106 th Congress 2d Session
SENATE
Report
106 292
Calendar No. 543
NATIONAL DEFENSE AUTHORIZATION
ACT FOR FISCAL YEAR 2001
REPORT
[to accompany s. 2549]
on
AUTHORIZING APPROPRIATIONS FOR FISCAL YEAR 2001 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
together with
ADDITIONAL AND MINORITY VIEWS
COMMITTEE ON ARMED SERVICES
UNITED STATES SENATE
[Graphic Image Not Available]
May 12, 2000.--Ordered to be printed
Filed under authority of the order of the Senate of May 11, 2000
NATIONAL DEFENSE AUTHORIZATION ACT FOR FISCAL YEAR 2001
?
64 303
2000
106 th Congress 2d Session
SENATE
Report
106 292
Calendar No. 543
NATIONAL DEFENSE AUTHORIZATION
ACT FOR FISCAL YEAR 2001
REPORT
[to accompany s. 2549]
on
AUTHORIZING APPROPRIATIONS FOR FISCAL YEAR 2001 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
together with
ADDITIONAL AND MINORITY VIEWS
COMMITTEE ON ARMED SERVICES
UNITED STATES SENATE
[Graphic Image Not Available]
May 12, 2000.--Ordered to be printed
Filed under authority of the order of the Senate of May 11, 2000
?
COMMITTEE ON ARMED SERVICES
(106th Congress, 2d Session)
JOHN WARNER, Virginia, Chairman
STROM THURMOND, South Carolina, Chairman Emeritus CARL LEVIN, Michigan
JOHN McCAIN, Arizona EDWARD M. KENNEDY, Massachusetts
BOB SMITH, New Hampshire JEFF BINGAMAN, New Mexico
JAMES M. INHOFE, Oklahoma ROBERT C. BYRD, West Virginia
RICK SANTORUM, Pennsylvania CHARLES S. ROBB, Virginia
OLYMPIA J. SNOWE, Maine JOSEPH I. LIEBERMAN, Connecticut
PAT ROBERTS, Kansas MAX CLELAND, Georgia
WAYNE ALLARD, Colorado MARY L. LANDRIEU, Louisiana
TIM HUTCHINSON, Arkansas JACK REED, Rhode Island
JEFF SESSIONS, Alabama
Les Brownlee, Staff Director
David S. Lyles, Staff Director for the Minority
(II)
C O N T E N T S
Purpose of the Bill 1
Committee Overview and Recommendations 2
Explanation of Funding Summary 14
Division A--Department of Defense Authorizations 21
Title I--Procurement 21
Explanation of tables 21
Subtitle A--Authorization of Appropriations 22
Chemical demilitarization program (sec. 107)
24
Subtitle B--Army Programs
25
Multiyear procurement authority for certain Army and Navy programs
(sec. 111)
45
Army transformation (sec. 112)
45
Other Army Programs
49
Army Aircraft
49
Utility aircraft
49
UH 60 Blackhawk
50
Longbow
50
Kiowa Warrior
51
Avionics support equipment
51
Aircrew integrated systems
51
Army Missile
51
Army tactical missile system--system summary
51
Stinger modifications
51
Weapons and Tracked Combat Vehicles
52
Carrier modifications
52
Breacher system modification
52
Heavy assault bridge system modifications
52
Machine gun, squad automatic weapon
53
Mark 19 grenade launcher
53
M4 carbine modifications
53
Army Ammunition
53
Procurement of ammunition, Army
53
Armament retooling and manufacturing support initiative
53
Other Army Procurement
54
Family of medium tactical vehicles
54
Weapons of Mass Destruction Civil Support Teams
54
Secure mobile anti-jam reliable tactical terminal
55
Army data distribution system
56
Area common user system modification program
56
Forward area air defense ground based sensor
56
Night vision
56
Forward area air defense command and control
57
Striker-command and control system
57
Standard integrated command post system
57
Lightweight maintenance enclosure
57
Roller, vibratory, self-propelled
57
Deployable universal combat earth mover
58
Subtitle C--Navy Programs
59
CVNX 1 nuclear aircraft carrier program (sec. 121)
83
Arleigh Burke-class destroyer program (sec. 122)
83
Virginia-class submarine program (sec. 123)
84
ADC(X) ship program (sec. 124)
85
Refueling and Complex Overhaul Program of the CVN 69 nuclear aircraft
carrier (sec. 125)
85
Other Navy Programs
86
Navy Aircraft
86
Airborne low frequency sonar
86
SH 60 helicopters
86
CH 60 helicopters
86
UC 35 aircraft
86
C 40A aircraft
86
T 45 aircraft
87
Joint primary air training system
87
KC 130J
87
EA 6B aircraft automatic flight control system
87
AV 8B precision targeting pod
88
18 modifications
88
AH 1W series
88
H 1 series
88
P 3 aircraft modifications
89
Tactical aircraft moving map capability
89
Navy Weapons
90
Joint standoff weapon
90
Weapons industrial facilities
90
Mark 48 advanced capability torpedo modifications
90
Navy and Marine Corps Ammunition
90
Procurement of ammunition, Navy and Marine Corps
90
Laser-guided bomb components
90
Training ordnance
90
Navy Shipbuilding and Conversion
90
Shipbuilding overview
90
LHD 8 advance procurement
93
Other Navy Procurement
94
AN/WSN 7 inertial navigation system
94
Surveillance and security for military sealift ships
94
Integrated condition assessment system
95
AN/SPS 73(V) surface search radar
95
Side-scanning sonar for forward deployed minesweepers
95
Joint Engineering Data Management and Information Control System
95
Aviation life support
96
Gun fire control radar performance improvements
96
Cruiser smart ship
96
NULKA anti-ship missile decoy system
97
Civil engineering support equipment
97
Marine Corps Procurement
97
Night vision
97
Radio systems
97
Subtitle D--Air Force Programs
98
Repeal of requirement for annual report on B 2 bomber aircraft
program (sec. 131)
114
Other Air Force Programs
114
Air Force Aircraft
114
EC 130J
114
Joint primary aircraft training system
114
Joint surveillance and target attack radar system
114
B 52H aircraft modifications
115
A 10 aircraft integrated flight and fire control computer
115
15 aircraft modifications
115
16 aircraft modifications
115
C 17 simulator
116
Defense airborne reconnaissance program aircraft modifications
116
ALE 50 towed decoys
116
Compass Call
117
Defense airborne reconnaissance program
117
Air Force Missile
117
Global Positioning System
117
Titan space boosters
117
Medium launch vehicle
118
Air Force Ammunition
118
Procurement of ammunition, Air Force
118
Other Air Force Procurement
118
Combat training ranges
118
Night vision goggles
118
Defense-Wide Programs
119
Advanced SEAL delivery system design enhancements
124
Special operations forces small arms and support equipment
124
Nuclear, Biological and Chemical Defense Enhancement Kits
125
Communications assistance for law enforcement act
125
Subtitle E--Other Matters
125
Pueblo Chemical Depot chemical agent destruction technologies (sec. 141)
125
Other Items of Interest
126
Acquisition programs at the National Security Agency
126
Army aviation
126
C 5 aircraft upgrades
127
Electronic digital compass system
127
Single channel ground and airborne radio system
128
Soldier's portable on-system repair tool
128
Title II--Research, Development, Test, and Evaluation
129
Explanation of tables
129
Subtitle A--Authorization of Appropriations
130
Subtitle B--Program Requirements, Restrictions, And
Limitations
131
Fiscal year 2002 joint field experiment (sec. 211)
131
Nuclear aircraft carrier design and production modeling (sec. 212)
132
DD 21 class destroyer program (sec. 213)
133
22 aircraft program (sec. 214)
136
Joint strike fighter (sec. 215)
137
Global Hawk high altitude endurance unmanned aerial vehicle (sec. 216)
139
Unmanned advanced capability aircraft and ground combat vehicles
(sec. 217)
141
Army space control technology (sec. 218)
142
Russian American Observation Satellites program (sec. 219)
143
Joint Biological Defense Program (sec. 220)
143
Report on biological warfare defense vaccine research and development
programs (sec. 221)
144
Subtitle C--Other Matters
145
Mobile offshore base (sec. 241)
145
Air Force science and technology planning (sec. 242)
145
Additional Matters of Interest
147
Army
147
Counter-terrorism basic research
156
Composite materials
156
Advanced missile composite components
156
Smart truck initiative
156
Portable hybrid electric power system
156
Thermoelectric power generation
156
Operational support
157
Equipment readiness
157
Fuel cell auxiliary power units
157
Big Crow program office
157
Army Space and Missile Defense Command Simulations
158
Aero-acoustics instrumentation
158
Acoustic technology research
158
Missile defense flight experiment
158
Radar power technology
158
Scramjet acoustic combustion enhancement
158
Space and missile defense battle lab
158
Supercluster distributed memory technology
159
Tactical High Energy Laser
159
Anti-malarial research
159
Electronic warfare development
159
Threat simulator development
