FY2016 Defense Budget Update Jeremiah Gertler Specialist in - - PDF document

fy2016 defense budget update
SMART_READER_LITE
LIVE PREVIEW

FY2016 Defense Budget Update Jeremiah Gertler Specialist in - - PDF document

The Aerospace & Defense Forum Dallas Ft. Worth Chapter September 10, 2015 FY2016 Defense Budget Update Jeremiah Gertler Specialist in Military Aviation Aerospace and Defense Forum, September 10, 2015 Agenda Defining the defense


slide-1
SLIDE 1

The Aerospace & Defense Forum Dallas – Ft. Worth Chapter September 10, 2015 1

FY2016 Defense Budget Update

Jeremiah Gertler Specialist in Military Aviation

Aerospace and Defense Forum, September 10, 2015

CRS-2

Agenda

  • Defining the defense budget
  • The defense budget in context
  • Weapons procurement issues
slide-2
SLIDE 2

The Aerospace & Defense Forum Dallas – Ft. Worth Chapter September 10, 2015 2

CRS-3

Unless otherwise specified, all dollar amounts presented in this briefing refer to:

  • Budget Authority, that is, the amounts Congress appropriates, as

distinguished from the amounts the government spends (which are

  • utlays)
  • Current Dollars, that is, amounts compared across several years are

not adjusted to compensate for price increases that are the result of inflation

  • Department of Defense data, available at the DOD web-site:

http://comptroller.defense.gov

CRS-4

Which “Defense Budget”?

(President’s FY2016 budget request / budget authority)

National Defense Budget Function (function 050) $620.9 B

  • $592.3 B for DOD-Military
  • $20.5 B for Energy Dept. nuclear activities
  • $8.1 B for other defense-related activities
slide-3
SLIDE 3

The Aerospace & Defense Forum Dallas – Ft. Worth Chapter September 10, 2015 3

CRS-5

Which “Defense Budget”?

(President’s FY2016 budget request / budget authority)

National Defense Budget Function (function 050) $620.9 B

  • $592.3 B for DOD-Military
  • $20.5 B for Energy Dept. nuclear activities
  • $8.1 B for other defense-related activities

Department of Defense – Military $592.3 B

  • $534.3 B for DOD Base Budget -- Discretionary
  • $50.9 B for war costs (OCO)
  • $7.0 B for mandatory spending

CRS-6

Which “Defense Budget”?

(President’s FY2016 budget request / budget authority)

National Defense Budget Function (function 050) $620.9 B

  • $592.3 B for DOD-Military
  • $20.5 B for Energy Dept. nuclear activities
  • $8.1 B for other defense-related activities

Department of Defense – Military $592.3 B

  • $534.3 B for DOD Base Budget -- Discretionary
  • $50.9 B for war costs (OCO)
  • $7.0 B for mandatory spending

DOD Base Budget – Discretionary $534.3 B

  • DOD Appropriations Bill
  • Military Construction/VA Appropriations Bill
  • Permanent Appropriation (TRICARE-for-Life -- $6.2 B)
slide-4
SLIDE 4

The Aerospace & Defense Forum Dallas – Ft. Worth Chapter September 10, 2015 4

CRS-7

FY2016 Defense Request and Budget Control Act (BCA) Statutory Limits

  • Since 2011 enactment, BCA caps on defense spending has

dominated debate.

  • If appropriated level breaches limits, President must cut

defense spending across-the-board.

  • FY2016 request exceeds caps by $38 billion but Congress

could avoid sequestration by reducing request by 6.8%.

  • Over FY16-FY21 cap period, defense request exceeds caps

by $183 billion or 3.3%.

CRS-8

15.9% 8.4% 6.4% 3.3%

0% 2% 4% 6% 8% 10% 12% 14% 16% 18% 200 400 600 800 1,000 1,200 Billions of $

3.3%

Sources: CRS estimates based on OMB, CBO, and DOD data.

