drug Activities, Defense, which is 

$31,860,000 less than the amount provided in fiscal year 2007 and 

$8,950,000 more than the request for fiscal year 2008. 

The adjustments to the budget activities for Drug Interdiction 

and Counter-Drug Activities, Defense are shown below: 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARING
406 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 237 36323A.229
407 

JOINT IMPROVISED EXPLOSIVE DEVICE DEFEAT FUND 

Fiscal year 2007 appropriation .......................................................... – – –

Fiscal year 2008 budget request ....................................................... $500,000,000 

Committee recommendation .............................................................. 500,000,000 

Change from budget request ............................................................. – – –

This appropriation funds the Joint Improvised Explosive Device 

Defeat Organization (JIEDDO). The Committee recommends $500,000,000 for the Joint Improvised Explosive Device Defeat Organization, fully funding the 

President’s budget request. This is the first time the budget includes a funding request for the JIEDDO through the regular appropriations process, and the Committee encourages the continued 

submission of requests in this manner, particularly for ongoing operating costs. The Committee has limited to $110,000,000 amounts 

available to the Organization for operating and administrative 

costs. 

PROGRAM RECOMMENDED

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


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARING
408 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 240 36323A.232
409 

RAPID ACQUISITION FUND 

Fiscal year 2007 appropriation .......................................................... – – –

Fiscal year 2008 budget request ....................................................... $100,000,000 

Committee recommendation .............................................................. – – –

Change from budget request ............................................................. ¥100,000,000 

The Committee recomends no funding for the Rapid Acquisition 

Fund. This request will be considered by the Committee during its 

deliberations of the fiscal year 2008 war supplemental. 

OFFICE OF THE INSPECTOR GENERAL 

Fiscal year 2007 appropriation .......................................................... $216,297,000 

Fiscal year 2008 budget request ....................................................... 215,995,000 

Committee recommendation .............................................................. 239,995,000 

Change from budget request ............................................................. +24,000,000 

The Committee recommends an appropriation of $239,995,000 for 

the Office of the Inspector General. Of this amount, $238,995,000 

shall be for operation and maintenance, and $1,000,000 shall be for 

procurement. The recommendation is an increase of $24,000,000 

above the amount requested and will allow the DoD Inspector General to provide additional oversight of Department of Defense contracted services. 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARING
(410) 

TITLE VII 

RELATED AGENCIES 

NATIONAL AND MILITARY INTELLIGENCE PROGRAMS 

The National Intelligence Program (NIP) consists of those intelligence activities of the government that provide the President, 

other officers of the Executive Branch, and the Congress with national intelligence on broad strategic concerns bearing on U.S. national security. These concerns are stated by the National Security 

Council in the form of long-range and short-range requirements for 

the principal users of intelligence. In addition, the Military Intelligence Program (MIP) consists of intelligence activities of the Department of Defense that provide servicemembers with tactical intelligence on the battlefield, as well as provide the President, other 

officers of the Executive Branch, and the Congress with defense-related intelligence pertinent to defending the United States. 

The National Intelligence Program and the Military Intelligence 

Program budgets funded in the Department of Defense Appropriations Act consist primarily of resources for the Director of National 

Intelligence including the Intelligence Community Management 

staff, the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA), the Defense Intelligence Agency, the National Reconnaissance Office, the National 

Security Agency, the National Geospatial-Intelligence Agency, the 

intelligence services of the Departments of the Army, Navy, Air 

Force, and Marine Corps and the CIA Retirement and Disability 

fund. 

CLASSIFIED ANNEX 

The Committee’s budget reviews are published in a separate detailed and comprehensive classified annex. The intelligence community, Department of Defense and other organizations are expected 

to fully comply with the recommendations and directions in the 

classified annex accompanying the Department of Defense Appropriations Act, 2008. As directed by House Resolution 35, the recommendations of the Select Intelligence Oversight Panel are addressed as recommendations to the House Appropriations Committee, Subcommittee on Defense, in the accompanying classified 

annex. 

CENTRAL INTELLIGENCE AGENCY RETIREMENT AND 

DISABILITY SYSTEM FUND 

Fiscal year 2007 appropriation .......................................................... $256,400,000 

Fiscal year 2008 budget request ....................................................... 262,500,000 

Committee recommendation .............................................................. 262,500,000 

Change from request .......................................................................... – – –


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARING
411 

This appropriation provides payments of benefits to qualified 

beneficiaries in accordance with the Central Intelligence Agency 

Retirement Act of 1964 for Certain Employees (P.L. 88–643), as 

amended by Public Law 94–522. This statute authorized the establishment of the CIA Retirement and Disability System (CIARDS) 

for certain employees and authorized the establishment and maintenance of a fund from which benefits would be paid to those beneficiaries. 

The Committee recommends the budget request of $262,500,000 

for the Central Intelligence Agency Retirement and Disability System fund. This is a mandatory account. 

INTELLIGENCE COMMUNITY MANAGEMENT ACCOUNT 

Fiscal year 2007 appropriation .......................................................... $621,611,000 

Fiscal year 2008 budget request ....................................................... 705,376,000 

Committee recommendation .............................................................. 683,276,000 

Change from request .......................................................................... ¥22,100,000 

The Committee recommends an appropriation of $683,276,000 for 

the Intelligence Community Management Account, a decrease of 

$22,100,000 below the budget request. Of the amount appropriated 

under this heading, $39,000,000 is for transfer to the Department 

of Justice for operations at the National Drug Intelligence Center 

(NDIC). This is an increase of $23,000,000 above the budget request. 

Within the available funding, the Committee has provided $1,000,000 for the purpose of allowing NDIC to support requests 

utilizing the Real-time Analytical Intelligence Data Base (RAID) 

software and training to enhance the capabilities of foreign nations, 

particularly those in Central America, to address and combat 

transnational drug and gang-related criminal activities, to include 

providing translation services and a Spanish language version of 

the RAID software. 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARING
(412) 

TITLE VIII 

GENERAL PROVISIONS 

Title VIII includes the general provisions recommended by the 

Committee. Most of these provisions were included in the Department of Defense Appropriations Act for fiscal year 2007 and many 

have been included in the Defense Appropriations Acts for a number of years. A description of each provision follows. 

Section 8001 provides that no funds made available in this Act 

may be used for publicity or propaganda purposes not authorized 

by Congress. 

Section 8002 provides for conditions and limitations on the payment of, compensation to, or employment of, foreign nationals. 

Section 8003 provides that no funds made available in this Act 

may be obligated beyond the end of the fiscal year unless express 

provision for a greater period of availability is provided elsewhere 

in the Act. 

Section 8004 provides a 20 percent limitation on the obligation 

of funds provided in this Act during last two months of the fiscal 

year. 

Section 8005 provides for the general transfer authority. 

Section 8006 provides for the establishment of a baseline for application of reprogramming and transfer authorities for fiscal year 

2008. 

Section 8007 provides for limitations on the use and transfer authority of working capital fund cash balances. 