159
Multiple launch rocket system product improvement program
159
Joint Land Attack Cruise Missile Defense Elevated Netted Sensor
160
Communications and networking technologies
160
Navy
161
Free electron laser
171
Biodegradable polymers
171
Bioenvironmental hazards research
171
Nontraditional warfare initiatives
171
Communications, command, and control, intelligence, surveillance, and
reconnaissance
171
Cognitive research
172
Ceramic and carbon based composites
172
Nanoscale sensor research
172
Littoral area acoustic demonstrations
172
Computational engineering design
172
Advanced water-jet technology
173
Composite helicopter hangar door
173
Composite modules for ship hull construction
173
Laser welding and cutting
173
Supply chain best practices
174
Virtual test bed for reconfigurable ship
174
Ocean modeling for mine and submarine warfare
174
Marine Corps advanced technology transition
175
Integrated combat weapons system for mine countermeasures ships
175
Trident SSGN design
175
Enhanced performance electric motor brush technology
176
Submarine composite sail
176
Joint command and control ship
176
Shipboard simulators for Marine Corps operations
177
Navy common command and decision system
177
Advanced amphibious assault vehicle
178
Marine Corps ground combat/support system
178
Extended range guided munition
178
Nonlethal research and technology development
179
Navy collaborative integrated information technology initiative
179
Parametric airborne dipping sonar
179
Multi-mission helicopter upgrade development
180
Power node control centers
180
Ship manpower reduction initiative
180
SPY 3 and volume search radars
181
Acoustic rapid commercial-off-the-shelf insertion of multi-purpose
processor
181
Submarine antenna technology improvement
181
Submarine common architecture
182
Advanced tactical software for submarines
182
NULKA anti-ship missile decoy system
182
Navy single integrated human resources strategy
182
Marine Corps research university
183
Reentry system applications program
183
Joint tactical combat training system
183
14 tactical reconnaissance
183
Software interoperability process tools
184
Satellite communications systems integration initiative
184
Distributed engineering plant
184
Air Force
186
Laser processing tools
196
Resin systems for Air Force applications
196
Thermal protection systems
196
Aeronautical research
196
Polyphenylene benzobisoxozole membrane fuel cell
196
Variable displacement vane pump
197
High frequency active auroral research
197
Space survivability
197
Aluminum aerostructures
197
Hyperspectral research
197
Fiber optical control technology
197
Low cost launch technology
197
Micro-satellite technology
198
Miniature satellite threat reporting system
198
Next generation composite launch vehicle payload fairings and shrouds
198
Solar orbital transfer vehicle
198
Space maneuver vehicle
198
Upper stage flight experiment
198
Space Based Laser program
199
Airborne laser program
199
Rocket systems launch program
200
Wideband gapfiller military satellite communications
200
B 2 advanced technology bomber
200
Milstar satellite communications
200
15E squadrons
200
Hyperspectral system development
200
Extended range cruise missile
200
Joint surveillance and target attack radar system
201
Lighthouse cyber security
201
Dragon U 2
201
Defense-Wide
202
Advanced photonic composites research
211
Infrasound detection capability basic research
211
Personnel research initiative
211
Defense experimental program to stimulate competitive research
211
Chemical and biological defense basic research
211
Ballistic Missile Defense Organization funding and programmatic guidance
212
Bio-defense research
214
Hybrid sensor suite
214
High definition systems
214
Three dimensional structures research
215
Biological agent sensor technologies
215
Blast mitigation testing
215
Facial recognition access control technology
215
Chemical and Biological Incident Response Force detector technologies
215
Consequence Management Information System
216
Reactive materials
216
Complex systems design
216
Competitive sustainment initiative
216
Weapons of Mass Destruction (WMD) Attack-Effects-Response Assessment
capability at U.S. Joint Forces Command (USJFCOM)
217
Integrated data environment technology
217
Demonstration/validation of technology for the remediation of
unexploded ordnance at active, inactive, closing, transferred, and
transferring ranges
217
Next generation anthrax vaccine
218
Remote Ordnance Neutralization System
218
Cyber attack sensing and warning
218
Information Operations Technology Center
218
Trusted RUBIX
218
Virtual worlds initiative
218
Intelligent spatial technologies for smart mapping systems
219
Joint Mapping Tool Kit
219
Information assurance testbed
219
Joint course of action analysis and targeting support for information
operations
219
Advanced lightweight grenade launcher
219
Management reform for Department of Defense test and evaluation centers
220
Augmented reality fire-fighting training
221
Other Items of Interest
221
Aircraft carrier modernization
221
Advanced ship hull demonstrators
221
Crusader
222
Future ship technology research and development
222
Joint training and experimentation
223
Joint operational test bed system
224
Maritime patrol aircraft
224
Patriot theater missile defense
224
Prophylactic pharmaceuticals
225
Radiation hardened electronics investment strategy
225
Small arms fire control system
226
Transition of successful research projects into the acquisition system
226
Title III--Operation And Maintenance
227
Explanation of tables
227
Subtitle A--Authorization of Appropriations
228
Armed Forces Retirement Home (sec. 303)
261
Subtitle B--Program Requirements, Restrictions, and
Limitations
261
Impact aid for children with disabilities (sec. 311)
261
Joint Warfighting Capabilities Assessment Teams (sec. 312)
261
Subtitle C--Humanitarian and Civic Assistance
261
Increased authority to provide health care services as humanitarian
and civic assistance (sec. 321)
261
Use of humanitarian and civic assistance funding for pay and
allowances of special operations command reserves furnishing demining
training and related assistance as humanitarian assistance (sec. 322)
262
Subtitle D--Department of Defense Industrial Facilities
262
Codification and improvement of armament retooling and manufacturing
support programs (sec. 331)
263
Centers of industrial and technical excellence (sec. 332)
263
Effects of outsourcing on overhead costs of centers of industrial and
technical excellence and ammunition plants (sec. 333)
264
Revision of authority to waive limitation on performance of
depot-level maintenance (sec. 334)
264
Subtitle E--Environmental Provisions
265
Environmental restoration accounts (sec. 341)
265
Payments of fines and penalties for environmental compliance
violations (sec. 342)
265
Annual reports under Strategic Environmental Research and Development
Program (sec. 343)
267
Modification of authority for indemnification of transferees of
closing defense property (sec. 344)
267
Payment of fines or penalties imposed for environmental compliance
violations at certain Department of Defense facilities (sec. 345)
267
Reimbursement for certain costs in connection with the former
Nansemond Ordnance Depot Site, Suffolk, Virginia (sec. 346)
268
Environmental restoration activities (sec. 347)
268
Ship disposal project (sec. 348)
269
Report on the Defense Environmental Security Corporate Information
Management Program (sec. 349)
269
Report on Plasma Energy Pyrolysis System (sec. 350)
269
Subtitle F--Other Matters
269
Effects of worldwide contingency operations on readiness of certain
military aircraft and equipment (sec. 361)
269
Realistic budgeting for readiness requirements of the Army (sec. 362)
270
Additions to plan for ensuring visibility over all in-transit end
items and secondary items (sec. 363)
270
Performance of emergency response functions at chemical weapons
storage installations (sec. 364)
271
Congressional notification of use of radio frequency spectrum by a
system entering engineering and manufacturing development (sec. 365)
271
Monitoring of value of performance of Department of Defense functions
by workforces selected from between public and private workforces (sec.
