S. 3254 (112^th): National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2013

To maximize planned work in shops and early stages of construction.

To sequence construction of structural units to maximize the effects of lessons learned.

To incorporate design changes to improve producibility for the Ford class aircraft carriers.

To increase the size of erection units to eliminate disruptive unit breaks and improve unit alignment and fairness.

To increase outfitting levels for assembled units before erection in the dry-dock.

To increase overall ship completion levels at each key construction event.

To improve facilities in a manner that will lead to improved productivity.

To ensure the shipbuilder initiates plans that will improve productivity through capital improvements that would provide targeted return on investment, including—

determines that such an approach will permit the Navy to procure an additional Virginia class submarine in fiscal year 2014; and

intends to use the funding for that purpose.

Transfer to AEGIS Ashore System

Notwithstanding any other provision of law, the Secretary of the Navy may transfer AEGIS Weapon System (AWS) equipment with ballistic missile defense (BMD) capability to the Missile Defense Agency for use in the AEGIS Ashore System of the Agency for installation in the country designated as Host Nation #1 (HN–1) by transferring to the Agency such equipment procured with amounts authorized to be appropriated to the SCN account for fiscal years 2010 and 2011 for the DDG–51 Class Destroyer Program.

Adjustments in equipment deliveries

Transfer from AEGIS Ashore System

The Director of the Missile Defense Agency shall transfer AEGIS Weapon System equipment with ballistic missile defense capability procured for installation in the AEGIS Ashore System to the Department of the Navy for the DDG–51 Class Destroyer Program to replace any equipment transferred to Agency under paragraph (1).

Treatment of transfer in funding destroyer construction

Notwithstanding the source of funds for any equipment transferred under paragraph (3), the Secretary shall fund all work necessary to complete construction and outfitting of any destroyer in which such equipment is installed in the same manner as if such equipment had been acquired using amounts in the SCN account.

SCN account defined

In this subsection, the term SCN account means the Shipbuilding and Conversion, Navy account.

designate the effort to develop and produce all variants of the mission modules in support of the Littoral Combat Ship program as a major defense acquisition program under section 2430 of title 10, United States Code; and

with respect to the development and production of each variant, submit to the congressional defense committees a report setting forth such cost, schedule, and performance information as would be provided if such effort were a major defense acquisition program, including Selected Acquisition Reports, unit cost reports, and program baselines.

The United States Marine Corps is a combat force which leverages maneuver from the sea as a force multiplier allowing for a variety of operational tasks ranging from major combat operations to humanitarian assistance.

The United States Marine Corps is unique in that, while embarked upon Naval vessels, they bring all the logistic support necessary for the full range of military operations, operating “from the sea” they require no third party host nation permission to conduct military operations.

The Department of the Navy has a requirement for 38 amphibious assault ships to meet this full range of military operations.

Due to fiscal constraints only, that requirement of 38 vessels was reduced to 33 vessels, which adds military risk to future operations.

The Department of the Navy has been unable to meet even the minimal requirement of 30 operationally available vessels and has submitted a shipbuilding and ship retirement plan to Congress which will reduce the force to 28 vessels.

Experience has shown that early engineering and design of naval vessels has significantly reduced the acquisition costs and life-cycle costs of those vessels.

the Department of Defense should carefully evaluate the maritime force structure necessary to execute demand for forces by the commanders of the combatant commands;

the Department of the Navy carefully evaluate amphibious lift capabilities to meet current and projected requirements;

the Department of the Navy should consider prioritization of investment in and procurement of the next generation of amphibious assault ships, as a component of the balanced battle force;

the next generation amphibious assault ships should maintain survivability protection;

operation and maintenance requirements analysis, as well as the potential to leverage a common hull form design, should be considered to reduce total ownership cost and acquisition cost; and

maintaining a robust amphibious ship building industrial base is vital for the future of the national security of the United States.

by striking Effective October 1, 2011, the and inserting The; and

by striking 301 aircraft and inserting 275 aircraft.

is stored in flyable condition;

can be returned to service; and

is not used to supply parts to other aircraft unless specifically authorized by the Secretary of Defense upon a request by the Secretary of the Air Force.

Any modernization program through Increment 3.2A.

The Reliability and Maintainability Maturation Program (RAMMP) and the Structural Repair Program (SRP II).

The modernization Increment 3.2B and any future F–22A Raptor aircraft modernization program that would otherwise, if a standalone program, qualify for treatment as a major defense acquisition program for purposes of chapter 144 of title 10, United States Code.

Avionics Modernization Program

The Secretary of the Air Force shall take no action to cancel or modify the Avionics Modernization Program (AMP) for the C–130 aircraft until 30 days after the date of the submittal to the congressional defense committees of the report required by subsection (b).

CNS/ATM program

The costs and schedule to complete the current program of record for the Avionics Modernization Program for the C–130 aircraft, as anticipated at the time of the last certification on that program under section 2433a of title 10, United States Code.

The total cost and schedule, from start to completion, of any proposed alternative communication, navigation, surveillance, and air traffic management program for the C–130 aircraft.

The projected manpower savings to be derived from the current program of record for the Avionics Modernization Program for the C–130 aircraft in comparison with the projected manpower savings to be derived from any proposed alternative communication, navigation, surveillance, and air traffic management program for the C–130 aircraft.

In general

The Secretary of the Air Force may procure two space-based infrared system satellites by entering into a fixed-price contract for such procurement.

Cost reduction

The Secretary may include in a contract entered into under paragraph (1) the following:

Use of incremental funding

The Secretary may use incremental funding for a contract entered into under paragraph (1) for a period not to exceed six fiscal years.

Liability

A contract entered into under paragraph (1) shall provide that—

Limitation

Except as provided in subsection (c), and excluding amounts described in paragraph (2), the total amount obligated or expended for the procurement of two space-based infrared system satellites authorized by subsection (a) may not exceed $3,900,000,000.

Exclusion

The amounts described in this paragraph are amounts associated with the following:

In general

The Secretary may increase the limitation set forth in subsection (b)(1) by the amount of an increase described in paragraph (2) if the Secretary submits to the congressional defense committees written notification of the increase made to that limitation.

Increase described

An increase described in this paragraph is one of the following:

Report on contracts

Not later than 30 days after the date on which the Secretary enters into a contract under subsection (a), the Secretary shall submit to the congressional defense committees a report on the contract that includes the following:

Plan for using cost savings

Not later than 90 days after the date on which the Secretary enters into a contract under subsection (a), the Secretary shall submit to the congressional defense committees a plan for using the cost savings described in paragraph (1)(A) to improve the capability of military infrared and early warning satellites that includes a description of the following:

amounts authorized to be appropriated for fiscal year 2011 by section 103(1) of the Ike Skelton National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2011 (Public Law 111–383; 124 Stat. 4152) for aircraft procurement for the Air Force; and

amounts authorized to be appropriated for fiscal year 2012 by section 101 of the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2012 (Public Law 112–81; 125 Stat. 1317) and available for Aircraft Procurement, Air Force as specified in the funding table in section 4101 of that Act.

A description of the efforts of the contractor under the Shallow Water Combat Submersible (SWCS) program and the United States Special Operations Command to improve the accuracy of the tracking of the schedule and costs of the program.

The revised timeline for the initial and full operational capability of the Shallow Water Combat Submersible.

A current estimate of the cost to meet the basis of issue requirement under the program.

Quarterly reports required

The Commander of the United States Special Operations Command shall submit to the congressional defense committees on a quarterly basis updates on the metrics from the earned value management system with which the Command is tracking the schedule and cost performance of the contractor of the Shallow Water Combat Submersible program.

Sunset

The requirement in paragraph (1) shall cease on the date the Shallow Water Combat Submersible has completed operational testing and has been found to be operationally effective and operationally suitable.

Mechanisms for establishing agile prototyping practices and programs, including rotorcraft X-planes, and an identification of the resources required for such purposes.

A restructuring of the Joint Multi-role (JMR) development program of the Army to include more technology demonstration platforms with challenge goals of significant reductions in cost and time to flight.

A restructuring of the X-Plane Rotorcraft program of the Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency to develop performance objectives beyond the Joint Multi-role development program, including at least two competing teams.

Approaches, including competitive prize awards, to encourage the development of advanced rotorcraft capabilities to address challenge problems such as nap-of-earth automated flight, urban operation near buildings, slope landings, automated autorotation or power-off recovery, and automated selection of landing areas.

The Ballistic Missile Defense Review of February 2010 stated as its first policy priority that the United States will continue to defend the homeland against the threat of limited ballistic missile attack and that an essential element of the United States’ homeland ballistic missile defense strategy is to hedge against future uncertainties, including both the uncertainty of future threat capabilities and the technical risks inherent to our own development plans.

