DOCSLIB.ORG

Dod Fiscal Year 2009 Budget Request Summary Justification

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Dod Fiscal Year 2009 Budget Request Summary Justification U.S. Department of Defense FISCAL YEAR 2009 BUDGET REQUEST Summary Justification February 4, 2008 On behalf of the President, I am pleased to transmit to Congress this volume that presents the Department of Defense’s budget request of $515.4 billion for Fiscal Year 2009. This is the first Defense summary justification volume of its kind. Its purpose is to inform Congress and provide the American people a clear understanding of how their tax dollars are being invested to provide for our Nation’s defense. It includes: • An explanation of the Department’s missions, accomplishments, and priorities; • A summary of the request by Military Department and Defense agency; • Information on special areas of interest and emphasis for Fiscal Year 2009; and • Details on the Department’s major weapons programs. The Military Departments and Defense agencies will provide Congress with additional detailed justification materials on this request. The requested funds would: provide military pay, benefits, and world-class healthcare for 2.2 million Soldiers, Sailors, Marines, and Airmen ($149.4 billion); support military operations and force readiness ($158.3 billion); invest in strategic modernization ($183.8 billion); and support family housing and facilities ($23.9 billion). In addition to the $515.4 billion request, the Administration requests $70 billion for an emergency allowance for the Global War on Terror. Details will be provided to Congress once the specific needs of our troops on the ground are better known. However, it remains imperative that Congress complete action on the remaining $102.5 billion Fiscal Year 2008 Global War on Terror request. Further delay in providing these funds will have a detrimental effect on our military’s ability to carry out its vital missions. Robert M. Gates Secretary of Defense COMPTROLLER This volume has been developed under the leadership of the Office of the Under Secretary of Defense (Comptroller) to provide transparency and accountability to the American people and Congress. Tina W. Jonas Under Secretary of Defense (Comptroller) DoD FY 2009 Budget Request Summary Justification Table of Contents Overview .................................................................................................................................................................................................1 Justification ..............................................................................................................................................................................................6 Services and Defense Agencies.........................................................................................................................................................19 Department of the Army.........................................................................................................................................................................20 Department of the Navy .........................................................................................................................................................................30 Department of the Air Force...................................................................................................................................................................42 Defense-Wide Agencies ........................................................................................................................................................................53 Special Topics......................................................................................................................................................................................69 Capability Portfolios ...............................................................................................................................................................................70 Intelligence.............................................................................................................................................................................................79 Healthcare and Wounded Warrior ........................................................................................................................................................85 Combatant Commands, including the Establishment of U.S. Africa Command ...................................................................................95 Building Partnership Capacity .............................................................................................................................................................101 National Guard and Reserve ...............................................................................................................................................................107 Cyberspace Initiatives..........................................................................................................................................................................113 President’s Management Agenda........................................................................................................................................................115 Performance Improvement .................................................................................................................................................................127 Financial Management Accomplishments ..........................................................................................................................................147 1000106 TABLE OF CONTENTS ii