366)
272
Suspension of reorganization of naval audit service (sec. 367)
272
Investment of commissary trust revolving fund (sec. 368)
272
Economic procurement of distilled spirits (sec. 369)
272
Resale of armor piercing ammunition disposed of by the Army (sec. 370)
273
Damage to aviation facilities caused by alkali silica reactivity
(sec. 371)
273
Reauthorization of pilot program for acceptance and use of landing
fees charged for use of domestic military airfields by civil aircraft
(sec. 372)
273
Reimbursement by civil air carriers for support provided at Johnston
Atoll (sec. 373)
273
Review of costs of maintaining historical properties (sec. 374)
273
Extension of authority to sell certain aircraft for use in wildfire
suppression (sec. 375)
274
Overseas airlift service on Civil Reserve Air Fleet aircraft (sec. 376)
274
Additional Matters of Interest
275
Army
275
Real property maintenance
275
Excess carryover-defense working capital fund activities
275
Foreign currency fluctuation
276
Civilian personnel pay in excess of requirements
276
Army equipment maintenance
277
Battlefield mobility enhancement system
277
Army aviation spares
277
Adjustments to Junior Reserve Officers Training Corps
277
Navy
277
Navy spares
277
Ship depot maintenance
278
Oceanography
278
Training range upgrades
278
Adjustments to Junior Reserve Officers Training Corps
278
Navy information technology center
278
US Navy Call Center
279
Marine Corps
279
USMC initial issue
279
USMC equipment maintenance
279
Adjustments to Junior Reserve Officers Training Corps
279
Air Force
280
Air Force base operations
280
Adjustments to Junior Reserve Officers Training Corps
280
Air Force readiness spares packages
280
Air Force nuclear, biological and chemical defense
280
Defense-Wide
281
Mobility enhancements
281
Mechanization of Contract Administration Service (MOCAS)
281
Partnership for Peace Program (Warsaw Initiative)
281
Defense Environmental Security Corporate Information Management Program
282
Domestic preparedness center
282
Cultural and historic activities
282
Defense Travel System
283
Command information superiority architecture program
283
Guard and Reserve Components
284
Air Force Reserve equipment maintenance
284
National Guard initial issue
284
Distributed mission trainer
284
Miscellaneous
284
Overseas humanitarian, disaster, and civic affairs
284
Other Items of Interest
285
Charlestown Naval Auxiliary Landing Field, Charlestown, Rhode Island
285
Commander-in-Chiefs Initiative Fund
286
Inventory of financial management and feeder systems
286
Joint computer-aided acquisition and logistics support (JCALS) program
287
Mechanization of Contract Administration Service
287
National Defense Center for Environmental Excellence
287
Pesticide contamination at the former Fort Devens, Devens,
Massachusetts, and other closed and active military installations
288
Revised requirements for report on Defense use of smart card as PKI
authentication device carrier
289
Title IV--Military Personnel Authorizations
291
Subtitle A--Active Forces
291
End strengths for active forces (sec. 401)
291
Subtitle B--Reserve Forces
291
End strengths for Selected Reserve (sec. 411)
291
End strengths for reserves on active duty in support of the reserves
(sec. 412)
292
End strengths for military technicians (dual status) (sec. 413)
292
Fiscal year 2001 limitation on non-dual status technicians (sec. 414)
292
Increase in number of members in certain grades authorized to be on
active duty in support of the reserves (sec. 415)
293
Subtitle C--Other Matters Relating to Personnel
Strengths
293
Suspension of strength limitations during war or national emergency
(sec. 421)
293
Exclusion of certain reserve component members on active duty for
more than 180 days from active component end strengths (sec. 422)
293
Exclusion of Army and Air Force medical and dental officers from
limitations on strengths of reserve commissioned officers in grades
below brigadier general (sec. 423)
293
Authority for temporary increases in number of reserve personnel
serving on active duty or full-time National Guard duty in certain
grades (sec. 424)
293
Temporary exemption of Director of the National Security Agency from
limitations on number of Air Force officers above major general (sec.
425)
293
Subtitle D--Authorization of Appropriations
294
Authorization of appropriations for military personnel (sec. 431)
294
Title V--Military Personnel Policy
295
Subtitle A--Officer Personnel Policy
295
Eligibility of Army Reserve colonels and brigadier generals for
position vacancy promotions (sec. 501)
295
Promotion Zones for Coast Guard Reserve Officers (sec. 502)
295
Time for release of officer promotion selection board reports (sec. 503)
295
Clarification of authority for posthumous commissions and warrants
(sec. 504)
295
Inapplicability of active-duty list promotion, separation, and
involuntary retirement authorities to reserve general and flag officers
serving in certain positions designated by the Chairman of the Joint
Chiefs of Staff (sec. 505)
295
Review of actions of selection boards (sec. 506)
296
Extension to all Air Force biomedical sciences officers of authority
to retain until specified age (sec. 507)
297
Termination of application requirement for consideration of officers
for continuation on the Reserve Active-Status List (sec. 508)
297
Technical corrections relating to retired grade of reserve
commissioned officers (sec. 509)
297
Grade of chiefs of reserve components and directors of National Guard
components (sec. 510)
297
Subtitle B--Joint Officer Management
298
Joint officer management (sec. 521--528)
298
Subtitle C--Education and Training
298
Eligibility of children of reserves for Presidential appointment to
service academies (sec. 541)
298
Selection of foreign students to receive instruction at service
academies (sec. 542)
298
Repeal of contingent funding increase for Junior Reserve Officers
Training Corps (sec. 543)
298
Revision of authority for Marine Corps platoon leader class tuition
assistance program (sec. 544)
298
Subtitle D--Matters Relating to Recruiting
299
Army recruiting pilot programs (sec. 551)
299
Enhancement of the joint and service recruitment market research and
advertising programs (sec. 552)
299
Access to secondary schools for military recruiting purposes (sec. 553)
299
Subtitle E--Other Matters
300
Authority for award of Medal of Honor to certain specified persons
(sec. 561)
300
Waiver of time limitations for award of certain decorations to
certain persons (sec. 562)
300
Ineligibility for involuntary separation pay upon declination of
selection for continuation on active duty (sec. 563)
300
Recognition by states of military testamentary instruments (sec. 564)
300
Sense of Congress on the court-martial conviction of Captain Charles
Butler McVay, Commander of the USS Indianapolis, and the courageous
service of its crew (sec. 565)
301
Other Items of Interest
301
Automated in- and out-processing of military personnel
301
Funeral honors for members of the uniformed services
302
Information related to alternatives to the Survivor Benefit Plan
302
Prevention of alcohol-related incidents
302
Study on the use of peyote by military personnel
303
Title VI--Compensation and Other Personnel Benefits
305
Subtitle A--Pay and Allowances
305
Increase in basic pay for Fiscal Year 2001 (sec. 601)
305
Corrections for basic pay tables (sec. 602)
305
Pay in lieu of allowance for funeral honors duty (sec. 603)
305
Clarification of service excluded in computation of creditable
service as a Marine Corps officer (sec. 604)
305
Calculation of Basic Allowance for Housing (sec. 605)
305
Eligibility of members in grade E 4 to receive basic allowance for
housing while on sea duty (sec. 606)
306
Personal money allowance for the senior enlisted members of the armed
forces (sec. 607)
306
Increased uniform allowances for officers (sec. 608)
306
Cabinet-level authority to prescribe requirements and allowance for
clothing of enlisted members (sec. 609)
306
Subtitle B--Bonuses and Special Incentive Pays
306
Extension of certain bonuses and special pay authorities for reserve
forces (sec. 611)
306
Extension of certain bonuses and special pay authorities for nurse
officer candidates, registered nurses, and nurse anesthetists (sec. 612)
307
Extension of authorities relating to payment of other bonuses and
special pays (sec. 613)
307
Consistency of authorities for special pay for reserve medical and
dental officers (sec. 614)
307
Special pay for physician assistants of the Coast Guard (sec. 615)
307
Authorization of special pay and accession bonus for pharmacy
officers (sec. 616)
307
Corrections of references to Air Force veterinarians (sec. 617)
307
Entitlement of active duty officers of the Public Health Service
Corps to special pays and bonuses of health professional officers of the
armed forces (sec. 618)
308
Career sea pay (sec. 619)
308
Increased maximum rate of special duty pay assignment pay (sec. 620)
308
Expansion of applicability of authority for critical skills
enlistment bonus to include all armed forces (sec. 621)
308
Subtitle C--Travel and Transportation Allowances
308
Advance payments for temporary lodging of members and dependents
(sec. 631)
308
Incentive for shipping and storing household goods in less than
average weights (sec. 632)
309
Expansion of funded student travel (sec. 633)
309
Benefits for members not transporting personal motor vehicles
overseas (sec. 634)
309
Subtitle D--Retirement Benefits
309
Exception to high-36 month retired pay computation for members
retired following a disciplinary reduction in grade (sec. 641)
309
Automatic participation in Reserve Component Survivor Benefit Plan
unless declined with spouses' consent (sec. 642)
309
Participation in thrift savings plan (sec. 643)
310
Retirement from active reserve service after regular retirement (sec.