The United States currently has an operational Ground-based Midcourse Defense (GMD) system with 30 Ground-Based Interceptors (GBIs) deployed in Alaska and California, protecting the United States against the potential future threat of limited ballistic missile attack from countries such as North Korea and Iran.

As Deputy Assistant Secretary of Defense for Nuclear and Missile Defense Policy Bradley Roberts testified before the Committee on Armed Services of the Senate on April 25, 2012, [w]ith 30 GBIs in place, the United States is in an advantageous position vis-à-vis the threats from North Korea and Iran, and neither has successfully tested an ICBM or demonstrated an ICBM-class warhead.

Deputy Assistant Secretary Roberts testified that maintaining this advantageous position requires continued improvement to the GMD system, including enhanced performance by the GBIs and the deployment of new sensors. It also requires the development of the Precision Tracking Space System (PTSS) to handle larger raid sizes and the Standard Missile-3 (SM–3) Block IIB as the ICBM threat from states like Iran and North Korea matures. These efforts will help to ensure that the United States possesses the capability to counter the projected threat for the foreseeable future.

As its highest priority, the Missile Defense Agency is designing a correction to the problem that caused a December 2010 flight test failure of the Ground-based Midcourse Defense system using the Capability Enhancement II (CE–II) model of exo-atmospheric kill vehicle, and plans to demonstrate the correction in two flight tests before resuming production or assembly of additional Capability Enhancement II kill vehicles.

The Department of Defense has a program to improve the performance and reliability of the Ground-based Midcourse Defense system, including a plan to test every component of the Ground-Based Interceptors for reliability. According to Department of Defense officials, the goal of the Ground-Based Interceptor reliability program is to double the number of threat Intercontinental Ballistic Missiles (ICBMs) that our current inventory of Ground-Based Interceptors could defeat, thereby effectively doubling the capability of our current Ground-based Midcourse Defense system.

The Missile Defense Agency, working with the Director of Operational Test and Evaluation and with United States Strategic Command, has developed a comprehensive Integrated Master Test Plan (IMTP) for missile defense, with flight tests for the Ground-based Midcourse Defense system planned through fiscal year 2022, including salvo testing, multiple simultaneous engagement testing, and operational testing.

The Director of Operational Test and Evaluation, who must review, approve, and sign each semi-annual version of the Integrated Master Test Plan, testified that the Test Plan is a robust and rigorous test plan. He also testified that the current pace of Ground-based Midcourse Defense system testing of one flight test per year is the best that we’ve been able to achieve over a decade.

The Director of the Missile Defense Agency testified before the Committee on Armed Services of the Senate on April 25, 2012, that flight testing the Ground-based Midcourse Defense system more often than once per year could cause greater risk of further failure and setbacks to developing our homeland defense capability as rapidly as possible.

As part of its homeland defense hedging strategy, the Department of Defense has already decided upon or implemented a number of actions to improve the missile defense posture of the United States in case the threat of Intercontinental Ballistic Missiles from North Korea or Iran emerges sooner or in greater numbers than anticipated. These include the following actions:

As part of its homeland defense hedging strategy review, the Department of Defense is considering other options to enhance the future United States posture to defend the homeland, including the feasibility, advisability and affordability of deploying additional Ground-Based Interceptors, either in Alaska or at a missile defense site on the East Coast of the United States.

it is a national priority to defend the homeland against the potential future threat of limited ballistic missile attack from countries such as North Korea and Iran;

the currently deployed Ground-based Midcourse Defense system, with 30 Ground-Based Interceptors deployed in Alaska and California, provides protection of the United States homeland against the potential future threat of limited ballistic missile attack from North Korea and Iran;

it is essential for the Ground-based Midcourse Defense system to achieve the levels of reliability, availability, sustainability, and operational performance that will allow it to continue providing protection of the United States homeland against limited ballistic missile attack;

the Missile Defense Agency should, as its highest priority, correct the problem that caused the December 2010 Ground-based Midcourse Defense system flight test failure and demonstrate the correction in flight tests before resuming production of the Capability Enhancement-II kill vehicle, in order to provide confidence that the system will work as intended;

the Department of Defense should continue to enhance the performance and reliability of the Ground-based Midcourse Defense system, and enhance the capability of the Ballistic Missile Defense System, to provide improved capability to defend the homeland against possible increased future missile threats from North Korea and Iran;

the Missile Defense Agency should continue its robust, rigorous, and realistic testing of the Ground-based Midcourse Defense system at a pace of one flight test per year, as described in the Integrated Master Test Plan, including salvo testing, multiple simultaneous engagement testing, and operational testing;

if successfully developed, the Standard Missile-3 Block IIB interceptor would provide an essential first layer of defense of the homeland against an emerging Intercontinental Ballistic Missile threat from Iran, using a cost-effective forward-based early intercept system that could permit holding Ground-Based Interceptors in reserve, and if such interceptor could be deployed on ships, it would also provide a significant enhancement to defense against possible future threats from North Korea;

the Precision Tracking Space System has the potential to improve dramatically the capability of homeland and regional missile defense systems against large numbers of missiles launched simultaneously, and should remain a high priority for development;

the Department of Defense has taken a number of prudent, affordable, cost-effective, and operationally significant steps to hedge against the possibility of future growth in the missile threat to the homeland from North Korea and Iran; and

the Department of Defense should continue to evaluate the evolution of the long-range missile threat from North Korea and Iran and consider other possibilities for prudent, affordable, cost-effective, and operationally significant steps to improve the posture of the United States to defend the homeland against possible future growth in the threat.

Report required

Not later than 180 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 status of efforts to improve the homeland ballistic missile defense capability of the United States.

Elements of report

The report required by paragraph (1)) shall include the following:

Form of report

The report shall be submitted in unclassified form, but may include a classified annex.

In the introduction to the Ballistic Missile Defense Review of February 2010, Secretary of Defense Robert Gates states that I have made defending against near-term regional threats a top priority of our missile defense plans, programs and capabilities.

In describing the threat of regional ballistic missiles, the report of the Ballistic Missile Defense Review states that there is no uncertainty about the existence of regional threats. They are clear and present. The threat from short-range, medium-range, and intermediate-range ballistic missiles (SRBMs, MRBMs, and IRBMs) in regions where the United States deploys forces and maintains security relationships is growing at a particularly rapid pace.

In testimony before the Committee on Armed Services of the Senate on April 25, 2012, Dr. Bradley Roberts, Deputy Assistant Secretary of Defense for Nuclear and Missile Defense Policy stated, with respect to regional missile defense, that the need arises from the rapidly emerging threats to our armed forces in Europe, the Middle East, and East Asia from regional missile proliferators and the basic challenge such proliferation poses to the safety and security of our forces and allies and to our power projection strategy.

Iran has the largest inventory of regional ballistic missiles in the Middle East, with hundreds of missiles that can reach southeastern Europe and all of the Middle East, including Israel. Iran is improving its existing missiles and developing new and longer-range missiles.

North Korea has a large and growing inventory of short-range and medium-range ballistic missiles that can reach United States forces and allies in South Korea and Japan. North Korea is improving its existing missiles and developing new and longer-range missiles.

In September 2009, President Barack Obama announced that he had accepted the unanimous recommendation of the Secretary of Defense and the Joint Chiefs of Staff to establish a European Phased Adaptive Approach to missile defense, designed to protect deployed United States forces and allies and partners in Europe against the large and growing threat of ballistic missiles from Iran.

In November 2010, at the Lisbon Summit, the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) decided to adopt the core mission of missile defense of its population, territory and forces. The North Atlantic Treaty Organization agreed to enhance its missile defense command and control system, the Active Layered Theater Ballistic Missile Defense, to provide a North Atlantic Treaty Organization command and control capability. This is in addition to contributions of missile defense capability from individual nations.

During 2011, the United States successfully implemented Phase 1 of the European Phased Adaptive Approach, including deployment of an AN/TPY–2 radar in Turkey, deployment of an Aegis Ballistic Missile Defense ship in the eastern Mediterranean Sea with Standard Missile-3 Block IA interceptors, and establishment of a missile defense command and control system in Germany.

During 2011, the United States successfully negotiated all the international agreements with North Atlantic Treaty Organization allies needed to permit future phases of the European Phased Adaptive Approach, including agreements with Romania and Poland to permit the deployment of Aegis Ashore missile defense systems on their territory, an agreement with Turkey to permit deployment of an AN/TPY–2 radar on its territory, and an agreement with Spain to permit the forward stationing of four Aegis Ballistic Missile Defense ships at Rota.

