" ! HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

112TH CONGRESS

2d Session 

REPORT

112–493 

DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE 

APPROPRIATIONS BILL, 2013 

R E P O R T 

OF THE

COMMITTEE ON APPROPRIATIONS 

together with 

ADDITIONAL VIEWS 

[TO ACCOMPANY H.R. 5856]

MAY 25, 2012.—Committed to the Committee of the Whole House on the 

State of the Union and ordered to be printed 


rfrederick on DSK6VPTVN1PROD with HEARINGE:\Seals\Congress.#13
DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE APPROPRIATIONS BILL, 2013 


rfrederick on DSK6VPTVN1PROD with HEARING
U.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE

WASHINGTON : 

1 

74–226 

" ! HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

112TH CONGRESS

2d Session 

REPORT

2012

112–493 

DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE 

APPROPRIATIONS BILL, 2013 

R E P O R T 

OF THE

COMMITTEE ON APPROPRIATIONS 

together with 

ADDITIONAL VIEWS 

[TO ACCOMPANY H.R. 5856]

MAY 25, 2012.—Committed to the Committee of the Whole House on the 

State of the Union and ordered to be printed 


rfrederick on DSK6VPTVN1PROD with HEARINGE:\Seals\Congress.#13

rfrederick on DSK6VPTVN1PROD with HEARING
(III) 

C O N T E N T S 

Page 

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

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

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

Fiscal Management ................................................................................................. 3 

Competition .............................................................................................................. 5 

Conferences .............................................................................................................. 5 

Funding Increases ................................................................................................... 5 

Committee Recommendations by Major Category ................................................ 5 

Active, Reserve and National Guard Military Personnel .............................. 5 

Operation and Maintenance ............................................................................ 6 

Procurement ...................................................................................................... 6 

Research, Development, Test and Evaluation ............................................... 7 

Special Operations Command Critical Needs ................................................ 8 

Defense Health Program .................................................................................. 8 

Overseas Contingency Operations .................................................................. 8 

Classified Programs .......................................................................................... 8 

Forces to be Supported ............................................................................................ 9 

Department of the Army .................................................................................. 9 

Department of the Navy .................................................................................. 10 

Department of the Air Force ........................................................................... 11 

Air Force Reductions in Force Structure & Reserve Component Impacts ........................................................................................................ 11 

TITLE I. MILITARY PERSONNEL ....................................................................... 13 

Military Personnel Overview ........................................................................... 15 

Summary of End Strength ........................................................................ 15 

Overall Active End Strength .................................................................... 15 

Overall Selected Reserve End Strength .................................................. 15 

Full-Time Support Strengths ................................................................... 16 

Military Personnel Transfer Authority .................................................... 17 

Reduction of Troop End Strength ............................................................ 17 

Retroactive Stop Loss Special Pay Program ........................................... 18 

Suicide Prevention Training and Outreach ............................................. 18 

Sexual Assault Prevention and Response ............................................... 19 

Hazing in the Armed Forces ..................................................................... 19 

Minority Outreach ..................................................................................... 20 

Military Personnel, Army ................................................................................ 20 

Army Military Personnel Funding Shortfall ........................................... 24 

Military Personnel, Navy ................................................................................. 24 

Littoral Combat Ship Manning ................................................................ 28 

Military Personnel, Marine Corps ................................................................... 28 

Military Personnel, Air Force .......................................................................... 32 

Creech Air Force Base Incentive Pay ...................................................... 36 

Air Force Base Family Housing Privatization ........................................ 36 

Reserve Personnel, Army ................................................................................. 37 


rfrederick on DSK6VPTVN1PROD with HEARING
Page

IV 

TITLE I. MILITARY PERSONNEL —Continued 

Reserve Personnel, Navy ................................................................................. 40 

Reserve Personnel, Marine Corps ................................................................... 43 

Reserve Personnel, Air Force .......................................................................... 46 

National Guard Personnel, Army .................................................................... 49 

National Guard Personnel, Air Force ............................................................. 52 

TITLE II. OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE ................................................... 55 

Restoration of Funding for Unrealistic Efficiency Savings ........................... 57 

Operation and Maintenance Reprogrammings .............................................. 57 

Operation and Maintenance Budget Execution Data .................................... 58 

Military Information Support Operations ...................................................... 58 

STEM Education .............................................................................................. 59 

Border Security Equipment ............................................................................. 59 

State and Local Partnerships .......................................................................... 60 

Middle East Security Dialogues ...................................................................... 60 

POW/MIA Accountability Efforts .................................................................... 60 

Civil Affairs Center and School ....................................................................... 60 

Official Flag Displays ....................................................................................... 60 

Operation and Maintenance, Army ................................................................. 61 

Junior Reserve Officer Training Corps Schools ...................................... 67 

Unjustified Program Growth .................................................................... 67 

Cemeterial Expenses ................................................................................. 67 

Operation and Maintenance, Navy ................................................................. 67 

Strategic Dispersal of Aircraft Carriers .................................................. 72 

Operation and Maintenance, Marine Corps ................................................... 72 

Operation and Maintenance, Air Force .......................................................... 75 

Visibility of Depot Maintenance Funding ............................................... 81 

National Security Requirements for NASA Facilities ............................ 81 

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

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

Operation and Maintenance, Navy Reserve ................................................... 87 

Operation and Maintenance, Marine Corps Reserve ..................................... 87 

Operation and Maintenance, Air Force Reserve ............................................ 94 

Operation and Maintenance, Army National Guard ..................................... 97 

National Guard State Partnership Program ........................................... 101 

National Guard Civil Support Teams ...................................................... 101 

Operation and Maintenance, Air National Guard ......................................... 102 

United States Court of Appeals for the Armed Forces .................................. 105 

Environmental Restoration, Army .................................................................. 105 

Environmental Restoration, Navy ................................................................... 105 

Environmental Restoration, Air Force ............................................................ 105 

Environmental Restoration, Defense-Wide .................................................... 105 

Environmental Restoration, Formerly Used Defense Sites .......................... 105 

Overseas Humanitarian, Disaster, and Civic Aid .......................................... 106 

Cooperative Threat Reduction Account .......................................................... 106 

Department of Defense Acquisition Workforce Development Fund ............. 106 

Defense Acquisition Workforce Development Fund ............................... 106 

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

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

Global Hawk Block 30 ............................................................................... 109 

C–27J Spartan, C–23 Sherpa, and Direct Support ................................ 110 

Special Interest Items ............................................................................... 111 

Reprogramming Guidance for Acquisition Accounts .............................. 111 

Reprogramming Reporting Requirements ............................................... 112 

Funding Increases ..................................................................................... 112 


rfrederick on DSK6VPTVN1PROD with HEARING
Page

V 

TITLE III. PROCUREMENT —Continued 

Classified Annex ........................................................................................ 112 

Aircraft Procurement, Army ............................................................................ 112 

UH–72A Lakota Light Utility Helicopters .............................................. 117 

UH–60117ackhawk Helicopters ............................................................... 117 

Missile Procurement, Army ............................................................................. 117 

Patriot Missiles .......................................................................................... 120 

Procurement of Weapons and Tracked Combat Vehicles, Army .................. 120 

Bradley Fighting Vehicle .......................................................................... 124 

M1 Abrams Tank Upgrade Program ....................................................... 124 

M88A2 Hercules Improved Recovery Vehicle ......................................... 124 

Survivability Enhancements for Combat and Tactical Vehicles ........... 125 

Procurement of Ammunition, Army ................................................................ 125 

Excalibur M982 ......................................................................................... 129 

Other Procurement, Army ............................................................................... 129 

Container Handling Equipment ............................................................... 138 

Aircraft Procurement, Navy ............................................................................ 138 

F/A–18E/F Tactical Aircraft ..................................................................... 146 

EA–18G Electronic Attack Aircraft ......................................................... 146 

Weapons Procurement, Navy ........................................................................... 147 

Procurement of Ammunition, Navy and Marine Corps ................................. 151 

Shipbuilding and Conversion, Navy ................................................................ 155 

Shipbuilding ............................................................................................... 158 

Other Procurement, Navy ................................................................................ 159 

Procurement, Marine Corps ............................................................................. 171 

Light Armored Vehicle .............................................................................. 177 

Aircraft Procurement, Air Force ...................................................................... 177 

F–22 Backup Oxygen System ................................................................... 183 

C–130 Avionics Modernization Program ................................................. 183 

B–52 Combat Network Communications Technology ............................ 183 

C–130J ........................................................................................................ 184 

War Readiness Engine Shortfall .............................................................. 184 

Missile Procurement, Air Force ....................................................................... 184 

Space Launch ............................................................................................. 188 

Space Based Infrared System and Advanced Extremely High Frequency Satellite System Procurement ................................................. 188 

Procurement of Ammunition, Air Force ......................................................... 188 

Other Procurement, Air Force ......................................................................... 190 

Procurement, Defense-Wide ............................................................................. 195 

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

National Guard and Reserve Equipment ....................................................... 200 

National Guard and Reserve Equipment ................................................ 202 

Defense Production Act Purchases .................................................................. 202 

Advanced Drop-In Biofuel Production ..................................................... 203 

TITLE IV. RESEARCH, DEVELOPMENT, TEST AND EVALUATION ........... 205 

Systems Engineering ................................................................................ 207 

Department of Defense and Service Cyber Activities ............................ 208 

Advanced Hypersonic Weapon ................................................................. 208 

Special Interest Items ............................................................................... 208 

Reprogramming Guidance for Acquisition Accounts .............................. 208 

Reprogramming Reporting Requirements ............................................... 209 

Funding Increases ..................................................................................... 209 

Classified Annex ........................................................................................ 209 

Research, Development, Test and Evaluation, Army .................................... 209 


rfrederick on DSK6VPTVN1PROD with HEARING
Page

VI 

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

Research, Development, Test and Evaluation, Army —Continued 

Medium Extended Air Defense ................................................................ 219 

Robotic Development ................................................................................. 219 

Research, Development, Test and Evaluation, Navy ..................................... 219 

Firescout ..................................................................................................... 230 

Bone Marrow Registry .............................................................................. 230 

Electronic Equipment Maintenance ......................................................... 231 

Automated Test and Re-Test .................................................................... 231 

Strategic Submarine Replacement ........................................................... 231 

Research, Development, Test and Evaluation, Air Force .............................. 231 

Space System Acquisition and System Modernization Initiatives ........ 232 

Space Based Infrared System Ground Enhancements ........................... 242 

Moving Target Indicator ........................................................................... 242 

KC–46A ...................................................................................................... 242 

Joint Strike Fighter Decontamination ..................................................... 243 

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

Historically Black Colleges and Universities and Minority Institutions ........................................................................................................ 254 

Science, Technology, Engineering and Mathematics Education ........... 254 

Expanding Underrepresented Minority Participation ............................ 254 

Special Operations Command Undersea Mobility Program .................. 254 

Defense Personnel Security Research Center ......................................... 255 

Advanced Remote Sensor Technology ...................................................... 255 

Standard Missile-3 Risk Reduction for the Missile Defense Agency .... 255 

Semiconductor Industry ............................................................................ 256 

Operational Test and Evaluation, Defense .................................................... 256 

TITLE V. REVOLVING AND MANAGEMENT FUNDS ..................................... 259 

Defense Working Capital Funds ..................................................................... 259 

National Defense Sealift Fund ........................................................................ 259 

Afloat Forward Staging Base ................................................................... 259 

TITLE VI. OTHER DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE PROGRAMS ...................... 261 

Defense Health Program .................................................................................. 261 

Defense Health Program Reprogramming Procedures ........................... 265 

Carryover ................................................................................................... 265 

TRICARE Fee Increases ........................................................................... 265 

Peer-Reviewed Cancer Research Program .............................................. 265 

Joint Warfighter Medical Research Program .......................................... 266 

Congressionally Directed Medical Research Program ............................ 266 

Traumatic Brain Injury/Psychological Health Funding ......................... 267 

Peer-Reviewed Prostate Cancer Research Program ............................... 267 

Joint Task Force National Capital Region Medical ................................ 267 

Prescription Drug Abuse ........................................................................... 268 

Overseas Medical Laboratories ................................................................ 268 

Information Technology Discharge Solutions ......................................... 269 

Cooperation Between Military Medical Facilities, Civilian Healthcare 

Facilities, and Universities ................................................................... 269 

Prosthetic Research ................................................................................... 269 

Multi-Disciplinary Brain Research .......................................................... 269 

Federal Neuroscience Working Group ..................................................... 270 

Chemical Agents and Munitions Destruction, Defense ................................. 270 

Drug Interdiction and Counter-Drug Activities, Defense ............................. 270 

National Guard Counter-Drug State Plans ............................................. 271 

Tethered Aerostat Radar System Program ............................................. 271 


rfrederick on DSK6VPTVN1PROD with HEARING
Page

VII 

TITLE VI. OTHER DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE PROGRAMS —Continued 

Joint Improvised Explosive Device Defeat Fund ........................................... 271 

Joint Urgent Operational Needs Fund ........................................................... 272 

Office of the Inspector General ........................................................................ 272 

TITLE VII. RELATED AGENCIES ....................................................................... 273 

National and Military Intelligence Programs ................................................ 273 

Classified Annex ........................................................................................ 273 

Central Intelligence Agency Retirement and Disability System Fund ........ 273 

Intelligence Community Management Account ............................................. 273 

TITLE VIII. GENERAL PROVISIONS .................................................................. 275 

TITLE IX. OVERSEAS CONTINGENCY OPERATIONS .................................... 285 

Committee Recommendation ........................................................................... 285 

Reporting Requirements .................................................................................. 285 

Afghan Local Police and Human Rights Abuses ............................................ 285 

Military Personnel ............................................................................................ 286 

Operation and Maintenance ............................................................................ 292 

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

Coalition Support Funds ........................................................................... 298 

C–17 Engine Maintenance ........................................................................ 298 

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

Research, Development, Test and Evaluation ............................................... 307 

Revolving and Management Funds ................................................................. 309 

Defense Working Capital Funds .............................................................. 309 

Other Department of Defense Programs ........................................................ 309 

Defense Health Program .......................................................................... 309 

Drug Interdiction and Counter-Drug Activities, Defense ...................... 311 

Joint Improvised Explosive Device Defeat Fund .................................... 311 

Joint Urgent Operational Needs Fund .................................................... 311 

Office of the Inspector General ................................................................ 311 

General Provisions .................................................................................... 311 

TITLE X. ADDITIONAL GENERAL PROVISIONS ............................................. 313 

HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES REPORTING REQUIREMENTS ................ 313 

Changes in the Application of Existing Law .................................................. 313 

Appropriations Not Authorized By Law ......................................................... 313 

Transfer of Funds ............................................................................................. 324 

Rescissions ........................................................................................................ 326 

Transfer of Unexpended Balances .................................................................. 326 

Statement of General Performance Goals and Objectives ............................ 326 

Constitutional Authority .................................................................................. 327 

Compliance with Rule XIII, CL. 3(e) (Ramseyer Rule) ................................. 327 

Earmark Disclosure Statement ....................................................................... 327 

Comparison with the Budget Resolution ........................................................ 327 

Five-Year Outlay Projections ........................................................................... 327 

Financial Assistance to State and Local Governments ................................. 328 

Full Committee Votes ...................................................................................... 328 

Additional Views ............................................................................................... 343 


rfrederick on DSK6VPTVN1PROD with HEARING

rfrederick on DSK6VPTVN1PROD with HEARING
112TH CONGRESS REPORT " ! HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 2d Session 112–493 

DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE APPROPRIATIONS BILL, 2013 

MAY 25, 2012.—Committed to the Committee of the Whole House on the State of 

the Union and ordered to be printed 

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

submitted the following 

R E P O R T 

together with 

ADDITIONAL VIEWS 

[To accompany H.R. 5856] 

The Committee on Appropriations submits the following report in 

explanation of the accompanying bill making appropriations for the 

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

ending September 30, 2013. 

BILL TOTALS

Appropriations for most military functions of the Department of 

Defense are provided for in the accompanying bill for the fiscal 

year 2013. This bill does not provide appropriations for military 

construction, military family housing, civil defense, and military 

nuclear warheads, for which requirements are considered in connection with other appropriations Acts. 

The President’s fiscal year 2013 budget request for activities 

funded in the Department of Defense Appropriations Act totals 

$516,131,553,000 in new budget obligational authority for the base 

military bill. 


rfrederick on DSK6VPTVN1PROD with HEARING
2 


rfrederick on DSK6VPTVN1PROD with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 01 here 73883A.001
3 

COMMITTEE BUDGET REVIEW PROCESS

During its review of the fiscal year 2013 budget request and execution of appropriations for fiscal year 2012, the Subcommittee on 

Defense held a total of ten hearings and three formal Subcommittee briefings during the period from February 2012 to April 

2012. Testimony received by the Subcommittee totaled 763 pages 

of transcript. Hearings were held in open session, except when the 

security classification of the material to be discussed presented no 

alternative but to conduct those hearings in executive or closed session. 

INTRODUCTION

The Committee recommendation for the fiscal year 2013 Department of Defense base budget is $519,219,373,000, which is 

$3,087,820,000 above the request. The Committee recommendation 

for overseas contingency operations is $88,479,906,000, which is 

$1,839,000 below the request. 

The increase in base allocation above the request provides the 

Committee with the resources to mitigate risks contained in the 

budget. Decreases in shipbuilding, unrealistic efficiencies, as well 

as Guard and reserve force structure decisions all carry an inherent level of risk. The Committee, where able, has attempted to 

mitigate these risks. 

In addition, the Subcommittee has reviewed in detail the budget 

request and found areas and programs where reductions are possible without adversely impacting the warfighter or modernization 

and readiness efforts. Examples of such reductions include: programs which have been terminated or restructured since the budget was submitted; savings from favorable contract pricing adjustments; contract/schedule delays resulting in fiscal year 2013 savings; unjustified cost increases or funding requested ahead of need; 

anticipated/historical under execution; rescissions of unneeded 

prior year funds; and reductions that are authorized in the pending 

fiscal year 2013 National Defense Authorization Act. 

FISCAL MANAGEMENT

In the past, the Committee has expressed considerable concern 

over an apparent erosion of the Department’s fiscal discipline. That 

erosion is reflected in an ever increasing reliance on the reprogramming of funds rather than establishing its funding priorities during 

the budget formulation process. The Committee once again notes 

the extraordinary growth in the Department’s requests for authority to reprogram previously appropriated funding and transfer it to 

other programs, often including ‘‘new start’’ programs which have 

not yet received congressional approval. Congress annually provides a significant amount of general and special transfer authority 

to move funding to previously approved, higher priority defense 

programs in order to adjust to budgetary changes and unanticipated program changes. However, the Department has established 

a startling trend of requesting multiple numbers of large-scale, omnibus-like reprogrammings each year, including an alarming number of requests for approval to start new programs without the required budgetary and program information. 


rfrederick on DSK6VPTVN1PROD with HEARING
4 

The Committee is concerned that these trends appear to indicate 

a disturbing degradation of the Department of Defense Planning, 

Programming, and Budgeting System (PPBS) that was established 

over 40 years ago. As was noted in previous Committee Reports, 

beginning in 2003, the PPBS process has been significantly altered, 

splintering planning phases and requiring that the program and 

budget reviews occur simultaneously. The Committee continues to 

believe that these process changes were ill-conceived and have had 

significant and lasting adverse implications. There can be no doubt 

that the Department’s financial officers have faced considerable 

challenges in managing both the war and base budgets, and the 

Committee appreciates the significant pressures the Department 

has been operating under while conducting two simultaneous combat operations in Iraq and Afghanistan, and the Committee has attempted to provide all the funding and flexibility necessary to support our forces in combat. However, the excessive reliance on authority to transfer funding previously appropriated for specifically 

requested programs, and use that funding for other programs is of 

great concern to the Committee. 

During annual budget deliberations for the fiscal year 2008 defense budget request, the Committee expressed its concern over the 

apparent erosion of the Department’s fiscal discipline, in part because the Department’s annual amount of requests for reprogramming authority had more than doubled since the early 2000s. Despite the Committee’s fiscal year 2008 expression of concern and direction to implement more discipline in its budget development, the 

Department has continued to request significantly increased 

amounts of reprogramming authority, well beyond those amounts 

objected to by the Committee in fiscal year 2008. In fact, in fiscal 

year 2011, the Department requested authority to reprogram over 

$15,100,000,000, an almost 500 percent increase from the early 

2000s. 

Additionally, the Committee has clearly indicated its objection to 

the initiation of new start programs through reprogramming and 

specifically noted the lack of any supporting justification and explanatory documentation to aid the Committee in consideration of 

proposed new start programs. The Department’s own regulation, 

DoD Financial Management, 7000.14R, Volume 3, Chapter 6, paragraph 060401E states: ‘‘Except for extraordinary situations, consideration will not be given to new start reprogramming requests for 

which the follow-on funding is not budgeted or programmed,’’ and 

yet the Department routinely submits numerous reprogramming 

requests, including dozens of proposed new start programs, while 

often not providing any budgetary information at all concerning 

those new start programs. 

The Committee continues to strongly discourage the use of reprogramming requests to initiate new start programs. However, in 

those cases where the Secretary of Defense determines that a reprogramming request is necessary in the interest of national security to rapidly respond to high priority requirements from combatant commanders, such requests should be supported with specific 

justification and supporting budgetary implications. Urgent requests should not be held and aggregated over a period of time nor 

included in large omnibus-like reprogrammings. Such requests 

should be submitted immediately to the congressional defense comVerDate Mar 15 2010 02:14 May 26, 2012 Jkt 074226 PO 00000 Frm 00014 Fmt 6659 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\HR493.XXX HR493

rfrederick on DSK6VPTVN1PROD with HEARING
5 

mittees so that the Committee can expedite its consideration of 

these urgent warfighter requests. 

The Committee strongly urges the Department to reinstitute rational and sequential planning and budgeting processes and procedures and significantly reduce its reliance on reprogramming of 

previously appropriated funding to fix problems. In order to assist 

the Department in returning to a more normal planning and budgeting process, the Committee has reduced the Department’s request 

for general and special transfer reprogramming authority by 

$3,000,000,000. 

COMPETITION

The Committee understands that the Department of Defense, including the Military Services and related agencies, awards contracts through the use of competitive procedures in accordance with 

chapter 137 of title 10 U.S.C. and the Federal Acquisition Regulation and uses competitive procedures or a combination of competitive procedures as appropriate. The Committee directs the Secretary of Defense to use these and other duly established legislative and regulatory guidelines for the competitive acquisition of 

services and materials described in this bill and the accompanying 

report. 

CONFERENCES

The Committee is concerned with recent reports that taxpayer 

funds have been misused to support inappropriate conferences and 

activities. The Committee directs that, not later than 30 days after 

enactment of this Act, the Inspector General of the Department of 

Defense shall report to the House and Senate Appropriations Committees the procedures that each Military Service and Defense Department Component has in place to ensure compliance with all applicable Federal laws and regulations on travel, conferences, and 

employee awards programs, and shall assess the effectiveness of 

these procedures. 

Further, not later than 30 days after the end of fiscal year 2013, 

the Inspector General of the Department of Defense shall report to 

the House and Senate Appropriations Committees on appropriate 

department, agency, board, or commission conference spending and 

compliance with laws and regulations. At a minimum, the report 

shall include: the number of conferences held; the amount of funds 

obligated and expended by appropriation or other source of funding 

including budget accounts and subaccounts; and compliance with 

all applicable laws and regulations. 

FUNDING INCREASES

The Committee directs that the funding increases outlined in the 

tables for each appropriation account shall be provided only for the 

specific purposes indicated in the tables. 

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS BY MAJOR CATEGORY

ACTIVE, RESERVE, AND NATIONAL GUARD MILITARY PERSONNEL

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

$128,462,794,000 for active, reserve, and National Guard military 

personnel, an increase of $32,769,000 above the budget request, 


rfrederick on DSK6VPTVN1PROD with HEARING
6 

and $2,627,745,000 below the fiscal year 2012 enacted level. The 

recommendation supports the request to increase basic pay for all 

military personnel by 1.7 percent, effective January 1, 2013. The 

Committee also recommends full funding to support the authorized 

end strength levels for active duty and Selected Reserve personnel. 

OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE

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

$175,159,569,000 for operation and maintenance support to the 

military services and other Department of Defense entities, an increase of $220,636,000 from the fiscal year 2013 budget request, 

and an increase of $12,086,428,000 above the fiscal year 2012 enacted level. The recommended levels will robustly fund operational 

training programs in fiscal year 2013. Requests for unit and depot 

level maintenance; facility sustainment, restoration and modernization; and base operations support program funding are fully supported. 

PROCUREMENT

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

$102,496,191,000 for procurement. 

Major initiatives and modifications include: 

$1,306,087,000 for the procurement of 69 UH–60 Blackhawk helicopters, an increase of $199,000,000 and ten aircraft above the 

President’s request. 

$1,076,036,000 for the procurement of 38 CH–47 Chinook helicopters, the same as the President’s request. 

$518,088,000 for the procurement of 19 MQ–1 Unmanned Aerial 

Vehicles, the same as the President’s request. 

$946,590,000 for the procurement of Patriot PAC–3 missiles and 

launchers, an increase of $300,000,000 above the President’s request. 

$255,433,000 for the procurement of M1A2 SEP upgraded 

Abrams tanks, an increase of $181,000,000 above the President’s 

request. 

$288,193,000 for the procurement of Bradley Fighting Vehicle 

Modernization, an increase of $140,000,000 above the President’s 

request. 

$169,909,000 for the procurement of 49 M88A2 Improved Recovery Vehicles, an increase of $62,000,000 above the President’s request. 

$100,000,000 for HMMWV modernization for the Army National 

Guard, an increase of $100,000,000 above the President’s request. 

$940,965,000 for the procurement of 12 EA–18G Growler electronic attack aircraft and $45,000,000 for EA–18G advance procurement to preserve the option of buying additional aircraft in fiscal year 2014. 

$2,597,565,000 for the procurement of 37 F/A–18E/F Super Hornet tactical aircraft, an increase of $562,434,000 and eleven aircraft 

above the President’s request. 

$2,387,052,000 for the procurement of 13 P–8A Poseidon Multimission aircraft, a decrease of $33,703,000 below the President’s request. 


rfrederick on DSK6VPTVN1PROD with HEARING
7 

$759,945,000 for the procurement of 29 UH–1Y/AH–1Z Helicopters, an increase of $39,012,000 and two aircraft above the 

President’s request. 

$5,158,617,000 for the procurement of 29 F–35 Lightning Aircraft, six short take-off and vertical landing variants for the Marine 

Corps, four carrier variants for the Navy, and 19 conventional 

variants for the Air Force. 

$15,236,126,000 in Navy Shipbuilding and Conversion for the 

procurement of eleven Navy ships, one above the request, including 

one aircraft carrier, three DDG–51 guided missile destroyers, two 

SSN–774 attack submarines, four Littoral Combat Ships, and one 

Intra-theater Connector Ship. 

$1,209,421,000 for the procurement of 14 C/HC/MC/KC–130J aircraft, an increase of $447,000,000 and seven aircraft above the 

President’s request. 

$1,656,600,000 for the procurement of 18 MV–22 and four CV– 

22 Osprey aircraft, an increase of $59,260,000 and one MV–22 aircraft above the President’s request. 

$708,530,000 for the procurement of 36 MQ–9 Reaper unmanned 

aerial vehicles, an increase of $155,000,000 and 12 aircraft above 

the President’s request. 

$1,679,856,000 for the procurement of four Evolved Expendable 

Launch Vehicles, the same as the President’s request. 

RESEARCH, DEVELOPMENT, TEST AND EVALUATION

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

$69,984,145,000 for research, development, test and evaluation. 

Major initiatives and modifications include: 

$278,018,000 for the development of the Warfighter Information 

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

$639,874,000 for the development of the Manned Ground Vehicle 

Ground Combat Vehicle, the same as the President’s request. 

$483,095,000 for the continuation of the development of the replacement for the Ohio class ballistic missile submarine, the same 

as the President’s request. 

$119,065,000 for the continued development of the E–2D Advanced Hawkeye aircraft, the same as the President’s request. 

$257,480,000 for the continued development of the Joint Tactical 

Radio System, a decrease of $80,000,000 below the President’s request. 

$2,682,674,000 for the continued development of the F–35 Lightning Joint Strike Fighter aircraft, a decrease of $16,824,000 below 

the President’s request. 

$436,102,000 for the continued development of the Multi-mission 

Maritime Aircraft, an increase of $15,000,000 above the President’s 

request. 

$291,742,000 for the development of a new penetrating bomber, 

the same as the President’s request. 

$1,815,588,000 for the continued development of the Next Generation Aerial Refueling Aircraft, the same as the President’s request. 

$516,594,000 for continued development of the Space Based Infrared Satellite (SBIRS) and associated ground support systems, an 

increase of $68,000,000 above the President’s request. 


rfrederick on DSK6VPTVN1PROD with HEARING
8 

$335,295,000, for the development of the Global Positioning System III operational control segment (OCX), a decrease of 

$38,300,000 below the President’s request. 

$2,827,176,000 for the Defense Advanced Research Projects 

Agency, an increase of $10,000,000 above the President’s request. 

$948,736,000 for the Israeli Cooperative Program, an increase of 

$848,900,000 above the President’s request. 

SPECIAL OPERATIONS COMMAND CRITICAL NEEDS

The Committee recommends $143,000,000 for United States Special Operations Command (USSOCOM) to address a critical capability shortfall identified by the Commander through the Combat 

Missions Needs process and approved by the Secretary of Defense. 

The recommendation funds the Commander’s request to modify selected platforms with High Definition Full Motion Video which will 

provide a game changing Intelligence, Surveillance, and Reconnaissance capability. 

DEFENSE HEALTH PROGRAM

The Committee recommends a total of $32,862,234,000 for the 

Defense Health Program to support worldwide medical and dental 

services for active forces and other eligible beneficiaries, 

$333,516,000 above the fiscal year 2013 budget request and 

$380,175,000 above the amount appropriated for fiscal year 2012. 

The Committee recommends funding to augment the request for 

enduring Traumatic Brain Injury and Psychological Health and 

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

the following: 

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

Peer-Reviewed Spinal Cord Research .................................................. $15,000,000 

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

OVERSEAS CONTINGENCY OPERATIONS

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

$88,479,906,000 for overseas contingency operations. 

Major initiatives and modifications include: 

Military Personnel: The Committee recommends a total of 

$13,786,221,000 for military personnel in title IX of the bill. 

Operation and Maintenance: The title IX operation and maintenance account fully funds key readiness programs critical to prepare forces for combat operations and other missions such as 

OPTEMPO flying hours and steaming days, depot maintenance, 

training, spare parts, and base operations. 

Procurement: The title IX procurement account provides funds for 

items such as replacement aircraft for combat losses, aircraft upgrades and modifications, intelligence, surveillance, and reconnaissance equipment, and physical security improvements. 

Defense Health Program: The Committee recommends a total of 

$993,898,000 for the Defense Health Program in title IX of the bill. 

CLASSIFIED PROGRAMS

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


rfrederick on DSK6VPTVN1PROD with HEARING
9 

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

FORCES TO BE SUPPORTED

DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY

The fiscal year 2013 budget request is designed to support current budget guidance and the Army’s continuing transformation of 

its operating forces to meet defense strategy. Current budget guidance directs the Active Component (AC) end strength to reduce to 

490,000 by the end of fiscal year 2017, Army National Guard 

(ARNG) end strength to reduce to 353,200 by the end of fiscal year 

2017, and the United States Army Reserve (USAR) to maintain its 

end strength at 205,000. 

By the end of fiscal year 2013, the AC will include six Army 

Service Component Command headquarters and one Army Component headquarters assigned to U.S. Forces Korea, three Corps 

headquarters, ten Division headquarters, 44 Brigade Combat 

Teams (BCTs), and 38 Multi-Functional Support Brigades. By the 

end of fiscal year 2013, the Army Force structure in the ARNG and 

the USAR will include eight ARNG division headquarters, 28 

BCTs, and 60 multi-functional Support Brigades (48 ARNG and 12 

USAR). 

A summary of the major forces follows: 

Fiscal year 

2011 2012 2013 

Active Component Forces: 

Theater Army HQs ............................................................................................................ 6 6 6 

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

Division HQs ..................................................................................................................... 10 10 10 

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Forces Total ............................................................................................................. 100 104 102 

Army National Guard Forces: 

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Forces Total ............................................................................................................. 79 79 79 

United States Army Reserve Forces: 

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

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

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

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


rfrederick on DSK6VPTVN1PROD with HEARING
10 

DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY

The fiscal year 2013 budget request supports battle forces totaling 293 ships at the end of fiscal year 2013, including 14 fleet ballistic missile submarines, 10 aircraft carriers, 24 support ships, 

eight reserve ships, 237 other battle forces ships, 1,688 Navy/Marine Corps tactical/ASW aircraft, 271 undergraduate training aircraft, 514 Fleet Air Training aircraft, 225 Fleet Air Support aircraft, 250 reserve aircraft, and 251 aircraft in the pipeline. 

A summary of the major forces follows: 

Fiscal year 

2011 2012 2013 

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

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

General Purpose ............................................................................................................ 252 255 247 

Aircraft Carriers ................................................................................................... 11 11 10 

Surface Combatants ............................................................................................ 111 110 101 

Submarines (attack) ............................................................................................ 53 54 55 

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

Amphibious Warfare Ships .................................................................................. 28 30 31 

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

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

Support Forces .............................................................................................................. 18 20 24 

Support Ships ...................................................................................................... 18 20 24 

Mobilization Cat. A (Reserve) ....................................................................................... 8 8 8 

Surface Combatants ............................................................................................ 8 8 8 

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

Total Ships, Battleforce (incl. Cat. A Reserve) ............................................................ 292 297 293 

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

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

Maritime Preposition ................................................................................... 17 18 12 

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

Ready Reserve Force Ships (NDSF) ............................................................ 49 48 46 

Naval Aircraft: 

Primary Authorized (plus pipe) ............................................................................ 3,572 3,563 3,555 

Authorized Pipeline ..................................................................................... 308 266 251 

Tactical/ASW Aircraft ........................................................................................... 1,648 1,668 1,688 

Fleet Air Training ........................................................................................ 503 515 514 

Fleet Air Support ......................................................................................... 222 222 225 

Training (Undergraduate) ........................................................................... 612 624 627 

Reserves ...................................................................................................... 280 268 250 

Naval Personnel: 

Active: 

Navy ............................................................................................................ *325,301 **322,700 322,700 

Marine Corps ............................................................................................... 201,157 202,100 182,100 

Temporary Marine Corps end strength in OCO .......................................... .................. .................. 15,200 

Reserves Navy: 

SELRES/Drilling Reserve ............................................................................. 54,288 53,639 52,386 

Fulltime Support ......................................................................................... 10,504 10,297 10,114 

Navy Reserves Total ........................................................................... 64,792 63,936 62,500 

Reserves Marine Corps: 

SELRES/Drilling Reserve ............................................................................. 37,580 37,339 37,339 

Fulltime Support ......................................................................................... 2,192 2,261 2,261 

Marine Corps Reserves Total ............................................................. 39,772 39,600 39,600 

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

**FY 2012 includes 3,836 non-core IA requested for temporary IA OCO missions. 


rfrederick on DSK6VPTVN1PROD with HEARING
11 

DEPARTMENT OF THE AIR FORCE

AIR FORCE REDUCTIONS IN FORCE STRUCTURE AND RESERVE

COMPONENT IMPACTS

The Air Force’s fiscal year 2013 budget request proposes to retire 

or divest 286 current or in-production aircraft over the 2013–2017 

future years defense program (FYDP), including a loss of 227 aircraft by the end of fiscal year 2013 alone. The proposed reduction 

in aircraft would have a disproportionate impact on the Air National Guard and Air Force Reserve. The Air National Guard would 

lose 163 aircraft over the FYDP, not including 17 C–27J Joint 

Cargo Aircraft for which funds have been appropriated but withheld from execution by the Air Force due to its decision to terminate the C–27J program. The Air Force Reserve would lose 82 aircraft. These losses would be accompanied by personnel reductions 

of 5,100 for the Air National Guard and 900 for the Air Force Reserve. The reserve component would absorb more than 85 percent 

of the aircraft reduction and approximately 60 percent of the total 

Air Force personnel reduction. As a consequence, the reserve component would suffer a loss of five airlift squadrons and five tactical 

fighter squadrons in fiscal year 2013. The Air Force additionally 

proposes to realign aircraft between components and installations 

and re-mission some units that otherwise would be adversely affected by the proposed reductions. 