DoD FY 2009 Budget Request Summary Justification Major Weapons Systems...................................................................................................................................................................153 Summary..............................................................................................................................................................................................157 Aircraft .................................................................................................................................................................................................161 Command, Control, Communications, Computers, and Intelligence (C4I) Systems ...........................................................................179 Ground Vehicles .................................................................................................................................................................................182 Missile Defense....................................................................................................................................................................................188 Munitions and Missiles ........................................................................................................................................................................191 Shipbuilding and Maritime Systems ....................................................................................................................................................200 Space Based and Related Systems ...................................................................................................................................................206 Resource Exhibits..............................................................................................................................................................................211 Table of Contents.................................................................................................................................................................................211 Budget Tables......................................................................................................................................................................................212 Execution and Personnel Tables .........................................................................................................................................................225 Department Organizational Charts ......................................................................................................................................................227 List of Acronyms ..................................................................................................................................................................................229 1000106 TABLE OF CONTENTS iii DoD FY 2009 Budget Request Summary Justification List of Figures Overview .................................................................................................................................................................................................1 Figure 1.1 – Historical Budget and Global War on Terror Funding..........................................................................................................6 Figure 1.2 – Defense Outlays as a Percentage of Gross Domestic Product ...........................................................................................6 Figure 1.3 – FY 2008 Global War on Terror Request and Action to Date................................................................................................7 Figure 1.4 – Budget by Category .............................................................................................................................................................9 Figure 1.5 – Readiness Metrics ............................................................................................................................................................14
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Case #2 United States of America (Respondent)
    Model International Court of Justice (MICJ) Case #2 United States of America (Respondent) Relocation of the United States Embassy to Jerusalem (Palestine v. United States of America) Arkansas Model United Nations (AMUN) November 20-21, 2020 Teeter 1 Historical Context For years, there has been a consistent struggle between the State of Israel and the State of Palestine led by the Palestine Liberation Organization (PLO). In 2018, United States Secretary of State Mike Pompeo announced that the U.S. embassy located in Tel Aviv would be moving to the city of Jerusalem.1 Palestine, angered by the embassy moving, filed a case with the International Court of Justice (ICJ) in 2018.2 The history of this case, U.S. relations with Israel and Palestine, current events, and why the ICJ should side with the United States will be covered in this research paper. Israel and Palestine have an interesting relationship between war and competition. In 1948, Israel captured the west side of Jerusalem, and the Palestinians captured the east side during the Arab-Israeli War. Israel declared its independence on May 14, 1948. In 1949, the Lausanne Conference took place, and the UN came to the decision for “corpus separatum” which split Jerusalem into a Jewish zone and an Arab zone.3 At this time, the State of Israel decided that Jerusalem was its “eternal capital.”4 “Corpus separatum,” is a Latin term meaning “a city or region which is given a special legal and political status different from its environment, but which falls short of being sovereign, or an independent city-state.”5 1 Office of the President, 82 Recognizing Jerusalem as the Capital of the State of Israel and Relocating the United States Embassy to Israel to Jerusalem § (2017).