Phase 2 of the European Phased Adaptive Approach is planned for deployment in 2015, and is planned to include the deployment of Standard Missile-3 Block IB interceptors on Aegis Ballistic Missile Defense ships and at an Aegis Ashore site in Romania.

Phase 3 of the European Phased Adaptive Approach is planned for deployment in 2018, and is planned to include the deployment of Standard Missile-3 Block IIA interceptors on Aegis Ballistic Missile Defense ships and at an Aegis Ashore site in Poland.

Phase 4 of the European Phased Adaptive Approach is planned for deployment in 2020, and is planned to include the deployment of Standard Missile-3 Block IIB interceptors at Aegis Ashore sites. This interceptor is intended to protect both Europe and the United States against potential future long-range ballistic missiles from Iran.

At the North Atlantic Treaty Organization Summit in Chicago in 2012, the North Atlantic Treaty Organization plans to announce it has achieved an interim capability for the North Atlantic Treaty Organization missile defense system, including initial capability of its Active Layered Theater Ballistic Missile Defense system at a command and control facility in Germany.

The United States has a robust program of missile defense cooperation with Israel, including joint development of the Arrow Weapon System and the new Arrow-3 upper tier interceptor, designed to defend Israel against ballistic missiles from Iran. These jointly developed missile defense systems are designed to be interoperable with United States ballistic missile defenses, and these interoperable systems are tested in large military exercises. The United States has deployed an AN/TPY–2 radar in Israel to enhance missile defense against missiles from Iran.

The United States is working with the nations of the Gulf Cooperation Council on enhanced national and regional missile defense capabilities against growing missile threats from Iran. As part of this effort, the United Arab Emirates plans to purchase two batteries of the Terminal High Altitude Air Defense (THAAD) system, as well as other equipment.

The United States has a strong program of missile defense cooperation with Japan, including the co-development of the Standard Missile-3 (SM–3) Block IIA interceptor for the Aegis Ballistic Missile Defense system, intended to be deployed by Japan and in Phase 3 of the European Phased Adaptive Approach, Japan’s fleet of Aegis Ballistic Missile Defense ships using the SM–3 Block IA interceptors, and the United States deployment of an AN/TPY–2 radar in Japan.

the threat from regional ballistic missiles, particularly from Iran and North Korea, is serious and growing, and puts at risk forward-deployed United States forces and allies and partners in Europe, the Middle East, and the Asia-Pacific region;

the Department of Defense has an obligation to provide force protection of forward-deployed United States forces, assets, and facilities from regional ballistic missile attack;

the United States has an obligation to meet its security commitments to its allies, including ballistic missile defense commitments;

the Department of Defense has a balanced program of investment and capabilities to provide for both homeland defense and regional defense against ballistic missiles, consistent with the Ballistic Missile Defense Review and with the prioritized and integrated needs of the commanders of the combatant commands;

the European Phased Adaptive Approach to missile defense is an appropriate and necessary response to the existing and growing ballistic missile threat from Iran to forward deployed United States forces and allies and partners in Europe;

the Department of Defense—

European members of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization are making valuable contributions to missile defense in Europe, by hosting elements of United States missile defense systems on their territories, through individual national contributions to missile defense capability, and by collective funding and development of the Active Layered Theater Ballistic Missile Defense system; and

the Department of Defense should continue with the development of the key enablers of enhanced regional missile defense, including the Precision Tracking Space System.

In general

Not later than 180 days after the date of enactment of this Act, the Secretary of Defense shall submit to the congressional defense committees a report describing the status and progress of regional missile defense programs and efforts.

Elements of report

The report required by paragraph (1) shall include the following:

Form

The report required by paragraph (1) shall be submitted in unclassified form, but may include a classified annex.

For more than a decade, the United States and Russia have discussed a variety of options for cooperation on shared early warning and ballistic missile defense. For example, on May 1, 2001, President George W. Bush spoke of a new cooperative relationship with Russia and said it should be premised on openness, mutual confidence and real opportunities for cooperation, including the area of missile defense. It should allow us to share information so that each nation can improve its early warning capability, and its capability to defend its people and territory. And perhaps one day, we can even cooperate in a joint defense.

Section 1231 of the Floyd D. Spence National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2001 (as enacted into law by Public Law 106–398; 1654A–329) authorized the Department of Defense to establish in Russia a joint center for the exchange of data from systems to provide early warning of launches of ballistic missiles and for notification of launches of such missiles, also known as the Joint Data Exchange Center (JDEC).

On March 31, 2008, Deputy Secretary of Defense Gordon England stated that we have offered Russia a wide-ranging proposal to cooperate on missile defense—everything from modeling and simulation, to data sharing, to joint development of a regional missile defense architecture—all designed to defend the United States, Europe, and Russia from the growing threat of Iranian ballistic missiles. An extraordinary series of transparency measures have also been offered to reassure Russia. Despite some Russian reluctance to sign up to these cooperative missile defense activities, we continue to work toward this goal.

On July 6, 2009, President Barack Obama and Russian President Dmitry Medvedev issued a joint statement on missile defense issues, which stated that Russia and the United States plan to continue the discussion concerning the establishment of cooperation in responding to the challenge of ballistic missile proliferation. . . We have instructed our experts to work together to analyze the ballistic missile challenges of the 21st century and to prepare appropriate recommendations.

The February 2010 report of the Ballistic Missile Defense Review established as one of its central policy pillars that increased international missile defense cooperation is in the national security interest of the United States and, with regard to cooperation with Russia, the United States is pursuing a broad agenda focused on shared early warning of missile launches, possible technical cooperation, and even operational cooperation.

at the November 2010 Lisbon Summit, the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) decided to develop a missile defense system to protect NATO European populations, territory and forces and also to seek cooperation with Russia on missile defense. In its Lisbon Summit Declaration, the North Atlantic Treaty Organization reaffirmed its readiness to invite Russia to explore jointly the potential for linking current and planned missile defence systems at an appropriate time in mutually beneficial ways. The new NATO Strategic Concept adopted at the Lisbon Summit states that we will actively seek cooperation on missile defense with Russia, that NATO-Russia cooperation is of strategic importance, and that the security of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization and Russia is intertwined.

In a December 18, 2010, letter to the leadership of the Senate, President Obama wrote that the North Atlantic Treaty Organization invited Russia to cooperate on missile defense, which could lead to adding Russian capabilities to those deployed by NATO to enhance our common security against common threats. The Lisbon Summit thus demonstrated that the Alliance's missile defenses can be strengthened by improving NATO-Russian relations. This comes even as we have made clear that the system we intend to pursue with Russia will not be a joint system, and it will not in any way limit United States' or NATO's missile defense capabilities. Effective cooperation with Russia could enhance the overall efficiency of our combined territorial missile defenses, and at the same time provide Russia with greater security.

Section 221(a)(3) of the Ike Skelton National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2011 (Public Law 111–383; 124 Stat. 4167) states that it is the sense of Congress to support the efforts of the United States Government and the North Atlantic Treaty Organization to pursue cooperation with the Russian Federation on ballistic missile defense relative to Iranian missile threats.

In a speech in Russia on March 21, 2011, Secretary of Defense Robert Gates cited the NATO-Russian decision to cooperate on defense against ballistic missiles. We've disagreed before, and Russia still has uncertainties about the European Phased Adaptive Approach, a limited system that poses no challenges to the large Russian nuclear arsenal. However, we've mutually committed to resolving these difficulties in order to develop a roadmap toward truly effective anti-ballistic missile collaboration. This collaboration may include exchanging launch information, setting up a joint data fusion center, allowing greater transparency with respect to our missile defense plans and exercises, and conducting a joint analysis to determine areas of future cooperation.

In testimony to the Committee on Armed Services of the Senate on April 13, 2011, Deputy Assistant Secretary of Defense for Nuclear and Missile Defense Policy Bradley H. Roberts stated that the United States has been pursuing a Defense Technology Cooperation Agreement with Russia since 2004, and that such an agreement is necessary for the safeguarding of sensitive information in support of cooperation on missile defense, and to provide the legal framework for undertaking cooperative efforts. Further, Dr. Roberts stated that the United States would not provide any classified information to Russia without first conducting a National Disclosure Policy review. He also stated that the United States is not considering sharing hit-to-kill technology with Russia.

In a March 2012 answer to a question from the Committee on Armed Services of the Senate on missile defense cooperation with Russia, Acting Under Secretary of Defense for Policy Jim Miller wrote that I support U.S.-Russian cooperation on missile defenses first and foremost because it could improve the effectiveness of U.S. and NATO missile defenses, thereby improving the protection of the United States, our forces overseas, and our Allies. Missile defense cooperation with Russia is in the security interests of the United States, NATO, and Russia, first and foremost because it could strengthen capabilities across Europe to intercept Iranian missiles. He also wrote that [t]he United States has pursued missile defense cooperation with Russia with the clear understanding that we would not accept constraints on missile defense, and that we would undertake necessary qualitative and quantitative improvements to meet U.S. Security needs.

