The Insider

Fair Warning
By Jason Sherman
March 19, 2012 at 9:05 PM

Two key lawmakers today cautioned the Pentagon to avoid any preliminary action to implement force structure reductions proposed in the fiscal year 2013 budget request until congressional authorization is granted.

In a letter today to Defense Secretary Leon Panetta, Senate Armed Services Committee Chairman Carl Levin (D-MI) and Ranking Member John McCain (R-AZ) outlined their concerns:

In our preliminary review of the fiscal year 2013 budget request, it has become clear that the Department intends to begin implementing decisions under this budget request by taking actions in fiscal year 2012.  It is also clear that there are programs where the Department plans to implement actions in 2012 before any of the congressional defense committees will have had an opportunity to act on the fiscal year 2013 budget request.  While we understand that doing so may help the Department achieve more “savings” than might be otherwise realized, the Department should avoid taking actions that would restrict Congress’ ability to consider and act on the fiscal year 2013 budget request.

We request that you not take actions to implement decisions that would be difficult or impossible to reverse by anticipating congressional approval of what may turn out to be very contentious proposals before the committees have had an opportunity to produce bills reflecting their responses to the fiscal year 2013 budget request.

Nuke Labs Invite
By John Liang
March 19, 2012 at 6:31 PM

House Armed Services strategic forces subcommittee Chairman Mike Turner (R-OH) has again invited Rep. Ed Markey (D-MA) to tour the facilities at Los Alamos National Lab in New Mexico.

Last month, Markey introduced legislation that would cut $100 billion in spending on "outdated, wasteful nuclear weapons and related programs over the next ten years," he said in a statement, adding: "Let's cut new nuclear weapons and not programs for the poor, the elderly, the sick and the children of our country."

In a March 16 statement, Turner said: "Without ever seeing the true state of these facilities, Mr. Markey is living in blissful ignorance. It must make calling for funding cuts and unilateral disarmament a lot easier. No one who has toured these facilities and has seen their deplorable conditions would deny the need for this funding."

In a letter sent to Markey the same day, Turner writes:

It is clear from your response that you have been given grossly inaccurate, or wholly out-of-context, information on the plutonium and uranium facilities -- and their prospective replacements -- at the Los Alamos National Laboratory and the Y-12 National Security Complex. We very much need to get you to Los Alamos and Y-12 as soon as possible to clear up this terribly mistaken information.

This is not the first time Turner has written Markey on the state of U.S. nuclear labs. Click on the below to view those related letters:

Rep. Turner's 11/30/2011 Letter To Rep. Markey On Nuclear Deterrent Costs

Turner 11/4/2011 Letter On The Cost Of The U.S. Nuclear Deterrent

Space Jam
By John Liang
March 16, 2012 at 4:44 PM

A Defense Department report detailing the national security implications of returning to the president the authority to move satellites and related components from the U.S. Munitions List (USML) to the less-stringent Commerce Control List (CCL) must be submitted to Congress in the next three weeks if lawmakers are to have adequate time this year to pass legislation to permit such transfers, Inside U.S. Trade reports this morning, citing a senior congressional aide:

"The window for real constructive legislative action is not very wide," said David Fite, a House Foreign Affairs Committee staff member who works on export control issues for Ranking Member Howard Berman (D-CA).

Many lawmakers will not make up their minds about whether to support legislation that would restore the president's authority over the transfer of items off USML Category XV, which covers satellites and related components, until the so-called "Section 1248" report is released, Fite said at a March 14 forum on export controls at the Satellite 2012 conference.

The report, required as part of Section 1248 of the 2010 National Defense Authorization Act, could be forthcoming soon now that it is in the inter-agency review process, according to Lou Ann McFadden, an official with the Defense Technology Security Administration (DTSA) who spoke at the same forum.

Although McFadden would not assign a specific expected date to the report's release to Congress, she said it is in the final coordination stages. The report will be accompanied by a proposed revision of Category XV and a corresponding rule showing where transferred items will be placed.

