U.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE

WASHINGTON : 

For sale by the Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Government Printing Office,

http://bookstore.gpo.gov. For more information, contact the GPO Customer Contact Center,

U.S. Government Printing Office. Phone 202–512–1800, or 866–512–1800 (toll-free). E-mail, gpo@custhelp.com.

i 

82–458 2013

[H.A.S.C. No. 113–43] 

HEARING 

ON

NATIONAL DEFENSE AUTHORIZATION ACT 

FOR FISCAL YEAR 2014 

AND

OVERSIGHT OF PREVIOUSLY AUTHORIZED 

PROGRAMS 

BEFORE THE

COMMITTEE ON ARMED SERVICES 

HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

ONE HUNDRED THIRTEENTH CONGRESS 

FIRST SESSION 

FULL COMMITTEE HEARING 

ON

NATIONAL DEFENSE PRIORITIES 

FROM MEMBERS FOR THE 

FISCAL YEAR 2014 NATIONAL 

DEFENSE AUTHORIZATION ACT 

HEARING HELD 

MAY 8, 2013 
(II) 

COMMITTEE ON ARMED SERVICES 

ONE HUNDRED THIRTEENTH CONGRESS

HOWARD P. ‘‘BUCK’’ MCKEON, California, Chairman 

MAC THORNBERRY, Texas 

WALTER B. JONES, North Carolina 

J. RANDY FORBES, Virginia 

JEFF MILLER, Florida 

JOE WILSON, South Carolina 

FRANK A. LOBIONDO, New Jersey 

ROB BISHOP, Utah 

MICHAEL R. TURNER, Ohio 

JOHN KLINE, Minnesota 

MIKE ROGERS, Alabama 

TRENT FRANKS, Arizona 

BILL SHUSTER, Pennsylvania 

K. MICHAEL CONAWAY, Texas 

DOUG LAMBORN, Colorado 

ROBERT J. WITTMAN, Virginia 

DUNCAN HUNTER, California 

JOHN FLEMING, Louisiana 

MIKE COFFMAN, Colorado 

E. SCOTT RIGELL, Virginia 

CHRISTOPHER P. GIBSON, New York 

VICKY HARTZLER, Missouri 

JOSEPH J. HECK, Nevada 

JON RUNYAN, New Jersey 

AUSTIN SCOTT, Georgia 

STEVEN M. PALAZZO, Mississippi 

MARTHA ROBY, Alabama 

MO BROOKS, Alabama 

RICHARD B. NUGENT, Florida 

KRISTI L. NOEM, South Dakota 

PAUL COOK, California 

JIM BRIDENSTINE, Oklahoma 

BRAD R. WENSTRUP, Ohio 

JACKIE WALORSKI, Indiana 

ADAM SMITH, Washington 

LORETTA SANCHEZ, California 

MIKE MCINTYRE, North Carolina 

ROBERT A. BRADY, Pennsylvania 

ROBERT E. ANDREWS, New Jersey 

SUSAN A. DAVIS, California 

JAMES R. LANGEVIN, Rhode Island 

RICK LARSEN, Washington 

JIM COOPER, Tennessee 

MADELEINE Z. BORDALLO, Guam 

JOE COURTNEY, Connecticut 

DAVID LOEBSACK, Iowa 

NIKI TSONGAS, Massachusetts 

JOHN GARAMENDI, California 

HENRY C. ‘‘HANK’’ JOHNSON, JR., Georgia 

COLLEEN W. HANABUSA, Hawaii 

JACKIE SPEIER, California 

RON BARBER, Arizona 

ANDRE ́ CARSON, Indiana 

CAROL SHEA-PORTER, New Hampshire 

DANIEL B. MAFFEI, New York 

DEREK KILMER, Washington 

JOAQUIN CASTRO, Texas 

TAMMY DUCKWORTH, Illinois 

SCOTT H. PETERS, California 

WILLIAM L. ENYART, Illinois 

PETE P. GALLEGO, Texas 

MARC A. VEASEY, Texas 

ROBERT L. SIMMONS II, Staff Director 

JAIME CHESHIRE, Professional Staff Member 

TIM MCCLEES, Professional Staff Member 

AARON FALK, Clerk 

JOE SANGIORGIO, Communications Assistant 
(III) 

C O N T E N T S 

CHRONOLOGICAL LIST OF HEARINGS 

2013 

Page 

HEARING: 

Wednesday, May 8, 2013, National Defense Priorities from Members for the 

Fiscal Year 2014 National Defense Authorization Act ..................................... 1 

APPENDIX: 

Wednesday, May 8, 2013 ......................................................................................... 41 

WEDNESDAY, MAY 8, 2013 

NATIONAL DEFENSE PRIORITIES FROM MEMBERS FOR THE FISCAL 

YEAR 2014 NATIONAL DEFENSE AUTHORIZATION ACT 

STATEMENTS PRESENTED BY MEMBERS OF CONGRESS 

Barr, Hon. Garland ‘‘Andy,’’ a Representative from Kentucky ............................ 21 

Blackburn, Hon. Marsha, a Representative from Tennessee ............................... 10 

Broun, Hon. Paul C., a Representative from Georgia .......................................... 17 

Cartwright, Hon. Matthew A., a Representative from Pennsylvania ................. 6 

Crawford, Hon. Eric A. ‘‘Rick,’’ a Representative from Arkansas ........................ 24 

DeSantis, Hon. Ron, a Representative from Florida ............................................ 31 

Fattah, Hon. Chaka, a Representative from Pennsylvania .................................. 18 

Gabbard, Hon. Tulsi, a Representative from Hawaii ........................................... 33 

Gosar, Hon. Paul A., a Representative from Arizona ........................................... 36 

Green, Hon. Al, a Representative from Texas ....................................................... 37 

Hanna, Hon. Richard L., a Representative from New York ................................ 20 

Heck, Hon. Denny, a Representative from Washington ....................................... 14 

Hudson, Hon. Richard, a Representative from North Carolina ........................... 11 

Jackson Lee, Hon. Sheila, a Representative from Texas ...................................... 30 

Kildee, Hon. Daniel T., a Representative from Michigan .................................... 15 

Lee, Hon. Barbara, a Representative from California .......................................... 27 

McKeon, Hon. Howard P. ‘‘Buck,’’ a Representative from California, Chairman, Committee on Armed Services .................................................................. 1 

Nunes, Hon. Devin, a Representative from California ......................................... 3 

O’Rourke, Hon. Beto, a Representative from Texas ............................................. 38 

Pierluisi, Hon. Pedro R., Resident Commissioner from Puerto Rico ................... 12 

Posey, Hon. Bill, a Representative from Florida ................................................... 29 

Roskam, Hon. Peter J., a Representative from Illinois ........................................ 19 

Ros-Lehtinen, Hon. Ileana, a Representative from Florida ................................. 26 

Sherman, Hon. Brad, a Representative from California ...................................... 35 

Smith, Hon. Adam, a Representative from Washington, Ranking Member, 

Committee on Armed Services ............................................................................ 2 

Takano, Hon. Mark, a Representative from California ........................................ 2 

Thompson, Hon. Glenn, a Representative from Pennsylvania ............................ 8 

Young, Hon. Don, a Representative from Alaska ................................................. 22 

APPENDIX 

PREPARED STATEMENTS: 

Barr, Hon. Garland ‘‘Andy’’ ............................................................................. 137 
Page

IV 

PREPARED STATEMENTS—Continued 

Bilirakis, Hon. Gus M., a Representative from Florida ................................ 99 

Black, Hon. Diane, a Representative from Tennessee ................................... 119 

Blackburn, Hon. Marsha .................................................................................. 80 

Broun, Hon. Paul C. ......................................................................................... 105 

Burgess, Hon. Michael C., a Representative from Texas .............................. 84 

Calvert, Hon. Ken, a Representative from California ................................... 52 

Cartwright, Hon. Matthew A. .......................................................................... 139 

Cramer, Hon. Kevin, a Representative from North Dakota ......................... 142 

Crawford, Hon. Eric A. ‘‘Rick’’ ......................................................................... 121 

DelBene, Hon. Suzan K., a Representative from Washington ...................... 136 

Dent, Hon. Charles W., a Representative from Pennsylvania ...................... 88 

DeSantis, Hon. Ron .......................................................................................... 144 

Faleomavaega, Hon. Eni F. H., a Delegate from American Samoa .............. 168 

Fattah, Hon. Chaka .......................................................................................... 53 

Gabbard, Hon. Tulsi ......................................................................................... 149 

Gibbs, Hon. Bob, a Representative from Ohio ............................................... 126 

Gingrey, Hon. Phil, a Representative from Georgia ...................................... 85 

Gosar, Hon. Paul A. .......................................................................................... 130 

Green, Hon. Al .................................................................................................. 90 

Hanna, Hon. Richard L. ................................................................................... 132 

Heck, Hon. Denny ............................................................................................. 151 

Honda, Hon. Michael M., a Representative from California ......................... 68 

Hudson, Hon. Richard ...................................................................................... 153 

Hurt, Hon. Robert, a Representative from Virginia ...................................... 133 

Issa, Hon. Darrell E., a Representative from California ............................... 72 

Jackson Lee, Hon. Sheila ................................................................................. 54 

Kildee, Hon. Daniel T. ...................................................................................... 156 

Lee, Hon. Barbara ............................................................................................ 63 

McClintock, Hon. Tom, a Representative from California ............................ 107 

McMorris Rodgers, Hon. Cathy, a Representative from Washington .......... 94 

Moore, Hon. Gwen, a Representative from Wisconsin .................................. 96 

Nunes, Hon. Devin ........................................................................................... 86 

O’Rourke, Hon. Beto ......................................................................................... 158 

Pierluisi, Hon. Pedro R. ................................................................................... 170 

Pingree, Hon. Chellie, a Representative from Maine .................................... 108 

Posey, Hon. Bill ................................................................................................ 110 

Rice, Hon. Tom, a Representative from South Carolina ............................... 161 

Roskam, Hon. Peter J. ..................................................................................... 100 

Ros-Lehtinen, Hon. Ileana ............................................................................... 50 

Sarbanes, Hon. John P., a Representative from Maryland ........................... 102 

Sherman, Hon. Brad ........................................................................................ 60 

Stivers, Hon. Steve, a Representative from Ohio .......................................... 134 

Takano, Hon. Mark .......................................................................................... 165 

Thompson, Hon. Glenn ..................................................................................... 115 

Vargas, Hon. Juan, a Representative from California .................................. 166 

Waxman, Hon. Henry A., a Representative from California ........................ 49 

Young, Hon. Don ............................................................................................... 45 

DOCUMENTS SUBMITTED FOR THE RECORD: 

Mr. Nunes’ letter to Secretary Panetta regarding Lajes Field ..................... 175 

Slides used by Mr. Nunes ................................................................................ 177 

WITNESS RESPONSES TO QUESTIONS ASKED DURING THE HEARING: 

[There were no Questions submitted during the hearing.] 

QUESTIONS SUBMITTED BY MEMBERS POST HEARING: 

[There were no Questions submitted post hearing.] 
(1) 

NATIONAL DEFENSE PRIORITIES FROM MEMBERS FOR 

THE FISCAL YEAR 2014 NATIONAL DEFENSE AUTHORIZATION ACT 

HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES, COMMITTEE ON ARMED SERVICES, Washington, DC, Wednesday, May 8, 2013. 

The committee met, pursuant to call, at 12:35 p.m., in room 

2118, Rayburn House Office Building, Hon. Howard P. ‘‘Buck’’ 

McKeon (chairman of the committee) presiding. 

OPENING STATEMENT OF HON. HOWARD P. ‘‘BUCK’’ MCKEON, 

A REPRESENTATIVE FROM CALIFORNIA, CHAIRMAN, COMMITTEE ON ARMED SERVICES 

The CHAIRMAN. The committee will come to order. 

Good afternoon. The House Armed Services Committee meets 

today to receive testimony from Members of Congress on their national defense priorities for the fiscal year 2014 National Defense 

Authorization Act [NDAA]. 

In exactly 4 weeks, this committee will reconvene to mark up our 

51st consecutive NDAA. And, as we begin crafting our legislation, 

it is essential we seek input from all Members of the House to better enable us to fulfill Congress’ article I, section 8 constitutional 

mandate to provide for the common defense. We all share the responsibility to provide the best possible resources for our warfighters, and we look forward to hearing from this group of our fellow Members of Congress on their proposals for how best to carry 

out our mandate. 

In a tough budget environment, such as the one we face this 

year, I hope to enlist all of you who care deeply about our troops 

and our national security in focusing on solutions to the damage 

to our force caused by the across-the-board cuts known as sequestration, not just targeted fixes. 

A quick note on our format for today. In consultation with the 

ranking member, we will depart from our regular questioning process. Each witness will have 5 minutes to testify, followed by a 5- 

minute round of clarifying questions from the committee. Members 

of the committee may seek recognition by raised hand and will be 

granted 2 minutes apiece, up to the 5-minute limit. This will ensure we can hear from all witnesses today in a timely fashion. 

As this hearing is intended to be a listening session, it is not my 

intent to engage in extended debate or colloquy with all our witnesses. 

We look forward to today’s testimony and thank the participating 

Members for their advocacy on behalf of our troops. 

Mr. Smith. 
2 

STATEMENT OF HON. ADAM SMITH, A REPRESENTATIVE FROM 

WASHINGTON, RANKING MEMBER, COMMITTEE ON ARMED 

SERVICES 

Mr. SMITH. I just concur in the chairman’s remarks and look forward to hearing from all the Members. 

You know, we have 62 Members on this committee, and we work 

with them, but the entire House is interested in what goes in the 

Defense Authorization Act. So it is always good to hear from all the 

Members, and I look forward to doing that this afternoon. 

I yield back. 

The CHAIRMAN. Thank you. 

We, you know, go through a markup process where members of 

the committee all get to offer amendments, and then when we get 

to the floor, Members get to offer amendments. But this is a way 

to get something in the bill without going through the cumbersome 

amendment process. 

So Mr. Takano. 

STATEMENT OF HON. MARK TAKANO, A REPRESENTATIVE 

FROM CALIFORNIA 

Mr. TAKANO. Mr. Chairman, thank you very much. 

Chairman McKeon, Ranking Member Smith, members of the 

committee, thank you for this opportunity to testify. 

Recently, a crew from the California Air National Guard that 

was operating a remotely piloted aircraft out of March Air Reserve 

Base was able to locate a survival raft less than 2 minutes after 

being given a rough approximation of its position—not 2 days, not 

2 hours, 2 minutes. 

We are on the cusp of a new era. Remotely piloted aircraft, or 

RPAs, simply perform tasks better than manned airplanes do. 

The majority of the United States RPA expertise, both combat 

and defense support of civil authorities, is located in the Air National Guard. Unfortunately, that previously mentioned California 

Air National Guard unit will be out of business in less than 4 years 

unless they are included in the Air Force’s RPA upgrade plan, a 

plan they are not currently even mentioned in. Similar fates 

threaten Air National Guard units flying the soon-to-be-phased-out 

MQ–1 Predator in Arizona, North Dakota, Texas, and Ohio. 

The United States is on the verge of incorporating RPAs in the 

National Airspace System, and these Air National Guard units 

have the most experience of any RP [remotely piloted] operation. 

They are the true experts in how to do this right. In light of this, 

the Guard should be at the top of the list for conversion to safer, 

higher flying follow-on RPAs, like the MQ–9 Reaper, rather than 

as an afterthought. 

America needs to capitalize on the Air National Guard’s expertise to reap fully the benefits of seamless RPA support for search 

and rescue efforts, disaster relief, and emergency services. Converting to the MQ–9 swiftly will also protect the thousands of jobs 

and countless small businesses that support these units. 

The next 5 years will see substantial, maybe even exponential 

growth in remotely piloted aircraft operations worldwide, and 

America cannot afford to squander the significant advantage we 

have in this arena. 
3 

As the MQ–1 nears the end of its service life, it is absolutely imperative that the Air Force revises its RPA upgrade plan and upgrades the forgotten Air National Guard MQ–1 units in California, 

Arizona, North Dakota, Texas, and Ohio to the MQ–9 as quickly 

as possible to prevent a gap in mission coverage. This will also ensure we capitalize on, rather than lose, the Air National Guard’s 

critical expertise and maintain America’s lead beyond the approaching RPA horizon. 

While the Air Force does have a strategic basing process for the 

recapitalization of MQ–1s to MQ–9s, the criteria do not place proper emphasis on the importance of current MQ–1 flight training 

schoolhouses. The Air Force should prioritize the replacement of 

MQ–1s with MQ–9s at locations with existing flight training unit 

schoolhouses, which would allow the Air Force to capitalize on existing infrastructure, trained personnel, instructor expertise, and 

save taxpayer money. 

We need to see a formal recapitalization plan for the replacement 

of all National Guard MQ–1 aircraft with MQ–9 aircraft. That plan 

should contain the criteria for bed-down, including both the weight 

and scoring that will be given to MQ–1 wings and squadrons with 

collocated flight training unit schoolhouse missions. 

That concludes my testimony, Mr. Chairman. 

[The prepared statement of Mr. Takano can be found in the Appendix on page 165.] 

The CHAIRMAN. Boy, you used the exact minute, right to the second. 

Mr. TAKANO. I didn’t want to outstay my welcome, sir. 

The CHAIRMAN. You did a very good job. 

Mr. TAKANO. Thank you. 

The CHAIRMAN. Thank you very much. Appreciate it. 

I said in my opening statement we would have 5 minutes, but 

it will be 4 minutes. In all of the Members that we have signed up, 

it worked out we will only have 4 minutes. 

Next will be Mr. Nunes from California. 

STATEMENT OF HON. DEVIN NUNES, A REPRESENTATIVE 

FROM CALIFORNIA 

Mr. NUNES. Thank you, Mr. Chairman and Ranking Member 

Smith. I appreciate the opportunity to testify. 

I have a letter that I would like to submit for the record based 

on the Air Force’s decision to draw down forces at Lajes Field on 

Terceira Island. 

The CHAIRMAN. Without objection, so ordered. 

[The information referred to can be found in the Appendix beginning on page 175.] 

Mr. NUNES. Lajes has an unparalleled strategic value. Located 

on the Azore islands between Europe and the United States, it is 

like the Hawaii of the Atlantic Ocean, only closer to America’s 

homeland. 

The islands belong to Portugal, a strong U.S. ally since World 

War II that has never prevented us from conducting operational 

missions. The base was critical to our tracking of Soviet submarines during the cold war. Today, it allows us access to Europe, 

the Middle East, to Western and Sub-Sahara Africa. It is also a 
4 

vital site for countering AQIM [Al Qaeda in the Islamic Maghreb] 

and other jihadist groups in Southern Sahara Africa. 

Furthermore, Lajes is well-positioned to act as a logistical hub, 

not only for Department of Defense, but for USAID [United States 

Agency for International Development], the State Department, and 

other agencies. 

I want to bring Lajes to your attention today due to the dire consequences of the decision to draw down the base. Our strategic 

planners may believe we can leave a mere skeletal operation at 

Lajes and retain access there, but, in reality, the decision means 

a total end to the U.S. presence at the facility. 

Scaling back to current plans will severely impact the Azorian 

economy, forcing authorities to look for a new tenant for the site. 

In light of Portugal’s weak economy, we do not want to make Azorians choose between their loyalty to the United States and the ability to feed their families. 

Next slide, please. 

[The slide referred to can be found in the Appendix on page 177.] 

Mr. NUNES. While our strategic planners may not want to be in 

the Azores anymore, leaders of other nations feel differently. Several high-ranking Chinese officials have visited the Azores in recent years, culminating in a June 2012 visit by Premier Wen 

Jiabao. The Chinese did not divulge what these delegates were 

doing there, but I highly doubt they were sipping port and enjoying 

the pleasant climate. 

Next slide, please. 

[The slide referred to can be found in the Appendix on page 178.] 

Mr. NUNES. Crucially, we cannot assume the Portuguese will exclude China or other bad actors from the site simply out of allegiance to the United States. The recent decision to send 500 U.S. 

Marines to Moro ́n, Spain, a contingent that would have much more 

flexibility at the logistics hub of Lajes, could easily be perceived as 

a calculated insult to our Portuguese allies. 

I fully understand the budget reality we face. However, as we reduce our European footprint comprising of 110,000 personnel and 

29 military installations, we need to consider each site’s 

geostrategic value. It would cost billions to build a base like Lajes 

today. And if our strategic planners insist on giving up something 

this vital, then at the very least I would urge this committee to create a pilot program to privatize its operations to guarantee 24/7 access to the site for TRANSCOM [Transportation Command] and 

other agencies. 

I would like to draw the final slide. It is up on the screen now. 

[The slide referred to can be found in the Appendix on page 179.] 

Mr. NUNES. In conclusion, the retention of Lajes was not an issue 

for 70 years—70 years—because prior planners never contemplated 

surrendering something so crucial to the United States interests. 

And I leave this committee with three questions. The first: If we 

withdraw from Lajes, should we assume that Chinese and Russian 

submarines will suffer some mishap that prevents them from sailing beneath the Atlantic Ocean? 

Second, if we withdraw from Lajes, should we assume that 

jihadists will stop training in Sub-Sahara Africa? 
5 

And, finally, I want to draw your attention to the map and ask 

an extremely simple question: If the U.S. Government wants to fulfill its responsibility to protect the United States, its people, and 

its interests, then I ask you to look at the map, and what location 

of the 29 locations on the map is most critical? I would argue that 

a strategic site equivalent to Hawaii in the Atlantic Ocean is the 

most critical. 

And, with that, Mr. Chairman and Ranking Member, I appreciate your time, and I look forward to answering any questions that 

you may have. 

[The prepared statement of Mr. Nunes can be found in the Appendix on page 86.] 

The CHAIRMAN. Mr. Thornberry. 

Mr. THORNBERRY. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

Mr. Nunes, let me be sure I understand. So the military thinks 

they can leave a skeletal force and then come back if we need it. 

And your point is that if we leave, they have, by necessity, got to 

do something else with the base, and so it will not be an option to 

come back. 

Mr. NUNES. Right. I think rough numbers, Mr. Thornberry, is 

that it would cost multiple billions dollars to construct a base like 

we have there today. It is a 10,000-foot runway, hundreds of homes 

and facilities. It used to house 5,000 troops; today it is down to 500. 

So the problem is, if you want to draw down from 500 to 50 or 

75 or 100 and then cut the civilian workforce there, I mean, this 

is a no-brainer that they are going to want to sell that base, because the economics are going to require it. That is the problem. 

You have 25 percent unemployment on the islands already. In 

mainland Portugal, you have 20 percent unemployment. Likely, if 

you close this base, you are going to see 35 or 40 percent employment. That is not a sustainable economic model. 

Mr. THORNBERRY. And so the danger is, if we walk away, we lose 

it forever. 

Mr. NUNES. Right. If we walk away and draw down, the Portuguese will be forced to make a very tough decision, which is, do 

we support the United States, which I think they want to do, or 

do we make a strategic decision to try to feed our families? And 

that will be the decision they will be down to. 

Mr. THORNBERRY. Okay. And could you just briefly, again, describe what you are suggesting about private—— 

Mr. NUNES. Well, roughly, I would think that—this has been 

tried some times. It has been tried some times in the past. But I 

think, roughly, they are spending about $50 million a year there 

now. I think they are trying to draw it down closer to $30 million. 

The base is going to go to part-time; it is going to be a skeleton 

crew. 

I would argue that maybe we could use that $30 million to look 

for a way to keep it open 24/7 under a smaller maybe military contingent, but locals possibly, and we could get more for less. We 

could actually save the government money. 

I mean, look, I don’t believe that we should withdraw the presence there at all. In fact, I would argue that we should probably 

increase the presence at Lajes and draw down other facilities. But 

if they are dead set in their plans, perhaps this is an opportunity 
6 

for a pilot project to privatize and save some money and, most importantly, keep our access there. 

Mr. THORNBERRY. Thank you. 

The CHAIRMAN. Mr. Cook. 

Mr. COOK. Yes, sir. I have a quick comment and maybe a question. 

And, by the way, I support what you are saying there. 

And I would just call the committee’s attention to a little bit of 

history. And that was, many, many years ago, when the Shah of 

Iran’s regime had changed, there were certain contingencies. And 

it was about relief forces that were to go into Iran via that particular base, then into insulate Turkey, and then into Tehran. At 

that time, it was to evacuate the embassy. Never happened for a 

variety of reasons, one of which is the op plans, I think, were 

leaked to the press. 

I kind of know the area a little bit. I would hope that the military has reviewed that. But with the situation in the Middle East 

with Syria and Iran, I just think that the gentleman from California is making an excellent point about the importance of that. 

I didn’t even know it was going to be on the docket today, but I 

did want to offer that support. 

Thank you. I yield. 

Mr. NUNES. Well, thank you, Mr. Cook. And I appreciate your 

service to our country. 

And I would point out that, in the past, similar times throughout 

history, almost all the other European countries have blocked our 

access except for Portugal. 

The CHAIRMAN. Any further questions? 

Thank you. Thank you very much for your presentation. 

Mr. NUNES. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

The CHAIRMAN. Next would be Mr. Cartwright from Pennsylvania. 

STATEMENT OF HON. MATTHEW A. CARTWRIGHT, A 

REPRESENTATIVE FROM PENNSYLVANIA 

Mr. CARTWRIGHT. Thank you, Chairman McKeon, Ranking Member Smith, members of the House Armed Services Committee. I 

come before you today to testify about the importance of our defense industrial base and specifically about military depots. 

Right now, we stand at the tail end of two long wars that have 

stretched our budgets and severely strained our All-Volunteer 

Force. As the committee is well aware, hard choices about defense 

spending will have to be made in the near future. In order to 

shrink our defense budget to fit a peacetime force, this committee 

will have to identify programs that are no longer vital to American 

safety, while at the same time maintain funding for readiness for 

a myriad of continuing threats. 

I hope you will join me in supporting replacing the sequesterlevel cuts with a defense budget policy that thoughtfully and appropriately reshapes our fighting forces. 

Now, depots. Our military depots are a fiscally prudent tool in 

maintaining readiness. As you set their budget, I urge you to consider the value of depots to the warfighter, the return on the investment that the American taxpayer receives from depots, and the 
7 

indispensable economic role these facilities play in communities 

where they are located. 

In my district alone, the Tobyhanna Army Depot, the Army’s 

only C4ISR [command, control, communications, computers, intelligence, surveillance and reconnaissance] communications depot, 

generates $1.68 in economic activity for every dollar invested. Additionally, every job at Tobyhanna generates two and a half jobs in 

the larger community. Letterkenny Army Depot, also in my State, 

generates over one and a half local jobs for every employee who 

goes to work for the base. 

In many cases, as with Tobyhanna, depots are the largest employers in their respective congressional districts. Dramatic reductions would economically devastate these communities. 

I would further ask you to consider the impact sequestration and 

the fiscal year 2013 continuing resolution have already had on 

Tobyhanna. Five hundred people have already lost their jobs. Projected funding is about $100 million below what was originally 

planned, and funding actually received by the depot is now only 

about 72 percent of the revised scaled-back plan. 

Work stoppages on several key systems will begin occurring next 

month. To maintain costs of competitiveness, the depot has curtailed contracts and canceled its capital investment program for 

this fiscal year. 

As the ability of depots to refurbish essential supplies becomes 

lost because of such costs, the outlook for better integrating our 

forces through upgraded communications networks and equipment 

becomes bleaker. As Army Chief of Staff General Raymond T. 

Odierno stated last August, network upgrades remain the Army’s, 

quote, ‘‘number-one modernization priority,’’ unquote. Now, going forward, last year the House voted to cut nearly $2 

billion from our military depot budget. Depots are required to run 

like businesses. They have to win work and remain cost-competitive within the private sector. If they can’t do so, they have to cut 

costs. Slashing their operational funding means they are able to do 

less work. And if overhead costs become too great a percentage of 

total costs, the facility becomes less competitive when bidding for 

new work. That leads to the kind of a death spiral that is just 

doomsday for a depot. 

In addition to increasing operational funds, this committee 

should seek to enforce the 50–50 rule and ensure that the essential 

go-to-war items are identified so that depots maintain sufficient 

workload. We should use the oversight power of Congress to ensure 

that the service branches move quickly to establish new systems 

that will be supported by depots and that will support depot workloads for decades to come. 

I urge you to authorize an expansion of the electronic technology 

that tomorrow’s warfighter will need, along with increased direct 

funding for our Nation’s military depots. Only a well-equipped, 

well-supported force will allow America to meet all of its future 

threats. 

I thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

[The prepared statement of Mr. Cartwright can be found in the 

Appendix on page 139.] 

The CHAIRMAN. Thank you very much. 
8 

Any questions of the gentleman? 

Thank you very much. 

Next is Mr. Thompson from Pennsylvania. 

STATEMENT OF HON. GLENN THOMPSON, A REPRESENTATIVE 

FROM PENNSYLVANIA 

Mr. THOMPSON. Chairman McKeon, Ranking Member Smith, 

members of the Armed Services Committee, I want to thank you 

for allowing me to testify before you today. 

This committee has done an excellent job supporting the brave 

men and women who serve our country, which is a passion I share 

with each of you. 

Two years ago I worked very closely with the committee to include the Servicemembers’ Telemedicine and E-Health Portability 

Act, or STEP Act, in the fiscal year 2012 National Defense Authorization Act, which was signed into law in December 2012. The 

STEP Act was a positive step forward in modernizing how the Department of Defense delivers health care. Specifically it made widespread telemedicine possible and accessible by expanding the State 

licensure exemption to all DOD [Department of Defense] 

healthcare professionals, regardless where they are or the patient 

is located. 

Many committee members have worked closely on the issue of 

mental health and suicide prevention and know just how important 

it is for our service members to get treatment without delay. Of 

equal importance is ensuring our service members can access care 

without the stigma that is often associated with seeking mental 

health treatment. The STEP Act is assisting with achieving these 

very goals. 

Last year, after passage of the STEP Act, the Army was able to 

perform nearly 36,000 teleconsultations, which included over 

31,200 tele-behavioral health clinical encounters. This is an incredible achievement and a great start. Since its passage I have worked 

closely with the Department of Defense to monitor its implementation. 

In large part the services have embraced these changes. In a new 

memo to the service chiefs this year, the Department of Defense 

presented the first part of the STEP Act implementation with a 

broad waiver to expand telemedicine. This waiver was a tremendous step forward. 

However, there remains two issues which the Department of Defense needs to address. First, the waiver does not allow service 

members to use telemedicine from their homes, only fixed facilities. 

Second, TRICARE providers were not included as a part of this 

waiver for licensure portability. However, the STEP Act has already clearly addressed both of these waiver issues. And this is my 

concern, that the Department of Defense has not fully implemented 

the spirit of the law. 

We need to make health services and care as convenient and accessible as possible, especially when it comes to the mental health. 

There is no better way to remove the stigma of seeking mental 

health from a bricks-and-mortar facility, in plain sight of colleagues 

than to allow our service members to access care in the comfort 

and privacy of their own homes. 
9 

I did have the opportunity to speak yesterday with Dr. Jonathan 

Woodson, the Assistant Secretary of Defense for Health Affairs, 

and relayed some of my concerns to him. As we move forward, I 

would appreciate your help with that. 

I cut short some of my original prepared remarks just to elevate 

an issue that came from constituents just this week. And I would 

just ask, with this, the committee’s close oversight as we prepare 

to draw down and depart from Afghanistan. This week I received 

multiple constituent contacts from members of the military currently deployed in Afghanistan. They were from different FOBs 

[forward operating bases], but had the same issue: hunger. 

I recognize, as they do, that we are at war, and at times of war 

circumstances will dictate nights when the troops won’t go to sleep, 

and will go to sleep hungry, or may not go to sleep at all. That is 

what happens when you are at war, at times. But the situation I 

am talking about is not one of those times. 

In a conversation with CENTCOM [Central Command] on this 

issue, after the constituent contacts, I was provided the U.S. Expeditionary Mindset Campaign Key Messages. Bullet 4 of that document states, quote, ‘‘It is no longer business as usual. We do not 

need money for non-mission-essential resources. In this cost culture, we need to ask, Do we need it?’’ 

Well, colleagues, I would argue that the safety, shelter, and sustenance—or food—are mission-essential resources and an obligation to the men and women serving in harm’s way. I just ask your 

oversight that we fulfill these mission essentials until the last set 

of boots are out of Afghanistan. 

Let me close with sharing just the following email I received 2 

days ago from a constituent. It is short. I got it May 6. And it is 

a quote. 

‘‘So they took away breakfast and midnight chow and replaced it 

MREs [Meal Ready to Eat]. It doesn’t affect me much because it’s 

helping me lose weight, but the guys I work with that work a 12- 

hour shift overnight really get hosed. What they have been doing 

is going to dinner, which is their breakfast, grabbing a to-go plate 

for a meal later on. Tonight’’—and I replaced the position with just 

senior NCO [noncommissioned officer]—‘‘told them that they’re not 

allowed to do that. Other times the dining facility soldiers have 

told the guys that they can only take one MRE. Basically these 

guys are trying to starve people, I think. Just filling you in. Maybe 

a phone call to someone would help.’’ 

Well, I hope the opportunity that you have allowed me today, 

quite frankly, has fulfilled that constituent’s request. And I yield 

back. 

[The prepared statement of Mr. Thompson can be found in the 

Appendix on page 115.] 

The CHAIRMAN. The gentleman’s time has expired. 

We will include your whole statement in the record. No objection. 

Thank you very much. 

Mr. THOMPSON. Thank you. 

The CHAIRMAN. Ms. Blackburn from Tennessee. 
10 

STATEMENT OF HON. MARSHA BLACKBURN, A 

REPRESENTATIVE FROM TENNESSEE 

Mrs. BLACKBURN. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, Ranking Member 

Smith. We appreciate the opportunity to testify today. 

I represent the Seventh Congressional District of Tennessee, 

which is home to the brave men and women of Fort Campbell, and 

that is home to the storied 101st Airborne, the 5th Special Forces 

Group, and the Army’s 160th Special Operations Aviation Regiment, which piloted Navy SEAL [Sea, Air, and Land] Team 6 during the raid on Osama bin Laden. 

The nearly 3,500 officers and 27,000 enlisted personnel who call 

Fort Campbell home have gone through intensive training which 

has pushed their minds and bodies to the limits. In the end, those 

who made the cut have truly earned the right to be part of the U.S. 

military and serve on the front lines in the fight against terrorism. 

However, due to the extreme cuts facing our military under sequestration, some of our military readiness programs are in jeopardy. One program that I am especially concerned about is the Flying Hour Program. This vital program provides aviation training 

resources for individual crew members and units according to approved aviation training strategies. In addition, it also provides individual and collective proficiency in support of ongoing combat and 

noncombat air operations. For aviation units like the 101st Airborne, this training is not only vital to mission success, but to the 

safety of our soldiers. 

As a result of sequestration, the Army has already begun curtailing training, canceling training center rotations, ending collective training above the platoon level except for the next-to-deploy 

units, and reducing flying hours, which is leaving many units unprepared for possible contingencies both at home and abroad. 

Many military specialties, such as pilots, are acutely affected, 

with many set to lose their currency in a matter of months. The 

Army could have to cut 37,000 flying hours from aviation training, 

creating a shortfall of over 500 aviators just this year. 

I urge the House Armed Services Committee to pay close attention to restoring the Flying Hour Programs to their full capacity in 

fiscal year 2014. Without it, vital national security assets like the 

101st Airborne will find their important mission at risk. More importantly, the lives of the soldiers we count on to deploy in our defense will also be put at much greater risk. 

One additional program that I would like to highlight for the 

committee is the Troops to Teachers program. Given that the current unemployment rate for veterans is a staggering 10 percent, it 

is important that we help our troops exiting the military transition 

to a new career. Becoming a teacher is the perfect outlet for many 

of our veterans who are looking to continue their service. The program is currently underutilized in the Fort Campbell area, despite 

the large presence of veterans in the communities. I urge the committee to provide a thoughtful review of the program and look for 

ways to enhance it through innovative changes so that institutions 

of higher education can work more closely with members of the 

armed services. 

I thank you for your time, and I yield back. 
11 

[The prepared statement of Mrs. Blackburn can be found in the 

Appendix on page 80.] 

The CHAIRMAN. Thank you very much. 

Any questions? Thank you. 

Next will be Mr. Hudson from North Carolina. The gentleman is 

recognized. 

STATEMENT OF HON. RICHARD HUDSON, A REPRESENTATIVE 

FROM NORTH CAROLINA 

Mr. HUDSON. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

Chairman McKeon, and Ranking Member Smith, I want to thank 

you and this committee for the opportunity to share with you some 

of the national security priorities I hold for the upcoming year on 

behalf of the Eighth District of North Carolina. 

As I have traveled around communities in North Carolina, people 

have consistently told me that restoring fiscal responsibility is their 

number one priority, and that they sent me to Washington to help 

force the government to live within its means. Accordingly, I am 

committed to cutting spending, reducing the size of government, 

promoting economic growth, and putting our budget on a path to 

balance. 

Today I would like to discuss a number of issues; namely, the 

challenges that we face, along with our allies and partners; the 

commitments we have made to our men and women in uniform; 

and the importance of ensuring accountability and transparency 

when trying to maintain a strong national defense in a tough budget environment. 

The past decade has taught us that many of the threats we face 

no longer come from traditional nations, but rather from determined groups of extremists who seek to wreak havoc on the American dream. While the war on terror is an ongoing battle against 

evil, in most cases states continue to pose the greatest threat to our 

national security, whether through the sponsor of terrorist groups 

or outright provocation. A failure to exercise U.S. diplomatic and 

military leadership means nuclear states like Iran and North 

Korea will be able to bully the entire international system. 

North Carolina is fortunate to be home to over 700,000 proud 

veterans, and I am lucky to represent a district that has a strong 

military presence, given its proximity to Fort Bragg. I just returned 

from a terrific visit to Fort Bragg and am proud to report that 

some of the finest Americans are working there on behalf of this 

great Nation. The men and women of Fort Bragg have very unique 

capabilities and a very unique mission. 

I look forward to working with this committee on behalf of Fort 

Bragg to make sure their priorities are understood and met. Among 

these are a number of new centers, including a skills sustainment 

course building for the Joint Special Operations Medical Training 

Center, an engineer training facility for the 1st Special Warfare 

Training Group, a language and cultural center for the John F. 

Kennedy Special Warfare Center and School. 

As the United States increases its Special Operations and airborne operations presence, it is critically important that we support 

in-depth training and techniques, an area where Fort Bragg continues to excel. I look forward to working with you and this com-
12 

mittee to provide the necessary resources to ensure the utmost success for our dedicated men and women in uniform serving at Fort 

Bragg and around the world. 

America has made promises to the men and women who have 

made countless sacrifices for this Nation, and we must guarantee 

these promises are kept. As chairman of the Subcommittee on 

Transportation Security, I have worked for and support the TSA’s 

[Transportation Security Administration] decision to offer lessinvasive screening for members of the military who have sustained 

severe combat-related injuries. 

Finally, I would like to discuss the defense budget. I recognize 

the difficult challenges facing this committee in balancing the important needs of our Defense Department with diminishing resources. In tough economic times it is critical that we hold every 

Federal agency accountable for taxpayer dollars, and the Department of Defense is no exception. 

I applaud the work of my colleagues, Congressman Mike 

Conaway and Congressman Rob Andrews, who have long urged 

DOD to make financial management a priority within the Department. We can all agree that DOD must make certain every dollar 

is accounted for and used to its fullest potential. 

With that said, it is important to remember that defense spending represents approximately 19 percent of the Federal budget, yet 

has to absorb nearly half the spending reductions occurring in the 

past 2 years. We must always ensure that our military’s readiness 

is not compromised by an inability in Washington to properly set 

spending priorities. 

Thank you to the committee for the opportunity to speak to you 

today and for your efforts on behalf of our Nation’s warfighters and 

their families. 

I yield back my time, Mr. Chairman. 

[The prepared statement of Mr. Hudson can be found in the Appendix on page 153.] 

The CHAIRMAN. Thank you very much. 

Are there any questions of the gentleman? 

Thank you. 

Mr. Pierluisi from Puerto Rico. 

STATEMENT OF HON. PEDRO R. PIERLUISI, RESIDENT 

COMMISSIONER FROM PUERTO RICO 

Mr. PIERLUISI. Thank you, Mr. Chairman and Ranking Member, 

for the opportunity to summarize my requests. 

First, the Corps of Engineers is cleaning limited areas of 

Culebra, Puerto Rico, a former training range under the FUDS 

[Formerly Used Defense Sites] program. However, the Army argues 

that a 1974 law prohibits the Federal cleanup of a 400-acre parcel 

that was part of the bombardment zone. This parcel is the only 

former defense site in the Nation the Federal Government says it 

is not authorized to clean. 