In February 2012, an international group of independent experts known as the Euro-Atlantic Security Initiative issued a report proposing missile defense cooperation between the United States (with its North Atlantic Treaty Organization allies) and Russia. The group, whose leaders included Stephen Hadley, the National Security Advisor to President George W. Bush, proposed that the nations share satellite and radar early warning data at joint cooperation centers in order to improve their ability to detect, track, and defeat medium-range and intermediate-range ballistic missiles from the Middle East.

In a letter dated April 13, 2012, Robert Nabors, Assistant to the President and Director of the Office of Legislative Affairs, wrote that it is Administration policy that we will only provide information to Russia that will enhance the effectiveness of our missile defenses. The Administration will not provide Russia with sensitive information that would in any way compromise our national security, including hit-to-kill technology and interceptor telemetry.

The United States and Russia already engage in substantial cooperation on a number of international security efforts, including nuclear nonproliferation, anti-piracy, counter-narcotics, nuclear security, counter-terrorism, and logistics resupply through Russia of coalition forces in Afghanistan. These areas of cooperation require each side to share and protect sensitive information, which they have both done successfully.

The United States currently has shared early warning agreements and programs of cooperation with eight nations in addition to the North Atlantic Treaty Organization. The United States has developed procedures and mechanisms for sharing early warning information with partner nations while ensuring the protection of sensitive United States information.

Russia and the United States each have missile launch early warning and detection and tracking sensors that could contribute to and enhance each others' ability to detect, track, an defend against ballistic missile threats from Iran.

The Obama Administration has provided regular briefings to Congress on its discussions with Russia on possible missile defense cooperation.

it is in the national security interest of the United States to pursue efforts at missile defense cooperation with Russia that would enhance the security of the United States, its North Atlantic Treaty Organization allies, and Russia, particularly against missile threats from Iran;

the United States should pursue ballistic missile defense cooperation with Russia on both a bilateral basis and a multilateral basis with its North Atlantic Treaty Organization allies, particularly through the NATO-Russia Council;

missile defense cooperation with Russia should not in any way limit United States' or NATO's missile defense capabilities, as acknowledged in the December 18, 2010, letter from President Obama to the leadership of the Senate, and should be mutually beneficial and reciprocal in nature;

the United States should not provide Russia with sensitive missile defense information that would in any way compromise United States national security, including hit-to-kill technology and interceptor telemetry; and

the United States should pursue missile defense cooperation with Russia in a manner that ensures that—

Assessment required

The Director shall define the desired technical parameters and performance capabilities for a next generation Exo-atmospheric Kill Vehicle using an assessment conducted by the Director for that purpose that is designed to ensure that a next generation Exo-atmospheric Kill Vehicle design—

Evaluation of payloads

The assessment required by paragraph (1) shall include an evaluation of the potential benefits and drawbacks of options for both unitary and multiple Exo-atmospheric Kill Vehicle payloads.

Standard Missile-3 Block IIb interceptor

As part of the assessment required by paragraph (1), the Director shall evaluate whether there are potential options and opportunities arising from the Standard Missile-3 Block IIB interceptor development program for development of an exo-atmospheric kill vehicle, or kill vehicle technologies or components, that could be used for potential upgrades to the Ground-Based Interceptor or for a next generation Exo-atmospheric Kill Vehicle.

In general

Not later than one year after the date of the enactment of this Act, the Director shall submit to the congressional defense committees a report setting forth the plan developed under subsection (a), including the results of the assessment under subsection (b), and an estimate of the cost and schedule of implementing the plan.

Form

The report required by paragraph (1) shall be submitted in unclassified form, but may include a classified annex.

An assessment of the integrated air and missile defense capabilities required to meet the demands of evolving and emerging threats.

A plan for the introduction of changes to the Patriot air and missile defense system program to achieve reductions in the life-cycle cost of the Patriot air and missile defense system.

Section 233 of the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2012 (Public Law 112–81; 125 Stat. 1340) requires a homeland defense hedging policy and strategy report from the Secretary of Defense.

The report was required to be submitted not later than 75 days after the date of the enactment of the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2012, namely by March 16, 2012.

The Secretary of Defense has not yet submitted the report as required.

In March 2012, General Charles Jacoby, Jr., Commander of the United States Northern Command, the combatant command responsible for operation of the Ground-based Midcourse Defense system to defend the homeland against ballistic missile threats, testified before Congress that I am confident in my ability to successfully defend the homeland from the current set of limited long-range ballistic missile threats, and that [a]gainst current threats from the Middle East, I am confident we are well postured.

Phase 4 of the European Phased Adaptive Approach (EPAA) is intended to augment the currently deployed homeland defense capability of the Ground-based Midcourse Defense system against a potential future Iranian long-range missile threat by deploying an additional layer of forward-deployed interceptors in Europe in the 2020 timeframe.

The Director of National Intelligence, James Clapper, has testified to Congress that, although the intelligence community does not know if Iran will eventually decide to build nuclear weapons, it judges that Iran would likely choose missile delivery as its preferred method of delivering a nuclear weapon. He also testified that Iran already has the largest inventory of ballistic missiles in the Middle East, and it is expanding the scale, reach, and sophistication of its ballistic missile forces, many of which are inherently capable of carrying a nuclear payload.

The 2012 Annual Report to Congress on the Military Power of Iran by the Department of Defense states that, in addition to increasing its missile inventories, Iran has boosted the lethality and effectiveness of its existing missile systems with accuracy improvements and new submunitions payloads, and that it continues to develop missiles that can strike Israel and Eastern Europe. It also states that Iran has launched multistage space launch vehicles that could serve as a testbed for developing long-range ballistic missiles technologies, and that [w]ith sufficient foreign assistance, Iran may be technically capable of flight-testing an intercontinental ballistic missile by 2015.

Despite the failure of its April 2012 satellite launch attempt, North Korea warned the United States in October 2012 that the United States mainland is within range of its missiles.

The threat of limited ballistic missile attack against the United States homeland from countries such as North Korea and Iran is increasing.

the homeland defense hedging policy and strategy report required by section 233 of the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2012 is necessary to inform Congress on options to protect the United States homeland against the evolving ballistic missile threat, including potential options prior to the deployment of Phase 4 of the European Phased Adaptive Approach to missile defense; and

the Secretary of Defense should comply with the requirements of section 233 of the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2012 by submitting the homeland defense hedging policy and strategy report to Congress.

A plan for the Mission Packages demonstrating that Preliminary Design Review for every capability increment precedes Milestone B or equivalent approval for that increment.

A plan for demonstrating that the capability increment for each Mission Package, combined with a Littoral Combat Ship, on the basis of a Preliminary Design Review and post-Preliminary Design Review assessment, will achieve the capability specified for that increment.

A plan for demonstrating the survivability and lethality of the Littoral Combat Ship with its Mission Packages sufficiently early in the development phase of the system to minimize costs of concurrency.

In general

Not later than March 1 of each year beginning in 2013, the Comptroller General shall submit to the congressional defense committees a report on the review of the acquisition program for the Amphibious Combat Vehicle conducted under subsection (a).

Matters to be included

Each report on the review of the acquisition program for the Amphibious Combat Vehicle shall include, to the extent appropriate and feasible, the following:

Additional information in first report

In submitting to the congressional defense committees the first report under paragraph (1), the Comptroller General shall include, with respect to the Amphibious Combat Vehicle program, an assessment of the sufficiency and objectivity of the following documents:

Information in subsequent reports

Termination

No report is required under this subsection after the first report following the award of a contract for full rate production of the Amphibious Combat Vehicle.

A detailed description of the capability gaps that Marine Personnel Carriers are intended to mitigate and the capabilities that the Marine Personnel Carrier will be required to have to mitigate such gaps, and an assessment whether, and to what extent, Amphibious Combat Vehicles could mitigate such gaps.

A detailed explanation of the role of the Marine Personnel Carriers in fulfilling the forcible entry requirement for the two Marine Expeditionary Brigades (MEBs) that make up the assault echelons of the three Marine Expeditionary Brigade force required to meet applicable war plans of the combatant commands.

A description of the fraction of the assault echelon of the brigades referred to in paragraph (2) that would be comprised of Marine Personnel Carriers.

An assessment of the direct operational risk associated with using ship-to-shore connectors to deliver Marine Personnel Carriers to shore in an amphibious assault.

An assessment of the indirect operational risk associated with using ship-to-shore connectors to deliver Marine Personnel Carriers rather than tanks and artillery and other tactical vehicles.