Fite encouraged the administration to make the release of the report a "big deal." "This can't be released at 5 o'clock on a Friday afternoon," he said, adding that national security professionals, preferably wearing uniforms, should be publicly involved.

The transfer of militarily less significant items from the USML to the CCL where they will be subject to a broad export license exception is a key part of the administration's export control reform initiative. The reform effort's current goal is to restructure what are viewed as arcane controls that are impacting U.S. commercial trade of items currently on the USML.

Despite an imminent release of the report, Fite acknowledged that it's "almost too late for this Congress" to pass legislation on satellites.

Fite said there will need to be enough time for markups and floor debates in both chambers. Additionally, after passage in each chamber, the two bills would likely have to go through a conference proceeding.

In addition to procedural considerations, Fite signaled that passing such a bill may become more difficult the closer it gets to the November presidential election. Although there is bipartisan support for legislation already introduced in the House, Republican opponents of the reform initiative may be more likely to raise objections to the satellites bill in order to score political points given that the export control reform is a presidential initiative,

Passing such a bill would clear the one legislative hurdle this phase of the president's export control reform effort needs to overcome.

Berman has already introduced a bill, H.R. 3288, that would restore authority over satellites to the president with certain conditions. Fite also said there is a companion bill that will be introduced in the Senate in the coming weeks.

But for any legislation in the Senate will have to overcome opposition from Sen. Jon Kyl (R-AZ), who was closely involved in pushing for the 1999 legislation that moved all satellites, parts and components and related technology from the CCL to the USML.

Control of satellites has been a hot-button issue after a 1999 scandal in which U.S. satellite manufacturers Loral and Hughes Space and Communications were found responsible for the unlicensed export of missile design information to China during the course of an independent investigation to review the failure of a Chinese launch vehicle. This fueled fears that China would be able to further develop the same launch capabilities it could use for a nuclear weapon.

In the wake of that scandal, Congress obtained the authority to determine if Category XV items can be moved off the USML.

Supporters of legislation that restore the president's authority over satellite transfers have said the U.S. space industrial base has lost competitive ground to satellite producers in Europe who can manufacture and export commercial satellites and related parts without the same export restrictions.

Supporters go further to say that this is a national security risk to the U.S. as foreign companies are beginning to "design out" U.S. satellite parts and components that are subject to the International Trafficking in Arms Regulations (ITAR) that govern items on the USML.

This has led at least one European satellite manufacturer, Thales Alenia, to advertise "ITAR free" satellites that do not require customers to undergo the scrutiny of the U.S. export control system because of U.S. content.

Fite said an ongoing State Department investigation into a so-called "ITAR free" satellite that was sold to China without a license even though it still contained U.S.-controlled content has highlighted the national security impact of maintaining too stringent restrictions on commercial satellites.

For more news from this week's Satellite 2012 conference, check out this morning's issue of Inside the Air Force:

Loverro, Shelton Stress ORS Emphasis Will Remain Despite Closure

DOD Asks Congress To Nix Biennial GPS Reporting Requirement

Rep. Ruppersberger Urges DOD To Adopt Space-Launch Competition

Pentagon Takes Key Step Toward Acquiring New SBIRS Satellites

CBRN Confab
By John Liang
March 15, 2012 at 6:56 PM

North American Aerospace Defense Command and U.S. Northern Command are holding their annual Chemical, Biological, Radiological and Nuclear Summit this week at Peterson Air Force Base, CO, according to a NORTHCOM statement released today. The statement further reads:

The purpose of this year's summit is to bring together Canadian and U.S. CBRN personnel from local, state, national and military organizations to give the current composition of the CBRN Response Enterprise a hard look and determine if changes need to be made.

"It's part two of a three-part strategic assessment for the CBRN Response Enterprise," said Army Lt. Col. Pete Lofy, Deputy Chief of NORAD and USNORTHCOM CBRN Operations. "The first part was a rehearsal of concept for the CBRN Response Enterprise and had a military focus. Round two has an interagency focus."

