[DOCID: f:hr132.105]
From the House Reports Online via GPO Access
[wais.access.gpo.gov]

105th Congress                                                   Report
                        HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

 1st Session                                                    105-132
_______________________________________________________________________


 
        NATIONAL DEFENSE AUTHORIZATION ACT FOR FISCAL YEAR 1998


                               ----------                              

                              R E P O R T

                                 OF THE

                     COMMITTEE ON NATIONAL SECURITY
                        HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                                   ON

                               H.R. 1119

                             together with

                    ADDITIONAL AND DISSENTING VIEWS

      [Including cost estimate of the Congressional Budget Office]

                                     
<GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT>

                                     

 June 16, 1997.--Committed to the Committee of the Whole House on the 
              State of the Union and ordered to be printed



         NATIONAL DEFENSE AUTHORIZATION ACT FOR FISCAL YEAR 1998



105th Congress                                                   Report
                        HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

 1st Session                                                    105-132
_______________________________________________________________________


        NATIONAL DEFENSE AUTHORIZATION ACT FOR FISCAL YEAR 1998

                               __________

                              R E P O R T

                                 OF THE

                     COMMITTEE ON NATIONAL SECURITY

                        HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                                   ON

                               H.R. 1119

                             together with

                    ADDITIONAL AND DISSENTING VIEWS

      [Including cost estimate of the Congressional Budget Office]


<GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT>


 June 16, 1997.--Committed to the Committee of the Whole House on the 
              State of the Union and ordered to be printed



                  HOUSE COMMITTEE ON NATIONAL SECURITY
                       One Hundred Fifth Congress

               FLOYD D. SPENCE, South Carolina, Chairman
BOB STUMP, Arizona                   RONALD V. DELLUMS, California
DUNCAN HUNTER, California            IKE SKELTON, Missouri
JOHN R. KASICH, Ohio                 NORMAN SISISKY, Virginia
HERBERT H. BATEMAN, Virginia         JOHN M. SPRATT, Jr., South 
JAMES V. HANSEN, Utah                    Carolina
CURT WELDON, Pennsylvania            SOLOMON P. ORTIZ, Texas
JOEL HEFLEY, Colorado                OWEN PICKETT, Virginia
JIM SAXTON, New Jersey               LANE EVANS, Illinois
STEVE BUYER, Indiana                 GENE TAYLOR, Mississippi
TILLIE K. FOWLER, Florida            NEIL ABERCROMBIE, Hawaii
JOHN M. McHUGH, New York             MARTIN T. MEEHAN, Massachusetts
JAMES TALENT, Missouri               ROBERT A. UNDERWOOD, Guam
TERRY EVERETT, Alabama               JANE HARMAN, California
ROSCOE G. BARTLETT, Maryland         PAUL McHALE, Pennsylvania
HOWARD ``BUCK'' McKEON, California   PATRICK J. KENNEDY, Rhode Island
RON LEWIS, Kentucky                  ROD R. BLAGOJEVICH, Illinois
J.C. WATTS, Jr., Oklahoma            SILVESTRE REYES, Texas
MAC THORNBERRY, Texas                TOM ALLEN, Maine
JOHN N. HOSTETTLER, Indiana          VIC SNYDER, Arkansas
SAXBY CHAMBLISS, Georgia             JIM TURNER, Texas
VAN HILLEARY, Tennessee              F. ALLEN BOYD, Jr., Florida
JOE SCARBOROUGH, Florida             ADAM SMITH, Washington
WALTER B. JONES, Jr., North          LORETTA SANCHEZ, California
    Carolina                         JAMES H. MALONEY, Connecticut
LINDSEY GRAHAM, South Carolina       MIKE McINTYRE, North Carolina
SONNY BONO, California               CIRO D. RODRIGUEZ, Texas
JIM RYUN, Kansas
MICHAEL PAPPAS, New Jersey
BOB RILEY, Alabama
JIM GIBBONS, Nevada
                    Andrew K. Ellis, Staff Director



                            C O N T E N T S

                              ----------                              
                                                                   Page

Explanation of the Committee Amendment...........................     1
Purpose..........................................................     1
Relationship of Authorization to Appropriations..................     2
Summary of Authorization in the Bill.............................     2
  Summary Table of Authorizations................................     2
Rationale for the Committee Bill.................................    10
  Readiness......................................................    13
  Quality of Life................................................    14
  Modernization and Innovation...................................    15
  Defense Reform.................................................    16
  Conclusion.....................................................    17
Hearings.........................................................    18

DIVISION A--DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE AUTHORIZATION..................    19
TITLE I--PROCUREMENT.............................................    19

  OVERVIEW.......................................................    19
    Aircraft Procurement, Army...................................    22
      Overview...................................................    22
      Items of Special Interest..................................    25
    Missile Procurement, Army....................................    27
      Overview...................................................    27
      Items of Special Interest..................................    30
    Weapons and Tracked Combat Vehicles, Army....................    31
      Overview...................................................    31
      Items of Special Interest..................................    34
    Ammunition Procurement, Army.................................    36
      Overview...................................................    36
      Items of Special Interest..................................    40
    Other Procurement, Army......................................    41
      Overview...................................................    41
      Items of Special Interest..................................    50
    Aircraft Procurement, Navy...................................    57
      Overview...................................................    57
      Items of Special Interest..................................    61
    Weapons Procurement, Navy....................................    66
      Overview...................................................    66
      Items of Special Interest..................................    70
    Ammunition Procurement, Navy/Marine Corps....................    71
      Overview...................................................    71
      Items of Special Interest..................................    74
    Shipbuilding and Conversion, Navy............................    74
      Overview...................................................    74
      Items of Special Interest..................................    77
    Other Procurement, Navy......................................    81
      Overview...................................................    81
      Items of Special Interest..................................    91
    Procurement, Marine Corps....................................    95
      Overview...................................................    95
      Items of Special Interest..................................   100
    Aircraft Procurement, Air Force..............................   101
      Overview...................................................   101
      Items of Special Interest..................................   106
    Ammunition Procurement, Air Force............................   110
      Overview...................................................   110
    Missile Procurement, Air Force...............................   113
      Overview...................................................   113
      Items of Special Interest..................................   116
    Other Procurement, Air Force.................................   117
      Overview...................................................   117
      Items of Special Interest..................................   123
    Procurement, Defense-Wide....................................   124
      Overview...................................................   124
      Items of Special Interest..................................   129
    National Guard and Reserve Equipment.........................   130
      Overview...................................................   130
      Items of Special Interest..................................   134
    Chemical Agents and Munitions Destruction, Defense...........   134
      Overview...................................................   134
      Items of Special Interest..................................   136
    Defense Export Loan Guarantees...............................   137
      Overview...................................................   137
  LEGISLATIVE PROVISIONS.........................................   139
    Subtitle A--Authorization of Appropriations..................   139
      Sections 101-108--Authorization of Appropriations..........   139
      Section 121--Limitation on Obligation of Funds for the 
        Seawolf Submarine Program................................   139
      Section 122--Report on Annual Budget Submission Regarding 
        the Reserve Components...................................   139

TITLE II--RESEARCH, DEVELOPMENT, TEST, AND EVALUATION............   140

  OVERVIEW.......................................................   140
    Army RDT&E-..................................................   142
      Overview...................................................   142
      Items Of Special Interest..................................   151
    Navy RDT&E...................................................   164
      Overview...................................................   164
      Items Of Special Interest..................................   174
    Air Force RDT&E..............................................   202
      Overview...................................................   202
      Items Of Special Interest..................................   211
    Defense Agencies RDT&E.......................................   216
      Overview...................................................   216
      Items Of Special Interest..................................   225
  LEGISLATIVE PROVISIONS.........................................   255
    Subtitle A--Authorization of Appropriations..................   255
      Section 201--Authorization Of Appropriations...............   255
      Section 202--Amount For Basic And Applied Research.........   255
      Section 203--Dual Use Technology Programs..................   255
    Subtitle B--Program Requirements, Restrictions, and 
      Limitations................................................   255
      Section 211--Manufacturing Technology Program..............   255
      Section 212--Strategic Environmental Research and 
        Development Program......................................   256
      Section 213--Tactical Unmanned Aerial Vehicles.............   256
      Section 214--Revisions to Membership of and Appointment 
        Authority for National Ocean Research Leadership Council.   257
      Section 215--Maintenance and Repair of Real Property at Air 
        Force Installations......................................   257
      Section 216--Expansion of Eligibility for the Defense 
        Experimental Program to Stimulate Competitive Research...   257
      Section 217--Limitation on the Use of Funds for Adaptation 
        of Integrated Defensive Electronic Countermeasures 
        (IDECM) Program to F/A-18E/F Aircraft and AV-8B Aircraft.   257
      Section 218--Bioassay Testing of Veterans..................   257
    Subtitle C--Ballistic Missile Defense Programs...............   258
      Section 231--Budgetary Treatment of Amount Requested for 
        Procurement for Ballistic Missile Defense Programs.......   258
      Section 232--Cooperative Ballistic Missile Defense Programs   258
      Section 233--Deployment Dates for Core Theater Missile 
        Defense Programs.........................................   258
      Section 234--Annual Report on Threat Posed to the United 
        States by Weapons of Mass Destruction, Ballistic 
        Missiles, and Cruise Missiles............................   260
      Section 235--Director of Ballistic Missile Defense 
        Organization (BMDO)......................................   260
      Section 236--Tactical High Energy Laser Program (THEL).....   261

TITLE III--OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE.............................   262

  OVERVIEW.......................................................   262
    Funding Priorities...........................................   262
    Readiness....................................................   263
    Reform.......................................................   264
    Funding Overview.............................................   264
  ITEMS OF SPECIAL INTEREST......................................   292
    Budget Request Reductions....................................   292
      Administration and Support Accounts........................   292
      Bulk Fuel..................................................   292
      Advisory and Assistance Services...........................   293
    Defense Support Services Reform..............................   293
      Overview...................................................   293
      Contracting Out Firefighter and Security Activities at 
        Military Installations...................................   294
      Criminal Investigations and Board on Audits................   294
      Defense Reutilization and Marketing Service Improvements...   295
      Defense Supply and Logistics Management....................   295
      Definition of Mission Essential Support Services...........   296
      Extensively Studied Functions..............................   297
      Multi-Service Contracting of Base Operations Functions.....   297
      Oversight of Outsourced Functions..........................   298
      Procurement and Electronic Commerce Technical Assistance 
        Program..................................................   298
      United States Transportation Command.......................   299
    Environmental Issues.........................................   300
      Air Force Plant #3, Tulsa, Oklahoma........................   300
      Compliance Funding.........................................   300
      Environmental Cleanup at the Washington Navy Yard..........   301
      Exploring Options to Reduce Environmental Cleanup Costs....   302
      Performance Based Contracting..............................   302
    Intelligence Matters.........................................   303
      Budget Justification Materials.............................   303
      Command and Control, Communications, Computers and 
        Intelligence Integrated Architecture Plan................   304
      Defense Space Reconnaissance Program (DSRP)................   304
      Foreign Instrumentation Intelligence.......................   305
      Imagery and Geospatial System Production...................   305
      Intelligence System Interoperability.......................   306
      Interferometric Synthetic Aperture Radar...................   307
      Joint Planning and Program Review..........................   307
      National Imagery and Mapping Agency Civilian Personnel.....   307
      National Imagery and Mapping Agency Mission Support........   308
      Tactical Unmanned Aerial Vehicle (UAV).....................   309
      Tactical Information Program...............................   309
      Tactical Support...........................................   309
    Morale, Welfare, and Recreation Issues.......................   310
      Deferred Payment Programs of Military Exchanges............   310
      MWR Reimbursement from Closure of Foreign Military 
        Installations............................................   310
      Pentagon Concessions Committee Activities..................   311
      Report on Black Marketing of Beer in Korea.................   312
      Report on Tobacco Sales at Commissaries....................   312
      Uniform Health Benefit Program for Nonappropriated Fund 
        Employees................................................   313
      Defense Commissary Agency Produce Purchasing...............   313
    Other Issues.................................................   314
      Army After Next............................................   314
      Army Aviation Training.....................................   315
      Army Civilian Personnel Management.........................   315
      Army Depot Maintenance Funding.............................   316
      Automatic Document Conversion Technology...................   316
      Budget Justification Materials.............................   316
      Computer Crimes and Information Technology Security........   317
      Contractor Operated Civil Engineering Supply Stores........   317
      Department of Defense Next Generation Weather Radar-Doppler   318
      Emergency Communications Services for Members of the Armed 
        Forces and Their Families................................   318
      Flying Hour Shortfalls.....................................   319
      Impending Change in Air Force Supply Management Activity 
        Group....................................................   320
      Logistics Augmentation Programs............................   320
      Military Affiliate Radio System............................   321
      Mobility Infrastructure Enhancement........................   322
      Non-BRAC Caretaker Costs...................................   322
      Repair and Maintenance Projects............................   322
      Renovation of Building for Defense Accounting Service 
        Center...................................................   323
      Shatter Resistant Window Film..............................   323
      Travel Reengineering.......................................   323
  LEGISLATIVE PROVISIONS.........................................   324
    Subtitle A--Authorization Of Appropriations..................   324
      Section 301--Operation and Maintenance Funding.............   324
      Section 302--Working Capital Funds.........................   324
      Section 303--Armed Forces Retirement Home..................   324
      Section 304--Transfer From National Defense Stockpile 
        Transaction Fund.........................................   325
      Section 305--Refurbishment and Installation of Air Search 
        Radar....................................................   325
      Section 306--Refurbishment of M1A1 Tanks...................   325
      Section 307--Procurement and Electronic Commerce Technical 
        Assistance Program.......................................   325
      Section 308--Availability of Funds for Separation Pay for 
        Defense Acquisition Personnel............................   325
    Subtitle B--Military Readiness Issues........................   325
      Overview...................................................   325
      Section 311--Expansion of Scope of Quarterly Readiness 
        Reports..................................................   328
      Section 312--Limitation on Reallocation of Funds Within 
        Operation and Maintenance Appropriations.................   329
      Section 313--Operation of Prepositioned Fleet, National 
        Training Center, Fort Irwin, California..................   329
      Section 314--Prohibition of Implementation of Tiered 
        Readiness System.........................................   329
      Section 315--Reports on Transfers From High Priority 
        Readiness Appropriations.................................   330
      Section 316--Report on Chairman, Joint Chiefs of Staff 
        Exercise Program and Partnership for Peace Program.......   331
      Section 317--Quarterly Reports on Execution of Operation 
        and Maintenance Appropriations...........................   331
    Subtitle C--Civilian Personnel...............................   331
      Section 321--Pay Practices When Overseas Teachers Transfer 
        To General Schedule Positions............................   331
      Section 322--Use of Approved Fire-Safe Accommodations by 
        Government Employees on Official Business................   332
    Subtitle D--Depot-Level Activities...........................   332
      Section 331--Extension of Authority for Aviation Depots and 
        Naval Shipyards to Engage in Defense Related Production 
        and Services.............................................   332
      Section 332--Exclusion of Certain Large Maintenance and 
        Repair Projects from Percentage Limitation on Contracting 
        for Depot-Level Maintenance..............................   332
      Section 333--Restrictions on Contracts for Performance of 
        Depot-Level Maintenance and Repair at Certain Facilities.   332
      Section 334--Core Logistics Functions of Department of 
        Defense..................................................   333
      Section 335--Centers of Industrial and Technical Excellence   333
      Section 336--Personnel Reductions, Army Depots 
        Participating in Army Workload and Performance System....   334
    Subtitle E--Environmental Provisions.........................   334
      Section 341--Revision of Membership Terms for Strategic 
        Environmental Research and Development Program Scientific 
        Advisory Board...........................................   334
      Section 342--Amendments to Authority to Enter into 
        Agreements with Other Agencies in Support of 
        Environmental Technology Certification...................   334
      Section 343--Authorization to Pay Negotiated Settlement for 
        Environmental Cleanup at Former Department of Defense 
        Sites in Canada..........................................   334
      Section 344--Modifications of Authority to Store and 
        Dispose of Nondefense Toxic and Hazardous Materials......   335
      Section 345--Revision of Report Requirement for Navy 
        Program to Monitor Ecological Effects of Organotin.......   335
      Section 346--Partnerships for Investment in Innovative 
        Environmental Technologies...............................   335
      Section 347--Pilot Program to Test Alternative Technology 
        for Eliminating Solid and Liquid Waste Emissions During 
        Ship Operations..........................................   336
    Subtitle F--Commissaries And Nonappropriated Fund 
      Instrumentalities..........................................   336
      Section 361--Reorganization of Laws Regarding Commissaries, 
        Exchanges, and other Morale, Welfare, and Recreation 
        Activities...............................................   336
      Section 362--Merchandise and Pricing Requirements for 
        Commissary Stores........................................   336
      Section 363--Limitation on Noncompetitive Procurement of 
        Brand-Name Commercial Items for Resale in Commissary 
        Stores...................................................   337
      Section 364--Transfer of Jurisdiction over Exchange, 
        Commissary, and Morale, Welfare and Recreation Activities 
        to Under Secretary of Defense (Comptroller)..............   337
      Section 365--Public and Private Partnerships to Benefit 
        Morale, Welfare and Recreation Activities................   337
      Section 366--Treatment of Certain Amounts Received by 
        Defense Commissary Agency................................   338
      Section 367--Authorized Use of Appropriated Funds for 
        Relocation of Navy Exchange Service Command..............   338
    Subtitle G--Other Matters....................................   338
      Section 371--Assistance to Local Educational Agencies That 
        Benefit Dependents of Members of the Armed Forces and 
        Department of Defense Civilian Employees.................   338
      Section 372--Continuation of Operation Mongoose............   339
      Section 373--Inclusion of Air Force Depot Maintenance as 
        Operation and Maintenance Budget Activity Group..........   339
      Section 374--Programs to Commemorate 50th Anniversary of 
        Marshall Plan and Korean Conflict........................   339
      Section 375--Prohibition on Use of Special Operations 
        Command Budget for Base Operation Support................   340
      Section 376--Continuation and Extension of Demonstration 
        Program to Identify Overpayments Made to Vendors.........   340
      Section 377--Applicability of Federal Printing Requirements 
        to Defense Automated Printing Service....................   340
      Section 378--Base Operations Support for Military 
        Installations on Guam....................................   341

MILITARY PERSONNEL OVERVIEW......................................   341
TITLE IV--MILTARY PERSONNEL AUTHORIZATIONS.......................   346

  LEGISLATIVE PROVISIONS.........................................   346
    Subtitle A--Active Forces....................................   346
      Section 401--End Strengths for Active Forces...............   346
    Subtitle B--Reserve Forces...................................   347
      Section 411--End Strengths for Selected Reserve............   347
      Section 412--End Strengths for Reserves on Active Duty in 
        Support of the Reserves..................................   348
      Section 413--End Strengths for Military Technicians (Dual 
        Status)..................................................   348
      Section 414--Increase in Number of Members in Certain 
        Grades Authorized to Serve on Active Duty in Support of 
        the Reserves.............................................   349
    Subtitle C--Authorization of Appropriations..................   349
      Section 421--Authorization of Appropriations for Military 
        Personnel................................................   349

TITLE V--MILITARY PERSONNEL POLICY...............................   350

  ITEMS OF SPECIAL INTEREST......................................   350
      Family Life Assistance Programs............................   350
      Increased Support for Military Recruiting..................   350
      Investigation of the Deaths of Military Personnel by Self-
        inflicted Causes.........................................   350
      Joint Recruiting Information Support System................   351
      Military Identification Cards..............................   352
      Military Occupational Specialties (MOS) Consolidations.....   352
      Retention of Military Leave for Federal Civilian Employees 
        Who Perform Reserve Duty.................................   352
      Sexual Misconduct in the Armed Services....................   353
  LEGISLATIVE PROVISIONS.........................................   354
    Subtitle A--Officer Personnel Policy.........................   354
      Section 501--Limitation on Number of General and Flag 
        Officers Who May Serve in Positions Outside Their Own 
        Service..................................................   354
      Section 502--Exclusion of Certain Retired Officers from 
        Limitation on Period of Recall to Active Duty............   355
      Section 503--Clarification of Officers Eligible for 
        Consideration by Selection Boards........................   355
      Section 504--Authority to Defer Mandatory Retirement for 
        Age of Officers Serving As Chaplains.....................   355
    Subtitle B--Reserve Component Matters........................   355
      Section 511--Individual Ready Reserve Activation Authority.   355
      Section 512--Termination of Mobilization Income Insurance 
        Program..................................................   356
      Section 513--Correction of Inequities in Medical and Dental 
        Care and Death and Disability Benefits for Reserve 
        Members Who Incur or Aggravate an Illness in the Line of 
        Duty.....................................................   357
      Section 514--Time-in-Grade Requirements for Reserve 
        Commissioned Officers Retired During the Drawdown Period.   357
      Section 515--Authority to Permit Non-Unit Assigned Officers 
        to be Considered by Vacancy Promotion Board to General 
        Officer Grades...........................................   357
      Section 516--Grade Requirement for Officers Eligible to 
        Serve on Involuntary Separation Boards...................   357
      Section 517--Limitation on Use of Air Force Reserve AGR 
        Personnel for Air Force Base Security Functions..........   357
    Subtitle C--Military Technicians.............................   358
      Section 521--Authority to Retain on the Reserve Active-
        Status List Until Age 60 Military Technicians in the 
        Grade of Brigadier General...............................   358
      Section 522--Military Technicians (Dual Status)............   358
      Section 523--Non-Dual Status Military Technicians..........   359
    Subtitle D--Measures to Improve Recruit Quality and Reduce...   359
    Recruit Attrition............................................   359
      Section 531--Reform of Military Recruiting Systems.........   359
      Section 532--Improvements in Medical Prescreening of 
        Applicants for Military Service..........................   360
      Section 533--Improvements in Physical Fitness of Recruits..   360
    Subtitle E--Military Education and Training..................   360
      Section 541--Independent Panel to Review Military Basic 
        Training.................................................   360
      Section 542--Reform of Army Drill Sergeant Selection and 
        Training Process.........................................   361
      Section 543--Requirement for Candidates for Admission to 
        United States Naval Academy to Take Oath of Allegiance...   362
      Section 544--Reimbursement of Expenses Incurred for 
        Instruction at Service Academies of Persons from Foreign 
        Countries................................................   362
      Section 545--United States Naval Postgraduate School.......   363
      Section 546--Air Force Academy Cadet Foreign Exchange 
        Program..................................................   363
      Section 547--Training in Human Relations Matters for Army 
        Drill Sergeant Trainees..................................   364
      Section 548--Study of Feasibility of Gender-Segregated 
        Basic Training...........................................   364
    Subtitle F--Military Decorations and Awards..................   364
      Section 551--Study of New Decorations for Injury or Death 
        in Line of Duty..........................................   364
      Section 552--Purple Heart to be Awarded Only to Members of 
        the Armed Forces.........................................   365
      Section 553--Eligibility for Armed Forces Expeditionary 
        Medal for Participation in Operation Joint Endeavor or 
        Operation Joint Guard....................................   365
      Section 554--Waiver of Time Limitations for Award of 
        Certain Decorations to Specified Persons.................   365
    Subtitle G--Other Matters....................................   365
      Section 561--Suspension of Temporary Early Retirement 
        Authority................................................   365
      Section 562--Treatment of Educational Accomplishments of 
        National Guard ChalleNGe Program Participants............   365
      Section 563--Authority for Personnel to Participate in 
        Management of Certain Non-Federal Entities...............   366
      Section 564--Crew Requirements of WC-130J Aircraft.........   366
      Section 565 and Section 566--Civil-Military Programs.......   366
      Section 567--Continuation of Support to Senior Military 
        Colleges.................................................   367
      Section 568--Restoration of Missing Persons Authorities 
        Applicable to Department of Defense as in Effect Before 
        Enactment of National Defense Authorization Act For 
        Fiscal Year 1997.........................................   367
      Section 569--Establishment of Sentence of Confinement for 
        Life Without Eligibility for Parole......................   368
      Section 570--Limitation on Appeal of Denial of Parole for 
        Offenders Serving Life Sentence..........................   368
      Section 571--Establishment of Public Affairs Branch in the 
        Army.....................................................   368

TITLE VI--COMPENSATION AND OTHER PERSONNEL BENEFITS..............   369

  ITEMS OF SPECIAL INTEREST......................................   369
      Armed Forces Health Professions Scholarship Program 
        (AFHPSP).................................................   369
      Communication of Retirement Benefits to New Accessions.....   369
      Study of Certain Compensation Issues.......................   370
      Tax Deferred Savings Plan..................................   370
  LEGISLATIVE PROVISIONS.........................................   371
    Subtitle A--Pay and Allowances...............................   371
      Section 601--Increase in Basic Pay for Fiscal Year 1998....   371
      Section 602--Annual Adjustment of Basic Pay and Protection 
        of Member's Total Compensation While Performing Certain 
        Duty.....................................................   371
      Section 603--Use of Food Cost Information to Determine 
        Basic Allowance for Subsistence..........................   372
      Section 604--Consolidation of Basic Allowance for Quarters, 
        Variable Housing Allowance, and Overseas Housing 
        Allowances...............................................   372
    Subtitle B--Bonuses and Special and Incentive Pays...........   373
      Section 611--One-Year Extension of Certain Bonuses and 
        Special Pay Authorities for Reserve Forces...............   373
      Section 612--One-Year Extension of Certain Bonuses and 
        Special Pay Authorities for Nurse Officer Candidates, 
        Registered Nurses, and Nurse Anesthetists................   373
      Section 613--One-Year Extension of Authorities Relating to 
        Payment of Other Bonuses and Special Pays................   373
      Section 614--Increase in Minimum Monthly Rate of Hazardous 
        Duty Incentive Pay for Certain Members...................   374
      Section 615--Availability of Multiyear Retention Bonus for 
        Dental Officers..........................................   374
      Section 616--Increase in Variable and Additional Special 
        Pays for Certain Dental Officers.........................   374
      Section 617--Special Pay for Duty at Designated Hardship 
        Duty Locations...........................................   374
      Section 618--Selected Reserve Reenlistment Bonus...........   375
      Section 619--Selected Reserve Enlistment Bonus for Former 
        Enlisted Members.........................................   375
      Section 620--Special Pay or Bonuses for Enlisted Members 
        Extending Tours of Duty Overseas.........................   375
      Section 621--Increase in Amount of Family Separation 
        Allowance................................................   375
      Section 622--Change in Requirements for Ready Reserve 
        Muster Duty Allowance....................................   375
    Subtitle C--Travel and Transportation Allowances.............   375
      Section 631--Travel and Transportation Allowances for 
        Dependents of Member Sentenced by Court-Martial..........   375
      Section 632--Dislocation Allowance.........................   376
    Subtitle D--Retired Pay, Survivor Benefits, and Related 
      Matters....................................................   376
      Section 641--Time in Which Certain Changes in Beneficiary 
        Under Survivor Benefit Plan May Be Made..................   376
    Subtitle E--Other Matters....................................   376
      Section 651--Definition of Sea Duty for Purposes of Career 
        Sea Pay..................................................   376
      Section 652--Loan Repayment Program for Commissioned 
        Officers in Certain Health Professions...................   376
      Section 653--Conformance of NOAA Commissioned Officers 
        Separation Pay to Separation Pay for Members of Other 
        Uniformed Services.......................................   376
      Section 654--Reimbursement of Public Health Service 
        Officers for Adoption Expenses...........................   376
      Section 655--Payment of Back Quarters and Subsistence 
        Allowances to World War II Veterans Who Served as 
        Guerrilla Fighters in the Philippines....................   377
      Section 656--Space Available Travel for Members of Selected 
        Reserve..................................................   377
      Section 657--Study on Military Personnel At, Near, or Below 
        the Poverty Line.........................................   377
      Section 658--Implementation of Department of Defense 
        Supplemental Food Program for Military Personnel Outside 
        the United States........................................   377

TITLE VII--HEALTH CARE PROVISIONS................................   378

    OVERVIEW.....................................................   378
    ITEMS OF SPECIAL INTEREST....................................   379
        CHAMPUS as a Second-Payer to Other Health Insurance......   379
        Pacific Medical Network..................................   379
        TRICARE Program..........................................   379
        Vietnam Repatriated Prisoner of War Program..............   380
    LEGISLATIVE PROVISIONS.......................................   381
      Subtitle A--Health Care Services...........................   381
        Section 701--Expansion of Retiree Dental Insurance Plan 
          to Include Surviving Spouse and Child Dependents of 
          Certain Deceased Members...............................   381
        Section 702--Provision of Prosthetic Devices to Covered 
          Beneficiaries..........................................   381
      Subtitle B--TRICARE Program................................   381
        Section 711--Addition of Definition of TRICARE Program to 
          Title 10...............................................   381
        Section 712--Plan for Expansion of Managed Care Option of 
          TRICARE Program........................................   381
      Subtitle C--Uniformed Services Treatment Facilities........   382
        Section 721--Implementation of Designated Provider 
          Agreements for Uniformed Services Treatment Facilities.   382
        Section 722--Limitation on Total Payments................   382
        Section 723--Continued Acquisition of Reduced-Cost Drugs.   382
      Subtitle D--Other Changes to Existing Laws Regarding Health 
        Care Management..........................................   382
        Section 731--Waiver or Reduction of Copayments Under 
          Overseas Dental Program................................   382
        Section 732--Premium Collection Requirements for Medical 
          and Dental Insurance Programs..........................   382
        Section 733--Consistency Between CHAMPUS and Medicare in 
          Payment Rates for Service..............................   383
        Section 734--Use of Personal Services Contracts for 
          Provision of Health Care Services and Legal Protection 
          for Providers..........................................   383
        Section 735--Portability of State Licenses for Department 
          of Defense Health Care Professionals...................   384
        Section 736--Standard Form and Requirements Regarding 
          Claims for Payment for Services........................   384
        Section 737--Medical Personnel Conscience Clause.........   384
      Subtitle E--Other Matters..................................   384
        Section 741--Continued Admission of Civilians as Students 
          in Physician Assistant Training Program of Army Medical 
          Department.............................................   384
        Section 742--Emergency Health Care in Connection with 
          Overseas Activities of On-Site Inspection Agency of the 
          Department of Defense..................................   385
        Section 743--Comptroller General Study of Adequacy and 
          Effect of Maximum Allowable Charges for Physicians 
          under CHAMPUS..........................................   385
        Section 744--Comptroller General Study of Department of 
          Defense Pharmacy Programs..............................   385
        Section 745--Comptroller General Study of Navy Graduate 
          Medical Education Program..............................   385
        Section 746--Study of Expansion of Pharmaceuticals by 
          Mail Program to Include Additional Medicare-Eligible 
          Covered Beneficiaries..................................   386

TITLE VIII--ACQUISITION POLICY, ACQUISITION MANAGEMENT, AND 
  RELATED MATTERS-...............................................   387

  ITEMS OF SPECIAL INTEREST......................................   387
      Cost Accounting Standards Board............................   387
      Management Responsibility for Acquisition Policy...........   387
      Training and Education of the Acquisition Workforce........   388
  LEGISLATIVE PROVISIONS.........................................   389
    Subtitle A--Acquisition Policy...............................   389
      Section 801--Case-by-Case Waivers of Domestic Source 
        Limitations..............................................   389
      Section 802--Expansion of Authority to Enter Into Contracts 
        Crossing Fiscal Years to All Severable Services Contracts 
        Not Exceeding a Year.....................................   390
      Section 803--Clarification of Vestiture of Title Under 
        Contracts................................................   390
      Section 804--Exclusion of Disaster Relief, Humanitarian, 
        and Peacekeeping Operations from Restrictions on Use of 
        Undefinitized Contract Actions...........................   390
      Section 805--Limitation and Report on Payment of 
        Restructuring Costs under Defense Contracts..............   390
      Section 806--Authority Relating to Purchase of Certain 
        Vehicles.................................................   390
      Section 807--Multiyear Procurement Contracts...............   390
      Section 808--Domestic Source Limitation Amendments.........   391
      Section 809--Repeal of Expiration of Domestic Source 
        Limitation for Certain Naval Vessel Propellers...........   391
    Subtitle B--Other Matters....................................   391
      Section 821--Repeal of Certain Acquisition Reports and 
        Requirements.............................................   391
      Section 822--Extension of Authority for use of Test and 
        Evaluation Installations by Commercial Entities..........   391
      Section 823--Requirement to Develop and Maintain List of 
        Firms Not Eligible for Defense Contracts.................   391

TITLE IX--DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE ORGANIZATION AND MANAGEMENT......   392

    ITEMS OF SPECIAL INTEREST....................................   392
      Armed Services Patent Advisory Board.......................   392
      Defense Acquisition Workforce..............................   392
      Defense Boards and Commissions.............................   393
      Defense Reorganization.....................................   394
      Management Headquarters and Headquarters Support Personnel.   394
    LEGISLATIVE PROVISIONS.......................................   395
      Section 901--Limitation on Operation and Support Funds for 
        the Office of the Secretary of Defense...................   395
      Section 902--Components of National Defense University.....   396
      Section 903--Authorization for the Marine Corps University 
        to Employ Civilian Professors............................   396
      Section 904--Center for the Study of Chinese Military 
        Affairs..................................................   396
      Section 905--White House Communications Agency.............   397
      Section 906--Revision to Required Frequency for Provision 
        of Policy Guidance for Contingency Plans.................   397
      Section 907--Termination of the Defense Airborne 
        Reconnaissance Office....................................   397

TITLE X--GENERAL PROVISIONS......................................   399

    Counterdrug Activities.......................................   399
      Overview...................................................   399
      Items of Special Interest..................................   399
        C-26 aircraft photo reconnaissance upgrade...............   399
        Gulf states counterdrug initiative.......................   399
        Mapping, charting and geodesy............................   400
        Mexican, Caribbean and South American initiative.........   400
        Non-Intrusive Inspection Systems.........................   402
        Optionally piloted air vehicle...........................   403
        Southwest border fence project...........................   403
        Tracker aircraft.........................................   403
    Other Matters................................................   404
      Implementation of Whistleblower Protections................   404
      Intelligence Shortcomings During Persian Gulf War..........   404
      Resolution of Commercial Disputes in Saudi Arabia..........   405
  LEGISLATIVE PROVISIONS.........................................   405
    Subtitle A--Financial Matters................................   405
      Section 1001--Transfer Authority...........................   405
      Section 1002--Incorporation of Classified Annex............   405
      Section 1003--Authority for Obligation of Unauthorized 
        Fiscal Year 1997 Defense Appropriations..................   406
      Section 1004--Authorization of Supplemental Appropriations 
        for Fiscal Year 1997.....................................   406
      Section 1005--Increase in Fiscal Year 1996 Transfer 
        Authority................................................   406
      Section 1006--Fisher House Trust Fund......................   406
      Section 1007--Flexibility in Financing Closure of Certain 
        Outstanding Contracts for Which a Small Final Payment is 
        Due......................................................   406
    Subtitle B--Naval Vessels and Shipyards......................   406
      Section 1021--Relationship of Certain Laws to Disposal of 
        Vessels for Export from the Naval Vessel Register and the 
        National Defense Reserve Fleet...........................   406
      Section 1022--Authority to Enter into a Long-Term Charter 
        for a Vessel in Support of the Surveillance Towed Array 
        Sensor (SURTASS) Program.................................   407
      Section 1023--Transfer of Two Specified Obsolete Tugboats 
        of the Army..............................................   407
      Section 1024--Naming of a DDG-51 Class Destroyer the U.S.S. 
        Thomas F. Connolly.......................................   407
      Section 1025--Congressional Review Period with Respect to 
        Transfer of the Ex-U.S.S. Midway (CV-41).................   407
    Subtitle C--Counter-Drug Activities..........................   408
      Section 1031--Prohibition on Use of National Guard for 
        Civil-Military Activities Under State Drug Interdiction 
        and Counterdrug Activities Plan..........................   408
    Subtitle D--Miscellaneous Report Requirements and Repeals....   409
      Section 1041--Repeal of Miscellaneous Obsolete Reports 
        Required by Prior Defense Authorization Acts.............   409
      Section 1042--Repeal of Annual Report Requirement Relating 
        to Training of Special Operations Forces with Friendly 
        Foreign Forces...........................................   409
    Subtitle E--Other Matters....................................   409
      Section 1051--Authority for Special Agents of the Defense 
        Criminal Investigative Service to Execute Warrants and 
        Make Arrests.............................................   409
      Section 1052--Study of Investigative Practices of Military 
        Criminal Investigative Organizations Relating to Sex 
        Crimes...................................................   409
      Section 1053--Technical and Clerical Amendments............   410
      Section 1054--Display of POW/MIA Flag......................   410
      Section 1055--Certification Required Before Observance of 
        Moratorium on Use by Armed Forces of Antipersonnel 
        Landmines................................................   410
      Section 1056--Protection of Safety-Related Information 
        Voluntarily Provided by Air Carriers.....................   410
      Section 1057--National Guard ChalleNGe Program to Create 
        Opportunities for Civilian Youth.........................   411
      Section 1058--Lease of Non-Excess Personal Property of the 
        Military Departments.....................................   412
      Section 1059--Commendation of Members of the Armed Forces 
        and Government Civilian Personnel who Served During the 
        Cold War.................................................   412

TITLE XI--COOPERATIVE THREAT REDUCTION WITH STATES OF FORMER 
  SOVIET UNION...................................................   413

  OVERVIEW.......................................................   413
  ITEMS OF SPECIAL INTEREST......................................   413
      Arms Elimination Projects in Russia........................   413
      Arms Elimination Projects in Ukraine.......................   414
      Auditing of CTR Assistance.................................   414
      Chemical Weapons Destruction...............................   415
      Fissile Material Storage Facility..........................   417
      Nuclear Reactor Core Conversion............................   418
      Nuclear Weapons Storage Security In Russia.................   419
      Other Support Programs.....................................   419
      Program Overhead...........................................   420
      Prohibition of Specified Activities........................   420
  LEGISLATIVE PROVISIONS.........................................   420
      Section 1101--Specification of Cooperative Threat Reduction 
        Programs.................................................   420
      Section 1102--Fiscal Year 1998 Funding Allocations.........   420
      Section 1103--Prohibition on Use of Funds for Specified 
        Purposes.................................................   420
      Section 1104--Prohibition on Use of Funds Until Specified 
        Reports are Submitted....................................   420
      Section 1105--Limitation on Use of Funds Until Submission 
        of Certification.........................................   420
      Section 1106--Use of Funds for Chemical Weapons Destruction 
        Facility.................................................   421
      Section 1107--Limitation on Use of Funds for Storage 
        Facility for Russian Fissile Material....................   421
      Section 1108--Limitation on Use of Funds for Weapons 
        Storage Security.........................................   421
      Section 1109--Report to Congress on Issues Regarding 
        Payment of Taxes or Duties on Assistance Provided to 
        Russia Under Cooperative Threat Reduction Programs.......   421
      Section 1110--Limitation on Obligation of Funds for a 
        Specified Period.........................................   421
      Section 1111--Availability of Funds........................   421

TITLE XII--MATTERS RELATING TO OTHER NATIONS.....................   422

  OVERVIEW.......................................................   422
      African Center for Security Studies........................   422
      Arms Control Implementation................................   422
      Defense Logistics Cooperation with the People's Republic of 
        China....................................................   424
      The Khobar Towers Bombing and Force Protection in Southwest 
        Asia.....................................................   424
      Strategic Force Reductions.................................   426
  LEGISLATIVE PROVISIONS.........................................   427
      Section 1201--Reports to Congress relating to United States 
        forces in Bosnia.........................................   427
      Section 1202--One-year Extension of Counterproliferation 
        Authorities..............................................   429
      Section 1203--Report on Future Military Capabilities and 
        Strategy of the People's Republic of China...............   429
      Section 1204--Temporary Use of General Purpose Vehicles and 
        Nonlethal Military Equipment under Acquisition and Cross 
        Servicing Agreements.....................................   429

DIVISION B--MILITARY CONSTRUCTION AUTHORIZATIONS.................   431

  PURPOSE........................................................   431
  MILITARY CONSTRUCTION OVERVIEW.................................   431

TITLE XXI--ARMY..................................................   452

  SUMMARY........................................................   452
  ITEMS OF SPECIAL INTEREST......................................   452
      Improvements of Military Family Housing....................   452
      Planning and Design........................................   452
  LEGISLATIVE PROVISIONS.........................................   452
      Section 2101--Authorized Army Construction and Land 
        Acquisition Projects.....................................   452
      Section 2102--Family Housing...............................   452
      Section 2103--Improvements to Military Family Housing Units   453
      Section 2104--Authorization of Appropriations, Army........   453
      Section 2105--Correction In Authorized Uses of Funds, Fort 
        Irwin, California........................................   453

TITLE XXII--NAVY.................................................   454

  SUMMARY........................................................   454
  ITEMS OF SPECIAL INTEREST......................................   454
      Co-Composting Facility, Naval Education & Training Center, 
        Newport, Rhode Island....................................   454
      Improvements to Military Family Housing....................   454
      Prepositioned Equipment Maintenance Facilities, Blount 
        Island, Jacksonville, Florida............................   454
  LEGISLATIVE PROVISIONS.........................................   455
      Section 2201--Authorized Navy Construction and Land 
        Acquisition Projects.....................................   455
      Section 2202--Family Housing...............................   455
      Section 2203--Improvements to Military Family Housing Units   455
      Section 2204--Authorization of Appropriations, Navy........   455
      Section 2205--Authorization of Military Construction 
        Project at Naval Air Station, Pascagoula, Mississippi, 
        for which Funds have been Appropriated...................   455

TITLE XXIII--AIR FORCE...........................................   456

  SUMMARY........................................................   456
  ITEMS OF SPECIAL INTEREST......................................   456
      Disposal of Real Property, Hancock Field, Syracuse, New 
        York.....................................................   456
      Improvements to Military Family Housing....................   456
      Inter-Departmental Land Transfer, Bellows Air Force 
        Station, Hawaii..........................................   456
  LEGISLATIVE PROVISIONS.........................................   457
      Section 2301--Authorized Air Force Construction and Land 
        Acquisition Projects.....................................   457
      Section 2302--Family Housing...............................   457
      Section 2303--Improvements to Military Family Housing Units   457
      Section 2304--Authorization of Appropriations, Air Force...   457
      Section 2305--Authorization of Military Construction 
        Project at McConnell Air Force Base, Kansas, for which 
        Funds Have Been Appropriated.............................   457

TITLE XXIV--DEFENSE AGENCIES.....................................   458

  SUMMARY........................................................   458
  LEGISLATIVE PROVISIONS.........................................   458
      Section 2401--Authorized Defense Agencies Construction and 
        Land Acquisition Projects................................   458
      Section 2402--Military Housing Planning and Design.........   458
      Section 2403--Improvements to Military Family Housing Units   458
      Section 2404--Energy Conservation Projects.................   458
      Section 2405--Authorization Of Appropriations, Defense 
        Agencies.................................................   458
      Section 2406--Correction in Authorized Use of Funds, 
        McClellan Air Force Base, California.....................   458
      Section 2407--Modification of Authority to carry out Fiscal 
        Year 1995 Projects.......................................   459

TITLE XXV--NORTH ATLANTIC TREATY ORGANIZATION INFRASTRUCTURE.....   460

  SUMMARY........................................................   460
  LEGISLATIVE PROVISIONS.........................................   460
      Section 2501--Authorized NATO Construction and Land 
        Acquisition Projects.....................................   460
      Section 2502--Authorization of Appropriations, NATO........   460

TITLE XXVI--GUARD AND RESERVE FORCES FACILITIES..................   461

  SUMMARY........................................................   461
  ITEMS OF SPECIAL INTERESTS.....................................   461
      Budget Process to Support the Validation of Military 
        Construction Requirements for the Army National Guard....   461
  LEGISLATIVE PROVISIONS.........................................   462
      Section 2601--Authorized Guard and Reserve Construction and 
        Land Acquisition Projects................................   462
      Section 2602--Authorization of Military Construction 
        Projects for Which Funds Have Been Appropriated..........   462
      Section 2603--Army Reserve Construction Project, Salt Lake 
        City, Utah...............................................   462

TITLE XXVII--EXPIRATION AND EXTENSION OF AUTHORIZATIONS..........   463

  LEGISLATIVE PROVISIONS.........................................   463
      Section 2701--Expiration of Authorizations and Amounts 
        Required to be Specified by Law..........................   463
      Section 2702--Extensions of Authorizations of Certain 
        Fiscal Year 1995 Projects................................   463
      Section 2703--Extension of Authorizations of Certain Fiscal 
        Year 1994 Projects.......................................   463
      Section 2704--Extension of Authorizations of Certain Fiscal 
        Year 1993 Projects.......................................   463
      Section 2705--Extension of Authorizations of Certain Fiscal 
        Year 1992 Projects.......................................   463
      Section 2706--Extension of Availability of Funds for 
        Construction of Over-the-Horizon Radar in Puerto Rico....   464
      Section 2707--Effective Date...............................   464

TITLE XXVIII--GENERAL PROVISIONS.................................   465

  ITEMS OF SPECIAL INTEREST......................................   465
      Force Protection for Overseas Facilities from Chemical and 
        Biological Weapons.......................................   465
      Military Construction in the Republic of Korea and 
        Burdensharing Support for United States Forces Korea.....   465
      Withdrawals of Public Lands for Military Purposes..........   466
  LEGISLATIVE PROVISIONS.........................................   466
    Subtitle A--Military Construction Program and Military Family 
      Housing Changes............................................   466
      Section 2801--Use of Mobility Enhancement Funds for 
        Unspecified Minor Construction...........................   466
      Section 2802--Limitation on the Use of Operation and 
        Maintenance Funds for Facility...........................   466
      Section 2803--Leasing of Military Family Housing, United 
        States Southern Command, Miami, Florida..................   467
      Section 2804--Use of Financial Incentives Provided as Part 
        of Energy Savings and Water Conservation Activities......   467
      Section 2805--Congressional Notification Requirements 
        Regarding Use of Department of Defense Housing Funds for 
        Investments in Nongovernmental Entities..................   467
    Subtitle B--Real Property and Facilities Administration......   467
      Section 2811--Increase in Ceiling for Minor Land 
        Acquisition Projects.....................................   467
      Section 2812--Administrative Expenses for Certain Real 
        Property Transactions....................................   467
      Section 2813--Disposition of the Proceeds from the Sale of 
        Air Force Plant 78, Brigham City, Utah...................   467
    Subtitle C--Defense Base Closure and Realignment.............   468
      Section 2821--Consideration of Military Installations as 
        Sites for New Federal Facilities.........................   468
      Section 2822--Prohibition against Conveyance of Property at 
        Military Installations to State-Owned Shipping Companies.   468
    Subtitle D--Land Conveyances Generally.......................   468
      Part I--Army Conveyances...................................   468
      Section 2831--Land Conveyance, James T. Roker Army Reserve 
        Center, Durant, Oklahoma.................................   468
      Section 2832--Land Conveyance, Fort A.P. Hill, Virginia....   468
      Section 2833--Expansion of Land Conveyance, Indiana Army 
        Ammunition Plant, Charlestown, Indiana...................   468
      Section 2834--Modification of Land Conveyance, Lompoc, 
        California...............................................   469
      Section 2835--Modification of Land Conveyance, Rocky 
        Mountain Arsenal, Colorado...............................   469
      Section 2836--Correction of Land Conveyance Authority, Army 
        Reserve Center, Anderson, South Carolina.................   469
      Section 2837--Land Conveyance, Fort Bragg, North Carolina..   469
      Section 2838--Land Conveyance, Gibson Army Reserve Center, 
        Chicago, Illinois........................................   469
      Section 2839--Land Conveyance, Fort Dix, New Jersey........   469
      Part II--Navy Conveyances..................................   470
      Section 2851--Correction of Lease Authority, Naval Air 
        Station, Meridian, Mississippi...........................   470
      Part III--Air Force Conveyances............................   470
      Section 2861--Land Transfer, Eglin Air Force Base, Florida.   470
      Section 2862--Study of Land Exchange Options, Shaw Air 
        Force Base, South Carolina...............................   470
      Section 2863--Land Conveyance, March Air Force Base, 
        California...............................................   470
    Subtitle E--Other Matters....................................   470
      Section 2881--Repeal of Requirement to Operate Naval 
        Academy Dairy Farm.......................................   470
      Section 2882--Long-Term Lease of Property, Naples, Italy...   471
      Section 2883--Designation of Military Family Housing at 
        Lackland Air Force Base, Texas, in Honor of Frank Tejeda, 
        a Former Member of the House of Representatives..........   471

TITLE XXIX--SIKES ACT IMPROVEMENT AMENDMENTS.....................   472

  LEGISLATIVE PROVISIONS.........................................   472
      Section 2902--Definition of Sikes Act for Purposes of 
        Amendments...............................................   472
      Section 2903--Codification of Short Title of Act...........   472
      Section 2904--Integrated Natural Resource Management Plans.   472
      Section 2905--Review for Preparation of Integrated Natural 
        Resource Management Plans................................   472
      Section 2906--Annual Reviews and Reports...................   472
      Section 2907--Transfer of Wildlife Conservation Fees from 
        Closed Military Installations............................   472
      Section 2908--Federal Enforcement of Integrated Natural 
        Resource Management Plans and Enforcement of Other Laws..   473
      Section 2909--Natural Resource Management Services.........   473
      Section 2910--Definitions..................................   473
      Section 2911--Cooperative Agreements.......................   473
      Section 2912--Repeal of Superseded Provision...............   473
      Section 2913--Clerical Amendments..........................   473
      Section 2914--Authorizations of Appropriations.............   473

DIVISION C--DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY NATIONAL SECURITY AUTHORIZATIONS 
  AND OTHER AUTHORIZATIONS.......................................   475

TITLE XXXI--DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY NATIONAL SECURITY PROGRAMS......   475