A comparative estimate of the acquisition and life-cycle costs of a split fleet of Amphibious Combat Vehicles and Marine Personnel Carriers with the acquisition and life-cycle costs of a pure fleet of Amphibious Combat Vehicles.

the date that is 60 days after the date of the completion of the study referred to in subsection (a); or

February 1, 2013.

in the matter preceding paragraph (1)—

in paragraph (1), by striking National Academy of Science and inserting National Academies of Science;

by striking paragraphs (2) and (3); and

by redesignating paragraphs (4) and (5) as paragraphs (2) and (3), respectively.

by inserting , through the Administrator of the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, after The Council;

by striking paragraph (2);

by redesignating paragraphs (3) and (4) as paragraphs (4) and (5), respectively; and

by inserting after paragraph (1) the following new paragraphs (2) and (3):

Heading amendment

The heading of section 7903 of such title is amended to read as follows:

Table of sections

The table of sections at the beginning of chapter 665 of such title is amended by striking the item relating to section 7903 and inserting the following new item:

set forth criteria for when and under what circumstances public health assessments by the Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry shall be requested in connection with environmental contamination at military installations, including past incidents of environmental contamination;

establish procedures for tracking and documenting the status and nature of responses to the findings and recommendations of the public health assessments of the Agency of Toxic Substances and Disease Registry that involve contamination at military installations; and

prescribe appropriate actions with respect to the identification of military and civilian individuals who may have been exposed to contamination while living or working on military installations.

The status of property described in subsection (a) that is yet to be disposed of.

An assessment of the environmental conditions of, and plans and costs for environmental remediation for, each such property.

The anticipated schedule for the completion of the disposal of each such property.

An estimate of the costs, and a description of additional potential future financial liability or other impacts on the Department of Defense, if the authorities provided by Congress for military installations closed under defense base closure and realignment (BRAC) are extended to military installations closed outside the defense base closure and realignment process and for which property has yet to be disposed.

Such recommendations as the Secretary considers appropriate for additional authorities to assist the Department in expediting the disposal of property at closed military installations in order to facilitate economic redevelopment for local communities.

Section 2460 of title 10, United States Code (as amended by section 321 of the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2012 (Public Law 112–81)), is repealed.

Section 2464 of title 10, United States Code (as amended by section 327 of the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2012), is repealed.

The provisions of section 2460 of title 10, United States Code, as in effect on December 30, 2011 (the day before the date of the enactment of the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2012), are hereby revived.

Section 2366a of title 10, United States Code, is amended by striking core depot-level maintenance and repair capabilities each place it appears and inserting core logistics capabilities .

Section 2366b(A)(3)(F) of title 10, United States Code, is amended by striking core depot-level maintenance and repair capabilities, as well as the associated logistics capabilities and inserting core logistics capabilities.

Section 801(c) of the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2012 (125 Stat. 1483; 10 U.S.C. 2366a note) is amended by striking core depot-level maintenance and repair capabilities, as well as the associated logistics capabilities and inserting core logistics capabilities .

by striking subsection (a) and inserting the following new subsection:

in subsection (b), by striking Logistics Center, Navy Fleet Readiness Center, and inserting Logistics Complex, Navy Fleet Readiness Center, Navy shipyard, Marine Corps Logistics Base,.

in subsection (d), by striking 2013 and inserting 2018; and

in subsection (e), by striking 2014 and inserting 2019.

Civilian personnel expenses for personnel as follows:

Service contractor expenses for personnel as follows:

Personnel expenses for personnel in the civilian personnel or service contractor workforce performing such other critical functions as may be identified by the Secretary as requiring exemption in the interest of the national defense.

Initial report

Not later than 120 days after the date of the enactment of this Act, the Secretary shall submit to the congressional defense committees a report including a comprehensive description of the plan required by subsection (a).

Status reports

Not later than 60 days after the end of each fiscal year from fiscal year 2013 through fiscal year 2017, the Secretary shall submit to the congressional defense committees a report describing the implementation of the plan during the prior fiscal year. Each such report shall include a direct comparison of the savings achieved under the plan to the savings achieved in the same fiscal year through reductions in military end strengths. In any case in which savings fall short of the annual target, the report shall include an explanation of the reasons for such shortfall.

Exemptions

Each report under paragraphs (1) and (2) shall specifically identify any exemption granted by the Secretary under subsection (b)(3) in the period of time covered by the report.

In general

The Secretary of Defense shall develop and implement a plan which shall increase the number of Marine Corps personnel assigned to the Marine Corps Embassy Security Group at Quantico, Virginia, and Marine Security Group Regional Commands and Marine Security Group detachments at United States missions around the world by up to 1,000 Marines during fiscal years 2014 through 2017.

Purpose

The purpose of the increase under paragraph (1) shall be to provide the end strength and resources necessary to support an increase in Marine Corps security at United States consulates and embassies throughout the world, and in particular at locations identified by the Secretary of State as in need of increased security in light of threats to United States personnel and property by terrorists.

Budget requests

The budget of the President for each fiscal year after fiscal year 2013, as submitted to Congress pursuant to section 1105(a) of title 31, United States Code, shall set forth as separate line elements, under the amounts requested for such fiscal year for each of procurement, operation and maintenance, and military personnel to fully fund each of the following:

Preservation of funding for USMC under national military strategy

In determining the amounts to be requested for a fiscal year for the Marine Corps Security Guard Program and for additional personnel under the Marine Corps Security Guard Program under paragraph (1), the President shall ensure that amounts requested for the Marine Corps for that fiscal year do not degrade the readiness of the Marine Corps to fulfill the requirements of the National Military Strategy.

Reports on Program

Not later than October 1, 2014, and annually thereafter through October 1, 2017, the Secretary of Defense shall, in coordination with the Secretary of State, submit to Congress a report on the Marine Corps Security Guard Program. Each report shall include the following:

Report on changes in scope of Program in response to changing threats

If the President determines that a modification (whether an increase or a decrease) in the scope of the Marine Corps Security Guard Program is necessary or advisable in light of any change in the nature of threats to United States embassies, consulates and other diplomatic facilities abroad, the President shall—

The Army National Guard of the United States, 358,200.

The Army Reserve, 205,000.

The Navy Reserve, 62,500.

The Marine Corps Reserve, 39,600.

The Air National Guard of the United States, 106,435.

The Air Force Reserve, 72,428.

The Coast Guard Reserve, 9,000.

the total authorized strength of units organized to serve as units of the Selected Reserve of such component which are on active duty (other than for training) at the end of the fiscal year; and

the total number of individual members not in units organized to serve as units of the Selected Reserve of such component who are on active duty (other than for training or for unsatisfactory participation in training) without their consent at the end of the fiscal year.

National guard

Within the limitation provided in section 10217(c)(2) of title 10, United States Code, the number of non-dual status technicians employed by the National Guard as of September 30, 2013, may not exceed the following:

Army reserve

The number of non-dual status technicians employed by the Army Reserve as of September 30, 2013, may not exceed 595.

Air force reserve

The number of non-dual status technicians employed by the Air Force Reserve as of September 30, 2013, may not exceed 90.

by inserting or a regular Navy warrant officer in the grade of chief warrant officer, W–5, exempted under paragraph (3) after Army warrant officer; and

by striking he and inserting the officer.

In general

Chapter 1007 of title 10, United States Code, is amended by adding at the end the following new section:

Clerical amendment

The table of sections at the beginning of chapter 1007 of such title is amended by adding at the end the following new item:

In general

The study required by subsection (a) shall address the unique challenges members of the National Guard and the Reserves face when reintegrating into civilian life following a deployment on active duty in the Armed Forces and the adequacy of the policies, programs, and activities of the Department of Defense to assist such members in meeting such challenges.

Particular elements

The study shall take into consideration the following:

to accurately capture the inclusion and capability aspects of the armed forces broader diversity plans, including race, ethnic, and gender specific groups, functional expertise, and diversified cultural and language skills so as to leverage and improve readiness; and

to be verifiable and systematically linked to strategic plans that will drive improvements.

The progress made in implementing the plan required by subsection (a) to accurately measure the efforts of the Department of Defense to achieve its diversity goals.

The number of members of the Armed Forces, including reserve components, listed by sex and race or ethnicity for each grade under each military department.

The number of members of the Armed Forces, including reserve components, who were promoted during the years covered by the report, listed by sex and race or ethnicity for each grade under each military department.

The number of members of the Armed Forces, including reserve components, who reenlisted or otherwise extended the commitment to military service during the years covered by the report, listed by sex and race or ethnicity for each grade under each military department.