Section 8008 provides that none of the funds appropriated in this 

Act may be used to initiate a special access program without prior 

notification to the congressional defense committees. 

Section 8009 provides limitations and conditions on the use of 

funds made available in this Act to initiate multi-year contracts. 

Section 8010 provides for the use and obligation of funds for humanitarian and civic assistance costs under Chapter 20 of title 10, 

United States Code. 

Section 8011 provides that civilian personnel of the Department 

may not be managed on the basis of end-strength or be subject to 

end-strength limitations. 

Section 8012 prohibits funds made available in this Act from 

being used to influence congressional action on any matters pending before the Congress. 

Section 8013 prohibits compensation from being paid to any 

member of the Army who is participating as a full-time student 

and who receives benefits from the Education Benefits Fund when 

time spent as a full-time student is counted toward that member’s 

service commitment. 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARING
413 

Section 8014 provides for the limitations on the conversion of any 

activity or function of the Department of Defense to contractor performance. 

Section 8015 provides for the transfer of funds appropriated in 

title III of this Act for the Department of Defense Pilot MentorProte ́ge ́ Program. 

Section 8016 provides for the Department of Defense to purchase 

anchor and mooring chains manufactured only in the United 

States. 

Section 8017 prohibits funds made available to the Department 

of Defense from being used to demilitarize or dispose of certain surplus firearms. 

Section 8018 provides a limitation on funds being used for the relocation of any Department of Defense entity into or within the National Capital Region. 

Section 8019 provides for incentive payments authorized by section 504 of the Indian Financing Act of 1974 (25 U.S.C. 1544). 

Section 8020 provides for a 24-month limitation on a study of a 

single activity or function and a 30-month limitation on a study of 

multiple activities or functions. 

Section 8021 provides that no funds made available in this Act 

for the American Forces Information Service may be used for national or international political or psychological activities. 

Section 8022 provides for the obligation of funds for purposes 

specified in section 2350j(c) of title 10, United States Code. 

Section 8023 provides funding for the Civil Air Patrol Corporation. 

Section 8024 provides for the number of staff years of technical 

effort that may be funded for defense Federally Funded Research 

and Development Centers (FFRDCs) and deletes language on the 

number of staff years that may be funded for defense studies and 

analysis by FFRDCs. 

Section 8025 provides for the Department of Defense to procure 

carbon, alloy or armor steel plate melted and rolled only in the 

United States and Canada. 

Section 8026 defines the Congressional Defense Committees as 

being the Armed Services Committees and the Subcommittees on 

Defense of the Committees on Appropriations of the House and 

Senate. 

Section 8027 provides for competitions between private firms and 

Department of Defense Depot Maintenance Activities for modification, depot maintenance, and repair of aircraft, vehicles and vessels 

as well as the production of components and other Defense-related 

articles. 

Section 8028 provides for revocation of blanket waivers of the 

Buy American Act upon a finding that a country has violated a reciprocal trade agreement by discriminating against products produced in the United States that are covered by the agreement. 

Section 8029 provides for the availability of funds for the Young 

Marines Program. 

Section 8030 provides for the availability of funds for purposes 

specified in section 2921(c)(2) of the 1991 National Defense Authorization Act, namely facility maintenance and repair and environmental restoration at military installations in the United States. 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARING
414 

Section 8031 provides for the conveyance, without consideration, 

of relocatable housing units located at Grand Forks and Minot Air 

Force Bases to Indian Tribes located in North and South Dakota, 

Montana, and Minnesota. 

Section 8032 provides authority to use operation and maintenance appropriations to purchase items having an investment item 

unit cost of not more than $250,000, or upon determination by the 

Secretary of Defense that the operational requirements of a Commander of a Combatant Command engaged in contingency operations overseas can be met, funds may be used to purchase items 

having an investment item unit cost of not more than $500,000. 

Section 8033 prohibits the use of Working Capital Funds to purchase specified investment items. 

Section 8034 provides that none of the funds appropriated for the 

Central Intelligence Agency shall remain available for obligation 

beyond the current fiscal year except for funds appropriated for the 

Reserve for Contingencies, the Working Capital Fund, or other certain programs authorized under section 503 of the National Security Act. 

Section 8035 provides that funds available for the Defense Intelligence Agency may be used for intelligence communications and 

intelligence information systems for the Services, the Unified and 

Specified Commands, and the component commands. 

Section 8036 provides funding for the procurement of competitive, domestic expansion of essential vacuum induction melting furnace capacity and vacuum arc re-melting furnace capacity. 

Section 8037 provides for the Department of Defense to comply 

with the Buy American Act (title III of the Act entitled ‘‘An Act 

making appropriations for the Treasury and Post Office Departments for the fiscal year ending June 30, 1934, and for other purposes’’). 

Section 8038 provides conditions under which contracts for studies, analyses or consulting services may be entered into without 

competition on the basis of an unsolicited proposal. 

Section 8039 provides for the limitations of funds made available 

in this Act to establish Field Operating Agencies. 

Section 8040 provides grant authorities for the Department of 

Defense acting through the Office of Economic Adjustment. 

Section 8041 provides for the rescission of $367,786,000 from the 

following programs: 

2006 Appropriations: 

Aircraft Procurement, Air Force: 

C–5 RERP ................................................................................ $10,000,000 

C–5 RERP Advanced Procurement ........................................ 15,786,000 

2007 Appropriations: 

Aircraft Procurement, Air Force: 

C–5 RERP ................................................................................ 40,000,000 

C–5 RERP Advanced Procurement ........................................ 11,000,000 

Research, Development, Test and Evaluation, Navy: 

Expeditionary Fighting Vehicle .............................................. 24,000,000 

Research, Development, Test and Evaluation, Air Force: 

Personnel Recovery Systems .................................................. 92,000,000 

Defense Reconnaissance/Support Activities .......................... 50,000,000 

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

Defense Advance Research Projects Agency ......................... 125,000,000 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARING
415 

Section 8042 prohibits funds made available in this Act from 

being used to reduce authorized positions for military (civilian) 

technician of the Army National Guard, Air National Guard, Army 

Reserve and Air Force Reserve unless such reductions are a direct 

result of a reduction in military force structure. 

Section 8043 provides that none of the funds made available in 

this Act may be obligated or expended for assistance to the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea unless appropriated for that purpose. 

Section 8044 provides for reimbursement to the National Guard 

and Reserve when members of the National Guard and Reserve 

provide intelligence or counterintelligence support to the Combatant Commands, Defense Agencies and Joint Intelligence Activities. 

Section 8045 prohibits funds made available in this Act from 

being used to reduce civilian medical and medical support personnel assigned to military treatment facilities below the September 30, 2003, level unless the Service Surgeon General certifies 

to the congressional defense committees that it is a responsible 

stewardship of resources to do so. 

Section 8046 provides that Defense and Central Intelligence 

Agency drug interdiction and counter-drug activity funds may not 

be transferred to other agencies unless specifically provided in an 

appropriations law. 