644)
310
Same treatment for federal judges as for other federal officials
regarding payment of military retired pay (sec. 645)
310
Subtitle E--Other Matters
310
Reimbursement of recruiting and ROTC personnel for parking expenses
(sec. 651)
310
Extension of deadline for filing claims associated with capture and
internment of certain persons by North Vietnam (sec. 652)
311
Settlement of claims for payments for unused accrued leave and for
retired pay (sec. 653)
311
Eligibility of certain members of the Individual Ready Reserve for
Servicemembers' Group Life Insurance (sec. 654)
311
Authority to pay gratuity to certain veterans of Bataan and
Corregidor (sec. 655)
311
Other Items of Interest
311
Adjustments to the Basic Allowance for Housing
311
Title VII--Health Care
313
Subtitle A--Senior Health Care
313
Extension of TRICARE senior supplement demonstration program (sec. 701)
313
TRICARE senior prime demonstration program (sec. 702)
313
Extension and expansion of demonstration project for participation of
uniformed services personnel in the Federal Employee Health Benefit
program (sec. 703)
313
Implementation of redesigned pharmacy system (sec. 704)
MDBU314
Subtitle B--TRICARE Program
MDBU314
Additional beneficiaries under TRICARE prime remote program in CONUS
(sec. 711)
MDBU314
Elimination of copayments for immediate family (sec. 712)
MDBU314
Improvement in business practices in the administration of the
TRICARE program (sec. 713)
MDBU314
Subtitle C--joint Initiatives With Department of
Veterans Affairs
MDBU315
Tracking patient safety in military and veterans health care systems
(sec. 721)
MDBU315
Pharmaceutical identification technology (sec. 722)
MDBU315
Medical informatics (sec. 723)
MDBU315
Subtitle D--other Matters
MDBU315
Permanent authority for certain pharmaceutical benefits (sec. 731)
MDBU315
Provision of domiciliary and custodial care for CHAMPUS beneficiaries
(sec. 732)
Medical and dental care for medal of honor recipients and their
dependents (sec. 733)
MDBU316
School-required physical examinations for certain minor dependents
(sec. 734)
MDBU316
Two-year extension of dental and medical benefits for surviving
dependents of certain deceased members (sec. 735)
MDBU316
Extension of authority for contracts for medical services at
locations outside medical treatment facilities (sec. 736)
MDBU317
Transition of chiropractic health care demonstration program to
permanent status (sec. 737)
MDBU317
Use of information technology for enhancement of delivery of
administrative services under the Defense Health Program (sec. 738)
MDBU317
Patient care reporting and management system (sec. 739)
MDBU318
Health care management demonstration program (sec. 740)
MDBU318
Studies of accrual financing for health care for military retirees
(sec. 741)
MDBU318
Augmentation of Army Medical Department by reserve officers of the
Public Health Service Corps (sec. 742)
MDBU318
Other Items of Interest
MDBU319
Consultation with schools of pharmacy and nursing
MDBU319
Financial assistance for those beneficiaries requiring animal assistance
MDBU319
Health care benefits for retirees living overseas
MDBU319
Implementation of Department of Defense and Veterans Affairs
Department sharing initiatives
MDBU319
Notification of persons affected by unanticipated adverse outcomes of
medical care
MDBU320
Special pays for military health care professionals
MDBU320
Title VIII--Acquisition Policy, Acquisition Management, and
MDBURelated Matters
MDBU321
Improvements in procurements of services (sec. 801)
MDBU321
Addition of threshold value requirement for applicability of a
reporting requirement relating to multiyear contract (sec. 802)
MDBU322
Planning for the acquisition of information systems (sec. 803)
MDBU322
Tracking of information technology purchases (sec. 804)
MDBU322
Repeal of requirement for contractor assurances regarding the
completeness, accuracy, and contractual sufficiency of technical data
provided by contractor (sec. 805)
MDBU323
Extension of authority for Department of Defense acquisition pilot
programs (sec. 806)
MDBU324
Clarification and extension of authority to carry out certain
prototype projects (sec. 807)
MDBU324
Clarification of authority of Comptroller General to review records
of participants in certain prototype projects (sec. 808)
MDBU325
Eligibility of small business concerns owned and controlled by women
for assistance under the mentor-prote AE1ge AE1 program (sec. 809)
MDBU325
Navy-Marine Corps Intranet (sec. 810)
MDBU325
Qualifications required for employment and assignment in contracting
positions (sec. 811)
MDBU326
Defense acquisition workforce (sec. 812)
MDBU327
Financial analysis of use of dual rate for quantifying overhead costs
at army industrial facilities (sec. 813)
MDBU328
Other Items of Interest
MDBU328
Application of Cost Accounting Standards to universities
MDBU328
Appropriate use of the government purchase card
MDBU329
Availability of contractor past performance information
MDBU329
Contracts for ancillary commercial services
MDBU330
Online auctioning
MDBU330
Performance goals and measures for quality of equipment and other
products
330
Polyacrylonitrile carbon fibers
331
Procurements from the small arms production industrial base
332
Risk management in the acquisition of major systems
332
Technical data rights for items developed exclusively at private expense
333
Title IX--Department of Defense Organization and Management
335
Repeal of limitation on major Department of Defense headquarters
activities personnel (sec. 901)
335
Overall supervision of Department of Defense activities for combating
terrorism (sec. 902)
335
National Defense Panel 2001 (sec. 903)
336
Quadrennial National Defense Panel (sec. 904)
337
Inspector General investigations of prohibited personnel actions
(sec. 905)
337
Network centric warfare (sec. 906)
338
Additional duties for the Commission to Assess United States National
Security Space Management and Organization (sec. 907)
340
Special authority for administration of Navy Fisher Houses (sec. 908)
340
Organization and management of the Civil Air Patrol (sec. 909)
340
Responsibility for the National Guard Challenge Program (sec. 910)
340
Supervisory control of Armed Forces Retirement Home Board by
Secretary of Defense (sec. 911)
340
Consolidation of certain Navy gift funds (sec. 912)
341
Temporary authority to dispose of a gift previously accepted for the
Naval Academy (sec. 913)
341
Title X--General Provisions
343
Subtitle A--Financial Matters
343
Authorization of prior emergency supplemental appropriations for
fiscal year 2000 (sec. 1002)
343
United States contributions to NATO common-funded budgets (sec. 1003)
343
Annual OMB/CBO joint report on scoring budget outlays (sec. 1004)
343
Prompt payment of contractor vouchers (sec. 1005)
343
The repeal of certain requirements relating to timing of contract
payments (sec. 1006)
344
Plan for prompt posting of contractual obligations (sec. 1007)
344
Plan for the electronic submission of documentation supporting claims
for contract payments (sec. 1008)
344
Administrative offsets for overpayment of transportation costs (sec.
1009)
344
Subtitle B--Counter-Drug Activities
344
Extension and increase of authority to provide additional support for
counter-drug activities (sec. 1011)
345
Recommendations on expansion of support for counter-drug activities
(sec. 1012)
345
Review of riverine counter-drug program (sec. 1013)
346
Subtitle C--Strategic Forces
347
Revised nuclear posture review (sec. 1015)
347
Plan for the long-term sustainment and modernization of United States
strategic nuclear forces (sec. 1016)
348
Correction of scope of waiver authority for limitation on retirement
or dismantlement of strategic nuclear delivery vehicles (sec. 1017)
348
Study and report on hardened and deeply buried targets (sec. 1018)
348
Subtitle D--Miscellaneous Reporting Requirements
349
Annual report of the chairman of the joint chiefs of staff on
combatant command requirements (sec. 1021)
349
Joint Requirements Oversight Council (sec. 1022)
349
Preparedness of military installation first responders for incidents
involving weapons of mass destruction (sec. 1023)
350
Date of submittal of reports on shortfalls in equipment procurement
and military construction for reserve components in future years defense
programs (sec. 1024)
351
Management review of defense logistics agency (sec. 1025)
351
Management review of defense information systems agency (sec. 1026)
352
Subtitle E--Information Security
352
Institute for defense computer security and information protection
(sec. 1041)
352
Information security scholarship program (sec. 1042)
353
Process for prioritizing background investigations for security
clearances for Department of Defense personnel (sec. 1043)
354
Authority to withhold certain sensitive information from public
disclosure (sec. 1044)
355
Protection of operational files of the Defense Intelligence Agency
(sec. 1045)
356
Subtitle F--Other Matters
356
Commemoration of the fiftieth anniversary of the Uniform Code of
Military Justice (sec. 1051)
356
Eligibility of dependents of American Red Cross employees for
enrollment in Department of Defense Domestic Dependent Schools in Puerto
Rico (sec. 1053)
356
Grants to American Red Cross for Armed Services Emergency Services
(sec. 1054)
356
Transit pass program for certain Department of Defense personnel
(sec. 1055)
356
Fees for providing historical information to the public (sec. 1056)
357
Access to criminal history record information for national security
purposes (sec. 1057)
357
Sense of Congress on the naming of the CVN 77 aircraft carrier (sec.