The Committee acknowledges the Air Force’s need to find budget 

savings and its efforts to adjust force structure to the lowered expectations of the strategic review. Even with such reduced requirements, however, the Committee is concerned that the force structure reductions would add an unnecessary element of risk. The 

Committee is further concerned that the Air Force’s proposal discounts the value that the reserve component adds to the total force 

and that the Air Force has not adequately considered homeland defense and disaster assistance requirements, especially with the proposal to transfer C–130 aircraft from the Gulf Coast region. 

The scope and complexity of the Air Force’s force reduction and 

realignment plan demand that the Committee consider it as a 

whole. The Committee does not concur with the Air Force’s proposed force structure plan and includes bill language prohibiting 

the use of funds for the retirement, divestiture, realignment, or 

transfer of any aircraft and associated missions. The Committee acknowledges the Air Force’s concerns that the restoration of force 

structure without the necessary resources would risk a ‘‘hollow 

force’’, and therefore the Committee’s recommended funding levels 

include targeted increases to preserve existing force structure in 

fiscal year 2013. 

The Committee is aware that the Council of Governors (COG), a 

Department of Defense advisory body established by the National 

Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2008, has proposed an 

alternative force restructuring plan. The Committee neither endorses nor disapproves of this plan, but encourages the Department 

and the Air Force to continue engagement with the COG and report on force structure alternatives resulting from such engagement to the congressional defense committees. Furthermore, the 

Committee expects the Air Force to refrain from taking any actions 

during fiscal years 2012 or 2013, including the reduction of any Air 


rfrederick on DSK6VPTVN1PROD with HEARING
12 

National Guard or Air Force Reserve Units, that would prejudice 

or preempt final decisions on force structure pending the enactment of final authorization and appropriations legislation by Congress. 

Finally, the Committee directs the Air Force to submit a report 

to the House Appropriations Committee at the earliest practicable 

date, but not later than October 1, 2012, providing a cost-benefit 

analysis for each set of aircraft retirements and realignments proposed with the fiscal year 2013 budget request. The Committee further directs the Government Accountability Office to review the Air 

Force’s cost-benefit analyses and report its findings to the congressional defense committees not later than 180 days after the date 

of the Air Force’s submission. 

A summary of the major forces follows: 

2011 2012 2013 

Strategic Airlift Squadrons: 

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

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

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

Tactical Airlift Squadrons: 

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

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

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

2011 2012 2013 

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

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

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

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

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

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

Flighttest Units (DT and OT Units with Assigned aircraft) ................................... 12 12 12 

Fighter ............................................................................................................ 9 9 9 

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

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

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

USAF Airlift Squadrons (Active) 

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

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

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

Total Air Force Aircraft Inventory .......................................................... 5,566 5,587 5,568 

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

End Strength 2011 2012 2013 

Active Duty .............................................................................................................. 332,200 332,800 329,460 

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

ANG ................................................................................................................ 106,700 106,700 106,700 

AFR ................................................................................................................. 71,200 71,400 71,400 


rfrederick on DSK6VPTVN1PROD with HEARING
(13) 

TITLE I 

MILITARY PERSONNEL 

The fiscal year 2013 budget request for programs funded in title 

I of the Committee bill, Military Personnel, is $128,430,025,000 in 

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

permanent change of station (PCS) costs; and other military personnel costs such as survivor, unemployment, and education benefits. A summary of appropriations provided in title I, Military Personnel, follows: 


rfrederick on DSK6VPTVN1PROD with HEARING
14 


rfrederick on DSK6VPTVN1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 02 here 73883A.002
15 

MILITARY PERSONNEL OVERVIEW

The Committee recommendation provides $128,462,794,000 for 

the Military Personnel accounts. Included is funding for military 

pay and allowances, recruitment and retention initiatives, and 

overall quality of life programs for active duty, reserve, and National Guard personnel. The recommendation fully supports the resource requirements needed to maintain the authorized end 

strength levels for fiscal year 2013. The recommendation also provides funding to increase basic pay for all military personnel by 1.7 

percent, effective January 1, 2013. The Committee continues to 

support and encourage constructive evaluations of recruitment and 

retention programs, bonus and special pay incentives, and personnel benefit programs for military personnel for fiscal year 2013. 

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

families. 

SUMMARY OF END STRENGTH

The fiscal year 2013 budget request includes a decrease of 21,600 

in total end strength for the active forces and a decrease of 9,700 

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

year 2012 authorized levels. The following tables summarize the 

Committee recommendations for end strength levels, both in the 

aggregate and for each active and Selected Reserve component. 

OVERALL ACTIVE END STRENGTH

Fiscal year 2012 authorized .............................................................. 1,422,600 

Fiscal year 2013 budget request ....................................................... 1,401,000 

Fiscal year 2013 recommendation ..................................................... 1,401,560 

Compared with fiscal year 2012 ................................................. ¥21,040 

Compared with fiscal year 2013 budget request ...................... +560 

OVERALL SELECTED RESERVE END STRENGTH

Fiscal year 2012 authorized .............................................................. 847,100 

Fiscal year 2013 budget request ....................................................... 837,400 

Fiscal year 2013 recommendation ..................................................... 843,400 

Compared with fiscal year 2012 ................................................. ¥3,700 

Compared with fiscal year 2013 budget request ...................... +6,000 

SUMMARY OF MILITARY PERSONNEL END STRENGTH 

Fiscal year 

2012 authorized 

Fiscal year 2013 

Budget 

request 

Committee 

recommendation Change from 

request 

Change from 

fiscal year 

2012 

Active Forces (End Strength): 

Army * ..................................................................... 562,000 552,100 552,100 ¥9,900 

Navy ........................................................................ 325,700 322,700 322,700 ¥3,000 

Marine Corps ** ..................................................... 202,100 197,300 197,300 ¥4,800 

Air Force ................................................................. 332,800 328,900 329,460 560 ¥3,340 

Total, Active Forces ....................................... 1,422,600 1,401,000 1,401,560 560 ¥21,040 

Guard and Reserve Forces (End Strength): 

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

Navy Reserve .......................................................... 66,200 62,500 62,500 ¥3,700 

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

Air Force Reserve ................................................... 71,400 70,500 71,400 900 


rfrederick on DSK6VPTVN1PROD with HEARING
16 

SUMMARY OF MILITARY PERSONNEL END STRENGTH—Continued 

Fiscal year 

2012 authorized 

Fiscal year 2013 

Budget 

request 

Committee 

recommendation Change from 

request 

Change from 

fiscal year 

2012 

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

Air National Guard ................................................. 106,700 101,600 106,700 5,100 

Total, Selected Reserve ................................. 847,100 837,400 843,400 6,000 ¥3,700 

Total, Military Personnel ................................................. 2,269,700 2,238,400 2,244,960 6,560 ¥24,740 

* For FY12, Army Active Forces end strength includes Temporary End Strength Increase of 14,600 troops 

* For FY13, Army Active Forces end strength includes 49,700 Army end strength requested in the Overseas Contingency Operations budget, 

as well as 12,400 increase requested in the base budget for the Army’s Temporary End strength Army Medical (TEAM) program associated 

with non-deployable soldiers in the Integrated Disability System 

** For FY13, Marine Corps Active Forces end strength includes 15,200 Marine Corps end strength requested in the Overseas Contingency Operations budget 

FULL-TIME SUPPORT STRENGTHS

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

reserve components: military technicians (dual status), Active 

Guard and Reserve (AGR), non-technician civilians, and active 

component personnel. 

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

and administer the reserve components. Military technicians (dual 

status) directly support units and are critical to helping units 

maintain readiness and meet the wartime mission of the Army and 

Air Force. 

The following table summarizes Guard and reserve full-time support end strengths: 

SUMMARY OF GUARD AND RESERVE FULL-TIME SUPPORT 

Fiscal 

year 2012 

authorized 

Fiscal year 2013 

Budget 

request 

Committee 

recommendation 

Change 

from 

request 

Change 

from 

Fiscal 

Year 

2012 

Army Reserve: 

AGR ............................................................................................. 16,261 16,277 16,277 .............. 16 

Technicians ................................................................................ 8,395 8,445 8,445 .............. 50 

Navy Reserve: 

AR ............................................................................................... 10,337 10,114 10,114 .............. ¥223 

Marine Corps Reserve: 

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

Air Force Reserve: 

AGR ............................................................................................. 2,662 2,888 2,888 .............. 226 

Technicians ................................................................................ 10,777 10,283 10,777 494 ..............

Army National Guard: 

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

Technicians ................................................................................ 27,210 28,380 28,380 .............. 1,170 

Air National Guard: 

AGR ............................................................................................. 14,833 14,305 14,833 528 ..............

Technicians ................................................................................ 22,509 21,101 22,509 1,408 ..............

Totals:.

AGR/AR ....................................................................................... 78,414 77,905 78,433 528 19 

Technicians ................................................................................ 68,891 68,209 70,111 1,902 1,220 

Total, Full-Time Support ................................................... 147,305 146,114 148,544 2,430 1,239 


rfrederick on DSK6VPTVN1PROD with HEARING
17 

MILITARY PERSONNEL TRANSFER AUTHORITY

The fiscal year 2013 budget request proposes the inclusion of a 

new provision that extends the availability of up to two percent of 

amounts appropriated for Military Personnel under title I for two 

fiscal years, instead of the customary one fiscal year. Since 2001, 

the Department has had ten violations of the Anti-deficiency Act 

(ADA) in the Military Personnel accounts. This includes two violations in the Military Personnel, Army account from fiscal years 

2005 and 2008 that remain under investigation. The Committee 

has repeatedly expressed its concern over the Department’s failure 

to adequately budget for Military Personnel. The Inspector General 

of the Department of Defense and the Government Accountability 

Office have regularly reported deficiencies in the Services’ military 

payroll processes and controls. Deficiencies include a lack of integration between military personnel, military pay, and accounting 

systems which can lead to potential errors, a lack of an efficient 

and effective system for providing documentation supporting payments for military payroll, and an inability to determine whether 

payroll accounts are valid or to verify the accuracy of payments 

and reported payrolls. 

Furthermore, because the Services continue to manage the Military Personnel appropriation by relying on estimated obligations or 

bulk obligations until actual disbursement data is provided weeks 

or months later, they are unable to track disbursements in real 

time and cannot ensure that obligations do not exceed the appropriation if unanticipated events occur. 

Notwithstanding the accounting deficiencies noted above, the 

Committee understands that the entitlement-based nature of the 

Military Personnel accounts and the sizable volume of obligations 

in the last quarter of the fiscal year create a unique budgeting 

challenge for the Department. The Committee recognizes the Department’s efforts to improve its budgeting and oversight of the 

Military Personnel accounts by improving its cost models and obligation methods and by establishing formal management oversight 

of budget execution. While the Committee does not include the proposed general provision in its recommendation, it recognizes that 

the additional flexibility provided by such a proposal could enable 

the Department to better manage the Military Personnel appropriation and avoid further ADA violations. The Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2012 included a provision directing the Inspector 

General of the Department of Defense to conduct a review of ADA 

violations in the Military Personnel accounts and submit recommendations for the implementation of corrective actions. The 

Committee looks forward to reviewing the Inspector General’s report and will reconsider the proposed provision based on the report’s findings and recommendations. 

In addition, the Committee remains extremely concerned over 

the length of time it takes the Department to complete investigations into potential ADA violations in the Military Personnel accounts, including an investigation still pending on a violation dating from fiscal year 2005. The Committee directs the Undersecretary of Defense (Comptroller) to report to the congressional defense 

committees not later than 120 days after enactment of this Act on 


rfrederick on DSK6VPTVN1PROD with HEARING
18 

the actions being taken to complete ADA violation investigations in 

a timely manner. 

REDUCTION OF TROOP END STRENGTH

The fiscal year 2013 budget request proposes a reduction of end 

strength in the active duty Army, Navy, Marine Corps, and Air 

Force, and the Navy Reserve, Air Force Reserve, Army National 

Guard, and Air National Guard components from fiscal year 2012 

to fiscal year 2017. The budget proposes to reduce the size of the 

active duty Army and Marine Corps by 72,000 and 20,000 personnel respectively over this time period. While the changes proposed as part of the Air Force strategic guidance are addressed 

elsewhere in this report, the Committee remains concerned that 

the recommendation to reduce troop end strength across the Services is budget driven rather than based on military requirements. 

In addition, the Committee understands that accomplishing the 

drawdown of end strength so quickly could prove difficult as all 

Services are currently operating at or near their authorized end 

strengths and continue to meet or exceed their recruiting and retention goals. The Committee believes that in this uncertain world, 

any changes in force structure must be tempered by the need to 

provide a strong, capable, and highly qualified force ready to meet 

current obligations and respond to any future potential military 

needs. 

RETROACTIVE STOP LOSS SPECIAL PAY PROGRAM

The Retroactive Stop Loss Special Pay Program authorizes the 

Secretary of Defense to provide compensation to qualifying servicemembers who were involuntarily extended on active duty under 

Stop Loss authority from September 11, 2001 through September 

30, 2009. The Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2012 extended the 

deadline for submission of a claim through October 21, 2012. According to the Defense Finance and Accounting Service, as of February 2012, more than 97,000 retroactive stop loss claims from 

servicemembers have been processed for payment. The Committee 

understands that the Department has pursued numerous methods 

to contact military personnel who would be eligible for compensation, including through direct mail, outreach through Veteran and 

Military Service Organizations, contemporary and social media, 

and the Public Affairs offices of the Secretary of Defense and Military Services. The Committee directs the Secretary of Defense to 

continue to use every means available to reach out to any remaining eligible personnel before the conclusion of the program. 

SUICIDE PREVENTION TRAINING AND OUTREACH

Suicide remains an issue of ongoing concern among the Services, 

particularly in the National Guard and reserve components. Although the rate of suicides in the National Guard and reserve components has decreased somewhat from calendar year 2010 to calendar year 2011, it remains far too high. While servicemembers 

serving on active duty return from deployments to military bases 

which provide more structured support networks, returning guardsmen and reservists are frequently geographically isolated from 


rfrederick on DSK6VPTVN1PROD with HEARING
19 

their units and may not have the regular interactions with their 

peers and chain of command that their active duty counterparts experience. The Committee is aware that suicide remains a problem 

among servicemembers who have never deployed as well as those 

who have deployed once or multiple times. The Committee acknowledges the steps the Services have taken to implement suicide 

prevention training and outreach efforts and to lower the rate of 

suicide among servicemembers. In addition, the Committee recognizes the important role that programs such as Yellow Ribbon 

serve in helping guardsmen and reservists transition to civilian life 

upon returning from deployments. 

The Committee believes that more must be done to identify atrisk servicemembers and to improve prevention and outreach efforts. For example, recent National Guard pilot programs embedding mental health providers in geographically separated or high 

risk units to make them readily available during annual training 

and inactive duty training have shown some initial successes. The 

Committee understands that the National Guard Bureau Office of 

the Joint Surgeon, Psychological Health is working with states to 

identify high-risk units for embedded counselor placement and supports efforts to improve access to mental health providers for all 

servicemembers, especially those in the National Guard and reserve components. In addition, the Committee provides increased 

funding for suicide prevention as well as the Air National Guard 

Yellow Ribbon program, which was underfunded in the budget request, and urges the Secretary of Defense to ensure that future 

budget requests include adequate funding for these important programs. The Committee urges the Services to continue to make suicide prevention a key priority and to regularly update the Committee on actions being taken. 

SEXUAL ASSAULT PREVENTION AND RESPONSE

Sexual assault remains a pervasive problem in the military. The 

Committee recognizes the measures that the Department of Defense has taken to reduce and prevent sexual assault, to prosecute 

perpetrators, and to respond to victims. The Secretary of Defense 

has implemented several new victim-focused policies, including providing additional legal assistance to victims, offering expedited 

transfers for victims of sexual assault, requiring Sexual Assault Response Coordinators and victim advocates to be credentialed, increasing funding for investigators and judge advocates to receive 

specialized training, and implementing enhanced sexual assault 

prevention and response training for commanders and senior noncommissioned officers. The Committee strongly supports Department and Service efforts to combat sexual assault and fully funds 

the President’s request for Sexual Assault Prevention and Response programs at the Service level and at the Department of Defense Sexual Assault Prevention and Response Program Office. 

HAZING IN THE ARMED FORCES

The Committee is extremely concerned by recent reports of hazing in the military. Hazing is inconsistent with the values of the 

military, and such behavior should not be tolerated within the military. The Committee understands that the Services are taking 


rfrederick on DSK6VPTVN1PROD with HEARING
20 

steps to better report incidents of hazing and to discipline servicemembers involved in such incidents. The Committee directs the 

Secretary of Defense to provide a report to the congressional defense committees not later than 180 days after enactment of this 

Act on the rates of incidence of hazing, harassment, and mistreatment of servicemembers, as well as a review of the policies to prevent and respond to alleged hazing incidents. The report should 

also include recommendations for implementation of a consistent 

reporting system for the Services and recommendations to implement prevention and education programs related to hazing and its 

harmful effects. 

MINORITY OUTREACH

Minorities are underrepresented in the officer ranks across the 

Services as well as in the officer and enlisted ranks of the Navy 

SEALs compared to personnel serving elsewhere in both the active 

and reserve components of the Navy and Marine Corps. To build 

a more diverse organization, disparities in representation need to 

be addressed by effective outreach that will expand the pool of 

well-qualified candidates to serve as military officers and as Navy 

SEALs. The Committee supports efforts to conduct effective outreach and recruiting programs in minority communities and encourages the Secretary of Defense and the Commander, Special Operations Command to support efforts to improve diversity in the 

military, including in the officer ranks and within the Special Operations Forces. The Committee directs the Commander, Special 

Operations Command to provide a report to the congressional defense committees not later than 90 days after enactment of this Act 

on the challenges of recruiting prospective Navy SEAL applicants 

from underrepresented communities and to provide recommendations to increase the competitiveness and to encourage recruitment 

of such candidates. 

MILITARY PERSONNEL, ARMY 

Fiscal year 2012 appropriation .......................................................... $43,298,409,000 

Fiscal year 2013 budget request ....................................................... 40,777,844,000 

Committee recommendation .............................................................. 40,730,014,000 

Change from budget request ............................................................. ¥47,830,000 

The Committee recommends an appropriation of $40,730,014,000 

for Military Personnel, Army. The total amount recommended in 

the bill will provide the following program in fiscal year 2013: 


rfrederick on DSK6VPTVN1PROD with HEARING
21 


rfrederick on DSK6VPTVN1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 03 here 73883A.003
22 


rfrederick on DSK6VPTVN1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 04 here 73883A.004
23 


rfrederick on DSK6VPTVN1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 05 here 73883A.005
24 

ARMY MILITARY PERSONNEL FUNDING SHORTFALL

The Committee understands that the Army has a potential shortfall in the fiscal year 2013 Military Personnel, Army appropriation 

due to three primary factors: expected under execution of the Temporary End Strength Army Medical; a higher active component 

grade plate; and an expected increase in reserve component soldiers serving on active duty. While the existence of a shortfall 

could not be verified in time to address it in this Act, the Committee commends the Army for highlighting the situation in a timely manner. The Committee remains committed to work with the 

Army to address the situation. 

MILITARY PERSONNEL, NAVY 

Fiscal year 2012 appropriation .......................................................... $26,803,334,000 

Fiscal year 2013 budget request ....................................................... 27,090,893,000 

Committee recommendation .............................................................. 27,075,933,000 

Change from budget request ............................................................. ¥14,960,000 

The Committee recommends an appropriation of $27,075,933,000 

for Military Personnel, Navy. The total amount recommended in 

the bill will provide the following program in fiscal year 2013: 


rfrederick on DSK6VPTVN1PROD with HEARING
25 


rfrederick on DSK6VPTVN1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 06 here 73883A.006
26 


rfrederick on DSK6VPTVN1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 07 here 73883A.007
27 


rfrederick on DSK6VPTVN1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 08 here 73883A.008
28 

LITTORAL COMBAT SHIP MANNING

From its inception, the Littoral Combat Ship (LCS) was planned 

to be minimally manned by small, experienced crews and therefore 

contains limited berthing commensurate with the minimal manning requirement. It is the Committee’s understanding that all 

crewmembers were to have experienced at least one deployment 

prior to joining the LCS crew and that no first tour junior officers 

or first term enlisted sailors would be eligible to join an LCS crew 

without having prior at-sea experience. Since the prototypical 

training opportunities are not available on the LCS and manning 

is limited, the entire crew must be capable of performing a variety 

of tasks. The Committee now understands that the Navy is assigning ensigns without prior sea duty to each LCS crew as part of a 

new pilot program. The Committee is concerned that the lack of 

training opportunities will pose a particular challenge for junior officers with no at-sea crew experience. In addition, the LCS will 

have to rely on the addition of an interim or temporary berthing 

module when fully manned to accommodate all of the personnel onboard due to an insufficient number of permanent berths. 

The Committee is concerned that the current LCS manning 

model is unrealistic and that relying on temporary solutions such 

as berthing modules to accommodate additional crewmembers is 

both impractical and detrimental to the quality of life of the entire 

crew. The Committee understands that more berths could be added 

to future ships to provide sufficient permanent berthing for all 

crewmembers. The Committee directs the Secretary of the Navy to 

submit a report to the congressional defense committees not later 

than 120 days after enactment of this Act on future manning plans 

for the LCS. The report should include the Navy’s plan for future 

manning requirements, including how additional crewmembers will 

be accommodated based on the outcome of the aforementioned pilot 

program, how training opportunities for junior crew members will 

be provided, a projected timeline for proposed manning changes, 

and a projected cost of ship modifications to accommodate additional crew members. 

MILITARY PERSONNEL, MARINE CORPS 

Fiscal year 2012 appropriation .......................................................... $13,635,136,000 

Fiscal year 2013 budget request ....................................................... 12,481,050,000 

Committee recommendation .............................................................. 12,560,999,000 

Change from budget request ............................................................. 79,949,000 

The Committee recommends an appropriation of $12,560,999,000 

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

year 2013: 


rfrederick on DSK6VPTVN1PROD with HEARING
29 


rfrederick on DSK6VPTVN1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 09 here 73883A.009
30 


rfrederick on DSK6VPTVN1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 10 here 73883A.010
31 


rfrederick on DSK6VPTVN1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 11 here 73883A.011
32 

MILITARY PERSONNEL, AIR FORCE 

Fiscal year 2012 appropriation ...................................................... $28,096,708,000 

Fiscal year 2013 budget request ................................................... 28,048,539,000 

Committee recommendation .......................................................... 28,124,109,000 

Change from budget request ......................................................... 75,570,000 

The Committee recommends an appropriation of $28,124,109,000 

for Military Personnel, Air Force. The total amount recommended 

in the bill will provide the following program in fiscal year 2013: 


rfrederick on DSK6VPTVN1PROD with HEARING
33 


rfrederick on DSK6VPTVN1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 12 here 73883A.012
34 


rfrederick on DSK6VPTVN1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 13 here 73883A.013
35 


rfrederick on DSK6VPTVN1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 14 here 73883A.014
36 

CREECH AIR FORCE BASE INCENTIVE PAY

In fiscal year 2008, the Air Force authorized Creech Assignment 

Incentive Pay (AIP) for personnel assigned to Creech Air Force 

Base, Nevada to support manning of the Remotely Piloted Aircraft 

mission. The Air Force described the pay as necessary because 

Creech Air Force Base was an austere location with limited infrastructure. In fiscal year 2012, the Secretary of Defense stated that 

Creech AIP would not be extended beyond December 31, 2011. The 

Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2012 reduced excess funding no 

longer required due to the discontinuation of Creech AIP in accordance with the Secretary’s decision. General Provision 8005 of the 

same Act prohibited the Department of Defense from using the 

transfer authority provided in those cases ‘‘where the item for 

which funds are requested has been denied by the Congress.’’ Additionally, in the DD Form 1414 Base for Reprogramming Actions, 

the Air Force identified Creech AIP as being specifically reduced by 

a congressional committee and it noted that Below Threshold Reprogramming (BTR) authority cannot be used to restore specific 

congressional reductions, including funding for Creech AIP. 

The Committee is extremely disturbed to learn that the Department of the Air Force blatantly violated public law, disregarded 

congressional intent, and ignored its own budget guidance by continuing to fund Creech AIP without prior congressional approval as 

required. On March 30, 2012, the Secretary of the Air Force stated 

that Creech AIP will continue until September 30, 2012 and will 

not be extended beyond that deadline. The Committee understands 

that no funding has been requested for Creech AIP in fiscal year 

2013 and the Committee provides no funding for Creech AIP in accordance with the Secretary’s decision. Any funding provided for 

this purpose, including amounts within the Below Threshold Reprogramming limit, must first be approved by a prior approval reprogramming. 

AIR FORCE BASE FAMILY HOUSING PRIVATIZATION

The Department of the Air Force is in the process of completing 

the Family Housing Privatization Initiative at all domestic bases. 

The Committee understands that three projects, the Western 

Group, the Northern Group, and the Continental Group, experienced unforeseen project delays, and thus the Air Force did not request funding in the Military Personnel appropriation for Basic Allowance for Housing for servicemembers living at those bases. The 

Committee also understands that the Air Force now expects those 

projects to close ahead of the revised schedule. The Western Group 

project closed in March 2012, while the Air Force’s most recent estimates show that the Northern Group will close in September 

2012, and the Continental Group will close sometime in fiscal year 

2013, although its timing remains uncertain. The Committee provides funding to cover anticipated shortfalls related to the Western 

Group and Northern Group, but it does not include funding for possible shortfalls related to the Continental Group due to its continued schedule uncertainties. The Committee directs the Secretary of 

the Air Force to provide regular updates on the proposed timeline 


rfrederick on DSK6VPTVN1PROD with HEARING
37 

for the Northern Group and Continental Group as they become 

available. 

RESERVE PERSONNEL, ARMY 

Fiscal year 2012 appropriation .......................................................... $4,289,407,000 

Fiscal year 2013 budget request ....................................................... 4,513,753,000 

Committee recommendation .............................................................. 4,456,823,000 

Change from budget request ............................................................. ¥56,930,000 

The Committee recommends an appropriation of $4,456,823,000 

for Reserve Personnel, Army. The total amount recommended in 

the bill will provide the following program in fiscal year 2013: 


rfrederick on DSK6VPTVN1PROD with HEARING
38 


rfrederick on DSK6VPTVN1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 15 here 73883A.015
39 


rfrederick on DSK6VPTVN1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 16 here 73883A.016
40 

RESERVE PERSONNEL, NAVY 

Fiscal year 2012 appropriation .......................................................... $1,935,544,000 

Fiscal year 2013 budget request ....................................................... 1,898,668,000 

Committee recommendation .............................................................. 1,871,688,000 

Change from budget request ............................................................. ¥26,980,000 

The Committee recommends an appropriation of $1,871,688,000 

for Reserve Personnel, Navy. The total amount recommended in 

the bill will provide the following program in fiscal year 2013: 


rfrederick on DSK6VPTVN1PROD with HEARING
41 


rfrederick on DSK6VPTVN1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 17 here 73883A.017
42 


rfrederick on DSK6VPTVN1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 18 here 73883A.018
43 

RESERVE PERSONNEL, MARINE CORPS 

Fiscal year 2012 appropriation .......................................................... $644,722,000 

Fiscal year 2013 budget request ....................................................... 664,641,000 

Committee recommendation .............................................................. 651,861,000 

Change from budget request ............................................................. ¥12,780,000 

The Committee recommends an appropriation of $651,861,000 for 

Reserve Personnel, Marine Corps. The total amount recommended 

in the bill will provide the following program in fiscal year 2013: 


rfrederick on DSK6VPTVN1PROD with HEARING
44 


rfrederick on DSK6VPTVN1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 19 here 73883A.019
45 


rfrederick on DSK6VPTVN1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 20 here 73883A.020
46 

RESERVE PERSONNEL, AIR FORCE 

Fiscal year 2012 appropriation .......................................................... $1,712,705,000 

Fiscal year 2013 budget request ....................................................... 1,741,365,000 

Committee recommendation .............................................................. 1,743,875,000 

Change from budget request ............................................................. 2,510,000 

The Committee recommends an appropriation of $1,743,875,000 

for Reserve Personnel, Air Force. The total amount recommended 

in the bill will provide the following program in fiscal year 2013: 


rfrederick on DSK6VPTVN1PROD with HEARING
47 


rfrederick on DSK6VPTVN1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 21 here 73883A.021
48 


rfrederick on DSK6VPTVN1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 22 here 73883A.022
49 

NATIONAL GUARD PERSONNEL, ARMY 

Fiscal year 2012 appropriation .......................................................... $7,585,645,000 

Fiscal year 2013 budget request ....................................................... 8,103,207,000 

Committee recommendation .............................................................. 8,089,477,000 

Change from budget request ............................................................. ¥13,730,000 

The Committee recommends an appropriation of $8,089,477,000 

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

year 2013: 


rfrederick on DSK6VPTVN1PROD with HEARING
50 


rfrederick on DSK6VPTVN1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 23 here 73883A.023
51 


rfrederick on DSK6VPTVN1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 24 here 73883A.024
52 

NATIONAL GUARD PERSONNEL, AIR FORCE 

Fiscal year 2012 appropriation .......................................................... $3,088,929,000 

Fiscal year 2013 budget request ....................................................... 3,110,065,000 

Committee recommendation .............................................................. 3,158,015,000 

Change from budget request ............................................................. 47,950,000 

The Committee recommends an appropriation of $3,158,015,000 

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

year 2013: 


rfrederick on DSK6VPTVN1PROD with HEARING
53 


rfrederick on DSK6VPTVN1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 25 here 73883A.025
54 


rfrederick on DSK6VPTVN1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 26 here 73883A.026
(55) 

TITLE II 

OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE 

The fiscal year 2013 budget request for programs funded in title 

II of the Committee bill, Operation and Maintenance, is 

$174,938,933,000 in new budget authority. These appropriations finance the costs of operating and maintaining the Armed Forces, including the reserve components and related support activities of 

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

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

weapons and equipment. Financial requirements are influenced by 

many factors, including force levels such as the number of aircraft 

squadrons, Army and Marine Corps divisions, installations, military personnel strength and deployments, rates of operational activity, and the quantity, complexity, and age of equipment such as 

aircraft, ships, missiles, and tanks. The Committee does not provide funding for a proposed civilian pay raise in fiscal year 2013. 

The table below summarizes the Committee’s recommendations. 


rfrederick on DSK6VPTVN1PROD with HEARING
56 


rfrederick on DSK6VPTVN1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 27 here 73883A.027
57 

RESTORATION OF FUNDING FOR UNREALISTIC EFFICIENCY SAVINGS

The House Report 112–110, accompanying the Department of Defense Appropriations Bill for fiscal year 2012, included language expressing the Committee’s concern over many of the Department of 

Defense’s proposed efficiency savings. In particular, the report stated that ‘‘more troubling were instances in which underfunding 

valid requirements were claimed as efficiencies,’’ including the decision to underfund base facility sustainment requirements and 

claim this reduction as infrastructure savings. In fiscal year 2013, 

the Department once again requests reduced funding for facility 

sustainment requirements and claims the reduction as infrastructure savings rather than deferral of maintenance. The Committee 

restores funding for Facilities Sustainment, Restoration and Modernization programs for the individual Services, the reserve components, and for Services’ medical facilities, as well as for the Army 

Base Operations Support program. 

OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE REPROGRAMMINGS

The Secretary of Defense is directed to submit the Base for Reprogramming (DD Form 1414) for each of the fiscal year 2013 appropriation accounts not later than 60 days after enactment of this 

Act. The Secretary of Defense is prohibited from executing any reprogramming or transfer of funds for any purpose other than originally appropriated until the aforementioned report is submitted to 

the House and Senate Appropriations Committees. 

The Secretary of Defense is directed to use the normal prior approval reprogramming procedures to transfer funds in the Services’ 

operation and maintenance accounts between O–1 budget activities 

in excess of $15,000,000. In addition, the Secretary of Defense 

should follow prior approval reprogramming procedures for transfers in excess of $15,000,000 out of the following budget sub-activities: 

Army: 

Maneuver units 

Modular support brigades 

Land forces operations support 

Force readiness operations support 

Land forces depot maintenance 

Base operations support 

Facilities Sustainment, Restoration, and Modernization 

Navy: 

Aircraft depot maintenance 

Ship depot maintenance 

Facilities Sustainment, Restoration, and Modernization 

Marine Corps: 

Depot maintenance 

Facilities Sustainment, Restoration, and Modernization 

Air Force: 

Primary combat forces 

Combat enhancement forces 

Combat communications 

Facilities Sustainment, Restoration, and Modernization 


rfrederick on DSK6VPTVN1PROD with HEARING
58 

Operating forces depot maintenance 

Mobilization depot maintenance 

Training and recruiting depot maintenance 

Administration and service-wide depot maintenance 

Air Force Reserve: 

Depot maintenance 

Air National Guard: 

Depot maintenance 

Finally, the Secretary of Defense should follow prior approval re- programming procedures for transfers in excess of $15,000,000 into 

the following budget subactivity: 

Operation and Maintenance, Army National Guard: 

Other personnel support/recruiting and advertising 

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

agencies in excess of $15,000,000 shall be subject to prior approval 

reprogramming procedures. 

OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE BUDGET EXECUTION DATA

The Committee directs the Secretary of Defense to continue to 

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

days after the close of each quarter of the fiscal year, and should 

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

group, and subactivity group, these reports should include the 

budget request and actual obligation amount; the distribution of 

unallocated congressional adjustments to the budget request; all 

adjustments made by the Department in establishing the Base for 

Reprogramming (DD Form 1414) report, all adjustments resulting 

from below threshold reprogrammings; and all adjustments resulting from prior approval reprogramming requests. 

MILITARY INFORMATION SUPPORT OPERATIONS

The budget request includes $251,600,000 for fiscal year 2013 

Department of Defense military information support operations 

programs. Of this amount, $52,700,000 is requested as base funding and $198,900,000 is requested as Overseas Contingency Operations funding. The Committee’s recommendation reduces the total 

request by $81,500,000. The allocation of funds by Combatant Command and funding levels for certain programs is specifically delineated in the classified annex to this report. The delineations shall 

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

9002 of this Act. 

The Committee has previously expressed its concern that some 

activities undertaken by the Department do not fulfill core military 

requirements and instead are more appropriately funded by other 

federal agencies which are statutorily authorized and traditionally 

charged with conducting such activities. The Committee appreciates the significant oversight and attention the Department has 


rfrederick on DSK6VPTVN1PROD with HEARING
59 

given to these programs and believes that progress is being made 

to address the Committee’s concerns. Therefore, the recommendation includes funding for activities requested as base funding for 

those items that represent enduring military activities while continuing to fund other activities as Overseas Contingency Operations that have not been adequately justified as an enduring or 

traditional military activity. 

The Committee appreciates the Department’s efforts to provide 

more detailed information regarding the budgets for these activities. However, the Committee believes this information should be 

provided as part of the official budget justification materials to enable proper analysis and oversight. Therefore, the Committee directs the Secretary of Defense to consult with the Committee to improve the official budget justification materials for fiscal year 2014. 

