Testimony issued by the Government Accountability Office with an abstract that begins "This testimony discusses the use of test facilities as a means of leveraging public, private, and academic resources to deliver technologies for the Next Generation Air Transportation System (NextGen). NextGen will affect nearly every aspect of air transportation and will transform the way in which the air transportation system operates today. It is a complex undertaking that requires new technologies--including new integrated ground and aircraft systems--as well as new procedures, processes, and supporting infrastructure. The result will be an air transportation system that relies on satellite-based surveillance and navigation, data communications, and improved collaborative decision making. Transforming the nation's air transportation system affects and involves the activities and missions of several federal agencies, though the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) is the lead implementer. In addition, NextGen was designed and planned to be developed in collaboration with aviation stakeholders--airlines and other airspace users, air traffic controllers, and avionics, aircraft, and automation systems manufacturers--in order to facilitate coordinated research activities, transfer technologies from FAA and partner agencies to the private sector, and take advantage of research and technology developed by the private sector that could meet NextGen needs, as appropriate. …

Correspondence issued by the Government Accountability Office with an abstract that begins ""

Correspondence issued by the Government Accountability Office with an abstract that begins "Gasoline prices are volatile and have increased greatly over the last several years, before dropping again recently. The national average of regular grade retail gasoline prices increased from about $2.24 the week of January 2, 2006, to a peak of $4.11 the week of July 14, 2008, an increase of almost 84 percent, before dropping to about $2.40 the week of November 3, 2008. High fuel prices have focused attention on conservation. Congress previously used a national speed limit as an approach to conserve fuel when, in 1974, it provided for a national 55 mile per hour (mph) speed limit to reduce gasoline consumption in response to the 1973 Arab oil embargo. The law prohibited federal funding of certain highway projects in any state with a maximum speed limit in excess of 55 mph. In 1987, Congress allowed states to raise the maximum speed limit to 65 mph on rural interstate routes. In 1995, the 55 mph speed limit was repealed. Since then, states have been free to set speed limits without the loss of federal highway funds. Congress expressed interest in obtaining information on using a national …

Correspondence issued by the Government Accountability Office with an abstract that begins "Spending reductions under sequestration affected DOD’s civilian workforce and many programs and functions, and required DOD to accept some risk in maintaining the readiness of military forces. However, DOD was able to mitigate some near-term effects of sequestration on its mission. Reduced spending levels required DOD to take actions such as furloughing most civilian employees for 6 days, cancelling or curtailing training for units that were not preparing to deploy by early in 2014, postponing some planned equipment maintenance at its depots and repairs or renovations of facilities, reducing some weapon system quantities or deferring modifications, and delaying system development and testing. DOD took various actions to plan for and implement sequestration, such as issuing guidance and establishing processes to identify priorities and evaluate alternatives for spending reductions. Generally, DOD’s approach to sequestration was a short-term response focused on addressing the immediate funding reductions for fiscal year 2013. DOD was able to reduce spending levels for the remainder of fiscal year 2013 without making permanent changes, such as adjusting the size of its forces or canceling weapon systems programs. By setting priorities for funding and using available prior …

Testimony issued by the General Accounting Office with an abstract that begins "A 1995 Presidential Decision Directive gave the highest priority to developing the capabilities to detect, prevent, defeat, and manage the consequences of a nuclear, biological, or chemical attack. In addition, the former Secretary of Defense emphasized at his 1997 confirmation hearing the threat that U.S. forces abroad face from chemical and biological weapons. The Office of the Secretary of Defense, the joint staff, and the armed services play distinct but interrelated roles in ensuring medical readiness. Defense planning is led by the Office of the Secretary of Defense, which sets policy and develops defense planning guidance. On the basis of this guidance, the Joint Chiefs issue a biannual Joint Strategic Capabilities Plan for the nation's unified combat commands. These commands are responsible for fighting and winning wars within a particular area, usually defined by geographical boundaries. The commanders-in-chief develop war plans and requirements that specify the combat troops and support that will be needed to meet the threat and mission assigned by the Capabilities Plan. The services, in turn, train and equip the forces, including medical personnel, to meet the needs of the commanders-in-chief. So far, neither DOD …

