_______________________________________________________________________ 105th Congress Report 2d Session SENATE 105-189 _______________________________________________________________________ DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE AUTHORIZATION ACT FOR FISCAL YEAR 1999 REPORT [to accompany s. 2060] on AUTHORIZING APPROPRIATIONS FOR FISCAL YEAR 1999 FOR MILITARY ACTIVITIES OF THE DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE, TO PRESCRIBE PERSONNEL STRENGTHS FOR SUCH FISCAL YEAR FOR THE ARMED FORCES, AND FOR OTHER PURPOSES together with ADDITIONAL VIEWS ---------- COMMITTEE ON ARMED SERVICES UNITED STATES SENATE <GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT> May 11, 1998.--Ordered to be printed Calendar No. 367 _______________________________________________________________________ 105th Congress Report 2d Session SENATE 105-189 _______________________________________________________________________ DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE AUTHORIZATION ACT FOR FISCAL YEAR 1999 REPORT [to accompany s. 2060] on AUTHORIZING APPROPRIATIONS FOR FISCAL YEAR 1999 FOR MILITARY ACTIVITIES OF THE DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE, TO PRESCRIBE PERSONNEL STRENGTHS FOR SUCH FISCAL YEAR FOR THE ARMED FORCES, AND FOR OTHER PURPOSES together with ADDITIONAL VIEWS __________ COMMITTEE ON ARMED SERVICES UNITED STATES SENATE <GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT> May 11, 1998.--Ordered to be printed ------- U.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE 48-264 WASHINGTON : 1998 COMMITTEE ON ARMED SERVICES (105th Congress, 2d Session) STROM THURMOND, South Carolina, Chairman JOHN W. WARNER, Virginia CARL LEVIN, Michigan JOHN McCAIN, Arizona EDWARD M. KENNEDY, Massachusetts DAN COATS, Indiana JEFF BINGAMAN, New Mexico BOB SMITH, New Hampshire JOHN GLENN, Ohio DIRK KEMPTHORNE, Idaho ROBERT C. BYRD, West Virginia JAMES M. INHOFE, Oklahoma CHARLES S. ROBB, Virginia RICK SANTORUM, Pennsylvania JOSEPH I. LIEBERMAN, Connecticut OLYMPIA J. SNOWE, Maine MAX CLELAND, Georgia PAT ROBERTS, Kansas Les Brownlee, Staff Director David S. Lyles, Staff Director for the Minority C O N T E N T S ---------- Page Purpose of the Bill.............................................. 1 Committee overview and recommendations........................... 2 Explanation of funding summary................................... 3 Division A--Department of Defense Authorizations................. 13 Title I--Procurement............................................. 13 Explanation of tables........................................ 15 Subtitle A--Authorization of Appropriations.................. 16 Sec. 107. Chemical Demilitarization Program.............. 18 Chemical Weapons Convention (CWC).................... 18 Chemical Stockpile Emergency Preparedness Project (CSEPP)............................................ 19 Defense Threat Reduction Agency (DTRA)............... 19 Subtitle B--Army Programs.................................... 20 Sec. 111. Multiyear procurement authority for Longbow Hellfire missile program............................... 41 Sec. 113. Armored system modernization................... 41 Sec. 114. Reactive armor tiles........................... 42 Sec. 116. Extension of authority to carry out Armament Retooling and Manufacturing Support Initiative......... 43 Other Army Programs.......................................... 43 Army Aircraft............................................ 43 UC-35................................................ 43 UH-60 blackhawk...................................... 43 C-12 Flight Maintenance System....................... 43 Longbow.............................................. 44 Army Missile............................................. 44 Enhanced fiber optic guided missile.................. 44 Multiple launch rocket system rocket................. 44 Weapons and Tracked Combat Vehicles...................... 45 Small arms programs.................................. 45 Army Ammunition.......................................... 45 Small arms ammunition................................ 45 M919 25mm ammunition................................. 45 M830A1 tank ammunition............................... 46 Other Army Procurement................................... 46 High mobility multipurpose wheeled vehicle........... 46 Family of medium tactical vehicles................... 46 Medium truck extended service program................ 47 Project management support........................... 47 System fielding support.............................. 48 Army data distribution system........................ 48 Single channel ground and airborne radio system family............................................. 48 Area common user system modernization program........ 48 Night vision equipment............................... 48 Multiple integrated laser engagement system 2000..... 49 Subtitle C--Navy Programs.................................... 50 Sec. 121. CVN-77 nuclear aircraft carrier program........ 76 Sec. 122. Increased amount to be excluded from cost limitation for Seawolf submarine program............... 76 Sec. 123. Multiyear procurement authority for the medium tactical vehicle replacement........................... 77 Other Navy Programs.......................................... 77 Navy Aircraft............................................ 77 F-14 pods............................................ 77 AH-1W series......................................... 77 EP-3 spares.......................................... 77 P-3C antisurface warfare improvement program......... 78 Navy Weapons............................................. 78 Penguin missile program.............................. 78 Improved tactical air launched decoy................. 78 Close-in weapon system surface mode upgrade.......... 79 Surface ship gun mount rotatable pool................ 79 Navy and Marine Corps Ammunition......................... 80 Marine Corps ammunition.............................. 80 Navy Shipbuilding and Conversion......................... 80 LHD-8 advance procurement............................ 80 Strategic sealift.................................... 81 Landing craft air cusioned service life extension.... 81 Other Navy Procurement................................... 81 AN/WSN-7 inertial navigation system.................. 81 AN/BPS-15H surface search radar...................... 81 Submarine acoustic rapid commercial off-the-shelf insertion.......................................... 82 Integration and test facility command and control initiative......................................... 82 Information Technology-21............................ 82 Submarine connectivity............................... 83 Joint Engineering Data Management and Information Control System..................................... 84 Aviation life support................................ 84 AEGIS support equipment.............................. 84 Smart ship equipment................................. 84 NULKA assembly qualification......................... 85 Marine Corps Procurement................................. 85 Modification kits for tracked vehicles............... 85 Avenger.............................................. 85 Night vision equipment............................... 85 Communications and electronics infrastructure........ 86 Light tactical vehicle remanufacturing............... 86 Power equipment...................................... 86 Shop equipment contact maintenance................... 87 Material handling equipment.......................... 87 Subtitle D--Air Force Programs............................... 88 Sec. 131. Joint surveillance target attack radar system.. 105 Sec. 132. Limitation on replacement of engines on military aircraft derived from Boeing 707 aircraft..... 106 Sec. 133. F-22 aircraft program.......................... 107 Sec. 134. C-130J aircraft program........................ 108 C-130J Program Progress.............................. 108 WC-130J.............................................. 109 Other Air Force Programs..................................... 110 Air Force Aircraft....................................... 110 Joint Primary Aircraft Training System............... 110 F-15 220E engine modification........................ 110 ALQ-135 internal countermeasures sets................ 110 F-16 reconnaissance system........................... 111 Theater airborne warning system...................... 111 U-2 sensor upgrades.................................. 111 Air Force Missile........................................ 111 Minuteman III guidance replacement program........... 111 Titan IV space boosters.............................. 112 Other Air Force Procurement.............................. 112 Theater Deployable Communications.................... 112 Defense-Wide Programs.................................... 113 Penetration augmented munition....................... 120 Remote activation munition systems................... 120 Silent Shield........................................ 120 Surgical strike...................................... 120 Maritime equipment................................... 120 National Guard and Reserve Equipment................. 120 Other Items of Interest...................................... 122 Air National Guard Missions.............................. 122 Army aviation modernization.............................. 122 Bradley base sustainment................................. 123 Depleted Uranium Production.............................. 124 Digital information technology testbed................... 124 Domestic Emergency Response Program...................... 124 National Vaccine Stockpile........................... 125 Defense Threat Reduction Agency (DTRA)............... 126 Encapsulated life raft system............................ 126 F/A-18E/F configuration mix.............................. 126 Flight simulators for the Air National Guard............. 127 Full accounting of cost associated with ammunition procurement............................................ 127 Gun ship modernization................................... 128 Secure facsimile machines................................ 128 Small arms training ammunition........................... 129 Tactical trailers and dolly sets......................... 129 Vertical Takeoff and Landing Unmanned Aerial Vehicles.... 129 Title II--Research, Development, Test, and Evaluation............ 131 Subtitle A--Authorization of Appropriations.................. 132 Subtitle B--Program Requirements, Restrictions, and Limitations................................................ 133 Sec. 211. Crusader self-propelled artillery system program................................................ 133 Sec. 212. CVN-77 nuclear aircraft carrier program........ 135 Sec. 213. Unmanned aerial vehicle programs............... 135 Dark Star UAV........................................ 136 Global Hawk.......................................... 136 Sec. 214. Airborne laser program......................... 136 Sec. 215. Enhanced global positioning system program..... 138 Sec. 216. Manufacturing Technology Program............... 138 Sec. 217. Authority for use of major range and test facility installations by commercial entities.......... 139 Sec. 218. Extension of authority to carry out certain prototype projects..................................... 140 Subtitle C--Other Matters.................................... 140 Sec. 231. Policy with respect to ballistic missile defense cooperation.................................... 140 Additional Matters of Interest............................... 141 Army..................................................... 141 Hardened materials................................... 148 Missile technology................................... 148 Scramjet technology.................................. 148 Environmental technology............................. 148 Pollution prevention................................. 148 Software security.................................... 149 Cold regions research................................ 149 Nutrition research................................... 149 Weapons and munitions advanced technology............ 149 Combat vehicle and automotive advanced technology.... 150 Military human immunodeficiency virus research....... 150 Missile and rocket advanced technology............... 150 Advanced tactical computer science and sensor technology......................................... 150 Tactical High Energy Laser........................... 151 Space and missile defense battle lab................. 151 North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) Research and Development.................................... 151 Comanche............................................. 151 Advanced threat infrared countermeasure system....... 152 All source analysis system........................... 152 Radar development.................................... 152 Firefinder........................................... 152 Research, development, test and evaluation support... 153 Army test instrumentation and targets................ 153 Survivability/lethality analysis..................... 153 High energy laser system test facility............... 153 Aerostat joint project office........................ 154 Advanced field artillery tactical data system (AFATDS)........................................... 154 Combat vehicle improvement programs.................. 154 Navy..................................................... 155 Pulse detonation engine technology................... 163 Stainless steel double hull research................. 163 Communications, command and control technology....... 163 Thermal management materials......................... 163 Carbon-carbon heatshield technology.................. 163 Electronic propulsion technology..................... 163 Precision strike and air defense technology.......... 164 Advanced electric systems studies.................... 164 Composite helicopter hangar.......................... 164 Marine Corps warfighting laboratory.................. 164 Freeze dried blood research.......................... 165 Advanced lightweight influence sweep system.......... 165 Studies and experiments for combat systems engineering........................................ 165 SSGN study........................................... 166 Intercooled recuperated gas turbine engine........... 166 Predator............................................. 167 Vertical gun for advanced ships...................... 167 Naval surface fire support system integration........ 168 Joint Strike Fighter................................. 168 Nonlethal weapons and technologies of mass protection program............................................ 169 Advanced communications and information technologies. 170 Parametric airborne dipping sonar.................... 170 Commercial off-the-shelf insertion just prior to critical design review for helicopter improvement.. 171 Integrated defensive electronic countermeasures...... 171 DDG-51 composite director room....................... 171 Laboratories and field activities monitoring efforts. 172 Multi-purpose processor.............................. 172 Non-propulsion electronics system.................... 172 Smart propulsor product model........................ 172 Ship live-fire test.................................. 173 Infrared search and track system..................... 173 NUKLA antiship missile decoy system electro-magnetic compatibility...................................... 173 Voice instructional devices.......................... 174 Global command, control, communications, computers, intelligence, surveillance, reconnaissance (C4ISR) visualization...................................... 174 F/A-18E/F reconnaissance development................. 174 Battle force tactical training....................... 175 Air Force................................................ 176 Friction welding..................................... 185 Integrated high performance turbine engine program... 185 Variable displacement vane pump...................... 185 High frequency active auroral research program....... 185 Night vision technology.............................. 185 ALR-69 radar warning receiver upgrade................ 185 Ballistic missile technology......................... 186 Solar orbital transfer vehicle....................... 186 Micro-satellite technology program................... 186 Range improvements for liquid upper stage testing.... 186 Space control technology development................. 187 Variable stability in-flight simulator test aircraft. 187 EC-130H.............................................. 187 Big Crow program Office.............................. 188 Space maneuver vehicle............................... 188 Theater battle management system..................... 189 C-5 modernization.................................... 189 Aircrew laser eye protection......................... 189 Defense-Wide............................................. 190 University research initiative....................... 198 Chemical and biological defense program.............. 198 Shortcomings in Chemical and Biological Defense Program........................................ 198 DOD Anthrax Immunization Policy.................. 199 Biological Agent Detection and Identification.... 201 Status of Increased Chem/Bio Defense Funds in Fiscal Year 1998............................... 201 Defense Threat Reduction Agency (DTRA)........... 202 Ballistic Missile Defense Organization funding and programmatic guidance.............................. 202 Support technology............................... 203 National Missile Defense......................... 203 Medium Extended Air Defense System............... 204 Theater High Altitude Area Defense (THAAD) system 204 Navy Upper Tier (Theater Wide)................... 205 BMD Technical Operations......................... 205 International Cooperative Programs............... 205 Patriot PAC-3.................................... 206 BMD Targets...................................... 206 Report of the Panel on Reducing Risk in Ballistic Missile Defense Test Programs.................. 206 Countermeasures to missile defense systems....... 206 Medical free electron laser.......................... 206 Computing systems and communications technology...... 206 Telemedicine......................................... 207 Tactical technology.................................. 207 High definition systems.............................. 207 Mixed mode electronics............................... 208 Weapons of Mass Destruction Technologies............. 208 Core Competencies and Critical Expertise......... 208 Implications of nuclear and conventional explosions on critical civil and commercial activities..................................... 208 Structural Response and Blast Mitigation......... 209 Hard and Deeply Buried Underground Structures.... 209 Explosives and conventional demilitarization......... 209 Counterterror technical support...................... 210 Defense Threat Reduction Agency (DTRA)........... 211 Counterproliferation support program............. 211 Counterproliferation Analysis and Planning System 211 Defense Threat Reduction Agency (DTRA)........... 212 Generic logistics research and development technology demonstrations..................................... 212 Advanced lithography................................. 212 Advanced electronics technologies.................... 213 Maritime technology.................................. 213 Advanced concept technology demonstrations........... 213 High performance computing modernization............. 213 Command, control, and communications systems......... 214 Land warfare technology.............................. 214 Physical security.................................... 214 Advanced sensor applications......................... 215 Integrated data environment.......................... 215 Joint robotics program............................... 215 Defense support activities........................... 215 Defense technical information services............... 215 Joint simulation system.............................. 215 Surgical strike...................................... 215 Maritime equipment................................... 216 Other Items of Interest...................................... 216 Acoustic firefinding system.............................. 216 Army After Next Initiatives.............................. 216 Army multimedia tactical adaptor......................... 216 Brain protection in combat head injury................... 217 Defense imagery and mapping program...................... 217 Dual use applications programs........................... 217 Electronic commerce resource centers..................... 217 Electronic safe and arm devices.......................... 218 Flat panel display technology............................ 218 Global Positioning System alternate master control station................................................ 218 Joint experimentation plan report........................ 219 Man overboard notification technology.................... 221 Molten salt oxidation waste disposal technology.......... 221 National automotive center............................... 222 National solar observatory............................... 222 National technology alliance............................. 222 Next generation internet................................. 222 Patriot anti-cruise missile defense system............... 223 Rapid acquisition of manufactured parts.................. 223 Report on Department of the Navy applications for high- performance computing.................................. 223 Report on national security space policy................. 224 Software engineering institute........................... 224 Software productivity.................................... 224 Space weather............................................ 225 Torpedo defense.......................................... 225 Totally integration munitions enterprise................. 225 Trajectory correctable munition.......................... 225 United States-Japan management training.................. 226 Title III--Operation and Maintenance............................. 227 Subtitle A--Authorization of Appropriations.................. 231 Sec. 303. Armed Forces Retirement Home................... 261 Sec. 304. Transfer from the National Defense Stockpile Transaction Fund....................................... 261 Subtitle B--Program Requirements, Restrictions, and Limitations................................................ 261 Sec. 311. Special Operations Command counterproliferation and counterterrorism activities........................ 261 Sec. 312. Tagging system for identification of hydrocarbon fuels used by the Department of Defense.... 261 Sec. 313. Pilot program for acceptance and use of landing fees charged for use of domestic military airfields by civil aircraft......................................... 262 Subtitle C--Environmental Provisions......................... 262 Sec. 321. Transportation of polychlorinated biphenyls from abroad for disposal in the United States.......... 262 Sec. 322. Modification of deadline for submittal to Congress of annual reports on environmental activities. 263 Sec. 323. Submarine solid waste control.................. 263 Sec. 324. Payment of stipulated penalties assessed under CERCLA................................................. 264 Sec. 325. Authority to pay negotiated settlement for environmental cleanup of formerly used defense sites in Canada................................................. 265 Sec. 326. Settlement of claims of foreign governments for environmental cleanup of overseas sites formerly used by the Department of Defense........................... 266 Sec. 327. Arctic Military Environmental Cooperation Program................................................ 266 Subtitle D--Counter-Drug Activities.......................... 267 Drug Interdiction & Counter-drug Activities, Operations and Maintenance........................................ 268 Enhanced Caribbean/Eastern Pacific Interdiction Initiative............................................. 268 Gulf States Counterdrug Initiative....................... 269 Patrol Coastal Craft for Drug Interdiction by Southern Command (sec. 331)..................................... 270 Program Authority for Department of Defense Support for Counter-Drug Activities (sec. 332)..................... 270 Southwest Border Fence (sec. 333)........................ 270 Subtitle E--Other Matters.................................... 270 Sec. 341. Liquidity of working-capital funds............. 270 Sec. 342. Termination of authority to manage working- capital funds and certain activities through the Defense Business Operations Fund....................... 271 Sec. 343. Clarification of authority to retain recovered costs of disposals in working capital funds............ 271 Sec. 344. Best commercial inventory practices for management of secondary supply items................... 271 Sec. 345. Increased use of SMART cards................... 272 Sec. 346. Public-private competition in the provision of support services....................................... 272 Sec. 347. Condition for providing financial assistance for support of additional duties assigned to the Army National Guard......................................... 273 Sec. 348. Repeal of prohibition on joint use of Gray Army Airfield, Fort Hood, Texas............................. 273 Additional Matters of Interest............................... 273 Navy..................................................... 273 Ship depot maintenance............................... 273 Tomahawk recertification............................. 273 Dredging operations for the maintenance of ships in the inactive reserve............................... 274 Naval oceanographic program.......................... 274 Adjustments to civilian personnel education and training funds..................................... 274 Marine Corps............................................. 274 United States Marine Corps initial issue............. 274 Depot maintenance and corrosion control.............. 274 United States Marine Corps Reserve personal equipment 275 Air Force................................................ 275 Air launched cruise missiles and advanced cruise missile engineering analysis....................... 275 Air Force combat training range...................... 275 War reserve materials................................ 275 Adjustments to personnel program funds............... 275 Guard and Reserve Components............................. 276 Defense-Wide............................................. 276 National Guard Youth Challenge....................... 276 STARBASE............................................. 276 Defense reform initiative............................ 276 Adjustments to human resource activity funds......... 276 Overseas humanitarian demining and Commander-in- activities......................................... 277 Cooperative Threat Reduction (CTR) Program........... 277 Defense Threat Reduction Agency (DTRA)............... 277 Operational units readiness resources................ 277 Real property maintenance............................ 277 Civilian personnel levels............................ 278 Foreign currency fluctuation......................... 278 Fuel price reduction................................. 278 Restoration of work years to accomplish essential finance and accounting services.................... 279 Restoration of 1500 work years (in millions)......... 279 Assistance to local educational agencies that have benefit dependents of members of the Armed Forces and Department of Defense civilian employees....... 279 Revolving Funds.......................................... 279 Reserve Mobilization Income Insurance Program........ 279 Other Items of Interest...................................... 279 Defense Threat Reduction Agency (DTRA)................... 279 Defense Special Weapons Agency (DSWA)................ 281 On-Site Inspection Agency (OSIA) and Arms Control Implementation..................................... 281 Nuclear Weapons Council and Maintaining the Nuclear Deterrent.......................................... 282 Management and Oversight of the Defense Threat Reduction Agency................................... 283 Further Efficiencies and Economies................... 283 Department of Defense demolition program and historic properties............................................. 283 Department of Defense shipscrapping practices............ 284 Environmentally-preferable products...................... 286 Federal facilities....................................... 286 Retread tires and re-refined oils........................ 288 Title IV--Military Personnel Authorizations...................... 289 Subtitle A--Active Forces.................................... 289 Sec. 401. End strengths for active forces................ 289 Sec. 402. Limited exclusions of joint duty officers from limitations on number of general and flag officers..... 289 Sec. 403. Limitation on daily average of personnel on active duty in grades E-8 and E-9...................... 289 Sec. 404. Repeal of permanent end strength requirement for support of two major regional contingencies........ 290 Subtitle B--Reserve Forces................................... 290 Sec. 411. End strengths for Selected Reserve............. 290 Sec. 412. End strengths for Reserves on active duty in support of the reserves................................ 290 Sec. 413. End strengths for military technicians (dual status)................................................ 290 Sec. 414. Exclusion of additional reserve component general and flag officers from limitation on number of general and flag officers who may serve on active duty. 291 Sec. 415. Increase in numbers of members in certain grades authorized to be on active duty in support of the reserves........................................... 291 Sec. 416. Consolidation of strength authorizations for active status Naval Reserve flag officers of the Navy Medical Department staff corps......................... 291 Subtitle C--Authorization of Appropriations.................. 292 Sec. 421. Authorization of appropriations for military personnel.............................................. 292 Other Items of Interest...................................... 292 Army National Guard schools and special training......... 292 Title V--Military Personnel Policy............................... 292 Subtitle A--Officer Personnel Policy......................... 292 Sec. 501. Streamlined selective retention process for regular officers....................................... 292 Sec. 502. Permanent applicability of limitations on years of active naval service of Navy limited duty officers in grades of commander and captain..................... 293 Sec. 503. Involuntary separation pay denied for officer discharged for failure of selection for promotion requested by the officer............................... 293 Sec. 504. Term of office of the Chief of the Air Force Nurse Corps............................................ 293 Subtitle B--Reserve Component Matters........................ 293 Sec. 511. Service required for retirement of National Guard officer in higher grade.......................... 293 Sec. 512. Reduced time-in-grade requirement for reserve general and flag officers involuntarily transferred from active status..................................... 293 Sec. 513. Eligibility of Army and Air Force Reserve brigadier generals to be considered for promotion while on inactive status list................................ 294 Sec. 514. Composition of selective early retirement boards for rear admirals of the Naval Reserve and major generals of the Marine Corps Reserve................... 294 Sec. 515. Use of Reserves for emergencies involving weapons of mass destruction............................ 294 Subtitle C--Other Matters.................................... 295 Sec. 521. Annual manpower requirements report............ 295 Sec. 522. Four-year extension of certain force reduction transition period management and benefits authorities.. 295 Sec. 523. Continuation of eligibility for voluntary separation incentive after involuntary loss of membership in Ready or Standby Reserve................. 295 Sec. 524. Repeal of limitations on authority to set rates and waive requirement for reimbursement of expenses incurred for instruction at service academies of persons from foreign countries......................... 295 Sec. 525. Repeal of restriction on civilian employment of enlisted members-...................................... Sec. 526. Extension of reporting dates for Commission on Military Training and Gender-Related Issues............ 296 Sec. 527. Moratorium on changes of gender-related policies and practices pending completion of the work of the Commission on Military Training and Gender- Related Issues......................................... 296 Sec. 528. Transitional compensation for abused dependent children not residing with the spouse or former spouse of a member convicted of dependent abuse............... 296 Sec. 529. Pilot program for treating GED recipients as high school graduates for determinations of eligibility for enlisting in the Armed Forces...................... 297 Sec. 530. Waiver of time limitations for award of Distinguished Flying Cross in certain cases............ 297 Other Items of Interest...................................... 297 Personal finance training................................ 297 Operation Walking Shield Program......................... 298 Processing of reports of promotion boards................ 298 Recruiting effectiveness and efficiency.................. 298 Management of reserves on active duty in support of the reserve components..................................... 299 Personnel and finance support of the reserve components.. 300 Investigations of military deaths........................ 301 Management of officers assigned to interagency and international billets.................................. 302 Title VI--Compensation and Other Personnel Benefits.............. 303 Subtitle A--Pay and Allowances............................... 303 Sec. 601. Increase in basic pay for fiscal year 1999..... 303 Sec. 602. Rate of pay for cadets and midshipmen at the service academies...................................... 303 Sec. 603. Payments for movements of household goods arranged by members.................................... 303 Sec. 604. Leave without pay for suspended academy cadets and midshipmen......................................... 303 Subtitle B--Bonuses and Special Incentive Pays............... 304 Sec. 611. Three-month extension of certain bonuses and special pay authorities for reserve forces............. 304 Sec. 612. Three-month extension of certain bonuses and special pay authorities for nurse officer candidates, registered nurses, and nurse anesthetists.............. 304 Sec. 613. Three-month extension of authorities relating to payment of other bonuses and special pays........... 304 Sec. 614. Eligibility of Reserves for selective reenlistment bonus when reenlisting or extending to perform active guard and reserve duty.................. 304 Sec. 615. Repeal of ten-percent limitation on payments of selective reenlistment bonuses in excess of $20,000.... 304 Sec. 616. Increase of maximum amount authorized for army enlistment bonus....................................... 305 Sec. 617. Education loan repayment program for health professions officers serving in Selected Reserve....... 305 Sec. 618. Increase in amount of basic educational assistance under all-volunteer force program for personnel with critically short skills or specialties.. 305 Sec. 619. Relationship of entitlements to enlistment bonuses and benefits under the All-Volunteer Force Educational Assistance Program......................... 305 Subtitle C--Travel and Transportation Allowances............. 305 Sec. 621. Travel and transportation for rest and recuperation in connection with contingency operations and other duty......................................... 305 Sec. 622. Payment for temporary storage of baggage of dependent student not taken on annual trip to overseas duty station of sponsor................................ 306 Sec. 623. Commercial travel of Reserves at federal supply schedule rates for attendance at inactive duty training assemblies............................................. 306 Subtitle D--Retired Pay, Survivor Benefits, and Related Matters.................................................... 306 Sec. 631. Paid-up coverage under Survivor Benefit Plan... 306 Sec. 632. Court-required Survivor Benefit Plan coverage effectuated through elections and deemed elections..... 306 Sec. 633. Recovery, care, and disposition of remains of medically retired member who dies during hospitalization that begins while on active duty....... 307 Subtitle E--Other Matters.................................... 307 Sec. 641. Definition of possessions of the United States for pay and allowances purposes........................ 307 Sec. 642. Federal employees' compensation coverage for students participating in certain officer candidate programs............................................... 307 Sec. 643. Authority to provide financial assistance for education of certain defense dependents overseas....... 307 Other Items of Interest...................................... 308 Accrual funding of military retirement................... 308 Computation of retired pay for certain service members... 308 Title VII--Health Care........................................... 309 Sec. 701. Dependents' dental program..................... 309 Sec. 702. Extension of authority for use of personal services contracts for provision of health care at military entrance processing stations and elsewhere outside medical treatment facilities................... 309 Sec. 703. TRICARE Prime automatic enrollments and retiree payment options........................................ 310 Sec. 704. Limited continued CHAMPUS coverage for persons unaware of a loss of CHAMPUS coverage resulting from eligibility for medicare............................... 310 Sec. 705. Enhanced Department of Defense organ and tissue donor program.......................................... 310 Sec. 706. Joint Department of Defense and Department of Veterans Affairs reviews relating to interdepartmental cooperation in the delivery of medical care............ 310 Sec. 707. Demonstration projects to provide health care to certain medicare-eligible beneficiaries of the military health care system............................ 312 Other Items of Interest...................................... 313 Auto-destruct syringes................................... 313 Health care fraud........................................ 313 Hepatitis C testing...................................... 314 The Psychopharmacology Demonstration Project............. 314 Title VIII--Acquisition Policy, Acquisition Management, and Related Matters................................................ 315 Sec. 801. Para-aramid fibers and yarns................... 315 Sec. 802. Procurement of travel services for official and unofficial travel under one contract................... 315 Sec. 803. Limitation on use of price preference upon attainment of contract goal for small and disadvantaged businesses............................................. 315 Sec. 804. Distribution of assistance under the Procurement Technical Assistance Cooperative Agreement Program................................................ 316 Sec. 805. Defense Commercial Pricing Management Improvement Act........................................ 316 Sec. 806. Department of Defense purchases through other agencies............................................... 318 Sec. 807. Supervision of Defense Acquisition University structure by Under Secretary of Defense for Acquisition and Technology......................................... 319 Sec. 808. Repeal of requirement for Director of Acquisition Education, Training, and Career Development to be within the Office of the Under Secretary of Defense for Acquisition and Technology................. 319 Sec. 809. Eligibility of involuntarily downgraded employee for membership in an acquisition corps........ 319 Sec. 810. Pilot programs for testing program manager performance of product support oversight responsibilities for life cycle of acquisition programs 320 Sec. 811. Scope of protection of certain information from disclosure............................................. 320 Other Items of Interest...................................... 321 Defense capability preservation agreement................ 321 Item-by-item waivers to domestic preference requirements. 321 Title IX--Department of Defense Organization and Management...... 323 Sec. 901. Reduction in number of Assistant Secretary of Defense positions...................................... 323 Sec. 902. Renaming of position of Assistant Secretary of Defense for Command, Control, Communications, and Intelligence........................................... 323 Sec. 903. Authority to expand the National Defense University............................................. 324 Sec. 904. Reduction in Department of Defense headquarters staff.................................................. 324 Sec. 905. Permanent requirement for quadrennial defense review................................................. 324 Sec. 906. Management reform for research, development, test, and evaluation................................... 324 Sec. 907. Restructuring of administration of Fisher Houses................................................. 327 Title X--General Provisions...................................... 327 Subtitle A--Financial Matters................................ 327 Sec. 1002. Authorization of emergency appropriations for fiscal year 1999....................................... 327 Sec. 1003. Authorization of prior emergency supplemental appropriations for fiscal year 1998.................... 327 Sec. 1004. Partnership for Peace information system management............................................. 327 Subtitle B--Naval Vessels.................................... 327 Sec. 1011. Iowa class battleship returned to Naval Vessel Register............................................... 327 Sec. 1012. Long-term charter of three vessels in support of submarine rescue, escort, and towing................ 328 Sec. 1013. Transfers of naval vessels to foreign countries.............................................. 329 Subtitle C--Miscellaneous Report Requirements and Repeals.... 329 Sec. 1021. Repeal of reporting requirements.............. 329 Sec. 1022. Report on Department of Defense financial management improvement plan............................ 329 Sec. 1023. Feasibility study of performance of Department of Defense finance and accounting functions by private sector sources or other Federal Government sources..... 329 Sec. 1024. Reorganization and consolidation of operating locations of the Defense Finance and Accounting Service 330 Sec. 1025. Report on inventory and control of military equipment.............................................. 330 Sec. 1026. Report on continuity of essential operations at risk of failure because of computer systems that are not year 2000 compliant................................ 330 Sec. 1027. Reports on naval surface fire-support capabilities........................................... 332 Sec. 1028. Report on roles in Department of Defense aviation accident investigations....................... 333 Sec. 1029. Strategic plan for expanding distance learning initiatives............................................ 333 Sec. 1030. Report on involvement of Armed Forces in contingency and ongoing operations..................... 333 Subtitle D--Other Matters.................................... 334 Sec. 1041. Cooperative counterproliferation program...... 334 Sec. 1042. Extension of counterproliferation authorities for support of United Nations Special Commission on Iraq................................................... 334 Sec. 1043. One-year extension of limitation on retirement or dismantlement of strategic nuclear delivery systems. 335 Sec. 1044. Direct-line communication between United States and Russian commanders of strategic forces...... 335 Sec. 1045. Chemical warfare defense...................... 335 Sec. 1046. Accounting treatment of advance payment of personnel.............................................. 336 Sec. 1047. Reinstatement of definition of financial institution in authorities for reimbursing defense personnel for Government errors in direct deposits of pay.................................................... 336 Sec. 1048. Pilot program on alternative notice of receipt of legal process for garnishment of federal pay for child support and alimony.............................. 336 Sec. 1049. Costs payable to the Department of Defense and other federal agencies for services provided to the Defense Commissary Agency.............................. 336 Sec. 1050. Collection of dishonored checks presented at commissary stores...................................... 337 Sec. 1051. Defense commissary agency telecommunications.. 337 Sec. 1052. Research grants competitively awarded to service academies...................................... 337 Sec. 1053. Clarification and simplification of responsibilities of inspectors general regarding whistleblower protections.............................. 337 Sec. 1054. Amounts recovered from claims against third parties for loss or damage to personal property shipped or stored at Government expense........................ 338 Sec. 1055. Eligibility for attendance at Department of Defense domestic dependent elementary and secondary schools................................................ 338 Sec. 1056. Fees for providing historical information to the public............................................. 339 Sec. 1057. Periodic inspection of the Armed Forces Retirement Home........................................ 339 Sec. 1058. Transfer of F-4 phantom II aircraft to foundation............................................. 