Section 8047 prohibits the use of funds appropriated by this Act 

for the procurement of ball and roller bearings other than those 

produced by a domestic source and of domestic origin. 

Section 8048 provides for the Department of Defense to purchase 

supercomputers manufactured only in the United States. 

Section 8049 prohibits the use of funds made available in this or 

any other Act to transfer administrative responsibilities or budgetary resources of any program, project, or activity financed by this 

Act to the jurisdiction of another Federal agency not financed by 

this Act without expressed authorization of the Congress. 

Section 8050 provides for prior Congressional notification of article transfers to international peacekeeping organizations. 

Section 8051 prohibits the use of funds made available in this 

Act for contractor bonuses from being paid due to business restructuring. 

Section 8052 provides for the transfer of funds to be used to support personnel supporting approved non-traditional defense activities. 

Section 8053 provides for the Department of Defense to dispose 

of negative unliquidated or unexpended balances for expired or 

closed accounts. 

Section 8054 provides conditions for the use of equipment of the 

National Guard Distance Learning Project on a space-available, reimbursable basis. 

Section 8055 provides for the availability of funds provided by 

this Act to implement cost-effective agreements for required heating facility modernization in the Kaiserslautern Military Community, Germany. 

Section 8056 provides for the limitation on the use of funds appropriated in title IV to procure end-items for delivery to military 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARING
416 

forces for operational training, operational use or inventory requirements. 

Section 8057 provides for the use of funds made available in this 

Act for the transportation of relief supplies to American Samoa and 

the Indian Health Service. 

Section 8058 prohibits the use of funds made available in this 

Act from being used to approve or license the sale of the F–22A advanced tactical fighter to any foreign government. 

Section 8059 provides for a waiver of the ‘‘Buy America’’ provisions for certain cooperative programs. 

Section 8060 prohibits the use of funds made available in this 

Act to support the training of members of foreign security forces 

who have engaged in gross violations of human rights. 

Section 8061 provides for the Department to develop, lease or 

procure T–AKE class ships with main propulsion engines and 

propulsors manufactured only in the United States by a domestically operated entity. 

Section 8062 prohibits the use of funds made available in this 

Act for repairs or maintenance to military family housing units. 

Section 8063 provides obligation authority for new starts for joint 

concept technology demonstration projects only after notification to 

the congressional defense committees. 

Section 8064 provides that the Secretary of Defense shall provide 

a classified quarterly report on certain matters as directed in the 

classified annex accompanying this Act. 

Section 8065 provides for the crediting of travel and purchase 

card refunds. 

Section 8066 provides for the registration of financial management information technology systems with the DoD Chief Information Officer for certifications of compliance with the Financial Management Modernization Plan and with the Clinger-Cohen Act. 

Section 8067 prohibits the use of funds made available to the Department of Defense to provide support to an agency that is more 

than 90 days in arrears in making payments to the Department of 

Defense for goods or services provided on a reimbursable basis. 

Section 8068 provides for the use of National Guard personnel to 

support ground-based elements of the National Ballistic Missile Defense System. 

Section 8069 prohibits the use of funds made available in this 

Act to transfer to any nongovernmental entity ammunition held by 

the Department of Defense that has a center-fire cartridge and is 

designated as ‘‘armor piercing’’ except for demilitarization purposes. 

Section 8070 provides for a waiver by the Chief, National Guard 

Bureau or his designee for all or part of consideration in cases of 

personal property leases of less than one year. 

Section 8071 prohibits funds made available in this Act from 

being used to purchase alcoholic beverages. 

Section 8072 provides for the use of funds made available to the 

Department of Defense for the Global Positioning System. 

Section 8073 provides for the transfer of funds made available in 

this Act under ‘‘Operation and Maintenance, Army’’ to other activities of the Federal Government for classified purposes. 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARING
417 

Section 8074 provides for the forced matching of disbursement 

and obligations made by the Department of Defense in fiscal year 

2008. 

Section 8075 provides grant authority for the construction and 

furnishing of additional Fisher Houses to meet the needs of military family members when confronted with the illness or hospitalization of an eligible military beneficiary. 

Section 8076 provides the Secretary of Defense, in coordination 

with the Secretary of Health and Human Services, the authority to 

distribute surplus dental and medical equipment to Indian Health 

Service facilities and to federally qualified health centers. 

Section 8077 provides funding and transfer authority for the 

Arrow missile defense program. 

Section 8078 provides for the transfer funds to properly complete 

prior year shipbuilding programs. 

Section 8079 provides for the noncompetitive appointments of 

certain medical occupational specialties, as prescribed by section 

7403(g) of title 38, U.S.C. 

Section 8080 provides that funds made available in this Act are 

deemed to be specifically authorized by Congress for purposes of 

section 504 of the National Security Act of 1947. 

Section 8081 prohibits the use of funds made available in this 

Act to initiate a new start program without prior written notification. 

Section 8082 provides authority for the Secretary of the Army to 

make a grant only to the Center for Military Recruitment, Assessment and Veterans Employment. 

Section 8083 requires the Department of the Army and the Department of Defense to program and budget to fully finance the 

Non-Line of Sight Future Force Cannon program; to achieve fielding by fiscal year 2010; to deliver eight combat operational pre-production Non-Line of Sight Future Force Cannons by the end of calendar year 2008; and to ensure budgetary and programmatic plans 

to provide no fewer than eight Stryker Brigade Combat Teams. 

Section 8084 provides the Secretary of Defense the authority to 

make grants in the amounts specified. 

Section 8085 provides that the budget of the President for fiscal 

year 2008 shall include separate budget justification documents for 

costs of the United States Armed Forces’ participation in all named 

operations estimated to exceed $100,000,000 in cost. 

Section 8086 prohibits funds made available in this Act from 

being used for the research, development, test, evaluation, procurement or deployment of nuclear armed interceptors of a missile defense system. 

Section 8087 prohibits funds made available in this Act from 

being used to reduce or disestablish the operation of the 53rd 

Weather Reconnaissance Squadron of the Air Force Reserve. 

Section 8088 prohibits funds made available in this Act from 

being used for the integration of foreign intelligence information 

unless the information has been lawfully collected and processed 

during conduct of authorized foreign intelligence activities. 

Section 8089 provides that at the time members of Reserve components of the Armed Forces are called or ordered to active duty, 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARING
418 

each member shall be notified in writing of the expected period 

during which the member will be mobilized. 

Section 8090 provides that the Secretary of Defense may transfer 

funds from any available Department of the Navy appropriation to 

any available Navy ship construction appropriation to liquidate 

costs caused by rate adjustments or other economic factors. 

Section 8091 provides for the use of current and expired Shipbuilding and Conversion, Navy subdivisions to reimburse the Judgment Fund. 

Section 8092 provides for the presentation of promotional materials to active or Reserve members who have participated in Operation Enduring Freedom or Operation Iraqi Freedom. 