1058)
357
Donation of civil war cannon (sec. 1059)
358
Maximum size of parcel posts transported overseas for Armed Forces
Post Offices (sec. 1060)
358
Other Items of Interest
358
Department of Defense export control procedures
358
Firefighting equipment
358
Peacekeeper intercontinental ballistic missile
359
Title XI--Department of Defense Civilian Personnel Policy
361
Computer/electronic accommodations program (sec. 1101)
361
Additional special pay for foreign language proficiency beneficial
for United States national security interests (sec. 1102)
361
Increased number of positions authorized for the defense intelligence
senior executive service (sec. 1103)
361
Extension of authority for tuition reimbursement and training for
acquisition personnel in shortage categories (sec. 1104)
361
Work safety demonstration program (sec. 1105)
361
Employment and compensation of employees for temporary organizations
established by law or executive order (sec. 1106)
362
Extension of authority for voluntary separations in reductions in
force (sec. 1107)
362
Electronic maintenance of performance appraisal systems (sec. 1108)
362
Approval authority for cash awards in excess of $10,000 (sec. 1109)
362
Leave for crews of certain vessels (sec. 1110)
362
Life insurance for emergency essential Department of Defense
employees (sec. 1111)
363
Civilian personnel services public-private competition pilot program
(sec. 1112)
363
Extension, expansion, and revision of authority for experimental
personnel program for scientific and technical personnel (sec. 1113)
363
Title XII--Matters Relating to Other Nations
365
Transfers of naval vessels to foreign countries (sec. 1201)
365
Support of United Nations-sponsored efforts to inspect and monitor
Iraqi weapons activities (sec. 1202)
365
Repeal of restriction preventing cooperative airlift support through
acquisition and cross servicing agreements (sec.1203)
366
Western Hemisphere Institute for Professional Education and Training
(sec. 1204)
366
Biannual report on Kosovo peacekeeping (sec. 1205)
366
Mutual assistance for monitoring test explosions of nuclear devices
(sec. 1206)
367
Consolidated annual report on Cooperative Threat Reduction assistance
and activities (sec. 1207)
368
Limitation on use of funds for construction of a Russian facility for
the destruction of chemical weapons (sec. 1208)
368
Limitation on the use of funds for the Elimination of Weapons Grade
Plutonium Program (sec. 1209)
368
Title XIII--Navy Activities on the Island of Vieques, Puerto Rico
371
Navy activities on the island of Vieques, Puerto Rico (secs. 1301 1308)
371
Division B--Military Construction Authorizations
373
Title XXI--Army
393
Summary
393
Authorized Army construction and land acquisition projects (sec. 2101)
393
Family housing (sec. 2102)
393
Improvement to military family housing units (sec. 2103)
393
Authorization of appropriations, Army (sec. 2104)
393
Modification of authority to carry out certain fiscal year 2000
projects (sec. 2105)
394
Modification of authority to carry out certain fiscal year 1999
project (sec. 2106)
394
Modification of authority to carry out fiscal year 1998 project (sec.
2107)
394
Authority to accept funds for realignment of certain military
construction project, Fort Campbell, Kentucky (sec. 2108)
394
Other Items of Interest
395
Presidio Housing, Golden Gate National Recreation Area, San
Francisco, California
395
Title XXII--Navy
397
Summary
397
Authorized Navy construction and land acquisition projects (sec. 2201)
397
Family housing (sec. 2202)
397
Improvements to military family housing units (sec. 2203)
397
Authorization of appropriations, Navy (sec. 2204)
397
Correction in authorized use of funds, Marine Corps Combat
Development Command, Quantico, Virginia (sec. 2205)
397
Title XXIII--Air Force
399
Summary
399
Authorized Air Force construction and land acquisition projects (sec.
2301)
399
Family housing (sec. 2302)
399
Improvements to military family housing units (sec. 2303)
399
Authorization of appropriations, Air Force (sec. 2304)
399
Title XXIV--Defense Agencies
401
Summary
401
Authorized Defense Agencies construction and land acquisition
projects (sec. 2401)
401
Energy conservation projects (sec. 2402)
401
Authorization of appropriations, Defense Agencies (sec. 2403)
401
Other Items of Interest
401
Certification of requirement for military construction projects,
Manta Air Base, Ecuador
401
Planning and design, Defense Intelligence Agency
402
Title XXV--North Atlantic Treaty Organization Security
403
Summary
403
Authorized NATO construction and land acquisition projects (sec. 2501)
403
Authorization of appropriations, NATO (sec. 2502)
403
Title XXVI--Guard and Reserve Forces Facilities
405
Summary
405
Authorized Guard and Reserve construction and land acquisition
projects (sec. 2601)
405
Other Items of Interest
405
Support for Weapons of Mass Destruction Civil Support Teams
405
Title XXVII--Expiration and Extension of Authorizations
407
Expiration of authorizations and amounts required to be specified by
law (sec. 2701)
407
Extensions of authorizations of certain fiscal year 1998 projects
(sec. 2702)
407
Extensions of authorizations of certain fiscal year 1997 projects
(sec. 2703)
407
Effective date (sec. 2704)
407
Title XXVIII--General Provisions
409
Subtitle A--Military Construction Program and
Military Family Housing Changes
409
Joint use military construction projects (sec. 2801)
409
Exclusion of certain costs from determination of applicability of
limitation on use of funds for improvement of family housing (sec. 2802)
409
Replacement of limitations on space by pay grade of military family
housing with requirement for local comparability of military family
housing (sec. 2803)
409
Modification of lease authority for high-cost military family housing
(sec. 2804)
410
Applicability of competitive policy to alternative authority for
acquisition and improvement of military housing (sec. 2805)
410
Provisions of utilities and services under alternative authority for
acquisition and improvement of military housing (sec. 2806)
410
Extension of alternative authority for acquisition and improvement of
military housing (sec. 2807)
411
Inclusion of readiness center in definition of armory for purposes of
construction of reserve components facilities (sec. 2808)
411
Subtitle B--Real Property and Facilities Administration
411
Increase in threshold for reports to Congress on real property
transactions (sec. 2811)
411
Enhancements to military lease authority ( sec. 2812)
411
Expansion of procedures for selection of conveyees under authority to
convey utility systems (sec. 2813)
412
Subtitle C--Defense Base Closure and Realignment
413
Scope of agreements to transfer property to redevelopment authorities
without consideration under the base closure laws (sec. 2821)
413
Subtitle D--Land Conveyances
413
Part I--Army Conveyances
413
Land conveyance, Charles Melvin Price Support Center, Illinois (sec.
2831)
413
Land conveyance, Lieutenant General Malcolm Hay, Army Reserve Center,
Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania (sec. 2832)
414
Land conveyance, Colonel Harold E. Steele, Army Reserve Center and
Maintenance Shop, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania (sec. 2833)
414
Land conveyance, Fort Lawton, Washington (sec. 2834)
414
Land conveyance, Vancouver Barracks, Washington (sec. 2835)
414
Part II--Navy Conveyances
415
Modification of land conveyance, Marine Corps Air Station, El Toro,
California (sec. 2851)
415
Modification of land conveyance, Defense Fuel Supply Point, Casco
Bay, Maine (sec. 2852)
415
Modification of land conveyance authority, former Navy Training
Center, Bainbridge, Cecil County, Maryland (sec. 2853)
415
Land conveyance, Naval Computer and Telecommunications Station,
Cutler, Maine (sec. 2854)
415
Part III--Defense Agencies Conveyance
415
Land conveyance, Army and Air Force Exchange Service property,
Farmers Branch, Texas (sec. 2871)
415
Subtitle E--Other Matters
416
Naming of the Army missile testing range at Kwajalein Atoll as the
Ronald Reagan Ballistic Missile Defense Test Site at Kwajalein Atoll
(sec. 2881)
416
Other Items of Interest
416
Report on Naval Foundry and Propeller Center, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania
416
Report on requirement for Education Center at Fort Stewart, Georgia
417
Study on commercial leases
417
Study regarding the location of the National Museum of the United
States Army
417
Division C--Department of Energy National Security Authorizations and
Other Authorizations
419
Title XXXI--Department of Energy National Security Programs
419
Atomic energy defense activities
419
Subtitle A--National Security Programs Authorizations
421
National Nuclear Security Administration (sec. 3101)
434
Defense environmental restoration and waste management (sec. 3102)
438
Other defense activities (sec. 3103)
441
Defense environmental management privatization (sec. 3104)
443
Energy employees compensation initiative (sec. 3105)
443
Defense nuclear waste disposal (sec. 3106)
443
Subtitle B--Recurring General Provisions
444
Reprogramming (sec. 3121)
444
Limits on general plant projects (sec. 3122)
444
Limits on construction projects (sec. 3123)
444
Fund transfer authority (sec. 3124)
444
Authority for conceptual and construction design (sec. 3125)
444
Authority for emergency planning, design, and construction activities
(sec. 3126)
445
Funds available for all national security programs of the Department
of Energy (sec. 3127)
445
Availability of funds (sec. 3128)
445
Transfer of defense environmental management funds (sec. 3129)
445
Subtitle C--National Nuclear Security Administration
445
Term of Office of person first appointed as Under Secretary for
Nuclear Security of the Department of Energy (sec. 3031)
445
Membership of Under Secretary for Nuclear Security on the Joint
Nuclear Weapons Council (sec. 3132)
446
Scope of authority of Secretary of Energy to modify organization of
National Nuclear Security Administration (sec. 3133)
446
Prohibition on pay of personnel engaged in concurrent service or
duties inside and outside National Nuclear Security Administration (sec.