339 Sec. 1059. Act constituting presidential approval of vessel war risk insurance requested by the Secretary of Defense................................................ 339 Sec. 1060. Commendation and memorialization of the United States Navy Asiatic Fleet.............................. 340 Sec. 1061. Program to commemorate 50th anniversary of the Korean War............................................. 340 Sec. 1062. Relocation of frequency spectrum.............. 340 Sec. 1063. Technical and clerical amendments............. 342 Other Items of Interest...................................... 342 Arms control and other national priorities............... 342 Assured strategic command and control.................... 342 Reporting miscellaneous expenses in object classes 25 series (Contractual Services).......................... 343 Reprogramming procedures for the National Reconnaissance Office................................................. 343 Title XI--Department of Defense Civilian Personnel............... 345 Sec. 1101. Repeal of employment preference not needed for recruitment and retention of qualified child care providers.............................................. 345 Sec. 1102. Maximum pay rate comparability for faculty members of the United States Air Force Institute of Technology............................................. 345 Sec. 1103. Four-year extension of voluntary separation incentive pay authority................................ 345 Sec. 1104. Department of Defense employee voluntary early retirement authority................................... 345 Sec. 1105. Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency experimental personnel management program for technical personnel.............................................. 346 Other Items of Interest...................................... 346 Temporary assignments of personnel between Federal Government, and state or local governments, institutions of higher education, Indian tribal governments and other eligible organizations........... 346 Enhanced training for Department of Defense civilian employees regarding A-76............................... 346 Management by Full Time Equivalents...................... 347 High-grade restrictions.................................. 347 Title XII--Joint Warfighting Experimentation..................... 347 Division B--Military Construction Authorizations................. 349 Title XXI--Army.................................................. 375 Summary...................................................... 375 Sec. 2101. Authorized Army construction and land acquisition projects................................... 375 Sec. 2102. Family housing................................ 375 Sec. 2103. Improvements to military family housing units. 375 Sec. 2104. Authorization of appropriations, Army......... 375 Sec. 2105. Modification of authority to carry out fiscal year 1998 project...................................... 375 Other Items of Interest...................................... 375 Improvements of military family housing, Army............ 375 Title XXII--Navy................................................. 377 Summary...................................................... 377 Sec. 2201. Authorized Navy construction and land acquisition projects................................... 377 Sec. 2202. Family housing................................ 377 Sec. 2203. Improvements to military family housing units. 377 Sec. 2204. Authorization of appropriations, Navy......... 377 Title XXIII--Air Force........................................... 379 Summary...................................................... 379 Sec. 2301. Authorized Air Force construction and land acquisition projects................................... 379 Sec. 2302. Family housing................................ 379 Sec. 2303. Improvements to military family housing units. 379 Sec. 2304. Authorization of appropriations, Air Force.... 379 Other Items of Interest...................................... 379 Planning and design, Air Force........................... 379 Improvements of military family housing, Air Force....... 379 Consolidation of the Officer Training School, Maxwell Air Force Base, Alabama.................................... 380 Title XXIV--Defense Agencies..................................... 381 Summary...................................................... 381 Sec. 2401. Authorized Defense Agencies construction and land acquisition projects.............................. 381 Sec. 2402. Improvements to military family housing units. 381 Sec. 2403. Energy conservation projects.................. 381 Sec. 2404. Authorization of appropriations, Defense Agencies............................................... 381 Sec. 2405. Modification of authority to carry out certain fiscal year 1995 projects.............................. 381 Sec. 2406. Modification of authority to carry out fiscal year 1990 project...................................... 382 Title XXV--North Atlantic Treaty Organization Security Investment Program........................................................ 383 Summary...................................................... 283 Sec. 2501. Authorized NATO construction and land acquisition projects................................... 283 Sec. 2502. Authorization of appropriations, NATO......... 283 Title XXVI--Guard and Reserve Forces Facilities.................. 385 Summary...................................................... 385 Sec. 2601. Authorized Guard and Reserve construction and land acquisition projects.............................. 385 Sec. 2602. Reduction in fiscal year 1998 authorization of appropriations for Army National Guard military construction........................................... 385 Planning and design, Guard and Reserve Forces facilities......................................... 285 Title XXVII--Expiration and Extension of Authorizations.......... 387 Sec. 2701. Expiration of authorizations and amounts required to be specified by law........................ 387 Sec. 2702. Extension of authorizations of certain fiscal year 1996 projects..................................... 387 Sec. 2703. Extension of authorization of fiscal year 1995 project................................................ 387 Sec. 2704. Effective date................................ 387 Title XXVIII--General Provisions................................. 389 Subtitle A--Military Construction Program and Military Family Housing Changes............................................ 389 Sec. 2801. Modification of authority relating to architectural and engineering services and construction design................................................. 389 Sec. 2802. Expansion of Army overseas family housing lease authority........................................ 389 Subtitle B--Real Property and Facilities Administration...... 389 Sec. 2811. Increase in thresholds for reporting requirements relating to real property transactions.... 389 Sec. 2812. Exceptions to real property transaction reporting requirements for war and certain emergency and other operations................................... 389 Sec. 2813. Waiver of applicability of property disposal laws to leases at installations to be closed or realigned under the base closure laws.................. 390 Sec. 2814. Restoration of Department of Defense lands used by another Federal agency......................... 390 Subtitle C--Land Conveyances................................. 390 Sec. 2821. Land conveyance, Indiana Army Ammunition Plant, Charlestown, Indiana............................ 390 Sec. 2822. Land conveyance, Army Reserve Center, Bridgton, Maine........................................ 391 Sec. 2823. Land conveyance, Volunteer Army Ammunition Plant, Chattanooga, Tennessee.......................... 391 Sec. 2824. Release of interests in real property, former Kennebec Arsenal, Augusta, Maine....................... 391 Sec. 2825. Land exchange, Naval Reserve Readiness Center, Portland, Maine........................................ 392 Sec. 2826. Land conveyance, Air Force Station, Lake Charles, Louisiana..................................... 392 Subtitle D--Other Matters.................................... 392 Sec. 2831. Purchase of build-to-lease family housing at Eielson Air Force Base, Alaska......................... 392 Sec. 2832. Beach replenishment, San Diego, California.... 392 Other Items of Interest...................................... 394 Report on Air Force Plant #3, Tulsa, Oklahoma............ 394 Report on Fort Hunter Liggett, California................ 394 Title XXIX--Juniper Butte Range Lands Withdrawal................. 395 Division C--Department of Energy National Security Authorizations and Other Authorizations....................................... 397 Title XXXI--Department of Energy National Security Programs...... 397 Subtitle A--National Security Programs Authorizations........ 397 Sec. 3101. Weapons activities............................ 414 Stockpile stewardship programs....................... 414 Stockpile management programs........................ 415 Technology transfer and education.................... 416 Program direction.................................... 416 Construction projects................................ 416 Tritium production................................... 416 Laboratory Directed Research and Development......... 417 Sec. 3102. Environmental restoration and waste management 417 Post 2006 Completion................................. 417 Technology Development............................... 418 Accelerating Cleanup................................. 418 UF6 Stabilization and Reuse.......................... 419 Environmental Validation, Verification and Engineering Analysis............................... 419 Off-site Disposal of Low Level Waste................. 419 Overdue reports...................................... 419 Sec. 3103. Other defense activities...................... 420 Nonproliferation and verification research and development........................................ 420 Russian Reactor Core Conversion Program.............. 420 Nuclear Smuggling and Counterterrorism............... 421 Worker and Community Transition...................... 421 Fissile materials.................................... 421 Environment, Safety and Health-Defense............... 422 Naval Reactors....................................... 422 Sec. 3104. Defense nuclear waste disposal................ 422 Sec. 3105. Defense environmental management privatization 422 Subtitle B--Recurring General Provisions..................... 423 Sec. 3121. Reprogramming................................. 423 Sec. 3122. Limits on general plant projects.............. 423 Sec. 3123. Limits on construction projects............... 423 Sec. 3124. Fund transfer authority....................... 424 Sec. 3125. Authority for conceptual and construction design................................................. 424 Sec. 3126. Authority for emergency planning, design, and construction activities................................ 424 Sec. 3127. Funds available for all national security programs of the Department of Energy................... 424 Sec. 3128. Availability of funds......................... 424 Sec. 3129. Transfers of defense environmental management funds.................................................. 424 Subtitle C--Program Authorizations, Restrictions, and Limitations................................................ 425 Sec. 3131. International cooperative stockpile stewardship............................................ 425 Sec. 3132. Prohibition on use of funds for ballistic missile defense and theater missile defense............ 425 Sec. 3133. Licensing of certain mixed oxide fuel fabrication and irradiation facilities................. 425 Sec. 3134. Continuation of processing, treatment, and disposition of legacy nuclear materials................ 426 Sec. 3135. Authority for Department of Energy federally funded research and development centers to participate in merit-based technology research and development programs............................................... 426 Sec. 3136. Support for public education in the vicinity of Los Alamos National Laboratory, New Mexico.......... 426 Subtitle D--Other Matters.................................... 427 Sec. 3141. Repeal of fiscal year 1998 statement of policy on stockpile stewardship program....................... 427 Sec. 3142. Increase in maximum rate of pay for scientific, engineering, and technical personnel responsible for safety at defense nuclear facilities... 427 Sec. 3143. Sense of Senate regarding treatment of Formerly Utilized Sites Remedial Action Program under a nondefense discretionary budget function............... 427 Other Items of Interest...................................... 427 Asset disposition........................................ 427 Improving collaboration between the Department of Defense and Department of Energy laboratories.................. 428 Los Alamos Non-proliferation Center...................... 428 Robotics and intelligent machines........................ 429 Title XXXII--Defense Nuclear Facilities Safety Board............. 431 Title XXXIII--National Defense Stockpile......................... 433 Title XXXIV--Naval Petroleum Reserves............................ 435 Title XXXV--Panama Canal Commission.............................. 437 Sec. 3501. Short title; references to Panama Canal Act of 1979................................................ 437 Sec. 3502. Authorization of expenditures................ 437 Sec. 3503. Purchase of vehicles......................... 437 Sec. 3504. Expenditures only in accordance with treaties 437 Sec. 3505. Donations to the Commission.................. 437 Sec. 3506. Agreements for United States to provide post- transfer administrative services for certain employee benefits............................................... 438 Sec. 3507. Sunset of United States overseas benefits just before transfer................................... 438 Sec. 3508. Central Examining Office..................... 440 Sec. 3509. Liability for vessel accidents............... 440 Sec. 3510. Placement of United States citizens in positions with the United States Government............ 441 Sec. 3511. Panama Canal Board of Contract Appeals....... 442 Legislative Requirements......................................... 443 Departmental Recommendations..................................... 443 Committee Action................................................. 444 Congressional Budget Office Cost Estimate........................ 444 Regulatory Impact................................................ 444 Changes in Existing Law.......................................... 444 Additional Views of Senator John McCain.......................... 445 Additional Views of Senator Carl Levin........................... 450 Additional Views of Senator Jeff Bingaman........................ 454 Additional Views of Senator John Glenn........................... 456 Calendar No. 367 ----------------------------------------------------------------------- 105th Congress Report 2d Session SENATE 105-189 _______________________________________________________________________ AUTHORIZING APPROPRIATIONS FOR FISCAL YEAR 1999 FOR MILITARY ACTIVITIES OF THE DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE, TO PRESCRIBE PERSONNEL STRENGTHS FOR SUCH FISCAL YEAR FOR THE ARMED FORCES, AND FOR OTHER PURPOSES _______ May 11, 1998.--Ordered to be printed _______________________________________________________________________ Mr. Thurmond, from the Committee on Armed Services, submitted the following R E P O R T together with ADDITIONAL VIEWS [To accompany S. 2060] The Committee on Armed Services reports favorably an original bill to authorize appropriations during the fiscal year 1999 for military activities of the Department of Defense, for military construction, and for defense activities of the Department of Energy, to prescribe personnel strengths for such fiscal year for the armed forces, and for other purposes, and recommends that the bill do pass. PURPOSE OF THE BILL This bill would: (1) authorize appropriations for (a) procurement, (b) research, development, test and evaluation, (c) operation and maintenance and the revolving and management funds of the Department of Defense for fiscal year 1999; (2) authorize the personnel end strengths for each military active duty component of the armed forces for fiscal year 1999; (3) authorize the personnel end strengths for the Selected Reserve of each of the reserve components of the armed forces for fiscal year 1999; (4) authorize the annual average military training student loads for the active and reserve components of the armed forces for fiscal year 1999; (5) impose certain reporting requirements; (6) impose certain limitations with regard to specific procurement and research, development, test and evaluation actions and manpower strengths; provide certain additional legislative authority, and make certain changes to existing law; (7) authorize appropriations for military construction programs of the Department of Defense for fiscal year 1999; and (8) authorize appropriations for national security programs of the Department of Energy for fiscal year 1999. Committee overview and recommendations In the Second Session of the 105th Congress, the Committee on Armed Services continued its efforts to ensure, within the constraints of the new balanced budget agreement, an adequate balance between the current and long-term readiness of the armed forces. While this historic agreement between the Congress and the President to achieve a balanced budget by fiscal year 2002 protects our military forces from ``top line'' cuts, it does not guarantee immunity from the unplanned costs that have served to undermine programmed investments in our military. Accordingly, the committee remains concerned that the funding levels for defense may not be sufficient to sustain the military capability required to support the current foreign policy as well as the personnel, quality of life, readiness, and modernization programs critical to our armed forces. The committee believes that the limitations of the balanced budget agreement and the continual, demanding requirements of increasingly frequent contingency deployments have stretched our military forces to the breaking point. A disparity in outlay estimates for fiscal year 1999 between the Office of Management and Budget and the Congressional Budget Office required a decrease in recommended authorizations that will further strain our military. The committee is obligated to assess the impact of these factors on our military forces and recommend adjustments to the funding level for defense in the balanced budget agreement when necessary. In the National Defense Authorization Bill for Fiscal Year 1999, the committee worked to achieve an appropriate balance between near-term and long-term readiness through investments in modernization, infrastructure and research; the development and maintenance of sufficient endstrengths for all grade levels and specialties; policies supporting the recruitment and retention of high quality personnel; fielding of the types and quantities of weapons systems and equipment needed to fight and win decisivelywith acceptable risk to our troops; and ensuring an adequate, safe and reliable nuclear weapons capability. The committee modified the budget request to improve operations and achieve greater efficiencies and savings. The committee sought to eliminate defense spending that does not contribute directly to the national security of the United States. Savings were realized by accelerating programs where appropriate, and by limiting new program starts. The committee worked to protect the quality of life of our military personnel and their families. Quality of life initiatives include provisions designed to provide equitable pay and benefits to military personnel, including a 3.1 percent pay raise and the restoration of appropriate levels of funding for the construction and maintenance of troop billets and military family housing. The committee notes with concern the combined effects of supporting operations and maintenance at the expense of essential modernization along with a foreign policy that imposes high operational tempos on increasingly scarce military resources. There is clear evidence that the combat readiness of the armed forces is at greater risk due to two key factors: older and harder-to-maintain equipment resulting from inadequate modernization and the overuse of a smaller force structure. To ensure that the United States remains the preeminent military power in the world, current readiness requirements must be adequately funded without diverting critical funding from procurement and research, development, testing and evaluation accounts. The committee believes that a more robust, progressive modernization effort will not only provide the requisite capabilities for future military operations, but will also lower future operational and maintenance costs. The committee has increased investment in a broad spectrum of research and development activities to ensure that U.S. military forces remain superior in technology to that of any potential adversary. The committee believes that effective development of advanced technologies will be a key factor in ensuring U.S. armed forces dominate any future battlefield, whether it be primarily on the ground, on the sea, in the air, in space, or in cyberspace. A program of stable, long-term investment in science and technology will remain vital to guaranteeing U.S. dominance of threats in any medium. The committee continues to monitor the resources provided to the reserve components. While the Department of Defense continues to provide testimony on the importance of these components, and has improved integration of reserve component requirements, their chronic underfunding has been apparent in several critical areas. The ability of reserve component forces to be ready and relevant depends on proper funding to reduce backlogs in maintenance and repair of equipment; provide an appropriate quantity and quality of training; enhance infrastructure and base operations programs; and maintain adequate stocks of supplies, repair parts, fuel, and ammunition. Additionally, America's citizen-soldiers have been ordered to active duty in substantial numbers and for substantial periods of time in support of ongoing contingencies and operations, and the effects of repeated call-ups for such missions are forcing reservists to choose between being ``citizens'' or ``soldiers.'' The committee strongly cautions against any policy that drives a wedge between our community- based force and the grassroots support of the American public. The Department's template for the future--the 1997 Quadrennial Defense Review (QDR)--is based on a strategy that retains the requirement for a capability to win two concurrent major regional contingencies. However, even with the higher funding provided in the outyears of the budget agreement, the QDR recommended paying for essential modernization by eliminating up to 130,000 military personnel as well as reducing other key modernization programs. Given the effects of the high operational and personnel tempos due to the operations in Bosnia and Southwest Asia, and other ongoing activities, the committee is concerned that the armed forces, even if enhanced with the capabilities envisioned in the QDR, may not be able to execute the strategy without excessive risks and casualties. The committee intends to provide adequately for our men and women in uniform to defend our nation even within the balanced budget agreement. The committee will continue to examine the adequacy of the funds allocated to our national security, and provide increases when necessary. At the same time, the committee strongly encourages the Department of Defense to continue its efforts to improve the efficiency and effectiveness of defense programs to achieve savings that can be devoted to the operational needs of our armed forces. National security remains the federal government's most important obligation to its citizens. The Committee on Armed Services recognizes its critical role within the Senate in carrying out the constitutional powers of the Congress to provide for the ``common defense.'' The members of the committee further understand the importance of the committee's jurisdiction within the Senate over matters relating to the Department of Defense, the military departments, and the national security programs of the Department of Energy. Accordingly, in developing defense authorization legislation for fiscal year 1999, the committee, in its traditional bipartisan manner, placed the national security interests of the United States and the American people above other considerations. The National Defense Authorization Bill for Fiscal Year 1999 reflects a bipartisan approach to these priorities, and continues the committee's efforts to provide a clear basis and direction for U.S. national security policies and programs into the 21st century. Explanation of funding summary The administration's budget request for the national defensefunction of the federal budget for fiscal year 1999 was $270.9 billion (as estimated by the Congressional Budget Office), of which $200.1 billion was for programs which require specific funding authorization. The following table summarizes both the direct authorizations and equivalent budget authority levels for fiscal year 1999 defense programs. The columns relating to the authorization request do not include funding for the following items: military personnel funding; military construction authorizations provided in prior years; and other small portions of the defense budget that are not within the jurisdiction of this committee or which do not require an annual authorization. As explained above, funding for military personnel is included in the amounts authorized by the committee, but not in the total funding requested for authorization. Funding for all programs in the national defense function is reflected in the columns relating to the budget authority request and the total budget authority implication of the authorizations in this bill. The committee recommends funding for national defense programs totaling $270.6 billion in budget authority, which is consistent with the fiscal year 1999 Budget Resolution. <GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT> DIVISION A--DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE AUTHORIZATIONS TITLE I--PROCUREMENT The Department of Defense modernization program, as currently outlined, cannot be sustained. Former Secretary of Defense James Schlesinger, in recent testimony before the committee on the report of the National Defense Panel, stated ``quite simply you can't get there, that desired point in the 21st century, from here given the apparent fiscal limits.'' Both General Shalikashvili and General Shelton, the former and current Chairmen of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, after consultation with service chiefs, established a baseline requirement of $60 billion dollars per year to meet essential modernization priorities. Unfortunately, the Administration has yet to submit a budget request for the Department of Defense that satisfies this requirement even though the Future Years Defense Program indicates that the requirement would be satisfied in fiscal year 2001. For the last several years, testimony before the congressional defense committees suggests that our forces are living on the edge and relying on investments made years ago in modernization accounts. In brief, it is fairly clear that the Department of Defense is continuing to suffer from a series of procurement deficient budgets. This is explained, in part, by continually planned but unrealized savings from ``efficiencies'' projected by the Department of Defense. However, the costs associated with continued extended deployments not resourced by supplemental funding, especially when it forces the displacement of funds from modernization accounts to operation and maintenance accounts, are also crippling service modernization programs, and thereby our current and future military capabilities. The committee is becoming increasingly concerned that, despite these continued delays in meeting minimum modernization funding levels, the services continue to program for modernization requirements that cannot be supported by the elusive date associated with meeting the $60 billion dollar procurement goal, phantom ``efficiencies,'' and uncertain acquisition reform and future BRAC savings. Department of Defense plans to develop future generation systems, when tied to future funding of legacy system modernization requirements, have caused what many have referred to as a procurement ``bow wave.'' Continued annual delays of procurement create a very large and insurmountable unfunded procurement requirement. In an effort to quantify the scope of the bow wave problem for one of the services, the committee requested extended planning program data for the 2004 through 2010 time frame for that service's research, development, and acquisition programs. In reply, the committee received a copy of a memorandum, signed by the service secretary, that stated that the data ``had not been adequately reviewed by the Service and OSD leadership.'' The only conclusion that can be drawn is that the Department of Defense has not even tried to quantify the nature and scope of the bow wave problem. Recent independent analysis suggests that the Department of Defense modernization plan could exceed available funding by as much as $26 billion a year during the ten-year period following that covered by the 1999 through 2003 future years defense program. While some argue that there has always been a mismatch between available or projected funding and funds called for in service modernization programs, it is clear that the funding limitations will cripple active programs and delay, if not prevent, the military transformation called for by both the Quadrennial Defense Review and the National Defense Panel. The committee believes that the time has come for the Department of Defense, along with the services, to review both modernization plans and projected resources available in future years and make the tough calls necessary to better align programs with funding. The committee believes this review should be conducted in a joint environment that considers future warfighting requirements, efficiencies resulting from a focus on joint warfighting, and enhancements that future technologies may provide. Until this happens, the Congress will be forced to continue to make critical decisions on how to allocate increasingly scarce resources without insight into the overall scope and nature of the modernization ``bow wave'' and how service programs are linked to transformation initiatives. Overview The committee continues to give priority to buying essential core requirements, investing to achieve savings and investing in the future. Particular emphasis was given to Marine Corps programs in response to the level of concern raised by General Krulak in his testimony before the committee and in his March 25, 1998 letter to the Congress. It is clear, however, that the Department of Defense modernization plan in existence today cannot be supported by even the best case projections of available research, development, and acquisition funding. The committee was pleased with the level of funding provided in the budget request for the reserve components. In the fiscal year 1999 request, the Department requested more funding for reserve component modernization than had been previously provided for reserve component shortfalls in previous years, even after Congressional increases. The committee recognizes that both active and reserve component funding shortfalls are likely to continue, but believes that the fiscal year 1999 budget request reflects a good faith effort to move in the right direction. The committee believes that both components must continue to work together to meet the common goal of ensuring our total force is prepared for a challenging future. Explanation of tables The tables in this title display items requested by the administration for fiscal year 1999 for which the committee either increased or decreased the requested amounts. As in the past, the administration may not exceed the amounts approved by the committee (as set forth in the tables or, if unchanged from the administration request, as set forth in the Department of Defense's budget justification documents) without a reprogramming action in accordance with established procedures. Unless noted explicitly in the report, all changes are made without prejudice. SUBTITLE A--AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS <GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT> Sec. 107. Chemical Demilitarization Program. The budget request for the Army included $855.1 million for the chemical agents and munitions destruction program for operation and maintenance ($531.7 million), procurement ($140.7), and research and development ($182.8 million). The Congress directed in section 1412 of the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 1986 (P.L. 99-145) that the Secretary of Defense carry out the destruction of the lethal chemical agents and munitions in the U.S. stockpile. Pursuant to that direction, the committee recommends that the chemical agents and munitions destruction program continue to be funded in the defense accounts. The committee recommends the following reductions to the budget request: $40.0 million for operation and maintenance, $25.0 million for procurement, and $10.0 million for research and development. The committee recommends that an additional $3.0 million in the budget request for research and development be made available to accelerate the development and fielding of the Army's mobile munitions assessment systems. The committee also recommends a provision that would amend section 1412(g)(2) to require the Department of Defense to provide an annual report on the travel costs of members of the Chemical Demilitarization Citizen's Advisory Commission. Chemical Weapons Convention (CWC) On April 29, 1997, the Chemical Weapons Convention entered into force for countries that ratified the Treaty. As a State Party to the CWC, the United States is obligated to carry out all requirements of the Treaty. In May 1997, the United States submitted the required General Destruction Plan to the international monitoring agency, the Organization for the Prevention of Chemical Weapons (OPCW). Under the CWC, the United States is required to destroy its declared chemical stockpile by April 29, 2007 for the unitary stockpile and 2004 for the non-stockpile items. In fiscal year 1997, the Congress provided authority in section 8065 of Public Law 103-208 for the Department of Defense to conduct a pilot program to identify and demonstrate no fewer than two alternative technologies for the destruction of assembled chemical weapons. The Secretary of Defense is required to submit a report to the congressional defense committees on the effectiveness of each alternative technology identified and demonstrated under the pilot program and its ability to meet applicable safety and environmental requirements. Funds for construction of baseline incineration facilities at Pueblo Chemical Depot, Colorado and the Blue Grass Depot, Kentucky may not be obligated until 180 days after receipt of the Secretary's report. A decision by the Department on the technology to be implemented at the two facilities, whether it be incineration or an alternative, is required not later than June 30, 1999. The committee understands that the Army has continued with the necessary environmental activities to implement an incineration-based technology at Pueblo and Newport. However, no decision will be made on which technology to implement until the Assembled Chemical Weapons Assessment (ACWA) program is completed. Chemical Stockpile Emergency Preparedness Project (CSEPP) In order to enhance the protection of the communitiessurrounding the stockpiles, workers involved in the destruction effort, and the environment during storage, movement and destruction of the U.S. unitary chemical stockpile, the Chemical Stockpile Emergency Preparedness Project (CSEPP) was established in 1988. Since that time, both the Army and the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) have assisted the civilian communities surrounding the eight chemical stockpile storage locations to enhance their emergency response capabilities. The committee understands that the Army and FEMA have reached an agreement on management of the CSEPP. As a result of the agreement, FEMA will have authority and responsibility for the off-post communities, while the Army remains responsible for on-post emergency preparedness. The committee understands that both the Army and FEMA agree that coordination, integration and the joint nature of the CSEPP, particularly at the community level, must be preserved. Of the funds available for CSEPP in the Department of Defense operation and maintenance account, $25.0 million is available to FEMA for off-post community activities. Defense Threat Reduction Agency (DTRA) In November 1997, as part of its Defense Reform Initiative (DRI), the Department of Defense recommended the establishment of a single agency, the Defense Threat Reduction Agency (DTRA), to carry out programs to counter proliferation and reduce threats posed by weapons of mass destruction and to provide nuclear weapon stockpile and related support. The formation of this agency is to be accomplished through the consolidation of several agencies, and several functions from the office of the Secretary of Defense (OSD) involved in the management of associated programs, to including the chemical and biological defense program and the counterproliferation support program. Consistent with the DRI recommendation, the committee recommends the transfer of the chemical demilitarization program to the Defense Threat Reduction Agency (DTRA). SUBTITLE B--ARMY PROGRAMS <GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT> Sec. 111. Multiyear procurement authority for Longbow Hellfire missile program. The committee recommends a provision that would authorize the Army to enter into a multiyear procurement contract, beginning in fiscal year 1999, for procurement of the Longbow Hellfire missile. The committee understands this action can be accomplished with existing funds for this program and that this multiyear authority will ultimately reduce program costs. Sec. 113. Armored system modernization. The committee recommends a provision which would prohibit the expenditure of $20.3 million of the funds authorized to be appropriated to the Army for Weapons and Tracked Combat Vehicles and intended for the M1A1D (Applique Integration Kit) modification to the Abrams tank until such time as the Army provides an assessment and justification for its M1A2 fielding plan and an assessment of armored system modernization requirements through the 2020 time frame. The committee is concerned about Army plans for continued tank modernization as it moves toward its objective of the Army After Next (AAN). Army budget documents provided to the committee indicate that the M1A2 System Enhancement Program (SEP) upgrade program will be terminated in 2003, having produced a total of 1,150 M1A2 SEP tanks, but leaving two- thirds of the active Army and all of the National Guard with less capable tanks. The committee is aware that the National Defense Panel (NDP) has called for a lighter, quicker, and more agile tank for the Army After Next and has questioned continuing the upgrade of the M1A1 tank. For risk mitigation, however, the NDP did recommend that the M1A2 be deployed to III Corps and the forward based force while the balance of the Army transitions to the Army After Next. While reserving judgment on the design and technologies associated with a future tank, the committee believes the Army should consider a range of alternatives in its modernization review, including a possible concentration of modernized, and not simply digitized Abrams tanks in III Corps. Current Army plans call for the six active heavy divisions to be composed of one brigade of M1A2 SEP tanks and two brigades of M1A1D tanks with applique digitized capability. This would force a division commander to contend with a high-low mix of tanks with vastly different operational capabilities and substantially different logistical support requirements. The committee also understands that Army plans for the two major theater-of-war contingencies allocate roughly half of the Army's heavy divisions and National Guard Enhanced Brigades to each of the contingencies. Should the second contingency not materialize, and if the Army continues with the planned distribution of M1A2 SEP tanks throughout the active heavy divisions in limited numbers rather than concentrating them in one corps, the Army may face the situation of fighting a war with nearly half of its most modern tanks not committed to the fight, or of concentrating all modernized brigades in committed divisions at the last minute, thereby degrading the cohesiveness of units forged through habitual relationships in peacetime training. The committee believes it reasonable to take some risk that the second contingency would not materialize, and concentrate M1A2 tanks in completely modernized divisions allocated to the first contingency. This option would also facilitate a subsequent Army decision, should it be feasible, to adopt another of the NDP's recommendations and move more rapidlywith the remainder of the Army toward AAN organizations and weapon systems, eventually leaping in capability over the modernized Army XXI divisions and corps. From a broader perspective, although the committee supports the long term goal of AAN, testimony before the committee clearly indicates that the technological foundation required to produce a future combat system to replace the current tank may not be available until at least 2020. This suggests that continued modernization or upgrade of the Abrams tank should be considered to ensure that a viable industrial base is maintained to support the operational forces until the required technologies become available to begin procurement of a future combat system. The committee is aware that alternatives currently available for consideration by the Army include a proposal to modernize III Corps with a combination of M1A2 SEP tanks and M1A2 SEP Part 1 tanks and provide a digitized capability by 2004. This alternative would appear to meet the Army's goal of a digitized corps by its self-imposed deadline, as well as field a vastly more capable corps equipped entirely with modernized M1A2 tanks. The committee understands that a decision to concentrate the M1A2 Abrams tanks in III Corps would have to be made in a larger context of fielding all of the armor-related modernized combat systems, including the M2A3 Bradley fighting vehicle. However, the committee believes that the Army should give this alternative serious consideration. The committee directs the Army to identify alternatives for continued modernization of its primary ground combat systems, conduct an assessment of those alternatives and provide a report to the defense committees by January 31, 1999. Additionally, the committee further directs the Army to ensure that the armored system assessment includes a review of future warfighting capabilities, the impact of joint warfighting efficiencies, and overall armored system modernization requirements through the 2020 time frame. This report should outline requirements, budget projections, and industrial base implications for future service modernization requirements. Sec. 114. Reactive armor tiles. The committee recommends a provision that would require the Secretary of Defense to conduct, with input from the Army and Marine Corps, a detailed assessment of requirements for reactive armor tiles for Army and Marine Corps armored vehicles. This study will assess requirements for reactive armor tiles and provide a cost-benefit analysis of the procurement and installation of tiles on selected armored vehicles. The Secretary of Defense shall include the comments of the Secretaries of the Army and the Navy on the results of this study, and for those vehicles for which a requirement exists for reactive armor tiles, the Secretary of Defense shall make recommendations on the number of vehicles that should be equipped with such tiles. The Secretary of Defense will provide the results of this study and his corresponding recommendations to the Congressional defense committees no later than April 1, 1999. This provision would preclude any expenditure of funds for reactive armor tiles until 30 days after the date on which the Secretary of Defense submits the results of the study to the Congress. Sec. 116. Extension of authority to carry out Armament Retooling and Manufacturing Support Initiative. The committee recommends a provision that would extend the armament retooling and manufacturing support initiative through fiscal year 1999. OTHER ARMY PROGRAMS Army Aircraft UC-35 The budget request did not include funds for UC-35A aircraft (formerly known as the C-XX). The UC-35A is a fast, medium range air transport aircraft. The Army has a requirement for 35 UC-35A's, and has a total of 17 UC-35 aircraft either on hand or on order. The committee notes that there is an approved Mission Needs Statement and Operational Requirements Document to support the program, and that the Army has programmed for the procurement of the aircraft in the Future Years Defense Program. The committee recommends an increase of $15.9 million to procure an additional three UC-35A aircraft in fiscal year 1999. UH-60 Blackhawk The budget request included $243.8 million to procure 22 UH-60 Blackhawk helicopters. The committee continues to be concerned about the pace and scope of the Army aviation modernization effort. The committee notes the recently acknowledged requirement to procure an additional 90 UH-60 Blackhawk helicopters to meet requirements for a third assault company in each light division as identified in the recent total Army analysis, and is concerned that only 50 aircraft have been funded in the future years defense program (FYDP). Additionally, the committee notes that combined Army and Navy procurement falls eight short of the economic production rate of 36 aircraft per year. Therefore, the committee recommends an increase of $78.5 million to procure eight additional UH-60 aircraft to achieve the most economical production rate. The committee expects the Army to fund the remaining 32 aircraft, currently unfunded in the FYDP, in future budget submissions. C-12 Flight Maintenance System The budget request included $2.6 million for C-12 aircraft modification program. The Army operates a fleet of 93 C-12 fixed wing aircraft, which have been procured over the years and comprise four different models with cockpit instrumentation from the 1960's. The varied configurations require frequent retraining for aviators operating the aircraft. With a modest investment, the entire fleet could be brought to a common configuration, while replacing outdated systems with a modern, digital flight management system. The upgrade will provide for better standardization and decreased operational costs. Accordingly, the committee recommends an increase of $6.0 million to complete the C-12 modification program in the shortest practical time. Longbow The budget request included $607.0 million to support ongoing modification efforts for AH-64 Apache Longbow helicopters. The committee notes outstanding requirements for Longbow training devices and an ongoing program to convert the T701 engine to the T701C configuration. Longbow training devices are required to support operator and maintenance training at institutional training facilities. The committee understands that these training devices will promote an estimated $4.0 million each year in cost avoidance savings. The engine conversion effort is necessary to provide commonality in the fleet and additional power for the aircraft. The committee notes an outstanding requirement to conduct qualification tests on T701C engine conversion kits. Application of these kits will be necessary to enhance the performance of existing engines required to support the application of fire control radars to Army National Guard Apache Longbow aircraft. The committee recommends an additional $38.7 million for Longbow training devices and an additional $1.5 million to procure two engine kits and fund qualification testing that will establish the viability of upgrade kits and avoid costly procurement of new engines that would otherwise be required. The committee recommends a total authorization of $647.2 million for Apache Longbow requirements. Army Missile Enhanced fiber optic guided missile The budget request included $13.7 million to procure 96 enhanced fiber optic guided munition (EFOG-M) rockets. The committee is still concerned about ongoing development and fielding plans for the EFOG-M system and escalating costs for EFOG-M missiles. The committee notes problems encountered with recent Army testing of the missile system and has seen no indication that the Army intends to pursue fielding this system beyond those capabilities obtained to support the advanced concept technology demonstration (ACTD). The committee also is concerned about the large number of precision guided munitions either in development or in the field and believe that the current Army program cannot be sustained by future budgets. The committee, therefore, recommends a decrease of $13.7 million to eliminate procurement of EFOG-M missiles. Multiple launch rocket system rocket The budget request includes $16.5 million to procure extended range multiple launch rocket system (MLRS) rockets. The committee is concerned about excessively high costs associated with specific rocket components and believes the Army should reconsider planned procurement of the extended range rocket in 1999 and solve component cost issues before resuming production. Clearly, the Army's ultimate objective is to begin production and ultimately field the guided MLRS rocket in 2002 which will increase the range and accuracy of this system and provide a quantum leap in capability. The committee also notes that ongoing domestic production and projected international production requirements are sufficient to meet minimum production levels for 1999. Therefore, the committee recommends a decrease of $16.5 million to eliminate procurement of extended range rockets for fiscal year 1999 and directs the Army to provide a report to the defense committees on the resolution of component cost issues no later than January 31, 1999. Weapons and Tracked Combat Vehicles Small arms programs The committee continues to monitor the small arms industrial base and continues to be concerned about the ability of current and future budgets to sustain this industrial base. The budget request included $6.5 million to procure 673 M240B machine guns and $12.2 million for the MK-19 Grenade machine gun. The committee notes an unfilled requirement to provide a more rapid fielding of this weapon to both active Army units and Army National Guard Enhanced Brigades. The committee also notes an unfilled requirement for new mounts for the MK-19 to meet prepositioned equipment requirements. The committee, therefore, recommends an increase of $6.5 million to stabilize M240B procurement and meet critical warfighting requirements and an increase of $3.0 million to procure 800 of the MK64 mounts for the MK-19 Grenade machine gun required to support Army requirements. Army Ammunition Small arms ammunition The committee is concerned with the impact of dramatic changes in ammunition procurement on the small arms ammunition industrial base. The skyrocketing procurement of 5.56 mm and 7.62 mm ammunition over the past few years demonstrates one side of these dramatic changes. The administration's budget request for each of these has grown by approximately 300 percent (from $29.7 million to $91.6 million) between fiscal years 1997 and 1999. The committee believes that the Army should seek to stabilize funding for these programs and take greater advantage of the training opportunities afforded by available small arms simulation devices. Therefore, the committee recommends a reduction of $28.1 million in the budget request for 5.56 mm, and $6.4 million in the budget request for 7.62 mm ammunition. This will provide the same level of funding for these two programs that was provided for fiscal year 1998. M919 25mm ammunition The M919 25mm cartridge is used by the Bradley Fighting Vehicle and, therefore, would likely receive extensive use in any major theater of war. Unfortunately, there is a ``significant shortage of the M919 cartridge'' currently in the Army inventory. Therefore, the committee recommends an increase of $20.8 million to procure additional rounds in order to reduce this shortage. M830A1 tank ammunition The committee supports the recent decision of the Army to convert 4,500 rounds of its M830A1 tank ammunition into demolition rounds for potential obstacles in the Korean War scenario. Unfortunately, this has led to a shortfall in the Army's war reserves for these rounds. Therefore, the committee recommends an increase of $15.0 million to the Army's budget request in order to eliminate this shortfall. Other Army Procurement High mobility multipurpose wheeled vehicle The budget request included $12.1 million to modify 100 high mobility multipurpose wheeled vehicle (HMMWV) chassis and 10 enhanced cargo vehicles by installing armor protection and support fielding requirements. The committee notes a shortage of 18,000 vehicles for the Army, ongoing analysis of future requirements and alternatives, and a requirement to maintain a viable production line for both Army and Marine Corps future requirements. The committee, therefore, recommends an increase of $65.7 million for a total of $77.8 million for HMMWV production and support. Family of medium tactical vehicles The budget request included $332.0 million for procurement of family of medium tactical vehicle (FMTV) trucks. The committee continues to strongly support the fielding of new FMTV trucks to replace an aging fleet that suffers from escalating operations and maintenance costs. The committee notes that existing funding for the FMTV program is inadequate to meet economic production rates and meet both active and reserve shortfalls. This issue is compounded with the stated Army intent to qualify a second source for future FMTV procurement. A fixed defense budget and overly ambitious modernization program suggest the Army does not have the resources necessary to continue to qualify a second source for FMTV. In fact, dual sourcing is normally required only when a current producer cannot meet production demands or provide a product at a fair price. In fiscal year 1999, FMTV funding constraints will create a short break in production and extremely low production rates while at the same time, the trucks that are being fielded have been well received by soldier operators, are affordable, and are saving precious operations and support funding. The committee directs the Secretary of the Army to review the proposed second source initiative and conduct a cost and benefit analysis on the costs associated with continuing on the present course to qualify a second source. If it is determined that the second source initiative will result in cost savings to the government, the Secretary of the Army will provide certification of that fact to the Congressional defense committees. For fiscal year 1999, the committee believes that the production break should be eliminated and recommends an increase of $88.0 million to meet a production rate of 200 per month, while reducing unit costs by at least 5 percent. The committee directs that the vehicles procured with this additional funding be fielded to high priority National Guard and Reserve units. The committee encourages the Army to ensure that minimum production levels are maintained in future budget submissions. Medium truck extended service program The budget request included $37.2 million for medium truck remanufacture requirements necessary to reduce operation and support costs of an aging truck fleet. Current Army funding for new truck procurement is not adequate to meet force requirements and mandates that a portion of the existing fleet be remanufactured to support operational requirements and reduce operating costs. The budget request for 1999 includes $10.8 million for five ton truck requirements and $26.4 million for two and one-half ton truck requirements. The committee understands that funding requested for the two and one-half ton truck requirement is inadequate and recommends an increase of $93.9million to meet medium truck extended service program minimum economic rate requirements and field critically needed trucks to the reserve components. Of this increase, 30 percent will be available for the National Guard to support an ongoing effort to determine the viability of National Guard depots to perform a portion of this work to established standards at reduced cost. The committee further directs the Secretary of the Army to review the medium tactical vehicle extended service program to determine whether it is cost effective to continue with this effort. The committee supports the remanufacturing program as a means to provide reserve component units with much needed upgrades to an aging fleet. The committee understands that the goal for this program is to remanufacture a portion of the truck fleet, at a cost significantly lower than new vehicle procurement, in order to reduce operations and maintenance costs until new trucks could be manufactured in sufficient quantities to meet all active and reserve component requirements. The committee notes that this program has been underfunded for the past two years and that future funding projections also fall far short of minimum sustaining rate requirements. If this program is considered to be a viable program by the Army, the committee would expect the Army to fund it at the level required to sustain production. If the Army is unable to meet these minimum funding requirements, the committee would expect this effort to be terminated. The committee directs the Secretary of the Army to report on the results of this assessment and report findings to the defense committees no later than January 31, 1999. Project management support The budget request included $2.4 million for program manager support functions. The committee notes the proposed funding is to be used, in part, for planning and control purposes for two programs with limited activity in 1999. These programs include the Armored Security Vehicle and the High Mobility Multi-purpose Wheeled Vehicle Extended Service Program. The committee, therefore, recommends a decrease of $1.0 million for a total authorization of $1.4 million in 1999. System fielding support The budget request included $4.2 million for system fielding support requirements. The committee notes no fielding requirements for one of the systems supported by the requested funding. Therefore, the committee recommends a decrease of $1.0 million in 1999 and authorizes a total of $3.2 million. Army data distribution system The budget request included $24.0 million to procure 201 additional enhanced position location reporting system (EPLRS) radios and continue fielding of prior year hardware procurements. The committee has consistently supported fielding of EPLRS units and understands that outstanding requirements exist for both active and reserve component units. The committee also recognizes the importance of the EPLRS system to ongoing digitization activities. The committee, therefore, recommends an increase of $28.0 million for a total of $52.0 million to procure additional EPLRS units required for both active and reserve component units. Single channel ground and airborne radio system family The budget request included $13.2 million for single channel ground and airborne radio system (SINCGARS) system support. The committee notes that the Army has outstanding requirements for SINCGARS Advanced System Improvement Package (ASIP) radios for the reserve components that have not been filled. In light of evolving demand for digitization communication pipelines for voice and data transmission within the Enhanced Brigades, the committee recommends an increase of $61.9 million to support procurement of SINCGARS ASIP radios necessary to meet critical requirements within the Army National Guard. Area common user system modernization program The budget request included $97.1 million to support ongoing efforts to provide ground-based, networked, battlefield communications support required by the Army digitization effort and Force XXI command and control systems. The committee notes that, although programmed funding supports the fielding requirements of the first digitized division by 2000, unfunded aspects of this program remain. Specifically, the committee is concerned that Army efforts to downsize the shelters for warfighter information network systems is currently unfunded. The committee, therefore, recommends an increase of $47.8 million to continue the critical downsizing effort necessary to ensure the effectiveness of fielded warfighter information network systems. Night vision equipment The budget request included $29.6 million for night vision equipment. The committee recognizes the advantage that modern night vision equipment provides to ground force effectiveness on the battlefield and believes that continued fielding of these devices is essential. The committee recommends an increase of $13.5 million to procure the following: (1) $9.0 million for AN/PEQ-2A infrared target pointer/illuminator devices; (2) $4.5 million for AN/PEQ-4C infrared aiming light devices. Multiple integrated laser engagement system 2000 The budget request contained $56.8 million for Army training systems. Of this amount, $16.1 million is for procurement of the Multiple Integrated Laser Engagement System (MILES) 2000. The committee is concerned about inadequate Army plans to procure these training device upgrades. The Army currently uses a legacy MILES system that is rapidly aging and is becoming increasingly difficult to maintain. However, the committee notes significant problems with the new MILES 2000 training devices throughout the development and testing phase and the subsequent Army decision to delay the obligation of $34.4 million in fiscal year 1998 funding due to problems that occurred in user testing. The committee believes that replacement of MILES training devices is critical to support training requirements yet does not believe that the Army development and fielding plan has reviewed all available options. In fact, the committee notes the availability of at least two other training systems that could be used for this purpose. The committee therefore recommends a decrease of $16.1 million for fiscal year 1999 procurement and directs the Army to use fiscal year 1998 funding to meet short term testing and fielding requirements. The committee also directs the Army to review current procurement plans that call for ``attrition- based'' replacement of MILES training devices and provide the Congress, no later than 1 March 1999, with an assessment of both Army and Joint Service requirements, alternative training device systems, and procurement options to support fielding of fully functional training devices. SUBTITLE C--NAVY PROGRAMS <GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT> Sec. 121. CVN-77 nuclear aircraft carrier program. The budget request included $124.5 million for CVN-77 Advance Procurement. The National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 1998 contained a provision that authorized $50.0 million for the advance procurement and construction of components for CVN-77. To continue the effort begun in fiscal year 1998 to produce savings in the CVN-77 program, the committee recommends a provision that would authorize $124.5 million for the advance procurement and construction of components, including nuclear components, for the CVN-77 aircraft carrier program. Sec. 122. Increased amount to be excluded from cost limitation for Seawolf submarine program. The National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 1998 contained a provision requiring $272.4 million to be excluded from the cost limitation for the Seawolf submarine program for initial class design costs that were previously allocated to other canceled ships in the class. In addition, the Department of Defense Inspector General (DOD IG) was directed to provide a report which included the following: (1) audit $745.4 million identified by the Secretary of the Navy as having been obligated for canceled Seawolf-class submarines; (2) construction cost growth of SSN-21, SSN-22 and SSN-23 that had not been reported to Congress before the date of the DOD IG report; and (3) current cost estimates for the completion of SSN- 21, SSN-22 and SSN-23. The committee received the DOD IG audit March 13, 1998, which reported the following: (1) of the $745.4 million audited, the Navy obligated $557.6 million in costs that did not result in components that the Navy could use in the construction of the Seawolf class submarine; (2) the Seawolf program has not experienced an unreported cost growth in the Shipbuilding and Conversion, Navy funding levels since Congress established the cost limitation in fiscal year 1996; and (3) the Seawolf Program Management Office estimates the cost to complete construction of the SSN-21, SSN- 22, and SSN-23 at the cost limitation and the Seawolf Independent Cost Review Team estimate is $67.3 million under the cost limitation. The DOD IG verified that a total of $557.6 million obligated did not result in components the Navy could use in construction of the SSN-21, SSN-22, or SSN-23. Therefore, the committee recommends a provision that would amend section 123(a) of the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 1998 by striking the amount of $272.4 million and replacing it with the amount of $557.6 million as the amount excluded from the Seawolf cost limitation. Sec. 123. Multiyear procurement authority for the medium tactical vehicle replacement. The committee recommends a provision that would authorize the Marine Corps to enter into a multiyear procurement contract, for a term of up to five years and beginning in fiscal year 1999, for procurement of the medium tactical vehicle replacement. The committee understands this action can be accomplished with existing funds for this program and that this multiyear authority will ultimately reduce program costs. OTHER NAVY PROGRAMS Navy Aircraft F-14 pods The budget request included $223.7 million for F-14 modifications. Included in those modifications is an initiative, called the F-14 precision strike program, to fulfill an urgent fleet requirement to maintain a capacity for long range high payload strike missions in the F-14. The precision strike program makes use of an Air Force developed forward looking infrared (FLIR) pod, called a low altitude navigation and targeting infrared at night (LANTIRN) pod. To lower cost and shorten schedule, the Navy uses the pod as a stand alone sensor. The committee understands that the incorporation of these nondevelopmental pods could be accelerated, but that constrained funding prevented the most efficient acquisition of the pods and associated test equipment. Accordingly, the committee recommends an addition of $8.0 million to the budget request for that purpose. AH-1W series The budget request included $9.1 million for the Marine Corps AH-1W Super Cobra attack helicopter. The committee notes a requirement to complete installation of night targeting systems for 10 additional aircraft and meet the established acquisition objective of 188 systems. The night targeting system kit provides night/adverse weather and autonomous missile capabilities for AH-1W attack helicopter platforms. The committee recommends an additional $11.0 million to procure the remaining 10 kits and meet acquisition objectives. EP-3 spares The budget request included $5.4 million for EP-3 modifications. The EP-3 is a land based, long range aircraft, with electronic intercept devices. The budget request includes funds to improve EP-3 operational capability through expanded frequency coverage, as well as for flight tests of the high band prototype of the joint signals intelligence avionics family (JSAF). It is anticipated that those tests will shortly lead to an operational deployment of the system. However, the committee understands that the EP-3 funding request did not include sufficient funds for spares to support that operational deployment. Accordingly, the committee recommends an increase of $2.0 million to the EP-3 request to ensure sufficient spares are available for the deployment. P-3C antisurface warfare improvement program The budget request included $120.7 million for the procurement of P-3C antisurface warfare improvement program (AIP) kits and for associated installation, logistics support, engineering change proposals and training. While the primary mission of the aircraft during the Cold War was antisubmarine warfare, its role as a surveillance asset is now emphasized. The P-3C antisurface warfare improvement program (AIP), begun in fiscal year 1994, is designed to provide a commercial off- the-shelf (COTS)/nondevelopmental item (NDI) upgrade to the Navy's existing fleet of P-3C aircraft to improve its capability to conduct antisurface warfare (ASUW), over-the- horizon (OTH) targeting, and command and control interface with other command centers and fleet units. The P-3C AIP gives the aircraft a much better capability to execute littoral warfare missions at a reasonable price. An operational requirement calls for the procurement of 68 kits between fiscal years 1996 and 2001 at an economical procurement rate of 12 kits per year. The committee recommends an increase of $12.2 million for procurement of P-3C AIP kits. Navy Weapons Penguin missile program Neither the budget request nor the Future Years Defense Program included funding for additional procurement of Penguin missiles. The National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 1997 contained a provision that authorized the Navy to enter into a contract for multiyear procurement of not more than 106 Penguin missiles and limited the amount that could be expended for such procurement to $84.8 million. This provision was based on the existing shortfall in Penguin missile inventory and the premise that the Navy would be able to negotiate a very favorable price at around 55 percent of the average unit procurement cost for previous lots. Congress subsequently appropriated $7.0 million to procure Penguin missiles in fiscal year 1997 and $7.5 million in fiscal year 1998. Penguin is the only operational Navy helicopter-launched missile in the Navy's weapon inventory. It provides Navy surface combatants with a defense against surface threats armed with antiship missiles. A principal operational advantage of Penguin is its relatively long operational range, which permits a helicopter armed with Penguin to remain outside the launch envelopes of potential targets. The committee has concluded that additional funding in fiscal year 1999 could be used to exercise a procurement initiative that takes advantage of labor learning and production stability. The committee recommends an increase of $7.5 million for procurement of additional missiles to satisfy outstanding inventory objectives for both the tactical and telemetry variants. Improved tactical air launched decoy The Navy budget request included $0.3 million for drone and decoys. The request included no funds for procurement of the improved tactical air launched decoy (ITALD). The committee understands that there is an approved operational requirements document for buying more of the ITALD units. However, the Navy has informed the committee that the Department chose not to buy any in fiscal year 1999 because of competing budget priorities. The ITALD simulates a fighter/attack size aircraft better than current decoys. The present tactical air launch decoy is becoming less capable even when encountering existing threat integrated air defense systems (IADS). The committee believes that likely improvements in threat IADS require that the Navy have a more capable decoy than is currently available. Therefore, the committee recommends an increase of $10.0 million for the acquisition of 70 ITALDs. The committee understands that this increase, in addition to ITALDs already funded, will yield roughly enough systems to support two carrier battle groups. The Navy has informed the committee that additional funding for ITALD beyond fiscal year 1999 will be needed to complete this procurement. Close-in weapon system surface mode upgrade The budget request included no funds for procurement of Phalanx surface mode (PSUM) upgrade kits for the close-in weapon system (CIWS). The committee has received information from at- sea commanders that the Block I upgrade to CIWS to include the PSUM capability would solve two long-standing surface ship war fighting deficiencies: (1) engaging close-in, fast moving, small boats with an all-weather, unmanned stabilized weapon; and (2) engaging a slow moving, close-in helicopter. The National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 1998 authorized $15.0 million for PSUM. The committee recommends an increase of $10.0 million for procurement and installation of the surface mode upgrade. The Secretary of the Navy is directed to report to the congressional defense committees no later than December 1, 1998 on the Navy's plan to procure and install PSUM in Navy ships. The Secretary's report should also describe how the Navy intends to satisfy this mission requirement on those ships that will not receive a CIWS installation, or are scheduled to have CIWS equipment replaced by rolling airframe missile (RAM) installations. Surface ship gun mount rotatable pool The budget request included $900,000 for procurement and installation of safety shock ordnance alterations to the 5-inch 54 gun installed on surface combatants. The Navy intends to upgrade the 5-inch 54 Mk 45 guns on AEGIS class cruisers as part of the cruiser conversion program which begins in fiscal year 2001. The conversion plan includes retrofitting two guns per ship to the Mod 4 version. To ensure timely removal and subsequent installation, it is prudent for the Navy to establish a rotatable pool of guns. Establishment of a pool of two guns in fiscal year 1999 will reduce risk in the cruiser conversion program and maintain critical gun overhaul skills at the gun overhaul facility. Therefore, the committee recommends an increase of $15.0 million for test facility preparation, procurement of long lead material and establishment of a 5-inch 54 Mod 4 rotatable gun pool. Navy and Marine Corps Ammunition Marine Corps ammunition The committee is concerned that the budget request includes inadequate funding for ammunition procurement. Ammunition is an important contributor to military readiness; for training and in anticipation of conflict. The committee recommends the following adjustments to the budget request for Marine Corps ammunition procurement: Item Millions 5.56 mm....................................................... $0.5 7.62 mm....................................................... 0.7 9 mm.......................................................... 1.0 25 mm......................................................... 1.0 50 cal........................................................ 0.5 Fuze.......................................................... 2.5 Grenades...................................................... 1.0 SMAW.......................................................... 18.0 120 mm Tank................................................... 4.8 Subtotal.................................................. 30.0 Navy Shipbuilding and Conversion LHD-8 advance procurement The Navy's current plan is to conduct a service life extension program (SLEP) overhaul on the Tarawa class amphibious assault (LHA) ships when they reach the 35 year point in their operating life. The SLEP would provide another 15 years of life at a cost of nearly $1.0 billion per SLEP. The SLEP would extend the machinery operating life and provide communications upgrades. However, stability would remain a main concern and the LHA has limited capabilities to support 21st century littoral warfare systems such as the landing craft air cushion (LCAC) and MV-22Osprey tilt-rotor aircraft. The LHA can transport one LCAC when the LCAC is placed in the well deck sideways, while the Wasp class amphibious assault (multipurpose) (LHD) ship carries two LCACs which drive in and drive out of the well deck fully loaded. The LHD has 20,000 more cubic feet storage capacity but 5,000 square feet less vehicle storage than an LHA. The LHD has more hangar and deck space than an LHA giving the LHD the capacity to carry three more CH-46 helicopters than the LHA. A Marine Expeditionary Unit (MEU) with an LHA as the large deck amphibious ship requires three additional ships to provide the capabilities required of an MEU. When an LHD is the large deck amphibious ship in the MEU, one to two fewer ships are needed to support the MEU. Replacing the LHA with an LHD would provide a platform with the capability to support 21st century requirements. The service life estimate for a LHD is 35 years while the LHA SLEP will add an additional 15 years of life. From a force capitalization perspective, the Navy will have 20 more years of ship life at a drastically reduced procurement cost per year of life by building the LHD instead of performing a SLEP on the LHA. In addition, authorizing construction of a new LHD will leverage efficiencies gained by continuing an experienced workforce which will be completing LHD-7. The committee recommends an increase of $50.0 million for procurement of long lead materials for the construction of LHD-8 in lieu of a future SLEP for LHA-1. Strategic sealift The budget request included $251.4 million in the Shipbuilding and Conversion, Navy (SCN) account for one large medium-speed roll-on/roll-off (LMSR) strategic sealift ship. Section 2218 of title 10, United States Code, establishes the National Defense Sealift Fund (NDSF) to fund construction of sealift vessels. Therefore, the committee authorizes the procurement of one LMSR and the $251.4 million requested for that purpose, but provides that authorization in the NDSF account. Landing craft air cushioned service life extension The budget request did not include any funding for landing craft air cushioned (LCAC) service life extension. The committee notes that funding for the LCAC service life extension activity is currently programmed for fiscal year 2000 and beyond. The LCAC currently serves as a primary conveyance of Marine Corps equipment and personnel from ship to shore. LCAC upgrades are required as these craft approach 15 years of service life with requisite increases in operating costs and decreases in availability. The committee believes that the service life extension program should be accelerated and recommends an increase of $16.0 million to complete upgrades to two LCACs in fiscal year 1999. Other Navy Procurement AN/WSN-7 inertial navigation system The budget request included $21.8 million for procurement of AN/WSN-7 ring laser inertial navigation systems. The AN/WSN- 7 continuously and automatically determines and indicates a ship's position, attitude (heading, roll, and pitch), and velocity. This system replaces three legacy navigation systems, providing equipment commonality between surface combatants, submarines, and aircraft carriers. The annual operating cost of the AN/WSN-7 is projected to be only 10 percent of the cost of operating the legacy navigation systems it replaces. Accelerated procurement of the AN/WSN-7 could produce a substantial savings in maintenance costs. The committee recommends an increase of $12.0 million to the budget request for the procurement and installation of additional AN/WSN-7 navigation sets. AN/BPS-15H surface search radar There was no funding included in the budget request for the procurement of AN/BPS-15H submarine radar navigation sets. The Navy has been procuring the AN/BPS-15H, a commercial off-the- shelf (COTS) variant of the AN/BPS-15 radar navigation set, and its associated mast assembly for installation on new construction submarines and for backfit on SSN-688 class submarines. Procurement of the COTS variant has produced a substantial cost savings over a comparable system built to military specifications, has enhanced operational performance, and has improved navigational safety. The Navy established a new specification to eliminate the manpower intensive requirement for paper navigation charts on ships. Instead of paper charts, all ships will have the Electronic Chart Display Information Systems (ECDIS-N). ECDIS-N requires an upgrade to navigation radar systems. Therefore, the committee recommends an increase of $9.0 million for AN/BPS-15(H) software and hardware upgrades to bring them into ECDIS-N compliance. Submarine acoustic rapid commercial off-the-shelf insertion The budget request included $70.0 million for submarine acoustic rapid commercial off-the-shelf insertion (A-RCI). This program provides cost-effective rapid insertion of technology which enables the operating submarine fleet to maintain acoustic superiority. A-RCI reduces operations and maintenance costs resulting in significantly lower life-cycle costs. The committee recommends an increase of $25.0 million to accelerate the introduction of A-RCI to the operating fleet. Integration and test facility command and control initiative The Navy is continuing an initiative to provide fully integrated and supportable command, control, communications, computer, and intelligence (C4I) systems at its integration and test facilities. These facilities are used for architecture design, systems engineering, integration, and to provide life- cycle support for the fleet's C4I systems. The committee learned that the Navy's East coast in-service engineering Space Warfare System Center (SWSC) began the operation of the Integrated Product Center (IPC). The IPC has the ability to be configured to support almost every Navy laboratory including the Maritime Battle Center (MBC). Additional communication nodes and terminal devices, as well as an increase in existing network bandwidth to accommodate additional users, would permit the facility to support the wide variety of operational protocols and physical interfaces associated with new fleet tactical C4I systems. The committee recommends an increase of $4.0 million above the budget request for engineering design; hardware and software procurement; and installation, testing, and documentation of the additional technical networking infrastructure for continued development of the SWSC's Integrated Products Center. Of this amount, $2.0 million would be for procurement and $2.0 million would be for operations and maintenance. Information Technology-21 The budget request includes $74.7 million in ship communication automation procurement, $168.2 million in satellite communications ship terminals, and $71.7 million in Naval Shore Communications for Information Technology-21 (IT- 21) equipment procurement and installation. IT-21 is a fleet- driven initiative, which is providing accelerated introduction of command, control, communications, and computer (C4I) innovations from the commercial marketplace. Both the Quadrennial Defense Review and the National Defense Panel Report state that future information technologies have the potential to revolutionize Naval Warfare. Network centricity provides the capability to make sweeping changes in the way the services exchange and use information. Network centric operations will require connectivity sufficient to support offensive distributed firepower, to establish an intermediate and robust common tactical picture, conduct archival data retrieval for multi-warfare targeting, conduct two to three simultaneous video teleconferences, maintain a continuous equipment monitoring data transmission path, conduct distance learning and virtual immersion training, and establish afloat networked training communications paths. However, the committee believes that the information exchange required to enable these types of changes will require significant increases in data transfer rates. The committee is concerned that the military satellite communications architecture may not be robust enough to support the high data rates required for future information exchange. Additionally, current high-bandwidth satellite communications (SATCOM) antennas are too large and unwieldy for installation on most surface combatants. However, future commercial systems such as low earth orbit (LEO) constellations offering high bandwidth communication paths are promising alternatives which may help solve the connectivity challenges. In addition, advanced technologies are being demonstrated that might result in significantly smaller high data rate antennas. Visits to the first ships and staffs deploying with IT-21 revealed that IT-21 training is not phased properly with IT-21 equipment installation. In some cases, no IT-21 training was provided to ships ready to deploy with new IT-21 capabilities. The Navy is directed to provide IT-21 training to units scheduled to receive IT-21 equipment. The committee is aware that Year 2000 software and hardware development has resulted in realignment of some IT-21 resources. To assist the Navy in achieving its goal of a fully outfitted fleet by the year 2000, the committee recommends an increase of $20.0 million for ship communication automation and an increase of $20.0 million in naval shore communications for IT-21 procurement, installation and training. Submarine connectivity The budget request included $64.6 million for submarine communications equipment. Submarines are vital to network centric warfare and fighting in the littorals in the 21st century. Establishing communications between the submarine and operational commanders leverages the submarine's stealth and firepower with other assets available in the area of operations. Increasing the submarine's ability to transmit and receive tactical data is a key to information exchange which will result in operational commanders controlling the battle. Therefore, the committee recommends an increase of $15.0 million for the procurement and installation of high data rate antennas and extremely high frequency (EHF) kits to improve communications connectivity equipment for submarines. Joint Engineering Data Management and Information Control System The budget request included no funding for Joint Engineering Data Management and Information Control System (JEDMICS), the designated Department of Defense standard system for management, control and storage of engineering drawings. It is designed as an open, client-server architecture and is nearing full deployment for global access to the data in its repositories. The 1998 program for JEDMICS will start procurement of a commercial off-the-shelf (COTS) security system to preventunauthorized access to JEDMICS data. The committee recommends a $10.0 million increase for the continued security system procurement, integration and accreditation surveys for the JEDMICS system. Aviation life support The budget request included $22.3 million to procure aviation life support and night vision systems. The committee is aware of the limited capabilities that existing AN/AVS-6 OMNI II and III night vision goggles provide in overcast skies or in urban environments. The committee notes that an OMNI IV system virtually doubles the gain of currently fielded night vision goggles and that this system is critical to the overall effectiveness of Marine Corps rotary wing squadrons. The committee recommends an additional $22.6 million to meet retrofit requirements for the OMNI IV in all Marine Corps AN/ AVS-6 night vision goggle systems. AEGIS support equipment The budget request included $83.2 million for AEGIS support equipment. The committee understands that the AEGIS Training and Readiness Center has introduced a new lesson authoring system that can operate in different computer operating environments to meet the Navy's embedded tactical training requirements. This lesson authoring system operates on the fleet's standard display console, the AN/UYQ-70, and is capable of providing multimedia, speech recognition and technologies for distant learning networks. Using such a system could permit the Navy to avoid spending critical resources to modify and update proprietary software systems to accommodate new technology applications. The committee recommends an increase of $8.0 million to expand this lesson authoring system to other tactical warfare systems, such as the Advanced Tomahawk Weapon Control System (ATWCS), Naval Surface Fire Support System (NSFSS), and the Joint Maritime Communications Information System (JMCIS). Smart ship equipment The budget request included $12.8 million to procure and install proven Smart Ship technology in operational Navy ships. The Navy's Smart Ship initiative is managed at fleet level and is designed to reduce crew workload and lower operating and support costs. The committee has concluded that Smart Ship has proven considerable reductions in operating costs of the Navy's fleet units with no loss in operational effectiveness. The committee recommends expanding Smart Ship to all AEGIS cruisers and Arleigh Burke class destroyers. Therefore, the committee recommends an increase of $12.0 million to procure and install Smart Ship equipment in AEGIS. NULKA assembly qualification The budget request included $21.5 million for procurement and installation of the NULKA antiship missile decoy program. NULKA depot maintenance presently requires the shipment of NULKA rounds to an overseas location. The overseas shipment is more expensive than performing the maintenance in the United States. The committee recommends an increase of $1.0 million to outfit and qualify a NULKA assembly facility in the United States. Marine Corps Procurement Modification kits for tracked vehicles The budget request included $5.7 million for modification kits required to ensure the reliability, maintainability, and safety of Marine Corps tracked vehicles. The committee notes an outstanding requirement for a muzzle boresight device (MBD) that improves the accuracy of the M1 Abrams tank main gun. Escalating prices for these devices have created a shortfall in procurement. Additionally, the committee understands that the Marine Corps has been having problems with M1 tank nuclear, biological, and chemical (NBC) protection devicess that have occasionally caused fires on board due to inherent design deficiencies. The committee recognizes ongoing efforts to replace these devices with modern and safe components and believes this effort should be accelerated. The committee, therefore, recommends an increase of $4.6 million for a total authorization of $10.3 million. This increase will buy 403 MBD systems and 403 NBC modification kits. Avenger The budget request included $200,000 for Marine Corps Pedestal Mounted Stinger equipment support. The committee notes existing obsolescence and electro-magnetic interference problems with the forward looking infrared (FLIR) system found on this air defense platform. The committee understands that 81 of 235 fielded systems have received a fully modernized FLIR that eliminates the electro-magnetic interference problem. The Marine Corps still has an unfilled requirement to upgrade the remaining 154 Avengers with the fully modernized FLIR configuration. The committee, therefore, recommends an increase of $7.6 million to complete Marine Corps Avenger FLIR upgrade requirements in fiscal year 1999. Night vision equipment The budget request included $11.6 million for Marine Corpsnight vision equipment. The committee believes that modern night vision equipment serves as a combat multiplier and strongly supports night vision equipment procurement for land forces. Noted are outstanding requirements for night vision equipment. The committee recommends an increase of $11.1 million to procure the following: (1) $6.1 million for generation III tubes to retrofit existing night vision equipment; (2) $1.4 million for laser aiming modules; (3) $2.6 million for medium power laser