The committee has recognized that this state of affairs is dangerous, since the parcel includes beaches, walkways, and campgrounds. In the 2010 bill, the House repealed the relevant provision in the 1974 law to authorize cleanup of the parcel, but receded 

in conference. 
13 

In the 2011 bill, Congress required a study on the amount of 

unexploded ordnance within the parcel, the risk it poses, and the 

cost of removal. DOD completed the study after this committee 

marked up the 2012 NDAA. To preserve the issue for conference, 

I offered a successful floor amendment expressing the sense of the 

House that if this parcel could be cleaned at reasonable cost, the 

1974 law should be relaxed or repealed. Again, the Senate failed 

to act. 

This March, the consequences of the Senate’s inaction became 

terribly clear. A young girl visiting a Culebra beach suffered burns 

and was hospitalized after she picked up a munition containing 

white phosphorous. Officials responding to the scene found additional UXO [unexploded ordnance], including naval gun rounds 

that were detonated by the FBI [Federal Bureau of Investigation]. 

This incident highlights the need for congressional action. So I ask 

the committee to again include language to relax or repeal the 1974 

law and to defend this provision in conference. 

My second request concerns the 156 Airlift Wing of the Puerto 

Rico Air National Guard. The 156th has had the highest operational tempo of any C–130 unit in the Guard, conducting ISR [intelligence, surveillance, and reconnaissance] and other missions in 

AFRICOM [Africa Command], CENTCOM, and SOUTHCOM 

[Southern Command], and fulfilling its commitments under Operation Coronet Oak, all while flying the oldest C–130s in the inventory. 

The unit has unmatched operational experience in its AOR [area 

of responsibility], is strategically located, and is fully bilingual, yet 

its future is uncertain. The unit has three C–130Es that are scheduled to be retired this year, and recently received WC–130s, which 

are not combat-coded. I understand these planes are intended to be 

a stopgap measure until the unit is provided with newer H or J 

models that are fully mission capable; however, when I ask about 

the delivery date of the new planes, no clear response is provided. 

There are multiple options that would be good for the unit and 

good for our national security. Allowing the unit’s flying mission to 

lapse would be a strategic mistake and is inconsistent with repeated assurances I have been given by defense officials, including 

the Secretary of the Air Force. Therefore, I ask the committee to 

address this matter in its report. 

My final request concerns counterdrug activities. The murder 

rate in Puerto Rico is far higher than any State, and most murders 

are linked to the drug trade. The Coast Guard seized or disrupted 

over 17,000 pounds of drugs around Puerto Rico in 2012, an 800 

percent increase over the previous year. DEA [Drug Enforcement 

Agency] seizures rose nearly 100 percent. CBP [Customs and Border Protection] seized more drugs in Puerto Rico than along the 

Mexico-New Mexico border. Meanwhile the price of drugs in Puerto 

Rico has decreased. This is a problem of national scope because 

most of the drugs that enter Puerto Rico are transported to the 

U.S. mainland. 

The commanders of NORTHCOM [Northern Command] and 

SOUTHCOM recently testified that this is a matter of great concern to them. I ask this committee to direct DOD to report on its 

activities to support counterdrug operations in and around Puerto 
14 

Rico, and I hope you will work with me to ensure that DOD enhances its role as appropriate. 

Thank you. I yield back. 

[The prepared statement of Mr. Pierluisi can be found in the Appendix on page 170.] 

The CHAIRMAN. Thank you very much. 

The gentleman’s time has expired. Are there any questions of the 

gentleman? 

Thank you very much. 

Next is Mr. Heck from Washington. The gentleman is recognized. 

STATEMENT OF HON. DENNY HECK, A REPRESENTATIVE 

FROM WASHINGTON 

Dr. HECK. Thank you, Mr. Chairman and Ranking Member 

Smith. I appreciate the opportunity to testify before you today. 

I have the great privilege to represent the congressional district 

that contains Joint Base Lewis-McChord, the third largest military 

installation in America. Thousands of families in my district are 

connected to this joint base in some way. They are the families of 

Active service duty members, reservists, civilian workers, veterans, 

and more. In the past few months, many of these families have 

begun to feel the negative effects of the decisions the Department 

of Defense has had to make as a result of the sequestration cuts. 

I want to read you just part of a letter I received from one of the 

members of one of these families. It comes from a woman named 

Lacey, who lives in Olympia, the same city as I do. Lacey’s husband is stationed at JBLM [Joint Base Lewis-McChord]. He has 

been deployed multiple time overseas in the last decade. Lacey and 

her husband have two young sons, ages 3 and 1. 

She writes: ‘‘Our lives together have held surprises, both good 

and bad, thanks to my husband’s military commitment. But I support my husband in his service. I know that for the bad days at 

‘the office’ that he has far more good days. He truly enjoys his job. 

My husband was put on orders to come here to Fort Lewis, and we 

were told that this particular assignment, though chaotic, would result in more time home for him. More time with our young boys. . . . 

‘‘The first portion of my husband’s assignment was wonderful. He 

was home for dinner. We could actually eat a family meal, for the 

first time since we have had children, I might add. He was able to 

actually do the whole bedtime routine for our older son instead of 

barely skidding in the door to read him part of the story and put 

him to bed. My sons blossomed with this extra time with their father. . . . 

‘‘In the few short weeks that these sequester cuts have been coming downhill, I can tell you that there has been a significant and 

miserable change in my children. Both of them have become moody 

and angry. . . . My husband wakes up at 5 a.m. and isn’t getting 

back home from work until 6 p.m. on a good day. Many days he 

is barely getting through the door at 7:30 p.m. at night, and that 

is with leaving tasks incomplete at his desk. We have barely 2 

hours together before he is falling asleep, exhausted, on the couch. 

While I cook a meager dinner, he works on his graduate course (he 

just started that program in January). 
15 

‘‘I know my husband is a hardworking man. I have supported 

him through two Iraq tours, two assignments in Africa, and an assignment in a former Soviet territory. I have brought two children 

into this world with him. I have moved completely across the country with him, and I am putting my graduate degree and career on 

hold in order to support him and raise our children until they are 

of school age. 

‘‘I know what kind of hours he works when he is deployed; it is 

the same daily hours as he is working now. My job, as I see it, is 

to hold this family together, to make sure that my children are connected to their dad. But how can I keep them connected to a husk 

of a person? The schedule, this pace, will turn my husband into a 

shell of himself.’’ 

Mr. Chairman, often this town gets lost in the numbers, and the 

percentages and the statistics that go into our Federal budgeting 

process. We lose focus on the fact that the decisions we make impact real families in real ways. These are real people out there, 

who have to deal with the consequences of Congress’ action or our 

inaction, as the case may be. 

I know this committee does not have jurisdiction on this issue. 

I can guarantee you, however, that sequestration has affected the 

district of each and every member of this committee. Congress and 

we can still get this right. We can stop the unnecessary hardships 

that Lacey talks about in her letter. We just need to muster the 

will to act, and I hope, for the sake of our military families around 

the country, including those like Lacey’s, that we will. 

Thank you, sir, very much. 

[The prepared statement of Mr. Heck can be found in the Appendix on page 151.] 

The CHAIRMAN. Thank you. 

Are there any questions of the gentleman? 

Thank you. 

Mr. Kildee. The gentleman is recognized. 

STATEMENT OF HON. DANIEL T. KILDEE, A REPRESENTATIVE 

FROM MICHIGAN 

Mr. KILDEE. Thank you, Chairman McKeon, Ranking Member 

Smith, and distinguished members of the committee, for holding today’s hearing and allowing me the opportunity to share some of the 

defense priorities I hope you will consider in preparing the fiscal 

year 2014 National Defense Authorization Act. Although I do not 

serve on the Armed Services Committee, all Members of Congress 

have a responsibility to protect our Nation, and your gracious invitation reflects that. It is an honor to be here. 

I respectfully ask that you fully fund the National Guard to enable it to continue to play a critical role as a member of the total 

force. The National Guard provides a significant portion of the Active Duty services’ capabilities. Since September 11, 2001, individual National Guard members have mobilized over 750,000 times 

in support of overseas operations, including over 17,000 individual 

deployments from my home State of Michigan. 

The Air National Guard supplies 35 percent of the Air Force capability at a fraction of the Active Duty Air Force’s budget. Moreover, the Army National Guard provides 32 percent of the total 
16 

Army force, again, with a significantly smaller portion of the Active 

Duty components’ budget. 

In addition to providing the military combatant commanders 

with fully deployable capability, the National Guard continues to 

fulfill its critical State mission. Last year, the National Guard responded to over 100 national disasters, including deploying 12,000 

personnel to assist with the Hurricane Sandy relief efforts. Further, the National Guard, particularly in my home State of Michigan, has started to take a leading role in strengthening our 

cybersecurity at both the State and national levels. 

Finally, the National Guard members serve as military ambassadors in our communities. As less than 1 percent of the population 

has served in the military, many citizens’ largest connection to our 

service members and their sacrifices is via the citizen soldiers of 

the National Guard. 

For these reasons fully funding and supporting the National 

Guard is both sound fiscal and defense policy. 

I also ask that the committee consider some additional priorities 

particularly relevant to individual service members. A smart and 

well-educated military is a more effective and adaptable force. 

Thus, I ask that you fully fund the Military Tuition Assistance Program. This program enables service members to pursue educational 

opportunities while serving. Members of the military use this critical program to advance their military careers as well as prepare 

for their transition back to civilian life. 

Further, to address the significant veterans’ unemployment rate, 

the Department of Defense must improve the assistance it provides 

to service members as they transition from the military. Improving 

opportunities to transfer military credentials and training to the civilian sphere, job training and assistance, and implementing programs to ensure that service members are aware of the support 

and benefits available to them would all be positive steps. 

Moreover, as the committee is well aware, military suicide and 

mental health issues are major problems facing service members 

and recent veterans. I ask that you continue to explore ways to address these issues and increase funding for programs that will help 

treat and identify mental illness. In this area in particular, our 

service members deserve our Nation’s best. 

And finally, please continue to support programs that seek to 

prevent sexual assault in the military. Sexual assault is becoming 

a significant concern in the armed services, and our service members deserve the opportunity to serve their country honorably and 

in an environment free of this type of mistreatment. 

Thank you again, Mr. Chairman, for this wonderful opportunity 

to testify before the committee. 

[The prepared statement of Mr. Kildee can be found in the Appendix on page 156.] 

The CHAIRMAN. Thank you very much. 

Any questions of the gentleman? 

Thank you. 

Mr. Broun from Georgia. The gentleman is recognized. 
17 

STATEMENT OF HON. PAUL C. BROUN, A REPRESENTATIVE 

FROM GEORGIA 

Dr. BROUN. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

Chairman McKeon, Ranking Member Smith, members of the 

committee, thank you for the opportunity to testify before you 

today. 

There are two issues which I would like to briefly discuss before 

the committee. The first relates to the continued controversy over 

the U.S. Government’s ability to indefinitely detain, without trial, 

U.S. citizens who are accused of terrorism or collaboration with terrorist groups. The second issue is related to the first, regarding the 

government’s use of unmanned aerial vehicles, UAVs or drones, to 

kill suspected terrorists either in the U.S. or overseas. 

These issues are related insofar as they both raise the question 

of how, under the Constitution, suspected terrorists ought to be 

treated, particularly those who are U.S. citizens. While past 

versions of the National Defense Authorization Act, the NDAA, 

have attempted to shed light on this question, it seems that there 

remains significant doubt over what the legal process should be 

when suspected terrorists are identified by our government. 

Central to this debate is the Authorization for Use of Military 

Force in Afghanistan, AUMF, giving the U.S. Government the authority to indefinitely detain individuals suspected of terrorism. 

The AUMF became law in 2001 and was upheld by the U.S. Supreme Court in 2004 in Hamdi v. Rumsfeld. While both the 2012 

and 2013 NDAA bills stated nothing in the underlying bills gives 

the U.S. Government the authority to detain U.S. citizens suspected of terrorism without due process, neither bill included language to repeal the authority granted under the AUMF. 

This apparent disparity has resulted in widespread concern 

about whether the U.S. Government may, in fact, indefinitely detain U.S. citizens accused of terrorism. If the government does have 

this power under the law, it is unclear under what circumstances 

it may use this potentially sweeping power against its own people. 

Last year I supported an amendment to the NDAA offered by 

Ranking Member Smith which would have ensured that individuals arrested on U.S. soil under either the AUMF or the fiscal year 

2013 NDAA would be provided with due process as guaranteed by 

our Constitution. Unfortunately, this amendment did not pass the 

House and was not included in the final bill language. I urge the 

committee to include similar language in the fiscal year 2014 

NDAA so that individuals who are accused of terrorism are afforded their right to a fair trial and due process, either via the 

criminal justice system or the military court system, depending on 

the situation and the citizenship of the accused. 

Moreover, I urge the committee to work toward protecting the 

definition of ‘‘enemy combatant,’’ a broad designation which lacks 

a clear meaning and may be placed on individuals under the 

AUMF in order to allow for their indefinite detention. Allowing any 

administration to use such a vague designation to punish individuals without due process opens the door to exceedingly dangerous 

scenarios, including classifying dissenters as potential terrorists 

who may be punished without regard to their constitutional rights. 
18 

At the same time I am very concerned about the white paper recently released by the Justice Department, which outlines the legal 

framework for the use of deadly force against American citizens. 

While this document purportedly relates only to individuals who 

are suspected of working as forces of Al Qaeda, I believe that it is 

highly dangerous nonetheless. Most significantly, it is unconscionable for the U.S. Government to kill any of its own citizens without 

first allowing them due process and their day in court. As with the 

designation of enemy combatants, I believe that no administration 

has the right to be judge, jury, and executioner of American citizens. Our country was founded under the notion that citizens must 

be protected from this type of tyrannical overreach, and even in 

these times marred by terrorist threats, it is imperative that we 

stay true to that important principle. 

The CHAIRMAN. The gentleman’s time expired, but we will include your whole testimony in the record. 

Dr. BROUN. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

I ask the committee to do all it can do to ensure that Americans’ 

God-given, constitutionally protected rights are defended as it begins this important legislation. 

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

[The prepared statement of Dr. Broun can be found in the Appendix on page 105.] 

The CHAIRMAN. Thank you very much. 

Any questions of the gentleman? 

Thank you. 

Dr. BROUN. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

The CHAIRMAN. Mr. Fattah from Pennsylvania. It was Ms. Lee’s 

turn, but she is not here. So Mr. Fattah. The gentleman is recognized. 

STATEMENT OF HON. CHAKA FATTAH, A REPRESENTATIVE 

FROM PENNSYLVANIA 

Mr. FATTAH. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. And thank you to our 

ranking member. I have submitted testimony for the record, but I 

wanted to come and make this case personally. And I thank you 

for the opportunity. 

The CHAIRMAN. Your testimony that you submitted will be included. 

Mr. FATTAH. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

Since the First Tee was born in 1997, it has worked to help over 

7.5 million young people in terms of character development and 

perseverance through teaching the skills of golf. 

In 2008, because of the work of both the chairman, Congressman 

Clyburn, myself, others, there was a $3 million Department of Defense grant that allowed First Tee to operate on all of our military 

bases. So it is now in 50 States. It is all across the world on our 

military bases so that the children of our service men and women 

can take advantage of this great program. 

Now, as the Federal dollars are coming to a conclusion, First Tee 

has raised private dollars. And like the Boys and Girls Clubs, like 

other programs on our bases, these are critically important programs to really provide real help to young people there and skills 

that they will need to go forward. 
19 

And so I know that the committee has heard a lot of testimony 

on Member’s Day about a lot of important issues. And, Chairman, 

I know about your great work and concern for our national defense. 

I remember fondly our traveling to the International Atomic Energy Agency to learn more details about the Iranian weapons development program. This is not as weighty an issue as you are going 

to deal with. 

What I am asking is that even though it will no longer be federally funded—and it doesn’t need Federal funding. Joe Barrow and 

his board, they have done a tremendous job in raising money. I am 

going to be joining former President Bush in Philadelphia at the 

U.S. Open. We are doing a little event for First Tee there. And they 

have done the work to raise the money. We want to make sure that 

they can continue to provide this service on all of our military 

bases, both domestically and internationally. 

And I thank the committee for allowing me an opportunity to 

make my point. 

[The prepared statement of Mr. Fattah can be found in the Appendix on page 53.] 

The CHAIRMAN. Thank you very much. I am glad you didn’t mention any of my scores. 

Any questions of the gentleman? 

Thank you. And it is great to see a program that starts out using 

Federal funding, weans itself from the Federal funding, and is able 

to move forward in the private sector. They have been a fantastic 

program. 

Mr. FATTAH. It is an extraordinary program and widely successful in 5,300 elementary schools this year. And when they make this 

announcement to double their efforts, they are going to be in 

11,000 elementary schools. We want them in all our Boys and Girls 

Clubs. It is just a great program. 

Thank you for your time, Mr. Chairman. 

The CHAIRMAN. Thank you very much. 

Mr. Roskam. The gentleman is recognized. 

STATEMENT OF HON. PETER J. ROSKAM, A REPRESENTATIVE 

FROM ILLINOIS 

Mr. ROSKAM. Thank you, Mr. Chairman and Ranking Member 

Smith. I am here to congratulate and thank the committee for your 

past support for the U.S.-Israeli missile defense cooperation and to 

urge your consideration of that continued support. 

There are four programs that I know are well known to this committee, but are certainly in need of highlighting, particularly in the 

season of incredible challenge that we are facing. Those programs 

are Iron Dome, David’s Sling, Arrow, and Arrow 3. Two of them, 

Mr. Chairman, as you know, are already deployed, that is Iron 

Dome and Arrow, and two of them are in development. 

I know many of us in Congress have visited the city of Sderot 

on the Gaza border, and we have interacted—I know I have—firsthand with the men and women and families who are there. A particular conversation when I was there made an impression on me. 

A mother described the challenge of having a 15-second lead time 

when an alert goes that an incoming missile is coming from Gaza. 

And you can imagine now the success and transformation that has 
20 

happened through this joint effort between the U.S. and Israel, and 

it has had an 85 percent success rate in knocking down hundreds 

of missiles. This is exactly the type of thing that I think the United 

States should be involved in. 

It is a joint effort. All of these programs are a joint effort between the U.S. and Israel. It is an opportunity for us to share in 

technology; share in, essentially, the fruits of this product. And it 

continues to enhance our relationship with one of our key allies in 

the world and certainly our best friend in the Middle East. 

So, Mr. Chairman, I know that these programs—and along with 

the ranking member—have no better friend than this committee. 

I am here to cheer you on and urge your consideration and advocacy. And if I can help in my role, I am happy to do that. And I 

appreciate the chance to testify today. 

[The prepared statement of Mr. Roskam can be found in the Appendix on page 100.] 

The CHAIRMAN. Thank you very much. We appreciate your efforts in this area. I was talking to the ambassador, Ambassador 

Oren, maybe, oh, it has been a month or two ago, and had just had 

a series of attacks over the weekend, and Iron Dome at that point 

was 95 percent effective. No loss of life. And it probably kept us 

from having a much bigger war, because if they had lost lives, they 

probably would have gone to war. 

Mr. ROSKAM. We in the whip’s office had a meeting yesterday 

with the ambassador, had 30 members in, and it was a continuous 

conversation about that exact issue. He was deeply grateful for the 

U.S. participation. And it is an incredible win for the U.S. as well. 

The CHAIRMAN. Sure is. Thank you very much. 

Mr. ROSKAM. Thank you. 

The CHAIRMAN. Any questions of the gentleman? 

Thank you. 

Mr. ROSKAM. Thank you. 

The CHAIRMAN. Mr. Hanna. 

STATEMENT OF HON. RICHARD L. HANNA, A REPRESENTATIVE 

FROM NEW YORK 

Mr. HANNA. Thank you, Chairman McKeon, Ranking Member 

Smith, members of the committee, for this opportunity and for your 

bipartisan support of our Armed Forces. I come before you today 

to formally request the committee’s support for programs of monumental value to our Nation’s modern defense capabilities as you 

prepare for your 2014 National Defense Authorization Act. 

Specifically, I request that the committee support the President’s 

fiscal year 2014 budget request for the Air Force’s Dominant Information Sciences and Methods program and the Air Force’s Battleship Knowledge Development and Demonstration program. These 

programs fulfill an essential mission that is critical to our Nation’s 

defense and our information management. The work completed by 

this funding is vital to the development and maintaining of our defensive and offensive cyber capacities. Adequate funding of these 

programs is essential if we are to preserve our secure networks and 

the technologies that will allow us to deter enemy attacks against 

our systems. 
21 

Equally important, these programs provide critical services for 

our advanced communications, battleship and command control, 

and intelligence exploitation abilities. As our services work to become more efficient and unified, these assets are central to the establishment of joint operations. I believe the funding levels laid out 

by the President’s budget request acknowledge the critical nature 

of these important programs. 

The technologies that are developed and demonstrated through 

these fundings are essential to our continued 21st century national 

defense priorities. Their importance is clearly recognized by those 

who utilize the technologies and practices developed under these 

programs, including services of the Defense Department, the Intelligence Community, and other Federal agencies. 

Therefore, I would like to formally ask my colleagues on this 

committee to maintain the President’s recommended funding levels 

for both of these programs within the fiscal year 2014 National Defense Authorization Act. And I thank you for your time today. 

[The prepared statement of Mr. Hanna can be found in the Appendix on page 132.] 

The CHAIRMAN. Thank you very much. 

Are there any questions of the gentleman? 

Thank you. 

Mr. HANNA. Thank you. 

The CHAIRMAN. Mr. Barr. 

Mr. BARR. Thank you, Chairman. 

The CHAIRMAN. Gentleman is recognized. 

STATEMENT OF HON. GARLAND ‘‘ANDY’’ BARR, A 

REPRESENTATIVE FROM KENTUCKY 

Mr. BARR. Thank you, Chairman McKeon, for providing me the 

opportunity to speak before the House Armed Services Committee 

today. I come before you in support of our Active, Guard, and Reserve Components, as well as our veterans, to ensure they receive 

the needed equipment and support they deserve. 

Today I want to particularly focus on the National Guard, which 

faces mounting challenges regarding how to replace equipment that 

is obsolete and worn out through normal wear and tear, as well as 

strengthening family readiness programs. I stand beside the Commonwealth of Kentucky’s Adjutant General, Major General Edward 

Tonini, in requesting that we fully fund the fiscal year 2014 National Guard and Reserve Equipment Account request in order to 

remain mission capable and a valuable asset toward maintaining 

our national defense. 

I know that appropriations are not within this committee’s jurisdiction, but I do want to commend Chairman McKeon for his persistent and strong efforts when it comes to advocating for our military to have the funding resources it needs to do its job and maintain readiness. 

I also would like to address the alarming increase in suicides, 

which, as you know, are quickly becoming an epidemic throughout 

the U.S. military and among veterans. The VA [Veterans’ Administration] reports that 22 veterans take their lives every day. On-site 

access to mental health professionals has proven successful in overcoming time, geographical, and stigma barriers that have saved 
22 

countless lives. I ask that this committee work to strengthen programs that will aid in stabilizing our service men and women’s 

mental health. 

Separately, a number of concerns have been brought to my attention regarding the Blue Grass Chemical Activity which is taking 

place at the Blue Grass Army Depot, located in Richmond, Kentucky. As you know, the United States is legally obligated to ensure the destruction of all chemical weapons under the Convention 

on the Prohibition of the Development, Production, Stockpiling and 

Use of Chemical Weapons and on their Destruction Treaty. Many 

are concerned that the Blue Grass Chemical Activity at the Blue 

Grass Army Depot is not receiving the resources needed to complete the chemical demilitarization operations. 

A major source of funding for BGCA [Blue Grass Chemical Activity] is Operation and Maintenance, Army [OMA} funding. OMA 

funds have been reduced from $23 million to $18 million. This cut 

in funding comes at a very critical time, in addition to hiring 

freezes, furloughs, and a reduction of force that have taken place 

at the depot. Due to these cuts, BGCA will be challenged to continue supporting vital chemical demilitarization operations obligations demanded by the CWC [Chemical Weapons Convention] Treaty, and so I hope to work further with the committee to address 

these concerns and provide the necessary response. 

Further, I would like to personally thank Chairman McKeon and 

this committee for your leadership and strong support for increasing public-private partnerships at arsenals and depots. As someone 

who recognizes that public-private partnerships can play an important role in bringing long-term stability and jobs to communities, 

I certainly encourage this committee to continue to take an active 

role in this area. 

By providing increased opportunities for additional business not 

limited to the defense industry to locate or relocate two depots, it 

would not only increase revenue to the Army Working Capital 

Fund, but also allow for additional jobs to the people of the community. I look forward to working with this committee, the DOD, and 

the BGAD [Blue Grass Army Depot] in my district in order to help 

the depot reach its fullest potential. 

I yield back. Thank you. 

[The prepared statement of Mr. Barr can be found in the Appendix on page 137.] 

The CHAIRMAN. Thank you very much. 

Any questions of the gentleman? 

Thank you. 

Mr. BARR. Thank you. 

The CHAIRMAN. Mr. Young. 

Mr. YOUNG. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

The CHAIRMAN. Gentleman is recognized. 

STATEMENT OF HON. DON YOUNG, A REPRESENTATIVE 

FROM ALASKA 

Mr. YOUNG. Thank the committee. Thank you for holding this 

hearing. 

As you know, Mr. Chairman, Alaska is a proud State and has a 

proud military State. Not only is Alaska home to the largest per 
23 

capita population of veterans in the country, it is also home to a 

significant force structure for both the Air Force and the Army. 

Since I have numerous issues to discuss today, I will keep my remarks brief on each issue. My staff will be happy to follow up and 

provide additional information on any of these issues. 

First, I would like to ask the committee to consider including language for two reports on the possibility of co-locating both defenserelated and other Federal government tenants on large military installations in the Asian-Pacific region. These reports, which would 

be completed by the Department of Defense and Government Accountability Office, would go a long way to finding efficiencies that 

will help us complete our strategic shift to the Pacific. 

Second, I would like to ask the committee to broadly consider the 

amazing training opportunities in Alaska in JBER [Joint Base Elmendorf-Richardson]. Specifically, as the President begins to ask 

for more funding for training ranges, I would like to encourage the 

committee to find ways to apply those resources to ranges of the 

future, like JBER. Along these lines, I would also like the committee to consider working with the Army to pre-position mobility 

and instrumented land warfare equipment at bases like Fort Wainwright for force-on-force training. The U.S. is an Arctic nation. As 

other countries in which we have conducted combat operations in 

our history, we must be able to project power into the Arctic environment, and extreme Arctic training is needed to do that. Mr. 

Chairman, I would like to suggest respectfully, as Billy Mitchell 

said, he who controls Alaska controls the military of the world. 

Third, I would like to request the committee include language for 

the report to analyze the capacity of the Northern and Southern 

Pacific air bridges. This report would ask the Secretary of the Air 

Force to provide information on the benefits of adding additional 

manpower and/or aircraft to these air bridges. These bridges are 

the logistic keys to power-projection and rapid-response capabilities 

of the Pacific. 

Finally, I would like to draw my committee’s attention to four remaining issues. 

One, given the ongoing drawdown of the C–23, I ask the committee to work on a specific solution for Alaska’s Sherpa fleet. 

These aircraft can land on many of Alaska’s short rural runways 

and a capability cannot be filled with any other aircraft. 

Two, when working with the Air Force on OCONUS [outside the 

contiguous United States] basing review of the F–35A, please consider Alaska’s unique and highly strategic location. I have included 

a chart in my testimony that demonstrates a unique position in the 

world. 

Three, as the committee works with the Army on basing the 

Gray Eagle, consider interior Alaska. Interior Alaska has a huge 

amount of airspace that could be ideal for the Gray Eagle. 

Four, I would like to invite all members of the committee to Alaska. We have a lot of amazing force structure and are quite proud 

of it. Specifically, though, one area I would like to encourage you 

to visit is the IED [improvised explosive device] training lane at 

JBER. This lane is a model of IDA training on which the rest of 

the Department of Defense does its training. 
24 

Again, I would like to thank you, Mr. Chairman, the ranking 

member, the committee members who listen to my testimony. 

Again, come to Alaska, see what we can do militarily, and see how 

we can accomplish the mission for the rest of the military and this 

Nation defending our shores. 

[The prepared statement of Mr. Young can be found in the Appendix on page 45.] 

The CHAIRMAN. Thank the gentleman. 

Are there any questions? 

Mr. YOUNG. Oh, come on. There has got to be a question somewhere. 

The CHAIRMAN. Thank you. 

Mr. YOUNG. You are quite welcome, Mr. Chairman. 

The CHAIRMAN. You did such a great job of selling Alaska. 

Mr. Crawford. Gentleman is recognized. 

STATEMENT OF HON. ERIC A. ‘‘RICK’’ CRAWFORD, A 

REPRESENTATIVE FROM ARKANSAS 

Mr. CRAWFORD. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. And thank you, 

Ranking Member Smith and distinguished members of the committee. Thank you for the work you do to preserve the security of 

our great Nation and for allowing me to testify before the full committee regarding Explosive Ordnance Disposal or EOD priorities 

for fiscal year 2014 National Defense Authorization Act. 

I served in the Army as an EOD tech, and proud to be a cofounder, along with committee member Susan Davis, of the House 

EOD Caucus. EOD soldiers, sailors, airmen, and marines are the 

military’s preeminent team of explosive experts. They are trained 

and equipped to identify and neutralize explosive used by terrorist 

networks across the globe. The military’s EOD mission is to defeat 

global emerging threats using explosive. EOD techs protect their 

fellow military personnel and innocent civilians from these threats 

while providing support across a wide range of military and civilian 

national security operations. 

EOD forces have proven to be game changers in attacking and 

dismantling terrorist cells and associated networks. These forces 

will continue to be indispensable assets for the foreseeable future 

supporting counterterrorism operations, building the capacity of 

partner nations, and protecting the homeland through providing 

support to civilian law enforcement agencies at Federal, State, and 

local levels. 

Thank you for the committee’s support of EOD, beginning with 

the fiscal year 2008 NDAA that inquired into the health and viability of EOD forces. I am especially appreciative of the committee’s 

direction to the Secretary of Defense in the last three NDAAs to 

provide reports to the committee to develop a better understanding 

of the services’ plans for EOD force structure and funding. 

It is critical that EOD is provided with adequate levels of funding for procurement, research, development, tests, evaluation, and 

operations and maintenance to carry out their mission. A GAO report from last month concluded that the DOD needs better resource 

planning and joint guidance to manage EOD. The report also reveals that the Army and Marine Corps still have not established 
25 

a program element for their respective EOD force since the committee’s initial inquiry in the 2008 NDAA. 

The Boston bombings serve as a stark reminder of the threat of 

the terrorist detonation of explosives in the United States and have 

revealed gaps in the Nation’s ability to defeat a sustained bombing 

campaign in the homeland. Following the attacks, the Army Forces 

Command issued guidance that the local staff judge advocate must 

review every civil law authority request for emergency EOD response prior to sending aid to ensure that the support does not violate the Posse Comitatus Act of 1878. In addition, the guidance requires that a general officer must then approve each of these EOD 

immediate responses and must ensure that civil authorities will reimburse the Army as a condition of immediate response. 

There is an estimated 66,000 call outs annually across the 

United States on explosive ordnance by interagency, military EOD, 

and public safety bomb squads. Army EOD units responding under 

immediate response authority have historically departed their 

home station installation with 30 minutes of notification during 

duty hours and within 60 minutes of notification after duty hours, 

365 days a year. On these civil support missions, EOD has provided support to civil law enforcement authorities, but they do not 

perform law enforcement activities. 

In one of the most significant examples of EOD civil support missions, the 387th Ordnance Company from Camp Edwards, Massachusetts, responded to 64 call outs during the Boston bombing. 

This support was critical in the aftermath of the attack. I understand the need to ensure the EOD is compliant with Posse Comitatus Act in any of its civil law enforcement authority missions, 

but it is vital that we do not overcorrect for a nonexistent violation 

and negatively impact the ability of our EOD forces to provide increasingly needed and immediate support to our civilian law enforcement agencies. 

We must also ensure that our EOD units, like the 387th out of 

Massachusetts, are properly equipped to respond to explosive 

threats in cities and towns throughout the United States. Mine-Resistant Ambush Protected vehicles, or MRAPS, are critically needed 

vehicles for EOD operations in Afghanistan, but I feel that Army 

National Guard EOD units, comprising one-third of Army EOD 

force, need response vehicles like those used by WMD [weapon of 

mass destruction] civil support teams. These units also need portable containment magazines to safely store explosives as well as 

communications capable of integrating with civil law enforcement 

authority that they are supporting. These National Guard units 

should also receive training readiness oversight and Active Duty 

soldier support from FORSCOM/20th [United States Army Forces 

Command] Support Command. 

I will leave the remainder of my comments in writing. And I appreciate the chairman’s permission to testify this morning. Yield 

back. 

[The prepared statement of Mr. Crawford can be found in the Appendix on page 121.] 

The CHAIRMAN. Gentleman’s time expired. But your full testimony will be included in the record. 

Mr. CRAWFORD. Thank you. 
26 

The CHAIRMAN. Thank you very much for coming. 

Ms. Ros-Lehtinen. 

STATEMENT OF HON. ILEANA ROS–LEHTINEN, A 

REPRESENTATIVE FROM FLORIDA 

Ms. ROS-LEHTINEN. Thank you so much, Mr. Chairman, committee members. Thank you for everything that you do, because 

you all have dedicated your congressional service on behalf of our 

service men and women who bravely protect us. And whether it is 

Active Duty and Reserve and veterans and their families. So thank 

you for your service. 

Those who dedicate their lives to the service of others truly embody the heart and spirit of America, and I thank each one of you 

for what you do and for helping all of our brave Americans continue in their battle to keep our country free. 

Florida—and I am here with Congressman Bill Posey, my colleague—is a very active State in terms of military presence and is 

rated among the States that is most accommodating to service men 

and women, as well as their families. As you craft this year’s National Defense Authorization Act, I know that you will rightfully be 

focused on the warfighter well-being here at home, as well as 

downrange. Heightened security demands on our military installations caused by an increasingly dangerous world is of utmost importance to your committee, and many installations still suffer 

from inadequate security measures, which is a recipe for disaster. 

And that brings me to why I am here today, Mr. Chairman, because the Homestead Air Reserve Base is a perfect example of a 

facility that is in dire need of enhanced security measures. The installation has two entry gates to allow traffic in and out of the 

base, but at present one of them has been forced to be closed due 

to terrorism concerns. The remaining gate is substandard. You 

would not believe it if you looked at it. It is completely ill-designed 

to function as a primary entry control point. It is a single insufficient guard shack that is within close proximity of the base fuel 

storage compound and is only a 30-second drive to the F–16 ramp, 

which holds $800 million in F–16 fighter jets. 

So just think about that, Mr. Chairman and members. A little 

guard shack very close to the fuel storage, and then just a 30-second drive and you have got access to fighter jets worth $800 million. So it fails in every aspect to meet force protection standards. 

And with the current and projected mission growth at the Homestead Reserve Base, we know that it is a high visibility target for 

potential attacks. 

And truck inspections is currently being conducted outdoors during all weather conditions. And if you have ever been to South 

Florida, you know it is raining half the time. So you have got this 

terrible weather condition, that is the only time that they can inspect the trucks, and once again in close proximity to the base bulk 

fuel storage compound. It is extremely small, the inspection area, 

and when the volume of traffic is very high, unfortunately, the inspections are not done as high as they really should be done. And 

these service men and women are doing the best they can within 

very difficult parameters. 
27 

So we have got traffic backups, we have got terrible weather conditions, no space, proximity to high value targets. So we have had 

in many circumstances traffic backed up over a mile long during 

the high volume usage that this facility regularly sees. So more 

often than not, the traffic is backed up more than a mile. It is a 

long procedure. And Homestead Air Reserve Base serves 2,700 airmen, soldiers, sailors, marines, coastguardmen, Customs and Border Protection agents, and Florida National Guardsmen who dedicated their lives, work to serving our Nation throughout our country. 

There are projects out there that demand our attention. And I 

know that you are committed, as well as every member here, to 

issues affecting service members. And I hope, Mr. Chairman and 

members, that you take a careful look at the needs of Homestead 

Air Reserve Base and the security concerns that are hampering 

their ability to do as good a job as they want to do. And they are 

doing it to the best of their abilities. 

Thank you, Mr. Chairman, members. 

[The prepared statement of Ms. Ros-Lehtinen can be found in the 

Appendix on page 50.] 

The CHAIRMAN. I have a question. You say there are two gates, 

but one is closed. 

Ms. ROS-LEHTINEN. Correct. 

The CHAIRMAN. Is it a better gate than the guard shack? 

Ms. ROS-LEHTINEN. No. It is the same type of problems. 

The CHAIRMAN. They are both bad. 

Ms. ROS-LEHTINEN. They are both bad. But because of the budget 

constraints they had to choose one, and they chose the one where 

the traffic could be backed up without it being a problem for the 

base. And that is why they chose this one. It is two bad options. 

They chose the one that could be less dangerous. And those men 

and women who patrol those gates, they are doing the best they 

can. We couldn’t ask more of them. And they do it every day and 

very professional and courteous. And we thank them for their service. We just want to make life a little bit better for them so they 

can do their job in a better way. 

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Thank you, members. 

The CHAIRMAN. Thank you very much. 

Ms. ROS-LEHTINEN. Thank you, sir. 

The CHAIRMAN. Thank you. 

Ms. Lee. Gentlelady is recognized. 

STATEMENT OF HON. BARBARA LEE, A REPRESENTATIVE 

FROM CALIFORNIA 

Ms. LEE. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman. First, thank you 

for affording me the opportunity to explain my request to you to 

consider including in the fiscal 2014 Defense Authorization Act. I 

want to thank all of the members for this chance to be with you 

today. 

I have a number of recommendations that I will quickly address 

and for which I strongly urge you to look at, support, and hopefully 

include. I have also submitted my full set of remarks for the record. 

First, Mr. Chairman—— 

The CHAIRMAN. Without objection, so ordered. 
28 

Ms. LEE. Thank you very much. 

I am concerned that this bill may not contain language prohibiting permanent military bases in Afghanistan. As signed into law 

on numerous occasions by both former President Bush and President Obama, Congress has maintained a longstanding prohibition 

on the establishment of permanent military bases in Afghanistan. 

I request you to consider and include in the 2014 Defense Authorization Act that this be brought clearly in line with the ‘‘no permanent bases’’ provision which historically have been included into 

the defense authorization and related appropriations measures. 

Secondly, it should come as no surprise that I share the belief 

of many in the Congress that there is no military solution in Afghanistan. As the daughter of a military veteran, I also know firsthand the sacrifices and the commitment involved in defending our 

Nation. Our troops have done everything that was asked of them 

and more. But the truth is that their mission in Afghanistan is far 

past due and we should be withdrawing all of our troops and military contractors as soon as safely possible. 

In addition to auditing the Pentagon, which I will touch on in a 

few moments, it is important that the Pentagon face the same financial constraints that all other government agencies are being 

subjected to. I am deeply concerned that the Pentagon is already 

seeking an exemption from the sequestration cuts mandated by 

Congress as part of the deeply flawed legislation that, of course, I 

could not support last year. I urge the committee to consider commonsense defense spending reforms outlined by many organizations across the political spectrum. With billions each year lost to 

waste, fraud, and abuse at the Pentagon, we need to ask the same 

of the Department of Defense that we ask of other agencies. 

Also, Mr. Chairman, I am deeply concerned to hear about a possible expansion of the 2001 authorization to use force. As you 

know, Congress has a solemn constitutional obligation to deliberate 

and authorize all war-making and hostilities abroad. If the executive branch is seeking expanded war-making authority, let them request it and let us engage in a full and transparent debate with 

the proper committees holding—excuse me, proper committee hearings—and also with Members of Congress who should be afforded 

the opportunity to consider the full implications of an expanded 

AUMF. I am as deeply opposed to expanding the 2001 AUMF as 

I was against authorizing the original one on September 14th, 

2001, when I cast the lone vote against it, because I knew then 

that it was a blank check to wage war, that it really did erode our 

systems of checks and balances. We passed that with little debate, 

and it removed Congress from our constitutional responsibility 

again in matters of making war. 

Lastly, on the AUMF issue, in addition to my opposition to expanding the 2001 AUMF, now is the right time really to repeal this 

overly broad 2001 AUMF. 

Finally, Mr. Chairman, I ask your committee to consider creating 

financial consequences for the Pentagon unless the Defense Department subjects itself to an audit, as it is required to do by law and 

as all other Federal agencies regularly do. I urge the committee to 

take a first step toward compelling the Pentagon to act with urgency in assuring fiscal responsibility in our defense dollars. As the 
29 

only Federal agency not subject to audit, the Pentagon has lost 

tens of billions of dollars to waste, fraud, and abuse. 

Thank you again for the opportunity to testify. And I strongly request you to consider these requested changes to the bill. 

[The prepared statement of Ms. Lee can be found in the Appendix on page 63.] 

The CHAIRMAN. Thank you very much. 

Any questions of the gentlelady? 

Mr. Posey. Gentleman is recognized. 