Lofy said the summit will look at several aspects of the enterprise and ask hard questions. Any changes that are determined to be necessary would affect the Fiscal Year 2015 CBRN Response Enterprise.

"We're going to look at whether we are addressing the missions and requirements," he said. "Do we have the right units conducting these missions? Are the logistical functions set up to support the CBRN Response Enterprise? And are we satisfying the Interagency's requirements for consequence management in the homeland?"

The summit consists of panel discussions, working groups, static displays and a table-top exercise wherein CBRN organizations respond to a simulated incident on the U.S.-Canadian border.

Foreign Affairs and International Trade Canada, Public Safety Canada and Canada Command have sent representatives to the summit while on the U.S. side organizations such as the Department of Homeland Security, Federal Bureau of Investigation and the Federal Emergency Management Agency, as well as local responders from Denver and Michigan will also be participating.

In September 2010, InsideDefense.com reported that DOD should elevate the importance of its homeland-security mission to make it equal with warfighting as a means of ensuring that Pentagon planners set aside enough forces to support civil authorities in the aftermath of a catastrophe on U.S. soil with chemical, biological, or nuclear agents, according to a commission chartered by Congress. Further:

Despite DOD's claims in the 2010 Quadrennial Defense Review that homeland security is a key mission, there is "inadequate provision" for a task known as defense support of civil authorities (DSCA) in the military force-generation cycle, according to the panel's Sept. 15 report.

"DOD is not placing sufficient emphasis on budget and planning priorities related to DSCA missions, including CBRNE response," states the document. "DOD must have the ability to generate forces for the execution of DSCA missions, notwithstanding its other commitments."

The recommendation is one of many forwarded to Defense Secretary Robert Gates and congressional defense leaders by the Advisory Panel on Department of Defense Capabilities for Support of Civil Authorities After Certain Incidents. The Fiscal Year 2008 National Defense Authorization Act called for the creation of the panel, which first met on Sept. 15, 2009. The group published its final report, titled "Before Disaster Strikes -- Imperatives for Enhancing Defense Support of Civil Authorities," in accordance with disclosure requirements governing government advisory groups.

U.S. Northern Command should get a plus-up of federal forces operating under Title 10 of the U.S. Code, the report states. It does not say how many such forces panelists believe are needed.

"Despite the advent of the National Guard [Homeland Response Forces], given the magnitude of a catastrophic CBRNE incident, general-purpose Title 10 forces that may be required for DSCA should be identified, at least by type," the document states.

In July 2010, InsideDefense.com reported that the Pentagon's acquisition executive had established a standing advisory panel to regularly assess the vulnerability of U.S. military weapons to attack from an electromagnetic pulse designed to cripple microcircuits and electronic systems.

Ashton Carter, the then-under secretary of defense for acquisition, technology and logistics, directed the Defense Science Board to form a permanent task force "to assess all aspects of survivability of DOD systems and assets to EMP [electromagnetic pulse] and other nuclear weapon effects," according to a March 1, 2010, memo. InsideDefense.com further reported:

Carter has authorized the assistant to the secretary of defense for nuclear and chemical and biological defense programs, Andrew Weber, to "act upon the advice and recommendations" of the task force, according to the memo.

The new task force -- co-chaired by Miriam John, former head of Sandia National Laboratories' California division, and Joe Braddock, founder of the BDM Corporation -- will "conduct an independent review and assessment of DOD's EMP survivability program and review other matters associated with nuclear survivability," according to the memo. . . .

In September 2008, the Defense Department issued a policy requiring all mission-critical weapon systems to have a plan to withstand the effects of a nuclear attack -- which includes a powerful electromagnetic pulse. This directive -- in the form of DOD Instruction No. 3150.09 -- stated that "survivability may be achieved by hardening, [tactics, techniques or procedures], or another mitigation procedure as funding allows."