Section 8093 provides for unspecified reductions to reflect savings from revised economic assumptions. 

Section 8094 provides limitations for the reimbursement of any 

health care provider for inpatient mental health services. 

Section 8095 provides authority to the Secretary of Defense to 

adjust wage rates for civilian employees hired for certain health 

care occupations. 

Section 8096 provides authority to purchase heavy and light armored vehicles notwithstanding price or other limitations on the 

purchase of passenger carrying vehicles. 

Section 8097 provides obligation authority of supervision and administration costs associated with construction projects outside the 

United States. 

Section 8098 limits the obligation authority of funds provided for 

the Director of National Intelligence to the current fiscal year except for research and technology which shall remain available for 

the current and the following fiscal years. 

Section 8099 provides for the adjustment of obligations within 

the Shipbuilding and Conversion, Navy appropriation. 

Section 8100 provides that not more than 35 percent of the funds 

made available in this Act for environmental remediation may be 

obligated under indefinite delivery/indefinite quantity contracts 

with a total contract value of $130,000,000 or higher. 

Section 8101 provides for the creation of a major force program 

category for space for the Future Years Defense Program of the Department of Defense. 

Section 8102 provides additional appropriations to and transfer 

authority for the Tanker Replacement Transfer Fund. 

Section 8103 prohibits the use of funds made available in this 

Act to establish any permanent military installation or base in 

Iraq. 

Section 8104 prohibits the use of funds made available in this 

Act to contravene laws enacted or regulations promulgated to implement the United Nations Convention Against Torture and Other 

Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment. 

Section 8105 provides limitations on the use of funds made available in this Act to pay negotiated indirect cost rates on agreements 

or arrangements between the Department of Defense and certain 

entities conducting basic research. 

Section 8106 requires the cost of ongoing operations be included 

in the budget request. The Congress has urged the Department of 

Defense to include the reasonably known and ongoing costs of miliVerDate Aug 31 2005 08:25 Jul 31, 2007 Jkt 036903 PO 00000 Frm 00430 Fmt 6604 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\HR279.011 HR279

cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARING
419 

tary operations in Afghanistan and Iraq within the annual regular 

budget request each year over the past five years. However, the fiscal year 2008 budget again included the cost for military operations 

in Afghanistan and Iraq as a supplemental funding request out 

side the regular budget and in a separate schedule. This non-compliance not only defies Congressional direction, it contravenes stated policy of the Executive Office of the President Office of Management and Budget (OMB), found in OMB circular A–11, which 

states, that supplemental and budget amendments are to be used 

for ‘‘an unforeseen emergency situation . . .’’ The Committee observes that the historical precedent for including the cost of ongoing military operations in the annual regular budget requests of 

the President following initial funding for such operations by emergency or supplemental appropriations Acts, includes: 

—funds for Operation Noble Eagle, beginning in the budget 

request of President George W. Bush for fiscal year 2005; 

—funds for operations in Kosovo, beginning in the budget request of President George W. Bush for fiscal year 2001; 

—funds for operations in Bosnia, beginning in budget request of President Clinton for fiscal year 1997; 

—funds for operations in Southwest Asia, beginning in the 

budget request of President Clinton for fiscal year 1997; 

—funds for operations in Vietnam, beginning in the budget 

request of President Johnson for fiscal year 1966; and 

—funds for World War II, beginning in the budget request 

of President Roosevelt for fiscal year 1943. Accordingly, this 

section requires the cost of overseas military operations, to include operations in Afghanistan and Iraq, to be included within 

the annual regular budget request. 

Section 8107 prohibits award fees to any defense contractor contrary to the provisions of section 814 of the National Defense Authorization Act, Fiscal Year 2007 (Public Law 109–364). 

Section 8108 limits to 90 percent the funds appropriated to the 

Department of Defense for contracted services unless and until the 

Secretary of Defense submits to the congressional defense committees a report of contracted services. 

Section 8109 makes available up to $30,000,000 from funds appropriated under ‘‘Operations and Maintenance, Defense-Wide’’ for 

impact aid to eligible local education agencies. 

HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES REPORTING REQUIREMENTS 

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

CHANGES IN THE APPLICATION OF EXISTING LAW

Pursuant to clause 3(f)(1) of rule XIII of the Rules of the House 

of Representatives, the following statements are submitted describing the effect of provisions in the accompanying bill which directly 

or indirectly change the application of existing law. 

Language is included in various parts of the bill to continue ongoing activities which require annual authorization or additional 

legislation, which to date has not been enacted. 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARING
420 

The bill includes a number of provisions which place limitations 

on the use of funds in the bill or change existing limitations and 

which might, under some circumstances, be construed as changing 

the application of existing law. 

The bill includes a number of provisions, which have been virtually unchanged for many years, that are technically considered 

legislation. 

The bill provides that appropriations shall remain available for 

more than one year for some programs for which the basic authorizing legislation does not presently authorize each extended availability. 

In various places in the bill, the Committee has allocated funds 

within appropriation accounts in order to fund specific programs. 

Changes in the application of existing law found within appropriations headings: 

Language is included that transfers funds appropriated under 

the heading ‘‘Operation and Maintenance, Army’’ to the U.S. Corps 

of Engineers for expenses related to dredging of the Hudson River 

Channel and provides that such transfer shall be in addition to any 

other transfer authority provided elsewhere in the bill. 

Language is included that provides for emergency and extraordinary expenses within the appropriation for ‘‘Operation and Maintenance, Army’’. 

Language is included that provides that any transfer authority 

provided under the heading ‘‘Operation and Maintenance, Army’’ is 

in addition to any other transfer authority provided elsewhere in 

the Act. 

Language is included that provides for emergency and extraordinary expenses within the appropriation for ‘‘Operation and Maintenance, Navy’’. 

Language is included that provides that any transfer authority 

provided under the heading ‘‘Operation and Maintenance, Navy’’ is 

in addition to any other transfer authority provided elsewhere in 

the Act. 

Language is included that provides for emergency and extraordinary expenses within the appropriation for ‘‘Operation and Maintenance, Air Force’’. 

Language is included that provides that any transfer authority 

provided under the heading ‘‘Operation and Maintenance, Air 

Force’’ is in addition to any other transfer authority provided elsewhere in the Act. 

Language is included that provides not more than $25,000,000 

for the Combatant Commander Initiative Fund. 

Language is included that provides for emergency and extraordinary expenses of the Office of the Secretary of Defense. 

Language is included that provides for the Procurement Technical Assistance Cooperative Agreement Program and centers. 

Language is included that provides not less than $245,075,000 

shall be available for the Combatant Commander’s Exercise Engagement and Training Transformation program. 

Language is included that provides that none of the funds in or 

made available by this Act shall be used to plan or implement consolidation of a budget or appropriations liaison office of various ofVerDate Aug 31 2005 08:25 Jul 31, 2007 Jkt 036903 PO 00000 Frm 00432 Fmt 6604 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\HR279.011 HR279

cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARING
421 

fices with the Department into a legislative affairs or legislative liaison office. 