STATEMENT OF HON. BILL POSEY, A REPRESENTATIVE 

FROM FLORIDA 

Mr. POSEY. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, for the opportunity to testify today in advance of the committee’s consideration of the fiscal 

year 2014 National Defense Authorization Act. National defense is 

the government’s greatest constitutional responsibility, and I appreciate the challenges faced by the committee, especially after sequestration, with its impact falling significantly more on the defense portion as compared to all other federal spending. 

In regards to the 2014 NDAA, I have a letter that I am submitting with a number of priorities. And I would appreciate the committee’s attention to those. 

The CHAIRMAN. That will be included in the record without objection. Thank you. 

[The information referred to can be found in the Appendix on 

page 112.] 

Mr. POSEY. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

I would like to address my concern about the administration letting slip from its budget the important Range Communications 

Building, commonly known down in the Cape as the XY Building, 

at Cape Canaveral Air Force Station. The building must be updated for the 21st century. The XY Building is the hub for commercial telemetry and radar for Cape Canaveral Air Force Station, 

Kennedy Space Center, Wallops Island, and all downrange launch 

sites. It is indispensable for military and NASA [National Aeronautics and Space Administration] launches. 

I have been inside the XY Building and not much has changed 

since the 1970s. Despite its importance for our national security, 

it feels like a museum. The original structure predates the Apollo 

era, and the facility still utilizes vacuum tubes. I believe we have 

Members of Congress who don’t know what vacuum tubes are, and 

we are still relying on them to do our telemetry down there at the 

Cape. 

The building is also prone to flooding, which can render it unusable. There are other safety concerns with the structure. And if 

anyone thinks I am exaggerating, I would be happy for them to 

tour it with me any time. 

Our national security and our leadership in space depends on a 

capable and functioning XY Building. I am informed the Air Force 

has indicated in previous years that a new facility is a very high 

priority, but in the 2014 President’s budget request it was not addressed. I understand the Air Force may place a request for a new 

facility in the fiscal year 2015 budget, but I have heard some in 

the Pentagon are looking to put this critical project off until 2017 
30 

or beyond. I am concerned that this can can keep getting kicked 

down the road. I would ask that the committee include report language expressing interest in ensuring that a safe, secure, and reliable modern Range Communications Building be operational in accordance with the needs of the U.S. military and NASA. Such language should direct the Air Force to report back to the committee 

on the steps being taken to ensure the facility is properly upgraded. It is critical to our national security that it is not being unnecessarily delayed in a way that jeopardizes the U.S. space launch 

capabilities. 

There are other defense priorities, Mr. Chairman, which I believe 

merit your attention, and they are included in my separate correspondence. I thank you and the members very much for your 

time and the opportunity to make this presentation. Yield back. 

Thank you. 

[The prepared statement of Mr. Posey can be found in the Appendix on page 110.] 

The CHAIRMAN. All right. Any questions of the gentleman? 

Thank you. 

Ms. Jackson Lee. Gentlelady is recognized. 

STATEMENT OF HON. SHEILA JACKSON LEE, A 

REPRESENTATIVE FROM TEXAS 

Ms. JACKSON LEE. Mr. Chairman, let me thank you for your 

courtesies and that of this committee. Thank you for allowing me 

to come and make a brief presentation. I want to add my public 

comments again that all of us have mentioned on the concern for 

the incident in Boston, and due to the hearings on Benghazi I 

again add my sympathy to the families who lost loved ones serving 

their country in the Benghazi tragedy. 

I am also one to acknowledge that I come from a State that has 

sent very large numbers, proudly so, of men and women to the 

front line with a number of bases. And in particular I guess most 

recently to Iraq and Afghanistan. And I want to thank those men 

and women over the ages that have served us in uniform and those 

that you care for under this committee. 

I understand that my entire statement will be placed in the 

record, so I will, as I indicated, make these remarks brief on the 

issues that I would like to discuss. 

The CHAIRMAN. Without objection, the entire statement will be 

included in the record, thank you. 

Ms. JACKSON LEE. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

Authorization of appropriations adequate to fund research programs to treat and to prevent breast cancer, especially that understudied strain known as the triple negative breast cancer. Authorization of appropriations adequate to fund the increasing need for 

programs, including grant programs, to treat and recover from 

post-traumatic stress disorder. And an even stronger commitment 

to provide and extend to women and minority entrepreneurs’ business enterprises the opportunity to compete for and win procurement contracts for military construction projects, overseas contingency operations, and other projects. 

Very quickly, on the triple negative breast cancer, this disproportionately affects young women of color and others under the age of 
31 

50. This disease should continue to be of special concern to the Department of Defense because a significant portion of its personnel 

is comprised of women and women of color under the age of 50. 

And I am pleased that this committee responded to my request, including a provision in last year’s Defense Authorization bill, that 

will lead directly to improve awareness, early detection, prevention, 

and treatment of breast cancer among Active Duty members of the 

Armed Forces. 

But I am here today to ask you to ensure that the NDAA for fiscal year 2014 not only contains the same provision, but also utilizes 

all necessary resources within the Department of Defense and the 

National Institutes of Health to identify specific genetic and molecular targets and biomarkers for all types of breast cancer, including 

specifically triple negative breast cancer [TNBC]. I think that will 

give long life to many in the United States military who serve this 

country and who have a longer tenure as career officers, and I believe that it is crucial. As a survivor myself, I believe that this will 

not only help men and women in the United States military, since 

we realize that breast cancer is not a respecter of gender, but it 

will help expand the research that we have across the Nation. 

I am respectfully asking that fiscal year 2014 authorize research 

funding needed for biomarker selection, drug discovery, and clinical 

trial designs that will lead to the early detection of TNBC and to 

development of multiple-targeted therapies to treat this awful disease. 

I also want to add my advocacy for increased opportunities for 

treating post-traumatic stress disorder. The need for mental health 

services for service members and their families will continue to 

grow in coming years as the Nation recovers from the effects of 

more than a decade-plus of military conflict. As a Member of Congress from Texas, we have seen, as I indicated, a number of our 

men and women returning from Afghanistan and Iraq, and they 

join others from other wars needing urgent services regarding 

PTSD [post-traumatic stress disorder]. And I would hope that that 

would be one that would you be able to provide for, Mr. Chairman. 

In addition—— 

The CHAIRMAN. Gentlelady’s time has expired, but your full 

statement will be included in the record. 

Ms. JACKSON LEE. I thank you, Mr. Chairman. As I close, if you 

would consider small businesses for opportunities for procurement. 

Thank you very much. 

[The prepared statement of Ms. Jackson Lee can be found in the 

Appendix on page 54.] 

The CHAIRMAN. Thank you very much. 

Are there any questions of the gentlelady. 

Thank you. 

Ms. JACKSON LEE. Thank you. 

The CHAIRMAN. Mr. DeSantis. Gentleman is recognized. 

STATEMENT OF HON. RON DESANTIS, A REPRESENTATIVE 

FROM FLORIDA 

Mr. DESANTIS. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Chairman McKeon, 

Ranking Member Smith, members of the committee, thank you for 
32 

having me here to testify. I know this is a particularly busy period 

for the committee, and I appreciate your time. 

I am here to talk about the E–2D Advanced Hawkeye, which, as 

you know, is the Navy’s carrier-based Airborne Early Warning and 

Battle Management Command and Control system. Variants of this 

aircraft have been serving our military well since the 1960s. The 

most advanced version, the E–2D Advanced Hawkeye, has now 

been cleared for full production. The E–2D is equipped with new 

cutting-edge communication capabilities and radar systems. These 

advancements will enable the E–2D to synthesize information from 

multiple onboard and offboard sensors to provide increased missile 

protection to our carrier defense groups while also improving the 

aircraft’s offensive capabilities, key capabilities in support of our 

combatant commands. 

The E–2D program has met every major milestone on schedule 

since the program’s inception in 2003. As the program moves forward, I urge you to support the Navy’s multiyear procurement of 

the E–2D in the President’s fiscal year 2014 budget. Fiscal year 

2014 is the first year of a planned 5-year, fixed-price, multiyear 

procurement which would provide the Navy with the full complement of 32 E–2D aircraft in the program of record over the next 

5 years. Multiyear procurement will yield a 10 percent savings over 

single or over annual single-year contracts, an expected savings of 

more than $522 million over the length of the contract term. 

This is a critical program for the Navy. As my friend and committee member Congressman Jim Bridenstine from Oklahoma said, 

‘‘Given the threats to the strike groups, multiyear procurement of 

E–2D is absolutely necessary. The only question is, are we purchasing enough E–2Ds and missile interceptors to counter the high 

volumes of incoming missiles that our sailors and soldiers could 

face?’’ End quote. 

Thank you for your consideration of support for the multiyear 

procurement of the E–2D. This procurement method will ensure 

that this vital aircraft is produced in a timely and cost-effective 

way. As an appendix to my written testimony, I have attached a 

letter from May 7th from myself, Congressmen Bridenstine, 

Crenshaw, Mica, Brown, Posey, Rooney, Miller, Yoho, and DiazBalart to Chairman McKeon and Ranking Member Smith in support of this program. 

And I would just also like to encourage the Department of Defense to examine the advantages of acquiring simulation capability 

using short-term, fee-for-service contracting, thereby rewarding and 

expanding innovation and commercial off-the-shelf offerings. Likewise, DOD should encourage common, commercially developed, 

commercially supported R&D [research and development] investments by industry. These common standards would reduce costs, 

eliminate duplicative government R&D, create a competitive industry base, ensure that simulation components can plug and play, regardless of original equipment manufacture, and most importantly, 

eliminate the long acquisition cycle. 

Thank you again for having me here today, and thank you for 

what you do to support our warfighters and our military. 

[The prepared statement of Mr. DeSantis can be found in the Appendix on page 144.] 
33 

The CHAIRMAN. Thank you very much. 

Are there any questions of the gentleman? 

Mr. Bridenstine. 

Mr. BRIDENSTINE. I just wanted to thank you personally for your 

leadership on this issue. As you and I have talked, and our staffs 

have talked, this is an issue that is personally important to me as 

a naval aviator and somebody who has flown E–2 Hawkeyes for 

most of my adult career. Started off flying E–2Cs. Got many hours 

in that aircraft. And, of course, the E–2D is a platform, while I was 

on Active Duty, I was responsible for designing the requirements 

for that particular platform. 

I am very glad that the President’s budget had multiyear procurement for that platform, and I am so glad that you are leading 

the charge to make sure that this stays as it is in the NDAA. 

Real quick, if it is okay, would you just share with us your philosophy or your thoughts on why this particular platform is so important to the future of the United States Navy? 

Mr. DESANTIS. Absolutely. As a Navy guy, you know that, you 

know, these carrier groups that we have are essentially taking 

American sovereignty and putting them essentially anywhere in 

the blue seas throughout the world. And that is a huge capability 

for us. But because it is a good capability, that is obviously a target 

for our enemies. And so I think, you know, with the C [E–2C] that 

you have the experience in, this aircraft has even more capability 

for detection of threats and early warning that is going to be absolutely critical to maintaining the safety of our carrier groups, especially in a changing environment where we are facing new threats. 

This is the type of platform that can meet that challenge. 

Mr. BRIDENSTINE. Well, I appreciate that. And certainly as the 

threats around the world become more robust, it is absolutely critical that we have the ability to intercept those threats beyond the 

horizon, which requires an airborne platform capable of delivering 

what is required to do interdiction and interception of those 

threats. So I appreciate your leadership on this issue. 

And, Mr. Chairman, I will yield back. 

The CHAIRMAN. Thank you very much. Thank you. 

Mr. DESANTIS. Yes, sir. 

The CHAIRMAN. Ms. Gabbard. Gentlelady is recognized. 

STATEMENT OF HON. TULSI GABBARD, A REPRESENTATIVE 

FROM HAWAII 

Ms. GABBARD. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman, Ranking 

Member Smith, members of the committee. I appreciate the opportunity to testify before you today. I echo the words from last year’s 

priorities for the 21st century defense strategy. We are in a moment of transition. Under your leadership with this committee, the 

United States has made significant progress in the drawdown of 

the costly and protracted wars in the Middle East that have consumed the resources and attention of our armed services for the 

previous decade. This is no easy task, and your leadership in seeing it through is greatly appreciated. 

The priorities for the 21st century defense strategy also emphasize the importance to focus on a broader range of challenges and 

opportunities, including the security and prosperity of the Asia-Pa-
34 

cific region, which has matured into our rebalance strategy. My 

representation of our constituents in Hawaii have placed us strategically and otherwise in the middle of this rebalance. 

The regional instability created by the recent North Korean 

provocations, as well as the slow-boiling territorial disagreements 

around the Senkakus and South China Seas underscore the growing need to strengthen our Nation’s military and diplomatic presence in this region where our economic and national security interests are inextricably linked; a region where our greatest security 

adversary is not a nation or a specific threat but the distance we 

must overcome to ensure open and secure access to the global domains and our national security interests. 

Hawaii is a critical link in addressing this challenge. We must 

keep Hawaii safe, and in today’s threat environment, this translates into ballistic missile defense. With the increased operational 

tempo that our naval forces are experiencing, the Pearl Harbor 

Naval Shipyard and Regional Maintenance Center provides fullservice support to the surface fleet and the new Virginia-class submarines, which cover more than 60 percent of the world’s surface 

and are essential to maintaining the robust presence called for in 

our national military strategy. 

As we continue to realign our force posture in the Asia-Pacific region, it is important that we ensure that we provide the very best 

training facilities enabling combat readiness. This additional presence comes on the heels of the Marine Corps’ decision to base two 

squadrons of its latest transport aircraft, the MV–22 Osprey, and 

one light attack helicopter squadron in my district at Kaneohe Bay. 

The Pacific Missile Range Facility [PMRF] is the world’s largest 

multi-environmental range capable of supporting surface, subsurface, air, and space operations simultaneously. PMRF’s work 

with the Aegis Ashore Missile Defense Test Complex is vital to enhancing our Nation’s ballistic missile defense capabilities and protecting the United States and its territories from any future attack. 

In addition, the Pohakuloa Training Area [PTA] serves as the 

premier combined arms training facility for all of the Pacific region. 

Ground and air units from all U.S. military services are able to 

train at PTA because it offers realistic training opportunities not 

found elsewhere and thus vital to our Armed Forces’ readiness. 

Each of these key enablers is critical to this committee’s efforts 

to provide oversight to the ongoing military transportation that has 

already begun taking place. I look forward to working with the 

committee as we continue to build on the progress we have already 

made in executing the U.S. rebalance to this vitally important region. 

Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman, Ranking Member Smith, 

for allowing me the opportunity to testify today about Hawaii’s 

strategic importance in this process and rebalance. Thank you. 

[The prepared statement of Ms. Gabbard can be found in the Appendix on page 149.] 

The CHAIRMAN. Thank you. 

Any questions of the gentlelady? 

Thank you very much. 

Ms. GABBARD. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

The CHAIRMAN. Mr. Sherman. Gentleman is recognized. 
35 

STATEMENT OF HON. BRAD SHERMAN, A REPRESENTATIVE 

FROM CALIFORNIA 

Mr. SHERMAN. Mr. Chairman, Ranking Member Smith, good to 

be with you. And the chairman asked me to keep it brief; said I 

would have a higher likelihood of success if I do that. I will follow 

that. 

The CHAIRMAN. The lengthy one will be included in your record. 

Mr. SHERMAN. I am here in support of inclusion of report language requested by Congresswoman Loretta Sanchez, the ranking 

member of the Tactical Air and Land Forces Subcommittee, directing the Transportation Command and Air Force Mobility Command 

to develop plans for the manufacture of an operational prototype 

hybrid airship. This would be an airship capable of carrying between 60 and 70 tons. The project would cost roughly $300 million, 

spread out over the next 3 years. Roughly half of that money will 

come from the private sector because this technology has tremendous private sector potential as well. 

I am here to testify not only on behalf of myself, but Grace 

Napolitano, Adam Schiff, Dana Rohrabacher, Steve Stockman, 

Judy Chu, and Mike Honda, and some of those Members will be 

submitting statements of their own in support of this project. 

A new airship technology has the potential to carry perhaps hundreds of tons of material and personnel anywhere on the globe at 

a fraction of the cost per ton-mile of fixed-wing aircraft, because 

you can travel directly to where the cargo is needed and land anywhere where there is open space. You can provide necessary material and personnel where you need them, even if there is no infrastructure. That would be so important in Afghanistan, and so important to our humanitarian efforts, whether they be after a Pakistani earthquake, an Indian Ocean disaster, Haiti, et cetera. As 

TRANSCOM Commander General Fraser told the committee on 

March 6, ‘‘Hybrid airships represent a transformational capacity 

bridging the longstanding gap between high-speed lower capacity 

airlift and low-speed higher capacity sealift.’’ Hybrid airship technology, he said, has the potential to accomplish ‘‘factory to foxhole’’ 

cargo delivery. Airships will also save in fuel costs, 20 cents per 

ton-mile as opposed to the 80 cents per mile for airlift today. 

The advantages, psychological and physical, in humanitarian relief, where an enormous airship is able to bring relief to the distant 

village even when the airports and seaports are unavailable, offers 

an opportunity for our foreign policy that exceeds any other technology I am aware of. 

The recently completed Pelican Project, an effort of the Emerging 

Capacities Directorate at DOD and Ames NASA, demonstrated 

that it is possible to overcome the previous challenges to hybrid 

airship development. The technology in the Pelican allows the airship to take off and land vertically and to move and to increase and 

decrease its altitude in flight without losing ballast or releasing helium. 

The Pelican is a demonstrated technology. However, there is 

nothing in the budget right now in order to build on the success 

of the test completed just a few months ago in January. The government should move forward with an operational prototype. 

Therefore, I respectfully request that the committee include the 
36 

language requested by Congresswoman Loretta Sanchez calling for 

the development of this prototype. And I would welcome your questions. 

[The prepared statement of Mr. Sherman can be found in the Appendix on page 60.] 

The CHAIRMAN. Thank you very much. 

Any questions of the gentleman? 

Thank you. 

Mr. SHERMAN. Thank you. 

The CHAIRMAN. Mr. Gosar. 

STATEMENT OF HON. PAUL A. GOSAR, A REPRESENTATIVE 

FROM ARIZONA 

Mr. GOSAR. Thank you, Chairman McKeon and Ranking Member 

Smith. I thank you for allowing me to testify before you today. I 

appreciate the fair and open process that is taking place here 

today. I come before you to highlight a serious issue facing a group 

of my constituents. 

By way of background, the Radiation Exposure Compensation 

Act of 1990, or RECA, as it is called, established a trust fund to 

provide a compassionate lump-sum payment to individuals, commonly referred to as ‘‘down winders,’’ who have contracted certain 

cancers and other serious diseases that are presumed to be the result of their exposure to ionizing radiation from above-ground nuclear weapons testing or from various activities in connection with 

uranium mining. 

Though the testing in question was performed in Nevada, radioactive elements affected people in Utah and Arizona as well. The 

original language in the 1990 RECA used a broad definition of the 

affected areas in Arizona. The language reads ‘‘that part of Arizona 

that is north of the Grand Canyon and west of the Colorado River.’’ 

That definition, therefore, included northern Mojave County, Arizona, in its definition as it is the county in Arizona that is closest 

to Nevada, and therefore closest to the testing ranges. 

But when RECA was reauthorized and amended in 2000, the 

purpose was to expand eligibility. With respect to Arizonans’ eligibility, the definition of the affected areas changed to reflect certain 

specific counties. Of the five Arizona counties listed in the 2000 act, 

Mojave County is not among them. Then, in 2002, technical corrections were made to the 2000 act to reflect part of the 1990 language concerning Arizona. So after the 2002 correction, the law 

listed the five counties that included the language and that part of 

Arizona that is north of the Grand Canyon. Again, Mojave County 

is the closest of the Arizona counties to the Nevada border and, 

therefore, to the nuclear testing ranges. The Arizona counties directly east and southeast from Mojave County are both covered in 

their entirety. 

This omission seems to be a clerical error, which is consistent 

with the fact that the 2000 reauthorization contained composition 

errors that had to be fixed in a separate 2002 act. To correct the 

omission, Congressman Trent Franks, a member of this committee, 

introduced bills in the 111th and 112th Congresses to include Mojave County as an affected area for RECA purpose. Because I am 

now the representative of Mojave County, I have reintroduced the 
37 

bill in the 113th Congress. It is known as H.R. 424, the Mojave 

County Radiation Compensation Act. And I am pleased to have 

Representative Franks as an original cosponsor. 

I thank Representative Franks for his continued support for this 

cause. It is this exact language that I am seeking to have included 

in the National Defense Authorization Act for the fiscal year 2014. 

The trust fund associated with these claims has been active since 

1992, and the fund will sunset in 2022 by statute. My goal is to 

ensure that the affected residents of Mojave County, Arizona, have 

a fair shot at justified compensation before the trust fund is closed. 

It will not increase costs, it will simply allow constituents who 

should have been included in the 2002 law to submit a claim. 

Each Mojave claimant should be subject to the same burden of 

proof as any other claimants. But for Congress to deny the rest of 

Mojave County, Arizona, the right to even file a claim is both inconsistent and careless. 

Again, I thank the committee for providing this opportunity to be 

heard. It is my hope that the committee will favorably adopt this 

language and ensure that my constituents affected by the government’s nuclear weapons testing are eligible for reasonable and justified compensation. I thank you. 

[The prepared statement of Mr. Gosar can be found in the Appendix on page 130.] 

The CHAIRMAN. I thank the gentleman. 

Are there any questions? 

I have one. Is this a stand-alone act, this RECA? 

Mr. GOSAR. It is a stand-alone act, and it was based upon compensation for those individuals that took on nuclear radiation or 

worked with the nuclear industry for testing, were in the military 

coming from Nevada. 

The CHAIRMAN. Has it ever been a part of the NDAA? 

Mr. GOSAR. That I am not sure. 

It has been. Sorry about that. It has been part of the NDAA. 

The CHAIRMAN. Does it have jurisdiction in other committees? 

Mr. GOSAR. The other one would be Judiciary. 

The CHAIRMAN. Okay. Well, we will look into that. Thank you 

very much. 

Mr. GOSAR. Thank you. 

The CHAIRMAN. Mr. Green. Gentleman is recognized. 

STATEMENT OF HON. AL GREEN, A REPRESENTATIVE 

FROM TEXAS 

Mr. GREEN. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. And I thank the ranking 

member as well. And, Mr. Chairman, I, too, will be brief. 

The CHAIRMAN. Is your mike on? 

Mr. GREEN. It is now. Thank you. 

The view from here is slightly different, Mr. Chairman, I might 

add. 

If I may just take a second, Mr. Chairman, and say this, I know 

that the time is precious. But I was very much impressed with Mr. 

Bridenstine’s statements about his record. He looks so young. And 

God has truly been good to him and he has been good to his country. And in his absence, I would just like to let him know that I 

appreciate his service, and thank you for that moment. 
38 

Mr. Chairman, I am here to talk about the HAVEN [Housing Assistance for Veterans] Act. It received bipartisan support in the 

112th Congress. It went through the House and through the Senate 

and made it to conference committee, but it did not make it 

through the conference committee. This is a piece of legislation designed to assist disabled and low-income veterans, to help them 

with their housing needs, to modify their homes, their bathrooms, 

their kitchens, so that they may use them efficaciously. 

I am honored to tell you that this legislation will result in a pilot 

program wherein NGOs [nongovernmental organizations] will have 

the opportunity to work with our veterans to perfect the renovations necessary. 

This is a great piece of legislation, in my opinion, and I have just 

hope that we will be able to get it into the Defense Authorization 

Act. I could say a lot more about the number of veterans that may 

benefit, but you and I know that we have a good many coming 

home who don’t return the way they left. And they need this help. 

So I am begging, I beseech, I implore that we place this in the 

NDAA. 

[The prepared statement of Mr. Green can be found in the Appendix on page 90.] 

The CHAIRMAN. Thank you. 

Any questions? 

This committee doesn’t have jurisdiction or responsibility for the 

veterans, but we create the veterans. 

Mr. GREEN. Yes, sir. 

The CHAIRMAN. So we feel strongly about the veterans. So we 

will look into this and see where it fell out last time and if there 

is some way we can include it this time. So thank you very much. 

Mr. GREEN. I thank you, Mr. Chairman, and I thank the ranking 

member as well. Thank you both. 

The CHAIRMAN. Thank you. 

Mr. O’Rourke. Gentleman is recognized. 

STATEMENT OF HON. BETO O’ROURKE, A REPRESENTATIVE 

FROM TEXAS 

Mr. O’ROURKE. Chairman McKeon and Ranking Member Smith, 

thank you for this opportunity to testify about the fiscal year 2014 

National Defense Authorization Act. I would also like to thank the 

chairman and his staff for being so accommodating so that I could 

testify in person. 

I have the honor of representing El Paso, home to Fort Bliss and 

the Army’s 1st Armored Division, along with nearly 33,000 soldiers 

and their family members. I was reminded again this week of the 

incredible sacrifice these service members and their families make 

to our country when five soldiers from Fort Bliss were killed in an 

IED attack in Afghanistan. 

I would like to testify about three things today. Number one, the 

ability of Fort Bliss to adapt to the changing needs of the Army 

and the amazing support it has in El Paso. Number two, the new 

Army hospital at Fort Bliss. And number three, the importance of 

the Tuition Assistance Program. The Army’s ability to field a ready 

and capable force to meet its mission requirements has been placed 

at risk by fiscal challenges in fiscal year 2013, especially the se-
39 

quester. Despite these challenges, the Army remains the best 

trained, best equipped, and best led fighting force in the world. I 

urge this committee to use the National Defense Authorization Act 

to guarantee that this remains true. 

Even absent the sequester the reality is that the Army is significantly reducing its Active Duty force. This reduction should be carried out in a way that prioritizes readiness, balance, and flexibility. 

Fort Bliss is well-suited to help the Army meet these objectives. To 

echo the words of former Secretary of Defense Leon Panetta when 

he visited the installation, Fort Bliss is the premier post in America. 

The El Paso region and the entire Fort Bliss community continue 

to go above and beyond in their steadfast support of our soldiers 

and their families. El Paso has invested over $2 billion in highway 

projects, new schools, and a children’s hospital to support the 

growth at Fort Bliss. Recently, we agreed to tax ourselves to pay 

for additional quality-of-life projects around the installation. Civil, 

political, and business leaders all work closely with Major General 

Pittard and Fort Bliss leadership to make El Paso a great place for 

soldiers and their families, and we will continue to do so. 

Fort Bliss has always responded swiftly when the needs of the 

Army have changed. In 2005, it became the new world-class home 

for Old Ironsides, the 1st Armored Division, providing nearly 1 million acres of maneuver area for this division to train and later 

seamlessly receiving several brigade combat teams and their supporting units. Fort Bliss is uniquely situated to serve the evolving 

needs of the Army. 

Service members and their families depend on top quality health 

care from the Army. Thanks to the past work of this committee, 

the new William Beaumont Army Medical Center stands ready to 

fill this role. The hospital complex will have a 7-story hospital 

building with 135 private rooms, 30 specialty clinics, and a 4-story 

administration building. The hospital is designed to last for the 

next 50 years and is expected to set a new bar in patient care for 

the Army. I urge this committee to continue to support this project 

so that our soldiers, including our wounded warriors returning 

home, receive the world-class care that they deserve. 

I also urge the committee to continue support for the Military 

Tuition Assistance Program in fiscal year 2014. In the last year 

alone, this program has allowed service members to take 870,000 

classes and earn over 50,000 degrees, diplomas, and certificates. It 

constitutes 0.1 percent of the Department of Defense’s budget. I 

was proud to work with Joe Wilson from this committee on maintaining tuition assistance during the CR [continuing resolution] debate. Denying our brave men and women access to education programs will negatively impact their ability to carry out their missions while in service and it will also make it harder for them to 

find jobs after transitioning out of the military. 

Recently, I led 68 of our colleagues from both sides of the aisle 

in submitting a letter to the Defense Appropriations Subcommittee 

to support full funding in fiscal year 2014. While I don’t serve on 

this committee, I have a very keen interest in seeing these priorities carried out. I thank you for the opportunity to testify. 
40 

[The prepared statement of Mr. O’Rourke can be found in the Appendix on page 158.] 

The CHAIRMAN. Thank you. 

Any questions of the gentleman? 

Thank you very much. 

Mr. O’ROURKE. Thank you. 

The CHAIRMAN. That concludes Members that have signed up to 

give testimony before the committee. There are several others who 

have submitted written testimony. That will be included in the 

record. 

And that concludes our business for today. The committee stands 

adjourned. 

[Whereupon, at 2:31 p.m., the committee was adjourned.] 
A P P E N D I X 

MAY 8, 2013 

PREPARED STATEMENTS SUBMITTED FOR THE RECORD 

MAY 8, 2013 

(45) 

Testimony of 

The Honorable Don Young (AK-AL) 

Before the 

House Armed Services Committee 

Hearing: National Defense Priorities from Members for the FY 2014 National 

Defense Authorization Act 

2118 Rayburn HOB 

May 8, 2013 

Chairman McKeon, Ranking Member Smith, and distinguished colleagues of the House Anned 

Services Committee, thank you for holding this hearing. 

Alaska is a proud state and it is a proud military state. Not only is Alaska home to the largest per 

capita population of veterans in the country, it is also home to significant force structure for both 

the Air Force and AmlY. In Alaska, we appreciate our servicemembers as much as any 

community in the country. As their lone Representative in the House, I felt it was important for 

me to share my thoughts on several malters that pertain to Alaskan force structure. Since I have 

a lot of issues to discuss today, I will keep my remarks brief for each issue. My staff will be 

happy to follow up and provide additional inlormation on all of these issues, if needed. 

Cost-Effectiveness and the Shift to the Pacific: 

Understanding that these are tough budget times and significant force structure changes 

arc needed, I would ask the Committee to require the Secretary of Defense to submit a 

report on all large Asia-Pacific and Arctic-oriented bases which analyzes the possibility 

of co-locating Department of Defense (000) tenants on these installations. This colocation would help make these bases more cost-efficient as we shift our strategic focus 

towards the Pacific. Additionally, I would ask the Committee to ask the Government 

Accountability Office (GAO) to issue a similar report on potential federal and state 

government tenants on Asia-Pacitic and Arctic-oriented bases, rather than in leased 

space, in order to leverage available infrastructure and force protection measures on 

military bases, any of which could be used to help reduce the operating costs of some of 

these installations. 

Training in Alaska: 

Alaska's provides our Armed Forces with unparalleled training opportunities. From Red 

Flag-Alaska to Northern Edge, Alaska's unique space, topography, and location provide 

both large and small scale joint training, which our modern fighting lorce needs to 

succeed on the battlefield. The Joint Pacific Alaska Range Complex (JPARC) is a gem 

among all of our nation's ranges. It supports both multi-national and U.S-only training 

and has the capability of providing an uncluttered electromagnetic training environment. 

With 65,000 square miles of available air space, which is over five times as large as 

Nellis Range in Nevada, Alaska's JPARC is becoming more and more critical as the 

speed of war increases. Additionally, where other training areas have to deal with urban 

encroachment, Alaska's JPARC is expanding. As the Administration asks for increased 

funding for our nation's training ranges, I ask the committee to consider applying those 
46 

resources to ranges ofthe future like the JPARC, which support the Administration's 

focus on the Pacific Rim in its National Military Strategy. 

Pre-Placement of Force Structure at Ft. Wainwright and Arctic Training: 

Given the nearly 2,500 square miles of land space and 1.5 million acres of maneuver land 

in the JPARC, I would ask the committee to strongly think ahout the pre-positioning 

mobility, and instrumented land warfare equipment at bases like Fort Wainwright for 

"force on force" training. This would allow the Army to take advantage of the 

mountainous terrain, cold weather, and long periods of daylight to allow them to train for 

places like Afghanistan and/or a variety of arctic environments. This pre-positioning of 

legacy army systems would also reduce the cost of training in Alaska as units would not 

have to incur the expense of shipping all of their equipment to the state. Arctic training is 

especially important as the arctic begins to open up to commerce and resource 

development. The U.S. is an arctic nation, as are other countries in which we have 

conducted combat operations in our history. Thus, we must be able to project power into 

the arctic environment. 

Northem and Southern Air Bridges in the Pacific: 

The Northem and Southem Pacific Air Bridges are critical to our shift in focus to the 

Pacific Theater. These Air Bridges are at the core of our power-projection and rapidresponse capabilities. I ask the Committee to work with the Secretary of the Air Force to 

produce report that analyzes the capacity of these two Air Bridges and include, within 

that report, the advantages of adding additional manpower and/or KC-135 or KC-46 

airframes to these Air Bridges. 

Gray Eagle Basing in the Asia Pacific 

Recently, the Army tinished its Gray Eagle initial operational and testing and evaluation 

(lOT&E), which demonstrated the effectiveness of the Gray Eagle platform. As the 

Committee works with the Anny on Gray Eagle Basing, I would like to draw the 

Committee's attention to Interior Alaska as a strong option for the Gray Eagle in the 25th 

InfantlY Division. When one considers the importance that the Air Force placed on 

including Unmanned Aerial System (UAS) operations in their JPARC EIS, the Military 

Operations in Urban Terrain range in the JPARC, which the Army uses for training, 

accessibility to the range, and unencumbered air space, and the sheer abundance of range 

space in the JPARC, Interior Alaska is an ideal spot for the Gray Eagle. 

C-23 (Shema): 

In the FY20 13 Defense Authorization, I know the Committee advocated on retaining the 

remaining C-23s at the current level. I also know that C-23 provision did not become 

law. As the C-23 drawdown continues, I ask the committee to look for a solution tor 

Alaska's C-23s. Given many of the short runways in our mral areas, the C-23 fills a very 

specialized role that cannot be filled by any other airframe. 

F-35 OCONUS Basing: 

Eie1son Air Force Base has been noted by many Air Force officials as being particularly 

suited for the F-35A. As the Committee works with the Air Force on OCONUS Basing 
47 

Review for the F-35A, I ask that the Committee note the airspace, range capability and 

joint warfare training/operations uniquely available in Alaska. I also ask that the 

Committee secure a firm schedule for F-35A OCONUS Basing. Force posture and 

deterrence is about positioning. In other words, if you want to maintain a credible threat 

and provide deterrence, you have to be as close to that threat as policy allows. In my 

testimony I have included a distance chart that shows Alaska's central and highly 

strategic position to possible hotspots in Asia, Europe, and the Arctic. 

Innovative lED Lane: 

Lastly, I'd like to draw the Committee's attention to an interesting piece of Alaskan 

ingenuity. Recently, two former EOD members decided to construct a realistic lED Lane 

at JBER in Anchorage. They use this training lane to supplement existing lED training. 

In a very realistic environment, this lane specifically trains soldiers to identijy of 

numerous types IEDs and the different method in which these IEDs are employed. I 

encourage the Committee to visit this lED Lane and to consider how best to deploy 

similar lanes across this country, especially given the very low cost of construction for 

this lED Lane. 

I would like to thank the Chairman, Ranking Member, and other Committee Members for 

listening to my testimony. Once again, I look forward to working with all of you on these issues. 
48 

The following table depicts distances between possible hotspots, Fairbanks and other force 

locations. The geographic North Pole represents the need to plan for addressing the evolving 

tension over Arctic resources and possible opening of a northern sea passage between Europe 

and Asia. As can be seen, Fairbanks is closer than installations with red bolded distances and 

nearly as close as those shown in blue bold font. 

Location Beijing, 

China 

Pyongyang, 

North Korea 

Seoul, South 

Korea

Vladivostok, 

Russia

Serveromorsk, 

Russia 

Geographic 

North Pole 

Fairbanks, AK 3,918 3,717 3,798 3,292 3,199 1,747 

Anderson AFB, 

Guam 2,507 2,121 2,000 2,190 5,881 5,281 

Camp Pendleton, 

CA 6,323 6,020 6,068 5,577 5,211 3,924 

Cocos Islands, 

Australia 3,813 3,995 3,920 4,427 6,393 7,052 

Darwin, 

Australia 3,726 3,568 3,443 3,841 7,222 7,068 

Hickam AFB, HI 5,062 4,599 4,576 4,233 6,180 4,750 
49 

Committee on Armed Services 

FY14 National Defense Authorization Act 

Testimony of Congressman Henry A. Waxman 

Submitted for the record 

May 7, 2013 

Thank you, Chainnan McKeon and Ranking Member Smith, for allowing me the 

opportunity to submit testimony as you consider how to approach the Fiscal Year 2014 defense 

authorization bill. 

I would like to express strong opposition to the proposal in the President's Budget for FY 

2014 to establish another Defense Base Closure and Realignment Commission (BRAC) round in 

2015. 

As you know, the Government Accountability Office (GAO) released a report last year 

showing that the 2005 BRAC was the "biggest, most complex, costliest BRAC round ever." Its 

implementation costs ballooned 86% over the Department of Defense's original estimates and 

will exceed by billions the anticipated long term savings. 

One of my top priorities is to protect the mission of the LA Air Force Base. The 

significance of the LA Air Force Base is the Space and Missile Systems Center. No other 

military installation worldwide matches the LA Air Force Base's position as a leader in space 

systems design and development. The LA Air Force Base contributes to the development of the 

next generation of ballistic missiles, rockets and satellites. The advancements in technology that 

were born and developed in the South Bay have made our country safer. The base is the hub of 

the Southern California aerospace and defense industries, and it supports thousands of jobs in the 

private sector. FUlthcnnore, as we seck to create jobs to support our economic recovery, the 

aerospace industry has been one of our nation's largest net exporters. So, the value of the base 

goes beyond the direct and indirect jobs statewide and annual payroll. 

I do not believe that funding a BRAC process is the best use of our limited funds, 

especially when the 2005 BRAC has yet to earn savings eight years later. I urge you to avoid a 

new BRAC process and make sensible decisions for our national defense. I look forward to 

working with you as you move forward with the FY 2014 National Defense Authorization Act. 
50 

FY14 National Defense Authorization Act Testimony 

Congresswoman Ileana Ros-Lehtinen 

May 14,2013 

Page lof2 

You have all dedicated much of your careers here in Congress to our nation's service members: 

active duty, reserve, veterans, and their families. 

Those who dedicate their lives to the service of others truly embody the heart and spirit of 

America, and I thank each of you as I do each and every brave American who serves our 

country. 

Florida is an active state in terms of military presence and is rated among those states most 

accommodating to servicemcn and woman, as well as their families. 

As you craft this year's National Defense Authorization Act, I know you will rightly be focused 

on wartighter wellbeing, here at home as well as downrange. 

Heightened security demands on our military installations caused by an increasingly dangerous 

world is of utmost importance to your Committee. 

Many installations still suffer from inadequate security measures, creating a recipe for disaster. 

One such example of a facility in dire need of enhanced security measures is Homestead Air 

Reserve Base. 

This installation has two entry gates to allow traffic in and out ofthe base, but at present one of 

them has been forced to close due to terrorism concerns. 

The remaining gate is substandard and ill designed to function as a primary entry control point. 

The single, insnfficient guard shack is within close proximity of the base luel storage compound 

and is only a 30 second drive to the F-16 ramp which holds $800 million in F-16 fighter jets. 

It simply fails to meet force protection standards. 

With the current and projected mission growth at the installation, Homestead Air Reserve Base 

provides a high visibility target for potential attacks. 

Furthermore, truck inspection is currently being conducted outdoors during all weather 

conditions and within close proximity to the base bulk fuel storage compound. 

The location for inspections is also extremely small and limiting when the volume ortraffic is 

high. 

Significant traffic backups have been noted up to a milc long during the high volume usage this 

faci lity regularly sees. 
51 

Page 2of2 

Overall, Homestead Air Reserve Base serves 2,700 Airmen, Soldier, Sailors, Marines, Coast 

Guardsmen, Customs and Boarder Protection agents, and Florida National Guardsmen who 

dedicate their life's work to serving our great nation. 

Throughout the country there are projects like this that demand our attention. 

Out there, each and every day, our servicemen and women defend the privileges, comforts and 

freedoms that we, as Americans, enjoy. 

These brave men and women deserve the best protection we can provide. 

The courage and sacrifice of our service members is unwavering, as our commitment to them 

must be. 

I am personally committed, through my family and my voting record, to the issues affecting 

service members. 

Our country was born of their heroic deeds, and continues to live in freedom through the 

vigilance of to day's warfighters. 

Mr. Chairman, thank you for the opportunity to testify before the Committee this afternoon. 
52 

Rep. Ken Calvert 

Testimonv for FY14 NDAA 

2013 

Chairman McKeon, Ranking Member Smith and distinguished Members of the House Armed Services 

Committee: thank you for the invitation to testify before the committee regarding the fiscal year 2014 

National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA). While my schedule did not allow me to be there in person, 

I appreciate the opportunity to submit a written statement for the record. 

An issue of great importance is the recapitalization of MQ-1s to the MQ-9. As you are aware, the 

Department of Defense {DoD} has yet to provide a comprehensive plan to recapitalize MQ-! aircraft in 

the National Guard with MQ-9 aircraft. Beginning in 2015-2017, Air National Guard squadrons will begin 

to lose their mission capability simply because of a lack of MQ-1 aircraft that have been lost by attrition. 