    [Show full text]
  • Universal GEOINT Credentialing Christopher K
    GEOINT ESSENTIAL BODY OF KNOWLEDGE Transparent Transportable TransIndustry USGIF is a 501(c)(3) non-lobbying, nonprofit educational foundation dedicated to promoting the geospatial intelligence tradecraft and developing a stronger community of interest between Government, Industry, Academia, and Professional Organizations. Almost 500 students Twelve Accredited Geospatial have graduated from Intelligence Certificate Programs Northeastern West Point USGIF-accredited Penn State U. of Utah programs with George Mason UM Columbia Air Force GEOINT Certificates. Redlands Academy Fayetteville State USC UT Dallas U. of South Carolina Did you know USGIF offers hundreds of hours of training, education, and professional development opportunities throughout the year? in Scholarships $792K awarded since 2004 u S gif Monograph Serie S V o L u M e 1 USGIF in 2014 published the Human Geography monograph as a community resource. Socio-Cultural Dynamics and USGIF is developing the first GEOGRAPHYChallenges to Global Security Darryl G. Murdock, Robert R. Tomes and Universal GEOINT Credentialing Christopher K. Tucker, editors Program to bolster profesional development in the GEOINT tradecraft. USGIF produces the GEOINT Symposium, the largest intelligence event in the world. Sustaining Member 240 Organizations TEN YEARS Launched in 2012 as USGIF’s first official print magazine. GEOINT ESSENTIAL BODY OF KNOWLEDGE SECTION I The GEOINT Essential Body of Knowledge �� � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � 3 Transparency and Transportability
    [Show full text]
  • From Air, Sea, and Space, Geospatial Technology Is Helping Nations Monitor One of Their Biggest and Most Understated Threats: the Open Ocean
    » CARDILLO AND LONG Q&A » FUTURE GEOINT LEADERS » SMALLSAT WORKING GROUP 2014 ISSUE 4 THE OFFICIAL MAGAZINE OF THE UNITED STATES GEOSPATIAL INTELLIGENCE FOUNDATION WATCHING THE 2014 USGIF MEMBERSHIP DIRECTORY WATERFrom air, sea, and space, geospatial technology is helping nations monitor one of their biggest and most understated threats: the open ocean. © DLR e.V. 2014 and © Airbus 2014 DS/© DLR Infoterra e.V. GmbH 2014 WorldDEMTM Reaching New Heights The new standard of global elevation models with pole-to-pole coverage, unrivalled accuracy and unique quality to support your critical missions. www.geo-airbusds.com/worlddem CONTENTS 2014 ISSUE 4 The USS Antietam (CG 54), the USS O’Kane (DDG 77) and the USS John C. Stennis (CVN 74) steam through the Gulf of Oman. As part of the John C. Stennis Carrier Strike Group, these ships are on regularly scheduled deployments in support of Maritime Operations, set- ting the conditions for security and stability, as well as complementing counterterrorism and security efforts to regional nations. PHOTO COURTESY OF U.S. NAVAL FORCES CENTRAL COMMAND/U.S. 5TH FLEET 5TH COMMAND/U.S. CENTRAL FORCES NAVAL U.S. OF COURTESY PHOTO 02 | VANTAGE POINT Features 12 | ELEVATE Tackling the challenge of Fayetteville State University accelerating innovation. builds GEOINT curriculum. 16 | WATCHING THE WATER From air, sea, and space, geospatial technology 14 | COMMON GROUND 04 | LETTERS is helping nations monitor one of their biggest USGIF stands up SmallSat Trajectory readers offer Working Group. feedback on recent features and most understated threats: the open ocean. and the tablet app. By Matt Alderton 32 | MEMBERSHIP PULSE Ball Aerospace offers 06 | INTSIDER 22 | CONVEYING CONSEQUENCE capabilities for an integrated SkyTruth and the GEOINT enterprise.
    [Show full text]
  • Overhead Surveillance
    Confrontation or Collaboration? Congress and the Intelligence Community Overhead Surveillance Eric Rosenbach and Aki J. Peritz Overhead Surveillance One of the primary methods the U.S. uses to gather vital national security information is through air- and space-based platforms, collectively known as “overhead surveillance.” This memorandum provides an overview of overhead surveillance systems, the agencies involved in gathering and analyzing overhead surveillance, and the costs and benefits of this form of intelligence collection. What is Overhead Surveillance? “Overhead surveillance” describes a means to gather information about people and places from above the Earth’s surface. These collection systems gather imagery intelligence (IMINT), signals intelligence (SIGINT) and measurement and signature intelligence (MASINT). Today, overhead surveillance includes: • Space-based systems, such as satellites. • Aerial collection platforms that range from large manned aircraft to small unmanned aerial vehicles (UAVs). A Brief History of Overhead Surveillance Intelligence, surveillance and reconnaissance platforms, collectively known as ISR, date back to the 1790s when the French military used observation balloons to oversee battlefields and gain tactical advantage over their adversaries. Almost all WWI and WWII belligerents used aerial surveillance to gain intelligence on enemy lines, fortifications and troop movements. Following WWII, the U.S. further refined airborne and space-based reconnaissance platforms for use against the Soviet Union. Manned reconnaissance missions, however, were risky and could lead to potentially embarrassing outcomes; the 1960 U-2 incident was perhaps the most widely publicized case of the risks associated with this form of airborne surveillance. Since the end of the Cold War, overhead surveillance technology has evolved significantly, greatly expanding the amount of information that the policymaker and the warfighter can use to make critical, time-sensitive decisions.