Gap Between BCA Caps and President’s Budget (PB) Plans Narrows, FY2012-FY2016

Pre-BCA

  • Orig. Caps

FY13 PB FY14 BBA Caps FY15PB FY16 PB

slide-5
SLIDE 5

The Aerospace & Defense Forum Dallas – Ft. Worth Chapter September 10, 2015 5

CRS-9

100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800 1950 1954 1958 1962 1966 1970 1974 1978 1982 1986 1990 1994 1998 2002 2006 2010 2014 2018 2022 Billions of FY2016$

1985 Highpoint ($606 Billion) 1985 Highpoint ($606 Billion) 2008 Base ($527 Billion) 2008 Base ($527 Billion) 2007 Base ($486 Billion) 2007 Base ($486 Billion) Actuals, FY1950-FY2015, FY2016 President’s Budget (PB) Request/Plan, FY2016-FY2025 BCA Caps

DOD BCA Limits in Historical Perspective, FY1950-FY2024

Fiscal Year CRS-10

DOD Spending Historical Perspective, FY1950- FY2025

100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800 900 1,000 FY50 FY60 FY70 FY80 FY90 FY00 FY10 FY20

Korean War: 288% buildup, 1950-1952 57% drawdown, 1952, 1955 Vietnam War: 54% buildup, 1961-1968 31% drawdown, 1968-1975 Reagan Buildup/ Post Cold War: 65% buildup, 1979-1985 33% drawdown, 1985-1997 Iraq & Afghanistan Wars: 84% buildup, 1997-2010 23% drawdown, 2010-2021 Billions of FY2016$ Yellow column indicates dedicated funding outside DOD “base budget”

slide-6
SLIDE 6

The Aerospace & Defense Forum Dallas – Ft. Worth Chapter September 10, 2015 6

CRS-11

National Defense Outlays as % of GDP

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

FY62 FY67 FY72 FY77 FY82 FY87 FY92 FY97 FY02 FY07 FY12 FY17 Est. % of GDP

  • Est. = Estimate

Vietnam 9.1% Reagan Buildup 6% Iraq/Afghanistan 4.7% 2015 (est.) 3.3% CRS-12

100 200 300 400 500 600 700 1980 1984 1988 1992 1996 2000 2004 2008 2012 2016 Req. Operations and Maintenance, Other Military Personnel Procurement RDT&E MilCon/Family Housing

Sources: CRS estimates based on OMB data.

Trends in Types of DOD Base Budget Spending: FY1980-FY2016

Billions of FY2016$

slide-7
SLIDE 7

The Aerospace & Defense Forum Dallas – Ft. Worth Chapter September 10, 2015 7

CRS-13

Choices to Respond to BCA Caps

Congressional choices: 1) Raise the BCA caps

  • Caps raised in American Taxpayer Relief Act (ATRA) in 2013 and the Bipartisan Budget

Act (BBA) in 2014.

  • Increases reduced overall BCA savings by $46 billion or about 1%.
  • Sets DOD on path of level nominal spending.

2) Accept Administration proposal to raise defense caps by $183B over decade and substitute tax changes. 3) Approve request and accept across-the-board sequestration cuts to achieve BCA savings. 4) Avoid sequester by reducing President’s Defense request to meet caps.

  • DOD argues that meeting caps would increase risk in achieving strategy and require cuts

to readiness, force structure and modernization.

CRS-14

Many options proposed to reduce defense spending

  • New report from Military Compensation and Retirement Commission

(MCRMC) proposes retirement, health, and other changes that would save $4.4 billion in FY2016 and $30.9 billion from FY2016-FY2020.

  • Changes to force structure or size of military could range from fewer

carriers to smaller Army.

  • Modernization plans by could include cancelling systems, delaying

weapon system purchases or RDT&E.

  • Delay DOD’s plans to return to “full spectrum” readiness training units

for large-scale conflicts.

  • Reduce excess infrastructure with new round of base closures.
  • Achieve additional efficiencies in operating costs and acquisition

practices.

slide-8
SLIDE 8

The Aerospace & Defense Forum Dallas – Ft. Worth Chapter September 10, 2015 8

CRS-15

2014 QDR

  • 5 Strategic Priorities:
  • Rebalance to the Asia-Pacific region.
  • Maintain a strong commitment to European and Middle Eastern

security and stability.

  • Sustain a global counterterrorism campaign.
  • Strengthen key allies and partnerships.
  • Prioritize key modernization efforts.

