House Committee on Armed Services Report on H.R. 2647, National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2010

Bill Number: 
H. Rept. 111-166
Bill Status: 
Bill Location: 
Date of Last Action: 
Thursday, June 18, 2009
Relevant Text: 




1st Session



JUNE 18, 2009- Committed to the Committee of the Whole House on the State of the Union and ordered to be printed

Mr. SKELTON, from the Committee on Armed Services, submitted the following


together with


[To accompany H.R. 2647]

[Including cost estimate of the Congressional Budget Office]

    The Committee on Armed Services, to whom was referred the bill (H.R. 2647) to authorize appropriations for fiscal year 2010 for military activities of the Department of Defense, to prescribe military personnel strengths for fiscal year 2010, and for other purposes, having considered the same, reports favorably thereon with amendments and recommends that the bill as amended do pass.

    The amendments are as follows:

    The amendment strikes all after the enacting clause of the bill and inserts a new text which appears in italic type in the reported bill.

    The title of the bill is amended to reflect the amendment to the text of the bill.





The budget request contained $1.06 billion for drug interdiction and counter-drug activities, in addition to $135.8 million, for operational tempo, which is contained within the operating budgets of the military services. The budget is organized in fiscal year 2010 to address four broad national priorities: (1) international support; (2) domestic support; (3) intelligence and technology; and (4) demand reduction.

The committee recommends an authorization for fiscal year 2010 Department of Defense counter-drug activities as follows (in millions of U.S. dollars):



FY10 Drug Interdiction and Counter-Drug Request $1,059.0

International Support $537.5

Domestic Support $212.5

Intelligence Technology and Other Demand Reduction $169.8

Demand Reduction $139.2

Recommended Decrease:

International Support--USEUCOM -$5.6

International Support -$32.0

Recommended Increase:

International Support--USNORTHCOM/USSOUTHCOM $5.6

International Support--USCENTCOM CN TRAINING $24.0

FY10 Drug Interdiction and Counter-Drug Recommendation $1,051.0



Budget requests

The budget request contained nearly $1.1 billion for drug interdiction and counter-drug activities, including all counter-narcotics resources in the Department of Defense with the exception of those resources in the operating budget for the military services and those resources which are appropriated or requested in emergency budgets. The committee notes that, in the fiscal year 2010 budget request, the Administration proposed to fund the counter-narcotics activities to the Islamic Republic of Afghanistan and the rest of Central Asia through the regular budget request process, instead of using separate Overseas Contingency Operations budget requests, as had become the pattern in previous years. The committee welcomes this development and notes that the fiscal year 2010 Overseas Contingency Operations request for $324.6 million, which was submitted as part of the regular budget process, is fully funded in title XV of this Act.

Department of Defense efforts to combat drug-related cartel activity along the United States border with Mexico

The committee notes that over the past year, narcotics-related activity has increased in the northern United Mexican States to the point that in April 2008, the Mexican government deployed three Army brigades to the city of Juarez to quell cartel crime and violence. The committee is aware that, concurrently, many U.S. border-states have realized an increase in narcotics-related violence, and states across the country have felt the impact of increasingly powerful narco-trafficking cartels. The committee directs the Secretary of Defense to provide a briefing on the efforts of the Department of Defense (DOD) to combat cartel activity to the House Committee on Armed Services by August 1, 2009. The briefing may be classified and should include a review of DOD coordination with other U.S. agencies and with the Mexican government.

International support

The budget request contained $537.5 million for international support. The committee understands the importance of international support and notes that this request for international support will result in increased operational support for all four military services. This support includes: detection and monitoring platforms and assets; command and control support; and the training, equipment, and supplies intended for other nations that are key to the U.S. national drug strategy and defense security cooperation goals.

The committee recommends fully funding the proposed international support with a number of changes. The Administration proposes increasing the counter-narcotics operational support of the U.S. European Command (USEUCOM) by more than 134 percent in fiscal year 2010 from fiscal year 2009 enacted levels. Although USEUCOM provided invaluable counter-narcotics support to the U.S. Africa Command (USAFRICOM) while the latter was being established, USEUCOM no longer has responsibility over that geographic area. Further, the Administration's cursory explanation for more than doubling this account year-on-year is insufficient. As a result, given the counter-narcotics needs elsewhere in the world, the committee recommends decreasing the budget for USEUCOM counter-narcotics operational support from $9.95 million to $4.35 million, which still represents a two percent increase from last year. The committee is prepared to entertain a reprogramming request from the Department of Defense should USEUCOM present a detailed justification for additional resources.

