H. R. 4200—239
(b) CONTENT.—(1) The report shall include a discussion of the
matters described in paragraph (2), with a particular emphasis
on accomplishments and shortcomings and on near-term and long-
term corrective actions to address such shortcomings.
(2) The matters to be discussed in the report are as follows:
(A) The military and political objectives of the international
coalition conducting the post-major combat operations phase
of Operation Iraqi Freedom, and the military strategy selected
to achieve such objectives, together with an assessment of the
execution of the military strategy.
(B) The mobilization process for the reserve components
of the Armed Forces, including the timeliness of notification,
training and certification, and subsequent demobilization.
(C) The use and performance of major items of United
States military equipment, weapon systems, and munitions
(including non-lethal weapons and munitions, items classified
under special access procedures, and items drawn from
prepositioned stocks) and any expected effects of the experience
with the use and performance of such items on the doctrinal
and tactical employment of such items and on plans for con-
tinuing the acquisition of such items.
(D) Any additional requirements for military equipment,
weapon systems, munitions, force structure, or other capability
identified during the post-major combat operations phase of
Operation Iraqi Freedom, including changes in type or quantity
for future operations.
(E) The effectiveness of joint air operations, together with
an assessment of the effectiveness of—
(i) the employment of close air support; and
(ii) attack helicopter operations.
(F) The use of special operations forces, including oper-
ational and intelligence uses.
(G) The scope of logistics support, including support to
and from other nations and from international organizations
and organizations and individuals from the private sector in
Iraq.
(H) The incidents of accidental fratricide, including a
discussion of the effectiveness of the tracking of friendly forces
and the use of the combat identification systems in mitigating
friendly fire incidents.
(I) The adequacy of spectrum and bandwidth to transmit
information to operational forces and assets, including
unmanned aerial vehicles, ground vehicles, and individual sol-
diers.
(J) The effectiveness of strategic, operational, and tactical
information operations, including psychological operations and
assets, organization, and doctrine related to civil affairs, in
achieving established objectives, together with a description
of technological and other restrictions on the use of information
operations capabilities.
(K) The readiness of the reserve component forces used
in the post-major combat operations phase of Operation Iraqi
Freedom, including an assessment of the success of the reserve
component forces in accomplishing their missions.
(L) The adequacy of intelligence support during the post-
major combat operations phase of Operation Iraqi Freedom,
H. R. 4200—240
including the adequacy of such support in searches for weapons
of mass destruction.
(M) The rapid insertion and integration, if any, of develop-
mental but mission-essential equipment, organizations, or
procedures during the post-major combat operations phase of
Operation Iraqi Freedom.
(N) A description of the coordination, communication, and
unity of effort between the Armed Forces, the Coalition Provi-
sional Authority, other United States government agencies and
organizations, nongovernmental organizations, and political,
security, and nongovernmental organizations of Iraq, including
an assessment of the effectiveness of such efforts.
(O) The adequacy of training for military units once
deployed to the area of operations of the United States Central
Command, including training for changes in unit mission and
continuation training for high-intensity conflict missions.
(P) An estimate of the funding required to return or replace
equipment used through the period covered by the report in
Operation Iraqi Freedom, including equipment in prepositioned
stocks, to mission-ready condition.
(Q) A description of military civil affairs and reconstruction
efforts, including efforts through the Commanders Emergency
Response Program, and an assessment of the effectiveness of
such efforts and programs.
(R) The adequacy of the requirements determination and
acquisition processes, acquisition, and distribution of force
protection equipment, including personal gear, vehicles, heli-
copters, and defense devices.
(S) The most critical lessons learned that could lead to
long-term doctrinal, organizational, and technological changes,
and the probable effects that an implementation of those
changes would have on current visions, goals, and plans for
transformation of the Armed Forces or the Department of
Defense.
(T) The planning for and implementation of morale, wel-
fare, and recreation programs for deployed forces and support
to dependents, including rest and recuperation programs and
personal communication benefits such as telephone, mail, and
email services, including an assessment of the effectiveness
of such programs.
(U) An analysis of force rotation plans, including individual
personnel and unit rotations, differing deployment lengths, and
in-theater equipment repair and leave behinds.
(V) The organization of United States Central Command
to conduct post-conflict operations and lessons for other combat-
ant commands to conduct other such operations in the future.
(c) FORM
OF
REPORT.—The report shall be submitted in
unclassified form, but may include a classified annex.
(d) POST-MAJOR COMBAT OPERATIONS PHASE
OF OPERATION
IRAQI FREEDOM DEFINED.—In this section, the term ‘‘post-major
combat operations phase of Operation Iraqi Freedom’’ means the
period of Operation Iraqi Freedom beginning on May 2, 2003, and
ending on December 31, 2004.
H. R. 4200—241
SEC. 1043. REPORT ON TRAINING PROVIDED TO MEMBERS OF THE
ARMED FORCES TO PREPARE FOR POST-CONFLICT OPER-
ATIONS.
(a) STUDY ON TRAINING.—The Secretary of Defense shall con-
duct a study to determine the extent to which members of the
Armed Forces assigned to duty in support of contingency operations
receive training in preparation for post-conflict operations and to
evaluate the quality of such training.