Carter wants the new task force to "assess implementation" of this instruction as well as to "assess the effectiveness" of the Chemical, Biological, Radiological and Nuclear (CBRN) Survivability Oversight Group (CSOG) led by Weber and created to review and monitor the execution of DOD CBRN survivability policy.

Check out the DSB's subsequent conclusions here:

DSB Report on EMP Survivability of Defense Systems

MDA's IT Priorities
By John Liang
March 15, 2012 at 6:12 PM

The Missile Defense Agency's major information technology activities in fiscal years 2012 and 2013 "will be concentrated in IT services delivery and support, information assurance support, IT infrastructure recapitalization, and Defense business system migration efforts," according to the agency's FY-13 IT budget request.

Overall, MDA has the following activities planned for FY-12 and FY-13, according to the budget book:

* Implement a more advanced applications interface for mobile devices

* Plan, engineer and buildout IT for the Von Braun IV facility in Huntsville and the P609 Building in Dahlgren, Virginia

* Operate and maintain the classified and unclassified IT infrastructure for all MDA locations

* Field a unified communications collaboration capability that integrates voice, video and documents into a single environment

* Sustain hardware, software and maintenance licenses while focusing on consolidating procurements

* Continue to implement web-based applications to enhance MDA business processes and improve efficiency

* Sustain global classified and unclassified communications to support personnel at all MDA locations

* Operate and maintain general purpose conference rooms and auditoriums Video Teleconferencing (VTC) capabilities in order to minimize travel costs.

As for information assurance in particular, MDA has the following activities planned for FY-12/13:

* Actively monitor MDA test and administrative IT systems via the MDA Computer Emergency Response Center (CERT)

* Continue to test and certify all MDA systems in accordance with DoD Information Assurance policy and instructions

* Provide IA engineering and planning guidance for all MDA IT acquisition programs

* Continue implementation of classified Public Key Infrastructure (PKI)

* Upgrade network equipment to comply with DoD Instruction 8500.2 and DoD Global Information Grid architecture plan.

For more coverage of DOD's FY-13 IT budget, check out this story from today's Inside the Pentagon:

DOD Seeks $37B For IT Spending With Goal Of IT 'Anywhere, Anytime'

. . . as well as this related story:

In IT Reform Effort, DOD Touts Acquisition Instruction Revision, Programs

. . . and stay tuned for more coverage in tomorrow's Inside the Air Force.

The Buck Stops Here
By Sebastian Sprenger
March 14, 2012 at 9:00 PM

Many lawmakers have said they want to find a way to avoid defense cuts under the oft-cited "sequestration" mechanism of the Budget Control Act. Today, House Armed Services Committee Chairman Buck McKeon (R-CA) went a step further, saying he would work against all the cuts required under the legislation.

"I held my breath and voted for the BCA, with the hopes that we could fix the serious problems with the bill shortly after,” McKeon said in a speech at the Reagan Presidential Library in Simi Valley, CA. “That’s why one of my top priorities is getting that half a trillion dollars back."

Congress passed the BCA last summer as a precondition to raising the nation's debt limit. The law mandates roughly $500 billion in reductions to planned defense spending over 10 years. Because a congressional "Supercommittee" was unable to agree on deficit-reduction measures last fall, an additional BCA stipulation is now in effect, which says an additional $500 billion must be cut.

The Pentagon's fiscal year 2013 budget proposal begins the process of scaling back defense spending. The FY-13 request includes the first tranche, a reduction of $45 billion over projections last year, to a total of $260 billion over the five-years spending plan.

Special Relationship
By John Liang
March 14, 2012 at 4:55 PM

President Obama held meetings with British Prime Minister David Cameron this morning, with defense cooperation among the topics discussed. Here are some excerpts from a fact sheet released by both countries:

Today President Obama and Prime Minister Cameron reaffirmed their commitment to continue close cooperation on defense as the United States and United Kingdom build their Armed Forces for the future. The U.S. and UK share an unprecedented defense relationship that has helped secure our shared interests and values since the World Wars of the last century.  We have developed unparalleled military interoperability and interconnectedness, working together to meet the challenges of the Cold War, leading in NATO, and fighting side-by-side in defense of global interests. At every level of our defense establishments British and American service men and women train together, learn together, develop capability together and, when called upon, fight together.