illuminators; and (4) $1.0 million for borelights. Communications and electronics infrastructure The budget request included $57.9 million to support communications infrastructure activities. Of this amount, $16.3 million is for ongoing upgrades to Marine Corps base telecommunications infrastructure. The committee continues to support Marine Corps efforts to provide a modern backbone information transmission system at every Marine Corps base and station. This communications backbone will ensure that all installations are able to electronically transfer automated information. The committee notes an opportunity to complete upgrades for the entire Marine Corps infrastructure in fiscal year 1999 and recommends an increase of $64.1 million for this purpose. Additionally, the committee notes a critical requirement established by the Marine Corps to address the year 2000 compliancy issue for service computers. In support of an overall Marine Corps solution to this issue, the committee also recommends an additional $20.0 million to procure the 8,000 computer workstations necessary to meet the year 2000 compliance requirements. The committee recommends a total authorization of $142.0 million for communications and electronics infrastructure activities. Light tactical vehicle remanufacturing The budget request included $39.3 million to support efforts to replace aging high mobility multipurpose wheeled vehicles (HMMWVs). The committee continues to be concerned about an aging fleet of HMMWVs in the Marine Corps and understands that a recent analysis by the service established a critical replacement program that will procure new A2 configuration HMMWV's in lieu of upgrading the existing fleet. The A2 configuration HMMWV will improve safety, reliability, maintainability and will insert corrosion prevention measures in the manufacturing process necessary to protect these vehicles from the harsh environments in which they may operate. The committee recommends an increase of $37.0 million to accelerate the replacement process and field an additional 672 HMMWVs. Power equipment The budget request included $5.1 million for Marine Corps power generation equipment. The committee notes an ongoing joint program to provide clean and reliable mobile electric power to support command, control, and communications requirements. This Department of Defense program currently procures tactical quiet generators to replace existing military standard systems. The committee believes that replacement of existing systems should be accelerated and recommends an increase of $9.5 million to procure an additional 1,311 generators. Shop equipment contact maintenance The budget request included $6.0 million for the Marine Corps shop equipment contact maintenance (SECM) program. The committee notes an opportunity for the Marine Corps to achieve the acquisition objective for SECM platforms in fiscal year 1999. The committee, therefore, recommends an increase of $5.4 million to accelerate the final procurement of 47 systems and complete this program one year early. Material handling equipment The budget request included $6.5 million for material handling equipment. Material handling equipment is critical to Marine Corps logistics capabilities in support of unit deployments. The committee understands that rough terrain container handlers and 10,000 pound forklifts are old and need to be rebuilt or replaced. The Army has an existing program that rebuilds this equipment at roughly one third the cost of new vehicle procurement. The committee believes the Marine Corps should take advantage of this existing contract to begin rebuilding its existing fleet. The committee recommends an increase of $10.4 million for this purpose. SUBTITLE D--AIR FORCE PROGRAMS <GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT> Sec. 131. Joint surveillance target attack radar system. The budget request included $463.1 million for procuring two E-8C Joint Surveillance/Target Attack Radar System (JSTARS) aircraft, and $67.5 million for buying JSTARS spare parts. The request also included $123.8 million to continue various development efforts, including a new program to improve the JSTARS radar, called the radar technology insertion program (RTIP). The budget request does not include any funds for closing the JSTARS production line. The Air Force planning originally included a force level of 19 JSTARS aircraft until the Quadrennial Defense Review (QDR)reduced that number to 13 operational aircraft. The QDR recommendation was based, at least in part, on an assumption that the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) would buy from four to six JSTARS aircraft for the NATO airborne ground surveillance (AGS) program. However, NATO did not accept the U.S. proposal to procure JSTARS. The budget request included funding for the last two aircraft of the QDR-mandated fleet size of 13 JSTARS. The budget request did not include long lead funding to continue production past aircraft number 13. The committee understands that the JSTARS is high on operational commanders' list of priorities because of its joint application to battle space surveillance and management. Department of Defense (DOD) witnesses testified that a review would be conducted this year to decide how DOD would meet the war fighting requirement that would have been met with 19 JSTARS aircraft. The Department's options include: development of a space-based capability; increased capabilities of unmanned aerial vehicles; and continued procurement of the current JSTARS systems. Unfortunately, it is unlikely that the Department will have completed its analyses before the Congress will have to act on the fiscal year 1999 budget request. Without long lead funding available in fiscal year 1999, there will be a break in the JSTARS production line, making that option unnecessarily expensive. Therefore, the committee recommends an addition of $72.0 million to protect the option of producing two additional JSTARS aircraft in fiscal year 2000. However, the committee is mindful that roughly $450 million would be required in fiscal year 2000 to buy two additional JSTARS aircraft. The committee is also aware that these funds are not currently in the Future Years Defense Program (FYDP). Should the Department decide against acquisition of further JSTARS aircraft, the Department shall use the $72.0 million for a combination of: (1) fund the termination expenses for JSTARS production; and (2) augment funds in the RTIP development effort to accelerate incorporation of that capability into the JSTARS fleet. Accordingly, the committee recommends a provision that directs the Secretary of Defense to report to the congressional defense committees on the decision related to the future of the JSTARS program no later than March 1, 1999. The report will outline the decision making process, as well as the Department's long range plans to provide for overhead battle management and surveillance. Sec. 132. Limitation on replacement of engines on military aircraft derived from Boeing 707 aircraft. The budget request included $57.3 million to re-engine two RC-135 aircraft. The fiscal year 1999 budget request is the first in many years to provide funding for this high priority, high payoff initiative. The committee notes that the Department of Defense initiative followed several years of congressional funding adds and requirements to study the issue. The RC-135 re-engining effort merits attention because of the Department's decision to commit funds to the program. The current program is outfitting all models of RC-135's with CFM- 56 engines. Through a combination of prior year funding adds (fiscal years 1996-1998) and the Air Force future years defense plan, 19 of the 23 aircraft are programmed to be refitted with new engines. However, a funding shortfall exists to complete the last four aircraft. Accordingly, the committee recommends a total of $113.3 million to acquire re-engining kits for RC-135 aircraft. The committee has been concerned about this issue, and initiated a requirement for the Department to provide a report on the broader subject of re-engining 707-type aircraft. This requirement was mandated by Congress in section 133 of the National Defense Authorization Act for 1998 (Public Law 105- 85). The report was supposed to analyze re-engining to assess the requirements and the costs and benefits of such a program. The report would help ensure that: (1) this vital requirement is not ignored in future planning and programming; (2) the Congress understands the Department's priorities; and (3) the Congress has a quantitative basis for determining the most efficient ways to prolong the life of so many vital airborne platforms. Although section 133 required the Department to submit a report by March 1, 1998, the Department failed to submit the report as of the end of April. The committee expects the Department to comply with all reporting requirements in a timely fashion. The Department has indicated that the re- engining study results have been delayed because the Air Force had to wait for data requested from the various engine contractors. The committee has not been able to confirm that assertion. Although the committee would prefer to operate otherwise, it notes the Department's improved responsiveness when report requirements are accompanied by funding limitations or restrictions. Accordingly, the committee recommends a provision that would restrict funding for re-engining until receipt of the report required by section 133. The committee notes that more than one engine manufacturer has expressed interest in competing for re-engining work. The committee expects that the Department would use competitive procedures for future 707-type engine replacement to ensure that the Department can select options that could provide the best value for the government. Sec. 133. F-22 aircraft program. The budget request included $668.1 million for F-22 procurement, and $190.2 million for advance procurement. The budget request also included $1,582.2 million for F-22 engineering and manufacturing development (EMD). These funds provide substantial building activity separate from any early award of production contracts. The fiscal year 1999 EMD effort includes $828.0 million for air vehicle assembly of test aircraft. Specifically, the EMD program provides funds to complete air vehicle 3, to continue on air vehicles 4-6, and to initiate assembly of air vehicles 7-9. The EMD request also includes $461.0 million for avionics development, $174.5 million for engine development, and $119.2 million other government costs. In response to the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 1998 (Public Law 105-85), the Comptroller General submitted a report that assessed the progress of the EMD phase of the F-22 program and its prospect of completion under the cost cap. The General Accounting Office (GAO) report and recent program progress was the subject of a hearing held by the AirLand Subcommittee to review tactical aviation modernization issues. During the hearing, the GAO gave the F-22 program a positive assessment of the progress made since the program was restructured in response to the recently completed Quadrennial Defense Review (QDR). However, the GAO also noted that contracts for procurement of lot I production aircraft had been accelerated when compared with last year's plan, and that actual program progress had fallen behind. Moving contracts ahead of demonstrated performance directly contradicts the Air Force's previous emphasis on event-based decision making. When the GAO witness noted that moving the production contract from June 1999 to December 1998 did not change actual production, the Assistant Secretary of the Air Force for Acquisition testified that the change in signing contracts was, ``* * * to get the base locked in * * *.'' In 1995, a Defense Science Board report on the F-22, which included Rand Corporation study results, concluded that when major program problems occur, it is usually within the first 10-20 percent of flight testing. The Board noted in its report of only that the F-22 program had substantial tests programmed before moving into production: To put this in perspective, we looked at the current schedule of the F-22, and at 20 percent of full scale development testing. The Lockheed schedule calls for approximately 25 hours per month, with approximately 400 hours of flight testing scheduled by December 1997 (10 months, using 1.5 aircraft) and approximately 1,400 hours by December, 1998 (using 4 aircraft). The present reality is far different from that original prediction. By December of 1997, only three flight test hours had been flown of the planned 400 hours. The program is now scheduled to complete 183 flight hours by December 1998. The committee is concerned that the contract awards are being accelerated, while testing is decelerating. The following table reflects how flight test hours before production award have eroded: Comparison of F-22 Flight Test Hours Planned ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Percent of Flight test flight test Total hours hours Flight hour schedule as of flight test planned planned hours before before planned production production award award ------------------------------------------------------------------------ November 1994.................... 5,191 1,400 27 May 1997......................... 4,337 601 14 February 1998.................... 4,337 183 4 ------------------------------------------------------------------------ In a recent press conference, responding to the concerns raised in the AirLand Subcommittee hearing, the Under Secretary of Defense for Acquisition and Technology (USD(AT)) announced that the F-22 production decision would slip one year, and would be addressed in December 1999. The reason given for the delayed production decision was to complete more testing before committing production funds. The committee supports the approach taken by the USD(AT) and recommends a provision to provide clear guidance for the timing of that decision to proceed into production in fiscal year 2000. The committee notes that funds have not been taken from the program, and are available for obligation once flight testing has been completed to a modest degree--less even than projected by the Joint Estimating Team (JET). Should testing go faster than presently planned, the funds would be immediately available and would not have to be reprogrammed or added to future budget requests. The committee must see demonstrated results in accord with the minimum requirements represented to the committee in the Defense Science Board report of April, 1995, or have substantial assurance from the Secretary of Defense that anything less than that has his full confidence. The committee agrees with the USD(AT) that the production decision should only be made when sufficient testing has been completed. Sec. 134. C-130J aircraft program. The budget request included $63.8 million for oneC-130J. While the budget request did include funds for spares and logistics for C-130J's elsewhere, those funds are not yet sufficient to account for prior omissions. Air Force briefers have acknowledged that the present logistics program is not executable through the Future Years Defense Program (FYDP). Shortfalls in logistics and support include $30 million for a flight simulator, $27.0 million for modifications to C-130J's into the WC-130J configuration, and $15.0 million for modifications to C-130J's into the EC-130J configuration. Though funding for modifications is also not sufficient for the program, funds available from prior years are sufficient to begin the modifications of C-130J aircraft into the WC and EC-130J configurations. C-130J Program Progress The committee views with concern the slow progress of the C-130J program, the increased expense of developing the aircraft, which could be borne by the Department in higher prices for production C-130J's, and notes the Department's failure to provide a report on remanufacture of existing C-130 airframes. The C-130J program was initiated by the manufacturer as a commercial development, which would produce an inexpensive, pragmatic, and rapidly developed follow-on to previous C-130 models. Development costs were to be spread over the first 120 aircraft sold, rather than billed to the government as a developmental program. Development costs were initially estimated at $350 million, and introduction of the new model forecast to begin in mid-1997. Since the program is a commercial one, exact cost accounting has not been available to the Department to date. However, it has been estimated that the program has cost more than $900 million and is over two years behind schedule. Considering the delay in the development of the aircraft and reported overruns in developmental costs, the committee views with concern the future of the C-130J program. Accordingly, the committee recommends a provision that would require the Secretary of Defense to report to the congressional defense committees on the impact of delays and overruns. In the statement of managers accompanying the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 1997 (S. Rept. 104- 267), the committee directed the Secretary of Defense to provide a report, by March 1, 1997, on the net benefits of pursuing a program to design, develop, and produce renewed C- 130 aircraft through remanufacture of existing airframes. The Secretary submitted the report on April 30, 1997 and did not answer the question. Accordingly, the statement of managers accompanying the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 1998 (S. Rept 105-340) restated the direction for an examination of C-130 remanufacturing alternative, as originally requested. As of the middle of April 1998, the report had not been received from the Department. The committee notes that reports from the Department provide important insights in technical and policy matters, and gives the Department an opportunity to examine issues and report the findings to the Congress. Absent any response from the Department, the committee assumes that the Department cannot address the issue in any meaningful way and provides the following direction for C-130 modernization. (Funds for the simulator are shown in line 12 of the P-1 exhibit, combined with the additional C-130J's.) Fiscal Year 1999 C-130 Program (In millions of dollars) ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- C-130J EC-130J WC-130J Simulator Total ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Budget Request \1\.................................. $63.8 - - - $63.8 (Quantity).......................................... 1 1 Committee Recommendation............................ 191.4 $85.0 $75.4 30.0 $381.8 Quantity............................................ 3 1 1 1 5 ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- \1\ The budget request included $62.0 million for C-130J initial spares in Budget Activity 06. WC-130J The scope and cost of modifications to airframes to the WC- 130J configuration are not yet clearly defined or prices negotiated. The committee notes the prior years' authorization of modification funds on hand to begin the program. Once the program is defined and contracts are in place, the remaining requirements for modification can be authorized. OTHER AIR FORCE PROGRAMS Air Force Aircraft Joint Primary Aircraft Training System The budget request included $107.1 million to procure 19 JPATS aircraft. JPATS is a joint Air Force/Navy program to replace T-37 and T-34 primary flight training aircraft and the associated ground based training systems. The committee understands that the present contract for JPATS allows for an increase of three aircraft in fiscal year 1999 without future year implications or additional requirementsfor funding. An additional three JPATS aircraft would increase the contract to its maximum number under the existing variations in quantity (VIQ) matrix and lead to reduced unit costs as well as an enhanced learning curve in the early production of JPATS. Accordingly, the committee recommends an increase of $9.1 million to the budget request to acquire an additional three JPATS aircraft in fiscal year 1999. F-15 220E engine modification The budget request included $196.5 million for F-15 modifications, with $17.8 million dedicated to 220E engine upgrades. The 220E upgrades the engine controls from analog to digital technology, making the engine more supportable, and thus more available. The committee recommended increased funding in fiscal year 1998 to accelerate the program by one year. Based on the possible operational savings in years to come and the high priority assigned to the project by the Chief of Staff of the Air Force, the committee recommends an increase of $25.0 million to the fiscal year 1999 budget request to further accelerate the fielding of the 220E upgrade. ALQ-135 internal countermeasures sets The budget request included $11.4 million in PE 27134F to finish development and testing of the ALQ-135 band 1.5 upgrade. The band 1.5 upgrade would provide low- to mid-band jamming coverage for the F-15E aircraft. The committee understands that this capability would be important in protecting aircrews in high threat environments. The committee also notes that the band 1.5 equipment shares a high degree of commonality with circuit card assemblies associated with the currently fielded band 3 equipment. Production of the band 3 equipment will be completed in fiscal year 1998. Unless the Air Force is able to begin low rate initial production in fiscal year 1999, there would be a 12 month production break. The committee recommends an additional $25.0 million in Aircraft procurement Air Force (APAF) modification of inservice aircraft, line 31 for F-15 modifications. The committee understands that this amount would be sufficient to provide a limited operational capability to complete one F-15E squadron, and would lead to an orderly transition to full production after a milestone III decision in August 1999. F-16 reconnaissance system The budget request included $229.3 million for F-16 modifications. The Air Force has been buying a version of the Marine Corps' advanced tactical airborne reconnaissance system (ATARS). In fiscal year 1999, the Air Force was projected to take delivery of 20 pod systems. Each pod would have included two sensors: (1) a forward-oblique camera in the front bay; and (2) a medium altitude elector-optic (MAEO) sensor in the middle bay. The committee understands that necessary engineering change proposals have caused the Air Force to scale back the scope of the contract, which would now include only 5 MAEO sensors. The lack of a medium altitude sensor would subject a significant portion of reconnaissance missions to flying in riskier, low-altitude regimes. The committee recommends an increase of $13.3 million for F-16 modifications. The committee understands that this amount would be sufficient to purchase the remaining 15 MAEO sensors to outfit each of the new reconnaissance pods. Theater airborne warning system The budget request included no funds for the Theater Airborne Warning system (TAWS). The committee has supported this program and continues to believe that it may offer a near- term means of augmenting Defense Support Program infrared missile warning data. The committee notes that the Air Force has yet to complete testing of this system but plans to be finished with such testing before the end of fiscal year 1998. Therefore, the committee recommends an increase of $12.0 million in Aircraft Procurement, Air Force to permit the Air Force to commence the Rivet Joint infrared technology transfer if the testing is successfully completed. The committee, however, directs that none of these funds be obligated for TAWS until the Air Force completes testing and submits a report on the test results to the congressional defense committees. U-2 sensor upgrades The budget request included $152.1 million for the defense Airborne Reconnaissance Program (DARP). The committee has been informed by the Department of Defense that even with prior year funding, additional funds are required to modify U-2 Senior Ruby, Senior Spear, and Senior Glass-1A sensors to the Senior Glass-1R baseline. The committee understands that: (1) economies of scale are possible; (2) earlier spares procurement would sustain the common baseline; and (3) an increase to the budget request would reduce the impact of vanishing vendor items. Accordingly, the committee recommends an addition of $17.0 million to continue the reliability and maintainability (R&M) conversion of 11 Senior Glass sensor systems for the U-2. Air Force Missile Minuteman III guidance replacement program The committee continues to support the Minuteman III Guidance Replacement Program (GRP). The committee is concerned by the Air Force's decision to reduce GRP production funding in fiscal years 1999 and 2000. This decision will result in significant delay and cost growth. The GRP production effort would be delayed by two years and the program costs would increase by approximately $280.0 million. The Minuteman III guidance systems are currently 10 to 18 years beyond their original design life of 10 years, and must be replaced as soon as possible. The committee understands that an increase of $46.0 million in fiscal year 1999, with an additional increase in fiscal year 2000, will mitigate this production gap. The committee therefore recommends an increase of $46.0 million in Missile Procurement, Air Force for GRP and urges the Secretary of the Air Force to seek additional funds in fiscal year 2000 to establish a more efficient and expeditious production program. Titan IV space boosters The committee is aware that, due to continuing adjustments in the Titan IV space boosters program, the budget request includes funds in excess of what can be obligated in fiscal year 1999 for Titan IV. Therefore, the committee recommends a reduction of $10.0 million in Missile Procurement, Air Force, for Titan IV Space boosters. Other Air Force Procurement Theater Deployable Communications The budget request included $31.1 million for tactical communications-electronic (CE) equipment, of which $27.3 million would be for theater deployable communications (TDC). TDC is composed of two components, the lightweight multiband satellite terminal (LMST) and the integrated communications access package. Together these two systems provide the communications infrastructure in deployed bare base environments. TDC is currently funded at 76 percent of the requirement to support 100 percent of one major theater war and 30 percent of another. The TDC replaces existing commiunication suites that require more manpower to operate and more resources to maintain and operate. The committee recognizes the efficiencies associated with accelerated deployment of TDC and the increased forward deployment capability. The committee recommends an increase of $17.7 million to procure an additional three TDC ICAP units. Defense-Wide Programs <GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT> Penetration augmented munition The committee is aware of the need for the Special Operations Command's (SOCOM) Penetration Augmented Munitions (PAMs). The PAM is a multi-stage munition, designed for attacking and neutralizing heavily reinforced concrete structures, such as bridges, piers, abutments, bunkers, and Weapons of Mass Destruction (WMD) infrastructure. It replaces the need for SOCOM operators to transport and emplace large quantities of explosives to destroy heavily reinforced, concrete structures. Currently, SOCOM plans to begin procurement of this system in fiscal year 2000. The committee believes that important modernization programs, such as this, should be accelerated in order to provide a greater near-term capability, and reduce the strain on out year procurement budgets. Therefore, the committee recommends an increase of $6.5 million in line number 57, SOF ordinance acquisition, for the procurement of additional 400 PAMs. Remote activation munition systems The committee is aware of the shortfall in procurement funds for the remote activation munition system (RAMS). RAMS is a radio frequency controlled remote initiator. It provides the special operations community with the capability to remotely control detonation of demolition charges, or the remote operation of other items of equipment, such as beacons, laser markers, radios and weapons. The committee understands that if an additional $6.0 million were provided for this system in fiscal year 1999, the Special Operations Command would realize a 15 percent acquisition savings, or $2.0 million. Therefore, the committee recommends an increase of $6.0 million in line number 57, SOF ordinance acquisition, for the procurement of additional RAMS basic kits and receivers. Silent Shield The committee notes an outstanding requirement for Silent Shield systems. Silent Shield systems provide Air Force special operations crews with an on-board, real-time source of situational awareness, threat warning, and target update information. The committee believes these systems are essential for the successful employment of special operations aircraft and recommends an increase of $5.0 million to accelerate procurement of 10 systems. Surgical strike The committee recommends an increase of $5.0 million for this classified program. Maritime equipment The committee recommends an increase of $5.1 million for this classified program. National Guard and Reserve Equipment In light of continued shortfalls in budget authority for Department of Defense (DOD) modernization, the committee is pleased to note an increase in the level of funding provided for Guard and Reserve modernization in the fiscal year 1999 budget request. In an era of overextended Service modernization programs that cannot be sustained by projected DOD funding levels, it is clear that the increased funding requested by the Services for the reserve components reflects a recognition of the critical role that these forces provide in DOD operations. The committee believes that reserve component modernization, as an integral component of overall DOD modernization, should rely on a collaborative budget development process within the Department and not on annual Congressional supplemental funding. In fact, as future defense budget totals have been determined by Administration and Congressional budget agreements, if supplemental funding for reserve components was necessary, it would have to come at the expense of other programs funded in the budget request. The budget request for fiscal year 1999 included $1.36 billion for National Guard and Reserve equipment as shown in the table below: Appropriation Cost (millions) Aircraft, Army................................................ 110.2 Missiles, Army................................................ 35.3 Weapons and Tracked Combat Vehicles, Army..................... 12.3 Ammunition, Army.............................................. 182.3 Other Procurement, Army....................................... 502.9 Aircraft, Navy................................................ 41.8 Ammunition, Navy/USMC......................................... 17.3 Other Procurement, Navy....................................... 3.6 Procurement, USMC............................................. 39.9 Aircraft, USAF................................................ 293.3 Ammunition, USAF.............................................. 30.4 Other Procurement, USAF....................................... 85.0 NG&RE, Other Procurement...................................... 9.3 -------------------------------------------------------------- ____________________________________________________ Total DOD................................................. 1,363.6 This request reflects a net increase of almost $400.0 million in funding requested for the reserve component modernization from the fiscal year 1998 budget request. The committee recommends funding increases in service programs to support reserve component modernization as follows: Millions UH-60 Blackhawk............................................... $78.5 Family of Medium Tactical Vehicles............................ 88.0 Medium Truck Extended Service Program......................... 93.9 SINCGARS family............................................... 61.9 C130 (2 C130J, 1 EC-130J)..................................... 352.1 C130J Simulator............................................... 30.0 -------------------------------------------------------------- ____________________________________________________ Total..................................................... 704.4 Additionally, the committee recommends an increase of $60.0 million to the budget request for National Guard and Reserve miscellaneous equipment: Millions Army Reserve: Miscellaneous................................... $10.0 Navy Reserve: Miscellaneous................................... 10.0 Marine Corps Reserve: Miscellaneous........................... 10.0 Air Force Reserve: Miscellaneous.............................. 10.0 Army National Guard: Miscellaneous............................ 10.0 Air National Guard: Miscellaneous............................. 10.0 The committee directs that miscellaneous funding allocated for the Army National Guard, in consultation with the service chief, give priority consideration to the following items: vibration management enhancement system; engagement skills trainer; night vision equipment; high mobility multipurpose wheeled vehicles. The committee further directs that miscellaneous funding allocated for the Air Guard, in consultation with the service chief, give priority consideration to procuring airborne firefighting equipment. OTHER ITEMS OF INTEREST Air National Guard Missions In reviewing the many contributions made by the Air National Guard (ANG), the committee notes the valuable contribution made by C-130 units to firefighting in the Western states. The committee understands that older C-130E aircraft are to be replaced with C-130J aircraft, now on order. The committeeexpects the Department to ensure that all western state ANG units have at least the necessary eight aircraft for airlift missions and special missions, such as counter drug flights and firefighting, and have a rotating pool of Mobile Aerial Firefighting Systems (MAFFS) for support of the U.S. Forest Service mission. The committee is also concerned about the relative peacetime utilization of C-130 Air National Guard and Air Force Reserve units. The committee fears that some units may be experiencing high operational tempo rates participating in peacetime missions, while others may not be operating with such a demanding schedule. Such missions include supporting Bosnia operations and counter drug missions, in addition to domestic efforts, such as firefighting and disaster relief. Therefore, the committee directs the Secretary of the Air Force to provide a report to the congressional defense committees on the balance among C-130 units for operating tempo. The Secretary shall submit that report no later than March 31, 1999. The committee notes that the Air Force provided an assessment last year that dealt with wartime requirements for tactical airlift. The Secretary's report should also provide an assessment of whether these peacetime operating tempos can be accommodated within the tactical airlift force structure identified as meeting wartime requirements. Army aviation modernization The committee has completed a review of the Army aviation modernization plan called for in the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 1998. While this plan makes progress in several areas, it does not adequately prioritize investment opportunities and leaves many requirements unfunded. In fact, for portions of the utility helicopter fleet, the plan failed to describe either a formal plan or details associated with a range of alternatives called for in the bill provision. The committee also understands that follow-on modifications to the plan have significantly changed the nature and scope of what was presented earlier this year. Consequently, the committee must assume that the provided plan does not provide a viable, balanced program for Army aviation. The committee has several concerns with deficiencies identified in the current aviation modernization plan. First, the number one aviation modernization program for the Army is the ongoing development of the Comanche scout helicopter. If, in fact, the Comanche helicopter is a top priority, it is hard to understand why the Army continues to fund its number one program at a level so low that it has only resourced one prototype platform for flight testing. Although a second prototype will soon be moved to the flight test facility, current funding limitations will not support flight testing of this aircraft until January 2001. Second, the Army is pursuing an inadequate procurement strategy for both the Apache Longbow and Comanche helicopters. Missing from the current strategy is adequate funding for self- protection countermeasures and sensor fusion capabilities which are key requirements for the survivability and effectiveness of these high-value platforms and their crews. The committee believes it essential that the Army ensure that Apache, Comanche, and other aircraft with similar requirements are provided with both the latest radio frequency and infrared countermeasures when procured, even if it means reducing the rate or number of aircraft procured. Third, while the modernization plan would retire AH-1 aircraft in attack battalions more quickly than originally planned, it would still leave a sizeable number in the cavalry squadrons. An even lower density aging aircraft will be more of a maintenance and support challenge. The committee believes that the Army should seek to retire the entire AH-1 fleet on an accelerated schedule. Fourth, utility helicopter requirements are acknowledged, but not resourced in a balanced manner. The committee understands a further analysis of requirements has convinced the Army of the need for an additional 90 Blackhawks for the Army National Guard, but only 50 are currently funded in the future years defense program. However, the readiness of the Army National Guard's UH-1 fleet is a source of serious concern. The fleet is currently grounded and undergoing inspections and necessary repairs on spur gears. Even if this action returns the fleet to service, it does not address the modernization requirement for over 500 UH-1 aircraft remaining in the force. While reserving judgment until the Army analysis is complete, the committee is skeptical that the Army can afford to procure 145 commercial-off-the-shelf aircraft for the light utility helicopter role and conduct a service life extension program on the rest of the UH-1 fleet. The committee believes the Army must address this issue and assist the Congress in understanding how these requirements should be met. The committee directs the Army to review the aviation modernization plan provided to the Congress earlier this year and provide an update to this plan that addresses the issues discussed in this report. The results of this review and update shall be provided to the congressional defense committees no later than January 31, 1999, to support a review of the President's fiscal year 2000 budget request. Bradley base sustainment The budget request included $285.8 million to support Bradley base sustainment. The committee recognizes a requirement for the Army to measure the wear on the bore of the Bradley's 25mm cannon to ensure troop safety and identify when barrels need to be replaced. The committee understands that there are new bore erosion gauges available today that can accurately measurebore wear and provide an improved and cost effective means to ensure weapon accuracy and extend the service life of the Bradley main gun. The committee believes that alternative bore erosion gauges should be evaluated and directs the Secretary of the Army to investigate any potential benefit of new bore erosion gauges and report to the Congress no later than January 31, 1999. Depleted Uranium Production The committee supports the Army's efforts to preserve the tank ammunition production base. However, it also recognizes that the Army must downsize the base to be cost effective. This includes the proposed reduction from two to one producer of tank depleted uranium penetrators. The committee is concerned that the decontamination and management of Government furnished equipment at the commercial facility which will no longer produce these penetrators has not been clearly identified, and that there will not be adequate funds to ensure that the decontamination will be accomplished either by the Army or by the contractor on a timely basis. Therefore, the committee directs the Secretary of the Army to provide a report to the congressional defense committees discussing the Army's management plan for this Government furnished equipment, including decontamination and disposition as appropriate. This report should be provided no later than March 31, 1999. Digital information technology testbed The committee supports Department of Defense initiatives to develop and field information management systems that will meet the needs of an information centered military. The committee notes ongoing Department efforts to review architecture alternatives for automated electronic storage, retrieval, dissemination, and downgrading or declassifying government data. The committee is pleased to note the success achieved by the Army through the digital information technology testbed (DITT) in developing a prototype electronic data management system. The DITT system allows for storage of voluminous amounts of data, user friendly access to data at multiple levels of security, rapid dissemination of time-critical information, automatic downgrading or declassification and redaction. The committee understands that the Army plans on funding DITT hardware and software procurement in the 2000 timeframe. The committee directs the Department of Defense to provide a report to the Congress, no later than 1 March 1999, on how the DITT model might be used to meet defense-wide requirements for an automated electronic storage and retrieval capability. Domestic Emergency Response Program The budget request included $99.0 million to develop a program to prepare and enhance Federal, state and local response capabilities to terrorist incidents involving weapons of mass destruction (WMD), $49.8 million in the Department of Defense and $49.2 million in the Department of the Army budgets. The Assistant Secretary of Defense for Special Operations and Low Intensity Conflict (ASD(SO/LIC)) has been assigned responsibility by the Secretary of Defense for policy and resource oversight. Responsibility for procurement has been assigned to the Assistant to the Secretary of Defense for Nuclear, Chemical and Biological Defense programs. The Secretary of the Army has been designated by the Secretary of Defense to serve as Executive Agent for coordinating DOD training assistance to Federal, state and local officials. Additionally, the Secretary of the Army is also responsible for training state and local first responders to respond to terrorist threats involving chemical and biological agents and weapons; identifying, neutralizing, dismantling and disposing of chemical and biological weapons and related materials and technologies; and for developing and implementing planning guidance, plans, and procedures for the Domestic Emergency Preparedness Program. Following the Quadrennial Defense Review (QDR), the Secretary of Defense recommended that the Reserve Components should play a more active role in responding to domestic WMD terrorism. The committee agrees with the assessment of the Secretary of Defense, that the Reserve Components could be the first military responders on the scene to support local and state governments in managing the consequences of a terrorist use of WMD. The committee understands that the funds included in the Department of the Army budget request for the Reserve Components are for activities to begin addressing increased support requirements associated with terrorist use of WMD in the United States. These activities include the following: establishment of 10 Rapid Assessment and Initial Detection (RAID) teams; establishment of WMD patient decontamination teams from existing Guard and Reserve chemical companies and medical decontamination teams; training and equipping of Reserve Components to conduct WMD search, survey, surveillance and sampling activities; development of additional versions of the Army's Medical Management of Chem/Bio Causualties course; increased training days to improve coordination of interagency planning; upgrading existing Army Reserve simulation systems to include WMD effects capabilities, and the design and conduct of a proof-of-concept exercise; and establishment of a Reserve Component program office under the Director of Military Support (DOMS) to oversee WMD response activities. National Vaccine Stockpile The committee understands that the Department of Defense has a limited stockpile of vaccines, medical supplies and protectivegear which could be used in response to a terrorist incident involving WMD, subject to approval by the Secretary of Defense. During testimony before the committee, the Assistant Secretary of Defense for Special Operations and Low Intensity Conflict testified that the Secretary of Defense could authorize the use of this stockpile under certain circumstances. The committee directs the Department to report to the congressional defense committees by December 1, 1998 on the circumstances under which the Secretary of Defense might authorize the use of the stockpile for a domestic WMD incident. The report should also contain information on the availability of vaccines, antiserums and antidotes in other Federal Government entities, such as the Centers for Disease Control (CDC), that could be used in such an emergency. Lastly, the report should discuss the advisability of establishing a national stockpile of vaccines, antiserums and antidotes, how the Department of Defense could contribute to that effort, and the estimated cost. Defense Threat Reduction Agency (DTRA) In November 1997, as part of its Defense Reform Initiative (DRI), the Department of