    [Show full text]
  • U.S. Air and Ground Conventional Forces for NATO: Mobility and Logistics Issues
    BACKGROUND PAPER U.S. Air and Ground Conventional Forces for NATO: Mobility and Logistics Issues March 1978 Congress of the United States Congressional Budget Office Washington, D.C. U.S. AIR AND GROUND CONVENTIONAL FORCES FOR NATO: MOBILITY AND LOGISTICS ISSUES The Congress of the United States Congressional Budget Office For sale by the Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Qovernment Printing Office Washington, D.C. 20402 FT II PREFACE The defense budget that the Congress will be considering in fiscal year 1979 places a strong emphasis on improving U.S. conventional forces for NATO. U.S. decisions concerning air and ground conventional forces for NATO are, however, tied closely to, and must be assessed in terms of, the capabilities of our NATO allies. This paper outlines the increasing importance of mobility and logistics in NATO defense. It compares U.S. and allied capabilities in those areas and presents options regarding U.S. decisions on logistics and mobility. The paper is part of a CBO series on the U.S. military role in NATO. Other papers in this series are U.S. Air and Ground Conventional Forces for NATO: Overview (January 1978),Assessing the NATO/Warsaw Pact Military Balance"" (December 1977), and two forthcoming, background papers, Air Defense Issues and Firepower Issues. This series was under- taken at the request of the Senate Budget Committee. In accord- ance with CBO's mandate to provide objective analysis, the study offers no recommendations. This paper was prepared by Peggy L. Weeks and Alice C. Maroni of the National Security and International Affairs Division of the Congressional Budget Office, under the supervision of John E.
    [Show full text]
  • ATLAS SUPPORTED: Strengthening U.S.-Israel Strategic Cooperation
    ATLAS SUPPORTED: Strengthening U.S.-Israel Strategic Cooperation JINSA’s Gemunder Center U.S.-Israel Security Task Force Chairman Admiral James Stavridis, USN (ret.) May 2018 DISCLAIMER The findings and recommendations contained in this publication are solely those of the authors. Task Force and Staff Chairman Admiral James Stavridis, USN (ret.) Former NATO Supreme Allied Commander and former Commander of U.S. European Command Members General Charles Wald, USAF (ret.) Former Deputy Commander of U.S. European Command LTG John Gardner, USA (ret.) Former Deputy Commander of U.S. European Command Lt Gen Henry Obering, USAF (ret.) Former Director of U.S. Missile Defense Agency JINSA Gemunder Center Staff Michael Makovsky, PhD President & CEO Harry Hoshovsky Policy Analyst Jonathan Ruhe Associate Director Table of Contents Executive Summary 7 Strategic Overview 17 Growing Iranian threat to the Middle East 18 Israel’s vital role in defending mutual interests 19 New opportunities for U.S.-led regional defense 20 Recommendations 21 Elevate Israel’s official standing as an ally to that of Australia 21 Frontload the MoU to ensure Israel’s qualitative military edge (QME) 26 Replenish and regionalize prepositioned munitions stockpiles in Israel 28 Drive Israeli-Arab regional security cooperation 29 Support Israel’s legitimate security needs against the Iranian threat in Syria 33 Develop new frontiers for bilateral military cooperation and R&D 35 Endnotes 37 I. Executive Summary “Beautiful,” is how Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu recently described the relationship between the United States and Israel, two liberal democratic countries which acutely share many values and security interests. The United States recognized the State of Israel minutes after the Jewish state was established 70 years ago this month, but a bilateral strategic partnership only began several decades later during the height of the Cold War.
    [Show full text]
  • Unmanned Systems Sentinel
    Unmanned Systems Sentinel All opinions expressed within this newsletter are those of the respective author or authors and do not represent the official policy or positions of the Naval Postgraduate School, the United States Navy, or any other government entity. Approved for public release; distribution is unlimited. Thanks to Robin Alexander, Mark Rindler and Marcy Huber for providing several of the below articles. 22 MAY 2016 Please keep in mind that in most instances the below summaries are excerpts from the original article. The full articles can be viewed at the accompanying hyper-links. The inclusion of these links does not represent an endorsement of the organization, service, or product. Immediately below are this edition’s highlights with links to the respective articles: NAVY/USMC: AeroVironment details Blackwing UAS (Navy to Deploy Submarine-Launched Drones) Navy Researchers to Test UAV Swarming Technology this Summer USN Expects More Development of Stingray Timeline This Year ARMY: US Army Special Operations Has Big Appetite for ISR – UAS Army tests prepare for all-domain warfare US Army tests GBSAA system Army Mulls Hybrid Electric for Next Gen Drones USAF: USAF’s Small UAS roadmap calls for swarming ‘kamikaze’ drones USAF to go small on UAS NATIONAL AIR SPACE: California has the Most Drones in US (Excellent tables and illustrations) FAA Expands Drone Detection Pathfinder Initiative FAA Key Initiatives – UAS FAA Releases Drone Registration Location Data FAA and FBI Test Drone Detection A Look Back at April Drone Law Developments:
    [Show full text]
  • Download File