The available pool of qualified candidates for the general officer grades of general and lieutenant general and the flag officer grades of admiral and vice admiral.

in subsection (a)(1), by inserting and members on active Guard and Reserve duty after officers and enlisted members of the regular components;

by redesignating subsection (l) as subsection (m); and

by inserting after subsection (k) the following new subsection (l)

by striking for purposes of the entitlement and inserting “for purposes of—

by striking the period at the end and inserting ; and; and

by adding at the end the following new paragraph:

The total number members involuntarily separated.

The number of members separated set forth by grade.

The number of members separated set forth by total years of service in the Armed Forces at the time of separation.

The number of members separated set forth by military occupational specialty or rating, or competitive category for officers.

The number of members separated who received involuntary separation pay, or who are authorized to receive temporary retired pay, in connection with separation.

The number of members who completed transition assistance programs relating to future employment.

The average number of months deployed to overseas contingency operations set forth by grade.

the advisability of modifying the criteria for the award of the Purple Heart to provide for the award of the Purple Heart to members of the Armed Forces who are killed or wounded in a terrorist attack within the United States that is determined to be inspired by ideological, political, or religious beliefs that give rise to terrorism; and

the advisability of modifying the criteria for the award of the Defense Medal of Freedom to provide for the award of the Defense Medal of Freedom to civilian employees of the United States who are killed or wounded in a terrorist attack within the United States that is determined to be inspired by ideological, political, or religious beliefs that give rise to terrorism.

The views of veterans service organizations, including the Military Order of the Purple Heart.

The importance that has been assigned to determining all available facts before a decision is made to award the Purple Heart.

Potential effects of an award on the ability to prosecute perpetrators of terrorist acts in military or civilian courts.

The views of the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff.

In general

The Secretary of the Army shall carry out a research program on resilience in members of the Army.

Purpose

The purpose of the research study shall be to determine the effectiveness of the current Comprehensive Soldier and Family Fitness (CSF2) Program of the Army while verifying the current means of the Army to reduce trends in high risk or self-destructive behavior and to prepare members of the Army to manage stressful or traumatic situations by training members in resilience strategies and techniques.

Elements

In carrying out the research study, the Secretary shall determine the effectiveness of training under the Comprehensive Soldier and Family Fitness program in—

Science-based evidence and techniques

The research study shall be rooted in scientific evidence, using professionally accepted measurements of experiments, of longitudinal research, random-assignment, and placebo-controlled outcome studies to evaluate which interventions can prove positive results and which result in no impact.

A description of the trends in high risk or self-destructive behavior within each of the units involved in the research study during the fiscal year covered by such report.

A description of the effectiveness of Comprehensive Soldier and Family Fitness Program training in enhancing individual performance through resiliency techniques, utilization of positive psychology.

In the case of the report on fiscal year 2014, such recommendations for the expansion or modification of the research study as the Secretary considers appropriate.

in the first sentence, by striking detailed and inserting appointed by the President, by and with the advice and consent of the Senate,; and

in the second sentence—

by redesignating subsection (c) as subsection (d); and

by inserting after subsection (b) the following new subsection (c):

by redesignating paragraphs (4) and (5) as paragraphs (5) and (6), respectively; and

by inserting after paragraph (3) the following new paragraph (4):

Administration of military justice

Section 806(a) of such title (article 6(a) of the Uniform Code of Military Justice) is amended in the third sentence by striking The Judge Advocate General and all that follows through shall and inserting The Judge Advocates General, and within the Marine Corps the Staff Judge Advocate to the Commandant of the Marine Corps, or senior members of their staffs, shall.

Delivery of legal assistance

Section 1044(b) of such title is amended by inserting and within the Marine Corps the Staff Judge Advocate to the Commandant of the Marine Corps after title).

A requirement to establish within each military department, under regulations prescribed by the Secretary of Defense, an enhanced capability for the investigation, prosecution, and defense of special victim offenses under chapter 47 of title 10, United States Code (the Uniform Code of Military Justice).

A requirement that each military department initiate and retain for a period prescribed by the Secretary of Defense a record on the disposition of allegations of sexual assault using forms and procedures prescribed by the Secretary.

A requirement that all commanders and commanding officers receive training on sexual assault prevention, response, and policies before, or shortly after, assuming command.

A requirement that all new members of the Armed Forces (whether in the regular or reserve components) receive training on the Department of Defense policy on sexual assault prevention and response program during initial entry training.

A requirement for military commands and units specified by the Secretary of Defense for purposes of the policy to conduct periodic climate assessments of such commands and units for purposes of preventing and responding to sexual assaults.

A requirement to post and widely disseminate information about resources available to report and respond to sexual assaults, including hotline phone numbers and Internet websites available to all members of the Armed Forces.

A requirement to assign responsibility to receive and investigate complaints against members of the Armed Forces and civilian personnel of the Department of Defense for the violation or failure to provide the rights of a crime victim established by section 3771 of title 18, United States Code, as applicable to such members and personnel in accordance with Department of Defense Directive 1030.1, or a successor directive, and Department of Defense Instruction 1030.2, or a successor instruction.

A requirement that each Secretary of a military department establish policies that require that each member of the Armed Forces under the jurisdiction of such Secretary whose conviction for a covered offense is final and who is not punitively discharged from the Armed Forces in connection with such conviction be processed for administrative separation from the Armed Forces, which requirement shall not be interpreted to limit or alter the authority of such Secretary to process members of the Armed Forces for administrative separation for other offenses or under other provisions of law.

The term covered offense means the following:

The term special victim offenses means offenses involving allegations of any of the following:

A discussion of the policies of the Armed Force for preventing and responding to incidents of hazing.

A description of the methods implemented to track and report, including report anonymously, incidents of hazing in the Armed Force.

An assessment by the Secretary submitting such report of the following:

A description of the additional actions, if any, the Secretary submitting such report and the Chief of Staff of the Armed Force propose to take to further address the incidence of hazing in the Armed Force.

50 years commencing on the date of signature of the member on Department of Defense Form 2910; or

the time provided for the retention of such forms in connection with Unrestricted Reports on incidents of sexual assault involving members of the Armed Forces under Department of Defense Directive-Type Memorandum (DTM) 11–062, entitled Document Retention in Cases of Restricted and Unrestricted Reports of Sexual Assault, or any successor directive or policy.

In general

The Secretary of Defense shall, in consultation with the Secretaries of the military departments and the Equal Opportunity Office of the Department of Defense, develop a comprehensive policy to prevent and respond to sexual harassment in the Armed Forces. The policy shall provide for the following:

Report

Not later than one year after the date of the enactment of this Act, the Secretary of Defense shall submit to the Committees on Armed Services of the Senate and the House of Representatives a report setting forth the policy required by paragraph (1).

Collection

The Secretary of Defense shall require that the Secretary of each military department establish a record on the disposition of any report of sexual harassment, whether such disposition is court martial, non-judicial punishment, or other administrative action. The record of any such disposition shall include the following, as appropriate:

Retention

The Secretary of Defense shall require that—

Annual report on sexual harassment

Not later than March 1, 2015, and each March 1 thereafter through March 1, 2018, the Secretary of each military department shall submit to the Secretary of Defense a report on the sexual harassments involving members of the Armed Forces under the jurisdiction of such Secretary during the preceding year. Each Secretary of a military department shall submit the report on a year under this section at the same time as the submittal of the annual report on sexual assaults during that year under section 1631 of the Ike Skelton National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2011 (10 U.S.C. 1561 note). In the case of the Secretary of the Navy, separate reports shall be prepared under this section for the Navy and the Marine Corps.

Contents

The report of a Secretary of a military department for an Armed Force under paragraph (1) shall contain the following:

by striking paragraph (3) and inserting the following new paragraph (3):

by adding at the end the following new paragraphs

in paragraph (1), by striking the second sentence and inserting the following new sentences: Each medical student shall be appointed as a regular officer in the grade of second lieutenant or ensign. An officer so appointed may, upon meeting such criteria for promotion as may be prescribed by the Secretary concerned, be appointed in the regular grade of first lieutenant or lieutenant (junior grade). Medical students commissioned under this section shall serve on active duty in their respective grades.; and

in paragraph (2), by striking grade of second lieutenant or ensign and inserting grade in which the member is serving under paragraph (1).

in paragraph (1), by striking the second sentence and inserting the following new sentences: Each person so commissioned shall be appointed as a reserve officer in the grade of second lieutenant or ensign. An officer so appointed may, upon meeting such criteria for promotion as may be prescribed by the Secretary concerned, be appointed in the reserve grade of first lieutenant or lieutenant (junior grade). Medical students commissioned under this section shall serve on active duty in their respective grades for a period of 45 days during each year of participation in the program.; and

in paragraph (2), by striking grade of second lieutenant or ensign and inserting grade in which the member is serving under paragraph (1).

in the subsection heading, by striking Appointment and treatment of prior active service and inserting Service on active duty; and

by striking paragraph (1) and inserting the following new paragraph (1):

in paragraph (1), by striking or at the end;

in paragraph (2), by striking the period at the end and inserting ; or; and

by adding at the end the following new paragraph:

The table of sections at the beginning of chapter 152 of such title is amended by inserting after the item relating to section 2552 the following new item:

The table of sections at the beginning of chapter 441 of such title is amended by striking the item relating to section 4651.