Defense recommended the establishment of a single agency to carry out programs to counter proliferation and reduce threats posed by weapons of WMD and to provide nuclear weapons stockpile and related support. Consistent with the DRI recommendation, the committee recommends that the mission, function and resources for fiscal year 1999 for the defense domestic preparedness program be transferred to the Defense Threat Reduction Agency (DTRA). Encapsulated life raft system The committee is concerned by delays in the procurement of a 25-person encapsulated life raft system to replace the aging MK-6 life raft. Due to safety, support, cost and operational benefits of a new system, the committee encourages the Navy to complete a competitive source selection for this program. The Navy is directed to provide the committee, no later than December 1, 1998, a schedule for production and installation of these systems. F/A-18E/F configuration mix The budget request included $2,876.1 million for the procurement of 30 F/A-18E/F aircraft. Among the 30 aircraft, the Navy would buy 14 single seat aircraft (F/A-18E) and 16 two seat aircraft (F/A-18F). During the Quadrennial Defense Review (QDR), the Defense Department reduced the planned buy for F/A- 18E/F from 1,000 aircraft to a total of 548-785. The new total would vary, depending upon how soon the joint strike fighter (JSF) enters service. Whatever the size of the program for F/A- 18E/F, the total program would now include a greater proportion of the two seat F/A-18F aircraft. One explanation for the richer mix has been that the Navy needs more two seat F/A-18s to replace two seat F-14s that will be retiring. Following a recent hearing, the committee asked the Navy for a definition and rationale for the force mix between single seat F/A-18E aircraft and F/A-18F aircraft. The committee was very disappointed with the answer provided. Perhaps the Department did not understand the question. The question was: ``Why does the Navy need a two seat aircraft to replace the F- 14, when it is contemplating a two seat aircraft F/A-18F to replace the present day EA-6B?'' The EA-6B aircraft is a four seat aircraft. The committee recognizes the large strides made in human factors design of modern cockpits and simplified controls now available in tactical aircraft. The committee is aware that such improvements as digital displays, data links, and other improvements have decreased cockpit workload. For single seat aircraft, a major improvement has come from the development of hands on throttle and stick (HOTAS) flight management systems. HOTAS systems allow pilots to fly tactical aircraft without removing their hands from the flight controls to operate and fight the aircraft system. In fact, the Navy has represented that these technologies will permit the Navy to perform the EA- 6B mission in a two seat aircraft. The committee notes that such technologies might permit the Navy to replace some two seat F-14 aircraft with single seat F-18 aircraft. Therefore, the committee needs to understand more of the reasoning behind the Navy's F/A-18E/F force mix. Accordingly, the committee directs the Secretary of the Navy to provide a report to the congressional defense committees, no later than February 1, 1999, on the F/A-18E/F mix that includes: (1) an analysis of crew contribution to mission success in tactical aircraft acquired since 1980, with due consideration given the technology improvements that would allow a single pilot to fly a tactical aircraft and simultaneously operate complex weapons systems; (2) a comparison of crew workload and mission requirements of single and dual seat tactical aircraft acquired or planned for acquisition from 1980 through 2010; and (3) a complete description of how a two seat F/A-18F aircraft will be able to perform the missions of the four seat EA-6B; (4) the planned mix of F/A-18E and F/A-18F aircraft from the fiscal year 1999 budget request through the end of the program; (5) a complete explanation of why F-14 aircraft must be replaced on a one-for-one basis by F/A-18F aircraft; (6) a complete analysis of the range differential between the two seat F/A-18F and the single seat F/A- 18E that considers reduced fuel for the second seat, increased life cycle costs, and any range degradation associated withwing drop remedies; (7) an analysis of the intended roles for the single and dual seat F/A-18's highlighting similarities and differences in their roles; and (8) an analysis of F/A-18 capability shortfalls brought on by network-centered warfare requirements that could require a second crew member. Flight simulators for the Air National Guard The Air National Guard is scheduled to begin operating C-17 airlifters in 2002 is a part of the Air National Guard's increasingly critical national security role. Just as the regular component units need to train and prepare for the transition to C-17 operation, National Guard aircrews will be required to undergo an initial qualification and continued training to maintain proficiency. The Air Force is now programmed to acquire ten flight simulators for the C-17, with four at one regular component location, but none programmed to be sited at the National Guard operating base. Accordingly, the committee directs the Secretary of Defense to ensure that training plans for the National Guard C-17 unit include simulator training in a C-17 flight simulator, and that the simulator will be will be stationed at the National Guard operating base at least 9 months prior to initial arrival of C- 17 aircraft. Full accounting of cost associated with ammunition procurement The committee is concerned that in some cases, the Department of Defense may not be considering the total cost and savings to the Federal Government when choosing a contractor for the production of ammunition. The costs and savings that may not be considered include retirement liabilities, overhead, and other administrative costs at Government facilities. The committee believes that when determining the source of production for ammunition programs, the Department should take into account all costs associated with that production, as well as the overall savings that would be realized if this production were to utilize facilities or personnel to which the Federal Government would continue to owe a financial obligation, whether or not those facilities and personnel were awarded the production contract. Gun ship modernization The budget request did not include funding for buying new aircraft to modernize the Special Operations Command (SOCOM) AC-130 gun ships. The committee understands that internal Department of Defense studies may have identified an inventory objective that could require additional AC-130 gun ships. The committee directs the Department of Defense to submit an analysis of SOCOM AC-130 gun ship inventory requirements to the congressional defense committees by March 1, 1999. This report should include the following: (1) whether there are additional requirements, such as providing theater commanders with support to perform force protection, border surveillance, reconnaissance, airfield and seaport defense, or other missions; (2) whether additional gun ship capability is the best way to provide this capability; (3) the relative costs and benefits of converting existing C-130 aircraft, buying new C-130J aircraft, or buying another aircraft altogether; (4) the relative costs and benefits of assigning any additional mission requirements to active component SOCOM units versus assigning these requirements to reserve component units. Secure facsimile machines In the report accompanying the National Defense Authorization Act of fiscal year 1998, the committee directed the Army to provide a report on the future requirements for secure facsimile machines, the costs and benefits of replacing existing legacy systems with newer technology machines, and the Department's funding plan for addressing future requirements. The Army reported that future requirements for secure facsimile machines had not been determined and will be ultimately based on testing and evaluation of the communications architecture projected for the first digitized division. The committee is aware that some organizations within the Army have already procured limited quantities of newer technology machines to meet secure facsimile machine requirements. The committee supports this action and encourages the Army to consider procuring additional commercial-off-the-shelf rugged multi- functional tactical computer facsimile machine peripherals as a cost saving alternative to maintaining aging legacy systems. Small arms training ammunition The committee is aware of Army research and development efforts to produce lead-free, non-toxic small arms training rounds to address environmental problems associated with firing lead rounds in indoor, as well as outdoor training ranges. This problem impacts readiness by restricting training opportunities through closure of Department of Defense (DOD) ranges, or requiring expensive remediation and monitoring efforts at these ranges. Furthermore, lead contamination has resulted in the cessation of operations at military ranges, increasing the cost of transportation and reducing valuable training time. The Environmental Protection Agency, Region 1, suspended weapons training at one of the principal National Guard training sites in New England. The committee is aware of the availability of commercial, lead free, non-toxic frangible ammunition that may address some of the military's problems in this area. The committee understands that this ammunition has also been safety tested by the Army Test and Evaluation Command and approved for use. The committee urges the DOD to further explore this frangible ammunition to determine the extent to which it would solve its environmental problems, and to incorporate it in its training inventory, if it provides a cost effective solution that would enable the continued use of training facilities that would not otherwise be available. Tactical trailers and dolly sets The budget request included $12.0 million for procurement of tactical trailers and dolly sets. The committee notes the recent approval of a requirement for the self-loading/off- loading trailer (SLOT) system that will enhance Army logistical operations. The SLOT multi functional trailer has the capability to self-load/off-load and transport operable and inoperable wheeled and light tracked vehicles, material handling equipment, engineering construction equipment, general cargo and international standards organization compatible containers. The committee understands that the basis of issue for these trailers has yet to be determined but understands the Army plans on initiating procurement in fiscal year 2000. The committee strongly supports this program and believes that these trailers will serve to strengthen the Army's logistics backbone. Vertical Takeoff and Landing Unmanned Aerial Vehicles The committee notes the progress made in conducting a demonstration of vertical takeoff and landing (VTOL) unmanned aerial vehicles (UAV), following congressional direction to investigate the feasibility of a VTOL UAV for use in maritime or land based environments to provide near-real-time reconnaissance, surveillance, target acquisition, and battle field management. The committee expects that lessons learned from the demonstration will be applied towards potential acquisition of such a system. TITLE II--RESEARCH, DEVELOPMENT, TEST, AND EVALUATION Explanation of tables The tables in this title display items requested by the administration for fiscal year 1999 and the committee's actions in regard to the requested amounts. As in the past, the administration may not exceed the amounts approved by the committee (as set forth in the tables or, if unchanged from the administration request, as set forth in the Department of Defense's budget justification documents) without a reprogramming action in accordance with established procedures. Unless noted explicitly in the report, all changes are made without prejudice. SUBTITLE A--AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS <GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT> SUBTITLE B--PROGRAM REQUIREMENTS, RESTRICTIONS, AND LIMITATIONS Sec. 211. Crusader self-propelled artillery system program. The budget request included $313.2 million for continued development of the Crusader artillery system. The committee has watched the development of Crusader over time with great interest in the capabilities which this system was designed to provide. The Crusader program was initially developed to be an advanced technology, liquid propellant cannon offering great advances in range, targeting, mobility, and resupply requirements. The committee was concerned when, in March of 1996, the Army elected to switch to an advanced technology solid propellant and stop work on the liquid propellant concept due to escalating developmental costs and chronic technical problems associated with that concept. The Army Crusader effort was initially prompted by the establishment of future warfighting requirements and a realization that the existing self-propelled howitzer system has been in the inventory for over thirty years. The current fleet of M109 Paladin artillery systems was first fielded in its original configuration in 1963 and has undergone a series of upgrades over time that have brought this system to the currently fielded M109A6 configuration. Today's Paladin system is much more capable than the original M109. However, while additional improvements might be possible, some suggest that this system has been improved as far as the current configuration will allow. The committee continues to support Army efforts to develop and field new systems that will provide combat overmatch, increased lethality, crew survivability, and support the Army's ability to fight and win on future battlefields. However, the committee has several concerns associated with the Crusader system as it is currently programmed. First, the Army decision to terminate the liquid propellant program due to immature technology and rising costs resulted in a solid propellant technology that is also unproven and does not provide the advantages expected of the liquid propellant system. Some of these advantages included range, reload and resupply efficiencies, and safety. Second, a June 1997 GAO report noted that the current program still suffers from considerable programmatic risks due to technical challenges faced in developing and integrating advanced technologies, the potential compression of the program schedule, the use of a streamlined acquisition approach, and the absence of defined criteria for entering into low-rate production. While some of the GAO's concerns are being addressed, the committee still believes that there is significant risk in continuing on the current course. Third, the recently released National Defense Panel (NDP) report, which focused on the nation's future warfighting requirements, questioned the numbers of the Crusader system programmed by the Army. In testimony before the committee in January of 1998, one of the panel members stated that the Crusader program lost its luster when the Army elected to terminate the liquid propellant effort. Panel members also expressed their concern about the utility of this system as its weight, estimated to be approximately 60 tons, would likely preclude it from being deployed in some future scenarios due to airlift and access problems expected in future conflicts. The problem of access was seen this year in the Persian Gulf region where U.S. allies, whom U.S. forces were trying to protect, would not allow use of their bases to strike Iraq. The NDP report and panel member testimony also made it clear that future systems must be lighter, faster, more lethal, and have a smaller logistics footprint if they are going to be viable in an increasingly uncertain future. Finally, the committee is concerned about the ability of future Army budgets to meet all the acquisition requirements it has established in its modernization program. The committee is concerned about a possible, if not probable, procurement bow wave that cannot be supported by projected resources. The committee sees an aging aviation fleet in the Army, with some helicopters already over 30 years old; an old truck fleet; and escalating requirements for new missiles, weapons, and ammunition. The committee is concerned that if the bow wave issue is not adequately addressed, Crusader may become the next program termination casualty for the Army. The committee, therefore, believes the Army should revisit both current requirements and schedule for the established Crusader program which is estimated to cost over $12.0 billion to design and procure 824 howitzers and resupply vehicles. The committee directs the Army to provide a report to the Congress, no later than March 1, 1999, that describes the following: (1) assessment of the risk associated with the current Crusader program technology; (2) total requirement for Crusader associated with Army After Next force structure revisions; (3) cost and benefit analysis of procuring only those Crusader systems necessary for one heavy corps and redirecting future procurement funding to develop an Army After Next compatible artillery system; (4) potential for reducing system weight by as much as 50 percent; (5) potential for propellant and munition alternatives and the impact of maturing this technology on the overall program schedule; and (6) cost and benefit analysis of delaying procurement of Crusader to avoid affordability issues associated with the current schedule and allow for maturation of weight and propellant technologies. The committee supports continued research and development and believes an ultimate fielding of an advanced field artillery system is necessary. However, the committee believes that the Army's next generation artillery system should meet the criteria specified in the NDP report, be relevant to future Army After Next warfighting requirements and challenges, and should be affordable within future constrained modernization budgets. It is the affordability of this program in light of a fiscally unsupportable Army modernization program that threatens the ultimate fielding of Crusader to the force. Sec. 212. CVN-77 nuclear aircraft carrier program. The budget request included $149.5 million for future aircraft carrier research and development in PE 603512N and $40.6 million for CV(X) feasibility studies in PE 603564N. The request also included $38.5 million for CVN-77 contract design in PE 604567N. The committee is concerned that the limited funding for CVN-77 design is insufficient for incorporating into CVN-77 the technologies that can enhance capabilities or reduce life-cycle costs for both CVN-77 and CV(X). The committee believes it is prudent to prove as many technologies as possible prior to insertion into CV(X). These technologies would be those that have the ability to transition from the CVN-77 to the CV(X) program; and: (1) demonstrate enhanced capabilities for the CV(X); or (2) mitigate the cost or risk of the CV(X) program. Because these technologies would benefit both the CVN-77 and the CV(X) program, the committee recommends a provision that would authorize $50.0 million for future aircraft carrier system development in PE 603512N to be used exclusively for CVN-77 development. Sec. 213. Unmanned aerial vehicle programs. The budget request included $178.7 million for high altitude endurance (HAE) unmanned aerial vehicles (UAV). The two HAE UAVs are the Global Hawk, formerly the Tier II plus, and the Dark Star, formerly the Tier III minus. Each has different characteristics, but both are designed for high altitude extended flights. The programs are presently managed by the DefenseAdvanced Research Projects Agency (DARPA), and are differentiated from tactical UAVs, which are designed for shorter flights, less endurance, and for use by field commanders. The budget request included $40.5 million for the Dark Star, $90.1 for the Global Hawk, and $48.1 million for the common ground segment. The endurance UAVs development has progressed from small, ``disposable'', inexpensive aircraft to multi-million dollar systems. Through the use of advanced concept technology demonstrations (ACTD) to field complex, developmental systems, the Department has found that endurance UAVs barely fit the definition of mature technologies. While most of the HAE UAV results have been discouraging, the Global Hawk's recent first flight suggests that it is an apparently mature, redundant system that can withstand minor systems problems without catastrophic results. Section 216 of the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 1998 (Public Law 105-85) established the following requirements with respect to the HAE UAV program required: (1) a cost cap; (2) a cessation of further air vehicle procurement pending completion of testing identified in phase II of the test plan for the ACTD; and (3) a General Accounting Office report that assesses the estimated production costs for each vehicle in the endurance UAV ACTD. The committee continues to believe that the section 216 requirements are as valid now as when enacted. Dark Star UAV The committee has been disappointed by the lack of progress on the Dark Star UAV. The Dark Star was an ambitious undertaking for an ACTD, since it involved demonstration of new technologies under development. The Dark Star is an unfortunate case of over reach with respect to cost, schedule, and performance. Regrettably, it has taken too long to complete development and recover from the crash of the first air vehicle on its second flight. The committee recommends a decrease of $40.5 million in the budget request and cancellation of the Dark Star UAV program. Global Hawk While the Global Hawk has been slowed by testing delays and a cautious development schedule, a successful test flight has been completed. The Global Hawk is a substantial air vehicle, with a gross weight of 25,600 pounds and a wing span of 116 feet, capable of carrying a 2,000 pounds of payload, nearly half of that carried aboard a U-2 reconnaissance aircraft. Successful development of the Global Hawk may be the most cost effective and indeed operationally effective solution to the endurance UAV requirements, should its potential be successfully demonstrated in testing. Consistent with the committee's focus on demonstrated performance, the committee recommends an increase in the Global Hawk program of $32.5 million to acquire an additional three air vehicles upon completion of the phase II testing, and in concordance with Section 216 of the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 1998 (Public Law 105-85). Section 216 prohibits acquisition of additional air vehicles until the completion of the testing identified in phase II of the test and demonstration plan for the advanced concept technology demonstration of the HAE UAV vehicles. Sec. 214. Airborne laser program. The budget request included $292.2 million for the Airborne Laser (ABL) program. The committee continues to be concerned by technical and operational issues facing the ABL program. The program is currently structured such that critical testing data and other important information will not be available until after the United States has committed significant funding and acquired a large amount of equipment that may not be needed to attain basic data that is now missing. These and other concerns were first expressed in the committee's report on the fiscal year 1997 Defense Authorization Bill (S. Rept. 104-267). In this report, the committee stated that the Air Force had not ``adequately demonstrated the feasibility of the necessary technology to begin such a significant investment.'' The committee also questioned whether ``the ABL concept of operations will allow the system to be cost and operationally effective.'' Under the current schedule much of the testing necessary to make well informed judgments about the technical viability of the ABL program will not begin to occur until fiscal year 2002, just prior to the program entering Engineering and Manufacturing Development (EMD). This would require the expenditure of approximately $1.3 billion, and the acquisition and outfitting of a 747-400 aircraft, before testing of key subsystems takes place. The first time the Air Force plans to collect optical data on the performance of a laser fired horizontally through the atmosphere is during the last quarter of fiscal year 2002, during its first attempt to shoot down a target missile and only a few months prior to a milestone II review to consider whether the program should be permitted to enter EMD. The committee also notes that the Air Force plans to cease the collection of turbulence data in fiscal year 1998 even though this data is currently the sole basis for Air Force models and estimates. Hence, for the next four years, the Air Force will cease all collection of environmental data with the hope that the first live fire test in 2002 will validate current models. The Air Force justifies this approach by stating that early testing of a laser device in an operationally representative environment would be too costly. The committee believes that thecost of such a demonstration must be weighed against the potential waste of funds that would result if the system does not prove to be operationally viable in the 2002-2003 timeframe when in excess of a billion dollars will already have been spent. The committee also does not believe that the Air Force has adequately made the case that the ABL concept of operations justifies an investment of $6.3 billion to develop and acquire this capability, especially with a number of other theater missile defense (TMD) systems competing for limited TMD resources. Given the vulnerability of a large, slow platform to hostile air defenses, the ABL will have to operate at a significant distance away from enemy lines of defense. Coupled with the inherent range limitations of a laser fired horizontally through the atmosphere, the ABL would, in many scenarios, not have sufficient reach to engage boosting missiles. Since many of the missiles that ABL is designed to counter are mobile, and the ranges of such systems are steadily increasing, it may be possible for opponents to simply reposition launchers outside of an ABL's lethal range. The committee believes that the Secretary of Defense must carefully evaluate these technical and operational issues. The committee also believes that the Secretary should establish an independent review of the ABL program. Specifically, the committee directs the Secretary to task the Panel on Reducing Risk in Ballistic Missile Defense Flight Test Programs, which has recently reviewed BMDO's hit-to-kill test programs, to assess the adequacy of the ABL development and testing program. In addition, the committee directs the Secretary to seek an independent assessment of the operational issues facing the ABL, including, but not limited to, those issues identified above. The committee believes the Air Force should not proceed with the acquisition and outfitting of a new aircraft before such reviews have been completed. The committee notes that due to the commercial base for such aircraft, and the Air Force's relationship with the contractor, it is possible for the Air Force to delay this acquisition without disadvantaging the government, disrupting contractor production, or undermining the program's ability to proceed if it passes rigorous review. The committee recommends a reduction of $97.0 million in PE 63319F, the amount which the Air Force has budgeted for fiscal year 1999 for air vehicle integration and checkout. The committee directs the Secretary to ensure that a full assessment be completed prior to any additional expenditure related to the acquisition or integration of the ABL aircraft and submit a report to the congressional defense committees by March 15, 1999 that outlines his findings and recommendations. The report should include the findings and recommendations of the Panel on Reducing Risk in Ballistic Missile Defense Test Programs, and the findings and recommendations of the independent panel that reviews ABL operational issues. The committee further directs that no more than $150.0 million of the funds remaining available to the ABL program be obligated until 30 days after the Secretary submits the report specified above. Sec. 215. Enhanced global positioning system program. The committee is concerned that the Department of Defense has not moved aggressively enough to implement Presidential policy and statutory requirements to develop an enhanced Global Positioning System (GPS), the use of which can be denied to potential enemies while ensuring access to U.S. and allied military forces and civil users. The committee is aware that modifications to future GPS satellites to include dynamic frequency reconfiguration and regional-level directional signal enhancement are being seriously considered. The committee strongly endorses the development of such capabilities. Therefore, the committee recommends a provision that would: (1) require the Secretary of Defense to develop an enhanced GPS system as an urgent national security priority; (2) authorize $44.0 million for fiscal year 1999 in PE 64480F to begin such development; (3) urge the Secretary of Defense to adequately fund this initiative in the Future Years Defense Program; (4) urge the Secretary of Transportation to provide sufficient funding to support additional civil frequencies and other enhancements for civil users; (5) extend by five years the existing requirement to outfit all major Defense Department platforms with GPS receivers by the year 2000; and (6) require the Secretary to submit a plan for implementing this provision by April 15, 1999. Sec. 216. Manufacturing Technology Program. The committee supports the goals for the Defense Manufacturing Technology (MANTECH) program as outlined in the five-year MANTECH plan submitted to Congress in February 1998. The committee is encouraged by the positive trends in the five- year budget projections for each service MANTECH funding line and work of the military services is evident in the plans for their fiscal year 1999 program. However, the committee is concerned that the budget projections for the program are still inadequate to accomplish the stated goals for MANTECH. In the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 1998, Congress recommended a minimum annual spending target for each service's MANTECH program equal to 0.25 percent of the total amount budgeted in each service for Demonstration and Validation, Engineering Manufacturing Development, Procurement, and Operational Systems Development. The fiscal year 1999 budget request falls short of this minimum funding level for the Army, Navy, and the Air Force MANTECH programs. The committee expects the Department of Defense and the services to fully fund the MANTECH program. This program provides ``seed funding'' for the development of moderate to high risk material, process, and equipment technology to enable production of advanced, high quality weapon systems with shorter lead times and reduced acquisition costs. In an effort to encourage the services to provide greater support to the MANTECH program, the committee recommends a provision that would provide more flexibility by modifying cost share requirements to allow for different levels of cost-share where appropriate. The provision would eliminate the two-to-one cost share requirement and allow the competitive bidding process to establish the level of cost-share; move the cost- share waiver authority from the Secretary of Defense to the service secretaries; and require cost-share reporting to track investment by non-industry MANTECH participants. It is not the intention of this language to diminish support for cost-sharing in MANTECH. The committee expects that cost-sharing will remain an important factor in selection of manufacturing technology projects. Furthermore, the committee supports the Secretary's efforts to leverage MANTECH funds with budget resources from other federal sources. In particular, the committee expects greater investment in MANTECH programs by weapon system program offices. The five-year plan described two MANTECH initiatives that received direct support from program offices such as the Joint Strike Fighter program. In the annual MANTECH report due to Congress with the annual budget submission, the Department shall include information on the level of direct financial support by weapons system program offices in MANTECH programs and a plan to increase the level of investment. The committee believes that this investment will ensure that the MANTECH program remains relevant to the programs it is intended to support. Sec. 217. Authority for use of major range and test facility installations by commercial entities. The committee recommends a provision that would amend section 2681 of title 10, United States Code, making the temporary authority to permit commercial use of test and evaluation centers permanent. Section 2861 currently allows the Secretary of Defense to enter into contracts with commercial entities that desire to conduct commercial test and evaluation activities at major range and test facility installations, which are designated by the secretary. Contracts under section 2681 must require the commercial entity to reimburse the Department of Defense for all indirect costs to the United States associated with the use of the facility. In addition, the contract may include a requirement to reimburse the Department for such indirect costs as the secretary deems appropriate. Under section 2681(d), amounts collected for the commercial use are credited to the appropriation accounts under which the costs associated were incurred. The committee makes this recommendation based on the report issued by the Secretary of Defense in reponse to the requirement in Section 842 of the National Defense Authorization Act forFiscal Year 1998 and the assurance in that report that a directive will be issued in the near future on procedures to ensure that the major range and test facility installations will not compete with private sector test and evaluation services. Sec. 218. Extension of authority to carry out certain prototype projects. The committee recommends a provision that would extend the authority to carry out certain prototyping project specified under section 845 of the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 1994 (Public Law 103-160), through September 30, 2001. The committee regards the section 845 authority as a potentially important tool for improving the access of the Department of Defense to technology innovation by commercial industry. In order to make an informed decision on whether the provision should be codified as permanent authority, the committee directs the Secretary of Defense to provide a report to the congressional defense committees, no later than March 1, 1999, that describes each instance in which the authority has been used, the contractors involved, the dollar amounts of the transactions, the contractor cost-share, and the specific circumstances that justify the use of the authority, including any specific impediments to achieving the same results under another authority. The report should also identify which projects have proceeded beyond prototyping into production and discuss any difficulties associated with the use of the section 845 authority that may have been encountered in making such transition. SUBTITLE C--OTHER MATTERS Sec. 231. Policy with respect to ballistic missile defense cooperation. The committee has consistently supported a shift in the U.S.-Russian strategic relationship away from its Cold War focus on strategic offensive threats to a more balanced and cooperative relationship. In order to facilitate such a transition and to encourage cooperation in dealing with related matters, such as the Anti-Ballistic Missile (ABM) Treaty, the committee recommends a provision stating that the United States should seek to foster a climate of cooperation with Russia on matters related to missile defense, especially in the area of early warning. The committee believes that such an approach could lead to a mutually agreeable evolution of the ABM Treaty, either modification or replacement by a newer understanding, that would clear the way for the United States and Russia to deploy national missile defenses each believes necessary for its security. If implemented in a cooperative manner, the committee does not believe that such steps would undermine the original intent of the ABM Treaty, which was to maintain strategic stability and permit significant nuclear arms reductions. ADDITIONAL MATTERS OF INTEREST ARMY <GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT> Hardened materials The committee recommends an increase of $3.0 million in PE 62105A to continue research in composite structures and composite shroud assemblies. The committee believes that such technologies provide significant opportunities for weight reduction and increased stiffness of critical missile components such as shrouds, nosetips, heat shields, and deployment systems. Missile technology The committee recommends an increase of $1.5 million in PE 62303A to initiate a missile acoustics technology program. The committee believes that high frequency vibrations resulting from aerodynamically generated acoustics can create substantial electronic noise, and damage or destroy sensitive components in atmospheric interceptors for theater missile defense. The missile acoustics technology program may enable the Army to address these issues in a timely and cost-effective manner. Scramjet technology The committee recommends an increase of $3.0 million in PE 62303A to initiate application studies and design of scramjet technologies for the advanced interceptor technology program. The committee believes that scramjet technologies, because of higher engine efficiencies and the lack of need for on-board oxidizers, are the only available technologies for addressing flight speeds of greater than Mach 10, which may be required to counter future threats. The committee directs that all applicable competitive procedures be used in the award of contracts or other agreements under this program. Environmental technology The committee recommends an increase of $5.0 million in PE 62720A to continue to develop, demonstrate, and validate the plasma energy pyrolysis system (PEPS) for the destruction of hazardous waste, with an emphasis on a mobile system. The purpose of PEPS is to develop an incineration process for hazardous waste disposition, which minimizes toxic air emissions and the disposal of ash contaminated with heavy metals. The committee also recommends an increase of $3.5 million in PE 62720A to complete development of an integrated environmental and pollution prevention management and control system known as the Radford Environmental Development and Management Program (REDMAP). Pollution prevention The committee continues to support the efforts of the Department of Defense to shift emphasis away from ``end of pipeline'' solutions to control and mitigate the effects of using environmentally harmful materials and procedures. While the Department has acknowledged the need for prudent investments in pollution prevention measures, the fiscal year 1999 funding reduction in this area is inconsistent with that objective. The committee believes that a greater investment in pollution prevention would reduce long-term compliance and cleanup costs, and increase the resources available for the core requirements of the Department. The committee is very concerned about the decrease in the Department's budget support for pollution prevention measures. As a result, the committee recommends an additional $24.0 million for pollution prevention research and development initiatives, to be awarded on a competitive basis by the National Defense Center for Environmental Excellence (PE 62720A). The committee directs that all applicable competitive procedures be used in the award of contracts or other agreements related to the obligation and expenditure of the $24.0 million, and that cost-sharing requirements for non-federal participants be utilized where appropriate. These funds should be used to develop new materials and manufacturing processes for the purpose of enhancing weapons systems performance and reducing lifecycle operations and maintenance costs. Research and development efforts should include reduction of hazardous solvents and heavy metals related to corrosion protection materials and processes, environmentally benign munitions technology, and green gun barrel technology. Specifically, the committee expects that these technologies and materials shall reduce lifecycle environmental compliance costs, consistent with pollution prevention objectives of all the military departments. Software security The committee recommends an increase of $.5 million to PE 62783A to continue efforts to improve computer security by developing and testing prototype software security mechanisms. Cold regions research The committee recommends an increase of $1.2 million in PE62784A to support expanded applied research in knowledge based issues and engineering principles needed to sustain effective war fighting in winter and in cold regions of the world. The committee notes the increasing importance of this research to support effective development of military forces areas, such as Korea and Bosnia. Nutrition research The committee recommends an increase of $2.0 million in PE 63002A to continue nutrition research in support of improvements in the Meals-Ready-to-Eat (MRE) system. The committee views this research to be of continuing importance for maintaining the health and readiness of deployed forces in operations around the world. Weapons and munitions advanced technology The committee recommends an increase of $4.5 million in PE 63004A to support operational analysis and to address producibility and affordability issues with regard to the precision guided mortar munition program. The committee believes that these investments in fiscal year 1999 could significantly reduce the risks involved with the deployment of this important technology. Combat vehicle and automotive advanced technology The budget request included $54.4 million to support ongoing evaluation of advanced technologies with military applications. The committee notes a shortfall in funding for continued exploration of aluminum metal matrix technology that began last year. The committee, therefore, recommends an increase of $3.0 million in PE 63005A to complete this developmental effort and support the transition of this technology into applications that will strengthen armored track shoes and engine components at significantly reduced weight. Military human immunodeficiency virus research The committee recommends a decrease of $2.6 million in PE 63105A to fund higher priority programs. The committee notes that this reduction represents the amount proposed by the Army to expand certain activities under the human immunodeficiency virus program in fiscal year 1999. The committee supports continuation of the long-term core program of research and development. Missile and rocket advanced technology The budget request included $86.1 million to support development of advanced missile technologies. The committee is concerned about the proliferation of anti-armor missile systems and the inability of future budgets to sustain the current number of missile modernization programs. The committee notes problems encountered with Army testing of the E-FOGM missile system and rising missile costs. There is no indication that the Army intends to pursue fielding this system beyond those capabilities obtained to support the advanced concept technology demonstration (ACTD). The committee believes that limited resources must be redirected to more critical programs. The committee, therefore, recommends a decrease of $35.7 million in PE 63313A allocated for evaluation of the E-FOGM missile system. The committee is pleased to note progress with the future missile technology integration (FMTI) program but is concerned about the lack of robust testing that is programmed for this activity. This program manufactures missile component hardware, using advanced materiel and structures for ground and flight test evaluation to determine how they might be applied to other Army development programs. The committee recommends an additional $6.0 million to support additional flight tests that will greatly reduce risk and ensure that the technology return on the $73.0 million invested in FMTI is fully captured. The committee, therefore, recommends a total authorization of $56.4 million in PE 63313A. Advanced tactical computer science and sensor technology The committee recommends an increase of $2.5 million in PE 63772A to fund the application of situational awareness technology and display techniques with commercially available palmtop computer technology to provide dismounted soldiers with map-based intelligence and situation awareness. The committee notes that there are security issues raised by the emerging opportunities to provide such capabilities to soldiers in the forward battlefield areas and that such issues must be addressed in parallel with technology development and demonstration. The committee directs that all applicable competitive procedures be used for any contracts, grants, or other agreements awarded under this program and that cost- sharing requirements for non-federal participants also be used, where appropriate. Tactical High Energy Laser The committee continues to support the Tactical High Energy Laser (THEL) program. The committee notes that the existing cost-sharing agreement between the United States and Israel does not include funding to deploy the system in Israel. Pending a future agreement on cost sharing, the committee recommends an increase of $10.0 million in PE 63308A to support continued THEL testing and deployment activities. Space and missile defense battle lab The committee has supported the Space and Missile Defense Battle Integration Center, which has now transitioned to a Battle Lab. The committee is pleased that the administration has increased the budget request for fiscal year 1999 to $9.2 million, but does not believe that this amount adequately supports the Battle Lab. Therefore, the committee recommends an increase of $7.0 million in PE 63308A for the Space and Missile Defense Battle Lab. North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) Research and Development The budget request included $44.4 million for NATO research and development in the following accounts: $11.6 million for the Army (PE 63790A), $11.0 million for the Navy (PE 63790N), $11.1 million for the Air Force (PE 63790F) and $10.7 million for the Department of Defense (PE 63790T). The committee recommends that funds in these activities be maintained at fiscal year 1998 levels plus inflation, and therefore recommends the following reductions in the military service and defense accounts: $2.0 million (Army), $1.1 million (Navy), $0.4 million (Air Force) and $2.3 million (Defense). Comanche The budget request included $367.8 million for continued development of the Comanche helicopter. The committee strongly supports the Comanche helicopter development effort and believes this program should be accelerated. The committee recognizes that Army funding constraints have prevented the timely delivery of the second prototype aircraft necessary for testing and developmental efforts. The Comanche program, as an integral component of Army digitization, must be fielded as soon as practicable to support necessary flight test requirements and development of tactics, techniques and procedures for the future digitized force. The committee recommends an increase of $24.0 million for a total of $391.8 in PE 64223A. This increase in funding will support necessary flight test requirements, development of first digitized corps enhancements, and risk reduction activities for Comanche. Advanced threat infrared countermeasure system The budget request included $86.0 million to support electronic warfare development programs. The committee understands that Army efforts to complete the design of an advanced threat infrared countermeasure and common missile warning system (ATIRCM/CMWS) installation kit were adversely affected by a Department of Defense program budget decision that eliminated funding for the ATIRCM/CMWS installation kit development effort. The committee supports Army initiatives to complete work on the installation kits for ATIRCM/CMWS which will allow this device to be inserted into the lot 6 production line for Apache Longbow. This action is projected to save the Army $74,000 per aircraft, or $5.3 million per year, if the planned installation of ATIRCM/CMWS begins on the Longbow production line in fiscal year 2001. The committee, therefore, recommends an increase of $8.6 million in PE 64270A to restore the program schedule and support completion of the ATIRCM/CMWS kit design effort. All source analysis system The budget request included $28.1 million to support development of the all source analysis system (ASAS). The committee continues to support ongoing efforts to enhance the capabilities of this system and is encouraged to note progress made to date. The committee understands the Army is continuing to experiment with the Integrated Battlespace Intelligence Server (IBIS) to ensure that the technology transition framework required to support fielded systems remains viable. The committee, therefore, recommends an increase of $2.2 million in PE 64321A for critical ASAS Block II software requirements. Radar development The budget request included $2.8 million to support improvements to existing ground based radar systems. The committee has been pleased with the capabilities provided by the Sentinel radar system for Army air defense forces. The Sentinel system acquires targets sufficiently forward of the forward line of troops to improve short-range air defense weapons reaction time and allow engagement at optimum ranges. The integrated identification friend or foe system reduces the potential for fratricide. The committee notes an outstanding requirement for the fielding of a passive adjunct sensor capability as a continuation of an approved pre-programmed product improvement program. The committee believes this passive capability should be accelerated and recommends an increase of $4.0 million in PE 64820A to support this developmental effort. Firefinder The budget request included $19.8 million to support the Firefinder Block II pre-planned product improvement program by replacing the antenna transceiver group. The committee understands that the Army will award an engineering and manufacturing development contract in 1998 in an effort to double the current range performance and improve target accuracy overthe existing radar. The committee recognizes this program as a force protection enabler and recommends an increase of $0.9 million in PE 64823A to support incremental funding necessary for acceleration of software development efforts required by this activity. Research, development, test and evaluation support The committee remains concerned about the proportion of research, development, test, and evaluation (RDT&E) funding allocated to management, infrastructure, and support. In an effort to slow this trend until a more comprehensive plan for RDT&E management reform is initiated, the committee recommends a total reduction of $27.0 million, to be allocated as follows: Army: Millions PE 64759A................................................. $1.0 PE 65301A................................................. 2.0 Navy: PE 65853N................................................. 11.0 PE 65864N................................................. 5.0 Air Force: PE 65807.................................................. 