Testimony issued by the General Accounting Office with an abstract that begins "The United States now confronts a range of diffuse threats that put increased destructive power into the hands of small states, groups, and individuals. These threats include terrorist attacks on critical infrastructure and computer systems, the potential use of weapons of mass destruction, and the spread of infectious diseases. Addressing these challenges will require leadership to develop and implement a homeland security strategy in coordination with all relevant partners, and to marshal and direct the necessary resources. The recent establishment of the Office of Homeland Security is a good first step, but questions remain about how this office will be structured, what authority its Director will have, and how this effort can be institutionalized and sustained over time. Although homeland security is an urgent and vital national priority, the United States still must address short-term and long-term fiscal challenges that were present before September 11."

Testimony issued by the General Accounting Office with an abstract that begins "The attacks of September 11 and the recent anthrax cases have heightened long-standing concerns about the proliferation of weapons of mass destruction. The United States and the international community have undertaken several efforts over the years to secure these weapons and prevent their spread. Today, there is renewed need to maintain strong international controls over such weapons and related technologies, and to reevaluate the effectiveness of the controls. The United States has used the following four key policy instruments to combat the proliferation of weapons of mass destruction: (1) international treaties, (2) multilateral export control arrangements, (3) U.S. export controls, and (4) security assistance to other countries. Each instrument is important to preventing the transfer of weapons of mass destruction and associated technologies to terrorists or rogue states, but each has limitations. International treaties restrict transfers of weapons of mass destruction technologies, but their effectiveness depends on whether treaties can be verified and enforced and whether all countries of concern are members. Multilateral export control arrangements are voluntary, nonbinding agreements under which countries that produce the technologies used to develop weapons of mass destruction agree to restrict the …

Collection of BRAC related news articles and clippings. Produced for Commission staff review.

BRAC 2005 Technical Joint Cross-Service Group (TJCSG)Daily Conference Call Meeting Minutes of 22 February 2005

BRAC 2005 Technical Joint Cross-Service Group (TJCSG)Daily Conference Call Meeting Minutes of 23 February 2005

BRAC 2005 Technical Joint Cross-Service Group (TJCSG)Daily Conference Call Meeting Minutes of 24 February 2005

BRAC 2005 Technical Joint Cross-Service Group (TJCSG)Daily Conference Call Meeting Minutes of 25 February 2005

BRAC 2005 Technical Joint Cross-Service Group (TJCSG)Daily Conference Call Meeting Minutes of 28 February 2005

BRAC 2005 Technical Joint Cross-Service Group (TJCSG)Daily Conference Call Meeting Minutes of 01 March 2005

BRAC 2005 Technical Joint Cross-Service Group (TJCSG)Daily Conference Call Meeting Minutes of 01 March 2005

BRAC 2005 Technical Joint Cross-Service Group (TJCSG)Daily Conference Call Meeting Minutes of 02 March 2005

BRAC 2005 Technical Joint Cross-Service Group (TJCSG)Daily Conference Call Meeting Minutes of 03 March 2005

BRAC 2005 Technical Joint Cross-Service Group (TJCSG)Daily Conference Call Meeting Minutes of 04 March 2005

2005 BRAC COMMISSION REGIONAL HEARING WEDNESDAY, JULY 6, 2005 BOSTON CONVENTION AND EXHIBITION CENTER, BOSTON, MASSACHUSETTS, STATES TESTIFYING: RHODE ISLAND, CONNECTICUT, MASSACHUSETTS, MAINE AND NEW HAMPSHIRE

BRAC 2005 Administration Joint Cross-Service Group (JCSG) Meeting Minutes of April 1, 2003

BRAC 2005 Administration Joint Cross-Service Group (JCSG) Meeting Minutes of April 16, 2003

Minutes of the 15 May 2003 HSA JCSG Meeting

Minutes of the 20 May 2003 HSA JCSG Meeting

Minutes of the 29 May 2003 HSA JCSG Meeting