Standing Together: British and American forces routinely operate side-by-side across a wide range of operations. A century of shared battlefield experience has led to a level of interoperability and familiarity that is unique in its breadth.  This is exemplified in Afghanistan today where the U.S. and UK are the two largest contributors to ISAF, and our Armed Forces are working together to degrade the insurgency and to train and mentor the Afghan Forces to provide security in Afghanistan.  For example, in Helmand province the U.S. Marines' Task Force Leatherneck and the UK-led Task Force Helmand are working together to deliver stability. . . .

Training, Learning, and Developing Together:  The ability of American and British forces to operate on the battlefield effectively is due in large part to the close-knit and constant training and exchange opportunities undertaken together.  As close Allies, the U.S. and UK host each other's forces in order to conduct training, be prepared to forward-deploy when necessary, and in many cases conduct current operations.  The U.S. currently has over 9,000 personnel permanently stationed in the UK, primarily on shared Royal Air Force (RAF) bases such as RAF Lakenheath and Mildenhall, where U.S. units conduct fighter, transport, and aerial refueling operations.  The Joint Analysis Center (JAC) at RAF Molesworth is a prime example of cooperation, where U.S. and British analysts monitor the world’s trouble spots together.  All four U.S. services send exchange officers to work with the British services, and exchange both junior and senior military officers with British defense schools.

The UK currently stations over 800 British personnel in the U.S., conducting a wide variety of activities from conducting RPAS (Remotely Pilot Air Systems) operations in Afghanistan from Creech AFB, Nevada, to working side by side with American colleagues on major acquisition projects such as the Joint Strike Fighter and C-17 projects, to working with U.S. counterparts on cyber and space cooperation.  Approximately 200 British officers are on exchange with the American services to develop joint approaches to develop capability and increase interoperability. . . .

Collaborating for the Future: The President and the Prime Minister agreed that both defense departments will continue to push for increased interoperability across the spectrum of military operations after today’s operations come to an end.  The U.S. Defense Strategic Guidance and UK Strategic Defence and Security Review reached many common conclusions, including the need for increased cooperation in dealing with the threats we face. We are committed to working together, and with other close allies, wherever possible.

• Navy -- Secretary Panetta and Secretary Hammond recently signed a Statement of Intent directing the U.S. and Royal Navies to seek ways to better develop aircraft carrier doctrine and maritime power projection capabilities.

• Land -- We will also seek to develop similar initiatives to enhance the already close ground force relationship though increased training opportunities in Europe and unit exchanges in the U.S.

• Air -- The UK is a tier-one partner in the development of the Joint Strike Fighter - a unique program in which each country’s defense industries are sharing in the development of a common platform that will ensure the U.S., UK, and other partners own the cutting edge in air superiority for the next generation.

• Cyber -- The U.S. and UK, along with other capable nations, are working together to protect vital information infrastructure from cyber attack. We are committed to building our interoperability in this vital new space, building on a Memorandum of Understanding signed in 2011.

• Space -- The UK and U.S. will work with other partner nations to explore the potential for collaboration and information sharing in this expanding realm of activity.

• Management of defense -- Both countries are committed to ensuring that our Armed Forces have what they need for the future, are given the support they and their families deserve, while maximizing the value of the resources spent on defense. There are many areas where we can work together to make this happen, ranging from our Service Personnel Task Force, to work on future energy requirements, science and technology, to nuclear sharing.

Senate Sunshine
By John Liang
March 14, 2012 at 4:03 PM

A coalition of organizations is urging the Senate Armed Services Committee to make the unclassified portion of its annual defense authorization bill mark-up hearing open to the public again.

