Mr. LEWIS. Thank you very much. Let's see. I doubt that there are any other members who would have additional questions since we are supposed to be out of this room, but I do see a finger somewhere being raised. Mr. Dicks, did you want to say something?

SHIP DEPOT MAINTENANCE

Mr. DICKS. Dr. Zakheim, how much is in this budget for ship depot maintenance for the United States Navy? They are very worried that all of these ships are going to come back and they are not going to have the money to repair them.

Mr. ZAKHEIM. If my memory serves me correctly it is $1.7 billion. Mr. DICKS. $1.7 billion in 2003 money?

Mr. ZAKHEIM. Fiscal year 2003 money.

Mr. LEWIS. A record for Mr. Dicks and a response, by the way. Mr. Obey has a quick question.

SMALLPOX VACCINE

Mr. OBEY. Totally different subject. In light of the controversy about the smallpox vaccine in our other subcommittee, can you tell us what has been our experience with that vaccine and how many negative reactions-or bad reactions that we had from our armed service personnel.

Mr. WOLFOWITZ. Let me get you a precision answer for the record. I do remember the last time I saw statistics, which was a few weeks ago, we seem to be doing much better than had been predicted before the vaccine was administered. This is an important subject to be precise on, and I will get you numbers.

[CLERK'S NOTE. The Department did not provide a response for the record.]

Mr. ZAKHEIM. From a personal perspective, since my stepson is in bed and had to take that vaccine and called my wife and was very nervous, we checked into it. They were both reassured that this vaccine has had minimal side effects. And that is personal. Mr. OBEY. Okay.

Mr. LEWIS. Very important subject and I am glad the question is in the record. Gentlemen, we very much appreciate you being present. In the weeks, days, months ahead, we will be working with each other a lot, and we appreciate the work that you are all doing.

The Committee is adjourned.

[CLERK'S NOTE.-Questions submitted by Mr. Lewis, and the answers thereto follow:]

ASSUMPTIONS USED TO DEVELOP SUPPLEMENTAL REQUEST

Question. Approximately one-half of the supplemental request is associated with "sunk costs" of the war in Iraq; the other half is the cost of the war effort based on a set of assumptions. What are the assumptions you used to determine the cost of the war?

Answer. The other half of the supplemental, not related to coercive diplomacy, was based on three phases of military operations:

1. Major Conflict-The supplemental request included $13.1 billion to finance the costs for a short, extremely intense period of combat operations using a full range of U.S. and coalition forces. The estimated timeframe for major combat operations was approximately one month.

2. Transition and Iraq Stability-The supplemental request included $12.0 billion to finance the limited combat "mopping up" operations, stabilization of the environ

ment within Iraq, and reestablishment of civil order. During this phase, the Department estimated that the overall U.S. forces would decline rapidly while retaining only those forces necessary to ensure the security of the Iraqi people and resources. This phase also included establishment of a temporary civilian Office of Reconstruction and Humanitarian Assistance, which would serve as an interim organization until international and coalition partners can be incorporated into the reconstruction efforts. The estimated timeframe for lower intensity operations was approximately 3 or more months.

3. Reconstitution-The supplemental request included $7.2 billion to finance redeployment of combat forces, replacement of key munitions expended in the conflict, and depot maintenance and repair of weapons and systems platforms.

Question. Is it true that the Services submitted data based on a set of assumptions that later changed?

Answer. Yes. The initial cost estimate for Iraq operations was prepared using the U.S. Central Command (CENTCOM) Concept Plan (CONPLAN), which outlined the Department's plan for joint operations in Iraq. Several months later, this initial estimate was refined when CENTCOM developed the Operational Plan (OPLAN), which represented the full development of the concept of military operations in Iraq. It specified the forces and support needed for the conduct of joint operations and the transportation schedule required to move those resources. In developing this plan, CENTCOM and the Services developed a detailed flow of resources into the theater to support the approved OPLAN concept. After forces were selected, time-phased support requirements were determined, and transportation feasibility was established, the detailed planning information was generated and stored as a "timephased force and deployment data" (TPFDD) file. Subsequently, this data was incorporated into the Contingency Operations Support Tool (COST) model, which further refined the cost estimate based on DoD's assumptions for the three major phases of the Iraq Operation.