Language is included that provides specific amounts for the Office of Legislative Affairs within the Office of the Secretary. 

Language is included that provides, notwithstanding section 

130(a) of title 10, U.S.C., funds shall be available for the Office of 

the Undersecretary of Defense Comptroller and Chief Financial Officer. 

Language is included that funds provided for the personnel security investigations of the Defense Security Service shall be paid at 

rates not to exceed those rates in effect as of August 1, 2006. Language is included that provides $4,000,000, to remain available until expended, only for expenses for certain classified programs, may be transferred to certain accounts and that ceilings on 

investment unit item cost shall not apply to such funds. 

Language is included that provides that any transfer authority 

provided under the heading ‘‘Operation and Maintenance, DefenseWide’’ shall be in addition to any other transfer authority provided 

in the Act. 

Language is included for the various Environmental Restoration 

accounts that provides that the service secretaries may transfer 

such funds for the purposes of the funds provided under such appropriations headings. 

Language is included that provides that funds made available for 

foreign disaster relief and response activities shall remain available 

until expended. 

Language is included that provides for specific construction, acquisition or conversion of vessels under the heading ‘‘Shipbuilding 

and Conversion, Navy’’. Language is included that prohibits the use of funds provided 

under ‘‘National Defense Sealift Fund’’ to award new contracts that 

provide for the acquisition of major components unless such components are made in the United States. 

Language is included that provides that the exercise of an option 

in a contract award through the obligation of previously appropriated funds shall not be considered to be the award of a new contract. 

Language is included that provides waiver authority of the Buy 

America provisions under ‘‘National Defense Sealift Fund’’ under 

certain circumstances. 

Language is included that provides that not less than 

$10,000,000 of funds provided under ‘‘Defense Health Program’’

shall be available for HIV prevention education activities. 

Language is included that provides for the carry-over of one percent of the Operation and Maintenance account under the ‘‘Defense 

Health Program’’. 

Language is included that provides for the transfer of funds 

within the Operation and Maintenance account under the ‘‘Defense 

Health Program’’. 

Language is included under the heading ‘‘Chemical Agents and 

Munitions, Destruction, Army’’ providing for the allocation of funds 

for specific activities. 

Language is included that provides for the transfer of Drug 

Interdiction and Counter-Drug Activities. Such transfer authority 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARING
422 

shall be in addition to other transfer authority provided elsewhere 

in the Act. 

Language is included that provides for operating and administrative costs within the Joint Improvised Explosive Device Defeat 

Fund. 

Language is included that allows the Director of the Joint Improvised Explosive Device Defeat Organization to undertake certain 

activities. 

Language is included that requires that within 60 days of enactment of this Act, a plan for the intended management and use of 

the Joint Improvised Explosive Defeat Fund is to be provided to 

the congressional defense committees. 

Language is included that requires the Secretary of Defense to 

submit a report to the congressional defense committees providing 

assessments of the evolving threats, service requirements to 

counter threats, pre-deployment training strategy and funds execution of the Joint Improvised Explosive Defeat Fund. 

Language is included under the Joint Improvised Explosive Defeat Fund to transfer funds. Such transfer authority shall be in addition to other transfer authority provided elsewhere in the Act. 

Language is included that provides for the transfer of funds for 

the National Drug Intelligence Center. 

Language is included that requires the National Drug Intelligence Center to maintain the personnel and technical resources to 

support law enforcement authorities with counter-drug, counterterrorism and national security investigations and operations. 

Changes in the application of existing law found within general 

provisions: 

Language is included that provides that no funds made available 

in this Act may be used for publicity or propaganda purposes not 

authorized by Congress. 

Language is included that provides for conditions and limitations 

on the payment of compensation to, or employment of, foreign nationals. 

Language is included that provides that no funds made available 

in this Act may be obligated beyond the end of the fiscal year unless express provision for a greater period of availability is provided 

elsewhere in the Act. 

Language is included that provides a 20 percent limitation on the 

obligation of funds provided in this Act during the last two months 

of the fiscal year. 

Language is included that provides for the general transfer authority. 

Language is included that provides for the establishment of a 

baseline for application of reprogramming and transfer authorities 

for fiscal year 2008 and prohibits certain reprogrammings until 

after submission of a report. 

Language is included that provides for limitations on the use and 

transfer authority of working capital fund cash balances. 

Language is included that provides that none of the funds appropriated in this Act may be used to initiate a special access program 

without prior notification to the congressional defense committees. 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARING
423 

Language is included that provides limitations and conditions on 

the use of funds made available in this Act to initiate multi-year 

contracts. 

Language is included that provides for the use and obligation of 

funds for humanitarian and civic assistance costs under Chapter 20 

of title 10, United States Code. 

Language is included that provides that civilian personnel of the 

Department may not be managed on the basis of end-strength or 

be subject to end-strength limitations. 

Language is included that prohibits funds made available in this 

Act from being used to influence congressional action on any matters pending before the Congress. 

Language is included that prohibits compensation from being 

paid to any member of the Army who is participating as a full-time 

student and who receives benefits from the Education Benefits 

Fund when time spent as a full-time student is counted toward 

that member’s service commitment. 

Language is included that provides for the limitations on the conversion of any activity or function of the Department of Defense to 

contractor performance. 

Language is included that provides for the transfer of funds appropriated in title III of this Act for the Department of Defense 

Pilot Mentor-Prote ́ge ́ Program. 

Language is included that provides for the Department of Defense to purchase anchor and mooring chains manufactured only in 

the United States. 

Language is included that prohibits funds made available to the 

Department of Defense from being used to demilitarize or dispose 

of surplus firearms. 

Language is included that provides a limitation on funds being 

used for the relocation of any Department of Defense entity into or 

within the National Capital Region. 

Language is included that provides for incentive payments authorized by section 504 of the Indian Financing Act of 1974 (25 

U.S.C. 1544). 

Language is included that provides for a 24 month limitation on 

a study of a single activity or function and a 30 month limitation 

on a study of multiple activities or functions. 

Language is included that provides that no funds made available 

in this Act for the American Forces Information Service may be 

used for national or international political or psychological activities. 

Language is included that provides for the obligation of funds for 

purposes specified in section 2350j(c) of title 10, United States 

Code. 

Language is included that provides funding for the Civil Air Patrol Corporation. 

Language is included that provides for the number of staff years 

of technical effort that may be funded for defense Federally Funded 

Research and Development Centers (FFRDC) and deletes language 

on the number of staff years that may be funded for defense studies and analysis by FFRDCs. 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARING
424 

Language is included that provides for the Department of Defense to procure carbon, alloy or armor steel plate melted and 

rolled only in the United States and Canada. 

Language is included that defines congressional defense committees as being the Armed Services Committees and the Subcommittees on Defense of the Committees on Appropriations of the House 

and Senate. 