CRS-16

2014: The Year of Geopolitical Surprises

  • March 2014: Russia’s unconventional campaign to destabilize

Crimea and the Ukraine.

  • June 2014: ISIS launches an offensive into Iraq.
  • August 2014 : Ebola outbreak in West Africa.
  • On top of an already volatile security environment:
  • Afghan drawdown and mission transition.
  • Negotiations with Iran over nuclear program.
  • China’s actions in the East and South China Seas.
  • Unrest in Middle East and Africa.
  • Growing cyber threats: e.g., Sony hack in November and December.
slide-9
SLIDE 9

The Aerospace & Defense Forum Dallas – Ft. Worth Chapter September 10, 2015 9

CRS-17

The Military Response

  • Operation Atlantic Resolve : Since April 2014, rotating forces to Poland,

Lithuania, Latvia, and Estonia to conduct training exercises designed to reassure allies. Additional military equipment being prepositioned in region.

  • Operation Inherent Resolve : Multi-national air strikes in Iraq and Syria to

combat ISIS: Multi-national efforts to train and equip Iraqi forces.

  • Operation Unified Assistance : Since September 2014, deployed U.S.

military forces to Liberia to work in conjunction with other U.S. and international aid efforts; train health care workers; establish treatment centers.

CRS-18

Major Weapons Programs

  • Information reflects proposals at request level

Not BCA-compliant

slide-10
SLIDE 10

The Aerospace & Defense Forum Dallas – Ft. Worth Chapter September 10, 2015 10

CRS-19

Aircraft (1)

  • 57 F-35s requested ($10.6B)
  • 44 AF, 9 USMC, 4 Navy; 2 more than projected last year
  • HASC and SASC added 6 USMC; HAC-D added 6 USMC, 2 Navy
  • A-10s again proposed for retirement (by FY19)
  • HASC, SASC, & SAC-D added funds to keep A-10s operating
  • (but from other Air Force priorities)
  • Long-Range Strike Bomber contract to be awarded this

spring summer fall

  • FY16-20 plan largely follows previous requests ($1.2B in FY16)
  • HASC, SASC, & HAC-D cut 465M due to contract award delay
  • No F/A-18E/Fs or EA-18Gs requested
  • HASC and SASC added 12 Gs; HAC-D added 7 Gs, 5 E/Fs

CRS-20

Aircraft (2)

  • Previous goal of 65 steady-state UAV orbits decreased to 60
  • vs 50 proposed in FY15
  • SASC added $725 million for UCAS-D and 24 MQ-9s
  • DOD now talking 90, using MQ-1C & contractors
  • P-8 (16), E-2D (5), KC-46 (12) all on track
  • U-2s, scheduled to retire in FY16, now funded through FY19
  • 7 AWACS, previously to be retired in FY15, also now FY19
  • JSTARS replacement slipped a year, to FY23
  • New:
  • Presidential Aircraft (sole-source contract)
  • Air Force T-X trainer
  • Research initiative for 6th-generation fighter
slide-11
SLIDE 11

The Aerospace & Defense Forum Dallas – Ft. Worth Chapter September 10, 2015 11

CRS-21

The Drones are Coming! (?)

DoD UAS Procurement, 2012-2020

200 400 600 800 1000 1200 1400 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 FY Units

CRS-22

The Drones are Coming! (?)

DoD UAS Spending, 2014-2020

200 400 600 800 1000 1200 1400 1600 1800 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 MQ-9 MQ-4C MQ-8 MQ-1C FY $M

slide-12
SLIDE 12

The Aerospace & Defense Forum Dallas – Ft. Worth Chapter September 10, 2015 12

CRS-23

Long-Range Strike Bomber funding

348.6 913.7 1,246.2 2,240.7 2,898.5 3,688.0 3,790.3 500 1,000 1,500 2,000 2,500 3,000 3,500 4,000 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 $M FY FY14 FY15 FY16 CRS-24

Air Force aircraft

FY14 FY15 FY16 F-35A 19 28 44 MQ-9 12 12 29 (53?) CV-22 3 HC-130J 1 4 5 C-130J 6 7 14 MC-130J 4 3 8 AC-130J 5 KC-46 7 12 TOTAL 50 60 112 (136?)

slide-13
SLIDE 13

The Aerospace & Defense Forum Dallas – Ft. Worth Chapter September 10, 2015 13

CRS-25

Navy/Marine aircraft

FY14 FY15 FY16 EA-18G 21 12 0 (12?) F/A-18E/F F-35B 6 6 9 (15?) F-35C 4 4 4 (6?) V-22 23 19 19 H-1 upgrades 22 28 28 MH-60R/S 37 37 29 P-8 16 9 16 E-2D 5 5 5 T-6 29 KC-130J 1 1 2 MQ-8 2 5 2 MQ-4C 3 TOTAL 166 126 117 (138?)