4.0 PE 65808F................................................. 2.0 Defense Agencies: PE 65804D................................................. 2.0 Army test instrumentation and targets The committee is concerned that aging instrumentation at its defense test and evaluation facilities will be inadequate to meet increasingly stringent technical standards for planned evaluations of cutting edge missile technologies. In order to effectively evaluate future technology, test instrumentation must be able to provide faster, more accurate results for smaller weapons with higher speeds, longer ranges, and higher altitudes. Aging telemetry and radar equipment at the existing facilities, first deployed in the 1960s, requires immediate replacement. Optics equipment must be updated in order to provide the accuracy levels demanded by high energy weapons and target systems. Accordingly, the committee recommends an increase of $7.0 million in PE 65602A to upgrade communications, optics, radar, and telemetry equipment to support programmed testing of advanced missile technologies at existing range facilties. Survivability/lethality analysis The committee recommends an increase of $4.0 million in PE 65604A to expand the current information warfare vulnerability assessments program to determine exploitable weaknesses in the First Digitized Division and to recommend mitigating solutions for systems throughout their acquisition cycle. The committee believes that the Army must aggressively pursue these assessments if the full benefits of digitization are to be achieved. High energy laser system test facility The committee recommends an increase of $8.0 million in PE 65606A to accelerate development of solid-state laser technologies for theater missile defense applications. If the technologies can be demonstrated, solid state laser weapons may have a number of critical advantages in missile defense applications, including no requirement for munitions logistics, a highly favorable cost per kill ratio, and a speed-of-light kill capability. Recent developments in a variety of related technologies provide new opportunities for the deployment of a working system in the relative near-term. The committee urges the Army to devote at least $1.5 million of the increase to address issues involving crystal growth manufacturing. Aerostat joint project office The committee has supported the development of elevated sensors for air and missile defense. The committee recognizes that such sensors are critical to satisfying cruise missile defense requirements. Notwithstanding this support, the committee does not believe that the Department of Defense has adequately integrated its various cruise missile defense programs into a coherent architecture and development plan. Given this lack of a comprehensive plan, the committee views the fiscal year 1999 increase in the joint aerostat program to be excessive. Therefore the committee recommends a reduction of $50.0 million in PE 12419A. The committee notes that even with this reduction, the budget for the joint aerostat program would grow in excess of 63 percent over the fiscal year 1998 appropriation for this program. Advanced field artillery tactical data system (AFATDS) The budget request included $35.1 million to support development of the AFATDS multi-service fire support command and control system. The committee recognizes that objective functionality enhancements are necessary to meet requirements for airspace deconfliction and technical fire direction support. AFATDS is a critical system that remains in the early stages of fielding. The committee recommends an increase of $12.5 million in PE 23726A to support development of system improvements and directs the Army to ensure that this program is adequately funded in future budget submissions. Combat vehicle improvement programs The budget request included $94.8 million to support research and development associated with identifying and fielding improvements to Army combat vehicles. For the last two years, the committee has supported the effort to develop new flat panel display devices to support Army digitization activities and alleviate a deficiency identified with experimental systems. The committee notes that the research and development effort is in its last year and the program will be ready for transition into production in fiscal year 2000. The committee recommends an increase of $7.0 million in PE 23735A to complete the research and development effort on flat panel displays in fiscal year 1999. NAVY <GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT> Pulse detonation engine technology The committee is encouraged by the potential of pulse detonation engine technology for rapid response to time critical targets and recommends an increase of $1.0 million in PE 62111N to accelerate the flight demonstration of this technology. Stainless steel double hull research The committee recommends an increase of $3.0 million in PE 62121N for the acceleration of research in stainless steel double hull technologies. The committee notes the potential of this technology to reduce acquisition and life-cycle costs and improve survivability. The committee directs that all applicable competitive procedures be used in the award of contracts or other agreements under this program, and that cost-sharing requirements for non-federal participants be utilized, where appropriate. Communications, command and control technology The budget request includes $65.0 million for Communication, command and control technology (PE 62332N). The committee recommends a reduction of $5.0 million in PE 62332N for the strategic sustainment program in order to fund higher priority programs. Thermal management materials The committee recommends an increase of $1.5 million in PE 62234N for high thermal conductivity carbon fiber material. In order to fully exploit the advancements in the area of thermal management for electronics and fully realize the potential for cost savings and performance, it is essential that these materials be used in conjunction with commercially available chips. The committee directs the Navy to pursue dual-use application and industry cost-sharing to the maximum extent practicable. Carbon-carbon heatshield technology The committee encourages the Navy to continue a robust program for the development of carbon-carbon heatshields and insulation materials and recommends an increase of $2.5 million in PE 62234N in order to specifically address future Navy reentry body requirements. The committee directs that all applicable competitive procedures be used in the award of contracts or other agreements under this program, and that cost-sharing requirements for non-federal participants be utilized where appropriate. Electronic propulsion technology The committee recommends an increase of $2.0 million in PE 62234N for the development of applied high temperature superconducting (HTS) technology for electric propulsion and related auxiliary systems in future surface ships and submarines. The Office of Naval Research, in conjunction with the Navy's principal shipbuilders, should build upon the advances realized in the commercial sector and pursue dual-use technology and cost-sharing to the maximum extent practicable. Precision strike and air defense technology The budget request included $58.3 million for precision strike and air defense technology, of which $4.9 million would be for mobile offshore basing (MOB), project R2266. The MOB effort would develop a concept to provide a means by which long-term U.S. presence can be maintained. Technology issues associated with both semi-submersible and mono-hull modules connected into platforms 1000 and 3000 meters in length will be explored. The committee has determined that engineering and design studies on critical technologies essential to MOB can be completed more efficiently if accelerated in fiscal year 1999. Accordingly, the committee recommends an increase of $5.0 million in PE 63238N for MOBS. Advanced electric systems studies The budget request included $14.8 million in PE 603508N for fabrication, demonstration, development and concept studies for quiet electric propulsion motor technologies. The studies and intermediate scale development are premature initiatives until fiscal year 1999 results from the 500KW sub-scale demonstration model are known. Therefore, the committee recommends a reduction of $1.0 million to PE 603508N. Composite helicopter hangar The budget request included no funding for continuation of a program to design and fabricate the outer shell of a DDG-51 helicopter hangar structure using composite materials. The composite helicopter hangar program goals are to leverage enabling technologies that can lead to reduced radar signatures and cost and weight savings. Development issues include fabrication, durability, maintenance and repair, outfitting, fire survivability in a manned space, and local loading due to shock from mounted equipment. The committee recommends an increase of $5.0 million in PE 603508N to continue a developmental effort to design and fabricate the outer shell of a DDG-51 helicopter hangar structure using composite materials. Marine Corps warfighting laboratory The budget request included $23.6 million within PE 603460M to support the Marine Corps warfighting laboratory (MCWL). The MCWL has supported the experimentation process for the Marine Corps. Last year's effort was highlighted by Hunter Warrior, an effort to test advanced operational concepts in extended and dispersed battlefields. In fiscal year 1999, the Marine Corps intends to conduct Urban Warrior to test concepts for operating in urban areas. Later in fiscal year 1999, the Marine Corps will begin the planning for the experimentation phase called Capable Warrior. Capable Warrior will attempt to integrate ``lessons learned'' from the previous experiments. The committee continues to support these warfighting experiments, and recommends an additional $10.0 million for accelerating these efforts. Of this amount, $5.0 million will be for the second phase continued evaluation of the broad-area unmanned retail and re-supply operation or BURRO. This funding will allow this joint effort to complete the evaluation process and have a flying prototype by year 2000. The committee understands that this series of experiments is not a normal acquisition program. It is clear that an effort to inflict robust countermeasures on the experimentation process could thwart attempts to learn as much as we can from the experiments about potential operational concepts. Nevertheless, the committee believes that the Marine Corps and the MCWL must pay greater attention to the vulnerabilities of systems used in these experiments to potential countermeasures. Decisions about changing operational concepts, changing force structure, or pursuing new hardware developments must be made with a better understanding of vulnerabilities to potential countermeasures. Therefore, the committee directs the Secretary of the Navy to provide a report on the long-term plan for developing ``red team'' countermeasures efforts activity to keep pace with the warfighting experiment efforts. The Secretary should provide the report to the congressional defense committees by May 15, 1999. The committee further directs that no more than 85 percent of the funds for this program be obligated, before the delivery of the report. Freeze dried blood research The committee recommends an increase of $1.0 million in PE 63706N to continue research on freeze-dried blood processes to develop a safe and reliable supply of blood for combat casualties. The technology provides freeze-dry blood platelets for the purpose of extending shelf-life, destroying potential contaminating viruses, and reducing space required for storage of blood stocks. The committee recognizes the commercial potential of this technology and encourages the Navy to pursue dual-use application and cost-sharing in this program to the maximum extent practicable. Advanced lightweight influence sweep system The budget request included $4.2 million for advanced mine sweeping. The advanced lightweight influence sweep system (ALISS) is focused on developing superconducting magnets and acoustic transducers to sweep influence mines targeted against specific classes of Navy ships. The lightweight, modular and low logistic requirements features make ALISS a candidate for deployment by a number of Navy platforms. The committee recommends a $1.0 million increase to PE 603782N to continue the test and development of ALISS. Studies and experiments for combat systems engineering The budget request included $8.6 million for studies and experiments for advanced combat systems engineering which, potentially, could be leveraged into new ship class computer architectures. The committee supports leveraging distributed architecture, radar technology and information management concepts when those efforts are directly connected to correcting a warfighting deficiency or to reducing the costs of building 21st century platforms. The committee recommends a reduction of $2.0 million in PE 603382N for studies and experiments not directly connected to correcting warfighting deficiencies in 21st century platforms. SSGN study In implementing pending strategic arms reduction treaties, the Navy may remove some of the Trident submarines from active service as fleet ballistic missile submarines (SSBNs). The ``Report of the National Defense Panel, December 1997'' stated thatthe Navy should examine converting Trident submarines coming out of strategic service for use in missions other than at the strategic level. The committee is aware that these SSBNs would have several years of service life remaining at the point that START II would require that they no longer be used as SSBNs. The committee understands that there are several alternative dispositions of any such boats removed from active service as SSBNs. One of these alternatives is to convert these vessels to carry only tactical missiles (SSGN), including such missiles as Tomahawk, or the Navy variant of the Army tactical missile system (NTACMS). The committee believes that this alternative may have merit for meeting some of the Navy's shore fire support requirements, but needs more information upon which to base any decision about a program to convert these SSBNs to SSGN-configuration. Elsewhere in this report, the committee has recommended a provision that would prohibit the retirement or conversion of any Trident submarines until the START II treaty enters into force. Nevertheless, the committee believes the Navy must begin now to develop plans for submarines that will become excess if the treaty enters into force. Therefore, the committee directs the Secretary of Defense to conduct an analysis of converting some of the Trident SSBNs to SSGN-configuration. This study should identify a schedule for such an SSGN conversion, the costs of such a conversion, the benefits that may be derived from such a plan, major problems areas that may require additional analysis and the implications of ensuring that such a conversion would be compliant with all applicable arms control treaties. The committee recommends an increase of $1.0 million to PE 603564N and directs the Secretary to provide the report to the congressional defense committees no later than March 1, 1999. Intercooled recuperated gas turbine engine The budget request included $23.4 million to conduct intercooled recuperated (ICR) gas turbine engine testing. The ICR naval engine program is a cooperative program being developed in conjunction with U.S. allies. The ICR engine is a candidate to provide main propulsion for future ships. The expectation is that the ICR engine will produce significant reductions in fuel consumption compared to the gas turbine engines now in use on Navy ships. ICR engine testing and evaluation have progressed during seven engine tests with a cumulative 1200 hours of engine operation. As a result of the latest testing, combustor and recuperator improvement development efforts have been identified that must be completed prior to resumption of testing. The committee believes the ICR engine should move rapidly to completion of testing to make it a viable candidate for ship propulsion. Therefore, the committee recommends an increase of $5.0 million in PE 603573N for continued development and testing of the ICR engine. Predator The committee is concerned about issues raised regarding the ongoing development of the Predator missile system. Predator is designed to be a man portable, lethal, fire-and- forget top attack anti-armor missile. The committee understands that personnel issues associated with the contractor work force have resulted in some schedule slippage for the production of this missile system. For the last two years, the committee has been compelled to add funding, with a recommendation for $18.0 million in fiscal year 1999 alone, for safety modifications to the shoulder launched multi-purposed assault weapon to extend the service life of this system until Predator can be fielded. The committee believes that the Predator system should be fielded as soon as possible and understands that necessary corrective actions have been taken to support continued development of this critical weapon system. If fact, recent live-fire tests have been very successful and it appears the program is back on track. The committee, therefore, recommends an increase of $4.0 million in PE 63635M to maintain the previously established development and fielding schedule. Vertical gun for advanced ships The budget request included $25.1 million in PE 603795N for a new initiative to develop a prototype vertical gun for land- based testing. The Navy intends to use the vertical gun for advanced ships (VGAS) as the main fire support battery for the land attack destroyer (DD-21). To meet the DD-21 schedule, VGAS development would need to be sufficiently mature to support DD- 21 critical design review and procurement authorization in fiscal year 2003. The Navy's plan is that the DD-21 would be the first member of a family of 21st century surface combatants (SC-21). The committee believes that it would be highly unlikely that the Navy would develop VGAS for DD-21, and then develop another gun system for other members of the SC-21 family. The committee views with concern the fact that the Navy's request would move forward with the vertical gun design without adequately analyzing alternative gun designs for DD-21. The committee notes that a vertical gun would have little or no ability to ``train and elevate.'' These deficiencies would limit availability and engagement envelopes for countering littoral threats, as well as limiting the Navy's choice of ammunition to a new, Navy-only family of gun ammunition. The committee believes the Navy should consider war fighting attributes other than low radar cross-section to justify the award of a contract for a vertical gun. In previous reports, the committee emphasized theadvisability of attempting to meet fire support requirements with modifications of systems already developed. The Navy has not reconsidered the Army's multiple launch rocket system (MLRS) as an option for providing fire support to the Marines. However, the Army has made significant improvements in MLRS range and launch platform stabilization since the Navy last reviewed this system to fill the fire support requirement. The committee believes that another review would be appropriate. The Secretary of the Navy is directed to report, prior to obligating funds for a prototype VGAS, the results of an analysis of alternatives for an advanced gun system that includes cost as an independent variable and considers at least the following: (1) meeting all war fighting capabilities that will be required for a gun system on a multi-mission combatant; (2) relying on joint ammunition programs that leverage technology investments by all services, and the availability and economies of scale of moving to one family of gun ammunition for Army, Marine Corps, and Navy fire support missions; (3) fulfilling some portion of the fire support requirement with a modified version of the Army's extended range multiple launch rocket system; and (4) fulfilling some portion of the fire support requirement with the Navy variant of the Army Tactical Missile System (NTACMS). Until such an analysis is complete, the committee believes that it would be premature to proceed with VGAS development at the pace assumed in the Navy's budget request. Therefore, the committee recommends a reduction of $10.0 million, and directs the Navy to conduct an analysis of all advanced gun designs, as well as ammunition availability, in determining the best gun design for DD-21. Naval surface fire support system integration The budget request included $21.6 million for a new initiative to develop surface fire support planning and control systems for the 5-inch 62 gun on DDG-51 ships and the 155mm vertical gun for the future DD-21 class of ships. The committee agrees with the need for a planning and control system for the 5-inch 62 gun for DDG-51 ships and considers this a priority to coincide with the introduction of the Extended Range Guided Munition (ERGM) to the fleet. The committee agrees with the Department of Defense's plan to reduce risk by integrating the 5-inch 62 gun into the existing Advanced Tomahawk Weapons Control System (ATWCS) initially hosted on a separate hardware processor. However, initiation of software builds to support vertical gun requirements is premature and counter to the Navy's plan to use a ``total systems'' approach in developing the DD-21. The committee encourages the Navy to pursue, through the DD-21 program and the Joint Maritime Command and Information System (JMCIS), system engineering for development of surface fire support system requirements within the DD-21 combat system architecture. Therefore, the committee recommends a reduction of $7.7 million to PE 603795N. Joint Strike Fighter The budget request included $919.5 million ($463.4 million in Navy research and development and $456.1 million in Air Force research and development) for continued development of the joint strike fighter (JSF). Section 213 of the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 1998 (Public Law 105-85) required a report on the order of fielding the variants of the JSF, and that specifically addressed the acceleration of the naval variant. The report included a certification that the JSF program contains sufficient funding to carry out an alternate engine program that includes flight qualification of an alternate engine in a JSF airframe. While not in total agreement with the report, the committee notes the timely submission and clear presentation of the Department of Defense priorities and plans. The certification of a funded program for an alternate engine is a positive commitment to cost-effective program management. However, the actual demonstration of the alternate engine in a JSF airframe has been continuously shifted to the ``out years,'' an action that threatens to invalidate the whole initiative. If the alternate engine is not completed for use for the most stressing of the JSF requirements (the short takeoff/vertical landing variant), then it may be too late to provide a major benefit to the program. Accordingly, the committee recommends an increase of $15.0 million to the budget request to accelerate the development of an alternative engine for the JSF. Nonlethal weapons and technologies of mass protection program The budget request included $22.5 million for the non- lethal weapons (NLW) technology demonstration and validation program (PE 63851M). The committee recommends an increase of $13.3 million to the budget request. The committee recommends that of the recommended increase, $6.3 million be used to accelerate the development and fielding of near-term, low-tech NLW technologies such as nonlethal claymore mines, vehicle-mounted 66mm delivery systems, nonlethal payloads for delivery by unmanned aerial vehicles, nonlethal foams, and calmative agents. In addition, increased funding for this activity would be used to accelerate demonstration of acoustic and electromagnetic directed energy systems, for medical surveillance and non-lethal casualty data collection, strategic planning, human effects assessments, technical studies and analysis, and increased experimentation in warfighting and battle labs. The committee understands that it is the intention of the Department of Defense to expand its review of doctrinal, legal, policy, and operation issues regarding the research, development, acquisition, and employment of NLW technologies. The committee recommends that $2.0 million be made available from funds authorized for the nonlethal weapons technology program in fiscal year 1999 to the Human Effects Panel of the Joint Non-Lethal Directorate for those activities. The committee recommends that the remaining $7.0 million of the recommended increase to the budget request be used to conduct a comprehensive effort to explore and develop nonlethal tactical denial systems that would provide ground commanders a wider range of capabilities. Finally, the committee recommends that $500,000 be made available to complete type classification of non-lethal weapons technology that can be mounted on existing weapons assigned to U.S. forces, such as M16s and M4 carbines. As noted in the statement of managers accompanying the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 1998 (S. Rept. 105-29), the committee believes it is important that advanced technologies be developed to provide U.S. military forces with greater flexibility to manage, shape, deter, or contain future conflicts, as they are increasingly confronted by unorthodox, non-traditional, and asymmetrical threats. These challenges, and an increase in low and medium-intensity conflict, require the Department of Defense to evaluate new technologies and doctrine for the use of force. In particular, the committee believes that the Department should focus on the development of new and emerging technologies to extend the scope of possible responses and to facilitate the containment of conflict across the operational continuum. Section 230 of the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 1997 (Public Law 104-201) established a program element that would consolidate and streamline the Department of Defense and military service nonlethal weapons technology program, and directed the Department to designate an executive agent. As part of the Department's Munitions Strategy announced in September 1996, the Under Secretary of Defense for Acquisition and Technology highlighted the importance of equipping U.S. forces with nonlethal weapons to conduct operations other than war, the focus of which would be to reduce civilian casualties. At the same, the Department announced the establishment of a nonlethals weapons technology program and designated the Marine Corps as the executive agent for the program. Despite congressional direction and designation of an executive agent by the Under Secretary of Defense for Acquisition and Technology, the committee remains concerned that the Department and the military services continue to conduct research and development on NLW activities that benefit all services outside the purview of the established defense NLW program and without oversight by the executive agent. The committee directs the Department and the military services to implement the congressional direction contained in Public Law 104-201, to consolidate all nonlethal weapons technology research and development into a single program element, with management and oversight of the program conducted by the Marine Corps as executive agent. Advanced communications and information technologies The committee continues to support the Advanced Communication and Information Technologies (ACIT) initiative. The committee recommends an increase of $3.0 million in PE 64707N for continuation of the ACIT initiative. Parametric airborne dipping sonar The budget request contained no funding for the parametric airborne dipping sonar (PADS). The PADS program is the continuation of a small business innovative research project that is designed to develop, demonstrate and evaluate the three dimensional, stabilized steerable acoustic beams for mine avoidance and submarine detection in shallow water. It is the only system that has the potential to provide airborne active dipping sonar antisubmarine and antimine capabilities for shallow water littoral operations. The committee is encouraged with initial results and potential future antisubmarine and antimine applications of the parametric airborne dipping sonar. The present program to prove parametric concepts using a prototype unit is scheduled for additional demonstrations in fiscal year 1998. Navy analysis and present plans include the possibility of PADS being a shallow water adjunct to the airborne low frequency active sonar system (ALFS). Continued development of the PADS system to make it a flightworthy system including reel machine, fiber-optic and power cable, and signal processor improvements resulting in a helicopter flight demonstration, is key to fighting in the littorals in the 21st century. Therefore, the committee recommends an increase of $8.0 million in PE 604212N for the continued development of PADS. Commercial off-the-shelf insertion just prior to critical design review for helicopter improvement The budget request included $231.1 million in PE 604212N for antisubmarine warfare (ASW) and other helicopter development. A second critical design review (CDR) for the Light Airborne Multipurpose System (LAMPS) MK III Improvement has been added to the program and scheduled for the second to the fourth quarter of fiscal year 1999. Commercial off-the- shelf (COTS) insertion opportunities for low rate initial production (LRIP) test articles should occur predominantly prior to critical design review. The $25.0 million request to continue efforts toincorporate COTS technology during the two fiscal quarters prior to CDR appears to be disproportionate when compared to past efforts ($14.0 million in fiscal year 1998) when four or more quarters were required to complete the efforts. Therefore the committee recommends a reduction of $1.0 million to PE 604212N. Integrated defensive electronic countermeasures The budget request included $128.6 million for electronic warfare development. The integrated defensive electronic countermeasures(IDECM) system is the next generation radio- frequency countermeasures system (RFCM) intended for the F/A- 18C/D/E/F, B-1B, F-15C/E, and other platforms. The committee understands and supports the Department of Defense efforts to apply this joint service technology to as many platforms as possible. The committee is also aware of the evolving nature of the operational requirements, which in many cases are driven by existing operational commitments and technical challenges inherent in the program. Therefore, the committee recommends an increase of $10.0 million in PE 64270N for the IDECM RFCM. DDG-51 composite director room The use of composites in shipbuilding has the potential to increase the survivability and reduce the overall weight of ships and to reduce maintenance. However, issues regarding composite use in construction in the following areas remain unanswered: combat repair, corrosion due to differences in the electric potential of composites and other shipbuilding materials, and possible toxicity resulting from exposure to intense heat. The committee believes the potential use of composite materials in shipbuilding should be pursued. The committee recommends an increase of $5.0 million in PE 603513N for continuation of a project to design and test a director room for the DDG-51 class of ships. Laboratories and field activities monitoring efforts The budget request included $132.5 million for surface combatant combat system engineering in PE 604307N. This request included $19.2 million for laboratory and field activity unspecified scientific services for monitoring baseline efforts. The committee recommends a reduction of $3.0 million to unspecified scientific services. Multi-purpose processor The budget request included $37.2 million for submarine sonar improvement. The multi-purpose processor (MPP) is the result of a small business innovative research (SBIR) initiative developed under the sponsorship of the new nuclear attack submarine (NSSN) program. The MPP provides a capability to easily transport new, advanced software to existing hardware installations. It lies at the heart of the Navy's acoustic rapid commercial off-the-shelf (COTS) insertion program (ARCI), a program designed to permit the SSN-688 class to regain acoustic superiority over the diesel and nuclear submarines of other navies. The committee recommends an increase of $15.0 million in PE 604503N for continuation of the SBIR follow-on for advanced development of MPP transportable software technology, technology insertion, advanced processor software builds, and for providing MPP units and training throughout the fleet and the Navy research and development community. Non-propulsion electronics system The budget request included $218.8 million for New Attack Submarine (NSSN) non-propulsion development. The purpose of the development is to reduce life-cycle costs by investigating and incorporating open systems architecture, commercial off-the- shelf software and hardware and advanced ship construction techniques. The non-propulsion electronics system (NPES) is comprised of 15 subsystems required to perform warfare missions. The major systems are sonar, combat control, exterior communications, electronic support measures and interconnecting architectures. To attain the possible life-cycle savings that could accrue, analysis and integration to support the 15 subsystems development is required. The committee recommends an increase of $12.0 million to PE 604558N for integration of the 15 NPES subsystems. Smart propulsor product model The budget request included $7.0 million for continuation of the development of the smart propulsor product model (SPPM) for DD-21. The SPPM will provide a complete representation of the ship's requirements, design and capabilities at each stage of the life-cycle. The SPPM program is a proposed joint Navy/ industry effort to develop software that will bring together design, manufacturing, cost and capability modeling for ship propulsion devices. This development will enable the Navy to consider innovative propulsion concepts for future ships while considering life-cycle costs and manufacturing techniques. The committee recommends an increase of $4.0 million in PE 604567N for the SPPM. Ship live-fire test The budget request included $8.6 million for the second year of DD-21 live fire test and evaluation prediction. The program's plan for fiscal year 1998 includes $3.4 million for the first year of DD-21 live fire test and evaluation prediction. Subsequent to the enactment of the fiscal year 1998 authorizationfor this program, the first year of full procurement authorization of DD-21 was delayed one year from fiscal year 2003 to fiscal year 2004. The committee believes the total fiscal year 1998 and fiscal year 1999 DD-21 live fire test prediction plan and request of $12.0 million to be excessive given the one year delay in the program. Therefore, the committee recommends a reduction of $8.6 million in PE 604567N, without prejudice, to reflect the rephasing of the program. Infrared search and track system The budget request included $900,000 for an infrared search and track (IRST) system. Land-based testing of IRST is scheduled for fiscal year 1998, followed by at-sea testing in fiscal year 1999. Congress has directed the Navy to develop IRST to provide a passive detection and tracking system. In many previous reports, the committee has noted the potential of IRST for complementing, not supplanting, radar, because IRST would operate in a different portion of the electromagnetic spectrum from radar. As shown by at-sea testing, IRST systems could complement existing shipboard radars by continuously scanning the horizon for threat platforms or sea-skimming missiles. Horizon search, for which IRST would be optimized, is an area of relative weakness for active radars. Although various studies have repeatedly validated that IRST could provide a major improvement in ship survivability against sea-skimming cruise missiles, Navy budget requests continue to emphasize exploitation of the radio portion (radar) of the electromagnetic spectrum. The committee believes developing a search and track system that is not dependent on active transmissions by either friendly or threat emitters could make an extremely important contribution to successful naval operations. Therefore, the committee recommends an increase of $6.5 million in PE 604755N for continued development of the IRST system. NUKLA antiship missile decoy system electro-magnetic compatibility The budget request included $2.3 million for continued development and testing of the electo-magnetic compatibility (EMC) upgrade to the NULKA active countermeasures decoy. Having EMC will permit a more rapid upgrade of the NULKA round to accommodate new friendly emitters as they enter the fleet, and also deal with the evolving ASM threat. The NULKA decoy was developed to improve surface ship survivability against antiship missiles (ASM). The ASM threat is growing rapidly. By the year 2000, an estimated 100 nations will possess more than 40,000 ASMs. These missiles will pose a potent threat to surface combatants and amphibious ships involved in littoral operations. The committee recommends an increase of $2.0 million in PE 604755N to complete the development and operational testing of the EMC upgrade. Voice instructional devices The committee recommends an increase of $1.0 million in PE 64771N for voice instructional device (VID) technology. The committee notes the progress made in technology that allows for faster, more efficient medical care in remote or combat situations and encourages the Navy to include VID technology in this research. The committee directs that all applicable competitive procedures be used in the award of contracts or other agreements under this program, and that cost-sharing requirements for non-federal participants be utilized where appropriate. Global command, control, communications, computers, intelligence, surveillance, reconnaissance (C4ISR) visualization The budget request included $13.2 million for space and electronic warfare surveillance and reconnaissance support. A continuing problem between the intelligence collectors and war fighting commanders is the manner in which intelligence is displayed. Useful information provided in a form that is quickly understandable and easily accessed is vital to winning battles. The Command, Control, Communications and Computers, Intelligence, Surveillance and Reconnaissance (C4ISR) systems in use provide various products to operational commanders. The Global C4ISR Visualization (GCIV) project will give operational commanders a visualization system that integrates information from all Intelligence, Surveillance and Reconnaissance (ISR) systems. GCIV will use multi-dimensional commercial off-the- shelf (COTS) visualization software integrated with a COTS database server connected to Navy databases. The committee recommends an increase of $4.0 million in PE 65867N for the GCIV project. F/A-18E/F reconnaissance development The budget request included $1.4 million in research and development and $43.2 million in procurement to continue the restructured advanced tactical air reconnaissance system (ATARS) program. The ATARS total program of $464.9 million includes $216.3 million in development and $248.6 million in procurement. The ATARS program will field reconnaissance systems on Marine Corps F/A-18D aircraft. The approved ATARS plan calls for fielding a total of 31 ATARS systems. The plan was restructured as part of a congressional cancellation of the original the Air Force follow-on tactical reconnaissance system (FOTRS) program. Congress dropped Air Force and Navy participation in the ATARSprogram specifically because of the inadequate support and oversight provided by the two services. The budget request also included $2.9 million for fiscal year 1998 and $43.4 million for fiscal year 1999 to begin an F/ A-18E/F tactical reconnaissance development within PE 24136N. This is a new start program to develop a replacement for the F- 14 tactical air reconnaissance pod system (TARPS). The Navy intends to spend $398.9 million ($112.4 million in research and development and $286.5 million in procurement) to