Question. If so, what was the genesis of the assumptions you are using to support this supplemental request and how have these assumptions changed in the past four weeks?

Answer. The initial Iraq operation cost estimate was prepared using the concept plan developed by the U.S. Central Command (CENTCOM). Subsequently, this initial estimate was refined based on CENTCOM's Operational Plan (OPLAŇ). Several months later, the Department conducted a formal review of the supplemental requirements. During this review, the cost estimates for military operations in Iraq and ongoing global war on terrorism were further refined based on the Time Phased Force and Deployment Data, (TPFDD), prepared by CENTCOM and the Military Departments, and other known factors (e.g., executability of the supplemental funds). Thereafter, this data was incorporated into the Contingency Operations Support Tool (COST) model based on DoD's assumptions for the four major phases of the Iraq Operation. As the plans changed, the Department also changed the cost estimates accordingly.

Question. Understanding the need for "flexibility" in expenditure of funds for emerging requirements of the war, with clearly one-half of the amount already spent, what is the rationale for requesting the amount needed for "sunk costs" in a transfer account?

Answer. The Department requested that the majority of supplemental funding be appropriated in a transfer account because of the unpredictable scope, duration, and intensity of military operations. The transfer account would provide the necessary flexibility to fund emerging requirements. For the funds that the Department has already incurred for coercive diplomacy, Department intended to transfer the requested resources to DoD's normal appropriation accounts. Therefore, the Department would not object if the Congress appropriates the funds requested for coercive diplomacy directly into the DoD's normal appropriation accounts.

Question. Within the transfer account you are requesting, are there funds to support the ongoing global war on terrorism? If so, can you differentiate the amount for Operation Iraq Freedom and the amount for the war on terrorism?

Answer. Yes, the Department included approximately $56.5 billion for Operation Iraq Freedom and $6.1 billion for ongoing global war on terrorism.

SUFFICIENCY OF THE REQUEST

Question. The Central Command has multiple operations underway in its area of responsibility: the war on terrorism in Afghanistan and Pakistan and the war in Iraq. Are you confident that the amount in this Supplemental is sufficient to sustain the war in Iraq given the CENTCOM's multiple efforts?

Answer. Yes, this request supports our best estimate of the costs we see at this time.

Question. Does this supplemental request finance the requirement as identified by CENTCOM?

Answer. The initial Iraq operation cost estimate was prepared using the concept plan developed by the U.S. Central Command (CENTCOM). Subsequently, this initial estimate was refined based on CENTCOM's Operational Plan (OPLAN). No one can predict with certainty exactly how any major combat campaign will progress. However, based on current circumstances, the supplemental request is sufficient to finance CENTCOM's requirements.

Question. The fiscal year 2003 budget request did not include the additional costs of the global war on terrorism, nor did it include the additional cost of a war with Iraq. How much above the amount provided in the Department of Defense Appropriations Act, 2003 (Public Law 107-248), is needed to finance these efforts?

Answer. The incremental increase of $68.7 billion above the amount appropriated in the FY 2003 DoD Appropriations Act is required to finance military operations in Iraq and the ongoing global war on terrorism. The Congress appropriated $6.1 billion in the FY 2003 Consolidated Appropriations Resolution (P.L. 108-7) and the remaining $62.6 billion is included in the DoD's FY 2003 supplemental request.

COST OF IRAQ OPERATIONS

Question. What are your projections for total cost of the war through the end of hostilities?

Answer. The fiscal year 2003 supplemental request includes $55.4 billion for coercive diplomacy, major conflict, and transition and Iraq stability phases of the Iraq operations. This is the Department's best estimate of the cost of the war through the end of hostilities.

Question. What is the expected duration of hostilities?

Answer. The supplemental request includes the necessary resources to finance a short, extremely intense period of combat operations lasting approximately one month. This phase is then followed by a period of approximately three or more months of limited combat "mopping up" operations and lower intensity, sporadic fighting.

Question. Please describe your methodology for estimating these combat costs. What are the cost drivers, and the daily burn rate?