(b) MATTERS TO BE INCLUDED IN STUDY.—As part of the study
under subsection (a), the Secretary shall specifically evaluate the
following:
(1) The doctrine, training, and leader-development system
necessary to enable members of the Armed Forces to success-
fully operate in post-conflict operations.
(2) The adequacy of the curricula at military educational
facilities to ensure that the Armed Forces has a cadre of mem-
bers skilled in post-conflict duties, including a familiarity with
applicable foreign languages and foreign cultures.
(3) The training time and resources available to members
and units of the Armed Forces to develop awareness about
ethnic backgrounds, religious beliefs, and political structures
of the people living in areas in which the Armed Forces operate
and areas in which post-conflict operations are likely to occur.
(4) The adequacy of training transformation to emphasize
post-conflict operations, including interagency coordination in
support of commanders of combatant commands.
(c) REPORT ON STUDY.—Not later than May 1, 2005, the Sec-
retary shall submit to the Committee on Armed Services of the
Senate and the Committee on Armed Services of the House of
Representatives a report on the result of the study conducted under
this section.
SEC. 1044. REPORT ON ESTABLISHING NATIONAL CENTERS OF EXCEL-
LENCE FOR UNMANNED AERIAL AND GROUND VEHICLES.
(a) REPORT REQUIRED.—Not later than 120 days after the date
of the enactment of this Act, the Secretary of Defense shall submit
to the congressional defense committees a report on the need for
one or more national centers of excellence for unmanned aerial
and ground vehicles.
(b) GOAL OF CENTERS.—The goal of the centers covered by
the report is to promote interservice cooperation and coordination
in the following areas:
(1) Development of joint doctrine for the organization,
training, and use of unmanned aerial and ground vehicles.
(2) Joint research, development, test, and evaluation, and
joint procurement of unmanned aerial and ground vehicles.
(3) Identification and coordination, in conjunction with the
private sector and academia, of the future development of
unmanned aerial and ground vehicles.
(4) Monitoring of the development and utilization of
unmanned aerial and ground vehicles in other nations for both
military and non-military purposes.
(5) The providing of joint training and professional develop-
ment opportunities in the use and operation of unmanned aerial
and ground vehicles to military personnel of all ranks and
levels of responsibility.
H. R. 4200—242
(c) REPORT REQUIREMENTS.—The report shall include, at a min-
imum, the following:
(1) A list of facilities at which the Department of Defense
currently conducts or plans to conduct research, development,
and testing activities on unmanned aerial and ground vehicles.
(2) A list of facilities at which the Department of Defense
currently deploys or has committed to deploying unmanned
aerial or ground vehicles.
(3) The extent to which existing facilities described in para-
graphs (1) and (2) have sufficient unused capacity and expertise
to research, develop, test, and deploy the current and next
generations of unmanned aerial and ground vehicles and to
provide for the development of doctrine on the use and training
of operators of such vehicles.
(4) The extent to which efficiencies with respect to research,
development, testing, and deployment of existing or future
unmanned aerial and ground vehicles can be achieved through
consolidation at one or more national centers of excellence
for unmanned aerial and ground vehicles.
(5) A list of potential locations for the national centers
of excellence under this section.
(d) CONSIDERATIONS.—In determining the potential locations
for the national centers of excellence under this section, the Sec-
retary of Defense shall take into consideration existing military
facilities that have—
(1) a workforce of skilled personnel;
(2) existing capacity of runways and other facilities to
accommodate the research, development, testing, and deploy-
ment of current and future unmanned aerial vehicles; and
(3) minimal restrictions on the research, development,
testing, and deployment of unmanned aerial vehicles resulting
from proximity to large population centers or airspace heavily
utilized by commercial flights.
SEC. 1045. STUDY OF CONTINUED REQUIREMENT FOR TWO-CREW MAN-
NING FOR BALLISTIC MISSILE SUBMARINES.
(a) STUDY AND DETERMINATION.—The Secretary of Defense shall
conduct a study of whether the practice of using two alternating
crews (referred to as the ‘‘Gold Crew’’ and the ‘‘Blue Crew’’) for
manning of ballistic missile submarines (SSBNs) continues to be
justified under the changed circumstances since the end of the
Cold War and, based on that study, shall make a determination
of whether that two-crew manning practice should be continued
or should be modified or terminated.
(b) REPORT.—Not later than six months after the date of the
enactment of this Act, the Secretary shall submit to the Committees
on Armed Services of the Senate and House of Representatives
a report providing notice of the Secretary’s determination under
subsection (a) and the reasons for that determination.
SEC. 1046. REPORT ON DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE PROGRAMS FOR
PREPOSITIONING OF MATERIEL AND EQUIPMENT.
(a) SECRETARY OF DEFENSE ASSESSMENT AND REPORT.—(1) The
Secretary of Defense shall conduct an assessment of the programs
of the Armed Forces for the prepositioning of materiel and equip-
ment. Such assessment shall focus on how those programs will
support the goal of the Secretary to have the capability, from
the onset of a contingency situation, to—