3134)
446
Organization plan for field offices of the National Nuclear Security
Administration (sec. 3135)
446
Future-years nuclear security program (sec. 3136)
447
Cooperative research and development of the National Nuclear Security
Administration (sec. 3137)
447
Subtitle D--Program Authorizations, Restrictions,
and Limitations
448
Processing, treatment, and disposition of legacy nuclear materials
(sec. 3151)
448
Formerly Utilized Sites Remedial Action Program (sec. 3152)
448
Department of Energy Defense Nuclear Nonproliferation Program (sec.
3153)
448
Modification of counterintelligence polygraph program (sec. 3154)
453
Employee incentives for employees at closure project facilities (sec.
3155)
453
Subtitle E--Other Matters
454
Extension of authority for appointment of certain scientific,
engineering, and technical personnel (sec. 3171)
454
Updates of report on nuclear test readiness postures (sec. 3172)
454
Frequency of reports on inadvertent releases of restricted data and
formerly restricted data (sec. 3173)
454
Form of certifications regarding the safety or reliability of the
nuclear weapons stockpile (sec. 3174)
455
Engineering and manufacturing research, development and demonstration
by plant managers of certain nuclear weapons production plants (sec.
3175)
455
Cooperative research and development agreements for government-owned,
government-operated laboratories (sec. 3176)
455
Commendation of Department of Energy and contractor employees for
Exemplary Service in Stockpile Stewardship and Security (sec. 3177)
456
Other Items of Interest
456
Department of Energy participation in the Interstate Technology
Reciprocity Council
456
Laboratory directed research and development
456
Report on Post-closure employee benefits at closure project facilities
457
Title XXXII--Defense Nuclear Facilities Safety Board
459
Defense Nuclear Facilities Safety Board (sec. 3201)
459
Title XXXIII--Naval Petroleum Reserves
461
Minimum price of petroleum sold from the naval petroleum reserves
(sec. 3301)
461
Repeal of authority to contract for cooperative or unit plans
affecting Naval Petroleum Reserve Numbered 1 (sec. 3302)
461
Title XXXIV--National Defense Stockpile
463
National defense stockpile (secs. 3401 3402)
463
Legislative Requirements
463
Departmental Recommendations
463
Committee Action
463
Congressional Budget Office Cost Estimate
463
Regulatory Impact
463
Changes in Existing Law
464
Additional Views of Senators Levin, Kennedy, Bingaman, Robb, Landrieu
and Reed
465
Additional Views of Senator Bingaman
468
Minority Views of Senator McCain
471
64 303
106 th Congress
Report
SENATE
2d Session
106 292
AUTHORIZING APPROPRIATIONS FOR FISCAL YEAR 2001 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
May 12, 2000.--Ordered to be printed
Filed under authority of the order of the Senate of May 11, 2000
Mr. Warner , from the Committee on Armed Services, submitted the
following
REPORT
together with
ADDITIONAL AND MINORITY VIEWS
[To accompany S. 2549]
The Committee on Armed Services reports favorably an original bill to
authorize appropriations during the fiscal year 2001 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 2001;
(2) authorize the personnel end strengths for each military active
duty component of the armed forces for fiscal year 2001;
(3) authorize the personnel end strengths for the Selected Reserve
of each of the reserve components of the armed forces for fiscal year
2001;
(4) impose certain reporting requirements;
(5) 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;
(6) authorize appropriations for military construction programs of
the Department of Defense for fiscal year 2001; and
(7) authorize appropriations for national security programs of the
Department of Energy for fiscal year 2001.
Committee overview and recommendations
The national security challenges that the United States will face in
the new millennium are many and diverse--new adversaries, new
battlefields, and new weapons. It is important that we remain vigilant,
forward thinking, and prepared to address these challenges.
While the Department of Defense (DOD) must plan and allocate
resources to meet future threats, ongoing military operations and
deployments from the Balkans to Southwest Asia to East Timor continue to
demand significant resources in the short term and the foreseeable
future. The National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2001
provides funding guidelines and policy directives which will allocate
some of the most critical readiness, modernization, and recruiting and
retention problems facing our military, while addressing complex current
and future challenges and threats to the nation's security.
For over a decade, our defense budget has been based on constrained
funding, not on the threats facing the nation or the military strategy
necessary to meet those threats. The result of this is evident today in
continuing recruiting and retention difficulties, declining readiness
ratings, and aging equipment.
Last year, the Congress reversed the downward trend in defense
spending by approving a defense authorization bill which, for the first
time in 14 years, included a real increase in the authorized level of
defense spending. This year, the committee continued the momentum
initiated last year by authorizing $309.8 billion for defense spending
for fiscal year 2001, an increase of $4.5 billion over the budget
request, and a real increase of 4.4 percent.
The committee's support for additional funding for defense is based
on an in-depth analysis of the threats facing U.S. interests, and
testimony from senior military leaders on the many shortfalls in the
defense budget.
It is evident that the world remains a complex and violent place. The
greatest threat to our national security today is instability;
instability fueled by ethnic, religious, and racial animosities that
have existed for centuries, but are now resulting in conflicts fought
with the weapons of modern warfare. Many have turned to the United
States, as the sole remaining superpower, to resolve the many conflicts
around the world and to ensure stability in the future. However, this
military power does not ensure our security. As Director of Central
Intelligence George Tenet told the committee in January, ``The fact that
we are arguably the world's most powerful nation does not bestow
invulnerability; in fact, it may make us a larger target for those who
don't share our interest, values, or beliefs.''
U.S. military forces are involved in overseas deployments at an
unprecedented rate. Currently, our troops are involved in over 10
contingency operations around the globe. At an October 1999 hearing of
the Committee, the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, General Hugh
Shelton, stated that, ``Two factors that erode military readiness are
the pace of operations and funding shortfalls. There is no doubt that
the force is much smaller than it was a decade ago, and also much
busier.'' Over the past decade, our active duty manpower has been
reduced by nearly a third, active Army divisions have been reduced by
almost 50 percent, and the number of Navy ships has been reduced from
567 to 316. During this same period, our troops have been involved in 50
military operations worldwide. By comparison, from the end of the
Vietnam War in 1975 until 1989, U.S. military forces were engaged in
only 20 such military deployments.
The fiscal year 2001 defense budget submitted by the administration
was a positive development. Encouraging elements of the plan included
full funding of the pay raise as directed by Congress last year,
achieving the procurement goal of $60.0 billion a year, and initiatives
to improve military health care. After careful examination, however, it
was clear that many shortfalls remained that required action by the
committee.
The Joint Chiefs of Staff have testified that they have a remaining
shortfall in funding of $9.0 billion for fiscal year 2000, a requirement
for an additional $15.5 billion above the budget request to meet
shortfalls in readiness and modernization for fiscal year 2001, and a
requirement for an additional $85.0 billion in the Future Years Defense
Program (FYDP). The committee has provided additional funding to meet
the most urgent requirements identified by the Joint Chiefs of Staff,
but remains troubled by the negative impact of the large number of
contingency operations on our smaller military force.
Unfortunately, there appears to be no end in sight for many of
these operations.
The high operations tempo of our armed forces has a negative impact
on recruiting and retention. Last year, the committee took action to
provide a pay raise and a package of retirement reforms and retention
incentives in an effort to recruit and retain highly qualified
personnel. The committee also took action to require intense senior
level management of the personnel tempo of the armed forces. The
committee has received testimony that these changes are having a
positive impact. This year the committee has focused on improving
military health care for our active duty and retired personnel and their
families.
The Secretary of Defense, the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs, and the
service chiefs have all highlighted the many problems associated with
implementing a user-friendly health care program for active duty service
members, military retirees, and their families. The committee strongly
supported initiatives that ensure our active duty personnel and their
families receive quality healthcare, and initiatives that begin to
fulfill our commitment to military retirees. These initiatives include
accelerating improvements in TRICARE, expanding TRICARE benefits to
families of military personnel serving in the remote locations,
increasing access to health care and providing pharmacy benefits for
military retirees, and expanding the longstanding cooperative
relationship between the DOD and the Department of Veterans' Affairs.