field 50 pods and eight ground stations. The committee believes that the budget request for tactical reconnaissance is excessive, particularly in view of other alternatives that may be available to solve the Navy's tactical reconnaissance needs. Therefore, the committee recommends a funding level of $20.0 million for F/A-18E/F tactical reconnaissance development, a reduction of $23.4 million. The committee believes that the Navy must conduct an analysis of alternatives (AOA) before launching upon a program that would spend another $400.0 million on providing a TARPS replacement, when a direct one-for-one replacement may not be the most effective solution to the problem. The AOA should consider reconnaissance capability to be provided by other planned or existing systems, such as carrier-capable Marine Corps F/A-18D aircraft, various unmanned aerial vehicles (UAVs), and a range of national reconnaissance systems. The committee directs the Navy to obligate no more than 50 percent of these funds until 30 days after the Navy submits the results of the AOA to the congressional defense committees. Battle force tactical training The budget request included $5.9 million for the surface tactical team trainer (STTT). The STTT is designated to further develop an existing system, the battle force tactical training (BFTT) system, so it will be able to provide joint warfare training. A highly successful small business innovative research (SBIR) project, N96-111, leveraged the capabilities of commercial off-the-shelf (COTS) operating systems and processors. The committee recognizes that the rapid development under the SBIR fast track program did not allow sufficient time for the Department of Defense to program funding to complete the development work of converting the software to a personal computer operating system. The committee recommends an increase of $7.0 million in PE 204571N for the purpose of SBIR phase III follow-on work to continue the BFTT operating system conversion. AIR FORCE <GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT> Friction welding The committee recommends an increase of $1.5 million to develop and optimize friction welding techniques for aluminum and other alloys used by the Air Force and the Department of Defense, to develop weld repair techniques and establish a mechanical property data base, including fatigue and stress corrosion cracking information. The committee directs that all applicable competitive procedures be used in the award of contracts or other agreements under this program, and that cost-sharing requirements for non-federal participants be utilized, where appropriate. Integrated high performance turbine engine program In order to fund higher priorities, the committee recommends a total reduction of $9.0 million in the integrated high performance turbine engine program in the following program elements: $4.0 million in PE 62203F; $3.0 million in PE 63202F; and, $2.0 million in PE 63216F. Variable displacement vane pump The committee recommends an increase of $2.0 million in PE 62203F to support durability and damage tolerance testing for the variable displacement vane pump (VDVP) program. The committee notes that the variable geometry features of VDVP simplify aircraft thermal design providing cost and weight benefits. The committee directs that all applicable competitive procedures be used in the award of contracts or other agreements under this program, and that cost-sharing requirements for non-federal participants be utilized where appropriate. High frequency active auroral research program The committee recommends an increase of $9.0 million in PE 62601F to continue experimentation in the high frequency auroral research program. Night vision technology Night vision goggles have been used in military aviation for more than twenty years, but are limited by a very narrow field of view. Attempts to increase the field of view have resulted in decreasing resolution. Panoramic night vision technology combines increased field of view (to 100 degrees), high resolution, integrated symbology, and close-to-face center of gravity, with human effects improvements, such as reduced weight, pilot fatigue, and ejection seat safety. The committee recommends an increase of $3.0 million in PE 63231F to accelerate the development of panoramic night vision goggles. ALR-69 radar warning receiver upgrade The budget request included $25.6 million for electroniccombat technology research and development (PE 0603270F), but included no new funds for the precision location and identification (PLAID) upgrade. PLAID is a low cost upgrade to the existing ALR-69 system that is being developed in project 431G of this program element. The Air Force uses funding in project 431G to develop and demonstrate advanced technologies for radio frequency (RF) electronic countermeasures to enhance survivability of air and space vehicles. The committee understands that PLAID upgrade program has undergone successful testing, and encourages such a cost effective approach to providing radar warning receivers (RWR). Accordingly, the committee recommends an increase of $14.0 million to continue development of the ALR-69 PLAID upgrade in fiscal year 1999. Ballistic missile technology The committee has supported past missile technology demonstration (MTD) experiments, which have contributed to the ballistic missile technology program and demonstrated capabilities to attack hardened and deeply buried targets. The committee has also supported this program as a means of developing capabilities utilizing Global Positioning System (GPS) for range safety. The committee strongly supports efforts to develop GPS-based alternatives to existing range radars, which offer the potential of significant savings in the future. The budget request did not include funds in the Ballistic Missile Technology program element. The committee recommends an increase of $5.0 million in PE 63311F to support the MTD-4 effort and develop GPS-based capabilities for range safety and tracking. Solar orbital transfer vehicle The committee has supported thermionics technology development for space applications. The solar powered orbital transfer vehicle program combines thermionic technology for electricity production and thermal propulsion which can be used to move spacecraft to higher orbits or new orbits. To continue this important effort, the committee recommends an increase of $10.0 million in PE 63401F. Micro-satellite technology program Section 215 of the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 1998 (Public Law 105-85) required the Secretary of Defense to establish a micro-satellite technology development program that supports a range of space mission areas. The committee strongly supports the efforts of the Air Force Research Laboratory (AFRL) to initiate such a program in fiscal year 1999. In order to accelerate this important effort, the committee recommends an increase of $10.0 million in PE 63401F to be applied to developing and flying a series of cooperative micro-satellite test vehicles (beginning with the so-called ``XSS-10'') with the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) to address critical issues of satellite inspection, protection, servicing, and re-fueling. Range improvements for liquid upper stage testing The committee supports efforts by the Air Force to upgrade existing rocket test ranges to conduct liquid upper stage flight experiments. To support this effort, the committee recommends an increase of $5.0 million in PE 63401F. Space control technology development The committee has reviewed the Department of Defense's February 1998 report on the Kinetic Energy Anti-Satellite Program. The report states that ``DOD is currently examining potential space control related research, development, and acquisition options to support the President's policy, satisfy military requirements within available resources, and address the architecture.'' In the cover letter to this report, the Under Secretary of Defense for Acquisition and Technology states that ``I anticipate that these efforts will culminate in a comprehensive plan in time for the FY 2000 President's budget.'' The committee supports the development of such a plan but is concerned that insufficient resources are available to support a comprehensive evaluation of various technical options. Therefore, the committee recommends an increase of $30.0 million in PE 63438F to support a range of space control technology activities. The Assistant Secretary of Defense for Command, Control, Communications, and Intelligence (Space and Information Superiority) shall be responsible for executing these resources in support of the ``comprehensive plan'' referenced in the Department of Defense's report. The committee directs the Secretary of Defense to submit a report to the congressional defense committees by February 15, 1999 that describes the Secretary's plan for executing the space control technology funds specified above. The report should also describe the Secretary's plan for continuing these efforts in fiscal year 2000 and beyond. Variable stability in-flight simulator test aircraft The budget request provided no funds for the variable stability in-flight simulator test aircraft (VISTA). The VISTA is a highly adaptable test resource that can be used for many flight test programs, including the Joint Strike Fighter, F-22, and others. As a testament to the effectiveness of the VISTA, the USAF points to VISTA testing of F-22 flight controls, when reviewing critical testing already completed for the F-22. TheVISTA, a highly modified F-16 can be programmed to simulate various aircraft, both real and theoretical, in a cost effective manner. The committee notes with concern the lack of practical support for the VISTA, but the eagerness to take credit for its contributions to F-22 testing. Accordingly, the committee recommends an increase of $7.3 million to continue VISTA development of thrust vectoring investigations and to provide for adequate support for continuing operations. EC-130H The budget request included no funds for the EC-130H Compass Call aircraft (PE 64270F) in fiscal year 1999, even though funds were included from fiscal years 1994 through 1998. The Compass Call EC-130H is a wide-area airborne offensive counter information system. Its mission is to deny, degrade, and disrupt adversary communications, and is currently fielding the first of two Block 30 configuration squadrons, a funded upgrade that includes a software-programmable, commercial off the shelf-based digital, open architecture. However, due to accumulated funding reductions and ongoing fiscal pressures, essential pre- production, system suitability, and integration activities remain to be completed. Accordingly, the committee recommends including $20.0 million to accelerate the development of the Compass Call to complete those initiatives in a cost effective manner. Big Crow Program Office The budget request did not include specific funding for the Big Crow Program Office (BCPO). The committee understands that the Department plans to operate the BCPO on a reimbursable basis, with expenses paid by customers using the BCPO's services. The BCPO operates two flying laboratories under a support agreement with the Air Force 412th Test Wing at Edwards Air Force Base, California. The Department of Defense uses these aircraft to evaluate weapons and communications systems under stressing conditions. The BCPO's capability to implement electronic warfare (EW) capabilities against systems during test and evaluation periods and during exercises provides a vital contribution. The BCPO provides services to many customers, including the Navy's AEGIS program, the Ballistic Missile Defense Office, the Army Patriot air defense program, E-3A Airborne Warning and Control System (AWACS) program, North Atlantic Treaty Organization, and North American Air Defense. However, because of the organizational arrangements for BCPO, there has been inadequate support for its best use and most economic operation. This lack of focus could result in the closure of the BCPO. If DOD were to lose the BCPO services, the Department would forfeit the benefits of exposing U.S. weapons systems to a realistic EW threats. Based on the broad use of BCPO, the committee directs Secretary of Defense to assign oversight responsibility for this office to the Assistant Secretary of Defense for Space and Information Superiority (ASD(SIS)). The committee expects the ASD (SIS) to provide policy guidance to ensure sustainable management and employment of the BCPO. The committee recommends an increase of $10.0 million to the budget request to ensure the BCPO remains financially sound. The committee directs the Secretary of Defense to provide the congressional defense committees with a report, submitted no latter than March 1, 1999, that describes the Department of Defense plans for the future BCPO funding policy, and management. Space maneuver vehicle The committee endorses the efforts of the Air Force to work with the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) on developing responsive, reusable space access systems. The committee believes that an early, high payoff for this work will be much lower costs for experiments funded in the space test program. Therefore, the committee recommends an increase of $10.0 million to the space test program (PE 65864F) to pursue a joint demonstration with NASA of the ``Space Maneuver Vehicle'' (SMV), which could serve as a reusable upper stage for a variety of space test missions. The committee understands that the Air Force is considering incorporating the flexible capabilities of the SMV concept into future Air Force space-based remote sensing programs such as the space-based moving target indicators (MTI) program. The committee directs the Secretary of the Air Force to submit a report to the congressional defense committees by March 1, 1999 that discusses the synergy between a maneuverable, recoverable SMV and a space-based sensor such as a space-based MTI system. The report should include a programmatic assessment of this approach, including the potential funding requirements for conducting such a demonstration by 2004. Theater battle management system The budget request included $27.3 million for theater battle management command and control research and development. Theater battle management system (TBM) is designed to integrate air support for ground forces through the air support operations center (ASOC). The committee understands that an additional $5.0 million would: (1) accelerate TBM ASOC development in fiscal year 1999; (2) provide for both pre-planned product improvement; (3) enhanced interoperability with the Marine Corps; and (4) field the ASOC's.Accordingly, the committee recommends an increase of $5.0 million to the budget request for TBM. C-5 modernization The budget request included $47.9 million for C-5 airlift squadrons research and development. The Air Mobility Command (AMC) has a documented deficiency in outsize cargo carrying capability, which was identified too late in the planning, programming and budgeting system (PPBS) for inclusion in the fiscal year 1999 budget request. The committee has been informed that an increase of $12.0 million would significantly accelerate the effort to address the deficiency in outsize cargo carrying capability. Accordingly, the committee recommends an increase of $12.0 million to the budget request for C-5 airlift squadrons research and development. Aircrew laser eye protection The budget request included $5.3 million in PE 63112F and PE 63231F to support various efforts to develop laser eye protection. The use of laser-based systems on the battlefield has increased. The proliferation of these systems increases the risk of permanent vision damage to our aircrews, either from friendly or hostile forces. The committee supports the Department's efforts in this area, and believes that there is a need for additional funds to develop manufacturing process to accelerate potential fielding of this capability. Accordingly, the committee recommends an increase of $5.5 million to continue the development of the aircrew laser eye protection technology. DEFENSE-WIDE <GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT> University research initiative The committee once again commends the Department of Defense for including $10.0 million in the budget request to continue efforts under the Defense Experimental Program to Stimulate Competitive Research (DEPSCoR) in fiscal year 1999 to broaden the infrastructure of universities supporting national defense. The committee believes that support for this competitive, merit-based program should be increased further. The committee, therefore, recommends that in addition to the $10.0 million provided in the budget request, an additional $10.0 million of the funds authorized to be appropriated in PE 61103D be added to the budget request for the DEPSCoR program. Chemical and biological defense program The budget request included $620.3 million for the chemical-biological defense program, including $336.4 million in research and development, test and evaluation and $283.9 million in procurement. The budget request also included $88.0 million for the Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency (DARPA) biological warfare defense program (PE 62383E), a $26.0 million increase to the program from fiscal year 1998. The committee recommends an undistributed reduction of $10.5 million to the budget request for PE 62383E. The committee recommends an increase of $15.5 million for the following chemical and biological defense research and development activities: $5.0 million in PE 61384BP and $5.0 million in PE 62384BP to accelerate research and development efforts of small, light-weight, manportable chemical and biological agent detection sensors; $4.0 million in PE 62384BP for SAFEGUARD to continue the proof of concept testing to establish sensor performance, initiate packaging and real-time processing, and conduct platform studies; and $1.5 million in PE 62383E to demonstrate the use of technologies for the deployment of telemedicine and other capabilities to the warfighters. Shortcomings in Chemical and Biological Defense Program The committee supports increases in the defense budget to improve the capability of U.S. forces to detect and defeat biological and chemical weapons and agents, as well as protect themselves on the battlefield against the use of chemical and biological weapons. The committee believes that commanders in chief (CINCs) in high threat regions need to remain vigilant to ensure that adequate force protection in the areas of collective defense protection, detection and decontamination needs are provided by the Department of Defense. The committee also believes that the Department must remain diligent in responding to the chemical defense and force protection requirements of the CINCs, and ensure that adequate funding is maintained in Future Years Defense Program. In response to recommendations in the Quadrennial Defense Review (QDR), the Secretary of Defense added almost $1 billion to the Future Years Defense Program, starting with the fiscal year 1999 defense budget request. Of this increase, $732.0 million was directly for chemical-biological defenses. While this represents a substantial investment, it does not eliminate the threat to U.S. forces posed by adversaries that might choose asymmetric responses to counter the U.S. superiority in conventional forces. Despite the increased emphasis on improving chemical and biological defenses, deficiencies remain in the program regarding the provision of force structure and equipment to protect facilities. The committee is aware that the Department is attempting to address these deficiencies in doctrine, policy,equipment and training for the defense of critical overseas ports and airfields in the fiscal year 1999 budget request. Because U.S. strategy to fulfill its foreign policy commitments and national security interests overseas relies on the projection of power, points where U.S. or allied forces mass or stage overseas may provide tempting targets for chemical and biological attacks. The United States must adapt its strategy to deal with asymmetric capabilities, so that U.S. forces and its allies are capable of operating in an environment where chemical and biological agents and weapons are employed. A relatively small quantity of a chemical or biological agent could degrade or halt air operations at airfields that lack proper defenses. Repeated attacks would exacerbate this problem by damaging decontamination facilities, limiting access to the airfields or ports, and by making personnel sick and unable to wear full individual protective suits. U.S. and allied forces must also be able to deploy to, reinforce, and provide logistical support in a conflict where chemical or biological agents or weapons may possibly be employed. Lastly, the committee is concerned that there appears to be no developed Department policy on the return of strategic air and sea lift which have been contaminated by chemical or biological agents or weapons. Nor has the administration developed a policy that determines responsibility for, and protection of, essential and nonessential civilians. With regard to the ability to detect biological agents in garrison, the committee was informed during its March 5, 1998 hearing on transnational threats about the creation of an Army Biological Integrated Detection Systems (BIDS) company, which is stationed in the United States, and the Department's plans to establish two additional companies by 2001. The Under Secretary of Defense for Policy informed the committee that a BIDS platoon had been deployed to the region during the recent crisis with Iraq. However, the committee is concerned that BIDS units are not stationed in high threat areas overseas, where they are likely to be needed early in an attack. The committee requests the Secretary of Defense to report to the congressional defense committees by December 1, 1998 on the steps it has taken to correct the remaining deficiencies identified above, and any steps that it may take to locate BIDS units on a permanent basis in high threat commands or regions. DOD Anthrax Immunization Policy In recognizing the threat to U.S. forces of the use of biological weapons, the Secretary of Defense and the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs announced in December 1997 a Department of Defense initiative to immunize U.S. service personnel against the biological agent anthrax. The committee understands that the vaccine that is to be used is approved by the Food and Drug Administration (FDA), and has been used by cattle and sheep ranchers since the 1970s. The vaccine to be administered to U.S. forces was jointly developed in the 1950s by the United States and the United Kingdom, and licensed in 1970 by the FDA. The vaccine has a proven safety record with over 500 doses administered a year, mainly as boosters, to private workers in the cattle and sheep industry. The committee understands that this same vaccine was administered to approximately 130,000 U.S. armed forces personnel during Operation Desert Shield/Desert Storm. The committee is aware that concerns have been raised about the safety of the anthrax vaccine to be administered to U.S. forces, and whether it has any links to Gulf War illnesses. The committee has been advised by the Army Surgeon General that the Department of Defense and agencies not associated with the Department, to include the Institute of Medicine and the Presidential Advisory Committee, have found no evidence linking this anthrax vaccine to Gulf War illnesses. Additionally, the committee understands that an independent review of the health and medical issues associated with the anthrax immunization program was conducted by the special assistant to the President of Yale University, who concluded that ``the anthrax vaccine appears to be safe and offers the best available protection against wild type anthrax as a biological warfare agent.'' The committee has been advised that the anthrax vaccine that is to be administered is effective, with only limited side effects such as minor swelling and redness. Of those vaccinated against anthrax over the past five years, 96-97 percent had no reaction. Additionally, the committee understands that the anthrax vaccine will provide protection against regular anthrax and also against a genetically-engineered anthrax strain. Since the end of the Persian Gulf War, the committee understands that selected U.S. forces and government laboratory workers have been immunized against the biological agent anthrax with this vaccine. U.S. forces receiving this vaccine include special operations forces participating in missions and operations in areas where anthrax is indigenous, members of the Marine Chemical/Biological Incident Response Force (CBIRF), members of the Army Technical Escort Unit (TEU), and defense and energy laboratory workers. The committee understands that the Department will centrally procure the anthrax vaccine from the Michigan Biologic Products Institute (MBPI). The committee also understands that DOD plans to determine at a future date whether to extend the immunization program to others, such as host nation personnel, civilian contractors, and dependents in high risk areas. The committee expects the Department to maintain an efficient inventory control system to ensure that military personnel receive vaccinations in a timely manner. Additionally, effective management of the immunization program is vital to ensure that there are sufficient supplies of vaccines available, that vaccines older than their one-year shelf life are destroyed, and that a complete record of vaccines received, administered and destroyed is kept to monitor and track the immunization program. Biological Agent Detection and Identification There may be no greater threat to the United States today from external or internal sources than that posed by chemical and biological weapons. Biological attacks can be devastating and have widespread consequences. Despite research on vaccines, internal medicine, protective clothing, and other initiatives to counter bioagent weapons effects, none are adequate without critical supporting detection and identification capabilities. U.S. forces and military and civilian incident response personnel must have bioagent detectors capable of real-time detection and identification of specific bioagents of interest. Combatant commanders, first responders, and hospital administrators and doctors must know what they are dealing with in order to better determine courses of remedial action rapidly for the infected as well as for the facilities, equipment, and personnel in contact with the infected. It is important for first responders to know if an agent is present and where it has spread or is likely to spread in order to take action to minimize the number infected and, in the case of U.S. forces, to act quickly to improve a combat readiness posture. Over the last several years this committee has expressed strong support for innovative technologies to detect chemical and biological agents, including mass spectrometry, upconverting phosphors, and fiber optic devices. Recent field testing shows that the committee's support of these programs has been justified. To optimize the utility of these devices, the Department of Defense is funding research into a program called aerogel. Aerogel is a special silica material that acts as a receptor that allows the rapid collection and transmission of a chemical or biological agent to an assay technology, such as upconverting phosphors. The committee understands that with this technology it is feasible to develop a small, light-weight sensor system that could collect and identify a biological agent nearly immediately. The committee has previously supported research and development of aerogels to be used in the pollution abatement system of the chemical agents and munitions destruction facilities (Public Law 103-337). The committeee continues to support innovative research in these areas that could lead to the development of hand-held sensors for U.S. forces, first responders, and arms control inspectors, or that could be placed on unmanned aerial vehicles (UAVs) for long-range detection. Status of Increased Chem/Bio Defense Funds in Fiscal Year 1998 In response to recommendations in the Quadrennial Defense Review by the Secretary of Defense to increase funding for the chemical and biological defense program, Congress appropriated additional funds in fiscal year 1998 for the following activities: $25.7 million in research and development activities; $25.0 million for procurement for increased funding for individual, protective and decontamination protection, including Joint Service Lightweight Integrated Suit Technology (JSLIST); $10.0 million for procurement of chemical and biological defense equipment for the Marine Corps Chemical/ Biological Incident Response Force (CBIRF); $10.0 million for collective protective shelters identified as a high priority by the U.S. Pacific Command; and $10.0 million for the Army National Guard to conduct a study on expanding its role in responding to domestic chemical and biological incidents. The committee is unable to determine from the budget documents provided to the committee the extent to which the increased funds appropriated for these activities have been executed. The committee directs the Department of Defense to provide a report by July 1, 1998 on the status and execution of the funds for the recommended activities. In this constrained budget environment, the committee wants to ensure that additional funds provided for chemical and biological defenses are utilized to meet unfunded research, development and procurement requirements in the area of biological defense, collective protection procurement, and counterterrorist efforts to render safe, and to protect against, the use of biological and chemical weapons of mass destruction. Defense Threat Reduction Agency (DTRA) In November 1997, as part of its Defense Reform Initiative (DRI), the Department of Defense recommended the establishment of a single agency, the Defense Threat Reduction Agency (DTRA), to carry out programs to counter proliferation and reduce threats posed by weapons of mass destruction and to provide nuclear weapon stockpile and related support. This agency will consolidate several agencies, and several functions from the Office of the Secretary of Defense (OSD) involved in the management of associated programs, including the chemical and biological defense program and the counterproliferation support program. Consistent with the DRI recommendation, the committee recommends the transfer of the mission, function and resources for fiscal year 1999 for the chemical and biological defense program to the Defense Threat Reduction Agency. Ballistic Missile Defense Organization funding and programmatic guidance The budget request included approximately $3.6 billion for the Ballistic Missile Defense Organization (BMDO) for research, development, test, and evaluation (RDT&E), and procurement. Thecommittee's recommended funding allocations for BMDO are summarized in the following table. Additional programmatic and funding guidance is also provided below. BMDO FUNDING ALLOCATION [Millions of dollars] ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Program Request Change Recommendation ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Support Technology................ 253.5 +140.0 393.5 THAAD............................. 821.7 -70.0 751.7 TMD-BM/C3 \1\..................... 22.8 ......... 22.8 Navy Lower Tier \2\............... 289.1 ......... 289.1 Navy Upper Tier................... 190.4 +120.0 310.4 MEADS............................. 43.0 -33.0 10.0 NMD............................... 950.5 ......... 950.5 Joint TMD......................... 176.8 ......... 176.8 PAC-3 \2\......................... 480.5 ......... 480.5 FOS E&I........................... 96.9 ......... 96.9 BMD Tech Ops...................... 190.1 -2.0 188.1 Int'l Coop Programs............... 50.7 -0.7 50.0 Threat/Countermeasures............ 22.1 ......... 22.1 ------------------------------------- BMDO Total.................. 3,588.1 +154.3 3,742.4 ------------------------------------------------------------------------ \1\ Procurement only. \2\ Procurement and RDT&E. Support technology The committee continues to support BMDO's wide bandgap electronics material development program. Higher speed and higher temperature operation afforded by wide bandgap electronic materials could enhance the miniaturization and functionality of advanced sensors and processing systems for space-based ballistic missile defense (BMD) sensors and ground- based radar systems. The committee recommends an increase of $14.0 million in PE 62173C to support this important activity. The committee continues to support the Atmospheric Interceptor Technology (AIT) program to develop advanced interceptors with potential applications for a range of theater missile defense (TMD) programs. The committee recommends an increase of $22.0 million in PE 63173C to continue the AIT program. The committee commends BMDO and the Air Force for increasing funding in the fiscal year 1999 budget request for the Space Based Laser (SBL) Readiness Demonstrator (RD) program. The committee continues to support the development of an SBL-RD that could be ready for launch in the 2006-2008 timeframe and urges the Secretary of Defense to provide the necessary funding in the Future Years Defense Program (FYDP) to support such a program. In order to support this objective, the committee recommends an increase of $94.0 million in PE 63173C. The committee has supported BMDO's efforts to evaluate innovative launch concepts, especially those utilizing pressure-fed rocket engine technology. The committee recommends an increase of $5.0 million in PE 63173C to support the Scorpius concept and an increase of $5.0 million in PE 63173C to support the Excalibur concept. National Missile Defense The committee notes the existence of some confusion regarding what, if any, national missile defense (NMD) policy has been established in law or otherwise endorsed by Congress. Although the committee recommended a provision on this subject last year, which was enacted in the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 1998 (section 231 of Public Law 105-85), this provision did not address NMD deployment policy nor otherwise endorse the administration's so-called ``three-plus- three'' policy. In its report accompanying the fiscal year 1998 Defense Authorization Bill (S. Rep. 105-29) the committee made this matter clear: ``Recognizing the continuing controversy over NMD deployment policy, the committee recommends a provision that would strengthen the option to deploy an NMD system in fiscal year 2003 without specifically establishing an overarching deployment policy.'' The committee notes further that there is no statutory expression of policy regarding NMD currently in law. Section 238 of the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 1996 (Public Law 104-106) repealed the Missile Defense Act of 1991 (Part C of Title II of Public Law 102-190), but did not replace it with an alternative policy. Congress has never endorsed the administration's NMD policy known as ``three-plus-three'' and the committee remains extremely concerned by this policy. The committee notes that the ``three-plus-three'' policy makes NMD the only major defense acquisition program that does not include a detailed schedule of milestones beyond initial development. This is a significant deviation from normal Defense Department acquisition policy, one which imposes significant risks and inefficiencies. The committee notes that the Director of BMDO recently testified that ``three-plus-three'' is an ``extremely high risk'' program. The committee believes that this policy should be modified to make NMD a normal defense acquisition program, regulated by the same kinds of considerations that regulate all major defense acquisition programs, including milestone reviews and annual budget reviews. Medium Extended Air Defense System Although the committee continues to support the need for a TMD system to support maneuver forces, the committee is troubled by the failure of the Department of Defense to structure a fully-funded development program to satisfy this requirement. Although the committee would support a coherent and fully-funded Medium Extended Air Defense System (MEADS) program, the committee is unwilling to support a MEADS program that has no funding programmed beyond fiscal year 1999. The committee notes that the Department of Defense has had ample opportunity to address this shortfall. In light of the Department's unwillingness to provide adequate funding in the outyears, the committee recommends a reduction of $33.0 million in PE 63869C. The remaining $10.0 million shall be used to assess alternatives to the current MEADS concept, including the use of the Patriot PAC-3 system in an air-directed surface-to- air missile (ADSAM) configuration. Theater High Altitude Area Defense (THAAD) system The committee continues to support the development, production, and fielding of THAAD as a matter of highest priority, including early fielding of the User Operational Evaluation System (UOES). The committee supports BMDO's incremental approach to the execution of the UOES missile option in order to minimize funding risks associated with beginning the UOES missile program following a single successful intercept test. The committee directs that no funds be obligated for acquisition of THAAD UOES missiles until the Secretary of Defense certifies to the congressional defense committees that the THAAD program has successfully completed an intercept flight test, and that this test has adequately demonstrated that the THAAD program is ready to proceed with the production of UOES missiles. The committee supports the budget request of $497.7 million in PE 63861C for THAAD Demonstration and Validation (Dem/Val). Given recent delays in the THAAD testing program, and the requirement for THAAD to achieve three successful intercept tests prior to entering Engineering and Manufacturing Development (EMD), the committee is not convinced that BMDO will be able to execute the entire THAAD EMD budget request before the end of the fiscal year. Therefore, the committee recommends a reduction of $70.0 million from the budget request for THAAD EMD, for a total of $253.9 million in PE 64861C. Navy Upper Tier (Theater Wide) The committee continues to support the Navy Upper Tier program. The committee urges the Secretary of Defense to accelerate this important development effort while maintaining it as a low to moderate risk program. To facilitate this acceleration, the committee also urges the Navy to begin allocating funds from within its budget to complement those already programmed within the BMDO budget. The committee is concerned that necessary radar improvements have not kept up with developments in the Navy Upper Tier interceptor missile system. Therefore, the committee recommends an increase of $50.0 million for the High Power Discriminator and an increase of $70.0 million for Navy Upper Tier acceleration, for an overall increase of $120.0 million in PE 63868C. BMD Technical Operations The committee supports the efforts being performed at the Army Space and Strategic Defense Command's Advanced Research Center (ARC). The ARC continues to be a valuable tool in support of the Army's development of both theater and national missile defense systems. Therefore, the committee recommends an increase of $5.0 million in PE 63874C for support of the ARC. The committee notes substantial unexplained growth in BMDO's system architecture and engineering effort and recommends a reduction of $5.0 million in PE 63874C. International Cooperative Programs The budget request included $37.9 million for BMDO's Israeli Cooperative Project, which includes funding for the Arrow ballistic missile defense system. The committee recommends an increase of $12.0 million in PE 63875C to support interoperability design so the Arrow can operate alongside forward deployed U.S. missile defense systems. The budget request included $12.7 million for the Russian- American Observation Satellites (RAMOS) program. The committee is concerned that this program is not funded beyond fiscal year 1999 and that the potential payoff of such an experiment is questionable. Therefore, the committee recommends no funds for the RAMOS program in fiscal year 1999. Patriot PAC-3 At the request of the Director of BMDO, the committee recommends a zero-balance transfer of $40.0 million from PAC-3 procurement to PAC-3 EMD to properly align funds for the type of work being performed. The committee notes with concern that this realignment is the result of significant delays in the PAC-3 flight test program. Although the committee does not recommend a reduction in PAC-3 funding at this time, if the PAC-3 test program does not demonstrate significant improvement, the committee does not rule out the possibility of future funding reductions. BMD Targets The committee is concerned that current TMD surrogate targets do not sufficiently represent ballistic missile threatsbased on liquid fuel engines. Therefore, the committee directs the Secretary of Defense to assess the need for a new liquid fueled target, or family of targets, for TMD testing and to submit a report to the committee by April 15, 1999. Report of the Panel on Reducing Risk in Ballistic Missile Defense Test Programs The committee directs the Director of BMDO to submit a report to the congressional defense committees by February 15, 1999 on the conclusions and recommendations of the Panel on Reducing Risk in Ballistic Missile Defense Test Programs, which recently reviewed a number of BMDO's hit-to-kill interceptor programs. The report should include discussions of lessons learned, actions that BMDO intends to take as a result of these lessons, and areas where the Director of BMDO does not agree with the report. Countermeasures to missile defense systems The committee directs the Director of BMDO to submit a report to the congressional defense committees by March 15, 1999 on anticipated countermeasures to U.S. ballistic and cruise missile defense systems. The report should include an analysis of existing and foreseen countermeasures as well as a description of the programs and plans that the United States has developed to overcome any such countermeasures. The committee acknowledges that such a report will have to be submitted in a classified form. Medical free electron laser The committee recommends an increase of $7.0 million in PE 62227D to ensure reasonable stability for the program in fiscal year 1999. The committee believes that this program continues to make breakthroughs in a number of areas of importance to military medicine, including soft tissue surgery, thermal and chemical burn treatment, sepia control, and wound healing. Computing systems and communications technology The budget request included $69.9 million for a new start program in PE 62301E for project ST-26, Joint Infrastructure Protection. The committee recommends a decrease of $30.0 million and a transfer of an additional $10.0 million to PE 33140F from funds requested for the project. With respect to the transfer of $10.0 million to PE 33140F, the committee recommends that the transferred funds be used for a cyber- security program to conduct research and development at federally funded research and development centers that are currently working in collaboration on issues relating to security and information assurance and to facilitate the transition of information assurance technology to the defense community. The committee strongly supports research in information infrastructure security in accordance with the recommendations of the President's Commission on Critical Infrastructure Protection. However, the committee believes that a new start of $69.9 million in fiscal year 1999 is not warranted given the steep increase in proposed funding and the lack of definition of research and development activities to be conducted. The committee believes that gradual program growth would more likely result in sound planning and investments, and that a comprehensive survey of ongoing related research and development efforts, sponsored by defense agencies and the military departments, is needed before a new program of this magnitude is initiated. The committee directs the Secretary of Defense to prepare a comprehensive plan and funding profile for information security research and to provide the plan to the congressional defense committees no later than March 1, 1999. The plan should serve as the basis for future funding requests for research in this area. Telemedicine The committee recommends an increase of $1.5 million in PE 62383E to initiate and complete a demonstration of the use of data compression and dynamic bandwidth allocation technologies for the deployment of telemedicine and other capabilities to the warfighters. The committee directs that all applicable competitive procedures be used in the award of contracts, grants, and other agreements under this program and that the Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency require significant cost-sharing from all non-federal participants. Tactical technology The committee recommends a reduction of $5.0 million in PE 62702E of the funds requested for increased scope of work on the micro unmanned aerial vehicle program. The committee recommends this reduction to fund other higher priority programs. High definition systems Since 1994, the Department of Defense has undertaken a program of investing in the development of a domestic flat panel display industry to provide the Department with assured access to affordable flat panel display technology for defense applications. As a result of this sustained investment, the domestic supplier base now numbers over 100 companies. The committee believes that the military utility of flat panel display technology has continued to grow because of the proven durability and low life cycle costs, as compared to other display technologies. Therefore, the committee believes that additionalfunding in fiscal year 1999 is