Answer. The Combatant Commanders first developed the concept plan, which was later refined as the Operational Plan (OPLAN). Thereafter, the Time Phased Force and Deployment Data (TPFDD) was prepared by the Services working closely with the Central Command Combatant Commander. Using this detailed data and other known factors, the Office of the Secretary of Defense (OSD) Cost Team generated cost estimates for military operations based on the type of mission/contingency, duration, operational tempo (OPTEMPO), number of personnel and equipment deployed, transportation needs, subsistence for personnel deployed, and the originating and destination site. Each primary cost category was further subdivided into multiple functional cost elements. These functional cost categories formed the basis of the cost breakdown structure used in the cost models to calculate the total cost of the operation. The daily burn rate estimate for the major conflict phase was approximately $400 million to $500 million (excluding coercive diplomacy). Question. What is your current estimate for the rebuilding of Iraq?

Answer. It is too early to know the ultimate costs of Iraq's recovery. However, the $2.475 billion requested and appropriated was built on a sector specific relief and reconstruction plan. We are now evaluating how the assumptions and requirements identified in that budget plan reflect actual needs in Iraq.

The Iraq Relief and Reconstruction Fund was requested with flexible authorities because of these uncertain conditions and requirements. The structure of the Fund will allow those resources to be transferred for use for other urgent requirements. Moreover, Iraq's troubles began long before the war. Iraq has suffered from 30 years of mismanagement of the economy and deliberate policies of neglect targeted at real or imagined foes of the former regime. These policies have taken a significant toll on Iraq's infrastructure and institutions. The Coalition is committed to repairing damage done in the war and assisting the Iraqi people in their task of reconstructing infrastructure and institutions damaged or destroyed by years of misrule and systematic oppression.

It is worth noting that numerous countries around the world are contributing to restoration efforts in Iraq, and the prospects for full recovery look very good. Iraq enjoys significant human and natural resources that will make an important dif

ferences in recovery. The Iraqi people are talented, educated, and resourceful, and they have fertile soil, major rivers and significant oil reserves.

Question. Are your estimates for rebuilding and administering Iraq based on assumed participation by the United Nations or some collection of countries that are not now participating in the combat?

Answer. Yes, DoD estimates for rebuilding and administering Iraq are based on assumed participation by the United Nations (UN) and a collection of countries that did (and did not) participate in combat operations in Iraq.

Pursuant to the UN Security Council Resolution 1453 and upcoming technical meeting in New York at the United Nations the week of 23 June 2003, DoD fully expects continued and additional significant contributions from donor countries and parties around the world. This meeting will be co-hosted by the UN Development Program, the World Bank and Coalition countries. It will discuss needs assessments and the way ahead to a donor's conference this fall.

Question. Are there funds in this request for refugee operations?

Answer. The funds appropriated to the President for Other Bilateral Economic Assistance total $2.475 billion. These funds are designed to address the costs associated with supporting relief efforts related to refugees, internally displaced persons, and vulnerable individuals, including assistance for families of innocent Iraqi civilians who suffer losses as a result of military operations.

Question. How much have we spent in preparation for refugee operations in and around Iraq?

Answer. The Report to Congress pursuant to Section 1506 of the Emergency Wartime Supplemental Appropriations Act, 2003 (Public Law 108-11) demonstrates that the funds apportioned to the Department of State Bureau of Population, Refugee and Migration (PRM) total $39.1 million. Approximately $40.1 million has been allocated by PRM to date. An additional $111.6 million was apportioned to support relief efforts related to refugees, internally displaced people and vulnerable individuals.

The Department of State's Bureau for Population, Refugees, and Migration contributed assistance for the pre-positioning and emergency response activities of the U.N. High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR), the International Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC), the International Federation of Red Cross and Red Crescent Societies (IFRC), and the International Organization for Migration (IOM).

Also in the Emergency Wartime Supplemental Appropriations Act 2003, Congress appropriated $2.475 billion for the President's Iraq Relief and Reconstruction Fund, which is the primary source of U.S. government funding for Iraqi recovery activities. Congress also made $489 million available to the Department of Defense within the Iraqi Freedom Fund for use, if needed, to repair damage to Iraqi oil facilities and to preserve a petroleum distribution capability.

The $2.475 billion requested and appropriated reflects USG assumptions about expected costs and was built on a sector specific relief and reconstruction plan.