CRS-26

Army aircraft

FY14 FY15 FY16 MQ-1 23 19 17 UH-72 37 55 28 AH-64 46 35 64 CH-47 29 32 39 UH-60M 70 87 94 TOTAL 205 228 242

slide-14
SLIDE 14

The Aerospace & Defense Forum Dallas – Ft. Worth Chapter September 10, 2015 14

CRS-27

All services (including UAVs)

FY14 FY15 FY16 Fixed-wing 136 142 177 (234?) Rotary-wing (incl V-22) 264 293 301 TOTAL 400 435 478 (535?)

CRS-28

Ships

  • Littoral Combat Ship (LCS)/Frigate program
  • Acquisition plan not yet announced for ships 25-32, to be procured FY16-FY18
  • Navy’s new plan to build ships (final 20) as modified LCSs (aka frigates)
  • Ohio Replacement (SSBNX) ballistic missile submarine
  • First increment of advance procurement (AP) funding for lead ship deferred from FY16 to FY17
  • Ford (CVN-78) class aircraft carrier program
  • Procurement funding for all 3 ships in FY16 budget
  • Managing to program’s cost cap
  • DDG-51 destroyer
  • Shift to Flight III design with 2nd FY16 ship
  • LPD-17 amphibious ship
  • FY16 budget requests funding needed to complete cost of 12th ship
  • Congress partially funded this ship in FY13 and FY15
  • LX(R) amphibious ship (lead ship FY20)
  • Navy decision to use LPD-17 hull as basis for its design
  • TAO(X) oiler
  • Lead ship requested for procurement in FY16
slide-15
SLIDE 15

The Aerospace & Defense Forum Dallas – Ft. Worth Chapter September 10, 2015 15

CRS-29

Ground forces equipment

Army and Marine Corps Joint Light Tactical Vehicle (JLTV)

Oshkosh just won Low Rate Initial Production (LRIP) contract award for 184 Army and 7 Marine JLTVs. FY2016: Anticipates a second LRIP buy of 450 Army and 109 Marine JLTVs. Total procurement quantities (FY2015 to FY2040): Army = 49,909; Marines = 5,500.

Army Armored Multi-Purpose Vehicle (AMPV): Vietnam-era M-113 personnel carrier

replacement. BAE Systems awarded $382.2M Engineering, Manufacturing and Development (EMD) contract in December 2014 for 29 vehicles (5 variants). BAE’s vehicle is a tracked vehicle. Could lead to a contract to replace 2,897 M-113s in Armored Brigade Combat Teams (ABCTs). No contract yet to replace 1,922 M-113s not in ABCTs. Some believe a wheeled variant would be suitable. Army wants an AMPV pure fleet (all tracked). FY2015 NDAA (Sec. 216): Limits funding until Army provides Congress with a report which, among other things, provides an assessment of the feasibility of incorporating medical wheeled AMPV variants.

Marine Corps Amphibious Combat Vehicle (ACV)

$219.1M FY16 RDT&E budget request to support a possible EMD decision (Milestone B) and potential award of an EMD contract and continued studies/technology development to advance high water speed capability. Total production quantities and total program cost: To be determined.

CRS-30

QUESTIONS?

slide-16
SLIDE 16

The Aerospace & Defense Forum Dallas – Ft. Worth Chapter September 10, 2015 16

CRS-31

BACKUPS

CRS-32 0.0 0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0 2.5 50 100 150 200 250 300 350 400 450 1980 1984 1988 1992 1996 2000 2004 2008 2012 2016 Req.