Language is included that provides for competitions between private firms and Department of Defense Depot Maintenance Activities for modification, depot maintenance, and repair of aircraft, vehicles and vessels as well as the production of components and 

other Defense-related articles. 

Language is included that provides for revocation of blanket 

waivers of the Buy American Act upon a finding that a country has 

violated a reciprocal trade agreement by discriminating against 

products produced in the United States that are covered by the 

agreement. 

Language is included that provides for the availability of funds 

for the Young Marines Program. 

Language is included that provides for the availability of funds 

for purposes specified in section 2921(c)(2) of the 1991 National Defense Authorization Act, namely facility maintenance and repair 

and environmental restoration at military installations in the 

United States. 

Language is included that provides for the conveyance, without 

consideration, of relocatable housing units located at Grand Forks 

and Minot Air Force Bases to Indian Tribes located in North and 

South Dakota, Montana, and Minnesota. 

Language is included that provides authority to use operation 

and maintenance appropriations to purchase items having an investment item unit cost of not more than $250,000, or upon determination by the Secretary of Defense that the operational requirements of a Commander of a Combatant Command engaged in contingency operations overseas can be met, funds may be used to purchase items having an investment item unit cost of not more than 

$500,000. 

Language is included that prohibits the use of Working Capital 

Funds to purchase specified investment items. 

Language is included that provides that none of the funds appropriated for the Central Intelligence Agency shall remain available 

for obligation beyond the current fiscal year except for funds appropriated for the Reserve for Contingencies, the Working Capital 

Fund, or other certain programs authorized under section 503 of 

the National Security Act. 

Language is included that provides that funds available for the 

Defense Intelligence Agency may be used for intelligence communications and intelligence information systems for the Services, the 

Unified and Specified Commands, and the component commends. 

Language is included that provides that of the funds made available in this Act under the heading ‘‘Defense Production Act Purchases’’, funds shall be for the procurement of competitive, domestic expansion of essential vacuum furnace melting capacity and 

vacuum arc re-melting furnace capacity. 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARING
425 

Language is included that provides for the Department of Defense to comply with the Buy American Act (title III of the Act entitled ‘‘An Act making appropriations for the Treasury and Post Office Departments for the fiscal year ending June 30, 1934, and for 

other purposes’’). 

Language is included that provides conditions under which contracts for studies, analyses or consulting services may be entered 

into without competition on the basis of an unsolicited proposal. 

Language is included that provides for the limitations of funds 

made available in this Act to establish Field Operating Agencies. 

Language is included that provides grant authorities for the Department of Defense acting through the Office of Economic Adjustment. 

Language is included that provides for the rescission of previously appropriated funds. 

Language is included that prohibits funds made available in this 

Act from being used to reduce authorized positions for military (civilian) technician of the Army National Guard, Air National Guard, 

Army Reserve and Air Force Reserve unless such reductions are a 

direct result of a reduction in military force structure. 

Language is included that provides that none of the funds made 

available in this Act may be obligated or expended for assistance 

to the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea unless appropriated 

for that purpose. 

Language is included that provides for reimbursement to the National Guard and Reserve when members of the National Guard 

and Reserve provide intelligence or counterintelligence support to 

the Combatant Commands, Defense Agencies and Joint Intelligence 

Activities. 

Language is included that prohibits funds made available in this 

Act from being used to reduce civilian medical and medical support 

personnel assigned to military treatment facilities below the September 30, 2003, level unless the Service Surgeons General certifies to the congressional defense committees that it is a responsible stewardship of resources to do so. 

Language is included that provides that Defense and Central Intelligence Agency drug interdiction and counter-drug activity funds 

may not be transferred to other agencies unless specifically provided in an appropriations law. 

Language is included that prohibits the use of funds appropriated by this Act for the procurement of ball and roller bearings 

other than those produced by a domestic source and of domestic origin. 

Language is included that provides for the Department of Defense to purchase supercomputers manufactured only in the United 

States. 

Language is included that prohibits the use of funds made available in this or any other Act to transfer administrative responsibilities or budgetary resources of any program, project, or activity financed by this Act to the jurisdiction of another Federal agency not 

financed by this Act without expressed authorization of the Congress. 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARING
426 

Language is included that provides for prior Congressional notification of article transfers to international peacekeeping organizations. 

Language is included that prohibits the use of funds made available in this Act for contractor bonuses from being paid due to business restructuring. 

Language is included that provides for the transfer of funds to 

be used to support personnel supporting approved non-traditional 

defense activities. 

Language is included that provides for the Department of Defense to dispose of negative unliquidated or unexpended balances 

for expired or closed accounts. 

Language is included that provides conditions for the use of 

equipment of the National Guard Distance Learning Project on a 

space-available, reimbursable basis. 

Language is included that provides for the availability of funds 

provided by this Act to implement cost-effective agreements for required heating facility modernization in the Kaiserslautern Military Community, Germany. 

Language is included that provides for the limitation on the use 

of funds appropriated in title IV to procure end-items for delivery 

to military forces for operational training, operational use or inventory requirements. 

Language is included that provides for the use of funds made 

available in this Act for the transportation of relief supplies to 

American Samoa and the Indian Health Service. 

Language is included that prohibits the use of funds made available in this Act from being used to approve or license the sale of 

the F–22A advanced tactical fighter to any foreign government. 

Language is included that provides for a waiver of the ‘‘Buy 

America’’ provisions for certain cooperative programs. 

Language is included that prohibits the use of funds made available in this Act to support the training of members of foreign security forces who have engaged in gross violations of human rights. 

Language is included that provides for the Department to develop, lease or procure T–AKE class ships with main propulsion engines and propulsors manufactured only in the United States by a 

domestically operated entity. 

Language is included that prohibits the use of funds made available in this Act for repairs or maintenance to military family housing units. 

Language is included that provides obligation authority for new 

starts for advanced concept technology demonstration projects only 

after notification to the congressional defense committees. 

Language is included that provides that the Secretary of Defense 

shall provide a classified quarterly report on certain matters as directed in the classified annex accompanying this Act. 

Language is included that provides for the crediting of travel and 

purchase card refunds. 

Language is included that provides for the registration of financial management information technology systems with the DoD 

Chief Information Officer for certifications of compliance with the 

Financial Management Modernization Plan and with the ClingerCohen Act. 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARING
427 

Language is included that prohibits the use of funds made available to the Department of Defense to provide support to an agency 

that is more than 90 days in arrears in making payments to the 

Department of Defense for goods or services provided on a reimbursable basis. 

Language is included that provides for the use of National Guard 

personnel to support ground-based elements of the National Ballistic Missile Defense System. 

Language is included that prohibits the use of funds made available in this Act to transfer to any nongovernmental entity ammunition held by the Department of Defense that has a center-fire cartridge and is designated as ‘‘armor piercing’’ except for demilitarization purposes. 

Language is included that provides for a waiver by the Chief, National Guard Bureau or his designee for all or part of consideration 

in cases of personal property leases of less than one year. 