Furthermore, the current recapitalization plan does not place proper emphaSis 011 the importance of 

current MQ-1 Flying Training Units (FTUs) schoolhouses. 

As part of the FY14 NOAA, the Committee should recommend that the Air Force prioritize the 

replacement of MQ-1s with MQ-9, at locations with an existing FTU schoolhouse, which would allow the 

Air force to capitalize on existing infrastructure, trained personnel, instructor expertise, and save 

taxpayer money. In addition, the Air Force should submit a comprehensive recapitalization plan for the 

replacement of all National Guard MQ-l aircraft with MQ-9 aircraft. The plan should include the criteria 

for beddown, including both the weight and scoring of said criteria that will be given to MQ·1 wings and 

squadrons with co-located FTU schoolhouse miSSions. The plan should be submitted to the Committee 

no later 90 days after enactment of the FY14 NOAA. 

The Air National Guard executes global unmanned aerial systems, combat support, and humanitarian 

missions that greatly augment the Active Duty Component. We should ensure that we are capitalizing 

on existing infrastructure and expertise as we retire the MQ-1 and replace them with the MQ-9 within 

National Guard units. 

Thank you. 
53 

Testimony ofthe Honorable Chaka Fattah, Member of Congress 

House Committee on Armed Services 

May 8,2013 

Chairman Mckeon, Ranking Member Smith, and distinguished Members of this Committee, 

thank you for the opportunity to appear before you today, and thank you for your support of 

youth mentoring organizations serving on military installations. It is through organizations such 

as the Boys & Girls Clubs of America, Big Brothers Big Sisters, and The First Tee that the 

children of service members receive the care and guidance they need. Therefore, as you begin 

consideration ofthe FY14 National Defense Authorization Act, I ask that you ensure that these 

organizations have continued access to these installations and the children that they serve. Such 

access, which is at no cost to the Federal government, is critical for The First Tee to carry out its 

character development program. 

The First Tee was founded in 1997 for the purpose of instilling life skills in young people 

through the game of golf Since that time, The First Tee has served 7.6 million participants and 

engaged 12,000 active volunteers. The program operates in all 50 states and throughout the 

world. 

[n 2008, The First Tee received $3 million from Congress to operate on 100 installations in the 

United States and 20 installations overseas. On these installations, The First Tee promotes 

integrity, confidence and perseverance-values the military itself esteems. As a result of The 

First Tee's work, the children of service members receive the help and support they need to 

become productive citizens and leaders in American society. 

Although this organization's federal funding will soon cease, The First Tee would use private 

funds, not taxpayer dollars, to operate on military bases. As such, The First Tee would only need 

permission from this Committee to do so. Therefore, I ask that this Committee ensure The First 

Tee's continued access to military installations for the purpose of administering its leadership 

training program. Thank you. 
54 

CONGRESSWOMAN SHEILA JACKSON LEE OF TEXAS 

STATEMENT BEFORE THE 

COMMITTEE ON ARMED SERVICES 

MEMBER DAY HEARING ON 

FY20 14 NATIONAL DEFENSE AUTHORIZATION ACT 

THURSDAY, 2013 

Chairman McKeon, Ranking Member Adam Smith and 

distinguished Members of the Committee: 

Thank you for all you do for the men and women who willingly risk their 

lives to keep our nation safe. This Congress has no higher obligation that 

to ensure that those who wear the uniform of the United States - and 

those civilians who provide logistical and operational support have the 

equipment, training, and resources needed to carry out and complete 

their mission. 

And we must never forget that a grateful nation has a sacred obligation, 

in the words of President Lincoln, "to care for him who has borne the 

battle, and for his widow and his orphan." 
55 

I know how seriously Chairman McKeon and Ranking Member Smith, 

and their committee colleagues, take this responsibility and want to 

acknowledge how much their colleagues in the House appreciate the 

good work they do. 

I would like to add my thoughts and prayers, to those affected by the 

terror attack in Boston, MA, and also tell you how proud I am of our men 

and women who were among the first responders. And, of course, I will 

join my colleagues and provide whatever support they need as this issue 

evolves. 

Mr. Chairman, when I appeared before you last year, I asked the 

Committee to ensure that the National Defense Authorization Act of 2013 

authorize research programs to treat and prevent breast cancer, 

especially triple negative breast cancer. Triple negative breast cancer 

disproportionately affects women of color under the age of 50 and thus 

should continue to be of special concern to the Department of Defense. 

I was very pleased that this Committee inclnded a provision in 

last year's NDAA that could improve the prevention, early 

detection, awareness, and treatment of breast cancer among 

members of the Armed Forces serving on active duty. As such, 

I am here today to ask you to ensure that the NDAA for Fiscal 

Year 2014 not only contains the same provision, but also 

utilizes all necessary resources within the Department of 

Defense and the National Institutes of Health to identify 

specific genetic and molecular targets and biomarkers for all 

types of Breast Cancer, specifically, Triple Negative Breast 

Cancer (TNBC). 

I am respectfully asking that research is invested into the 

scientific information useful in biomarker selection, drug 

discovery, and clinical trials design that will enable both triple 

negative breast cancer patients to be identified earlier in the 

progression of their disease; and the development of multiple 

targeted therapies for the disease. 

Mr. Chairman and Members of the Committee, I am a breast cancer 

survivor, and as a Member of Congress, a mother, a sister and a wife, 
56 

I feel a special responsibility to do all I can to ensure every American can 

win in the fight against cancer. 

As a breast cancer survivor, I was surprised to learn that Triple negative 

breast cancer is a specific strain of breast cancer for which no targeted 

treatment is available. The American Cancer Society calls this particular 

strain of breast cancer, "an aggressive subtype associated with lower 

survival rates." 

Mr. Chairman, breast cancers with specific, targeted treatment methods, 

such as hormone and gene based strains, have higher survival rates than 

the triple negative subtype, highlighting the need for a targeted 

treatment. And I ask you today to tap into the best and brightest 

scientific minds to identify the specific genetic and molecular targets and 

biomarkers for Triple Negative Breast Cancer so we may understand the 

occurrence of the triple negative tumor. Then we will be able to create 

better treatments for those kinds of tumors. 

As many of you may know, today, Breast cancer accounts for 1 in 4 cancer 

diagnoses among women in this country. It is also the most commonly 

diagnosed cancer among African American women. Please consider the 

following facts: 

• Triple-negative breast cancer (TNBC) is a term used to describe breast 

cancers whose cells do not have estrogen receptors and progesterone 

receptors, and do not have an excess of the HER2 protein on their cell 

membrane of tumor cells; 

• African-American women are more likely to be diagnosed with larger 

tumors and more advanced stages of breast cancer; 

• Triple Negative Breast Cancer (TNBC) cells are usually of a higher 

grade and size, onset at a younger age, more aggressive and more 

likely to metastasize; 

• TNBC also referred to as basal-like (BL) due to their resemblance to 

basal layer of epithelial cells 

o There is not a formal detailed classification of system of the subtypes 

of these cells 
57 

o TNBC is in fact a heterogeneous group of cancers; with varying 

differences in prognosis and survival rate between various subtypes; 

And this has led to a lot of confusion amongst both physicians and 

patients; 

• Apart from surgery, cytotoxic chemotherapy is the only available 

treatment, targeted molecular treatments while being investigated are 

not accepted treatments; 

• Between 10-17% of female breast cancer patients have the triple 

negative subtype; 

• Triple-negative breast cancer most commonly affect African-American 

women, followed by Hispanic women; 

o African-American women have prevalence TNBC of 26% vs. 16% in 

non-African-Americans women 

• TNBC usually affects women under 50 years of age; 

o African American women have a prevalence of premenopausal breast 

cancer of 26% vs. 16% for Non-African American Women 

• Women with TNBC are 3 times the risk of death than women with the 

most common type of breast cancer 

• Women with TNBC are more likely to have distance metastases in the 

brain and lung and more common subtypes of breast cancer 

am confident, the resources provided through the Department of 

Defense and the National Institutes of Health will enable them to target 

treatment for the triple negative breast cancer strain and help identify 

triple negative breast cancer earlier in the progression of the disease. 

This will in turn lead to the development of multiple targeted therapies 

for the disease. I look forward to working with all of you to identify the 

specific genetic and molecular targets and biomarkers for all types of 

Breast Cancer, specifically, Triple Negative Breast Cancer. 

4 
58 

Mr. Chairman, along with traumatic brain injury (TBI), the signature 

wounds from the following wars: Desert Storm, Operation Enduring 

Freedom and Operation Iraqi Freedom, is post-traumatic stress disorder 

(PTSD). 

I am here again to request that this committee ensure that programs 

designed to treat this grievous injury and the appropriations needed to 

fund them continue to be authorized. The sequestration has impacted 

our military and our families across the board, especially those served by 

urban hospitals. For example, to take just one such case, the Riverside 

General Hospital of Houston, which is in my congressional district, no 

longer is able to treat depression and posttraumatic stress disorder 

symptoms of mental illness, including suicidal thoughts or behaviors. As 

a result, more over 200 families in my congressional district will suffer 

due in part to the reduction in funding. 

The need for mental health services for service members and their 

families will continue to grow in coming years as the nation recovers 

from the effects of more than a decade of military conflict. 

And so I ask that you increase funds at the Department of 

Defense Office of Health Affairs for TruCARE partners such as 

Riverside General Hospital so VA hospitals across the country 

can provide health care services for patients suffering from 

mental health and substance abuse. 

I made a promise to my constituents to work with my colleagues across 

the aisles to deliver healthcare services to the area. And my testimony 

before you today is simply a matter of keeping my word. The men and 

women who serve this country with such courage and skill understand 

how important it is to keep one's word. 

Mr. Chairman, the Riverside General Hospital, is the oldest serving VA 

hospital in Texas. It was established in 1926 as the Houston Negro 

Hospital in memory of Lt. John Halm Cullinan, 344lh FA, 90th Division of 

the American Expeditionary Forces, and one of the thousands of African 

Americans who risked life and limb to defend America and its allies at a 
59 

time when those of his race did not enjoy the legal rights they fought so 

hard to secure for others. 

A PTSD facility at Riverside General Hospital was established in 2010 to 

treat PTSD for veterans, whether on active duty, discharged, or on leave 

in the metropolitan Houston area, including Harris and surrounding 

counties. There are nearly 200,000 military veterans in Harris County 

alone, and Riverside General Hospital has proven itself capable of 

providing psychiatric, medical, emergency medical, inpatient, and 

outpatient services to crisis populations. 

As a Member of Congress from Texas, a State which has sustained more 

casualties in the ongoing conflicts in Afghanistan and Iraq than all but 

one other, I am committed to addressing the urgent need for more posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD) treatment and counseling facilities 

servicing veterans living in some of the more distressed areas of our 

country. 

There is an unmet need for more medical facilities specializing in posttraumatic stress disorder located in underserved urban areas. Access to 

post-traumatic stress disorder treatment is especially important since 

veterans living in such areas are less likely to be diagnosed and treated 

for post-traumatic stress disorder. Riverside General Hospital is uniquely 

positioned to meet this need, and I look forward to working with you to 

provide the necessary healthcare to our men and women and their 

respective families around the world. 

Mr. Chairman, thank you for your leadership and your commitment to 

protecting our communities and leading our Nation. I welcome your questions. 
60 

Testimony of Congressman Brad Sherman 

National Defense Authorization Act for FY 2014 

in snpilort of Hybrid Development 

Chairman McKeon, Ranking Member Smith and members of the committee, thank you 

for the opportunity to testify today on what I believe to be a critical research and 

development ef10rt at a crossroads, namely the development of an airship for heavy lift 

capabilities. The government recently concluded a very promising RDT&E program 

known as Project Pelican. I am testifying here to urge that the efforts to develop hybrid 

airships for heavy lift continue in FY2014. 

Recent technological developments in hybrid airships have thc potential to revolutionize 

llot only military cargo transp0l1 and logistics, but also civilian transportation, 

international trade, and humanitarian relief. I will focus on thc military benefit, of 

course, but will also touch on some of these wider impacts that airships may have 

because of their implications for the Department of Defense and other government 

agencies. 

It is critical that the efforts that have been undenaken fi'om 2008-2012 be continued. The 

specific purpose of my testimony, and that submitted tor the record by Congresswoman 

Judy Chu, is to support the inclusion of language requested by Congresswoman Loretta 

Sanchez, Tactical Air and Land Forces Subcommittee Ranking Member, directing the 

Transportation Command and the Air Mobility Command to develop an operational 

prototype hybrid airship vehiele. Congresswoman Grace Napolitano also supports this 

request. 

Airships have the p01ential to carry perhaps hundreds of tons of materiel and personnel 

anywhere on the globe, at a fraction of the cosl per ton-mile of fixed wing aircraft, and 

without the need to tackle inter-modal challenges associated with ship-borne cargo 

transit. You do not need roads, railroads or ports. A II of these things, as we know from 

the Afghan expericnce, are either unavailable where you need them to be, can be 

destroyed by m3n or nature, or are politically difficult to secure and thus subject to 

blackmail. 

These modes can also be very dangerous in a conflict area. In addition to the obvious 

tragedy of losing U.S. troops and civilians on the roads of a confliet area, the need to 

protect vita! transit routes for cargo in places like Afghanistan and Iraq bogged down 

resources lhat could have been spent on fighting enemy forces and training our allies in 

those countries for the day when they would take over their own security. A hybrid 

airship airlift capability would not eliminate all needs for ground transit, obviously, but 

would certainly reduce the amount of time our men and women are in harm's way on 

dangerous roads very significantly. 
61 

The airships under development today will have the ability to take off and land vertically 

with little or no ground infrastructure. TIley do not need a runway. Cargo can be taken 

directly where it is needed and unloaded, directly from where it sits. All you need is 

open space to land and unload. 

As TRANSCOM Commander General William Fraser told the Committee on March 6, 

"Hybrid Airships represent a transformational capability bridging the long standing gap 

between high-speed lower capacity airlift and low-speed higher capacity sealift." He 

further noted that hybrid airship technology has the potential to tulfill "Factory to 

Foxhole" cargo delivery. 

While it is too early to be certain of exact operating costs, a hybrid airship with a large 

eargo capacity (66 tons or greater, up to 500 (ons) is estimated to have a per-mile cost of 

about 20 cents per ton. By contrast, fixed wing costs run approximately 80 cents per tonmile, not including, of coursc, the costs of getting the materiel from the airtleld to the 

battlefield when on the ground. 

As a member of the Foreign Atlairs Committee, 1 am well aware of the burden faced by 

our Armed Services in the face of humanitarian catastrophes. No one in the world can 

deliver food, medicine, medical personnel, and other needed supplies like the United 

States military. These etJOrls are often nothing short of heroic, They save lives, and build 

goodwill for (he U.S. 

We all remember the 2010 Haiti earthquake, where the pOli facilities and the airport were 

heavily damaged. Wc all remember the earthquakes in 2005 that affected remote areas of 

northern Pakistan. Thousands of additional victims died due to inaccessibility in the days 

after these disasters struck. These problems would be greatly reduced with an airlift 

capability like this, one that can deliver aid where it is needed without those damaged or 

nonexistent facilities. 

Not only will hybrid airships reduce DoD fuel consumption, they may playa role in the 

development of domestic energy supply and help the development of wind power. Large 

equipment that is impossible or economically impractical to ship via ground transit is 

needed for the development of wind power. You cannot ship the massive blades needed 

for a wind tarm easi lyon truck or train to the remote areas where it is most windy. You 

can do so in the cargo hold of a large airship. You cannot just build roads across 

environmentally sensitive lands to reach some of our best domestic energy sources. An 

airship, on the other hand, leaves no environmental footprint. 

I mention these not only to show that there are non-military benefits to this technology, 

but to demonstrate that there are signitlcant commercial interests in the continued 

development of hybrid airships. As a result, the government should not have to bear (he 
62 

costs on its own ifit chooses to fund airship development. The DoD does remain 

essential to the effort, however. 

The Key is Buoyancy Control. The recently-completed Project Pelican demonstrated 

that it is possible to overcome previous challenges to hybrid airship development. Most 

importantly, the technology in Pelican allows an airship to take off and land, as wcll as 

moderate altitude in flight, without taking on and unloading ballast, or releasing helium 

(which cannot then be recaptured) in flight. Put simply, prior to Pelican, airships could 

go up, they could go down, but they could not go up and down repeatedly while in flight. 

They also needed to be able to take on ballast, such as water, andior needed to be tethered 

while on the ground, which means they needed a lake or significant ground infrast1Ucture 

and crew. 

Pelican demonstrated a technology that allows for an airship to moderate its buoyancy 

through increasing and decreasing the pressure of the helium needed fur lift, without 

jettisoning ballast or helium. This technology is known as control of static heaviness 

(COSH). The program began in 2008 as a cooperative effort of NASA Ames and the 

Office of the of Defense Emerging Capabilities Directorate (formerly Force 

TransfoI1nation). 

An Advanced Demonstrator was constructed in a hangar in Tustin, CA. That 

demonstrator was tested in January 2013. It met of the objectives set at the onset of the 

program and was given a technical readiness level of 6-7 by NASA Ames. 

There is no eHort proposed at this time for FY2014. In order to build on the successes of 

the Project Pelican, the government needs to move forward with funding for a prototype 

vehicle that can carry approximately 60-70 tons. It is important to note that this tonnage 

capability is not a ceiling far from it. It appears that lift capabilities of several hundreds 

of tons are possible, but the next step is a smaller but still very significant prototype. 

Thcrefore, I respectfully request that thal the Committee include the language requested 

by Congresswoman Loretta Sanchez calling for the development of this operational 

prototype. 

Thank you again for this opportunity and for your consideration. 
63 

STATEMENT OF 

CONGRESSWOMAN BARBARA LEE, OF CALIFORNIA'S 13TH DISTRICT 

REGARDING: DEFENSE AUTHORIZATION ACT FOR FY14 

BEFORE THE HOUSE ARMED SERVICES COMMITTEE 

May 8, 2013 

Thank you, Chainnan McKeon and Ranking Member Smith for affording me the 

opportunity to explain my requests for you to consider including in the FY14 

Defense Authorization Act. I have a number of requested changes that I will 

quickly address and for which I strongly urge you to support and include. 

My requests are straightforward and will send a message that will be welcomed by 

the American people, who in the face of daunting economic challenges, believe 

that the era of perpetual warfare is over and that no government agency should get 

a pass from financial oversight and accountability. 

No Permanent Bases 

Mr. Chairman, I am concerned that this bill may not contain language prohibiting 

pennanent bases in Afghanistan. 

As signed into law on numerous occasions by both fonner President Bush and 

President Obama, Congress has maintained a longstanding prohibition on the 

establishment of penn anent military bases in Afghanistan. 

I request you consider and include in the FY20 14 Defense Authorization Act be 

brought clearly in line with the "no pennanent bases" provisions historically 

incorporated into Defense Authorizations and related Appropriations measures. 

No one believes it is in the strategic interests of the United States to have 

pennanent military bases based in Afghanistan. 

We should guard against the perception amongst the Afghan people, who 

historically have displayed a strong resentment and violently resisted outside 

forces occupying their country, by making it crystal clear that we do not intend on 

pennanently stationing our troops in Afghanistan. 
64 

Withdrawal from Afghanistan: 

Mr. Chairman, it should come as no surprise that I share the belief of many in the 

Congress that there is no military solution in Afghanistan. 

r have stated publically many times that a boots-on-the-ground, military-first 

strategy in Afghanistan is not in our economic or national security interest. 

As the daughter of a military veteran, I also know firsthand the sacrifices and the 

commitment involved with defending our nation. 

Our troops have done everything that was asked of them and more. 

But the truth is that their mission in Afghanistan is far past its expiration date and 

we should be withdrawing all our troops and military contractors as soon as safely 

possible, and certainly we should not be considering extending our military 

presence in Afghanistan beyond 2014. 

That is why r request you consider and include incorporating language ending 

combat operations in Afghanistan well before the current December 31,2014 

timeframe and limiting funding to the safe and orderly withdrawal of all U.S. 

troops and military contractors. 

And we know that regardless of the situation in Afghanistan by the end of 20 14 

and beyond the Pentagon will come back to us asking for more time, more troops, 

and more resources. 

The American people overwhelming agree that it is time to bring an end to this 

long war and my amendment will do just that. 

Pentagon Budget Reforms: 

2 

In addition to auditing the Pentagon, which r will touch on in a few moments, it is 

important that the Pentagon face the same financial constraints that all other 

government agencies are being subjected to. 

I am deeply concerned that the Pentagon is already seeking an exemption from the 

sequestration cuts mandated by Congress as part of the deeply flawed legislation I 

voted against last year. 

I urge the committee consider common sense defense spending refonns outlined by 

many organizations across the political spectrum. 
65 

3 

With billions each year lost to waste, fraud, and abuse at the Pentagon, we need to 

ask for the same of the Department of Defense that we ask of our other agencies. 

AUMF Extension 

Mr. Chairman, I am deeply concerned to hear about a possible expansion of the 

2001 AUMF. 

As you know, Congress has a solemn Constitutional obligation to deliberate and 

authorize all war making and hostilities abroad. 

Ifthe Executive branch is seeking expanded war making authority, let them request 

it and let us engage in a full and transparent debate, with the proper committees 

holding hearings and Members of Congress afforded the opportunity to consider 

the full implications of an expanded AUMF. 

I am as deeply opposed to expanding the 2001 AUMF as I was against authorizing 

the original AUMF on September 14,2001, when I made the lone vote in 

opposition because I knew it was blank check to wage war. 

I am also deeply concerned that without a proper debate that such a measure 

deserves, we will irrevocably damage our nation's foundation of checks of 

balances as they relate to U.S. national security. 

Unfortunately, rather than a reevaluation of the overly broad Authorization from 

2001, this committee is reportedly considering a far reaching new declaration of 

war against an undefined enemy, giving unchecked authority to the executive 

branch now and in the future. 

Passing these provisions as part of a comprehensive defense authorization bill, and 

without a full and comprehensive debate on the consequences of such an action, is 

a disservice to our military service members, our nation, and our democracy. 

AUMF Repeal: 

Mr. Chairman, in addition to my opposition to expanding the 2001 AUMF, now is 

the right time to repeal the overly broad 2001 AUMF. 

The AUMF is the underlying legal justification for extrajudicial killings, and has 

been invoked to justify a wide range of activities including warrantless surveillance 
66 

and wiretapping activities, indefinite detention practices that fly in the face of our 

constitutional values. 

1 am particularly disturbed by the rapid expansion of extrajudicial targeted-killing 

operations conducted by umanned, armed droned. 

I am preparing to introduce legislation to bring much needed oversight and 

accountability over the executive branch's use oflethally armed drones and am 

committed to bringing sunlight and proper deliberation into the drones debate that 

Congress needs to have. 

We must repeal this authorization for use of military force, end the perpetual state 

of war anytime anywhere, and re-focus our energy and efforts into creating jobs 

and nation building here at home. 

With the end ofthe Afghanistan war on the horizon in 2014, now is the right time 

to sunset the AUMF and end the blank check for war without end along with our 

military presence in Afghanistan. 

Congressional Approval of Attack on Iran 

4 

Mr. Chainnan, as we draw down from over a decade of fighting wars in two 

countries, we need to ensure that any potential war with Iran receive congressional 

approval or authorization. 

I share President Obama's deep commitment to ensuring the Iran does not obtain 

nuclear weapons. 

However, we must make sure that all diplomatic alternatives to war are exhausted 

before another major war is contemplated, and the Constitutional authority of 

Congress to declare war is clear and must be respected. 

Audit the Pentagon 

Finally Mr. Chairman, I ask your committee to consider creating financial 

consequences for the Pentagon unless the Defense Department subjects itself to an 

audit, as it's required to do by law and as all othcr federal agencies regularly do. 

I urge the Committee to take a first step toward compelling the Pentagon to act 

with urgency in assuring fiscal responsibility in our defense dollars. 
67 

As the only federal agency not subject to an audit, the Pentagon has lost tens of 

billions of dollars to waste, fraud, and abuse. 

5 

It is past time to check the wasteful practices with little oversight that weakens our 

financial outlook and ultimately our national security. 

The Pentagon is the only agency that cannot be audited or predict realistically 

when it will do so. 

The Pentagon admits the problem and agrees it has a duty to pass an audit. The 

Pentagon's Office of the Comptroller wrote in 2008, "Our financial problems are 

pervasive and well documented." 

This failure of oversight and accountability is unacceptable and it is time to bring 

the Pentagon up to the same standards that prevail throughout the private and 

public sector. 

Conclusion/Thanks: 

Mr. Chairman, thank you again for the opportunity to testify. 

I strongly urge you to adopt these requested changes. 
68 

Written Statement for the Record 

Congressman Michael M. Honda 

Priorities for National Defense Authorization Act for FY 2014 

May 7, 2013 

Chairman McKeon and Ranking Member Smith, thank you for the opportunity to provide 

testimony on several items that I believe are national defense priorities that should be reflected in 

the Fiscal Year 2014 National Defense Authorization Act. 

Grid Resiliency, Reliability and Security 

The 000 invests in research on micro-grid applications that potentially provide improved fault 

tolerant operation and efficiency; next-generation devices to provide high temperature, voltage, 

and current conversion for micro-grid applications; and devices such as smart switches, to 

provide more enicient, robust, and reliable power delivery for vehicle power applications. 

Technologies such as superconductors increase grid resistance abruptly in response to 

overcurrents from faults in the system, limiting the overcurrents and protecting the grid from 

damage. If the Committee recommends that the 000 strongly tlu1her support this Program, it 

would enable the development and deployment of technologies that provide a rapid, automated 

reaction that would allow 000 iustallations and bases to reset after the overload is cleared, 

providing a selt:healing feature that enhances grid reliability and military energy security. 

(Defense-wide RDT&E, Line #52 Strategic Environmental Research and Development Program) 

Special Forces Electronic Warfare System Program 

CUlTently and in the future, our opponents are using radio-controlled lED's and standard radio 

tactics to coordinate attacks on our troops & personnel. In many cases, small unit Special Forces 

opcrators and Military Intelligence units in forward operating areas do not have small, compact, 

lightweight EW systems capable of responding to these threats. What is needed is a next 

generation, compact, tactical EW system that provides more adequate soldier protection from 

wireless threats, target finding, and combat situational awareness all in one. This Army R&D 

Program is developing just such a next generation EW technology that will give our troops 

Counter-lED, Threat Avoidance, and Intelligence Gathering capabilities, in small soldier-worn 

packages. Threats will be detected, located, monitored and jammed during dismounted tactical 

combat operations. The Program is thus vital to Special Forces and national security as it will 

save lives. This program applies to all branches of the DoD such as Joint Special Forecs, 

ArmylNavy EWO's, and Army Intelligence since the technology is also applicable to ground 

mobile, fixed site, rotary wing, and UAV operations. If the Committee recommends that the 

000 strongly further support this R&D Program, deployment can be accelerated. This Prol,,'ram 

is applicable to multiple DoD Services, and there is great potential for commercial sector 

technology spin-off to the Nation's mobile computing and aircraft/device EMC compliance 

markets. (Army RDT &E, Line #44 Electronic Warfare Technology) 

Advanced Cyber Operations Sensor Program 

Every day, cyber threats are attacking our government networks. They are evolving, distributed, 

and forever escalating. The nation spends more and more money, time, and effort yet the 

damage still accelerates. One of the problems with our nation's efforts to combat cyber attacks is 

that we too often look at cyber as an IT process, with software-only solutions & approaches. 
69 

What is needed are new innovative hardware and hybrid technology approaches. The Anny's 

Cyber Offensive Operations Division is presently working on such advanced cyber 

hardware/hybrid techniques. This R&D Program focuses on converging the traditional 

Electronic Warfare (EW) with Computer Network Operations (CNO) fields, which is very 

unique and no other DoD group is addressing. This Division has special knowledge, history, and 

experience with both fields (EW and CNO), and is converging the two. The Program 

substantially advances the U.S. Government's ability to provide critical cyber hardware sensor 

technologies and techniques. Tfthe Committee recommends that the DoD more strongly support 

this Program, it will be able to accclerate cybcr R&D efforts using new specialized EW/Cyber 

hardware approaches that no other DoD group is currently investigating. It will broadly benefit 

the DoD and the national defense contractor industrial basco (Army, RDT &E, Line #53, 

Advanced Tactical Computer Science and Sensor Technology) 

Secure/Covert Wireless Network Program 

The DoD has requirements across all Services for new secure, short range, wireless combat 

networking technologies. Such a technology would have wide-ranging, multi-Service 

application to the DoD. For example, Special Forces operators utilize a collection of equipment 

connected by many wires. Other needs include reducing the wires onboard aircraft and vehicles 

and replacing them with this new secure wireless technology. This would save many millions of 

dollars of operation & maintenance costs for the Government, every year. Still other 

applications are covert communications, intra-team networking, and intra-site networking. The 

Air Force's Secure/Covert Wireless Network Program is an on-going effort. This R&D Program 

is will eliminate the cables from Special Forces operators, and replace them with new 

secure/covert wireless transceivers that are small form factor. Future goals of the Program are to 

network the sensors onboard aircraft to reduce the operational costs. Many other applications are 

envisioned. The impact of this new tcchnology is broad based across the entire DoD and the 

federal government. There is great potential for commercial spin-offs as well to the nation's 

commercial wireless networking markets. If the Committee recommends that the DoD more 

strongly support this Program, it can accelerate development of a short range, covert wireless 

networking technology that will greatly enhance the operations o[all Services of the DoD. (Air 

Force, RDT&E, Line #10 Conventional Munitions) 

Command, Control, Communications, Computers, Intelligence, Surveillance, and 

Reconnaissance Test and Repair 

Tobyhanna Anny Depot is the only DoD depot dedicated to C4ISR test and repair for the joint 

warfighter, White House Communications Agency, and NSA. Much of the equipment currently 

being used for this work is outdated, costing taxpayers millions of dollars to maintain obsolete 

equipment and limiting thc effectiveness and efficiency of DoD's test and repair work. If the 

Committee recommends that the DoD more strongly support this program, it will enable DoD to 

recapitalize and refresh this Tcst & Measurement Equipment, which would save taxpayer money 

and increase the C41SR readiness level, and create a future capability to refresh at the modular 

level. (Army, Working Capital Fund, Industrial Operations) 

Highly Integrated Photonics 

The Navy has been investing in Highly Integrated Photonics (HIP) technology, which will 

provide for next-generation network architectures and processing capabilities in E6B Airborne 
70 

Strategic Command and Control Aircraft and similar advanced platfonns while dramatically 

cutting purchase and lifecycle costs. HIP can be readily be adapted across Naval and 

Department of DeJ(mse platfonns and data centers at marginal cost. The key integrated chip 

components for avionics networks create a common optical backplane of nearly unlimited 

growth capacity to supersede existing point-to-point data links, which use expensive copper and 

multimode fiber architectures. Ifthe Committee recommends that the DoD more strongly 

suppOli this Program, it can achieve advancements in optical links in semiconductors leading to 

tremendous increases in information transfer onboard military platfonns and reduction of land 

based data centers, saving substantial energy resources. (Navy, RDT&E, Line #30 Aircraft 

Systems) 

Hazing in the Military 

In recent years, there have been a number of reports of hazing in the military, about which the 

public and Members of Congress are gravely concerned. Hazing is inconsistent with the values 

of the military, and such behavior should not be tolerated within the military. I thank you for 

including a provision in the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2013 requiring 

the Secretary of Defense to report on efforts that the Services are undertaking to better report 

incidents of hazing and to discipline service members involved in such incidents, and I ask that 

you review this repOli closely when you receive it and that the NDAA for Fiscal Year 2014 

reflect its findings. (Office of the Secretary of Defense) 

Economic Adjnstment 

The mission of the Office of Economic Adjustment (OEA) is to assist communities impacted by 

DoD program changes by helping those communities to develop comprehensive strategies to 

adjust to events like the closures of bases and the transfer orthose facilities to local control, and 

we greatly appreciate the assistance OEA has provided for this purpose to communities 

nationwide. Before many of these facilities can be put to beneficial use, however, they require 

extensive infrastructure improvements and remediation, including the removal of abandoned 

structures and the cleanup of toxic materials. While much has been accomplished on these 

cleanup and reuse efforts, in a number of instances the work has moved at such a slow pace that 

the communities in which these tacilities are located remain without the full benefit of the use 

and economic redevelopment of these facilities. If the Committee recommends that the DoD 

allow the OEA to award grants to the local governments and the private, nonprofit and 

educational organizations that are now responsible for these propeliies, it would accelerate the 

remediation and reuse activities and allow these properties to be put to full beneficial use. 

(Defense-wide, Operations and Maintenance) 

Individual Soldier Power Systems 

Individual Soldier Power Systems (SPSs) enable dismounted Soldiers and squads to execute their 

missions with significantly less battery weight and enable longer missions without a daily unit 

re-supply of batteries. These power solutions include, but are not limited to, individual Soldier 

worn systems, integrated power vests, wireless power technology, and small unit charger/power 

supplies intended for use in the most austere operating environments. A portable power system 

will equip the Squad with power to the forward edge. Soldier portable power platforms reduce 

the weight and logistical risk and burden associated with moving fuel and primary (disposable) 

batteries. By using renewable energy and power scavenging technology, Infantry Squads will be 
71 

able to operate independently for longer durations without being tethered to a large generator, 

vehicle, or supply train. If the Committee recommends that the DoD more strongly support this 

Program, it can accelerate the work to develop, test, and deploy soldier portable renewable 

energy solutions such as portable chargers and power scavenging technology capable of 

supporting the variety of batteries used in the tactical fonnations. (Army, RDT&E, Line #113 

Soldier Systems - Warrior DemNa!) 

Trusted Foundry Program 

The DoD Trusted Foundry Program was initiated in 2004 to ensure that mission-critical national 

defense systems have access to leading-edge integrated circuits from secure, domestic sources. 

While it the program has more than 50 accredited suppliers, in practice work is concentrated 

among a limited number of suppliers, which could jeopardize the dependable, continuous longterm access to trusted mission critical semiconductors. The Committee can help ensure the 

health of the program by recommending that DoD take steps to promote competition within the 

Trusted Foundry Program. (Defense-wide, RDT&E, Line #53 Advanced Technology 

Development, Microelectronics Development and Support, Trusted Foundry) 

Hybrid Airship Development 

The recently-completed Project Pelican demonstrated that it is possible to overcome previous 

challenges to hybrid airship development. Most importantly, the technology in Pelican allows an 

airship to take off and land, as well as moderate altitude in flight, without taking on and 

unloading ballast, or releasing helium (which cannot then be recaptured) in night. Pelican 

demonstrated a technology known as control of static heaviness (COSH) that allows for an 

airship to moderate its buoyancy through increasing and decreasing the pressure of the helium 

needed for lift, without jettisoning ballast or helium. An Advanced Demonstrator was 

constructed and was tested in January 20]3. It met ofthe objectives set at the onset ofthe 

program and was given a technical readiness level of6-7 by NASA Ames. If the Committee 

recommends that DoD more strongly support his program, we can build on the successes ofthe 

Project Pelican by developing a prototype vehicle that can carry approximately 60-70 tons, a step 

towards a vehicle that can lift several hundreds of tons. (Air Force, RDT&E, Line #5 Air Vehicle 

Technologies) 

Thank you for your thoughtful consideration of these important priorities. 
72 

Testimony of Darrell Iss a 

Chainnan, House Oversight and Government Reform Committee 

House Anned Services Committee Hearing 

2014 National Defense Authorization Act 

May 8, 2013 
73 

Mr. Chairman, ranking member Smith, thank you for this opportunity to discuss the 

Federal Information Technology Acquisition Reform Act, or FITARA. FITARA is a major 

Government-wide information technology acquisition reform bill recently reported from my 

committee by unanimous voice vote. Although FIT ARA does not directly amend Title 10, the 

Department of Defense is an enormous user of the government-wide acquisition resources that 

are at the heart ofthe FITARA legislation. I believe the bill would therefore significantly 

enhance the Department's acquisition capabilities. 

Major acquisition reforms have often advanced as part of the National Defense 

Authorization Act. In fact, the original Clinger-Cohen legislation that FIT ARA updates was 

enacted as Sections D and E of the National Defense Authorization Act in 1996. 

HT ARA is the outgrowth of oversight by the Committee on Oversight and Government 

Reform concerning the means and methods by which the federal government acquires a critical 

resource - those IT systems essential to its operation. Starting in the 11th Congress 1

, we began a 

detailed inquiry into the organizational structures and processes that continue to impede the 

implementation of this critical infrastructure. 

IT is indeed a critical pathway to efficient and responsive government. Inforn1ation 

technology plays a pivotal role in the efficient operation of government. Without modern IT 

systems, government is incapable of providing basic services, cUliailing waste, fraud and abuse 

or managing internal operations. 

These failures directly impact progress towards improving citizen services and 

conducting effective oversight. Approximately $80 billion is spent annually by the Federal 

Government on information technology, and these expenditures impact the entire $3.5 trillion 

dollars of annual federal outlays. For example, without state-of-the-art IT-- and the oversight 

I Starting in the 112''' Congress, the Oversight and Government Reform Committee began a detailed reexamination 

of the basic framework by which the government acquires and deploys IT assets. OUf oversight hearings confirmed 

that despite spending more than $600 billion over the past decade, too oftcn federal information technology (IT) 

investments run over budget, behind schedule, or never deliver on the promised solution or functionality. Indeed, 

some industry experts have estimated that as much as 25 percent of the annual $80 billion spent on IT is attributable 

to mismanaged or duplicative JT investments. 

2 
74 

capability it brings --the Government cannot tackle the $108 billion lost to improper payments in 

fiscal year 2012 alone. 2 In tenns of potential cost savings to be had in this area, some in industry 

have estimated that more than one trillion dollars could be saved over the next decade if the 

Government adopted the "proven" IT best practices currently in use by the private sector.] 

The existing legal framework for IT acquisition and deployment is now 17 years 01d4

, a 

virtual eternity in terms of the evolution of IT technology. While our Government stands by, 

industry is experiencing tectonic shifts in IT, such as the transition to cloud computing; the 

shared services model ofIT delivery; and the need for data center optimization. Although modest 

revisions have been made to the procedures used to acquire and deploy modern IT, increasingly 

the management structure and acquisition procedures currently in place are causing the 

Government to fall further behind. 

The Federal Information Technology Acquisition Reform Act (FIT ARA) addresses this 

rapidly changing landscape by addressing key underlying issues. First, it creates a clear line of 

responsibility, authority, and accountability over IT investment and management decisions 

within each agency. 

Second, it creates an operational framework to drastically enhance government's ability 

to procure commonly-used IT faster, cheaper, and smarter. The majority of IT needs such as 

infrastructure or back office systems and applications are common throughout the Government 

and could be met by commercially-available solutions. A meaningful IT transfonnation must 

target such common and expensive problems. 

Third, it strengthens the IT acquisition workforce. No matter how many laws we pass, 

the effectiveness of our federal acquisition system ultimately depends on a vital human 

2 For example, without state-of-the-art IT and the oversight capability it brings, the Government cannot tackle the 

$108 billion lost to improper payments in fiscal year 2012 alone. 2 In fiscal year 2012, federal agencies reported a 

government-wide improper payment rate of 4.35%. 

Source: http://\vww-.paymentaccuracv.goviabout-improper-payments 

3 !tOne Trillion Reasons." The 

4 The Clinger-Cohen Act of 1996 (P.L. 104-106) 

3 
75 

component ~ the acquisition workforce. Each failed IT procurement a better-trained acquisition 

professional manages to prevent will save the taxpayers tens of millions of dollars. If IT contract 

overspending is reduced just one percent, taxpayers will save more than $800 million each year. 

Title I of FIT ARA increases the responsibility, authority, and accountability of the Chief 

Information Officer (CrO) for each ofthe major civilian federal agencies by providing them with 

budget and personnel-related authority over IT investments within the entire agency. 

Currently, CIOs in most agencies lack the necessary over how the agency's IT budget is 

allocated and executed. Many large federated agencies such as Department of Homeland 

Security or Department of Commerce have numerous CIOs at their component organizations 

with little or no accountability to the central agency CIO. 5 

As a result, the primary role of agency cros has been typically limited to policymaking 

and infrastructure maintenance. An agency CIO should playa central role in all aspects onT 

within the entire agency. CIOs must be able to design and deliver transformational enterprisewide IT solutions that support the mission and business function while overcoming bureaucratic 

impediments and parochialism. With increased stature and authority, each CIO can be held 

accountable for success Of failure of the agency's overall IT management. As an extension of 

this intra-agency leadership, FITARA expands the role of the CIO Council to encompass a more 

active role in cross-agency shared services and collaboration. 