  PURPOSE........................................................   475
  OVERVIEW.......................................................   475
  ITEMS OF SPECIAL INTEREST......................................   488
      Accelerated Strategic Computing Initiative and Control of 
        Supercomputer Technology.................................   488
      Chemistry and Metallurgy Research Facility at the Los 
        Alamos National Laboratory...............................   488
      Defense Asset Acquisition..................................   489
      Defense Environmental Restoration and Waste Management.....   489
      Enhanced Surveillance Program at the Production Plants.....   491
      Inertial Confinement Fusion................................   491
      Infrastructure and Manufacturing Improvements at Weapons 
        Production Sites.........................................   492
      Initiatives For Proliferation Prevention...................   492
      Laboratory Review of Missile Defenses......................   493
      Management and Organization of DOE's Nuclear Weapons 
        Program..................................................   493
      Materials Protection, Control, and Accounting Program......   494
      Naval Reactors.............................................   494
      Nuclear Energy.............................................   495
      Operation of F and H canyons...............................   495
      Privatization..............................................   495
      Program Direction for Defense Programs.....................   498
      Recurring General Provision Relating to Availability of 
        Funds....................................................   498
      Stockpile Life Extension Program at Y-12 Plant.............   499
      Technology Transfer........................................   499
      Transfer of Funds Associated with Security at Rocky Flats 
        Site and the Fernald Site................................   499
      Tritium Production.........................................   499
      Worker and Community Transition............................   500
  LEGISLATIVE PROVISIONS.........................................   501
    Subtitle A--National Security Program Authorization..........   501
      Section 3101--Weapons Activities...........................   501
      Section 3102--Environmental Restoration and Waste 
        Management...............................................   501
      Section 3103--Other Defense Activities.....................   501
      Section 3104--Defense Nuclear Waste Disposal...............   501
    Subtitle B--Recurring General Provisions.....................   501
      Section 3121--Reprogramming................................   501
      Section 3122--Limits on General Plant Projects.............   502
      Section 3123--Limits on Construction Projects..............   502
      Section 3124--Fund Transfer Authority......................   502
      Section 3125--Authority for Conceptual and Construction 
        Design...................................................   502
      Section 3126--Authority for Emergency Planning, Design and 
        Construction Activities..................................   502
      Section 3127--Funds Available for all National Security 
        Programs of the Department of Energy.....................   503
      Section 3128--Authority Relating to Transfer of Defense 
        Environmental Management Funds...........................   503
    Subtitle C--Program Authorizations, Restrictions, and 
      Limitations................................................   503
      Section 3131--Ballistic Missile Defense National Laboratory 
        Program..................................................   503
    Subtitle D--Other Matters....................................   503
      Section 3141--Plan for Stewardship, Management, and 
        Certification of Warheads in the Nuclear Weapons 
        Stockpile................................................   503
      Section 3142--Repeal of Obsolete Reporting Requirement.....   503
      Section 3143--Revisions to Defense Nuclear Facilities 
        Workforce Restructuring Plan Requirements................   503
      Section 3144--Extension of Authority for Appointment of 
        Certain Scientific, Engineering, and Technical Personnel.   504
      Section 3145--Report on Proposed Contract for Hanford Tank 
        Waste Vitrification Project..............................   504
      Section 3146--Limitation on Conduct of Subcritical Nuclear 
        Weapons Tests............................................   504
      Section 3147--Limitation on Use of Certain Funds Until 
        Future Use Plans are Submitted...........................   505
      Section 3148--Plan for External Oversight of National 
        Laboratories.............................................   505
      Section 3149--University-Based Research Center.............   505
      Section 3150--Stockpile Stewardship Program................   505
      Section 3151--Reports on Advanced Supercomputer Sales to 
        Certain Foreign Nations..................................   505

TITLE XXXII--DEFENSE NUCLEAR FACILITIES SAFETY BOARD 
  AUTHORIZATION..................................................   507

  LEGISLATIVE PROVISIONS.........................................   507
      Section 3201--Authorization................................   507
      Section 3202--Plan for Transfer of Functions of Defense 
        Nuclear Facilities Safety Board to Nuclear Regulatory 
        Commission...............................................   507

TITLE XXXIII--NATIONAL DEFENSE STOCKPILE.........................   508

  LEGISLATIVE PROVISIONS.........................................   508
      Section 3301--Authorized Uses of Stockpile Funds...........   508
      Section 3302--Disposal of Beryllium Copper Master Alloy 
        From National Defense Stockpile..........................   508
      Section 3303--Disposal of Titanium Sponge in National 
        Defense Stockpile........................................   508
      Section 3304--Conditions on Transfer of Stockpiled Platinum 
        Reserves for Treasury Use................................   508
      Section 3305--Restrictions on Disposal of Certain Manganese 
        Ferro....................................................   508
      Section 3306--Required Procedures for Disposal of Strategic 
        and Critical Materials...................................   509

TITLE XXXIV--NAVAL PETROLEUM RESERVES............................   510

  LEGISLATIVE PROVISIONS.........................................   510
      Section 3401--Authorization of Appropriations..............   510
      Section 3402--Price Requirement on Sale of Certain 
        Petroleum During Fiscal Year 1998........................   510
      Section 3403--Termination of Assignment of Navy Officers to 
        Office of Naval Petroleum and Oil Shale Reserves.........   510

TITLE XXXV--PANAMA CANAL COMMISSION..............................   511

  LEGISLATIVE PROVISIONS.........................................   511
    Subtitle A--Authorization Of Expenditures From Revolving Fund   511
    Subtitle B--Facilitation Of Panama Canal Transition..........   511
      Section 3511--Short Title; References......................   511
      Section 3512--Definitions Relating to Canal Transition.....   511
      Part I--Transition Matters Relating to Commission Officers 
        and Employees............................................   511
      Section 3521--Authority for the Administrator of the 
        Commission to Accept Appointment as Administrator of the 
        New Panama Canal Authority...............................   511
      Section 3522--Post-Canal Transfer Personnel Authorities....   512
      Section 3523--Enhanced Authority of Commission to Establish 
        Compensation of Commission Officers and Employees........   512
      Section 3524--Travel, Transportation and Subsistence 
        Expenses for Commission Personnel No Longer Subject to 
        Federal Travel Regulations...............................   513
      Section 3525--Enhanced Recruitment and Retention 
        Authorities..............................................   513
      Section 3526--Transition Separation Incentive Payments.....   513
      Section 3527--Labor-Management Relations...................   513
      Section 3528--Availability of Panama Canal Revolving Fund 
        for Severance Pay for Certain Employees Separated by the 
        Panama Canal Authority after Canal Transfer Date.........   514
      Part II--Transition Matters Relating to Operation and 
        Administration of Canal..................................   514
      Section 3541--Establishment of Procurement System and Board 
        of Contract Appeals......................................   514
      Section 3542--Transactions with the Panama Canal Authority.   515
      Section 3543--Time Limitations for Filing of Claims for 
        Damages..................................................   515
      Section 3544--Tolls for Small Vessels......................   515
      Section 3545--Date of Actuarial Evaluation of FECA 
        Liability................................................   515
      Section 3546--Notaries public..............................   516
      Section 3547--Commercial Services..........................   516
      Section 3548--Transfer from President to Commission of 
        Certain Regulatory Functions Relating to Employment 
        Classification Appeals...................................   516
      Section 3548--Enhanced Printing Authority..................   516
      Section 3549--Technical and Conforming Amendments..........   516

TITLE XXXVI--MARITIME ADMINISTRATION.............................   516

  LEGISLATIVE PROVISIONS.........................................   516
      Section 3601--Authorization of Appropriations for Fiscal 
        Year 1998................................................   516
      Section 3602--Repeal of Obsolete Annual Report Requirement 
        Concerning Relative Cost of Shipbuilding in the Various 
        Coastal Districts of the United States...................   517
      Section 3603--Provisions Relating to Maritime Security 
        Fleet Program............................................   517
      Section 3604--Authority to Utilize Replacement Vessels and 
        Capacity.................................................   517
      Section 3605--Authority to Convey National Defense Reserve 
        Vessel...................................................   518
Departmental Data................................................   519
  Department of Defense Authorization Request....................   519
  Military Construction Authorization Request....................   519
Committee Position...............................................   520
Communications From Other Committees.............................   520
Fiscal Data......................................................   528
  Congressional Budget Office Estimate...........................   528
  Congressional Budget Office Cost Estimate......................   528
    Authorization of Appropriations..............................   529
  Committee Cost Estimate........................................   537
  Inflation-Impact Statement.....................................   537
Oversight Findings...............................................   537
Constitutional Authority Statement...............................   538
Statement of Federal Mandates....................................   538
Roll Call Votes..................................................   538
Changes in Existing Law Made by the Bill, as Reported............   546
Additional and dissenting Views..................................   768
  Dissenting views of Ronald V. Dellums..........................   768
  Additional views of John Spratt................................   770
  Additional views of James Hansen, Tillie Fowler and Solomon 
    Ortiz........................................................   773
  Additional views of James M. Talent............................   777
  Additional views of Patrick J. Kennedy.........................   779
  Additional Views of Van Hilleary, Stephen Buyer, Tillie Fowler, 
    Roscoe Bartlett, Buck McKeon, Joe Scarborough, Lindsey 
    Graham, and Jim Ryun.........................................   781



105th Congress                                                   Report
                        HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

 1st Session                                                    105-132
_______________________________________________________________________


        NATIONAL DEFENSE AUTHORIZATION ACT FOR FISCAL YEAR 1998

                                _______
                                

 June 16, 1997.--Committed to the Committee of the Whole House on the 
              State of the Union and ordered to be printed

_______________________________________________________________________


  Mr. Spence, from the Committee on National Security, submitted the 
                               following

                              R E P O R T

                        [To accompany H.R. 1119]

      [Including cost estimate of the Congressional Budget Office]

    The Committee on National Security, to whom was referred 
the bill (H.R. 1119) to authorize appropriations for fiscal 
years 1988 and 1999 for military activities of the Department 
of Defense, to prescribe military personnel strengths for 
fiscal years 1998 and 1999, and for other purposes, having 
considered the same, report favorably thereon with amendments 
and recommend that the bill as amended do pass.
    The amendments are as follows:
    The amendment strikes out all after the enacting clause of 
the bill and inserts a new test which appears in italic type in 
the reported bill.
    The title of the bill is amended to reflect the amendment 
to the text of the bill.

                 EXPLANATION OF THE COMMITTEE AMENDMENT

    The committee adopted an amendment in the nature of a 
substitute during the consideration of H.R. 1119. The remainder 
of the report discusses the bill, as amended.

                                PURPOSE

    The bill would--(1) Authorize appropriations for fiscal 
year 1998 for procurement and for research, development, test 
and evaluation (RDT&E); (2) Authorize appropriations for fiscal 
year 1998 for operation and maintenance (O&M) and for working 
capital funds; (3) Authorize for fiscal year 1998: (a) the 
personnel strength for each active duty component of the 
military departments; (b) the personnel strength for the 
Selected Reserve for each reserve component of the armed 
forces; (c) the military training student loads for each of the 
active and reserve components of the military departments; (4) 
Modify various elements of compensation for military personnel 
and impose certain requirements and limitations on personnel 
actions in the defense establishment; (5) Authorize 
appropriations for fiscal year 1998 for military construction 
and family housing; (6) Authorize appropriations for fiscal 
year 1998 for the Department of Energy National Security 
Programs; (7) Modify provisions related to the National Defense 
Stockpile; (8) Authorize appropriations for fiscal year 1998 
for the operation of the Panama Canal Commission; and (9) 
Authorize appropriations for fiscal year 1998 for the Maritime 
Administration.

            RELATIONSHIP OF AUTHORIZATION AND APPROPRIATIONS

    Importantly, the bill does not generally provide budget 
authority. The bill authorizes appropriations. Subsequent 
appropriation acts provide budget authority. The bill addresses 
the following categories in the Department of Defense budget: 
procurement; research, development, test and evaluation; 
operation and maintenance; working capital funds, military 
personnel; and military construction and family housing. The 
bill also addresses Department of Energy National Security 
Programs and the Maritime Administration.
    Active duty and reserve personnel strengths authorized in 
this bill and legislation affecting compensation for military 
personnel determine the remaining appropriation requirements of 
the Department of Defense. However, this bill does not provide 
authorization of specific dollar amounts for personnel.

                  SUMMARY OF AUTHORIZATION IN THE BILL

    The President requested budget authority of $265.6 billion 
for the national defense budget function for fiscal year 1998. 
Of this amount, the President requested $251.0 billion for the 
Department of Defense (including $8.4 billion for military 
construction and family housing) and $13.6 billion for 
Department of Energy national security programs and the Defense 
Nuclear Facilities Safety Board.
    The committee recommends an overall level of $268.2 billion 
in budget authority. This amount is an increase of 
approximately $2.6 billion from the amount requested for the 
national defense budget function by the President. The 
committee's recommendation is consistent with the amounts 
established in the budget resolution for fiscal year 1998 for 
the national security budget function.

                    SUMMARY TABLE OF AUTHORIZATIONS

    The following table provides a summary of the amounts 
requested and that would be authorized for appropriation in the 
bill (in the column labeled ``Budget Authority Implication of 
Committee Recommendation'') and the committee's estimate of how 
the committee's recommendations relate to the budget totals for 
the national defense function. For purposes of estimating the 
budget authority implications of committee action, the table 
reflects the numbers contained in the President's budget for 
proposals not in the committee's legislative jurisdiction.
    Offset Folios 24 to 29 Insert here

<SKIP PAGES = 006>

                    RATIONALE FOR THE COMMITTEE BILL

    H.R. 1119, the National Defense Authorization Act for 
Fiscal Year 1998, reflects the committee's continued efforts to 
manage the risks that continued force downsizing and budget 
reductions pose for U.S. national security interests in an 
uncertain world. The committee and the Congress have helped 
bring a measure of stability to the U.S. defense program over 
the past two years, moving to restore some balance between the 
need to maintain sufficiently large and capable forces today 
and the need to modernize and introduce innovative new 
technologies and concepts that will provide a basis for 
continued American military superiority in future.
    The committee believes that the fundamental dilemma facing 
the Department of Defense remains constant: how to maintain a 
viable all-volunteer force in an environment where the number, 
scope and duration of military missions, especially 
peacekeeping and humanitarian missions, continue to grow while 
military forces and defense budgets continue to decline. 
Although the Department's recent Quadrennial Defense Review 
(QDR) recognized these realities, the long-standing gap between 
strategy and resources will persist and, in fact, is likely to 
widen. The National Defense Panel (NDP), an independent body 
selected by the Administration and Congress to assess the QDR, 
summarized the problem when it concluded that the QDR exposed a 
``risk in defense resources.'' In particular, the NDP concluded 
that the QDR's plan to improve modernization funding was based 
upon ``tenuous'' assumptions which ``collec tively . . . 
represent a budget risk which could potentially undermine the 
entire Defense Strategy.''
    The QDR acknowledges that a sound national military 
strategy is based upon protecting the ability of U.S. military 
forces to respond to today's challenges while also preparing 
for the challenges of an uncertain future. This strategy 
requires three principle tasks of the Department of Defense. 
First, U.S. military forces must help to maintain the security 
and stability among powerful nations that is by and large the 
result of the American-led victory in the Cold War. Second, 
U.S. forces must protect today's security and stability from 
lesser threats, be they smaller nations, ethnic conflicts, 
terrorism or myriad other sources. Finally, U.S. forces must 
begin to prepare now for the possibility of future great-power 
conflicts that may be fought with military forces quite 
different from today's.
    This first task of maintaining current security and 
stability has been articulated in a clear set of standards that 
account for the size and structure of today's U.S. military 
forces. These standards include the need to maintain 
approximately 100,000 troops both in Europe and in East Asia, 
and sufficient forces available to deploy, fight and rapidly 
win two nearly simultaneous major wars. The committee continues 
to support these standards. The troop levels in Europe and Asia 
represent an enduring commitment by the United States to these 
vital regions, while the capability to fight two wars 
simultaneously ensures that the United States will be able to 
respond to crises without compromising the ability to maintain 
stability elsewhere. With the continued imminent threats in 
Korea and the Persian Gulf, this two-war capability must remain 
a basic building block of U.S. military forces.
    At the same time, the dominance of U.S. conventional 
military forces and the continued strength of our nuclear 
deterrent is compelling adversaries to be more innovative and 
aggressive. Countering more diffuse and less traditional 
threats accounts for the second principle task of U.S. armed 
forces. Terrorism, proliferation of weapons of mass 
destruction, tribal and ethnicconflicts, the potential for 
``information warfare'' and other asymmetric threats are placing new 
burdens upon the U.S. military. In the past year, the terrorist bombing 
of the Khobar Towers complex in Dhahran, Saudi Arabia has highlighted 
the need for improved force protection measures for U.S. units deployed 
abroad. The proliferation of ballistic missile technology and weapons 
of mass destruction also has accelerated in the past year, and the 
committee continues to believe that efforts to develop and deploy 
effective defenses against such threats must remain a national 
priority.
    The QDR also has acknowledged, under the rubric of 
``smaller-scale contingencies,'' that U.S. military forces will 
be engaged in a growing number of peacekeeping and humanitarian 
missions. Because the Administration regularly has deployed the 
U.S. military on such missions, the QDR concluded that these 
lesser contingencies will represent a significant element of 
U.S. military operations over the next decade. The QDR also 
recognized the strains that multiple peacekeeping and 
humanitarian deployments place on U.S. troops, their families, 
military equipment and training for combat. However, based upon 
its continued attention to the growing readiness problems that 
U.S. forces confront, the committee is skeptical that the 
Department can maintain the current level of operational and 
personnel tempo without sacrificing critical military 
capabilities. Units and troops absorbed in repeated 
peacekeeping operations are unable to train effectively, for 
the high-intensity combat missions necessary to execute the 
national military strategy.
    The committee has long been concerned that the third 
principle task of the U.S. armed forces--preparing today for 
the eventuality of future great-power conflicts--has been 
undervalued by the administration. By contrast, the committee 
considers the maintenance of peace and stability among the 
world's most powerful nations to be America's unique 
contribution to global security, and of critical importance to 
the nation's ability to protect its interests around the world. 
However, today's security is the historical exception rather 
than the rule. As historian Donald Kagan testified before the 
committee, ``War has been a persistent part of human experience 
since before the birth of civilization. In 1968, Will and Ariel 
Durant calculated that there had been only 268 years free of 
war in the previous 3,421.'' There is every reason to believe 
that the current epoch should be viewed not as a ``post-war'' 
period, but instead as an interwar period. With history as a 
teacher, it is only prudent to assume that a large power or 
coalition of powers eventually will contest a vital U.S. 
national security interest.
    While the committee cannot predict with certainty who this 
challenger will be or exactly when the challenge will arise, it 
is possible to identify what our enduring national interests 
are, for they have remained constant. Even in the post-Cold War 
era and absent a global competitor like the Soviet Union, the 
United States retains its traditional interests in protecting 
the American homeland and its people; preventing a hostile 
power or coalition of hostile powers from dominating Europe, 
East Asia and the energy-producing regions of the world; and 
protecting the international order of nation-states. These 
abiding interests preceded, and have survived, the Cold War.
    The most serious and sustained threats to these enduring 
interests can only come from other powers capable of fielding 
substantial conventional military forces or nuclear weapons. 
While the QDR represents an improvement over the 
Administration's 1993 Bottom-Up Review, the QDR presents an 
overly optimistic view of the possibility of future challenges 
to America's core security interests. The committee believes 
that a sound national military strategy must account not only 
for the likelihood of threats but also for the gravity of any 
threat to these core security interests.
    In the past year, the committee has focused on the 
challenges posed by China--an emerging power--and Russia--a 
once and perhaps future power--to United States global 
interests. While neither nation is currently an enemy of the 
United States, they do represent the nations most likely and 
able to accumulate military power sufficient to challenge U.S. 
vital national security interests. The QDR's projection that 
neither China nor Russia is likely to emerge as a regional 
great power until beyond 2015 is questionable.
    The committee remains supportive of efforts to bolster the 
democratic process in Russia. The collapse of the Soviet Union 
has created an opportunity to more closely tie Russia to the 
world's democracies. However, the committee believes that 
Russia's future will be shaped less by U.S. policies than by 
whether Russia decides to remain an independent power pursuing 
its own strategic goals, driven by its own history and 
character, or decides to form working partnerships with the 
United States and its allies. The current Russian experiment in 
quasi-democracy is struggling against a centuries-long 
tradition of autocracy, and the United States must remain 
guarded in assessing prospects for the experiment's success. 
Moreover, history has demonstrated that the transition to 
democracy often proves a tumultuous and violent process. A vast 
but collapsed empire, governed by a weak central authority and 
armed with an arsenal of nuclear weaponry under questionable 
control, Russia must provide cause for great caution. Even if 
Russia succeeds in becoming more fully democratic, it still may 
establish security goals that conflict with those of the United 
States.
    China is an emerging power and poses an inverse problem. 
The Administration believes that the nature of Chinese power is 
not yet determined, and that China's external relations can be 
shaped through engagement to allow it to make a positive 
contribution to regional stability and to act as a responsible 
member of the international community. The committee takes a 
guarded view, more consistent with the Department of Defense 
report prepared pursuant to the National Defense Authorization 
Act for Fiscal Year 1997. The report concluded that China's 
goal is to become one of the world's great powers, that China 
will be securely established as the leading political power in 
East Asia early in the coming century and that China will 
``build its military power to the point where it can engage and 
defeat any potential enemy within the region with its 
conventional forces and can deter any global threat to China's 
national security.'' Whether or not an emerging China becomes 
an enemy of the United States and its allies remains to be 
seen, but China's stated strategic goals would appear to 
challenge America's current position as a powerful presence for 
peace and stability in East Asia.
    The committee believes that the process of managing 
strategic risk must be shaped first and foremost by the risks 
of renewed great-power rivalries. The surest way to optimize 
the chances of an American strategic partnership with either 
Russia or China is for the United States to continue to be the 
world's most powerful force for peace and stability. However, 
the committee also recognizes that the assumption that either 
Russia or China will acquiesce in American global leadership is 
a dangerous premise upon which to base U.S. security strategy 
for the coming century.
    The making of strategy has always been a process of 
managing risk. In a post-Cold War environment of shrinking 
military forces and constrained defense budgets, the imperative 
to maintain strategic priorities grows while the margin for 
error gets smaller. The QDR strategy is consistent with the 
committee's view of the role America should play in the post-
Cold Warworld, and the committee is hopeful that the review 
might provide a more stable foundation for maintaining the armed forces 
necessary for the nation to meet these future challenges. However, the 
continued decline in defense spending means that the committee's two-
year-old effort to begin revitalizing U.S. military forces will take 
longer and will involve higher risk to the nation.
    The projected real decline in future defense budgets, 
assumed in the QDR and ratified in the recent budget agreement, 
adds to strategic risk. Neither the Administration's fiscal 
year 1998 defense budget request nor the defense plan 
established in the QDR adequately address budgetary shortfalls 
that exacerbate the strategic risks inherent in a dangerous 
world. The QDR has not allayed the committee's skepticism 
regarding the Administration's commitment to establishing a 
defense program that balances the pillars of a sound defense 
program: the maintenance of sufficient combat forces in a state 
of readiness necessary to execute the national military 
strategy, the guarantee of a decent quality of military life 
and an adequate program of equipment modernization to ensure 
for the future the advantages U.S. military force enjoy today. 
If the defense program is to be truly brought into balance, and 
the harmony between current readiness, quality of life, and 
modernization restored, more dramatic actions are demanded.

                               READINESS

    The committee reaffirms its commitment to maintaining a 
high state of military readiness. In past years, the committee 
has added significant funds to restore pay raises, increase the 
level of combat training, improve the level of equipment 
maintenance and undertake many other initiatives to compel the 
Administration to address readiness problems. However, the 
readiness of U.S. armed forces, particularly for the high-
intensity combat missions central to the nation's military 
strategy, has continued to erode. It is apparent that the high 
pace of military operations, due in large part to the burdens 
of repeated deployments for peacekeeping and humanitarian 
missions, and declining budgets are taking a heavy toll on U.S. 
military forces. Four trends are salient. First, soldiers, 
sailors, airmen and Marines are working harder and longer to 
execute their peacetime missions due to an inherent tension 
between personnel and resources shortages and the increased 
pace of operations. Military personnel and their families are 
paying an increasingly higher human price from being repeatedly 
asked to ``do more with less.'' Second, the quantity and 
quality of combat training is being compromised, especially for 
the most demanding mission--to fight and win tomorrow's high-
intensity wars. Third, the quality of military life continues 
to erode to the point where a growing number of talented and 
dedicated military personnel and their families are questioning 
the desirability of a life in uniform. And fourth, military 
equipment is aging prematurely due to extended use and reduced 
maintenance. Budget cuts and the increased operational tempo 
have started to affect the reliability and availability of 
existing fleets of equipment. In sum, these trends depict a 
significant, systemic readiness problem that will continue to 
undermine the preparedness of U.S. military forces.
    The committee bill represents an effort to manage the risk 
associated with a deepening readiness problem by protecting 
funding for high-intensity combat training and maintenance of 
equipment and infrastructure. In addition, the committee 
believes that the Administration's personnel budget request 
will not be able to provide the forces needed to execute the 
national military strategy and to support current operational 
tempo while providing a decent quality of military life. Nor 
does the committee accept the QDR's end-strength 
recommendations, which are likely to exacerbate the personnel 
readiness problems outlined above. To more prudently manage the 
risk associated with the problems inherent in the 
Administration's budget request, the committee has maintained 
the end-strength floors established in 1996 and continues to 
protect what it believes to be prudent active-duty force 
levels. The committee also has continued its commitment to 
readiness by adding funds for depot maintenance, real property 
maintenance and mobility enhancements needed to maintain a 
power-projection force capable of rapid reaction to world 
crises.

                            QUALITY OF LIFE

    In past, the committee has considered the quality of 
military life to be an essential component of a balanced 
defense program, and has strengthened military housing 
programs, programs to reduce out-of-pocket costs for military 
personnel and their families, and has funded full pay raises, 
whether requested by the Administration or not. Nonetheless, 
many troops and their families have grown increasingly 
dissatisfied with the quality of military life. Much of this 
dissatisfaction stems from the stress of extended time away 
from home resulting from almost continuous peacekeeping and 
other humanitarian missions.
    Quality of life is inherently difficult to quantify. It is 
a complex construct, reflected in a delicate mix of variables 
such as balancing family life and military service, decent 
housing, adequate pay and benefits, reliable and affordable 
health care and many other factors. Providing a decent quality 
of military life is essential to recruit, retain and maintain 
the professional, all-volunteer force upon which U.S. military 
strategy relies. Since the 1970s, when the draft was 
terminated, the compact between the nation and the men and 
women who serve it in uniform has rested upon the proposition 
that soldiers, sailors, airmen and Marines and their families 
will be provided with a standard of living that approximates 
that of middle-class America.
    However, there is a widespread belief among service 
personnel and their families that the quality of their lives is 
eroding. As a consequence, many in the military are beginning 
to question whether the rewards of military life are worth the 
mounting hardships. Perhaps the leading cause of 
dissatisfaction is increased family separations. Given that 65 
percent of the force, officer and enlisted, is married, the 
choice between professional requirements and personal needs is 
becoming more complicated. One Navy spouse summarized the 
problem when she told the committee, ``In such a high 
[operations tempo] environment, the best marriages, the ones 
that survive, are those in which people learn to live apart.''
    The services' attempts to balance quality of life with 
other factors reveal just how difficult a management problem 
this is. For example, the commander of the Army's III Corps at 
Fort Hood, Texas, has demanded that important training time and 
resources be diverted to create opportunities for soldiers to 
attend to basic and essential activities of family life, such 
as parent-teacher conferences. This is a poignant and 
disturbing example of the dilemmas facing military families. 
Since the committee began reporting on the growing readiness 
problem, the Department of Defense has begun to recognize the 
problem, and has introduced a number of measures to better 
manage the strains of high operational and personnel tempos. 
The committee notes these small belated steps with 
satisfaction, but believes that more aggressive actions will be 
necessary.

                      MODERNIZATION AND INNOVATION

    A third critical component of a balanced defense program is 
ensuring that U.S. military personnel are equipped with modern 
technology. There is widespread general consensus that the 
``procurement holiday'' of the past five years must come to an 
end. The Joint Chiefs of Staff have identified a goal of $60 
billion per year in procurement spending as the approximate 
funding level needed to recapitalize the U.S. armed forces--a 
figure reconfirmed by the QDR. The committee continues to 
support this objective, but continues to doubt the 
Administration's commitment.
    In the context of trying to manage risk in an environment 
of constrained resources, the committee believes it is 
necessary to set modernization priorities that reflect 
strategic priorities. Systems that promise only marginal 
improvement over those currently in the field should, and 
eventually will, give way to those systems that demonstrate 
more cost-effective and strategically relevant capabilities. 
There is no better example than tactical aircraft programs, 
where plans far exceed projected budgets and the half-measures 
recommended in the QDR do not address the problem.
    The committee was pleased to see, in several instances, 
that the QDR did make important strides toward aligning 
modernization priorities with strategic need. For example, the 
QDR's recognition that the Administration's own ``three-plus-
three'' national missile defense program was substantially 
underfunded confirms the committee's approach to this important 
program over the past several years. The committee stands by 
its belief that continued global proliferation of ballistic 
missile technology makes the deployment of an effective 
national missile defense system of the highest priority. 
However, the committee continues to question the 
Administration's commitment to either national or theater 
missile defenses. Despite claims advanced in the fiscal year 
1998 defense budget request that theater defense programs were 
being accelerated, funding for these programs was cut by more 
than $400 million from current spending levels.

                             DEFENSE REFORM

    Serious readiness, quality of life and modernization 
problems and shortfalls add increased urgency to the 
committee's continuing efforts to reform the Department of 
Defense establishment to create a smaller, smarter and 
streamlined bureaucracy. In an environment where combat forces 
continue to be reduced while they are deploy more often, the 
committee believes that it is untenable to continue devoting 60 
percent of the defense budget to support and infrastructure. If 
the goal to reestablish a defense program balanced among the 
need to maintain ready forces and to ensure a decent quality of 
military life today while modernizing U.S. military forces for 
tomorrow is to become a reality, the Administration must become 
a more active partner in pursuing meaningful defense reform.
    Defense reform is no longer just about being more 
efficient. Rather, it is about survival in an environment where 
failure to achieve real defense reform will result in degraded 
combat capability for lack of adequate resources. The committee 
initiated a number of reforms during the 104th Congress in the 
areas of acquisition policy, infrastructure and support 
services, and defense structure and organization. All were 
intended to increase overall efficiency within the Department 
while, at the same time, encouraging the shift of resources 
from the Department's support ``tail'' to the services' combat 
``tooth'' in an effort to preserve the military's warfighting 
effectiveness.
    The committee acknowledges Secretary Cohen's promise to 
pursue defense reform through the establishment of the Task 
Force on Defense Reform, but the committee notes that the 
results of that new review will not be known until late in the 
year. While additional reviews may be warranted, it is the 
committee's view that in the aftermath of the 1995 Commission 
on Roles and Mission, the 1996 Defense Science Board Task Force 
on Outsourcing and Privatization, and the 1997 QDR, the time 
for aggressive action is now.
    To accelerate the process of reform, the committee reported 
H.R. 1778, the Defense Reform Act of 1997, to the House of 
Representatives. This bill pursues meaningful reform in three 
basic areas: streamlining the defense bureaucracy, improving 
defense business practices and adding a measure of common sense 
to the environmental regulations governing the Department's 
operations. Chief among the bureaucratic reforms are 
initiatives to reduce headquarters staffs by 25 percent and the 
defense acquisition workforce by more than 40 percent. 
According to the Congressional Budget Office, these reforms 
will save $15 billion over the next five years and an 
additional $5 billion each year thereafter without taking into 
account the additional potential savings resulting from the 
mandated increases in competition of defense support services. 
Finally, the environmental reforms will not merely help to 
control the rapidly escalating cost--now $12 billion per year--
of defense environmental clean-up efforts, they will ensure 
that these funds actually are spent on restoration work itself, 
rather than to satisfy excessive and redundant regulatory 
requirements. The committee recognizes the need for 
environmental restoration of former military and defense 
installations, but believes that taxpayer dollars should be 
devoted to the needed cleanup work, not on paperwork.

                               CONCLUSION

    Secretary of Defense Cohen has admitted that the defense 
posture outlined in the Quadrennial Defense Review will allow 
U.S. forces to execute the national military strategy, but at 
increased risk. He also quantified the budgetary risk--the 
amount of defense spending required to close the strategy-
resource gap--at approximately $15 billion per year. While the 
committee believes that the annual shortfall is greater than 
$15 billion, what was most striking about the Secretary's 
estimate was the relatively small size of the budget shortfall 
in comparison to the tremendous strategic risk associated with 
not addressing it. At $15 billion, the estimate represents 
approximately one-tenth of 1 percent of the federal budget. Yet 
the military, strategic and political risks associated with not 
fixing this shortfall are monumental. For the military, the 
budget shortfall translates into declining readiness, 
diminished quality of military life and postponed modernization 
problems described above. The continued erosion of military 
capability will threaten the nation's capabilities to protect 
and promote its interests around the world and will inevitably 
lead to the loss of American international influence. In the 
committee's view, the risks of inaction or failure far outweigh 
the cost of addressing shortfalls in the defense budget--
whether $15 billion per year, or more.
    Although the QDR was completed too late to shape the 
Administration's fiscal year 1998 defense budget request or to 
factor significantly in the committee's deliberations, H.R. 
1119 reflects the committee's mounting sense of urgency to 
restore a proper balance among readiness, quality of military 
life and modernization and to push the Department of Defense in 
the directionof meaningful reform. The nation cannot afford 
status quo defense budgets. The way forward is uncertain and involves 
great risks. The committee would prefer to be raising and maintaining 
military forces capable of an unquestioned response to challenges 
anywhere in the world, rather than managing budgetary, military and 
strategic risk with no margin for error. In this context, H.R. 1119 
reflects the committee's effort to address serious shortfalls while 
managing risk in a resource-constrained environment.

                                HEARINGS

    Committee consideration of the National Defense 
Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 1998 results from extensive 
hearings that began on February 12, 1997 and that were 
completed on May 22, 1997. The full committee conducted 11 
sessions. In addition, a total of 54 sessions were conducted by 
five different subcommittees and two panels of the committee on 
various titles of the bill.
            DIVISION A--DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE AUTHORIZATION

                          TITLE I--PROCUREMENT

                                OVERVIEW

    The last few years have seen a vigorous debate concerning 
the adequacy of the Clinton Administration budgets for defense 
modernization. Administration officials argue that a 
``holiday'' in weapons procurement was justified due to the 
many new weapons purchased in the 1980s and to not having to 
replace older weapons retired as a result of the drawdown in 
the size of the force. The 104th Congress reasoned otherwise: 
namely, that the disproportionate cuts in the equipment 
modernization accounts jeopardized the technological edge that 
was so brilliantly demonstrated in the Persian Gulf War. 
Consequently, Congress added $11 billion to these accounts in 
the fiscal year 1996 and fiscal year 1997 National Defense 
Authorization Acts (Public Laws 104-106 and 104-201)--a 15 
percent increase over the budget request for each of those two 
years--despite the Administration's opposition to doing so. In 
taking these actions, the 104th Congress sought the expert 
advice of the military service chiefs on how best to apply the 
additional funds to the most urgent unfunded modernization 
priorities. Regrettably, no sooner had these acts had been 
signed into law than the Administration proposed to use the 
added modernization funds to pay for the operations and 
readiness shortages contained in their budgets.
    This same pattern continues with the fiscal year 1998 
budget request. Attainment of even modest modernization 
increases has again been deferred until ``next year.'' Despite 
obvious and compelling evidence of procurement shortfalls and 
despite the fact that the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff 
concluded that, beginning with fiscal year 1998, the Department 
required $60 billion annually to keep the force modernized, the 
fiscal year 1998 budget request of $42.6 billion represents a 
cut of $1.5 billion from the budget enacted for fiscal year 
1997 and is $2.9 billion below the spending levels forecast in 
the President's budget for fiscal year 1998 just last year. 
Furthermore, the budget request marks the fourth consecutive 
year that the Administration has reduced the fiscal year 1998 
procurement figure--by a cumulative total of $14.5 billion--
relative to its earlier projections.
    The committee notes that the recently-released Quadrennial 
Defense Review (QDR) acknowledges that the planned ``rebound'' 
in procurement ``has been repeatedly postponed in recent 
budgets as increases previously projected for the procurement 
accounts have been eroded by unexpected demands for additional 
funding in operational activities.'' The committee is dismayed 
by the fact that the 
Department believes this shift in resources from modernization 
to operations will continue and that procurement funding, 
instead of growing to $60 billion per year, could be expected 
to stall in the range of $45-$50 billion. The committee further 
notes that this belief is reinforced by the independent 
National Defense Panel's critique of the QDR, which found the 
QDR modernization plan risky due to tenuous assumptions of 
further base closures and savings from acquisition and other 
infrastructure reforms.
    Notwithstanding the Administration's lack of resolve to 
deal proactively with the continuing modernization problem, the 
committee--for the third year in a row--has added funds 
significantly in excess of the procurement budget request. 
Moreover, in formulating its proposed addition of $3.8 billion, 
the committee has also once again been responsive to meeting 
the unfunded priorities submitted by the various military 
service chiefs of staff. However, because the committee 
believes that the QDR has not made the correct decisions 
regarding tactical aircraft and the B-2, it has taken different 
positions on these two issues. Furthermore, the committee 
disagrees with the Department's assessment of the Arsenal Ship 
demonstrator's utility and its proposed teaming arrangement for 
construction of the New Attack Submarine. These topics are 
discussed at length in the report.
    Offset Folio 40--Insert here

<SKIP PAGES = 001>

                       Aircraft Procurement, Army

                                Overview

    The budget request contained $1,162.5 million for Aircraft 
Procurement, Army in fiscal year 1998. The committee recommends 
authorization of $1,535.3 million for fiscal year 1998.
    The committee recommends approval of the request except for 
those programs adjusted in the following table. Unless 
otherwise specified, adjustments are without prejudice and 
based on affordability considerations.
    Offset Folios 42 to 43 Insert here

<SKIP PAGES = 002>

                       Items of Special Interest

Aircraft survivability equipment (ASE)

    The budget request contained $900,000 for project 
management support and fielding of ASE systems, however, no 
funding was included for upgrades to the Aircraft Survivability 
Equipment Trainer IV (ASET IV).
    The ASET IV is a ground-based, mobile aviation threat 
emitter simulation and training system, which teaches aircrews 
to recognize surface-to-air-missile (SAM) and anti-aircraft 
artillery threats in order to employ the correct aircraft 
threat avoidance tactics. ASET IV systems are currently fielded 
at major training centers throughout the United States and 
Germany and require that an aircraft have a fully operational 
ASE suite of sensors on board for training. The committee 
understands that in its present configuration, however, the 
ASET IV cannot locate, identify, or track aircraft at night nor 
can it simulate the most current infrared (IR) SAM threats, 
thereby limiting aircrews to daylight training against older IR 
SAM threats, which is not representative of the Army's ``train 
as you fight concept.''
    The committee is aware of upgrades to the ASET IV system 
that would enable nighttime training through the incorporation 
of a night vision camera and provide an up-to-date IR SAM 
threat emitter simulation capability. Based on the Army's 
requirement for forces to train in realistic threat 
environments, the committee recommends an increase of $14.8 
million for upgrading eight ASET IV systems with IR SAM threat 
simulators and night vision cameras.

Aircraft survivability equipment (ASE) modifications

    The budget request contained $4.6 million for ASE 
modifications, of which $2.2 million was to complete the 
installation of AN/AVR-2A Laser Detecting Sets (LDS) on the AH-
64 Apache. However, no funding was requested for procurement of 
additional LDSs for other types of aircraft despite the fact 
that only 413 of the required 2,063 systems have been fielded 
by the Army.
    The LDS detects, identifies, and characterizes threats from 
laser-targeted weapons 360-degrees-around and plus-or-minus 45 
degrees above-and-below an aircraft. It is the only device 
procured by the Army that provides warning to helicopter crews 
when they have been illuminated by a laser-targeted weapon. As 
a result of the increasing proliferation of laser technology, 
the committee believes the Army should fulfill its requirement 
for these unique detection systems as soon as possible and, 
therefore, recommends an increase of $15.0 million for 
continued procurement of LDS for installation on UH-60 
Blackhawks, MH-60K Blackhawks, and MH-47E Chinooks.

C-12 cargo aircraft modifications

    The budget request contained $600,000 for avionics and 
cockpit upgrades to C-12 cargo aircraft.
    The C-12 is based throughout the world and is one of the 
Army's primary passenger-carrying aircraft. The C-12 is 
expected to remain active in service for at least the next 20 
years and will be one of four types of aircraft that will 
remain in the Army's fixed wing utility aircraft fleet after a 
major consolidation of the inventory is completed.
    Based on the need for passenger-carrying military aircraft 
to have the latest technology for safe flight operations and 
noting that the majority of the Army's C-12 aircraft were 
purchased in the 1970s and 1980s with avionics and navigation 
equipment that was state-of-the-art at that time but obsolete 
today, the committee believes these upgrades should be 
accelerated. Therefore, the committee recommends an increase of 
$6.0 million for avionics and cockpit upgrades for 34 C-12 
cargo aircraft.

Longbow training devices

    The budget request contained $474.8 million for the Longbow 
modification program, of which $81.6 million was for Longbow 
training devices. The requested funding will procure two types 
of pilot trainers, the Longbow Crew Trainer and the Longbow 
Collective Training System, and several types of maintenance 
trainers.
    The Army has deemed these devices critical for training, 
since the Apache Longbow will be a primary weapon system in 
almost all Army operations and deployments. The committee 
recommended an increase of $53.0 million in fiscal year 1997 to 
accelerate procurement of these devices to support pilot and 
maintenance training when the Army's first Apache Longbow 
battalions are fielded. Since $28.5 million of this amount was 
not appropriated in fiscal year 1997, the committee recommends 
an increase of $28.5 million in fiscal year 1998 for this 
purpose.

OH-58D kiowa warrior modifications

    The budget request contained $38.8 million for Kiowa 
Warrior modifications.
    The committee notes that the current inventory of Kiowa 
Warriors is still below the requirement of 507, yet, the Army 
has not requested funds for the procurement of additional 
aircraft. While there are sufficient aircraft to meet the 
active Army division, regiment, and battalion component 
requirements, an insufficient amount exists for active 
component target acquisition and reconnaissance platoons, as 
well as for Force XXI needs and Army National Guard units. 
Therefore, the committee recommends $175.0 million to fund an 
additional 21 aircraft.

Training devices

    The budget request did not contain funding for training 
devices.
    Currently, the Korean-based Eight Army (EUSA) UH-60 
Blackhawk, CH-47 Chinook, and AH-64 Apache flight simulators 
visually depict generic terrain that does not duplicate any 
real-world location. The committee is concerned that EUSA 
helicopter pilots do not have the correct visual databases, 
state-of-the-art image generators and associated computers to 
simulate the Korean terrain. Further, the committee believes 
that having the capability to practice flying over Korean-
simulated terrain in a simulator would greatly reduce the 
possibility of inadvertent flights over politically sensitive 
and potentially hostile areas. The committee is aware of an 
EUSA requirement for improved flight simulators, including 
geographic-specific databases and state-of-the-art image 
generators, and recommends an increase of $18.6 million for 
these hardware and software upgrades.

UH-60 blackhawk

    The budget request contained $183.2 million for 18 UH-60L 
Blackhawks but did not contain funding to modify Blackhawks to 
the UH-60Q enhanced medical evacuation variant.
    Noting that the total Blackhawk requirement for the Army 
National Guard's (ARNG) aging utility helicopter fleet is in 
excess of 400 aircraft, the committee recommends an increase of 
$90.0 million to procure an additional 12 Blackhawks for the 
ARNG. The committee further recommends an increase of $6.0 
million for modification kits to configure three of these 
aircraft as UH-60Q enhanced medical evacuation models in 
acknowledgment of the fact that this modification is also a 
priority modernization requirement of the ARNG.

                       Missile Procurement, Army

                                Overview

    The budget request contained $1,178.2 million for Missile 
Procurement, Army in fiscal year 1998. The committee recommends 
authorization of $1,176.5 million for fiscal year 1998.
    The committee recommends approval of the request except for 
those programs adjusted in the following table. Unless 
otherwise specified, adjustments are without prejudice and 
based on affordability considerations.
    Offset Folios 47 to 48 Insert here

<SKIP PAGES = 002>

                       Items of Special Interest

Army tactical missile system (ATACMS)

    The budget request contained $97.8 million for the 
procurement of 153 Block IA ATACMS missiles to be acquired 
using a multiyear procurement contract. The committee notes, 
however, that the Army has changed its plans for initiating a 
multiyear procurement contract as a result of deficiencies in 
operational testing performed on the missile prior to its 
entering into full-rate production.
    As a result of the multiyear procurement cancellation, the 
committee understands that only 100 missiles will be procured 
in fiscal year 1998. Therefore, the committee recommends a 
corresponding reduction of $10.8 million.

Avenger modifications

    The budget request did not contain funding for 
modifications to Avenger fire units, which constitute the rear 
component of the Army's Forward Area Air Defense System (FAADS) 
and are the first element of FAADS that has been fielded.
    The committee notes that the Avenger's current 
configuration limits its capability to rapidly lock on and 
track newly emerging threats to ground forces, such as cruise 
missiles and unmanned aerial vehicles, both of which are under 
development by many countries around the world. The slew-to-cue 
upgrade gives the Avenger an automatic and much more rapid 
target identification, tracking and processing capability in 
response to these types of targets and provides an over 50 
percent increase in kill capability as a result of the greater 
speed of operation.
    Since the committee believes it is vitally important to 
enhance the capability of the Army's only FAADS fielded assets, 
it recommends an increase of $13.3 million for 125 slew-to-cue 
upgrade kits.

Improved target acquisition system/tube-launched, optically-tracked, 
        wire-guided (ITAS/TOW) missile modifications

    The budget request contained $62.8 million for ITAS/TOW 
modifications, of which no funding was included for the Missile 
Ordnance Inhibit Circuit (MOIC) modification.
    The MOIC modification provides for installation of a 
circuit on TOW training missiles to prevent flyback in the 
event of a missile malfunction. This critical safety 
enhancement is fundamental for troops to be able to train with 
live-fire missiles. Therefore, the committee recommends an 
increase of $7.0 million for the procurement and installation 
of the MOIC on both the basic and improved versions of the TOW 
missile.

Stinger modifications

    The budget request contained $12.4 million for modification 
upgrades to 751 Stinger Block I missiles.
    This electronics, software and guidance upgrade extends the 
service life of Block I missiles and increases the 
effectiveness of the Stinger against low-flying fixed and 
rotary wing targets. Consequently, consistent with actions 
taken by the committee in fiscal years 1996 and 1997, the 
committee recommends an increase of $9.3 million for an 
additional 549 Block I upgrades to continue to maintain an 
economic production rate of this missile.

               Weapons and Tracked Combat Vehicles, Army

                                Overview

    The budget request contained $1,065.7 million for 
procurement of Army weapons and tracked combat vehicles for 
fiscal year 1998. The committee recommends authorization of 
$1,519.5 million for fiscal year 1998.
    The committee recommends approval of the request except for 
those programs adjusted in the following table. Unless 
otherwise specified, adjustments are without prejudice and 
based on affordability considerations.
    Offset Folios 51 to 52 Insert here

<SKIP PAGES = 002>

                       Items of Special Interest

Bradley fighting vehicle system series modifications

    The budget request contained $61.2 million for 
modifications to the Bradley fighting vehicle, of which $34.6 
million is for upgrading Bradley ``A2'' version vehicles to the 
Operation Desert Storm (ODS) variant.
    The Bradley ODS variant incorporates changes that improve 
the vehicle's lethality, survivability, and mobility, as well 
as the situational awareness of its crew. Modifications include 
installation of a laser range finder, Global Positioning System 
navigation capability, a combat identification system, a 
driver's thermal viewer and a missile countermeasure device.
    When the Army completes all of its planned modifications to 
the Bradley, the active fleet will include a mix of the most 
advanced ``A3'' variant, along with ``A2'' and ODS versions. 
The Army National Guard (ARNG), however, will be left with 
unmodified, first-generation ``A0'' vehicles, which, because of 
major survivability deficiencies, were not used in ODS and will 
not be taken into future combat.
    Because the ARNG comprises an increasing percentage of the 
total force warfighting assets as a result of active component 
force reductions, the committee recommends an increase of 
$120.0 million for modifying 120 Bradley ``A0'' vehicles to the 
ODS variant for the ARNG.

M109A6 paladin/M992A2 field artillery ammunition support vehicle 
        (FAASV)

    The budget request did not contain funding to procure 
M109A6 Paladin self-propelled howitzers or M992A2 FAASVs for 
the Army National Guard (ARNG).
    Although ARNG units comprise the majority of the Army's 
field artillery force, the committee notes that the ARNG does 
not have a full complement of the most recently upgraded 
versions of either the M109A6 Paladin or the M992A2 FAASV. 
Since ARNG artillery battalions will have a greatly enhanced 
role in the future, yet only 16 of the 48 ARNG battalions are 
scheduled to receive the fully-digitized Paladin system, the 
committee recommends an increase of $111.0 million for 72 
Paladins and a corresponding $81.1 million increase for 72 
FAASVs to upgrade four additional ARNG artillery battalions.

M113 carrier modifications

    The budget request contained $20.2 million for modifying 66 
M113 carriers to the ``A3'' configuration. The M113A3 upgrade 
program, forecast to add an additional 20 years of service life 
to the vehicle, includes depot overhaul and rebuild of the 
vehicle along with the installation of a new engine, 
transmission, external fuel tanks, driver controls, and spall 
liners. The committee recommends an increase of $53.0 million 
for M113 modifications, as discussed below.
    The committee notes that the budget request falls far short 
of the required amount, as it has in previous years, for the 
planned upgrade of 250 vehicles per year andrecommends an 
increase of $24.6 million, which, when combined with the budget 
request, will provide for approximately this number. Also, the 
committee is concerned that the M113 may not provide sufficient armor 
protection for its crew and that the majority of the M113 fleet cannot 
operate at night. Therefore, the committee recommends an increase of 
$20.0 million for reactive armor tiles to enhance the vehicle's 
survivability and an increase of $8.4 million to accelerate equipping 
the M113A3 with night vision driver viewers.

M240B medium machine gun

    The budget request did not contain funding for the M240B 
medium machine gun. The M240B is intended to replace the M60 
series machine gun in light infantry, mechanized infantry, and 
combat engineer units. Although the Army has a total 
procurement objective of over 11,000 M240B machine guns, the 
service has only procured 1,200 of these weapons to date.
    The committee notes that the Army has failed to fund this 
requirement for a second straight year and that funding to 
fulfill the Army's objective falls far short of the 11,000 
weapons objective through the future years defense program. 
Moreover, the Army has not entered into a multiyear procurement 
as the committee strongly encouraged in the committee report on 
H.R. 3230 (H Rept. 104-563)
    To ensure that the requirements for small arms are 
fulfilled, the committee recommends an increase of $20.0 
million for 2,100 M240B medium machine guns and strongly urges 
the Secretary of the Army to include funding in the fiscal year 
1999 budget request for this weapon.

M88A2 improved recovery vehicle

    The budget request contained $28.6 million for modifying 12 
existing ``A1'' variant vehicles to the more capable ``A2'' 
version.
    The A2 upgrade enables the vehicle to safely perform 
battlefield recovery of the 70-ton M1 Abrams tank and other 
vehicles weighing 60 tons or more. It consists of structural 
improvements to the vehicle chassis, an increased-horsepower 
engine, additional armor, an improved winch, and the addition 
of a hydraulic-assisted braking system. Although 24 vehicles 
per year is the minimum sustaining production rate, the budget 
request is sufficient to fund only 12 vehicles.
    The committee believes that this upgrade program is vital 
to the Army's future mobility and, consistent with its actions 
for the past two fiscal years, recommends an increase of $27.8 
million for 12 additional vehicles.

M9 armored combat earthmover (ACE)

    The budget request did not contain funding for the M9 ACE.
    The M9 ACE provides infantry, tank and artillery units with 
survivable fighting positions and creates anti-tank ditches as 
obstacles against enemy maneuver units. The committee believes 
the vehicle's high speed and heavy digging capabilities are 
essential to the success of any ground combat unit's maneuver 
effectiveness.
    Consistent with its recommendation for fiscal year 1997 to 
fund an additional 54 M9 ACE vehicles, the committee recommends 
an increase of $52.4 million to fund the remaining 54 M9 ACEs 
necessary to complete the active Army's requirement for 108 
vehicles.