The table of sections at the beginning of chapter 667 of such title is amended by striking the item relating to section 7911.

The table of sections at the beginning of chapter 941 of such title is amended by striking the item relating to section 9651.

Whether the Reserve Officers' Training Corps (ROTC) programs of the Departments of the Army, the Navy, and the Air Force are effectively meeting, and structured to meet, current and projected requirements for newly commissioned officers in the Armed Forces.

The cost-effectiveness and unit productivity of the current Reserve Officers' Training Corps programs.

The adequacy of current oversight and criteria for unit closure for the Reserve Officers' Training Corps programs.

A list of the units of the Reserve Officers' Training Corps programs by Armed Force, and by college or university, and the number of cadets and midshipman currently enrolled by class or year group.

The number of officers commissioned in 2012 from the Reserve Officers' Training Corps programs, and the number projected to be commissioned over the period of the current future-years defense program under section 221 of title 10, United States Code, from each unit listed under paragraph (1).

An assessment of the requirements of each Armed Force for newly commissioned officers in 2012 and the strategic planning regarding such requirements over the period of the current future-years defense program.

The number of military and civilian personnel of the Department of Defense assigned to lead and manage Reserve Officers' Training Corps program units, and the grades of the military personnel so assigned.

An assessment of Department of Defense-wide and Armed-Force specific standards regarding the productivity of Reserve Officers' Training Corps program units, and an assessment of compliance with such standards.

An assessment of the projected use by the Armed Forces of the procedures available to the Armed Forces to respond to overages in the number of cadets and midshipmen in the Reserve Officers' Training Corps programs.

A description of the plans of the Armed Forces to retain or disestablish Reserve Officers' Training Corps program units that do not meet productivity standards.

A description of the similarities and differences between the educational transcripts issued to members separating from the various Armed Forces.

A description of any assessments done by the Department, or in conjunction with educational institutions, to identify shortcomings in the transcripts issued to separating members in connection with their ability to qualify for civilian educational credits.

A description of the implementation plan for the Joint Services Transcript, including a schedule and the elements of existing educational transcripts to be incorporated into the Transcript.

Review of methodology

The Comptroller General of the United States shall review the methodology used by the Military Education Coordination Council in compiling the report on joint professional military education that is to be submitted to the Director of Joint Force Development by March 1, 2013, pursuant to the Joint Staff Memorandum, Joint Staff Review, dated July 16, 2012. The review shall include an examination of the analytical approach used by the Council for that report, including the types of information considered, the cost savings identified, the benefits of options considered, the time frames for implementation, and transparency.

Report

Not later than 90 days after receiving from the Director of Joint Force Development the report described in paragraph (1), the Comptroller General shall submit to the Committees on Armed Services of the Senate and the House of Representatives a report on the review under paragraph (1) of the report described in that paragraph. The report of the Comptroller General under this paragraph shall set forth the following:

Report required

Not later than January 31, 2014, the Comptroller General of the United States shall submit to the congressional defense committees a report setting forth the assessment by the Comptroller General of the work performed by joint professional military education research institutions in support of professional military education and the broader mission of the Department of Defense, the military departments, and the Defense Agencies.

Elements

The report required by paragraph (1) shall include an assessment of the following:

Definitions

In this subsection:

Disseminate information about the Troops-to-Teachers Program to eligible schools (as defined in section 2301(3) of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act of 1965 (20 U.S.C. 6671(3)), as added by subsection (b)(2)).

Advise the Department of Defense on how to prepare eligible members of the Armed Forces described in section 2303(a) of such Act to become participants in the Program to meet the requirements necessary to become a teacher in an eligible school.

Advise the Department of Defense on how to identify teacher preparation programs for participants in the Program.

Inform the Department of Defense of academic subject areas with critical teacher shortages.

Identify geographic areas with critical teacher shortages, especially in high-need schools (as defined in section 2301(4) of such Act, as added by subsection (b)(2)).

by redesignating paragraphs (2) through (5) as paragraphs (5) through (8), respectively; and

by inserting after paragraph (1) the following:

Amendment

Section 2304 of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act of 1965 (20 U.S.C. 6674) is amended—

in section 8002 (20 U.S.C. 7702)—

in section 8003(a)(4) (20 U.S.C. 7703(a)(4))—

in section 8010 (20 U.S.C. 7710)—

The hopes and prayers of the people of the United States for the safe return of members of the Armed Forces of the United States serving overseas are often demonstrated through the proud display of yellow ribbons.

The designation of a Yellow Ribbon Day would serve as an additional reminder for all people of the United States of the continued sacrifice of members of the Armed Forces.

Yellow Ribbon Day would also recognize the history and meaning of the yellow ribbon as the symbol of support for members of the Armed Forces and other individuals of the United States who are serving in combat or crisis situations overseas.

A description of the current family support programs of each of the Armed Forces and the Department of Defense, including the name, scope and intended purpose of each program.

An assessment of the current costs of the family support programs covered by paragraph (1), and an estimate of the costs of anticipated family support programs of the Department over the period covered by the report.

An assessment of the costs and other consequences associated with the elimination or reduction of any current family support programs of the Department over the period covered by the report.

An assessment by the Secretary of the Army of the Family Readiness Support Assistant program, and a description of any planned or anticipated changes to that program over the period covered by the report.

In general

Chapter 155 of such title is amended by adding at the end the following new section:

Clerical amendment

The table of sections at the beginning of chapter 155 of such title is amended by adding at the end the following new item:

in paragraph (1)—

by adding at the end the following new paragraph:

In general

Subject to subsection (e), the Secretary concerned shall, upon application therefor, make a payment to each individual described in paragraph (2) of $200 for each day of nonparticipation of such individual in the Post-Deployment/Mobilization Respite Absence program as described in that paragraph.

Covered individuals

An individual described in this paragraph is an individual who—

Applications

If an individual otherwise covered by subsection (a) is deceased, the application required by that subsection shall be made by the individual's legal representative.

Payment

If an individual to whom payment would be made under subsection (a) is deceased at time of payment, payment shall be made in the manner specified in section 1552(c)(2) of title 10, United States Code.

Construction with other pay

Any payment with respect to an individual under subsection (a) is in addition to any other pay provided by law.

Construction of authority

It is the sense of Congress that—

Section 2130a(a)(1), relating to nurse officer candidate accession program.

Section 16302(d), relating to repayment of education loans for certain health professionals who serve in the Selected Reserve.

Section 302c–1(f), relating to accession and retention bonuses for psychologists.

Section 302d(a)(1), relating to accession bonus for registered nurses.

Section 302e(a)(1), relating to incentive special pay for nurse anesthetists.

Section 302g(e), relating to special pay for Selected Reserve health professionals in critically short wartime specialties.

Section 302h(a)(1), relating to accession bonus for dental officers.

Section 302j(a), relating to accession bonus for pharmacy officers.

Section 302k(f), relating to accession bonus for medical officers in critically short wartime specialties.

Section 302l(g), relating to accession bonus for dental specialist officers in critically short wartime specialties.

in subsection (a)—

in subsection (f), by adding at the end the following new paragraph:

in subsection (j), by striking In this and inserting Other than in subsection (a)(6), in this.

by redesignating subsections (l), (m), and (n) as subsections (m), (n), and (o); and

by inserting after subsection (k) the following new subsection (l)

in the subsection heading, by inserting and FERS after CSRS;

by inserting or for the purposes of chapter 84 of title 5, after chapter 83 of title 5,;

by inserting or 8416(a) after 8339(j); and

by inserting or 8442(a) after 8341(b).

by inserting or for the purposes of chapter 84 of title 5, after chapter 83 of title 5,;

by inserting or 8146(a) after 8339(j); and

by inserting or 8442(a) after 8341(b).

Policy required

The Secretary of Defense shall, in consultation with the officials and entities specified in section 987(h)(3) of title 10, United States Code, prescribe a policy on the predatory extension of credit through installment loans targeting members of the Armed Forces and their dependents.