Title II ofFITARA is designed to optimize the usage and efficiency offederal data 

centers. As of September 2011,24 CFO Act agencies had identified almost 2,900 data centers. 6 

Operating such a large number of centers is a significant cost to the federal government, 

including hardware, software, real estate, and cooling costs. According to the Environmental 

Protection Agency, the electricity cost alone is about $450 million annually.7 My committee 

5 According to the research conducted by the Congressional Research Service (CRS). there arc currently more than 

240 CIOs in 24 major departments and agencies that are subject to the Chief Financial Officers Act. The 

Department ofTransp0l1ation alone has 35 CIOs. 

6 GAO. "DATA CENTER CONSOLIDATION: Agencies Making Progress on Efforts. but Inventories and Plans 

Need to Be Completed"; GAO-12-742 (Washington, D.C.: July 2012). 

'Ibid. p2. 

4 
76 

recognizes that there is an on-going Administration initiative to consolidate data centers. 8 

FITARA requires such initiative to place greater emphasis on performance and savings, rather 

than merely focusing on the number of data centers closed or consolidated. 

FITARA's use of the term "optimization," rather than "consolidation" is used to make 

this important distinction. As required in the bill, there should be appropriate consideration of 

utilizing commercially owned data centers where appropriate. The government IT managers 

must evolve from the mindset ofIT hardware ownership to outcome-based citizen service 

delivery. 

Title II[ of FITARA aims to eliminate wasteful duplication in IT assets, processes, and 

contracts. Unnecessary duplications and unaccounted or underutilized IT assets cost both the 

government and the industry money and administrative effort. This not only redirects resources 

away from other needed investments, it hampers the adoption of new and innovative solutions. 

The bill requires an inventory of IT assets with particular focus on software licenses. It directs 

the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) to reshape government web strategy to facilitate 

the creative use of government data by the public. I recognize that commercial cloud computing 

services may offer a critical part of such consideration. The flexibility offered by cloud 

technology necessitates appropriate re-consideration of how Government should consumc and 

pay for needed software and services while keeping pace with technology upgrades. 

Title IV of FIT ARA focuses on acquisition operations. Recognizing that there currently 

is and will continue be a severe shOItage of skilled [T acquisition personnel in the foreseeable 

future,9 the Government must bettcr leverage its current IT acquisition capahilities while 

81n 2010, the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) launched the Federal Data Center Consolidation Initiative 

(FDCCI), a Government-wide effort to consolidate data centers. 

9 Testimony of Daniel I. Gordon, Associate Dean for Government Procurement Law Studies, the George 

Washington University Law School and Stan Soloway. President & CEO, Professional Services Council. before the 

House Committee on Oversight & Government Reform, February 27, 2013. 

5 
77 

strengthening the IT acquisition workforce. Experts from both Government and industry have 

pointed out that particular weakness exists in IT program management. 10 

Almost all major IT acquisition failures stem from poorly drafted requirements 11 and 

federal agencies often pursue individualized approach for common problems, without building 

upon collective knowledge and experiences. Mandatory centralized acquisition, however, may 

hamper a specific agency's need to support its mission and inappropriately dilute its ownership 

of its own acquisition decisions. Therefore, the bill takes a balanced approach by creating 

central acquisition resources and capabilities for common IT requirements that individual 

agencies are allowed the choice to utilize. 

The most notable IT waste and duplication exists in the area of infrastructure and 

common IT systems and business applications. 12 For example, in the fiscal year 20 II budget 

submissions, agencies reported 622 separate investments or $2.4 billion in human resource 

management systems, and 580 investments or $2.7 billion in financial management systems. 13 

Considering most of these back office systems perform similar functions, there are opportunities 

to consolidate them into smaller, manageable numbers within each major agency, and even share 

services across multiple agencies. 14 

FITARA aims to eliminate unnecessary duplication and streamline IT acquisitions by 

first targeting numerous, commonly-used IT commodity-like investments such as these. 

FITARA requires establishment of a Federal Infrastructure and Common Application 

III Ibid. Also see testimony of Richard A. Spires, ChiefInformation Officer, U.S. Department of Homeland 

Security, before the House Committee on Oversight & Government Reform, February 27,2013. 

11 GAO, "INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY: Critical Factors Underlying Successful Major Acquisitions"; October 

2011. 

12 See OMB M-J3-09. "Fiscal Year 2013 PortfolioStat Guidance: Strengthening Federal IT Portfolio Management." 

This is referred to as "commodity IT" by OMB. !!Commodity IT' was defined in the memorandum as including 

services such as. "IT infrastructure (data centers, networks, desktop computers and mobile devices); enterprise IT 

systems (email, collaboration tools, identity and access management. security, and web infrastructure); and business 

systems (finance, human resources, and other administrative functions)." 

13 Testimony of David A. Powner, Director, Information Technology Management Issues, GAO, Before the 

Committee on Oversight and Government Reform. House of Representatives. January 22. 2013. 

"Ibid. 

6 
78 

Collaboration Center (Collaboration Center) to serve as a focal point for the program and 

technical expertise necessary for coordinated IT acquisition best practices. In developing such 

common requirements, it is imperative that the Collaboration Center keep its focus on "common" 

-- the so-called 80 percent solution required by all agencies -- and not non-standard or noncommercial features desired by each individual agency. This Center will be funded by existing 

interagency acquisition fees, without the need for any additional appropriation or agency 

expense. 

With respect to the formation of specific contracts for commonly-needed IT, FIT ARA 

recognizes that individual agency contracting personnel often lacks the relevant experience and 

knowledge of market conditions to get the best value for taxpayer dollars. FIT ARA therefore 

provides for OMB to designate fee-for-service Assisted Acquisition Centers of Excellence 

(AACEs) to promote expedient, best value procurement practices. By engaging in repeated 

acquisitions of the same basic IT requirement, the contracting personnel in the AACEs will 

develop a keen acquisition expertise and market awareness that can beneJit multiple agencies and 

promote demand aggregation where possible and appropriate. 

The Committee expects that AACEs will ultimately be able to expedite the acquisition 

cycle for common IT requirements to a matter of months rather than years. When used properly, 

an individual agency should be able to obtain a well-constructed IT requirement "template" from 

the Collaboration Center, customize to its specific needs, and then avail itself of expert 

contracting support from an AACE. This would enable the agency to fulfill its purchasing need 

by leveraging acquisition expertise and resources it does not alone possess .. 

Between fiscal years 2002 and 2012, acquisition spending by the federal government 

expanded by 95 percent, from $264 billion to close to $5 14 billion. While contract spending has 

risen dramatically, the number of acquisition professionals did not keep pace. Moreover, a 

significant portion of the current acquisition workforce will be eligible to retire over the next 

decade. Statistics from the Office of Personnel Management show that there are seven times as 

7 
79 

many IT workers in government over 50 as under 30 -- the diametric opposite orthe commercial 

worldY 

The complexities and challenges in rebuilding the acquisition workforce under the 

current budget-constrained environment make an acquisition workforce plan essential. FITARA 

directs OMB to prepare and implement a 5-year strategic plan, to be accompanied by annual 

implementation reports to Congress and GAO verification. 

Title V of FIT ARA makes additional reforms to improve acquisition practices and 

transparency. The Committee reaffirms that government IT managers must maintain technology 

neutrality and should fairly consider open source solutions, alongside proprietary ones, when 

making procurement decisions. I agree with the report language accompanying the FY 2009 

National Defense Authorization Act that there are many instances where the use of open source 

software and its attendant business model would greatly benefit the Government while 

promoting transparency and engagement with and by the public. 

Mr. Chairman, we believe that FIT ARA will significantly advance the effective, timely 

and cost-effective adoption of emerging IT capabilities by the federal government. While we 

may never reach the day when the Government is called "state-of-the-art," at least we can ensure 

that it is not left behind as a technology backwater in the face of tectonic shifts in the IT 

landscape. 

Thank you for providing me the opportunity to testiry, and I look forward to discussions 

with this Committee concerning the inclusion ofFlTARA in the 2014 National Defense 

Authorization Act. 

"Ibid. Testimony of Stan Soloway. 

8 
80 

Congressman Marsha Blackburn 

House Armed Services Committee: 

Member Day 

Opening Statement 

May 8,2013 

Chairman McKeon, Ranking Member Smith, and 

Members of the Committee, thank you for allowing 

me to testify this afternoon. 

As you may know I represent the Seventh 

Congressional District of Tennessee which is home 

to the brave men and women of Ft. Campbell. 

Ft. Campbell is home to the storied 101 st Airborne, 

the 5th Special Forces Group and the Army's 160th 

Special Operations Aviation Regiment which piloted 

Navy SEAL Team Six during the raid on Osama Bin 

Laden. 

Each soldier who calls Ft. Campbell home has gone 

through some of the most intensive training on the 

planet which pushed their minds and bodies to their 

physical limits. In the end, those who made the cut 
81 

have truly earned the right to be part of our United 

States military and serve on the frontlines in the 

fight against global terrorism. 

However due to the extreme cuts to our military 

under Sequestration some of the military readiness 

programs that they depend upon are in jeopardy of 

facing cuts. 

One program that I am especially concerned about is 

the Flying Hour Program. This vital program 

provides aviation training resources for individual 

crewmembers and units according to approved 

aviation training strategies. In addition, it also 

provides individual and collective proficiency in 

support of ongoing combat and non-combat air 

operations. 

F or aviation units like the 101 st Airborne, this 

training is not only vital to mission success but to 

the safety of our soldiers. 

As a result of sequestration, the Army has already 

begun curtailing training, cancelling training center 

rotations, ending collective training above the 
82 

platoon level except for the next-to-deploy units, 

reducing flying hours, leaving many units 

unprepared for possible contingencies both at home 

and abroad. 

Many military specialties, such as pilots, are acutely 

affected, with many set to lose their currency in a 

matter of months. 

The Army could have to cut 37,000 flying hours 

from aviation training creating a shortfall of over 

500 aviators just this year. 

I urge the House Armed Services Committee to pay 

close attention to restoring the Flying Hour 

Programs to their full capacity in FY 14. 

Without it, vital national security assets like the 

101 st Airborne will find their important mission at 

risk. More importantly, the lives of the soldiers we 

count on to deploy in our defense will be put at 

much greater risk. 

I thank the committee again for allowing me to 

testify this morning and hope that we can work 
83 

together to protect this vital program to the Ft. 

Campbell community. 
84 

Rep. Michael Burgess. M.D. NOAA FY14 HASC Testimony 

Good Morning, 

I am writing to request the Committee include clarifying language as part of the FY 2014 

National Defense Authorization Act to assert that certain rehabilitative therapies are 

included as covered services for TRICARE beneficiaries. 

The President's FY 2014 Budget states that it aims to "promote health of service members 

and their families". I applaud the Administration's focus on supporting service-members 

and their families. However, there continues to be inadequacies in the health care services 

provided to our military members and their families. 

Certain physical therapy services have been denied to TRICARE beneficiaries because 

TRICARE has determined the services do not fall within "traditional" physical therapy 

services. Specifically, therapies utilizing tools, such as a horse, have been denied to 

TRICARE beneficiaries because they have been misclassified as "hippotherapy". 

It is crucial that TRICARE provides rehabilitative therapies that are prescribed by a 

patient's physician and included in a patient's individualized plan of care, authorized by his 

or her physical therapist. In the TRICARE Policy Manual, Section 18.2, Chapter 7, 2.1, 

physical therapy is described to include "The treatment by physical means, hydrotherapy, 

heat, or similar modalities, physical agents, bio-mechanical and neuro-physiological 

principles, and devices to relieve pain, restore maximum function, and prevent disabilities 

following disease, injury or loss of a body part." 

Therefore, I would like to formally ask my colleagues on the Committee to include specific 

language in the Fiscal Year 2014 National Defense Authorization Act to allow TRICARE 

beneficiaries to receive therapies that are prescribed by a patient's physician and included 

in a patient's individualized plan of care, authorized by his or her physical therapist, 

including those performed on a balance board, ball, bolster, horse, and bench. 

Thank you for your consideration and your time. 

Sincerely, 

Michael C. Burgess, M.D. 
85 

Rep. Phil Gingrey, M.D. - FY14 HASC Testimony Submission 

May 8, 2013 

Mr. Chairman, as you and the other Members of the House Armed Services Committee work to craft 

the Fiscal Year 2014 National Defense Authorization Act, I want to bring forward an issue of critical 

importance to the safety of our troops in theater. 

Over the past decade, while many servicemen and women have survived an initial ballistic or blast 

event in a combat or combat support vehicle, many of them ultimately sacrificed their lives due to 

post-event fire. Since 2003, according to U.S. Army reports, over 800 military burn casualties have 

occurred in support of Overseas Contingency Operations. This is simply unacceptable when 

technologies are available today and in development - that can prevent these horrendous 

occurrences. 

Unfortunately, in addition to physical and psychological trauma that is associated with post-event fires, 

thennal injuries cause significant impact ranging from loss of tactical freedom of maneuver, and there 

is a subsequent negative ramifications on recruitment and retention efforts, equipment losses, and the 

aggregate cost to the military, particularly when the consequences of these events could be avoided. 

The aviation community adopted standards and specifications (such as MIL-DTL-27422) to define 

survivability that have successtully preventcd thermal industries. I would ask thc Committee to 

consider similar measures department wide through Thermal Injury Prevention Strategies (TIPS). 

TIPS will model its focus on thermal injuries as other etIorts have focused on Post-Traumatic Stress 

Disorder (PTSD) and Traumatic Brain Injury (TBI). Much like the consequences from these 

conditions, the problems associated with Thermal Injury are intolerable to the individual, the 

Department of Defense (DOD), and our country. 

This is why I am making this request of the Committee for language to be included in the FYl4 

NOAA. Survivability enhancements have been applied to aviation and ground platfonns to protect our 

troops from injury and deaths due to fires. Technologies like fuel containment, fire retardants, fire 

suppression, fire prevention, and personal fire protection can improve occupant safety and the chances 

for vehicle survivability. 

Accordingly, I would ask the Committee to direct the DOD to establish threshold and objective 

survivability requirements and standards for TIPS on ground platforms using demonstrations and 

analysis to ensure that in otherwise humanly survivable events, lives are not lost to post-event fires. 

This should include, but not be limited to: fuel containment, tire retardants, tire suppression, and 

personal protection. Furthermore, DOD must be compelled to repOli back to all Congressional 

Committees with a plan for implementation of TIPS requirements and standards into ground platforms 

within six months of enactment of the FY 14 NOAA. 

Mr. Chairman, we owe that to the men and women who put themselves in hann's way to defend our 

freedom. Thank you for your consideration. 
86 

Statement for the Record 

Rep. Devin Nunes 

Hearing before the House Armed Services Committee 

U.S. House of Representatives 

On 

The FY14 National Defense Authorization Act 

May 8, 2013 

Chairman McKeon and Ranking Member Smith, 

Thank you lor this opportunity to testify. 

Before I begin, T'd like to submit this letter for the record, signed by myself and five other 

congressmen, raising concerns about the Air Force's decision to draw down forces at Lajes Field 

on Terceira Island. 

Lajes has an unparalleled strategic value. Located on the Azores island chain between Europe 

and the United States, it is like the Hawaii of the Atlantic Ocean - only closer to the American 

mainland. The islands belong to Portugal, a strong U.S. ally since World War II that has never 

prevented us from conducting operational missions. 

The base at this crucial location has bolstered the United States' control of the Atlantic since 

World War II, proving critical to our tracking of Soviet submarines during the Cold War. It 

allows for U.S. access to Europe, the Middle East, and western and sub-Saharan Africa, and 

enables the expeditionary movement of warfighters, aircraft, ships, and global communications 

to AFRICOM and CENTCOM's joint, coalition, and NATO operations. 

It is also a vital site for countering a major regional threat, al-Qaeda in the Islamic Maghreb, 

which has known ties to al-Qaeda in the Arabian Peninsula and other violent groups. In fact, 

from Lajes, ten of the eighteen African countries that hold State Department Travel Warnings 

can be reached within six hours. Further, Lajes is well-positioned to act as a logistical hub not 

only for the Defense Department, but also for USAID, the State Department, and other agencies. 

Having engaged with Portuguese officials for years on the issue of Lajes, I bring it to your 

attention today due to the dire consequences of the decision to draw down at the base. Our 

strategic planners may believe we can leave a mere skeletal operation at the base and retain 

access there, but in reality, this decision means a total end to the U.S. presence at Lajes. Scaling 

back the base according to current plans will severely impact the Azorean economy, forcing 

Portugal to find a new tenant for the site. In light of the weak Portuguese economy, we do not 

want to make Azoreans choose between their loyalty to the United States and their ability to feed 

their families. 

While our strategic planners may not want to be in the Azores ar1ymore, leaders of other nations 

feel differently. Several high ranking Chinese officials have visited the Azores in recent years, 
87 

culminating in a June 2012 visit to Tcrceira by then-Premier Wen Jiabao. The Chinese did not 

divulge what all these delegates were doing there, but I can assure you they weren't sipping port 

and enjoying the pleasant climate. 

In the wake of our decision to wind down Lajes, we cannot assume the Portuguese will exclude 

China or other bad actors from the site simply out of allegiance to the U.S.; the recent decision to 

send 500 U.S. Marines to Moron, Spain - a contingent that would havc much morc flexibility at 

the logistics hub ofLajes - could easily be interpreted as a calculated insult to our Portuguese 

friends. 

I fully understand the budgetary reaJity we face. However, as we reduce our European footprint 

comprising 110,000 personnel and twenty-nine military installations - we need to base our 

decisions on each site's global strategic value and tactical and strategic l1exibility. It would cost 

billions to build a base like Lajes today, and if our strategic planners insist on giving up 

something this vital, then at the very least, this committee should encourage the creation of a 

pilot program to privatize its operations, to keep them running round-the-clock, and to guarantee 

2417 access to the site for TRANSCOM. 

In conclusion, the retention ofLajes was not an issue for seventy years because prior planners 

never contemplated surrendering something so crucial to U.S. interests. This committee must 

understand that the decision to cut the base's operations means closing the site and losing our 

access there. I leave this committee with three questions: 

1. lfwe withdraw trom Lajes, should we assume that Chinese and Russian submarines will 

suffer some mishap that prevents them from sailing in the Atlantic Ocean? 

2. lfwe withdraw from Lajes, should we assume that sub-Saharan Africa - which has the 

youngest population on Earth and includes countries like Mali, Nigeria, Senegal, GuineaBissau, and others with known al-Qaeda affiliates - will not be used as a training site for 

the next generation of j ihadists? 

3. Finally, I draw your attention to this map and ask an extremely simple question: if the 

U.S. government wants to fulfill its responsibility to protect the United States, its people, 

and its interests, then which of these bases should it deem as having the highest 

geostrategic value? 

Thank you for your time today. I'd be happy to answer any questions you have. 
88 

May 7, 2013 

Chaimmn McKeon and Ranking Member Smith: 

As the Committee begins to draft the Fiscal Year 2014 Defense Authorization bill, I request the 

issue pertaining to the treatment of American citizens carrying out or suspected of acts of terror 

be Iln active part oflhe Committee's dialogue this year, particularly in the wake ofthe Boston 

attacks on 15 April 2013. I submitted testimony to the Committee on this matter last year, and I 

am committed to remaining engaged in a productive pDlicy discussion again. 

In recent years, Members have participated in an animated debate over the lawful arrest and 

dctention of tert'Ol' suspects (Sections 1021 and 1022, p,L, 112-81), with the explicit exclusion of 

United States citizens and individuals arrested on U.S. soiL With each year that passes in this 

post-9!11 era, it becomes more evident that the war against terrorism demands our nation's 

attention and commitment if we are to remain successful in securing our homeland and 

preserving the American way of life. Individuals or lone wolf actors, as well as extremist 

organizations, prove to be bent on altering, at the very least, the rhythm and freedoms of our 

daily lives in the United States. Our federal laws must evolve to reflect the national security 

challenges ofthe 21" century. 

Similar to my position articulated to you in the testimony I submitted during the FY 2013 NDAA 

discussion, I believe the policy conversation we have here in Congtess must advance beyond 

"the lawful arrest and detention of terror suspects." Specifically, ! believe it is critical for the 

Committee to consider ways to modernize current law to ensure the State Dcpattment has the 

latitude to review the actions of an American citizen or naturalized citizens should he or she 

engage in or pnrposefully and materially support hostilities against the United States. 

In October 201 !, r introduced the bipartisan, bicameral Enemy Expatriation Act, I also 

introduced legislation with the same intent in the III th Congress, As you know, current federal 

statute, 8 U.S.C 1481, identifies seven categories of acts tor which U,S, or naturalize'\! citizens 

can lose their citizenship if it is detcrmined they perfonned one ofthose acts "with the iotention 

of relinquishing United States nationality." Examples of acts listed in the statute that would 

trigger this review are: taking an oafh to a foreign Slate, serving in the armed forces of a foreign 

state, or committing acts oftreason. Legislation like the Enemy Expatriation Act would only 

update the current stattl!e first adopted in 1944 to clarify that any person who engages in 

hostilities against the United States whether or not they are formally setving in the armed forces 

of a foreign slate may be reviewed for loss of nationality. The State Department would still need 

to investigate the individual's actions and determine if he or she intended to renounce his or her 
89 

citizenship. The individual could appeal determination in federal court if necessary. The original 

statule was adopted when our Armed Services were engaged with the forces oflmperial Japan 

and Nazi Gennany. Federal law should reflect the global. asynm,etric conflict the United Slates 

faces today. 

For several years leading up to his death, the late Anw1\l' al-Awlaki, an American citizen, incited 

the violent overthrow of the United States and worked within terrorist networka to coordinate 

attacks against the American people. His revolting actions served as the impetus for my pursuit 

of this revision of the law. 

Now today, the Boston attacks are fresh in the minds of the American people and "'ill forever 

impact the families of those who lost loved ones and the hundreds of victims de~ling with life 

altering injuries. The deadly explosions unleashed at the Boston Marathon on runners, their 

families and spectators should be a stark reminder to lawmakers, as well as the general American 

public, that radicalized individuals _. whether they are Americans acting as lone wolves or 

connected with an extremist group - are committed to bringing pain and suffering to iImocent bistanders, families and communities. 

The war on lerror will continue despite the deaths of Anwar al-Awlaki and Osama Bin Laden. 

With that, we must remain dedicated to combating extremism - willing to ask the difficnlt 

questions and analyzing bow our federal laws rightfully protect our COlllltry and the American 

people against the threats we face today. 

lbank you, once 

framework of the 

Charles W. Dent 

Member of Congress 

for carefully considering engaging in this policy discussion within the 

2014 Defense Authorization bilL 
90 

Written Testimony of the Honorable AI Green 

Hearing before the House Armed Services Committee 

Wednesday May 8, 2013 

Chairman McKeon, Ranking Member Adam Smith, and Members of the 

Committee, thank you for the opportunity to testifY today on the priorities that 

should be considered in the FY 2014 National Defense Authorization Act 

(NOAA). 

The Housing Assistance for Veterans Act of 2013 (HAVEN Act) aims to modifY 

and rehabilitate the homes of low-income veterans and veterans with disabilities. 

The HAVEN Act was included in the FY 2013 Senate NOAA but was removed in 

conference. This initiative is important as the Department of Veterans Affairs 

estimates that there are 22.2 million veterans in our country. In addition, according 

to the 2010 American Community Survey, 4.3 million veteran homeowners have 

disabilities and 2.7 million of our veterans are elderly. 

Finally, many of those veterans who have disabilities and disproportionate housing 

costs are either at risk of becoming homeless, or are already experiencing 

homelessness. 
91 

What the bill does: 

This bill authorizes the Secretary of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) to 

establish a pilot program that provides grants to nonprofit organizations to 

rehabilitate and modifY homes of disabled and low-income veterans. The bill has a 

strong outreach component since it is administered through HUD, and veterans 

service organizations that have experience working with veterans. This program is 

competitive and when applying, organizations will need to detail their plans for 

working with VA and veterans service organizations to identifY veterans who can 

benetit from the program. 

Examples of the work to be done: 

Examples of work that can be done under this bill include: installation of 

wheelchair ramps, bathroom reconfiguration, or other modifications that the 

veteran requires as a result of their disability. Organizations will be required to 

provide matching funds of no less than 50 percent of the grant award; and the 

repairs or adaptations will be provided at either no cost or at very low cost to the 

veteran. 

Authorization: 

To carry out this Act, $4,000,000 will be authorized for each of the fiscal years 

from 2013 through 2017. 
92 

How it complements existing programs: 

The HAVEN Act complements other existing federal programs as it provides for 

veterans who are not eligible for existing VA programs and thus, have fallen 

through the cracks. Under the HAVEN Act, the definition of disability considers 

the physical and mental limitations that veterans may face, regardless of whether 

the limitations are connected to the veteran's service. 

Goal of the Program: 

The goal of the HAVEN Act is to provide sustainable housing modifications for 

veterans who currently do not qualily for existing VA programs and cannot receive 

assistance even if they have dedicated their lives in service of their country. The 

HA VEN Act brings awareness to the needs of veterans by allowing more 

organizations to become involved in the cause of housing for veterans. 

Importance ofthe bill and steps taken in the last Congress: 

This bill is supported by veterans organizations like Rebuilding Together and Vets 

First. This bill had bipartisan support in the 112th Congress, passed the House by a 

voice vote, and was added to the FY 2013 National Defense Authorization Act. 

However, it was taken out of the FY 2013 National Defense Authorization Act 

during the conference committee. Chairman McKeon, Ranking Member Smith, we 

can all agree that helping our veterans is the right thing to do. We know that 
93 

veterans do not always seek out help, even when they need it. Thus, helping these 

low-income and disabled veterans, by repairing their homes before they come too 

dilapidated, is smart policy that can help to keep veterans self-sufficient and 

independent. 
94 

House Armed Services Committee 

National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2014 

Wednesday, May 8, 2013 

2118 Rayburn House Office Building 

Statement for the Record by Congresswoman Cathy McMorris Rodgers 

I appreciate the opportunity to submit testimony to the House Armed Services Committee. While 

America stands at a crossroads, our commitment to freedom, security, and to our service men and 

women and their families who have and continue to protect our nation must remain. As such, the 

National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2014 must continue to further these commitments 

despite the fiscal challenges ahead. 

Afghanistan and the Middle East along with turmoil in Asia-Pacific region and Africa demonstrate 

the need to ensure that our total force has the tools they need to remain successful. This includes support 

for the National Guard members and Reservists who play an instrumental role in our nation's military 

strategy. We also need to translate these successes here at home strengthening TRICARE, increasing 

support for spouses and children, and providing support to our veterans who have honorably served. 

In my district, there is no better example of these contributions and needs than Fairchild Air Force Base. 

Home to more than 4,700 military members and 1, 100 civilian personnel and their families, Fairchild 

houses the Air Foree's 920d Air Refueling Wing and the Washington Air National Guard's 141" Air 

Refueling Wing. As such, Fairchild is vital to our nation's aerial refueling effort and a key component to 

the Air Force achieving global-level reach. Additionally, over time, the aviation missions at Fairchild 

have been complemented by the development of the Air Force Survival, Evasion, Resistance and Escape 

(SERE) school and the Joint Personnel Recovery Center. 

Recently, I have had the privilege of meeting with members of Fairchild Air Force Base, military and 

community stakeholders to discuss future needs. In the course of these meetings, the following key 

issues have been emphasized. 

First, the importance of authorizing funding for the KC-46A refueling tanker program. The Air Force 

currently maintains two refueling tankers, the KC-135 and KC-IO. A recent inventory conducted by Air 

Mobility Command reveals that the newest of the 395 KC-135 were delivered to the Air Force in 1965, 

nearly jifty years ago. We know that refueling tankers play an integral role in our military operations, 

allowing the Air Force to achieve global-reach, and asking the current tanker fleet to support a 21" 

century defense operation is inappropriate. 

While the Air Force and the Department of Defense will continue to operate in a restrained fiscal 

climate for the upcoming fiscal year, the importance of funding key modernization programs cannot be 

understated. The KC-46A refueling tanker program is the Air Force's first step to recapitalize the aging 

KC-135 fleet. It is the Air Force's number one acquisition program. Additionally, the Air Force has 

worked closely with the contractor to ensure that the program remains on schedule and the fixed-price 

incentive firm contract continues to be a model of a sound fiscal approach to an acquisition program of 

this magnitude. Therefore, I urge the Committee to authorize funding for this program at a sustainable 
95 

level in the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2014 to ensure that our air mobility 

operations remain superior. 

Second, the importance of maintaining the Air National Guard (AN G). The ANG has and continues to 

playa critical role in our air operations-particularly as it relates to national security and emergency 

response operations. Members of the AN G have served and continue to serve on the front lines of our 

overseas military operations, at the same time responding to the needs of their local communities. I urge 

the Committee to continue to examine the contribution and cost savings associated with the ANG and 

provide appropriate authorization levels. 

Third, the importance of investing in the Air Force SERE school. The 336th Training Group, located at 

Fairchild Air Force Base, is home to the Air Force's only SERE school. The SERE School offers 22 

ditlerent courses to 20,000 students each year. 

The SERE school also houses the 36th Rescue Flight (36 RQF) which services two purposes. First, the 

36 RQF provides additional training to more than 3,000 students, including live rescue hoist training, 

para drop demonstrations, and combat rescue procedures training for students in the basic Combat 

Survival Course. Additionally, an aircraft and crew arc on stand-by twenty-four hours a day, six days a 

week to provide medical evacuation coverage for students and instructors. 

The 36 RQF also supports the National Search-and-Rescue (SAR) plan by conducting SAR and medical 

evacuation missions in a four state region (Washington, Northern Oregon, Idaho, and Western 

Montana). The unit utilizes the only hoist-equipped aircraft and Night Vision Goggle-qualified aircrews 

in the Inland Northwest. On average, the unit responds to 15-20 calls for assistance each year and has 

been credited with saving over 650 lives since its inception in 1971. I urge the Committee to continue its 

efforts to support the SERE school and the 36 RQF. 

While I recognize the need to reduce costs, I do not believe the reduction should come at the expense of 

maintaining a strong national defense. I appreciate your consideration of these issues. 
96 

WRITTEN TESTIMONY 

CONGRESSWOMAN GWEN MOORE 

"National Defense Priorities from Members for the FY 2014 National Defense 

Authorization Act" 

May 8,2013 

House Armed Services Committee 

Chairman McKeon and Ranking Member Smith, 

Thank you for the opportunity to submit written testimony as your Committee begins its 

work on the FY 2014 National Defense Authorization Aet (NDAA). 

The National Defense Authorization Act provides an opening to consider needed policy 

changes and reforms to help provide for our nation's national defense and support the 

men and women who are the backbone of those efforts. As your Committee begins this 

process, I would urge you to keep in mind the need to continue to address the following 

issues impacting our men and women in uniform. 

Military Sexual Assault 

I applaud the committee for its ongoing work to make sure that the Defense Department 

effectively and aggressively combats sexual assault, prosecuting such crimes when they 

occur, and supporting and assisting victims. Ensuring the safety and protection of our 

men and women in tmiform must remain a priority. 

Yet, we know there is a long way to go before the military truly "gets it" as recent 

episodes demonstrates, inclnding attacks on recruits at basic training at Lackland Air 

Force Base in Texas along with the widely condemned decision by Lt. Gen. Craig 

Franklin, commander of the 3rd Air Force at Ramstein Air Base in Germany, to overturn 

a sexual assault conviction. The Congress and the military must remain committed to 

eradicating this scourge and creating a culture of zero tolerance for such vicious crimes. 

As the Committee weighs the FY 2014 bill, r urge you to consider: 

o Including H.R. 1593, which would amend Title 10, United States Code, to 

improve the prevention of and response to sexual assault in the Armed 

Forces by establishing a Sexual Assault Oversight and Response Council 

and an enhanced Sexual Assault Oversight and Response Office and by 

requiring the appointment of a Director of Military Prosecutions for 

sexual-related offenses committed by a member of the Armed Forces. 
97 

o Including provisions from H.R. 1079 to address the ability of commanders 

to unilaterally and without justification overturn sexual assault convictions 

approved by military courts. 

Benefits Equality for all Military Spouses 

I hope you also share my commitment to doing all that is possible to ensure that no 

military spouses and families are denied benefits that they are entitled to and rightly 

deserve. All military families sacrifice and should be treated equally when it comes to 

the benefits that our nation makes available to them in recognition of that sacrifice. 

With 'Don't Ask, Don't Tell' repealed and while court challenges to the Defense of 

Marriage Act are pending, there is more that Congress can do to ensure that the rights of 

all of our service members and their spouses, regardless of whether they are of the samesex or opposite-sex as the service member, are protected. 

o I would urge the Committee to make military personnel policies and military and 

veterans' benefits available to any marriage recognized by a state, regardless of 

sexual orientation. This change would ensure that in states which do not 

discriminate in their definition of spouses, military spouses are able to have 

access to key benefits, including the military health care program and funding to 

allow that spouse to accompany the servicemember when he or she is assigned to 

a new duty station, which may otherwise be prohibitively expensive. 

Mental Health Care Needs 

o I know improving access of our servicemembers to quality mental health care has 

been a priority for the Committee and I urge you to continue to support existing 

and authorize new, innovative, and effective tools to address the mental health 

needs of our men and women in uniform. 

o I support bills like H.R. 1464 that will boost education efforts about services that 

are available and try to erase the pervasive stigma attached with mental health 

treatment that continues to stymie efforts to improve access. 

o H.R. 1464 would require notice to all members of the Armed Forces, 

beginning with recruit basic training and the initial training of officer 

candidates, about the availability of mental health services, to help 

eliminate perceived stigma associated with seeking and receiving mental 

health services, and to clarify the extent to which information regarding a 

member seeking and receiving mental health services may be disclosed. 

o In providing this information, the Department should be required to take 

all steps to eliminate any stigma associated with seeking and receiving 

mental health services and to promote the use of mental health services on 

a basis comparable to the use of other medical and health services. 
98 

STARBASE 

STARBASE (Science and Technology Academies Reinforcing Basic Aviation and Space 

Exploration) is a program aimed at promoting Science, Technology, Engineering, and 

Mathematics (STEM) education among urban, rural, and disadvantaged elementary 

school students through partnerships with military volunteers who provide them 

instruction and hands on learning. After 23 years of operation building partnerships 

between the military and local communities, the ST ARBASE program-authorized under 

10 U.S.C 2193b-currently has 76 Academies supported by the different branches on 

military installations in 40 states, the District of Columbia, and Puerto Rico. 

In 2012, DoD ST ARBASE employed 367 personnel and served 2,659 classrooms of 

students in 365 school district across the Nation. In its FY 20t3 request, the 

Administration noted that "The DoD STARBASE Program is a productive investment in 

the future of our youth and will help build and enlarge the taJent pool of potential workers 

needed to support the DoD workforce consisting of civilian and military personnel." 

This successful partnership has resulted in a waiting list of installations seeking to join 

the program and open up new learning opportunities for thousands of young children. 

The partnership with the military is a key component of this program. Given its success, I 

urge the Committee to continue to support this program in the FY 2014 NDAA and to 

reject proposals to remove this program from the Defense Department. 

I thank you again for your consideration of these request and all you do for our men and 

women in uniform and their families. 
99 

Testimony for National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2014 

Congressman Gus M. Bilirakis (FL-12) 

May 7, 2013 

Chail111an McKeon and Ranking Member Smith, thank you for taking the time to solicit and 

consider the testimonies of you fellow members of Congress as you begin considering the 

National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2014. The United States' Al111ed Services 

are the preeminent military forces in the world and this bill is crucial for the safety and security 

of American citizens. 

As the Vice-Chair ofthe House Veterans Affairs Committee, [am constantly in awe of the 

members of our Armed Forces and their work as they protect the freedoms that Americans enjoy. 

It is critical that we support these men and women and their families while they serve and I 

support military pay raises that take into account inflation and maintain living standards. 

There are two pieces of legislation that T have introduced and believe should be taken into 

consideration by the Committee. The first is H.R. 164, "To amend title 10, United States Code, 

to permit veterans who have a service-connected, permanent disability rated as total to travel on 

military aircraft in the same manner and to the same extent as retired members of the Anned 

Forces entitled to such travel." This legislation would allow veterans with service related 

disabilities rated as "total" to utilize no-cost, space-available travel on DoD aircraft. These 

veterans have bravely served our country and have made enormous personal sacrifices that 

follow them in their daily lives. 

Space-A travel is a program that allows for active duty service members and certain others to fill 

empty seats on scheduled DoD flights. While active duty members and their families will remain 

the primary beneficiaries ofthis program in order to assist them with the rigors of military life, 

H.R. 164 will allow the pool of potential passengers to now include veterans who were 

permanently disabled while serving their country, and is supported by the Veterans of Foreign 

Wars and the National Federation oflhe Blind. 

The second piece oflegislation seeks to honor military divers who have bravely served our 

country in a number of specialties, including combat diving, rescue operations, salvage, harbor 

clearing, and ordinance disposal, among other signiticant diving disciplines. H.R. 165 authorizes 

the Secretary of the Navy to designate an appropriate site at the former Navy Dive School at the 

Washington Navy Yard for a memorial to honor the members of the Al111ed Forces who have 

served as divers and whose service in defense ofthe United States has been carried out beneath 

the waters of the world. The legislation specifies that the memorial is to be paid for with private 

funds and retains the authority to approve the design and site of the memorial with the Secretary 

of the Navy. H.R. 165 builds upon the sense of Congress expressed in section 2855 of the 

National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2013 that the Secretary of the Navy may 

permit such a memorial to be built. I urge the committee to build on its sense last year so that we 

might demonstrate our nation's gratitude to this special segment of heroes, both past and present. 

Thank you for your consideration of these issues. 
100 

The Honorable Peter J. Roskam of Illinois 

Testimony on U.S.-Israeli Missile Defense Cooperation 

House Armed Services Committee 

May 8, 2013 

Chainnan McKeon, Ranking Member Smith, distinguished Members of the Committee: thank 

you for the opportunity to testify at this critical hearing on our national defense priorities for the 

Fiscal Year 2014 National Defense Authorization Act. 

Mr. Chainnan, I appear before you today to discuss U.S.-Israeli missile defense cooperation, an 

issue of critical importance to our national security. I am grateful to this committee for its past 

support ofthis component of America's partnership with our ally Israel. The reality is that we 

live in dangerous times. The situation in Syria continues to deteriorate, Tran is hurdling toward a 

nuclear weapons capability, and its proxies-Hamas and Hezbollah-continue to stockpile 

advanced missiles that pose a deadly threat not only to Israel, but our brave men and women 

serving overseas. In light ofthese challenges, we must continue to work closely with our allies to 

maintain a qualitative and quantitative military edge over our enemies. A robust missile defense 

apparatus is a strategic imperative in confronting these evolving threats. 

Over the past two decades, the United States and Israel have worked seamlessly to develop, 

produce and implement cutting-edge missile defense programs. These systems are lifesaving, 

war preventing, and, most importantly, ajoint venture. Israel matches U.S. funding and 

technology and intellectual property is shared. And certain aspects of these systems are produced 

here in the United States, which creates well-paying manufacturing jobs. Simply put, it is a winwin. 

Mr. Chairman, many of us here have visited the Israeli city of Sderot along the Gaza border, 

which has endured literally thousands of Hamas rockets over the years. On my visit, the brave 

residents told me how they have just 15 seconds to take shelter from an incoming rocket. One 

woman explained that she dreamed of a "nonnal" life for her family without the constant fear of 

attack. That dream has become a reality thanks to Iron Dome. Iron Dome shields Israel from 

short-range rocket threats like those posed by Hamas and lIezbollah. Last November, during 

Operation Pillar of Defense, Iron Dome intercepted 500 Hamas rockets with a success rate of 

nearly 85%. With help from the United States, Israel has already deployed five Iron Dome 

batteries, with plans for a sixth by the year's end. Ultimately, Israel hopes to operate 10 to 13 

batteries to protect the entire state. 

Iron Dome has exceeded expectations, but it is unable to defend against more advanced, longrange missiles, which are becoming an increasingly viable danger. Therefore, the United States 

and Israel have teamed up to jointly develop David's Sling, which is designed to intercept short 

and medium-range ballistic missiles, long-range rockets, and cruise missiles. In its first test this 

past November, the system successfully intercepted an inert medium-range rocket, and defense 

officials expect the program to be fully operational in 2014. 
101 

The Arrow Weapons System has been operational since 2000 and targets medium-range ballistic 

missiles. This system, co-developed by Israel Aircraft Industries and Boeing, is manufactured by 

subcontractors here in the United States in Mississippi and Alabama. Together, Iron Dome, 

David's Sling, and Arrow create a strong force field capable of defending against nearly any 

rocket attack. However, the outstanding threat to Israel, the United States, and the world remains 

a nuclear-armed Iran. As a result, the United States and Israel are developing the Arrow 3, a 

long-range, exo-atmospheric interceptor designed to catch missiles in high altitude to minimize 

leakage from a nuclear or chemical warhead. A successful fly test of Arrow 3 was conducted in 

February, and the system is expected to be operational within the next few years. 

