Qioptiq logo Raytheon Global MilSatCom


From McAleese & Associates, P.C.

09 Aug 12. SAC-D cut -$5B from 2013 DoD Base, but moved +$2.2B Procurement plus-up, and +$3B O&M plus-up, into OCO.

* Biggest “Winners” were Procurement overall; Navy Ships; and Army Aircraft.

* Biggest “Loser” was historic USAF Aircraft plus-ups, since SAC-D instead divested all additional Funding to sustain excess Force Structure.

McAleese Conclusions

I. Summary: SAC-D cut DoD’s 2013 Base Request by approximately -$5B (-1%), to meet BCA Ceiling, but then moved +$5B plus-up into OCO; to fully-fund 2013 DoD Request through $504B Base and $93B OCO. ($597B total without separate MilCon). (p. 6)

* Specifically, SAC-D cut approximately -$5.4B from 2013 DoD Base, comprised of: -$928M MilPer; -$4.2B O&M; -$316M RDT&E; and -$417M “Other Programs”; while providing a +$441M plus-up to 2013 Base Procurement.

* SAC-D then transferred ~$6.8B into 2013 OCO, comprised of: +$622M MilPer; +$3B O&M; +$2.2B Procurement; +$1B Revolving Funds (NDSF); with flat RDT&E. SAC-D then cut -$1.7B Rescissions from prior-year funds, to reduce total 2013 OCO plus-up to $5B.

* Title I: MilPer – SAC-D cut -$928M from DoD’s $128B 2013 MilPer Base, (primarily Army; Navy; Army Reserve; Army National Guard; and Air National Guard). SAC-D then transferred +$600M of that cut to OCO, as part of +$5B OCO plus-up.

* Title II: Base O&M – SAC-D cut -$4.2B from $175B 2013 DoD O&M Base, (primarily $2.8B Army O&M; $1.1B Navy O&M; with smaller cuts to USAF O&M and “DoD-wide” O&M). SAC-D also provided $480M plus-up for Air National Guard Base O&M, and $450M Base plus-up for “Defense Acquisition Workforce Development Fund.” Of -$4.2B 2013 O&M Base cuts, SAC-D then transferred +$3B plus-up to O&M OCO.

* Title III – Base Procurement – SAC-D plussed-up 2013 DoD Procurement by +$2.6B, comprised of +$440M plus-up to $97.2B 2013 Base Procurement, plus additional +$2.2B plus-up to $7.9B 2013 OCO Procurement. Biggest “Winners” in 2013 Base Procurement are +$2B Navy SCN; +$500M for “DoD-wide” Procurement; combination of USAF Aircraft Procurement and USAF Other Procurement; and Army “W&TCV” (Abrams/Hercules). Biggest “Winners” in 2013 OCO Procurement are +$650M Army Aircraft Procurement; +$268M Army Other Procurement; +$262M Navy APN; and +$1B DoD-wide Guard/Reserve Equipment.

* Title IV – Base RDT&E – SAC-D targeted Base RDT&E as primary “Billpayer,” to fund +$440M plus-up in 2013 Base Procurement. Specifically, SAC-D cut -$317M from $69.4B 2013 RDT&E Base, while flat-lining de minimis 2013 OCO RDT&E. Biggest “Winner” in 2013 Base RDT&E was +$437M “DoD-wide” RDT&E plus-up; while biggest “Losers” in 2013 Base RDT&E were -$502M cuts to Army RDT&E, and -$237M cuts to Navy RDT&E.

* Title IX – OCO – SAC-D increased $88.2B 2013 OCO Request, through $5B plus-up (after $1.7B Rescission), to $93B. Biggest “Winners” are +$2.2B OCO Procurement (up to $10.1B); +$600M OCO MilPer (up to $14.4B); and +$3B OCO O&M (up to $65.5B). Biggest “Losers” are -$1.7B Rescissions, to prior-year OCO funding, plus -$200M cut to 2013 OCO “Other Programs,” (such as JUONS).

II. 2013 Army Appropriations: (p. 11)

* Proposed 2013 Army RDT&E: SAC-D cut -$502M from $8.9B 2013 Army RDT&E Base, and flat-lined RDT&E OCO at $42M. The biggest “Winner” was final year of $381M MEADS RDT&E. Biggest “Loser” was -$107M cut to $278M WIN-T RDT&E Request. (p. 12)

* Proposed 2013 Army Procurement: SAC-D cut -$.9B from $16.6B 2013 Army Base Procurement, funding only $15.1B Base Procurement. Biggest “Winners” were +$186M “W&TCV” Procurement (Abrams/Hercules); and +$127M Missile Procurement. Biggest “Losers” were -$440M Army Aircraft Procurement; -$1.3B OPA; and -$115M Ammunition Procurement. But SAC-D also shifted +$654M plus-up to OCO Army Aircraft Procurement (MQ-1 UAV; AH-64; UH-60; and MQ-1 Payloads. See OH-58 cuts.) SAC-D also provided $268M plus-up to OCO OPA Procurement, (DCGS-A; Counterfire Radars;

Back to article list