The Insider

The Defense Department should "periodically review and improve [the] visibility of combatant commands' resources," a new Government Accountability Office report recommends.

"Authorized military and civilian positions and mission and headquarters-support costs have grown considerably over the last decade due to the addition of two new commands and increases in authorized positions at theater special operations commands," the May 15 report states. Additionally, military and civilian personnel positions went up by "about 50 percent" between fiscal years 2001 and 2012, to about 10,100 authorized positions.

GAO further found that "mission and headquarters support-costs at the combatant commands more than doubled from fiscal years 2007 through 2012, to about $1.1 billion. Both authorized military and civilian positions and mission and headquarters-support costs at the service component commands supporting the combatant commands also increased."

While the Pentagon "has taken some steps" to manage COCOMs' resources, GAO found that DOD's processes to review size and oversee those commands have "four primary weaknesses that challenge the department's ability to make informed decisions." Those are:

• DOD considers the combatant commands' requests for additional positions, but it does not periodically evaluate the commands' authorized positions to ensure they are still needed to meet the commands' assigned missions.

• DOD tracks some assigned personnel; however, all personnel supporting the commands are not included in DOD's personnel management system and reviews of assigned personnel vary by command.

• The service component commands support both service and combatant command missions. However, the Joint Staff and combatant commands lack visibility and oversight over the authorized manpower and personnel at the service component commands to determine whether functions at the combatant commands can be fulfilled by service component command personnel.

• Each military department submits annual budget documents for operation and maintenance to inform Congress of total authorized positions, full-time equivalents, and mission and headquarters-support funding for all combatant commands that they support. However, these documents do not provide transparency into the resources directed to each combatant command.

"GAO's work on strategic human capital management found that high-performing organizations periodically reevaluate their human capital practices and use complete and reliable data to help achieve their missions and ensure resources are properly matched to the needs of today's environment," the report states. "Until DOD effectively manages the resources of the combatant commands, it may be difficult to ensure that the commands are properly sized to meet their assigned missions, or to identify opportunities to carry out those missions efficiently."

View the full report here.

Six Senate Republicans have notified their colleagues that they will not support any legislation that fails to meet certain standards.

In their May 14 "dear colleague" letter, Sens. Tom Coburn (OK), John McCain (AZ), Ron Johnson (WI), Rand Paul (KY), Kelly Ayotte (NH) and Jeff Flake (AZ) note that the House "has enacted a number of requirements to ensure any bill considered by the chamber does not grow the size or cost of the government or increase our national debt. We believe the Senate should apply these and other commonsense practices to restore fiscal responsibility and increase accountability and transparency in the legislative process."

Consequently, the senators list five standards that, if not met, would be dealbreakers for them:

* All New Spending Must Be Offset With Cuts To Lower Priority Spending

* Government Programs Must Be Periodically Reviewed And Renewed

* The Cost And Text Of Bills Must Be Made Available Prior To Passage

* Duplicative Government Programs Must Be Consolidated Or Eliminated

* Congress Must Not Infringe Upon The Constitutional Rights Of The People

"By making clear these expectations now, it is our hope we can work together earlier in the legislative process to resolve any differences that could otherwise delay or stop the passage of your legislative priorities," the senators' letter states. "And while we expect all of these standards to be met for each bill the Senate considers, this is not an exhaustive list of all the reasons we may individually object to a particular bill or unanimous-consent request."

View the letter here.

Deputy Defense Secretary Ashton Carter issued a memo last week that updates the Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency's "mission, organization and management, responsibilities and functions, relationships, authorities, and administration."

View the memo here.

Inside the Pentagon reported earlier this month that the Defense Department is at work on a new generation of science and technology efforts aimed at weaning the military from a potentially fatal over-reliance on space platforms, giving rise to alternative technologies for precision navigation and long-haul communications. In the same story, ITP reported that DARPA had recently released a new strategy that describes several efforts underway to develop GPS alternatives:

For example, the combination of inertial measurement units and chip-sized atomic clocks can provide precise position, navigation and timing capabilities, according to the DARPA strategy.

These new technologies can be integrated onto weapon systems, providing onboard precision navigation without relying on satellite signals, according to [acting Assistant Secretary of Defense for Research and Engineering Al] Shaffer. "Maybe not as exquisitely, but good enough to operate," he added.

With those kinds of technologies on the rise, GPS could one day be a capability geared more toward civilian applications, Shaffer mused. "I think the nation would still be in need of a GPS," he said. "But that would be a debate that would have to be had. It would no longer have to be a critical Department of Defense system, so I can see a date when we would start to come out of that."

View the full story.