                      Ammunition Procurement, Army

                                Overview

    The budget request contained $890.9 million for Ammunition 
Procurement, Army in fiscal year 1998. The committee recommends 
authorization of $1,093.8 million for fiscal year 1998.
    The committee recommends approval of the request except for 
those programs adjusted in the following table. Unless 
otherwise specified, adjustments are without prejudice and 
based on affordability considerations.
    Offset Folios 56 to 58 Insert here

<SKIP PAGES = 003>

                       Items of Special Interest

Ammunition

    The budget request contained $694.2 million for procurement 
of ammunition. The committee recommends $915.1 million, an 
increase of $212.9 million for the following types of 
ammunition:

                        [In millions of dollars]

Small/Medium Cal Ammunition:
    CTG 5.56mm Blank M200 Linked..................................   2.4
    CTG 7.62mm ball M80 linked....................................   6.0
    CTG 50 caliber ball M33 w/M9 linked...........................   0.1
    CTG 50 caliber 4 ball/1 Tracer................................   0.1
Mortar Ammunition:
    CTG Mortar 120mm HE M934 w/mo Fuze............................   9.0
    CTG Mortar 120mm Illum M930...................................   3.0
Tank Ammunition:
    CTG Tank 120mm TPCSDS-T M865..................................  12.8
    CTG Tank 120mm TP-T M831/M831A................................   9.8
Artillery Ammunition:
    CTG Arty 105mm DPICM M915.....................................  10.0
    CTG Arty 105mm HERA M927......................................  20.0
    PROJ Arty 155mm HE M795.......................................  50.0
Artillery Fuzes:
    M767A1 Electronic Artillery Fuze..............................  20.0
Mines:
    M87 Volcano...................................................  12.0
Rockets:
    Bunker Defeating Munition.....................................  10.0
    Rocket, Hydra-70 MPSM Practice................................  37.2
Demolition Munitions, All Types:
    SLAM..........................................................  10.0
Other Ammunition:
    Antitank Simulator M27........................................   0.5

Armament retooling and manufacturing support (ARMS) initiative

    The budget request contained $5.0 million for the ARMS 
initiative.
    The committee is aware that several refinements could be 
made to the ARMS Act of 1992 (Public Law 102-484), which 
provides for the reutilization of excess capacity of 
government-owned, contractor-operated ammunition facilities of 
the Department of the Army for commercial purposes. While the 
committee is supportive of innovative ways to reduce the impact 
of defense downsizing on communities, it believes that a 
thoroughreview of the benefits of these proposed refinements is 
required before considering permanent changes to existing authorities.
    Therefore, the committee directs the Secretary of the Army 
to provide a report to the congressional defense committees by 
March 31, 1998, that evaluates the following issues: (1) 
establishment of a special account for the accumulation of 
revenues generated from ARMS activities and the benefits of 
allowing the Secretary of the Army to retain those revenues for 
ARMS industrial base projects; (2) authorization for the 
Secretary to offer an ARMS participant who had made 
nonseverable property improvements to a facility to have the 
first right of refusal in acquiring title to the improved 
property at a fair market or negotiated value in the event that 
the Army decided to dispose of the property or facility as 
surplus; (3) authorization for the Secretary to enter into 
sole-source contracts with a facility-use contractor for long-
term periods; (4) authorization for the Secretary to be able to 
accept a combination of funds, property, services or other 
consideration in lieu of rental payments for the use of 
property accountable under an ARMS facility-use contract; and 
(5) authorization for the Army Industrial Operations Command to 
make an ammunition facility available for ARMS initiatives, 
even in cases where the facility was considered ``excess,'' 
thus providing an alternative to the current requirement to 
transfer an ``excess'' facility to the Army Corps of Engineers 
for environmental remediation and property management 
determinations.

Conventional ammunition demilitarization

    The budget request contained $106.1 million for 
conventional ammunition demilitarization.
    The committee strongly supports demilitarization of older 
ammunition but notes that the request represents a 10 percent 
increase over the amount requested in prior years and that is 
forecast for fiscal year 1999 in the future years defense 
program. The committee recommends $96.1 million, a $10.0 
million reduction, which the committee believes would create 
neither a near-term safety hazard nor prevent the execution of 
a balanced and safe ammunition demilitarization program.

                        Other Procurement, Army

                                Overview

    The budget request contained $2,455.0 million for Other 
Procurement, Army in fiscal year 1998. The committee recommends 
authorization of $2,640.3 million for fiscal year 1998.
    The committee recommends approval of the request except for 
those programs adjusted in the following table. Unless other 
specified, adjustments are without prejudice and based on 
affordability considerations.
    Offset Folios 61 to 68 Insert her

<SKIP PAGES = 008>

                       Items of Special Interest

Area common user system (ACUS) modifications

    The budget request contained $82.4 million for 
implementation and engineering support of the ACUS modification 
program to update current legacy information systems and 
transition them to the Warfighter Information Network (WIN), 
which will support the Army's Force XXI digitization efforts. 
However, no funding was included for procurement of Tactical 
Personal Communications Services (PCS).
    As part of the Army's future wireless command post, 
Tactical PCS will replace wire-based communications with 
cellular communications. The committee is supportive of the 
Army's WIN communications upgrades and is aware of demonstrated 
cellular technologies that could meet preliminary Army Tactical 
PCS requirements. Based on the Army's plan to field a fully 
digitized division by fiscal year 2001 and its related mobile 
communications requirements, the committee recommends an 
increase of $10.0 million for the procurement of currently 
available Tactical PCS technologies for evaluation by Force XXI 
experimental forces.

Army data distribution system (ADDS)

    The budget request contained $57.2 million for the ADDS, of 
which $37.0 was for procurement of 304 Enhanced Position 
Location Reporting System (EPLRS) radios.
    As the digital ``backbone'' of the Army's Force XXI 
battlefield digitization efforts, EPLRS provides field 
commanders position information on their forces, in addition to 
supporting the majority of their data communication 
requirements. The Army's procurement objective for EPLRS is 
5,015 units, however, it has only procured 1,776 units to date. 
The committee understands the unique position location 
information that this system contributes to a combat unit's 
situational awareness, and, therefore, recommends an increase 
of $37.4 million for the procurement of 1,092 additional EPLRS 
radios.

All source analysis system (ASAS)

    The budget request contained $7.8 million for procurement 
of six ASAS-Extended unit sets to replace selected ASAS Common 
Hardware Software (CHS)-I workstations with CHS-II workstations 
and enhanced software.
    The ASAS is a ground-based, mobile, intelligence 
information processing and fusion system designed to provide 
automated intelligence support to combat commanders. The system 
interfaces with selected national, joint, and theater-level 
intelligence assets to provide commanders at echelons above 
corps down through battalion level a common, comprehensive 
picture of an opposing force's capabilities and potential 
actions.
    The committee anticipates that the Army will become 
increasingly reliant upon timely and accurate all source 
intelligence data provided by ASAS for the rapid targeting and 
employment of precision weapons and, therefore, recommends an 
increase of $9.0 million for the procurement of additional 
ASAS-Extended unit sets and enhanced software.

Automated data processing equipment

    The budget request contained $125.1 million for the Army's 
sustaining base automation systems, of which no funding was 
included for Sustaining Base Information Services (SBIS).
    As the Army modernizes its warfighting forces for the 
twenty-first century, it must also leverage state-of-the-art 
automation technology to plan, organize, train, equip, deploy, 
sustain, and redeploy these forces. The committee notes that 
continental United States (CONUS)-based combat service support 
for forces forward-deployed throughout the world will likely 
expand in the future to include logistics, personnel, finance, 
transportation, medical, and other sustaining base functions. 
However, the committee understands that the overall base 
automation infrastructure is currently overburdened, is 
reaching technological obsolescence, and may not be able to 
provide the level of combat service support expected of it by 
Army leaders. Consequently, the committee recommends an 
increase of $13.0 million to procure additional SBIS hardware 
for application fielding to additional CONUS bases and urges 
the Secretary of the Army to fully fund SBIS requirements in 
future budget requests.

Close combat tactical trainer (CCTT)

    The budget request contained $93.0 million for continued 
low rate initial production of the CCTT system, to include 122 
modules for fixed sites and seven mobile modules.
    The CCTT is a networked system of manned simulators for the 
Abrams tank, Bradley fighting vehicle, High Mobility 
Multipurpose Wheeled Vehicle, and M113A3 carrier and will train 
both active and reserve component crews of armored and 
mechanized infantry combat units. The committee is aware of the 
cost savings that can be achieved through simulation training 
and is encouraged with the progress made to date. However, the 
committee notes that a delay in the Initial Operational Test 
and Evaluation of the CCTT from April 1997 to the second 
quarter of fiscal year 1998 has occurred due to software 
reliability difficulties. Accordingly, the committee recommends 
a reduction of $11.5 million.

Common hardware software (CHS)

    The budget request did not contain funding for the 
procurement of CHS, which provides the standardized hardware 
and software for the information systems that will support the 
Army's first fully digitized division.
    The committee understands that the Army's contract for CHS-
I will expire prior to the end of fiscal year 1997. The 
committee believes it would be imprudent to terminate the 
existing CHS-I contract until a thorough analysis of the 
results of the recently concluded Advanced Warfighting 
Experiment, which evaluated its ``digital battlefield'' 
modernization efforts, has been completed. Allowing the CHS-I 
contract to expire prior to the complete evaluation of CHS-I, 
CHS-II and other battlefield digitization hardware could 
potentially delay fielding of critically-needed command, 
control and communications capabilities. Therefore, the 
committee directs the Army to extend the expiring CHS-I 
contract for one year, a period commensurate with minimizing 
fielding interruptions and with attaining the final 
certification of CHS-II.

Communications satellite radios

    The budget request did not contain funding for procurement 
of satellite communications radios for counterintelligence (CI) 
units in Korea.
    The committee is aware that communications shortfalls exist 
to fully support CI units deployed throughout the Korean 
peninsula and that a recent study identified a requirement to 
provide satellite communications connectivity for these units. 
Therefore, the committee recommends an increase of $2.8 million 
for this purpose.

Depot maintenance of other end items

    The budget request contained $24.8 million for depot 
maintenance of other end items.
    The committee is puzzled by the first-time request for 
these funds, as many of the projects included in the budget 
justification material appear to be associated with research, 
development, test and evaluation of existing systems rather 
than related to depot maintenance activities. Therefore, the 
committee recommends a reduction of $24.8 million.

Family of heavy tactical vehicles (FHTV)

    The budget request contained $9.1 million for procurement 
of Palletized Load System (PLS) cargo beds and handling 
devices.
    The FHTV includes the PLS along with companion trailers and 
flatracks, three variants of Heavy Expanded Mobility Tactical 
Trucks, and the Heavy Equipment Transporter System (HETS). The 
committee has recommended increases in funding for this class 
of vehicles in previous fiscal years because it recognized the 
increased role that they play in the Army's expanding mission 
areas and the multiple requirements they have fulfilled during 
operations in Bosnia. However, the committee notes that the 
Army National Guard still has a shortfall of approximately 500 
HETS. Therefore, the committee recommends an increase of $45.0 
million for 96 of these vehicles in order to equip an Army 
National Guard HETS company.

Family of medium tactical vehicles (FMTV)

    The budget request contained $209.4 million for 1,506 FMTV 
vehicles. The FMTV program provides for replacement for 
approximately 50 percent of the two-and-halfton and 100 percent 
of the five-ton trucks in the Army's inventory, all of which are 
reaching the end of their useful service lives.
    While the committee strongly supports the Army's 
requirement for medium trucks, it notes that there is a large 
increase in the funds requested for engineering change orders. 
Therefore, the committee recommends a decrease of $10.0 million 
and believes the funds remaining for engineering change orders 
are adequate for a program at this level of maturity.

Handheld computer terminal units

    The budget request contained $13.1 million for three 
Forward Area Air Defense Command and Control (FAAD C2) computer 
and software systems and $2.4 million for 20 Forward Entry 
Devices (FED). No funding was included for the XM-30 Mortar 
Ballistic Computer (MBC). The committee recommends a total 
increase of $33.2 million for these programs, as discussed 
below.
    The automated, deployable FAAD C2 system provides accurate 
and timely targeting information for the employment of FAAD 
weapon systems. The committee notes that although full-rate 
production of the FAAD C2 system was approved by the Joint 
Requirements Oversight Council in June 1995, funding requests 
for this critical air defense system have continued to decrease 
since fiscal year 1996. The committee, therefore, recommends an 
increase of $10.0 million for accelerated fielding of the FAAD 
C2 system to five divisions.
    The FED, a ruggedized, lightweight, high resolution, 
handheld computer, is an integral part of the Advanced Field 
Artillery Tactical Data System (AFATDS) and is used by Forward 
Observers (FO), Fire Support Teams (FIST) and Field Artillery 
Battery Commanders to control and synchronize fire support 
assets within the AFATDS. The committee understands that 
currently-fielded systems require upgrading in order to provide 
artillery forces with a much faster computer processing 
capability. The committee is concerned that FOs, FISTs, and 
Battery Commanders have the processing capability to rapidly 
coordinate artillery fire and counterfire support missions, 
and, also notes that these devices are high on the Army Chief 
of Staff's fiscal year 1998 unfunded priority list. Therefore, 
the committee recommends an increase of $16.3 million to 
procure upgraded FEDs for these purposes.
    The XM-30 MBC will replace the obsolete M23 MBC and provide 
accurate, rapid ballistic trajectory calculations for all 
cartridge and fuze combinations of 60mm, 81mm, 107mm and 120mm 
mortars as well as automated digital communications with other 
fire support devices via the AFATDS. The M23 MBC is 
incompatible with FEDs and is no longer supportable in the 
field due to the lack of unique repair parts and components. 
Based upon the enhanced response times, improved accuracy and 
commonality with AFATDS and FEDs, the committee recommends an 
increase of $6.9 million for the XM-30 MBC.

High mobility multi-purpose wheeled vehicle (HMMWV)

    The budget request contained $66.2 million to procure 774 
HMMWVs, of which $28.8 million was for 250 Up-Armored HMMWVs.
    In response to increased peacekeeping mission requirements, 
the Army developed the Up-Armored HMMWV variant to provide 
increased ballistic and blast protection primarily for the 
military police. This variant has proven to be a valuable asset 
and is responsible for saving the lives of soldiers whose 
vehicles were struck by mine blasts in Bosnia. Since the 
committee anticipates that the Up-Armored HMMWV will play a 
continuing role in more frequent deployments to areas of unrest 
around the world, it recommends an increase of $38.7 million 
for an additional 360 of these HMMWV variants.

Logtech

    The budget request contained $3.4 million for automatic 
identification technology (AIT), which consists of various 
radio frequency (RF), bar code scanning and data carrier 
devices. AIT devices, as components of automated logistics 
systems, contribute to expedited receiving, storage, 
distribution, and inventory management of new and reparable 
items.
    The committee is aware of an AIT that employs an RF tagging 
device to identify items and track their location for supply 
and logistics purposes. The committee understands that the 
device is currently used to track supplies being shipped from 
several inventory control points in the continental United 
States to Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, as well as to forces deployed 
in Bosnia. The committee further understands that the device is 
used to automate manufacturing process controls for jet engine 
repairs and inventory tracking of ground support equipment at 
various military depots. The committee is impressed with the 
promising results achieved to date with the RF tagging device 
and believes that substantial savings can be achieved from 
further implementation of the device into automated inventory 
and repair processes. Therefore, the committee recommends an 
increase of $11.7 million for this purpose.

M915/M916 line haul tractor trailer truck

    The budget request contained $36.1 million to initiate the 
procurement of 293 commercially available vehicles.
    While the committee is well aware of the requirements for 
this cargo handling vehicle and commends the Army for procuring 
a commercial truck, it believes there should be a more moderate 
initial rate of procurement. For this reason, the committee 
recommends a reduction of $18.0 million.

Modifications to in-service equipment

    The budget request contained $1.2 million for modifications 
to Firefinder radars, including the AN/TPQ-36 Mortar Locating 
Radar.
    This radar is the primary target acquisition and 
counterfire system for Army field artillery forces. It is 
capable of rapidly locating multiple indirect fire weapons, 
such asmortars and rocket launchers, simultaneously and 
transmitting target data in near-real-time. However, the committee 
understands that currently-fielded radars generate false target 
location errors and believes there is a critical need to eliminate 
these errors. Therefore, the committee recommends an increase of $6.5 
million for modification kits to correct the AN/TPQ-36 Mortar Locating 
Radar false target location errors. The committee also recommends an 
increase of $1.5 million for spares and logistics support.

Night vision devices

    The budget request contained $85.3 million for procurement 
of night vision devices, of which $24.3 million was for the 
procurement of AN/PVS-7 night vision goggles. However, no 
funding was included for the procurement of 25mm generation 
three image intensifier tubes for upgrading the Aviator's Night 
Vision Imaging System (ANVIS). The committee recommends a total 
increase of $30.8 million for night vision devices as discussed 
below and elsewhere in this report.
    The AN/PVS-7 night vision goggle is a head- or helmet-
mounted, third-generation, image intensifying, device used by 
soldiers for nighttime operations. The Army procurement 
objective for this device is 281,000 however, at the end of 
fiscal year 1997, only 166,180 units will have been procured.
    The committee is aware of the enhanced operational 
capability that night vision devices provide combat forces and 
believes that these devices will play an increasingly important 
role in future Army deployments. Accordingly, the Army Chief of 
Staff has designated these devices as one of the Army's highest 
unfunded priorities for fiscal year 1998. The committee 
understands that an increase in funding would allow for 
procurement of an additional 6,239 devices, enabling the Army 
to fulfill force requirements earlier than planned. Therefore, 
the committee recommends an increase of $17.0 million to 
procure AN/PVS-7 night vision goggles for this purpose.
    The ANVIS upgrade, also included in the Army Chief of 
Staff's top unfunded fiscal year 1998 priorities, will provide 
aviators with a significantly enhanced night flying capability 
and contribute immeasurably to their safety of flight. The 
ANVIS collects critical flight information, such as, altitude 
and course heading from aircraft sensors and converts this 
information onto a visual imaging heads-up display. The upgrade 
will provide new image intensifier tubes that generate higher 
resolution images at lower light levels, which the committee 
understands will increase pilot reaction time to avoid 
obstacles by 40 percent. Because of the critical safety 
improvements that will result from this upgrade, the committee 
recommends an increase of $5.4 million for ANVIS 25mm 
generation three image intensifier tubes.

Nonsystem training devices

    The budget request contained $49.7 million for nonsystem 
training devices, of which no funding was included for 
firefighter trainers. This training device is a computer-
controlled, natural-gas-fueled system, which is currently 
providing safe, realistic, and environmentally-friendly 
training for firefighters at airports and training academies 
throughout the country.
    The committee understands that Army firefighter training 
sites have been or will be closed in the future because most 
are not in compliance with environmental regulations. Because 
of the site closures, the Army has established a program to 
provide regional firefighter training and has awarded a 
contract to procure 28 firefighter trainers over a five-year 
period for this purpose. However, it has procured only four of 
these trainers to date. The committee believes these trainers 
provide a safe, unique and fundamental fire prevention and 
teaching capability for Army firefighters and, therefore, 
recommends an increase of $4.0 million to procure four 
additional firefighter trainers.

Reserve component automation system (RCAS)

    The budget request contained $114.3 million for continued 
procurement and fielding of the RCAS. The RCAS provides the 
Army the capability to more effectively administer, manage, and 
deploy the Army National Guard and Reserve forces.
    While the committee is a strong supporter of the National 
Guard and Reserve forces, it is concerned with the significant 
increase in funding requested for this program, an increase of 
50 percent over the combined amounts contained in the budget 
requests for the previous two years. The committee believes 
that such a large increase is not warranted and, therefore, 
recommends a reduction of $24.0 million.

Sentinel

    The budget request contained $41.0 million for 12 Sentinel 
systems.
    The Sentinel system consists of a trailer-mounted radar and 
an identification-friend-or-foe device, along with Forward Area 
Air Defense stCommand, Control and Intelligence interfaces. The 
system plays an integral role in the digital battlefield by 
automatically detecting, identifying, and reporting cruise 
missiles, unmanned aerial vehicles (UAV), and rotary and fixed 
wing aircraft targets and rapidly transmitting data on these 
targets to air defense units.
    The committee believes that the Sentinel system will play 
increasingly critical air defense and force protection roles, 
especially with the proliferation of UAVs and cruise missiles 
throughout the world. These small targets require early 
detection in order to provide maximum reaction times for 
engagement at ranges well beyond the forward line of troops. 
Therefore, the committee recommends an increase of $20.3 
million for 14 additional Sentinel systems.

Shortstop

    The budget request did not contain funding for procurement 
of the Shortstop Electronic Protection System (SEPS).
    The SEPS is a commercial electronics radio frequency 
countermeasure system that protects personnel and high value 
assets from artillery and mortar rounds and rockets by 
detonating their proximity fuzes well before they impact in the 
target area. The committee understands that initial Army 
testing of 5000 artillery rounds fired at the SEPSresulted in a 
100 percent pre-detonation success rate, while follow-on tests with 
both artillery and rockets were also highly successful.
    The initial SEPS units were developed as a quick reaction 
capability system and deployed during Operation Desert Storm. 
More recently the SEPS has been deployed to Bosnia. The 
committee is aware of an urgent need statement for 62 systems 
for the Eighth Army in Korea. Funding for procurement of 20 
units for Korea was appropriated in fiscal year 1997; however, 
the Army failed to request funding for SEPS in the fiscal year 
1998 budget request. Therefore, the committee recommends an 
increase of $9.0 million for the procurement of 42 additional 
SEPS to ensure that deployed forces have adequate protection 
from artillery, mortar and rocket attacks.

Single channel anti-jam manportable (SCAMP) terminals

    The budget request contained $4.3 million for fielding of 
SCAMP terminals. No funds were requested to procure new 
terminals even though the Army has procured less than half of 
its requirement for 660 terminals.
    These satellite communications terminals provide extended-
range, anti-jam voice and data command and control (C2) 
communications capability worldwide as part of the extremely 
high frequency Milstar satellite communications program.
    Based on the critical requirement for joint C2 
communications and to ensure that the Army can be fully 
integrated into the joint C2 network provided by the Milstar 
communications network, the committee recommends an increase of 
$12.3 million for SCAMP terminals and encourages the Secretary 
of Army to exercise the existing firm fixed price contract 
option for these terminals in fiscal year 1998.

                       Aircraft Procurement, Navy

                                Overview

    The budget request contained $6,086.0 million for Aircraft 
Procurement, Navy in fiscal year 1998. The committee recommends 
authorization of $6,173.0 million for fiscal year 1998.
    The committee recommends approval of the request except for 
those programs adjusted in the following table. Unless 
otherwise specified, adjustments are without prejudice and 
based on affordability considerations.
    Offset Folios 78 to 80 insert here

<SKIP PAGES = 003>

                       Items of Special Interest

Aircraft spares and repair parts

    The budget request contained $740.2 million for aircraft 
spares and repair parts.
    The committee recommends an additional $62.0 million to 
procure 11 improved F402-408A engines for the TAV-8B Harrier 
trainer aircraft. The committee notes that the Commandant of 
the Marine Corps identified a requirement for 22 of these 
engines among his highest unfunded aviation procurement 
priorities. In making this recommendation, the committee 
understands that these engines will enhance the safety margin 
of flight training operations and increase AV-8B pilot training 
production by twenty percent. The committee encourages the Navy 
to include the remaining 11 F402-408A engines in its fiscal 
year 1999 budget request in order to re-engine all 22 TAV-8B 
trainer aircraft.

AN/ALR-67E(V)2 radar warning receiver upgrade

    The budget request contained $32.9 million for common 
electronic countermeasures modifications but did not include 
any funding to upgrade the AN/ALR-67E(V)2 radar warning 
receiver (RWR).
    The AN/ALR-67E(V)2 RWR is the common RWR installed on all 
Navy and Marine Corps front-line strike and fighter aircraft. 
The committee understands that low cost upgrades to the AN/ALR-
67E(V)2 RWR are now available that would provide significantly 
greater survivability through better signal analysis, longer 
detection ranges, and improved situation awareness. The 
committee further understands that these upgrades would 
significantly lower the RWR's life cycle costs through 
maintainability improvements to the operating system software. 
Accordingly, the committee recommends an increase of $15.0 
million to provide these upgrades to the AN/ALR-67E(V)2.

AN/ALQ-165 airborne self-protection jammer (ASPJ)

    The budget request contained $32.9 million for common 
electronic countermeasures equipment, but did not include 
funding to procure the AN/ALQ-165 ASPJ for the F-14D or the F/
A-18C/D aircraft.
    The self-protection system installed on the F/A-18C/D, 
except those configured with the ASPJ for contingency 
operations, has no capability against pulse doppler or 
continuous wave radars that currently are the most widely 
deployed air-to-air and air-to-surface radar threats to 
tactical aircraft. The committee is aware that the Navy can 
only equip approximately 72 aircraft with the ASPJ, although it 
has a requirement for employment of this system on over 500 F-
14Ds and F/A-18C/Ds. The committee understands that in order to 
meet its current deployment requirements in the Bosnia and 
Persian Gulf theaters, the Navy must remove the ASPJs from 
aircraft returning from these areas and install them on 
aircraft beginning deployment. Furthermore, as a result of this 
shortfall, ASPJs are not available to support training or other 
potential combatrequirements. Accordingly, the committee 
recommends an increase of $75.0 million for production of 50 AN/ALQ-165 
ASPJs.

AN/AWW-13 guided weapon control monitor set

    The budget request did not contain funding to procure AN/
AWW-13 guided weapon control monitor sets.
    The AN/AWW-13 provides the data link capability for the F/
A-18 series aircraft to employ the precision-guided Walleye and 
Stand-off Land Attack Missiles (SLAM). The committee 
understands that the Navy requires 218 AN/AWW-13s, but only 
plans to procure 200 of these systems through calendar year 
1997, when production of the AN/AWW-13 is scheduled for 
termination. To meet the Navy's requirement and retain AN/AWW-
13 production capability for future F/A-18s or other aircraft 
that employ Walleye or SLAM, the committee recommends an 
increase of $9.0 million to procure the remaining 18 systems.

AV-8B

    The budget request contained $277.6 million to procure 11 
remanufactured AV-8B aircraft, and $19.4 million for advance 
procurement of 12 remanufactured aircraft in fiscal year 1999.
    The committee continues to support the upgraded AV-8B's 
enhanced mission-capability and safety-related improvements and 
notes that, for fiscal year 1997, it authorized the procurement 
of two more additional aircraft than were appropriated. Since 
the Commandant of the Marine Corps identified an additional AV-
8B as his highest unfunded aviation procurement priority for 
fiscal year 1998, the committee recommends an additional $33.0 
million to procure this aircraft.

Contract aerial refueling services

    The budget request did not contain funding for contract 
aerial refueling services.
    The committee understands that commercial aerial refueling 
may be less expensive than the cost-per-flight-hour of the 
current Air Force tankers and believes this concept warrants 
further evaluation. Accordingly, the committee recommends an 
increase of $6.0 million to modify three aircraft for this 
purpose.

E-2C

    The budget request contained $236.5 million to procure 
three E-2C aircraft, and $23.6 million for advance procurement 
of four aircraft in fiscal year 1999.
    Fleet aviation continues to require modern, robust, 
carrier-based airborne early warning (AEW) command and control 
aircraft. Except for fiscal year 1998, the Department plans to 
procure four new AEW aircraft per year throughout the future 
years defense program. The Chief of Naval Operations (CNO), in 
order to maintain a steady production rate of four aircraft per 
year, identified an additional E-2C as one of his top two 
unfunded procurement priorities in fiscal year 1998.
    The committee supports the CNO's request and recommends an 
additional $68.0 million to procure one additional E-2C 
aircraft. This increase will result in a more efficient 
production flow, provide aircraft to the fleet sooner, and save 
$13.2 million.

EA-6B modifications

    The budget request contained $86.8 million for EA-6B 
modifications but did not include funding to replace wing 
center sections (WCS) or for the turbine engine blade 
containment system (TEBS).
    The first 65 EA-6B aircraft were manufactured with an 
aluminum alloy WCS that is susceptible to stress corrosion 
cracking. Thirty nine of these aircraft are still in service, 
20 of which Congress provided WCS replacement funding in fiscal 
years 1995 and 1997. Consistent with its prior actions, the 
committee recommends an increase of $50.0 million to replace 
the WCSs of 10 additional EA-6Bs. The committee urges the 
Secretary of the Navy to provide funds to complete the WCS 
modifications in his fiscal year 1999 budget request.
    Based on historical data analysis of the EA-6B's engine, 
the Navy determined that the EA-6B will experience between 
three and five aircraft losses due to catastrophic failure of 
turbine engine blades before the EA-6B reaches its retirement. 
In fiscal year 1997, the Congress provided $5.0 million to 
address this problem, but the committee has since learned that 
the cost to outfit the entire fleet has risen to $60.0 million. 
Since the EA-6B is no longer in production and the total cost 
to modify all EA-6Bs with the TEBS is less than the value of 
one aircraft, the committee recommends an increase of $18.0 
million to continue this modification.

F/A-18

    The budget request contained $2,101.1 million for 
procurement of 20 F/A-18E/F aircraft, four fewer than the 
number for which advance procurement funds were requested in 
fiscal year 1997, and $90.5 million for advanced procurement of 
30 aircraft in fiscal year 1999.
    Based on the recently-released recommendations of the 
Quadrennial Defense Review (QDR), the Navy's current 
procurement objective for the F/A-18E/F is 548 to 785 aircraft, 
at a maximum production rate of 48 aircraft per year, which has 
been decreased from the fiscal year 1998 budget request 
procurement plan of 1,000 aircraft at a maximum production rate 
of 60 aircraft per year. The committee understands that the 
Navy plans to determine its actual procurement objective based 
on the initial operational capability date of the Joint Strike 
Fighter (JSF).
    The committee is sensitive to the Navy's requirement to 
modernize its tactical aircraft fleet. Unfortunately, the Navy 
failed in its attempts to replace the A-6 and F-14 fleets first 
with the A-12 and then with the A/F-X, both of which were 
terminated. Consequently, the F/A-18E/F program emerged--more 
by default than by design--as the Navy's choice to replace the 
A-6 in the all-weather attack mission, replace the F-14 in 
thefleet air defense and tactical reconnaissance missions, and to 
supplement existing F/A-18C/Ds. The F/A-18E/F improves range and 
payload capabilities compared to the F/A-18C/D, but it will not be 
nearly as survivable as either the A-12 or the A/F-X would have been. 
Accordingly, the committee strongly supports the Navy's participation 
in the JSF program to meet its longer-term force structure and 
modernization requirements and believes that the JSF will be more cost 
and operationally effective than any previous Naval aircraft when it 
enters service with the fleet. Therefore, the committee recommends an 
increase of $20.0 million in PE63800N to accelerate development of the 
Naval variant of the JSF, as explained elsewhere in this report.
    The committee notes that the budget request proposal to 
reduce the quantity of F/A-18E/Fs procured in fiscal years 1998 
and 1999 by 10 from the 60 proposed in the fiscal year 1997 
acquisition plan, together with the QDR recommendation to 
reduce both the total procurement objective and the maximum 
production rate of this aircraft, suggests that future 
aircraft, shipbuilding, and other weapons procurement demands 
on the Navy's budget are necessitating consideration of 
alternative F/A-18E/F production rates. Accordingly, the 
committee recommends $1,348.9 million for continued F/A-18E/F 
production, a reduction of $752.2 million. The committee 
believes that until the review of the QDR by the independent 
National Defense Panel is completed in December 1997 and 
assessed by the Congress, the F/A-18E/F program should proceed 
at a slower pace.

H-1 series modifications

    The budget request contained $18.5 million for 
modifications to the H-1 series helicopter, of which $18.3 
million was planned for communications and navigation block 
upgrades. The budget request also contained $80.7 million in 
research and development funding for future H-1 upgrades.
    Subsequent to the Department's submission of the budget 
request, the Navy determined a need to restructure its 
communications and navigation block upgrades and research and 
development plans for the H-1 series helicopters. The 
restructured program, which requires transferring funds from 
the aircraft procurement account to the research and 
development account, would improve commonality between the UH-
1N and AH-1W helicopters through a new plan to design common 
cockpit architecture and to procure common parts and software. 
The committee supports this initiative and recommends $12.7 
million for H-1 communications and navigation block upgrades, a 
reduction of $5.6 million, and a corresponding increase in PE 
0604245N for research and development of H-1 series upgrades.

Lightweight environmentally sealed parachute assembly (LESPA)

    The budget request did not contain funding for LESPA.
    The committee continues to support this initiative, begun 
in fiscal year 1997, to replace old parachutes in the P-3 and 
EP-3 aircraft with the LESPA. Due to its longer repack cycle 
and extended service life, the committee understands that the 
Navy will realize substantial life cycle cost savings by 
procuring LESPA compared to continued use of existing 
parachutes. Accordingly, the committee recommends an additional 
$11.0 million to procure LESPA for P-3 and EP-3 aircraft fleets 
as follows: $10.8 million for the P-3 and $200 thousand for the 
EP-3.

Oil debris detection system (ODDS)

    The budget request contained $164.9 million for the 
modification of P-3 aircraft, $49.1 million for the 
modification of E-2 aircraft, and $19.2 million for the 
modification of C-2 aircraft. The budget request did not 
contain funding for the procurement and installation of ODDS in 
the T-56 engine, which is common to the P-3, E-2 and C-2 
fleets.
    The ODDS is an on-board detection system that alerts 
aircrews to the presence of metal chips in engines and 
propeller gear boxes, allowing flights to be terminated prior 
to catastrophic failure of critical components. It also permits 
the clearing of smaller particles that routinely accumulate in 
engine oil and cause false impending engine failure alarms, 
resulting in unnecessary termination of aircraft missions and 
costly engine diagnostics. Since the ODDS, which has been 
successfully integrated into many other Department of Defense 
aircraft, both reduces aircraft maintenance costs and enhances 
aircrew safety, the committee recommends an increase of $1.6 
million to incorporate this system on the P-3, E-2 and C-2 
fleets as follows: $1.4 million for the P-3 and $100 thousand 
each for the E-2 and C-2 fleets.

P-3 series modifications

    The budget request contained $164.9 million for P-3 series 
modifications, $74.7 million of which is for four anti-surface 
warfare improvement program (AIP) kits, and $41.3 million of 
which is for 11 sustained readiness program (SRP) kits.
    The AIP improves the P-3's capabilities in communications, 
survivability and over-the-horizon targeting through the 
installation of commercial-off-the-shelf components. The 
committee understands that the Commanders-in-Chief (CINCs) of 
the Atlantic and Pacific theaters require 68 AIP-configured P-3 
aircraft by fiscal year 2001, but the future years defense 
program only provides for 44 aircraft by this time. In the last 
year alone, these aircraft have played major roles in joint 
naval operations in Bosnia, Liberia, Central Africa, the 
Formosa Strait and the Strait of Hormuz by providing littoral 
and overland surveillance. Consequently, in order to meet CINC 
requirements and achieve a more efficient production rate, the 
committee recommends an increase of $56.6 million for an 
additional eight AIP kits.
    The SRP extends the service life of the P-3C by replacing 
and refurbishing airframe components. The committee understands 
that material conditions of the fleet aircraft are 
deteriorating faster than originally forecast, requiring 
frequent major airframe repairs in advance of the nominal 30-
year expected operational service life. If left unchecked, 
aircraft could be rendered unserviceable due to corrosion or 
cracking of major structural components. Accordingly, the 
committee recommends an increase of $35.1 million to procure 17 
additional shipsets of SRP kits.

T-45 training system

    The budget request contained $244.0 million to procure 12 
T-45C aircraft and associated ground-based training equipment, 
and $6.2 million for advance procurement of 12 T-45C aircraft 
in fiscal year 1999.
    The committee is aware that the T-45A Goshawks delivered 
thus far are performing extremely well and have exceeded 
expectations in almost every performance measure. The last T-
45A is planned for delivery in February 1998 and a 
significantly upgraded T-45C, with a digital cockpit, will 
begin deliveries in October 1997. Student training in the 
digitally instrumented T-45C will begin in mid-summer 1998.
    The committee is concerned that the aging TA-4J and T-2C 
aircraft, now scheduled for retirement in fiscal years 1998 and 
2003 respectively, are increasingly expensive to operate due to 
an increased instructor requirement, more frequent parts 
replacement cycle, and more aircraft flight time required to 
train students to the desired standard. Lead time for spares is 
excessive and results in an increased period of time that the 
aircraft are unavailable for training. Moreover, the T-2 fleet 
has been grounded on numerous occasions due to flight control 
problems and other maintenance issues related to an aging 
aircraft. Taken together, these factors could cause the fiscal 
year 1998 pilot training rate to fall short of the Navy's 
yearly quota by approximately 100 naval aviators.
    Therefore, the committee recommends an increase of $100.0 
million to procure six additional T-45C aircraft. The committee 
understands that by continuing to procure the T-45C at the rate 
of 18 aircraft per year, the Navy would complete its T-45 
aircraft procurement program three years earlier and save 
$210.0 million in aircraft procurement costs compared to the 
future years defense program, as well as $262.2 million in T-2 
flight hour cost avoidance.

V-22

    The budget request contained $472.0 million to procure five 
V-22 aircraft and $69.7 million for advance procurement of 
seven aircraft in fiscal year 1999.
    The committee has been a strong supporter of accelerated V-
22 procurement and endorses the recently-released Quadrennial 
Defense Review's (QDR) recommendation to achieve a long-term 
production rate of 30 aircraft per year by 2004. However, the 
committee notes that despite the fact that in fiscal year 1997 
Congress appropriated advance procurement funding for 12 
aircraft in fiscal year 1998, the Department has requested only 
five. Therefore, consistent with its prior actions, the 
recommendations of the QDR, and the Commandant of the Marine 
Corps' unfunded priorities for fiscal year 1998, the committee 
recommends an increase of $189.3 million to procure two 
additional aircraft.

                       Weapons Procurement, Navy

                                Overview

    The budget request contained $1,136.3 million for Weapons 
Procurement, Navy in fiscal year 1998. The committee recommends 
authorization of $1,214.7 million for fiscal year 1998.
    The committee recommends approval of the request except for 
those programs adjusted in the following table. Unless 
otherwise specified, adjustments are without prejudice and 
based on affordability considerations.
    Offset Folios 88 to 90 Insert here

<SKIP PAGES = 003>

                       Items of Special Interest

Close-in weapon system (CIWS) surface mode upgrade

    The budget request contained $10.0 million for CIWS but did 
not include funding to procure surface mode upgrade kits for 
this system.
    The CIWS is a fully autonomous, radar-directed gun system 
designed for anti-ship missile defense. While the existing 
system is effective against its designed threat, the Navy's new 
focus on littoral operations requires an ability to defend 
against small, fast surface craft for which most Navy ships 
have a limited defense. To address this deficiency, the 
committee recommends an increase of $20.0 million to procure 
CIWS upgrade kits for both surface combatants and other ships 
equipped with this system.

                          Hellfire II missiles

    The budget request did not contain funding for the Hellfire 
II missile.
    The Hellfire II missile is an anti-armor and anti-ship 
weapon used by the Marine Corps on the AH-1W and by the Navy on 
the SH-60B. Neither the Navy nor the Marine Corps have procured 
Hellfire II missiles since fiscal year 1994. The committee has 
been informed that because of this situation, the Navy's and 
the Marine Corps' inventories of Hellfire II missiles is 25 
percent below requirements. To address this shortfall, the 
committee recommends $37.5 million to procure 700 Hellfire 
missiles.

Joint stand off weapon (JSOW)

    The budget request contained $58.7 million for 113 JSOW 
missiles for the Navy. No funds were requested to procure JSOW 
missiles for the Air Force until fiscal year 1999.
    The committee continues to support accelerated procurement 
of precision guided munitions and integration of these weapons 
into aircraft and mission planning subsystems. Also, the 
committee notes that the Chief of Naval Operations included 
additional JSOW procurement in the top one-third of his fiscal 
year 1998 unfunded priorities.
    The committee added funding in fiscal year 1997 to 
accelerate the integration of precision guided weapons on the 
B-2 bomber and understands that some of this funding will be 
used to complete JSOW integration in late 1998. The committee 
urges the Air Force to accelerate updating the B-2's mission 
support system in order to employ JSOW at the earliest possible 
date.
    The committee recommends an increase of $10.0 million for 
the Navy to procure 37 additional missiles and an increase of 
$29.0 million for the Air Force to initiate procurement of 100 
missiles. The committee understands that these increases will 
reduce the fiscal year 1998 JSOW unit cost by 24 percent. The 
committee expects the Air Force to accelerate JSOW capability 
on the B-2 with these weapons.

Standard Missile (SM)-2 Block IIIB medium range (MR) modification kits

    The budget request contained $35.6 million for 80 SM-2 
Block IIIB MR modification kits.
    The SM is the Navy's primary surface-to-air weapon against 
hostile aircraft and anti-ship cruise missiles. The latest MR 
version to enter production, SM-2 Block IIIB, retains the full 
performance of earlier models and adds improvements against 
electronic countermeasures. However, the current SM inventory 
is dominated by older versions that are less capable against 
modern anti-ship weapons and ineffective against some newer 
threat missiles.
    Even though the Navy plans to supplement its new missile 
production by upgrading older missiles to the Block IIIB 
configuration, its projected Block IIIB inventories at the turn 
of the century will still fall significantly short of the 
quantity required to meet deployment inventories. Accordingly, 
the committee recommends an increase of $33.0 million to 
procure an additional 80 SM-2 Block IIIB MR modification kits. 
This action will allow the Navy to field more of the latest-
version missiles and reduce the need to ``cross deck'' the 
missiles between deploying and returning ships.

               Ammunition Procurement, Navy/Marine Corps

                                Overview

    The budget request contained $336.8 million for Ammunition 
Procurement, Navy/Marine Corps in fiscal year 1998. The 
committee recommends authorization of $470.4 million for fiscal 
year 1998.
    The committee recommends approval of the request except for 
those programs adjusted in the following table. Unless 
otherwise specified, adjustments are without prejudice and 
based on affordability considerations.
    Offset Folios 93 to 94 Insert here

<SKIP PAGES = 002>

                       Items of Special Interest

Marine corps ammunition

    The budget request contained $99.0 million for procurement 
of ammunition. The committee recommends $227.0 million, an 
increase of $128.0 million for the following types of 
ammunition:

                        [In millions of dollars]

CTG 5.56mm training rounds........................................   3.0
CTG 7.62mm training rounds........................................   6.0
Rocket Motor, 5 inch..............................................   1.5
Charge, demolition linear HE......................................  10.0
CTG 40mm practice grenade linked M918.............................  10.6
CTG Tank 120mm M830A1 (HEAT)......................................  33.4
CTG Tank 120mm TPCSDS-T M865......................................   5.2
Fuze, ET, XM762...................................................   7.0
CTG 25mm TPDS-T, linked...........................................   1.1
Signal Smoke, illumination........................................   3.4
Charge, demolition assembly M183..................................  43.3
Fuze, ET, M767....................................................   3.5

                   Shipbuilding and Conversion, Navy

                                Overview

    The budget request contained $7,438.2 million for 
Shipbuilding and Conversion, Navy in fiscal year 1998. The 
committee recommends authorization of $7,655.0 million for 
fiscal year 1998.
    The committee recommends approval of the request except for 
those programs adjusted in the following table. Unless 
otherwise specified, adjustments are without prejudice and 
based on affordability considerations.
    Offset Folios 96 to 97 Insert here

<SKIP PAGES = 002>

                       Items of Special Interest

Fast patrol craft

    The budget request did not contain funding for a fast 
patrol craft.
    The Navy and Marine Corps emphasis on the employment of 
expeditionary forces, coupled with the enormous investment 
required for construction of major combatant ships, combine to 
make the procurement of an inexpensive, multi-mission fast 
patrol craft a highly desirable objective. The committee 
direction for such a craft, contained in its report on H.R. 
1530 (H. Rept. 104-131), was clear--a high-speed vessel capable 
of carrying multiple anti-surface ship missiles, as well as 
command, control, and intelligence assets. The committee 
continues to believe that a fleet of such small multi-mission 
craft would be a national asset and, consequently, recommends 
an increase of $20.0 million, to be combined with the $9.5 
million authorized and appropriated in fiscal year 1996, to 
construct this platform. The committee directs the Secretary of 
the Navy to release these funds to the Office of Naval Research 
only for the purpose of contracting for the fast patrol craft.

Landing craft air cushion (LCAC) service life extension program (SLEP)

    The budget request did not contain funding for LCAC SLEP.
    Congress provided $3.0 million in fiscal year 1997 for 
advance procurement of components needed to initiate an LCAC 
SLEP, based on its understanding that the Navy was prepared to 
fully fund this program in fiscal year 1998. The committee 
understands that these funds will not be released until fiscal 
year 1999 because the Navy now intends to begin the LCAC SLEP 
in fiscal year 2000. However, the committee also understands 
that the Navy's strategy to begin this SLEP in fiscal year 2000 
is currently under review in order to address the realities of 
more extensive corrosion and greater obsolescence of electronic 
equipment in the LCAC fleet than earlier realized.
    The LCAC is the only surface platform that can provide 
high-speed, heavy lift from over-the-horizon. Without a SLEP, 
the first LCACs will begin retiring in 2004; with a SLEP, ten 
years of useful life will be added to the LCAC fleet. Since no 
funding is programmed for a replacement craft, allowing the 
LCACs to deteriorate without a SLEP would result in a severe 
degradation in the Navy's ability to perform amphibious warfare 
and operational maneuver from the sea. Accordingly, the 
committee recommends $17.3 million to begin the LCAC SLEP in 
fiscal year 1998.

LPD-18

    The budget request did not contain funding for the LPD-18.
     LPD-18 is the second ship of 12 in the LPD-17 class of new 
amphibious ships with which the Navy plans to replace 41 
obsolete amphibious vessels. The LPD-17 class will not only 
provide the Navy and Marine Corps with advanced-technology 
command systems and extensively improved ship self-defense 
capabilities but also reduce by 60 percent the crew 
requirements of the four existing classes of ships it will 
replace. Thecommittee notes that the Chief of Naval Operations 
considers the procurement of the LPD-18 to be among his top unfunded 
procurement priorities for fiscal year 1998 and recommends $185.0 
million for the advance procurement of this ship.

New attack submarine (NAS)

    The budget request contained $2,314.9 million for 
procurement of the first NAS and $284.9 million for advance 
procurement of the second and third NASs in fiscal years 1999 
and 2001 respectively.
    In presenting its budget request for fiscal year 1996 two 
years ago, the Navy was poised to proceed with its plan to 
begin producing a 30-ship class of NASs at a single shipyard, 
the Electric Boat Division of General Dynamics. Congress 
rejected the Navy's plan, directing that the NAS would not be a 
serially-produced new class of nuclear attack submarines and 
further directing that Newport News Shipbuilding would 
participate in the future construction of such submarines. 
Congress was concerned over having the NAS design serially 
produced at a single shipyard since it could have led to 
production of a scaled-down, less capable, version of the NAS 
predecessor, the Seawolf, while precluding the consideration of 
technological innovation available through the other nuclear-
capable shipyard. Moreover, because Congress was concerned with 
the prospects of an unaffordable nuclear attack submarine, it 
reasoned that competition between Electric Boat and Newport 
News was viewed as important to controlling costs.
    The results of Congress' efforts were enacted into law in 
the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 1996 
(Public Law 104-106). Section 131 of that Act replaced the 
Navy's plan with one that set forth a series of four 
submarines, beginning construction in each of fiscal years 1998 
through 2001, which use the NAS as a baseline design and 
successively incorporate new technologies. The first and third 
of these submarines were to be built at Electric Boat; the 
second and fourth were to be built at Newport News. The 
Congressional plan stated that the best designs from each 
shipyard would form the basis for serial production of the 
first of a new class of next-generation submarines beginning in 
2003 (amended to 2002 by the National Defense Authorization Act 
for Fiscal Year 1997 (Public Law 104-201)). Although the Navy's 
original plan also projected commencing construction of four 
NASs between fiscal year 1998 and fiscal year 2003, the Navy, 
nevertheless, maintained that the Congressional plan was 
unaffordable.
    Notwithstanding the previously signed Memorandum of 
Agreement (MOA) with Electric Boat and Newport News to 
facilitate the competition requirements of Section 131, the 
Navy's budget request for fiscal year 1998 is premised upon 
having the two shipyards team to produce not only the first 
four NASs, beginning construction in fiscal years 1998, 1999, 
2001 and 2002 respectively, but all NASs thereafter. This 
teaming arrangement, in conjunction with authorization to 
initiate a proposed multiyear procurement contract for the 
first four submarines, would, according to the Navy, save 
$600.0 million ``over the current plan.''
    The committee notes several inconsistencies between 
provisions contained in the formal Team Agreement and 
representations made to the committee in other documents: (1) 
The Team Agreement states that, ``The Government, acting 
through the Department of the Navy (``Government'') planned to 
construct four NAS submarines, the first and third of which 
were to be built by Electric Boat, and the second and fourth of 
which were to be built by Newport News, in accordance with the 
National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 1997.'' The 
Assistant Secretary of the Navy (Research, Development, and 
Acquisition), in a formal witness statement submitted to the 
committee earlier this year stated, ``The plan the Secretary of 
Defense submitted to the Congress in March of last year, for 
fiscal year 1997, included funding for two of the four 
submarines and concluded that it would be very difficult to 
accelerate funding for the program in the context of other 
modernization priorities.'' (2) The Team Agreement states that, 
``Both Electric Boat and Newport News have been encouraged by 
the Government to enter into a team arrangement for NAS 
submarines, and the parties anticipate alterations to existing 
law to accommodate the team arrangement contemplated by this 
Agreement.'' In the same formal statement noted above, the 
Assistant Secretary of the Navy stated that, ``In December 
1996, Electric Boat and Newport News proposed to construct New 
Attack Submarines as a team, rather than as competitors.'' The 
committee is puzzled by such apparent contradictions and 
believes they call into question the forthrightness with which 
the Navy is dealing with the Congress.
    Additionally, the committee notes that the Navy has 
proposed legislation that would waive section 2306b (a) of 
Title 10, United States Code, which enumerates those 
determinations that an agency head must make as being in the 
best interests of the government in order to enter into a 
multiyear procurement contract, and would repeal the provisions 
of the National Defense Authorization Acts for Fiscal Years 
1996 and 1997, which codified the Congressional plan for next-
generation nuclear attack submarines. Based on the Navy's 
request for a waiver of section 2306b (a), the committee can 
only infer that authorizing a multiyear procurement in the case 
of the NAS may not be in the best interests of the government. 
Accordingly, the committee does not recommend approval of this 
waiver. Moreover, the committee believes that the current NAS 
design is the best the Navy is willing to do rather than the 
best the Navy is capable of doing and, therefore, declines to 
repeal the Congressional plan for production of the next-
generation submarine, as enacted into law.
    The committee is pleased that the Navy has followed the 
committee's direction to increase funding for advanced 
submarine technologies and notes that the fiscal year 1998 
request adds approximately $60.0 million to the amount 
requested in fiscal year 1997 for this purpose. However, the 
committee is not convinced that the Navy is committed to 
maturing these advanced technologies and inserting them into 
the NAS, especially into any of the first four submarines. 
Although the Navy asserts there are many technology insertion 
``opportunities'' on these four submarines, the committee does 
not yet see evidence of a funding commitment to incorporate 
more than a very few of them as they mature. Because of this 
apparent shortcoming, the committee recommends a provision 
(sec. 121) that would prohibit the obligation of more than 50 
percent of the funds authorized and appropriated for fiscal 
year 1998 for the Seawolf (SSN-23) until the Secretary of 
Defense certifies that he will fully fund in the future years 
defense program accompanying the fiscal year 1999 budget 
request 50 percent of the procurement resources estimated to be 
required for incorporation into each of the first four NASs 
thetechnology ``opportunities'' available for those vessels, as briefed 
to the committee by the Assistant Secretary of the Navy (Research, 
Development, and Acquisition).
    The committee is aware that the initial sea trials of the 
Seawolf produced some very unexpected and positive results. 
Those results testify to the potential of contemporary 
hydrodynamic design to both improve the performance and enhance 
the affordability of the NAS. Unfortunately, the Seawolf's 
hydrodynamic design is not reflected in the NAS, and the 
committee believes that the results of these sea trials 
demonstrate that the Congressional plan not to freeze the NAS 
design has merit.
    Based on the Seawolf initial sea trials, the committee 
believes that the current NAS power plant might be capable of 
providing performance levels beyond those demonstrated by the 
Seawolf, if alternative hydrodynamic technologies are 
exploited. If such is the case, then: (1) an even smaller power 
plant might be used on an NAS-displacement platform to produce 
planned-for NAS performance levels while simultaneously 
yielding more space for additional weapons storage; or (2) a 
smaller power plant might be used to provide Seawolf 
performance levels on a less-than-NAS-displacement platform. In 
recognition of the fact that hydrodynamic shaping and advanced 
control surfaces cannot be ``inserted'' once a submarine is 
built, the committee further believes the Navy should pursue a 
parallel, large-scale demonstrator that is not limited by form 
(hull and appendages) or by a single hull design to evaluate 
the potential to achieve higher levels of performance with 
either the NAS or smaller power plants. The committee is aware 
of the encouraging hydrodynamic and acoustic potential 
identified by a recent Electric Boat evaluation of 
incorporating a double hull around a contemporary submarine and 
believes this potential reinforces the benefits of constructing 
such a demonstrator.
    For this purpose, the committee recommends an additional 
$103.0 million in research and development funds and directs 
the Secretary of the Navy to issue a competitive solicitation 
for the demonstrator to the shipyards not currently involved in 
the design or future construction of the NAS. Furthermore, the 
committee directs the Secretary to transfer funds in the future 
years defense program accompanying the fiscal year 1998 budget 
for the Arsenal Ship demonstrator, which the committee 
recommends terminating in Title II of this report, to the 
submarine large-scale demonstrator.