Language is included that prohibits funds made available in this 

Act from being used to purchase alcoholic beverages. 

Language is included that provides for the use of funds made 

available to the Department of Defense for the Global Positioning 

System. 

Language is included that provides for the transfer of funds 

made available in this Act under ‘‘Operation and Maintenance, 

Army’’ to other activities of the Federal Government for classified 

purposes. 

Language is included that has been amended and provides for 

the forced matching of disbursement and obligations made by the 

Department of Defense in fiscal year 2008. 

Language is included that provides funds and grant authority for 

the construction and furnishing of additional Fisher Houses to 

meet the needs of military family members when confronted with 

the illness or hospitalization of an eligible military beneficiary. 

Language is included that provides the Secretary of Defense, in 

coordination with the Secretary of Health and Human Services, the 

authority to distribute surplus dental and medical equipment to Indian Health Service facilities and to federally-qualified health centers. 

Language is included that provides funding and transfer authority for the Arrow missile defense program. 

Language is included that provides for the transfer funds to 

properly complete prior year shipbuilding programs. 

Language is included that provides for the noncompetitive appointments of certain medical occupational specialties, as prescribed by section 7403(g) of title 38, U.S.C. 

Language is included that provides that funds made available in 

this Act are deemed to be specifically authorized by Congress for 

purposes of section 504 of the National Security Act of 1947. 

Language is included that prohibits the use of funds made available in this Act to initiate a new start program without prior written notification. 

Language is included that provides authority for the Secretary of 

the Army to make a grant only to the Center for Military Recruitment, Assessment and Veterans Employment. 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARING
428 

Language is included that requires the Department of the Army 

and the Department of Defense to program and budget to fully finance the Non-Line of Sight Future Force Cannon program; to 

achieve fielding by fiscal year 2010; to deliver eight combat operational pre-production Non-Line of Sight Future Force Cannons by 

the end of calendar year 2008; and to ensure budgetary and programmatic plans to provide no fewer than seven Stryker Brigade 

Combat Teams. 

Language is included that provides the Secretary of Defense the 

authority to make grants in the amounts specified. 

Language is included that provides that the budget of the President for fiscal year 2008 shall include separate budget justification 

documents for costs of the United States Armed Forces’ participation in named operations with an estimated cost in excess of 

$100,000,000. 

Language is included that prohibits funds made available in this 

Act from being used for the research, development, test, evaluation, 

procurement or deployment of nuclear armed interceptors of a missile defense system. 

Language is included that prohibits funds made available in this 

Act from being used to reduce or disestablish the operation of the 

53rd Weather Reconnaissance Squadron of the Air Force Reserve. 

Language is included that prohibits funds made available in this 

Act from being used for the integration of foreign intelligence information unless the information has been lawfully collected and processed during conduct of authorized foreign intelligence activities. 

Language is included that provides that at the time members of 

Reserve components of the Armed Forces are called or ordered to 

active duty, each member shall be notified in writing of the expected period during which the member will be mobilized. 

Language is included that provides that the Secretary of Defense 

may transfer funds from any available Department of the Navy appropriation to any available Navy ship construction appropriation 

to liquidate costs caused by rate adjustments or other economic factors. 

Language is included that provides for the use of current and expired Shipbuilding and Conversion, Navy subdivisions to reimburse 

the Judgment Fund. 

Language is included that provides hereafter for the presentation 

of promotional materials to active or Reserve members who have 

participated in Operation Enduring Freedom or Operation Iraqi 

Freedom. 

Language is included that provides for unspecified reductions to 

reflect savings from revised economic assumptions. 

Language is included that provides limitations for the reimbursement of any health care provider for inpatient mental health services. 

Language is included that provides authority to the Secretary of 

Defense to adjust wage rates for civilian employees hired for certain health care occupations. 

Language is included that provides authority to purchase heavy 

and light armored vehicles notwithstanding price or other limitations on the purchase of passenger carrying vehicles. 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARING
429 

Language is included that provides obligation authority of supervision and administration costs associated with construction 

projects outside the United States. 

Language is included that limits the obligation authority of funds 

provided for the Director of National Intelligence to the current fiscal year except for research and technology which shall remain 

available for the current and the following fiscal years. 

Language is included that provides for the adjustment of obligations within the Shipbuilding and Conversion, Navy appropriation. 

Language is included that provides that not more than 35 percent of the funds made available in this Act for environmental remediation may be obligated under indefinite delivery/indefinite 

quantity contracts with a total contract value of $130,000,000 or 

higher. 

Language is included that provides for the creation of a major 

force program category for space for the Future Years Defense Program of the Department of Defense. 

Language is included that provides additional appropriations to 

and transfer authority for the Tanker Replacement Transfer Fund. 

Language is included that prohibits the use of funds made available in this Act to establish any permanent military installation or 

base in Iraq. 

Language is included that prohibits the use of funds made available in this Act to contravene laws enacted or regulations promulgated to implement the United Nations Convention Against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment. 

Language is included that provides limitations on the use of 

funds made available in this Act to pay negotiated indirect cost 

rates on agreements or arrangements between the Department of 

Defense and certain entities conducting basic research. 

Language is included that requires any request for funds for a 

fiscal year after fiscal year 2008 for an ongoing military operation 

shall be included in the annual budget of the President. 

Language is included that prohibits award fees to any defense 

contractor contrary to the provisions of section 814 of the National 

Defense Authorization Act, 2007. 

Language is included that limits to 90 percent the funds appropriated to the Department of Defense for contracted services unless 

and until the Department of Defense submits to the congressional 

defense committees a report on contracted services. 

Language is included that provides appropriations for assistance 

to local education agencies. 

APPROPRIATIONS NOT AUTHORIZED BY LAW

Pursuant to clause 3(f)(1) of rule XIII of the Rules of the House 

of Representatives, the following table lists the appropriations in 

the accompanying bill which are not authorized by law: 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARING
430 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 020 36323A.244
431 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 021 36323A.245
432 

TRANSFER OF FUNDS

Pursuant to clause 3(f)(2) of rule XIII of the Rules of the House 

of Representatives, the following is submitted describing the transfer of funds provided in the accompanying bill. 

Language has been included in ‘‘Operation and Maintenance, Defense-Wide’’ which provides for the transfer of funds relating to 

classified activities. 

Language has been included in ‘‘Environmental Restoration, 

Army’’ which provides for the transfer of funds for environmental 

restoration, reduction and recycling of hazardous waste, removal of 

unsafe buildings and debris or for similar purposes. 

Language has been included in ‘‘Environmental Restoration, 

Navy’’ which provides for the transfer of funds for environmental 

restoration, reduction and recycling of hazardous waste, removal of 

unsafe buildings and debris or for similar purposes. 

Language has been included in ‘‘Environmental Restoration, Air 

Force’’ which provides for the transfer of funds for environmental 

restoration, reduction and recycling of hazardous waste, removal of 

unsafe buildings and debris or for similar purposes. 