Last year, NATO conducted its first large-scale, offensive military
operation with the 78-day air war on behalf of Kosovo. The lessons
learned from that operation, addressed during a series of committee
hearings, highlighted not only shortfalls in weapon systems and
intelligence programs, but also the complexities of engaging in
coalition operations. As noted in the combined testimony of Operation
Allied Force commanders, General Wesley Clark, Admiral James Ellis, and
Lieutenant General Michael Short, the campaign ``. . . required (that)
we adapt (U.S.) military doctrine and strategy to strike a balance
between maintaining allied cohesion, striking key elements of the
Yugoslav armed forces, minimizing losses of allied aircraft, and
maintaining collateral damage.'' Of paramount concern to the committee
was applying the lessons learned from the air campaign over Kosovo to
ensure the future preparedness of the U.S. armed forces. The committee
added funding above the amount requested to address some of the most
essential lessons learned from Kosovo.
Over 38,000 combat sorties were conducted during the Kosovo air
campaign with no combat casualties. While the committee understands that
no military operation is without risk, limiting the risk to military
personnel is clearly an important goal. Every day, advances in
technologies such as computing and telecommunications are being
integrated into warfighting equipment.
The committee believes that the Defense Department must further
pursue these technological advances in an effort to provide advanced
warfighting capabilities, while at the same time limiting the risk to
military personnel. To this end, the committee directed the DOD to
aggressively develop and field unmanned combat systems in the air and on
the ground so that within 10 years, one-third of our operational deep
strike aircraft would be unmanned, and within 15 years, one-third of our
ground combat vehicles would be unmanned. The committee has provided an
additional $200.0 million for this initiative.
Personnel
This year the Personnel Subcommittee focused on some of the most
pressing issues facing the DOD and the military services. Recruiting and
retention, pay and compensation, personnel tempo, and health care are
identified in every survey, poll and informal gathering of soldiers,
sailors, airmen and Marines as the areas that affect decisions on
joining or continuing to serve in the armed forces. The committee
prioritized its efforts to address each of these issues.
When the Cold War ended and the nation began to reduce the active
forces, it became clear that the pressures caused by the reduction in
the number of medical personnel and facilities and the increase in
medical costs made it almost impossible for the military health care
system to meet its wartime missions, as well as fulfill its mission to
provide health care to the families of active duty personnel and retired
personnel and their families. As a result, in 1993 Congress directed the
DOD to take the bold step of implementing a nationwide managed care
system in which the DOD partnered with the private sector to deliver
health care. This system, known as TRICARE, is struggling with
implementation problems. The committee devoted a significant amount of
time and effort to examining TRICARE and determining how that system
might be improved and made more efficient and effective.
On February 23, 2000, a bipartisan group of Senators introduced S.
2087, the Military Health Care Improvement Act of 2000, to address the
most urgent medical needs of our active duty and retired personnel and
their families. In addition to providing for improvements in the TRICARE
program, this bill would provide, for the first time, an entitlement to
military health care for Medicare-eligible military retirees and their
families. The most significant benefit of this bill is a pharmacy
benefit for Medicare-eligible military retirees. The committee has
determined that access to prescription drugs is the single most critical
unmet need of Medicare-eligible military retirees.
The committee has incorporated the provisions of S. 2087 and
additional initiatives in this bill. The committee views this as only
the first step toward providing a comprehensive health care benefit to
all military health care system beneficiaries, including those who are
Medicare-eligible.
The Personnel Subcommittee has made recruiting and retention a
priority for each of the past three years. Despite efforts on behalf of
recruiters, military leaders, the Office of the Secretary of Defense and
the Congress, the disturbing trends of declining numbers and missed
goals in both recruiting and retention continue.
While last year's legislative initiatives have slowed the decline,
more needs to be done if we are to recruit and retain quality personnel
to defend the nation's vital interests around the world. Once these
young men and women have been trained in their military skills, it is
essential that the services retain these developing military leaders so
that we can benefit from their experience and use their abilities to
train those recruits who will follow.
The committee recognizes that if the services cannot man the force
with qualified, well-trained personnel, readiness will continue to
suffer. The committee believes that the proposals, resources and
policies recommended in this bill will assist the military services in
recruiting and retaining the numbers of quality personnel required to
meet the national military strategy.
Readiness and Management Support
Aging equipment, spare parts shortfalls, manning and experience gaps
continue to manifest themselves in terms of declining mission capable
rates and decreasing unit readiness ratings. According to the DOD
Quarterly Readiness Report to the Congress, October through December
1999, ``. . . the pace of contingency operations continues to stress the
readiness of certain segments of the force.'' Most troubling are
indications that problems are emerging in the readiness of forward
deployed and first-to-fight units.
During the past year, the committee focused on the readiness of the
armed forces to meet the challenges of today while preparing for those
of tomorrow. Maintaining a ready force is particularly difficult if
military personnel are not provided with sufficient opportunities to
receive the training necessary to perform their difficult missions. The
committee notes the prohibition of live-fire training by Atlantic fleet
units at Vieques is resulting in significant degradation of unit
readiness. Ensuring that our armed forces receive the
necessary training to make certain they have safe and successful
deployments continues to be one of the committee's highest priorities.
The committee is also concerned with continuing reports of readiness
problem as a result of the declining materiel condition of military
equipment, primarily due to shortfalls in spare parts and increasing
equipment age. The committee added significant resources to the defense
budget in previous fiscal years to ensure that the current inventory of
equipment was adequately maintained until the modernization programs
could provide sufficient replacements. Unfortunately, with the pace of
operations continuing to place strains on both maintenance personnel and
supply availability, the increased funding has not prevented declines in
materiel condition.
Military construction
Although the overall DOD request for fiscal year 2001 is more than
$11.0 billion higher than the previous year, neither military
construction nor family housing construction benefitted from this
increase. In fact, the military construction and family housing Request
is $400.0 million less than the administration's fiscal year 2000
incrementally funded military construction program, and $500.0 million
less than the amount authorized in fiscal year 2000.
One noteworthy shortfall is that the budget request for fiscal year
2001 did not include construction contingency funds which are critical
to correct design flaws or unforseen construction problems. In testimony
before the Subcommittee on Readiness and Management Support, service
officials stated that the elimination of the $128.0 million for
contingency construction will cause significant difficulty in executing
construction programs.
The committee is deeply disturbed that for two consecutive years the
Department has used budgetary gimmicks in funding the military
construction program. The committee urges the Department to refrain from
such practices in future years.
To correct the deficiencies in the budget request, the committee
recommends an increase of $430.0 million for military construction. The
focus of the additional funding is on quality of life projects and on
critical projects for the reserve components, whose construction
programs continue to be underfunded. In addition, the committee did
include contingency construction funding for each project the committee
added.
Emerging Threats and Capabilities
The Subcommittee on Emerging Threats and Capabilities continued to
provide an effective forum for highlighting such issues as the threat
posed by the proliferation of nuclear, chemical and biological weapons,
the ever increasing danger of terrorist attacks both in the United
States and overseas, the impact of narco-trafficking on U.S. national
security and regional stability, and the growing threat cyber-attacks on
the military's critical information infrastructure. The committee
continued its review and assessment of the Department's ability to
respond to these threats. The committee believes it is of the utmost
importance that the Department prepare for these and other emerging
threats through robust investments in technology and exploration of new
warfighting concepts.
Unfortunately, the terrorist threat to our citizens and service
members--both at home and abroad--shows no signs of diminishing. During
the weeks leading up to the millennium celebrations, numerous
individuals suspected of planning terrorist attacks directed against
U.S. citizens were arrested in the United States and abroad. With the
proliferation of weapons of mass destruction, the threat of a terrorist
attack with a chemical, biological or nuclear weapon is increasing at an
alarming rate. We, as a nation, must be prepared.
This committee will continue to play a leading role in ensuring that
the DOD is adequately funded and structured to perform its critical role
in the overall U.S. government's efforts to combat terrorism. Last year,
the committee conducted a comprehensive review of the Defense
Department's activities to combat terrorism, with the goal of making the
Department's efforts in this critical area more visible and better
organized; and of increasing the capabilities of DOD assets to assist in
the event of a terrorist attack on U.S. soil involving the use of a
weapon of mass destruction.
This year, the committee has taken action to build on last year's
efforts by assigning overall policy and budgeting oversight of the DOD
activities for combating terrorism to the assistant secretary of defense
for special operations and low-intensity conflict; and by adding funding
for the establishment of five new Weapons of Mass Destruction Civil
Support Teams to bring the total number of such teams to 32 by the end
of fiscal year 2001.