Nuclear aircraft carrier refueling overhauls

    The budget request contained $1,615.0 million for the 
refueling overhaul of the Nimitz nuclear aircraft carrier and 
$92.9 million in advance procurement for overhaul of a second 
carrier in fiscal year 2001.
    The committee understands that the Navy will not install 
the close-in weapons system on the Nimitz, as previously 
planned and budgeted. Therefore, the committee recommends 
$1,608.4 million, a corresponding reduction of $6.6 million.

                        Other Procurement, Navy

                                Overview

    The budget request contained $2,825.5 million for Other 
Procurement, Navy in fiscal year 1998. The committee recommends 
authorization of $3,073.4 million for fiscal year 1998.
    The committee recommends approval of the request except for 
those programs adjusted in the following table. Unless 
otherwise specified, adjustments are without prejudice and 
based on affordability considerations.
    Offset Folios 103 to 111 Insert Here

<SKIP PAGES = 009>

                       Items of Special Interest

Airborne mine countermeasures

    The budget request contained $20.2 million for airborne 
mine countermeasures, but did not include funding for Magic 
Lantern.
    The committee is aware of the successful Naval Reserve 
operational assessment of the Magic Lantern airborne mine 
detection system. The committee understands the system 
demonstrated the ability to automatically detect and classify 
contact mines from the surface to below the keel depth of any 
U.S. warship with an unprecedented probability of detection.
    The committee supports the Navy's decision to designate the 
Naval Reserve as the existing operational command for the laser 
airborne mine warfare mission. The committee is concerned, 
however, that if the capability exists only in the one East 
Coast Light Airborne Multi-Purpose System (LAMPS) squadron, as 
is presently the case, the Navy will not be optimizing the use 
of these very limited assets. The committee believes that, with 
minor modifications, existing Magic Lantern assets could be 
used to establish a capability in the West Coast LAMPS squadron 
comparable to that in its East Coast counterpart. A Magic 
Lantern capability in the West Coast squadron would provide for 
more flexible training and, more importantly, enhance the 
ability of the Reserves to draw qualified and trained personnel 
from both squadrons to support contingencies for extended 
periods.
    Therefore, the committee recommends an increase of $7.5 
million for: (1) equipping the West Coast squadron with two 
Magic Lantern systems; (2) procuring spares and support 
equipment for the West Coast Magic Lantern systems; (3) 
provisioning eight Reserve LAMPS aircraft with Magic Lantern 
engineering change proposals, including miniaturized airborne 
Global Positioning System receivers; and (4) converting the 
Magic Lantern adaptation system to the Magic Lantern deployment 
contingency configuration.

AN/BPS-16 submarine navigation radar

    The budget request did not contain funding for the AN/BPS-
16 submarine navigation radar.
    Consistent with its initiative over the last two years to 
upgrade the navigation radar on the Los Angeles-class submarine 
fleet, the committee recommends $9.0 million to initiate the 
backfit of the AN/BPS-16 radar on the TRIDENT submarine fleet. 
The AN/BPS-16 navigation radar redresses a severe safety and 
readiness problem associated with the high failure rate of the 
older BPS-15 radar. The routine failure of the older system 
forces the fleet to rely on a small, pleasure boat style 
commercial radar that does not meet standards for larger 
vessels. Installation of the AN/BPS-16 will provide TRIDENT 
submarines with significantly improved capability for safe 
operations while navigating into and out of ports and 
performing tactical surface operations at sea in adverse 
weather conditions.

AN/SPS-73(V) surface search radar

    The budget request contained $1.7 million to procure 10 AN/
SPS-73(V) surface search radars.
    The AN/SPS-73(V) surface search radar is the radar 
navigation system selected to replace the less-reliable AN/SPS-
55, AN/SPS-64(V), AN/SPS-67(V)1 and LN-66 radars, many of which 
are over 30 years old. The AN/SPS-73(V) will replace these 
different radars with one system, reducing logistics management 
costs and saving approximately $42,000 per ship per year in 
maintenance costs. Although the Navy's procurement objective is 
550 systems, it has budgeted for only 44 systems in the future 
years defense program. To accelerate the introduction of this 
cost-effective system and enhance the navigation safety of the 
Navy's surface ships, the committee recommends an increase of 
$13.0 million for production and installation of approximately 
55 more systems.

Computer aided submode training (CAST) lesson authoring system (CLASS)

    The budget request contained $26.8 million for AEGIS 
support equipment, but did not include any funding for CLASS to 
be expanded to ships or systems other than AN/UYQ-70-equipped 
AEGIS destroyers.
    CLASS is a commercial-off-the-shelf training system that 
operates with the Navy's existing CAST system, but adds multi-
media capabilities such as video, audio, three-dimensional 
graphics, animation and interactive simulations. The committee 
understands that the CLASS is fully funded beginning in fiscal 
year 1999 for installation on AN/UYQ-70-equipped AEGIS 
destroyers, but the Navy does not plan to backfit this system 
on other AEGIS-equipped platforms or to expand it to other 
systems. Accordingly, the committee recommends an increase of 
$8.0 million for the purpose of backfitting CLASS on AEGIS 
cruisers and destroyers and to expand this technology to other 
systems such as cooperative engagement capability, joint 
maritime command information system, and global command and 
control system.

Cooperative engagement capability (CEC)

    The budget request did not contain funding for CEC.
    The CEC significantly improves anti-air warfare (AAW) 
capability by integrating all battle group component AAW sensor 
information into a single, real-time depiction that allows one 
platform to target and engage a hostile air threat with 
information from another. CEC distributes sensor data from any 
ship or aircraft in the battle group to all others through a 
real-time, line-of-sight, high-data-rate distribution network. 
The committee notes that the Chief of Naval Operations has 
identified CEC as one of the top three fiscal year 1998 
unfunded procurement priorities. Therefore, the committee 
recommends $114.8 million to restore the Navy's CEC fielding 
plan by procuring and installing CEC shipsets for two aircraft 
carrier battle groups.

DD-963 combat control upgrade

    The budget request contained $14.3 million for Navy 
tactical data systems, but did not include funding to upgrade 
DD-963 combat control systems with AN/UYQ-70 workstations and 
associated peripherals.
    The Spruance-class surface combatants operate with combat 
control and display systems, designed thirty years ago, that 
are obsolete, unreliable and expensive to maintain. Due to the 
obsolescence of these computer and display systems, the Navy 
must often ``cannibalize'' ships in non-deployed and overhaul 
status for spare parts. Moreover, the lack of modern 
technology, combined with the low reliability and frequent 
maintenance of these systems, require increased shipboard 
manning to keep these systems combat-ready. Accordingly, the 
committee recommends $10.0 million to upgrade the computers, 
consoles and associated equipment of two Spruance-class surface 
ships with AN/UYQ-70 workstations and associated peripherals.

Integrated navigation, information, and ship control system

    The budget request did not contain funding for the 
integrated navigation, information, and ship control system.
    Congress authorized and appropriated $24.0 million in 
fiscal year 1997 for the procurement and installation of 
commercial-off-the-shelf (COTS) integrated navigation, 
information, and ship control systems for backfit on CG-47 
class cruisers. However, the committee understands that the 
Navy currently intends to use these funds to conduct a 
competition for the development of a machinery control system, 
notwithstanding the fact that the $24.0 million was provided 
for the procurement and installation of a suite of non-
developmental ``smart ship'' systems like those installed on 
the U.S.S. Yorktown. The committee strongly opposes the Navy's 
intentions and directs the Secretary of the Navy to procure 
COTS systems--not develop new ones--for installation on CG-47 
class cruisers.

Mobile remote emitter simulator (MRES)

    The budget request contained $4.9 million for weapons range 
support, but did not include funding to procure MRES systems.
    The MRES is a ground-based threat simulator system that 
provides in-flight electronic threat training to aircrews. The 
Navy currently operates outdated electronic combat simulator 
systems at two fixed sites on the east coast of the United 
States. The MRES system would provide both updated threat 
simulation and allow this training to be conducted at other 
locations. Therefore, to improve the quality and availability 
of electronic combat training, the committee recommends an 
increase of $9.5 million to procure two MRES systems for the 
Atlantic test range component of the Naval Air Warfare Center.

Self-contained breathing apparatus (SCBA)

    The budget request contained $14.1 million for fire 
fighting equipment, but did not include funding to procure 
oxygen breathing apparatus used for shipboard firefighting.
    The committee notes that the Navy is attempting to replace 
antiquated oxygen-breathing apparatus used for shipboard 
firefighting with a more user-friendly and efficient system. 
The committee understands that in fiscal year 1996, the Navy 
successfully completed testing of a non-developmental, 
commercial off-the-shelf SCBA in the fleet and, as a result, 
recently directed that SCBAs be procured and installed on all 
Navy ships. Given the improved performance of these systems and 
their contribution to shipboard survivability, the committee 
recommends an additional $23.0 million to begin outfitting the 
fleet with SCBAs.

Sonobuoys

    The budget request contained $54.8 million for the 
procurement of AN/SSQ-36, AN/SSQ-53E, AN/SSQ-62E and Signal 
Underwater Sound (SUS) sonobuoys. The budget request did not 
contain any funding for the AN/SSQ-57 or the AN/SSQ-110 
sonobuoys.
    The Navy formerly maintained the equivalent of a five-year 
stockpile of sonobuoys based on peacetime consumption rates. 
However, today's inventory has been reduced to only one and 
one-half to two times the annual peacetime consumption rate and 
the committee understands that the level of funding contained 
in the budget request will not allow the Navy to meet inventory 
requirements for the execution of even one major regional 
conflict. Furthermore, the committee notes that the Chief of 
Naval Operations identified additional sonobuoy procurement 
among the top ten unfunded procurement priorities for fiscal 
year 1998. To address this inventory shortage, the committee 
recommends an increase of $45.8 million. The committee expects 
this increase to be distributed as follows: $1.5 million to 
restore and stabilize the inventory of AN/SSQ-36s at required 
levels; $23.7 million to meet AN/SSQ-53 inventory shortfalls; 
$4.5 million to retrofit the current inventory of AN/SSQ-57 
sonobuoys to meet changing threat acoustic signatures; $8.6 
million to restore and stabilize the inventory of SSQ-62s; $5.0 
million to continue to upgrade the existing inventories of the 
AN/SSQ-110 with shallow-water capabilities and safety 
enhancements; and $2.5 million to restore and stabilize the 
inventory of the SUS sonobuoy.

Surface ship sonar windows and domes

    The budget request did not contain funding for surface ship 
sonar windows and domes.
    In fiscal year 1996, Congress authorized and appropriated 
funds to ensure that essential support services and ongoing 
product improvement initiatives would continue for surface ship 
sonar windows and domes. However, the committee understands 
that the Department of the Navy has reprogrammed these funds 
for other purposes and has jeopardized the completion of a 
Navy-initiated product improvement. This product improvement 
employs a structural acoustic glass-reinforced plastic-and-
rubber sandwich material system which, in tests thus far, 
demonstrates superior performance, lower life-cycle costs, and 
reduced manufacturing and procurement costs over the current 
rubber-only system. Accordingly, the committee recommends $6.0 
million to complete the ongoing product improvement initiative 
for the structural acoustic sandwich material system for 
surface ship sonar domes.

Surface ship torpedo defense (SSTD)

    The budget request contained $344 thousand for SSTD but did 
not include funding for the procurement of countermeasure 
systems or acoustic devices.
    The SSTD system, which consists of the AN/SLQ-25A towed 
torpedo countermeasure, the AN/SLQ-25B torpedo countermeasure 
set, and the launched expendable acoustic device, enhances ship 
survivability against both advanced acoustic and non-acoustic 
homing torpedoes. The committee understands that the current 
program funds equipment for only 53 surface combatants, leaving 
over 200, including aircraft carriers, unprotected. Since the 
worldwide torpedo threat continues to proliferate, the 
committee recommends an increase of $12.6 million to add this 
capability to additional surface combatants and urges the 
Secretary of the Navy to adequately fund this program in future 
budget requests.

TB-23 towed array

    The budget request contained $78.0 million for submarine 
acoustics, of which approximately $8.0 million is for the 
refurbishment and upgrade of 20 TB-23 towed arrays.
    The TB-23 is one of four towed arrays employed by 
submarines to passively detect other ships, thereby enhancing 
their ability to determine ship activity in an area of 
operations. The committee understands that the TB-29, the 
newest towed array of the four, is currently undergoing a 
program restructure due to the high cost of the first 10 
systems and, as a result, approximately 55 TB-23s will require 
refurbishment to fully outfit the Navy's attack and ballistic 
missile submarine fleets. Fifteen of these 55 systems will be 
refurbished with funds provided in fiscal year 1997, in 
addition to the 20 in the fiscal year 1998 budget request. 
Accordingly, the committee recommends an increase of $8.0 
million to refurbish and upgrade the remaining 20 TB-23s in 
order to restore the towed array inventory to needed readiness 
levels.

WSN-7 ring laser gyro (RLG)

    The budget request contained $31.6 million for navigation 
equipment, including $12.3 million for the procurement of nine 
WSN-7 RLGs. The WSN-7 has been selected as the common RLG for 
all surface and submarine fleets.
    The committee recommends an increase of $18.0 million for 
procurement and installation of 18 additional WSN-7 RLGs. This 
increase would allow the Navy to significantly accelerate the 
replacement of high-maintenance-cost WSN-1, WSN-2, WSN-3, and 
WSN-5 ship navigation systems in the surface and submarine 
fleets with theWSN-7 RLG ship navigator. According to fleet 
commanders, this accelerated procurement would maximize cost savings 
and improve fleet performance.

                       Procurement, Marine Corps

                                Overview

    The budget request contained $374.3 million for 
Procurement, Marine Corps in fiscal year 1998. The committee 
recommends authorization of $442.8 million for fiscal year 
1998.
    The committee recommends approval of the request except for 
those programs adjusted in the following table. Unless 
otherwise specified, adjustments are without prejudice and 
based on affordability considerations.
    Offset Folios 118 to 121 Insert here

<SKIP PAGES = 004>

                       Items of Special Interest

Communications and electronics infrastructure support

    The budget request contained $41.8 million for 
Communications and Electronics Infrastructure Support, of which 
$17.5 million was included for upgrades to base 
telecommunications infrastructure.
    The Commandant of the Marine Corps has designated 
communications upgrades for Marine bases as the number one 
unfunded priority for fiscal year 1998. These upgrades will 
vastly improve the telecommunications infrastructure at Marine 
Corps Air Stations (MCAS) Beaufort and Cherry Point, at Marine 
Corps Base (MCB) Quantico and Marine Corps Air Ground Combat 
Center (MCAGCC) Twenty Nine Palms with state-of-the-art fiber 
optic voice and data technology and ensure they are fully 
compatible with the digital Defense Messaging System. 
Additionally, the leased telephone system at MCAS Beaufort, 
which is presently at saturation level, will be replaced with a 
government-owned Integrated Services Digital Network-capable 
system. To support the Marine Corps' growing demands for 
modeling and simulation, telemedicine, optical disk imagery 
transmission and video teleconferencing, the committee 
recommends an increase of $42.6 million to be allocated as 
follows:

                        [In millions of dollars]

MCAS Beaufort.....................................................   5.4
MCAS Cherry Point.................................................  19.4
MCB Quantico......................................................   8.8
MCAGCC Twenty Nine Palms..........................................   9.0

Javelin

    The budget request contained $42.1 million for procurement 
of 194 Javelin antitank missiles and 140 command launch units.
    The Javelin, which is jointly procured with the Army, is a 
man-portable, fire-and-forget, antitank weapon capable of 
defeating all known and projected armor threats. The committee 
believes that this improved warfighting capability is necessary 
for early entry Marine forces to achieve dominance on the 
battlefield and, therefore, recommends an increase of $17.0 
million for procurement of 186 additional missiles.

Marine enhancement program

    The budget request did not contain funding for a Marine 
enhancement program.
    The committee recommends $10.0 million to be expended at 
the discretion of the Commandant of the Marine Corps for 
purposes of procuring emerging advanced technology equipment 
that would increase the warfighting effectiveness of the force 
or equipment that would eliminate identified deficiencies of 
currently-fielded items. Thecommittee directs the Commandant to 
provide a report to the congressional defense committees not later than 
March 31, 1998, that details the expenditure of these funds

                    Aircraft Procurement, Air Force

                                Overview

    The budget request contained $5,817.8 million for Aircraft 
Procurement, Air Force in fiscal year 1998. The committee 
recommends authorization of $6,770.9 million for fiscal year 
1998.
    The committee recommends approval of the request except for 
those programs adjusted in the following table. Unless 
otherwise specified, adjustments are without prejudice and 
based on affordability considerations.
    Offset Folios 124 to 127 Insert here

<SKIP PAGES = 004>

                       Items of Special Interest

B-1 modifications

    The budget request contained $114.2 million for B-1 
modifications, but did not include funding to procure a digital 
data link for this aircraft.
    The committee notes that the Air Force Chief of Staff's 
fiscal year 1998 unfunded priority list included as the fifth 
highest priority a request for funding to provide a limited 
capability and to develop tactics and concepts for employment 
of a digital data link on the B-1 fleet. Such a data link 
allows the fighter and bomber fleets--the ``shooters''--to 
receive real-time, secure, and jam-resistant targeting 
information from aircraft such as the Airborne Warning and 
Control System or the Joint Surveillance and Target Attack 
Radar System--the ``sensors.'' This linked information improves 
an aircrew's situational awareness, operational coordination 
among shooter aircraft, and in-flight re-targeting of emerging 
higher priority targets. It also contributes to the positive 
identification of both airborne and ground forces, thereby 
contributing to the elimination of friendly fire. The committee 
endorses the requirement to include the B-1 on the Department's 
primary data link and recommends $24.0 million to install a 
stand-alone Joint Tactical Information Distribution System 
terminal and display on up to six B-1 aircraft for this 
purpose.

B-2

    The budget request contained $174.1 million for the B-2 
bomber. These funds are requested for costs associated with 
additional software investment, technical orders, interim 
contractor support, aircrew training devices, peculiar support 
equipment, program management administration, and non-recurring 
costs for curtailment of the B-2 production line.
    Having held two hearings on the B-2 since the committee 
concluded its fiscal year 1997 authorization deliberations, the 
committee is convinced of the need to continue production of 
this bomber. No less than seven former secretaries of defense 
have recommended doing so, as have numerous other former senior 
leaders of the Air Force and the Congress. Likewise, current 
Air Force leaders privately acknowledge that they would welcome 
more B-2s in the bomber inventory, except that they are 
``unaffordable.'' The committee rejects this ``unaffordable'' 
assertion and strongly believes the United States can afford 
additional B-2s.
    Twenty-one B-2s does not constitute an adequate force level 
to deal with the many likely contingencies and crises over the 
next 30-40 years, and no other military systems in existence or 
on the drawing boards can adequately substitute for the 
capabilities the B-2 offers. As noted in testimony presented to 
the committee by the former air component commander in the 
Persian Gulf war, the B-2 is the only weapon system in the U.S. 
inventory free of range, survivability, and lethality 
limitations, and, as such, could well be the nation's only 
practical option for quickly projecting truly decisive power in 
future regional crises.
    On April 1, 1997, the B-2 reached its initial operational 
capability milestone. According to a statement issued by the 
commander of the Air Force's Air Combat Command, ``This is a 
significant milestone in ensuring the future of national 
defense. The combination of low observability, large payload 
capacity, bombing accuracy, and long range gives America a 
unique, unprecedented military capability. This combination 
allows the B-2 to penetrate sophisticated defenses and threaten 
an enemy's war-making capability. It gives the United States 
the capability to project power to any part of the globe within 
a matter of hours and deliver combat power with precision in 
support of warfighting commands.'' The committee agrees that 
the B-2's combination of range, payload, precision weapons 
delivery, and stealth make it uniquely capable of independently 
responding quickly and decisively from secure U.S. bases to 
future contingencies anywhere in the world--and thus justify 
its continued production. Accordingly, the committee recommends 
an additional $331.2 million for the B-2. This amount 
represents an increase of $353.0 million to initiate the 
eventual procurement of an additional nine B-2s coupled with a 
decrease of $21.8 million, which was requested for production 
curtailment costs. Of the $353.0 million added, $281.0 million 
is for reestablishment of those elements of the production line 
that have been previously laid away and $52.0 million is for 
advance procurement.

C-130J

    The budget request contained $49.9 million for one C-130J 
aircraft. No funds were requested for advance procurement of C-
130Js and no funds were requested for the Marine Corps tankers.
    The committee recommends an increase of $522.6 million for 
nine additional aircraft. Three of these are to be configured 
as tankers for the Marine Corps and six are for Air National 
Guard units, including one EC-130J variant.

F-16 digital terrain system (DTS)

    The budget request did not contain funding for the F-16 
DTS. The DTS provides ground collision avoidance information to 
pilots, thereby contributing to safer aircraft operations at 
night and in low visibility.
    The committee understands that the DTS, which is currently 
in production to upgrade the F-16s owned by Norway, Denmark, 
the Netherlands, Belgium, and Taiwan has completed flight 
certification and been declared fully certified for use on Air 
Force F-16s. The committee further understands that the Air 
Force plans to purchase DTSs to equip its active, Guard, and 
Reserve F-16 fleets beginning in fiscal year 1999 and is in the 
process of modifying the F-16's operational flight program to 
accommodate the DTS integration. In order to initiate 
procurement of the F-16 DTS in fiscal year 1998, the committee 
recommends an additional $20.0 million.

Global air traffic management (GATM)

     The budget request contained $20.6 million for the GATM 
upgrades.
     The committee is aware that the world is experiencing a 
tremendous growth in air traffic that has necessitated a 
significant change in the manner by which both commercial and 
military aircraft will be controlled and managed in the future. 
To handle this expected increase, a new management system, 
approved by the International Civil Aviation Organization 
(ICAO), is being designed to reduce the distance required 
between transiting aircraft and to allow pilots more freedom in 
selecting their routes and altitudes.
    Implementation of this new system, however, requires new or 
upgraded equipment for communications, global navigation, 
flight management, and collision avoidance. The committee 
understands the Air Force has already undertaken steps to 
ensure that future aircraft will include this equipment. 
However, the problem lies with upgrading aircraft currently in 
the fleet, especially airlift and tanker aircraft. Since the 
specific ICAO requirements have only recently been published, 
the Air Force was unable to include funding in the fiscal year 
1998 budget request for much of the equipment it needs to begin 
modifying existing aircraft to meet these requirements. In 
fact, the Air Force Chief of Staff has advised the committee 
that GATM equipment is the second highest priority for 
additional funding. Accordingly, the committee recommends an 
additional $67.7 million to procure GATM equipment.

H-1 modifications

    The budget request contained $2.8 million for UH-1 
modifications, but none of these funds were for inclusion of an 
oil debris detection system (ODDS) as part of an upgrade to the 
aircraft's engine diagnostic system.
    As noted elsewhere in this report, the ODDS modification, 
which has been incorporated on all Army UH-1s, alerts aircrews 
of debris in engine and propeller gear boxes, thereby allowing 
flights to be terminated prior to a catastrophic engine 
failure. It also clears particles that routinely accumulate in 
engine oil and cause false impending engine failure alarms, 
resulting in unnecessary termination of aircraft missions as 
well as unnecessary and costly engine diagnostics. 
Consequently, the ODDS not only enhances aircrew safety and but 
also reduces operating and support costs. The committee is 
impressed by the results of the ODDS installation on Army UH-1s 
and recommends an increase of $800,000 for the installation of 
this system on the Air Force UH-1 fleet.

Joint primary aircraft training system (JPATS)

     The budget request contained $65.4 million for JPATS, 
including 18 T-6A aircraft and associated ground-based training 
equipment.
    The JPATS, consisting of both the T-6A aircraft and a 
ground-based training system, will be used by both the Air 
Force and the Navy for primary pilot training. The T-6A will 
replace both the Air Force's T-37B and the Navy's T-34C fleets, 
providing safer, more economical and more effective training 
for future student pilots.
    The Air Force began procurement of the T-6A in fiscal year 
1995, and the Navy plans to begin procurement in fiscal year 
2000. The committee notes that the Air Force Chief of Staff 
included the acquisition of additional T-6As in his list of 
unfunded priorities for fiscal year 1998. Accordingly, the 
committee recommends an increase of$12.2 million for four 
additional aircraft. The committee understands that this action will 
reduce the fiscal year 1998 unit cost by $100,000 per aircraft and 
contribute to the accelerated reduction of Air Force primary pilot 
training direct operating costs, since the T-6A is approximately 30 
percent less expensive to operate than the T-37B.

Predator unmanned aerial vehicle (UAV)

    The budget request contained $116.5 million for 15 Predator 
UAVs.
    The Predator was acquired as an advanced concept technology 
demonstration (ACTD) program in response to an urgent 
requirement identified by the Joint Chiefs of Staff (JCS) in 
1993 and is the first ACTD to make the transition to a 
production program. The committee is aware of the success of 
the Predator in a number of continental United States 
exercises, as well as two operational deployments to Bosnia, 
and supports the full number of systems validated by the JCS. 
However, the committee notes that the request does not include 
funds needed for attrition aircraft or for spares and, 
therefore, recommends $30.0 million for these purposes.

RC-135

    The budget request did not contain funding for re-engining 
RC-135 reconnaissance aircraft.
    The committee notes that $145.0 million was authorized to 
re-engine six RC-135 aircraft in the National Defense 
Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 1997 (Public Law 104-106). 
The committee remains convinced the RC-135 will continue to be 
the workhorse of the manned special reconnaissance fleet well 
into the 21st century and is disappointed that, despite 
previous assurances to the contrary, continuation of this 
effort remains unfunded in the fiscal year 1998 budget. 
Nevertheless, the committee is persuaded by the General 
Accounting Office's analysis of the re-engining program, which 
concluded that the Department can expect to realize savings of 
over $1.5 billion with new engines compared to operating and 
maintaining the current TF-33 engines on these aircraft. 
Accordingly, the committee recommends an additional $52.0 
million to re-engine two RC-135 aircraft.

Senior Year Electro-Optical System (SYERS)

    The budget request contained $141.5 million for continued 
procurement of spares and repair parts for the U-2 aircraft and 
sensors. Because the U-2 SYERS imagery satisfies a large 
percentage of theater commanders' imagery requirements, the 
committee is committed to ensuring the availability of this 
aircraft and the viability of its sensors. The committee 
understands that the request does not adequately fund either 
upgrades to existing components of or required additional spare 
parts for SYERS. Accordingly, the committee recommends an 
increase of $5.0 million for these purposes.
    Congress initiated and sustained for several years an 
upgrade to the SYERS imaging sensor which among other things 
would allow it to be carried in the ``Q-bay'' of the U-2, such 
that a radar sensor and the SYERS electro-optical sensor could 
be flown simultaneously. This initiative appeared to Congress 
to be well worth the small investment in SYERS, since in 
wartime this dual capability could free another U-2 aircraft to 
fly other missions.
    The committee has now learned that the aircraft fuselage 
may have to be modified in order to carry SYERS in the Q-bay. 
Specifically, a ``canoe'' would have to be added to allow the 
camera to image beyond 45 degrees. In view of this fact, the 
committee directs the Secretary of the Air Force to provide a 
report to the congressional defense and intelligence committees 
by March 15, 1998, on the need and the costs to design and 
procure the number of ``canoes'' necessary to allow SYERS and a 
radar sensor to flown simultaneously.

Theater Airborne Warning System (TAWS)

    The budget request contained $67.1 million for defense 
airborne reconnaissance program modifications, but did not 
contain funding for TAWS, a medium-wave infrared (MWIR) sensor 
system capable of detecting and calculating the launch points 
of tactical ballistic missiles. TAWS is currently deployed on 
the Cobra Ball RC-135 reconnaissance aircraft.
    In the statement of the managers accompanying the 
conference report on H.R. 3230 (H. Rept. 104-724), the 
conferees urged the Air Force to proceed with a program to 
install TAWS on the Rivet Joint RC-135 aircraft, which is 
available in greater numbers than the Cobra Ball. Such a 
program would provide an option for early deployment of TAWS in 
support of improved theater ballistic missile defenses. 
However, the Department has opted instead to install this 
capability on the Airborne Laser (ABL).
    The committee understands that the ABL is not scheduled to 
reach initial operational capability until 2003. The long 
intervening period during which TAWS would remain only on the 
very few Cobra Ball aircraft would not meet the near-term need 
for a theater ballistic missile analysis and warning 
capability. Furthermore, the Air Force plans to acquire no more 
than seven ABL aircraft, a force structure too small to assure 
that TAWS would be available when and where needed.
    The committee believes this important mission is best 
satisfied by a reconnaissance aircraft. Therefore, the 
committee recommends an increase of $20.0 million to migrate 
the MWIR TAWS technology from the Cobra Ball RC-135 to the 
Rivet Joint RC-135 to enhance near-term deployment flexibility.

                   Ammunition Procurement, Air Force

                                Overview

    The budget request contained $404.0 million for Ammunition 
Procurement, Air Force in fiscal year 1998. The committee 
recommends authorization of $437.0 million for fiscal year 
1998.
    The committee recommends approval of the request except for 
those programs adjusted in the following table. Unless 
otherwise specified, adjustments are without prejudice and 
based on affordability considerations.
    Offset Folios 133 to 134 Insert here

<SKIP PAGES = 002>

                     Missile Procurement, Air Force

                                Overview

    The budget request contained $2,557.7 million for Missile 
Procurement, Air Force in fiscal Year 1998. The committee 
recommends authorization of $2,389.2 million for fiscal year 
1998.
    The Committee recommends approval of the request except for 
those programs adjusted in the following table. Unless 
otherwise specified, adjustments are without prejudice and 
based on affordability considerations.
    Offset Folios 136 to 137 Insert here

<SKIP PAGES = 002>

                       Items of Special Interest

AGM-65 maverick modifications

    The budget request did not contain funding for AGM-65 
modifications.
    The committee understands that 12,000 early-generation 
models of this anti-tank weapon are approaching 20 years 
service life and require upgrading to further extend their 
longevity, particularly since the Maverick has been identified 
as a weapon to be employed by the Joint Strike Fighter. To 
alleviate this problem, the Air Force has completed the 
development of a reliability and maintainability upgrade to 
these missiles, but the committee further understands that 
funds to begin production of the upgrade are not anticipated 
until fiscal year 1999 or later. The committee is aware that 
the gap between the completion of testing and the beginning of 
production could significantly increase the cost of the 
upgrade, as well as unacceptably delay its fielding. Therefore, 
the committee recommends an increase of $11.0 million to 
eliminate any such gap with low-rate production and to ensure a 
smooth transition to full-rate production, which the committee 
assumes will occur in fiscal year 1999.

AGM-130

    The budget request contained $1.5 million for AGM-130 
management administration and contractor support, but did not 
include funding to procure additional AGM-130 missiles.
    The AGM-130 is a precision-guided air-to-surface missile 
employed on the F-15E aircraft to strike targets from outside 
point defense ranges and is the F-15E's only 2,000-pound class 
weapon with this capability. The committee is aware that both 
the Department's Heavy Bomber Force Study and a separate study 
conducted by the Defense Science Board recommended that the Air 
Force retain 1,000 AGM-130 missiles in its inventory. In view 
of this fact, and to address the unfunded requirement 
identified by the Air Force Chief of Staff, the committee 
recommended an increase of $95.0 million in fiscal year 1997 
for an additional 250 missiles. Recognizing that the 
requirement for the AGM-130 still exceeds the number of 
missiles funded in prior years by over 200, the committee 
recommends an increase of $41.0 million for an additional 100 
missiles.

Medium launch vehicle (MLV)

    The budget request contained $165.8 million for the MLV 
program.
    The Air Force has identified $14.8 million in excess prior 
year funds in this program resulting from lower-than-expected 
cost growth and launch failure recovery activities that are no 
longer required. Of this total, $5.0 million was recommended 
for rescission in H.R. 1469, the Fiscal Year 1997 Supplemental 
Appropriations Act. The committee notes that the remaining 
balance of these excess funds are available to meet fiscal year 
1998 MLV requirements and, consequently, recommends $156.0 
million, a $9.8 million reduction.

Titan space boosters

    The budget request contained $555.3 million for Titan IV 
boosters and related equipment and launch support activities.
    The Air Force has identified $204.0 million in excess prior 
year funds in the Titan program. Of this total, $122.0 million 
was recommended for rescission in H.R. 1469, the Fiscal Year 
1997 Emergency Supplemental Appropriations Act. The committee 
notes that the remaining balance of these excess funds are 
available to meet fiscal year 1998 Titan IV requirements. 
Consequently, the committee recommends $473.3 million, a 
decrease of $82.0 million.

                      Other Procurement, Air Force

                                Overview

    The budget request contained $6,561.3 million for Other 
Procurement, Air Force in fiscal year 1998. The committee 
recommends authorization of $6,574.1 million for fiscal year 
1998.
    The committee recommends approval of the request except for 
those programs adjusted in the following table. Unless 
otherwise specified, adjustments are without prejudice and 
based on affordability considerations.
    Offset Folios 141 to 145 insert here

<SKIP PAGES = 005>

                       Items of Special Interest

Air Force satellite control network (AFSCN)

    The budget request contained $32.2 million for the AFSCN.
    The committee understands that $9.0 million was authorized 
and appropriated in fiscal year 1997 for an AFSCN hardware 
purchase to support a classified program. The committee has 
been informed, however, that the Air Force canceled this 
hardware purchase because of a delay in the classified program 
and a resulting shift in plans to support it. The committee 
notes that the funds for this purchase are now available to 
meet fiscal year 1998 AFSCN requirements and recommends $23.2 
million, a reduction of $9.0 million.

Automated surface observation system (ASOS)

    The budget request contained $18.0 million for weather 
observation/forecast equipment but did not include funding for 
ASOS. ASOS is the only federally-sanctioned automated weather 
observation system and is being procured by the Federal 
Aviation Administration, the National Weather Service, and all 
of the military services.
    The committee understands that the Navy and Marine Corps 
have funded their planned systems but that there are unfunded 
requirements for a stand-alone ASOS at both Air Force and Army 
air combat training ranges. The committee believes that 
accurate and timely weather information is a matter of pilot 
safety and recommends an increase of $4.0 million to purchase 
20 ASOSs for these ranges. The committee further recommends 
that the Air Force, as executive agent for this system, 
identify the total remaining requirements for both services and 
fund these requirements in the future years defense program.

Joint situational awareness system (JSAS)

    The budget request did not contain funding for the JSAS.
    The committee is aware of the significant progress made by 
the Air Force in providing theater-wide situational awareness 
to joint task force commanders through the JSAS. The JSAS has 
proven to be a highly-effective, low-cost, real-time, user-
friendly intelligence fusion system and represents a building 
block for greatly expanded capabilities. The committee believes 
the Air Force should pursue integrating the JSAS into the 
Global Command and Control System and recommends an additional 
$6.3 million for this purpose.

Radio equipment

    The budget request contained $12.8 million to procure new 
and upgrade existing Air Force radio equipment, including $12.2 
million to replace and upgrade high frequency (HF) radio 
communications systems with commercial-off-the-shelf equipment 
at 14 locations worldwide, a program known as Scope Command.
    The committee is pleased with the progress of the Scope 
Command program and notes that there is an opportunity to 
capitalize on this investment with the forthcoming 
implementation of the Global Air Traffic Management (GATM) 
system, discussed elsewhere in this report. The committee 
understands that GATM implementation will place renewed 
emphasis on HF communications to satisfy requirements for 
maintaining beyond-line-of-sight contact with aircraft, and, 
therefore, recommends an increase of $6.5 million to cost-
effectively augment the ongoing Scope Command equipment upgrade 
to meet these requirements.

Tactical signals intelligence support

    The budget request contained $4.1 million for tactical 
signals intelligence support.
    The committee fully supports the Department of Defense's 
efforts to coordinate intelligence data broadcasts to the 
warfighters and recommends an increase of $5.0 million to 
accelerate the procurement of hardware and software to fully 
implement the Integrated Broadcast Service technical/
operational architecture.

                       Procurement, Defense-Wide

                                Overview

    The budget request contained $1,695.1 million for 
Procurement, Defense-Wide in fiscal year 1998. The committee 
recommends authorization of $1,837.0 million for fiscal year 
1998.
    The committee recommends approval of the request except for 
those programs adjusted in the following table. Unless 
otherwise specified, adjustments are without prejudice and 
based on affordability considerations.
    Offset Folios 148 to 151 insert here

<SKIP PAGES = 004>

                       Items of Special Interest

All-torso body armor

    The committee notes that the extraordinary effectiveness of 
modern all-torso body armor was demonstrated during Operation 
Provide Hope in Somalia when a group of 98 all-torso body 
armor-equipped Army Rangers surrounded by a much larger number 
of Somali militiamen took extremely heavy fire for many hours, 
involving direct hits on 78 to 80 percent of its personnel, and 
yet withdrew as a thoroughly combat-capable unit. The committee 
understands that some Rangers took as many as three hits on 
their all-torso body armor yet remained combat-effective, 
although essentially all of these hits were subsequently judged 
to likely have been fatal or disabling had the armor not been 
worn. It is unlikely that few, if any, Rangers in this 
firefight would have survived, if a large fraction of them had 
not remained combat-capable due to the effectiveness of their 
body armor.
    Subsequent Army studies and analyses indicate that more 
than 50 percent of all life-threatening wounds sustained in 
combat such as this firefight would be prevented by the use of 
such armor. Not unimportantly, these analyses indicate that the 
costs of procuring and employing such modern high-technology 
body armor are a small fraction of combat-related medical costs 
which would be avoided by use of this armor. Moreover, morale 
gains by infantrymen due to the combat effectiveness of body 
armor may also be expected to be a significant force-
multiplier.
    For the above reasons, the committee recommends an increase 
of $30.0 million to procure state-of-the-art all-torso body 
armor of the quality to stop most shrapnel and small arms fire 
for Army, Marine Corps, and special forces infantrymen.

Automated document conversion system (ADCS)

    The budget request did not contain funding for the ADCS.
    The committee notes that for the past five years the 
Department has conducted extensive testing of an ADCS and 
concluded that significant cost savings can be achieved by, for 
example, converting hard copy complex engineering drawings to 
an electronic format. These tests have also proven the 
flexibility of this system for converting electrical system 
schematics and contour maps as well. The committee understands 
that the latest document conversion test disclosed that the 
average savings of ADCS compared to computer-aided redrawing is 
50 percent and compared to hand-drawn work is 70 percent. 
Consequently, as it has for each of the past two fiscal years, 
the committee strongly supports the ADCS program and recommends 
$30.0 million for continued purchase of ADCS software.

Information systems security

    The budget request contained $19.6 million for information 
systems security.
    As a result of its hearing on information warfare, where 
for the first time all of the Department of Defense's corporate 
information officers were present in one forum, thecommittee 
was pleased to learn that the global threat of information warfare is 
an issue which the Department has taken extremely seriously. However, 
the committee is concerned that the number of attempted intrusions into 
the Department's unclassified networks has been occurring with 
increasing frequency. While the Department is meeting the challenge 
with a well-organized system to protect against would-be intruders, 
detect those who attempt to intrude, and react to those that do 
intrude, the committee is convinced that much more needs to be done, 
especially at the worldwide locations of the theater Commanders-in-
Chief (CINCs). Although the committee recognizes that there are plans 
to fully secure the CINCs' information links, it believes that these 
plans require expediting. Consequently, the committee recommends an 
increase of $50.0 million to implement network intrusion devices, 
firewalls, multi-level security assurance guards and other equipment in 
order to ensure the secure operation of these links as soon as it is 
possible to do so.

                  National Guard and Reserve Equipment

                                Overview

    The budget request did not contain funding for National 
Guard and Reserve Equipment for fiscal year 1998. The committee 
recommends authorization of $700.4 million for fiscal year 
1998.
    Offset Folios 154 to 156 Insert here

<SKIP PAGES = 003>

                       Items of Special Interest

AC-130 gunship

    The committee has reviewed the Department of Defense's AC-
130 gunship requirements study and believes the operational 
shortfalls identified are valid. The committee requests the 
Department provide a report to the congressional defense 
committees by March 31, 1998 on the potential cost 
effectiveness of using the Air National Guard to meet this 
shortfall.

Army force wide digitization

    The committee notes that the recently-concluded Quadrennial 
Defense Review (QDR) findings included unqualified support for 
the Army's Force XXI digitization efforts and that the digital 
attack or armed scout helicopters will perform an important 
``quarterback'' function in that battlefield scenario. The 
committee concurs with this analysis. Indeed, the committee 
recommends a total of $715.3 million for both AH-64 Longbow 
Apache digital attack and OH-58D Kiowa Warrior armed scout 
helicopters elsewhere in this report.
    Nevertheless, the committee is concerned that plans to 
replace AH-1 Cobras in the Army National Guard (ARNG) may not 
be adequately synchronized with Army-wide digitization plans. 
This may be due to the fact that the Army Aviation Plan has not 
been updated since the completion of the QDR.
    Accordingly, the committee expects the Secretary of the 
Army and the Director of ARNG Bureau to review and align AH-1 
Cobra replacement plans for the ARNG consistent with the QDR 
findings as they apply to the Army's digitized battlefield. The 
committee also expects the fiscal year 1999 budget request to 
reflect the results of this review as appropriate.

           Chemical Agents and Munitions Destruction, Defense

                                Overview

    The budget request contained $620.7 million for Chemical 
Agents and Munitions Destruction, Defense for fiscal year 1998. 
The committee recommends authorization of $610.7 million for 
fiscal year 1998.
    The committee recommends approval of the request except for 
those programs adjusted in the following table. Unless 
otherwise specified, adjustments are without prejudice and 
based on affordability considerations.
    Offset Folio 158 Insert here

<SKIP PAGES = 001>

                       Items of Special Interest

Chemical agents and munitions destruction

    The budget request contained $620.7 million for the defense 
chemical agents and munitions destruction program, including 
$472.2 million for operations and maintenance, $66.3 million 
for research and development, and $82.2 million for 
procurement.
    Section 152 of the National Defense Authorization Act for 
Fiscal Year 1996 (Public Law 104-106), directed the Secretary 
of Defense to conduct an assessment of the chemical stockpile 
disposal program and to consider measures that could be taken 
to reduce program costs, while continuing to ensure maximum 
protection of the public and the environment. The results of 
the assessment were to be reported to the Congress with the 
submission of the fiscal year 1998 budget request. Section 142 
of the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 1997 
(Public Law 104-201) further required that the Secretary of 
Defense conduct an assessment of alternative demilitarization 
technologies (other than incineration) that could be used for 
destruction of the chemical stockpile and report the results of 
this assessment to the Congress by December 31, 1997. Section 
8065 of the Omnibus Consolidated Appropriations Act for Fiscal 
Year 1997 (Public Law 104-208) directed that the Under 
Secretary of Defense (Acquisition and Technology) conduct a 
pilot program to identify and demonstrate not less than two 
alternatives to the baseline incineration process and appoint a 
program manager for these activities who would report directly 
to him.
    Based upon the results of a hearing which addressed all of 
the aforementioned concerns, the committee affirms its 
previously-held views that the risks of continued storage of 
the chemical weapons stockpile exceed those associated with 
demilitarization operations. Therefore, the committee believes 
that the demilitarization program should proceed expeditiously 
with the current baseline incineration program until such time 
as the evaluation of alternative technologies for destruction 
of the stockpile is concluded. The committee also notes that 
continued delays in the program will lead to further cost 
increases.
    However, the committee also agrees with the Department's 
decision to further develop chemical neutralization 
technologies for destruction of agents at the bulk-only 
chemical storage sites and with its plan for assessing the 
feasibility of alternative technologies for potential use at 
other chemical stockpile storage sites. The committee directs 
the Secretary of Defense to report to the Congress by December 
31, 1997, the status of that assessment and its potential 
impact on the costs and schedule for completion of destruction 
operations at the Pueblo and Lexington-Blue Grass storage 
sites.
    Of the $63.3 million requested for research and development 
activities, $40.8 million is for the non-stockpile chemical 
materiel project. The committee notes that the project is to be 
completed in the third quarter of fiscal year 2002, and 
believes that this represents too aggressive a schedule in view 
of the overall uncertainties surrounding the project. The 
committee expects that more time will be needed for the Army to 
prove that the proposed disposal systems will safely and 
effectively destroy all non-stockpile materiel and will be 
accepted by the affected states and communities. Accordingly, 
thecommittee recommends a reduction of $10.0 million for non-
stockpile chemical materiel research and development.

                     Defense Export Loan Guarantees

                                Overview

    The budget request contained $1.2 million for Defense 
Export Loan Guarantees, Defense for fiscal year 1998. The 
committee recommends authorization of $1.2 million for fiscal 
year 1998.
    Offset Folio 161 Insert here

<SKIP PAGES = 001>

                         LEGISLATIVE PROVISIONS

              Subtitle A--Authorization of Appropriations

           Sections 101-108--Authorization of Appropriations

    These sections would authorize the recommended fiscal year 
1998 funding levels for all procurement accounts.

    Section 121--Limitation on Obligation of Funds for the Seawolf 
                           Submarine Program

    This section would prohibit the obligation of more than 50 
percent of the funds authorized and appropriated for the 
Seawolf Submarine until the Secretary of the Navy certifies 
that he would fully fund in the future years defense program 
accompanying the fiscal year 1999 budget request 50 percent of 
the resources estimated to be required for incorporation into 
each of the first four New Attack Submarines of the technology 
``opportunities'' available for those vessels, such 
``opportunities'' being those presented to the committee in 
testimony by the Assistant Secretary of the Navy (Research, 
Development, and Acquisition).

 Section 122--Report on Annual Budget Submission Regarding the Reserve 
                               Components

    This section would require the Secretary of Defense to 
submit an annual report to Congress that describes the measures 
taken within the Department to ensure that the reserve 
components are appropriately funded and lists the major weapons 
and items of equipment provided for these components. The 
section would also require the Secretary of Defense to display 
in all future years defense program updates the amounts 
programmed for the procurement of equipment for the reserve 
components.
         TITLE II--RESEARCH, DEVELOPMENT, TEST, AND EVALUATION

                                OVERVIEW

    The budget request contained $35,934.5 million for 
research, development, test, and evaluation (RDT&E), 
representing a $658.9 million decrease from the amount 
authorized for fiscal year 1997.
    The committee recommends authorization of $37,273.7 
million, an increase of $1,339.2 million from the fiscal year 
1998 request.
    The committee recommendations for the fiscal year 1998 
RDT&E program are identified in the table below. Major issues 
are discussed following the table.
    Offset Folio 164 Insert here

<SKIP PAGES = 001>

                               Army RDT&E

                                Overview

    The budget request for fiscal year 1998 contained $4,510.8 
million for Army RDT&E. The committee recommends authorization 
of $4,752.9 million, a increase of $242.1 million.
    The committee recommendations for the fiscal year 1998 Army 
RDT&E program are identified in the table below. Major changes 
to the Army request are discussed following the table.
    Offset Folios 166 to 173 Insert here

<SKIP PAGES = 008>

                       Items of Special Interest

Advanced field artillery tactical data system

    The budget request contained $39.0 million for the advanced 
field artillery tactical data system (AFATDS). The committee 
supports this vital fire control automation to digitally 
integrate command and control of artillery fire support and 
understands that additional funding is needed to complete 
software development and prevent delay in fielding this system. 
The committee recommends an increase of $12.0 million in PE 
23726A.

All source analysis system

    The budget request contained $24.0 million for engineering 
development of the all source analysis system (ASAS). The 
committee notes that the ASAS is a critical Army tactical 
intelligence fusion effort essential to the success of the 
Army's Force XXI digitization initiative, and recommends an 
additional $3.5 million in PE 64321A to support the software 
upgrade program for ASAS.

Armament enhancement initiative

    The budget request contained $40.3 million in PE 63639A for 
the armament enhancement initiative (AEI). The committee 
understands that the tank extended range munition-kinetic 
energy (TERM-KE) offers the potential of significantly improved 
offensive capability for the M-1 tank main armament system. The 
committee recommends $60.3 million for AEI, an increase of 
$20.0 million, to accelerate development of the TERM-KE.