  • No. of Troops in Millions

In Thousands FY2016$ Cost per troop Active-Duty Strength Post Cold War Drawdown 1990-1997

Cost per Troop and Strength

Declining Personnel Increasing Costs

Sources: CRS estimates based on OMB and DOD data.

slide-17
SLIDE 17

The Aerospace & Defense Forum Dallas – Ft. Worth Chapter September 10, 2015 17

CRS-33

War Spending as Share of Total: FY2001- FY2016

7% 5% 17% 19% 16% 23% 28% 28% 22% 24% 23% 18% 14% 15% 11% 9% 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800 Billions of $ FY01 FY02 FY03 FY04 FY05 FY06 FY07 FY08 FY09 FY10 FY11 FY12 FY13 FY14 FY15 FY16

Sources: CRS estimates based on DOD data. CRS-34

Cumulative War spending: FY2001-FY2016

Afghanistan 46%

($745 B)

Non-War 5% ($78B) Islamic State 1% ($10B) Enhanced Security 2% ($28B)

Iraq 47%

($754 B) Non-war is DOD spending designated as emergency or OCO for non-war needs.

Sources: CRS estimates based on DOD data.

Total: $1,615 B

slide-18
SLIDE 18

The Aerospace & Defense Forum Dallas – Ft. Worth Chapter September 10, 2015 18

CRS-35

War Spending by Mission: FY2001-FY2016

20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 01 & 02 03 04 05 06 07 08 09 10 11 12 13 14 15 Est. 16 Req.

Afghanistan Iraq

  • Enh. Security

Islamic State Other "Non-War" Defense

Billions of $

Iraq Afghanistan ISIS Non-War

Enhanced Security

Sources: CRS estimates based on DOD data. CRS-36

Potential War Spending Issues

  • Overlap between war and base budget.
  • FY2016 higher than expected.
  • Flexible funding accounts and Congressional oversight.
  • Transitioning long-term war costs to base.
  • Uncertainties about potential future cost of ISIS and Ukraine and

Afghan withdrawal plan.

  • Future war spending paths uncertain.
slide-19
SLIDE 19

The Aerospace & Defense Forum Dallas – Ft. Worth Chapter September 10, 2015 19

CRS-37

Troop Levels During Afghan and Iraq Wars, FY2002-FY2017

Sources: CRS estimates based on DOD and other data. CRS-38

Active Component End Strength

FY 2001 FY2014 FY2015 FY2016

(Budget Request) Authorized 9/30/2001 Actual 9/30/2001 Authorized 9/30/2014 Minimum Authorized 9/30/2014 Actual 9/30/2014 Authorized 9/30/2015 Proposed 9/30/2016

A

480,000 480,801 520,000 510,000 508,210 490,000 475,000

MC

172,600 172,934 190,200 188,000 187,891 184,100 184,000

N

372,642 377,810 323,600 323,600 326,054 323,600 329,200

AF

357,000 353,571 327,600 327,600 316,332 312,980 317,000

slide-20
SLIDE 20

The Aerospace & Defense Forum Dallas – Ft. Worth Chapter September 10, 2015 20

CRS-39

Proposed Compensation Changes in the President’s Budget

Basic Pay

Budget proposes a 1.3% increase for FY2016 – 1% lower than the expected increase in the Employment Cost Index (ECI) which is what the statutory formula specifies

Congress authorized average increases greater than ECI every year for calendar years 2000-2010. Pay raises for 2011-13 were equal to the ECI. Pay raises for 2014-15 were below the ECI, as directed by the President using his authority to provide an alternative pay adjustment.

Housing Allowance (BAH)

Budget proposes a reduction in BAH over 2-3 years to cover 95% of costs of average housing costs, rather than the current 99%.