The Secretary of Defense is also directed to submit a report, not 

later than 30 days after enactment of this Act, to the House and 

Senate Appropriations Committees detailing the proposed execution of the funding provided for these programs. This report shall 

include the program name, activity, a description of service, target 

audience, goals/objectives, attribution, measures of effectiveness, 

prior year obligations and expenditures, and the estimated budget 

for the year of execution. This report, and the delineation of each 

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

STEM EDUCATION

The Committee is concerned about the future of the Nation’s 

workforce, specifically in the science, technology, engineering, and 

math (STEM) disciplines. These skills are vitally needed within the 

Department of Defense to maintain United States military superiority. While these skills are underrepresented in the available 

workforce, minorities especially are underrepresented in these skill 

sets both in the current workforce and at university levels. 

The Committee encourages the Department to support the development of STEM skill sets, especially in undergraduate and graduate programs, and to focus on increasing the participation and 

success of minority students through engaged mentoring, enriched 

research experiences, and opportunities to publish, present, and 

network. These factors, along with peer-to-peer mentoring, have 

been demonstrated to be a successful model for minority education. 

BORDER SECURITY EQUIPMENT

The Committee supports the efforts of the Department of Defense, including the efforts of the Defense Logistics Agency and the 

Domestic Preparedness Support Initiative, to collaborate and coordinate with other agencies at the federal, state, and local levels, 

including the Department of Homeland Security and the Department of Justice, and to prioritize the distribution of equipment and 

technologies that will mitigate security threats and violence along 

the southwest border of the United States, including efforts to curb 

the crossing of illegal aliens and the trafficking of humans, firearms, chemical precursors, narcotics, and bulk cash. 


rfrederick on DSK6VPTVN1PROD with HEARING
60 

STATE AND LOCAL PARTNERSHIPS

The Committee encourages the Secretary of Defense, in conjunction with the Services, to consider entering cooperative agreements 

with State and local governments for use of certain multi-use military facilities for public affairs activities that benefit local job creation, including commercial activities that promote American technology. The Committee expects any such agreements would be at 

no cost to the military and would not create an undue burden to 

accomplishing the inherent mission of the facility. 

MIDDLE EAST SECURITY DIALOGUES

The Committee supports the Department of Defense’s efforts to 

promote region-wide informal conferences and task forces on arms 

control, regional security, and related topics to the Middle East for 

Arab, Israeli, and other officials and experts engaged in security 

dialogues in the Middle East at U.S. institutions of higher education. 

POW/MIA ACCOUNTABILITY EFFORTS

The Committee supports the Department of Defense’s efforts to 

comply with the Prisoner Of War/Missing In Action accounting 

goals established in Section 1509(f)(2)(d)(2) of the fiscal year 2010 

National Defense Authorization Act, as well as the Department’s 

use of universities and non-profit entities qualified to support the 

fulfillment of the accounting goals. 

CIVIL AFFAIRS CENTER AND SCHOOL

The civil-military interface is increasingly vital to U.S. national 

security goals, such as conflict prevention and Counterinsurgency 

Operations (COIN), with civil affairs forces acting as key participants in such strategies. The Committee supports the Army’s commitment to improve the language and cultural training and education of the General Purpose Forces of both the active and reserve 

components and to establish a branch and force modernization proponent for Civil Affairs to support the Army’s total force. The Committee supports the Civil Affairs program in the active and reserve 

components and encourages the leveraging of existing investment 

in language and cultural training. 

OFFICIAL FLAG DISPLAYS

Currently, there is no uniform regulation governing the inclusion 

of the flags of the District of Columbia and the U.S. Territories. 

The Department of the Army is the only branch of the military that 

has taken steps to ensure a service-wide policy requiring the display of all flags. The Committee encourages the Secretary of Defense to adopt the Army’s policy, which states that when the official flags of all 50 states are displayed by the Armed Forces, such 

displays shall also include the flags of the District of Columbia, the 

Commonwealth of Puerto Rico, the United States Virgin Islands, 

Guam, American Samoa, and the Commonwealth of the Northern 

Marianas Islands. 


rfrederick on DSK6VPTVN1PROD with HEARING
61 

OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE, ARMY 

Fiscal year 2012 appropriation .......................................................... $31,072,902,000 

Fiscal year 2013 budget request ....................................................... 36,608,592,000 

Committee recommendation .............................................................. 36,422,738,000 

Change from budget request ............................................................. ¥185,854,000 

The Committee recommends an appropriation of $36,422,738,000 

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

year 2013: 


rfrederick on DSK6VPTVN1PROD with HEARING
62 


rfrederick on DSK6VPTVN1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 28 here 73883A.028
63 


rfrederick on DSK6VPTVN1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 29 here 73883A.029
64 


rfrederick on DSK6VPTVN1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 30 here 73883A.030
65 


rfrederick on DSK6VPTVN1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 31 here 73883A.031
66 


rfrederick on DSK6VPTVN1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 32 here 73883A.032
67 

JUNIOR RESERVE OFFICER TRAINING CORPS SCHOOLS

The Committee notes that the Army’s request for operation and 

maintenance includes an additional $9,289,000 to increase the 

number of Junior Reserve Officer Training Corps (JROTC) schools 

by eleven during fiscal year 2013. However, the justification material supporting the fiscal year 2013 budget request for Military Personnel, Army states that no additional JROTC schools will be 

added in fiscal year 2013. The Committee directs that the Army increase JROTC schools by eleven in fiscal year 2013 consistent with 

the Army’s operation and maintenance budget request. Further, 

the Committee directs the Secretary of the Army to provide a report to the congressional defense committees not later than 30 days 

after enactment of this Act that lists the eleven additional schools 

to be added in fiscal year 2013. 

UNJUSTIFIED PROGRAM GROWTH

Included in the Army’s request for fiscal year 2013 operation and 

maintenance funding is more than $500,000,000 for which no valid 

justification is provided. The Army’s justification material explains 

that program growth is due to additional funding. The justification 

material does not provide an explanation of how the funds will be 

used or why the funds are necessary. The Committee has adjusted 

the Army’s budget request accordingly. 

CEMETERIAL EXPENSES

The Committee does not support the budget request proposal to 

fund Arlington National Cemetery through three separate accounts 

contained in two different appropriations bills. The budget request 

proposes $25,000,000 to be provided through Operation and Maintenance, Army, $103,000,000 to be provided through Military Construction, Army, and $45,800,000 to be provided through 

Cemeterial Expenses, Army for a total of $173,800,000. The Committee recommends no funds be provided through Operation and 

Maintenance, Army. 

OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE, NAVY 

Fiscal year 2012 appropriation .......................................................... $38,120,821,000 

Fiscal year 2013 budget request ....................................................... 41,606,943,000 

Committee recommendation .............................................................. 41,463,773,000 

Change from budget request ............................................................. ¥143,170,000 

The Committee recommends an appropriation of $41,463,773,000 

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

year 2013: 


rfrederick on DSK6VPTVN1PROD with HEARING
68 


rfrederick on DSK6VPTVN1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 33 here 73883A.033
69 


rfrederick on DSK6VPTVN1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 34 here 73883A.034
70 


rfrederick on DSK6VPTVN1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 35 here 73883A.035
71 


rfrederick on DSK6VPTVN1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 36 here 73883A.036
72 

STRATEGIC DISPERSAL OF AIRCRAFT CARRIERS

The Committee understands that the Department of the Navy 

has delayed the strategic dispersal of the Nation’s east coast aircraft carriers due to fiscal concerns. The Committee continues to 

support the Navy’s policy of strategic dispersal of aircraft carriers 

on both the east and west coast and strongly encourages the Secretary of the Navy to provide funding to the projects in the outyears that will satisfy this requirement. 

OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE, MARINE CORPS 

Fiscal year 2012 appropriation .......................................................... $5,542,937,000 

Fiscal year 2013 budget request ....................................................... 5,983,163,000 

Committee recommendation .............................................................. 6,075,667,000 

Change from budget request ............................................................. 92,504,000 

The Committee recommends an appropriation of $6,075,667,000 

for Operation and Maintenance, Marine Corps. The total amount 

recommended in the bill will provide the following program in fiscal year 2013: 


rfrederick on DSK6VPTVN1PROD with HEARING
73 


rfrederick on DSK6VPTVN1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 39 here 73883A.037
74 


rfrederick on DSK6VPTVN1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 001 here 73883A.038
75 

OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE, AIR FORCE 

Fiscal year 2012 appropriation .......................................................... $34,985,486,000 

Fiscal year 2013 budget request ....................................................... 35,435,360,000 

Committee recommendation .............................................................. 35,408,795,000 

Change from budget request ............................................................. ¥26,565,000 

The Committee recommends an appropriation of $35,408,795,000 

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

year 2013: 


rfrederick on DSK6VPTVN1PROD with HEARING
76 


rfrederick on DSK6VPTVN1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 41 here 73883A.039
77 


rfrederick on DSK6VPTVN1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 42 here 73883A.040
78 


rfrederick on DSK6VPTVN1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 43 here 73883A.041
79 


rfrederick on DSK6VPTVN1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 44 here 73883A.042
80 


rfrederick on DSK6VPTVN1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 45 here 73883A.043
81 

VISIBILITY OF DEPOT MAINTENANCE FUNDING FOR AIR FORCE

RESERVE AND AIR NATIONAL GUARD

The Air Force Reserve and Air National Guard have not properly 

justified $104,111,000 and $497,704,000, respectively, of depot 

maintenance funding contained in the fiscal year 2013 budget request by not correctly reflecting the requested funding for weapons 

system depot maintenance in the Depot Maintenance Subactivity 

Group. The Committee remains concerned that the lack of visibility 

of depot maintenance funding is an obstacle to effective management of a program which is critical to military readiness. The Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2012 consolidated all depot maintenance funding for the Air Force in the Depot Maintenance Subactivity Group. In fiscal year 2013, the Committee identifies and 

consolidates all depot maintenance funding contained in the Air 

Force Reserve and Air National Guard fiscal year 2013 budget requests in the respective Depot Maintenance Subactivity Groups. 

The Committee also directs the Secretary of the Air Force to display all depot maintenance funds requested in the fiscal year 2014 

budget in the Depot Maintenance Subactivity Group. 

The Committee is also concerned that the Department of the Air 

Force significantly underfunded Depot Maintenance for both the 

Air Force Reserve and Air National Guard. The Committee believes 

that failing to provide adequate funding for weapons system depot 

maintenance will impact readiness and cause aircraft to be grounded due to failure to meet maintenance requirements. The Committee restores funding for depot maintenance and expects that future budget requests to contain sufficient funding for the reserve 

component depot maintenance programs. 

NATIONAL SECURITY REQUIREMENTS FOR NASA FACILITIES

For NASA property that has a national security purpose, the 

Committee directs that the Department of Defense provide to the 

House Committee on Appropriations a report, concurrent with any 

report submitted by NASA for such property under 51 U.S.C. 

20117 and consistent with the procedures established under 51 

U.S.C. 20117, describing how continued access to such property will 

remain viable. 

OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE, DEFENSE-WIDE 

Fiscal year 2012 appropriation .......................................................... $30,152,008,000 

Fiscal year 2013 budget request ....................................................... 31,993,013,000 

Committee recommendation .............................................................. 31,780,813,000 

Change from budget request ............................................................. ¥212,200,000 

The Committee recommends an appropriation of $31,780,813,000, 

for Operation and Maintenance, Defense-Wide. The total amount 

recommended in the bill will provide the following program in fiscal year 2013: 


rfrederick on DSK6VPTVN1PROD with HEARING
82 


rfrederick on DSK6VPTVN1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 46 here 73883A.044
83 


rfrederick on DSK6VPTVN1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 47 here 73883A.045
84 

OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE, ARMY RESERVE 

Fiscal year 2012 appropriation .......................................................... $3,071,733,000 

Fiscal year 2013 budget request ....................................................... 3,162,008,000 

Committee recommendation .............................................................. 3,199,423,000 

Change from budget request ............................................................. 37,415,000 

The Committee recommends an appropriation of $3,199,423,000 

for Operation and Maintenance, Army Reserve. The total amount 

recommended in the bill will provide the following program in fiscal year 2013: 


rfrederick on DSK6VPTVN1PROD with HEARING
85 


rfrederick on DSK6VPTVN1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 48 here 73883A.046
86 


rfrederick on DSK6VPTVN1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 49 here 73883A.047
87 

OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE, NAVY RESERVE 

Fiscal year 2012 appropriation .......................................................... $1,305,134,000 

Fiscal year 2013 budget request ....................................................... 1,246,982,000 

Committee recommendation .............................................................. 1,256,347,000 

Change from budget request ............................................................. 9,365,000 

The Committee recommends an appropriation of $1,256,347,000 

for Operation and Maintenance, Navy Reserve. The total amount 

recommended in the bill will provide the following program in fiscal year 2013: 


rfrederick on DSK6VPTVN1PROD with HEARING
88 


rfrederick on DSK6VPTVN1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 50 here 73883A.048
89 


rfrederick on DSK6VPTVN1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 51 here 73883A.049
90 


rfrederick on DSK6VPTVN1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 52 here 73883A.050
91 

OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE, MARINE CORPS RESERVE 

Fiscal year 2012 appropriation .......................................................... $271,443,000 

Fiscal year 2013 budget request ....................................................... 272,285,000 

Committee recommendation .............................................................. 277,377,000 

Change from budget request ............................................................. 5,092,000 

The Committee recommends an appropriation of $277,377,000 for 

Operation and Maintenance, Marine Corps Reserve. The total 

amount recommended in the bill will provide the following program 

in fiscal year 2013: 


rfrederick on DSK6VPTVN1PROD with HEARING
92 


rfrederick on DSK6VPTVN1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 53 here 73883A.051
93 


rfrederick on DSK6VPTVN1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 54 here 73883A.052
94 

OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE, AIR FORCE RESERVE 

Fiscal year 2012 appropriation .......................................................... $3,274,359,000 

Fiscal year 2013 budget request ....................................................... 3,166,482,000 

Committee recommendation .............................................................. 3,362,041,000 

Change from budget request ............................................................. 195,559,000 

The Committee recommends an appropriation of $3,362,041,000 

for Operation and Maintenance, Air Force Reserve. The total 

amount recommended in the bill will provide the following program 

in fiscal year 2013: 


rfrederick on DSK6VPTVN1PROD with HEARING
95 


rfrederick on DSK6VPTVN1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 55 here 73883A.053
96 


rfrederick on DSK6VPTVN1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 56 here 73883A.054
97 

OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE, ARMY NATIONAL GUARD 

Fiscal year 2012 appropriation .......................................................... $6,924,932,000 

Fiscal year 2013 budget request ....................................................... 7,108,612,000 

Committee recommendation .............................................................. 7,187,731,000 

Change from budget request ............................................................. 79,119,000 

The Committee recommends an appropriation of $7,187,731,000 

for Operation and Maintenance, Army National Guard. The total 

amount recommended in the bill will provide the following program 

in fiscal year 2013: 


rfrederick on DSK6VPTVN1PROD with HEARING
98 


rfrederick on DSK6VPTVN1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 57 here 73883A.055
99 


rfrederick on DSK6VPTVN1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 58 here 73883A.056
100 


rfrederick on DSK6VPTVN1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 59 here 73883A.057
101 

NATIONAL GUARD STATE PARTNERSHIP PROGRAM

The National Guard State Partnership Program (SPP) is an innovative program that partners individual National Guards with allied nations to exchange military skills and experience, share defense knowledge, enhance partnership capacity, and further mutual 

security cooperation. For twenty years, the SPP has played a critical role in extending U.S. military capabilities, enhancing bilateral 

relations, and supporting the missions of U.S. ambassadors and 

combatant commanders abroad by creating sustainable cooperative 

partnerships between the state and territorial National Guards and 

foreign partner nations. By promoting better understanding of one 

another’s military needs and security concerns, the SPP helps lay 

the foundation for more effective teamwork and a more cooperative 

security environment among friendly and allied nations. The Committee fully funds the President’s request for the SPP and supports 

the continued efforts of this program. 

NATIONAL GUARD CIVIL SUPPORT TEAMS

The Deputy’s Management Action Group (DMAG), created by the 

Deputy Secretary of Defense to eliminate wasteful spending, has 

chosen to eliminate two National Guard Weapons of Mass Destruction/Civil Support Teams (WMD/CSTs)—one each in New York and 

Florida. 

WMD/CSTs were established to rapidly assist a local incident 

commander in determining the nature and extent of an attack or 

incident by identifying agents and substances, assessing current 

and projected consequences, advising on response measures, and 

assisting with requests for additional military support. Teams provide expert technical advice on WMD response operations and help 

identify and support the arrival of follow-on state and federal military response assets. They are joint units and, as such, might consist of both Army National Guard and Air National Guard personnel. 

Currently there are 57 WMD/CSTs—one in each state, plus one 

in the District of Columbia, Guam, Puerto Rico, and the U.S. Virgin Islands, and two each in the states of California, New York, 

and Florida, due to the geographic separation and concentrations 

of populations in these three states. 

The Committee believes that the DMAG’s recommendation to 

eliminate WMD/CSTs from New York and Florida is an imprudent 

decision, especially given that the additional teams in New York 

and Florida were recently certified. 

The personnel and operation and maintenance costs for each 

team averages less than $5,000,000 annually. 

Given the geographic disparity and high population concentrations of these two states, the Committee directs that the Secretary 

of Defense review the DMAG’s recommendations regarding this reduction and not later than 90 days after enactment of this Act provide a report to the congressional defense committees outlining in 

detail the savings expected by this reduction, and how these savings outweigh the benefit of providing WMD/CST coverage at these 

two important locations. Additionally, the Committee expects the 


rfrederick on DSK6VPTVN1PROD with HEARING
102 

Department of Defense to fully fund the two teams in New York 

and Florida in the fiscal year 2014 request. 

OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE, AIR NATIONAL GUARD 

Fiscal year 2012 appropriation .......................................................... $6,098,780,000 

Fiscal year 2013 budget request ....................................................... 6,015,455,000 

Committee recommendation .............................................................. 6,608,826,000 

Change from budget request ............................................................. 593,371,000 

The Committee recommends an appropriation of $6,608,826,000 

for Operation and Maintenance, Air National Guard. The total 

amount recommended in the bill will provide the following program 

in fiscal year 2013: 


rfrederick on DSK6VPTVN1PROD with HEARING
103 


rfrederick on DSK6VPTVN1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 60 here 73883A.058
104 


rfrederick on DSK6VPTVN1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 61 here 73883A.059
105 

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE ARMED 

FORCES 

Fiscal year 2012 appropriation .......................................................... $13,861,000 

Fiscal year 2013 budget request ....................................................... 13,516,000 

Committee recommendation .............................................................. 13,516,000 

Change from budget request ............................................................. – – – 

The Committee recommends an appropriation of $13,516,000 for 

the United States Court of Appeals for the Armed Forces. 

ENVIRONMENTAL RESTORATION, ARMY 

Fiscal year 2012 appropriation .......................................................... $346,031,000 

Fiscal year 2013 budget request ....................................................... 335,921,000 

Committee recommendation .............................................................. 335,921,000 

Change from budget request ............................................................. – – – 

The Committee recommends an appropriation of $335,921,000 for 

Environmental Restoration, Army. 

ENVIRONMENTAL RESTORATION, NAVY 

Fiscal year 2012 appropriation .......................................................... $308,668,000 

Fiscal year 2013 budget request ....................................................... 310,594,000 

Committee recommendation .............................................................. 310,594,000 

Change from budget request ............................................................. – – – 

The Committee recommends an appropriation of $310,594,000 for 

Environmental Restoration, Navy. 

ENVIRONMENTAL RESTORATION, AIR FORCE 

Fiscal year 2012 appropriation .......................................................... $525,453,000 

Fiscal year 2013 budget request ....................................................... 529,263,000 

Committee recommendation .............................................................. 529,263,000 

Change from budget request ............................................................. – – – 

The Committee recommends an appropriation of $529,263,000 for 

Environmental Restoration, Air Force. 

ENVIRONMENTAL RESTORATION, DEFENSE-WIDE 

Fiscal year 2012 appropriation .......................................................... $10,716,000 

Fiscal year 2013 budget request ....................................................... 11,133,000 

Committee recommendation .............................................................. 11,133,000 

Change from budget request ............................................................. – – – 

The Committee recommends an appropriation of $11,133,000 for 

Environmental Restoration, Defense-Wide. 

ENVIRONMENTAL RESTORATION, FORMERLY USED 

DEFENSE SITES 

Fiscal year 2012 appropriation .......................................................... $326,495,000 

Fiscal year 2013 budget request ....................................................... 237,543,000 

Committee recommendation .............................................................. 237,543,000 

Change from budget request ............................................................. – – – 

The Committee recommends an appropriation of $237,543,000 for 

Environmental Restoration, Formerly Used Defense Sites. 


rfrederick on DSK6VPTVN1PROD with HEARING
106 

OVERSEAS HUMANITARIAN, DISASTER, AND CIVIC AID 

Fiscal year 2012 appropriation .......................................................... $107,662,000 

Fiscal year 2013 budget request ....................................................... 108,759,000 

Committee recommendation .............................................................. 108,759,000 

Change from budget request ............................................................. – – – 

The Committee recommends an appropriation $108,759,000 for 

Overseas Humanitarian, Disaster, and Civic Aid. 

COOPERATIVE THREAT REDUCTION ACCOUNT 

Fiscal year 2012 appropriation .......................................................... $508,219,000 

Fiscal year 2013 budget request ....................................................... 519,111,000 

Committee recommendation .............................................................. 519,111,000 

Change from budget request ............................................................. – – – 

The Committee recommends an appropriation of $519,111,000 for 

the Cooperative Threat Reduction Account. 

DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE ACQUISITION WORKFORCE 

DEVELOPMENT FUND 

Fiscal year 2012 appropriation .......................................................... $105,501,000 

Fiscal year 2013 budget request ....................................................... 274,198,000 

Committee recommendation .............................................................. 50,198,000 

Change from budget request ............................................................. ¥224,000,000 

The Committee recommends an appropriation of $50,198,000 for 

the Department of Defense Acquisition Workforce Development 

Fund for fiscal year 2013. 

DEFENSE ACQUISITION WORKFORCE DEVELOPMENT FUND

The purpose of the Defense Acquisition Workforce Development 

Fund is to ensure the Department has the capacity in both personnel and skills needed to perform its acquisition mission, provide 

appropriate oversight of contractor performance, and ensure that 

the Department receives the best possible value for its use of the 

taxpayer’s precious resources. The fund accomplishes this purpose 

through the use of directly appropriated funds as well as using 

funding transferred from other efforts. In fiscal year 2013, the 

budget request proposes $274,198,000 to meet the Department’s 

statutory level of $944,000,000 for the year. Department representatives have stated that this level of funding will not be required 

to achieve the goals of the fund in fiscal year 2013. Accordingly, the 

Committee recommends funding of $50,198,000, which represents a 

reduction of $224,000,000 below the request and maintains the 

fund at the fiscal year 2012 level. 


rfrederick on DSK6VPTVN1PROD with HEARING
(107) 

TITLE III 

PROCUREMENT 

ESTIMATES AND APPROPRIATIONS SUMMARY 

The fiscal year 2013 Department of Defense procurement budget 

request totals $97,194,677,000, with advanced appropriations of 

$4,426,700,000, for a total of $101,621,377,000. The table below 

summarizes the budget estimates and the Committee’s recommendations. 


rfrederick on DSK6VPTVN1PROD with HEARING
108 


rfrederick on DSK6VPTVN1PROD with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 062 here 73883A.060
109 

ADVANCED MEDIUM RANGE AIR-TO-AIR MISSILE

The Committee recommends $304,327,000 for procurement of the 

Advanced Medium Range Air-to-Air Missile (AMRAAM) in the 

Weapons Procurement, Navy and Missile Procurement, Air Force 

accounts, a decrease of $27,993,000 below the request. The decrease is due to lower than expected missile costs based upon the 

contract award of the Lot 26 (fiscal year 2012) contract. The recommendation fully funds the requested quantity of 180 missiles 

and also rescinds a total of $40,572,000 from prior year appropriations to the same accounts due to the fiscal year 2012 contract savings. 

The Committee is concerned with the level of diminishing manufacturing sources (DMS) costs within the AMRAAM program. The 

fiscal year 2013 request for AMRAAM DMS is $64,496,000, or 19.4 

percent of the total request, and program officials have reported 

that DMS costs are projected to increase to $100,000,000 annually, 

an amount that appears to be far higher than that of any other 

missile program. The Committee therefore directs the Secretary of 

the Air Force to submit a report to the congressional defense committees on the management of DMS within the AMRAAM program. 

This report shall include, at a minimum: identification of the cost 

drivers for DMS within the AMRAAM program; a comparison of 

AMRAAM DMS costs with other Department of Defense tactical 

missile programs; a discussion of the AMRAAM program’s approach to DMS and its conformity with departmental guidance and 

best practices; and an economic analysis demonstrating the costs 

and benefits, including the break-even point, of the AMRAAM DMS 

program. This report shall be submitted not later than 90 days 

after enactment of this Act. 

GLOBAL HAWK BLOCK 30

The Air Force’s fiscal year 2013 budget request proposes terminating the Global Hawk Block 30 program and retiring the 18 aircraft that have been delivered or are currently in production. The 

Air Force also intends not to execute funds provided for three additional Block 30 aircraft, which the Air Force requested in fiscal 

year 2012. The Block 30 aircraft and sensor suite previously was 

designated by the Air Force as the platform to replace the U–2 aircraft for high altitude intelligence, surveillance, and reconnaissance 

(ISR) by 2016. 

On June 14, 2011, the Under Secretary of Defense for Acquisition, Technology and Logistics certified the Global Hawk Block 30 

program as essential to national security per the Nunn-McCurdy 

Act. The certification further stated that the U–2 would cost 

$220,000,000 per year more than the Global Hawk in the context 

of the Block 30 mission requirement. The Air Force’s dramatic reversal of position on the respective merits of the Block 30 and the 

U–2 appears to be based on three major factors: a reduced requirement for high altitude ISR pursuant to the Department of Defense’s strategic review; an assessment by the Department that the 

sensors on the U–2 perform at a level equal or superior to those 

on the Block 30; and that cost considerations favor the U–2. 


rfrederick on DSK6VPTVN1PROD with HEARING
110 

The Committee does not concur with the Air Force’s proposal to 

retire the Global Hawk Block 30. First, the abrupt reversal of the 

Department’s position on the relative merits of the Global Hawk 

Block 30 and the U–2 is highly dependent on the assumptions and 

findings of the strategic review, and the Committee believes that 

the rationale and implications of this new strategy require further 

examination. 

Second, the Air Force’s contention that the U–2 is more cost-effective than the Global Hawk is open to question. Air Force data 

indicates that the operation and sustainment cost per flight hour 

of the Global Hawk Block 30, approximately $32,000, is roughly 

equal to that of the U–2. The new high altitude ISR requirement 

appears to negate the Block 30’s range advantage, allowing the Air 

Force to perform the mission with the existing U–2 fleet. However, 

since the Global Hawk’s endurance advantage should allow for 

fewer aircraft to execute high altitude ISR orbits under the new requirement approved by the Joint Requirements Oversight Council 

(JROC), the cost comparison between the Global Hawk and the U– 

2 at the level of mission execution is unclear. The Air Force has 

also stated that achieving sensor ‘‘parity’’ between the U–2 and 

Global Hawk would require additional funding up to $808,000,000, 

but it has not justified this estimate or indicated alternatives, such 

as adapting U–2 sensors for use on the Global Hawk. 

Third, the Air Force has not presented the Committee with the 

full range of options and associated costs for divesting its Global 

Hawk Block 30 fleet. The ramifications of Block 30 termination include potential cost and schedule impacts to the Navy’s Broad Area 

Maritime Surveillance (BAMS) program and the NATO Alliance 

Ground Surveillance (AGS) program. 

The Committee directs the Secretary of the Air Force to submit 

a report to the congressional defense committees that includes the 

cost and feasibility of converting Global Hawk Block 30 aircraft for 

the purposes of the Navy’s Broad Area Maritime Surveillance 

(BAMS) program; a detailed cost estimate for achieving sensor 

‘‘parity’’ between the U–2 and Global Hawk and the assumptions 

behind such estimate, as well as an estimate of the cost and feasibility of adapting U–2 sensors for use on the Global Hawk Block 

30 airframe; a comparison between the Global Hawk and the U– 

2 of the number of aircraft and cost required to execute a high altitude ISR orbit at the range required by the JROC; and the estimated cost and schedule impacts of Block 30 termination to both 

the BAMS and the NATO AGS program. The sections of the report 

relating to BAMS shall be developed in consultation with the Secretary of the Navy. This report shall be provided not later than 

March 1, 2013. 

Finally, the Committee directs the Air Force to fully execute 

funding provided in fiscal year 2012 for the procurement of three 

additional Global Hawk Block 30 aircraft and includes bill language to this effect. 

C–27J SPARTAN, C–23 SHERPA, AND DIRECT SUPPORT

The Air Force’s fiscal year 2013 budget request proposed terminating the C–27J Spartan, also known as the Joint Cargo Aircraft. 

The C–27J fleet is assigned to the Air National Guard and provides 


rfrederick on DSK6VPTVN1PROD with HEARING
111 

time sensitive/mission critical cargo delivery to ground forces in 

austere environments. Congress has fully funded the Air Force’s 

program of record for 38 aircraft, of which twelve had been delivered and nine were in production as of February 2012. 

The C–27J currently is operational in Afghanistan, and the Committee has been presented with no evidence that the aircraft is deficient in performance or otherwise fails to satisfy mission requirements. The Air Force’s proposal is based on the contention that the 

C–27J’s ‘‘niche’’ mission can be performed equally well by the C– 

130 fleet at less cost. Even if such considerations are valid, they 

were not made known to the Committee when the Air Force requested funds for the procurement of additional C–27J aircraft as 

recently as last year. The Committee is concerned both by the impact that termination of the C–27J would have on the Air National 

Guard and the wastefulness of disowning an investment of 

$1,040,000,000 in a brand new aircraft recently considered by the 

Air Force and Army as vital to the direct support of forward deployed troops. When combined with the Army’s proposal to phase 

out the Army National Guard’s C–23 Sherpa fleet by 2015, the termination of the C–27 indicates flagging commitment to ensuring 

the direct support mission within the Department of Defense, and 

the devaluation of the role that aircraft such as the C–23 and C– 

27 play in homeland defense and disaster response support to the 

States. The Committee therefore does not concur with the Air 

Force’s proposal to terminate the C–27J program. 

The Committee directs the Secretary of the Air Force to execute 

the existing funds provided by Congress in fiscal years 2011 and 

2012 to procure up to 17 additional aircraft and includes bill language to this effect. The Committee recommends additional funds 

in this bill for the purchase of spares, interim contractor support, 

and other costs required to continue the C–27J program. Finally, 

the Committee includes bill language prohibiting the further retirement of C–23 Sherpa aircraft and includes funds to maintain the 

current fleet of 34 aircraft. 

SPECIAL INTEREST ITEMS

Items for which additional funds have been provided as shown in 

the project level tables or in paragraphs using the phrase ‘‘only for’’ 

or ‘‘only to’’ in this report are congressional interest items for the 

purpose of the Base for Reprogramming (DD Form 1414). Each of 

these items must be carried on the DD Form 1414 at the stated 

amount specifically addressed in the committee report. These items 

remain special interest items whether or not they are repeated in 

a subsequent conference report. 

REPROGRAMMING GUIDANCE FOR ACQUISITION ACCOUNTS

It is the intent of the Congress that the program baseline for reprogramming funds reflects all approved adjustment actions: the 

initial appropriation as well as any rescissions, supplemental appropriations, and approved Department of Defense Form 1415 

reprogrammings. The Secretary of Defense is directed to ensure 

that financial management regulations incorporate approved reprogramming actions as an adjustment to the base for reprogramming value. 


rfrederick on DSK6VPTVN1PROD with HEARING
112 

The Committee directs the Secretary of Defense to continue to 

follow the reprogramming guidance specified in the report accompanying the House version of the Department of Defense Appropriations Act, 2006 (H.R. 109–119). Specifically, the dollar threshold for reprogramming funds will remain at $20,000,000 for procurement and $10,000,000 for research, development, test and evaluation. The Secretary shall continue to follow the limitation that 

prior approval reprogrammings are set at either the specified dollar 

threshold or 20 percent of the procurement or research, development, test and evaluation line, whichever is less. The percentage 

change limitation applies to both program increases and decreases. 

Additionally, this percentage change applies to the program base 

value at the time the below threshold movement of funds is executed. These thresholds are cumulative from the base for reprogramming value as modified by any adjustment action. Therefore, if the combined value of transfers into or out of a procurement 

(P–1) or research, development, test and evaluation (R–1) line exceeds the identified threshold, the Secretary of Defense must submit a prior approval reprogramming to the congressional defense 

committees. In addition, guidelines on the application of prior approval reprogramming procedures for congressional special interest 

items are established elsewhere in this report. 

REPROGRAMMING REPORTING REQUIREMENTS

The Committee directs the Under Secretary of Defense (Comptroller) to continue to provide the congressional defense committees 

quarterly, spreadsheet-based DD Form 1416 reports for service and 

defense-wide accounts in titles III and IV of this Act as required 

in the explanatory statement accompanying the Department of Defense Appropriations Act, 2006. 

FUNDING INCREASES

The Committee directs that the funding increases outlined in 

these tables shall be provided only for the specific purposes indicated in the tables. 

CLASSIFIED ANNEX

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

AIRCRAFT PROCUREMENT, ARMY 

Fiscal year 2012 appropriation .......................................................... $5,360,334,000 

Fiscal year 2013 budget request ....................................................... 5,853,729,000 

Committee recommendation .............................................................. 6,115,226,000 

Change from budget request ............................................................. 261,497,000 

This appropriation provides funds for the acquisition of tactical 

and utility airplanes and helicopters, including associated electronics, electronic warfare equipment for in-service aircraft, ground 

support equipment, components, and parts such as spare engines, 

transmission gear boxes, and sensor equipment. It also funds related training devices such as combat flight simulators and production base support. 


rfrederick on DSK6VPTVN1PROD with HEARING
113 

The total amount recommended in the bill will provide the following program in fiscal year 2013: 


rfrederick on DSK6VPTVN1PROD with HEARING
114 


rfrederick on DSK6VPTVN1PROD with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 063 here 73883A.061
115 


rfrederick on DSK6VPTVN1PROD with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 064 here 73883A.062
116 


rfrederick on DSK6VPTVN1PROD with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 065 here 73883A.063
117 

UH–72A LAKOTA LIGHT UTILITY HELICOPTERS

The budget request proposes $271,983,000 to procure 34 UH–72A 

Lakota Light Utility Helicopters. The Committee is aware of the 

excellent performance of UH–72A helicopters in both active and reserve component Army units. The Committee recommendation provides the full amount requested for UH–72A Light Utility Helicopters. Additionally, the Committee recognizes the increased capability the UH–72A provides to the Army National Guard for homeland security, civil search and rescue, support to training centers 

including medical evacuation, and counter-drug operations. Accordingly, the Committee includes an additional $23,997,000 above the 

budget request for a total of $295,980,000. The additional funds are 

only for the procurement of three Lakota helicopters for the Army 

National Guard, including one to replace an aircraft lost in a training accident. 

UH–60 BLACKHAWK HELICOPTERS

The budget request proposes $1,107,087,000 to purchase 59 UH– 

60M helicopters. All of the aircraft are intended for the active duty 

Army. However, the Committee is aware that the Army National 

Guard operates a fleet of more than 815 Blackhawk helicopters. 

Many of the Army National Guard aircraft date back to the 1970s. 