Army tactical missile system

    The budget request contained $1.3 million in PE 23802A for 
other missile product improvement programs. While the Army 
tactical missile system (ATACMS) is identified as a high 
priority modernization program for precision strike capability, 
no funds were included in the request for missile improvements. 
However, due to recent program restructuring, additional 
funding is required to complete the ATACMS block upgrade 
program. The committee supports the ATACMS program and 
recommends $3.2 million for ATACMS product improvement.

Aviation advanced technology

    The budget request contained $7.1 million in PE 63801A for 
aviation advanced technology. The committee understands that 
the Army is exploring retinal display technology, a new 
development which revolutionizes the manner in which aircraft 
cockpit displays can be presented to military aircraft crews. 
Specifically, retinal display technology uses the human retina 
as the focal plane for images beamed into the eye, creating a 
high fidelity, full color image directly on the human visual 
system. Utilization of this technology would enable major 
improvements in aircraft cockpit design. The committee 
recommends $12.1 million, an increaseof $5.0 million for 
further development and integration of retinal display technology into 
the Army's aircrew integrated common helmet.

Aviation advanced technology development

    The budget request contained $6.6 million for aircraft 
demonstration engines in PE 63003A. The committee is informed 
of the potential benefits of scramjet technology for future 
advanced missiles and recommends an increase of $8.0 million to 
develop this capability.

Ballistics technology

    The budget request contained $33.3 million for ballistics 
technology in PE 62618A. The committee understands that liquid 
propellant technology offers a significant increase in 
capability for future artillery systems, and that additional 
funding is needed to support completion of the liquid 
propellant armament technology maturation program. The 
committee is also aware that the Army has placed a high 
priority on development of electric armament technology for the 
future tank and supports efforts to resolve fundamental issues 
including power generation and switching.
    The committee recommends $38.3 million for PE 62618A, an 
increase of $5.0 million for liquid propellant armament 
technology.

Battlefield Combat Identification System (BCIS)

    The budget request contained $14.8 million for combat 
identification development. The committee continues to support 
the development of a battlefield combat identification system 
as a means of preventing friendly fire casualties. Recent 
advanced warfighting experiments have demonstrated the benefits 
of and requirement for better battlefield situation awareness.
    The committee supports the budget request of $14.8 million 
and urges the Secretary of the Army to maintain the high 
priority placed on development and procurement of a battlefield 
combat identification system and to ensure requested BCIS 
funding is used only to support that initiative.

CH-47 improved cargo helicopter

    The budget request contained $2.6 million for aircraft 
modifications/product improvement programs in PE 23744A. The 
Chinook CH-47 helicopter is the Army's only heavy lift cargo 
helicopter. The committee notes that there is no program in the 
Army modernization plan for a new replacement helicopter and, 
therefore, strongly recommends that the Army continue the 
improved cargo helicopter (ICH) program which will provide 
essential upgrades and extend the Chinook service life by 
twenty years. The proposed modifications are projected to 
reduce Chinook operating and sustainment costs by more than 22 
percent. The committee recommends an increase of $20.0 million 
for the CH-47 ICH program.

Comanche

    The budget request contained $282.0 million in PE 64223A 
for continued development of the Comanche helicopter.
    The committee notes that Comanche development began in 1982 
with the first planned initial operational capability (IOC) 
scheduled for 1994. The Department's most recent selected 
acquisition report (SAR) indicates that the planned date to 
begin engineering manufacturing development has been delayed to 
the end of fiscal year 2001, with the soonest possible IOC 
being December, 2007. While Comanche is reported to be one of 
the Army's highest priority programs, it is currently 
identified by the Army Chief of Staff as under-funded, calling 
into question the actual importance of Comanche to Army 
modernization.
    Results of recent warfighting experiments at the national 
training center strongly support the requirement for a modern 
armed reconnaissance helicopter in the digital battlefield. The 
committee supports the planned testing and engine development 
including production of a second Comanche prototype which will 
allow a robust demonstration and validation program and 
therefore recommends $322.0 million, an increase of $40.0 
million to accelerate the second prototype Comanche.

Combat vehicle and automotive advanced technology

    The budget request contained $32.7 million for combat 
vehicle and automotive advanced technology. The committee is 
impressed by the advances reflected in the composite armored 
vehicle advanced technology demonstration and recommends an 
increase of $3.0 million in PE 63005A, including $2.0 million 
for the composite experience base program to strengthen 
materials initiatives, and $1.0 million to support the electric 
drive for survivability initiative.

Combat vehicle and automotive technology

    The budget request contained $33.1 million in PE 62601A for 
combat vehicle and automotive technology. The committee 
understands that a number of combat vehicles are now carrying 
additional equipment weight which requires engines of greater 
horsepower density to maintain or improve combat performance. 
The high output diesel engine (HODE) would offer the potential 
of significant increases in horsepower for combat vehicles. The 
committee recommends an additional $1.0 million to support HODE 
testing by the Army's National Automotive Center (NAC).
    The budget request also contained $12.4 million for 
advanced automotive technology within PE 62601A. The committee 
notes that the program funding for fiscal year 1998 was 
projected last year to be $8.4 million, but was increased by 
$4.0 million to fund the advanced automotive technology 
necessary to support the National Automotive Center's 
Technology Demonstration III. The committee also recommends an 
additional $3.0 million to continue testing of commercial 
technologies critical to new vehicle development and vehicle 
upgrades, in the NAC's Technology Demonstration III program.
    The committee understands that new alternatives to common 
vehicle propulsion technology are being developed by the public 
and private sector that offer significant benefits to the 
military, such as reduced pollution, lower operating cost, and 
noise reduction. The committee supports a unified effort to be 
administered by the NAC to assess and develop promising 
alternative vehicle propulsion technologies such as natural 
gas, fuel cell power plant,electric drive, and other propulsion 
innovations and improvements, and recommends an increase of $7.0 
million for a joint effort using academic, industry and government 
resources to develop alternative propulsion.
    The committee recommends $44.1 million for combat vehicle 
and automotive technology in PE 62601A, an increase of $11.0 
million.

Combat vehicle improvement programs

    The budget request contained $136.5 million for ground 
combat vehicles horizontal technology integration within PE 
23735A. Field emission flat panel display technology is of 
increasing importance as the Army incorporates digitization 
technology into its fleet of vehicles. The committee strongly 
supports development of this important technology and 
recommends an additional $2.0 million to integrate these 
displays into the Abrams tank. The committee also recommends an 
increase of $8.0 million to continue development of the AN/VVR-
1 Laser Warning Receiver.
    The committee is aware of the successful development of 
Linebacker slew-to-cue technology and recommends an additional 
$10.1 million to complete development and integration of this 
capability into the Bradley vehicle. The committee recommends 
$156.6 million for combat vehicle improvement programs, an 
increase of $20.1 million.

Countermine technology development and demonstration program

    The budget request contained $8.7 million in PE 62712A, 
$10.6 million in PE 63606A, and $15.1 million in PE 63619A for 
countermine technology.
    The committee is pleased with the increased emphasis that 
the Department has placed on the countermine program and with 
the Department's response to direction from the committee 
contained in the committee report on H.R. 3230 (H. Rept. 104-
563). The committee notes the Department's March 1997 report 
``Unexploded Ordnance Clearance: A Coordinated Approach to 
Requirements and Technology Development,'' and the Department's 
progress in establishing a requirements-driven research and 
development program for unexploded ordnance (UXO) clearance 
technology that is designed to coordinate and leverage 
technology advances in the areas of countermine, explosive 
ordnance disposal, humanitarian demining, active range 
clearance, and UXO environmental remediation. The Department's 
report addresses a total of $174.6 million contained with in 
the budget request for technology development to support UXO 
clearance, including $141.7 million for development of 
countermine technology, $7.5 million for explosive ordnance 
disposal, $17.7 million for humanitarian demining, $1.0 million 
for active range clearance, and $4.3 million for environmental 
UXO remediation. This represents an increase of $44.1 million 
above that provided for the countermine program in fiscal year 
1997.
    The committee is encouraged by measures the Department is 
taking to ensure focused oversight of operational requirements 
and coordination of the development of countermine and other 
UXO clearance technology and also notes the creation of the UXO 
Center of Excellence, a joint service activity which will 
coordinate technology activities in the five UXO clearance 
mission areas and provide a clearing house for UXO technology 
and information with industry, academia, other government 
agencies, and U.S. international partners.
    The committee recognizes that there are many areas of 
commonality, but also significant differences among the UXO 
clearance mission areas. The committee also recognizes that no 
single ``Silver Bullet'' technology exists that is likely to 
solve the UXO clearance problem and that a UXO clearance 
``system of systems'' which makes use of a range of 
technologies will be required. The committee strongly urges the 
Department to continue a robust countermine and other UXO 
clearance research and development program which investigates, 
demonstrates, and evaluates emerging technologies and continues 
the development and fielding of those that show promise for 
improving countermine and other UXO clearance capabilities. 
Accordingly, the committee recommends an increase of a total of 
$11.0 million for the development of countermine technology, 
including $3.0 million in PE 62712A, $5.0 million in PE 63606A, 
and $3.0 million in PE 63619A. The committee directs that the 
Secretary of Defense provide to the Congressional defense 
committees an updated report on the development and fielding of 
UXO clearance technology with the submission of the Fiscal Year 
2000 budget request.

Electromechanics and hypervelocity physics

    The budget request contained $45.6 million in PE 61104A for 
Army university and industry research centers. The committee 
recommends an increase of $1.9 million in the program for basic 
research in electromechanics and hypervelocity physics.

Electronics and electronics devices

    The budget request contained $20.2 million for electronics 
and electronic devices, of which $2.2 million was for battery/
individual power technologies within PE 62705A. Battery 
technology is increasingly important as the armed forces shift 
to digital technology. Continued innovation is necessary to 
provide more affordable power sources which will also be more 
portable, reusable and more efficient in order to meet the 
increasing power demands of new weapons systems and equipment. 
The committee strongly supports development of technologies 
such as advanced high-energy battery systems, low cost reusable 
and no-lead added alkaline cells and recommends that the 
Secretary of the Army continue these efforts.
    Up to 50 percent of the backpack weight carried by forward-
deployed Army and special forces troops is comprised of 
electrical batteries to power the increasing number of 
electronic weapons and communication systems. No lightweight 
field battery recharging capability presently exists to enable 
the reuse of power sources to minimize the amount of batteries 
that must be carried to the field. The resultant additional 
weight in batteries thereby limits other essentials for field 
operations, such as food, weapons, ammunition and supplies.
    The committee is aware of research efforts sponsored by the 
Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency for the development 
of the PEP-100, a standard-combustion fuel-driven, man-portable 
thermophotovoltaic generator (TPV). TPV technology has 
demonstrated that it can provide up to 110 watts of power, and, 
if proven feasible, may supply a 12-man, 12-day patrol with a 
portable, quiet, low thermal signature electrical power 
generator.
    The committee recommends an increase of $5.0 million for 
further development and testing of a TPV generator to provide 
soldiers and special forces with a much-needed field battery 
recharging capability. The committee also recommends an 
additional $3.0 million for development of improved 
manufacturing technology.
    The committee recommends $28.2 million, an increase of $8.0 
million.

Environmental quality technology

    The budget request contained $17.5 million for 
environmental quality technology within PE 62720A. The 
committee notes that no funding is specifically identified to 
continue the development of computer models to remediate 
training areas, or to continue support of the Radford 
Environmental Development and Management Program (REDMAP). The 
committee strongly supports these initiatives to enhance 
environmental quality and directs the Secretary of the Army to 
ensure that these efforts are adequately supported within the 
funding authorized for environmental quality technology 
research.
    The committee also supports continuation of the joint 
effort of the U.S. Army Environmental Center and the U.S. 
Department of Agriculture to demonstrate the efficacy and cost 
effectiveness of agriculturally based bioremediation to restore 
contaminated military and civilian sites in geographically 
isolated Pacific island ecosystems. In particular, the 
committee supports demonstration of phytoremediation, 
composting, wetlands, and other agriculturally based 
technologies to restore lands and related resources and 
recommends that an increase of $4.0 million to continue the 
existing Bioremediation Education Science and Technology 
program.
    Additionally, the committee recommends an increase of $4.9 
million for the continued development of a computer-based land 
management model to reduce time and costs for training area 
recovery.

Family of heavy tactical vehicles

    The budget request contained no funding for engineering and 
manufacturing development for the family of heavy tactical 
vehicles (HTV). The committee understands that safety systems 
are being developed to protect HTV crew members from accidents 
involving impacts and rollovers. The committee recommends $1.3 
million to develop enhanced safety products for HTVs.

Force XXI architecture

    The budget request contained $11.1 million for command, 
control, and communications systems engineering development in 
PE 64805A. The committee is aware of the Army emphasis on 
digitization for Force XXI and the high priority of its 
architecture development. The committee supports acceleration 
of the Army's highest priority unfunded requirement, and 
recommends an increase of $5.0 million.

Healthcare information protection demonstration

    The budget request contained $9.6 million in PE 33140A for 
the Army's information systems security program.
    The committee understands that the use of advanced 
information and communication technology, which provides the 
ability to transfer patient information and medical histories 
among military and civilian health care providers, raises 
significant issues relative to the need to maintain the 
security and privacy of healthcare data for military personnel 
who may receive treatment in civilian and military healthcare 
facilities. The committee believes there is a need to establish 
an integrated and focused program for the development and 
demonstration of healthcare information security systems which 
would address these issues. The committee recommends an 
increase of $2.5 million in PE 33140A to initiate a 
demonstration program for military healthcare information 
protection that would be consistent with national healthcare 
and information protection initiatives. The committee directs 
the Secretary of the Army to report to the Congressional 
defense committees the program development plan, plan for 
evaluation of the demonstration, and funding requirements for 
the program with the submission of the fiscal year 1999 Defense 
budget request.

Human factors engineering technology

    The budget request contained $14.3 million for human 
factors engineering technology. The committee understands that 
the Army is exploring the potential of emergency medical team 
coordination (MedTeams) to provide enhanced battlefield medical 
support and recommends an increase of $5.1 million in PE 62716A 
for development of the MedTeams capability.

Information systems technology, information superiority, and 
        information security

    The budget request contained approximately $10.3 billion 
for Department of Defense information systems and information 
technology, including $544.4 million for information systems 
and information technology research, development, test, and 
evaluation. Of that amount, $306.0 million was for information 
security research, development, test, and evaluation.
    The committee views with great interest the development of 
information systems technology and the increasing use of, and 
dependence on information systems in the Department of Defense 
and in the nation as a whole. Rapidly advancing information-
based technologies and an increasingly competitive global 
environment have thrust information into center stage in 
society, government, and warfare. Increasingly, complex 
information systems are being integrated into traditional 
military operational disciplines such as mobility, logistics, 
command, control, communications, and intelligence, and 
increased emphasis is being placed on the use of the commercial 
information infrastructure.
    The committee believes that the application of information 
and information technology in our military forces, combined 
with the supporting infrastructure in the Department of 
Defense, and our national life will offer greatly increased 
capabilities, but also will require that the Administration 
begin to treat information technology as a strategic resource 
vital to our national security. Inherent in these new 
capabilities, information technology also creates potentially 
serious vulnerabilities that could be exploited by an 
adversary, as the military and other elements of national power 
become increasingly dependent upon information systems and 
information capabilities. The vulnerability of information 
infrastructures to attack and the linkage between information 
systems and the traditional critical infrastructures (such as 
the electrical power system) have increased the scope and 
potential of the information warfare threat.
    The promise of information technology as a key ``enabler'' 
to achieve superiority on future battlefields, the 
vulnerabilities that information technology brings, and how 
theDepartment of Defense plans to protect against these vulnerabilities 
provided the focus for a committee hearing in March 1997. The committee 
also heard testimony on the findings and recommendations of the 1996 
Defense Science Board Task Force on Information Warfare-Defense. The 
task force report cited a robust information infrastructure as critical 
to the future effectiveness of U.S. military forces and the need for 
extraordinary action to deal with the present and emerging challenges 
of defending against possible information warfare attacks on the United 
States.
    The committee commends the efforts taken to develop and 
institutionalize the use of common information architectures 
within the Department of Defense, to improve policies and 
management practices, and to create a Department-wide 
environment that promotes interoperability and integration 
among the military services and defense agencies. The committee 
notes the efforts that are underway to protect and assure the 
integrity of the Defense and national information 
infrastructures. The committee also notes that the budget 
request for the information systems security program in PE 
33140G includes an increase of $56.6 million above the fiscal 
year 1997 funding level.
    The committee supports the maintenance of a robust 
information systems security research and development program. 
Accordingly, the committee recommends the following increases 
to the budget request:
          (1) $2.0 million in PE 63006A for tactical internet 
        command and control protection;
          (2) $6.7 million in PE 65604A for information 
        operations/warfare survivability analysis of command, 
        control, communications, and computers/information 
        electronic warfare systems;
          (3) $1.6 million in PE 33150A for development and 
        application of information protection measures for the 
        Army's component of the global command and control 
        systems for the U.S. European Command; and
          (4) $2.7 million in PE 33140F for the Air Force 
        information protection program.
    The committee directs the Secretary of Defense to report to 
the Congressional defense committees with the submission of the 
fiscal year 1999 budget, an assessment of the progress in the 
Department's information systems security program that 
addresses the current status of the program, specific actions 
being taken on the recommendations of the 1996 Defense Science 
Board Task Force on Information Warfare-Defense, and additional 
actions that should be taken to assure the increased security 
and integrity of the Defense information infrastructure. The 
report shall also address measures necessary to assure the 
integrity of those elements of the national information 
infrastructure and critical national infrastructure on which 
the Defense information infrastructure depends, and 
identification of any additional resources and legislative 
authority which may be required.

Integrated family of test equipment

    The budget request contained $2.6 million in PE 64746A for 
automatic test equipment. The committee understands that 
additional funding is required to continue development and 
upgrading of the integrated family of test equipment (IFTE), 
including completion of the electro-optics test facility and 
software upgrades for the portable on-system repair tool. The 
committee recommends an increase of $2.3 million to continue 
the IFTE program.

Joint service small arms program

    The budget request contained $4.8 million for the joint 
service small arms program within PE 63607A. The objective of 
this program is to demonstrate key technologies leading to more 
effective small arms weapons and munitions for all services, 
including such technology as the objective individual combat 
weapon (OICW). The committee supports this initiative and 
recommends an increase of $5.5 million to expedite development 
of the OICW. The committee notes the relevance of the Advanced 
Lightweight Anti-armor Weapon System (ALAWS) warhead technology 
to the Objective Crew Served Weapons System. The Defense 
Science Board 1996 Summer Study Task Force on Tactics and 
Technology for the 21st Century stated that there is a need for 
man-portable weapons to be capable of engaging a range of 
targets, from adversary soldiers to adversary armor. 
Accordingly, the committee recommends an additional $1.5 
million for continued warhead development.
    The committee recommends $11.8 million for the joint 
service small arms program, an increase of $7.0 million.

Life support for trauma and transport

    The budget request contained $18.4 million in PE 62712E for 
military medical and trauma care technologies, $8.8 million in 
PE 62787A for combat casualty care technology, and $6.8 million 
in PE 63807A for medical systems advanced development.
    The Army's budget justification included $3.3 million for 
continued evaluation and refinement of sensors, surgical and 
evacuation technology, including the life support for trauma 
and transport (LSTAT) Pod and the advanced surgical suite for 
trauma casualties (ASTEC). Developed under a Defense Advanced 
Research Projects Agency project, the LSTAT pod is a single-
patient, intensive care and life support capability that would 
be used to maintain life support and stabilization of 
battlefield casualties during their evacuation from the front 
line for higher echelon medical treatment. Four of these units 
are expected to complete air-worthiness testing and achieve 
Food and Drug Administration approval during fiscal year 1997. 
The Army is leading the joint service test program. The 
committee believes that the LSTAT pod represents a major 
advance in battlefield medical care and strongly supports an 
expedited development and evaluation process which would lead 
to early achievement of an initial operating capability and 
accelerated fielding of the system for battlefield use by all 
the services. Accordingly, the committee recommends an increase 
of $1.0 million in PE 62787A and $5.0 million in PE 63807A to 
accelerate the development program and the joint developmental 
and operational test of the LSTAT. The committee directs the 
Secretary of the Army to report to the Congressional defense 
committees the plan for completing the joint service test 
program and plans for fielding the LSTAT and other advanced 
battlefield life support and evacuation systems with the 
submission of the fiscal year 1999 Defense budget request.

Logistics advanced technology

    The budget request contained $35.5 million for logistics 
advanced technology. The committee is aware of the increasing 
importance of suppression of infrared (IR) signature on 
thebattlefield. The committee recommends an increase of $2.0 million in 
PE 63001A for further development of IR suppression fabrics for combat 
uniforms.

Missile/air defense product improvement

     The budget request contained $17.4 million for missile/air 
defense product improvement within PE 23801A. The Patriot 
system, which provided vital air defense during Operation 
Desert Storm, is being upgraded through enhanced communications 
and other system improvements to respond to the evolving air 
and cruise missile threat. The committee is also aware of 
efforts to develop block II modifications to the Stinger 
Missile to provide enhanced performance. The committee supports 
continuation of these initiatives and recommends $34.1 million, 
an increase of $10.0 million for Patriot PAC-3 missile upgrades 
and an increase of $6.7 million for Stinger block II 
modifications. The Secretary of the Army may use existing PAC-3 
missiles from inventory to support development of a cruise 
missile defense capability.

Missile and rocket advanced technology

    The budget request contained $117.1 million for missile and 
rocket advanced technology in PE 63313A.
    The missile and rocket technology program included $1.0 
million for future missile technology. The committee is aware 
of potential cost and performance benefits for future missiles 
from the use of composite materials and structures and 
recommends an increase of $6.0 million for this program.
    The budget request included $57.7 million for the enhanced 
fiber optic guided missile (EFOG-M) program. Development of 
this technology has been plagued since its inception by 
technical problems and changing priorities. To date, only 
aircraft mounted captive carry testing of the sensor has been 
performed, and only surrogate missiles are planned during the 
remainder of the Advanced Concept Technology Demonstrator 
(ACTD) before committing to procure 300 user operational 
evaluation missiles. The Army has continued to develop EFOG-M, 
which requires operator control from launch until impact, even 
though it now states requirements for smart, fire and forget 
weapons based on modern technology. The committee recommends no 
funds for EFOG-M and directs the Secretary of the Army to 
restructure the ACTD program to require flight testing of 
prototype weapons before any missile production is approved.
    The committee recommends authorization of $65.4 million in 
PE 63313A, a decrease of $51.7 million.

Missile defense battle integration center

    The budget request contained $5.0 million for the battle 
integration center (BIC). The Army is building a flexible 
distributed interactive simulation-based architecture which can 
operate in regimes of training, exercises and military 
operations, as well as providing support to advanced concept 
development. The committee understands that this effort has 
been identified as an Army priority, yet it is insufficiently 
funded. The committee recommends an increase of $14.0 million 
in PE 63308A to continue development of the BIC as an 
integrated battlelab with the capability to provide high 
fidelity representation of the modern battlefield.

Munitions manufacturing technology

    The budget request contained $44.3 million in PE 78045A for 
the Army's manufacturing technology program. The current 
munitions research, development, and production base, which 
emphasizes the use of high volume, single purpose production 
lines and was built to fight the Cold War and needs to be 
reshaped to meet the requirements of the 21st Century. 
Achieving superiority on the 21st century battlefield within 
today's austere defense budget will require the development of 
munitions that are smart, light-weight, affordable, and capable 
of being produced in a reasonable time frame, at a reasonable 
cost, and in short production runs.
    The committee recommends an increase of $15.0 million for 
munitions manufacturing technology. This increase should be 
used to accelerate key munitions manufacturing technologies in 
composites, electronics, energetics, power supplies and metal 
parts that would reduce the cost of future munitions and permit 
both government and commercially owned munitions production 
facilities to produce research and development and production 
quantities of munitions concurrently, adapt design changes and 
product improvements quickly, and make short production runs 
feasible and cheaper. The committee encourages the Secretary of 
the Army to maintain the increased funding level for munitions 
manufacturing technology in the fiscal year 1999 budget 
request.

Passive millimeter wave camera

    The budget request contained $3.5 million for ground combat 
identification technology in PE 62120A. The committee is aware 
that the passive millimeter wave camera technology is reaching 
maturity, and recommends an increase of $5.0 million.

Persian Gulf illness clinical trials program

    The budget request included $74.7 million in PE 62787A for 
medical technology.
     The committee has been deeply concerned about the health 
problems experienced by veterans of the Persian Gulf War. The 
committee understands that although there are many ongoing 
studies investigating risk factors which may be associated with 
these health problems, there have been no studies which examine 
health outcomes and the effectiveness of the treatment received 
by the veterans. Testimony presented in hearings on Persian 
Gulf War illness and the medical literature indicate there are 
therapies, such as cognitive behavioral therapy, which have 
been effective in treating patients with symptoms similar to 
those seen in many Persian Gulf veterans. The committee 
recommends an increase of $4.5 million for the establishment of 
a program of multi-site cooperative clinical trials by the 
Department of Defense and the Department of Veterans Affairs to 
assess the effectiveness of protocols for treating veterans of 
the Persian Gulf War who suffer from ill-defined or undiagnosed 
conditions. Such protocols should include, but not be limited 
to, a multi-disciplinary treatment model, of which cognitive 
behavioral therapy is a component.

Plasma energy pyrolysis system

    The budget request contained no funds for the plasma energy 
pyrolysis system (PEPS). The committee is aware that PEPS 
offers the potential to render hazardous waste, including 
medical and chemical, into an inert glass slag by-product. The 
committee recommends an increase of $8.7 million in PE 62720A 
to complete development and construction of a mobile PEPS unit 
to deal with environmental hazards.

Projectile detection and cueing (PDCue)

    The committee continues to support the projectile detection 
and cueing (PDCue) program for Army evaluation in PE 62120A. 
The committee is aware that the Army Research Laboratory (ARL) 
will receive prototypes this fiscal year and plans to 
incorporate mobile HMMWV capability and deliver the system for 
evaluation under the Military Operations in Urban Terrain 
(MOUT) Advanced Concept Technology Demonstration program. To 
accelerate the program the committee recommends an increase of 
$2.5 million for PDCue within PE 62120A.

Short-range unmanned aerial vehicle

    The budget request contained no funding for short-range 
unmanned aerial vehicles (UAV). The Department, based on lack 
of progress in the tactical unmanned aerial vehicle program, 
which is under close scrutiny for possible cancellation, has 
directed the Services to assess other solutions for UAV 
requirements. The Army has an unfulfilled, validated 
operational requirement for a short-range UAV. The committee 
directs the Secretary of Defense to initiate an Army 
acquisition program for the Department, to develop and procure 
a short-range UAV to fulfill the existing requirement. 
Performance specifications for a short-range UAV are to be as 
defined by the validated operational requirement. The UAV is to 
be equipped with the objective digital data link that is 
compatible with the Army's digital architecture for the future. 
The committee notes that historically, requirements changes and 
upgrading have been, in great part, the cause of many failed 
UAV programs. Therefore, the Department is directed to acquire 
a short-range UAV with minimum development to meet the existing 
validated operational requirement. Subsequent to IOC, as 
appropriate, block changes may be used to implement a pre-
planned product improvement program.
    The committee notes that technology improvement since 
validation of the operational requirement may allow increased 
range beyond 100 kilometers. The committee directs that the 
range threshold be 100 kilometers with specified endurance, 
while the objective range shall be 200 kilometers.
    The committee recommends $5.0 million in PE 63003A to begin 
development of a short-range UAV for all services having the 
defined requirement. Such development should as much as 
practicable, use mature, existing air vehicle technology and 
include digitization of systems to be compatible with emerging 
digital force architecture.

Telemedicine

    The budget request contained $10.7 million for advanced 
medical technology within PE 63002A.
    The committee endorses the Army's efforts to improve 
medical response and treatment of soldiers on the battlefield 
but notes, however, that no funds in the budget request were 
specifically identified under a separate project for 
telemedicine. The committee also recognizes the potential value 
of virtual reality emergency medical telemedicine (VREMT) 
efforts designed to improve diagnostics and treatment by combat 
medics. In addition to improving primary care on the 
battlefield, VREMT will also provide an exportable training 
capability. The committee recommends $16.5 million in PE 
63002A, an increase of $2.3 million for telemedicine technology 
and $3.5 million for VREMT.

Weapons and munitions advanced technology

    The budget request contained $18.3 million for weapons and 
munitions advanced technology in PE 63004A. The committee 
supports this initiative which includes demonstration of a 
precision guided mortar munition that will be evaluated along 
with other new tactics and technologies to provide early entry 
forces the capability to defeat armored forces. The committee 
is aware of the potential benefits of electro-rheological 
fluids recoil for future artillery systems and recommends an 
increase of $5.0 million for associated research.
     The committee is also aware that plastic cased ammunition 
for military use as a service round has been preliminarily 
developed for 5.56mm ammunition. The committee is aware that 
plastic cased ammunition offers potential cost and weight 
savings compared to existing munitions and, therefore, 
recommends an increase of $3.0 million for development and 
certification of this innovative munitions technology.
    The committee recommends $26.3 million for weapons and 
munitions advanced technology, an increase of $8.0 million.

                               Navy RDT&E

                                Overview

    The budget request contained $7,611.0 million for Navy 
RDT&E. The committee recommends authorization of $7,947.0 
million, an increase of $336.0 million.
    The committee recommendations for the fiscal year 1998 Navy 
RDT&E program are identified in the table below. Major changes 
to the Navy request are discussed following the table.
    Offset Folios 188 to 196 Insert here

<SKIP PAGES = 009>

                       Items of Special Interest

Advanced anti-radiation guided missile

    The budget request contained no funds to continue the 
advanced anti-radiation guided missile (AARGM) demonstration 
program.
    AARGM is a Phase III Small Business Innovative Research 
(SBIR) program designed to develop and demonstrate an advanced 
dual-mode seeker on an existing high-speed anti-radiation 
missile (HARM) airframe. The committee has placed a high 
priority on the AARGM program, and believes that the technology 
demonstrated to date shows great promise for providing a 
significantly increased anti-radiation missile capability. The 
committee is concerned, however, that the high level of 
concurrency in the schedule for the AARGM development and 
demonstration results in increased risk to the program and that 
a more sequential development program may be warranted. 
Accordingly, the committee recommends an increase of $35.0 
million in PE 25601N to continue the AARGM program. The 
committee directs the Secretary of the Navy to conduct an 
independent assessment of the program plan, development and 
demonstration schedule, program execution, technical 
performance, and program risk, and report the results of the 
assessment to the Congressional defense committees by March 31, 
1998. The report should also include the Secretary's 
recommendations on revisions to the program schedule and the 
funding required to complete the program.

Advanced deployable system

    The budget request contained $33.0 million in PE 64784N for 
continued development of the Advanced Deployable System (ADS), 
an element of the Integrated Undersea Surveillance System 
program. The request includes funds for the concept evaluation, 
program definition, and risk reduction phase of an ADS 
prototype and engineering and manufacturing development for 
production of the ADS.
    To meet the requirement for providing reliable detection of 
quieter threat submarines operating in the noisy and shallow 
waters of the world's littoral regions, a significantly 
improved information processing and data fusion capability is 
needed for support of ADS operations. The committee finds the 
budget request to be insufficient for development of these 
capabilities and inadequate to support the conduct of at-sea 
testing to validate performance in challenging littoral 
environments. Accordingly, the committee recommends an increase 
of $10.4 million for continued development and integration of 
automated detection and data fusion algorithms, rapid 
prototyping of information processing capabilities, and at-sea 
testing to validate the expected improvements in ADS 
performance.

Advanced ranging source

    The budget request contained $16.9 million in PE 64261N for 
engineering and manufacturing development of acoustic search 
sensors.
    The committee recommends an increase of $4.0 million to 
accelerate the development of alternative shallow water-capable 
sound sources in the advanced extended echo ranging (AEER) 
program and ensure that unique acoustic technology is available 
for the advanced ranging source (ARS) and air deployed low 
frequency project (ADLFP) comparative program testing.

Advanced submarine tactical electronic combat system

    The budget request contained $311.1 million in PE 64558N to 
continue engineering and manufacturing development for the New 
Attack Submarine (NSSN), including $95.8 million for NSSN 
combat system development.
    An integral part of the NSSN combat system is the advanced 
submarine tactical electronic combat system (ASTECS) and the 
integrated electronic support measures mast (IEM). The IEM 
combines communication, radar intercept, and precision 
direction finding capabilities in a single, low observable 
mast. As the precision sensor for the ASTECS, the IEM allows 
the combined system to address the full spectrum of advanced, 
complex radar, communication, and navigation systems that may 
be deployed by adversaries. Both ASTECS and IEM are planned for 
the NSSN, and the IEM for back-fit on SSN-688 and SSN-21 class 
submarines. The committee understands that budgetary 
constraints have resulted in the deferral of several critical 
elements of the IEM and ASTECS program: full implementation of 
IEM precision radar band direction finding; specific emitter 
identification, interception of frequency-agile and cellular 
communications, and international maritime satellite (INMARSAT) 
emissions; development of systems software for automatic data 
correlation, onboard training, and situational awareness; and 
back-fit of IEW. The committee believes these capabilities are 
essential and should be reinstated in the NSSN program. 
Accordingly, the committee recommends an increase of $17.0 
million in PE 64558N to restore the deferred elements of the 
ASTECS/IEM program, including repackaging the non-development 
initiative precision radar direction finding receiver and 
reducing the production cost of the IEM antenna group.

Anti-submarine warfare systems development

    The budget request contained $22.9 million in PE 63254N for 
development of anti-submarine warfare systems.
    The committee recommends an increase of $3.8 million to 
complete demonstration/validation of sonobuoy geo-positioning 
system integration and transducer enhancements for improving 
the shallow water anti-submarine warfare effectiveness of the 
air deployed low frequency projector.

AN/WLY-1 submarine acoustic intercept receiver

    The budget request contained $6.1 million in PE 11226N for 
operational systems development of improvements in the 
effectiveness and survivability of all classes of U.S. 
submarines, including continued development and testing of the 
AN/WLY-1 submarine countermeasure detection and control set.
    The AN/WLY-1 is the next generation of submarine acoustic 
intercept receivers and will significantly enhance a 
submarine's ability to respond to threat active sonar and 
acoustic homing torpedoes. Scheduled for initial fleet 
introduction in 2001, the AN/WLY-1 will be deployed on all new 
submarine classes (SSN-21 and NSSN) and will replace the 
current AN/WLR-9 acousticintercept receiver on existing SSN-
688I submarines. The committee recommends an increase of $8.0 million 
to accelerate the introduction of the AN/WLY-1 in the fleet and back-
fit on the SSN-688I submarine.

Arctic oceanographic observation program

    The budget request contained $48.2 million in PE 62435N for 
applied research in oceanographic and atmospheric technologies.
    The committee understands that additional funding is 
required to support the second year of a four-year, cooperative 
science and technology program for the utilization of 
underwater acoustic techniques to determine ocean climate and 
acoustic characteristics in a large ocean basin. The committee 
recommends an increase of $3.0 million and encourages the 
Secretary of the Navy to include funds for completion of the 
program in the fiscal year 1999 Defense budget request.

Arsenal ship and surface combatant-21 (SC-21)

    The budget request contained $103.0 million in PE 64310N 
and $47.2 million in PE 63763E for the Arsenal Ship program. 
The budget request also included $55.0 million in PE 64567N for 
the Navy's next generation surface combatant, SC-21.
    The Arsenal Ship is a joint Navy-Defense Advanced Research 
Projects Agency (DARPA) program to develop and demonstrate a 
``proof-of-principle prototype strike warfare ship'' and a new 
paradigm for development and construction of Navy ships. The 
Arsenal Ship is envisioned as a stealthy, highly survivable, 
reduced manpower fire support ship, loaded with as many as 500 
vertical launch cells. Up to five additional Arsenal Ships 
could be procured beginning in fiscal year 2004 should the 
evaluation of the Arsenal Ship demonstrator prove successful. 
The cost of the Arsenal Ship demonstration program is 
approximately $520 million, and the Congressional Budget 
Office's estimate of the cost of a six Arsenal Ship program 
totals $3 billion, plus an additional $2 billion for the 
weapons load for the six ships. The committee understands that 
the Navy envisions the Arsenal Ship as a bridge to the SC-21 
and intends to use the Arsenal Ship demonstrator to evaluate 
various technologies that might be incorporated in SC-21.
    According to recent Navy briefings, the first variant of 
SC-21 will be a land attack destroyer, DD-21, a multi-mission 
ship with 128 vertical launch cells that places an overwhelming 
emphasis on fire support, small crew, reduced signature, and 
significantly reduced life cycle cost. Based on the results of 
the Navy's SC-21 cost and operational effectiveness analysis, 
DD-21 would represent the ``best balance'' of capability 
compared to other options considered. The cost for the SC-21 is 
estimated to be approximately $750.0 million through fiscal 
year 2003, and the Navy indicates that the first potential DD-
21 construction contract award could be in fiscal year 2004. 
According to the Navy, development of SC-21 is to capitalize on 
the investments made in Arsenal Ship and in the Navy's Smart 
Ship programs.
    Both the House report (H. Rept. 104-563) and the statement 
of managers accompanying the conference report on H.R. 3230 (H. 
Rept. 104-724) agree that Arsenal Ship would be a major defense 
acquisition program and would have to satisfy the major 
acquisition program management issues, such as operational 
requirements validation and cost and operational effectiveness 
analysis. Committee hearings on the Navy's budget request for 
naval ship construction and research and development raised 
issues regarding the Arsenal Ship concept, the development 
schedules for the Arsenal Ship and the SC-21 program, and the 
ability for the lessons learned in the Arsenal Ship 
demonstration to feed into the SC-21 program. These issues have 
not been resolved, despite recent announcements that Arsenal 
Ship is to be merged into the SC-21 program, and the committee 
understands that there has been no change in the Arsenal Ship 
program.
    The committee believes that differences in ship size and 
mission capability between the Arsenal Ship and DD-21, as 
conceived, yield two separate development programs. The 
committee also believes that the overlapping schedules for the 
Arsenal Ship and the SC-21 program do not provide sufficient 
opportunity for the experience gained from the Arsenal Ship 
demonstrator to provide maximum benefit to design and 
construction of the DD-21. The committee further believes that 
the Navy's program, as outlined in the fiscal year 1998 budget 
request, would lead to two parallel, overlapping, and nearly 
simultaneous development programs for future surface 
combatants, each of which meets the criteria for a major 
defense acquisition program. The committee believes that two 
such programs are unaffordable, and that requirements for both 
programs have not yet been validated by the Department of 
Defense.
    The committee therefore recommends no funding for the 
Arsenal Ship in PE 64310N and PE 63763E in fiscal year 1998. 
The committee directs the Under Secretary of Defense 
(Acquisition and Technology) and the Secretary of the Navy to 
review the acquisition strategy for the SC-21 program and to 
determine whether or not a prototyping strategy is appropriate 
for the new surface combatant. The results of the review and 
plans to incorporate such a strategy in the development of SC-
21 shall be reported to the Congressional defense committees 
with the submission of the fiscal year 1999 budget request.

Automatic target recognition/optical correlation

    The budget request contained $34.2 million in PE 63609N for 
Navy conventional munitions development, $26.2 million in PE 
63601F for Air Force conventional weapons technology, and $4.8 
million in PE 63232D for automatic target recognition. The 
committee is aware progress is being made in the Director, 
Defense Research and Engineering (DDR&E) automatic target 
recognition (ATR) program and the development of ATR 
technologies for missiles, precision-guided weapons, and target 
cueing for surveillance systems. The DDR&E's January 1997 
report to the Congressional defense committees on optical 
correlation technology describes the progress that has been 
made in the potential weaponization of optical correlation 
technology for these purposes. The committee also understands 
that the Air Force is investigating the use of optical 
correlators for missile applications in its Optical Processor 
Enhanced Ladar program.
    The committee recommends an increase of $8.0 million in PE 
63609N for the development and demonstration of a miniature 
optical correlator for automatic target recognition and 
improved aimpoint selection for the Standard Missile, and an 
increase of $3.5 million in PE 63601F for the development and 
demonstration of a miniature optical correlator for automatic 
target recognition and aimpoint selection for the AGM-130. The 
committee expects the Air Force and the Navy to capitalize on 
current programs for the development of ATR technologyand the 
application of optical correlator technology and to coordinate their 
activities with the DDR&E's ATR program.

Autonomous underwater vehicle and sonar development

    The budget request contained $48.2 million in PE 62435N for 
oceanographic and atmospheric technologies, including $17.5 
million for applied research in environmental influences on 
mine countermeasures systems and littoral oceanography.
    The committee recommends an increase of $10.0 million to 
continue applied research and exploratory development in 
technologies for advanced sensors and unmanned underwater 
vehicles applicable to mine countermeasures and other littoral 
operations.

Battle force tactical trainer

    The budget request contained $59.0 million in PE 24571N for 
consolidated training systems development, including $2.9 
million for continued development of the battle force tactical 
training (BFTT) system.
    The committee understands that the BFTT system provides 
opportunities for fleet personnel to achieve and maintain 
combat readiness through coordinated, realistic, stressful, 
combat system team training, and permits the ship's combat 
system team to train on their own equipment while located at 
pier-side. The committee also recognizes that electronic 
surveillance systems aboard naval combatants are integral parts 
of ship and battle force combat systems and the information 
architecture required to conduct naval combat operations 
successfully. To take full advantage of the training capability 
represented by the BFTT system and permit fleet personnel to 
train using all aspects of their operational systems (including 
those that generate classified data), the committee believes 
that these electronic surveillance systems should interface 
with the BFTT system. Accordingly, the committee recommends an 
increase of $5.0 million for the integration of ship and battle 
force electronic surveillance systems into the BFTT system.

Beach and surf zone obstacle clearance

    The budget request contained $41.6 million in PE 63782N for 
advanced development and demonstration of technology for 
shallow water mine counter-measures.
    The committee is aware of initial testing by the Air Force 
and the Navy that demonstrates the ability of GPU-5 gunpod, 
mounted on an air-cushion landing craft, to breach beach and 
surf zone obstacles safely, quickly, and decisively. The 
committee believes that the system, when proven by further 
testing, offers potential for a relatively low cost, highly 
effective obstacle clearance capability that could be fielded 
quickly to improve the capability of U.S naval and amphibious 
forces operating in the littoral. Accordingly, the committee 
recommends an increase of $750,000 to complete the additional 
testing required to prove the capability.

Carbonate fuel cells

    The budget request contained $19.2 million in PE 63513N for 
development of shipboard systems non-propulsion machinery 
systems, components, and improvements for current and future 
surface fleet hull, mechanical, and electrical systems.
    The request included funding to continue the program that 
was initiated in fiscal year 1997 for design of a full scale 
ships service molten carbonate fuel cell power plant and 
demonstration of a 500 kilowatt molten carbonate fuel cell. The 
molten carbonate fuel cell demonstration program supports the 
development of high efficiency, dispersed, and environmentally 
friendly power plants for the next generation of surface 
combatants (SC-21) and fleet support vessels. To accelerate 
system and key component development and demonstration and the 
scale-up of the 500 kilowatt demonstrator to a full scale ships 
service electric power plant that could be considered for use 
on the SC-21 future surface combatant, the committee recommends 
an increase of $3.5 million. The committee encourages the 
Secretary of the Navy to include the additional funding 
required to maintain the accelerated schedule for development 
and demonstration of the full scale system in the Navy's budget 
request for fiscal year 1999.

Commandant's warfighting laboratory

    The budget request contained $34.2 million in PE 63640M for 
the Commandant's warfighting laboratory (CWL) advanced 
technology demonstration.
    The Commandant and the Chairman, Joint Chiefs of Staff 
identified the CWL as a priority un-funded requirement to 
expand experimentation to meet future technologically advanced 
warfighting threats. These experiments and demonstrations focus 
on developing operational and warfighting concepts to enhance 
warfighting capabilities in the next century. Recent advanced 
warfighting experiments have, in particular, demonstrated the 
importance of information provided from relatively low cost 
unmanned aerial vehicles. The committee notes the early results 
from the CWL initiative, and recommends an increase of $24.8 
million for the CWL, including $5.0 million specifically to 
investigate the utility of low-cost close range unmanned aerial 
vehicles as defined by the current operational requirement.

Composite engineered materials

    The budget request contained $1.7 million in PE 63725N for 
advanced development of materials, electronics and computer 
technologies.
    The committee continues to support the Navy's development 
and use of new and improved materials to address the growing 
backlog and cost of naval shore facility maintenance and 
repair. The committee therefore recommends an increase of $3.0 
million to complete the shore facilities materials program in 
cost-shared research on carbon fiber-reinforced, recycled 
thermoplastic engineered lumber.

Cooperative engagement capability

    The budget request contained $139.2 million in PE 63658N 
for the cooperative engagement capability (CEC).
    As reflected in the House report (H. Rept. 104-563) on H.R. 
3230 and the statement of managers accompanying the conference 
report on H.R. 3230 (H. Rept. 104-724), the Congresshas 
recognized the CEC program as among the highest priority programs in 
the Navy and the Department of Defense. In testimony during the defense 
posture hearing on the fiscal year 1997 budget request, the Secretary 
of Defense singled out the CEC as a program of high priority that he 
had chosen to accelerate because of its great potential for linking 
units from more than one service together and greatly increasing their 
warfighting capability. The Congressional defense committees agreed 
with the priority established by the Secretary and recommended 
significant increases to the CEC program to accelerate the fielding of 
the capability to the fleet and to accelerate and expand joint service 
integration efforts.
    The committee notes that the Navy's fiscal year 1998 budget 
request for the CEC program is significantly less than 
projected in the fiscal year 1997 Future Years Defense Plan and 
budget justification, and results in a slip of over one year in 
the fielding of the capability to fleet units. The committee 
does not understand the Navy's failure to provide the funding 
required to maintain the accelerated fielding schedule for a 
program that has received such a high priority from the 
Secretary of Defense and from the Congress. The committee 
believes that the Navy has overemphasized programs for new 
naval ``platforms'', at the expense of the warfighting weapons 
systems that would make existing platforms more effective.
    The committee recommends a total increase of $50.0 million 
in PE 63658N for the CEC program: $15.0 million to continue the 
accelerated development of the low cost common equipment set, 
$5.0 million to support transfer of the CEC design and 
development agent to industry, $20.0 million to accelerate 
integration of the CEC into Navy E-2C and P-3 aircraft, $5.0 
million to initiate development of an integrated capability 
between CEC and the ship self defense program, and $5.0 million 
to accelerate joint service integration and demonstration of 
CEC with the Army's Patriot and the Marine Corps' Hawk air 
defense missile systems.

Cryogenic electronics technology

    The budget request contained $76.7 million in PE 62234N for 
advanced development of materials, electronics and computer 
technologies, including $9.5 million for advanced 
multifunctional radio frequency system support technology, and 
$9.2 million in PE 62712E for development of cryogenic 
technologies.
    The committee understands that cryogenic electronics and 
high temperature superconductivity technology may offer the 
potential for achieving significant improvements in the ability 
of future radar systems to detect and track low-flying targets 
in clutter. The committee is aware that the Defense Advanced 
Research Projects Agency and the Office of Naval Research are 
demonstrating notable performance gains through the use of 
cryogenic electronics and high temperature superconductivity 
technology in analog and digital electronic components. The 
committee is also informed that the application of these 
technologies may permit the development of advanced RF 
receiver/exciter subsystems that could be common to a wide 
range of radar applications and could result in significant 
reductions in the cost of future radar systems. Accordingly, 
the committee recommends an increase of $3.0 million in PE 
62234N to continue the development of superconducting waveform 
generator and analog-to-digital converter technology.

CVN-77 research and development

    The budget request contained $17.9 million in PE 64567N for 
aircraft carrier contract design for the CVN-77.
    The Navy has stated that CVN-77 will provide a transition 
from the Nimitz-class nuclear aircraft carrier to the next-
generation CV(X). As such, CVN-77 is a candidate for 
development, evaluation, and incorporation of a range of 
advanced technologies and acquisition reform initiatives which, 
not only could result in lower life cycle costs, but could also 
set the standard by which further improvements in the 
application of advanced technologies and acquisition 
initiatives to the design and construction of the CV(X) will be 
measured. Accordingly, the committee recommends an increase of 
$17.0 million to accelerate the evaluation of maturing advanced 
technologies for potential incorporation in the design of CVN-
77.

CV(X) carrier systems development

    The budget request contained $90.2 million in PE63512N for 
future aircraft carrier research and development.
    The committee notes that this request represents an 
increase of $84.5 million above the amount appropriated for 
fiscal year 1997 and $88.4 million above that projected for 
fiscal year 1998 in the fiscal year 1997 Future Years Defense 
Plan. The increase is planned for advanced development of a 
range of advanced technologies for potential incorporation in 
the design and construction of the next-generation CV(X) 
aircraft carrier.
    The committee notes that the Joint Requirements Oversight 
Council approved a mission needs statement (MNS) for a New 
Tactical Aviation Sea-Based Platform for the 21st Century, the 
CV(X), in March 1996. The committee understands that among the 
potential alternatives that may compete with CV(X) in meeting 
the operational requirements of the MNS are the Mobile Offshore 
Base (MOB) and the Arsenal Ship, as well as land-based 
aircraft. The committee further understands that MOB studies in 
support of the CV(X) cost and operational effectiveness 
analysis have just been initiated. The committee also notes 
that the budget request includes funding for an Arsenal Ship 
demonstration that could lead to procurement of up to five 
Arsenal Ships. The committee is concerned that the issues 
raised in the committee report on H.R. 3230 (H. Rept. 104-563) 
and the statement of managers accompanying the conference 
report on H.R. 3230 (H. Rept. 104-724) relative to the need for 
validation of the Arsenal Ship operational requirement and 
performance analysis have not yet been addressed by the Navy.
    In view of the above, the committee believes that it is 
neither fiscally nor technically prudent to increase advanced 
carrier systems research and development for the CV(X) to the 
degree sought by the Navy. The committee believes that 
increased emphasis should be placed on the research and 
development program for the CNV-77, and elsewhere in this 
report, has recommended an increase to the research and 
development program for the CVN-77 aircraft carrier to provide 
a transition to the CV(X). The committee recommends that 
funding for carrier systems research and development for the 
CV(X) be held to the level originally projected for fiscal year 
1998 and recommends a decrease of $88.4 million

E-2 eight-blade composite propeller system

    The budget request contained $64.9 million in PE 24152N for 
operational systems development of preplanned product 
improvements in E-2C aircraft and weapon system capabilities, 
including $39.4 million for E-2C mission system improvements.
    The committee is aware that the Navy is seeking solutions 
to operational limitations encountered with the propeller 
system used on E-2C and C-2A aircraft. The current propeller 
system incorporates technology developed in the 1950's and the 
1960's, is difficult and expensive to maintain, is no longer in 
production, and is a frequent cause of E-2C aircraft not being 
operationally ready. The committee is also aware of proposals 
to develop an eight-blade composite propeller for E-2C and C-2A 
aircraft that might also be retrofitted to Navy P-3 and C-130 
aircraft. The committee understands that the cost of developing 
and producing the new propeller system could be recovered in 
four to five years as a result of reduced operation and support 
costs for the aircraft. Accordingly, the committee recommends 
an increase of $10.0 million to initiate a 24 month program for 
development and demonstration of an eight-blade composite 
propeller system for the E-2C. The committee encourages the 
Secretary of the Navy to include the funds for completion of 
the development program in the fiscal year 1999 defense budget 
request.