Question. If the requested supplemental funds are provided, will the services be able to replace all funds borrowed from normal operating accounts, such as for building repair?

Answer. Yes, the DoD's request of $30.3 billion for costs required for coercive diplomacy will replace all funds borrowed from normal operating accounts. For instance, this amount is necessary to reimburse the Components for estimated military personnel costs and transportation of personnel and equipment to the area of military operations. Also, the Services will need to be reimbursed for building repairs and facility enhancements (such as in Kuwait) in preparation for military operations in Iraq.

Question. If not, what activities that were provided for in the fiscal 2003 appropriations act, will not be accomplished?

Answer. If the DoD's total supplemental request is appropriated before May 2003, the Department will be able to replace all funds borrowed from normal operating accounts.

AFGHANISTAN OPERATION ENDURING FREEDOM

Question. Besides the war in Iraq, military operations and humanitarian rebuilding efforts are continuing in Afghanistan. What are your estimates of the additional funds needed to continue the Afghanistan operation through the end of the year? What is your method for estimating costs?

Answer. The Department reviewed all the cost estimates for the cost of Afghanistan Operation Enduring Freedom (OEF) submitted by DoD Components. In addition, the Department also reviewed the cost of Operation Noble Eagle (ONE). Based on execution of approximately $1.1 billion per month in the first quarter of FY 2003

for ONE and OEF, the Department included $6.1 billion in the FY 2003 supplemental request. This is required in addition to the $6.1 billion appropriated in the FY 2003 Consolidated Appropriations Resolution.

Question. What work is being accomplished by other countries in Afghanistan? What is the estimated cost of humanitarian and rebuilding operations in Afghanistan to the end of the fiscal year? Are these costs fully funded?

Answer. The scope of the Humanitarian Assistance (HA)/reconstruction effort in Afghanistan is beyond the Defense Department's area of responsibility, although we work closely with State and USAID on these efforts. To date, over 37 countries have contributed to the rebuilding of Afghanistan.

The work being accomplished includes but is not limited to:

• Establishment of a refugee camp,

Providing food, medical and water supplies,

• Technical assistance to the banking sector,

• Building education facilities,

• Providing clean water and sanitation to refugees,

• Extensive medical assistance,

Logistical coordination,

Pharmaceuticals,

Demining equipment,

Construction of a women's center, and

Providing various vehicles.

This list is not comprehensive and is a sample of accomplished work in Afghanistan to date.

Additionally, 20 coalition partner countries have contributed forces to the coalition military operation in Afghanistan, focused on creating the conditions for security, stability and reconstruction.

Question. What cash or in-kind contributions have been received or promised by other countries to assist with operations in Afghanistan?

Answer. Since the beginning of the war on terrorism, foreign nations have provided approximately $2.7 billion in logistical support to the United States.

Question. In the Omnibus Continuing Appropriations bill approved last month, Congress provided an additional $6.1 billion for the Department of Defense. How have these funds been used?

Answer. These funds were used to reimburse the Services for the costs incurred in support of Operation Noble Eagle and Operation Enduring Freedom.

Question. What is the current unobligated balance of the $6.1 billion appropriated. (Please provide this information by appropriation).

Answer. The current unobligated balance (as of March 27, 2003) is approximately $160 thousand.

PAYMENTS TO PAKISTAN AND JORDAN

Question. The supplemental request includes $1.4 billion for payments to Pakistan, Jordan, and other key cooperating nations, for logistical and military-related support provided, or to be provided, to the United States in connection with military action in Iraq and the global war on terrorism. How much has been provided in the past for such support? Of the request, how much represents payments that have already been made for which the Department is seeking reimbursement?

Answer. Pakistan, Jordan, and other key cooperating nations have been reimbursed a total of $1.2 billion for logistical and military-related support provided to the United States in connection with the global war on terrorism. Of this amount, $530 million was taken from the O&M accounts to make a payment under the Acquisition and Cross Servicing Agreement with Pakistan.

Question. What nations have received funding for such support, and what nations do you expect will receive assistance in the future?

Answer. As of September 30, 2003, the following nations have received reimbursement or have reimbursements pending from the FY 2002 Supplemental ($390 million) and the FY 2003 Supplemental ($1.4 billion).