    Remote Controlled Restraint The Effect of Remote Warfighting Technology on Crisis Escalation Erik Lin-Greenberg Submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy in the Graduate School of Arts and Sciences COLUMBIA UNIVERSITY 2019 © 2019 Erik Lin-Greenberg All rights reserved ABSTRACT Remote Controlled Restraint: The Effect of Remote Warfighting Technology on Crisis Escalation Erik Lin-Greenberg How do technologies that remove warfighters from the front lines affect the frequency and intensity of military confrontations between states? Many scholars and policymakers fear that weapons that reduce the risks and costs of war – in blood and treasure – will lead states to resort to force more frequently during crises, destabilizing the international security environment. These concerns have featured prominently in debates surrounding the proliferation and use of remote warfighting technologies, such as drones. This project sets out to evaluate whether and how drones affect crisis escalation. Specifically, do drones allow decisionmakers to deploy military forces more frequently during interstate crises? Once deployed, how do these systems affect escalation dynamics? I argue that drones can help control escalation, raising questions about scholarly theories that suggest the world is more dangerous and less stable when technology makes conflict cheaper and less risky. At the core of this project is a theory of technology-enabled escalation control. The central argument is that technologies like drones that remove friendly forces from the battlefield may lead states to use force more frequently, but decrease the likelihood of escalation when used in lieu of inhabited platforms. More specifically, these technologies lower the political barriers to initiating military operations during crises, primarily by eliminating the risk of friendly force casualties and the associated domestic political consequences for launching military operations.
    [Show full text]
  • Perspectives and Opportunities in Intelligence for U.S. Leaders
    Perspective EXPERT INSIGHTS ON A TIMELY POLICY ISSUE September 2018 CORTNEY WEINBAUM, JOHN V. PARACHINI, RICHARD S. GIRVEN, MICHAEL H. DECKER, RICHARD C. BAFFA Perspectives and Opportunities in Intelligence for U.S. Leaders C O R P O R A T I O N Contents 1. Introduction ................................................................................................. 1 2. Reconstituting Strategic Warning for the Digital Age .................................5 3. Unifying Tasking, Collection, Processing, Exploitation, and Dissemination (TCPED) Across the U.S. Intelligence Community ...............16 4. Managing Security as an Enterprise .........................................................25 5. Better Utilizing Publicly Available Information ..........................................31 6. Surging Intelligence in an Unpredictable World .......................................44 7. Conclusion .................................................................................................56 Abbreviations ................................................................................................57 References ....................................................................................................58 Acknowledgments ........................................................................................64 About the Authors .........................................................................................64 The RAND Corporation is a research organization that develops solutions to public policy challenges to help make
    [Show full text]
  • Bottom Line up Front Trends & Issues GEOSPATIAL INTELLIGENCE A
    GEOSPATIAL INTELLIGENCE A REVOLUTION IS UNDERWAY JUNE 2015 Bottom Line Up Front In the not-too-distant past, imaging from space was the sole provenance of governments, and governments were also the primary drivers of geospatial demand and innovation; however, with the proliferation of technology, the commercial world is now taking a more prominent role in both, shifting the focus from intelligence to information. Today the commercial world is taking notice of the competitive advantage that geospatial information can create for businesses, and the lifestyle impact that it can have on everyday consumers. This recognition has caused the demand for geospatial information to grow exponentially from both government and commercial consumers. But, importantly, the change has also started to shift where innovations are born. “Non-traditional” companies, such as Google and Amazon, and new entrants are bringing a revolution through new talent, ideas, innovations, and applications to the geospatial marketplace. Trends & Issues GEOSPATIAL CAPABILITIES PROLIFERATE, GOING MAINSTREAM As technologies advance and accessibility improves, the impact of and demand for geospatial intelligence has increased significantly over the last decades. Geospatial information is going mainstream and that has caused a paradigm shift where vt innovation is born. In the future, look for the government to rely more heavily on “non-traditional” companies for leap ahead capabilities. TECHNOLOGY MATURITY EXPANDS MARKET, CREATING DEMAND Precision GPS, advanced algorithms, mobile computing, big data analytics and cloud computing are just some of the recent technological developments that have allowed geospatial data to accelerate in value. As new applications for location-based services and location-based intelligence are developed, demand will grow in both the government and commercial markets.