Extended range guided munition

    The budget request contained $37.8 million in PE 63795N for 
land attack systems technology.
    The committee strongly supports a naval surface fire 
support (NSFS) program which focuses on near term and far term 
improvements to naval fire support systems: development and 
demonstration of an extended range guided projectile (ERGM) 
which would incorporate advanced, low cost, global positioning 
system/inertial navigation system (GPS/INS) guidance 
technology; improvements in the existing Mk 45 5-inch naval 
gun; demonstration of the Army's tactical missile system 
(ATACMS) and other missile systems for NSFS applications; and 
development and demonstration of technologies to satisfy the 
Navy's long term requirements for advanced gun systems. The 
committee believes that the Navy must continue to place a high 
priority on the program and accelerate the fielding of near 
term capabilities to correct the existing shortfall in naval 
surface fire support capabilities. Accordingly, the committee 
recommends an increase of $15.1 million in PE 63795N to 
complete the development and commence integration of a fire 
control system to support the achievement of initial 
operational capability of the advanced 5''/62 caliber gun and 
the ERGM in DDG 81, planning and land-based testing of the 5''/
62 gun, and risk reduction and testing of the ERGM projectile 
and propellant. Elsewhere in this report, the committee 
recommends increases to the NSFS program for a naval ATACMS, 
and advanced, miniaturized GPS/INS guidance and control.

F/A-18E/F super hornet

    The budget request contained $317.0 million in PE 24136N 
for the F/A-18 fleet. The committee understands that $267.5 
million of this amount is for the F/A-18E/F Super Hornet and 
that funding for this program has increased $114.2 million over 
the amount forecast in the 1997 Future Years Defense Plan 
(FYDP).
    The committee has expressed great concern, described in 
detail elsewhere in this report, over the unaffordable pace of 
tactical aviation (TACAIR) modernization being pursued by the 
Department. Of the three most costly TACAIR programs in the 
Department's request--the Air Force F-22 Raptor, the Navy F/A-
18E/F Super Hornet, and the Joint Strike Fighter--the Super 
Hornet was recently approved by the Department to enter 
production, even prior to final recommendations by the 
Quadrennial Defense Review and National Defense Panel.
    The committee is unaware of any justification to support 
such a large increase in this year's research and development 
request for the Super Hornet over the recently forecast funding 
level identified in the 1997 FYDP. Therefore, the committee 
recommends $202.8 million for the F/A-18 fleet, a decrease of 
$114.2 million for the F/A-18E/F.

F/A-18F Tactical Reconnaissance

    The budget request contained no funding for developing the 
F-14 Tactical Air Reconnaissance Pod System (TARPS) Completely 
Digital (CD) capability.
    The committee understands that the Navy plans to replace 
the F-14 Tactical Air Reconnaissance Pod System (TARPS) with an 
electro-optical podded system for the F/A-18F Super Hornet. The 
committee has closely monitored the technical issues and 
difficulties experienced by the Marine Corps with the 
internally mounted Advanced Tactical Reconnaissance System 
(ATARS) for the F/A-18D. These issues, combined with the 
expected costs and extent of modifications to the F/A-18F if an 
internally mounted sensor were chosen, point to a podded 
reconnaissance capability as a more cost-effective and flexible 
approach for Navy fighter aircraft.
    Therefore, the committee supports the Navy's decision to 
develop a non-dedicated podded reconnaissance capability for 
the Super Hornet. The committee expects that the Navy will 
adhere to this decision and stresses that it will not favor any 
future request for development of an internally mounted F/A-18 
reconnaissance capability. The committee believes that the Navy 
should, to the extent possible, ensure that the TARPS 
development be transferable to the F/A-18F pod. To ensure that 
the latest technologies are provided to the user, the committee 
directs that the development and procurement of the F/A-18F 
podded system be awarded competitively.
     The committee has followed the TARPS digital imagery (DI) 
electro-optical (EO) improvements and is pleased with the 
results of this interim, but limited, capability. However, the 
committee believes there is a need to move to a production EO 
capability with a larger format backplane that provides both 
better resolution and a larger target area field-of-view, and 
understands that the TARPS CD development would provide such a 
capability at significantly less cost than a Navy purchase of 
the Advanced Tactical Airborne Reconnaissance System (ATARS).
    Based on the successful results from the interim DI 
efforts, the committee is convinced that CD will provide a cost 
effective EO tactical manned reconnaissance capability to 
replace the current film-based F-14 pods. Therefore, the 
committee recommends $5.0 million in PE 24136N for TARPS CD 
non-recurring engineering. The committee directs the Navy to 
move to TARPS CD production as expeditiously as possible.

Free electron laser

    The budget request contained $32.3 million in PE 62111N for 
technologies applicable to surface and aerospace surveillance 
and weapons.
    The committee has supported the Navy's technology program 
for design, fabrication, and activation of a one kilowatt 
average power free electron laser that operates in the infrared 
spectrum, and the evaluation of the technology for potential 
ship self-defense applications. The committee recommends an 
increase of $9.0 million to continue the Navy's free electron 
laser program. The increase will support the next phase in the 
development of superconducting accelerator free electron laser 
technology to achieve higher power levels and to evaluate the 
utility of a high energy laser weapon for naval applications.

Freeze-dried blood

    The budget request contained $18.3 million in PE 63706N for 
advanced development and demonstration of medical technology 
for care and treatment of Navy and Marine Corps personnel in 
operational theaters, including $3.6 million for advanced 
technology development related to blood and blood substitutes.
    The committee supports the Navy's program for the 
development of technologies for freezing red blood cells, the 
development of freeze-dried red blood cell units having 
extended shelf-life, and the development and clinical trial of 
improved frozen and freeze-dried blood platelet products that 
have enhanced storage capabilities, and recommends an increase 
of $2.5 million to accelerate these efforts.

Ground proximity warning system (GPWS)

    The budget request contained $36.3 million in PE 64215N for 
standards development, but did not include funding to continue 
the integration of GPWS technology into Navy-Marine Corps 
helicopter fleets.
    Congress provided an increase of $2.0 million for fiscal 
year 1997 to continue development of the GPWS in anticipation 
of its fielding on Navy and Marine heavy lift helicopters. The 
committee notes that the Navy plans to use these funds to 
achieve production approval of the GPWS for the H-53 and H-46 
series helicopters. To continue this development effort, the 
committee recommends an increase of $4.0 million for 
integration of GPWS technology into the remaining Navy-Marine 
Corps helicopter fleet and urges the Navy to program the 
modification funding needed to complete the fleet-wide 
installation of this system.

H-1 series modifications

    The budget request contained $18.5 million in Navy 
procurement for modifications to the H-1 series helicopter of 
which $18.3 million was planned for communications and 
navigation block upgrades. The budget request also contained 
$80.7 million in PE 64245N for development of future H-1 
upgrades.
     Subsequent to the submission of the budget request, the 
Navy determined a need to restructure its communications and 
navigation block upgrades and research and development plans 
for the H-1 series helicopters. The restructured program, which 
requires transferring funds from the aircraft procurement 
account to the research and development account, would improve 
commonality between the UH-1N and AH-1W helicopters through a 
new plan to design a common cockpit architecture and to procure 
common parts and software. The committee supports this 
initiative and recommends a reduction of $5.6 million in 
procurement for H-1 communications and navigation block 
upgrades and an increase of $5.6 million in PE 64245N for 
design of a common cockpit architecture.

High frequency surface wave radar

    The budget request contained $87.3 million in PE 63792N in 
the Navy's advanced technology demonstration (ATD) program.
    The ATD program demonstrates high-risk/high-payoff 
technologies that could significantly improve the warfighting 
capabilities of the fleet and joint forces and provides the 
opportunity to identify and move emerging technologies quickly 
and efficiently from the laboratory to the fleet. The committee 
understands that the high frequency surface wave radar (HFSWR) 
has the potential for significantly improving over-the-horizon 
detection of cruise missiles and is also applicable to other 
over-the-horizon surveillance missions. Fiscal year 1997 
funding reductions forced the Navy to place the HFSWR ATD on 
hold after conducting two years of a three-year ATD, and no 
funds are included in the fiscal year 1998 budget request for 
completion of the demonstration. Because of the positive 
results achieved in the HFSWR ATD before it was halted and the 
potential increase in over-the-horizon surveillance capability 
that the technology would bring to the fleet, the committee 
recommends an increase of $4.0 million to complete the HFSWR 
ATD.

Hull, mechanical, and electrical systems virtual laboratory initiative

    The Navy is considering revolutionary changes to its 21st 
century naval vessel fleet, such as SC-21 and CVX, that 
includes stealth, automation, power electronics building blocks 
and electric drive. While these synergistically linked 
technologies are ideal candidates for cross-discipline system 
evaluation in a synthetic environment, the Navy has no formal 
plan or funding for such a capability. The committee recognizes 
the success achieved by the other services and industry in the 
employment of simulation-based design of innovative 
technologies and believes that this capability would contribute 
significantly to cost-effectiveness and innovation in the 
development of hull, mechanical and electrical ship systems. 
The committee believes that a virtual laboratory concept that 
includes integrated product and process development capability, 
electronically linking government, academic and industrial 
partners, is a way to incorporate timely innovation, optimized 
system design and control acquisition and total ownership 
costs. This concept would provide a virtual test bed for 
performance evaluation and interface development as well as 
virtual prototyping of systems, components and subassemblies 
under simulated conditions. The committee directs the Secretary 
of the Navy to provide an assessment to the Congressional 
defense committees of such a virtual laboratory for hull, 
mechanical and electrical systems and if warranted, an 
implementation plan for this concept by June 1, 1998. The 
committee encourages the Navy to seek technical input from 
industry and other services laboratory programs as part of the 
assessment process.

Integrated combat weapon system

    The budget request contained $18.3 million in PE 63502N for 
surface and shallow water mine countermeasures, including $5.2 
million for the Integrated Combat Weapon System (ICWS).
    The ICWS is a series of major incremental block upgrades to 
current mine countermeasures combat systems to provide MCM- and 
MHC-class ships an affordable and fully integrated combat 
weapons system. The committee recommends an increase of $10.3 
million to accelerate the transition of ICWS to a commercial-
off-the-shelf, open systems architecture with increased 
commonality among operator stations, development and 
demonstration of improvements in system navigation and command 
and control, and early deployment of the ICWS full 
implementation system to the fleet.

Integrated ship self defense test site

    The budget request contained $132.3 million in PE 64755N 
for the ship self defense program and $33.2 million in PE 
64759N, Major Test & Evaluation Investment. No funds were 
requested in either program element for the ship self defense 
set and support equipment required to activate the Navy's 
Integrated Ship Self Defense Engineering Center (ISDEC).
    In 1991, the Navy received approval to construct a land-
based test facility at Wallops Island to integrate and test the 
ship self defense system (SSDS) and its related equipment. The 
decision was made after a comprehensive review of available 
test sites and their ability to support the engineering 
development, in-service engineering, training, testing, and 
other initiatives associated with the SSDS. Construction of the 
facility was completed in 1995. A December 1996 letter from the 
Office of the Chief of Naval Operations advised that ``program 
reductions have resulted in delays of two or more years for the 
procurement and installation of systems intended for ships and 
insufficient funding to operate and maintain the Wallops Island 
facility.''
    In view of the priority assigned to the cooperative 
engagement capability (CEC) and ship self defense programs, the 
committee does not understand the inability of the Department 
of the Navy to fund the installation of the required SSDS 
equipment set and related equipment required to activate the 
integrated SSDS test site. Such funding should have been an 
integral part of the program plan when approval for 
construction of the site was sought and given in 1991. The 
Navy's inability to provide the required funding is even more 
incomprehensible in view of the fact that the ship self defense 
and CEC programs that will use the site have been among the 
Navy's highest priority programs. These programs have been 
funded at an average funding level of approximately $400.0 
million annually since 1990, and have received significant 
annual funding increases from Congress. By failing to budget 
for the activation and operation of the ISDEC, the Navy has 
severely restricted its ability to perform testing and lifetime 
engineering support, in-service engineering, and engineering 
initiatives related to the CEC and SSDS systems.
    Accordingly the committee recommends an increase of $8.6 
million in PE 64759N to purchase the SSDS and related equipment 
required to activate the integrated land based test site at 
Wallops Island. The Secretary of the Navy is also directed to 
provide from available funds the $6.0 million that is required 
to refurbish and install an AN/SPS-48E air search radar at the 
site.

Inter-cooled recuperated engine

    The budget request contained $49.7 million in PE 63573N for 
the Navy's advanced surface machinery program (ASMP), including 
$32.3 million for the inter-cooled recuperated (ICR) gas 
turbine engine. The ICR engine program is a cooperative 
development program between the United States, the United 
Kingdom, and France to develop and demonstrate an advanced fuel 
efficient gas turbine engine that would be the prime power 
plant for future ship applications.
    In the statement of managers accompanying the conference 
report on H.R. 3230 (H. Rept. 104-724), the conferees directed 
the Secretary of the Navy to review the results of 
developmental testing of the ICR engine and to provide a report 
of the progress made in resolving the problems previously 
encountered during early stages of the ICR engine development 
testing. The committee also notes that significant progress has 
been made and that the development program is proceeding in 
accordance with a two-phased recovery plan. The committee also 
understands that testing of the engine has demonstrated the 
ability to operate from 1 percent to 110 percent of the design 
power range and the ability to achieve a 21 percent annual fuel 
savings based on a DDG-51 Class operating profile.
    The committee is encouraged by the progress being made and 
by the indication that the ICR engine will be an advanced 
maritime power plant capable of the significant annual fuel 
savings and reduced operating costs that are the objective of 
the program, but notes that considerable development and 
testing must still be done to realize this goal. The committee 
also notes that the United States has borne the majority of the 
cost of the ICR engine program. The committee is aware of 
ongoing discussions between the Department of the Navy and its 
counterparts in the development program partnership regarding 
the conduct of land-based engine qualification testing, 
proposals for at-sea testing, and the funding required to 
support completion of the program. The committee believes that 
agreement on these issues will be key to ensuring the 
completion of the development program and the provision of an 
advanced, fuel-efficient power plant for future U.S. ships.
    The committee directs the Secretary of the Navy to conduct 
an assessment of the progress in the ICR engine program, future 
plans for engine testing and qualification, and the status of 
agreements with the United Kingdom, France, and other countries 
that are participating in the development program. The results 
of the assessment shall be reported to the Congress with the 
submission of the fiscal year 1999 defense budget request.

Joint air to surface standoff missile/standoff land attack missile 
        expanded response

    The budget request contained $9.6 million in PE 64312N and 
$203.3 million in PE 27325F for the Air Force/Navy Joint Air to 
Surface Standoff Missile (JASSM) program and $28.9 million in 
PE 64603N for the Navy's Standoff Land Attack Missile Expanded 
Response (SLAM ER) program.
    The JASSM program was established in the fiscal year 1996 
budget, following cancellation of the Tri-Service Stand-off 
Attack Missile (TSSAM), to develop a replacement for that 
system at the earliest possible date. In the statement of 
managers which accompanied the conference report on S. 1124 (H. 
Rept. 104-450), the conferees stressed the urgent need for the 
operational capability that would have been provided by the 
TSSAM and the expectation that theSecretary of Defense would 
establish a joint program in the Air Force and the Navy for development 
of a TSSAM replacement that would meet the requirements of both 
services.
    The committee notes recent proposals by the Navy to replace 
the joint program for JASSM with the Navy's SLAM-ER, prior to 
completion of the current program definition and risk reduction 
phase for JASSM. The committee considers such a proposal to be 
premature and not in the best interests of the joint program. 
The proposal is, however, one of the program alternatives that 
could be considered at the Milestone II review for entry of the 
JASSM program into engineering and manufacturing development in 
July 1998, if properly based on the technical progress in the 
program and risk reduction phase, cost and operational 
effectiveness analysis, and other factors that must be taken 
into account in that review.
    The committee has reviewed the Navy's SLAM-ER program and 
considers the development and procurement schedule excessively 
concurrent. The committee understands that on the basis of a 
single controlled flight test, the Navy has made a low rate 
initial production decision that will result in the procurement 
of approximately 19 percent of the total planned buy of SLAM-ER 
before the completion of development and operational testing. 
The committee further notes that flight test of a SLAM-ER with 
operational seeker will not be conducted until Development Test 
II. The committee believes that this decision is neither 
technically nor fiscally prudent. The committee directs the 
Secretary of the Navy to review the development and acquisition 
program for SLAM-ER and provide to the Congressional defense 
committees by December 31, 1997, and provide an assessment 
which addresses the concerns expressed by the committee.

Joint standoff weapon system

    The budget request contained $71.5 million in PE 64727N for 
the joint standoff weapon system (JSOW). JSOW is a modular 
design that is being developed in three variants: a submunition 
dispenser, an anti-armor submunition dispenser, and a unitary 
warhead variant which will incorporate an imaging infrared 
seeker, data link and 500 pound blast fragmentation warhead. 
The committee understands that the submunition variant has 
completed development and initial operational testing with a 
success rate of over 96 percent and has been approved for low 
rate initial production with initial deliveries to the Navy for 
use in the F/A-18 in 1998. Initial procurement of the anti-
armor submunition variant is scheduled for fiscal year 1999, 
however, current program funding levels would delay fielding of 
the unitary warhead variant until 2002. The committee 
recommends an increase of $9.0 million to accelerate the 
development and fielding of the unitary warhead variant.

Joint strike fighter

    The budget request contained $448.9 million in PE 63800N 
for Navy portion of the Joint Strike Fighter (JSF) program.
    The committee is concerned that, although this request 
represents an increase of almost 100 percent in funding for 
Navy JSF participation over fiscal year 1997 levels, it is 
based on schedule, cost, and quantity objectives that no longer 
reflect the Department's plans for Navy tactical aircraft as 
outlined in the recently released Quadrennial Defense Review 
(QDR). The committee understands that the QDR proposes a major 
increase in Navy JSF aircraft quantities from the level 
anticipated in the 1997 Future Years Defense Plan (FYDP) and 
supports efforts to accelerate the Navy portion of JSF. The 
committee recommends an increase of $20.0 million and directs 
the Secretary of Defense to use the increase in funding to 
ensure that JSF meets all Navy requirements and to enable this 
program to support a significantly increased quantity of Navy 
JSF aircraft.
    The committee is also concerned that the 1997 FYDP does not 
reflect adequate funding within the JSF program to continue 
development of the alternative fighter engine (AFE) beyond the 
current demonstration/validation phase. The committee continues 
to believe that a fully developed and flight tested AFE is 
essential to reduce risk to the JSF program and to provide 
credible competition necessary for controlling program cost. 
Therefore, the committee directs the Secretary of Defense to 
provide a report to the Congressional defense committees no 
later than February 15, 1998, detailing the level of funding 
within the JSF program that is identified to fund full 
development and flight test of the AFE.

Joint surveillance and target radar system integration

    The budget request contained $5.1 million in PE 64231N for 
the Joint Maritime Communications Information System (JMCIS)--
Afloat. No funds were requested to include a capability within 
JMCIS to exploit the Joint Surveillance and Target Radar System 
(JSTARS) moving target indicator (MTI) data.
    The committee believes that there are compelling reasons 
for the Navy to acquire the ability to use the JSTARS radar 
surveillance system. The Navy currently has no means to detect 
and track, and locate moving targets, on a large scale, to 
contribute meaningfully to operations ashore. The Navy and 
Marine Corps aviation forces, future variants of the Tomahawk 
missile, shore fire-support systems, and amphibious forces will 
all require highly capable moving target indicator (MTI) radar 
support for situation assessment and targeting.
    Therefore, the committee recommends an increase of $10.0 
million to perform the tasks necessary to integrate JSTARS data 
into Navy and Marine ship and air platforms.

Joint tactical combat training system

    The budget request contained $59.0 million in PE 24571N for 
consolidated training systems development, including $33.6 
million for continued development of the joint tactical combat 
training system (JTCTS). The JTCTS is a Navy-led, joint Air 
Force/Navy program for the development of fixed, transportable, 
and mobile range instrumentation for shore-based tactical air 
crew training and for deployable, at-sea naval expeditionary 
force training.
    The committee notes that the estimated cost of the program 
through fiscal year 1999 has grown over 70 percent in the last 
year, and that the budget request for fiscal year 1998 is $27.5 
million greater than proposed in the fiscal year 1997 Future 
Years Defense Plan. The committee understands that the increase 
results from inadequate estimates of development costs and 
program complexity, failure to clearly define the requirements 
of the development contract, and reductions in Air Force 
funding below that anticipated by the Navy. These factors have 
forced major contract restructure, economic inefficiencies in 
hardware and software development, and a significant extension 
in the development schedule. The committee believes that the 
JTCTSrequirement and program must be reassessed and a new 
system and program baseline established to bring the program under 
control.
    The committee directs the Secretary of the Navy, in 
coordination with the Secretary of the Air Force, to conduct an 
assessment of the JTCTS requirement and development program 
execution and to report the results of the assessment, 
revisions to the program baseline, and funding requirements and 
schedule for completion of the program to the Congressional 
defense committees by December 31, 1997. The committee believes 
that until the assessment is completed, no increase to the 
program is warranted, and therefore recommends a decrease of 
$27.5 million in PE 24571N.

Light airborne multi-purpose system helicopter program

    The budget request contained $73.4 million in PE 64212N for 
other helicopter development.
    The Navy has embarked on a program to convert its existing 
fleet of LAMPS helicopters from the SH-60B configuration to the 
SH-60R configuration. The block II upgrade will enhance the 
anti-submarine warfare and anti-surface warfare capabilities of 
the LAMPS MK III in support of the naval battle group in 
littoral operations and in regional conflicts. The committee 
recommends an increase of $15.0 million to maintain the 
schedule for the block II upgrade and support the insertion of 
ruggedized, scaleable, commercial-off-the-shelf (COTS) avionics 
technology into SH-60R avionics. The committee understands that 
use of COTS avionics technology will yield significant savings 
in production costs during the conversion program and reduce 
overall system life-cycle costs.

Light strike vehicle

    The budget request contained no funds for the light strike 
vehicle (LSV). The committee understands that there is an 
approved operational requirements document (ORD) for 
lightweight, high performance all-terrain vehicles for a number 
of critical missions, such as special operations and forward 
reconnaissance in conventional operations.
    The ORD requires an initial operational capability by 
fiscal year 2001. The committee is concerned that while the 
Commandant has emphasized the high priority of the V-22 Osprey 
to Marine combat capability, the Marine Corps currently has no 
viable ground vehicle that can be carried inside the Osprey. 
Current vehicles for these missions are reaching the end of 
their service life, are easily detected, and have limited 
mobility or are not internally transportable in the Osprey.
    Accordingly, the committee recommends $5.0 million in PE 
26624M to begin the development of the LSV for both the Marine 
Corps and Special Operations Forces, and directs the Secretary 
of the Navy to report to the Congressional defense committees 
by November 30, 1997 the plan to field this critical 
warfighting asset.

Lightweight wide aperture array

     The budget request contained $61.1 million in PE 63504N 
for advanced submarine combat systems, including $10.5 million 
to continue the development of advanced flank array technology.
    The committee recommends an increase of $4.0 million to 
accelerate the development and application of fiber optic 
technology to low cost, lightweight hull array systems for 
current and next generation submarines.

Littoral anti-submarine warfare technology demonstration

    The budget request contained $54.8 million in PE 63747N for 
undersea warfare advanced technology, including $30.9 million 
for shallow water surveillance advanced technology.
    The committee has expressed concerns about the potential 
threat of advanced diesel submarines operating in the shallower 
waters of the world's littoral regions and the challenge posed 
to U.S. surveillance and detection capabilities. In fiscal year 
1996, Congress provided additional funds for the development 
and demonstration of advanced technologies for shallow water 
anti-submarine warfare (ASW). These funds were subsequently 
used for the development, testing, and calibration of 
components of a mobile, high power broadband acoustic 
surveillance source that is based upon the adaptation of 
commercial-off-the-shelf (COTS) air-gun technology. The 
committee understands that this effort has been successfully 
completed and shows promise for filling a significant niche in 
the U.S. ASW shallow water surveillance capability. The 
committee, therefore, recommends an increase of $5.0 million 
for continued development, demonstration, and evaluation of the 
technology which, the committee understands, will permit 
decisions on proceeding further with the development of COTS 
air gun technology as an acoustic surveillance source.

Marine Corps assault vehicles

    The budget request contained $60.1 million for the advanced 
amphibious assault vehicle (AAAV) in PE 63611M.
    The Marine Corps is developing the AAAV to be a high water 
speed, amphibious armored personnel carrier replacement for its 
current fleet of aging amphibious vehicles. The committee 
understands that additional funding is required for fabrication 
and testing of a second prototype which is needed to preserve 
the current schedule if any significant equipment failures 
occur. The committee strongly supports development of the AAAV 
and recommends an increase of $10.0 million for a second AAAV 
prototype.

Marine Corps communications systems

    The budget request contained $38.3 million in PE 26313M for 
Marine Corps communications systems.
    The committee notes that the Commandant of the Marine Corps 
has identified critical unfunded requirements for development 
of a tactical hand held radio, a tactical remote sensor system, 
a Marine common hardware suite, and the tactical electronic 
reconnaissance processing and evaluation system. The committee 
recommends an additional $5.2 million for these programs.

Marine Corps ground combat/supporting arms system

    The budget request contained $12.6 million in PE 26623M for 
Marine Corps ground combat/supporting system development.
    The committee recommends an increase of $4.3 million to 
integrate and test the AN/VVR-1 Laser Warning Receiver into the 
M1A1 Abrams tank. The committee also recommends an increase of 
$0.7 million as requested by the Commandant for the Marine 
enhancement program to support development of better clothing 
and other items for the individual Marine.

Marine Corps ground combat/support system

    The budget request contained $36.5 million for PE 63635M, 
including funding for continued development of the joint Army/
Marine Corps lightweight 155mm howitzer.
    The program has completed competitive selection of the 
prime contractor, and has entered the engineering and 
manufacturing development phase. The committee fully supports 
this program effort to field a much needed replacement for the 
aging and operationally deficient M198 howitzer and recommends 
an increase of $3.6 million.

Marine mammal research program

    The budget request contained $366.3 million in PE 61153N 
for Navy Defense Research Sciences, including $137.1 million to 
support basic research in ocean sciences.
    The committee recommends an increase of $500,000 to 
continue the Navy's cooperative marine mammal research program. 
The committee directs the Secretary of the Navy to submit to 
the Congressional defense committees by March 1, 1998, a report 
on the research being conducted in the marine mammal research 
program and the technological implications of this research to 
Navy sonar requirements.

Medical mobile monitor

    The budget request contained $18.3 million in PE 63706N for 
advanced development and demonstration of medical technology 
for care and treatment of Navy and Marine Corps personnel in 
operational theaters. No funds were requested to continue the 
program for advanced technology development and evaluation of 
the medical mobile monitor.
    The committee continues to believe that the Department must 
place high priority on the fielding of state-of-the-art, cost 
effective, medical care for U.S. forces. The development and 
demonstration of miniaturized, lightweight, rugged emergency 
medicine and medical information technology tools for use in 
forward units should lead to advances in critical medical care 
for the military services that could also be adopted by other 
Federal and civilian medical organizations that are required to 
provide medical care in remote and austere environments. The 
committee recommends an increase of $4.0 million to complete 
the program for development and demonstration of mobile medical 
monitor prototypes and to demonstrate the ability of the 
monitor to interface with existing military communications 
systems and medical information systems.

Micro-electromechanical systems guidance and control

    The budget request contained $37.8 million in PE 63795N for 
land attack systems technology for naval ship-to-shore fire 
support.
    The committee has strongly supported a naval surface fire 
support (NSFS) program which focuses on near and long term 
improvements to naval fire support systems. The committee 
believes that advanced global positioning system/inertial 
navigation system (GPS/INS) guidance and control technology is 
essential to the NSFS program and to other precision guided 
munitions programs. The success of this program and the 
affordability and cost-effectiveness of advanced precision 
guided munitions can be significantly enhanced by micro-
electromechanical systems (MEMS) technology used in the 
guidance and control unit. MEMS technology has the potential to 
significantly reduce the cost of the GPS/INS guidance and 
control for the Navy's extended range guided projectile (ERGM), 
the Army's low cost competent munition (LCCM), and other 
Department programs. The committee is informed of a recent 
successful demonstration of a MEMS-based advanced guidance and 
control unit for the ERGM in gun-fired tests at Yuma Proving 
Ground that demonstrated the promise of MEMS-based GPS/INS 
technology. Accordingly, the committee recommends an increase 
of $5.0 million in PE 63795N to continue the Navy's guidance 
and control risk reduction program, accelerate development and 
qualification of MEMS-based GPS/INS guidance and control, and 
ensure the early availability of the technology for ERGM 
program, LCCM, and other guided munitions, rocket and missile 
programs. The committee recommends that the Secretary of the 
Navy and the Secretary of the Army ensure that the development 
of MEMS-based GPS/INS guidance and control is coordinated 
closely between the two services.

Mine countermeasures autonomous system technology

    The budget request contained $42.7 million in PE 62315N for 
mine countermeasures, mining, and special warfare technology.
    The committee understands that recent research, operational 
simulations, and evaluation of prototype hardware indicates 
that application of autonomous robotics surveillance and 
tactical oceanography system technologies could yield 
significant improvements in shallow water mine countermeasures. 
The committee believes that a partnership between academia, the 
Navy materiel development community, and the Navy operational 
community would be useful in evaluating the utility of such 
systems, developing tactics for their use, and then evaluating 
the operational results in at-sea tests of the systems and 
tactics. To support such a program, the committee recommends an 
increase of $3.0 million for research and development in 
autonomous system technologies for shallow water mine 
countermeasures.

Molecular design material science

    The budget request contained $366.3 million in PE 61153N 
for Navy defense research sciences. The committee holds 
continuing interest in research in the synthesis and creation 
ofnew molecular structures at the atomic level and the 
potential that this research holds for developing new products for use 
in electronics, biomedical science, and many other military 
applications. The committee recommends an increase of $10.0 million to 
continue the program of basic research in molecular design materials 
science that was initiated in fiscal year 1994. The committee directs 
the Secretary of the Navy to conduct an assessment of the goals, 
objectives, and progress of the program, and future directions and 
funding requirements for the program, and to report the results of the 
assessment to the Congressional defense committees by March 15, 1998.

National oceanographic partnerships program

    The budget request contained $48.2 million in PE 62435N for 
applied research in oceanographic and atmospheric technologies, 
including $5.0 million to continue the National Oceanographic 
Partnership Program.
    In the belief that a strong national oceanography program 
is essential to the long-term national security of the United 
States, and to other areas of U.S. national interest, the 
Congress established in section 282 of the National Defense 
Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 1997 (Public Law 104-201) the 
National Oceanographic Partnerships Program. The objective of 
the program is to coordinate and leverage all U.S. 
oceanographic efforts in the Navy, industry, and academia, and 
to encourage the sharing of resources, intellectual talent, and 
facilities in ocean science and education in order to ensure 
the superiority of the U.S. oceanography program. To maintain 
the momentum of the program and provide a bridge until 
additional funds for support of the program can be included in 
the budget requests of other participating agencies and 
departments, the committee recommends an increase of $16.0 
million in PE 62435N and $7.5 million in Navy operations and 
maintenance, as reflected in Title III of this report, to 
continue to support the development of federal, academic and 
industry oceanographic research partnerships under the program.
    The committee commends the Secretary of the Navy for his 
leadership of the National Ocean Research Leadership Council. 
The committee directs the Secretary of Defense to coordinate 
with the secretaries of Commerce, Energy, and Interior, the 
Director of the National Science Foundation, the Administrators 
of the National Aeronautics and Space Administration and the 
Environmental Protection Agency on funding levels required in 
future budget requests for continuation of the NOPP, and to 
provide a report to the Congressional defense committees by 
February 28, 1998 on the funding for the program in the fiscal 
year 1998 budget requests of these agencies and of the 
Department of Defense.

National test and training range center initiative

    The committee understands that the Department of Defense 
has supported development of a capability in the Hampton Roads 
region for integration and transcontinental connectivity of 
military test and training ranges, which would result in a 
national test network architecture to support widely 
distributed combat systems integration and testing. The test 
center, under development by the Navy, would leverage resources 
from several existing government-sponsored high performance 
computing and high speed network programs, such as simulation-
based design, synthetic theater of war, the National Science 
Foundation's partnership for advanced computing infrastructure, 
the high performance computing modernization program, and 
Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency distributed object 
computation test bed. The committee recognizes the potential of 
this technology in reducing the high cost of system 
acquisition, test, and training, while enhancing quality and 
stimulating advances in information technology and electronic 
commerce. The committee encourages enhanced support for the 
Navy's initiative.

Naval biodynamics laboratory data bank

    The budget request contained no funding for the Naval 
Biodynamics Laboratory (NBDL).
    For nearly thirty years, the NBDL focused on the intensive 
test, study, and analysis of the human body's response to the 
trauma of crashes, and developed a national data bank of 
collective human crash response information based on 
approximately 3,500 crash tests using live human subjects. In 
1996, the NBDL ceased operations as a result of previous 
decisions to close the laboratory, but was not able to 
consolidate and safely store its research information in a 
consistent, useful data bank format. The committee believes 
that the effort spent in amassing the unique human response 
data by the NBDL should not be lost. Accordingly, the committee 
directs the Secretary of the Navy to develop a plan for 
establishing a national crash survival data bank that will 
safeguard the integrity of the data gathered by the NBDL and to 
submit a report on the plan and the funding required to 
establish the data bank with the fiscal year 1999 Defense 
budget request.

Navy tactical missile system (NTACMS)

    The budget request contained $37.8 million in PE 63795N for 
development, demonstration, and validation of land attack 
systems technology for naval ship-to-shore fire support.
    The committee is aware of preliminary Navy studies 
indicating that the U.S. Army tactical missile system (ATACMS), 
when suitably marinized for employment by surface ships and 
submarines, would enhance the Navy's capability against many 
potential surface targets. The committee is further aware that 
a Navy version of ATACMS, called NTACMS, meets the requirement 
of the Naval Surface Fire Support Mission Need Statement (MNS) 
for a responsive and lethal fire support missile system. The 
committee is also aware of the successful demonstration in 
November 1996 at White Sands Missile Range of the firing of an 
ATACMS from a Navy Mark 41 Vertical Launch System launcher. The 
proposed NTACMS would adapt the ATACMS Block IA missile with 
the M74 submunition for naval use. In addition, the potential 
exists in the future to adapt other ATACMS warhead variants 
into NATACMS, including the Brilliant Anti-Tank (BAT) anti-
armor submunition and hard target penetrator weapons. The 
committee recommends an increase of $20.0 million in PE 63795N 
for program definition and risk reduction activities to permit 
NTACMS to begin accelerated engineering and manufacturing 
development in fiscal year 1999.
    The committee considers it appropriate that demonstration, 
validation, and risk reduction for NTACM and the Land Attack 
Standard Missile (LASM) continue through fiscal year 1998. The 
committee is aware of competing claims regarding cost and 
effectiveness of the two systems that have been made by system 
proponents. The committee strongly believes, cautions, and 
expects that a through, objective, and independent cost and 
operational effectiveness analysis ofcompeting system 
alternatives will be required before the Navy proceeds with any 
development milestone decision for a land attack missile.

P-3 maritime patrol aircraft modernization program

    The budget request contained $3.2 million in PE 64221N to 
continue upgrades to the P-3C aircraft system to enhance 
surface and surface tracking, classification, and attack 
capabilities.
    The committee notes the continuing disparity between the 
operational requirements of the regional commanders-in-chief 
and the Navy's plans for modernization of the P-3C fleet, and 
believes that the Navy must increase the priority given to the 
P-3C modernization program.
    The committee recommends an increase of $12.0 million to 
continue acceleration of the integration of anti-surface 
warfare improvement program (AIP) sensors to reduce operator 
workload, modernize the operator-machine interface, provide 
additional sensor integration/enhancements, improve/automate 
tactical planning aids, and provide for multi-sensor data 
correlation and fusion.

Power electronic building blocks and power node control centers

    The budget request contained $46.9 million in PE 62121N for 
applied research in surface ship and submarine hull, 
mechanical, and electrical technology, logistics technology, 
and environmental protection for all Navy platforms and shore 
facilities. The request included $6.0 million to continue the 
development of power electronic building block for the rapid 
switching and control of shipboard high power electrical 
systems.
    The committee believes that this technology should be 
accelerated to provide the electric power system options for 
future shipboard designs that include electric drive and for 
meeting reduced manning goals through automation of ship 
systems. The committee also believes that the use of virtual 
prototyping for simulation and evaluation of advanced concept 
electrical systems should contribute to this effort. The 
committee recommends an increase of $6.0 million to accelerate 
the development and demonstration of power electronic building 
blocks, and an increase of $1.5 million to continue the 
development of power node control centers for advanced 
integrated electrical distribution system fault detection, 
switching, reconfiguration, and control of shipboard electrical 
systems.

Precision targeting and location system

    The budget request contained no funds for global 
positioning system (GPS) interference precision targeting and 
location.
    The committee is aware of the potential vulnerability of 
GPS signals to collateral interference and intentional jamming. 
In fiscal year 1997, Congress authorized and appropriated $3.5 
million in PE 64270N for demonstration of a flyable prototype 
of a currently available technology capable of rapid, precision 
location of sources of GPS interference in order to assess the 
technical feasibility and utility of such a targeting system 
incorporated on operational aircraft and unmanned aerial 
vehicles. The committee recommends an increase of $2.8 million 
in PE 64270N to complete the demonstration.

Project ``M''

    The budget request contained $39.7 million in PE 63508N for 
technologies for submarine and surface ship handling, 
machinery, and engineering systems.
    The committee recommends an increase of $5.0 million to 
continue the Navy's program for transition, development and 
demonstration of advanced quieting technology developed under 
the Defense Advanced Research Project Agency Project ``M.''

Proton exchange membrane fuel cells

    The budget request contained $18.2 million in PE 63712N for 
environmental quality and logistics advanced technology.
    The committee understands that proton exchange membrane 
(PEM) fuel cell technology is rapidly maturing and has been 
successfully demonstrated in automotive and portable power 
applications. High power conversion efficiency, modularity, 
rugged operational characteristics and low environmental impact 
should make the PEM fuel cell well-suited for portable and on-
site power generation. The committee believes that 
opportunities exist for the development and demonstration of 
PEM fuel cell technology for both military and civilian 
applications in a cost-shared, cooperative program involving 
government and industry that makes use of existing cooperative 
research and development agreements. The demonstration would 
permit the Department of the Navy and the civilian sector to 
gain experience with, and evaluate the power generation 
capability of a facility-level power plant that uses PEM fuel 
cell technology. Accordingly, the committee recommends an 
increase of $1.8 million to establish a cooperative, cost-
shared demonstration of PEM fuel cell technology.

Remote minehunting system

    The budget request contained $18.3 million in PE 63502N for 
surface and shallow water mine countermeasures, including $6.9 
million for the Remote Minehunting System (RMS) (V)3.
    RMS is a remotely operated system for detection and 
classification of sea mines that operates from surface 
combatant ships and provides the fleet with an organic means of 
finding and avoiding mined waters. The RMS prototype was 
successfully demonstrated in Exercise Kernel Blitz in March 
1995 and subsequently deployed in an overseas exercise in which 
the system again demonstrated great success in providing the 
force the ability to quickly assess and monitor the extent of 
the sea mine threat. The success of the demonstration has 
resulted in an accelerated program to deploy RMS to the fleet 
and the endorsement by the Chief of Naval Operations and the 
Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff. The committee 
understands that an increase in funding would enable completion 
of a second engineering development model (EDM) of the RMS, 
including the over-the-horizon communication subsystem, and to 
support integration of the RMS in DDG-51 Flight IIA new ship 
construction and the AN/SQQ-89 undersea combat system. 
Development of the second EDM would permit the Navy to meet an 
aggressive program schedule and reduce program risk by allowing 
concurrent environmental and development testing. The committee 
recommends an increase of $7.9 million to accelerate the 
integration of the RMS capability on other ships of the fleet.

Safety and survivability enhancements

    The budget request contained $263.9 million in PE 65864N, 
including $131.8 million for test and evaluation support at the 
Naval Air Warfare Center Weapons Division and $85.7 million for 
test and evaluation support at the Naval Air Warfare Center 
Aircraft Division.
    The committee believes that there is a high potential for 
the adaptation of commercial off-the-shelf non-developmental 
items (COTS NDI) that could improve operational safety and 
combat survivability in the Navy's operational commands. To 
that end, the committee has previously supported funding for 
the procurement, test, and evaluation by the Navy of COTS NDI 
that have high potential for contributing to safety of flight, 
fire fighting, damage control, emergency preparedness ashore, 
survival at sea, and chemical/biological warfare defense. The 
committee recommends an increase of $2.0 million to continue 
ongoing evaluations and expand the program to assess COTS NDI 
that are new to the industrial marketplace. The committee 
recommends that the Secretary of the Navy consider establishing 
a separate program line item for this activity in future budget 
requests.

Second source qualification program for carbon fibers

    The budget request contained $76.7 million in PE 62234N for 
materials, electronics and computer technologies.
    The committee continues to monitor the Navy's efforts in 
materials applied research and development in support of 
aviation platform affordability, supportability, and mission 
performance. The committee recommends an increase of $2.0 
million to continue the program established in fiscal year 1997 
to address new materials processes such as resin transfer 
molding and to establish second source qualification procedures 
for carbon fibers for advanced composites used in several naval 
aircraft and for prepreg systems.

Shipboard condition-based maintenance and damage assessment

    The budget request contained $46.9 million in PE 62121N, 
including $8.6 million for logistics and environmental quality 
technology.
    An objective of the Navy's logistics technology program is 
the development of diagnostic technologies that will enable the 
implementation of condition-based maintenance, rather than the 
traditional philosophy of time-based maintenance. The committee 
believes that advanced micro-electromechanical systems (MEMS) 
employed in damage-tolerant sensor networks show promise for 
meeting the Navy's goals for shipboard condition-based 
maintenance and damage assessment. Accordingly, the committee 
recommends an increase of $5.0 million in PE 62121N for the 
development of enabling MEMS and damage-tolerant sensor network 
technologies in preparation for the initiation of an advanced 
technology demonstration in fiscal year 1999.

Ship self defense program

    The budget request contained $132.3 million in PE 64755N 
for the Navy's ship self defense program, including $14.1 
million for development of an infrared mode upgrade to the 
Rolling Airframe Missile (RAM) and improvements in RAM's 
capability against low-elevation targets. No funds were 
requested to continue development of the Phalanx close-in 
weapon system (CIWS).
    As a result of experience gained during tanker escort 
operations in the Persian Gulf that was confirmed during 
Operation Desert Storm, the Navy established an operational 
requirement for an advanced minor caliber gun system to provide 
close-in defense for surface ships against small surface craft, 
small low-flying aircraft, and helicopters. In May 1993, 
following extensive Congressional defense committee reviews, 
the Navy determined that adding a surface mode capability to 
CIWS would provide the most cost and operationally effective 
solution to address the operational requirement. In July 1993, 
the Navy announced that the RAM would replace Phalanx on major 
surface combatants, although development of the CIWS surface 
mode capability (Phalanx Block IB) would continue for use on 
other surface combatants and ships equipped with the CIWS. 
Currently, 369 CIWS systems are fielded on 222 U.S. Navy ships 
and 233 systems are fielded on foreign ships.
    The committee understands that the Navy intends to end the 
Phalanx Block IB upgrade following the completion of testing 
and will not procure the upgrade for the fleet, but does intend 
to field a low altitude or surface mode upgrade for the RAM 
systems that will be deployed on major surface combatants. Navy 
officials cited the need to reallocate fiscal year 1998 funding 
to higher priority programs as the reason for the Phalanx Block 
IB decision. The committee believes that the Navy's action 
would leave the majority of the Navy's ships without the close-
in defense capability that the Navy previously convinced the 
Defense authorizing committees was required and that this 
decision reflects the Navy's continuing disregard of the 
requirements to provide adequate self defense for U.S. fleet 
ships, other than major combatants, that have been the focus of 
the ship self defense program.
    The committee directs the Secretary of the Navy to reassess 
the requirement for close-in defense of Navy surface ships and 
how the Navy will satisfy the requirements not only for major 
surface combatants, but also for other surface ships in the 
fleet. A report of the results of the assessment and the Navy's 
plan for meeting the requirement shall be submitted to the 
Congressional defense committees by February 28, 1998. No 
fiscal year 1998 funds may be obligated for the RAM upgrade 
program until thirty days after the Secretary's report is 
received by the committees.

Submarine anti-submarine warfare defensive weapons

    The budget request contained $54.8 million in PE 63747N for 
advanced technology.
    The committee recommends an increase of $4.0 million to 
mature the development of hydrodynamics and propulsion 
technologies for the 6.25" torpedo vehicle and expand guidance 
and control technologies. The additional funds would accelerate 
the development and demonstration of technologies applicable to 
quick reaction anti-submarine weapons for close-range 
engagements and to defensive systems for protecting surface 
ships and submarines against torpedo attack.

Submarine combat system multi-purpose processor (MPP)

    The budget request contained $42.3 million in PE 64503N for 
SSN-688 and TRIDENT modernization, including $33.5 million for 
submarine sonar improvement. However, the budget request did 
not contain funding for the MPP.
     To facilitate rapid improvements in submarine acoustic 
data processing, the Navy selected the MPP as the cornerstone 
of sonar upgrades for the existing SSN-688, 688I and TRIDENT 
submarines. At one-half the cost of legacy systems, the MPP 
provides the Navy with vastly improved processing power and the 
ability to integrate advanced software to existing hardware 
using an open operating system architecture. For fiscal year 
1997, the committee recommended an additional $11.0 million and 
Congress appropriated $7.0 million for advanced development and 
rapid introduction of the MPP into the U.S. submarine fleet. To 
continue this cost-effective initiative, the committee 
recommends an increase of $15.0 million.

Surface ship torpedo defense system

     The budget request contained no funds to continue the 
Navy's surface ship torpedo defense (SSTD) program.
    In 1995, the Navy informed Congress that the SSTD program 
was being restructured to mitigate the risk and cost in 
development of an improved torpedo defense capability for Navy 
surface ships. The committee is encouraged by the recent 
successes in development of the launched expendable acoustic 
device (LEAD) and the multi-sensor torpedo recognition and 
alertment processor (MSTRAP) and the improvements in SSTD 
capability that these systems will provide when deployed to the 
fleet. However, the absence of funding for continuation of the 
SSTD program in fiscal year 1998 will halt further progress and 
will inhibit the ability of the Navy to capitalize on the 
results of the joint United States/United Kingdom 
demonstration/validation program. Accordingly, the committee 
recommends an increase of $9.8 million in PE 63506N to continue 
the SSTD development program and further enhance detection, 
classification, and localization of threat torpedoes and 
integrated improved soft kill capabilities that are being 
tested in the joint United States/United Kingdom programs.

Surveillance towed array sensor system/low frequency active program

     The budget request contained $9.9 million in PE 24311N for 
the integrated surveillance system, including research and 
development support of the Surveillance Towed Array Sensor 
System (SURTASS) and for the integrated undersea surveillance 
system (IUSS).
    The committee understands that the SURTASS is a proven 
mobile, long-range underwater passive acoustic sensor systems 
and that the addition of the low frequency active (LFA) 
capability provides a significant increase in the capability of 
the system to detect quiet submarines operating in both deep 
ocean and shallow coastal littoral waters. In the statement of 
managers accompanying the conference report on H.R. 3230 (H. 
Rept. 104-724), the conferees agreed to increased funding for 
the SURTASS program which would:
          (1) continue development and integration of SURTASS 
        twin line arrays, reduce the size of transmit arrays, 
        continue fiber optic array development, expand 
        frequency processing capabilities, and conduct at-sea 
        testing of resulting developments;
          (2) sustain the low frequency active program and 
        development of more reliable low frequency active 
        transmitters; and
          (3) adapt SURTASS software algorithms for submarine 
        sonar systems.
    The committee recommends an increase of $4.0 million in PE 
24311N to continue the development of fiber optic sensors for 
the SURTASS/LFA program.

Visualization architecture technology for aviation test and evaluation

     The budget request contained $33.2 million in PE 64759N 
for the Navy's Major Test & Evaluation Investment program.
    The committee understands that increased funding is 
required for the visualization architecture and technology 
project to develop and improve data display technologies, 
provide enhanced situation awareness, and improve the ability 
of developmental and operational test personnel to assess 
complex, dynamic air combat testing and operations. The 
committee recommends an increase of $3.0 million, and expects 
the project to focus initially on improving aviation 
development and test capabilities at the Navy's Air Combat 
Environment Test and Evaluation Facility.

                            Air Force RDT&E

                                Overview

    The budget request contained $14,451.4 million for Air 
Force RDT&E. The committee recommends authorization of 
$14,659.7 million, an increase of $208.4 million.
    The committee recommendations for the fiscal year 1998 Air 
Force RDT&E program are identified in the table below. Major 
changes to the Air Force request are discussed following the 
table and in the classified annex to this report.
    Offset Folios 226 to 233 Insert here

<SKIP PAGES = 008>

                       Items of Special Interest

ALR-69 radar warning receiver

    The budget request contained $25.6 million in PE 63270F for 
electronic combat technology. Included in this program are 
modernization efforts to improve the survivability of current 
technology combat aircraft in high radar threat environments.
    The committee notes that while efforts to date have 
successfully improved radar warning equipment for aircraft 
employed by active forces, the Air Force Reserve, Air National 
Guard, and Special Operations Forces aircraft have not received 
adequate development support to integrate these same 
survivability improvements. The committee recommends an 
increase of $14.0 million to accelerate these additional 
survivability improvement efforts.

Autonomous free-flight dispenser system

    The budget request contained $41.2 million in PE 63605F for 
advanced weapons technology.
    The committee notes that the Department of Defense's 
increased emphasis in developing precision guided munitions 
(PGMs) with stand-off capability to enhance strike aircraft 
performance and survivability. Although the services are 
pursuing several PGM development programs to address specific 
requirements, the committee is aware of a previously tested 
glide-bomb PGM which, when modified with turbojet powered 
capability, could address a significant number of current 
precision weapon system requirements. The autonomous free 
flight dispenser-turbo (AFDS-T) has been successfully tested on 
U.S. strike aircraft in an unpowered configuration and a glide 
version is currently in production in Europe for allied 
aircraft. The committee believes that the AFDS-T offers both 
cost effective PGM capability as well as interoperability with 
allied forces and recommends an increase of $15.0 million to 
conduct sufficient verification testing to evaluate the 
capability of this weapon system and its suitability for U.S. 
forces.

Bomber testing

    The budget request contained $389.3 million in PE 65807F 
for test and evaluation support of Air Force test ranges and 
facilities.
    The committee is aware of ongoing efforts to improve B-2 
bomber testing capability at the Bark Flight Test Facility and 
supports the expansion of this facility's capability to conduct 
testing of other Air Force bomber aircraft. The committee 
recommends an increase of $8.0 million to add test capability 
to this existing facility for B-1B, B-52, and other bomber or 
strike aircraft.