As part of a comprehensive effort of the United States to assist the United Mexican States, the committee intends to address the influx of illicit narcotics into the United States from Mexico which entered the latter country from its southern border with the Republic of Guatemala and Belize. The committee recommends increasing the accounts for U.S. Northern Command (USNORTHCOM) and U.S. Southern Command (USSOUTHCOM) by $5.6 million to improve the coordination of counter-narcotic efforts between Mexico, Guatemala, and Belize along their shared borders.

The Department of Defense estimates that approximately 80 percent of the cocaine consumed in the United States enters Mexico through its southern border. Guatemala and Belize have become major transshipment hubs of cocaine, with the majority of illicit drugs originating in South America. The Department of Defense estimates that nearly 90 percent of cocaine entering Guatemala is subsequently shipped into Mexico, most of this amount arriving by overland transport. The Department of Defense finds that the profits from the sale of this cocaine perpetuate the drug-related violence in Mexico and the United States.

To address the influx of illicit narcotics into Mexico through its southern border by facilitating the coordination and interdiction efforts in the tri-border area, the committee increases the counter-drug accounts for USNORTHCOM and USSOUTHCOM by $5.6 million. Specifically, the committee encourages the Secretary of Defense, working through the commanders of USNORTHCOM and USSOUTHCOM, to assist Mexico and its two southern Central American neighbors by: strengthening their respective governmental presence in remote areas; improving full spectrum domain awareness and reaction capability; and encouraging nations to cooperate and respond in a regional nature. Specifically, the committee recommends that the Secretary of Defense: upgrade fixed Belizean border checkpoints west of San Ignacio and at Corozal; upgrade fixed sites in Guatemala along the Guatemalan/Mexican border; train Belizean security forces in the best practices of border security, night interdiction operations, and jungle and riverine operations; and properly equip the Belizean security forces for these missions.

The second major change within international support, which the committee recommends, regards the transfer of Mi-17s to the Islamic Republic of Pakistan. Although the committee supports the President's commitment to assist the government of Pakistan in its fight against insurgents and terrorists, including through the use by the armed forces of Pakistan of existing U.S. stocks of Mi-17s, the committee is concerned that the transfer of such equipment to Pakistan may substantially decrease the training capabilities of the Department of Defense to combat the narcotics trade in the Islamic Republic of Afghanistan. As a result, the committee expects the Secretary of Defense to procure, at a cost of $16.0 million, two factory-rebuilt Mi-17 helicopters and upgrade their cockpits to make them night-vision capable as well as compatible for operations involving the member countries of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization serving in Afghanistan. The committee recommends decreasing international support by $16 million to account for this purchase.

The committee recommends an additional $16.0 million is recommended to be allocated from international support in the following manner: (1) $8.0 million to remain within international support for the purchase of one factory-rebuilt Mi-17 helicopter with upgraded cockpit; and (2) $8.0 million from international support to be transferred to Operation and Maintenance, Army, for the purchase of one factory-rebuilt Mi-17 helicopter with upgraded cockpit. Both of these helicopters are meant to fulfill the requirement that was created by the transfer of two Mi-17 helicopters from Ft. Bliss, Texas, where they were part of a training program for counter-drug activities by Afghan security forces.




This section would extend, by one year, the reporting requirement on expenditures to support foreign counter-drug activities under section 1022(a) of the Floyd D. Spence National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2001 (Public Law 106-398), as most recently amended by section 1021 of the Duncan Hunter National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2009 (Public Law 110-417).

This section would also extend, by one year, the unified counter-drug and counter-terrorism campaign in the Republic of Colombia under section 1021 of the Ronald W. Reagan National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2005 (Public Law 108-375), as most recently amended by section 1023 of the Duncan Hunter National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2009 (Public Law 110-417).

This section would further extend, by one year, the support for counter-drug activities of certain foreign governments under section 1033(a)(2) of the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 1998 (Public Law 105-85), as most recently amended by section 1024(a) of the Duncan Hunter National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2009 (Public Law 110-417).