The age of the National Guard fleet combined with the high operating tempo experienced over a decade of war argue for a combination of upgrades and new purchases to help maintain an acceptable 

state of readiness. However, at the current rate of upgrading the 

oldest UH–60s, the A models, the work will not be completed until 

2027. The Committee finds this to be an unacceptable readiness 

risk. Accordingly, the Committee recommendation includes an additional $199,000,000 above the budget request only for ten new UH– 

60M helicopters for the Army National Guard. The total provided 

for new UH–60s is $1,306,087,000. 

Additionally, the Committee recommendation includes $20,000,000 above the budget request of $73,804,000 for a total of 

$93,804,000 for conversion of Army National Guard UH–60A model 

aircraft to UH–60L model aircraft. 

MISSILE PROCUREMENT, ARMY 

Fiscal year 2012 appropriation .......................................................... $1,461,223,000 

Fiscal year 2013 budget request ....................................................... 1,302,689,000 

Committee recommendation .............................................................. 1,602,689,000 

Change from budget request ............................................................. 300,000,000 

This appropriation provides funds for the acquisition of surfaceto-air, surface-to-surface, air-to-surface, and anti-tank/assault missile systems. Also included are major components, modifications, 

targets, test equipment, and production base support. 

The total amount recommended in the bill will provide the following program in fiscal year 2013: 


rfrederick on DSK6VPTVN1PROD with HEARING
118 


rfrederick on DSK6VPTVN1PROD with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 066 73883A.064
119 


rfrederick on DSK6VPTVN1PROD with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 067 73883A.065
120 

PATRIOT MISSILES

The budget request proposes $646,590,000 for Patriot missile systems, including 84 missiles and 38 Enhanced Launcher Electronic 

Systems. The Committee is aware of the importance of the Patriot 

Advanced Capability 3 (PAC–3) missile to the combatant commanders. The Committee is also aware of the threat facing forward 

deployed units and the challenges of integrating the capabilities of 

the various Patriot series missiles. The Committee expects that advances achieved in the soon to be fielded Missile Segment Enhancement Missile and technology developed in the Medium Extended 

Air Defense System proof of concept will enhance the coverage and 

lethality of our missile defenses. In the near term; however, the Patriot PAC–3 provides accurate and reliable surveillance, detection, 

and engagement capability against tactical ballistic missiles, cruise 

missiles, and air breathing threats. The Committee recommendation fully supports the budget request of $646,590,000 for additional Patriot systems. The recommendation provides $300,000,000 

above the budget request to provide additional PAC–3 missiles and 

launcher systems in support of the combatant commanders. The 

total funding provided is $946,590,000. 

PROCUREMENT OF WEAPONS AND TRACKED COMBAT 

VEHICLES, ARMY 

Fiscal year 2012 appropriation .......................................................... $2,070,405,000 

Fiscal year 2013 budget request ....................................................... 1,501,706,000 

Committee recommendation .............................................................. 1,884,706,000 

Change from budget request ............................................................. 383,000,000 

This appropriation provides funds for the acquisition of tanks, 

personnel and cargo carriers, fighting vehicles, tracked recovery vehicles, self-propelled and towed howitzers, machine guns, mortars, 

modification of in-service equipment, initial spares, and production 

base support. 

The total amount recommended in the bill will provide the following program in fiscal year 2013: 


rfrederick on DSK6VPTVN1PROD with HEARING
121 


rfrederick on DSK6VPTVN1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 068 here 73883A.066
122 


rfrederick on DSK6VPTVN1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 69 here 73883A.067
123 


rfrederick on DSK6VPTVN1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 70 here 73883A.068
124 

BRADLEY FIGHTING VEHICLE

The budget request proposes $148,193,000 for the Bradley Fighting Vehicle upgrade program. The Committee recommendation 

fully funds the budget request and provides an additional 

$140,000,000 for a total of $288,193,000. The Bradley Fighting Vehicle has performed well in the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan. The 

high priority placed on the Ground Combat Vehicle program—Infantry Fighting Vehicle that will succeed the Bradley is a testament to the importance of the armored-troop-carrying and directengagement fighting vehicle with its multiple functional configurations. From Operation Desert Storm to the present, as the threat 

has adapted, the Army has upgraded the Bradley with improved 

lethality, armor, fire controls, communications, and situational 

awareness. The Committee is aware that the budget request provides funding for Engineering Change Proposal 1 (ECP–1) upgrades to the track and suspension and funding for Second Generation Forward Looking Infrared. The Committee provides the additional $140,000,000 to support ECP–2, which improves the power 

train and electrical system in order to better support the technology advances of the Joint Tactical Radio System, Battle Command System, Warfighter Information Network-Tactical, and Second Generation Forward Looking Infrared. The Committee directs 

the Secretary of the Army to provide a report to the congressional 

defense committees, not later than 90 days after enactment of this 

Act, which describes the plan to use the additional funds to keep 

the Bradley production base operating. 

M1 ABRAMS TANK UPGRADE PROGRAM

The budget request includes $74,433,000 for the Abrams Tank 

Upgrade Program. The requested funding is intended to provide 

System Technical Support, Total Package Fielding for tanks that 

have been produced, and New Equipment Training. The recommendation provides $255,433,000 for the M1 Abrams Tank Upgrade Program, which is $181,000,000 above the request, to continue production of the latest model M1A2 SEP tank. The Committee understands that the Secretary of the Army has taken action using the additional funds provided by Congress in the Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2012, that will mitigate risk to the 

industrial base. The additional funds recommended in this Act will 

support a continuation of that effort. The additional tanks that will 

be produced will bring the tank fleet closer to a ‘‘pure fleet’’ situation for training, operations, and logistics. The Committee directs 

the Secretary of the Army to provide a report to the congressional 

defense committees, not later than 90 days after enactment of this 

Act, that describes the plan to use the additional funds to sustain 

the tank production base. 

M88A2 HERCULES IMPROVED RECOVERY VEHICLE

The budget request includes $107,909,000 to procure 31 M88A2 

Heavy Equipment Recovery Combat Utility Lift and Evacuation 

Systems (HERCULES) Improved Recovery Vehicles. The Committee recommendation fully funds the request and provides an additional $62,000,000 for a total of $169,909,000. The additional 


rfrederick on DSK6VPTVN1PROD with HEARING
125 

funding increases the number of M88A2s purchased by 18 to a 

total of 49 vehicles. The M88A2 is the only vehicle that is capable 

of single vehicle recovery of the 70 ton M1A2 tank. Without the 

availability of an M88A2, Army units must use two vehicles to recover an Abrams tank, with the second vehicle serving as a braking 

vehicle. Using two lighter vehicles to tow an M1A2 Abrams tank 

is difficult and dangerous. The Committee understands that heavy 

brigade combat teams are equipped with a mix of recovery vehicles, 

typically 15 M88A2s and 11 M88A1s. The Committee encourages 

the Army to accelerate the replacement of the A1 models with 

M88A2 Hercules vehicles. 

SURVIVABILITY ENHANCEMENTS FOR COMBAT AND TACTICAL VEHICLES

The Committee is aware that in order to protect our troops from 

injuries and deaths due to fires, survivability enhancements have 

been applied to ground platforms, specifically to the Army’s Bradley Fighting Vehicle. The Committee applauds this initiative and 

notes that mature technologies exist that can improve occupant 

safety and the chances for vehicle survivability. Accordingly, the 

Committee looks forward to the Army’s and other Services’ continued application of such mature, non-developmental approaches to 

other ground combat and non-combat vehicles including, but not 

limited to, Mine Resistant Ambush Protected vehicles and 

Strykers. 

PROCUREMENT OF AMMUNITION, ARMY 

Fiscal year 2012 appropriation .......................................................... $1,884,424,000 

Fiscal year 2013 budget request ....................................................... 1,739,706,000 

Committee recommendation .............................................................. 1,576,768,000 

Change from budget request ............................................................. ¥162,938,000 

This appropriation provides funds for the acquisition of ammunition, modification of in-service stock, and related production base 

support including the maintenance, expansion, and modernization 

of industrial facilities and equipment. 

The total amount recommended in the bill will provide the following program in fiscal year 2013: 


rfrederick on DSK6VPTVN1PROD with HEARING
126 


rfrederick on DSK6VPTVN1PROD with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 071 here 73883A.069
127 


rfrederick on DSK6VPTVN1PROD with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 072 here 73883A.070
128 


rfrederick on DSK6VPTVN1PROD with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 073 here 73883A.071
129 

EXCALIBUR M982

The M982 Extended Range 155mm artillery projectile has proven 

to be a reliable, accurate, and lethal weapon. The Army is able to 

achieve the necessary effect with fewer rounds fired and with reduced collateral damage. The budget request proposes $110,329,000 

in the base budget to procure 2,046 projectiles, and $12,300,000 in 

Overseas Contingency Operations funding for 241 projectiles. The 

Committee recommendation fully funds the Overseas Contingency 

Operations request. The Committee notes that the base program 

has experienced a delay of about six months as a result of a NunnMcCurdy review and recertification. The first production award for 

Increment 1b is scheduled to take place in the second quarter of 

fiscal year 2013 using fiscal year 2012 carryover funding. The second production award is scheduled to occur in the fourth quarter 

of fiscal year 2013. Further delays would likely delay that award 

until the first fiscal quarter of 2014. The Committee recommendation includes $60,329,000 for Excalibur projectiles, a reduction of 

$50,000,000 from the request. 

OTHER PROCUREMENT, ARMY 

Fiscal year 2012 appropriation .......................................................... $7,924,214,000 

Fiscal year 2013 budget request ....................................................... 6,326,245,000 

Committee recommendation .............................................................. 6,488,045,000 

Change from budget request ............................................................. 161,800,000 

This appropriation provides funds for the acquisition of tactical 

and commercial vehicles, including trucks, semi-trailers, and trailers of all types to provide mobility and utility support to field forces 

and the worldwide logistical system; communications and electronic 

equipment of all types to provide fixed, semi-fixed, and mobile strategic and tactical communications; other support equipment, generators and power units, material handling equipment, medical 

support equipment, special equipment for user testing, and nonsystem training devices. In each of these activities, funds are also 

included for the modification of in-service equipment, investment 

spares and repair parts, and production base support, 

The total amount recommended in the bill will provide the following program in fiscal year 2013: 


rfrederick on DSK6VPTVN1PROD with HEARING
130 


rfrederick on DSK6VPTVN1PROD with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 074 73883A.072
131 


rfrederick on DSK6VPTVN1PROD with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 075 73883A.073
132 


rfrederick on DSK6VPTVN1PROD with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 076 73883A.074
133 


rfrederick on DSK6VPTVN1PROD with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 077 73883A.075
134 


rfrederick on DSK6VPTVN1PROD with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 078 73883A.076
135 


rfrederick on DSK6VPTVN1PROD with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 079 73883A.077
136 


rfrederick on DSK6VPTVN1PROD with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 080 73883A.078
137 


rfrederick on DSK6VPTVN1PROD with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 081 73883A.079
138 

CONTAINER HANDLING EQUIPMENT

Congress has provided funding for various types of container 

handling equipment including devices to be used with the 

Palletized Load System and Heavy Expanded Mobile Tactical 

Truck. Container Roll-in/out Platform (CROPs)/Flatracks, Enhanced Container Handling Units (ECHU), and Container Transfer 

Enhancements (CTE) have facilitated the transfer of heavy cargo 

in forward tactical areas in Iraq and Afghanistan. The budget request for fiscal year 2012 includes $35,833,000 for 2,095 CROPs/ 

Flatracks to fill requirements described as urgent for Stryker and 

Modular Brigade Combat Teams. The budget request also includes 

$23,105,000 for urgent requirements for 548 Container Handling 

Units. However, obligation of the fiscal year 2012 funding for these 

items has lagged. Significant amounts also remain available from 

fiscal year 2011, and additional funds are included in the fiscal 

year 2013 request. The Army indicates that currently, the Container Handling Unit is preferred in use over CROPs/Flatracks and 

the slow budget execution is a result of changing requirements in 

the combat theater. The Committee appreciates actions taken by 

the Army to avoid spending funds on unneeded equipment. However, the abrupt change in requirements from one year to the next 

calls into question the accuracy and diligence of the Army’s budget 

formulation process. The Committee understands that the Army 

expects to acquire no additional CROPs/Flatracks for the next 

three years. The Committee notes that after a three year break, 

substantial costs could be incurred to reestablish a production line 

and certify a producer. The Committee believes that better forecasting and inter-service coordination would assist both the industrial base and the armed services to ensure the availability of the 

required equipment. The Committee directs the Comptroller General to provide a report to the congressional defense committees not 

later than 90 days after enactment of this Act on the acquisition 

plan, requirement, and inventory for container handling equipment 

in the Army including CROPs/Flatracks, ECHU, CTE, and similar 

equipment in use by the Army. Additionally, the Committee directs 

that none of the funds in this Act or any other appropriations act 

for fiscal year 2013 or any previous fiscal year may be used to 

make payments for the procurement of container handling equipment for the Army including CROPs/Flatracks, ECHU, CTE, and 

similar equipment in use by the Army, until 30 days after receipt 

of the report by the Comptroller General. 

AIRCRAFT PROCUREMENT, NAVY 

Fiscal year 2012 appropriation .......................................................... $17,675,734,000 

Fiscal year 2013 budget request ....................................................... 17,129,296,000 

Committee recommendation .............................................................. 17,518,324,000 

Change from budget request ............................................................. 389,028,000 

This appropriation provides funds for the procurement of aircraft 

and related support equipment and programs; flight simulators; 

equipment to modify in-service aircraft to extend their service life, 

eliminate safety hazards and improve aircraft operational effectiveness; and spare parts and ground support equipment for all end 

items procured by this appropriation. 


rfrederick on DSK6VPTVN1PROD with HEARING
139 

The total amount recommended in this bill will provide the following program in fiscal year 2013: 


rfrederick on DSK6VPTVN1PROD with HEARING
140 


rfrederick on DSK6VPTVN1PROD with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 002 73883A.080
141 


rfrederick on DSK6VPTVN1PROD with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 083 73883A.081
142 


rfrederick on DSK6VPTVN1PROD with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 084 73883A.082
143 


rfrederick on DSK6VPTVN1PROD with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 085 73883A.083
144 


rfrederick on DSK6VPTVN1PROD with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 086 73883A.084
145 


rfrederick on DSK6VPTVN1PROD with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 087 73883A.085
146 

F/A–18E/F TACTICAL AIRCRAFT

The Committee believes a strong tactical aircraft fleet is vital to 

the Nation’s security. The F/A–18E/F Super Hornet aircraft, which 

is nearing the end of its production run, is the Navy’s current 

strike fighter workhorse. The future of Navy tactical aviation will 

be the F–35C Lightning II aircraft, which will bring a fifth generation strike fighter to the decks of the Nation’s aircraft carriers. As 

a result of several variables, not the least of which has been the 

increased flight hours flown by the Navy’s tactical aircraft fleet in 

support of conflicts around the world, the Navy has been faced with 

a strike fighter shortfall. To partially offset the severity of this 

shortfall, the Navy has begun a service life extension program for 

150 of the legacy F–18 Hornet aircraft. While still in its infancy, 

this effort is expected to gain approximately 1,400 flight hours per 

aircraft at a cost of approximately $25,000,000 per aircraft. The 

Committee notes that a new Super Hornet aircraft has a cost of approximately $55,000,000 and an expected service life of 9,000 flight 

hours. When comparing the two options, a new aircraft would provide six times the service life at just twice the cost. While it is not 

reasonable to close the entire strike fighter shortfall gap with new 

aircraft, a small quantity of new aircraft is an attractive alternative, especially considering the additional flight hours gained. 

Accordingly, the recommendation provides $605,000,000 for the 

procurement of an additional eleven Super Hornet aircraft above 

the request. 

EA–18G ELECTRONIC ATTACK AIRCRAFT

The Department of the Navy has accomplished the Nation’s airborne electronic attack (AEA) mission for the Department of Defense for several years. This mission has largely been performed 

with the EA–6B Prowler aircraft flown by the Navy and Marine 

Corps. The mission is currently transitioning to the EA–18G 

Growler aircraft (a variant of the F/A–18 aircraft) as the Prowler 

aircraft age and are retired. There are currently 19 airborne electronic attack squadrons in the Department of the Navy, however, 

only 15 Growler squadrons are planned. This is due to the fact that 

the Marine Corps will not fly the Growler aircraft but intends to 

move away from dedicated airborne electronic attack squadrons 

and shift to an organic capability using electronic warfare payloads 

such as Intrepid Tiger and the inherent capabilities within the F– 

35 aircraft. Although this approach is envisioned to satisfy the requirements of the Marine Corps, the Committee is concerned about 

the reduced AEA capability for the Nation at large. The Prowler 

aircraft (and the compatible AEA mission) has been a high demand, low density platform since the days of Desert Storm and is 

expected to continue as such. Accordingly, the recommendation provides $45,000,000 above the request for the advance procurement 

of materials for the construction of 15 additional EA–18G aircraft 

in fiscal year 2014 to preserve the option of increasing the quantity 

of this vital aircraft. 


rfrederick on DSK6VPTVN1PROD with HEARING
147 

WEAPONS PROCUREMENT, NAVY 

Fiscal year 2012 appropriation .......................................................... $3,224,432,000 

Fiscal year 2013 budget request ....................................................... 3,117,578,000 

Committee recommendation .............................................................. 3,072,112,000 

Change from budget request ............................................................. ¥45,466,000 

This appropriation provides funds for the procurement of strategic and tactical missiles, target drones, torpedoes, guns, associated support equipment, and modification of in-service missiles, 

torpedoes, and guns. 

The total amount recommended in the bill will provide the following program in fiscal year 2013: 


rfrederick on DSK6VPTVN1PROD with HEARING
148 


rfrederick on DSK6VPTVN1PROD with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 088 73883A.086
149 


rfrederick on DSK6VPTVN1PROD with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 089 73883A.087
150 


rfrederick on DSK6VPTVN1PROD with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 090 73883A.088
151 

PROCUREMENT OF AMMUNITION, NAVY AND MARINE 

CORPS 

Fiscal year 2012 appropriation .......................................................... $626,848,000 

Fiscal year 2013 budget request ....................................................... 759,539,000 

Committee recommendation .............................................................. 677,243,000 

Change from budget request ............................................................. ¥82,296,000 

This appropriation provides funds for the acquisition of ammunition, ammunition modernization, and ammunition-related material 

for the Navy and Marine Corps. 

The total amount recommended in the bill will provide the following program in fiscal year 2013: 


rfrederick on DSK6VPTVN1PROD with HEARING
152 


rfrederick on DSK6VPTVN1PROD with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 091 73883A.089
153 


rfrederick on DSK6VPTVN1PROD with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 092 73883A.090
154 


rfrederick on DSK6VPTVN1PROD with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 093 73883A.091
155 

SHIPBUILDING AND CONVERSION, NAVY 

Fiscal year 2012 appropriation .......................................................... $14,919,114,000 

Fiscal year 2013 budget request ....................................................... 13,579,845,000 

Committee recommendation .............................................................. 15,236,126,000 

Change from budget request ............................................................. 1,656,281,000 

This appropriation provides funds for the construction of new 

ships and the purchase and conversion of existing ships, including 

hull, mechanical and electrical equipment, electronics, guns, torpedo and missile launching systems, and communication systems. 

The total amount recommended in the bill will provide the following program in fiscal year 2013: 


rfrederick on DSK6VPTVN1PROD with HEARING
156 


rfrederick on DSK6VPTVN1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 094 73883A.092
157 


rfrederick on DSK6VPTVN1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 095 73883A.093
158 

SHIPBUILDING

The Navy’s shipbuilding program is the centerpiece of the Navy’s 

budget request. The Nation’s fleet creates our forward presence, 

projects power, and maintains open sea lanes. The Committee is 

well aware that the sight of a U.S. Navy ship on the horizon makes 

a powerful strategic statement in any theater. The Committee 

strongly supports all actions to maintain the standing of the United 

States Navy as the world’s preeminent sea power and a global good 

neighbor when humanitarian relief is required. The Committee is 

therefore puzzled by the Navy’s priorities in its shipbuilding plan. 

As part of its new strategy, the Department of Defense has rebalanced toward the Asia-Pacific and Middle East regions of the 

world. Despite these regions having a significantly larger area of 

the world’s oceans, the Navy plans to accelerate the decommissioning of seven guided missile cruisers, has reduced the shipbuilding budget by nearly eleven percent relative to the fiscal year 

2012 appropriated level, and is reducing the total number of ships 

required to fulfill its requirements under this new strategy. The required fleet size has been reduced from 313 ships to approximately 

300 ships in the long term, but the Navy will maintain 285 ships 

in the near term. The Navy has also deferred the procurement of 

an attack submarine and a guided missile destroyer, the backbone 

of the Navy’s combatant fleet, from fiscal year 2014 to future years 

and, in their place has inserted a vessel known as the Afloat Forward Staging Base. This vessel would fill a very long standing (but 

never fulfilled) mission need. The Committee applauds the Navy 

for finally fulfilling such a long standing need but is confused by 

the timing of this action in an era of decreasing budgets and also 

by the fact that a submarine and destroyer are not being procured 

in fiscal year 2014 in part to make funding available for this new 

vessel. 

The decision to defer the procurement of a submarine and a destroyer is both confusing and concerning, especially the submarine. 

Since its inception in 1998, the Virginia Class Submarine program 

always intended to build two submarines per year. Although the 

second submarine repeatedly appeared in outyear budget projections, it was continually deferred by the Navy. The program finally 

reached a rate of two submarines per year in fiscal year 2011, 

largely due to the efforts of this Committee. Now, after only three 

years at this rate (2011 through 2013), the Navy is again reducing 

the production rate. The Committee believes this decision will increase the cost of the submarines, result in production inefficiencies, and exacerbate the Navy’s own predicted attack submarine 

shortfall. Additionally, with the impending addition of the SSBN 

replacement submarine to the shipbuilding budget, an event which 

will ‘‘suck the air out of the Navy’s shipbuilding budget’’ according 

to a former Secretary of Defense, funding in the outyears will not 

be any easier to come by. 

The Committee believes the Navy recognizes the need to fund another destroyer and submarine in fiscal year 2014 since the Navy 

has approached the Committee with various plans and schemes to 

attempt to restore these ships to fiscal year 2014. One of these 

plans revolves around the incremental funding concept despite the 


rfrederick on DSK6VPTVN1PROD with HEARING
159 

fact that the Department’s own financial management regulations 

and policies prohibit incremental funding of large end items such 

as ships, except under certain circumstances, none of which apply 

in this case. The Committee strongly supports these regulations 

and policies because fully funded end items do not commit future 

Congresses to obligations they may or may not agree with and also 

because they provide the ability to conduct much more complete, 

transparent, and rigorous program oversight. Incremental funding 

is certainly comparable to buying items on credit by deferring payments to the outyears. 

The Committee understands the constraints of the fiscal year 

2014 budget, but to give up two highly prized combatants, and fund 

instead a vessel for a mission that can be (and has been) satisfied 

with existing ships, then attempt to restore those combatants 

through funding gimmicks in violation of the Department’s own financial regulations is deeply troubling. The Committee firmly believes that a strong Navy shipbuilding program is absolutely essential for the Nation’s security but will not mortgage the Nation’s future to accomplish it. Accordingly, the recommendation provides an 

additional $1,000,000,000 above the request for the procurement of 

an additional DDG–51 guided missile destroyer. The Secretary of 

the Navy is directed to use this funding as part of the DDG–51 

multiyear procurement planned for fiscal years 2013 through 2017 

in order to achieve a lower cost and provide a more stable production base for the duration of the DDG–51 multiyear procurement. 

Finally, the recommendation provides an additional $723,000,000 

above the request for advance procurement for the Virginia Class 

Submarine program. The Secretary of the Navy is directed to fully 

fund an additional submarine in fiscal year 2014 to achieve a lower 

cost and stable production base through the course of the program’s 

planned multiyear procurement. 

OTHER PROCUREMENT, NAVY 

Fiscal year 2012 appropriation .......................................................... $6,013,385,000 

Fiscal year 2013 budget request ....................................................... 6,169,378,000 

Committee recommendation .............................................................. 6,364,191,000 

Change from budget request ............................................................. 194,813,000 

This appropriation provides funds for the procurement of major 

equipment and weapons other than ships, aircraft, missiles, and 

torpedoes. Such equipment ranges from the latest electronic sensors for updates of naval forces, to trucks, training equipment, and 

spare parts. 

The total amount recommended in the bill will provide the following program in fiscal year 2013: 


rfrederick on DSK6VPTVN1PROD with HEARING
160 


rfrederick on DSK6VPTVN1PROD with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 096 73883A.094
161 


rfrederick on DSK6VPTVN1PROD with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 097 73883A.095
162 


rfrederick on DSK6VPTVN1PROD with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 098 73883A.096
163 


rfrederick on DSK6VPTVN1PROD with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 099 73883A.097
164 


rfrederick on DSK6VPTVN1PROD with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 0100 73883A.098
165 


rfrederick on DSK6VPTVN1PROD with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 0101 73883A.099
166 


rfrederick on DSK6VPTVN1PROD with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 0102 73883A.100
167 


rfrederick on DSK6VPTVN1PROD with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 0103 73883A.101
168 


rfrederick on DSK6VPTVN1PROD with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 0104 73883A.102
169 


rfrederick on DSK6VPTVN1PROD with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 0105 73883A.103
170 


rfrederick on DSK6VPTVN1PROD with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 0106 73883A.104
171 

PROCUREMENT, MARINE CORPS 

Fiscal year 2012 appropriation .......................................................... $1,422,570,000 

Fiscal year 2013 budget request ....................................................... 1,622,955,000 

Committee recommendation .............................................................. 1,482,081,000 

Change from budget request ............................................................. ¥140,874,000 

This appropriation provides funds for the procurement, production, and modification of equipment, supplies, materials, and spare 

parts. 

The total amount recommended in the bill will provide the following program in fiscal year 2013: 


rfrederick on DSK6VPTVN1PROD with HEARING
172 


rfrederick on DSK6VPTVN1PROD with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 0107 73883A.105
173 


rfrederick on DSK6VPTVN1PROD with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 0108 73883A.106
174 


rfrederick on DSK6VPTVN1PROD with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 0109 73883A.107
175 


rfrederick on DSK6VPTVN1PROD with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 0110 73883A.108
176 


rfrederick on DSK6VPTVN1PROD with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 0111 73883A.109
177 

LIGHT ARMORED VEHICLE

The budget request proposes $186,216,000 for the Light Armored 

Vehicle (LAV) Product Improvement Program. The Committee recommendation provides $45,342,000, which is $140,874,000 below 

the request. The reduction is due to a change in the authorized acquisition objective for the LAV based on a planned end strength reduction and related elimination of three Light Armored Reconnaissance companies. The acquisition objective decreased from 1,005 to 

930 vehicles. 

AIRCRAFT PROCUREMENT, AIR FORCE 

Fiscal year 2012 appropriation .......................................................... $12,950,000,000 

Fiscal year 2013 budget request ....................................................... 11,002,999,000 

Committee recommendation .............................................................. 11,304,899,000 

Change from budget request ............................................................. 301,900,000 

This appropriation provides for the procurement of aircraft, and 

for modification of in-service aircraft to improve safety and enhance 

operational effectiveness. It also provides for initial spares and 

other support equipment to include aerospace ground equipment 

and industrial facilities. In addition, funds are provided for the procurement of flight training simulators to increase combat readiness 

and to provide for more economical training. 

The total amount recommended in the bill will provide the following program in fiscal year 2013: 


rfrederick on DSK6VPTVN1PROD with HEARING
178 


rfrederick on DSK6VPTVN1PROD with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 0112 73883A.110
179 


rfrederick on DSK6VPTVN1PROD with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 0113 73883A.111
180 


rfrederick on DSK6VPTVN1PROD with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 0114 73883A.112
181 


rfrederick on DSK6VPTVN1PROD with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 0115 73883A.113
182 


rfrederick on DSK6VPTVN1PROD with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 0116 73883A.114
183 

F–22 BACKUP OXYGEN SYSTEM

The Committee is concerned by the continuing problems with hypoxia-type events involving the F–22 and the Air Force’s inability 

to determine a remediable root cause for this problem. As the military’s only operational fifth generation fighter, the F–22 is critical 

to the implementation of the National Defense Strategy. Due to the 

small size of the F–22 fleet, and the utmost importance of preserving the safety and readiness of F–22 pilots, the Committee 

strongly supports Air Force efforts to address this problem. The 

Committee understands that the Air Force is in the final stages of 

selecting a design for an automated backup oxygen system as a 

mitigation measure. The Committee’s recommendation therefore includes $50,000,000 only for the procurement and installation of a 

backup oxygen system for the F–22. The Committee further directs 

the Air Force to provide regular updates to the Committee on physiological events involving F–22 pilots, impacts on flight operations, 

and the progress of efforts to discover and implement solutions. 

C–130 AVIONICS MODERNIZATION PROGRAM

The Air Force’s fiscal year 2013 budget request proposes to terminate the C–130 Avionics Modernization Program (AMP). The C– 

130 AMP effort modernizes and standardizes the avionics and cockpit configurations on legacy C–130H aircraft, increasing the efficiency of the fleet and satisfying Communication, Navigation, and 

Surveillance/Air Traffic Management (CNS/ATM) mandates. In lieu 

of AMP, the Air Force proposes to initiate a new start program to 

satisfy CNS/ATM mandates only. The Committee does not concur 

with the Air Force’s proposal to terminate C–130 AMP. The Committee is not satisfied that the Air Force has performed adequate 

cost-benefit analysis on AMP termination. Even though previous 

Air Force budget documents have stated that AMP will lower total 

ownership costs for the C–130 fleet, the Air Force has failed to provide the Committee with a life-cycle cost analysis that would allow 

the Committee to weigh the immediate budgetary benefits of AMP 

termination against the long term costs of maintaining a heterogeneous C–130H fleet and retaining the navigator position. At the 

same time, the Committee acknowledges the Air Force’s need to 

lower the upfront costs of the program. The Committee recommends increases of $10,000,000 each to the Aircraft Procurement, Air Force and Research, Development, Test and Evaluation, 

Air Force accounts to continue the current AMP program with the 

provision that the Secretary of the Air Force and the prime contractor should engage in efforts to reduce the average procurement 

unit cost of AMP modifications to less than $10,000,000 in base 

year dollars. 

B–52 COMBAT NETWORK COMMUNICATIONS TECHNOLOGY

The Air Force’s fiscal year 2013 budget request proposes a restructuring of the B–52 Combat Network Communications Technology (CONECT) effort. CONECT provides multiple hardware upgrades to the B–52 to enhance communications and increase situational awareness, allowing for timely re-tasking and weapons retargeting capability that greatly improves the mission flexibility of 


rfrederick on DSK6VPTVN1PROD with HEARING
184 

the B–52. The Air Force’s proposed restructuring would reduce program content to replacement of the aircraft’s visual displays and 

reliance on the temporary, laptop-based Evolutionary Data Link 

modification as the permanent solution, which would provide significantly less capability. The Committee discerns no rationale for 

this restructuring other than a short-term need to meet budget 

constraints. The Committee directs the Secretary of the Air Force 

to continue with the B–52 CONECT effort using funds previously 

appropriated for this program. The Committee also recommends a 

reduction of $34,700,000 from the fiscal year 2013 request for research, development, test and evaluation, eliminating funds requested to develop the restructured program and de-modify a B– 

52 test aircraft previously modified for CONECT. 

C–130J

The Air Force’s future years defense program for fiscal years 

2012–2016 projected a requirement for twelve additional C–130J 

aircraft in fiscal year 2013. Congress authorized and appropriated 

$120,000,000 in fiscal year 2012 for advance procurement of these 

12 aircraft. The Air Force’s fiscal year 2013 budget request includes 

only seven aircraft. The Committee’s recommendation includes additional funds to restore procurement of one C–130J, two HC–130J, 

and two MC–130J aircraft. The Committee directs the Secretary of 

the Air Force to use fiscal year 2012 C–130J advance procurement 

funds for the purposes for which such funds were originally appropriated. 

WAR READINESS ENGINE SHORTFALL

The Committee understands that the Air Force faces a shortfall 

of useable F–100–229 engines for the F–15 and F–16 fleets as compared to the War Readiness Engine (WRE) objective. Given that 

the Air Force will continue to rely on the F–15 and F–16 well into 

the foreseeable future, and that service life extension requirements 

for these aircraft continue to grow, maintaining the fleets at the 

highest feasible state of readiness is imperative. The Committee 

urges the Secretary of the Air Force to budget for the full WRE objective for the F–100–299 and all other engines that have similar 

shortfalls. 

MISSILE PROCUREMENT, AIR FORCE 

Fiscal year 2012 appropriation .......................................................... $6,080,877,000 

Fiscal year 2013 budget request ....................................................... 5,491,846,000 

Committee recommendation .............................................................. 5,449,146,000 

Change from budget request ............................................................. ¥42,700,000 

This appropriation provides funds for the procurement, installation, and checkout of strategic ballistic and other missiles, modification of in-service missiles, and initial spares for missile systems. 

It also provides for operational space systems, boosters, payloads, 

drones, associated ground equipment, non-recurring maintenance 

of industrial facilities, machine tool modernization, and special program support. 

The total amount recommended in the bill will provide the following program in fiscal year 2013: 


rfrederick on DSK6VPTVN1PROD with HEARING
185 


rfrederick on DSK6VPTVN1PROD with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 0118 73883A.115
186 


rfrederick on DSK6VPTVN1PROD with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 0119 73883A.116
187 


rfrederick on DSK6VPTVN1PROD with HEARINGInsert graphoc folio 0120 73883A.117
188 

SPACE LAUNCH

The Committee supports the Air Force’s initiative to achieve 

competition in the space launch enterprise. While the Evolved Expendable Launch Vehicle (EELV) program has achieved considerable progress with 49 successful launches to date, the costs for this 

program have been difficult to justify and have been a source of 

concern. The Committee is pleased that the EELV program will be 

reviewed as part of the Nunn-McCurdy recertification process and 

is eager to see the results. The Committee also supports the New 

Entrant Certification initiative that should enable competition and 

lead to additional cost savings. 

SPACE BASED INFRARED SYSTEM AND ADVANCED EXTREMELY HIGH

FREQUENCY SATELLITE SYSTEM PROCUREMENT

The Committee has supported an incremental funding approach 

for Advanced Extremely High Frequency (AEHF) satellites numbers five and six and supports the same approach for Space Based 

Infrared System (SBIRS) satellites numbers five and six. However, 

the cost estimate for these satellites appears to be extremely conservative. Based on past development histories, this would seem 

prudent; however, since these are production satellites with little 

non-recurring engineering required, the excess funding is not required. Therefore, the Committee directs that the Secretary of the 

Air Force, in conjunction with the Office of the Secretary of Defense, Cost Assessment and Program Evaluation, shall provide to 

the congressional defense committees not later than 30 days after 

enactment of this Act a report that shows the should-cost estimate, 

the costs for robust sparing, and the unit and total costs for buying 

three satellites rather than the current quantity of two for both the 

AEHF and SBIRS systems. If the approved acquisition strategy 

does not support the most economical procurement of these vehicles, the report should explain such differences. 

PROCUREMENT OF AMMUNITION, AIR FORCE 

Fiscal year 2012 appropriation .......................................................... $499,185,000 

Fiscal year 2013 budget request ....................................................... 599,194,000 

Committee recommendation .............................................................. 599,194,000 

Change from budget request ............................................................. – – – 

This appropriation provides funds for the acquisition of ammunition, modifications, spares, weapons, and other ammunition-related 

items for the Air Force. 