Langage has been included in ‘‘Environmental Restoration, Defense-Wide’’ which provides for the transfer of funds for environmental restoration, reduction and recycling of hazardous waste, removal of unsafe buildings and debris or for similar purposes. 

Language has been included in ‘‘Environmental Restoration, Formerly Used Defense Sites’’ which provides for the transfer of funds 

for environmental restoration, reduction and recycling of hazardous 

waste, removal of unsafe buildings and debris at sites formerly 

used by the Department of Defense. 

Language has been included in ‘‘Drug Interdiction and CounterDrug Activities, Defense’’ which transfers funds to other appropriations accounts of the Department of Defense. 

Language has been included in ‘‘Joint Improvised Explosive Device Defeat Fund’’ which provides for the transfer of funds to appropriations for military personnel; operation and maintenance; 

procurement; research, development, test and evaluation; and the 

defense working capital funds. 

Lannguage has been included in ‘‘Intelligence Community Management Account’’ which provides for the transfer of funds to the 

Department of Justice for the National Drug Intelligence Center. 

Language has been included in several accounts and general provisions which allows for the transfer of funds between accounts. 

RESCISSIONS

Pursuant to clause 3(f)(2) of rule XIII of the Rules of the House 

of Representatives, the following table is submitted describing the 

rescissions recommended in the accompanying bill: 

Aircraft Procurement, Air Force, 2006/2008 .................................... $25,786,000 

Aircraft Procurement, Air Force, 2007/2009 .................................... 51,000,000 

Research, Development, Test and Evaluation, Navy, 2007/2008 ... 24,000,000 

Research, Development, Test and Evaluation, Air Force 2007/ 

2008 .................................................................................................. 142,000,000 

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

2007/2008 ......................................................................................... 125,000,000 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARING
433 

COMPLIANCE WITH CLAUSE 3 OF RULE XIII (RAMSEYER RULE) 

In compliance with clause 3(e) of rule XIII of the Rules of the 

House of Representatives, the Committee notes that the accompanying bill does not propose to repeal or amend a statute or part 

thereof. 

STATEMENT OF GENERAL PERFORMANCE GOALS AND OBJECTIVES

Pursuant to clause 3(c)(4) of rule XIII of the Rules of the House 

of Representatives, the following is a statement of general performance goals and objectives for which this measure authorizes funding: 

The Committee on Appropriations considers program performance, including a program’s success in developing and attaining 

outcome-related goals and objectives, in developing funding recommendations. 

CONSTITUTIONAL AUTHORITY

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

Each report of a committee on a bill or joint resolution 

of a public character, shall include a statement citing the 

specific powers granted to the Congress in the Constitution 

to enact the law proposed by the bill or joint resolution. 

The Committee on Appropriations bases its authority to report 

this legislation from Clause 7 of Section 9 of Article I of the Constitution of the United States of America which states: 

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

Appropriations contained in this Act are made pursuant to this 

specific power granted by the Constitution. 

COMPARISON WITH THE BUDGET RESOLUTION

Clause 3(c)(2) of rule XIII of the Rules of the House of Representatives requires an explanation of compliance with section 

308(a)(1)(A) of the Congressional Budget and Impoundment Control 

Act of 1974 (Public Law 93–344), as amended, which requires that 

the report accompanying a bill providing new budget authority contain a statement detailing how that authority compares with the 

reports submitted under section 302 of the Act for the most recently agreed to concurrent resolution on the budget for the fiscal 

year from the Committee’s section 302(a) allocation. This information follows: 

[In millions of dollars] 

302(b) allocation This bill 

Budget authority Outlays Budget authority Outlays 

Discretionary .................................................................................. 459,332 475,980 459,332 473,079 

Mandatory ...................................................................................... 263 263 263 263 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARING
434 

FIVE-YEAR OUTLAY PROJECTIONS

In compliance with section 308(a)(l)(B) of the Congressional 

Budget and Impoundment Control Act of 1974 (Public Law 93–

344), as amended, the following table contains five-year projections 

associated with the budget authority provided in the accompanying 

bill. 

(Millions) 

Budget Authority ....................................................................................................................................................... 459,332 

Outlays: 

2008 ................................................................................................................................................................ 309,511 

2009 ................................................................................................................................................................ 101,111 

2010 ................................................................................................................................................................ 29,442 

2011 ................................................................................................................................................................ 9,931 

2012 and beyond ............................................................................................................................................ 8,588 

FINANCIAL ASSISTANCE TO STATE AND LOCAL GOVERNMENTS

In accordance with section 308(a)(1)(C) of the Congressional 

Budget and Impoundment Control Act of 1974 (Public Law 93–

344), as amended, no new budget or outlays are provided by the 

accompanying bill for financial assistance to State and local governments. 

EARMARKS

Pursuant to clause 9 of rule XXI of the Rules of the House of 

Representatives, this bill, as reported, contains the following congressional earmarks, limited tax benefits, or limited tariff benefits 

as defined in clause 9(d), 9(e), or 9(f) of rule XXI. 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARING
435 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 0116 here HR279.233
436 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 0117 here HR279.234
437 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 0118 here HR279.235
438 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 0119 here HR279.236
439 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 0120 here HR279.237
440 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 0121 here HR279.238
441 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 0122 here HR279.239
442 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 0123 here HR279.240
443 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 0124 here HR279.241
444 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 0125 here HR279.242
445 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 0126 here HR279.243
446 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 0127 here HR279.244
447 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 0128 here HR279.245
448 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 0129 here HR279.246
449 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 0130 here HR279.247
450 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 0131 here HR279.248
451 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 0132 here HR279.249
452 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 0133 here HR279.250
453 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 0134 here HR279.251
454 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 0135 here HR279.252
455 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 0136 here HR279.253
456 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 0137 here HR279.254
457 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 0138 here HR279.255
458 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 0139 here HR279.256
459 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 0140 here HR279.257
460 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 0141 here HR279.258
461 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 0142 here HR279.259
462 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 0143 here HR279.260
463 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 0144 here HR279.261
464 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 0145 here HR279.262
465 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 0146 here HR279.263
466 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 0147 here HR279.264
467 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 0148 here HR279.265
468 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 0149 here HR279.266
469 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 0150 here HR279.267
470 

FULL COMMITTEE VOTES

Pursuant to the provisions of clause 3(b) of rule XIII of the House 

or Representatives, the results of each roll call on an amendment 

or on the motion to report, together with the names of those voting 

for and those voting against, are printed below: 

No recorded votes were ordered during consideration of the bill 

in Committee. 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARING
471 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 0151 here HR279.268
472 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 0152 here HR279.269
473 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 0153 here HR279.270
474 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 0154 here HR279.271
475 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 0155 here HR279.272
476 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 0156 here HR279.273
477 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 0157 here HR279.274
478 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 0158 here HR279.275
479 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 0159 here HR279.276
480 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 0160 here HR279.277
481 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 0161 here HR279.278