"The National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) last year authorized more than $662 billion of taxpayer dollars for FY 2012, but was drafted and debated behind closed doors in the Senate Armed Services Committee," according to a Project On Government Oversight statement released this morning. The statement further reads:

The "Open NDAA" campaign urges Senators to shine a light on the defense budget by making the draft bill and amendments available in advance of the markup, as well as opening the mark-up -- or committee votes -- to the public.

Because the NDAA is one of the few bills passed annually, it attracts many proposals, some of which would be considered by other committees -- and some have been very controversial.

For the past few years, the SASC has voted to close the entire markup for the NDAA -- instead of closing only the portions of the session dealing with classified information. Last year, 17 senators voted to close the markup and 9 voted against closing the mark-up.

Consequently, POGO today sent thank-you letters to the committee members who in the past have called on re-opening the mark-up process to the public, and a separate letter to those panel members who voted for keeping the mark-up closed urging them to change their minds.

Arctic Access
By John Liang
March 13, 2012 at 9:08 PM

During a Senate Armed Services Committee hearing on the fiscal year 2012 budget requests of U.S. Northern and Southern commands, Sen. Jack Reed (D-RI) asked NORTHCOM chief Gen. Charles Jacoby today about the possibility that commercial ships would be regularly transiting the Arctic Ocean for two months out of the year by 2020. Jacoby responded:

Arctic is a unique domain and it's changing every day for us. We work closely with the Canadians on how they think about the Arctic and how they are planning for it. They really are working in three five-year blocks towards some of the same things we are considering.

Today, [U.S. Coast Guard Commandant] Adm. [Robert] Papp and I are going to sign a white paper that we've done -- a capabilities gap assessment, principally in the areas of communications, domain awareness, infrastructure and presence, and what we will recommend for the future that might lead to prudent investments to position us for that eventual opening of the Arctic.

Traffic's already increased over 61 percent in the Arctic since 2008. They'll be drilling starting in the Beaufort Sea prior to the close of the spring, so security interests follow closely behind economic interests, and we will be participating in a number of venues to help lead that for the Department of Defense.

Following a March 2 speech he gave in Louisville, KY, Defense Secretary Leon Panetta was asked about climate change and its possible effect on national security. In his response, he touched on the melting polar ice cap:

In addition, obviously, we do look at the polar ice cap and are able through imagery to determine what's happening with polar ice cap and just how quickly is it melting and what that impact will be.  I can tell you.  As the polar ice cap melts, the national security implications are that countries like Russia and others are going to be looking for the opportunity to go into those areas and try to go after the resources in the Arctic.  They've already made claims to that effect.

Further, a Jan. 13 Government Accountability Office report on DOD policy toward the Arctic found:

While DOD has undertaken some efforts to assess the capabilities needed to meet national security objectives in the Arctic, it is unclear whether DOD will be in a position to provide needed capabilities in a timely and efficient manner because it lacks a risk-based investment strategy for addressing near-term needs and a collaborative forum with the Coast Guard for addressing long-term capability needs.

Sequestration Scenarios
By John Liang
March 12, 2012 at 4:20 PM

Credit Suisse, which co-hosted an aerospace and defense conference last week with McAleese and Associates, came away from the event with the notion that while sequestration is "highly unlikely," it's still a "rising concern," according to a just-released research note.

"While we agree the expiring Bush Tax Cuts should drive a negotiated compromise during the lame-duck session, we see increased headline risk building into the summer," the note reads. Further:

Share Downside Outweighs Upside; Boiling Frog Still Possible:  We think defense stocks are discounting zero-to-little chance of Sequestration (which adds >$500B in incremental cuts over 9 years).   We expect ultimate negotiation to yield $100B-$300B in incremental cuts.  However, the closer the end result to the lower end, the greater the chance that further cuts become necessary in the out-years (the Boiling Frog scenario).

The note also lists the companies Credit Suisse analysts had varying degrees of bullishness if sequestration did in fact take place:

* Most Bullish: BA (OP-$85): Based on our discussions, Boeing is the only company specifically preparing for a sequestration.  While it needs new orders to keep the F-18 line open beyond 2014, we see it as best positioned in the near-term.  We note universally positive commentary on Tanker progress from all relevant DoD stakeholders.