warranted and recommends an increase of $8.0 million in PE 62708E to continue the development of a domestic infrastructure within the context of the flat panel display initiative. Mixed mode electronics The committee recommends an increase of $6.0 million in PE 62712E for the continuation of the mixed mode electronics multitechnology insertion program (MIME). The committee believes that this program has significant potential benefits for electronics in military applications. Weapons of mass destruction technologies The budget request included $203.6 million for weapons of mass destruction technologies (PE 62715BR) of the Defense Special Weapons Agency (DSWA) to support and develop the technology base necessary for national security issues related to nuclear and other advanced weapons and force application technologies. In November, 1997, the Department of Defense (DOD) recommended the establishment of an agency to carry out programs related to counter proliferation, to reduce threats posed by weapons of mass destruction, and to provide nuclear weapon stockpile and related support as part of its Defense Reform Initiative (DRI). The formation of this agency was to be accomplished through the consolidation of several agencies, including the DSWA. Consistent with the DRI recommendation, the mission, function, and resources for DSWA in fiscal year 1999 have been transferred to the Defense Threat Reduction Agency (DTRA) for DSWA. Core Competencies and Critical Expertise While the end of the Cold War has changed the risk to the United States from a nuclear weapons attack, the nuclear threat continues to evolve. The United States now faces potential nuclear threats from emerging capabilities of terrorists and third world proliferation. There is also the potential for a resurgence of superpowers. With continued reductions in the defense budget, the committee remains concerned about the loss of technical expertise and the impact on the nation's ability to analyze the effects of a nuclear weapons attack on military and civilian infrastructure and systems, as well as the effect on the ability to provide reliable and timely technical guidance. The DOD must continue to ensure that the military services and civilian personnel retain their nuclear core competencies and critical scientific and engineering skills. The committee recommends a $10.0 million increase to the budget request to maintain nuclear core competencies and critical scientific and engineering expertise. Implications of nuclear and conventional explosions on critical civil and commercial activities The committee remains concerned about the potential vulnerability of the next generation satellites and high level technology upon which U.S. forces continue to rely, and the possibility that an adversary could seriously impair or negate military operations, as well as critical civil and commercial activities. The committee recommends an increase of $2.0 million to reduce potential vulnerabilities of the effects of radiation and electromagnetic pulse (EMP) on advanced electronic technologies and space systems. Structural Response and Blast Mitigation The committee understands that the Technical Support Working Group (TSWG) is responsible for coordinating the development of technologies to meet the needs for combating terrorism, and encourages the Department to utilize the unique expertise and testing capabilities of the DSWA to accelerate the fielding of new protective technologies, including affordable and practical retrofit options for existing infrastructures. Additionally, the committee encourages the Department to continue to leverage existing and promising technologies designed to mitigate earthquake and corrosion related damage. The committee directs the Department to report to congressional defense committees by December 1, 1998 on efforts, commensurate with previous recommendations, to develop structural engineering design guidelines and standards modeled after those developed by other federal agencies (similar to those developed by the Department of State for new embassy office buildings) to prevent the collapse of buildings and structures subjected to heavy blast loads. Hard and Deeply Buried Underground Structures The committee supports the unique contributions made by DSWA toward the defeat of hard and deeply buried targets. Efforts to develop technology to detect and discriminately attack and destroy or neutralize deeply buried underground facilities would address a critical gap in the capabilities of our armed forces. The committee believes that the successful completion of the proof of principal demonstration of the ``deep digger'' concept by DSWA represents a significant step forward. Accordingly, the committee recommends an increase of $3.0 million in PE 62715BR to accelerate the pace and development of components and subsystems toward a prototype ``deep digger'' system within the larger context of the DSWA hard and deeply buried target defeat program. Explosives and conventional demilitarization Currently, there are over 400,000 tons in the existingconventional munitions stockpile that are obsolete, unserviceable, or unusable, and no longer of any use. The Department of Defense (DOD) expects that the stockpile will grow by an additional 400,000 tons by the end of fiscal year 1999. The munitions storage depots in the United States are currently at their maximum storage capacity, without room for new munitions until such time as the munitions stockpile is reduced. In September 1996, the Under Secretary of Defense for Acquisition and Technology announced the DOD Munitions Strategy. An element of that overall strategy included conventional munitions demilitarization. The Congress endorsed the Department's recommendation to expand its demilitarization program by establishing a new research and development program to investigate and develop safe, efficient, and environmentally compliant technologies as alternatives to open burning/open detonation (OB/OD) to reduce the munitions stockpile. The Department also included as part of its strategy the increased reliance on commercial industry to augment demilitarization capabilities. The Secretary of Defense was directed in the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 1998 to conduct a demonstration program utilizing an existing commercial technology as an alternative to open burn/open detonation. The committee understands that a commercially available blast chamber technology is available which is recognized by industry experts as a viable alternative to OB/OD demilitarization of conventional munitions. The Congress provided a $4.0 million increase to the budget request in fiscal year 1998 in the Army munitions standardization effectiveness and safety program (PE 65805A) to conduct a demonstration using an existing commercially available blast chamber technology. The committee recommends an increase of $4.0 million to the budget request to complete the demonstration program. There are demilitarization sites in the United States where small numbers of conventional munitions exist which need to be destroyed, and where it may not be cost effective, or practical, to construct a demilitarization facility, such as in Alaska, South Carolina and California. There are also sites which are either remote in nature, or are in close proximity to residences or businesses, such as in Colorado and Massachusetts. The committee is aware that the capability exists to design a mobile system utilizing the commercially available blast chamber technology. The committee recommends an increase of $1.5 million for this activity. Counterterror technical support The budget request included $35.8 million for the counterterror technical support program for antiterrorism and counterterrorism projects. The committee recommends an increase of $5.0 million for the facial recognition technology program. In the statement of managers to the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 1998, the conferees directed the Secretary of Defense to report to the Congress on its assessment of the operational requirements for a pulsed fast neutron analysis (PFNA) cargo inspection system. On April 10, 1998, the Secretary of Defense, in concurrence with the Secretary of the Treasury, reported his assessment to the Congress that neither the Department of Defense nor the Department of Treasury had a specific requirement for developing and fielding a PFNA system. Funds were provided for the PFNA in the Department of Defense Appropriations Act for Fiscal Year 1998. The committee has supported funding for the PFNA technology program in prior years. However, with the report of the Secretary of Defense assessing no need for the development or fielding of this technology, the committee believes that funds appropriated for this activity should be utilized for unfunded requirements for operational needs to counter terrorism, such as chemical and biological detection, neutralization, mitigation and decontamination. The committee continues to support collaborative efforts with allies who have demonstrated counter-terrorism capabilities, such as Israel and the United Kingdom, which can provide the United States a cost-effective way of remaining at the cutting edge of technology. The committee also believes that the Department should examine retrofit options and develop design guidelines for new and existing structures, to include the use of composite systems and retrofit applications technologies such as those demonstrated for seismic retrofitting of highway columns and corrosion damage. Defense Threat Reduction Agency (DTRA) In November 1997, the Department of Defense recommended the establishment of an agency to carry out programs to counter proliferation and reduce threats posed by weapons of mass destruction and to provide nuclear weapon stockpile and related support as part of its Defense Reform Initiative (DRI). The formation of this agency is to be accomplished through the consolidation of several agencies, and several functions from the Office of the Secretary of Defense (OSD) involved in the management of associated programs. Consistent with the DRI recommendation, the committee recommends the transfer of the counterterror technical support program to the Defense Threat Reduction Agency (DTRA). Counterproliferation support program The fiscal year 1998 budget request included $80.4 million for the counterproliferation support program to accelerate thedevelopment and deployment of essential counterproliferation technologies and capabilities in the Department of Defense (DOD) and the military services. The committee recommends an increase of $7.0 million to the counterproliferation support program: $3.0 million for the high frequency active auroral research program (HAARP); $4.0 million for the continuation of the Counterproliferation Analysis and Planning System (CAPS) to support theater commanders and special operations forces in preparing for regional contingencies involving weapons of mass destruction. In addition, the committee recommends a $20.5 million increase to the budget request for defense, including operation and maintenance ($7.6 million), research and development ($7.8 million) and procurement ($5.1 million), for unfunded requirements for the U.S. Special Operations Command (USSOCOM) for equipment to detect and destroy underground facilities and for training activities to locate, identify, render safe, destroy, or recover weapons of mass destruction from deep underground structures. The committee raised concerns last year in the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 1998 (S. Rept. 105- 29) that funds authorized for HAARP were being diverted to fund government overhead and Systems Engineering and Technical Assessments (SETA) support in the range of about 20 percent. The committee directs that the combined government overhead/ SETA support costs be no more than 10 percent. Counterproliferation Analysis and Planning System The proliferation of weapons of mass destruction remains a continuing national security concern and challenge for the long term. To address this challenge, the committee has supported funding for the Counterproliferation Analysis Planning Systems (CAPS). The committee understands that the Joint Requirements Oversight Council (JROC) endorsed a funding level for CAPS in the 2000-2005 Five Year Defense Plan at $12.0 million per year. To address the fiscal year 1999 shortfall, of the total increase recommended for the counterproliferation support program, the committee recommends that PE 65160D8Z be increased by $4.0 million for CAPS. Defense Threat Reduction Agency (DTRA) In November 1997, as part of its Defense Reform Initiative (DRI), the Department of Defense recommended the establishment of a single agency, the Defense Threat Reduction Agency (DTRA), to carry out programs to counter proliferation and reduce threats posed by weapons of mass destruction and to provide nuclear weapon stockpile and related support. The formation of this agency is to be accomplished through the consolidation of several agencies, and several functions from the Office of the Secretary of Defense (OSD) involved in the management of associated programs. Consistent with the DRI recommendation, the committee recommends the transfer of the counterproliferation support program to the Defense Threat Reduction Agency. Generic logistics research and development technology demonstrations The committee recommends an increase of $4.0 million in PE 63712S to continue the computer assisted technology transfer program in fiscal year 1999. The committee directs the Defense Logistics Agency to develop a plan for deploying any technology successfully developed under this program broadly throughout the major systems support infrastructure. Advanced lithography Advanced lithography is an important enabling technology needed to produce advanced integrated circuits. The Department of Defense has a strong interest in maintaining access to this technology for application in new and future military systems. There are presently three basic lithography technologies (based upon the use of x-ray, electron-beam, and extreme ultra-violet radiation sources) in various stages of development that are capable of producing integrated circuits to meet the future needs of the Department. The committee understands that the Department is currently developing an initiative to develop cross-cutting technologies, such as mask fabrication and defect reduction, metrology, development of new radiation sensitive imaging materials, and modeling and simulation, that will be applicable to all three basic lithography technologies. Because this initiative is still under development, no funding was provided in the fiscal year 1999 budget. The committee recommends an increase of $10.0 million to PE 603739E for the advanced mask writer development. This funding is intended to bridge the gap until the Department's cross-cutting technology initiative takes effect in fiscal year 2000. The committee expects that sufficient funding will be devoted to this initiative in the budget request for fiscal year 2000 so that consideration of further increases by Congress will not be necessary. Advanced electronics technologies The committee recommends a reduction of $4.0 million in PE 63739E for a portion of new start work in project MT-04 to allow funding of higher priority research. Maritime technology The budget request included $15.0 million in PE 603746E for the maritime technology (MARITECH) advanced shipbuilding enterprise (ASE) program. The MARITECH ASE program is a government, shipbuilding industry and academia cooperative effort to improve process and products required for ship design, construction and repair. The effort continues the MARITECH focus on making U.S. shipbuilders competitive in the international market and reducing the costs to build Navy ships. The committee recommends a $5.0 million increase to PE 603746E for MARITECH ASE. Advanced concept technology demonstrations The committee recommends a reduction, without prejudice, of $6.0 million in PE 63739E to allow funding of other priority initiatives. The committee notes that this reduction will leave approximately $20.0 million for new start advanced concept technology demonstrations (ACTD) in fiscal year 1999. During hearings this year, the committee received testimony concerning the problem of providing adequate manning for ACTD participation by the unified and specified commands. One of the justifications for the ACTD program is its ability to put mature technologies in hands of the warfighters for evaluation and possible use in a much more rapid manner than can be accommodated in the standard acquisition process. The joint staff has been reluctant to provide the unified and specified commands with any additional manning to allow for a thorough evaluation by the warfighter and for support of residual operational capability should an ACTD prove successful. The committee commends the efforts of the Office of the Under Secretary of Defense for Acquisition and Technology to alleviate this situation through the provision of increased contractor support and other resources. Unfortunately, such support cannot substitute for the intensive, necessary warfighter field evaluation. The committee directs the Under Secretary of Defense for Acquisition and Technology to work closely with the joint staff to develop an approach to improve manning allocation to allow the unified and specified commands to more effectively support ACTD execution. The committee directs the Under Secretary of Defense for Acquisition and Technology to report to the congressional defense committees no later than February 15, 1999 on the status of these efforts. High performance computing modernization The committee recommends an increase of $3.0 million in PE 63755D to initiate a program to address the related challenges of remote visualization, collaborative exploitation of high performance computing modernization capabilities, and distance learning expansion. Advances in telecommunications, high performance computing, and computer networking have created opportunities to overcome these challenges, especially to the extent that the major shared resource centers can increase collaboration and shared capabilities. The committee believes that the proposed program would offer a significant opportunity for participation by historically black colleges and universities, and other minority institutions. The committee directs the Department of Defense (DOD) to seek substantial participation of at least one minority institution in the program. The committee directs that all applicable competitive procedures be used for the award of any contract, grant, or other agreement under this program and that cost-sharing requirements for non-federal participants be utilized, where appropriate. The committee also recommends an increase of $20.0 million in PE 63755D to sustain operations of supercomputing centers established with DOD funds. The committee notes that the increase is $5.0 million less than the amount authorized in fiscal year 1998 for this purpose and reflects sustainment funding provided by other users. The committee believes that any sustainment funding increases provided in fiscal year 2000 for such supercomputing centers should be reduced by a similar amount to reflect increased support from government and non- government users, as well as sponsoring institutions. Command, control, and communications systems The committee recommends a total reduction of $11.0 million in PE 63760E to fund higher priority research and development. The committee intends the reduction to be made in increased scope of work included in the budget request for projects CCC01 and CCC02. Land warfare technology The committee recommends a reduction of $4.0 million in PE 63764E for a new start project in CNW01 to allow funding of higher priority programs. Physical security The committee recommends authorization of $25.7 million for the physical security program for fiscal year 1999, a $6.0 million reduction to the budget request for force protection commercial off-the-shelf activities. The committee supports research and development activities that would provide force protection to U.S. forces, and recommends that no reductions be taken out of programs currently underway in this program element. The committee is aware of a software technology for evaluating safeguards and security developed jointly by industry and the national laboratories known as AnalyticSystem and Software for Evaluating Safeguards and Security (ASSESS), which has been used as a primary security modeling tool by the Department of Energy to analyze the vulnerabilities of its facilities to theft or sabotage of its nuclear materials. The committee understands that this software tool can be used to assess physical security vulnerabilities of existing buildings as well as new construction under design. The committee believes that the ASSESS technology could be an integral component to vulnerability assessments conducted at numerous Department of Defense (DOD) facilities and installations. The committee recommends that $3.0 million be made available for a study to analyze how this technology can best be utilized by DOD, and for upgrades and computer-aided design enhancements so that DOD agencies can utilize this technology. Advanced sensor applications The budget request included $15.1 million for advanced sensor applications. The committee recommends an increase of $2.0 million to continue the high frequency active auroral research program (HAARP). Integrated data environment The committee recommends an increase of $2.0 million in PE 63736D to continue the integrated data environment program in fiscal year 1999. The committee believes that programs such as this have the potential to provide cost-effective tools for reducing life cycle costs and improve logistics support for the warfighter. Joint robotics program The committee recommends an increase of $6.0 million in PE 64709D to allow the Department of Defense to accelerate engineering and manufacturing development efforts for the Vehicle Teleoperation Capability, including the Remote Combat Support System and the transfer of technology, where necessary. This accelerated transfer of technology has great potential for avoiding life cycle costs for a family of systems that are of growing importance to the missions of the warfighters. Defense support activities The committee recommends an increase of $2.0 million in PE 65798S to increase the scope of the commodity management system consolidation (CMSC) program in fiscal year 1999. The committee believes that the CMSC program is a key part of the efforts to migrate the Defense Logistics Agency commodity management system to a common operating environment to support the logistics vision incorporated in Joint Vision 2010. Defense technical information services The committee recommends a reduction of $2.0 million in PE 65801K for expanded activities at the Defense Technical Information Center in order to fund higher priority initiatives. Joint simulation system The committee recommends an increase of $4.5 million in PE 92740J to accelerate the fielding of the fully capable joint simulation system. The committee believes that this system has the potential to provide significant realistic training capability for the joint field commanders. Surgical strike The committee recommends an increase of $7.8 million for this classified program. Maritime equipment The committee recommends an increase of $10.5 million for this classified program. OTHER ITEMS OF INTEREST Acoustic firefinding system The committee notes that the Army is currently conducting tests on a system that detects the shock waves of passing supersonic projectiles to provide real time data to locate and classify fire in multiple force protection situations. The committee is aware that the Army Research Laboratory (ARL) is scheduled to receive five such systems, one of which will be mounted on a high mobility multipurpose wheeled vehicle. The program is also in development for participation and evaluation under the military operations in urban terrain advanced concept technology demonstration program. The committee urges the Army to transition the program from ARL to an Army Research, Development, and Engineering Center effort in fiscal year 2000 should the technology prove successful in current and planned evaluations. Army After Next Initiatives The committee supports the Army's plan to restructure the 2nd Armored Cavalry Regiment as an experimental strike force to investigate alternative land force organizations for the Army After Next (AAN) initiative. The committee recommends the Army expedite this initiative. Furthermore, in this pursuit of Army After Next capabilities, the Army will experiment with new armored vehicles that are lighter, faster, more deployable, and with similar or increased lethality and survivability. These AAN systems are not yet available. However, several surrogates are available to investigate the impact of AAN systems on new organizational structures and operational concepts that address 21st Century operational requirements. For example, the Army has already invested over $200.0 million in the development of the Armored Gun System (AGS) which is C130 aircraft deployable, has top speeds of 45 miles per hour, modular armor, a reduced crew size, and a cannon that fires up to 12 rounds per minute. The committee believes the Army should employ its AGS prototypes, along with other surrogate systems, in strike force experimentation activities. Army multimedia tactical adaptor The committee believes that the Army Multimedia Tactical Adapter may have the potential to enhance the warfighter's survivable wireless communications links by increasing speed and bandwidth while decreasing the costs of operations during critical battlefield operations. Additionally, joint standardization and interoperability of this device have the potential to benefit all military networks. The committee directs the Secretary of the Army to review this program and determine whether additional funding should be provided in the fiscal year 2000 budget. Brain protection in combat head injury The committee is aware of a proposal to research approaches for using pharmacological intervention mechanisms for reversing brain injury due to combat head injury or exposure to chemical weapons. If successful, such research could result in reduction of combat mortality and morbidity from such causes. The committee urges the Secretary of Defense to review this or similar proposals and, if determined to be of sufficient promise, to include funding for such research in the fiscal year 2000 budget. Defense imagery and mapping program The committee urges the Department of Defense to fund the defense imagery and mapping system research programs at adequate levels to sustain critical spatial information systems research programs. The development efforts will assume increasing importance to the achievement of national security objectives as the military services work to enhance battlespace awareness. Dual use applications programs The committee notes that the budget request contains $6.0 million for dual use applications program administered by the Defense Logistics Agency (DLA). This program differs fundamentally from other Department of Defense dual use programs in that it is managed through an agreement with a single, non-governmental entity for the purposes of establishing cost-shared pilot programs at selected public sector maintenance facilities in the areas of commercial manufacturing technologies and best business practices. Accordingly, the committee recommends a provision that would change the name of the program to Commercial Technology for Maintenance Activities. The committee further directs that, in managing the program in fiscal year 1999, the DLA shall require each of the participating services to match on a one-for-one basis any DLA funds expended for the projects under the program. Electronic commerce resource centers The committee directs that competitive procedures be used, to the maximum extent practicable, in the award of future contracts or other agreements, including subcontracts for the operation of individual regional centers under the Electronic Commerce Resource Center (ECRC) program, and that cost-sharing requirements for the non-Federal participants be utilized where appropriate. The committee further directs that the establishment of any additional ECRC sites be based on a Department of Defense analysis that considers the needs of the Department and the concentration of Defense suppliers, particularly manufacturing enterprises located near such sites. Electronic safe and arm devices The committee is encouraged by the positive results of the recent Cooperative Research and Development (CRADA) conducted by the Naval Surface Warfare Center and industry to design and develop a modular electronic safe and arm device (ESAD) that could be used in multiple tactical missile systems. The results of this CRADA parallel a recent initiative conducted by the Army. This Army program resulted in the development of an ESAD with common components for the full spectrum of Army tactical missile systems. This initiative was consistent with the Department of Defense goalsto develop an affordable multi- missile manufacturing (AM<SUP>3</SUP>) program and was accomplished in a cost-effective manner in cooperation with industry's missile manufacturers. In order to also capitalize on the positive results of the recent CRADA, the committee needs more information. Therefore, the committee directs the Navy to provide a report to the congressional defense committees, not later than December 1, 1998, that outlines the Navy's participation in the AM<SUP>3</SUP> program, as well as an analysis of the costs and benefits of integrating these electronic devices in all of the Navy's tactical missile product lines (both surface and air launched). Flat panel display technology In the statement of managers to accompany the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 1998 (S. Rept. 105- 29), the committee expressed concern that program managers and contractors were making procurement decisions on flat panel displays (FPD's) based on cost and schedule constraints without benefit of life-cycle cost and performance trade-off analysis. In March 1998, the Department responded to the committee's direction by submitting a report on the application of flat panel displays for military applications. The committee applauds the report as a good first step and encourages the Department to follow through on its conclusions: to better coordinate flat panel display activities; to mitigate supply uncertainty; to promote life-cycle affordability by supporting programs for sound technology choices; to continue the development of an integrated product teams approach; and to address cross-program coordination needs. The committee urges the Department to develop defense-wide common procurement training, to generate an FPD technical road-map, and to establish product standards for use by program managers. Global Positioning System alternate master control station Dependence on the Global Positioning System (GPS) in the military, civil, and commercial sectors continues to grow exponentially. GPS is vital to the national interests of the United States and the committee recognizes this system must be operated and maintained at the highest levels of readiness and reliability. GPS remains, however, the only critical national satellite system that does not have an adequate separate and secure backup ground control station. The committee is pleased that the Department of Defense and the Air Force initiated development of an alternate master ground control station at Vandenberg Air Force Base, California, but urges the Air Force to evaluate fully any potential vulnerabilities that may exist at Vandenberg. The committee urges the Department of Defense and the Air Force to continue to make GPS a top priority program and ensure that the alternate master ground control station will be operational by fiscal year 2001. The committee previously recognized the need to reduce vulnerabilities of the current GPS command and control infrastructure and continues to be concerned that plans to modernize, operate, and maintain the aging GPS worldwide ground control system are not being developed on a timely basis. The committee, therefore, directs the Secretary of the Air Force to submit a report by February 15, 1999 to the congressional defense committees on the alternate master control station and the plan to modernize the entire GPS ground control system to ensure GPS will support our national security and economic interests well into the next century. Joint experimentation plan report The committee is concerned there is too little coherent focus and effort on joint experimentation. In the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 1998, the Secretary of Defense was directed to provide a joint experimentation plan report by March 30, 1998. The committee conducted hearings this year to address Department of Defense activities directed at transforming the armed forces to address operational challenges anticipated in the early 21st Century. Members of the National Defense Panel testified that it was ``absolutely critical'' and ``urgent'' that the Department establish a joint experimentation process to investigate capabilities dealing with these future challenges. The committee remains concerned about the progress and joint oversight of transformation activities across the Department. The Secretary of Defense submitted the Joint Experimentation Plan Report to the Congress on April 14, 1998. This report failed to provide the requested information relating to a process of joint experimentation, and the relationship of this process to the experimentation efforts of the military departments. It is clear that the experimentation activities of the military departments do not currently provide an adequate foundation for joint experimentation because they do not employ a joint headquarters or a consistent set of joint enablers in command, control, communications and computers (C4); intelligence; surveillance; reconnaissance (ISR); and other areas. Therefore, it is necessary that an overarching process of joint experimentation be established. The committee supports the initiative of the Secretary of Defense to approve a charter assigning the mission of joint experimentation to a combatant commander. This charter provides necessary clarification in terms of responsibility and authority among the combatant commanders, services, anddefense agencies. The committee notes that the Joint Experimentation Plan Report states: ``The Department is committed to making rapid progress on joint experimentation as a central part of our efforts to pursue the revolution in military affairs (RMA) through Joint Vision 2010.'' The committee directs the Secretary of Defense to provide an addendum to his report, no later than December 1, 1999, that addresses the following issues: (1) describe the responsibilities and the authorities of the Office of the Secretary of Defense and defense agencies, services, combatant commands, and the Joint Staff in each of the concept development; assessment/ experimentation; and implementation phases of the joint experimentation process; (2) describe the activities of and the results achieved by the RMA oversight council in accomplishing its stated tasks to oversee the Department's planned and current RMA transformation activities, recommend areas that could benefit from greater jointness, and direct changes in funding or activities; (3) describe the responsibilities and authority of the Department of Defense, unified commands, the Joint Staff, and the services for the Information Superiority Implementation and Assessment Plan (ISIAP) and describe how the ISIAP impacts decisions to modify, accelerate, or terminate C4ISR; (4) describe the authority and responsibility of the joint force experimenter in service experimentation efforts that include joint elements, the authority and responsibility for the integration of C4ISR and developing and assessing the information, sensor, and engagement grids for service network centric efforts; (5) estimate the proportion of transformation activities undertaken in service unique arenas against the joint venue described in the report, and identify duplicative efforts; (6) describe the relationship of vulnerability assessments conducted in joint experiments with vulnerability assessments conducted in service experimentation activities, including a description of the authority and responsibility of the proponent for conducting vulnerability assessments in joint experimentation activities and a description of the responsibilities of the Director of Operational Test and Evaluation with respect to those responsible for conducting vulnerability assessments in service experiments; (7) describe the feedback process by which the results of vulnerability assessments, as well as other experimentation results, are reflected in future experimentation, or in changes to doctrine, operational concepts, organizational structures, or programs for the development of new technologies; and (8) identify the joint experimentation activities which have been completed and describe the command and control process for each experiment, the budget and forces employed, capabilities assessed, and impact on changes in doctrine, operational concepts, organizational structures, or programs for the development of advanced technologies. The committee further directs the General Accounting Office to investigate the following matters related to the Secretary of Defense Joint Experimentation Plan Report and report findings to the committee by March 31, 1999. This review should include the following: (1) assess the Joint Vision 2010 Implementation Plan with respect to the following areas: (A) whether the Joint Vision 2010 Implementation Plan reflects a viable time line, adequate resources including forces, funding and facilities, and the integrating functions necessary to achieve the operational concepts of the vision by 2010; (B) whether the plan incorporates the operational challenges and desired force characteristics described in the Report of the National Defense Panel; (C) whether the funding for the execution of the Joint Vision 2010 assessment roadmaps is adequately reflected in the future years defense program and whether service plans for experimentation activities are consistent with these roadmaps; (2) assess whether the plan for the development of joint enablers in areas such as command, control, communications and computers (C4), intelligence, surveillance, and reconnaissance (ISR), logistics, force protection and others is adequate to implement the operational concepts of Joint Vision 2010 by 2010; (3) assess whether the Defense Planning Guidance for fiscal years 2000 through 2005 and the subsequent budget and planning review process, to include the Chairman's Program Recommendations and Assessment, directs the fielding of advanced technologies, preparation of forces, and funding required for the joint experimentation plan; (4) assess the capability and limitations of existing and developing models and simulations to support the assessment and experimentation phase of the joint experimentation process; (5) assess whether the Defense Science and Technology Strategy, Basic Research Plan, Defense Technology Area Plan, and Joint Warfighting Science and Technology plan are effective in synchronizing thefielding of advanced technologies across the services to support the development of joint capabilities; and (6) compare the charter assigning U.S. Atlantic Command (USACOM) the mission for joint warfighting experimentation to the framework for Joint Forces Command recommended by the National Defense Panel and assess the capabilities of USACOM to implement this charter. Man overboard notification technology Each year lives are lost at sea as a result of sailors accidentally falling off ships. The committee encourages the Navy to investigate the feasibility of integrating a commercial off-the-shelf water-activated person overboard indicator as a means of immediately alerting ship control personnel of a person accidentally falling overboard. Molten salt oxidation waste disposal technology The committee is aware of the potential value of molten salt oxidation (MSO) technology to solve many of the problems with the disposal of hazardous materials. In particular, MSO technology, if made cost effective, would certainly be beneficial in a shoreside shipyard environment. The committee is aware that a consortium comprised of academic institutions and the Naval Surface Warfare Center (NSWC) has been developing a working MSO system at NSWC Indian Head, Maryland. The committee directs the Secretary of the Navy to provide a report by February 1, 1999 to the congressional defense committees on the potential costs and benefits of MSO technology for shoreside waste disposal and the desirability of continuing development of the MSO system at Indian Head in order to develop a working prototype leading to a full scale model. National automotive center The committee views the rapid infusion of advanced commercial technology into military land warfare systems as a key component of maintaining cost effective U.S. military dominance in ground combat technology. The committee commends the Army's National Automotive Center, part of the Tank- automotive and Armaments Command, for its role as the Army's focal point for collaborative research and development in the land combat vehicle arena, including advancements in alternative propulsion technology. The committee believes that the National Automotive Center should serve as the focal point for all Department of Defense shared commercial-military automotive technology development that is directly applicable to military land warfare systems, including alternative propulsion technologies. In support of this goal, the committee directs that the Secretary of Defense develop and submit an implementation plan to the congressional defense committees by February 15, 1999. National solar observatory The Air Force provided for the support of the National Solar Observatory (NSO) for fiscal year 1999 through the Air Force science and technology program in the amount of $650,000, which would be transferred to the National Science Foundation to operate NSO. The committee supports the continuation of this annual contribution for the support of NSO. National technology alliance During the last ten years, the National Technology Alliance (NTA) has helped the Intelligence community realize cost savings by providing commercially available information technology. Prior year funding for the NTA has led to reductions in operations and maintenance costs, improved intelligence analysis in the field, and advanced capabilities for reconnaissance and surveillance. The committee directs the Secretary of Defense to study the feasibility and desirability of expanding the NTA into a Defense-wide program and to report the findings to the congressional defense committees not later than 90 days after the enactment of this Act. Next generation internet The committee supports industry and government efforts to improve the communications and data transfer capability for future high speed data networks. The next generation of computer data networks will have important ramifications for military communications and technology. Industry is making considerable investment in the next generation of communication networks, and the federal government is involved in a partnership with industry and academia through the Next Generation Internet (NGI) program to help ensure that the following generation of technology is accessible to the military, as well as to the civilian sector. It is important for the Department of Defense to focus its efforts and resources on the promising technologies that are not already the subject of substantial investment by commercial industry for near-term deployment, but rather to focus on the next generation of technology that will ensure higher speeds and higher volumes of data transmission. In this regard, the committee believes that the Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency (DARPA), through its NGI program, should investigate the possibility of placing greater researchemphasis on future promising technologies in the area of ultra-high speed optical data networks. It is widely recognized that wavelength-division- multiplexed (WDM)systems and access networks are already being commercialized by industry. However, many consider time- division-multiplexed (TDM) technologies to be the next phase of development in high speed communication, and an area in which the United States should devote increased funding in the near- term to maintain our technological advantage. Therefore, the committee urges DARPA to consider focusing more of its near- term funding to support the development of TDM systems and access nodes technologies. Patriot anti-cruise missile defense system The committee reaffirms its support for fully evaluating the Patriot anti-cruise missile (PACM) concept and directs the Secretary of the Army to complete a rigorous test and evaluation program in fiscal year 1999, using funds previously appropriated for this purpose, to determine the effectiveness of the PACM seeker against the full range of advanced cruise missile threats. Results of this evaluation shall be provided to the committee in a written report by April 15, 1999. The report shall also include an assessment of options and associated costs for utilizing the PACM seeker in future upgrades to existing Patriot missiles. Rapid acquisition of manufactured parts The committee commends the Department of Defense for the decision to transfer the rapid acquisition of manufactured parts (RAMP) program to the Defense Logistics Agency (DLA). As a DLA-sponsored program, RAMP should be fully leveraged to support the rapid acquisition of non-standard and difficult-to- acquire spare parts in a timely and cost effective manner. The committee expects the Department of Defense to continue to support this important initiative. Report on Department of the Navy applications for h