Objectives

The objectives of the policy required by paragraph (1) shall be as follows:

Modification of regulations

The Secretary of Defense shall modify the regulations prescribed under section 987 of title 10, United States Code, to take into account the amendment made by subsection (a).

Effective date of modification and policy

The amendment made by subsection (a), and the policy required by subsection (b), shall take effect on—

Publication of earlier date

If pursuant to paragraph (2)(B) the Secretary specifies an earlier effective date for the amendment made by subsection (a) and the policy required by subsection (b), the Secretary shall publish notice of such earlier effective date in the Federal Register not later than 90 days before such earlier effective date.

in subparagraph (A), by inserting any consumer credit or before loans; and

in subparagraph (B), by inserting covering consumer credit after State consumer lending protections.

in the matter preceding subparagraph (A)—

by striking subparagraph (E); and

by redesignating subparagraphs (F) and (G) as subparagraphs (E) and (F), respectively.

Modification of regulations

The Secretary of Defense shall modify the regulations prescribed under section 987 of title 10, United States Code, to take into account the amendments made by subsection (a).

Effective date

The amendments made by subsection (a) shall take effect on—

Publication of earlier date

If the Secretary specifies an earlier effective date for the amendments made by subsection (a) pursuant to paragraph (2)(B), the Secretary shall publish notice of such earlier effective date in the Federal Register not later than 90 days before such earlier effective date.

in subsection (f), by adding at the end the following new paragraph:

in subsection (l), by striking at the time of the dependent-abuse offense resulting in the separation of the former member and inserting or eligible spouse at the time of the dependent-abuse offense resulting in the separation of the former member or who was carried during pregnancy at the time of the dependent-abuse offense resulting in the separation of the former member and was subsequently born alive to the eligible spouse or former spouse.

A description of the process used by the Armed Forces Medical Examiner to issue a death certificate for members of the Armed Forces who die on active duty abroad, including an explanation for any current delays in the issuance of such death certificates.

A description of the average amount of time taken by the Armed Forces Medical Examiner to issue such death certificates.

An assessment of the feasibility and advisability of issuing temporary death certificates for members of the Armed Forces who die on active duty abroad in order to provide necessary documentation for survivors.

A description of the actions required to enable the Armed Forces Medical Examiner to issue a death certificate for a member of the Armed Forces who dies on active duty abroad not later than seven days after the return of the remains of the member to the United States.

Such other recommendations for legislative or administrative action as the Secretary considers appropriate to provide for the issuance by the Armed Forces Medical Examiner of a death certificate for members of the Armed Forces who die on active duty abroad not later than seven days after the return of the remains of such members to the United States.

by striking Eligibility and inserting (1) Except as provided in paragraph (2), eligibility; and

by adding at the end the following new paragraph:

in subparagraph (D), by striking No pharmaceutical agent may be excluded and inserting Except as provided in subparagraph (F), no pharmaceutical agent may be excluded; and

by adding at the end the following new subparagraph:

Cross-reference amendments

Subsections (a)(6)(A) and (b)(1) of such section are amended by striking subsection (g) and inserting subsection (h).

Repeal of obsolete provisions

A description, by region, of the difference in availability of TRICARE Prime for eligible beneficiaries (other than eligible beneficiaries on active duty in the Armed Forces) under newly-awarded TRICARE managed care contracts, including, in particular, an identification of the regions or areas in which TRICARE Prime will no longer be available for such beneficiaries under such contracts.

A description of the transition and outreach plans for eligible beneficiaries described in paragraph (1) who will no longer have access to TRICARE Prime under the contracts described in that paragraph.

An estimate of the increased costs to be incurred for healthcare under the TRICARE program for eligible beneficiaries described in paragraph (2).

An estimate of the saving to be achieved by the Department as a result of the contracts described in paragraph (1).

A description of the plans of the Department to continue to assess the impact on access to healthcare for eligible beneficiaries described in paragraph (2).

In general

Chapter 55 of title 10, United States Code, is amended by inserting after section 1077 the following new section:

Clerical amendment

The table of sections at the beginning of chapter 55 of such title is amended by inserting after the item relating to section 1077 the following new item:

Increase

The amount authorized to be appropriated for fiscal year 2013 by section 1406 and available for the Defense Health Program for Private Sector Care as specified in the funding table in section 4501 is hereby increased by $45,000,000, with the amount of the increase to be available for the provision of care in accordance with section 1077a of title 10, United States Code (as added by subsection (a)).

Offset

The amount authorized to be appropriated for fiscal year 2013 by section 301 for Operation and Maintenance and available as specified in the funding table in section 4301 is hereby reduced by $45,000,000.

in subsection (b), by striking the subsection heading and inserting Definition relating to primary and preventive health care services for women; and

by adding at the end the following new subsection:

by striking subparagraph (B) and (C) of; and

by striking determines that— and all that follows and inserting “determines—

by striking if the physician, dentist, nurse, pharmacist, or paramedical and inserting to such a physician, dentist, nurse, pharmacist, or paramedical;

by striking involved is; and

by inserting before the period at the end the following: or a subcontract at any tier under such a contract that is authorized in accordance with the requirements of such section 1091.

engages in the research activities described in subsection (d); and

meets such qualifications for treatment as a community partner as the Secretary shall establish for purposes of the research program.

Physical health.

Mental and behavioral health.

Educational and vocational aptitude and capabilities.

Such other matters as such Secretary considers appropriate.

When the member commences participation in the program.

At least once each year the member participates in the program.

When the member ceases participation in the program (whether for return to military duty or to civilian life).

With the consent of the member, one year after the member ceases participation in the program as described in paragraph (3).

The progress of members participating in the Warriors in Transition programs in the areas specified in subsection (a).

The efficacy of the Warriors in Transition programs in facilitating the transition of members to military duty or civilian life, as applicable.

The differences in outcomes in the Warriors in Transition programs, by location, type, Armed Force, component, and types of wounds, injuries, or conditions of program participants.

The percentage of members participating in the Warriors in Transition programs who receive care under such programs from assigned providers, including medical care case managers, non-medical service providers (including non-medical case managers, legal support personnel, and, as applicable, Physical Evaluation Board Liaison Officers), mental health care providers, and medical evaluation (MEB) physicians whose caseload exceeds the caseload ratio that has been designated as adequate by the Secretary of Defense.

The percentage of members participating in the Warriors in Transition programs for whom the intervals between various phases in the transition process exceeds the average length of such intervals, including intervals relating to appointment times for specialists and for treatment for Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD).

Such other measurements of outcomes or progress of members through the Warriors in Transition programs as such Secretary considers appropriate.

Warrior Transition Units and the Wounded Warrior Program of the Army.

The Safe Harbor program of the Navy.

The Wounded Warrior Regiment of the Marine Corps.

The Recovery Care Program and the Wounded Warrior programs of the Air Force.

The Care Coalition of the United States Special Operations Command.

The number and nature of traumatic injuries incurred by members of the Armed Forces as a result of a vaccination required by the Department of Defense each year since January 1, 2001, set forth by aggregate in each year and by military department in each year.

Such recommendations as the Secretary of Defense considers appropriate for improvements to the policies, procedures, and systems (including tracking systems) of the Department to identify members of the Armed Forces who experience traumatic injury as a result of a vaccination required by the Department.

Such recommendations as the Secretary of Defense considers appropriate for improvements to the policies, procedures, and systems of the Department to support members of the Armed Forces who experience traumatic injury as a result of a vaccination required by the Department.

In general

Not later than 180 days after the date of the enactment of this Act, the Secretary of Defense shall submit to the Committees on Armed Services of the Senate and the House of Representatives a plan to streamline the programs of the Department of Defense that address psychological health and traumatic brain injury among members of the Armed Forces.

Elements

The report required by paragraph (1) shall include the following:

The delivery of controlled substances under the program to such members of the Armed Forces, medical professionals, and other employees of the Department of Defense, and to such other acceptance mechanisms, as the Secretary and the Attorney General jointly specify for purposes of the program.

Appropriate guidelines and procedures to prevent the diversion, misuse, theft, or loss of controlled substances delivered under the program.

To establish a uniform definition of resiliency for use in the suicide prevention and resilience programs and preventative behavioral health programs of the Department of Defense (including those of the military departments and the Armed Forces).

In consultation with the National Center for Post Traumatic Stress Disorder of the Department of Veterans Affairs and other appropriate public and private agencies and entities, to require the use of clinical best practices in mental health care, suicide prevention programs, and resilience programs of the Department of Defense, including the diagnosis and treatment of behavioral health disorders.

To oversee and manage the comprehensive program on the prevention of suicide among members of the Armed Forces required by section 752.

To raise awareness among members of the Armed Forces about mental health conditions and the stigma associated with mental health conditions and mental health care.

To provide members of the Armed