The total amount recommended in the bill will provide the following program in fiscal year 2013: 


rfrederick on DSK6VPTVN1PROD with HEARING
189 


rfrederick on DSK6VPTVN1PROD with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 0121 73883A.118
190 

OTHER PROCUREMENT, AIR FORCE 

Fiscal year 2012 appropriation .......................................................... $17,403,564,000 

Fiscal year 2013 budget request ....................................................... 16,720,848,000 

Committee recommendation .............................................................. 16,632,575,000 

Change from budget request ............................................................. ¥88,273,000 

This appropriation provides funds for the procurement of weapon 

systems and equipment other than aircraft and missiles. Included 

are vehicles, electronic and telecommunications systems for command and control of operational forces, and ground support equipment for weapon systems and supporting structure. 

The total amount recommended in the bill will provide the following program in fiscal year 2013: 


rfrederick on DSK6VPTVN1PROD with HEARING
191 


rfrederick on DSK6VPTVN1PROD with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 0122 73883A.119
192 


rfrederick on DSK6VPTVN1PROD with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 0123 73883A.120
193 


rfrederick on DSK6VPTVN1PROD with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 0124 73883A.121
194 


rfrederick on DSK6VPTVN1PROD with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 0125 73883A.122
195 

PROCUREMENT, DEFENSE-WIDE 

Fiscal year 2012 appropriation .......................................................... $4,893,428,000 

Fiscal year 2013 budget request ....................................................... 4,187,935,000 

Committee recommendation .............................................................. 4,429,335,000 

Change from budget request ............................................................. 241,400,000 

This appropriation provides funds for the procurement, production, and modification of equipment, supplies, materials, and spare 

parts. 

The total amount recommended in the bill will provide the following program in fiscal year 2013: 


rfrederick on DSK6VPTVN1PROD with HEARING
196 


rfrederick on DSK6VPTVN1PROD with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 0126 73883A.123
197 


rfrederick on DSK6VPTVN1PROD with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 0127 73883A.124
198 


rfrederick on DSK6VPTVN1PROD with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 0128 73883A.125
199 


rfrederick on DSK6VPTVN1PROD with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 0129 73883A.126
200 

SPECIAL OPERATIONS COMMAND AVIATION FOREIGN INTERNAL

DEFENSE PROGRAM

The budget request contains $97,700,000 in the Non-Standard 

Aviation Program for procurement of aircraft for the Aviation Foreign Internal Defense (AvFID) program, and $7,500,000 for the U– 

28 program. The Committee is aware that the Special Operations 

Command has changed its strategy regarding the AvFID and U– 

28 programs subsequent to submission of the fiscal year 2013 budget request. The Committee recommendation reflects implementation of the revised strategy by transferring funds requested for 

AvFID procurement to the U–28 program. 

The Committee understands that the revised strategy will combine the Non-Standard Aviation (NSAV) light program and the 

AvFID program with resulting efficiencies in training, maintaining, 

and supporting of forward deployed combined units. The Committee believes that this decision to combine the two programs will 

create efficiencies through reduced acquisition and operational 

costs and leverage the existing logistical and operational expertise 

experiences of the Air Force Special Operations Active and reserve 

components. The Committee notes that the overall program realignment of assets will result in an estimated reduction of contractor logistics support costs by approximately $53,000,000 between fiscal years 2013 and 2017. 

The Committee encourages the Commander, U.S. Special Operations Command and the Commander, Air Force Special Operations Command (AFSOC) to continually and comprehensively validate geographic combatant commander requirements for AvFID 

and NSAV and to prioritize in a way that will ensure a globally 

persistent and effective presence that contributes to security force 

assistance and national security objectives. The Committee also encourages the Commander, AFSOC to refine global site selection to 

optimize operational an logistical support and to continue efforts to 

reduce contracted logistics support across the Future Years Defense 

Program. 

NATIONAL GUARD AND RESERVE EQUIPMENT 

Fiscal year 2012 appropriation .......................................................... $1,000,000,000 

Fiscal year 2013 budget request ....................................................... – – – 

Committee recommendation .............................................................. 2,000,000,000 

Change from budget request ............................................................. 2,000,000,000 


rfrederick on DSK6VPTVN1PROD with HEARING
201 


rfrederick on DSK6VPTVN1PROD with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 0131 73883A.127
202 

NATIONAL GUARD AND RESERVE EQUIPMENT

The National Guard and reserve forces regularly receive less 

than a proportionate share of funding to resource their dual-use 

equipment needs. However, the role of the reserve components in 

providing fully equipped, trained, and ready forces in the Services’ 

force generation models is essential. The readiness of the National 

Guard and reserve units is imperative. 

The Committee recommendation for the National Guard and Reserve Equipment Account (NGREA) is $2,000,000,000. Of that 

amount, $650,000,000 is for the Army National Guard; 

$650,000,000 for the Air National Guard; $300,000,000 for the 

Army Reserve; $140,000,000 for the Navy Reserve; $120,000,000 

for the Marine Corps Reserve; and $140,000,000 for the Air Force 

Reserve to meet urgent equipment needs that may arise in fiscal 

year 2013. 

This funding will allow the Guard and reserve components to 

procure high priority equipment that may be used by these components for both their combat missions and their missions in support 

of state governors. This funding will allow the National Guard and 

reserve components to procure items such as: Generation 4 Advanced targeting pods, internal and external auxiliary fuel tank 

systems for Apaches and Chinooks, Green Laser Interdiction Systems, propeller balancing systems, ultra-light tactical vehicles, 

handheld laser trackers, tactical radios, tactical trailers, and field 

engineering, logistics, and maintenance equipment. 

The use of simulation training systems has yielded a military 

that is better trained, more capable, and more confident as compared to units that do not have access to modern simulation training devices. Simulation training is a cost effective means by which 

reserve units can improve tactical decision-making skills and ultimately save lives. It is anticipated that a portion of this funding 

will be used to procure a variety of simulation training systems. To 

ensure the most efficient and effective training program, these systems should be a combination of both government owned and operated simulators and simulation support from a dedicated commercial activity capable of providing frequent hardware and software 

updates. 

Additionally, the Committee recognizes that adding capability 

and modernizing equipment unique to the reserve component or 

legacy systems with limited active component investment may require design, integration, test, and software efforts prior to procurement. Therefore, for fiscal year 2013, on a one year trial basis, 

bill language is included that will allow the use of up to three percent of the respective reserve component’s NGREA appropriation, 

as needed, for research, development, test and evaluation for federal and domestic operations requirements as they relate to equipping the reserve components. 

DEFENSE PRODUCTION ACT PURCHASES 

Fiscal year 2012 appropriation .......................................................... $169,964,000 

Fiscal year 2013 budget request ....................................................... 89,189,000 

Committee recommendation .............................................................. 63,531,000 

Change from budget request ............................................................. ¥25,658,000 


rfrederick on DSK6VPTVN1PROD with HEARING
203 

The Committee recommendation shall be distributed as follows: 

EXPLANATION OF PROJECT LEVEL ADJUSTMENTS 

(In thousands of dollars) 

P–1 Budget 

request 

Committee 

Recommended 

Change 

from 

request 

DEFENSE PRODUCTION ACT 

GALLIUM NITRIDE RADAR AND ELECTRONIC WARFARE MONOLITHIC MICROWAVE 

INTEGRATED CIRCUITS ........................................................................................ 5,031 5,031 ....................

CADMIUM ZINC TELLURIDE SUBSTRATE PRODUCTION ........................................... 1,900 1,900 ....................

READ OUT INTEGRATED CIRCUIT FOUNDRY IMPROVEMENT AND SUSTAINABILITY 1,200 1,200 ....................

SPACE QUALIFIED SOLAR CELL SUPPLY CHAIN ...................................................... 1,000 1,000 ....................

TRAVELING WAVE TUBE AMPLIFIERS ....................................................................... 1,320 1,320 ....................

COMPLEMENTARY METAL OXIDE SEMICONDUCTOR FOCAL PLAN ARRAYS FOR 

VISIBLE SENSORS FOR STAR TRACKERS ............................................................ 1,800 1,800 ....................

ADVANCED PROJECTS .............................................................................................. 1,280 1,280 ....................

PRODUCTION BASE INVESTMENT ASSESSMENTS AND ACTIVITIES .......................... 5,658 0 ¥5,658 

Program reduction ......................................................................................... ¥5,658 ....................

ADVANCED DROP-IN BIOFUEL PRODUCTION ........................................................... 70,000 0 ¥70,000 

Ahead of need ................................................................................................ ¥70,000 ....................

PROGRAM INCREASE ............................................................................................... 50,000 ....................

TOTAL, DEFENSE PRODUCTION ACT 89,189 63,531 ¥25,658 

ADVANCED DROP-IN BIOFUEL PRODUCTION

The request includes $70,000,000 for the construction or retrofit 

of domestic commercial (or pre-commercial) scale advanced drop-in 

biofuel plants and refineries. The Committee understands that the 

Department has allocated $100,000,000 of the $150,000,000 program addition to the fiscal year 2012 Defense Production Act account for this effort and that $70,000,000 of this funding likely will 

not execute until well into fiscal year 2013 or even into fiscal year 

2014. While the Committee is supportive of alternative energy development, in these times of decreasing budgets, it does not seem 

prudent to stockpile funds so far ahead of need. Accordingly the 

recommendation provides no funding for this effort in fiscal year 

2013. The Committee urges the Secretary of Defense to request 

this funding in future years when it can execute in a timely manner. 


rfrederick on DSK6VPTVN1PROD with HEARING

rfrederick on DSK6VPTVN1PROD with HEARING
(205) 

TITLE IV 

RESEARCH, DEVELOPMENT, TEST AND EVALUATION 

The fiscal year 2013 Department of Defense research, development, test and evaluation budget request totals $69,407,767,000. 

The accompanying bill recommends $69,984,145,000. The total 

amount recommended is an increase of $576,378,000 above the fiscal year 2013 budget request and is $2,436,530,000 below the total 

provided in fiscal year 2012. The table below summarizes the budget estimate and the Committee’s recommendations. 


rfrederick on DSK6VPTVN1PROD with HEARING
206 


rfrederick on DSK6VPTVN1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 0132 here 73883A.128
207 

SYSTEMS ENGINEERING

The Committee recognizes the importance of a strong systems 

engineering workforce for the success of acquisition programs within the Department of Defense. Studies indicate that early and sustained investment in systems engineering reduces the likelihood of 

cost and schedule overruns in acquisition programs. 

The Committee is concerned that the Department exhibits inconsistency in its approach to systems engineering. The Defense Acquisition Guidebook defines systems engineering as ‘‘an interdisciplinary approach encompassing the entire technical effort to 

evolve and verify an integrated and total life cycle balanced set of 

system, people, and process solutions that satisfy customer needs, 

and the integrating mechanism across all technical efforts related 

to the development, manufacturing, verification, deployment, operations, support, disposal of, and user training for systems and their 

life cycle processes.’’ This definition is consistent with many others 

that distinguish systems engineering, a multidisciplinary and integrative effort, from other engineering disciplines. 

By contrast, the Department’s approach to its systems engineering workforce does not distinguish between the limited cadre of 

government engineers with the education, experience, and record of 

past performance that qualifies them as true systems engineers, 

and the rest of its engineering workforce. Given the challenges the 

Department faces in recruiting and retaining these highly soughtafter individuals, the Committee views the Department’s inability 

to track the level of real systems engineering expertise in its workforce as a key deficiency that must be addressed. The current lack 

of visibility clouds the Department’s knowledge of this vital element of its workforce, with implications for staffing, succession 

planning, and ultimately, program performance. Of particular concern is the fact that pending personnel reductions may result in the 

loss of hard-to-replace senior systems engineering talent and promising future systems engineers. 

The Department conducts a wide range of Science, Technology, 

Engineering, and Mathematics (STEM) outreach programs aimed 

at all education levels to encourage students to pursue careers in 

these fields. Recruiting personnel with STEM backgrounds would 

logically help improve the quality of the systems engineering workforce. 

The Committee urges the Secretary of Defense to establish a 

mechanism for identifying and tracking personnel within the Department’s organic acquisition workforce whom the Department 

recognizes as being qualified in the discipline of systems engineering, on the basis of education, experience, and such other factors 

as it may identify (such as prior performance). Additionally, the 

Committee believes it would benefit the Department to track the 

effectiveness of its many STEM outreach programs in an effort to 

determine if these programs are actually resulting in an improved 

STEM (including systems engineers) workforce within the Department. 


rfrederick on DSK6VPTVN1PROD with HEARING
208 

DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE AND SERVICE CYBER ACTIVITIES

The Committee acknowledges the threat to and from the cyber 

realm and believes it has been well documented; however, the resources being expended against the threat have not. In order to 

better evaluate the planning and resourcing for Department of Defense cyber activities, the Committee directs the Commander, 

United States Cyber Command, in coordination with the Secretary 

of Defense and each of the Service Secretaries, to provide the congressional defense committees separate budget justification material, in the form of budget documents as defined in the Department’s financial management regulation, that details the year-toyear budgets, schedule, and milestone goals over the Future Years 

Defense Program for the individual programs that support the 

goals of cyber initiatives. The programs detailed must include 

cyberspace operations, computer network operations, information 

assurance, and full spectrum cyber operations for the Department 

of Defense and the Services. Further, the Committee suggests that 

the Department continue to refine what activities, budget lines, 

and programs should be considered cyber in order to better coordinate and track these budgets. 

ADVANCED HYPERSONIC WEAPON

The Committee is aware that the United States Army Space and 

Missile Defense Command/Army Forces Strategic Command conducted the first test flight of the Advanced Hypersonic Weapon 

(AHW) concept on November 17, 2011. The AHW is designed to fly 

within the earth’s atmosphere at hypersonic speed and long range. 

In the test, a three-stage booster system launched the AHW glide 

vehicle and deployed it on the desired flight trajectory. The vehicle 

flew a non-ballistic glide trajectory at hypersonic speed to the 

planned impact location. The Committee will follow the program as 

it advances. The Committee directs the Secretary of Defense to provide a report to the congressional defense committees not later 

than 60 days after enactment of this Act on plans for future development and testing of the Advanced Hypersonic Weapon. The report shall include the program plan and funding allocation for fiscal year 2012, fiscal year 2013, and the Future Years Defense Program through 2017, for Prompt Global Strike and the Navy Strategic Systems Project Office. 

SPECIAL INTEREST ITEMS

Items for which additional funds have been provided as shown in 

the project level tables or in paragraphs using the phrase ‘‘only for’’ 

or ‘‘only to’’ in this report are congressional interest items for the 

purpose of the Base for Reprogramming (DD Form 1414). Each of 

these items must be carried on the DD Form 1414 at the stated 

amount specifically addressed in the committee report. These items 

remain special interest items whether or not they are repeated in 

a subsequent conference report. 

REPROGRAMMING GUIDANCE FOR ACQUISITION ACCOUNTS

It is the intent of the Congress that the program baseline for reprogramming funds reflects all approved adjustment actions: the 


rfrederick on DSK6VPTVN1PROD with HEARING
209 

initial appropriation as well as any rescissions, supplemental appropriations, and approved Department of Defense Form 1415 

reprogrammings. The Secretary of Defense is directed to ensure 

that financial management regulations incorporate approved reprogramming actions as an adjustment to the base for reprogramming value. 

The Committee directs the Secretary of Defense to continue to 

follow the reprogramming guidance specified in the report accompanying the House version of the Department of Defense Appropriations Act, 2006 (H.R. 109–119). Specifically, the dollar threshold for reprogramming funds will remain at $20,000,000 for procurement and $10,000,000 for research, development, test and evaluation. The Secretary of Defense shall continue to follow the limitation that prior approval reprogrammings are set at either the specified dollar threshold or 20 percent of the procurement or research, 

development, test and evaluation line, whichever is less. The percentage change limitation applies to both program increases and 

decreases. Additionally, this percentage change applies to the program base value at the time the below threshold movement of 

funds is executed. These thresholds are cumulative from the base 

for reprogramming value as modified by any adjustment action. 

Therefore, if the combined value of transfers into or out of a procurement (P–1) or research, development, test and evaluation (R– 

1) line exceeds the identified threshold, the Secretary of Defense 

must submit a prior approval reprogramming to the congressional 

defense committees. In addition, guidelines on the application of 

prior approval reprogramming procedures for congressional special 

interest items are established elsewhere in this report. 

REPROGRAMMING REPORTING REQUIREMENTS

The Committee directs the Under Secretary of Defense (Comptroller) to continue to provide the congressional defense committees 

quarterly, spreadsheet-based DD Form 1416 reports for service and 

defense-wide accounts in titles III and IV of this Act as required 

in the explanatory statement accompanying the Department of Defense Appropriations Act, 2006. 

FUNDING INCREASES

The Committee directs that the funding increases outlined in 

these tables shall be provided only for the specific purposes indicated in the tables. 

CLASSIFIED ANNEX

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

RESEARCH, DEVELOPMENT, TEST AND EVALUATION, ARMY 

Fiscal year 2012 appropriation .......................................................... $8,745,492,000 

Fiscal year 2013 budget request ....................................................... 8,929,415,000 

Committee recommendation .............................................................. 8,593,055,000 

Change from budget request ............................................................. ¥336,360,000 

This appropriation provides funds for the research, development, 

test and evaluation activities of the Department of the Army. The 


rfrederick on DSK6VPTVN1PROD with HEARING
210 

total amount recommended in the bill will provide the following 

program in fiscal year 2013: 


rfrederick on DSK6VPTVN1PROD with HEARING
211 


rfrederick on DSK6VPTVN1PROD with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 0133 73883A.129
212 


rfrederick on DSK6VPTVN1PROD with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 0134 73883A.130
213 


rfrederick on DSK6VPTVN1PROD with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 0135 73883A.131
214 


rfrederick on DSK6VPTVN1PROD with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 0136 73883A.132
215 


rfrederick on DSK6VPTVN1PROD with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 0137 73883A.133
216 


rfrederick on DSK6VPTVN1PROD with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 0138 73883A.134
217 


rfrederick on DSK6VPTVN1PROD with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 0139 73883A.135
218 


rfrederick on DSK6VPTVN1PROD with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 0140 73883A.136
219 

MEDIUM EXTENDED AIR DEFENSE

The budget request for fiscal year 2013 proposes to provide 

$400,861,000 for the final year of funding for the Medium Extended 

Air Defense (MEADS) proof of concept. While the Committee recognizes that some additional benefit might be realized by additional 

funding, the expected benefits do not justify the cost. The Committee recommendation includes no funding for MEADS. 

ROBOTIC DEVELOPMENT

Recognizing the increased need to use unmanned systems as a 

means to maintain U.S. military capabilities in the face of likely 

reductions in manpower, the Committee encourages the Secretary 

of the Army to accelerate efforts to develop and deploy operational, 

prototype ground robotics systems utilizing both traditional and 

non-traditional suppliers. 

RESEARCH, DEVELOPMENT, TEST AND EVALUATION, NAVY 

Fiscal year 2012 appropriation .......................................................... $17,753,940,000 

Fiscal year 2013 budget request ....................................................... 16,882,877,000 

Committee recommendation .............................................................. 16,987,768,000 

Change from budget request ............................................................. 104,891,000 

This appropriation provides funds for the research, development, 

test and evaluation activities of the Department of the Navy, which 

includes the Marine Corps. The total amount recommended in the 

bill will provide the following program in fiscal year 2013: 


rfrederick on DSK6VPTVN1PROD with HEARING
220 


rfrederick on DSK6VPTVN1PROD with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 0141 73883A.137
221 


rfrederick on DSK6VPTVN1PROD with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 0142 73883A.138
222 


rfrederick on DSK6VPTVN1PROD with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 0143 73883A.139
223 


rfrederick on DSK6VPTVN1PROD with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 0144 73883A.140
224 


rfrederick on DSK6VPTVN1PROD with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 0145 73883A.141
225 


rfrederick on DSK6VPTVN1PROD with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 0146 73883A.142
226 


rfrederick on DSK6VPTVN1PROD with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 0147 73883A.143
227 


rfrederick on DSK6VPTVN1PROD with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 0148 73883A.144
228 


rfrederick on DSK6VPTVN1PROD with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 0149 73883A.145
229 


rfrederick on DSK6VPTVN1PROD with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 0150 73883A.146
230 

FIRESCOUT

The MQ–8 Firescout vertical take-off and landing unmanned aerial vehicle will provide intelligence, surveillance, and reconnaissance data to users without the use of manned aircraft or reliance 

on national assets. The Navy’s original plan for this platform was 

for use in the mission packages onboard the Littoral Combat Ships. 

With the delay in construction and fielding of these ships, the aircraft has migrated to other roles and missions, which has disrupted 

the testing and development schedule, resulting in a concurrent development, testing, and production schedule. The current state of 

this program is not unlike the Joint Strike Fighter program, although both programs have arrived at their current state via different paths. Concurrency in an acquisition program is undesirable 

in that end items are being procured despite the development and 

testing being incomplete. This condition typically results in the 

need to modify, at some cost, these end items as problems are discovered and resolved. Recent examples of issues in the Firescout 

program include one aircraft that was unable to be recovered on its 

host ship and ultimately crashed into the water, and another aircraft that lost communications with its control station and was lost 

while conducting operations. These incidents have resulted in the 

Firescout fleet being grounded from routine operations. Additionally, the Firescout program is in the midst of a transition from the 

MQ–8B variant to the MQ–8C variant, which will possess much 

greater endurance relative to the MQ–8B. However, this transition 

has been delayed as not all components of the MQ–8C variant are 

ready for production. The result of the delay in transitioning 

variants in this program has been the stockpiling of development 

funding. The program essentially has two years of development 

funding to expend in fiscal year 2012 and undoubtedly a large portion of that will carry over to fiscal year 2013. Therefore the recommendation provides $33,600,000 for the development of the 

Firescout program, a reduction of $66,000,000. 

The Committee recognizes the parallels between this program 

and the Joint Strike Fighter program. The F–35B variant of the 

Joint Strike Fighter was placed on probation as a result of some 

of the technical challenges it faced. Although probation was never 

specifically defined for the Committee, the Department recently removed the F–35B from probation, an indication that the strategy 

achieved its objectives. The Committee urges the Secretary of the 

Navy to use a similar strategy on the Firescout program and report 

to the congressional defense committees not later than 90 days 

after enactment of this Act on the strategy and its planned objectives. 

BONE MARROW REGISTRY

The bill includes $31,500,000 for the Department of the Navy to 

be administered by the Bone Marrow Registry, also known as and 

referred to within the Naval Medical Research Center as the C.W. 

Bill Young Marrow Donor Recruitment and Research Program. 

Funds appropriated for the Bone Marrow Registry shall remain 

available only for the purposes for which they were appropriated 

and may only be obligated for the Bone Marrow Registry. This DeVerDate Mar 15 2010 02:14 May 26, 2012 Jkt 074226 PO 00000 Frm 00240 Fmt 6601 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\HR493.XXX HR493

rfrederick on DSK6VPTVN1PROD with HEARING
231 

partment of Defense donor center has recruited more than 700,000 

Department of Defense volunteers and provides more marrow donors per week than any other donor center in the nation. More 

than 18,000 servicemembers and other Department volunteers 

from this donor center have provided marrow to save the lives of 

patients. The success of this national and international life-saving 

program for military and civilian patients, which now includes 

more than 10,000,000 potential volunteer donors, is admirable. 

Further, the agencies involved in contingency planning are encouraged to continue to include the Bone Marrow Registry in the development and testing of their contingency plans. The Department of 

Defense form (DD Form 1414) shall show this as a congressional 

interest item. The Department is further directed to release all of 

the funds appropriated for this purpose to the Bone Marrow Registry not later than 60 days after enactment of this Act. 

ELECTRONIC EQUIPMENT MAINTENANCE

The Committee is aware that the Navy has included low cost 

electronic system maintenance and distance support tools as part 

of the Aegis cruiser and destroyer modernization programs, resulting in improved readiness for Aegis ships. The Committee urges 

the Navy to develop these tools and practices for other platforms, 

including the Littoral Combat Ship. 

AUTOMATED TEST AND RE-TEST

The Committee is aware that the Navy’s automated test and retest (ATRT) project has reduced labor requirements for testing, improved system performance, and reduced cost for systems where 

the tool has been applied. The Committee believes with the advent 

of software intensive systems that the potential savings through 

the use of ATRT has only begun to be realized and encourages the 

Secretary of the Navy to expand the use of ATRT to other programs and systems and to expedite the execution of funding allocated towards this resource. 

STRATEGIC SUBMARINE REPLACEMENT

The Committee is concerned with the national security and programmatic risks associated with the Department’s decision to delay 

the Ohio class ballistic missile submarine replacement program. 

The Committee expects the Secretary of the Navy to conduct close 

and frequent oversight of this program to ensure that these risks 

are minimized. 

RESEARCH, DEVELOPMENT, TEST AND EVALUATION, AIR 

FORCE 

Fiscal year 2012 appropriation .......................................................... $26,535,996,000 

Fiscal year 2013 budget request ....................................................... 25,428,046,000 

Committee recommendation .............................................................. 25,117,692,000 

Change from budget request ............................................................. ¥310,354,000 

This appropriation provides funds for the research, development, 

test and evaluation activities of the Department of the Air Force. 

The total amount recommended in the bill will provide the following program in fiscal year 2013: 


rfrederick on DSK6VPTVN1PROD with HEARING
232 


rfrederick on DSK6VPTVN1PROD with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 0152 73883A.147
233 


rfrederick on DSK6VPTVN1PROD with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 0153 73883A.148
234 


rfrederick on DSK6VPTVN1PROD with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 0154 73883A.149
235 


rfrederick on DSK6VPTVN1PROD with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 0155 73883A.150
236 


rfrederick on DSK6VPTVN1PROD with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 0156 73883A.151
237 


rfrederick on DSK6VPTVN1PROD with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 0157 73883A.152
238 


rfrederick on DSK6VPTVN1PROD with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 0158 73883A.153
239 


rfrederick on DSK6VPTVN1PROD with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 0159 73883A.154
240 


rfrederick on DSK6VPTVN1PROD with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 0160 73883A.155
241 


rfrederick on DSK6VPTVN1PROD with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 0161 73883A.156
242 

SPACE SYSTEM ACQUISITION AND SYSTEM MODERNIZATION INITIATIVES

The Committee is concerned that, in a time of declining budgets, 

the Air Force and the Department of Defense may resort to silverbullet acquisition concepts in an attempt to save money and accelerate immature concepts and technologies. As the past two decades 

have proven, acquisition of space systems requires components 

with high technology readiness levels, as well as program managers, engineers, and organizations that have long histories of developing the system concepts to the point that many of the inevitable problems have been recognized and resolved. Quick-fix substitutes for years of hard-won experience are attractive but illusory. 

The Committee supports the concept of evolutionary modifications 

but believes that complete utilization of the systems that have been 

in development and production for the past two decades should be 

given priority. The Committee recommends that the Air Force reevaluate the choices of capabilities being pursued in the System 

Modernization Initiative effort and prioritize full utilization of fielded capabilities through ground and terminal enhancements, rather 

than future sensor enhancements. 

SPACE BASED INFRARED SYSTEM GROUND ENHANCEMENTS

The Committee recommends $50,000,000 for acceleration of the 

Space Based Infrared System (SBIRS) ground segment automated 

sensor tasking, which will allow the scanning sensor and the staring sensor to cue off each other and provide more accurate track 

for missile warning and tracking. Further, based on the current 

launch schedule of the various SBIRS system components, the 

Committee is concerned that the ground segment needs enhancement to command and control the projected constellation. The Committee also recommends $50,000,000 for ground enhancement that 

will support the growth of command and control capability beyond 

the originally approved constellation. 

MOVING TARGET INDICATOR

The Committee understands that the Air Force and the Department of Defense will soon complete the Synthetic Aperture Radar/ 

Moving Target Indicator and Joint STARS mission area analysis of 

alternatives (AoA). The Committee is concerned by the extended 

length of time that has been required to complete the AoA and the 

uncertainty regarding the Air Force’s future budget requirements 

for this vital mission. The Committee understands that the Department’s final determination on the AoA will inform a Material Development Decision to achieve a solution for future requirements. 

The Committee has therefore included an increase of $10,000,000 

to Battle Management, Command and Control Sensor Development 

to initiate any new programs required as a result of the AoA. 

KC–46A

The Committee directs the Secretary of the Air Force to continue 

to submit quarterly reports on any KC–46A contract modifications 

with a cost greater than or equal to $5,000,000, as directed by the 

explanatory statement accompanying the Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2012. 


rfrederick on DSK6VPTVN1PROD with HEARING
243 

JOINT STRIKE FIGHTER DECONTAMINATION

The Committee notes that, since 2001, Congress has appropriated funds to develop new technologies and techniques to decontaminate complex weapons systems and related equipment to protect against the threat of contamination by chemical or biological 

agents. Although system components have been developed to deliver decontamination technologies in a variety of environmental 

and field conditions, the Committee is concerned that no funding 

was requested for fiscal year 2013 to further Joint Strike Fighter 

(JSF) decontamination system development, begin system integration, and complete system validation. As a mission critical system, 

the F–35 is required by Department of Defense policy to be survivable in chemical, biological, radiological, and nuclear (CBRN) environments. Accordingly, the Committee directs the Air Force to 

make as a high priority investments in technologies that will ensure the safety of pilots in potentially contaminated environments, 

and to ensure that funding for such investments is adequately 

phased to support CBRN survivability requirements for the JSF 

and other mission critical systems. 

RESEARCH, DEVELOPMENT, TEST AND EVALUATION, 

DEFENSE-WIDE 

Fiscal year 2012 appropriation .......................................................... $19,193,955,000 

Fiscal year 2013 budget request ....................................................... 17,982,161,000 

Committee recommendation .............................................................. 19,100,362,000 

Change from budget request ............................................................. 1,118,201,000 

This appropriation provides funds for the research, development, 

test and evaluation activities of the Department of Defense for defense-wide activities. The total amount recommended in the bill 

will provide the following program in fiscal year 2013: 


rfrederick on DSK6VPTVN1PROD with HEARING
244 


rfrederick on DSK6VPTVN1PROD with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 0162 73883A.157
245 


rfrederick on DSK6VPTVN1PROD with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 0163 73883A.158
246 


rfrederick on DSK6VPTVN1PROD with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 0164 73883A.159
247 


rfrederick on DSK6VPTVN1PROD with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 0165 73883A.160
248 


rfrederick on DSK6VPTVN1PROD with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 0166 73883A.161
249 


rfrederick on DSK6VPTVN1PROD with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 0167 73883A.162
250 


rfrederick on DSK6VPTVN1PROD with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 0168 73883A.163
251 


rfrederick on DSK6VPTVN1PROD with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 0169 73883A.164
252 


rfrederick on DSK6VPTVN1PROD with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 01 73883A.165
253 


rfrederick on DSK6VPTVN1PROD with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 02 73883A.166
254 

HISTORICALLY BLACK COLLEGES AND UNIVERSITIES AND MINORITY

INSTITUTIONS

The Committee noted with concern in fiscal year 2012 that the 

Department transferred the Historically Black Colleges and Universities and Minority Institutions (HBCU/MI) program from the 

Office of the Secretary of Defense to the Department of the Army, 

thus dramatically diminishing the effectiveness and scope of the 

program. 

At the request of the Department, after the budget submission, 

the Committee has transferred funding from the Army, thus returning the program’s execution to the Office of the Secretary of 

Defense. The Committee encourages the Department to maintain 

this account in this budget line in future budget submissions. 

SCIENCE, TECHNOLOGY, ENGINEERING, AND MATHEMATICS EDUCATION

The Committee notes with increasing concern the underperformance of students in science and math, and recognizes efforts being 

made at the Department to remedy these concerns. The Committee 

recommends that the Department explore the expansion of programs in science, technology, engineering and mathematics for 

grades K through 12 that are comprehensive in nature, provide 

curriculum for in-school and after-school programs, and promote an 

overall appreciation for the subject matter. 

EXPANDING UNDERREPRESENTED MINORITY PARTICIPATION

Consistent with the National Academy of Sciences report ‘‘Expanding Underrepresented Minority Participation: America’s 

Science and Technology Talent at the Crossroads’’, the Committee 

recognizes the importance of ensuring that there is a strong pipeline of underrepresented minorities pursuing engineering, science, 

and technology careers. The Committee commends public-private 

partnerships that have come together to ensure scholarship support, innovative ideas like Academies of Engineering in high 

schools, and corporate partnership and sponsorship of district, 

urban, and rural areas to build a minority pipeline in key fields 

like engineering, which are needed for both national security and 

national economic reasons and by virtually every federal science 

and technology agency. The Committee encourages the Secretary of 

Defense to provide resources for scholarships for minorities in engineering and to promote the collection of research information on 

the status of minorities in engineering education and employment. 

SPECIAL OPERATIONS COMMAND UNDERSEA MOBILITY PROGRAM

The Committee is concerned that frequent program and strategy 

changes to the Undersea Mobility Program have delayed the introduction of advanced capabilities for both wet combat submersible 

replacement and dry combat submersible development. The current 

program schedule for dry combat submersibles will not field an 

operational evaluation platform until early 2015 with extended integrated testing not taking place until 2016. Given current dry 

combat submersible capability gaps and a potential shift in strategic emphasis to the Asia-Pacific and other regions that present 

anti-access and area-denial challenges, the Committee believes sucVerDate Mar 15 2010 02:14 May 26, 2012 Jkt 074226 PO 00000 Frm 00264 Fmt 6601 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\HR493.XXX HR493

rfrederick on DSK6VPTVN1PROD with HEARING
255 

cessful development and fielding of undersea mobility capabilities 

are critical to meeting combatant commanders’ needs. Additionally, 

the Committee is concerned that the highly perishable and technical operational expertise for wet and dry combat submersibles 

resident within the Naval Special Warfare community have not 

been fully exercised and utilized in recent years, thereby increasing 

capability gaps and risks to the overall program. 

The Committee recommends $35,000,000 above the request for 

the Undersea Mobility Program for the dry combat submersible 

program to enable the program to undertake risk reduction activities, thereby increasing the likelihood of delivery of a technically 

satisfactory system that meets the warfighter’s requirements. 

DEFENSE PERSONNEL SECURITY RESEARCH CENTER

It is essential that the Department of Defense conducts proper 

background investigations for employees in a prompt and efficient 

manner. Workplace efficiency and morale decline when an employee is unable to work due to a delay in security clearance processing. The Committee is concerned that the Department is not investing enough in automated tools necessary to expedite the investigation and reinvestigation process for security clearances. The 

Committee encourages the Secretary of Defense to invest in automated tools capable of performing queries across government and 

commercial databases to streamline the time-consuming process for 

top level security clearances. 

ADVANCED REMOTE SENSOR TECHNOLOGY

The Committee recommendation includes $33,742,000 for the Advanced Remote Sensor Technology (ARST) program of the Missile 

Defense Agency. The focus of ARST is to develop and mature 

emerging sensor technologies capable of three-dimensional missile 

imaging and tracking to discriminate threats from a single platform. The Committee expects funding will enable the Missile Defense Agency to demonstrate a baseline sensor capability with instantaneous, three-dimensional imagery and precision track data 

on every frame at video rates. The Committee sees strong potential 

for utilizing this capability not only on space-based assets, but from 

remotely-piloted aircraft as a risk reduction for space-based platforms. However, the Committee notes that although this program 

is a follow-on effort from the Airborne Infrared system, it is considered a new start, and thus the Committee recommendation aligns 

funding with the request levels throughout the Future Years Defense Program. 

STANDARD MISSILE-3 RISK REDUCTION FOR THE MISSILE DEFENSE

AGENCY

The Committee is concerned that there are certain components 

for missile defense systems that only have one or two suppliers in 

the area of design and production. This is especially true for the 

producers of the Standard Missile-3 (SM-3) interceptor’s Divert and 

Attitude Control System which guides the kill vehicle during the 

final phase of its intercept operations. The Committee encourages 

the Director, Missile Defense Agency to fund risk reduction activiVerDate Mar 15 2010 02:14 May 26, 2012 Jkt 074226 PO 00000 Frm 00265 Fmt 6601 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\HR493.XXX HR493

rfrederick on DSK6VPTVN1PROD with HEARING
256 

ties for the continued development of components essential to the 

production of SM-3 interceptors. 