This multitier missile defense system is in the direct national security interest of the United 

States, and I'm pleased that this commonsense investment has enjoyed strong bipartisan support 

in both the House and Senate. I want to commend and express gratitude to the entire committee 

for its past support for U.S.-Israeli missile defense cooperation, and I look forward to working 

with you to maintain and expand this partnership. Thank you again for the opportunity to testify 

today. 
102 

JOHN P. SARBANES 

House Armed Services Committee 

National Defense Priorities from Members for the 

FY 2014 National Defense Authorization Act 

May S, 20B 

Pilot Program on Comprehensive Medication Therapy Management Services 

Requested by Congressman John P. Sarbanes 

Chairman McKeon and Ranking Member Smith, 

As you begin to craft the FY 2014 National Defense Authorization Act, I request that you 

consider including a pilot program to provide medication therapy management services to 

TRICARE beneficiaries. Providing these services to the TRICARE population could have a 

positive impact on their overall health care and reduce Department of Defense (DOD) spending 

on prescription drugs. The potential cost savings are significant considering that DOD spent 

approximately $8 billion on prescription drugs in 2011 - a 400 percent increase over the 

previous decade. Medication therapy management services have proven successful in civilian 

settings. Because TRICARE is one of the largest health systems in the country, the potential 

value to DOD is tremendous. 

For these reasons, I hope you will consider adding the enclosed bill language to the FY 

2014 National Defense Authorization Act. 

Member of Congress 
103 

Fiscal Year 2014 National Defense Authorization Act 

Title VII. Health Care Provisions 

Subtitle A -- TRlCARE and Otber Healtll Benefits 

Draft Bill Language 

Sec._. Pilot Program on Comprehensive Medication Therapy Management Services. 

(a) PILOT PROGRAM-

(l) IN GENERAL- From within available funds for operation and maintenance, the Secretary of 

Defense shaU conduct a pilot program to provide Comprehensive Medication Therapy Management 

services to a pool of up to 10,000 TRICARE beneficiaries in one or more prescribed geographic 

areas. 

(2) COMMENCEMENT- The Secretary shall commence the pilot program under paragraph (1) by 

not later than 120 days after the date of the enactment ofthis Act. 

(b) DURATION- The Secretary may not carry out the pilot program under subsection (a) (I) for longer 

than a 48-month period from the date of the pilot's initiation. 

(c) PILOT REQUIREMENTS The Secretary shall select competitively one or more appropriate entities 

to conduct this pilot and shall include as eligible Academic Health Centers which have a School of 

Pharmacy, but must guarantee in any selection that the entity has the necessary experience in the 

provision and management of comprehensive medication therapy management to lead the pilot program 

under subsection (a)(1). The pilot program shall include the following partners: 

(I) At least three Military Treatment Pharmacies located on bases in the same metropolitan 

geographic area. 

(2) At least two pharmacy chain stores who participate in TRICARE. 

(3) Local community pharmacies who participate in TRICARE. 

(4) Department of Defense Pharmacoeconomic Center. 

(d) SERVICES PROVIDED - The Secretary shall require that the Comprehensive Medication Therapy 

Management pilot program under subsection (a) (1) provide the following services to each enrolled 

member: 

(1) A comprehensive, updated medication list and an individualized medication action plan; 

(2) An updated medication action plan at least once per year; and 

(3) Comprehensive on-going management of the beneficiaries' medication and medical conditions 

which includes face to race interaction with a pharmacist to regularly solve potential and actual drug 

related problems. 
104 

(e) TARGETED BENEFICIARIES - The Secretary shall ensure that TRICARE identify as candidates for 

these services beneficiaries who meet one of the following criteria: 

(1) Receive multiple medications or have multiple medication prescribers; 

(2) Have recently changed medication regimens; 

(3) Have experienced an acute event such as a hospitalization or emergency room visit; 

(4) Have difficulty adhering to their medication regimen; or 

5) Have one or more chronic conditions requiring medication management 

(I) LOCA TlONS- The Secretary shall carry out the pilot program under subsection (a)(l) at not less than 

two military installations of different military departments, including at least one facility in the National 

Capitol region that meets the following criteria: 

(1) Contains a military medical treatment facility that has inpatient and outpatient capabilities at the 

installation and an on-base Pharmacy. 

(2) Provides medical treatment to a range of active duty and retired military personnel and their 

families. 

(g) REPORT- Not later than 180 days after the date on which the pilot program under subsection (al (!) 

concludes~ the Secretary shall submit to the Committees on Anned Services of the Senate and the House 

of Representatives a report on the pilot program. The report shall include the following: 

(I) An assessment of the average cost and overall health care savings of providing Comprehensive 

Medication Therapy Management services to TRICARE beneficiaries in the pilot program. 

(2) An assessment of the level of improvement in clinical outcomes from the beneficiaries who 

received Comprehensive Medication Therapy Management services versus a control group of similar 

beneficiaries who did not received these services. 

(3) A post-implementation analysis which evaluates the feasibility offurther expansion of the 

program. 

(h) DEFlNITIONS- In this section: 

(I) The teno 'TRICARE program' has the meaning given that term in section 1072(7) of title 10, 

United States Code. 
105 

Statement for the Record 

The Honorable Paul C. Broun, M.D. (GA-tO) 

Committee on Armed Services, U.S. House of Representatives 

Hearing On: National Defense Priorities from Members for the FY 2014 National Defense 

Authorization Act 

Wednesday, May 8, 2013 

Chainnan McKeon, Ranking Member Smith, Members of the Committee, thank you for 

the opportunity to testify today. 

There are two issues which I would like to briefly discuss before the Committee. The 

first relates to the continued controversy over the U.S. government's ability to indefmitely 

detain, without trial, U.S. citizens who are accused of terrorism or collaboration with terrorist 

groups. The second issue is related to the first, regarding the government's use ofunmarmed 

aerial vehicles (UA Vs or "drones") to kill suspected terrorists, either in the U.S. or overseas. 

These issues are related insofar as they both raise the question of how, under the Constitution, 

suspected terrorists ought to he treated, particularly those who are U.S. citizens. While past 

versions of the National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) have attempted to shed light on this 

question, it seems that there remains significant doubt over what the legal process should be 

when suspected terrorists are identified by our government. 

Central to this debate is language in the Authorization for Use of Military Force in 

Afghanistan (AUMF) giving the U.S. government the authority to indefinitely detain individuals 

suspected of terrorism. The AUMF became law in 2001 and was upheld by the U.S. Supreme 

Court in 2004 in Hamdi v. Rums/eld. While both the 2012 and 2013 NDAA bills stated that 

nothing in the underlying bill gives the U.S. government the authority to detain U.S. citizens 

suspected of terrorism without due process, neither bill included language to repeal the authority 

granted under the AUMF. This apparent disparity has resulted in widespread concern about 

whether the U.S. government may, in fact, indetinitely detain U.S. citizens accused of terrorism. 

If the govemment does have this power under the law, it is unclear under what circumstances it 

may use this potentially sweeping power against its own people. 

Last year. I supported an amendment to the NDAA offered by Ranking Member Smith 

which would have ensured that individuals arrested on U.S. soil under either the AUMF or the 

FY 13 NDAA would be provided with due process, as guaranteed by the Constitution. 

Unfortunately, this amendment did not pass in the House, and it was not included in the final bill 

language. I urge the Committee to include similar language in the FY 14 NDAA, so that 

individuals who are accused of terrorism are afforded their right to a fair trial, either via the 
106 

criminal justice system or the military COUlt system, depending on the situation and the 

citizenship of the accused. 

Moreover, I urge the Committee to work towards perfecting the definition of "enemy 

combatant," a broad designation which lacks a clear meaning and may be placed on individuals 

under the AUMF in order to allow for their indefinite detention. Allowing any administration to 

use such a vagne designation to punish individuals without due process opens the door to 

exceedingly dangerous scenarios, including classifying dissenters as potential terrorists who may 

be punished without regard to their constitutional rights. 

At the same time, I am very concerned about the "white paper" recently released by the 

U.S. Department of Justice, which outlines the legal framework for the use of deadly force 

against American citizens. While this document purportedly relates only to individuals who are 

suspected of working as forces of al Qaeda, I believe that it is highly dangerous nonetheless. 

Most significantly, it is unconscionable for the U.S. government to kill any of its own citizens 

without first allowing them their day in court. As with the designation of "enemy combatants," I 

believe that no administration has the right to be the judge, jury, and executioner of American 

citizens. Our country was founded under the notion that citizens must be protected from this 

type of tyrarmical overreach, and even in these times marred by terrorist threats, it is imperative 

that we stay true to that important principle. 

Unfortunately, the potential for deadly force against Americans has grown with the 

increased use of drones by the U.S. military. While drones certainly provide a number of 

benefits to our armed forces, they have also become a symbol of the ease with which our 

government may infringe upon the constitutional rights of our citizens simply by unilaterally 

declaring that an individual is a terrorist, that capture is too difficult, and that his immediate 

demise is the best course of action, regardless of his rights. Of course, drones may also serve 

non-lethal functions, and as a result, their use has led to questions regarding when they may be 

used to gather intelligence on eitizens without their knowledge or consent. I therefore urge the 

Committee to address the use of drones by the U.S. military, and to fine-tune the administration's 

legal framework to ensure that the constitutional rights of all Americans - even those who are 

accused of terrorism - are protected at all times. 

Tn the aftermath of the recent bombing in Boston, it is more important than ever to ensure 

that we have a system that will work to punish those who wish to do us harm, while working 

within the protections established by our Constitution. One of the most challenging dilemmas of 

our time is how to balance individual liberties with providing the military with the tools it needs 

to keep our nation safe. However, a free society demands limits on these tools, and these limits 

are clearly stated within the Constitution. I ask that the Committee do all it can to ensure that 

Americans' God-given. constitutional rights are protected as it begins work on this important 

legislation. Thank you again for the opportunity to testify before you today. 
107 

May 8, 2013 

STATEMENT FOR THE RECORD 

BY 

THE HONORABLE TOM MCCLINTOCK 

FISCAL YEAR 2014 NATIONAL DEFENSE AUTHORIZATION BUDGET REQUEST 

COMMITTEE ON ARMED SERVICES 

As the Air Force prepares to sustain and modernize its Intercontinental Ballistic Missile fleet, I 

believe that competitive process among suppliers should be a fundamental consideration in 

future acquisition decisions. I have enclosed draft repOli language to reflect the need for this 

priority and would appreciate its inclusion in the Fiscal Year 2014 National Defense 

Authorization Act. 

The Air Force is currently evaluating propulsion alternatives to sustain the only land-based 

ICBM in service (Minuteman III) until 2030. Additionally, the Air Force is also conducting its 

alternative analysis to develop options for modernization or replacement of the ground-based leg 

of United States' nuclear arsenal post 2030. 

My requested language would direct the Air force to report to Congress on efforts it will 

undertake to enhance and maintain a viable, competitive evaluation process in regards to future 

acquisitions. 

Mr. Chainnan, I ask that the language (below) be made pati of the record: 

"The Committee directs the Air Force, within 180 days, to provide a report on specific efforts it 

will undertake to enhance and maintain competition between multiple providers when evaluating 

propulsion alternatives in order to sustain the Minuteman III ICBM strategic weapon .I:vstem 

until 2030, and what specific efforts it will undertake to enhance and maintain a competitive 

process when evaluating whether to modernize or replace the Minuteman 111 ICBM strategic 

weapon "ystem post 2030. " 

Mr. Chairman, I hope you and the Committee share my views on this matter and will give this 

request favorable consideration. Thank you for your efforts to improve our national security. 
108 

House ,~rmed SelTice Committee 

FY14 NDAA 1!cmber Day Hearing 

Testimony of Congresswoman Chellie Pingree (11E-Ol) 

May 8, 2013 

Chairman McKeon, Ranking Member Smith: Thank you for this opportunity to testify today 

on the Fiscal Year 2014 National Defense c\uthori:cation Act. 

As a former 1Iember of the l\rmed Services Committee, I want to thank the Committee for 

providing this opportunity to weigh in on the upcoming defense bill. Having spent my first 

four years in Congress on this Committee, I know the work that goes into crafting this 

legislation and I thank you and the staff in advance for your hard work and dedication to 

America's service members. 

]\fy Congressional District in Maine has a strong and proud tradition of support for 

.~merica's Armed Forces. More than 20 percent of the population is veterans and service 

members. We have a very active shipbuilding base at Bath Iron Works and we continue to 

provide Naval support through the work done at the Portsmouth Naval Shipyard in Kittery, 

]\faine. In fact, as you may know, Portsmouth was founded over 200 years ago and is the 

oldest continuously operating shipyard in the United States Nav),. 

I support the President's budget request for Navy Shipbuilding and Construction. 

In particular, I was pleased to see the funding levels for the Zumwalt Destroyer (the DDGWOOs) and the Arleigh Burke Destroyers (the DDG-Sl). Also, I support the multiyear 

advanced procurement in the DDG-Sl account. I urge the Committee to at least provide 

the President's budget request in these areas. 

Additionally, I am very supportive of the effort to contract additional Arleigh Burke-class 

destroyers this summer, with work to be completed over the next five years. This would 

provide significant and meaningful jobs in ]\faine and many others. 

I want to urge the Committee to support the rebuilding of the USS Miami nuclear submarine 

that is currently being done at the Portsmouth Naval Shipyard. Currently, this project has 

been supported by the Navy and I am eager to ensure that Congress provide the Navy with 

the resources to make sure the repair of the J'vliami is completed. 

Some of the best shipbuilders in the world live and work in Maine. Both BIW and the 

Portsmouth Naval Shipyard have well-earned reputations for their efficiency, on-time 

delivery and world-class quality. The public and private investment in both of these yards 

has been considerable, and it shows. It is vitally important for the Navy to keep these yards 

fully operational and keep the highly skilled and experienced workers on the job. 1 f we were 

to lose the industrial capacity at Bath and Kittery, it would be very hard to ever get it back. 

Another issue of concern is the economic redevelopment of closed military installations, like 

the Brunswick Naval Air Station, which was selected for closure in the 2005 BRAC round, 

before I came to Congress. Congress enacted a number of different incentives to help these 

bases recover economic vitality. One incentive is the inclusion of a BR,\C'd base in the list 
109 

of areas eligible for assistance under the SBA's HUBZone program, which provides 

improved federal contracting opportunities. However, in order to obtain these preferences, 

35% of a business' employees must live within the HUBZone itself. 

[lor many BRACd bases, this presents an obvious problem because there isn't necessarily 

sufficient housing at closed bases for ne'", employees to reside in and as a result, the 

HUB Zone designation for BRc\Cd bases is very difficult to use. Modifying the residency 

requirement for BR,\C'd installations to the immediate surrounding communities is a 

common sense solution to this technical problem. 

AJthough the loss of the Brunswick Naval .\ir Station has had a significant impact on the 

local economy, the community has done a tremendous job raking what the Navy has left 

behind and transfonning it into a cilJilian economic engine for the region. But there is a lot 

of work still to do, and this simple and common sense reform to the way HUB Zones are 

designated will help develop businesses and create the good-paying jobs that will grow the 

economy in the area. 

Lastly, 1 want to call attention to the issue of Military Sexual Assault. Just this week we heard 

of yet another horrific incident of sexual assault that reportedly occurred in the Air Force. 

We all know the lasting consequences of sexual assault and I'd like to talk about one of those 

consequences very briefly. 

ivlany victims of military sexual assault need and want to seek mental health counseling, but 

for many years, service members who sought counseling had that used against them when 

rhey applied to renew or get an initial security clearance. 

I was pleased that on :\priI5'h the Director of National Intelligence issued Interim Guidance 

for victims of military sexual assault who seck to obtain or renew a security clearance. 

Question 21 of the Security Form 86 (SF86) fontJeriy asked if you have consulted a health care 

professional regarding an emotional or mental health condition in the last seven years. In the 

past, many victims of military sexual assault refrained from seeking counseling because they 

feared it would prevent them from obtaining a security clearance. Under the Interim 

Guidance, victims of military sexual assault who received counseling strictly related to the 

assault are now directed to answer No to Q21. 

I request that the Committee support language that directs the service departments to 

include information about this new guidance at the earliest stages possible, so sexual assault 

survivors can be comforted that we want them to seek mental health counseling and it won't 

be used against them as they continue their military careers. 

Thank you Chairman l\IcKeon and Ranking Member Smith for the opportunity to speak 

today on these critical issues. 
110 

Testimony ofRep. Bill Posey (FL-S) 

House Armed Services Committee 

May 8,2013 

Dear Chairman McKeon and Ranking Member Smith, 

Thank you for the opportunity to testify today in advance of the Committee's 

consideration of the FY2014 National Defense Authol'ization Act (NOAA). National defense 

is the federal government's greatest Constitutional responsibility. I appreciate the 

challenges faced by the Committee, especially after sequestration, with its impact falling 

significantly more on defense as compared to all other federal spending. 

In regards to the FY2014 NOAA, I have a letter that I am submitting with a number 

of priorities, and I would appreciate the Committee's attention to those requests. 

I would like to address in my remarks my concern about the Administration letting 

slip from its budget the important Range Communications Building ("XY Building") at Cape 

Canaveral Air Force Station. This building must be updated for the 21.'t Century. The XY 

building is the hub for command, telemetry and radar for Cape Canaveral Air Force Station, 

Kennedy Space Center, Wallops Island, and all down range space launch sites. It is 

indispensable for military and NASA launches. 

I've been inside the XY Building and not much has changed since the 1970's. Despite 

its importance for national security, it feels like a museum. The original structure predates 

the Apollo era, and the facility still utilizes vacuum tubes. I think there are Members not 

even old enough to remember vacuum tubes! The building is also prone to nooding, which 

can render it unusable. There are safety concerns with the structure. If you think I am 

exaggerating, I would be happy to tour it with you. 
111 

Our national security and our leadership in space depends on a capable and 

functioning XY Building. [am informed the Air Force has indicated in previous years that a 

new facility is a very high priority, but the FY 2014 President's Budget Request did not 

address this. I understand that the Air Force may place a request for a new facility in the 

FY2015 Budget, hut I've heard some in the Pentagon are looking to put off this critical 

project until 2017 or beyond. 

I am concerned that this can keeps getting kicked down the road. I would ask that 

the Committee include Report language expressing interest in ensuring that a safe, secure, 

reliable and modern range communications building be operational in accordance with the 

needs of the U.S. military and NASA. Such language should direct the Air Force to report 

back to the Committee the steps being taken to ensure that this upgraded facility, critical to 

national security, is not being unnecessarily delayed or that the delay in any way 

jeopardizes U.S. space launch capabilities. 

There are other defense priorities, which I believe merit your attention. In separate 

correspondence, including the letter below, [ have outlined these for your consideration. 

Thank you again for the opportunity to bring these issues to your attention. 
112 

The Honorable Howard "Buck" McKeon 

Chairman 

House Committee on Armed Services 

Washington, DC 20515 

Dear Chairman McKeon: 

May 8, 2013 

As the Committee worl<s on the 2014 National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) please 

consider including the following items, 

Report Langnage on the Range Communications Bnilding, Cape Canaveral Air Force 

Station 

Tbis building is tbe hub for command, telemetry and radar for CCAI'S, Kennedy Space 

Center, Wallops Island and all down range sites including networks for au!' 

warfighters, The facility is indispensable for lannches, The original building predates the 

Apollo el'a, and despite several expansions is prone to tlooding and 

stl'llctural deficiencies. ! am informed the Air indicated that a new facility is a 

very high priority, but the FY 2014 President's Budget Request did not address this. I 

understand that the Air Force may place a request for a new facility in the FYZ015 

Budget. I would ask that the Committee include Report language expressing interest in 

ensuring that a safe, secure, l'Oliable and modern range communic<ltions building be in 

operation in accordance with the needs of the U,S, military and NASA, The Air Force should 

report back to the Committee on the steps being taken to ensure that this upgraded facility, 

critical to national security, is not being unnecessarily delayed or that the delay in any way 

jeopardizes U,S, space launch capabilities, 

Report language to retain the T·3 Test Aircraft forjSTARS 

The E,8 Attack Radar System (JSTARS) is a critical national 

security asset that detects tracks moving targets over land and water, The President's 

PY2014 Budget Request places the jSTARS T·3 test aircraft into preservation 

storage, However, the 1'·3 is important to support the reliability orthe joint Stars fleet 

through test and development activities, Please consider including report language 

directing retention of the '1'·3 test aircraft to ensul'C the JSTAHS fleet is being utilized to its 

full potential. 
113 

In written testimony for the Senate Armed Services on April 24, 2013, Lt. General Charles 

Davis described jSTARS as a world premier platform. jSTARS has performed in Iraq and 

Afghanistan, and is dependable for early deployment to monitor emerging crisis situations. 

General Davis mentioned that critical near term diminishing manufacturing sources (OMS) 

would not cause grounding of any joint STARS platforms until 2025 or 

later. Modernization efforts are keeping rSTARS viable to support the National Military 

Strategy. 

Report Language on Cyber and Cellular Security 

In separate correspondence, dated March 21, 2013, I asked the Committee to consider 

Report language on 1) cyber defense technology, and 2) threats related to the exploitation 

of commercial cellular netwol"l,s. I understand House Armed Services Committee 

professional staff are in the process of reviewing these requests. Suggested language was 

included in my earlier correspondence. 

Support President's FYZ01.4 Request for tbe E-ZD Advanced Hawkeye Program 

In separate cotTespondence, I joined colleagues in supporting the President's request for 

the Navy's multi-year procurement of the E-2D Advanced Hawkeye program. Fiscal Year 

2014 is the first of a planned five-year procurement, which would provide the Navy with 32 

E-2D aircraft while generating considerable savings for the taxpayer. As stated in a letter 

sent to the Committee on May 7,2013: "The B-ZO program, which is currently in 

development, has met every major milestone on schedule since the program's inception in 

2003. Pull funding for the B-20 ensures that the carrier air wings will fully realize the 

power and protection provided by this state-of-the art early warning and battle 

management command and control weapons system." 

Funding for Bradley Fighting Vebicles 

As you are aware, the FY2013 NOM and Full-Year Continuing Appropriations Act for 2013 

provided an additional $140 million to maintain the Bradley Fighting Vehicle Production 

Base. I am informed that manufacturers of the Bradley are asking for Congressional 

support to direct the Army to move forward out-year funds from FY2015 and FY2016 to 

help the Army better meet its needs for modernized vehicles with M3 to M2 

conversions. Although such changes would likely require consent by the Appropriations 

Committee, to the extent that the Armed Services Committee is taking into consideration 

the Army's industrial base and production and supply chain network, please consider the 

best distribution of these funds over the three-year period. 

Report Language on the Public-Public and Public-Private (P4) Initiative 

I am encouraged that the Air Force is being proactive and looking for innovative 

partnerships with local governments. The 45th Space Wing and the Economic 

Development Commission CEDC) of Florida's Space Coast are currently in dialogue 

regarding opportunities for public-private partnerships. This form of collaboration has 

great potential for all parties involved, not least the taxpayer, as we face challenges posed 
114 

by tighter budgets. Please consider including the suggested report language as the Air 

Force continues to move forward with these partnerships. 

The Committee is impressed with tile Department of the Air Force's efforts in tlying 

to reduce operating olld service costs through the Installation-Community 

partnerships, The Intergovernmental Services Agreement approach was authorized 

in the Fiscal Year 2013 National DefenseAutllOrizatioll Act and we believe it 

provides the necessary authority for the military services these 

Innovative and cost-cutting agreements that are in the severe 

budget environment. In fac~ these are good management practices that should 

always be pursued regardless of the fiscal climate, The shared services approach Is 

a 'will-wln'for the military as well as for local government when approached in the 

proper manller alld we applauci the Air Force for their efforts to date and would 

look t() them fora report on their activities in by March 31, 2014. We uncierstand 

that the DoD is fam11liatil1g 

this effort, but we are encouraged with 

Bill Language for Space A Transportation 

Please consider induding language in the NDAA from a bill! recently introduced, H.R. 1756, 

the Deployed Troops Support Act. The bill authorizes the Secretary of Defense to transport 

to any country, without charge, supplies fnrnlshed by a nonprofit that are intended for 

distribution to members of the Armed Forces, The Secretary would have authority to 

determine that there is a legitimate need for the goods being shipped, that supplies are 

suitable for distribution, and that adequate arrangements have been made for 

distribution. There is already a policy, the "Denton Program" under Section 402 of Title 10, 

which allows nonprofits to ship humanitarian goods overseas at the discretion afthe 

Secretary, This legislation would extend this discretionary authority for goods to be 

shipped to U,S. service members on a space available basis, 

Thank you for YOUI' consideration of these requests. 

Member of Congress 
115 

Statement of the Honorable Glenn 'GT' Thompson, Representative, 

Pennsylvania's Fifth Congressional District 

Before the House Armed Services Committee 

Hearing on, "National Defense Prioritiesfrom Membersfor the FY 

2014 National Defense Authorization Act" 

As prepared for delivery 

May 8, 2013 

Chairman McKeon, Ranking Member Smith, Members of the 

Armed Service Committee, thank you for allowing me to testifY 

before you today. 

This Committee has done an excellent job supporting the brave 

men and women who serve our country, which is a passion I 

share with each of you. 

Two years ago, I worked very closely with the Committee to 

include the Servicemembers Telemedicine and E-Health 

Portability Act, or STEP Act, in the Fiscal Year 2012 National 

Defense Authorization Act, which was signed into law in 

December of2012. 

The STEP Act was a positive step forward in modernizing how 

the Department of Defense delivers health care. Specifically, it 

made widespread telemedicine possible and accessible by 

expanding the state licensure exemption to all DOD health care 

professionals, regardless of where they, or the patient, are 

located. 
116 

Many Committee Members have worked closely on the issue of 

mental health and suicide prevention, and know just how 

important it is for our service members to get treatment -

without delay. Of equal importance, is ensuring that our service 

members can access care without the stigma that is often 

associated with seeking mental health treatment. The STEP Act 

is assisting with achieving these very goals. 

Last year after passage of the STEP Act, the Army was able to 

perform nearly 36,000 teleconsultations, which included over 

31,200 tele-behavioral health clinical encounters. This is an 

incredible achievement, and great start. 

Since passage, I have worked closely with the Department of 

Defense to monitor its implementation. 

In large part, the Services have embraced these changes. In a 

new memo to the service chiefs this year, the DOD presented the 

first part of STEP Act implementation with a broad waiver to 

expand telemedicine. This waiver was a tremendous step 

forward. 

However, there remain two areas which the DOD needs to 

address: 

• First, the waiver does not allow service members to use 

telemedicine from their homes, only "fixed facilities." 

• Second, TRICARE providers were not included as a part of 

this waiver for licensure portability. 
117 

However, the STEP Act already clearly addressed both of these 

waiver issues. This is my concern. The DOD has not fully 

implemented the spirit or letter of the law. 

We need to make health services and care as convenient and 

accessible as possible, especially when it comes to mental 

health. There is no better way to remove the stigma of seeking 

mental health from a bricks and mortar facility, in plain sight of 

colleagues, than to allow our service members to access care in 

the comfort and privacy of their own homes. 

As for TRICARE, the exclusion ofthese providers equates to 

the categorical exclusion of thousands of mental health care 

workers from being able to provide assistance, at a time when 

there is a recognized lack of qualified providers. 

Yesterday I had the opportunity to speak with Dr. Jonathan 

Woodson, the Assistant Secretary of Defense for Health Affairs, 

and relayed some of my concerns to him. Dr. Woodson has done 

a great job with many of the licensing details of the STEP Act 

and has promised to reexamine the waiver issue, in order to 

address some of these concerns. 

We face serious challenges when it comes to meeting the health 

care needs of our returning services members. We also face 

escalating costs in health care, during a time of budgetary 

constraints. The STEP Act law is allowing us to effectively 

navigate both of these challenges providing quality and 

expanded care while simultaneously reducing costs. 

As I mentioned earlier, over 31,000 tele-behavioral health 

clinical encounters took place last year. This represents a nearly 
118 

800% growth since 2009, and is still only between clinical 

locations. These numbers will continue to increase and would 

undoubtedly have a tremendous impact if allowed to further 

expand. 

With this in mind, I respectfully request the Committee's 

assistance in working with the Pentagon to fully implement this 

law. If full implementation is not or cannot be achieved under 

the existing authorization, further legislative clarification or 

additional statutory guidance may be needed. 

Again, I would like to thank the Committee and distinguished 

members for the opportunity to provide testimony today. I look 

forward to working together to achieve these goals. 
119 

Statement of 

Congressman Diane Black 

Before the House Armed Services Committee 

Natioual Defense Authorizatiou Act of2014 

May 8, 2013 

Chainnan McKeon, Ranking Member Smith, Members of the Committee, 

Thank you for the opportunity to address the House Anned Services Committee to highlight the 

importance of hypersonics technologies as it relates to the 2014 National Defense Authorization 

Act (NDAA). As Chairman of the Congressional Range and Testing Center Caucus, I urge my 

colleagues to consider the applications of hypersonics for the defense of the United States. 

The development of hypersonic systems~flying at Mach 5 and above~would yield unique 

"game-changing" capabilities for U.S. national security interests. 

Advances in propulsion, structures, thennal protection systems, guidance, and other areas will 

allow the U.S. to field high-speed time-critical strike (HSTCS) weapons. These weapons would 

be able to strike targets from several hundred miles away faster than adversaries could react and 

defend against them and from longer "stand-off" ranges still fast enough to be effective. Recent 

U.S. Government studies indicate that HSTCS weapons are almost in our grasp---"the lowhanging fruit on the tree." 

A second application of hypersonics is conventional prompt global strike (CPGS)~striking 

high-value or "fleeting targets" thousands of miles away deep inside adversary countries in as 

little as one hour after launch without using forward-based assets. 

Hypersonics technologies may also allow developing high-speed intelligence, surveillance, 

reconnaissance (lSR) capabilities. Both airbreathing and rocket powered vehicles are envisioned 

to provide responsive, unwarned, and survivable ISR. Sub-orbital trans-atmospheric vehicles 

(TAVs) would provide global non-invasive coverage of other countries by flying through space 

above them. 

Progress in hypersonics technologies and developing the systems described above would also 

bring closer to reality the hypersonics "holy grail" of hypersonic air-breathing space access, a 

capability with far-reaching implications for national defense as well as our civil space sector. 

Although hypersonics technologies offer these exciting capabilities, it is important to ask in these 

times of strained budgets whether we should pursue them. 

The answer to that question is that other countries are investing in hypersonics. India now has 

cruise missiles and surface-to-air missiles that exceed Mach 2.8, and the European Meteor air-toair missile is to be fielded as early as this year with a Mach 4+ capability. England, France, 

Germany, Japan, and Sweden are also known to be interested in hypersonic technology. 
120 

Potential adversaries such as China, Russia, and Iran are pursuing the strategic advantages 

hypersonic systems otTer. China in particular is striving to develop an Anti-Access/Area Denial 

(A2/AD) capability, using Integrated Air Defense Systems (lADS) and tactical ballistic missiles 

(TBMs) to deny access and freedom of action to U.S. forces. China clearly wants to counter the 

Obama Administration's "Pivot to the Pacific", which is a response to China's increasingly 

assertive behavior in that region. 

The U.S. has historically benefited from robust testing and evaluation (T&E) infrastructure in 

developing cutting edge military technologies. Successful development of hypersonics 

technologies will-like all new technologies-have new T&E requirements. I urge my 

colleagues to consider our ability to meet these requirements in composing this year's NOAA. 

The federal government's most important rcsponsibility is to protcct U.S. citizens from foreign 

threats. The potential for hypersonics technologies to maintain our strategic and tactical military 

advantages and our ability to field such a technology must be considered with the current threat 

environment in mind. 

Again, thank you for the opportunity to submit this statement. I look forward to working with the 

Committee on this issue to protect U.S. citizens and our national security interests. 
121 

Congressman Rick Crawford 

Testimony before the House Armed Services Committee: 

EOO Priorities for the FY2014 NOAA 

Good morning Chairman McKeon, Ranking Member Smith, and 

distinguished members of the Committee. Thank you for the work 

you do to preserve the security of our great nation and for 

allowing me to testify before the full committee regarding 

Explosive Ordnance Disposal priorities for the Fiscal Year 2014 

National Defense Authorization Act. I served in the Army as an 

EOD tech and I am proud to be a co-founder, along with 

Committee member Susan Davis, of the House EOD Caucus. 

Explosive Ordnance Disposal Soldiers, Sailors, Airmen and 

Marines are the military's preeminent team of explosive experts. 

They are trained and equipped to identify and neutralize 

explosives used by terrorist networks across the globe. The 

military's EOD mission is to defeat globally emerging threats 

using explosive. EOD techs protect their fellow military personnel 

and innocent civilians from these threats while providing support 

across a wide range of military and civilian national security 

operations. 

EOD forces have proven to be game changers in attacking and 

dismantling terrorist cells and associated networks. These forces 

will continue to be indispensable assets for the foreseeable future, 

supporting counterterrorism operations, building the capacity of 

partner nations and protecting the homeland through providing 

support to civilian law enforcement agencies at federal, state and 

local levels. 
122 

Thank you for the Committee's support of the EOO, beginning 

with the Fiscal Year 2008 NOAA that inquired into the health and 

viability of the EOO force. I am especially appreciative of the 

Committee's direction to the Secretary of Oefense in the last three 

NOAAs to provide reports to the Committee to develop a better 

understanding of the Services' plans for EOO force structure and 

funding. It is critical that the EOO is provided with adequate levels 

of funding for procurement; research, development, test and 

evaluation; and operations and maintenance to carry out their 

mission. A GAO Report from last month concluded that the 000 

needs better resource planning and joint guidance to manage the 

EOO. The report also reveals that the Army and the Marine Corps 

still have not established a Program Element for their respective 

EOO force since the Committee's initial inquiry in the 2008 NOAA. 

The Boston bombings serve as a stark reminder of the threat of 

the terrorist detonation of explosives in the United States and 

have revealed gaps in the Nation's ability to defeat a sustained 

bombing campaign in the homeland. Following the attacks, the 

Army Forces Command issued guidance that the local Staff 

Judge Advocate must review every civil authority request for 

emergency EOO response prior to sending aid to ensure that the 

support does not violate the Posse Comitatus Act of 1878. In 

addition, the guidance requires that a general officer must then 

approve each of these EOO immediate responses and must 

ensure that civil authorities will reimburse the Army as a condition 

of immediate response. 
123 

There is an estimated 66,000 "call outs" annually across the 

United States on explosive ordnance by interagency, military EOO 

and public safety bomb squads. Army EOO units responding 

under immediate response authority have historically departed 

their home station installation within 30 minutes of notification 

during duty hours and within 60 minutes of notification after duty 

hours, 365 days a year. On these civil support missions, the EOO 

has provided support to civilian law enforcement agencies but 

they do not perform law enforcement activities. 

In one of the most significant examples of the EOO civil support 

missions, the 38th Ordnance Company from Camp Edwards, 

Massachusetts, responded to 64 "call outs" during the Boston 

bombing. This support was critical in the aftermath of the attack. 

I understand the need to ensure that the EOO is compliant with 

the Posse Comitatus Act in any of its civil support missions, but it 

is vital that we do not overcorrect for a non-existent violation and 

negatively impact the ability of our EOO forces to provide 

increasingly needed and immediate support to our civilian law 

enforcement agencies. 

We must also ensure that our EOO units, like the 387th out of 

Massachusetts, are properly equipped to respond to explosive 

threats in cities and towns throughout the U.S. Mine-Resistant 

Ambush Protected vehicles, or MRAPS, are critically needed 

vehicles for EOO operations in Afghanistan, but I feel that Army 

National Guard EOO units, comprising one third of the Army EOO 

Force, need response vehicles like those used by WMO-Civil 

Support Teams. These units also need portable containment 

magazines to safely store explosives as well as communications 
124 

capable of integrating with the civilian law enforcement agencies 

that they're supporting. These National Guard units should also 

receive Training Readiness Oversight and active duty Soldier 

support from FORSCOM I 20th Support Command. Most 

importantly, they need to receive funding from an Army Program 

Element for EOD. 

I feel that there are a number of issues that we can address in this 

year's NDAA that can help strengthen our preeminent explosive 

experts. As you draft the NDAA, please consider including 

language to: 

1. Direct the Secretary of Defense to Establish a Program 

Element on "Emerging Threats - Explosive Ordnance" under the 

OSD Combating Terrorism Technical Support Office. 

2. Clarify that the EOD's immediate response authority saves 

lives and protects property and is not viewed as a law 

enforcement activity under the Posse Comitatus Act. 

3. Emphasize that the Commander of U.S. Northern Command's 

Joint Force Land Component Command and U.S. Army North 

must work closely with the Army Forces Command's 20th Support 

Command (CBRNE) and the 52d, 71 st and 111th Ordnance 

Groups (EOD) on EOD activities in coordination with the 

Department of Justice Joint Terrorism Task Forces. 

4. Direct the Secretary of the Army to Establish a Program 

Element on "Army EOD Program", managed by the Headquarters 

Department of the Army G-38, to consolidate functions and 
125 

achieve savings for EOD procurement, research, development, 

test and evaluation, and operations and maintenance. 

5. Direct the Secretary of the Navy to Establish a Program 

Element on "Marine Corps EOD Program", managed by the 

Headquarters, Marine Corps, Logistics Plans and Operations, to 

consolidate functions and achieve savings for EOD procurement, 

research, development, test and evaluation, and operations and 

maintenance. 

Thank you again for the opportunity to present my testimony 

today. I look forward to working with the Committee in the near 

future to craft legislation that supports the critical Joint Explosive 

Ordnance Disposal Forces in their mission to defend the 

homeland and our interests aboard. I remain available to the 

Committee for further assistance on EOD matters, and I thank 

you for your consideration. 
126 

ibtitClk 

"""'U"'P"'~'''''' :nQI: 20515 

May 7, 2013 

The Honorable Howard P. "Buck" McKeon 

Chairman 

House Armed Services Committee 

United States House of Representatives 

Washington, D.C. 20515 

Dear Chairman McKeon and Ranking Member Smith: 

The Honorable Adam Smith 

Ranking Member 

House Armed Services Committee 

United States House of Representatives 

Washington, D.C. 20515 

We respectfully request your support for a report from the Secretary of Defense pertaining to the 

current use and opportunities for enhanced electronic contracting. 

Doing business with the federal government should not be a burdensome or daunting task. Thanks to 

technological advancement in recent years, including the development of FedBizOpps, the Federal 

procurement process has been greatly improved. While FedBizOpps currently provides universal access 

to contract opportunities and solicitations electronically, the public should also be enabled to respond to 

the solicitations electronically. 

Congress recognized the need to adapt federal procurement policy to 21st century realities when it 

adopted Section 850 of Public Law 105-85 - the National Defense Authorization Act for FY1998. This Act 

placed the responsibility on government agencies to establish, maintain and use, to the maximum 

extent practical and cost effective, procedures and processes that employ electronic commerce in the 

conduct and administration of its procurement system. 

The NDAA not only directed federal agencies to provide universal access to contract opportunities and 

solicitations through a single, Government-wide port of entry (FedBlzOpps) but also directed the 

agencies to "permit the public to respond to the solicitation electronically." 

The attached legislative and report language would require the Secretary of Defense to submit a report 

outlining the Department's plans to address the requirement in Section 850 of the NDDA for fY1998 

regarding the use of electronic commerce in federal procurement. We respectfully urge you to include 

language to this effect in the NDM for FY2014. 

Sincerely, 

Tom Rice 

Member of Congress Member of Congress 
127 

Proposed Title 

Report on Current Use and Opportunities for Enhanced Electronic Contracting 

Proposed language IBiII) 

(a) Report- Not later than 180 days afterthe date of the enactment of this Act, the Secretary of 

Defense shall submit to the congressional defense committees a report outlining the 

Department's plans to address the requirement in Section 8500f the National Defense 

Authorization Act for FY1998 regarding the use of electronic commerce in federal procurement 

(b) Matters Included, - The report submitted under subsection (a) shall include, with respect to the 

two fiscal years before the fiscal year in which the report is submitted, the following information: 

1, An enumeration of the number, type, and dollar value of Department solicitatiolis in 

which the public was permitted to respond to the solicitation electronically, This 

enumeration shall differentiate between solicitations that allow full or partial electronic 

submissions, 

2, An analysis of the ability of the data collected through electronic submissions to be used 

for broader reporting and data usage by the Department, 

3, An analysis of the potential benefits and obstacles to implementing fuller use of 

electronic submissions, including cost savings, reduction in errors, paperwork reduction, 

broader bidder participation, competition, and the enhanced use of data collection for 

management and timely reporting to Congress, 

4, An analYSis of the available options and technologies for broader implementation and 

the suitability of each option, by contract type and size, for implementation, 

Proposed Accompanying Report language 

The Committee has long been involved in and successful in improving the federal effort to modernize 

the contracting process, In fact, the statutory language creating FedBizOpps was included in the Fiscal 

Year 1998 National Defense Authorization Act, 

The Committee recognizes the efforts made government wide and by the Department to make contract 

postings more accessible to a larger section of the public, encouraging competition, small business 

participation, and securing best value for the taxpayers, 

The Committee is aware that the Department does receive electronic submissions for some portion of 

its solicitations, and that the amount of data received electronically varies, It also is aware that many 

contract solicitations still require a paper only submission, 

More than 15 years ago, Congress induded language in the FY1998 National Defense Authorization Act 

that effectively initiated the FedBizOpps program as a single government-wide venue for federal 

agencies to advertise business opportunities, In addition to establishing a single, Government-wide 

port of entry, that same Act also required "permitting the public to respond to the solicitation 

electronically,N 

The Committee is aware of the experience of many local and state jurisdictions in allowing the electronic 

submiSSion of responses to solicitations, and is interested in the potential for cost-savings, enhanced use 

of data for management and timely reporting to Congress, the reduction of data errors and 

completeness of responses, and for enhanced competition and reduced thresholds for broader smaB 

business participation, 

The Committee seeks a report from the Secretary on the number, type, and dollar volume of electronic 

submission availability on solicitations posted over the past two fiscal years, as well as the Secretary's 

analysiS of the potential benefits, challenges to implementation, and potential technological solutions to 

broader implementation, 
128 

Proposal Justification 

Section 850 of Public Law 105-85, also known as the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 

1998, detailed the requirements for the use of electronic commerce in Federal procurement. This Act 

placed the responsibility on government agencies to establish, maintain and use, to the maximum 

extent practical and cost effective, procedures and processes that employ electronic commerce in the 

conduct and administration of its procurement system. 

other key elements of the FY988 NOAA induded: 

Applying nationally and internationally recognized standards. 