* Slightly Bullish: LMT (N-$80): We heard resounding DoD support for F-35, but customer still frustrated by cost & schedule. Int’l demand solid, but buyers laser focused on holding price.  See building confidence in ES revs and IS&GS margins.

* Developing Risk: HII (N-$30): CVN-78 (Ford) is under pressure with overrun currently estimated at >$800M; Congress pushing to zero HII’s profit, although DoD it expected this to mitigate somewhat.

* Incremental: GD (OP-$85): Gulfstream sounds great, Marine sounds good, but Combat remains challenged.  Further, we see risk for GD’s guidance for back-ended 2012 year at IS&T with GD’s expectation for combined effect of likely FY13 CR and Sequester overhang.

Check out InsideDefense.com's coverage of the Credit Suisse conference:

Hale: Costly Submarines Will Force Cuts To Other Priorities

Venlet: Navy To Test F-35C Tailhook Mods This Summer At Pax River

PEO Aircraft Carriers Working To Cut Man Hours, Cost In Future Ships

Mabus: Navy To Move 2,000 Sailors From Desk Jobs To Piers

Venlet: JSF Deferment Will Lead To Pricing Adjustments

Hale: DOD Unmoved By Senator's Warning On More Cuts

Senior Defense Officials: DOD Plans Naval Buildup In Pacific

Nuke Bill
By John Liang
March 9, 2012 at 8:07 PM

House Armed Services strategic forces subcommittee Chairman Michael Turner (R-OH) this week introduced legislation that would "directly link reductions in U.S. nuclear forces with successful execution of the president's nuclear modernization plan," according to a statement from his office. Further:

It would require construction of key new plutonium and uranium facilities, prevent asymmetries between the sizes of U.S. and Russian nuclear forces, and codify the President's promise of full funding for modernization of the nuclear stockpile. Further, the bill would refuse funding for implementing the results of the President's ongoing nuclear employment strategy review to allow ample time for Congress to consider it. Reports in the media have stated that the President's review could recommend unilateral reductions of up to 80 percent of U.S. nuclear forces.

Click here to view the bill.

Saudi Sale
By John Liang
March 8, 2012 at 11:21 PM

The Pentagon late this afternoon formally announced the award of an $11.4 billion foreign military sales contract to Boeing for 84 new F-15 fighter aircraft for Saudi Arabia. The agreement to sell the F-15s to the Saudi government was struck last December.

"This particular undefinitized contract action covers development efforts for the new aircraft and retrofit as well as procurement of the 84 new production aircraft," according to a Defense Department statement. "The locations of the performance are El Segundo, CA, Ocala, FL, and Cedar Rapids, Iowa. Work is expected to be completed October 2020. ASC/WWQ, Wright-Patterson Air Force Base, OH, is the contracting activity."

Last month, InsideDefense.com reported that DOD hopes to ratchet up foreign sales of U.S. weapons, seeking new deals that could advance numerous policy aims including higher procurement rates that would aid the U.S. military as it braces for a prolonged period of fiscal belt-tightening. Further:

Acting DOD acquisition chief Frank Kendall told Wall Street investors and defense industry executives that he is working with the Pentagon's top policy official -- who guides decisions about foreign military sales in cooperation with the State Department -- to find ways to facilitate more overseas deals.

"We've always been supportive of FMS but I think we can up our game a little bit," Kendall said at an aerospace and defense conference organized by Cowen and Company, an investment bank. "And maybe in some cases take a look at taking a little bit more risk then we've been willing to take in the past."

Government-to-government sales of U.S. military equipment totaled $28.3 billion in fiscal year 2011, with Afghanistan, Taiwan and India accounting for more than 50 percent of the total, according to the Defense Security Cooperation Agency, which manages foreign sales for the Pentagon (DefenseAlert, Dec. 5).