SEMICONDUCTOR INDUSTRY

The Committee is concerned about the ability of the United 

States to maintain its global leadership in the production of semiconductor manufacturing equipment. In order to ensure U.S. dominance in this critical technology sector and that the Department of 

Defense has long-term, reliable domestic access to the most advanced technologies to manufacture and service next generation 

semiconductor fabrication technology, the Committee directs the 

Department of Defense to submit a report to the congressional defense committees, not later than 90 days after enactment of this 

Act, on its plans to ensure leadership in the next generation of 

450mm semiconductor fabrication equipment manufacturing technology in the United States. 

OPERATIONAL TEST AND EVALUATION, DEFENSE 

Fiscal year 2012 appropriation .......................................................... $191,292,000 

Fiscal year 2013 budget request ....................................................... 185,268,000 

Committee recommendation .............................................................. 185,268,000 

Change from budget request ............................................................. – – – 

This appropriation provides funds for the research, development, 

test and evaluation activities of the Department of Defense for defense-wide activities. The total amount recommended in the bill 

will provide the following program in fiscal year 2013: 


rfrederick on DSK6VPTVN1PROD with HEARING
257 


rfrederick on DSK6VPTVN1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 0172 here 73883A.167

rfrederick on DSK6VPTVN1PROD with HEARING
(259) 

TITLE V 

REVOLVING AND MANAGEMENT FUNDS 

DEFENSE WORKING CAPITAL FUNDS 

Fiscal year 2012 appropriation .......................................................... $1,575,010,000 

Fiscal year 2013 budget request ....................................................... 1,516,184,000 

Committee recommendation .............................................................. 1,516,184,000 

Change from budget request ............................................................. – – – 

This appropriation finances, through the receipt of funded reimbursable orders, the operation of industrial, commercial and support-type activities such as depot maintenance, supply operations, 

distribution depots, transportation services, Navy research, finance 

and accounting services, information systems and telecommunication services. Working capital fund accounts use cost accounting 

and business management techniques to provide managers with information that can be used to monitor, control, and minimize costs 

of operations. 

NATIONAL DEFENSE SEALIFT FUND 

Fiscal year 2012 appropriation .......................................................... $1,100,519,000 

Fiscal year 2013 budget request ....................................................... 608,136,000 

Committee recommendation .............................................................. 564,636,000 

Change from budget request ............................................................. ¥43,500,000 

This appropriation provides funds for the lease, operation, and 

supply of pre-positioning ships, operation of the Ready Reserve 

Force, and acquisition of ships for the Military Sealift Command, 

the Ready Reserve Force, and the Marine Corps. 

EXPLANATION OF PROJECT LEVEL ADJUSTMENTS 

(in thousands of dollars) 

Budget request Committee recommended Change from request 

STRATEGIC SEALIFT ACQUISITION ............................................. 77,386 39,386 ¥38,000 

Afloat forward staging base ............................................ ¥38,000 ..............................

DoD MOBILIZATION ASSETS ....................................................... 184,616 184,616 ..............................

SEALIFT RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT ................................... 42,811 37,311 ¥5,500 

Afloat forward staging base ............................................ .............................. ¥5,500 ..............................

READY RESERVE FORCE OPERATIONS AND MAINTENANCE ...... 303,323 303,323 ..............................

Total NDSF .............................................................. 608,136 564,636 ¥43,500 

AFLOAT FORWARD STAGING BASE

The request includes $38,000,000 for the advance procurement of 

items for the Afloat Forward Staging Base (AFSB). The AFSB is 

envisioned by the Navy to act as a mobile at-sea platform that will 

provide flexible mission support and sustainment. This platform 

will fulfill a very longstanding (at least 20 years) but never fulfilled 


rfrederick on DSK6VPTVN1PROD with HEARING
260 

mission need for sea-based support for a variety of missions. In the 

past, this mission need has been filled by a variety of ad-hoc methods to include the use of available surface combatants or amphibious ships. The closest dedicated platform to fulfilling a similar 

mission need was the conversion of the Navy’s amphibious assault 

ship, USS Inchon, to a mine countermeasure command and support 

ship in 1995. This was done at a time when the Navy was shifting 

the fleet from an organic mine warfare capability embedded on surface combatants to a more dedicated mine warfare capability of 

mine hunting ships and aircraft. Similarly, the Navy plans to fill 

this mission need in the very near term with the conversion of the 

USS Ponce in fiscal year 2012. 

Further, the Committee notes that the AFSB is planned for construction in the National Defense Sealift Fund, whose purpose in 

ship construction is for strategic sealift acquisition. The Committee 

is struggling with placing the mission of the AFSB into a strategic 

sealift area and directs the Secretary of the Navy to accomplish 

any AFSB tasks in the traditional Navy appropriation accounts. 

The Committee applauds the Navy for finally attempting to satisfy such a longstanding need, but it is confused as to the timing 

of satisfying this need in an era of decreasing budgets and when 

two combatants were pulled out of the fiscal year 2014 shipbuilding 

program. The Committee believes this mission need can continue 

to be satisfied as it has been satisfied to date. The Committee directs the Navy to apply the fiscal year 2014 funding currently projected for the construction of an AFSB toward fully funding an additional submarine to help achieve cost savings and industrial base 

stability in that program. Accordingly, the recommendation provides no funding for the AFSB. 


rfrederick on DSK6VPTVN1PROD with HEARING
(261) 

TITLE VI 

OTHER DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE PROGRAMS 

DEFENSE HEALTH PROGRAM 

Fiscal year 2012 appropriation .......................................................... $32,482,059,000 

Fiscal year 2013 budget request ....................................................... 32,528,718,000 

Committee recommendation .............................................................. 32,862,234,000 

Change from the budget request ....................................................... 333,516,000 

This appropriation provides funds for the Defense Health Program of the Department of Defense. The total amount recommended in the bill will provide the following program in fiscal 

year 2013: 


rfrederick on DSK6VPTVN1PROD with HEARING
262 


rfrederick on DSK6VPTVN1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 0173 here 73883A.168
263 


rfrederick on DSK6VPTVN1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 0174 here 73883A.169
264 


rfrederick on DSK6VPTVN1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 0175 here 73883A.170
265 

DEFENSE HEALTH PROGRAM REPROGRAMMING PROCEDURES

The Committee remains concerned over the transfer of funds 

from Direct (or In-house) Care to pay for contractor-provided medical care. To limit such transfers and continue oversight within the 

Defense Health Program operation and maintenance account, the 

Committee includes bill language to cap the funds available for Private Sector Care under the TRICARE program subject to prior approval reprogramming procedures. The bill language and accompanying report language included by the Committee should not be 

interpreted by the Department of Defense as limiting the amount 

of funds that may be transferred to the Direct Care System from 

other budget activities within the Defense Health Program. In addition, the Committee continues to designate the funding for the 

Direct Care System as a special interest item. Any transfer of 

funds from the Direct (or In-house) Care budget activity into the 

Private Sector Care budget activity or any other budget activity 

will require the Department of Defense to follow prior approval reprogramming procedures. 

The Department also shall provide written notification to the 

House and Senate Appropriations Committees of cumulative transfers in excess of $15,000,000 out of the Private Sector Care budget 

activity. The Committee further directs the Assistant Secretary of 

Defense (Health Affairs) to provide quarterly reports to the House 

and Senate Appropriations Committees on budget execution data 

for all of the Defense Health Program accounts and to adequately 

reflect changes to the budget activities requested by the Services 

in future budget submissions. 

CARRYOVER

For fiscal year 2013, the Committee recommends one percent carryover authority for the operation and maintenance account of the 

Defense Health Program. The Committee directs the Assistant Secretary of Defense (Health Affairs) to submit a detailed spending 

plan for any fiscal year 2012 designated carryover funds to the congressional defense committees not fewer than 30 days prior to executing the carryover funds. 

TRICARE FEE INCREASES

The recommendation includes the assumed savings generated 

from proposed TRICARE fee changes. However, the Committee will 

continue to evaluate the proposed TRICARE changes, pending the 

passage of the fiscal year 2013 National Defense Authorization Act. 

PEER-REVIEWED CANCER RESEARCH PROGRAM

The Committee recommendation includes $15,000,000 for a PeerReviewed Cancer Research Program that would research cancers 

not addressed in the breast, prostate, ovarian, and lung cancer research programs currently executed by the Department of Defense, 

and specifically by the U.S. Army Medical Research and Materiel 

Command. 

The funds provided are directed to be used to conduct research 

in the following areas: melanoma and other skin cancers, pediatric 

brain tumors, genetic cancer research, pancreatic cancer, kidney 


rfrederick on DSK6VPTVN1PROD with HEARING
266 

cancer, blood cancer, colorectal cancer, mesothelioma, and listeria 

vaccine for infectious disease and cancer. 

The funds provided under the Peer-Reviewed Cancer Research 

Program shall be used only for the purposes listed above. The Assistant Secretary of Defense (Health Affairs) is directed to provide 

a report not later than 60 days after enactment of this Act to the 

congressional defense committees on the status of the Peer-Reviewed Cancer Research Program. For each research area, the report should include the funding amount awarded, the progress of 

the research, and the relevance of the research to servicemembers 

and their families. 

JOINT WARFIGHTER MEDICAL RESEARCH PROGRAM

The Committee recommendation includes $50,000,000 for the 

continuation of the Joint Warfighter Medical Research Program. 

Funds shall be used to augment and accelerate high priority Department of Defense and Service medical requirements and to continue prior year initiatives that are close to achieving their objectives and yielding a benefit to military medicine. The funds shall 

not be used for new projects or for basic research. The funding 

shall be awarded at the Department’s discretion following a review 

of medical research and development gaps as well as unfinanced 

medical requirements of the Services. Further, the Committee directs the Assistant Secretary of Defense (Health Affairs) to provide 

a report not later than 180 days after enactment of this Act to the 

congressional defense committees, which lists the projects that receive funding. The report should include the amount of funding 

provided to each project and a thorough description of each 

project’s research. 

CONGRESSIONALLY DIRECTED MEDICAL RESEARCH PROGRAM

The Committee continues to be a strong proponent of military 

medical research and includes adequate funds in its fiscal year 

2013 recommendation for the Congressionally Directed Medical Research Program (CDMRP). However, the Committee has become 

concerned with some aspects of the way the CDMRP has been administered. In particular, the Committee is concerned that too 

many basic research projects are funded, rather than more advanced research and translational research projects, which will potentially yield medical breakthroughs more quickly. The Committee 

encourages the CDMRP to fund projects in mature medical research areas that are at more advanced stages of research and development. The Committee understands that for some diseases, research is less mature than for other diseases, and fully expects that 

most funding in immature research areas will be used for basic research. In addition, the Committee directs the Assistant Secretary 

of Defense (Health Affairs) to submit a report to the House and 

Senate Appropriations Committees not later than 120 days after 

enactment of this Act on how the Department of Defense’s peer review process for the CDMRP can be strengthened. 


rfrederick on DSK6VPTVN1PROD with HEARING
267 

TRAUMATIC BRAIN INJURY/PSYCHOLOGICAL HEALTH FUNDING

The Committee recommendation includes $125,000,000 above the 

fiscal year 2013 budget request for Traumatic Brain Injury (TBI) 

and Psychological Health (PH) funding. 

For the last several fiscal years, the Committee has provided 

ample resources above the requested amounts for TBI and PH research. However, a recent report from the Government Accountability Office (GAO) found that the Department of Defense could 

not adequately track expenditures and that obligation data reported to Congress has been unreliable. The GAO report states 

that ‘‘the Office of the Assistant Secretary of Defense for Health Affairs has not developed quality control mechanisms to help ensure 

that data on PH and TBI activities are complete and accurate. Further, although the Department listed patient care among reported 

costs, it did not specify what those costs included, making it difficult for decisionmakers and Congress to fully understand the 

costs.’’ The GAO recommended that ‘‘the Department direct the Assistant Secretary of Defense (Health Affairs) to include expenditure 

data in annual reports to Congress, as required; establish quality 

control mechanisms on PH and TBI data; if patient care costs are 

provided in future annual reports, specify what they include; and 

revisit the role of the Defense Center of Excellence for PH and TBI 

(DCOE) as the Department’s coordinating authority for issues concerning PH and TBI, as stated in DCOE’s campaign plan, and determine whether DCOE or another organization should perform 

this function.’’ 

The Committee is dismayed at the GAO’s recent findings and encourages the Assistant Secretary of Defense (Health Affairs) to follow the GAO’s recommendations and to provide accurate expenditure and obligation data for PH and TBI funding to the congressional defense committees. 

Additionally, the Committee encourages the Assistant Secretary 

of Defense (Health Affairs) to collaborate with universities to develop the next generation of mental health professionals and to address psychological health diagnoses through innovative new methods and technologies. 

PEER-REVIEWED PROSTATE CANCER RESEARCH PROGRAM

The Committee recommendation includes $80,000,000 for the 

Peer-Reviewed Prostate Cancer Research Program. The Committee 

is aware that there still are not reliable diagnostic tools for guiding 

early detection and treatment of prostate cancer. Therefore, the 

Committee encourages the Secretary of Defense to fund research 

for the advancement of prostate imaging technologies. 

JOINT TASK FORCE NATIONAL CAPITAL REGION MEDICAL

The military medical treatment facilities provide our wounded 

warriors and their families world class health care. Nowhere is 

that more true than at the Walter Reed National Military Medical 

Center (WRNMMC). However, the Committee remains concerned 

that distinction is in jeopardy under the current governance structure for the National Capital Region (NCR). 


rfrederick on DSK6VPTVN1PROD with HEARING
268 

The Joint Task Force National Capital Region Medical (JTF 

CAPMED) was created for the sole purpose of ensuring a smooth 

and successful consolidation of major military medical hospitals in 

the NCR as directed by the Base Realignment and Closure Act of 

2005. That purpose has been fulfilled. In September 2011, a Task 

Force established by the former Deputy Secretary of Defense to review the governance of the Military Health System (MHS) as a 

whole and the governance of the National Capital Region military 

health care in particular, recommended the disestablishment of 

JTF CAPMED. Further, the Task Force recommended the transition to an enhanced multi-service market similar to other military 

health markets throughout the country. The Task Force determined that the National Capital Region does not need to have 

unique headquarters for its military health care. However, the final 

decision announced by the Secretary of Defense included the endurance of JTF CAPMED with some slight changes. 

The Committee believes the continued presence of JTF CAPMED 

only serves to confuse the command and control at WRNMMC and 

adds a layer of bureaucracy that does not exist in any other multiservice market area. It is also evident that friction exists at the 

command level between JTF CAPMED and the Service Surgeons 

General. While that friction has not yet jeopardized the world class 

medical treatment our troops receive, the Committee remains fearful that it will begin to permeate down the ranks and could threaten the day-to-day operations of the hospital. 

The military health care in the NCR is exemplary and should 

continue to be world class for our men and women in uniform and 

their families. The Committee understands the necessity of following the guidance recently issued by the Secretary of Defense but 

will continue to closely monitor the situation at JTF CAPMED. 

PRESCRIPTION DRUG ABUSE

The Committee remains concerned with pain management prescription medication dependency among servicemembers. It is imperative that the tracking of pain management prescription drugs 

is handled consistently at military medical treatment facilities, particularly in theater, as well as at retail and mail order pharmacies. 

It is also important that the proper steps are taken to prevent 

overmedication and that treatment options are available for those 

facing possible addiction. The Committee encourages the Secretary 

of Defense to make curtailing prescription drug abuse a priority. 

OVERSEAS MEDICAL LABORATORIES

The Committee recognizes the critical contribution that the Department of Defense research and development portfolio makes in 

protecting U.S. servicemembers from infectious diseases they may 

encounter on missions around the world. While focusing on troop 

readiness and protection, the Department’s research has also contributed to the production of new global health technologies. The 

Committee encourages the Secretary of Defense to continue to 

robustly fund infectious disease research and the Army and Navy 

Overseas Medical Research Laboratories. 


rfrederick on DSK6VPTVN1PROD with HEARING
269 

INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY DISCHARGE SOLUTIONS

The Committee is aware that many non-Department of Defense 

acute care facilities utilize automated referral and discharge processes known as Information Technology Discharge Solutions 

(ITDS). The ITDS provide seamless discharges from acute care facilities in a cost effective and expeditious manner. The Committee 

encourages the Assistant Secretary of Defense (Health Affairs) to 

determine whether ITDS could be utilized in Department of Defense facilities to improve coordinated care, hospital administration 

processes, transitions between levels of care, security of health information, length of stay, and cost savings for acute care. 

COOPERATION BETWEEN MILITARY MEDICAL FACILITIES, CIVILIAN

HEALTHCARE FACILITIES, AND UNIVERSITIES

The Committee recognizes the importance of cooperation between 

military medical facilities, universities, hospitals, and other civilian 

partners to integrate civilian and military domestic disaster medical and public health emergency preparedness and response activities and to provide trauma training to sustain the education of 

military medical providers. 

The Committee encourages the Assistant Secretary of Defense 

(Health Affairs) to continue the Department of Defense’s support of 

such vital cooperative activities for the active, National Guard, and 

reserve components. The Committee also encourages the Assistant 

Secretary of Defense (Health Affairs) to expand these partnerships 

in order to fully capitalize on the expertise in non-Department of 

Defense medical centers and universities that can lead to increased 

medical readiness and resiliency in the military. 

PROSTHETIC RESEARCH

The Committee encourages the Assistant Secretary of Defense 

(Health Affairs) to provide resources for research to support advances in technology at the interface between the nervous system 

and intelligent prosthetics to provide sensation to amputees. 

MULTI-DISCIPLINARY BRAIN RESEARCH

The Committee encourages the Secretary of Defense to support 

multi-disciplinary research toward translational medicine that may 

provide better diagnostic tools and treatment outcomes for 

servicemembers who suffer from traumatic brain injury, post-traumatic stress disorder, and other neurotrauma. The Committee encourages the Secretary of Defense to provide the capabilities necessary for researchers, scientists, surgeons, physicians, healthcare 

professionals, and patients to effectively communicate their findings and outcomes. With proper support, translational research 

outcomes would be augmented through real-time access to information and its integration between researchers, physicians, hospitals, 

and patients. The Committee directs the Secretary of Defense to 

provide a report not later than 90 days after enactment of this Act 

on possible implementation of this program. 


rfrederick on DSK6VPTVN1PROD with HEARING
270 

FEDERAL NEUROSCIENCE WORKING GROUP

The Committee is aware that the Office of Science and Technology Policy, within the Executive Office of the President, is establishing an interagency working group under the auspices of the National Science and Technology Council (NSTC) to coordinate investments in neuroscience research across the Federal Government and 

leverage the potential for significant, transformative advances in 

our fundamental understanding of learning, brain development, 

and brain health and recovery. The goal of the working group is 

to help coordinate, focus, and enhance Federal efforts related to 

neuroscience, including efforts to develop future clinical treatments 

for traumatic and acquired brain injuries; increase our understanding of cognition and apply that knowledge to the improvement 

of education and learning; and improve our understanding of, and 

develop better therapies for, neurodegenerative diseases, childhood 

developmental disorders, and other neurological conditions. The 

Committee supports the activities of the NSTC Neuroscience Working Group and urges the Department of Defense to play an active 

role in it. 

CHEMICAL AGENTS AND MUNITIONS DESTRUCTION, 

DEFENSE 

Fiscal year 2012 appropriation .......................................................... $1,554,422,000 

Fiscal year 2013 budget request ....................................................... 1,301,786,000 

Committee recommendation .............................................................. 1,301,786,000 

Change from budget request ............................................................. – – – 

This appropriation provides funds for the Chemical Agents and 

Munitions Destruction activities of the Department of Defense. 

The Committee recommends an appropriation of $1,301,786,000 

for the Chemical Agents and Munitions Destruction, Defense program. 

The total amount recommended in the bill will provide the following program in fiscal year 2013: 

EXPLANATION OF PROJECT LEVEL ADJUSTMENTS 

[in thousands of dollars] 

Budget request Committee recommendation Change from request 

OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE ............................................... 635,843 635,843 – 

PROCUREMENT ......................................................................... 18,592 18,592 – 

RESEARCH, DEVELOPMENT, TEST AND EVALUATION ................ 647,351 647,351 – 

TOTAL, CHEMICAL AGENTS AND MUNITIONS DESTRUCTION, DEFENSE ........................................ 1,301,786 1,301,786 – 

DRUG INTERDICTION AND COUNTER-DRUG ACTIVITIES, 

DEFENSE 

Fiscal year 2012 appropriation .......................................................... $1,209,620,000 

Fiscal year 2013 budget request ....................................................... 999,363,000 

Committee recommendation .............................................................. 1,133,363,000 

Change from the budget request ....................................................... 134,000,000 

This appropriation provides funds for military personnel; operation and maintenance; procurement; and research, development, 

test and evaluation for drug interdiction and counter-drug activiVerDate Mar 15 2010 02:14 May 26, 2012 Jkt 074226 PO 00000 Frm 00280 Fmt 6601 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\HR493.XXX HR493

rfrederick on DSK6VPTVN1PROD with HEARING
271 

ties of the Department of Defense to include activities related to 

narcoterrorism. 

EXPLANATION OF PROJECT LEVEL ADJUSTMENTS 

[in thousands of dollars] 

Budget request Committee recommendation Change from request 

DRUG INTERDICTION AND COUNTER-DRUG ACTIVITIES ........... 999,363 1,133,363 134,000 

National Guard counter-drug program ........................... 130,000 

Young Marines—drug demand reduction ...................... 4,000 

NATIONAL GUARD COUNTER-DRUG STATE PLANS

The Committee recommendation includes $130,000,000 above the 

request to supplement the National Guard Counter-Drug Program. 

The Committee is discouraged that, in a misguided effort to 

produce savings, the budget request reduced the National Guard 

Counter-Drug Program by nearly forty percent from the fiscal year 

2012 budget request, and by nearly fifty percent from the fiscal 

year 2012 enacted level. The Committee recognizes the importance 

of the mission of the National Guard Counter-Drug Program and 

encourages the continued use of the highly effective and efficient 

Threat Based Resource Model. Further, the Committee directs the 

Secretary of Defense to robustly fund the National Guard CounterDrug Program in subsequent budget years and to ensure that funding levels for the National Guard Counter-Drug Program do not fall 

below twenty percent of the total Drug Interdiction and CounterDrug Activities appropriations funded under title VI. 

TETHERED AEROSTAT RADAR SYSTEM PROGRAM

The Committee is aware that internal interagency discussions 

are again underway related to the administration of the Tethered 

Aerostat Radar System (TARS) program. TARS surveillance data is 

used by U.S. Customs and Border Protection and by the Joint 

Interagency Task Force-South in support of border security and 

counter-drug operations. The aerostats, while still under the responsibility of the Air Force, have not been maintained for a number of reasons. However, the Committee believes that an alternative means of supporting operational needs for surveillance data 

has yet to be deployed. For that reason, the Committee is concerned about the reduced capability, particularly in the Caribbean, 

and encourages the Secretary of Defense to work with U.S. Customs and Border Protection and other interagency partners to develop a short term solution to address reduced capability as well 

as the right long term solution—whether that is transfer of assets, 

repair of current assets, replacement with other technology or capability, or other solutions. 

JOINT IMPROVISED EXPLOSIVE DEVICE DEFEAT FUND 

Fiscal year 2012 appropriation .......................................................... – – – 

Fiscal year 2013 budget request ....................................................... $227,414,000 

Committee recommendation .............................................................. 217,414,000 

Change from budget request ............................................................. ¥10,000,000 


rfrederick on DSK6VPTVN1PROD with HEARING
272 

This fund provides for the staff and infrastructure of the Joint 

Improvised Explosive Device Defeat Organization. The Committee recommends an appropriation of $217,414,000. 

JOINT URGENT OPERATIONAL NEEDS FUND 

Fiscal year 2012 appropriation .......................................................... – – – 

Fiscal year 2013 budget request ....................................................... $99,477,000 

Committee recommendation .............................................................. – – – 

Change from budget request ............................................................. ¥99,477,000 

This fund provides for the Joint Urgent Operational Needs Fund. 

The Committee recommends no funding for the Joint Urgent 

Operational Needs Fund. 

OFFICE OF THE INSPECTOR GENERAL 

Fiscal year 2012 appropriation .......................................................... $346,919,000 

Fiscal year 2013 budget request ....................................................... 273,821,000 

Committee recommendation .............................................................. 350,321,000 

Change from budget request ............................................................. 76,500,000 

The Committee recommends an appropriation of $350,321,000 for 

the Office of the Inspector General. 

The total amount recommended in the bill will provide the following program in fiscal year 2013: 

EXPLANATION OF PROJECT LEVEL ADJUSTMENTS 

[in thousands of dollars] 

Budget request Committee recommendation Change from request 

OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE ............................................... 272,821 347,621 74,800 

Program increase ............................................................ 74,800 

PROCUREMENT ......................................................................... 1,000 2,700 1,700 

Program increase ............................................................ 1,700 

TOTAL, OFFICE OF THE INSPECTOR GENERAL ........ 273,821 350,321 76,500 


rfrederick on DSK6VPTVN1PROD with HEARING
(273) 

TITLE VII 

RELATED AGENCIES 

NATIONAL AND MILITARY INTELLIGENCE PROGRAMS 

The National Intelligence Program and the Military Intelligence 

Program budgets funded in the Department of Defense Appropriations Act consist primarily of resources for the Director of National 

Intelligence including the Intelligence Community Management 

Staff, the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA), the Defense Intelligence Agency, the National Reconnaissance Office, the National 

Security Agency, the National Geospatial-Intelligence Agency, the 

intelligence services of the Departments of the Army, Navy, Air 

Force, and Marine Corps, and the CIA Retirement and Disability 

fund. 

CLASSIFIED ANNEX

The Committee’s budget reviews are published in a separate detailed and comprehensive classified annex. The intelligence community, Department of Defense, and other organizations are expected 

to fully comply with the recommendations and directions in the 

classified annex accompanying the Department of Defense Appropriations Act, 2013. 

CENTRAL INTELLIGENCE AGENCY RETIREMENT AND 

DISABILITY SYSTEM FUND 

Fiscal year 2012 appropriation .......................................................... $513,700,000 

Fiscal year 2013 budget request ....................................................... 514,000,000 

Committee recommendation .............................................................. 514,000,000 

Change from budget request ............................................................. – – – 

This appropriation provides payments of benefits to qualified 

beneficiaries in accordance with the Central Intelligence Agency 

Retirement Act of 1964 for Certain Employees (P.L. 88–643), as 

amended by Public Law 94–522. This statute authorized the establishment of the CIA Retirement and Disability System for certain 

employees and authorized the establishment and maintenance of a 

fund from which benefits would be paid to those beneficiaries. 

The Committee recommends the budget request of $514,000,000 

for the Central Intelligence Agency Retirement and Disability System fund. This is a mandatory account. 

INTELLIGENCE COMMUNITY MANAGEMENT ACCOUNT 

Fiscal year 2012 appropriation .......................................................... $547,891,000 

Fiscal year 2013 budget request ....................................................... 540,252,000 

Committee recommendation .............................................................. 511,476,000 

Change from budget request ............................................................. ¥28,776,000 


rfrederick on DSK6VPTVN1PROD with HEARING
274 

The Committee recommends an appropriation of $511,476,000 for 

the Intelligence Community Management Account. 


rfrederick on DSK6VPTVN1PROD with HEARING
275 

TITLE VIII 

GENERAL PROVISIONS 

The accompanying bill includes 120 general provisions. Most of 

these provisions were included in the Department of Defense Appropriations Act for fiscal year 2012 and many have been included 

in the Defense Appropriations Acts for a number of years. A description of each provision follows. 

Section 8001 provides that no funds made available in this Act 

may be used for publicity or propaganda purposes not authorized 

by Congress. 

Section 8002 provides for conditions and limitations on the payment of compensation to, or employment of, foreign nationals. 

Section 8003 provides that no funds made available in this Act 

may be obligated beyond the end of the fiscal year unless expressly 

provided for a greater period of availability elsewhere in the Act. 

Section 8004 provides a 20 percent limitation on the obligation 

of funds provided in this Act during the last two months of the fiscal year. 

Section 8005 has been amended and provides for the general 

transfer authority of working capital funds to other military functions. 

Section 8006 has been amended and provides that the tables titled ‘‘Explanation of Project Level Adjustments’’ in the committee 

report and classified annex shall be carried out in the manner provided by the tables to the same extent as if the tables were included in the text of this Act. 

Section 8007 has been amended and provides for the establishment of a baseline for application of reprogramming and transfer 

authorities for the current fiscal year. 

Section 8008 provides for limitations on the use of transfer authority of working capital fund cash balances. 

Section 8009 provides that none of the funds appropriated in this 

Act may be used to initiate a special access program without prior 

notification to the congressional defense committees. 

Section 8010 has been amended and provides limitations and 

conditions on the use of funds made available in this Act to initiate 

multi-year contracts. 

Section 8011 provides for the use and obligation of funds for humanitarian and civic assistance costs under chapter 20 of title 10, 

United States Code. 

Section 8012 has been amended and provides that civilian personnel of the Department may not be managed on the basis of end 

strength or be subject to end strength limitations. 

Section 8013 prohibits funding from being used to influence congressional action on any matters pending before the Congress. 

Section 8014 prohibits compensation from being paid to any 

member of the Army who is participating as a full-time student 

and who receives benefits from the Education Benefits Fund when 

time spent as a full-time student is counted toward that member’s 

service commitment. 

Section 8015 provides for the transfer of funds appropriated in 

title III of this Act for the Department of Defense Pilot MentorProte ́ge ́ Program. 


rfrederick on DSK6VPTVN1PROD with HEARING
276 

Section 8016 provides for the Department of Defense to purchase 

anchor and mooring chains manufactured only in the United 

States. 

Section 8017 has been amended and makes permanent the prohibition of funds made available to the Department of Defense from 

being used to demilitarize or dispose of certain surplus firearms 

and small arms ammunition or ammunition components. 

Section 8018 provides a limitation on funds being used for the relocation of any Department of Defense entity into or within the National Capital Region. 

Section 8019 provides for incentive payments authorized by section 504 of the Indian Financing Act of 1974 (25 U.S.C. 1544). 

Section 8020 provides that no funding for the Defense Media Activity may be used for national or international political or psychological activities. 

Section 8021 provides for the obligation of funds for purposes 

specified in section 2350j(c) of title 10, United States Code, in anticipation of receipt of contributions from the Government of Kuwait. 

Section 8022 has been amended and provides funding for the 

Civil Air Patrol Corporation. 

Section 8023 has been amended and prohibits funding from being 

used to establish new Department of Defense Federally Funded Research and Development Centers (FFRDC), with certain limitations. 

Section 8024 provides for the Department of Defense to procure 

carbon, alloy, or armor steel plate melted and rolled only in the 

United States and Canada. 

Section 8025 defines the congressional defense committees as 

being the Armed Services Committees of the House and Senate and 

the Subcommittees on Defense of the Committees on Appropriations of the House and Senate. 

Section 8026 provides for competitions between private firms and 

Department of Defense Depot Maintenance Activities for modification, depot maintenance, and repair of aircraft, vehicles, and vessels as well as the production of components and other Defense-related articles. 

Section 8027 has been amended and provides for revocation of 

blanket waivers of the Buy American Act upon a finding that a 

country has violated a reciprocal trade agreement by discriminating against products produced in the United States that are covered by the agreement. 

Section 8028 provides for the availability of funds contained in 

the Department of Defense Overseas Military Facility Investment 

Recovery Account for purposes specified in section 2921(c)(2) of the 

1991 National Defense Authorization Act. 

Section 8029 provides for the conveyance, without consideration, 

of relocatable housing units that are excess to the needs of the Air 

Force located at Grand Forks Air Force Base, Malmstrom Air Force 

Base, Mountain Home Air Force Base, Ellsworth Air Force Base, 

and Minot Air Force Base to Indian Tribes located in the states of 

Nevada, Idaho, North Dakota, South Dakota, Montana, Oregon, 

Minnesota, and Washington. 


rfrederick on DSK6VPTVN1PROD with HEARING
277 

Section 8030 provides authority to use operation and maintenance appropriations to purchase items having an investment item 

unit cost of not more than $250,000. 

Section 8031 has been amended and prohibits the use of Working 

Capital Funds to purchase specified investment items. 

Section 8032 has been amended and provides that none of the 

funds appropriated for the Central Intelligence Agency shall remain available for obligation beyond the current fiscal year except 

for funds appropriated for the Reserve for Contingencies, the Working Capital Fund, or other programs as specified. 

Section 8033 provides that funds available for the Defense Intelligence Agency may be used for the design, development, and deployment of General Defense Intelligence Program intelligence 

communications and intelligence information systems. 

Section 8034 provides for the availability of funds for the mitigation of environmental impacts on Indian lands resulting from Department of Defense activities. 

Section 8035 requires the Department of Defense to comply with 

the Buy American Act (chapter 83 of title 41, United States Code). 

Section 8036 provides conditions under which contracts for studies, analyses, or consulting services may be entered into without 

competition on the basis of an unsolicited proposal. 

Section 8037 places certain limitations on the use of funds made 

available in this Act to establish Field Operating Agencies. 

Section 8038 provides grant authorities for the Department of 

Defense acting through the Office of Economic Adjustment. 

Section 8039 prohibits funds made available in this Act from 

being used to convert to contractor performance an activity or function performed by civilian employees, unless certain conditions are 

met. 

(RESCISSIONS)

Section 8040 provides for the rescission of $1,019,316,000 from 

the following programs: 

2011 Appropriations: 

Procurement of Ammunition, Army: 

40mm ammunition ................................................ $14,862,000 

Aircraft Procurement, Navy: 

P–8A ....................................................................... 30,100,000 

Weapons Procurement, Navy: 

Tomahawk contract savings ................................. 22,000,000 

Other Procurement, Navy: 

Minesweeping system replacement ...................... 12,432,000 

Aircraft Procurement, Air Force: 

Light mobility aircraft ........................................... 65,000,000 

Other Procurement, Air Force: 

GCSS–AF FOS (ECSS) .......................................... 9,500,000 

2012 Appropriations: 

Other Procurement, Army: 

Warfighter Information Network—Tactical ........ 80,000,000 

Aircraft Procurement, Navy: 

F–18 series OSIP 14–03 ILS ................................. 10,000,000 

H–53 series IMDS installation kits ...................... 4,400,000 

Weapons Procurement, Navy: 

Tomahawk contract savings ................................. 18,000,000 


rfrederick on DSK6VPTVN1PROD with HEARING
278 

AMRAAM contract savings ................................... 3,572,000 

ASW targets ........................................................... 10,000,000 

Aircraft Procurement, Air Force: 

Common Vertical Lift Support Platform ............. 52,800,000 

Light Attack Armed Reconnaissance ................... 115,000,000 

RQ–4 advance procurement .................................. 71,500,000 

C–17 modifications ................................................ 37,750,000 

Missile Procurement, Air Force: 

AMRAAM contract savings ................................... 37,000,000 

Classified programs ............................................... 7,000,000 

Other Procurement, Air Force: 

GCSS–AF FOS (ECSS) .......................................... 55,800,000 

Research, Development, Test and Evaluation, Army: 

Joint Air-to-Ground Missile .................................. 63,000,000 

Research, Development, Test and Evaluation, Navy: 

Medium range maritime UAS .............................. 15,000,000 

Joint Air-to-Ground Missile .................................. 105,000,000 

Research, Development, Test and Evaluation, Air Force: 

JSpoC modernization system ................................ 40,000,000 

Classified programs ............................................... 90,000,000 

EW development (MALD–J II) ............................. 4,600,000 

Common Vertical Lift Support Platform ............. 5,300,000 

Light Attack Armed Reconnaissance ................... 13,700,000 

AWACS ................................................................... 10,000,000 

B–2 squadrons ....................................................... 16,000,000 

Section 8041 prohibits funds made available in this Act from 

being used to reduce authorized positions for military technicians 

(dual status) of the Army National Guard, Air National Guard, 

Army Reserve, and Air Force Reserve unless such reductions are 

a direct result of a reduction in military force structure. 