Facilitating access lor small businesses to Federal Government procurement opportunities, 

Providing agency requirements or solicitations for contract opportunities in a form that allows 

universal access through a single, Government-wide port of entry, 

Over the course of the next few years, FedBizOpps became the recognized single government-wide 

venue for federal agendes to advertise bUSiness opportunities, 

The NOAA not only directed federal agencies to provide universal access to contract opportunities and 

solicitations through a Single, Government-wide port of entry (FedBizOpps) but also directed the 

agencies to ilpermit the public to respond to the solicitation electronically." This was done with the 

goal of providing an easier way to access and respond to federal solicitations and contract opportunities 

and to encourage greater participation in the federal procurement process, thereby making it more 

user-friendly, more competitive and cost-effective. Electronic submissions also reduce errors, facilitate 

bidding, and allow for data to be more easily reviewed, tracked, and assessed by the agency. 

FedBizOpps is now the gold standard in terms of providing the "entry" into the federal procurement 

marketplace, as Congress Intended. However, the ability to respond electronically is limited, In most 

cases, interested vendors must submit proposals and bids on paper requiring mail, courier or other 

delivery methods, Or, they can electronically submit information via document attachments to e-mail. 

in neither case are submissions being truly delivered electronically, 

Based on the experience of local and state governments implementation of true electronic submissions, 

significant benefits have accrued to both those governments and their counterparts in the contracting 

community. With the ability to submit bid Information over the internet, federal contractors could 

streamline their workflows and reduce their cost of submitting and delivering bids. Online bidding also 

benefits public agencies resulting in a win-win situation for all parties involved, Benefits may include: 

Simplifies and Standardizes 

o online bidding allows an agency or buying command to standardize and simplify the bidding or 

grant submiSSion process through a .secure online format 

Submissions can be configured to not mark a bid form as complete unless designated areas are 

checked, or without an appropriate calculation, 

Simplifies Contract Planning and Management, Reduces Overhead, Reduces Paperwork 8< 

Simplifies Review Process 

Grant/Bid review teams would be able to seamlessly receive and review electronically 

applications/proposals and compare apples to apples. 

Reduces Errors, Protects tile Agency Buyer 

There are options available to online bidding would include the ability to provide math 

computations and checks for bid completeness to alert the user before they submit an incorrect or 
129 

incomplete bid that might get rejected as unresponsive. At the same time, to protect the taxpayer, 

technology is available that also would not allow incomplete or inaccurate calculations, or 

calculations outside a preset range. This important feature would protect the federal buyer from 

potential cost overruns and will reduce the possibiHty of bid protests based on technical 

miscalculation. 

• Empowers Small Business 

o Accessible simple online bidding process allows more small businesses to access federal 

procurement easier. 

Encourages Competition 

o Online facilitation of the RFP process will increase bidding and weed out unresponsive 

proposals. 

• Greater Transparency 

For all parties to protect the taxpayer and to honor full and open competition requirements. 

o The Committee has aSKed, required, and otherwise encouraged the Department to do more 

fulsome tracking of contracted items 
130 

Congressman Paul A. Gosar 

Statement for the Record 

House Armed Services Committee Hearing: FY14 National Defense Authorization Act 

Wednesday, May 8, 2013 

Chairman McKeon, Ranking Member Smith, and members of the 

committee-I thank you for allowing me to testify before you all. I 

appreciate the fair and open process that is taking place here today. I come 

before you to highlight a serious issue facing a group of my constituents. 

By way of background, the Radiation Exposure Compensation Act of 1990, 

or RECA, established a trust fund to provide compassionate lump-sum 

payments to individuals-commonly referred to as "down winders"-who 

have contracted certain cancers and other serious diseases that are presumed 

to be the result of their exposure to ionizing radiation from above-ground 

nuclear weapons testing or from various activities in connection with 

uranium mining. Though the testing in question was performed in Nevada, 

radioactive elements affected people in Utah and Arizona as well. 

The original language in the 1990 RECA used a broad definition of the 

affected areas in Arizona. That language reads "that part of Arizona that is 

north of the Grand Canyon and west of the Colorado River". That definition 

therefore included northern Mohave County, Arizona in its definition, as it is 

the county in Arizona that is closest to Nevada and therefore closest to the 

testing ranges. 

But when RECA was reauthorized and amended in 2000, the purpose was to 

expand eligibility. With respect to Arizonans' eligibility, the definition of 

the affected areas changed to reflect specific counties. Of the five Arizona 

counties listed in the 2000 Act, Mohave County is not among them. 

Then in 2002, technical corrections were made to the 2000 Act to reflect part 

of the 1990 language concerning Arizona. So, after the 2002 corrections, the 

law listed the 5 counties and included the language "and that part of Arizona 

that is north of the Grand Canyon". 
131 

Again, Mohave County is the closest of the Arizona counties to the Nevada 

border and therefore to the nuclear testing ranges. The Arizona counties 

directly east and southeast from Mohave County are both covered in their 

entirety. This omission seems to be a clerical error-which is consistent 

with the fact that the 2000 reauthorization contained composition errors that 

had to be fixed in a separate 2002 Act. 

To correct the omission, Congressman Trent Franks, a member of this 

Committee, introduced bills in the 111 th and 11 i h Congresses to include 

Mohave County as an affected area for RECA purposes. Because I am now 

the representative of Mohave County, I have re-introduced the bill in the 

ll3th Congress. It is known as H.R. 424, the Mohave County Radiation 

Compensation Act, and I am pleased to have Representative Franks as an 

original cosponsor. I thank Representative Franks for his continued support 

for this cause. It is this exact language that I am seeking to have included in 

the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2014. 

The trust fund associated with these claims has been active since 1992, and 

that fund will sunset in 2022, by statute. My goal is to ensure that the 

affected residents in Mohave County, Arizona have their fair shot at justified 

compensation before the trust fund is closed. It will not increase costs, it will 

simply allow constituents who should have been included in the 2002 law to 

submit a claim. Each Mohave claimant would be subject to the same burden 

of proof as the other claimants. But for Congress to deny the rest of Mohave 

County, Arizona the right to eveniJk. a claim is both inconsistent and 

careless. 

Again, I thank the Committee for providing this opportunity to be heard. It 

is my hope that the Committee will favorably adopt this language and ensure 

that my constituents affected by the government's nuclear weapons tests are 

eligible for reasonable and justified compensation. 
132 

Rep. Richard Hanna FY14 NDAA HASC testimony - May 8, 2013 

Good AHernoon, 

Thank you Chairman McKeon, Ranking Member Smith, and members of the Committee for this 

opportunity and for your bipartisan support of our armed forces. 

I come before you today to formally request the Committee's support for programs of 

monumental value to our nation's modern defense capabilities as you prepare the Fiscal Year 

2014 National Defense Authorization Act. 

Specifically, I request that the Committee support the President's Fiscal Year 2014 Budget 

Request for the Air Force's Dominant Information Sciences and Methods program and the Air 

Force's Battlespace Knowledge Development and Demonstration program. 

These programs fulfill an essential mission that is critical to our national defense and our 

information management. The work completed by this funding is vital to developing and 

maintaining our defensive and offensive capabilities in the cyber security realm. In order to 

preserve secure networks and the technologies that allow us to deter enemy attacks against our 

systems, adequate funding of these programs is essential. 

Equally important, these programs provide crucial services for our service's advanced 

communications, battlefield command and control, and intelligence exploitation abilities. As our 

services work to become more efficient and unified, these assets are central to the establishment 

of joint operations. 

I believe the funding levels laid out in the President's Budget Request acknowledge the critical 

nature of these important programs. The technologies that are developed and demonstrated 

through this funding are essential to our continued 21 st century national defense priorities. Their 

importance is clearly recognized by those who utilize the technologies and practices developed 

under these programs: including the services of the Defense Department, the intelligence 

community, and other federal agencies. 

Therefore, I would like to formally ask my colleagues on this Committee to at least maintain the 

President's recommended funding levels for both ofthese programs within the Fiscal Year 2014 

National Defense Authorization Act. 

Thank you for your consideration and your time. 
133 

Testimony of Congressman Robert Hurt (V A-5) 

Before the House Armed Services Committee 

HEARING: National Defense Priorities from Members for the FY 2014 National Defense 

Authorization Act 

Room 2118 Rayburn House Office Building 

May 8, 2013 

Chainnan McKeon and Ranking Member Smith, I would like to thank you for this opportunity to 

testifY before you today regarding our national defense priorities. 

I come before you today to emphasize the important role that science and technology research 

play in advancing the mission of the Defense Intelligence Agency (DlA), and to encourage the 

development of an integrated science and technology campus with the University of Virginia 

(UVa) in Charlottesville and DIA Rivanna Station in Charlottesville. 

DIA has reorganized its science and technology programs to adapt and better respond to 

increasingly sophisticated threats. In addition, DIA is transforming its operation to include more 

analysts and intelligence gathering activities in regions beyond the Middle East where it has 

focused so much of its energy over the last several years. In order to quickly adapt, DIA will 

need to work in collaboration to leverage assets already available in the academic and industrial 

research community to address new challenges expected to arise. 

With four of its science and technology offices active in the Charlottesville region, Congress has 

called upon DlA to better integrate its activities into an integrated science and technology 

campus. This vision was encouraged to enhance DINs abilities overall and to protect against 

fhgmentation of its science and technology efforts. As threats become increasingly more 

complex and sophisticated, DIA science and technology programs will need to work together and 

leverage assets available in the academic and industrial research community to address new 

interdisciplinary challenges. An integrated science and technology campus would create an 

environment for these collaborative efforts to thrive. 

Specifically, I urge the Committee to direct the DIA to submit to the House and Senate Armed 

Services Committees a strategic plan to complete this integration within 120 days of enactment 

of the FY2014 National Defense Authorization Act. This plan should address how the DIA is 

utilizing or plans to utilize academic, industry, and non-profit research organization capabilities 

to enhance its science and technology focus. It should also consider current facilities and what 

needs to be designed or constructcd to realize the integrated campus. 

Thank you again for inviting me to testify here before you today. I believe this process provides 

members an invaluable opportunity, and I appreciate the Committee's time and consideration. 
134 

Statement of 

Representative Steve Stivers 

National Defense Priorities from Members for the FYI4 NDAA 

2013 

I want to thank Chairman McKeon and Ranking Member Smith for holding this 

hearing to allow Members to testify on behalf of their military personnel, assets, 

and community in our districts around the country - I would like to speak to 

Rickenbacker Air National Guard Base (RANGB), specifically. 

As many are aware, the President submitted his fiscal year (FY) 2014 budget to 

Congress on April 15,2013 to fund the government including the Department of 

Defense (DoD). I was troubled to learn that the President and the Pentagon are 

again requesting a new round of Base Realignment and Closure (BRAC) in 2015. 

In its latest review of the 2005 BRAC program the Government Accountability 

Office (GAO) found that the estimated cost of$21 billion to implement the 

program had grown to $35 billion by September 30, 20 II. With these figures, it 

should give Congress pause in granting a new round of BRAC in 20 15. 

I would urge the committee to seriously consider the implications a new round of 

BRAC would have on our military and civilian personnel and particularly the 

potential impact it would have on the 121 st Air Refueling Wing located at RANGB 

in Columbus, Ohio. The 121 st is part of an operational reserve that can be called 

upon daily to conduct refueling and other missions around the world. I respectfully 

ask the committee to carefully review any proposal calling for a new round of 

BRAC. 

Last year, the 2013 National Defense Authorization Act permitted the Air Force to 

retire six of the 18 KC-135 refueling aircraft currently stationed at RANGB. In 

addition to the short-term impact - the loss of nearly 200 jobs I am concerned 

that the force structure change will negatively impact the economies of scale 

achieved at the base. The most recent findings of a RAND Corporation study 

show that RANGB, in its current configuration, is the second most cost-effective 

refueling operation in the Air National Guard. Compared to the active duty, the 

Air National Guard across the nation only costs 30 cents per dollar, where as active 

is dollar for dollar. 
135 

Being so cost-effective, I ask the committee's support for my Central and 

Southeast Ohio community that provide the manpower for RANGB and is well 

positioned strategically and economically to base the new KC-46 refueling aircraft 

mission. The Air Force announced January 9, 2013 that RANGB is one of five Air 

National Guard bases to be nominated as a candidate for the new aircraft and the 

site review process has begun. This month, the Air Force will announce the final 

two bases and I urge the committee to support Rickenbacker being the first KC-46 

Air Refueling Wing in the Air National Guard. This would be a tremendous boost 

for the base, would help solidify the mission there in the long-teml, and would help 

secure the tens of millions in economic impact derived from having the Air 

National Guard mission located at Rickenbacker. 

Also, I would like to bring to the attention of the committee the opportunity to give 

the DoD guidance and direction on the possibility of future cost-sharing ventures 

with civilian aviation authorities to modemize joint military/civilian air traffic 

control towers. 

I would request that the committee consider policy that would allow collaborative 

funding between the DoD and the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) to 

provide the best opportunity to manage critical aviation infrastmcture investments 

by stakeholders with ajoint military/civilian control tower like Rickenbacker in 

my district. 

Lastly, if a BRAC occurs in 2015 or DoD seeks programmatic changes, the 

committee should consider the impact of current criteria standards that 

disproportionally cause a negative rankings for Air Guard and Reserve bases -

such as Rickenbacker - as compared to active duty bases. As you thoroughly 

review and craft the FY2014 National Defense Authorization Act, I request that 

this committee seek separate criteria standards to rank active Air Force and Air 

National Guard/Reserve bases. 

Again, I appreciate the Chairman and Ranking Member for allowing me to 

today in support of my community and the Rickenbacker Air National Guard Base. 

2 
136 

Statement for the Record 

Congresswoman Suzan [)elBene 

Washington's 1st Congressional [}jstrict 

HASC Member Testimony Day 

Wednesday, May 8, 2013 

Chairman McKeon and Ranking Member Smith, thank you for the opportunity to submit a 

statemcnt to the Committee today. As you work towards the markup of the National Defense 

Authorization Act (NDAA) for FY 2014, I urge you to consider supporting the expansion and 

integration of Solar Electric In-Space Propulsion (SEP) technology, an advanced, highly efficient 

method of propulsion used in space to place and reposition spacecraft in orbit, for National 

Security Space missions. 

The benefits of this SEP technology are significant. SEP tcchnology has the potential to 

maximize the size and lifespan of space assets, as well as reduce the costs to launch them. For 

the Air Force, advanced SEP systems are successfully tlying on the first two Advanced 

Extremely High Frequency (AEHF) satellites. These technologies, in the form of Hall current 

thrusters (HCT), associated power processing unit, electronics, hardware and solar arrays were, 

in fact, used to save the AEHF-I mission when the vehicle's bipropellant propulsion system 

intended to raise AEHF-l to its final Geosynchronous Orbit (GEO) failed. The AEHF-I HCTs, 

intended for only the last 20% of orbit-raising in addition to all station keeping for the life of the 

satellite, were successfully used to perform the full orbit raising portion of the mission and did so 

without loss of satellite service life. By preventing this loss, SEP technology has already 

provided a significant savings to the U.S. Government. 

Particularly in light of the current budget climate, we must prioritize high-value and cost-saving 

technologies that will provide a great return on our investment. Continuing our nation's 

leadership in developing these technologies is critical to our national security, and will also play 

a key role in driving our nation's economic growth through the creation of high-technology jobs. 

I hope you will agree that SEP's importance to national security and job creation merits further 

investment. Thank you for your attention to this important matter and for your support of 

technology advancement in the NDAA. 
137 

Written Testimony 

Congressman Andy Barr (KY-06) 

Thank you Chairman McKeon for providing me the opportunity to speak before the House 

AImed Services Committee today. I come before you in support of our Active, Guard, and 

Reserve components, as well as our veterans to ensure they receive the needed equipment and 

support they deserve. 

The United States must be capable of proactively protecting the nation and its citizens. Our 

Armed Forces must maintain a superior military force and be ready to act anywhere in the world 

where our vital national interests are thrcatened. I believe this can be achieved by giving our 

military the resources it needs to keep us safe and maintain freedom. Today, I want to 

particularly focus on the National Guard, which faces mounting challenges regarding how to 

replace equipment that is obsolete and worn out through normal wear and tear, as well as 

strengthening family readiness programs. 

I stand beside the Commonwealth of Kentucky's Adjutant General, Major General Edward 

Tonini in requesting that we fully fund the FY 14 National Guard and Reserve Equipment 

Account (NGREA) request in order to remain mission capable, and a valuable asset towards 

maintaining our national defense. I know that appropriations are not within this Committee's 

jurisdiction, but I do want to commend Chairman McKeon for his persistent and strong efforts 

when it comes to advocating lor our military to have the funding resources it needs to do its job 

and maintain readiness. 

I also would like to address the almming increase in suicides which, as you know, are quickly 

becoming an epidemic throughout the U.S. military and among veterans. The VA reports that 22 

veterans take their lives every day. 

Service members and veterans that are at high risk of suicide and dangerous behavioral health 

conditions need appropriate access to mental health professionals for screening, care, and 

refelTals. On-site access to mental health professionals has proven successful in overcoming 

time, geographical, and stigma barriers that have saved countless lives. I ask that this committee 

work to strengthen prograJl1S that will aid in stabilizing our service men and women's mental 

health. 

Additionally, one of the greatest concerns that I am hearing from the Veterans Coalition I have 

formed in my district is distress over retirees and their dependents, who are not yet Medicareeligible, being transitioned from TRICARE Prime to TRICARE Standard. Many in my district 

have voiced concerns that this forces retirees to pay higher out of pocket expenses, increases copays, and creates higher deductibles. 

We need to ensure that we keep our commitments to current retirees and family members from 

whom we have asked for such extraordinary sacrifices. I encourage the Committee not to move 

forward in changing Prime Service Areas (PSA's) which would have the effect oflimiting 

TRICARE options. Or as a solution, consider a onetime TRICARE Prime opt-in option for 
138 

current retirees not living in PSA's, which is all of Kentucky with the exception of Fort 

Campbell. 

Separately, a number of concerns have been brought to my attention regarding the Blue Orass 

Chemical Activity (BOCA), which is taking place at the Blue Orass Army Depot (BOAD) 

located in Richmond, Kentucky. 

As you know, the United States is legally obligated to ensure the destruction of all chemical 

weapons under the Convention on the Prohibition of the Development, Production, Stockpiling 

and Use of Chemical Weapons and on their Destruction Treaty (CWC Treaty). 

Many are concerned that the Blue Orass Chemical Activity at the Blue Orass Almy Depot is not 

receiving the resources needed to complete the chemical demilitarization operations. The main 

funding source for BOCA is the Operation and Maintenance, Army (OMA) funding. OMA 

funds have been reduced from $23 million to $18 million. 

This cut in funding comes at a very critical time in addition to hiring freezes, furloughs, and a 

Reduction of Force (RIF) that have taken place at the Depot. Due to these cuts, BOCA will be 

challenged to continue supporting vital chemical demilitarization operations obligations 

demanded by the CWC Treaty, and so I hope to work further with the Committee to address 

these concerns, and provide the necessary response. 

Further, r would like to personally thank Chailman McKeon and this Committee for your 

leadership and strong support for increasing pUblic-private partnerships at arsenals and depots. 

As someone who recognizes that public-private partnerships can play an important role in 

bringing long-term stability and jobs to communities, I certainly encourage this Committee to 

continue to take an active role in this area. 

By providing increased opportunity for additional business - not limited to the defense industry -

to locate or relocate to the Depot, it would not only increase revenue to the Army Working 

Capital Fund but also allow for additional jobs to the people of the community. I look forward to 

working with this Committee, the DOD, and the BOAD in my District, in order to help the Depot 

reach its fullest potential. 

I am humbled and inspired every day by the patriotism and dedication to duty that resides in the 

hearts of the men and women who chose to serve in our nation's Armed Services. I look forward 

to working with this Committee to help address the matters I have raised today. Thank you. 
139 

Testimony of Congressman Matt Cartwright 

House Armed Services Committee 

2118 Rayburn House Office Building 

Wednesday, 8 May, 2013 12.30 PM 

1. Introduction 

Members of the House Armed Services Committee, r come before you today to 

testify about the importance of our defense industrial base, and, specifically, about 

military depots. Right now, we stand at the tail end of two long wars that have 

stretched our budgets and severely strained our all-volunteer force. As the 

committee is aware, hard choices about defense spending will have to be made in 

the near future. [n order to shrink our defense budget to fit a peacetime force, this 

committee will have to identify programs that are no longer vital to American 

safety, while, at the same time, maintain funding for readiness for a myriad of 

continuing threats. I hope you will join me in supporting replacing the sequesterlevel cuts with a defense budget policy that thoughtfully and appropriately 

reshapes our fighting forces. 

TI. Depots 

Our military depots are a fiscally prudent tool in maintaining readiness. As you set 

their budget, I urge you to consider the value of depots to the warfighter, the return 

on the investment that the American taxpayer receives from depots, and the 

indispensable economic role these facilities play in communities where they are 

located. [n my district alone, Tobyhanna Army Depot, the army's only C4ISR 

depot, generates $1.68 in economic activity for every dollar invested. 

Additionally, every job at Tobyhanna generates two and half jobs in the larger 

local community. Letterkenny ArnlY Depot, also in my state, generates over one 

and half local jobs for every employee who goes to work for the base. In many 

cases, as with Tobyhanna, depots are the largest employers in their respective 

congressional districts. Dramatic reductions would economically devastate these 

communities. 
140 

I would further ask you to consider the impacts sequestration and the FY 2013 

Continuing Resolution have already had on Tobyhanna. Five hundred people have 

lost their jobs. Projected funding is about $] 00 million below what was originally 

planned, and funding actually received by the depot is now only about 72% of the 

revised, scaled-back plan. Work stoppages on several key systems will begin 

occurring next month. To maintain cost competitiveness, the depot has curtailed 

contracts and cancelled its capital investment program for this fiscal year. 

As the ability of depots to refurbish essential supplies becomes lost because of 

such cuts, the outlook for better integrating our forces through upgraded 

communications networks and equipment becomes bleaker. This is simply 

unacceptable. As Army Chief of Staff General Raymond T. Odierno stated last 

August: network upgrades remain the Army's "number one modernization 

priority." 

III. Going Forward 

Last year, the House voted to cut nearly $2 billion from our military depot budget. 

Depots are required to run like businesses: they must win work and remain costcompetitive with the private sector. If they cannot do so, they have to cut costs. 

Slashing their operational funding means they are able to do less work. If 

overhead costs become too great a percentage of total costs, the facility becomes 

less competitive when bidding for new work. That leads to further reductions in 

total work, which can lead to a so-called "death spiral" where this process repeats 

itself until the depot is no longer viable. 

In addition to increasing operational funds, this committee should seek to enforce 

the 50/50 rule and ensure that the essential "go to war" items are identified so that 

depots maintain sufficient workload. Also, we should use the oversight power of 

Congress to ensure that the service branches move quickly to establish new 

systems that will be supported by depots and that will support depot workloads for 

decades to come. 

The justification for last year's cuts to depots was that they had too much "extra" 

work to do. But, this year, we should listen to them. They are now fighting for 

their long-term survival. I urge you to authorize an expansion of the electronic 
141 

technology that tomorrow's warfighter will need along with increased direct 

funding for our nation's military depots. Only a well-equipped, well-supported 

force will allow America to meet all of its future threats. 
142 

WRITTEN TESTIMONY 

BY CONGRESSMAN KEVIN CRAMER, NORTH DAKOTA (AL) 

TO THE 

HOUSE ARMED SERVICES COMMITTEE 

MAY 7, 2013 

Chairman ~fcKcon, Ranking l\{cmbcr Smith, and distinguishcd Mcmbers of the Committcc, 

thank you for this opportunity to providc testimony for the fiscal 2014 National Defense 

Authorization /\ct. 1 thank you for rour sen-icc as you guide the U.S. Ilouse of Representatives on 

the most importanr job of our federal government. National defense is not only our top priority, 

but our only mandatory function, as laid out in the Constitution. 

If to "provide for the common defense" of our nation is not hard enough, we must do so in 

a situation of unprecedented debt. \'iihile it may be possible to make more strategic spcnding cuts 

from our military, which has done more with less, wc know that reforming cntitlemcnt programs is 

where thc significant spending cuts will have to come from. According to the Congressional Budget 

Office, spending on health programs and Social Security is projccted to equal 10.9 percent of Gross 

Domestic Product (GDP) during the coming decade, compared with a 40-rear a,-erage of7.2 

percenr, whereas defense spending is projected to avetagc 3.0 percent of GDP, compared with a 40-

ycar average of 4.7 pcrccnt. 

Historically low defense spending alone is not necessarily a bad thing, but when the threats 

facing our nation arc steady, if not increasing, it warrants cause for concern. Iran and North Korea 

continue to advance their ballistic missile and nuclear programs. Syria has shown a willingness to 

use chemical weapons. Pakistan continues to increase its nuclear capabilities with the threat of 

terrorist take over. Russia and China show no signs of slowing rhe development of their respective 

military assets. Our adversaries sense our uncertainty and they grow emboldened. Lastly, there is 

no shortage of terrorist groups who want to do harm to Amcrican people. t-."lr. Chairman, arc we 

prcpared for thc challengcs of this century? 

\\i e need military assets that project strength, swiftness, and superiority. \Ve need assets that 

deter attack. This means maintaining our nuclear arsenal, flying the best planes, drh-ing the best 

ground force, and sailing the best ships. This means giving our soldiers the best training and 

cquipment aronnd. The most expcnsivc price tag is the loss of American lives, and thc best way to 

avoid that cost is detcrrcnce. The words of Ronald Reagan still ring truc, "pcacc through strcngth." 

I'm ,-ery proud of our vcterau, guard, resen'e, and active military personnel. My own state, 

North Dakota, has a long history of service to our nation and continues to stand ready to face new 

challenges. Minot _\ir Force Base operates two of the three legs of our nuclear triad, B-S2 bombers 

and Intercontmental Ballistic i'vIissilcs, the most cost effective deterrent. Grand Porks Air Porce 

Base currently flies the Global Hawk unmanned system and stands ready to sen-e with rhe next 

generation of aerial refueling tanker, tlle KC-46a. The North Dakota Air National Guard, The 

Happy Hooligans, based out of Fargo has a long history of excellence in defense of our nation. The 

Happy Hooligans wcre recently awarded their 15'" Outstanding l!nit award. The North Dakota 

Army Nat.ional Guard has served numerous missions domestic and abroad with great success. The 

1" Battalion, 188'" ,\ir Defense Artillery Regiment will soon arrive in Washington D.C. to defend our 

nation's capital from airborne attack. 
143 

\\'e must support our military with the resources they need to protect the significant 

freedom and prosperity we enjoy. Thank you for this opportunity. 
144 

Testimony of Congressman Ron DeSantis (FL-6) 

May 8"', 2013 

House Armed Services Committee 

Chairman McKeon, Ranking Member Smith, Members or the House Armed Services Committee, thank 

you for having me here to testifY today. I know this is a particularly busy period for this committee, and I 

appre-ciate your time. 

I'm here to talk ahout the E-2D Advanced Hawkeye - which as you know is the Navy's carrier-based 

Airborne Early Warniug and Battle Management Command and Coutrol system. Variants of this aircraft 

have been serving our military well since the 1960's. The most advanced version the E-2D Advanced 

Hawkeye- has now been cleared for full production. 

The E-2D is equipped with new, cutting-edge communications capabilities and radar systems. These 

advancements will enable the E-2D to synthesize information from multiple onboard and off-board 

sensors to provide increased missile protection to our carrier defense groups, while also improving the 

aircraft's offensive capabilities; key capabilities in support of our combatant commands. 

The E-2D program has met every major milestone on schedule since the program's inception in 2003. As 

the program moves forward, I urge you to support the Navy's multi-year procurement ofthe E-2D in the 

President's FY14 budget. 

FY14 is the first year of a planned five-year fixed-price multi-year procurement, which would provide the 

Navy with the full complement of32 E-2D aircraft in the Program of Record over the next five years. 

Multi-year procurement will yield a 10% savings over annual single-year contracts - an expected savings 

of more than $522 million over the length of the contract term. 

This program is critical for our Navy and our military. As our friend, and E-2 pilot Rep. Bridenstine puts 

it: 

"Given the threats to the strike groups, multiyear procurement ofE2-D is absolutely 

necessary. The only question is, "Arc we purchasing enough E-2Ds and missile 

interceptors to counter the high volumcs of incoming missiles that our sailors and soldiers 

could face?" 

Thank you for your consideration of SUppot1. tor the multi-year procurement of the E-2D. This 

procurement method will ensure that this vital aircraft is produced in a timely, and cost-effective way. 

As' an appendix to my submitted written testimony, I've attached a May 7th letter from myself, Rep_ 

Bridenstine, Rep. Crenshaw, Rep.Mica, Rep. Brown, Rep. Posey, Rep. Rooney, Rep. Miller, Rep. Yoho 

and Rep. Diaz-Balati to Chairman McKeon and Ranking Member Smith in support of tile E-2D program. 

The role technology plays in modern warfare can never be discounted, and the technological advances of 

the E-2D will ensure that our military maintains its critical edge. There are other ways we can and should 

maintain that edge. 
145 

I would also like to encourage the Department of Defense to examine the advantages of acquiring 

simulation capability using short term, fee for service contracting, thereby rewarding and expanding 

innovation and commercial-otI-the shelf offerings. 

Likewise, DoD should encourage common commercially-developed, commercially supported R&D 

investments by industry. 

These common standards would reduce cost, eliminate duplicative government R&D, create a 

competitive industry base, ensure that simulation components can plug and play regardless of original 

equipment manufactnrer and most impOltantly eliminate the long acquisition cycle. 

Thank you again for having me here today, and thank you for all you do for our warfighters and our 

country. 
146 

Letter to Chairman McKeon and Ranking Member Smith from: Rep. Ron DeSantis, Rep. Ander Crenshaw, 

Rep. Jeff Miller, Rep. John Mica, Rep. Bill Posey, Rep. Thomas Rooney, Rep. Mario Diaz-Balart, Rep. 

Corrine Brown, Rep. Jim Bridenstine, Rep. Ted Yoho 
147 

RON DESANTIS 

finlQ'STR1P',hcfHOA 

COMM1T:EE ON FOREIGt\: AfTAIf1S 

COMMITT;:::F. ON OVERSIGHT AND 

GOVERNMENT REFORM 

COMMITTEE ON THE JUDICI,\RY 

~ongress of tbe mnitel:l ~tate£i 

j!)ousc of l\epnscntattbcl5 

mazijinllton, jl)<lf 20515-0906 

May 7, 2013 

The Honorable Buck McKeon 

Chatnnan 

House Armed Services Committee 

2120 Rayburn House Office Building 

Washington, DC 20515 

The Honorable Adam Smith 

Ranking Member 

House Armed Services Committee 

2120 Rayburn House Office Building 

Washington, DC 20515 

Dear Chairman McKeon and Ranking Member Smith: 

As you consider Fiscal Year 2014 authorizations for the Department of Defense, we request your support for 

the Navy's multi-year procurement of the E-2D Advanced Hawkeye program in the FY14 President's Budget. 

FY14 is the first year ofa planned five-year fixed-price Multi-Year Procurement (iVfYP), which would provide 

the Navy with the full complement of32 8-20 aircraft in the Program of Record and yield 10% savings over 

annual single~year contracts. The savings attributed to this IvrYP is estimated to be just over $522 million. We 

represent constituents across the cauntlY who engineer, n:anufadure. maintain, and operate the E-2D system. 

As you know, E-2D is the Navy's carrier~base.d Airborne Early Warning and Battle Management Command 

and Control (BMC2) system. The E .. 2D provides Theater Air and Missile Defense, synthesizing information 

from multiple onboard and off-board scmors, making complex tactica! decisions, and disseminating actionable 

information to Joint FQrces in a distributed, open-architecture environment. Using the newly-developed radar, 

the £-2D works with surface ships to provide force protection and allow the Navy to project forces into the 

littorals and overland to ensure access in c('I:1tested areas, 

The E-2D program, which is major milestone on schedule since the 

program's inception in 2003, Full will fully realize the 

power and protection provided by this state-of-the art early \vaming and battle management command and 

control weapons system, 

E-2D is a critical asset to our mllitary, 

communities nationwide, 

Hawkeye program included in essential to the start oftbe Navy's MYP. which 

is the most cost-effective and efficient way to provide the military with this critica\.airborne capability, 

Thank you for yom consideration of this request and your support for our 1110;1 Rnd womel: in uniform. 

~-RON DESANT1S 

rvfcmher of Congress 

Sincerely. 

{Kf\DER 

{:2L_~ CRENSHAW 

Member ofCongl'css 
148 

M;Z~Z:2,t ),1ember of Congress 

C:ifi~~~ Member of Congress 
149 

Congresswoman Tulsi Gabbard 

Testimony before the House Armcd Services Committee: 

National Defense Authorization Actfor Fiscal Year 2014 

Chairman McKeon, Ranking Member Smith, and members of the committee, I appreciate the 

opportunity to testily before you today. 

I echo words from last year's Priorities for 21 st Century Defense Strategy "we are in a moment of 

transition". Under this committee's leadership, the United States has made significant progress in 

the drawdown of the costly and protracted wars in the Middle East that have consumed the 

resources and attention of our Armed Services lor the past decade. Indeed, this is no easy task 

and your leadership seeing it through is greatly appreciated. 

The Priorities for 21 st Century Defense Strategy also emphasized the impOltancc to focus a 

broader range of challcnges and opportunities, including the security and prosperity ofthe Asia 

Pacific which has matured into our Rebalance Strategy. 

The regional instability created by the recent North Korean provocations as well as the slowboiling territorial disagreements around the Senkakus and South China Seas underscore the 

growing need to strengthen our nation's militmy and diplomatic presence in this region where 

our economic and national security interests are inextricably linked. 

A region where our greatest security adversary is not a nation or a specific threat, but the 

distance we must overcome to ensure open and secure access to the global domains and our 

national security interests. Hawaii is a critical link in addressing this challenge. 

We must keep Hawaii safe. In today's threat environment, this translates into ballistic missile 

defense. 

With the increased operational tempo that our naval forces are experiencing, the Pearl Harbor 

Naval shipyard and Regional Maintenance Center provides full-service support to the surface 

fleet and the new Virginia Class submarines which cover more than 60% of the world's surface 

and are essential to maintaining the robust presence called for in our national military strategy. 

As we continue to realign our force posture in the Asia-Pacific, it is important we ensure that we 

provide the very best training facilities enabling combat readiness. This additional presence 

comes on the heels of the Marine Corps' decision to base two squadrons of its latest transport 

aircraft, the MV-22 Osprey, and one light attack helicopter squadron to Kaneohe Bay. 

The Paci fie Missile Range Facility (PMRF) is the world's largest multi-environmental range 

capable of supporting surface, subsurface, air, and space operations simultaneously. PMRF's 

work with the Aegis Ashore Missile Defense Test Complex is vital to enhancing our nation's 

ballistic missile defense capabilities and protecting the United States and its telTitories from any 

future attack. 
150 

In addition, the Pohakuloa Training Area (PTA) serves as the premier combined arms training 

facility in the Pacific region. Ground and air units from all U.S. militmy services m'e able to 

train at PT A because it offers realistic training opportunities not found elsewhere and thus vital 

to our armed forces readiness. 

Each orthese key enablers is critical to this committee's efforts to provide oversight to the 

ongoing militruy transformation that is starting to take place. I look forward to working with the 

committee as we continue to build on the progress we have made in executing the US rebalance 

to this vitally important region. 

Once again, thank you Mr. Chainnan and Ranking Member Smith for allowing me the 

opportunity to testifY today about the strategic importance of Hawaii in this process. 
151 

Statement to the House Armed Services Committee 

Representative Denny Heck 

MayS, 2013 

Thank you Mr. Chairman and members of the committee for the opportunity to testify before 

you today. 

I represent the Congressional district that contains Joint Base Lewis-McChord, the third largest 

military installation in the United States. Thousands of families in my district are connected to 

this Joint Base in some way. They are the families of active duty service members, reservists, 

civilian workers, veterans, and more. In the past few months, many of these families have 

begun to feel the negative effects of decisions the Department of Defense has had to make as a 

result of the sequestration cuts. 

I want to read you part of a letter I received from one of the members of one of these families. 

It comes from a woman named Lacey, who lives in Olympia, the same city I do. Lacey's husband 

is stationed at Joint Base Lewis-McChord. He has been deployed multiple times overseas during 

the last decade. Lacey and her husband have two young sons, aged 3 and 1. She writes of her 

family: 

Our lives together have held surprises, both good and bad, thanks to my husband's military 

commitment. But I support my husband in his service - I know that for the bad days he has at 

"the office" that he has far more good days. He truly enjoys his job. My husband was put on 

orders to come here to Fort Lewis and we were told that this particular assignment, though 

chaotic, would actually result in more time home for him. More time with our two young boys, 3 

andl. 

The first portion of my husband's assignment was wonderful. He was home for dinner. We could 

actually eat a family meal (for the first time since we've had children, I might add). He was able 

ta actually do the whole bedtime routine for our oldest son, instead of barely skidding in the 

door to read him part of a story and put him in bed. My sons blossomed with this "extra" time 

with their father. My 3-year-old started actually talking: stringing together words and phrases, 

articulating complex thoughts, explaining feelings. My l-year-old started to talk period, mostly 

saying, "Dada." It took my l-year-old nearly six months to warm to my husband as he did not 

know his father. 

In the few short weeks that these sequester cuts have been coming downhill, I can tell you that 

there has been a significant and miserable change in my children. Both of them are moody and 
152 

angry; at the gym, I am called in my aften ta get my children fram care because they are 

unhappy and inconsoloble. What had been great progress at potty training suddenly regressed 

bock into diapers. My husband wakes up at 5:00 and isn't getting back home from work until 

6:00 pm on a good day. Many days he is barely getting through the door at 7:30 pm at night, 

and that is with leaving tasks incamplete on his desk. We have barely two hours together before 

he is falling asleep exhausted on the couch. While I cook us a meager dinner, he works on his 

graduate course (he just started his master's degree in January). 

I know my husband is a hard-working man. I have supported him through two Iraq tours, two 

assignments in Africa, and an assignment in a former Soviet territory. I have brought two 

children into this world with him. I have moved completely across the country with him, and I 

am putting my graduate degree and career on hold in order to support him and raise our 

children until they are of school-age. I know what kind of hours he works when he is deployed; it 

is the same daily hours as he is working now. My job, as I see it, is to hold this family together, 

to make sure that my children are connected to their father. But haw can I keep them connected 

to a husk of a person? This schedule, this pace, will turn my husband into a shell of himself 

Mr. Chairman, often this town gets lost in the numbers and percentages and statistics that go 

into our federal budgeting process. We lose focus on the fact that the decisions we make here 

impact families in real ways. There are real people out there who have to deal with the 

consequences of this Congress's actions - or in this case, it's inaction in regards to replacing the 

sequestration cuts with a balanced, responsible alternative. 

I know the committee does not have jurisdiction on this issue. I can guarantee that 

sequestration has affected the district of each member of this committee. Congress can still get 

this right. Congress can stop the unnecessary hardships that lacey speaks about in this letter. It 

just needs to muster the will to act. I hope, for the sake of military families around the country 

like lacey's, that this happens soon. 

Thank you. 
153 

May 8, 2013 

Prepared Statement of Congressman Richard Hudson on Fiscal Year 2014 National 

Defense Authorization Act before the House Armed Services Committee 

Chairman McKeon, Ranking Member Smith, I want to thank you and this Committee lor the opportunity to 

share with you some of the priorities I hold for the upcoming year, of which I am here to emphasize on hehalf 

of the Eighth District of North Carolina. 