    [Show full text]
  • Strengthening US-Israel Strategic Cooperation
    ATLAS SUPPORTED: Strengthening U.S.-Israel Strategic Cooperation JINSA’s Gemunder Center U.S.-Israel Security Task Force Chairman Admiral James Stavridis, USN (ret.) May 2018 DISCLAIMER This report is a product of JINSA’s Gemunder Center U.S.-Israel Security Task Force. The findings expressed herein are those solely of the Task Force. The report does not necessarily represent the views or opinions of JINSA, its founders or its board of directors. Task Force and Staff Chairman Admiral James Stavridis, USN (ret.) Former NATO Supreme Allied Commander and former Commander of U.S. European Command Members General Charles Wald, USAF (ret.) Former Deputy Commander of U.S. European Command LTG John Gardner, USA (ret.) Former Deputy Commander of U.S. European Command Lt Gen Henry Obering, USAF (ret.) Former Director of U.S. Missile Defense Agency JINSA Gemunder Center Staff Michael Makovsky, PhD President & CEO Harry Hoshovsky Policy Analyst Jonathan Ruhe Associate Director Table of Contents Executive Summary 7 Strategic Overview 17 Growing Iranian threat to the Middle East 18 Israel’s vital role in defending mutual interests 19 New opportunities for U.S.-led regional defense 20 Recommendations 21 Elevate Israel’s official standing as an ally to that of Australia 21 Frontload the MoU to ensure Israel’s qualitative military edge (QME) 26 Replenish and regionalize prepositioned munitions stockpiles in Israel 28 Drive Israeli-Arab regional security cooperation 29 Support Israel’s legitimate security needs against the Iranian threat in Syria 33 Develop new frontiers for bilateral military cooperation and R&D 35 Endnotes 37 I. Executive Summary “Beautiful,” is how Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu recently described the relationship between the United States and Israel, two liberal democratic countries which acutely share many values and security interests.
    [Show full text]
  • Overnance & Information Infrastructure
    Price: INR / US$ 150 Subscriber’s 15 copy. Not for Sale Your Geospatial i ndustrY Ma Gazine GEOSPATIALTM WORLD Publication: 10 R.N.I No - UPENG/2010/34153; Registration no: UP/GBD-136/2014-16 FebruaRy 2014 » VOLUme 04» ISSUe 07 | ISSN 2277–3134 www.geospatialworld.net th of every month I Posting: 15 of every month I Posting: th / 20 th of every month OVERNANCE & INFORMATION INFRASTRUCTURE SDI - Quo Vadis? | P. 24 INSPIRE - Towards a Participatory Digital Earth | P. 32 Back to the Future: US NSDI Shows the Way | P. 42 Shaping smart change through Smart Solutions Hexagon operates on the strength of our foundation – best-in-class technologies that produce solutions to transform how critical industries tackle increasingly diffi cult challenges. Built from custom combinations of our geospatial and industrial technologies, Hexagon Smart Solutions support four key areas – safety, infrastructure, resources and manufacturing – helping customers focus on smarter ways to protect and provide for the public, build and maintain industrial facilities, optimise resources and manufacture essentials for everyday life. With decades of experience in the geospatial industry, Hexagon offers a comprehensive geospatial portfolio that captures the constant, real-time changes of our dynamic earth through satellite imagery, terrestrial and aerial photography, remote sensing, CAD and GIS. SAFETY INFRASTRUCTURE RESOURCES MANUFACTURING © Copyright 2014 Hexagon. All rights reserved. IGF Double Ad.indd 2 1/30/2014 9:43:16 AM Modernising the geospatial experience Fusing real-world and digital-world data provides the power of information. Hexagon is at the forefront of this fusion, offering a comprehensive geospatial portfolio that gives customers control of important decision-making processes.
    [Show full text]