Section 8042 prohibits funding from being obligated or expended 

for assistance to the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea unless 

appropriated for that purpose. 

Section 8043 provides for reimbursement to the National Guard 

and reserve when members of the National Guard and reserve provide intelligence or counterintelligence support to the Combatant 

Commands, Defense Agencies, and Joint Intelligence Activities. 

Section 8044 prohibits funds from being used to reduce civilian 

medical and medical support personnel assigned to military treatment facilities below the September 30, 2003 level unless the Service Surgeons General certify to the congressional defense committees that it is a responsible stewardship of resources to do so. 

Section 8045 prohibits the transfer of Defense and Central Intelligence Agencies’ drug interdiction and counter-drug activity funds 

to other agencies except as specifically provided in an appropriations law. 

Section 8046 prohibits funding from being used for the procurement of ball and roller bearings other than those produced by a domestic source and of domestic origin. 

Section 8047 prohibits funding from being used to purchase 

supercomputers which are not manufactured in the United States. 

Section 8048 prohibits funding made available in this or any 

other Act from being used to pay the salary of anyone who approves or implements a transfer of administrative responsibilities 

or budgetary resources of any program, project, or activity financed 


rfrederick on DSK6VPTVN1PROD with HEARING
279 

by this Act to the jurisdiction of another Federal agency not financed by this Act without express authorization of the Congress. 

Section 8049 provides for prior Congressional notification of article transfers to international peacekeeping organizations. 

Section 8050 prohibits funding from being used for contractor bonuses being paid due to business restructuring. 

Section 8051 provides for the transfer of funds to be used to support personnel supporting approved non-traditional defense activities. 

Section 8052 provides for the Department of Defense to dispose 

of negative unliquidated or unexpended balances for expired or 

closed accounts. 

Section 8053 provides conditions for the use of equipment of the 

National Guard Distance Learning Project on a space-available, reimbursable basis. 

Section 8054 provides for the availability of funds to implement 

cost-effective agreements for required heating facility modernization in the Kaiserslautern Military Community, Germany. 

Section 8055 provides for the limitation on the use of funds appropriated in title IV to procure end-items for delivery to military 

forces for operational training, operational use, or inventory requirements. 

Section 8056 provides for a waiver of the ‘‘Buy American’’ provisions for certain cooperative programs. 

Section 8057 prohibits funding from being used to support the 

training of members of foreign security forces who have engaged in 

gross violations of human rights. 

Section 8058 prohibits funding from being used for repairs or 

maintenance to military family housing units. 

Section 8059 provides obligation authority for new starts for advanced concept technology demonstration projects only after notification to the congressional defense committees. 

Section 8060 provides that the Secretary of Defense shall provide 

a classified quarterly report on certain matters as directed in the 

classified annex accompanying this Act. 

Section 8061 prohibits the use of funds made available to the Department of Defense to provide support to an agency that is more 

than 90 days in arrears in making payments to the Department of 

Defense for goods or services provided on a reimbursable basis. 

Section 8062 provides for the use of National Guard personnel to 

support ground-based elements of the National Ballistic Missile Defense System. 

Section 8063 prohibits the use of funds made available in this 

Act to transfer to any nongovernmental entity ammunition held by 

the Department of Defense that has a center-fire cartridge and is 

designated as ‘‘armor piercing’’ except for demilitarization purposes. 

Section 8064 provides for a waiver by the Chief, National Guard 

Bureau or his designee for all or part of consideration in cases of 

personal property leases of less than one year. 

Section 8065 prohibits funding from being used to purchase alcoholic beverages. 

Section 8066 has been amended and provides for the transfer of 

funds made available in this Act under ‘‘Operation and MainteVerDate Mar 15 2010 02:14 May 26, 2012 Jkt 074226 PO 00000 Frm 00289 Fmt 6602 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\HR493.XXX HR493

rfrederick on DSK6VPTVN1PROD with HEARING
280 

nance, Army’’ to other activities of the Federal Government for 

classified purposes. 

Section 8067 has been amended and provides for the forced 

matching of disbursements and obligations made by the Department of Defense in the current fiscal year. 

Section 8068 provides grant authority for the construction and 

furnishing of additional Fisher Houses to meet the needs of military family members when confronted with the illness or hospitalization of an eligible military beneficiary. 

Section 8069 has been amended and provides funding and transfer authority for the Israeli Cooperative Programs. 

Section 8070 has been amended and prohibits funding from being 

obligated to modify command and control relationships to give 

Fleet Forces Command operational and administrative control of 

U.S. Navy forces assigned to the Pacific Fleet. 

Section 8071 has been amended and provides for the funding of 

prior year shipbuilding cost increases. 

Section 8072 has been amended and provides that funds made 

available in this Act for intelligence activities are deemed to be specifically authorized by Congress for purposes of section 504 of the 

National Security Act of 1947 until the enactment of the Intelligence Authorization Act for the current fiscal year. 

Section 8073 prohibits funding from being used to initiate a new 

start program without prior written notification. 

Section 8074 provides that the budget of the President for the 

subsequent fiscal year shall include separate budget justification 

documents for costs of the United States Armed Forces’ participation in contingency operations for the Military Personnel, Operation and Maintenance, and Procurement accounts. 

Section 8075 prohibits funding from being used for the research, 

development, test, evaluation, procurement, or deployment of nuclear armed interceptors of a missile defense system. 

Section 8076 provides the Secretary of Defense with the authority to make grants in the amounts specified. 

Section 8077 prohibits funding from being used to reduce or disestablish the operation of the 53rd Weather Reconnaissance Squadron of the Air Force Reserve. 

Section 8078 prohibits funding from being used for the integration of foreign intelligence information unless the information has 

been lawfully collected and processed during conduct of authorized 

foreign intelligence activities. 

Section 8079 provides that at the time members of reserve components of the Armed Forces are called or ordered to active duty, 

each member shall be notified in writing of the expected period 

during which the member will be mobilized. 

Section 8080 provides that the Secretary of Defense may transfer 

funds from any available Department of the Navy appropriation 

under certain conditions to any available Navy ship construction 

appropriation to liquidate costs caused by rate adjustments or 

other economic factors. 

Section 8081 provides for the use of current and expired Shipbuilding and Conversion, Navy subdivisions to reimburse the Judgment Fund. 


rfrederick on DSK6VPTVN1PROD with HEARING
281 

Section 8082 prohibits funding from being used to transfer program authority relating to current tactical unmanned aerial vehicles from the Army and requires the Army to retain responsibility 

for and operational control of the MQ–1C Sky Warrior Unmanned 

Aerial Vehicle. 

Section 8083 provides funding under certain conditions for the 

Asia Pacific Regional Initiative Program for the purpose of enabling 

the Pacific Command to execute certain Theater Security Cooperation activities. 

Section 8084 has been amended and prohibits funding provided 

for the Director of National Intelligence beyond the current fiscal 

year, except for funds appropriated for research and technology, 

which shall remain available for the current and the following fiscal years. 

Section 8085 provides for the adjustment of obligations within 

the Shipbuilding and Conversion, Navy appropriation. 

Section 8086 requires the Director of National Intelligence to include certain budget exhibits as described in the Department of Defense Financial Management Regulation with the congressional 

budget justification books. 

Section 8087 is a new provision that reduces the amounts provided to Operation and Maintenance, Army and Other Procurement, Army due to an excessive level of carryover at Army depots. 

Section 8088 has been amended and provides for the establishment of a baseline for application of reprogramming and transfer 

authorities for the Office of the Director of National Intelligence for 

the current fiscal year. 

Section 8089 provides for limitations on funding provided for the 

National Intelligence Program to be available for obligation or expenditure through a reprogramming or transfer of funds in accordance with section 102A(d) of the National Security Act of 1947 (50 

U.S.C. 403-1(d)). 

Section 8090 directs the Director of National Intelligence to submit a future-years intelligence program reflecting estimated expenditures and proposed appropriations. 

Section 8091 defines the congressional intelligence committees as 

being the Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence of the 

House, the Select Committee on Intelligence of the Senate, and the 

Subcommittees on Defense of the Committees on Appropriations of 

the House and Senate. 

Section 8092 has been amended and directs the Department of 

Defense to continue to report incremental contingency operations 

costs for Operation New Dawn, Operation Enduring Freedom, or 

any other named operations in the U.S. Central Command area of 

responsibility on a monthly basis in the Cost of War Execution Report as required by Department of Defense Financial Management 

Regulation. 

Section 8093 provides the authority to transfer funding from operations and maintenance accounts for the Army, Navy, and Air 

Force to the Fisher Houses and Suites. 

Section 8094 provides that operation and maintenance funds may 

be available for the purpose of making remittances to the Defense 

Acquisition Workforce Development Fund. 


rfrederick on DSK6VPTVN1PROD with HEARING
282 

Section 8095 provides that any agency receiving funds made 

available in this Act shall post on a public website any report required to be submitted by Congress with certain exceptions. 

Section 8096 requires contractors receiving any federal contract 

in excess of $1,000,000 to require, as a condition of employment, 

that employees or independent contractors agree to resolve through 

arbitration any claim or tort related to, or arising out of, sexual assault or harassment, including assault and battery, intentional infliction of emotional distress, false imprisonment, or negligent hiring, supervision, or retention and to certify that each covered subcontractor do the same. 

Section 8097 prohibits funding to the Association of Community 

Organizations for Reform Now (ACORN) or its subsidiaries. 

Section 8098 has been amended and provides funds for transfer 

to the Joint Department of Defense—Department of Veterans Affairs Medical Facility Demonstration Fund. 

Section 8099 has been amended and prevents the Office of the 

Director of National Intelligence from employing more Senior Executive employees than are specified in the classified annex. 

Section 8100 prohibits funding from being used to pay a retired 

general or flag officer to serve as a senior mentor advising the Department of Defense unless such retired officer files a Standard 

Form 278 or successor form. 

Section 8101 provides for the purchase of heavy and light armored vehicles for the physical security of personnel or for force 

protection purposes up to a limit of $250,000 per vehicle. 

Section 8102 has been amended and provides grants through the 

Office of Economic Adjustment to assist the civilian population of 

Guam in response to the military buildup of Guam. 

Section 8103 prohibits the Secretary of Defense from taking beneficial occupancy of more than 2,000 parking spaces to be provided 

by the BRAC 133 project unless certain conditions are met. 

Section 8104 has been amended and requires monthly reporting 

of the civilian personnel end strength by appropriation account to 

the congressional defense committees. 

Section 8105 prohibits funding to separate the National Intelligence Program budget from the Department of Defense budget. 

Section 8106 has been amended and provides the Director of National Intelligence with general transfer authority with certain limitations. 

Section 8107 has been amended and provides authority to make 

grants to construct, renovate, repair, or expand elementary and 

secondary public schools on military installations to address capacity or facility condition deficiencies. 

Section 8108 prohibits funding to transfer or release any individual detained at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba into the United States, 

its territories, or possessions. This language is identical to language enacted in Public Law 112–74. 

Section 8109 prohibits funding to transfer any individual detained at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba to a country of origin or other 

foreign country or entity unless the Secretary makes certain certifications. This language is identical to language enacted in Public 

Law 112–74. 


rfrederick on DSK6VPTVN1PROD with HEARING
283 

Section 8110 prohibits funding to modify any United States facility (other than the facility at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba) to house any 

individual detained at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba. This language is 

identical to language enacted in Public Law 112–74. 

Section 8111 prohibits funding from being used to enter into 

agreements with corporations with unpaid tax liabilities. 

Section 8112 prohibits funding from being used to enter into 

agreements with a corporation that was convicted of a federal 

criminal violation in the past 24 months. 

Section 8113 prohibits funding from being used to violate the 

Trafficking Victims Protection Act of 2000. 

Section 8114 prohibits funding from being used to violate the 

Child Soldiers Prevention Act of 2008. 

Section 8115 prohibits funding from being used to violate the 

War Powers Resolution Act. 

Section 8116 is a new provision that prohibits funding from being 

used to retire, divest, realign, or transfer Air Force aircraft or to 

disestablish or convert units associated with such aircraft. 

Section 8117 is a new provision that requires the Secretary of the 

Air Force to obligate and expend funds previously appropriated for 

the procurement of RQ–4B Global Hawk and C–27J Spartan aircraft. 

Section 8118 is a new provision that prohibits funding from being 

used to retire C–23 Sherpa aircraft. 

Section 8119 is a new provision that eliminates funding requested for the civilian pay raise. 

Section 8120 is a new provision that prohibits funding from being 

used to transfer a veterans memorial object to a foreign country or 

entity controlled by a foreign government unless such transfer is 

specifically authorized by law. 

Section 8121 is a new provision that restricts funding from being 

used to sponsor certain sporting events. 


rfrederick on DSK6VPTVN1PROD with HEARING

rfrederick on DSK6VPTVN1PROD with HEARING
(285) 

TITLE IX 

OVERSEAS CONTINGENCY OPERATIONS 

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

In title IX the Committee recommends total new appropriations 

of $88,479,906,000. A detailed review of the Committee’s recommendations for programs funded in this title is provided in the 

following pages. 

REPORTING REQUIREMENTS

The Committee directs the Secretary of Defense to continue to report incremental contingency operations costs for Operation Enduring Freedom on the monthly basis in the Cost of War Execution report as required by Department of Defense Financial Management 

Regulation, Chapter 23, Volume 12. The committee further directs 

the Secretary of Defense to continue providing Cost of War reports 

to the congressional defense committees that include the following 

information by appropriation account: funding appropriated, funding allocated, monthly obligations, monthly disbursements, cumulative fiscal year obligations, and cumulative fiscal year disbursements. 

Finally, given the Air Force’s recent confusion regarding named 

operations versus exercises, the Committee wants to make clear 

that overseas contingency operations funding should only be used 

to finance the incremental cost of named military operations in the 

Central Command area of responsibility. 

The Committee expects that in order to meet unanticipated requirements, funds may need to be transferred within these appropriations accounts for purposes other than those specified in this 

report. The Committee directs the Secretary of Defense to follow 

normal prior approval reprogramming procedures should it be necessary to transfer funding between different appropriations accounts in this title. 

AFGHAN LOCAL POLICE AND HUMAN RIGHTS ABUSES

The Committee is deeply concerned by reports from human 

rights and humanitarian organizations alleging human rights 

abuses committed by some members of Afghan Local Police (ALP) 

in Afghanistan. The Committee remains troubled by public reports 

highlighting the Government of Afghanistan’s lack of capacity to effectively oversee the ALP program and the potential consequences 

thereof. The Committee urges the Department to take additional 

steps to ensure that U.S. funds and personnel are employed in 

compliance with Section 8057 of this Act. Not later than 90 days 

after enactment of this Act, the Secretary of Defense shall provide 

a report to the congressional defense committees outlining in detail 


rfrederick on DSK6VPTVN1PROD with HEARING
286 

the following: how the U.S. is assisting the Afghan government to 

implement the ALP program, the Afghan government’s capacity 

and efforts to exercise effective oversight and investigate allegations of abuse by ALP units or individuals, and if necessary, what 

actions are being taken to hold those persons responsible accountable for these actions. The report should describe the U.S. and Afghan government’s responses to allegations, efforts taken to investigate the allegations and bring those accused to justice, U.S. funds 

expended or anticipated to be expended for the ALP, as well as the 

Department’s strategy to assist the Afghan government in the implementation of the program. 

MILITARY PERSONNEL 

The Committee recommends an additional appropriation of 

$13,786,221,000 for Military Personnel. The Committee’s recommendations for each military personnel account are shown 

below: 


rfrederick on DSK6VPTVN1PROD with HEARING
287 


rfrederick on DSK6VPTVN1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 0176 here 73883A.171
288 


rfrederick on DSK6VPTVN1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 0177 here 73883A.172
289 


rfrederick on DSK6VPTVN1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 0178 here 73883A.173
290 


rfrederick on DSK6VPTVN1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 0179 here 73883A.174
291 


rfrederick on DSK6VPTVN1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 0180 here 73883A.175
292 

OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE 

The Committee recommends an additional appropriation of 

$63,478,841,000 for Operation and Maintenance. The Committee’s 

recommendations for each operation and maintenance account are 

shown below: 


rfrederick on DSK6VPTVN1PROD with HEARING
293 


rfrederick on DSK6VPTVN1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 003 here 73883A.176
294 


rfrederick on DSK6VPTVN1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 004 here 73883A.177
295 


rfrederick on DSK6VPTVN1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 05 here 73883A.178
296 


rfrederick on DSK6VPTVN1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 22 here 73883A.179
297 


rfrederick on DSK6VPTVN1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 23 here 73883A.180
298 

COMMANDER’S EMERGENCY RESPONSE PROGRAM

The bill provides $250,000,000 of the $400,000,000 requested for 

the Commander’s Emergency Response Program (CERP) for Afghanistan. Funds to deliver CERP projects in Afghanistan in fiscal 

year 2013 were not fully justified to the Committee. The bill also 

requires the Secretary of Defense to notify the congressional defense committees 15 days prior to making CERP funds available for 

any project with an expected total cost in excess of $5,000,000. 

COALITION SUPPORT FUNDS

The recommendation provides $1,750,000,000 requested for Coalition Support Funds for reimbursements to coalition countries, primarily Pakistan and Jordan, for logistical, military, and other expenses incurred in supporting U.S. military operations. Closures 

placed on ground lines of communication through Pakistan into Afghanistan following the events of November 26, 2011 have resulted 

in limited reimbursements. Because of the limited need for reimbursement, the Committee imposes restrictions on the use of 

$1,300,000,000 of the $1,750,000,000 allocated specifically for Pakistan. Additionally, the bill requires a certification by the Secretaries of State and Defense regarding Pakistan’s cooperation with 

the United States on various matters. 

C–17 ENGINE MAINTENANCE

The Air Force requests a direct appropriation of $230,400,000 for 

C–17 engine maintenance in the Air Force Working Capital Fund 

but provides no supporting justification for this funding requirement. Further, the Air Force could not provide a coherent explanation as to why the funding was requested in the Working Capital 

Fund rather than in the operation and maintenance account. The 

Committee believes this funding requirement is an indication that 

the Air Force must do more to control the rising costs of maintaining the C–17 engine. The Air Force recently proposed a C–17 engine sustainment strategy to achieve savings through induced competition for engine overhaul and supply chain management services. However, the Committee is already concerned that this strategy will take longer to introduce competition than is necessary. As 

of December 2011, the Air Force had the C–17 engine overhaul and 

component repair manuals and the data rights to approve nonoriginal equipment manufacturer parts and therefore had the ability to competitively contract for engine components, subsystems, 

and for the management of the supply chain. The Committee believes that by expediting the establishment of an effective Source 

Approval Request process, savings can be achieved through open 

competition as soon as fiscal year 2013. Accordingly, the Committee 

reduces the request by $30,400,000 and expects the Secretary of 

the Air Force to take the necessary actions to accelerate competition in support of achieving these savings. 

PROCUREMENT 

The Committee recommends an additional appropriation of $7,906,039,000 for Procurement. The Committee’s recommendations for each procurement account are shown below: 


rfrederick on DSK6VPTVN1PROD with HEARING
299 


rfrederick on DSK6VPTVN1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 0186 here 73883A.181
300 


rfrederick on DSK6VPTVN1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 0187 here 73883A.182
301 


rfrederick on DSK6VPTVN1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 0188 here 73883A.183
302 


rfrederick on DSK6VPTVN1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 0189 here 73883A.184
303 


rfrederick on DSK6VPTVN1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 0190 here 73883A.185
304 


rfrederick on DSK6VPTVN1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 0191 here 73883A.186
305 


rfrederick on DSK6VPTVN1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 0192 here 73883A.187
306 


rfrederick on DSK6VPTVN1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 005 here 73883A.188
307 

RESEARCH, DEVELOPMENT, TEST AND EVALUATION 

The Committee recommends an additional appropriation of 

$235,516,000 for Research, Development, Test and Evaluation. The 

Committee’s recommendations for each research, development, test 

and evaluation account are shown below: 


rfrederick on DSK6VPTVN1PROD with HEARING
308 


rfrederick on DSK6VPTVN1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 0194 here 73883A.189
309 

REVOLVING AND MANAGEMENT FUNDS 

DEFENSE WORKING CAPITAL FUNDS 

The Committee recommends an additional appropriation of 

$293,600,000 for the Defense Working Capital Fund accounts. 

The Committee’s recommendations are shown below: 

EXPLANATION OF PROJECT LEVEL ADJUSTMENTS 

[in thousands of dollars] 

Budget 

request 

Committee recommendation Change from 

request 

Army WCF—Army Prepositioned stocks (OCO) ......................................................... 42,600 42,600 ....................

Army Working Capital Fund OCO Subtotal ............................................................... 42,600 42,600 ....................

AF WCF—Transportation for Fallen Heroes .............................................................. 10,000 10,000 ....................

AF WCF—CLS Contract for C–17 Engine Maintenance ........................................... 230,400 0 ¥230,400 

Realigned to Operation and Maintenance, Air Force ...................................... .............. ¥230,400 ....................

Air Force Working Capital Fund OCO Subtotal ......................................................... 240,400 10,000 ¥230,400 

DW WCF—Supply Chain Management ..................................................................... 89,964 60,600 ¥29,364 

Excess Growth in OEF Disposition Operations ................................................ .............. ¥18,364 ....................

Excess Growth in OEF Consolidated Shipping Costs ...................................... .............. ¥2,000 ....................

Excess Growth in DLA Distributions in Kuwait for OEF .................................. .............. ¥9,000 ....................

DW WCF—Energy Management ................................................................................ 130,400 180,400 50,000 

Restore Unexplained Reduction to Fuel 

Transportation and Terminal Operations ......................................................... .............. 50,000 ....................

Defense Working Capital Fund OCO Subtotal .......................................................... 220,364 241,000 20,636 

Working Capital Fund Total ...................................................................................... 503,364 293,600 ¥209,764 

OTHER DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE PROGRAMS 

DEFENSE HEALTH PROGRAM 

The Committee recommends an additional appropriation of 

$993,898,000 for the Defense Health Program. The Committee’s 

recommendations for operation and maintenance, procurement and 

research, development, test and evaluation are shown below: 


rfrederick on DSK6VPTVN1PROD with HEARING
310 


rfrederick on DSK6VPTVN1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 0195 here 73883A.190
311 

DRUG INTERDICTION AND COUNTER-DRUG ACTIVITIES, 

DEFENSE 

The Committee recommends an additional appropriation of 

$469,025,000 for Drug Interdiction and Counter-Drug Activities. 

The Committee’s recommendations for the counter-drug account 

are shown below: 

EXPLANATION OF PROJECT LEVEL ADJUSTMENTS 

[In thousands of dollars] 

Budget 

request 

Committee recommended Change from 

request 

DRUG INTERDICTION AND COUNTER-DRUG ACTIVITIES ............................................ 469,025 469,025 ....................

JOINT IMPROVISED EXPLOSIVE DEVICE DEFEAT FUND 

The Committee recommends an additional appropriation of 

$1,614,900,000 for the Joint Improvised Explosive Device Defeat 

Fund. The Committee’s recommendations for the Joint Improvised 

Explosive Device Defeat Fund are shown below: 

EXPLANATION OF PROJECT LEVEL ADJUSTMENTS 

[In thousands of dollars] 

P–1 Budget request Committee recommended Change from request 

1 ATTACK THE NETWORK .......................................................... 950,500 925,000 ¥25,500 

Program adjustment ........................................................ ¥25,500 

2 DEFEAT THE DEVICE .............................................................. 400,000 375,000 ¥25,000 

Program adjustment ........................................................ ¥25,000 

3 TRAIN THE FORCE ................................................................. 149,500 144,500 ¥5,000 

Program adjustment ........................................................ ¥5,000 

4 STAFF AND INFRASTRUCTURE ............................................... 175,400 170,400 ¥5,000 

Program adjustment ........................................................ ¥5,000 

TOTAL, JOINT IED DEFEAT FUND ............................. 1,675,400 1,614,900 ¥60,500 

JOINT URGENT OPERATIONAL NEEDS FUND 

The Committee recommends no funding for the Joint Urgent 

Operational Needs Fund. 

OFFICE OF THE INSPECTOR GENERAL 

The Committee recommends an additional appropriation of 

$10,766,000 for the Office of the Inspector General. 

GENERAL PROVISIONS 

Title IX contains several general provisions, many of which extend or modify war-related authorities included in previous Acts. A 

brief description of the recommended provisions follows: 

Section 9001 has been amended and provides that funds made 

available in this title are in addition to funds appropriated or otherwise made available for the Department of Defense for the current fiscal year. 

Section 9002 has been amended and provides for general transfer 

authority within title IX. 


rfrederick on DSK6VPTVN1PROD with HEARING
312 

Section 9003 provides that supervision and administration costs 

associated with a construction project funded with appropriations 

available for operation and maintenance, Afghanistan Infrastructure Fund or the Afghanistan Security Forces Fund may be obligated at the time a construction contract is awarded. 

Section 9004 provides for the procurement of passenger motor vehicles and heavy and light armored vehicles for use by military and 

civilian employees of the Department of Defense in the U.S. Central Command area. 

Section 9005 has been amended and provides funding for the 

Commander’s Emergency Response Program, with certain limitations. 

Section 9006 provides lift and sustainment to coalition forces 

supporting military and stability operations in Afghanistan. 

Section 9007 prohibits the establishment of permanent bases in 

Iraq or Afghanistan or United States control over Iraq oil resources. 

Section 9008 prohibits the use of funding in contravention of the 

United Nations Convention Against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment. 

Section 9009 limits the obligation of funding for the Afghanistan 

Security Forces Fund until certain conditions have been met. 

Section 9010 provides for the purchase of items of a particular 

investment unit cost from funding made available for operation and 

maintenance. 

Section 9011 has been amended and provides funding for the 

Task Force for Business and Stability Operations in Afghanistan. 

Section 9012 has been amended and provides funding for the operations and activities of the Office of Security Cooperation in Iraq 

and security assistance teams. 

Section 9013 is a new provision stating that each amount designated in this Act by Congress for Overseas Contingency Operations/Global War on Terrorism pursuant to Section 251(b)(2)(A)(ii) 

of the Balanced Budget and Emergency Deficit Control Act shall be 

available only if the President subsequently so designates all such 

amounts and transmits such designations to Congress. 

Section 9014 has been amended and provides for the rescission 

of $579,900,000 from the following programs: 

2009 Appropriations: 

General Provisions: 

Retroactive Stop Loss Special Pay Program ........ $79,900,000 

2012 Appropriations: 

Afghanistan Security Forces Fund: 

Afghanistan Security Forces Fund ....................... 500,000,000 

Section 9015 is a new provision that restricts funds provided 

under the heading Operation and Maintenance, Defense-wide for 

payments under Coalition Support Funds for reimbursement to the 

Government of Pakistan until certain conditions are met. 


rfrederick on DSK6VPTVN1PROD with HEARING
(313) 

TITLE X 

Title X contains one new general provision. A brief description of 

the recommended provision follows: 

Section 10001 is a new provision stating that the applicable allocation of new budget authority made by the Committee on Appropriations does not exceed the amount of proposed new budget authority. 

HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES REPORTING REQUIREMENTS 

The following items are included in accordance with various requirements of the Rules of the House of Representatives: 

CHANGES IN THE APPLICATION OF EXISTING LAW

Pursuant to clause 3(f)(1) of rule XIII of the Rules of the House 

of Representatives, the following statements are submitted describing the effect of provisions in the accompanying bill which directly 

or indirectly change the application of existing law. 

Language is included in various parts of the bill to continue ongoing activities which require annual authorization or additional 

legislation, which to date has not been enacted. 

The bill includes a number of provisions which place limitations 

on the use of funds in the bill or change existing limitations and 

which might, under some circumstances, be construed as changing 

the application of law. 

The bill includes a number of provisions, which have been virtually unchanged for many years that are technically considered 

legislation. 

The bill provides that appropriations shall remain available for 

more than one year for some programs for which the basic authorizing legislation does not presently authorize each extended availability. 

In various places in the bill, the Committee has allocated funds 

within appropriation accounts in order to fund specific programs. 

Changes in the application of existing law found within appropriations headings: 

Language is included in various accounts placing a limitation on 

funds for emergencies and extraordinary expenses. 

Language is included that provides not more than $30,000,000 

for the Combatant Commander Initiative Fund. 

Language is included that provides not more than $36,000,000 

for emergencies and extraordinary expenses. 

Language is included that provides not less than $35,897,000 for 

the Procurement Technical Assistance Cooperative Agreement Program, of which not less than $3,600,000 shall be available for centers. 


rfrederick on DSK6VPTVN1PROD with HEARING
314 

Language is included that makes available $8,563,000 for certain 

classified activities and allows such funds to be transferred between certain accounts. 

Language is included that provides that any transfer authority 

provided under the heading ‘‘Operation and Maintenance, DefenseWide’’ shall be in addition to any other transfer authority provided 

in this Act. 

Language is included under the various Environmental Restoration accounts that provides that the Service Secretaries may transfer such funds for the purposes of the funds provided under such 

appropriations headings. 

Language is included that provides for specific construction, acquisition, or conversion of vessels under the heading ‘‘Shipbuilding 

and Conversion, Navy’’. 

Language is included under the heading ‘‘National Guard and 

Reserve Equipment’’ requiring submission of a priority modernization assessment and placing a limitation on the use of research, development, test and evaluation funds for certain activities. 

Language is included under the heading ‘‘Research, Development, Test and Evaluation, Navy’’ that provides funds for certain 

activities. 

Language is included under the heading ‘‘Research, Development, Test and Evaluation, Defense-Wide’’ that provides 

$250,000,000 for the Defense Rapid Innovation Program and provides for the transfer of funds. 

Language is included that provides for the transfer of funds 

within the ‘‘National Defense Sealift Fund’’. 

Language is included that prohibits the use of funds provided 

under ‘‘National Defense Sealift Fund’’ to award new contracts that 

provide for the acquisition of major components unless such components are made in the United States. 

Language is included that provides that the exercise of an option 

in a contract award through the obligation of previously appropriated funds shall not be considered to be the award of a new contract. 

Language is included that provides waiver authority of the Buy 

America provisions under ‘‘National Defense Sealift Fund’’ under 

certain circumstances. 

Language is included that provides that not less than $8,000,000 

of funds provided under ‘‘Defense Health Program’’ shall be available for HIV/AIDS prevention education activities. 

Language is included that provides for the carry-over of one percent of the Operation and Maintenance account under the ‘‘Defense 

Health Program’’. 

Language is included that limits obligation of funds provided 

under the ‘‘Defense Health Program’’ for the integrated Department of Defense-Department of Veterans Affairs integrated health 

record pending submission of a report. 

Language is included that provides for the transfer of funds 

under ‘‘Drug Interdiction and Counter-Drug Activities’’. Such transfer authority shall be in addition to other transfer authority provided elsewhere in the Act. 

Language is included that allows the Director of the Joint Improvised Explosive Defeat Organization to undertake certain activities. 


rfrederick on DSK6VPTVN1PROD with HEARING
315 

Language is included that requires that within 60 days of enactment of this Act, a plan for the intended management and use of 

the Joint Improvised Explosive Defeat Fund is to be provided to 

the congressional defense committees. 

Language is included that requires the Secretary of Defense to 

submit a report to the congressional defense committees providing 

assessments of the evolving threats, service requirements to 

counter threats, pre-deployment training strategy, and funds execution of the Joint Improvised Explosive Defeat Fund. 

Language is included under the Joint Improvised Explosive Defeat Fund to transfer funds. Such transfer authority shall be in addition to other transfer authority provided elsewhere in the Act. 

Language is included that provides that no funds made available 

in this Act may be used for publicity or propaganda purposes not 

authorized by Congress. 

Language is included that provides for conditions and limitations 

on the payment of compensation to, or employment of, foreign nationals. 

Language is included that provides that no funds made available 

in this Act may be obligated beyond the end of the fiscal year unless express provision for a greater period of availability is provided 

elsewhere in this Act. 

Language is included that provides a 20 percent limitation on the 

obligation of funds provided in this Act during the last two months 

of the fiscal year. 

Language is included that provides for general transfer authority. 

Language is included that provides for incorporation of project 

level tables. 

Language is included that provides for the establishment of a 

baseline for application of reprogramming and transfer authorities 

for fiscal year 2013 and prohibits certain reprogrammings until 

after submission of a report. 

Language is included that provides for limitations on the use and 

transfer authority of working capital fund cash balances. 

Language is included that provides that none of the funds appropriated in this Act may be used to initiate a special access program 

without prior notification to the congressional defense committees. 

Language is included that provides limitations and conditions on 

the use of funds made available in this Act to initiate multi-year 

contracts. 

Language is included that provides for the use and obligation of 

funds for humanitarian and civic assistance costs under Chapter 20 

of title 10, United States Code. 

Language is included that provides that civilian personnel of the 

Department may not be managed on the basis of end strength or 

be subject to end strength limitations. 

Language is included that prohibits funds made available in this 

Act from being used to influence congressional action on any matters pending before the Congress. 

Language is included that prohibits compensation from being 

paid to any member of the Army who is participating as a full-time 

student and who receives benefits from the Education Benefits 


rfrederick on DSK6VPTVN1PROD with HEARING
316 

Fund when time spent as a full-time student is counted toward 

that member’s service commitment. 

Language is included that provides for the transfer of funds appropriated in title III of this Act for the Department of Defense 

Pilot Mentor-Prote ́ge ́ Program. 

Language is included that provides for the Department of Defense to purchase anchor and mooring chains manufactured only in 

the United States. 

Language is included that prohibits funds made available to the 

Department of Defense from being used to demilitarize or dispose 

of surplus firearms. 

Language is included that provides a limitation on funds being 

used for the relocation of any Department of Defense entity into or 

within the National Capital Region. 

Language is included that provides for incentive payments authorized by section 504 of the Indian Financing Act of 1974 (25 

U.S.C. 1544). 

Language is included that provides that no funds made available 

in this Act for the Defense Media Activity may be used for national 

or international political or psychological activities. 

Language is included that provides for the obligation of funds for 

purposes specified in section 2350j(c) of title 10, United States 

Code. 

Language is included that provides funding for the Civil Air Patrol Corporation. 

Language is included that provides for the number of staff years 

of technical effort that may be funded for defense Federally Funded 

Research and Development Centers. 

Language is included that provides for the Department of Defense to procure carbon, alloy, or armor steel plate melted and 

rolled only in the United States and Canada. 

Language is included that defines congressional defense committees as being the Armed Services Committees and the Subcommittees on Defense of the Committees on Appropriations of the House 

and Senate. 

Language is included that provides for competitions between private firms and Department of Defense Depot Maintenance Activities for modification, depot maintenance, and repair of aircraft, vehicles, and vessels, as well as the production of components and 

other Defense-related articles. 

Language is included that provides for revocation of blanket 

waivers of the Buy America Act upon a finding that a country has 

violated a reciprocal trade agreement by discriminating against 

products produced in the United States that are covered by the 

agreement. 

Language is included that provides for the availability of funds 

for purposes specified in section 2921(c)(2) of the 1991 National Defense Authorization Act, namely facility maintenance and repair 

and environmental restoration at military installations in the 

United States. 

Language is included that provides for the conveyance, without 

consideration, of relocatable housing units located at Grand Forks, 

Malmstrom, Mountain Home, Ellsworth, and Minot Air Force 

Bases to Indian Tribes that are excess to Air Force needs. 


rfrederick on DSK6VPTVN1PROD with HEARING
317 

Language is included that provides authority to use operation 

and maintenance appropriations to purchase items having an investment item unit cost of not more than $250,000. 