As a new Member ofthe House, I strongly support the call of the American people to reduce government 

spending and bring our staggering national debt under control. I firmly believe that our failure to do so is the 

single greatest threat to America's national security. As I have traveled around communities in North Carolina, 

people have consistently told me tbat restoring fiscal responsibility is their number one priority, and that tbey 

sent me to Washington to force the government to live witbin its means. Accordingly, I am committed to 

cutting spending, reducing the size of government, promoting economic growth, and putting our budget on a 

path to balance. 

Today, I would like to discuss a number of things: namely, the challenges that we must face along with our 

allies and partners; the commitments we have made to our men and women in uniform, and the importance of 

ensuring accountability and transparency when trying to maintain a strong national defense in a tough budget 

environment. 

Challenges Facing the United States 

The past decade has taught us that many threats no longer come from traditional nations, but rather from 

determined groups of extremists who seek to wreak havoc on the American dream. We ean never forget how 

the a!taeks of 9/11 changed the way America operates in the world and how we must be vigilant against any 

threats of terrorism. 

While the War on Terror is an ongoing battle against evil, in most cases, states continue to pose the greatest 

threat to our national security whether through the sponsor of terrorist groups or outright provocation. A failure 

to exercise US diplomatic and military leadership means nuclear states like Iran and North Korea will be able to 

bully the international system. The US cannot stand idly by while rogue states continue to test, build, and refine 

their nuclear capabilities. We must be prepared to take all actions necessary to prevent the proliferation of 

nuclear weapons and cannot afford the cost of failing to back up our claims. 
154 

Promises Made and Kept 

North Carolina is fortunate to be home to over 700,000 proud veterans, and I am lucky to represent a District 

that has a strong military presence given its proximity to fort Bragg. I continue to be involved with those 

communities most associated with fort Bragg and have joined the Arn1y Aviation and Special Operations 

Forces Caucus in order to keep up to date with the issues these units face on a daily basis. 

I also just returned from a productive visit to the base and am proud to report on their fine work there on behalf 

of this great nation. As a member of the North Carolina delegation very concerned about Ft. Bragg's mission 

and their future, I look forward to working with the base to ensure that their priOlities are met. Among these are 

a number of new centers including a skills sustainment course building for the Joint Special Operations Medical 

Training Center, an engineer training facility for the I st Special Warfare Training Group, a language and a 

cultural center for the John F. Kennedy Special Warfare Center and School. 

As the United States increases its Special Operations and Airborne operations tempo and presence, it is 

critically important that we support in depth training and techniques, an area where Ft. Bragg continues to excel. 

I look forward to working with you and this Committee to provide the necessary resources to ensure the utmost 

success for our dedicated men and women in unifonn there. 

America has made promises to the men and women who have made countless sacrifices for OUf nation, and we 

must guarantee those promises are kept. I will work tirelessly to ensure that these veterans are treated with the 

dignity and respect they have earned. Our men and women in uniform represent the best our nation has to offer, 

and [am proud to serve and support them in Congress as they serve our great country. 

As Chairman of the Subcommittee on Transportation Security, I have worked for and support the 

Transportation Sccurity Administration's decision to offcr less-invasive screcning to members of the military 

who have sustained severe combat-related inj uries. This update, which allows wounded warriors to keep their 

shoes, light jackets and hats on when undergoing screening at airport checkpoints, provided they contact TSA in 

advance of traveling, builds upon other changes promotcd by the Homeland Security Committcc. 
155 

Properly Budgeting for Strong National Defense 

Finally, I would like to discuss the defense budget In tough economic times it is critical that we hold every 

federal agency accountable for taxpayer dollars and the Department of Defense is no exception. I applaud the 

work of my colleagues Congressmen Conaway and Andrews who have long urged DOD to make financial 

management a priority within the department Under the current budget environment, I think we can all agree 

that the DOD must be audit ready in order to make certain every dollar appropriated and spent is accounted for 

and used to its fullest potentiaL 

With that said, it is important to remember that Defense spending represents approximately 19 percent of the 

federal budget, yet has been forced to absorb nearly halfofthe spending reductions occurring in the past two 

years. Given the defense community's already disproportionate contribution to delicit reduction, I encourage 

the committee to use all means necessary to cel1ify that our military has the resources it needs to properly 

defend the United States and keep its citizens safe in the future. We must always ensure that our military's 

readiness is not compromised by an inability in Washington to properly set spending priorities. 

1 would like to thank the committee for the opportunity to speak here today. I am eager to support your efforts 

to reduce the size of government, promote economic growth, and put our nation's budget on a path to balance in 

the near future. 

#### 
156 

Congressman Dan Kildee's Testimony before the House Armed Services Committee 

Regarding the Fiscal Year 2014 National Defense Authorization Act 

Thank you Chairman McKeon, Ranking Member Smith, and distinguished members ofthe 

committee for holding today's hearing and allowing me the opportunity to share some of the 

defense priorities I hope you will consider in preparing the Fiscal Year 20 l4 National Defense 

Authorization Act. Although I do not serve on the Armed Services Committee, all Members of 

Congress have a responsibility to protect our nation, and your gracious invitation reHects that. It 

is an honor to be here. 

I respectfully ask that you fully fund the National Guard to enahle it to continue to playa critical 

role as a mcmber of the total force. The National Guard provides a significant portion of the 

active duty services' capabilities. Since September II, 2001, individual National Guard 

members have mobilized over 750,000 times in support of overseas operations - including over 

17,000 individual deployments from my home state of Michigan. The Air National Guard 

supplies 35 percent ofthe Air Force's capability at a fraction of the active duty Air Force's 

budget. Moreover, the Army National Guard provides 32 percent of the total Army force, again 

with a significantly smaller portion of the active duty components' budget. 

In addition to providing the military combatant commanders with fully deployable capability, 

the National Guard continues to fulfill its critical state mission. Last year, the National Guard 

responded to over 100 natural disasters, including deploying 12,000 personnel to assist with the 

Hurricane Sandy relief efforts. Further, the National Guard-particularly in my home state of 

Michigan-has started to take a leading role in strengthening our cybersecurity at both the state 

and national levels. 

Finally, National Guard members serve as military ambassadors in our communities. As less 

than one percent of the population has served in the military, many citizens' largest connection 

to our service members, and their sacrifices, is via the citizen soldiers of the National Guard. 

For these reasons, fully funding and supporting the National Guard is both sound fiscal and 

defense policy. [ also ask that the committee consider some additional priorities particularly 

relevant to individual service members. 

A smart and well-educated military is a more effective and adaptable force. Thus, I ask that you 

fully fund the military tuition assistance program. This program enables service members to 

pursue educational opportunities while serving. Members of the military use this critical 

program to advance their military careers as well as prepare for their transition back to civilian 

life. 

Further, to address the significant veterans' unemployment rate, the Department of Defense 

must improve the assistance it provides to service members as they transition from the military. 

Improving opportunities to transfer military credentials and training to the civilian sphere, job 

training and assistance, and implementing programs to ensure that service members are aware of 

thc support and benefits available to them would all be positive initial steps. 
157 

Finally, as the committee is well aware, military suicide and mental health issues arc major 

problems facing service members and recent veterans. I ask that you continue to explore ways to 

address these issues and increase funding for programs that help treat and identiry mental 

illness. In this area in particular, our service members deserve our nation's best. 

Thank you again for this wonderful opportunity to testiry before the committee. 
158 

Statement of Representative Beto O'Rourke (TX-16) 

MayS, 2013 

Armed Services Committee 

Chairman McKeon and Ranking Member Smith, thank you for this opportunity to 

testify on the FY 2014 National Defense Authorization Act. I would also like to thank 

the Chairman and his staff for being accommodating in allowing me to testify in person. 

I have the distinct honor of representing the 16th Congressional district of Texas, which 

is home to Fort Bliss and the Army's 1st Armored Division along with nearly 100,000 

Soldiers and military families. I was reminded again this week of the incredible sacrifice 

these service members and their families make to our nation when five Soldiers from 

Fort Bliss were killed in an IED attack in Afghanistan. I am truly humbled by their 

service. 

I would like to testify about three things today: (1) the current budget situation facing 

the Army and the ability of Fort Bliss and the surrounding community to adapt to the 

changing needs of the Army; (2) the importance of the new William Beaumont Army 

Hospital being constructed on Fort Bliss; (3) the vital role that the tuition assistance 

program plays in the lives of our service members 

The Budget Situation 

As many of you have heard from Secretary of the Army McHugh and Chief of Staff 

General Odierno, the Army's ability to field a ready and capable force to meets its 

mission requirements has been placed at risk by fiscal challenges in FY 2013. The 

combined effects of sequestration and the fiscal uncertainty caused by multiple 

continuing resolutions has impacted Army readiness and has placed 11,000 civilian 

employees at Fort Bliss at risk of furlough or job loss. Despite these challenges, the 

Army remains the best-trained, best-equipped, and best-led fighting force in the world. 

I urge this committee to use the National Defense Authorization Act to guarantee this 

remains true. 

Congress needs to move forward with a plan to end the sequester in a responsible 

manner. Even if we do, the reality is that the Army will continue with its plan to reduce 

its active-duty force from 562,000 to 490,000 by 2020 while also looking at other 

possibilities such as eliminating a minimum of eight brigade combat teams. This 

reduction in Army end-strength should be carried out in a way that avoids a hollowing 

out of the force, while simultaneously enhancing readiness, balance, and flexibility. Fort 

Bliss is well suited to help the Army meet those objectives. And, as the largest power 

projection installation in the nation, Fort Bliss demonstrates daily its ability to deploy 

and redeploy Soldiers wherever they are needed. To echo the words of Former Secretary 

of Defense Leon Panetta when he visited the installation, "let me be clear Fort Bliss is 

the premiere post in America." 
159 

Additionally, the El Paso region and the entire Fort Bliss community continue to go 

above and beyond in their steadfast support of our Soldiers and their families, investing 

heavily in improvements to infrastructure, quality oflife projects, and education. We 

invested over $2 billion in highway projects, new schools, and a children's hospital 

alone. Recently we agreed to tax ourselves to pay for additional quality of life projects 

around Fort Bliss. The community's support of this Army post is second to none. The 

recent $5 billion of federal investment into the growth and expansion of Fort Bliss will 

also ensure that both the Army and surrounding community continue to benefit from 

this relationship well into the future. 

In the past, Fort Bliss has always responded swiftly when the needs of the Army have 

changed. In 2005, this post quickly adapted itself into a new, world-class home for "Old 

Ironsides," the 1st Armored Division, providing nearly 1 million acres of maneuver area 

for this division to train. This transition from an air defense mission to a heavy armor 

mission serves as proof that Fort Bliss is capable of training virtually any type of unit in 

the Army force structure. Along with the re-stationing of the 1st Armored Division, the 

Ft. Bliss post also seamlessly received several brigade combat teams and numerous 

supporting units. 

Beaumont Hospital 

Service members and their families depend on top quality health care from the Army. 

Thanks to the past work of this committee, the new William Beaumont Medical Center 

stands to fill this role. The hospital complex will have a seven-story hospital building 

with 135 private rooms; two, six-floor buildings with 30 specialty clinics; and a fourstory administration building. Along with the generation of nearly 3,000 civilian and 

contractor jobs, the hospital is designed to last for the next 50 years. This timeline 

guarantees that the Army will have access to state of the art equipment and medical care 

well after we have all left Congress. The facility is expected to set a new bar in patient 

care through the combination of best strategies in hospital construction and patient 

care, including evidence-based design, the Leadership in Energy and Environment 

Design guidelines Cor LEED), and the military's new gold standard for medical facilities, 

"World-Class design." As a result, I urge this Committee to continue to support this 

project so that our Soldiers and their family members can continue to carry out their 

mission. 

Tuition Assistance 

I also urge the committee to continue support for the Military Tuition Assistance 

program in FY 14. In the last year alone, this program has allowed Service Members to 

take 870,000 classes and earn over 50,000 degrees, diplomas, and certificates. In FY 

2012, the Military Tuition Assistance program constituted only 0.1% of the Department 

of Defense's budget, or $570 million. Current unemployment rates for post-September 

11 veterans are at 9-4%, which is considerably higher than the national unemployment 

rate. Denying our brave men and women access to education programs will negatively 

impact their ability to carry out their missions while in service, and also make it harder 

for them to find jobs after transitioning out of the military. Recently, I led 68 of our 
160 

colleagues from both sides of the aisle in submitting a letter to the Defense 

Appropriations Subcommittee to support full funding of this program in FY 14. The 

overwhelming bipartisan support serves as evidence that Congress must continue to 

uphold its promise and support our Service Members in the classroom as well. 

While I don't serve on the committee, I have a very keen interest in seeing these 

priorities carried out in FY 14. Thank you for the opportunity to testify. 
161 

May 7, 2013 

The Honorable Howard P. "Buck" McKeon 

Chairman 

House Armed Services Committee 

United States House of Representatives 

Washington, D.C. 20515 

Dear Chairman McKeon and Ranking Member Smith: 

The Honorable Adam Smith 

Ranking Member 

House Armed Services Committee 

United States House of Representatives 

Washington, D.C. 20515 

We respectfully request your support for a report from the Secretary of Defense pertaining to the 

current use and opportunities for enhanced electronic contracting. 

Doing business with the federal government should not be a burdensome or daunting task. Thanks to 

technological advancement in recent years, including the development of FedBizOpps, the Federal 

procurement process has been greatly improved. While FedBizOpps currently provides universal access 

to contract opportunities and solicitations electronically, the public should also be enabled to respond to 

the solicitations electronically, 

Congress recognized the need to adapt federal procurement policy to 21" century realities when it 

adopted Section 850 of Public Law 105-85 - the National Defense Authorization Act for FY1998. This Act 

placed the responsibility on government agencies to establish, maintain and use, to the maximum 

extent practical and cost effective, procedures and processes that employ electronic commerce in the 

conduct and administration of its procurement system, 

The NDAA not only directed federal agencies to provide universal access to contract opportunities and 

solicitations through a single, Government-wide port of entry (FedBizOpps) but also directed the 

agencies to "permit the public to respond to the solicitation electronically." 

The attached legislative and report language would require the Secretary of Defense to submit a report 

outlining the Department's plans to address the requirement in Section 850 of the NDDA for FY1998 

regarding the use of electronic commerce in federal procurement. We respectfully urge you to include 

language to this effect in the NDAA for FY2014. 

Sincerely, 

Tom Rice 

Member of Congress Member of Congress 
162 

Proposed Title 

Report on Current Use and Opportunities for Enhanced Electronic Contracting 

Proposed Language {Sill} 

(a) Report - Not later than 180 days after the date of the enactment of this Act, the Secretary of 

Defense shall submit to the congressional defense committees a report outlining the 

Department's plans to address the requirement in Section 8500f the National Defense 

Authorization Act for FY1998 regarding the use of electronic commerce in federal procurement. 

(b) Matters Included. -The report submitted under subsection (a) shall include, with respect lothe 

two fiscal years before the fiscal year in which the report is submitted, the following information: 

1. An enumeration of the number, type, and dollar value of Department solicitations in 

which the public was permitted to respond to the soliCitation electronically. This 

enumeration shall differentiate between solicitations that allow full or partial electronic 

submissions. 

2. An analysis of the ability of the data collected through electronic submissions to be used 

for broader reporting and data usage by the Department. 

3. An analysis of the potential benefits and obstacles to implementing fuller use of 

electronic submissions, including cost savings, reduction in errors, paperwork reduction, 

broader bidder participation, competition, and the enhanced use of data collection fOf 

management and timely reporting to Congress. 

4. An analySis of the available options and technologies for broader implementation and 

the suitability of each option, by contract type and size, for implementation. 

Proposed Accompanying Report language 

The Committee has long been involved in and successful in improving the federal effort to modernize 

the contracting process. In fact, the statutory language creating FedBIzOpps was included in the Fiscal 

Year 1998 National Defense Authorization Act. 

The Committee recognizes the efforts made government wide and by the Department to make contract 

postings more accessible to a larger section of the public, encouraging competition, small business 

participation, and securing best value for the taxpayers. 

The Committee is aware that the Department does receIve electronic submissions for some portion of 

its solicitations, and that the amount of data received electronically varies. It also is aware that many 

contract solicitations still require a paper onlv submission. 

More than 15 years ago, Congress included language in the FY1998 National Defense Authorization Act 

that effectively initiated the FedBizOpps program as a single government-wide venue for federal 

agencies to advertise business opportunities. In addition to establishing a single, Government-wide 

port of entry, that same Act also required "permitting the publlc to respond to the solicitation 

electronically." 

The Committee is aware of the experience of many local and state jurisdictions in allowing the electronic 

submission of responses to solicitations, and is interested in the potential for cost-savings, enhanced use 

of data for management and timely reporting to Congress, the reduction of data errors and 

completeness of responses, and for enhanced competition and reduced thresholds for broader small 

business participation. 

The Committee seeks a report from the Secretary on the number, type, and dollar volume of electroniC 

submission avallabitity on solicitations posted over the past two fiscal years, as well as the Secretary's 

analysis of the potential benefits, challenges to implementation, and potential technological solutions to 

bro.ader implementation. 
163 

Proposal Justification 

Section 850 of Public Law 105-85, also known as the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 

1998, detailed the requirements for the use of electronic commerce in Federal procurement. This Act 

placed the responsibility on government agencies to establish, maintain and use, to the maximum 

extent practical and cost effective, procedures and processes that employ electroniC commerce in the 

conduct and administration of Its procurement system. 

Other key elements of the FY9g8 NDAA induded: 

Applying nationally and Internationally recognized standards. 

Facilitating access for small businesses to Federal Government procurement opportunities. 

Providing agency requirements or solicitations for contract opportunities in a form that allows 

universal access through a single, GOvernment-wide port of entry. 

Over the course of the next few years, FedBizOpps became the recognized single government-wide 

venue for federal agencies to advertise business opportunities. 

The NDAA not only directed federal agencies to provide universal access to contract opportunities and 

solicitations through a Single, Government-wide port of entry (FedBizOpps) but also directed the 

agencies to "permit the public to respond to the solicitation electronically;' This was done with the 

goa! of providing an easier way to access and respond to federal soliCitations and contract opportunities 

and to encourage greater participation in the federal procurement process, thereby making it more 

user-friendly, more competitive and cast-effective. Electronic submissions also reduce errors, facilitate 

bidding, and allow for data to be more easily reviewed, tracked, and assessed by the agency. 

FedBizOpps is now the gold standard in terms of providing the "entry" into the federal procurement 

marl<etplace, as Congress intended. However, the ability to respond electronically is limited. In most 

cases, interested vendors must submit proposals and bids on paper requiring mall, courier or other 

delivery methods. Or, they can electronically submit information via document attachments to e-maiL 

In neither case are submissions being truly delivered electronically. 

Based on the experience of local and slate governments implementation of true electronic submissions, 

significant benefits have accrued to both those governments and their counterparts in the contracting 

community. With the ability to submit bid information over the internet, federal contractors could 

streamline their workflows and reduce their cost of submitting and delivering bids. Online bidding also 

benelits public agencies resulting in a win-win situation for all parties involved. Benefits may include: 

Simplifies and Standardizes 

online bidding allows an agency or buying command to standardize and simplify the bidding or 

grant submission process through a secure online format 

Submissions can be configured to not mark a bid form as complete unless designated areas are 

checked, or without an appropriate calculation. 

• Simplifies Contract Planning and Management, Reduces Overhead, Reduces Paperwark &. 

Simplifies Review Process 

o Grant/Bid review teams would be able to seamlessly receive and review electronically 

applications/proposals and compare apples to apples. 

Reduces Errors, Protects the Agency Buyer 

There are options available to online bidding would include the ability to provide math 

computations and checks for bid completeness to alert the user before they submit an incorrect or 
164 

incomplete bid that might get rejected as unresponsive. At the same time, to protect the taxpayer, 

technology is available that also would not allow incomplete or inaccurate calculations, or 

calculations outside a preset range. This important feature would protect the federal buyer from 

potential cost overruns and will reduce the possibility of bid protests based on technical 

miscalculation, 

.. Empowers Smail Business 

Accessible simple onllne bidding process allows more small businesses to access federal 

procurement easier. 

Encouroges Competition 

Online facilitation of the RFP process will increase bidding and weed out unresponsive 

proposals. 

• Greater Transparency 

For all parties to protect the taxpayer and to honor fuil and open competition requirements. 

The Committee has asked, required, and otherwise encouraged the Department to do more 

fulsome tracking of contracted items 
165 

National Defense Authorization Act Testimony 

Before the House Armed Services Committee 

Congressman Mark Takano (CA-41) 

MayS, 2013 

Recently, a crew from the California Air National Guard that was operating a remotely piloted 

aircraft out of March Air Reserve Base was able to locate a survival life raft less than two 

minutes after being given a rough approximation of its position. Not two days, not two hours 

two minutes! We are on the cusp of a new era - Remotely Piloted Aircraft or "RP As" simply 

perform some tasks better than manned airplanes do. The majority of the United States' RPA 

expertise, both combat and Defense Support of Civil Authorities, is located in the Air National 

Guard. 

Unfortunately, that previously mentioned California Air National Guard unit will be out of 

business in less than four years unless they are included in the Air Force's RPA Upgrade Plan. 

A plan they are not currently even mentioned in. Similar fates threaten ANG units flying the 

soon-to-be-phased out MQ-I Predator in Arizona, North Dakota, Texas, and Ohio. The United 

States is on the verge of incorporating RPAs in the National Airspace System and these Air 

National Guard units have the most experience of any RP A operation. They are the true experts 

on how to do this right. In light of this, the Guard should be at the top of the list for conversion 

to safer, higher flying follow-on RPAs like the MQ-9 Reaper, rather than an afterthought. 

America needs to capitalize on the Air National Guard's expertise to truly reap the benefits of 

seamless RP A support for Search and Rescue efforts, Disaster Relief, and Emergency Services. 

Converting to the MQ-9 swi my will also protect the thousands of jobs and countless small 

businesses that support these units. 

The next five years will see substantial, maybe even exponential growth in Remotely Piloted 

Aircraft operations worldwide and America cannot afford to squander the significant advantage 

we have in this arena. As the MQ-I nears the end of its service life, it is absolutely imperative 

that the Air Force revises its RP A Upgrade Plan and upgrades the forgotten Air National Guard 

MQ-I units in California, Arizona, North Dakota, Texas, and Ohio to the MQ-9 as quickly as 

possible to prevent a gap in mission coverage. This will also ensure we capitalize on, rather than 

lose, the ANG's critical expertise, and maintain America's lead beyond the approaching RPA 

horizon. 

While the Air Force does have a strategic basing process for the recapitalization ofMQ-1 s to 

MQ-9s, the criteria do not place proper emphasis on the importance of current MQ-l Flying 

Training Units (FTUs) schoolhouses. The Air Force should prioritize the replacement ofMQ-ls 

with MQ-9s at locations with existing FTU schoolhouses, which would allow the Air Force to 

capitalize on existing infrastructure, trained personnel, instructor expertise, and save taxpayer 

money. 

We need to see a formal recapitalization plan tor the replacement of all National Guard MQ-I 

aircraft with MQ-9 aircraft. That plan should contain the criteria for beddown, including both the 

weight and scoring that will be given to MQ-I wings and squadrons with co-located FTU 

schoolhouse missions. 
166 

(!longuss t4c ;Jtntrea ~t<ltes 

;House of ~eprcs~ntlrli\m VARGAS.HOUSE.GOV 

mUmt ~&tgm.l 51st ~ig±rid, t11uHforttilt 

May 8, 2013 

The Honorable Howard P. McKeon, Chairman 

The Honorable Adam Smith, Ranking Member 

House Committee on Armed Services 

2120 Rayburn House Office Building 

Washington, DC 20515 

Dear Chairman McKeon and Ranking Member Smith, 

COMMITTEE ON FOREIGN AFFAIRS 

COMMITTEE ON AGRICUt:rURE 

COMMITTEE ON HOUSE ADMINISTRATION 

Thank you for the opportunity to provide testimony regarding the National Defense 

Authorization Act (NDAA) for Fiscal Year (FY) 2014. There are several priorities I would like 

to bring to the Committee's attention that are important to my district and to the security of our 

nation. 

As the United States continues to "rebalance" our efforts to the Asia-Pacific, we must provide 

the adequate resources to our global commitments, particularly by investing in our naval 

capabilities. My district is home to Naval Base San Diego (NBSD), whicb is the largest Navy 

base on the West Coast and provides comprehensive nee! support for 58 home ported ships 

and 180 tenant commands. The economic benefit to my district and the surrounding community 

cannot be overstated, with military funding supporting thousands of job in the greater San Diego 

County area. As the Navy's premier Pacific Fleet surface force installation, NBSD has played an 

integral role in the Global War on Terrorism and will be a strategic asset as we expand our 

presence in the Pacific. In order to fulfill this mission, I request from your committee that the 

Navy remain a key priority in the NDAA for FY 2014. This would include funding for base 

operations and the maintenance and modernization of ships, and building a strong research and 

development core to support technological innovation. 

Last month, I introduced H.R. 1691, the Chocolate Monntain Aerial Gunnery Range Security 

Enhancement Act, which would transfer the administrative jurisdiction of certain public lands in 

the Chocolate Mountain Gunnery Range from the Bureau of Land Management (BLM) to the 

Secretary of the Navy. Due to the current checkerboard pattern of administrative jurisdiction, I 

believe this bill offers the necessary solution to the existing land withdrawal and cooperative 

management arrangement between BLM and the Department Dfthe Navy. Approximately 

227, 000 acres is withdra'Wl1 public land which is set to expire on October 31, 2014. 

Consolidating the land management nnder a sole federal agency would provide regulatory relief 

and certainty to the Department of the Navy while maintaining the spirit of the land withdrawal 
167 

program. This bill preserves the environmental integrity of the land and supports our national 

security interest. llook forward to working with this committee to ensure that H.R. 1691 is 

included in the FY 2014 NOAA. 

Additionally, the Department of the Navy is currently seeking to replace the aging Navy Pacific 

Fleet FA-IS aircraft with the F-35C aircraft. Two potential locations are being examined to 

homebase the F-35C in the Naval Pacific Fleet. Of the two alternatives being analyzed, I believe 

that the Naval Air Facility (NAF) EI Centro, in my district, offers the Navy a fiscally sound 

option along ",ith world class operations and facilities. Located in the heart of Southern 

California's Imperial Valley, NAt' El Centro's close proximity to San Diego's Pacific Fleet and 

Yuma, Arizona's Marine Joint Strike Fighter has allowed it to be an integral part in Naval 

Aviation Training. Before any final decision is made, I would request that this committee 

consider the long-term comparative operational cost of both alternatives. During these difficult 

budget times, we must ensure that we make fiscally responsible choices tbat maintain our 

national security while protecting the taxpayer. 

Finally, I would like to take a moment to express my concerns with the effects of this year's 

sequestration cuts will have on our military readiness, on our support for our allies, and on the 

lives oflhc men and women who proudly and honorably serve in the anued services. Many of 

the personnel who live and work in my district have faced furloughs and worry about any future 

pay decreases. We must keep our commitments to the men and women in uniform, and their 

families, by authorizing the pay they deserve and have earned. I also urge this committee to 

continue to support our key ally Israel by buttressing our cooperative missile defense program. 

Israel is faced with a very dil1icult security situation and cuts to programs, such as the Iron 

Dome, hinder its ability to protect the Israeli people. Lastly, and most importantly, in light of the 

Pentagon's recent report on the rise of sexual assault in the military, I would kindly request thai 

this committee contioue to work in a bipartisan fashion to provide new regulations and 

procedures to combat and prosecute these terrible acts. The FY 2014 NDAA should reinstate all 

funding for resources to deal with sexual assault within the military. 

Thank you for your consideration of these priorities and for your leadership in providing for our 

common defense. Please do not hesitate to contact me if I can provide additional information in 

support of these requests. 

JUAN VARGAS 

Member of Congrcss 

51 st District, California 
168 

ENI F. H. FALEOMAVAEGA 

STATEMENT OF THE HONORABLE ENI F. H. FALEOMAVAEGA BEFORE THE 

COMMITTEE ON ARMED SERVICES 

May 7, 2013 

Chairman McKeon & Ranking Member Smith: 

I want to take this opportunity to thank you for your leadership and for giving me the 

opportunity to testify before the House Anned Services Committee this afternoon. 

I testify today to request your assistance to include language in the National Defense 

Authorization Act (NOAA) for Fiscal Year 2014. The language will instruct the Department of 

Defense (000) to conduct a feasibility study for the establishment of a National Guard Unit 

(NGU) in American Samoa. 

For your information, American Samoa is one of two U.S. territories that docs not have a 

NGU. The other is the Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands. Recently, I have been 

in discussions with the American Samoa Government who have expressed great interest in 

establishing an NGU in the Territory. This comes as a necessity for the American Samoa 

Government after reviewing and restructuring response plans for state emergencies as a result of 

hurricanes, earthquakes, floods, and tsunamis. 

In 2009, American Samoa was hit by a powerful earthquake that was registered at a high 

8.3 on the Richter scale. The earthquake set off a massive tsunami that crashed into the Ten'itory 

and neighboring countries of the Independent State of Samoa and the Kingdom of Tonga. The 

tsunami created a devastating trail that wiped out many villages and took many lives. Although 

an Army Reserve Component is based in American SanlOa, it was not able to mobilize or be 

activated immediately because such a decision had to be made by the Pentagon. The Governor 

at the time could only make a request for assistance but only after the declaration of emergency. 

I strongly believe that much more could have been done to help, save, and support the 

local residents during the disaster if only the Governor was able to activate such a critical tool of 

a NGU. As we all know, the National Guard is a vital component of public safety, especially 

their role as the first responders during state of emergencies and, importantly, supporting our 

regular armed forces during time of war. The National Guard has been a part of our U.S. 

military history for hundreds of years. We have witnessed the exemplary response by the 

National Guard during Hurricane Katrina in 2005 to the recent tragic bombings in Boston. 
169 

During the llih Congress, I introduced H.R. 6294 to establish a NGU in American 

Samoa but the Committee took no further action. Given the recent reduction in federal spending 

and expected cuts in defense, I prefer that the 000 first conduct a feasibility study for 

establishing a NGU in American Samoa. The feasibility study will provide a better 

understanding of costs, funding sources, as well as necessary support that would be needed to 

establish and maintain such a unit in the Territory. [am hopeful that in the study, 000 can also 

review other options of possibly creating an attached unit to the Hawaii National Guard. This is 

viable given the close relationship between American Samoa and the State of Hawaii, and the 

Army Reserve infrastructure that already exists. 

I know that this Committee understands deeply the sense of service and contributions that 

American Samoa has made to our U.S. military. Being one of the highest enlistment rates per 

capita in any State or U.S. Territory, our sons and daughters have served in record numbers in 

every U.S. military engagement from World War II to our present operations in Afghanistan. 

We have stood by the U.S. in good times and bad, and I know that taking this initial step in 

establishing a National Guard Unit in American Samoa will make our relationship even stronger. 

Thank you again for the opportunity to testify this afternoon and I look forward to 

answering any of your questions. 
170 

Congressman Pedro R. Pierluisi 

Submission for the Record 

Member Day Testimony on the Fiscal Year 2014 National Defense Authorization Act 

House Armed Service Committee 

May 8, 2013 

Chairman McKeon, Ranking Member Smith, and Members of the Committee: thank you for the 

opportunity to testify. I will briefly summarize my three priorities for the FYI4 National 

Defense Authorization Act. 

Cleanup of Culebra, Puerto Rico (Title Ill) 

First, under the FOllnerly Used Defense Sites program, the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers is 

conducting e1eanup operations in limited areas of Culebra, Puerto Rico~which was used as a 

military training range for decades. However, the Department of the Army has asserted that a 

1974 law prohibits the use of federal funds to clean a 400-acre parcel ofland that was part of the 

former bombardment zone and that was conveyed to the government of Puerto Rico in 1982. 

Because the Army argues~wrongly, in my view~that the 1974 law has not been superseded by 

federal cleanup authorities enacted in the 1980s, this parcel on Culcbra is the only former 

defense site~of several thousand across the country~that the federal government claims it is 

not authorized to decontaminate. 

To its credit, this Committee has recognized that this state of affairs is not only illogical, but that 

it poses a threat to human safety~since this parcel contains popular beaches, pedestrian 

walkways and campgrounds. In Section 2815 of the 2010 NDAA, the House repealed the 

relevant provision in the 1974 law to authorize federal cleanup of the parcel. But the Senate--

where Puerto Rico has no representation~did not include a similar provision, and the House 

receded in conference. 

In the 20 II NDAA, Congress directed DOD to conduct a study to assess the amount of 

unexploded ordnance on this parcel, the risk it poses to safety and the environment, and the cost 

of its removal. Unfortunately, DOD completed this study after this Committee marked up the 

2012 NDAA. To preserve the issue for conference, I offered a floor amendment~which was 

accepted by voice vote~expressing the sense of the House that, if this parcel could be 
171 

decontaminated at a reasonable cost, the 1974 law should be relaxed or repealed. Once again, 

and despite the efforts of Senator Blumenthal, the Senate failed to act. 

On March 21 st of this year, the consequences of the Senate's inaction became terribly clear. A 

young girl who was visiting a Culebra beach with her family suffered bums and was taken to the 

hospital after she picked up an artillery shell containing white phosphorous. Law enforcement 

otlicials responding to the incident reported finding six other pieces of UXO, including six-inch 

naval gun rounds that were detonated and removed by the FBI. This incident, which could have 

had a truly tragic ending, underscores the need for congressional action. I ask this Committee to 

include language to relax or repeal the 1974 law and, if necessary, to fight for this provision in 

con ference. 

Defense Department Counter-Drug Activities Tn and Around Puerto Rico (Titles X, XI\') 

My second request concerns DOD counter-drug activities in and around Puerto Rico. I have 

worked hard to raise awareness about drug trafficking and related violence in Puerto Rico, and to 

urge the federal government---DIIS, DOJ, and DOD--to dedicate the resources necessary to 

alleviate this problem. 

The homicide rate in Puelto Rico is about three times higher than any state, and most of these 

murders arc linked to the drug trade. As the federal government has allocated substantial 

resources to combat drug tratlicking organizations operating in the Central American corridor, 

those organizations have returned to smuggling routes through the Caribbean region. The Coast 

Guard seized or disrupted over 17,000 pounds of drugs in the vicinity of Puerto Rico in 2012, an 

800 percent increase over the previous year. DEA seizures rose nearly 100 percent. CBP 

seizures were up nearly 40 percent, and the agency seized more drugs in Puerto Rico than it did 

along the 180-mile border between Mexico and New Mexico. Meanwhile, the street price of 

drugs in Puerto Rico has decreased. This is a security problem of national scope, given that 80 

percent of the drugs that enter Puerto Rico are transported to the U.S. mainland. 

On March 20th, this Committee heard testimony from the commanders of NORTlICOM and 

SOUTHCOM. Upon questioning from Ms. Borda11o, both generals stated that the matter was of 

great concern to them. General Jacoby of NORTH COM noted that JTF-NOIth was responsible 

for responding to requests for SUppOlt made by law enforcement agencies, and that it would 

make this issue a priority if such requests were forthcoming. I have urged DOD, DHS and DOJ 

to communicate constantly about how, in this constrained budget environment, they can 

maximize the effectiveness of counter-drug operations in Puerto Rico. While there has been 

some improvement, I continue to believe that not nearly enough is being done. 

As part of my efforts, I have asked this Committee, in the report accompanying this year's 

NOAA, to direct DOD to prepare a written report for the Committee on the detection, monitoring 

2 
172 

and other counter-drug activities it is undertaking, or intends to undertake, to support law 

enforcement operations in and around Puerto Rico and the U.S. Virgin Islands. 

The] 56th Airlift Wing of the Puerto Rico National Guard (Item of Special Interest) 

Finally, [ would like to work with the Committee to encourage the Air Force and the Air 

National Guard to ensure that the 156'h Airlift Wing of the Puerto Rico Air National Guard 

retains a Hying mission and is provided with the aircratl it needs to conduct that mission. 

Over the last several years, the 156'h AW has had the highest operational tempo or any C-130 

unit in the Air National Guard, conducting Intelligence, Surveillance, and Reconnaissance (ISR) 

and humanitarian relief missions in AFRICOM, CENTCOM and SOlJTHCOM and fulfilling its 

commitments under Operation CORONET OAK, all while Hying the oldest C-130s in the Air 

Force inventory. The unit has unmatched operational experience in its AOR, is strategically 

located, and is fully bilingual. It could-and should-become the unit of choice serving the 

Americas. 

Yet, for reasons I cannot fully understand, its future is uncertain. Currently, the 156'h has three 

C-130Es, all of which are scheduled to be retired this year, and recently took delivery of five 

WC-l30s, which are not combat-coded. The Air National Guard has consistently assured me 

that these planes are simply intended to be a temporary stop-gap measure until the 156'h can be 

provided with newer H or J models that are fully mission capable. Every time I inquire about the 

expected delivery date of these new planes, however, no clear response is provided. 

There are multiple options for the 156'". The unit could keep its current tactical airlift mission 

or, alternatively, pursue a strategic airlitl or tanker mission. Allowing the unit's ilying mission 

to lapse would be a terrible mistake, and inconsistent with the repeated assurances I have been 

given by top Air Force officials, including the Secretary of the Air Force, since 2009. Therefore, 

I respectfully ask the Committee to work with me on this matter, either through the NDAA or in 

other ways. 

Thank you. 

3 
DOCUMENTS SUBMITTED FOR THE RECORD 

MAY 8, 2013 

(175) 

The Honorable Leon Panetta 

Secretary of Defense 

1400 Defense Pentagon 

Washington, DC 20301 

Dear Secretary Panetta, 

February 22, 2013 

We take this opportnnity to raise an issue broached by the Regional President of the 

Azores, Vasco Cordeiro, and discussed during your recent visit to Portugal: the Air Force's 

decision to adjust the force structure and operational capability at Lajes Field on Terceira Island, 

Azores, Portugal. We appreciate the time and attention you and your staff have dedicated to this 

issue. 

Having bolstered the United States' and its allies' control of the Atlantic since World 

War II, Lajes Field is a valuable asset that enables the expeditionary movement of war fighters, 

aircraft, ships, and global communications to AFRICOM and CENTCOM's joint, coalition, and 

NATO operations. 

Today, amid the proliferation often-orist groups in unstable countries in West and SubSahara Africa, Lajes is a major strategic military location. It is a crucial site for countering the 

biggest regional threat, al-Qaeda in the Islamic Maghreb (AQIM), which has known ties to alQaeda in the Arabian Peninsula (AQAP), Boko Haram, and al-Shabab. While we commend the 

step forward to provide the needed resources to create a Commander's In-Extremis Force (CIF) 

within the AFRICOM AOR, its current staging does not allow for rapid deployment. Nor does 

the placement of the CIF in Stuttgart allow for the strategic flexibility needed. 

The terrorist hot-spots in western Africa can all be reached from Lajes Field in less than 

five hours' flight time and with few if any over-flight concerns. From this strategic location, ten 

of the eighteen African conntries that hold State Department Travel Warnings can be reached 

within six hours. There are few other military bases in EUCOM or AFRICOM that can match 

Lajes' unique capabilities. 

Amid growing regional instability, Lajes offers the opportunity to expand our strategic 

reach and force projection into the AFRICOM theater of operations. Further, Lajes is well 

positioned to act as a logistical hub for the Department of Defense, USAID humanitarian aid, the 

Department of State and other agencies. Therefore, we urge the Department of Defense not to 

reduce L~ies' operational capabilities. Unlike some of our other European allies, Portugal has 

ncvcr denied us the ability to conduct operational missions. We should work closely witn our 

Portuguese allies to retain a sufficient force structure at the base to expand operational 

capabilities. 
176 

Panetta 

Fchruary2013 

Page T\vo 

With the United States' critical focus on the Pacific now underway, the need to ensure 

retention of a strong Atlantic position at reasonable cost is a vital and delicate aspect of strategic 

re-positioning, We are aware ofthe reality that the high cost of Continental European 

deployment must be reduced. In this process the retention and even expansion of Lajes basing 

and capabilities become vital for the maintenance of United States' abilities to reinforce Europe 

at some future time, while at the same time allowing AFRICOM to bolster its efficacy. 

We certainly realize this is a difficult decision. However with more than 11 0,000 troops 

and civilians stationed and employed at 29 military installations in Europe, we should be able to 

prioritize assets to ensure the strategic location of Lajes Field is maintained. We stand ready to 

work with you to address this sitnation. 

Best regards, 

Member of Congress Member of Congress Member of Congress 

CC: The Honorable Chuck Hagel, Secretary of Defense Nominee 
177 

o 

< • 

, . . , , 0 

, ! 

, . • • 

• 
178 
179 

Æ 

o 

°1 illl II t Ij I 

" !ll,·l'i, h I 

I I Jij It.., ) /, I!.iJ !'I~ __ _ I 0, ~