InsideDefense.com reported on Friday about a new white paper issued by the Army, the Marine Corps and U.S. Special Operations Command that argues the United States is likely to fight another war in the next two decades, and victory will be impossible without the use of "capable" American ground forces:

The paper, signed by Army Chief of Staff Gen. Raymond Odierno, Marine Corps Commandant Gen. James Amos and SOCOM chief Adm. William McRaven, labels Iran and North Korea "adversaries." It mentions unrest in Syria and throughout the Middle East, tension in Africa and challenges stemming from China's rise. InsideDefense.com obtained an advance copy of the document, which the Army is due to formally release next week.

Navy and Air Force capabilities have been highlighted in the Pentagon's Air-Sea Battle initiative, aimed at countering anti-access and area-denial weapons developed by China, but the white paper on "strategic landpower" warns that long-range weapons alone cannot win wars. The paper comes amid the Defense Department's Strategic Choices and Management Review, through which high-level DOD officials are assessing how to handle potential looming budget cuts, including the likelihood of shrinking ground forces.

After a decade of war, the nation is "rebalancing its national security strategy to focus on engagement and preventing war," the senior officers write. "Some in the defense community interpret this rebalancing to mean that future conflicts can be prevented or won primarily with standoff technologies and weapons. If warfare were merely a contest of technologies that might be sufficient. However, armed conflict is a clash of interests between or among organized groups, each attempting to impose their will on the opposition."

We now have the white paper.

Read the rest of the story.

The impact of sequestration on the Missile Defense Agency's programs and workforce "is significant," according to MDA Director Vice Adm. James Syring.

Testifying yesterday at a House Armed Services strategic forces subcommittee hearing, Syring said in his prepared testimony:

We will see limitations in our ability to deliver future homeland defense capabilities. To mitigate some of the effects of sequestration cuts, I will be working with the Department to submit an Above Threshold Reprogramming request as part of the Department’s larger request this year.

Asked by subcommittee Ranking Member James Cooper (D-TN) to elaborate, Syring said:

There is an impact to the work I do in the work force of sequestration, as those cuts came down. And what we've done as part of our reprogramming request that will be submitted to the department is offer a better way and better method to take some of those cuts to mitigate and keep my highest priority issues fully funded and on schedule. So I'll share those details with you once I'm allowed to submit them via the comptroller, once they're approved. But I can assure you that what I've offered is a better use and better way to spread the cuts and preserve my top priorities for homeland regional and regional defense.

Syring is scheduled to testify this afternoon before the Senate Armed Services strategic forces subcommittee.

InsideDefense.com last week obtained a draft copy of the reprogramming request, which states that the Pentagon plans to ask Congress for permission to shift nearly $159.8 million for various missile defense activities, including the Ground-based Midcourse Defense and Aegis Ballistic Missile Defense programs. As InsideDefense.com reported:

If approved by Congress, most of the reprogrammed money would support the highly anticipated GMD intercept test slated for later this calendar year.

The draft document could undergo changes before it is approved by the Pentagon and sent to Congress, where the four defense oversight committees will have a say before any funding shifts can be made. A single "no" from any of the committees' members is enough to halt a funding transfer.

According to the draft reprogramming request, the Defense Department wants nearly $31 million for GMD flight-testing. "The Department is committed to increasing the defense of the Homeland from missile attack," the document states, adding: "This commitment requires a successful return to flight-testing of the GMD program."

View the full story here.

Sens. Carl Levin (D-MI), John McCain (R-AZ), Jay Rockefeller (D-WV) and Tom Coburn (R-OK) have introduced legislation aimed at countering cyber theft of U.S. technologies by foreign companies and governments.

The "Deter Cyber Theft Act" would combat "the theft of valuable intellectual property from U.S. companies, which invest billions every year in research and development, only to be targeted by foreign countries and companies that illegally access valuable data and then use it to compete against American companies and workers," according to a joint statement released by the four senators.

The proposed bill "would require the Director of National Intelligence to compile an annual report on foreign economic and industrial espionage," the statement reads, including:

*    A list of foreign countries that engage in economic or industrial espionage in cyberspace against U.S. firms or individuals, including a priority watch list of the worst offenders;

*    A list of U.S. technologies or proprietary information targeted by such espionage, and, to the extent possible, a list of such information that has been stolen;

*    A list of items produced using such stolen information;

*    A list of foreign companies, including state-owned firms, that benefit from such theft;

*    Details of the espionage activities of foreign countries; and

*    Actions taken by the DNI and other federal agencies to combat industrial or economic espionage in cyberspace.

The president would also be required "to block import of products containing stolen U.S. technology; products made by state-owned enterprises of nations on the DNI's priority watch list that are similar to items identified in the DNI's report as stolen or targeted U.S. technology; or made by a company the DNI identifies as having benefited from theft of U.S. technology or proprietary information," according to the statement.