In 1996, housing allowances covered about 80% of average housing costs. Subsequent statutory changes resulted in BAH covering 100% of average housing costs. For FY2015, Congress authorized the Secretary of Defense to reduce BAH rates by an amount equal to 1% of average national housing costs. CRS-40

Proposed Compensation Changes in the President’s Budget

Commissaries

The proposed savings “will largely come from efficiencies and operating changes that do not require legislative changes. The most visible impact will be reduction in operating days and hours, with most stores remaining open 5 or more days a week.” (FY2016 Defense Budget Overview, p. 6-7). The budget also proposes some legislative changes that enable certain transportation charges to be included in the cost of goods and to expand the purposes for which commissary surcharge funds can be expended.

slide-21
SLIDE 21

The Aerospace & Defense Forum Dallas – Ft. Worth Chapter September 10, 2015 21

CRS-41

Proposed Compensation Changes in the President’s Budget

Consolidated Health Plan – No More Prime/Standard/Extra

No Primary Care Manager. Allows open access to private providers. Annual Open Season Enrollment and Participation Fee ($286 Individual/$572 Individual and Family as of 1/1/2016). Annual Deductible ($300 Individual/$600 Individual and Family) Copayments based upon Beneficiary Status (Retirees and Family or Active Duty Family Member) and Care Venue (Military Treatment Facility, Network, Out-of –Network) Catastrophic Cap: ADFM - $1,500 network/$2,500 combined, Retirees - $3,000 network/$5,000 combined. Survivors of members who die on active duty and medically retired servicemembers and their families treated like Active Duty Family Members.

Medicare-Eligible Retirees (age 65 and over)

New Annual Enrollment Fee for TRICARE for Life (current beneficiaries grandfathered)

Pharmacy Co-Pay Increases

Increases to retail pharmacy copayments over time. MTF pharmacies still free.

CRS-42

Military Compensation and Retirement Modernization Commission (MCRMC)

Established by Congress in 2013. The Commission submitted its final report to the President and Congress on Wednesday, January 29, 2015. Final report contained 15 recommendations. Recommendations on the military retirement and health care systems appear to be the most far-reaching. President’s Budget request does not include Commission recommendations due to timing.

slide-22
SLIDE 22

The Aerospace & Defense Forum Dallas – Ft. Worth Chapter September 10, 2015 22

CRS-43

MCRMC Retirement Recommendations

Current military “longevity” retirement system Typically requires completing 20 years of service (YOS) – “cliff vesting” -- although there are important exceptions. Active component (AC) personnel receive their retired pay immediately upon retirement, regardless of age. Retired pay is equal to 2.5% multiplied by YOS, with the resulting percentage applied to the individual’s “pay base”. Thus, an AC servicemember with 20 YOS will receive 50% (2.5% x 20) of his or her pay base in retirement. There is also an option (“Redux”) for servicemembers to receive a $30,000 career status bonus in the 15th year of service, in exchange for reduced retired pay while under the age of 62.

CRS-44

MCRMC Retirement Recommendations

Proposed changes to the retirement system include: Reduce the retired pay multiplier from 2.5% to 2.0% per YOS (thus, an AC servicemember with 20 YOS will receive 40% of basic pay in retirement, rather than 50%). Enhance the Thrift Savings Plan for the military by:

Government provides an automatic 1% of basic pay contribution and matches up to 5% of basic pay contributed by the servicemember. Automatic and matching contributions vest when the servicemember completes two YOS. Automatic and matching contributions would cease once the member reaches 20 YOS.

slide-23
SLIDE 23

The Aerospace & Defense Forum Dallas – Ft. Worth Chapter September 10, 2015 23

CRS-45

MCRMC Retirement Recommendations

Proposed changes to the retirement system

Add “Continuation Pay” for all servicemembers who reach 12 YOS and are willing to commit to 4 more YOS. Allow retired servicemembers to accept a lump-sum payment in place of all or part of their annuity until they reach full social security eligibility age, at which point the full annuity would be reinstated. Currently serving personnel will be “grandfathered” (kept in the current system), but the Commission recommends allowing them to opt into the new system “The Commission estimates that its retirement recommendation would reduce DOD budgetary costs by $6.1 billion during FY2016-FY2020 and result in annual steady state savings of $1.9 billion by FY2046. Federal outlays would increase by $7.2 billion during FY2016-FY2020, but decrease by $4.7 billion annually starting in FY2053.”

CRS-46

MCRMC Health Plan Recommendations

The Commission proposes major changes to the TRICARE program structure, benefits, finance, and administration. Recommends replacing the current Prime/Standard/Extra with new TRICARE Choice program similar to Federal Employees Health Benefits Program (FEHBP) for military dependents, retirees, and reservists. Active duty personnel would continue to receive care primarily through Military Treatment Facilities.