Conventional ballistic missile

    The budget request contained $32.8 million in PE 63851F for 
intercontinental ballistic missile (ICBM) demonstration and 
validation activities.
    The committee notes that a number of ``rogue'' nations have 
constructed hardened, deeply buried facilities. Some of these 
facilities represent command and control structures and sites 
at which weapons of mass destruction are developed and stored 
and are therefore of great military significance. The 
destruction of these sites requires a weapon that can penetrate 
hardened structures or rock, while maintaining sufficient 
structural integrity to detonate. The committee further notes 
that the ability of the U.S. military to strike at these 
targets effectively without recourse to nuclear weapons is 
extremely limited.
    The committee believes that a conventionally armed ICBM has 
the potential to hold these targets at risk, in the near term, 
and at modest cost. This proposed capability is based on a 
combination of very high ICBM warhead terminal velocities, 
technologies that allow precision delivery, long range, 
relative invulnerability to enemy defenses, and the maturity of 
current ICBM technology.
    Therefore, the committee recommends $49.3 million for ICBM 
demonstration and validation activities, an increase of $16.5 
million. The additional funding is for the purpose of 
establishing a conventional ballistic missile advanced concept 
technology demonstration program. The funding is to be used to 
modify an existing reentry vehicle, complete flight test plans, 
and procure long lead items to support a flight test.

Ejection seats

    The budget request contained $7.9 million in PE 63216N for 
aviation survivability and $17.2 million in PE 63231F for crew 
systems and personnel protection technology.
    The committee understands that improvements are needed in 
tactical aircraft ejection seat systems to provide adequate 
safety for air crews. The committee fully supports enhanced 
crew safety, and recommends an increase of $1.5 million in PE 
63216N and an increase of $2.0 million in PE 63231F for 
continued development of improvements in aircrew ejection seats 
and evaluation of alternative technologies leading to an 
injury-free ejection seat design.

High speed anti-radiation missile

    The budget request contained $13.6 million for manned 
destructive suppression in PE 27136F.
    The committee believes that the high speed anti-radiation 
(HARM) missile provides a significant capability for 
suppression of enemy air defenses. The committee supports the 
HARM development and recommends an increase of $3.0 million to 
accelerate development of HARM F-16 interfaces and operational 
flight software.

Joint strike fighter

    The budget request contained $458.1 million in PE 63800F 
for the Air Force portion of the Joint Strike Fighter (JSF). As 
mentioned elsewhere in this report, the committee is extremely 
concerned that the current pace of the Department's tactical 
aviation programs is both unaffordable and not coordinated with 
the emerging Quadrennial Defense Review (QDR). The committee 
notes that this request represents an increase of $27.0 million 
over the projected funding for JSF identified in the 1997 
Future Years Defense Plan and recommends $431.1 million, a 
decrease of $27.0 million.

Minuteman safety enhanced reentry vehicle

    The budget request contained $137.9 million in PE 64851F 
for efforts to upgrade the Minuteman III intercontinental 
ballistic missile (ICBM) guidance and propulsion systems.
    The Minuteman guidance replacement program (GRP) is 
replacing 1960's vintage electronics with modern supportable 
technology. The program is proceeding through engineering and 
manufacturing development and the first of the upgraded 
guidance systems is expected to be delivered in 1999. The GRP 
also preserves the option to incorporate the Mk-21 safety 
enhanced reentry vehicle on the Minuteman III ICBM if 
Peackeeper ICBMs, which are now equipped with the Mk-21, are 
retired.
    The committee notes that the Mk-21 is the most modern, 
safest, and logistically supportable reentry vehicle in the Air 
Force inventory. It further notes that the Air Force is 
planning to replace the older Mk-12A reentry vehicle with the 
Mk-21 on 150 Minuteman III ICBMs. However, the actual design 
and development efforts for the hardware and software needed 
for the incorporation of the Mk-21 remain to be accomplished. 
Initial engineering tests will be accomplished with additional 
funding authorized and appropriated for fiscal year 1997. The 
committee believes that a continuation of this effort will 
reduce the risk of a potentially costly redesign and refit of 
the new guidance systems. To promote the timely completion of 
Mk-21 integration efforts, the committee recommends $152.9 
million for PE 64851F, an increase of $15.0 million.

Pollution prevention

    The budget request contained $5.9 million for pollution 
prevention in PE 65854F.
    The committee is aware of an automated monitoring network 
demonstration for in-ground, real-time monitoring of aquifers 
that allows the user to accurately determine if the 
contaminated area is stable or requires costly remediation. 
This smart monitoring system is designed to completely replace 
expensive, time consuming and potentially dangerous collection 
and transporting of soil and groundwater samples for analysis. 
The Air Force requires additional funding to further evaluate 
the system by continuing to monitor current wells and to expand 
the demonstration to monitor for contaminants in the aquifer 
throughout the base. The committee supports improvements in 
environmental monitoring on military installations and 
recommends an increase of $5.0 million for this program.

Protein-based ultra-high density memory

    The budget request contained $86.1 million in PE 62702F for 
command, control, and communications research.
    The committee understands that Air Force exploratory 
development in bioelectronics research has produced promising 
results that offer an alternative approach to data storage. 
Work to date has demonstrated that protein memory technology is 
feasible and potentially capable ofenabling significant 
increases in memory storage capacity. The committee recommends an 
increase of $3.0 million to continue protein-based memory research.

Range improvement program

    The budget request contained $47.3 million for major test 
and evaluation investment in PE 64759F.
    The committee understands that the test range at Eglin Air 
Force Base is a national asset that provides important test and 
evaluation capabilities for the Department of Defense. It is 
also aware that the range needs improved instrumentation and 
other modernization to meet 21st century requirements. The 
committee supports improved test and evaluation and recommends 
an increase of $14.8 million for range modernization.

Rocket propulsion research

    The budget request contained $48.1 million for rocket 
propulsion technology in the integrated high payoff rocket 
propulsion technology (IHPRPT) initiative programs.
    The IHPRPT represents the Department of Defense's principal 
technology effort to dramatically improve the performance of 
rocket systems and is leveraged through coordination and 
cooperation with industry and the National Aeronautics and 
Space Administration. The committee believes that the 
Department's strong leadership and commitment to this effort is 
essential to achieving this leverage, and is concerned that the 
requested level of funding may be insufficient to sustain 
critical research in materials and propellants. Therefore, the 
committee recommends an increase of $6.0 million to PE 62601F, 
$1.5 million be added to PE 63302F, and an increase of $1.0 
million to each for PE 62111N and PE 63217N for IHPRPT 
programs.

Rocket system launch program

    The budget request contained $8.0 million in PE 65860F for 
the rocket system launch program (RSLP). The RSLP provides 
research, development, test, and evaluation support to the 
Department of Defense and other government agencies using 
excess ballistic missile assets.
    The committee continues to support the atmospheric 
interceptor technology (AIT) program, a primary technology base 
program within the Ballistic Missile Defense Office for 
advanced hit-to-kill interceptor technologies. Flight tests are 
needed in fiscal year 1998 for the AIT program to move ahead, 
but funding for these tests was not included in the AIT or RSLP 
budget requests. The committee understands that these flight 
tests may use experimental Advanced Solid Axial Stages 
boosters, the testing of which will help the RSLP program 
better meet future requirements. The committee recommends $33.0 
million for RSLP, an increase of $25.0 million, to support AIT 
flight tests in fiscal year 1998.

Solar thermionics orbital transfer vehicle

    The budget request contained $40.8 million for advanced 
spacecraft technology in PE 63401F.
    The committee is aware that space power and thermal 
management technology is important to the goal of making future 
space-based systems more affordable. The committee also 
understands that the Air Force has initiated an orbital 
transfer vehicle program that will use thermionics technology 
to provide both electrical power and propulsion. The committee 
supports use of technological innovation to reduce the cost of 
space systems and recommends an increase of $20.0 million to 
support the orbital transfer vehicle program.

Space and Missile Rocket Propulsion

    The budget request contained $16.2 million within PE 63302F 
for Space and Missile Rocket Propulsion.
    The committee remains concerned that the nation's space 
launch system is too unreliable and expensive and believes that 
exploration of potentially revolutionary launch technologies is 
fully justified. Improving the efficiency and responsiveness of 
U.S. launch capabilities is important to a wide range of 
military activities and to reducing infrastructure costs.
    The Scorpius space launch technology demonstration program 
embodies one promising approach to robust, inexpensive, 
scalable launch capabilities. It has been funded through seven 
small business innovative research awards by BMDO and Phillips 
Laboratory. The committee recommends an increase of $15.0 
million for continuation of the Scorpius program and that the 
funding for the Scorpius program be transferred from BMDO (PE 
63173C) to the Air Force (PE 63302F).
    The committee believes that military single-stage-to-orbit 
(SSTO) vehicles could also be important to future defense 
missions and could provide assured and very flexible access to 
space. The committee notes that the budget request contained no 
funding for the military spaceplane, however, the Air Force has 
expressed support for this program and indicates that it will 
be funded in fiscal year 1999. The committee recommends an 
increase of $15.0 million in PE 63302F to continue this 
program.

Titan space launch vehicles

    The budget request contained $82.4 million in PE 35144F for 
research and development on Titan IVB boosters and related 
equipment.
    The Titan IVB uses upgraded strap-on solid rocket motors 
(SRMUs) to enable the Titan booster to meet increasing 
performance requirements. The Air Force determined that the 
SRMU needed to be requalified for use on the Titan IVB, if the 
program were to continue beyond 37 launches. The process of 
making this determination resulted in a significant lag in the 
obligation and expenditure of funding that was authorized in 
fiscal year 1996. Therefore, the committee recommends $67.4 
million, a reduction of $15.0 million to reflect this delay.

Trusted rubix

    The budget request contained $5.3 million for the 
information systems security program in PE 33140F.
    The committee is aware that the advent of the information 
age has caused a greater reliance on computer-based systems 
and, accordingly supports the Department's efforts to improve 
computer security and to protect the defense information 
infrastructure from attack. The committee recommends an 
increase of $2.3 million for continued development of the 
Trusted Rubix multi-level security program.

                         Defense Agencies RDT&E

                                Overview

    The budget request contained $9,361.2 million for Defense 
Agencies RDT&E. The committee recommends authorization of 
$9,914.1 million, an increase of $552.8 million.
    The committee recommendations for the fiscal year 1998 
Defense Agencies RDT&E program are identified in the table 
below. Major changes to the Defense Agencies request are 
discussed following the table.
    Offset Folios 241 to 248 Insert here

<SKIP PAGES = 008>

                       Items of Special Interest

Active structural control

    The budget request contained $82.6 million in PE 63764E for 
land warfare technology, including $29.0 million for technology 
for early entry forces.
    The committee understands that the helicopter active noise 
and vibration control (HANVC) program is demonstrating in a 
helicopter rotor control system the active structural control 
technology that was developed in the Defense Advanced Research 
Projects Agency advanced submarine technology program. The 
technology has the potential for significantly reducing the 
radiated noise and vibration produced by helicopters. The 
reduction in radiated noise and vibration could increase the 
survivability of helicopters on the battlefield and could also 
significantly reduce maintenance costs as well as crew and 
passenger discomfort. The committee recommends an increase of 
$6.6 million in PE 63764E for the HANVC program.

Advanced concept technology demonstrations

    The budget request contained $121.1 million in PE 63750D 
for Advanced Concept Technology Demonstrations (ACTD). The 
committee is concerned that this represents more than a hundred 
percent increase for the fiscal year 1997 appropriation of 
$58.5 million. Although the Department has stated that ACTDs 
are used to apply mature technologies to meet urgent military 
requirements, the committee has found that ACTDs often use 
technology that is not mature and fail to address a validated 
urgent military requirement. Therefore, the committee questions 
the requirement for the requested funding increase and 
recommends $91.1 million, a decrease of $30.0 million in PE 
63750D.

Advanced lithography program

    The budget request contained $32.0 million in PE 63739E for 
the Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency (DARPA) advanced 
lithography program.
    The committee notes the critical role played by lithography 
in the development of advanced microchip technology and the 
role of the microchip as the engine of the information 
technology revolution that is the foundation of modern 
warfighting. The DARPA advanced lithography program was 
established in response to Section 216 of the National Defense 
Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 1995 (Public Law 103-337) as 
a goal-oriented program to ensure the development of 
lithographic processes that would lead to superior performance 
electronics systems for the Department of Defense. The goal of 
the DARPA program to provide early research in high risk, high 
payoff technologies for the pattern transfer of highly complex 
patterns at sub 0.1 micron resolution, and focuses on the areas 
of maskless writing, new imaging materials, metrology, and 
exploitation of recent developments such as proximal probes and 
quantum structures. DARPA investments are used to demonstrate 
proofs of concept, with planned early transition to the 
services and industry for development of the prototype stage; 
and the DARPA strategy puts responsibility for research and 
development investments within five or six years of production 
in the hands of industry. The committee understands that DARPA 
is working with industry and the Navy to transition the DARPA 
program in x-ray lithography. To facilitate this transfer and 
ensure a smooth transition of the technology development 
program to industry and the Navy, the committee recommends an 
increase of $15.0 million. The committee also recommends an 
increase of $6.0 million for the support of ongoing long term 
nanofabrication and extreme ultraviolet lithography research 
aimed at the fabrication of nanoelectric structures.

Advanced submarine technology program

    The budget request contained $69.1 million in PE 63763E for 
the Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency marine technology 
program. No funds were included for joint U.S./Russian 
submarine research and development.
    The committee recommends an increase of $3.0 million to 
enable the Director of DARPA to establish a U.S.-Russian 
cooperative program for research and development relevant to 
nuclear submarines. This initiative will capitalize on the 
trust and confidence created under DARPA-sponsored initiatives 
with the Russian submarine design bureaus and institutes of the 
Russian Academies of Science. The cooperative program should 
apply to technology in the areas of nuclear submarine 
architecture, ship automation and damage control, submarine 
hydrodynamics and hydroacoustics. The technical direction and 
scope of these initiatives will be coordinated with the 
Department of the Navy.

Airborne information transmission

    The budget request contained $10.8 million in PE 35206D to 
continue testing and evaluation of the airborne information 
transmission (ABIT) system.
    The committee believes that all major airborne 
reconnaissance systems should have the ability to communicate 
and cooperatively operate sensor systems using wide-bandwidth, 
high data rate communications. Such a capability would allow 
real-time database sharing, cooperative target location, a long 
haul ``reach back'' capability to national processing 
facilities, and use/control of collection systems from platform 
to platform. The committee supports the Department's Common 
Data Link (CDL) and ABIT efforts to pursue these capabilities. 
Accordingly, the committee directs the Secretary of Defense to 
conduct a study on the costs, requirements, and benefits of 
adding wide-bandwidth data links on all major airborne 
reconnaissance/surveillance aircraft. The study should also 
provide costs for developing and installing this capability on 
the various aircraft. The results of this study shall be 
provided to the Congressional defense and intelligence 
committees by October 1, 1998.
    The committee notes the ongoing Air Force efforts to 
integrate ABIT capabilities on the RC-135 reconnaissance 
aircraft, and believes this effort should be the basis for all 
future manned reconnaissance interoperability efforts, 
including an ABIT capability on the joint surveillance target 
attack radar system aircraft. The committee recommends an 
increase of $3.0 million for the Air Force to lead this effort.

Airborne overhead integrated task force (AOITF)

    The Department of Defense and the Intelligence Community 
have formed an integrated task force to investigate the costs 
and benefits of correlating airborne and overhead 
signalsintelligence data for improved target location capabilities. The 
task force has concluded the first phase of its work, unquestionably 
showing results that would provide high payoff for tactical forces at 
modest costs. Due to the timing of the task force's study, the 
administration could not address its findings and funding 
recommendations in the budget request.
    Based on the potential importance of this initiative for 
dominant battlefield awareness in several primary mission 
areas, the committee recommends an increase of $7.2 million in 
the PE 35206D, within Defense Airborne Reconnaissance Program 
for continuing AOITF investigations and developments. 
Additionally, the committee recommends an additional $2.3 
million in PE 31359A, within the General Defense Intelligence 
Program for required software improvements to the Joint 
Collection Management Tool program. Other actions are detailed 
in the classified annex to this report.
    The committee applauds the work of the task force and the 
decision to sustain it and ultimately transform it into a joint 
office to oversee implementation. The committee also fully 
endorses the task force's plan to examine the costs and 
benefits of cooperative processing in other, closely related 
areas.

Airborne reconnaissance advanced development

    The budget request contained $4.5 million in PE 35206D for 
continued refinement of the joint airborne reconnaissance 
architecture standards. Included in this amount was funding for 
verifying compliance and interoperability of new upgrades and 
developments. The committee recommends $1.5 million for this 
effort, a decrease of $3.0 million.
    The budget request for PE 35206D also contained $3.0 
million for initiating development of the heavy fuel engine 
(HFE) for the tactical UAV. Department of Defense documentation 
duplicates justification for requesting an HFE within PE 
35204D. Additionally, the committee is aware that previous 
authorizations and appropriations for this effort have not been 
fully obligated or expended. Therefore, the committee 
recommends a decrease of $3.0 million in this program element.

Airborne reconnaissance advanced development

    The budget request contained $9.6 million in PE 35206D for 
studies and advanced designs leading to possible future 
integration of the joint signals intelligence (SIGINT) avionics 
family (JSAF) collection systems on the Global Hawk unmanned 
aerial vehicle (UAV). It also contained $6.6 million for 
beginning development of systems to incorporate the JSAF prime 
mission equipment. The committee understands that this funding 
will not build systems, but only provide the necessary studies 
and initial design efforts to do so.
    The committee understands the Global Hawk is an advanced 
concept technology demonstration (ACTD) designed to validate 
the military utility of a high altitude, long endurance, wide 
area coverage UAV. There is no stated goal for a SIGINT 
demonstration in the ACTD, and as stated by Department 
witnesses, there is no Joint Requirements Oversight Council 
approval for such requirement. Additionally, since the military 
utility demonstration phase of this ACTD is scheduled to be 
completed in fiscal year 2000, there has been no determination 
that this air vehicle will be continued beyond the ACTD.
    Although the committee does not believe this vehicle will 
ever totally replace existing SIGINT systems, it does believe 
there may be a future utility for a focused Global Hawk SIGINT 
mission. However, the committee is not willing to authorize the 
expenditure of such large sums for studying such a future 
mission when the air vehicle has not yet flown, or proven its 
military utility and suitability for its primary imagery role. 
The committee is particularly sensitive to this issue when the 
Department is apparently willing to deny funding to upgrade 
critical operational SIGINT collection systems in order to fund 
demonstration systems. Accordingly, the Congress for fiscal 
year 1997 denied $10.0 million funding request in the Global 
Hawk program element for SIGINT development. The committee, 
however, has recently learned that the Department has an 
additional $4.0 million in fiscal year 1997 funds in the 
Defense Airborne Reconnaissance Program's advanced technology 
funding line for this same purpose.
    Therefore, the committee recommends a decrease of $16.2 
million in this program element for the purpose of advanced 
design for a SIGINT capability on Global Hawk. The committee 
will be willing to address this issue as a product improvement 
to an imagery-capable and militarily suitable air vehicle that 
has been demonstrated, proven, and approved for acquisition. 
The committee believes the fiscal year 1997 funds are 
sufficient to study not implement development of a future 
SIGINT application and agrees the funds should be expended for 
that purpose.

Ballistic missile defense

    The budget request contained $2,589.1 million for research, 
development, test, and evaluation (RDT&E), procurement, and 
military construction of ballistic missile defense (BMD) 
systems within the Ballistic Missile Defense Organization 
(BMDO). The committee recommends changes to the request as 
summarized below:

                        [In millions of dollars]

Support technologies(PE63173C)................................    $25.0 
Navy Theater Wide (PE63868C)..................................    150.0 
Navy Area Theater (PE64867C)..................................     22.0 
THAAD (PE64861C)..............................................     45.0 
National Missile Defense (PE63871C)...........................    474.0 
Cooperative Programs (PE63XXXC)...............................    123.1 
Joint Theater Missile Defense (PE63872C)......................    (18.7)
UAV BPI (PE63870C)............................................    (12.9)
Theater Missile Defense procurement...........................     384.6

    A detailed explanation of the recommended changes are 
provided below.
            Cooperative programs
    The budget request did not contain a separate program 
element (PE) for cooperative ballistic missile defense (BMD) 
programs. The committee continues to support cooperative 
ballistic missile defense programs with U.S. allies.
    The budget request for cooperative BMD programs with Israel 
contained $38.7 million for the Arrow Continuation Experiments/
Arrow Deployability project (ACES/ADP) in PE 63872C, and $12.9 
million for the Unmanned Aerial Vehicle Boost Phase Intercept 
(UAV BPI) program in PE 63870C. The Israeli commitment to 
cooperative BMD development remains strong. The committee notes 
the accomplishments achieved to date by the U.S.-Israeli ACES/
ADP project and recommends $48.7 million for the program, an 
increase of $10.0 million. The committee believes that 
additional funding will support efforts to deploy an Israeli 
ballistic missile defense capability while also providing 
valuable technological benefits to on-going U.S. TMD programs.
    The budget request contained $16.5 million within PE 63308A 
for the Tactical High Energy Laser (THEL) program. The 
committee is aware that the threat from tactical rockets and 
missiles is growing, as such systems proliferate world-wide. 
The U.S. and Israel are cooperating in an effort to respond to 
this threat by developing a high energy laser that can destroy 
tactical missiles in flight.
    The committee recommends a legislative provision (sec. 236) 
that would transfer the THEL program from the Secretary of the 
Army to the director of BMDO, and would authorize a total of 
$38.2 million for the THEL program. The committee directs the 
transfer of $16.5 million from PE 63308A to PE 63XXXC, a new 
program element that would consolidate cooperative ballistic 
missile defense programs under BMDO management. The committee 
also recommends an increase of $15.0 million to ensure 
completion of the first phase of the program to design, build, 
integrate and test the THEL advanced concept technology 
demonstrator and to begin developmental testing to validate 
THEL capabilities. The committee further directs the director 
of BMDO to provide the remaining $6.7 million required for the 
THEL program from BMDO administrative accounts.
    The budget request did not contain funding for two 
cooperative projects with Russia, the Russian-American 
Observation Satellite (RAMOS) and the Active Plasma Experiment 
(APEX). The committee recommends $30.0 million for the RAMOS 
and APEX projects. Recent events indicate some Russian interest 
in exploring the possibility of greater cooperation in this 
area. For example, at the recent Helsinki summit, Presidents 
Clinton and Yeltsin declared that they are prepared to explore 
integrated cooperative defense efforts in the area of early 
warning support for TMD activities, technology cooperation in 
areas related to TMD, and expansion of the ongoing program of 
cooperation in TMD exercises.
    The committee notes that expanded cooperation with Russia 
in the area of ballistic missile defense must be carefully 
considered and implemented only in a manner that does not 
jeopardize U.S. technological advantages or the development and 
deployment of U.S. BMD systems. The committee directs the 
Secretary of Defense to develop a plan for U.S.-Russian 
cooperative projects--identifying the costs and benefits 
associated with each project--and to submit this plan to the 
Congressional defense committees no later than February 1, 
1998.
    The committee believes that the effective management of 
cooperative BMD programs requires their consolidation in a 
separate program element. Therefore, the committee recommends a 
legislative provision (Sec. 232) that would establish the 
``Cooperative Ballistic Missile Program'' as a separate program 
element within BMDO to support technical and analytical 
cooperative missile defense efforts between the U.S. and other 
nations.
    The committee recommends $123.1 million to support the 
cooperative programs in the new PE63XXXC. This amount includes 
the transfers of $38.7 million from PE 63872C, $12.9 million 
from PE 63870C, $16.5 million from PE 63308A, and an increase 
of $55.0 million over the amounts requested.
            Joint theater missile defense
    The budget request contained $542.6 million for the Joint 
Theater Missile Defense (JTMD) in PE 63872C.
    The Pacific Missile Range Facility (PMRF) provides an 
essential test range capability for Navy and other TMD 
programs. PMRF enhancements are needed to ensure that the range 
can support the full scope of TMD testing required in the 
future. The committee recommends an increase of $20.0 million 
for the purpose of upgrading the PMRF.
     The committee also directs the transfer of $38.7 million 
from PE 63872C to the new cooperative BMD PE 63XXXC to support 
the Israeli-U.S. effort to develop the Arrow ballistic missile 
defense system (project 2259). The details of this transfer are 
discussed elsewhere in this report.
    The committee recommends $523.9 million for the JTMD 
program.
            Medium extended air defense system (MEADS)
    The budget request contained $47.9 million in PE 63869C for 
the Medium Extended Air Defense System (MEADS).
    The Administration has identified the MEADS as a high 
priority Theater Missile Defense (TMD) initiative and as an 
important international cooperative development effort. While 
the committee supports MEADS, it does so with some reluctance 
since the Administration currently has no funding in fiscal 
year 1998 or the Future Years Defense Plan (FYDP) to continue 
MEADS development beyond the current project definition-
validation phase. The Administration's apparent lack of long-
term commitment to MEADS threatens both program stability and 
perceptions of U.S. reliability as a partner in current and 
future international cooperative programs. The committee's 
support for MEADS is dependent on the Administration's 
willingness to fund its continued development and the Secretary 
of Defense is urged to provide adequate funding for this 
development in the FYDP and to designate strongly MEADS as a 
core TMD program.
            Multilateralization of the Anti-Ballistic Missile Treaty
    The committee notes the Administration's decision to seek 
to expand beyond Russia the number of states party to the 1972 
U.S.-Soviet Anti-Ballistic Missile (ABM) Treaty to include 
three former republics of the Soviet Union.
    The committee is concerned with the Administration's 
contention that multilateralizing the ABM Treaty is not a 
substantive change to the treaty's terms and, therefore, 
Congressional approval is not required. In a report to Congress 
in November 1996, the Administration asserted that ``the 
resolution of succession questions has long been regarded as a 
function of the Executive Branch'' and that the notion of 
Congressional approval of any succession agreement ``would cast 
doubt on well-established principles of treaty succession.''
    The committee believes that the issue of whether or not 
multilateralization involves substantive changes to ABM Treaty 
has less to do with the question of which states are 
appropriate successors than with the rights accorded those 
states under the agreement reached. For example, the treaty 
allows the parties to deploy up to 100 ABM interceptors. 
However, the administration has stated that Russia will be 
granted exclusive rights to deploy the full complement of 100 
interceptors on its side. In other words, although the former 
Soviet states of Ukraine, Belarus, and Kazakhstan might become 
parties to the treaty, they would not be allowed to deploy ABM 
interceptors on their national territory. In the committee's 
view, this represents a modification to the rights of the 
states party to the ABM Treaty, and, therefore a substantive 
change to the treaty.
    Furthermore, the committee believes that the addition of 
multiple coequal parties to the ABM Treaty would substantively 
change the process by which treaty revisions to might be 
negotiated. Four parties, each of equal legal standing but with 
varying rights accorded under the treaty, would presumably have 
to agree unanimously to amend the treaty if the U.S. pursues 
such amendments. Such a process is substantively different than 
negotiating with one equal party.
    Deployment of an effective national missile defense capable 
of defending all fifty states, even against a limited ballistic 
missile threat, will likely require amendment of the treaty. 
With five parties where there were once only two, the treaty 
amendment process would be rendered much more difficult, and 
perhaps impossible. Thus, even while the Administration 
purports to be committed to an NMD deployment option, it 
simultaneously supports a change to the ABM Treaty that could 
render any such deployment option, short of abrogating the 
treaty, implausible.
    The committee believes that multilateralization represents 
a substantive change to the ABM Treaty, and, as such, that the 
Administration is required to submit any such proposal to 
Congress for appropriate review and approval.
            National missile defense
    The budget request contained $504.1 million for National 
Missile Defense (NMD) in PE 63871C, $324.7 million less than 
appropriated for fiscal year 1997. The Secretary of Defense 
recently informed the committee that NMD funding in the Future 
Years Defense Plan (FYDP) is inadequate to support the program 
and identified a fiscal year 1998 shortfall of $474.0 million, 
part of a total shortfall of at least $2.3 billion over the 
FYDP.
    The committee has consistently believed that proposed NMD 
budgets were inadequate to support the Administration's ``three 
plus three'' deployment readiness program. As early as 1994, 
the committee was informed by the BMDO that annual NMD funding 
of $600 million was required for a viable technology readiness 
program. BMDO reported then that annual funding in the range of 
only $450 million ``could seriously damage our NMD readiness 
strategy and would likely permit projected third world threats 
to the homeland to materialize prior to any viable NMD 
deployment capability.'' In 1995, BMDO informed the committee 
that a ``three plus three'' deployment readiness program would 
require annual development funding of $800 million to $850 
million. However, the Administration's annual funding requests 
have consistently fallen hundreds of millions of dollars short 
of the levels needed for a viable program. Even after the 
Administration provides additional outyear funding for NMD, the 
program schedule will be challenging and the committee is 
concerned that several factors may undermine the viability of 
even the Administration's option to deploy an NMD by 2003.
    First, the previous Under Secretary for Acquisition and 
Technology testified to the committee that no long lead 
procurement funding for NMD had been budgeted anywhere in the 
FYDP because no deployment decision had been made. The 
committee remains concerned that unless appropriate funds for 
long lead procurement, military construction, and deployment 
planning are programmed in fiscal year 1999, the option to 
deploy an NMD by 2003 will be unavailable. Accordingly, the 
committee directs the Director of BMDO to provide a report to 
the Congressional defense committees by February 1, 1998, 
detailing long lead procurement, military construction, and 
deployment planning, and any other acquisition activity that 
must be funded prior to a decision to deploy an NMD in order to 
ensure that deployment by 2003 could be achieved; the cost of 
these activities; and how BMDO intends to preserve a 2003 
deployment option if these activities are not funded in the 
fiscal year 1999 budget request.
    Second, the committee is concerned with persistent NMD 
program organizational difficulties, particularly the delays in 
establishing the NMD joint program office and awarding the lead 
system integrator contracts. The committee urges the Secretary 
to ensure that all management and contract difficulties are 
identified and addressed in an expedited manner in an effort to 
provide some long overdue stability to the program.
    Third, the committee notes that inadequate investments in 
test assets has increased technical and schedule risk for BMD 
programs, including NMD. A recent test failure, due to human 
error in the launch sequence of a NMD test vehicle, resulted in 
delays to the program because another booster and additional 
test targets were not available. The committee finds this kind 
of delay unacceptable for such a high priority program. 
Accordingly, the committee directs the Director of BMDO to 
report to the Congressional defense committees by February 1, 
1998, on the specific steps that are being taken, and those 
that should be taken but are not, to mitigate schedule risks 
and the potential for single point failures resulting from 
inadequate test assets.
    Finally, the committee notes that NMD battle management/
command, control, and communications (BM/C3) funding has 
declined dramatically in each of the last two fiscal years. 
Effective BM/C3 is of central importance to the success of all 
ballistic missile defense efforts. While the committee is 
encouraged that reuse of theater missile defense BM/C3 software 
is being emphasized by BMDO as a means of speeding development 
and reducing risk and cost, NMD software development remains a 
significant challenge. The committee believes that BM/C3 
development and risk reduction efforts deserve priority 
attention and urges DOD to establish reuse of TMD BM/C3 as a 
significant evaluation criterion in future NMD system contract 
awards, consistent with system requirements.
    The committee believes that deployment of a national 
missile defense remains a national priority and recommends 
$978.1 million, an increase of $474.0 million.
            Navy area theater ballistic missile defense
    The budget request contained $267.8 million in PE 64867C 
for Navy Area Theater Ballistic Missile Defense (TBMD). The 
committee notes the program's recent missile intercept testing 
successes and supports Department efforts to accelerate this 
program. As with all current TMD programs, the committee 
believes that the Navy Area TBMD test program could be more 
effectively accelerated if sufficient threat representative 
missile targets and test component spares were available. 
Accordingly, the committee recommends $289.8 million, an 
increase of $22.0 million to provide additional test support.
            Navy theater-wide missile defense
    The budget request contained $194.9 million in PE 63868C 
for the Navy theater-wide missile defense system. The unfunded 
requirements list from the Chief of Naval Operations and 
communications from other offices in the Navy indicate that the 
theater-wide program is inadequately funded to support an 
accelerated development test plan. Moreover, there is a growing 
concern that the Department still has not thoroughly assessed 
the feasibility of accelerating the currently planned Navy 
theater-wide missile defense deployment date of fiscal year 
2008. Noting numerous Administration statements attaching high 
priority to TMD programs, the committee directs the Secretary 
of Defense to report to the Congressional defense committees no 
later than February 15, 1998, on the cost and technical 
feasibility of options for a more robust Navy theater-wide 
flight test program, the earliest technically feasible 
deployment date, and costs associated with such a deployment 
date. The committee recommends an increase of $344.9 million, 
an increase of $150.0 million, to support a more robust program 
schedule.
            Support technologies
    The budget request contained a total of $147.6 million in 
PE 63173C for BMD support technologies.
    The Atmoshperic Interceptor Technology (AIT) program is an 
ongoing effort that addresses technological challenges common 
to several BMD programs, including THAAD, the Navy theater-wide 
program, and the national missile defense effort by examining 
advanced hit-to-kill warhead technologies. The budget request 
included only $4.9 million for AIT, a reduction from $43.0 
million appropriated for fiscal year 1997. The committee 
supports AIT and recommends an increase of $25.0 million to 
continue more robust AIT development.
    The committee is concerned by a funding reduction of over 
$100.0 million for BMD support technologies from the fiscal 
year 1997 level. Reductions of this magnitude slow the 
development of critical and innovative technologies and are 
inconsistent with the Administration's assertion that the 
budget request supports an acceleration of theater missile 
defense programs. They also undermine the comprehensive 
technology effort needed to stay ahead of the evolving 
ballistic missile threat.
    The committee urges the Secretary of Defense to provide 
adequate funding for BMD support technologies and recommends 
$172.6 million, an increase of $25.0 million.
            Theater high altitude air defense
    The budget request contained $556.1 million for 
demonstration/validation and engineering and manufacturing 
development for the Theater High Altitude Air Defense (THAAD) 
system.
    The committee supports the THAAD program, believes it will 
provide U.S. military forces with critically needed protection 
against ballistic missile attack, and restates its support of 
THAAD as a core TMD system. Although the THAAD program has met 
numerous test objectives to date, the committee is concerned by 
recent test failures and supports the Department's prompt and 
comprehensive program reviews. However, the committee is 
disturbed by indications that the Department nonetheless plans 
to reduce prior year and fiscal year 1998 THAAD funding in 
order to use the funds for other purposes. Although 
identification of the causes of test failures is necessary 
before further testing, the committee believes that both the 
Administration's currently planned fielding date of 2006 may be 
indicative of a program constrained by funding and insufficient 
test opportunities.
    Independent reviews of THAAD have reaffirmed the program's 
planned design, operational requirement, and the successful 
completion of 28 of the 30 THAAD program objectives to date. In 
addition to the on-going review of THAAD, the committee 
believes that the test program will benefit from additional 
funding to provide reserve interceptor, missile, and target 
assets, as well as other back-up resources. A more robust test 
program will help to lower the risk of delays and lost 
opportunities resulting for unexpected anomalies and single-
point failures.
    The committee recommends $601.1 million, an increase of 
$45.0 million in PE 64861C, to provide funds necessary for 
additional THAAD testing and to further mitigate risk in the 
flight test program. The committee strongly urges the 
Department not to reduce funding for THAAD in order to address 
shortfalls elsewhere in the FYDP and to use any prior or fiscal 
year 1998 THAAD funds deemed unavailable for obligation for 
their original purpose for further risk reduction in the test 
program.
            Theater missile defense demarcation
    The committee notes that the presidents of the United 
States and Russia, at the recent Helsinki summit, signed a 
joint statement concerning the 1972 Anti-Ballistic Missile 
(ABM) Treaty and the relationship of TMD systems to that 
treaty. The joint statement outlined the agreement reached last 
year between both sides at the Standing Consultative Commission 
(SCC) regarding lower-velocity TMD systems, which Russia 
refused to sign, and established parameters to be used as the 
basis for further negotiations on higher-velocity TMD systems.
    The committee is concerned with several elements of the 
joint Helsinki statement. First, it establishes limitations on 
TMD systems in the context of the ABM Treaty. The ABM Treaty, 
which prohibits a defense of U.S. national territory against 
strategic ballistic missiles, was never intended to apply to 
theater missile defense systems.
    Second, the Administration asserts that it has sought to 
negotiate an agreement with Russia that would ``clarify'' the 
distinction between permitted and prohibited missile defense 
capabilities. The agreement fails to achieve this 
clarification.
    The committee continues to accept the ``demonstrated 
standard'' identified in section 325 of the National Defense 
Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 1996 (Public Law 104-106), 
which makes no reference to interceptor speeds. Specifically, 
this provision established the principle that TMD interceptors 
could not be tested against a ballistic missile traveling 
farther than 3,500 kilometers or with a velocity greater than 
five kilometers per second. Interceptors tested against 
ballistic targets exceeding these parameters would be 
considered ABM-capable. This ``demonstrated standard'' was the 
only criterion supported by Congress for judging whether TMD 
interceptors were captured by the ABM Treaty.
    The U.S.-Russian Helsinki agreement would establish the 
``demonstrated standard'' as the sole measure of treaty 
compliance for lower-velocity TMD systems, those with speeds of 
three kilometers a second or less. However, no agreement was 
reached on higher-velocity TMDsystems. While the Administration 
has issued public assurances that no U.S. TMD systems now under 
development will be restricted by the Helsinki agreement, it has also 
committed to negotiate with Russia on the higher-velocity systems. The 
Russian perspective on these impending negotiations is that limits on 
interceptor speed must be introduced, the U.S. cannot unilaterally 
declare its higher-velocity TMD programs to be in compliance with the 
ABM Treaty, and that compliance can only be established through 
negotiation
    Far from clarifying the distinction between permitted and 
prohibited systems, the Administration has apparently accepted 
an artificial distinction between lower- and higher-velocity 
TMD and has agreed to negotiations that may limit the 
performance of U.S. TMD systems. The committee opposes 
restrictions on higher velocity U.S. TMD systems, as well as 
negotiations that would compel any degradation of the 
capabilities embodied in U.S. TMD systems, present or future.
    Third, the agreement reached in Helsinki went beyond even 
the Administration's stated objective of clarifying ambiguities 
in the ABM Treaty. For instance, the joint statement notes that 
TMD deployments should be limited in ``number and geographic 
scope.'' Such a restriction could impose for the first time 
unacceptable restraints on where and how TMD systems might be 
deployed.
    Fourth, the joint statement notes U.S.-Russian agreement 
that no TMD deployment will be directed against the other 
party. This prohibition could deny new NATO members an 
important defensive benefit under Article V of the North 
Atlantic Treaty. Under such a restriction, Russia may object to 
U.S. TMD systems deployed in Western Europe or Asia intended to 
protect U.S. forces and allies. Such a restriction is likely to 
make it more difficult to build an allied consensus on the need 
for TMD.
    Finally, the language of the joint statement committing the 
sides to ``exchange detailed information annually on TMD plans 
and programs'' has the potential to provide Russia with 
sensitive information regarding U.S. TMD programs, as well as 
an opportunity to challenge U.S. TMD programs early in their 
development. Such exchanges must be carefully thought through 
and implemented only to the extent that they do not undermine 
U.S. national security objectives.
    The committee notes the Administration has stated that the 
Helsinki agreement on theater missile defense demarcation 
represents a substantive change to the ABM Treaty and its 
intention to submit the agreement to the Senate for its advice 
and consent. The committee believes that a full and thorough 
debate over the implications of the TMD demarcation agreement 
for U.S. security is long overdue.
            Theater missile defense of U.S. territories
    The committee supports highly effective theater missile 
defenses for the territories of the United States and urges the 
Secretary of Defense to take all appropriate steps to ensure 
that U.S. ballistic missile defense planning continues to be 
responsive to evolving threats to these territories.

Chemical-biological defense program

    The budget request included a total of $530.9 million for 
the chemical-biological defense (CBD) program of the Department 
of Defense, including $320.8 million in research, development, 
test, and evaluation and $210.0 million in procurement.
    The committee has been advised of problems in manufacture 
and qualification of new production M-40 protective masks and 
is concerned about the impacts of these problems on the ability 
to meet acquisition objectives for the mask. The committee 
directs the Secretary of the Army to review the M-40 mask 
procurement program and provide a report to the Congressional 
defense committees by October 30, 1997, which addresses the 
results of that review and the actions to be taken to correct 
any problems discovered.
    The committee notes that the Counter Proliferation Review 
Committee's May 1997 Report states the Defense Advance Research 
Projects Agency (DARPA) biological warfare defense program will 
no longer be incorporated into the CBD program management and 
oversight structure. The Committee directs the Secretary of 
Defense to ensure that the DARPA biological warfare defense 
program is coordinated and integrated under the program 
management and oversight of the Department's CBD program.
    The committee understands that the Department's policies on 
anthrax vaccination of U.S. forces and support for Other than 
U.S. Forces are awaiting final approval, and that these 
decisions will impact total funding, vaccine production, and 
storage requirements. The committee also notes the impending 
award of a prime systems contract to develop new biological 
defense vaccines, pursue vaccine licensing, and produce 
stockpile vaccines to meet the Department's requirements.
    To address funding shortfalls in the budget request for the 
CBD program, the committee recommends an increase of $1.6 
million in PE 63384BP for vaccine advanced development, an 
increase of $858,000 in PE 64384BP for vaccine development and 
an increase of $5.0 million in PE63884 to support on-going 
development efforts in detectors, decontamination equipment, 
and protective equipment for the Chemical-Biological Quick 
Reaction Force and its components.
    The committee directs the Secretary of Defense to address 
the above issues as specific areas of interest in the next 
annual report to Congress on the NBC defense program.

Central test and evaluation investment plan

    The budget request contained $131.4 million for the central 
test and evaluation investment plan (CTEIP) in PE 64940D.
    The committee notes the reduction in funding for CTEIP and 
supports Department initiatives to streamline and consolidate 
development test operations. However, the committee understands 
that additional funds are required to begin the preliminary 
design phase for the heavy vehicle test facility. An increase 
of $10.0 million will accelerate the development, by a full 
year, of this capability offering significant cost and schedule 
benefits for future heavy vehicle development programs.
    The committee is also concerned that anechoic research 
efforts of both the Air Force and Navy are insufficiently 
funded in the budget request. The committee recommends $142.9 
million, an increase of $1.5 million for CTEIP for the heavy 
vehicle test facility and an increase of $10.0 million to 
adequately support both service anechoic research programs.

Commercial technology insertion programs

    The budget request contained $47.9 million in PE 63752D for 
insertion of commercial technology in military systems.
    The committee supports programs designed to reduce life 
cycle costs as well as enhance system reliability, 
maintainability and capability. However, the committee views 
this type of activity as integral to specific systems 
acquisition programs and not as a separate activity. The 
committee recommends no funds for PE 63752D and directs the 
Secretary of Defense to ensure that these initiatives are 
incorporated within the Department's dual use applications 
program.

Conventional munitions demilitarization technology

    The budget request contained $12.3 million in PE 63104D to 
continue the program for development and demonstration of 
environmentally compliant technologies for the disposal and 
demilitarization of conventional munitions, explosives, and 
rockets.
    The committee is pleased that the Department of Defense has 
developed a joint explosives demilitarization program in 
accordance with the National Defense Authorization Act for 
Fiscal Year 1996 (Public Law 104-106) and the direction 
contained in the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal 
Year 1997 (Public Law 104-201), using an integrated management 
structure that follows the model of the large rocket motor 
demilitarization program. The committee notes that the Joint 
Demilitarization Program Report to the Congress, dated February 
1997, reflects a six-year investment plan that is based on 
requirements from the Joint Ordnance Commander's Group and 
includes a range of competitively selected resource recovery 
and demilitarization technologies. The committee understands 
that the joint explosives demilitarization program would 
balance technology maturation with disposal needs that address 
the highest priority demilitarization requirements. The 
committee believes that the program should lead to the fielding 
of safe, efficient, and environmentally acceptable technologies 
for disposal and demilitarization of the nation's stockpile of 
obsolete munitions, explosives, and rockets. To maintain the 
program at the funding level established in the enabling 
legislation, the committee recommends an increase of $3.0 
million, which should permit the acceleration of promising 
technologies and the evaluation of additional alternative 
technologies.

Counter-proliferation analysis and planning system

    The budget request contained $58.3 million in PE 63160D for 
advanced development of counter-proliferation support 
technologies.
    The committee has been made aware of the counter-
proliferation analysis and planning system (CAPS) and is 
supportive of its demonstrated performance as a counter-
proliferation analysis and planning tool for the intelligence 
community and regional commanders-in-chief. The committee 
recommends an increase of $3.0 million in PE 63160D to 
accelerate the development of CAPS mission planning tools and 
develop the system architecture for mission-specific data bases 
and mission support.

DarkStar

    The investigation of last year's crash of the first 
DarkStar unmanned aerial vehicle (UAV) and the experience of 
trying to field the Predator after its successful demonstration 
have revealed that reliability is an important issue for these 
advanced concept technology demonstrations (ACTDs). In 
principle, an ACTD is to demonstrate technology and should not 
expend much resources ensuring that the demonstrated system is 
ready for serial production. However, in practice, the 
Department of Defense has demonstrated a proclivity to move 
directly into production with ACTD configurations immediately 
after successful demonstrations. Taking production issues into 
account in designing systems for ACTDs, therefore, would appear 
to be prudent, especially in cases (such as the endurance UAVs) 
where a unit price cap is a determining factor in the success 
of the program. The DarkStar program office is currently 
examining high-payoff reliability improvement measures for the 
system. The committee directs Department to provide the results 
of this review and any actions taken by February 15, 1998.
    The committee also requests the Department to sponsor a 
study of the operational benefits of adding a moving target 
indicator (MTI) radar capability to the DarkStar, and the costs 
of doing so. This study should be coordinated with the program 
office of the Joint Mobile Target Engagement ACTD, assuming it 
gets underway in fiscal year 1998. The study should be 
submitted to the Congressional defense and intelligence 
committees by April 1, 1998.

Defense airborne reconnaissance office

    The budget request included $21.5 million in PE 35209D for 
operation of the defense airborne reconnaissance office (DARO).
    The National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 1994 
(Public Law 103-160) directed the creation of an organization 
to oversee and coordinate the activities of the military 
services with respect to the development of airborne 
reconnaissance systems. While the committee continues to 
support oversight of service developmental efforts to ensure 
system interoperability and preclude unnecessary duplication of 
efforts, it believes defense reconnaissance system oversight 
and guidance would be more effectively accomplished by the 
Director of Military Intelligence (DMI) than it has been thus 
far by the DARO. The committee further believes that 
development and acquisition of reconnaissance systems would be 
more properly controlled by the military services rather than 
centrally directed by the Office of the Secretary of Defense.
    Therefore, the committee recommends a provision (sec. 907) 
that directs abolishment of the DARO, and transfer of required 
defense airborne reconnaissance program functions to the 
Director, Defense Intelligence Agency (DIA) under his 
authorities as Director of Military Intelligence (DMI) and 
Joint Military Intelligence Program (JMIP) Coordinator. The 
committee directs the Director, DIA to provide a transition 
plan, with a draft DMI DARP charter, to the Congressional 
defense and intelligence committees no later than the 
submission of the fiscal year 1999 President's budget.
    The committee recommends no funding for the DARO, and $7.5 
million for continued DARP management, a decrease of $14.0 
million.

Digital terrain elevation data

    The budget request contained no funds in PE 35206D for 
developing a digital terrain elevation data (DTED) collection 
capability for aircraft.
    The stated requirements for DTED are very stringent and may 
cost the Department of Defense more than it can afford using 
current and planning collection methods. There are also 
indications that the Joint Warfare Capabilities Assessment for 
intelligence and reconnaissance casts doubt on the need for 
worldwide DTED at the currently required levels (3, 4, and 5). 
Instead, the committee believes it may be sufficient to have 
the surge capability to collect such data only when needed with 
an airborne system. However, no such DTED collection capability 
currently exists.
    Therefore, the committee, recommends $2.0 million in this 
PE for the Department to conduct an analysis to determine 
design trades from which to choose an airborne platform to 
perform fine DTED data collection. This analysis should 
determine whether an embedded system or a ``remove and 
replace'' configuration that could be installed as necessary on 
an airframe of opportunity makes the most sense. The committee 
requests that the results of this analysis be provided to the 
defense and intelligence committees no later than April 1, 
1998.

DP-2 thrust vectoring system

    The budget request contained $82.6 million in PE 63764E for 
land warfare technology. The committee recommends an increase 
of $14.0 million to continue the DP-2 thrust vectoring system 
development and demonstration program.

Endurance unmanned aerial vehicles

    The budget request contained $216.7 million in PE 35205D 
for endurance unmanned aerial vehicles (EUAV). The request for 
high altitude EUAVs contained $96.0 million for Global Hawk and 
$54.6 million for DarkStar, while $15.0 million was requested 
for the medium altitude UAV Predator.
    The committee notes that the Department initiated Advanced 
Concept Technology Demonstrations (ACTD) to develop and 
demonstrate the two high altitude EUAVs in 1995 in order to 
permit the rapid and affordable evaluation of advanced 
capabilities. The EUAV ACTD also included the specific 
requirement that the two EUAV candidates must prove the ability 
to be procured at a unit cost of $10.0 million or less before 
being selected to perform the EUAV mission. The committee 
understands that the Global Hawk is to provide continuous, all-
weather, day/night, wide-area reconnaissance and surveillance 
in direct support of the joint forces commander. The DarkStar 
is intended to provide essentially the same capabilities, but 
is designed to employ stealth technology to operate in high 
threat environments.
    While the committee supports the need for determining the 
military utility of long-dwell UAVs for broad area coverage, it 
remains concerned about the two high altitude EUAVs. The 
concern is heightened by the recent DOD Inspector General 
report that states a lack of clear military worth of the 
current high altitude EUAV efforts. Further, the committee is 
concerned that current efforts are pushing the technologies 
involved and not specifically demonstrating proven/existing 
technologies (a major issue raised in the DOD IG report). The 
committee is also aware of system reliability and 
maintainability concerns and is concerned that it appears as 
though there is an apparent rush to this unproved UAV solution. 
In fact, the Department's own documentation shows that roughly 
39 percent of the airborne reconnaissance budget is going into 
proving UAVs--an extremely high percentage to demonstrate 
unproved capabilities that have marginally stated requirements.
    The EUAV ACTD management plan states that the number of 
Global Hawk and DarkStar EUAVs produced may be changed based on 
program status or user input. The committee understands that an 
adequate test program can be conducted with four Global Hawk 
air vehicles, four DarkStar air vehicles and two ground control 
stations, and strongly recommends that the Department complete 
the ACTDs, and user evaluations of the EUAV's military worth, 
before authorizing a high altitude EUAV acquisition program.
    The committee understands that the Department currently 
plans to suspend Global Hawk and DarkStar production after 
delivery of a total of five prototypes each in fiscal year 1997 
until both UAVs have been proven airworthy. The committee 
endorses this decision and recommends that all Global Hawk and 
DarkStar UAV assets remaining after completion of ACTD testing 
be transferred to the Air Force Air Combat Command for 
continued evaluation and user operational testing.
    The medium altitude EUAV, the Predator, was established as 
an ACTD in response to an urgent requirement identified by the 
Joint Chiefs of Staff (JCS) in 1993. The committee notes that 
while there have been some problems with this system, Predator 
is the first ACTD to complete transition to a production 
program. The success of the Predator in a number of continental 
United States exercises and two operational deployments to 
Bosnia has prompted the JCS to seek additional funding for 
Predator, including a number of pre-planned product improvement 
(P3I) upgrades to be included with production systems. Of the 
funds requested for fiscal year 1998, $4.4 million are 
designated for beginning development and integration of P3I 
upgrades. The committee recommends elsewhere in this report 
that additional procurement funding be provided to accelerate 
these upgrades.