This section would extend, by one year, the support by joint task forces under section 1022(b) of the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2004 (Public Law 108-136), as most recently amended by section 1022 of the Duncan Hunter National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2009 (Public Law 110-417). The current authority provides that a joint task force of the Department of Defense, which is providing support to law enforcement agencies conducting counter-drug activities, may also provide, subject to all applicable laws and regulations, these law enforcement agencies with support for their counter-terrorism activities.


This section would require the Comptroller General to present a report to the appropriate defense committees within 180 days after the date of enactment of this Act, which would: describe the performance evaluation system of the Department of Defense for measuring the effectiveness of the Department of Defense's counter-drug activities; assess the ability of this system to measure such activities effectively; and recommend improvements to such a system.



The committee supports efforts of the Department of Defense to combat terrorism and remains supportive of the authority provided by section 1208(c) of the Ronald W. Reagan National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2005 (Public Law 108-375), as amended, and commonly referenced as the `1208 Program.'

The committee is encouraged with the progress, including reporting protocols, established in pursuit of this authority and urges the Secretary of Defense to maintain the current level of openness, transparency, and consultation on all related activities. Despite experiencing a period of poor execution during fiscal years 2005 and 2006, the managers of the 1208 Program have since experienced numerous examples of success and the committee notes with appreciation the greater detail included in the annual submission of activities. The committee further applauds the constant consultation provided by Special Operations Command (SOCOM) with respect to these activities, and support for congressional delegations traveling to investigate the execution of these initiatives in the field.

The committee is aware that the SOCOM Commander seeks additional program flexibility and stability with respect to the 1208 authority and remains supportive. The committee notes that the 1208 Program is an authorization to utilize funds available, as opposed to a separate appropriation, and believes that such a distinction offers an additional amount of oversight review and discipline. Prior to recommending a specific operation under 1208, the SOCOM Commander must prioritize between operations and maintenance requirements at SOCOM and those that might be best executed by, with, and through foreign irregular forces, groups, or individuals. The committee believes such a process of prioritization is beneficial.

The committee, however, remains concerned about the 1208 Program in at least two specific respects. First, the committee remains concerned about any attempts to expand 1208 initiatives into a `train and equip' program managed out of SOCOM. The committee fundamentally believes that major train and equip efforts are best maintained elsewhere in the Department of Defense and only after close collaboration between the Secretary of Defense and the Secretary of State.

The committee is also concerned about the past and potential use of private contractors to execute the 1208 program. As a result, the committee directs the Secretary to submit a report summarizing both U.S. and foreign contractor support on these activities and an explanation of the circumstances of each to the Senate Committee on Armed Services and the House Committee on Armed Services by December 31, 2009. The summation should include an explanation about the amount and type of contract award, the name of the award recipient, and details about the nature of both the solicitation and selection process. Furthermore, the committee directs the Secretary to modify subsequent annual 1208 summations to include information on all future contractor involvement by operation and as appropriate. The committee also directs the Secretary to include information on the intent to use contractor support when notifying the congressional defense committees of an approval of a new operation.

Finally, to provide maximum management flexibility of the 1208 Program, the committee recommends an increase in the annual authorization from $35.0 million to $50.0 million. The committee believes that the additional authority would relieve the threat of funding constraints during planning discussions about potential 1208 operations.


The committee notes that over the last several years, the Department of Defense has developed a number of security cooperation programs to increase the capability of the military forces of certain partner nations, broadly referred to as Building Partnership Capacity (BPC). The committee commends the Department for proactively adapting to a rapidly evolving operating environment but notes that Congress continues to consider the future, permanent form these BPC authorities will take.

Therefore, the committee directs the Comptroller General to submit a report not later than April 1, 2010, to the Senate Committee on Armed Services and Senate Committee on Foreign Relations and the House Committee on Armed Services and the House Committee on Foreign Affairs on the timeliness, effectiveness, and interagency coordination of Department of Defense BPC programs relative to the Department of State and United States Agency for International Development (USAID) security assistance programs that conduct similar activities. At a minimum, the report should include an assessment of:

      (1) Where, if anywhere, BPC programs and BPC-like security assistance programs in the Department of State and USAID do not meet requirements identified by the Secretary of Defense or the Secretary of State.

      (2) The long-term plans for these programs, to include resourcing and legal authorities that may be required.

      (3) The requirements of other executive branch stakeholders in the program, beyond the department or agency administrating a particular program, including, but not be limited to relevant ambassadors, USAID missions, combatant commands, and Department of State regional bureaus.