DSCA estimates it will secure foreign military sales worth $30.5 billion this fiscal year, which ends Sept. 30, a Pentagon official told InsideDefense.com today. If realized, that estimate would reflect a 2.1 percent increase over FY-11.

The $30.5 billion "baseline" forecast does not include the $29.3 billion sale to Saudi Arabia of F-15 fighters and combat helicopters finalized in December. Once the Saudi deal -- an unusually large arms package -- is factored in, the Pentagon estimates foreign military sales in FY-12 will total $59.8 billion, a previously unreported figure.

NNSA And Sequestration
By John Liang
March 8, 2012 at 4:57 PM

If the National Nuclear Security Administration were to face funding cuts due to sequestration, NNSA would have to work with the Defense Department to understand DOD's priorities, the head of NNSA told reporters this morning.

NNSA is actively working on extending the lives of the B61 and W76 nuclear warheads, and studying how it would go about extending the service life of W78 and W88 warheads, according to the agency's fiscal year 2013 budget justification book. If sequestration were to take place, NNSA would "work with [DOD] to figure out which of these three priority projects can we defer, push back the date on, and what's more important," agency Director Thomas D'Agostino said this morning at a Defense Writers Group breakfast, adding:

It's not just us in isolation -- sequestration is a much broader thing for us. I don't want to tell you what gets cut, because I don't know . . . if we would take any kind of cut at all in sequestration. I just don't know. But I will tell you that taking care of the stockpile, doing the surveillance work is kind of No. 1. We will work then with the Defense Department to determine, given the challenges that they might face in this particular environment and determine whether it impacts force structure, and if it does impact force structure . . . then it could impact the systems we work on.

But as Inside Missile Defense reports this week, D'Agostino hopes he won't need a backup plan in the event the federal government goes into sequestration:

"We don't have a sequestration plan," Thomas D'Agostino told members of the House Appropriations energy and water subcommittee at a Feb. 29 hearing on his organization's fiscal year 2013 budget request. "When I think of plans, I think of a . . . written-down document that has been approved in the organization of, if this happens, we're going to implement plan X, Y, and Z over here. I don't have that written-down document."

C-17 Engines To U.K.
By John Liang
March 7, 2012 at 7:41 PM

The Pentagon is asking for congressional permission to sell $300 million worth of C-17A Globemaster engines to the United Kingdom, according to a Defense Security Cooperation Agency statement released this afternoon:

The Government of the United Kingdom (UK) has requested the possible sale of 20 F-117-PW-100 engines, engine exchange kits, support equipment, Global Positioning Systems, communications equipment, spare and repair parts, personnel training and training equipment, publications and technical documentation, U.S. Government and contractor engineering, technical, and logistics support services, and all other related elements of program support. The proposed sale supports the continued UK access to the United States Air Force/Boeing GLOBEMASTER III Sustainment Partnership program supporting the UK’s fleet of eight Boeing C-17A GLOBEMASTER III aircraft. The estimated cost is $300 million.

This proposed sale will contribute to the foreign policy and national security of the United States by helping to maintain and improve the security of a key NATO ally that has been, and continues to be, an important force for major political stability and economic progress throughout Europe.

The UK was the first foreign customer for the C-17 GLOBEMASTER III cargo aircraft. Continued sustainment of this system by the UK helps alleviate the burden placed on U.S. forces supporting NATO operations. The C-17 provides the UK with an increased force protection capability that enhances regional and global stability. The UK will have no problem absorbing these additional engines and support into its armed forces.

CAPE Reshuffling
By John Liang
March 6, 2012 at 7:20 PM

The Pentagon's cost assessment and program evaluation office is reshuffling some of its personnel, according to a statement issued this afternoon.

Eric Brumer, head of CAPE's program analysis division, will become director of the office's strategic defensive and space programs division. He will succeed Dennis Evans, who has been appointed director of CAPE's tactical air forces division.

Elaine Simmons, the current tactical air forces head, has been assigned to head CAPE's land forces division, according to the Defense Department.