Facial recognition technology

    The budget request contained $29.1 million for the DOD 
counter-terror technical support (CTTS) program in PE 63122D.
    The CTTS is an interagency program for development and 
demonstration of surveillance, physical security, and 
infrastructure protection technology. The committee fully 
supports use of advanced technology to control access to 
critical facilities, and recommends an increase of $5.0 million 
for the development and demonstration of biometric access 
control technology, including the use of authentication 
software and the principal component method of facial 
recognition.

Flat panel display initiative

    The budget request contained $37.0 million in PE 62708E for 
the development of the technology and manufacturing capability 
for high definition displays.
    In 1994, the President and the Department of Defense 
announced a five year Flat Panel Display Initiative and 
affirmed the commitment to establishing a viable domestic flat 
panel display industry. The objective of the program is to 
establish a domestic technical capability for development of 
advanced displays using multiple technological approaches, 
demonstrate themanufacturing capabilities required for high 
resolution military information display systems, and ensure the 
availability of advanced technology displays for use by defense 
agencies and the military services. The committee notes the success of 
the initiative in the development and demonstration of advanced 
technologies for high definition displays, in the increased level of 
participation in the program and funding provided by industry, and in 
the establishment of domestic capabilities for the manufacture of high 
definition displays. The ultimate success of the program will be a 
viable domestic flat panel display industry and proliferation of the 
application of flat panel display technology in the commercial sector 
and in the military services. The committee also notes, however, that 
the government's share of the program contained in the fiscal year 1998 
budget request for the Defense Advanced Research Project Agency is 
significantly below that originally projected when the initiative was 
announced to Congress in 1994. The committee believes that a stable 
funding level should be sustained until the completion of the original 
five year program. Such stability in funding is necessary in order to 
capitalize on previous investments in the development of high 
definition display technology and domestic manufacturing capabilities 
and to meet the government's stated commitment to support the 
establishment of domestic capabilities for manufacturing of flat panel/
high definition displays and display substrates. Accordingly, the 
committee recommends an increase of $23.0 million to sustain the 
program at the fiscal year 1997 funding level. The committee also 
recommends that the program place increased emphasis on the 
demonstration of flat panel displays for various applications by the 
military services in order to facilitate the transition of the flat 
panel display program to the military services and their use of the 
technology for service applications.

High altitude endurance unmanned aerial vehicle common ground segment

    The budget request contained $51.1 million in PE 35205D for 
the high altitude endurance (HAE) unmanned aerial vehicle (UAV) 
common ground segment (CGS), $9.0 million of which was for 
testing.
    The committee understands that $10.0 million of fiscal year 
1997 funds were authorized and appropriated for this same 
testing. The committee also understands that such testing was 
not completed due to the delays in both HAE advanced concept 
technology demonstrations. Therefore, the committee recommends 
$42.1 million, a decrease of $9.0 million.

Joint robotics program

    The budget request contained $23.2 million in PE 63709D for 
the joint robotics program.
    The committee notes that vehicle teleoperation capability 
(VTC) technology is becoming mature and recommends an increase 
of $10.0 million to evaluate VTC technology.

Joint wargaming simulation management office

    The budget request contained $71.3 million in PE 63832D for 
the Defense Modeling and Simulation Office activities to 
coordinate simulation policy within the Department of Defense, 
establish interoperability standards and protocols, promote the 
use of simulation within the military departments, and 
establish guidelines and objectives for coordination of 
simulation, wargaming, and training.
    The committee recommends $60.0 million, a reduction of 
$11.3 million. The committee believes that aggressive, 
innovative use of advanced modeling and simulation will be 
necessary if the Department of Defense is to modernize and 
perform its mission in the most cost-effective and timely 
manner, and will require that simulations be interoperable and 
reusable to the maximum extent possible. The committee 
understands that this is a key goal of the Department's 
Modeling and Simulation Master Plan. The committee also 
understands that the Department has successfully developed and 
demonstrated a high level architecture (HLA) for advanced 
modeling and simulation, which provides a necessary technical 
foundation for interoperability and reuse, and that the 
Department has a policy which requires HLA-compliance for all 
its simulations. The committee agrees with this initiative and 
intends to support only those investments in simulations which 
are HLA-compliant.

Joint strike fighter

    The budget request contained $23.9 million in PE 63800E for 
continued development of the Joint Strike Fighter. The 
committee understands that defense-wide funding for this 
program has been transferred to the Navy and Air Force research 
and development accounts, and, therefore, recommends no funds 
be authorized in defense-wide research and development accounts 
for this program.

Maritime technology program

    The budget request contained $37.4 million in PE 63746E to 
continue the maritime technology (MARITECH) program.
    This program is a five-year Defense Advanced Research 
Projects Agency (DARPA) initiative to preserve the U.S. 
shipbuilding industrial base by improvements in the industry's 
commercial competitiveness through the application of advanced 
technology. The committee notes the success of the MARITECH 
program to date. The program's two-phased acquisition strategy, 
which focuses in the near term on the development of 
internationally competitive commercial ship designs and 
construction strategies and in the long term on the development 
of advanced product and process technologies, has resulted in a 
significant increase in the level of activity and 
competitiveness of the U.S. shipbuilding industry. The 
committee recommends an increase of $4.0 million to support 
transition of the technologies developed under the program to 
the military services and to expand the opportunities for 
participation in the MARITECH program by the smaller, 
technologically innovative companies, that have participated in 
the DARPA program for development of advanced information 
technologies (such as simulation based design, virtual 
prototyping, and ship systems automation).

Multi-function self-aligned gate array

    The budget request contained $122.0 million in PE 35204D 
for tactical unmanned aerial vehicles (UAV), including $34.5 
million for tactical control systems.
    The committee recommends an increase of $6.0 million to 
complete the UAV multi-function self-aligned gate array 
technology development and demonstration program.

Next generation internet revolutionary applications

    The budget request contained $40.0 million in PE 62110E for 
the Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency (DARPA) component 
of the Next Generation Internet (NGI) program.
    NGI involves DARPA, the National Science Foundation (NSF), 
Department of Energy (DOE), National Institute of Science and 
Technology (NIST), and National Aeronautics and Space 
Administration (NASA) in a three-year, $100.0 million per year 
program to development and demonstrate the technologies, 
protocols, and standards for a very high speed, broad bandwidth 
NGI that will offer reliable, affordable, secure information 
delivery at rates thousands of times faster than today. The 
program has three goals: (1) develop the next generation 
network and connect universities and Federal research 
institutions with high speed networks that are 100 to 1000 
times faster than today's Internet; (2) promote experimentation 
with the next generation of networking technologies; and (3) 
demonstrate new applications that meet important national goals 
and missions.
    A fundamental objective for the NGI is to demonstrate a 
wide variety of nationally important applications that cannot 
be achieved over the current Internet infrastructure. Ideally, 
these applications will include federal agency mission, 
university and other public, and private sector applications. 
Potential application areas for the NGI include the following: 
health care (telemedicine, digital patient records, and 
emergency medical response team support), education (distance 
education, shared learning, and digital archives and 
libraries), scientific research (energy, earth systems, 
climate, and biomedical research), national security (high 
performance global communications and advanced information 
dissemination), environment (monitoring, prediction, warning, 
and response), government (delivery of government services and 
information to citizens and businesses), emergencies (disaster 
response and crisis management), design and manufacture 
(manufacturing engineering and virtual design), and information 
security (active and passive protection of defense and 
commercial information networks and information data bases). 
Many of these areas are of particular federal interest since 
they represent federal mission-critical applications that 
require advanced networking services and capabilities.
    The committee strongly endorses the NGI initiative. The 
committee supports the concept of the NGI initiative working 
with the applications communities--federal agencies, the public 
sector, academia, and private companies--to incorporate new and 
existing networking technologies and capabilities developed 
under the NGI into applications of importance to each community 
and which the community cannot achieve over the current 
Internet infrastructure, and the formation of cooperative 
ventures with regional consortia established for this purpose 
among federal agencies, local governmental authorities, 
industry, and academic institutions. The committee expects that 
such initiatives would leverage the application specific 
funding, knowledge, skills, and methods brought to the venture 
by the members of the regional consortium. Accordingly, the 
committee recommends an increase of $15.0 million to fund 
specific connectivity, functionality, services and software 
among the applications communities and regional consortia that 
will maximize the value of the infrastructure connectivity and 
services deployed by the NGI. The committee directs that 
competitive procedures shall be used for awarding all 
partnership grants and entering into all partnership contracts, 
cooperative agreements, and other transactions under the 
program, and encourages the establishment of cost-shared 
relationships where feasible.

Pulsed fast neutron analysis technology demonstration

    The budget request contained no funds for continuation of a 
program for demonstration of the application of pulsed fast 
neutron analysis (PFNA) technology to the inspection of cargo 
and baggage at ports-of-entry for the presence of drugs, 
explosives, nuclear and chemical agents, and weapons of mass 
destruction.
    Proposals have been made for the development and 
operational field demonstration of a relocatable PFNA cargo 
inspection system, which would be based upon Defense Advanced 
Research Projects Agency (DARPA)'s completed demonstration of a 
fixed-site PFNA system; and a total of $11.2 million was 
appropriated for this purpose in fiscal years 1996 and 1997. In 
March 1997, the Technical Support Working Group initiated a 
contract for modification of the fixed-site PFNA demonstrator 
to a relocatable system for testing in a controlled operational 
environment. The committee understands, based on a recent 
General Accounting Office report, that PFNA system technology 
has not been adopted by the U.S. Customs Service because of 
concerns about cost, size, operations, and safety issues. The 
committee also understands that the fixed site system has not 
yet demonstrated the ability to detect chemical agents or 
special nuclear materials, that an additional $10.0 million 
will be required to complete system modification and the 
operational testing program, and that the Customs' Service has 
not indicated any funding support for the program or intent to 
field the system should operational testing be successful.
    The committee believes that the ability of fixed-site PFNA 
system to detect chemical agents and special nuclear materials 
must be demonstrated before the program proceeds to the design 
and engineering phase for a relocatable PFNA system, and 
recommends no additional funding for the PFNA program in fiscal 
year 1998. The committee directs the Secretary of Defense and 
the Secretary of the Treasury to conduct a joint assessment of 
the PFNA program which addresses Department of Defense and 
Department of the Treasury operational requirements for a PFNA 
cargo inspection system, demonstrated technical performance of 
the fixed-site PFNA inspection system, the ability of a 
relocatable PFNA inspection system to meet the operational 
requirements, the intention of each Department regarding the 
fielding of the PFNA inspection system, and recommendations and 
funding requirements for the completion of the testing program 
and fielding the system. The results of the assessment shall be 
provided to the Congress by December 31, 1997. Should the 
Secretary of Defense and the Secretary of the Treasury jointly 
recommend continuation of the program, the committee would 
encourage the reprogramming of fiscal year 1998 funds for that 
purpose.

Response to threats of terrorist use of weapons of mass destruction

    The budget request contained $49.5 million to improve 
emergency response preparedness and coordination with state and 
local agencies through First Responder training, interagency 
exercises and technical assistance.
     The National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 
1997 (Public Law 104-201) directed the President to take 
immediate actions to enhance the capability of the Federal 
government to prevent and respond to terrorist incidents 
involving weapons of mass destruction, to provide enhanced 
support to improve the capabilities of state and local 
emergency response agencies to prevent and respond to such 
incidents at both the national and local level. The committee 
has reviewed the President's January 1997 report to the 
Congress, which provided hisassessment of those capabilities, 
and the Counterproliferation Program Review Committee's May 1997 report 
that provides the details of the Department of Defense role.
    The committee notes the actions taken to date by the 
Department of Defense to enhance emergency domestic 
preparedness and response to terrorist nuclear, biological, or 
chemical attacks under the counterproliferation support program 
and the CBD program. The committee notes the initial progress 
that has been made and that much remains to be done to extend 
the program to additional metropolitan areas and local 
jurisdictions.
            Chemical-biological response team
    Public Law 104-201 required the Secretary of Defense to 
establish and maintain at least one chemical-biological 
domestic terrorism rapid response team. The committee 
understands that the Department is establishing a Chemical-
Biological Quick Reaction Force (CBQRF) and directs the 
Secretary of the Army, as executive agent for the domestic 
emergency response program, to ensure that the plans, programs, 
and budget of the CBQRF and its components are reviewed to 
ensure full coordination and integration of all DOD assets. The 
committee also directs the Assistant to the Secretary of 
Defense (Nuclear, Chemical, and Biological Defense Program) to 
ensure that all research, development, and acquisition efforts 
in support of the CBQRF and its components are fully integrated 
and coordinated within the Department's chemical and biological 
defense program.
    The committee understands that the Department of Defense is 
examining a new mission for the National Guard which would 
involve countering chemical and biological terrorism in the 
United States. The committee notes that the Army National Guard 
and the Army Reserve include a number of chemical defense units 
which could be employed in response to a chemical emergency and 
also notes that trained chemical incident response forces are 
present at the Army's chemical munitions storage sites. The 
committee believes that the availability of the National Guard 
chemical defense units to State authorities would make them 
particularly useful in response to a chemical or biological 
incident.
     The committee recommends an increase of $2.0 million in PE 
63122D to accelerate the development and evaluation of 
protective masks for emergency response forces that could be 
used in the evacuation of casualties and other personnel from a 
contaminated area.
     Elsewhere in this report the committee recommends an 
increase of $5.0 million to the Department's chemical and 
biological defense program to support on-going development 
efforts in detectors, decontamination equipment, and protective 
equipment for the CBQRF and its components.
            First responder training
    The committee understands that an interagency training 
strategy is being developed which would initially focus 
training under the domestic emergency response preparedness 
program on professional emergency response organizations in the 
27 cities and metropolitan areas identified by the Federal 
Bureau of Investigation as being at particularly high risk and 
that the DOD Office of Domestic Preparedness (collocated with 
the Army's Chemical-Biological Defense Command) has been 
assigned responsibility for development of the first responder 
training program. The program objective is to complete first 
responder training for 126 major metropolitan areas and cities 
within three years. The committee recommends that emphasis also 
be placed on training of local volunteer emergency first 
response organizations. The training program and priorities 
must be coordinated with State emergency management directors. 
The committee believes that support of the first responder 
training program would be an appropriate mission for the 
National Guard and should be considered by the Secretary of 
Defense and the involved governors. The committee also believes 
that in addition to the ``train the trainer'' approach being 
used in the existing program, an exportable training package 
should be developed that is oriented toward the training of 
volunteer emergency first responders. The committee recommends 
an increase of $7.0 million in PE 65160D to support the further 
development of the first responder training strategy and the 
development of an exportable training package suitable for use 
by volunteer emergency first response organizations.
            Exercise program
    During the committee's review of the budget request, 
several proposals were made for the establishment of major 
exercise and training facilities at the national or regional 
level. The committee endorses the use of training exercises to 
test and improve consequence management response capabilities, 
but believes that the exercise site requirements should be 
based on the training and exercise needs of the agencies to be 
exercised, site capabilities, frequency of use, and proximity 
to participating agencies. These considerations imply the need 
for an overall coordinated training exercise strategy similar 
to that developed for training by the Senior Interagency Group. 
The committee recommends an increase of $5.0 million in PE 
65160D to support the development of a training exercise 
strategy for domestic emergency response preparedness and 
support of pilot training exercises in accordance with that 
strategy.
     The committee directs the Secretary of Defense, in 
coordination with the Director of the Federal Emergency 
Management Agency and the Director of the Federal Bureau of 
Investigation, to provide an annual assessment of progress in 
the domestic emergency response preparedness program. The 
report should be submitted to the Congressional defense 
committees beginning with the fiscal year 1999 budget request 
and extending through fiscal year 2001.

Reuse technology adoption program

    The budget request contained $105.5 million in PE 62301E 
for the Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency (DARPA) 
project for development of new information processing 
technology concepts that may lead to fundamentally new software 
and intelligent systems capabilities. No funds were requested 
to continue the Reuse Technology Adoption Program (RTAP).
    The committee notes the initial progress that has been made 
through the RTAP program in developing the software technology 
that would enable the use of software components, which were 
developed for a specific weapon system or applications, in 
other weapons systems and applications. If successful, 
development of this technology would result in increased 
productivity and reduced costs in the development of software-
intensive systems by the military services and defense 
agencies. The committee recommends an increase of $4.5 million 
to continue the RTAP initiative. The committee directs the 
Secretary of Defense to make an assessment of the goals and 
objectives of the RTAP initiative, results of the program to 
date, andplans and funding requirements for the future, and to 
submit a report on the results of the assessment to the Congress by 
March 1, 1998.

Safeguard

    The budget request contained $60.0 million in PE 62384BP 
for exploratory development of advanced technologies for 
chemical and biological defense in the areas of detection, 
identification and warning, contamination avoidance, individual 
and collective protection and decontamination.
    The committee recommends an increase of $10.8 million to 
continue the program, initiated by the Defense Advanced 
Research Projects Agency, for proof-of-concept demonstration 
and prototype development of multi-spectral sensors for 
detection of chemical agent precursors and agents from medium 
and high altitude platforms. The committee believes that the 
results of the program to date indicate the potential the 
technology has for stand-off detection and identification of 
chemical agents on the battlefield and for detection of the 
production of chemical agents and their precursor chemicals.

Smart unattended undersea sensors

    The budget request contained $69.1 million in PE 63763E for 
the Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency marine technology 
program, including $21.9 million for development of sensor and 
sonar technologies, advanced ship mechanical systems, and 
advanced maritime platforms.
     The committee is aware that the proliferation of quiet 
diesel-electric submarines in the fleets of potentially hostile 
nations represents a significant threat to U.S. Naval forces 
operating in the shallower waters of the world's littoral 
regions, where environmental factors of acoustic propagation, 
reverberation and ambient noise degrade the capabilities of 
existing acoustic detection systems. While improvements are 
being made in active and passive acoustic sensors systems for 
surface ships and submarines, the committee believes that the 
development of smart unattended undersea sensors capable of 
detecting, classifying, and reporting the presence of threat 
submarines to a remote monitoring center could significantly 
improve the capability of the anti-submarine warfare system of 
systems. The committee understands that such sensors could be 
capable of both passive listening and active echo reception, 
and could exploit recent advances in computer chip technology, 
information processing, global positioning system navigation, 
and cellular communications. The committee recommends an 
increase of $4.0 million in PE 63763E for development and 
demonstration of the technology for smart unattended undersea 
sensors.

Special operations intelligence systems development

    The committee is aware of the significant importance of 
mission familiarization for the special operation forces and 
the technology investments being made by joint Department of 
Defense activities.
    The Department, through its development of the Virtual 
Light Table, has displayed a highly effective, user friendly 
environment that is being adapted by the special operations 
forces for mission familiarization. This effort is intended to 
serve as a model for infusion of commercial technology into the 
DOD training environment. The committee views the Mission 
Familiarization Virtual Reality Project (MFVRP) as a 
cornerstone for greatly expanded mission familiarization and a 
new intelligence dissemination methodology. The committee 
recommends that the Special Operations Command pursue 
development of the MFVRP virtual reality technology and 
recommends an increase of $3.0 million in PE 1160405BB for this 
effort.

Special technology support

    The budget request contained $11.8 million in PE 63704D, 
for various Deputy Assistant Secretary of Defense (Intelligence 
and Security) quick reaction intelligence support projects.
     The committee fully supports funding for the Department's 
efforts to quickly respond to unforeseen theater and unified 
command technical requirements. However, the committee believes 
the justifications provided for fiscal year 1998 indicate that 
much of the activities in this program do not fall within this 
category and ought to be pursued, if at all, by the services or 
other DOD technology development agencies.
     Therefore, the committee recommends an authorization of 
$9.8 million for this project, a decrease of $2.0 million.

Strategic environmental research and development program (SERDP)

    The budget request contained $54.9 million in PE 63716D for 
Strategic Environmental Research and Development (SERDP).
    The Department has stated that the objective of SERDP is to 
improve DOD mission readiness by providing new knowledge, cost 
effective technologies, and demonstrations in the areas of 
environmental cleanup, compliance, conservation and pollution 
prevention. In times of increasingly constrained defense 
budgets, it is imperative that DOD efforts are focused on high 
priority, mission-relevant, defense unique, environmental needs 
that are not duplicated by the military services, other 
government agencies, or the private sector.
    The committee notes with particular interest that the 
fiscal year 1998 SERDP program includes projects whose 
objectives are the elimination of toxic materials and solvents 
from explosives and other energetic materials and the 
development of new insensitive materials which meet 
increasingly stringent environmental compliance regulations. 
The committee understands that these projects could lead to 
propellants and explosives that utilize environmentally 
compliant energetic materials for undersea, surface, and other 
weapon systems, and could result not only in higher weapon 
systems performance, but also in significant savings in overall 
life cycle costs. The committee recommends an increase of $3.0 
million to accelerate these activities under the SERDP.

Tactical unmanned aerial vehicle

    The budget request contained $122.0 million for Tactical 
Unmanned Aerial Vehicles (TUAV) in PE 35204D, including $87.5 
million for the Outrider Advanced Concept Technology 
Demonstration (ACTD) program.
    The committee understands that the purpose of the Outrider 
ACTD is to assemble and demonstrate a significant new tactical 
reconnaissance military capability based on matureadvanced 
technology. The Defense Airborne Reconnaissance Office (DARO) 
established the Joint Tactical Unmanned Aerial Vehicle (JTUAV) program 
from two previously unsuccessful programs, the close range and the 
maneuver UAVs. The DARO conducted a competitive selection which 
evaluated nine candidates and awarded a twenty-four month contract for 
the Outrider JTUAV in May 1996. The ``best value'' selection was based 
on the ability to successfully develop and deliver six ACTD systems, 
each consisting of four air vehicles and a ground control station with 
associated equipment, within the 24 months schedule, and, in part on 
the winning contractor's successful flight demonstration of the Hellfox 
air vehicle. The committee is informed that Outrider ACTD is well 
behind schedule and experiencing serious performance problems. Its 
first flight, scheduled for November 1996, did not occur until March 
1997.
    The committee supports efforts to streamline the current 
acquisition process and enable demonstrated capability to 
transition quickly to production. However, the committee is 
extremely concerned that the Outrider ACTD appears to have 
circumvented important acquisition criteria and milestones, 
including the need for the program to address a validated 
military requirement. The Joint Chiefs of Staff Joint 
Requirements Oversight Council (JROC) has failed to formally 
validate a joint operational requirement for the JTUAV, which 
contradicts the Department's own guidance that ACTDs must 
address user requirements clearly enough to firmly establish 
operational utility and system integrity.
    The committee is fully aware of the technical problems that 
have plagued development of the Outrider UAV. Outrider is 
experiencing serious shortcomings that indicate that the 
program is not based on mature technology. The committee 
understands that the program is under special review by the 
Under Secretary of Defense for Acquisition and Technology, and 
is being considered for cancellation by the Department. The 
technical problems with the Outrider UAV, and recent 
observations/statements by the Director, DARO that the 
Department was ``going to cut its losses'' on the program 
appear to lend creditability to this notion. The committee 
recommends a decrease of $87.5 million, resulting in no funding 
for the outrider ACTD. To address urgent service requirments 
for tactical UAVs, the committee recommends an increase $10.0 
million to support a vertical takeoff and landing UAV 
competition that was recently initiated by the DARO. In 
addition, the committee recommends an increase of $11.5 million 
of the funds authorized be made available to provide a 
dedicated Predator UAV system and associated equipment, 
including at least two aircraft equipped with synthetic 
aperture radar and Ku-band link, for operational 
experimentation and testing of the common UAV Tactical Control 
System (TCS).
    To ensure a viable transition from the Outrider ACTD, 
elsewhere in the report the committee recommends an additional 
$10.0 million in operations and maintenance, Army, for 
operating currently owned Hunter UAVs. Finally, the committee 
believes there are a number of existing UAVs, including Hellfox 
(from which the Outrider was derived), the Prowler, and others 
that could satisfy the Army's tactical short range UAV 
requirement. Therefore, the committee recommends $20.0 million 
in aircraft procurement, Army, for acquiring an ``off-the-
shelf'' tactical UAV with minimum development. The UAV selected 
is to be equipped with a digital data link that is compatible 
with the Army digital architecture for the future.
    In summary, the committee recommends a decrease of $66.0 
million for tactical UAVs. The committee directs the Secretary 
of the Army to provide a report to the Congressional defense 
committees outlining the short range UAV acquisition strategy 
no later than February 1, 1998. None of these funds may be 
obligated prior to submission of this report

Three-dimensional microelectronics technology

     The budget request contained $192.2 million in PE 62712E 
for materials and electronics technology, including $56.8 
million for microelectronics device technologies.
    The committee understands that the development of micro-
chip integrated circuit technology and the reduction of the 
size of the individual circuit elements on the micro-chip are 
progressing to the point that the length and density of the 
interconnects between the elements of the integrated circuits 
are becoming the limiting factor in processing speed and 
circuit density. Development of a three-dimensional electronics 
architecture with high lateral and vertical off-chip wiring 
densities could lead to further reductions in chip size, 
significantly increased performance, and reduced micro-chip 
costs. To achieve these goals, advances are required in the 
development of three-dimensional integrated circuit system 
architectures, advanced substrate materials, computer-aided 
design tools, and packaging technologies. The committee 
recommends an increase of $7.5 million in PE 62712E to 
accelerate the development of three-dimensional 
microelectronics technology and demonstration of three-
dimensional microelectronics systems.

Transfer of cooperative engagement capability operating frequency band

    Title VI of the Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act of 1993 
(Public Law 103-66) requires the federal government to provide 
a span of radio frequencies aggregating not less than 200 Mhz 
for allocation to the public. To minimize negative impact on 
the federal government, the act requires that the spectrum to 
be reallocated must not be ``required for the present or 
identifiable future needs of the Federal Government'' and 
should not result in costs to the federal government that 
exceed the benefits gained. In February 1995, the National 
Telecommunications and Information Administration, U.S. 
Department of Commerce, recommended reallocation of 50 MHz from 
within the operating frequency band of the Navy's cooperative 
engagement capability (CEC) system. In the statement of 
managers accompanying the conference report on H.R. 3230 (H. 
Rept. 104-724), the conferees directed the Secretary of the 
Navy to prepare a detailed report on: (1) progress being made 
to resolve spectrum interference that would result from the 
reallocation of the CEC operating band, and (2) steps being 
taken to resolve interference between CEC and other fleet 
weapon systems and data links.
    According to the Department of Defense (DOD) and the 
General Accounting Office (GAO), this transfer could result in 
the loss of a total of 200 MHz (one-third of the CEC's usable 
operating frequencies) and could severely affect the 
operational capability of the CEC. DOD officials have also 
indicated to the GAO that current and future spectrum 
reallocations could significantly degrade the capabilities of 
many major weapons systems in addition to the CEC and could 
cost the Department hundreds of millions of dollars to modify 
systems and/or rent frequencies from the private sector or 
foreign governments. The committee is informed, however, that 
the full implications of the 1993 act are not yet known and 
that the Department is conducting a comprehensive analysis of 
spectrum requirements for critical systems in order to 
determine the extent that operational effectiveness of these 
systems could be affected by loss ofthe frequency spectrum. The 
committee also understands that a recent DOD study indicates that the 
Department's top level spectrum management for planning, policy, and 
oversight is diffused and weak and that there is no single high-level 
DOD point of contact for spectrum management.
    In response to H. Rept. 104-724, the Secretary of the Navy 
has reported that the Navy is working with the Federal 
Communications Commission (FCC) to minimize interference with 
civilian applications in the reallocated frequency band and the 
effect of the reallocation on CEC performance. The Secretary's 
report also states that the Navy's preferred technical option 
for resolution of interference between CEC and the LAMPS Mk III 
data link is moving the LAMPS data link to the Ku-band. Should 
the Navy choose this option for resolution of the problem, the 
committee expects that the funding required for the transfer 
will be included in the fiscal year 1999 defense budget 
request.
    The committee concurs with the steps taken by the Navy to 
address the issues raised in the House report, but believes 
that the problem should be addressed in a more comprehensive 
manner by the Secretary of Defense. The committee encourages 
the Secretary to assign responsibility for overall radio 
frequency spectrum management to a specific organization within 
the Department. The committee directs the Secretary to prepare 
a report to the Congress, in coordination with the Chairman of 
the FCC and the Secretary of Commerce, which addresses: (1) 
agreements on measures being taken to resolve the impact of the 
transfer of 50 Mhz from the radio frequency operating band of 
the cooperative engagement capability (CEC); (2) the impact of 
transfers of the federal radio frequency spectrum on other 
critical military systems; (3) how the DOD plans to modify the 
CEC and other critical systems, including estimated costs and 
schedule, to compensate for any operational degradation that 
might be caused by losses of the radio frequency spectrum due 
to such transfers; and (4) any unresolved issues in joint 
frequency spectrum management and impediments to the 
resolutions of these issues. The report shall be submitted to 
the Congress by March 31, 1998.

United States imagery and geospatial system improvements

    The budget request contained $109.4 million in PE 35102BQ, 
for the national imagery and mapping agency's (NIMA) 
development, procurement and integration of an end-to-end 
imagery production capability for geospatial information.
    The Director of NIMA has officially embraced the Defense 
Science Board's (DSB) direction to move NIMA from production of 
products to the maintenance of geospatial information, a move 
the committee supports. One of the DSB's recommendation 
included trading off production of lower priority products and 
less critical functions in order to fund NIMA's more pressing 
technical needs, thereby allowing the agency to move more 
rapidly in implementing future technical capabilities. However, 
judging from the budget request, the committee does not believe 
NIMA's technology investment is sufficient to efficiently and 
effectively transition to these capabilities.
    Therefore, the committee recommends $124.4 million, an 
increase of $15.0 million for developing and fielding the 
modern imagery and mapping technologies.

University research initiative (URI)

    The budget request contained $237.8 million in PE 61103D 
for the University Research Initiative. However, the committee 
understands that overall funding fiscal year 1998 URI has 
increased by $23.0 million above the amount forecast just 
months ago in the 1997 Future Years Defense Plan. Requested 
funding for URI includes $10.0 million for the defense 
experimental program to stimulate competitive research 
(DEPSCoR). The committee supports continuation of the DEPSCoR 
program to strengthen the infrastructure, enhance research, and 
develop human resources to assist the DEPSCoR states to become 
more competitive for regular research and training grants. 
Therefore, the committee recommends $20.0 million for DEPSCoR 
within URI funding. Although supportive of URI, the committee 
believes that the overall funding increase is unjustified in 
light of other critical underfunded priorities and recommends 
$224.8 million, a decrease of $13.0 million.

Verification technology demonstration

    The budget request contained $83.4 million in PE 63711H for 
verification technology demonstration.
    The committee understands that the requested funding 
increase of $54.3 million is to initiate a new program for 
monitoring associated with the comprehensive test ban treaty 
(CTBT), and that this program was previously administered by 
the Air Force, with anticipated expenditures for fiscal year 
1998 of $29.0 million. The committee finds that the capability 
to conduct such activities, with regard to seismic events 
within the United States and its territories already exists 
within the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS), an agency of the 
Department of the Interior. Therefore, CTBT functions and 
obligations associated with seismic events occurring within the 
United States should be performed by the USGS, and a redundant 
technical capability should not be created within the 
Department of Defense. The committee recommends no funds for 
use by the Department of Defense for the purpose of 
establishing an independent capability to monitor, analyze, and 
report on domestic seismic events, as part of the CTBT 
functions or obligations.
    The committee, therefore, recommends $69.1 million, a 
decrease of $14.3 million in PE 63711H. Of the amount 
authorized, $11.0 million is recommended to be solely for 
seismic research and technology development. Additionally, of 
the amount authorized, the committee directs that not more than 
$20.0 million may be obligated until memoranda of agreement are 
signed between the Department of Defense and the U.S. 
Geological Survey delineating relationships associated with 
seismic sensing and CTBT monitoring.

Wide bandgap semiconductors

    The budget request contained $101.9 million in PE 62173C 
for applied research for ballistic missile defense programs.
    The committee recognizes the potential of wide bandgap 
semi-conductors that operate at higher power, higher frequency 
and higher temperature and have the ability to operate in high 
radiation environments. The committee recommends an increase of 
$10.0 million in PE 62173C to continue the wide bandgap semi-
conductor program for which funds were authorized and 
appropriated for fiscal year 1997. The committee directs that 
the program continue to involve industry and academia in 
applied research in gallium nitride and silicon carbide 
material growth, characterization, surface behavior and device 
development.

                         LEGISLATIVE PROVISIONS

              Subtitle A--Authorization of Appropriations

              Section 201--Authorization Of Appropriations

    This section would authorize Research, Development, Testing 
and Evaluation (RDT&E) funding for fiscal year 1998.

           Section 202--Amount For Basic And Applied Research

    This section would specify the amount authorized for fiscal 
year 1998 for technology base programs.

               Section 203--Dual Use Technology Programs

    The budget request contained $225.0 million for 
continuation of the Dual Use Application Program (DUAP).
    The committee understands that the Department is attempting 
to structure the DUAP initiative to comply with the guidance 
provided in section 203 of the National Defense Authorization 
Act for Fiscal Year 1997 (Public Law 104-201). The committee 
remains concerned that this program establishes and enforces 
Department guidelines that control the expenditure of valuable 
development funds without linkage to service priorities, during 
a period when Department research and development funding is 
already inadequate to meet critical service requirements. While 
$185.0 million was made available for DUAP for fiscal year 
1997, the committee understands that none of these funds have 
been obligated to date. The committee, therefore, recommends no 
funds for DUAP. This provision would direct the Secretary of 
Defense to fund the DUAP initiative in the service research and 
development accounts.

    Subtitle B--Program Requirements, Restrictions, and Limitations

             Section 211--Manufacturing Technology Program

    This section would amend section 2525 of title 10, United 
States Code, through fiscal year 2000, to establish a funding 
requirement for the manufacturing technology program of 0.25 
percent of the amount available for demonstration and 
validation, engineering and manufacturing development, 
operational systems development, and procurement programs of 
the Army, the Navy, the Air Force, and Defense Agencies, or the 
amount authorized by law for manufacturing technology projects 
of the military departments and defense agencies, whichever 
amount is greater. To ensure efficient implementation of the 
manufacturing technology program, the provision would provide 
the Secretary of Defense with the authority to transfer any of 
the funds made available to another military department or 
defense agency. The provision would require an annual report to 
the Congress through fiscal year 2000 which specifies the 
investment strategy for the manufacturing technology program 
and provides an assessment of program effectiveness; and would 
also require in the fiscal year 2000 report an assessment of 
the formula by which funding for the program is determined and 
any changes recommended in the formula, and recommendations for 
extension of the funding authority.
    The Department of Defense manufacturing technology program 
provides ``seed funding'' for the development of moderate to 
high risk materials, process, and equipment technology to 
enable production of advanced, high quality weapons systems 
with shorter lead times and reduced acquisition costs. The 
committee strongly supports the manufacturing technology 
program in the areas of electro-optics, advanced composites, 
electronics, metalworking, maritime applications, joining, 
advanced manufacturing, energetics, technology transfer, best 
manufacturing practices, advanced gear manufacturing, and 
others. To maintain the Department of Defense manufacturing 
technology program at the funding level needed to assure the 
availability of advanced manufacturing technology and processes 
for use in Defense acquisition programs, the Congress has 
provided annual increases to the budget request each year for 
the past several years. The funding authority that would be 
established by this provision is intended to stabilize the 
funding level and eliminate the uncertainty in annual funding 
that has reduced the effectiveness and efficiency of the 
program. The provision would also tie the funding level and 
advanced manufacturing technologies and processes being 
developed in the program to the manufacturing technology and 
process requirements of the various Defense acquisition 
programs in accordance with the purpose of the manufacturing 
technology program as stated in subsection 2525(b). In meeting 
the funding level needed to support the development of the 
manufacturing technologies required by the acquisition 
programs, the Department would have the alternatives of 
budgeting for the manufacturing technology development programs 
in the appropriate military departments and defense agency, or 
of funding the manufacturing technology program by a small 
percentage tax on the acquisition programs that will benefit 
from the technology.
    In recommending this provision, the committee reemphasizes 
the requirements of section 2525(d) of title 10, United States 
Code, for competitive procedures and cost-sharing in the 
awarding of grants and entering into contracts, cooperative 
agreements, and other transactions under the program.

 Section 212--Strategic Environmental Research and Development Program

    This section would direct the Secretary of Defense to 
submit a report by February 28, 1998 specifying (1) the 
defense-unique and mission-relevant aspect of each SERDP 
initiative, and (2) certifying that each initiative is not 
duplicative of environmentally related research, development 
and demonstration activities of other departments and agencies 
of the Federal, state and local governments, or of other 
organizations engaged in such activities.

             Section 213--Tactical Unmanned Aerial Vehicles

    This section would direct that: (1) no funds be made 
available for the Outrider advanced concept technology 
demonstration program, (2) that $10.0 million be made available 
to carry out a competition for an unmanned aerial vehicle (UAV) 
capable of vertical takeoff and landing, and (3) that $11.5 
million be made available to provide a Predator UAV system to 
facilitate development of a common tactical control system.

 Section 214--Revisions to Membership of and Appointment Authority for 
               National Ocean Research Leadership Council

    This section would amend section 7902 of title 10, United 
States Code to provide that the President shall appoint members 
of the National Ocean Research Council who are not already 
government officers, to represent the views of the ocean 
industries, state governments, and academia, and such other 
views as the President considers appropriate. The section would 
also provide that the President may delegate the appointment 
authority to the head of a department.

   Section 215--Maintenance and Repair of Real Property at Air Force 
                             Installations

    This section would amend chapter 949 of title 10, United 
States Code by adding a new provision to permit the use of both 
research, development, test, and evaluation funds and 
operations and maintenance funds for maintenance and repair of 
real property at Air Force installations.

  Section 216--Expansion of Eligibility for the Defense Experimental 
               Program to Stimulate Competitive Research

    This section would make a technical correction to section 
257 of the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 
1995 (Public Law 103-337) and would reauthorize the eligibility 
of the District of Columbia, Puerto Rico, Guam, and the United 
States Virgin Islands to participate in the Defense 
Experimental Program to Stimulate Competitive Research 
(DEPSCoR). It would also expand the definition of ``State'' to 
include the territories of American Samoa and the Commonwealth 
of the Northern Marianas Islands for purposes of the DEPSCoR.

     Section 217--Limitation on the Use of Funds for Adaptation of 
Integrated Defensive Electronic Countermeasures (IDECM) Program to F/A-
                   18E/F Aircraft and AV-8B Aircraft

    This section would limit the Secretary of the Navy to 
obligating no more than 50 percent of the amount authorized to 
be appropriated for development of the IDECM program for 
adaptation to the F/A-18E/F and AV-8B aircraft until the amount 
authorized to be appropriated for development of the IDECM 
program for adaptation to the F/A-18C/D aircraft is completely 
obligated.

Section 218--Bioassay Testing of Veterans Exposed to Ionizing Radiation 
                        During Military Service

    This section would direct the Defense Special Weapons 
Agency to make $300,000 available for the Nuclear Test 
Personnel Review Program, which conducts bioassay testing of 
veterans exposed to ionizing radiation during military service.

             Subtitle C--Ballistic Missile Defense Programs

 Section 231--Budgetary Treatment of Amount Requested for Procurement 
                 for Ballistic Missile Defense Programs

    The budget request incorporated a major change in funding 
policy for BMD programs by transferring all procurement for TMD 
programs from the centralized BMD account to the separate 
service procurement accounts. The committee is convinced that 
the Department, through this action, has placed its professed 
highest priority missile defense initiatives at risk by forcing 
them to compete with underfunded modernization programs of 
higher priority for each individual service. Additionally, in 
transferring fiscal year 1998 TMD procurement funding to the 
services, the Department did not issue any specific guidance 
that outyear funding for these programs was to be sustained or 
that TMD programs were to be considered as a service priority. 
Without such guidance, the committee believes that TMD 
procurement would suffer the same fate as other service 
modernization programs which continue to be restructured and 
have their schedules stretched due to funding shortfalls. 
Finally, despite testimony from the Department on the 
importance of TMD programs, the committee is disappointed to 
note that funding for all TMD programs is significantly reduced 
from the levels provided in fiscal year 1997.
    The committee is opposed to the proposed change in the TMD 
funding policy. This provision would direct the Secretary of 
Defense to transfer all fiscal year 1998 TMD program 
procurement funds back to the BMD procurement account. The 
provision would also require that all National Missile Defense 
program procurement funds be included in the BMDO procurement 
account. The committee considers procurement and fielding of 
TMD systems to be a priority congressional interest item and 
directs the Secretary to retain procurement for these programs 
within BMDO.

      Section 232--Cooperative Ballistic Missile Defense Programs

    This section would establish the ``Cooperative Ballistic 
Missile Defense Program'' within the Ballistic Missile Defense 
Organization, to support on-going and future technical and 
analytical cooperative efforts between the U.S. and other 
nations that contribute to U.S. missile defense capabilities.

Section 233--Deployment Dates for Core Theater Missile Defense Programs

    The committee is disappointed by the Administration's lack 
of commitment to the timely deployment of theater missile 
defenses. While the Administration concedes that theater 
ballistic missiles constitute a clear and present danger to 
U.S. forces deployed abroad, Congressional efforts on behalf of 
the rapid development and deployment of TMD systems to meet 
this threat have been slowed by both Administration action and 
inaction.
    In the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 
1996 (Public Law 104-106), Congress established first unit 
equipped (FUE) dates of fiscal year 2000 for Theater High 
Altitude Area Defense system (THAAD), fiscal year 2001 for the 
Navy Theater Wide system, fiscal year 1998 for Patriot Advanced 
Capability Configuration 3 (PAC-3), and fiscal year 1999 for 
the Navy Area Defense system. These dates were based on 
Congressional support for the early deployment of a TMD 
capability, but they were also based on the assumption of 
aggressive and streamlined management as well as robust 
funding.
    However, within weeks of the dates being approved by 
Congress and signed into law by the President, the 
Administration took budgetary and programmatic actions that had 
the effect ofdelaying each of these programs and their 
deployment dates. Compared to the legally directed dates, the 
Administration's plan delayed the THAAD deployment date by six years, 
the Navy Theater Wide system date by at least four years, PAC-3 by one 
year, and the Navy Area Defense system by two years.
    In presenting the fiscal year 1998 funding request earlier 
this year, the Department asserted that all TMD programs had 
been accelerated. Yet in the case of each of these TMD systems, 
the fiscal year 1998 request is lower than the amount Congress 
appropriated for fiscal year 1997. Despite the requirements of 
Public Law 106-104, the Administration target FUE dates for 
PAC-3 and Navy Area Defense remained fiscal year 1999 and 2001, 
respectively, the dates the Administration unilaterally 
established in 1996 contrary to the law. As noted elsewhere in 
this report, the Department has still not reviewed the Navy 
Theater Wide program to determine if accelerating the program 
from its currently anticipated deployment date of 2008 is 
feasible. And while Department of Defense announced in January 
that the THAAD FUE would be accelerated to 2004, the program's 
FUE was immediately slipped back to 2006 following a test 
failure.
    The committee continues to believe that a THAAD user 
operational evaluation system (UOES) can and should be deployed 
by fiscal year 2000 and FUE achieved by fiscal year 2004 at an 
acceptable risk given the high-value payoff associated with 
deployment of an operational THAAD capability. The committee 
also understands that BMDO is considering steps that could 
provide a more robust THAAD UOES capability, thus providing 
greater capability in the field at an earlier date, and 
strongly supports any such initiatives. Accordingly, this 
provision would require the Secretary of Defense to structure 
the THAAD program to achieve a THAAD UOES capability by fiscal 
year 2000 and FUE by fiscal year 2004.
    The committee reiterates its concern that the Department 
still has not defined the Navy Theater Wide program nor 
established a program schedule. The committee finds this lack 
of focus and commitment unacceptable and elsewhere in this 
report has directed the Secretary of Defense to report to the 
Congressional defense committees on the earliest feasible Navy 
Theater Wide deployment date. The committee reminds the 
Secretary of Defense of his obligation under current law and 
urges that the Navy Theater Wide program be structured to come 
as close as possible to achieving a UOES capability in fiscal 
year 1999 and FUE in fiscal year 2001.
    Congressional funding increases have helped to accelerate 
the Navy Area Defense system into engineering and manufacturing 
development and the PAC-3 program into procurement. The 
committee also notes the budget request does not propose to 
slip the deployment dates of these two systems further into the 
future. Given both programs' advanced state of development and 
the increasing likelihood that the currently programmed 
deployment dates will be met, this section would also repeal 
the dates specified in section 234 of the Defense Authorization 
Act for Fiscal Year 1996 (Public Law 104-106) for PAC-3 and the 
Navy Area Defense System.
    The committee remains committed to fielding effective TMD 
systems at the earliest feasible date and once again urges the 
Administration to support full funding and aggressive goal-
oriented management for all of these critical systems.

  Section 234--Annual Report on Threat Posed to the United States by 
  Weapons of Mass Destruction, Ballistic Missiles, and Cruise Missiles

    The committee believes that awareness of information and 
assessments concerning evolving threats to U.S. national 
security is essential to informed congressional debate and 
decision-making. To that end, the committee believes that a 
comprehensive description and assessment of the threats posed 
by weapons of mass destruction (WMD) and ballistic and cruise 
missiles to the U.S. and its allies would be an essential 
informational for Congress and the public.
    Therefore, this provision would direct the Secretary of 
Defense, in consultation with the Director of Central 
Intelligence, to prepare and submit to Congress by January 30, 
1998, and January 30 of each subsequent year, a report on 
threats posed to the U.S. and its allies by cruise missiles, 
ballistic missiles, and weapons of mass destruction, and the 
proliferation of such technologies. The report should be 
prepared in classified and unclassified form, to assure the 
most complete information and widest distribution possible.

 Section 235--Director of Ballistic Missile Defense Organization (BMDO)

    The committee believes that without appropriate senior 
leadership and a streamlined reporting chain, BMDO's ability to 
efficiently develop and deploy BMD systems is at risk. 
Therefore, this provision would requiring that the position of 
director of BMDO be filled by an officer of the armed forces of 
the United States with a rank of at least Lieutenant General or 
Vice Admiral. The committee believes that three star rank is 
essential to provide the BMDO director the stature within the 
Department of Defense commensurate with the job's 
responsibilities. The committee notes that the current director 
of BMDO is a Lieutenant General, and expects that the 
requirement established by this section will continue to be 
filled from within existing statutory authorizations for 
general and flag officers.
    The committee also recommends establishing a requirement 
that the director of BMDO report directly to the Secretary of 
Defense concerning all matters pertaining to the management of 
BMDO programs. Such streamlining will help overcome 
bureaucratic obstacles and allow issues to be promptly and 
definitively resolved.

         Section 236--Tactical High Energy Laser Program (THEL)

    This section would transfer the THEL program from PE 63308A 
to an new PE 63XXXC that would consolidate cooperative 
ballistic missile defense programs under Ballistic Missile 
Defense Organization management and would authorize $38.2 
million for THEL.
                  TITLE III--OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE

                                OVERVIEW

                           Funding Priorities

    The Administration's fiscal year 1998 defense budget 
request provides the illusion that funding for readiness of the 
armed forces was increased over past year levels. The 
Administration's rationale for this operation and maintenance 
(O&M) funding increase is that the preservation of readiness is 
a major priority. However, a significant portion of the growth 
in the O&M budget results from inflationary adjustments, 
additional funding for contingency operations, and in working 
capital funds adjustments (mostly to cover prior year 
expenses). When these factors are taken into account, the net 
effect is that the President's budget request would not 
increase military readiness or increase the resources necessary 
to arrest the shortfalls that are beginning to impact on 
battlefield effectiveness and safety.
    In response, the committee's recommendations for fiscal 
year 1998 extend a significant priority to sustaining an 
acceptable level of readiness for our military forces and 
continuing reforms of the administration and infrastructure of 
the Department of Defense (DOD). Each of these areas is 
extensively discussed elsewhere in this report.
    The committee is convinced that reforming the business 
operations of the DOD is critical since only 36 percent of the 
O&M budget relates directly to force readiness. Although a 
portion of the remaining 64 percent contributes indirectly to 
mobilization capabilities, the majority is directly related to 
the overhead needed to maintain a large and somewhat 
inefficient defense bureaucracy. The committee believes that 
too much of the current defense budget finances an overly large 
defense infrastructure at the expense of resources necessary to 
maintain a ready and capable force. The table below shows a 
breakdown of the readiness related expenditures contained in 
the budget request:

                        [In millions of dollars]

Land Forces...................................................  $3,523.2
Air Operations................................................  21,306.3
Ship Operations...............................................   7,431.0
Special Operations............................................   1,169.4
Drug Interdiction.............................................     652.6
                    --------------------------------------------------------------
                    ____________________________________________________

      Total...................................................  34,082.5

    The remaining $59.5 billion contained in the O&M budget 
request has been identified for activities other than training 
and operating military forces. Therefore, the committee 
believes there is ample room for effecting significant further 
efficiencies in the operations of the Department. The 
committee's recommendations in this area are detailed below.

                               Readiness

    Over the past few years, the committee has closely 
monitored the state of military readiness of our nation's armed 
forces. Two years ago, the committee found that the military 
services were in the early stages of a long-term systemic 
readiness problem. In response, the Congress added additional 
funding to the Administration's budget requests to improve 
force readiness.
    In an effort to assess readiness improvements, the 
committee conducted an intensive scrutiny of U.S military units 
around the world that revealed, in fact, military readiness is 
not improving, and may be declining. This investigation 
included numerous interviews and committee hearings with all 
ranks; from major military commands to individual military 
units, non-commissioned officers, and family members. A 
consistent theme voiced by service members was that they could 
only maintain their readiness levels by sacrificing other 
critical areas such as procurement, modernization, and quality 
of life. A recurring statement by many interviewed was that 
they are doing more with less, and working harder and longer 
just to keep up with peacetime mission requirements. The 
committee believes that U.S. military members should not have 
to choose between readiness and maintenance of equipment, 
facilities and quality of life initiatives.
    The committee is concerned that as readiness levels 
decline, the quality of military life will erode to the point 
at which talented and dedicated Americans will question the 
desirability of a career in uniform. As an example, all of the 
military services may soon be facing a critical shortage of 
experienced mid-level pilots due to increased separations to go 
work for a commercial airline industry that