    The committee has closely watched the application and evolution of the `train and equip' authority also known as `1206' since its inception through section 1206 of the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2006 (Public Law 109-163). In general, and with some notable exceptions, the committee regards the historical execution of this authority favorably and concludes that it is an important aspect of a combatant commander's theater engagement strategy. The committee recognizes that it has become an important tool for building partner capacity and security cooperation.

    In the past, the committee has regarded this and related authorities as part of the foreign assistance family of authorities that has traditionally resided within the Department of State's purview. However, as the committee has observed the execution and growth of this program over time, the committee has come to see a distinction between traditional foreign assistance-related authorities designed to assist a foreign country to meet what it perceives as its own national security requirements within the context of a larger United States foreign policy framework, and this new type of authority, which generally represents the Secretary of Defense's assessment of a combatant commander's need to build certain capacities in partner nations to satisfy specific theater security requirements.

    This fundamental distinction of purpose between requirements generated on behalf of the foreign nation (consistent with U.S. policy), and requirements generated through a Department of Defense-led assessment of the United States' national security needs is significant. It is critical to the understanding of the future of these authorities. The committee believes it is appropriate for the Secretary of Defense to have a major role in the latter case. In the past, the committee has supported the notion that these `train and equip' authorities might better reside within the Department of State's suite of foreign assistance tools. This may still prove to be the optimal case in the future. Nevertheless, the committee supports the idea of retaining the `dual key' approach that requires Secretary of State concurrence, but emphasizes that, whatever the final, permanent form these authorities take, the Secretary of Defense must play a primary role in generating requirements.

    Additionally, the committee is concerned that the Department of State still lacks the capacity to execute these authorities. The Department of State has not yet reformed the management of its foreign assistance programs in a manner that would give the committee confidence that the Department of State is ready to assume responsibility for Department of Defense security cooperation programs. The committee looks forward to continuing interaction with the Department of Defense and the Department of State to design the enduring form these authorities will take when this temporary authorization expires at the end of fiscal year 2011.

    The committee notes that, so far, the bulk of the application of this authority has been for the counterterrorism purpose. That, coupled with the planned reorganization within the Office of the Secretary of Defense to house the office which oversees this authority under the Assistant Secretary of Defense for Special Operations/Low Intensity Conflict & Interdependent Capabilities, threatens to create an enduring perception that this is primarily intended to be counterterrorism authority. `1206' authority was meant for a fairly broad purpose, both to train and equip partner countries to conduct counterterrorism operations and also to participate in military or stability operations in conjunction with United States forces. The committee cautions against the sub-optimization of the authority and therefore would like to make clear that, as an example, it would entertain proposals to use this authority to train and equip partner nations and allies with a demonstrated need for assistance for participation in third theatres, including ongoing operations in the Republic of Iraq and the Islamic Republic of Afghanistan.




    This section would make permanent the reporting requirement in section 1209 of the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2008 (Public Law 110-181) requiring a report on certain assistance provided to foreign nations. It would also add the humanitarian and civil assistance provided through the Combatant Commander's Initiative Fund as an additional reporting requirement.


    This section would require a report from the President by March 1, 2010, on the relationship between security cooperation authorities the Department of Defense uses to build the capacity of foreign military forces and the security assistance authorities the Department of State and other agencies use to train and equip foreign military forces. The report required by this section would also include information regarding: the strengths and weaknesses of current laws governing and relating to the provision of this type of assistance; recommended changes, if any, to those laws; any organizational and procedural changes that should be made in the Department of Defense and the Department of State to improve their ability to conduct such programs; and the resources and funding mechanisms required to assure adequate funding for such programs.





    This section would prohibit, in this division or otherwise, funds being made available for military construction of a cooperative security location (CSL) at German Olano Airbase in Palanquero, Republic of Colombia, until 15 days from the date on which the Secretary of Defense certifies to the congressional defense committees that an agreement has been entered into with the government of Colombia that permits the establishment of the cooperative security location at the German Olano Airbase in a manner that will enable the United States Southern Command to execute its Theater Posture Strategy in cooperation with the armed forces of Colombia. The committee notes that in title 23 of this Act, the committee includes a provision that would authorize the appropriation of $46.0 million, as requested by the Department of Defense, to construct the CSL at Palanquero, under the working premise that an agreement would be reached with the government of Colombia during fiscal year 2010.

    This section does not provide for, authorize, or establish the permanent stationing of United States armed forces in Colombia.