Language is included that prohibits the purchase of specified investment items within Working Capital Fund. 

Language is included that provides that none of the funds appropriated for the Central Intelligence Agency shall remain available 

for obligation beyond the current fiscal year except for funds appropriated for the Reserve for Contingencies, the Working Capital 

Fund, or other certain programs authorized under section 503 of 

the National Security Act. 

Language is included that provides that funds available for the 

Defense Intelligence Agency may be used for intelligence communications and intelligence information systems for the Services, the 

Unified and Specified Commands, and the component commands. 

Language is included that provides that not less than $12,000,000 within ‘‘Operation and Maintenance, Defense-Wide’’ 

shall be for mitigation of environmental impacts on Indian lands. 

Language is included that provides for the Department of Defense to comply with the Buy American Act (chapter 83 of title 41, 

United States Code). 

Language is included that provides conditions under which contracts for studies, analyses, or consulting services may be entered 

into without competition on the basis of an unsolicited proposal. 

Language is included that provides for the limitations of funds 

made available in this Act to establish Field Operating Agencies. 

Language is included that provides grant authorities for the Department of Defense acting through the Office of Economic Adjustment. 

Language is included that provides for the limitations on the conversion of an activity or function of the Department of Defense to 

contractor performance. 

Language is included that provides for the rescission of previously appropriated funds. 

Language is included that prohibits funds made available in this 

Act from being used to reduce authorized positions for military 

technicians (dual status) of the Army National Guard, Air National 

Guard, Army Reserve, and Air Force Reserve unless such reductions are a direct result of a reduction in military force structure. 

Language is included that provides that none of the funds made 

available in this Act may be obligated or expended for assistance 

to the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea unless appropriated 

for that purpose. 

Language is included that provides for reimbursement to the National Guard and reserve when members of the National Guard 

and reserve provide intelligence or counterintelligence support to 

the Combatant Commands, Defense Agencies, and Joint Intelligence Activities. 

Language is included that prohibits funds made available in this 

Act from being used to reduce civilian medical and medical support 

personnel assigned to military treatment facilities below the September 30, 2003, level unless the Service Surgeons General certify 

to the congressional defense committees that it is a responsible 

stewardship of resources to do so. 


rfrederick on DSK6VPTVN1PROD with HEARING
318 

Language is included that provides that Defense and Central Intelligence Agencies’ drug interdiction and counter-drug activity 

funds may not be transferred to other agencies unless specifically 

provided in an appropriations law. 

Language is included that prohibits the use of funds appropriated by this Act for the procurement of ball and roller bearings 

other than those produced by a domestic source and of domestic origin. 

Language is included that provides for the Department of Defense to purchase supercomputers manufactured only in the United 

States unless the Secretary certifies such acquisition must be made 

for national security purposes. 

Language is included that prohibits the use of funds made available in this or any other Act to transfer administrative responsibilities or budgetary resources of any program, project, or activity financed by this Act to the jurisdiction of another Federal agency not 

financed by this Act without expressed authorization of the Congress. 

Language is included that provides for prior Congressional notification of article transfers to international peacekeeping organizations. 

Language is included that prohibits the use of funds made available in this Act for contractor bonuses from being paid due to business restructuring. 

Language is included that provides for the transfer of funds to 

be used to support personnel supporting approved non-traditional 

defense activities. 

Language is included that provides for the Department of Defense to dispose of negative unliquidated or unexpended balances 

for expired or closed accounts. 

Language is included that provides conditions for the use of 

equipment of the National Guard Distance Learning Project on a 

space-available, reimbursable basis. 

Language is included that provides for the availability of funds 

provided by this Act to implement cost-effective agreements for required heating facility modernization in the Kaiserslautern Military Community, Germany. 

Language is included that provides for the limitation on the use 

of funds appropriated in title IV to procure end-items for delivery 

to military forces for operational training, operational use, or inventory requirements. 

Language is included that provides for a waiver of the ‘‘Buy 

America’’ provisions for certain cooperative programs. 

Language is included that prohibits the use of funds made available in this Act to support the training of members of foreign security forces who have engaged in gross violations of human rights. 

Language is included that prohibits the use of funds made available in this Act for repairs or maintenance to military family housing units. 

Language is included that provides obligation authority for new 

starts for advanced concept technology demonstration projects only 

after notification to the congressional defense committees. 


rfrederick on DSK6VPTVN1PROD with HEARING
319 

Language is included that provides that the Secretary of Defense 

shall provide a classified quarterly report on certain matters as directed in the classified annex accompanying this Act. 

Language is included that prohibits the use of funds made available to the Department of Defense to provide support to an agency 

that is more than 90 days in arrears in making payments to the 

Department of Defense for goods or services provided on a reimbursable basis. 

Language is included that provides for the use of National Guard 

personnel to support ground-based elements of the National Ballistic Missile Defense System. 

Language is included that prohibits the use of funds made available in this Act to transfer to any nongovernmental entity ammunition held by the Department of Defense that has a center-fire cartridge and is designated as ‘‘armor piercing’’ except for demilitarization purposes. 

Language is included that provides for a waiver by the Chief, National Guard Bureau or his designee for all or part of consideration 

in cases of personal property leases of less than one year. 

Language is included that prohibits funds made available in this 

Act from being used to purchase alcoholic beverages. 

Language is included that provides for the transfer of funds 

made available in this Act under ‘‘Operation and Maintenance, 

Army’’ to other activities of the Federal Government for classified 

purposes. 

Language is included that provides for the forced matching of 

disbursement and obligations made by the Department of Defense 

in fiscal year 2013. 

Language is included that provides grant authority for the construction and furnishing of additional Fisher Houses to meet the 

needs of military family members when confronted with the illness 

or hospitalization of an eligible military beneficiary. 

Language is included that provides funding and transfer authority for the Israeli Cooperative missile defense programs. 

Language is included that prohibits the use of funds made available in this Act to be obligated to modify the command and control 

relationship to give the Fleet Forces Command administration and 

operations control of U.S. Naval Forces assigned to the Pacific 

Fleet. 

Language is included that provides for the transfer of funds to 

properly complete prior year shipbuilding programs. 

Language is included that provides that funds made available in 

this Act are deemed to be specifically authorized by Congress for 

purposes of section 504 of the National Security Act of 1947. 

Language is included that prohibits the use of funds made available in this Act to initiate a new start program without prior written notification. 

Language is included that provides that the budget of the President for fiscal year 2014 shall include separate budget justification 

documents for costs of the United States Armed Forces’ participation in contingency operations that contain certain budget exhibits 

as defined in the Department of Defense Financial Management 

Regulation. 


rfrederick on DSK6VPTVN1PROD with HEARING
320 

Language is included that prohibits funds made available in this 

Act from being used for the research, development, test, evaluation, 

procurement, or deployment of nuclear armed interceptors of a missile defense system. 

Language is included that provides the Secretary of Defense discretionary authority to make grants to the United Service Organizations and the Red Cross if he determines it to be in the national 

interest. 

Language is included that prohibits funds made available in this 

Act from being used to reduce or disestablish the operation of the 

53rd Weather Reconnaissance Squadron of the Air Force Reserve. 

Language is included that prohibits funds made available in this 

Act from being used for the integration of foreign intelligence information unless the information has been lawfully collected and processed during conduct of authorized foreign intelligence activities. 

Language is included that provides that at the time members of 

reserve components of the Armed Forces are called or ordered to 

active duty, each member shall be notified in writing of the expected period during which the member will be mobilized. 

Language is included that provides that the Secretary of Defense 

may transfer funds from any available Department of the Navy appropriation to any available Navy ship construction appropriation 

to liquidate costs caused by rate adjustments or other economic factors. 

Language is included that provides for the use of current and expired ‘‘Shipbuilding and Conversion, Navy’’ subdivisions to reimburse the Judgment Fund. 

Language is included that prohibits the transfer of program authorities related to tactical unmanned aerial vehicles from the 

Army. 

Language is included that provides funding and authority for the 

Asia Pacific Regional Initiative program. 

Language is included that limits the obligation authority of funds 

provided for the Director of National Intelligence to the current fiscal year except for research and technology which shall remain 

available for the current and the following fiscal years. 

Language is included that provides for the adjustment of obligations within the ‘‘Shipbuilding and Conversion, Navy’’ appropriation. 

Language is included that provides that the Director of National 

Intelligence shall include certain budget exhibits with the congressional budget justification books. 

Language is included that prohibits transfers of funds until the 

Director of National Intelligence submits a baseline for application 

of reprogramming and transfer authorities. 

Language is included that sets forth reprogramming and transfer 

procedures for the National Intelligence Program. 

Language is included that provides that the Director of National 

Intelligence shall provide budget exhibits identifying the five year 

future-years intelligence program. 

Language is included that defines the congressional intelligence 

committees. 

Language is included that directs the Department of Defense to 

report on the Cost of War Execution Report on a monthly basis. 


rfrederick on DSK6VPTVN1PROD with HEARING
321 

Language is included that provides that funds may be used for 

the Defense Acquisition Workforce Development Fund. 

Language is included that provides that agencies post congressionally directed reports on a public website. 

Language is included that provides limitations on the award of 

contracts to contractors that require mandatory arbitration for certain claims as a condition of employment or a contractual relationship. The Secretary is authorized to waive the applicability of these 

limitations for national security interests. 

Language is included that provides funds and transfer authority 

for the Joint Department of Defense-Department of Veterans Affairs Medical Facility Demonstration Fund. 

Language is included that provides a limitation on the number 

of senior executives employed by the Office of the Director of National Intelligence. 

Language is included that provides a limitation on certain senior 

mentors unless such mentors make certain financial disclosures. 

Language is included that provides authority to purchase heavy 

and light armored vehicles notwithstanding price or other limitations on the purchase of passenger carrying vehicles. 

Language is included that provides availability of funds appropriated under ‘‘Operation and Maintenance, Defense-Wide’’ for activities related to the military buildup of Guam. 

Language is included that places limitations on the number of 

parking spaces provided by the BRAC 133 project, with certain 

waiver authorities. 

Language is included that requires the Secretary of Defense to 

provide monthly reports on civilian personnel end strength. 

Language is included that provides transfer authority for the Director of National Intelligence for the National Intelligence Program. 

Language is included that provides funding for construction, renovation, repair, and expansion of public schools on military installations. 

Language is included that prohibits funds to transfer or release 

certain individuals detained at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba into the 

United States, its territories, or possessions. 

Language is included that places limitations on the transfer or 

release of certain individuals detained at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba 

to the custody or control of a foreign country unless certain certifications are provided. 

Language is included that prohibits funds to construct, acquire, 

or modify any facility in the United States, its territories, or possessions to house individuals detained at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba. 

Language is included that places limitations on the provision of 

funds to any corporation with an unpaid Federal tax liability. 

Language is included that places limitations on the provision of 

funds to any corporation convicted of a felony criminal violation 

within the preceding 24 months. 

Language is included that directs the Secretary of the Air Force 

to obligate and expend funds previously appropriated for the purposes for which such funds were originally provided. 


rfrederick on DSK6VPTVN1PROD with HEARING
322 

Language is included that places limitations and requirements 

on the use of funds for reimbursements to key cooperating nations 

for logistical, military, and other support. 

Language is included that provides funds and transfer authority 

for overseas contingency operations. 

Language is included that provides authority for infrastructure 

projects in Afghanistan subject to certain conditions and reporting 

requirements. 

Language is included that provides authority for the provision of 

assistance to Afghanistan Security Forces subject to certain notification requirements. 

Language is included that provides for supervision and administration costs associated with overseas contingency operations. 

Language is included that provides authority to purchase passenger, heavy, and light armored vehicles notwithstanding price or 

other limitations on the purchase of passenger carrying vehicles for 

use in the U.S. Central Command area of responsibility. 

Language is included that provides funds and authority for the 

Commander’s Emergency Response Program and establishes certain reporting requirements. 

Language is included that authorizes the use of funds to provide 

certain assistance to coalition forces supporting military and stability operations in Afghanistan and establishes certain reporting 

requirements. 

Language is included that places limitations on the use of Afghanistan Security Forces Funds and requires certain certifications. 

Language is included that authorizes up to $88,000,000 under 

the heading ‘‘Operation and Maintenance, Army’’ for the Task 

Force for Business and Stability Operations in Afghanistan, subject 

to certain reporting requirements. Language is included that authorizes up to $508,000,000 under 

the heading ‘‘Operation and Maintenance, Air Force’’ for the Office 

of Security Cooperation in Iraq and security assistance teams, subject to written notice requirements. 

Language is included that places limitations on the use of Coalition Support Funds for the Government of Pakistan. 


rfrederick on DSK6VPTVN1PROD with HEARING
323 


rfrederick on DSK6VPTVN1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 006 here 73883A.191
324 

TRANSFER OF FUNDS

Pursuant to clause 3(f)(2) of rule XIII of the Rules of the House 

of Representatives, the following is submitted describing the transfer of funds provided in the accompanying bill. 

Language has been included under ‘‘Operation and Maintenance, 

Defense-Wide’’ which provides for the transfer of funds for certain 

classified activities. 

Language has been included under ‘‘Environmental Restoration, 

Army’’ which provides for the transfer of funds for environmental 

restoration, reduction and recycling of hazardous waste, removal of 

unsafe buildings and debris, or for similar purposes. 

Language has been included under ‘‘Environmental Restoration, 

Navy’’ which provides for the transfer of funds for environmental 

restoration, reduction and recycling of hazardous waste, removal of 

unsafe buildings and debris, or for similar purposes. 

Language has been included under ‘‘Environmental Restoration, 

Air Force’’ which provides for the transfer of funds for environmental restoration, reduction and recycling of hazardous waste, removal of unsafe buildings and debris, or for similar purposes. 

Language has been included under ‘‘Environmental Restoration, 

Defense-Wide’’ which provides for the transfer of funds for environmental restoration, reduction and recycling of hazardous waste, removal of unsafe buildings and debris, or for similar purposes. 

Language has been included under ‘‘Environmental Restoration, 

Formerly Used Defense Sites’’ which provides for the transfer of 

funds for environmental restoration, reduction and recycling of hazardous waste, removal of unsafe buildings and debris, or for similar 

purposes. 

Language has been included under ‘‘Research, Development, Test 

and Evaluation, Defense Wide’’ which provides for the transfer of 

funds for the Defense Rapid Innovation Program to appropriations 

for research, development, test and evaluation. 

Language has been included under ‘‘Drug Interdiction and 

Counter-Drug Activities, Defense’’ which provides for the transfer 

of funds to appropriations available to the Department of Defense 

for military personnel of the reserve components; operation and 

maintenance; procurement; and research, development, test and 

evaluation. 

Language has been included under ‘‘Joint Improvised Explosive 

Device Defeat Fund’’ which provides for the transfer of funds to appropriations for operation and maintenance; procurement; research, 

development, test and evaluation; and defense working capital 

funds to assist United States forces in the defeat of improvised explosive devices. 

Language has been included under ‘‘General Provisions, Sec. 

8005’’ which provides for the transfer of working capital funds to 

other appropriations accounts of the Department of Defense for 

military functions. 

Language has been included under ‘‘General Provisions, Sec. 

8008’’ which provides for the transfer of funds between working 

capital funds and the ‘‘Foreign Currency Fluctuations, Defense’’ appropriations and the ‘‘Operation and Maintenance’’ appropriation 

accounts. 


rfrederick on DSK6VPTVN1PROD with HEARING
325 

Language has been included under ‘‘General Provisions, Sec. 

8015’’ which provides for the transfer of funds from the Department of Defense Pilot Mentor-Prote ́ge ́ Program to any other appropriation for the purposes of implementing a Mentor-Prote ́ge ́ Program development assistance agreement. 

Language has been included under ‘‘General Provisions, Sec. 

8051’’ which provides for the transfer of funds from ‘‘Operation and 

Maintenance, Defense-Wide’’ to appropriations available for the pay 

of military personnel in connection with support and services of eligible organizations and activities outside the Department of Defense. 

Language has been included under ‘‘General Provisions, Sec. 

8066’’ which provides for the transfer of funds from ‘‘Operation and 

Maintenance, Army’’ to other activities of the federal government. 

Language has been included under ‘‘General Provisions, Sec. 

8069’’ which provides for the transfer of funds from ‘‘Research, Development, Test and Evaluation, Defense-Wide’’ for the Israeli Cooperative Programs. 

Language has been included under ‘‘General Provisions, Sec. 

8071’’ which provides for the transfer of funds within ‘‘Shipbuilding 

and Conversion, Navy’’ to fund prior year shipbuilding cost increases. 

Language has been included under ‘‘General Provisions, Sec. 

8080’’ which provides for the transfer of funds to available Navy 

ship construction appropriations for the purpose of liquidating liabilities resulting from inflation, market fluctuations, or rate adjustments. 

Language has been included under ‘‘General Provisions, Sec. 

8093’’ which provides for the transfer of funds from ‘‘Operation and 

Maintenance, Army’’, ‘‘Operation and Maintenance, Navy’’, and 

‘‘Operation and Maintenance, Air Force’’ to the central fund established for Fisher Houses and Suites. 

Language has been included under ‘‘General Provisions, Sec. 

8094’’ which provides that funds appropriated for operation and 

maintenance may be available for the purpose of making remittances to the Defense Acquisition Workforce Development Fund. 

Language has been included under ‘‘General Provisions, Sec. 

8098’’ which provides for the transfer of funds to the Joint Department of Defense—Department of Veterans Affairs Medical Facility 

Demonstration Fund. 

Language has been included under ‘‘General Provisions, Sec. 

8106’’ which provides for the transfer of funds for the National Intelligence Program. 

Language has been included under ‘‘General Provisions, Sec. 

8107’’ which provides for the transfer of funds from ‘‘Operation and 

Maintenance, Defense-Wide’’ to the Secretary of Education to construct, renovate, repair, or expand elementary and secondary public 

schools on military installations to address capacity or facility condition deficiencies. 

Language has been included under title IX ‘‘Operation and Maintenance, Navy’’ which provides for the transfer of funds to the 

Coast Guard ‘‘Operating Expenses’’ account. 

Language has been included under title IX ‘‘Overseas Contingency Operations Transfer Fund’’ which provides for the transfer of 


rfrederick on DSK6VPTVN1PROD with HEARING
326 

funds to military personnel; operation and maintenance; procurement; and working capital fund accounts for expenses directly related to overseas contingency operations. 

Language has been included under title IX ‘‘Afghanistan Infrastructure Fund’’ which provides for the transfer of funds to the Department of State for purposes of undertaking infrastructure 

projects in Afghanistan. 

Language has been included under title IX ‘‘Joint Improvised Explosive Device Defeat Fund’’ which provides for the transfer of 

funds to appropriations for military personnel; operation and maintenance; procurement; research, development, test and evaluation; 

and defense working capital funds to assist United States forces in 

the defeat of improvised explosive devices. 

Language has been included under ‘‘General Provisions, Sec. 

9002’’ which provides for the authority to transfer funds in title IX 

subject to certain conditions. 

RESCISSIONS

Pursuant to clause 3(f)(2) of rule XIII of the Rules of the House 

of Representatives, the following table is submitted describing the 

rescissions recommended in the accompanying bill: 

General Provisions, 2009 ...................................................................... $79,900,000 

Procurement of Ammunition, Army, 2011/2013 .................................. 14,862,000 

Aircraft Procurement, Navy, 2011/2013 .............................................. 30,100,000 

Weapons Procurement, Navy, 2011/2013 ............................................. 22,000,000 

Other Procurement, Navy, 2011/2013 .................................................. 12,432,000 

Aircraft Procurement, Air Force, 2011/2013 ........................................ 65,000,000 

Other Procurement, Air Force, 2011/2013 ........................................... 9,500,000 

Afghanistan Security Forces Funds, 2012 ........................................... 500,000,000 

Other Procurement, Army, 2012/2014 ................................................. 80,000,000 

Aircraft Procurement, Navy, 2012/2014 .............................................. 14,400,000 

Weapons Procurement, Navy, 2012/2014 ............................................. 31,572,000 

Aircraft Procurement, Air Force, 2012/2014 ........................................ 277,050,000 

Missile Procurement, Air Force, 2012/2014 ......................................... 44,000,000 

Other Procurement, Air Force, 2012/2014 ........................................... 55,800,000 

Research, Development, Test and Evaluation, Army, 2012/2013 ...... 63,000,000 

Research, Development, Test and Evaluation, Navy, 2012/2013 ...... 120,000,000 

Research, Development, Test and Evaluation, Air Force, 2012/2013 179,600,000 

TRANSFER OF UNEXPENDED BALANCES

Pursuant to clause 3(f)(2) of rule XIII of the Rules of the House 

of Representatives, the bill contains a general provision which allows for the transfer of unexpended balances from the Operation 

and Maintenance and Military Personnel accounts to the ‘‘Foreign 

Currency Fluctuation, Defense’’ account to address shortfalls due to 

foreign currency fluctuation. 

STATEMENT OF GENERAL PERFORMANCE GOALS AND OBJECTIVES

Pursuant to clause 3(c)(4) of rule XIII of the Rules of the House 

of Representatives, the following is a statement of general performance goals and objectives for which this measure authorizes funding: 

The Committee on Appropriations considers program performance, including a program’s success in developing and attaining 

outcome-related goals and objectives, in developing funding recommendations. 


rfrederick on DSK6VPTVN1PROD with HEARING
327 

CONSTITUTIONAL AUTHORITY

Pursuant to Section 6(e) of the rules of the Committee on Appropriations of the House of Representatives, the following statement 

is submitted regarding the specific powers granted to the Congress 

in the Constitution to enact the accompanying bill or joint resolution. 

The principal constitutional authority for this legislation is 

clause 7 of section 9 of article I of the Constitution of the United 

States (the appropriation power), which states: ‘‘No Money shall be 

drawn from the Treasury, but in Consequence of Appropriations 

made by Law . . . .’’ In addition, clause 1 of section 8 of article 

I of the Constitution (the spending power) provides: ‘‘The Congress 

shall have the Power . . . to pay the Debts and provide for the common Defence and general Welfare of the United States . . . .’’ Together, these specific constitutional provisions establish the congressional power of the purse, granting the Congress the authority 

to appropriate funds, to determine their purpose, amount, and period of availability, and to set forth terms and conditions governing 

their use. 

COMPLIANCE WITH RULE XIII, CL. 3(e) (RAMSEYER RULE)

In compliance with clause 3(e) of rule XIII of the Rules of the 

House of Representatives, the Committee notes that the accompanying bill does not propose to repeal or amend a statute or part 

thereof. 

EARMARK DISCLOSURE STATEMENT

Neither the bill nor the report contains any congressional earmarks, limited tax benefits, or limited tariff benefits as defined in 

Clause 9 of Rule XXI. 

COMPARISON WITH THE BUDGET RESOLUTION

Clause 3(c)(2) of rule XIII of the Rules of the House of Representatives requires an explanation of compliance with section 

308(a)(1)(A) of the Congressional Budget and Impoundment Control 

Act of 1974 (Public Law 93–344), as amended, which requires that 

the report accompanying a bill providing new budget authority contain a statement detailing how that authority compares with the 

reports submitted under section 302 of the Act for the most recently agreed to concurrent resolution on the budget for the fiscal 

year from the Committee’s section 302(a) allocation. This information follows: 

302(b) allocation This bill 

Budget 

authority Outlays Budget authority Outlays 

Comparison of amounts in the bill with Committee allocations 

to its subcommittees of amounts in the Budget Resolution 

for 2013: Subcommittee on Defense 

Discretionary: 

General Purpose ........................................................... 519,220 573,770 519,219 1 573,770 

Overseas Contingency Operations 2 ............................. 88,480 48,420 88,480 48,420 

Mandatory ............................................................................. 514 514 514 514 

1 Includes outlays from prior-year budget authority. 


rfrederick on DSK6VPTVN1PROD with HEARING
328 

2 Overseas Contingency Operations/Global War on Terrorism. 

FIVE-YEAR OUTLAY PROJECTIONS

In compliance with section 308(a)(1)(B) of the Congressional 

Budget and Impoundment Control Act of 1974 (Public Law 93– 

344), as amended, the following table contains five-year projections 

associated with the budget authority provided in the accompanying 

bill. 

[In millions of dollars] 

Non-OCO OCO 

Projection of outlays associated with the recommendation: 

2013 ........................................................................................................................................ 1 335,170 1 48,420 

2014 ........................................................................................................................................ 111,768 27,481 

2015 ........................................................................................................................................ 39,306 8,593 

2016 ........................................................................................................................................ 16,872 2,571 

2017 and future years .......................................................................................................... 12,235 859 

1 Excludes outlays from prior-year budget authority. 

Note: OCO is Overseas Contingency Operations/Global War on Terrorism. 

FINANCIAL ASSISTANCE TO STATE AND LOCAL GOVERNMENTS

In accordance with section 308(a)(1)(C) of the Congressional 

Budget and Impoundment Act of 1974 (Public Law 93–344), as 

amended, no new budget or outlays are provided by the accompanying bill for financial assistance to State and local governments. 

FULL COMMITTEE VOTES

Pursuant to the provisions of clause 3(b) of rule XIII of the House 

of Representatives, the results of each roll call on an amendment 

or on the motion to report, together with the names of those voting 

for and those voting against, are printed below: 

No record votes were ordered during consideration of the bill in 

Committee. 


rfrederick on DSK6VPTVN1PROD with HEARING
329 


rfrederick on DSK6VPTVN1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 0204 here 73883A.192
330 


rfrederick on DSK6VPTVN1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 0205 here 73883A.193
331 


rfrederick on DSK6VPTVN1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 0206 here 73883A.194
332 


rfrederick on DSK6VPTVN1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 0207 here 73883A.195
333 


rfrederick on DSK6VPTVN1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 0208 here 73883A.196
334 


rfrederick on DSK6VPTVN1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 0209 here 73883A.197
335 


rfrederick on DSK6VPTVN1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 0210 here 73883A.198
336 


rfrederick on DSK6VPTVN1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 0211 here 73883A.199
337 


rfrederick on DSK6VPTVN1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 0212 here 73883A.200
338 


rfrederick on DSK6VPTVN1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 0213 here 73883A.201
339 


rfrederick on DSK6VPTVN1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 0214 here 73883A.202
340 


rfrederick on DSK6VPTVN1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 0215 here 73883A.203
341 


rfrederick on DSK6VPTVN1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 0216 here 73883A.204
342 


rfrederick on DSK6VPTVN1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 0217 here 73883A.205
(343) 

ADDITIONAL VIEWS 

FY 2013 DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE APPROPRIATIONS BILL 

In this bill, the Committee has carried out its Constitutional responsibilities to recommend the appropriations necessary to provide for the common defense, and I am pleased to say that this 

work was accomplished on a bipartisan and collegial basis in the 

Committee’s longstanding tradition. The funding and priorities set 

in this bill are of vital importance to the quality of life, force structure and readiness, and investments for our Armed Forces. 

The bill addresses the needs of our men and women in uniform 

as well as their dependents. The bill fully funds military pay and 

the Defense Health program. Also, for the third consecutive year, 

the bill includes funding to improve the condition and capacity of 

schools, owned and operated by local educational authorities or the 

US Department of Education, that are located on military installations. Throughout the Department of Defense, there are nearly 150 

such schools supporting a student population of 42,000. The bill includes $270,000,000, $220,000,000 above the request, to replace inadequate schools. In addition, the bill includes $40,000,000 above 

the request for Impact Aid funding. Both of these measures are essential to support the school-aged children of US Service members. 

The bill pauses major changes to National Guard and Reserve 

Force Structure. In the budget request, DoD proposes significant 

reductions and rebalances force structure and missions between the 

Active and Reserve components. Particularly in the Air Force, the 

FY 2013 budget reflects decisions to divest aircraft and re-mission 

units in a way that disproportionately affects the National Guard 

and Reserve. In total the budget proposes retiring 200 aircraft in 

FY 2013 and nearly 300 aircraft over the Future Years Defense 

Program (FYDP), most of which would come from National Guard 

and Reserve force structure. The Committee recognizes many problems that may arise from this imbalance and has appropriately included funding to provide the opportunity needed to more carefully 

establish an appropriate balance. 

This Committee conducted a thorough review of the costs and 

benefits of changes to major acquisition programs proposed by the 

Department. For example, the Committee bill reconsiders the DoD 

proposal to cancel the Global Hawk Block 30 program. The DoD 

analysis in the FY 2013 budget request represents a dramatic reversal of the conclusions reported in the June 2011 Nunn-McCurdy 

certification. Accordingly, the Committee provided the resources 

and direction to continue the program and consider its interaction 

with and relationship to other acquisition efforts. 

Similarly, the Committee reconsidered a number of the proposals 

in the FY 2013 budget request regarding ground forces and Naval 

aviation. For the second consecutive year, the Committee has considered a budget proposal allowing tank production to cease only 


rfrederick on DSK6VPTVN1PROD with HEARING
344 

to be restarted in FY 2017. The Committee believes that the economic case for this course of action is debatable, and also finds that 

continued production in the near term will bring the Army closer 

to a common equipment fleet across Active and National Guard 

forces. The Committee has made similar recommendations regarding the Bradley Fighting Vehicle and M88 recovery vehicle. In both 

cases, additional production will significantly upgrade the Army’s 

vehicle fleet and preserve the industrial capacity required to 

produce the next generation of combat vehicles. 

The Committee also considered the Navy’s proposal to bridge the 

attack fighter gap by means of service life extension versus new 

production of F/A–18E/F Hornet aircraft. In the Committee’s view, 

the cost difference between service life extension and new aircraft, 

compared to the dramatic increase in the number of flight hours 

provided by new aircraft, clearly warrants new production. 

The Committee evaluated the investment accounts from the 

standpoint of DoD strategy as well. Prior to releasing the FY 2013 

budget request, the Defense Department announced a strategic review that would that would shape forces and inform budget preparation for years to come. An important feature of this strategy is 

an increased emphasis on the Asia-Pacific region. To better support 

this strategy, the Committee placed a high priority on shipbuilding 

programs including the Virginia Class submarine, DDG 51 Destroyer and the existing Cruiser fleet. Committee recommendations 

in these areas will strengthen Naval forces and help realize the 

emerging defense strategy. 

The Committee also continued its support of advanced technology 

development and support for small business innovation. In this bill 

the Committee provided $250,000,000 for the Defense Rapid Innovation Program. This bill represents the 3rd year of Congressional 

support for this initiative, begun by this Committee. The Committee understands that DoD has received over 3,500 proposals primarily from small businesses, and will award funding on a competitive basis to stimulate innovative technology, reduce the 

lifecycle costs of weapons systems, and address various technical 

risks confronting the Defense Department. 

As the Committee works toward completing the FY 2013 bill, and 

as we assess national security risks now and in the future, I believe there are threats that require fresh thinking and new approaches. Perhaps the area of greatest concern is cyber defense. 

There is consensus among government agencies that the newest official domain to be defended against enemies, foreign and domestic, 

is cyberspace. However, there seems to be confusion when determining requirements for this mission, in terms of budgets, weapons, and personnel. The attacks on Department of Defense networks have been widely reported. This is evident by the fact that 

foreign actors probe our military’s networks daily. Our industrial 

partners, whose products are vital to our military dominance, are 

also victims of cyber attacks in the form of industrial espionage 

and they have lost billions as a result. Although DoD has responded to the threat against the ‘‘dot mil’’ domain by establishing 

Cyber Command, and the successful Defense Industrial Base Pilot 

Program, significant concerns remain. The effectiveness of our defenses in the ‘‘dot mil’’ domain are called into question due to the 


rfrederick on DSK6VPTVN1PROD with HEARING
345 

scarcity of qualified personnel with technological and mathematical 

backgrounds; the lack of confidence in the integrity of the cloud 

storage architecture; and, the question of what protections DoD is 

able to achieve for the funding invested. Cyber, in all its forms, will 

continue to be one of the highest security priorities, but without a 

clear strategy and a transparent accounting of resources, questions 

and concerns will remain about our effectiveness in determining 

what is needed to defend our networks. 

In addition, I continue to believe that reducing our presence in 

Afghanistan is vital to enhancing our security. Our nation has paid 

a dear price for more than a decade of war—more than 1,800 of our 

service personnel have given their lives in this theater of war, and 

prosecuting the war has taken hundreds of billions from our Nation’s treasury. Indeed the financial demand of extended conflict is 

a chief contributor to our current debt crisis. 

The United States, our allies and Afghanistan stand at the 

threshold of significant changes in this conflict. On May 1, 2012, 

President Obama and President Karzai signed the Strategic Partnership Agreement, which advances beyond the 2010 Lisbon Accord, and further defines the transition to Afghan control of their 

own security. According to the Administration, the agreement will 

detail how the partnership between the United States and Afghanistan will be normalized as we look beyond a responsible end to the 

war. The Strategic Partnership Agreement comes on the heels of 

two important memoranda of understanding that were negotiated 

and signed by Ambassador Crocker and his counterpart, and General Allen and his counterpart, over the course of March and April 

2012—one on detention operations and the other on night operations or special operations. Both are designed to put Afghans in 

the lead on those two crucial issues. 

However, the Strategic Partnership Agreement does not define 

the United States’ potential troop levels in the future. Similarly, 

the Agreement does not suggest specific funding levels, yet it commits the United States to seek funding to support the training, 

equipping, advising and sustaining of Afghan National Security 

Forces, as well as for social and economic assistance. Left to its 

own resources, the Afghans could likely afford about 30,000 soldiers and police officers, a force only one-tenth the size of the current security force. 

Most recently, at the NATO conference convened in Chicago on 

May 20, 2012, the Administration and NATO leaders have stated 

that the coalition fighting in Afghanistan will remain whole despite 

the plans of some nations to withdraw troops as early as 2012. Indeed, it is widely reported that some NATO troops, led by the 

United States, will likely stay behind after 2014 both to train Afghans and act as a hedge against the Taliban’s return. The summit 

will try to clarify some of these details. 

Despite the recent diplomatic activities, the details that will ultimately define the continuing US commitment in Afghanistan will 

not be worked out until the US negotiates a bilateral security 

agreement with Afghanistan. The Strategic Partnership Agreement 

noted above commits the United States and Afghanistan to initiate 

negotiations on such an agreement to supersede the current status 

of forces agreement. 


rfrederick on DSK6VPTVN1PROD with HEARING
346 

The combination of a global economic crisis, public fatigue from 

more than a decade of conflict, and severe financial pressure domestically within the US clearly indicate that the time has come 

not only to consider withdrawal, but also to consider the nature 

and level of continuing US support for Afghan Security Forces. 

These pressures must be a factor in upcoming deliberations by 

NATO, discussions with Afghanistan on future bilateral security 

negotiations, and in future Defense Appropriations bills. Achieving 

solutions in these areas now appears possible, but it will require 

a focused approach and we should begin work within the Congress 

and with the Administration in this respect. 

Finally, while I support the content of this bill and the process 

the Committee followed in its preparation, I am extremely disappointed that House Republicans walked away from the bipartisan agreement to establish $1.047 trillion as the Committee’s allocation. A majority of their conference voted for the Budget Control Act agreement less than 9 months ago. By reneging on the 

agreement, House Republicans put themselves at odds with House 

Democrats, the White House, Senate Democrats, and Senate Republicans. Senate Minority Leader McConnell recently voted for allocations at $1.047 trillion and Ranking Member Cochran stated 

that it’s appropriate ‘‘for the Committee to proceed on the basis of 

the discretionary caps enacted into law.’’ House Republicans introduced uncertainty about the discretionary allocation, and about 

whether the House majority will threaten to shut down the government. This uncertainty will slow down the appropriations process 

and the austere House allocation, if it stands, will stall economic 

growth and impede job creation. 

NORMAN D. DICKS. 

Æ 


rfrederick on DSK6VPTVN1PROD with HEARING