During the post-Cold War decade, the U.S. government has spent over
$4.7 billion in the former Soviet Union to reduce the threat posed by
the possible proliferation of weapons of mass destruction,
weapons-usable nuclear materials, and scientific expertise. After nearly
a decade of working in Russia and the other states of the former Soviet
Union on this effort, the committee believes it is important to review
what these programs have achieved. The committee is concerned that for
the significant investment made in some areas, the return in terms of
reducing the threat has been relatively small. For example, the General
Accounting Office (GAO) found that $481.2 million has been spent since
fiscal year 1993 on a program designed to secure weapons-usable nuclear
material in Russia and the states of the former Soviet Union, but only
seven percent of the total nuclear material identified as being at risk
has been secured. The committee is troubled by the progress achieved in
light of this significant investment.
In March 2000, the GAO testified that the costs associated with
achieving threat reduction will continue to remain high due to Russia's
inability to pay its share of the costs of these programs, Russia's
reluctance to provide the United States with needed access to its
sensitive facilities, and expanding program budget requirements. The
committee recommends several initiatives to obtain greater Russian
commitment and necessary access so that the programs will have a greater
chance of attaining their intended threat reduction objectives.
In the area of chemical and biological warfare defense, the committee
notes that the Department has continued to maintain steady increases in
funding since fiscal year 1996. The committee is concerned, however,
that the Department's efforts to focus on the acquisition of the anthrax
vaccine may be taking an inordinate amount of personnel and financial
resources from other critical elements of the chem-bio defense program.
While the Department's fiscal year 2001 request represents a nearly 20
percent increase for procurement of chemical and biological defense
equipment and programs, a significant portion of this increase is to
address issues associated with the anthrax vaccine acquisition program.
The committee is concerned with the risks associated with continuing to
support the current Anthrax acquisition strategy, and believes that the
Department should develop an alternative plan to ensure that a vaccine
will be available to meet ongoing and future requirements.
In the year since the Subcommittee on Emerging Threats and
Capabilities was created, cyber threats to the United States, including
the DOD, have increased dramatically. During the subcommittee's March 1,
2000 hearing on cyber-security, the DOD reported that computer attacks
on Defense Department systems increased from under 6,000 in 1998 to over
22,000 in 1999. There is every indication that this trend will continue.
The committee remains concerned that many important information
assurance programs designed to protect against such cyber-attacks,
remain underfunded by the DOD. At the March 1, 2000, subcommittee
hearing, witnesses from the Department once again confirmed that such
funding shortfalls remain significant, and presented a list of almost
$500.0 million in unfunded requirements in this area.
Due to the expanding nature of the cyber threat, the committee
recommends increased funding for important information assurance
initiatives. In particular, the committee recommends initiatives in the
area of information assurance training and education. The committee
agrees with the conclusion contained in the National Plan for
Information Systems Protection, which was released by the White House in
January, that ``. . . within the Federal Government, the lack of skilled
information systems security personnel amounts to a crisis.'' The
committee also recommends funding increases to support information
assurance research and development, and procurement of critical
information assurance tools and detection devices.
The committee continued its examination of joint experimentation and
the prudent transformation of our armed forces to defend against current
and future threats to our national security. While encouraged by the
progress made by U.S. Joint Forces Command in the area of joint
experimentation since its activation with an expanded charter on October
1, 1999, the committee is concerned with the slow pace of robust
experimentation, noting that the first true joint field experiment is
not scheduled until 2004. Additionally, the committee is concerned that
there is not yet an institutionalized process to rapidly integrate
lessons learned into the overall service and defense-wide requirements
process. During a hearing before the subcommittee on April 4, 2000, the
Vice Chairman, Joint Chiefs of Staff, indicated that a review was
underway to revise and strengthen this joint requirements process. At
that same hearing, the Commander-in-Chief, U.S. Joint Forces Command
expressed interest in accelerating the pace of joint experimentation.
These are welcome developments which the committee will follow closely.
It is a priority of the committee to maintain a strong, stable
investment in science and technology in order to develop superior
technology that will permit the United States to maintain its current
military advantages, provide flexible options to future warfighters, and
hedge against technological surprise. The military dimensions of the
next century are likely to be so different from those on which the
current force was built that an evolutionary approach--based on
correcting near-term deficiencies--will not be sufficient to meet the
need for change. We must ensure that our ongoing efforts to maintain
current advantages in capability are complemented with bold action that
can effect the true transformation required for the 21st Century force.
For that reason, the committee has added approximately $200.0 million to
the defense science and technology (S&T) program.
It has been an on-going concern that the current S&T planning process
appears to focus on the ``micro'' issue of ensuring that individual
projects address legitimate warfighting needs, rather than on the
``macro'' issue of prioritizing those needs and ensuring that sufficient
S&T funding is made available to meet them. Both the Army and the Navy
took ambitious steps this year to address that shortcoming in the S&T
planning process by prioritizing their own needs on a ``macro'' basis,
and realigning S&T funding to match new priorities.
The Air Force does not appear to have undertaken any comparable
planning effort. The committee remains concerned with the serious
decline in the Air Force technology investment and the lack of support
for science and technology within the Air Force leadership. Critical
investment decisions are being made based on numbers rather than need.
Therefore, the committee recommends a provision which requires the
Secretary of the Air Force to conduct a thorough review of the S&T
program and to certify to Congress that the plans provided and the
investments planned will meet their objectives for air and space
superiority in the 21st Century and beyond.
Airland
The Airland Subcommittee focused on the impact of inadequate
modernization accounts, testing and evaluation activities associated
with developmental efforts, the Army transformation initiative and the
status of tactical aviation programs.
The committee has conducted an in-depth analysis of the Army
transformation initiative that was announced last fall. The committee
advocates transformation and recognizes that heavy forces within the
Army are difficult to deploy in support of the National Military
Strategy. The Army Chief of Staff has challenged the status quo within
the Army and initiated a process to transform the Army into a more
lethal, lightweight, strategically relevant and deployable force that
will be better suited to meet future defense challenges. While the
committee has expressed support for the transformation initiative, the
committee is concerned about the Army's ability to develop the objective
force and field an interim force capability. The committee has
particular concerns about the operational capabilities of the interim
force and the Army's acquisition strategy.
Given no significant change in projected Army modernization resources
from the DOD, the committee is concerned that the Army will not have
adequate resources to recapitalize the existing legacy force to maintain
operational readiness, field an interim force capability, and conduct a
robust research and development effort designed to lead to the objective
force in fiscal year 2012. The committee believes the Army vision should
more heavily focus on efforts for the objective force. Near-term interim
forces can provide an operational capability available to respond to
contingency operations while at the same time provide insights into
future force requirements. The committee believes that least cost
alternatives, including light, armored vehicles currently available
within the Army, should be primarily considered in efforts to fill an
interim force.
In response to last year's congressional direction, the Army issued
revised aviation and armor system modernization plans in which
significant steps have been taken to address long standing deficiencies
in service modernization programs. While the committee remains concerned
about the ability of future budgets to support these revised plans, the
Army is commended for ensuring that these plans more adequately reflect
the broad range of requirements that exist across the force.
The committee also focused on a range of tactical aviation issues.
The budget request included almost $8.0 billion for continued
development and procurement of the three new tactical fighter aircraft:
the F/A 18E/F Super Hornet, the F 22 Raptor, and the Joint Strike
Fighter (JSF). The committee remains concerned about the overall
affordability of these systems against the backdrop of increasing
average aircraft age, required modifications of legacy aircraft, and
precision guided weapon inventory shortages. Particular tactical
aviation issues examined by the committee included: F/A 18E/F upgrade
funding; F 22 flight test hours and the adequacy of test content; and,
JSF validation, program cost growth, and technical challenges.
The lessons learned from the Kosovo conflict presented additional
concerns that the committee addressed. In Kosovo after-action reviews,
the committee repeatedly heard concerns expressed about low-density,
high-demand weapon systems and platforms. Commanders reported having to
conserve certain precision weapon systems to prevent depletion. Tactical
electronic attack assets were seriously overtasked, as were
intelligence, surveillance and reconnaissance (ISR) assets. The
committee added over $700.0 million for programs supporting aircraft
precision strike capability, aircraft survivability, and ISR assets.
The committee continues to be concerned about the impact that
inadequate modernization funding will have on our ability to modernize
our forces. Significant levels of unfunded requirements, as identified
by the service chiefs, suggest that significant modernization shortfalls
are likely to continue.
Seapower
The committee continued its focus on reviewing the adequacy of Navy
and Marine Corps force structure and strategic lift to carry out the
National Security Strategy, and the ability of
Navy and Marine Corps programs to support new operational
concepts to influence events ashore, and from the sea.
Operational commanders presented compelling testimony to the
subcommittee that indicated that their commands do not have enough ships
and aircraft to shape the international environment and respond to
crises within the required time frame. As stated by the Commander, U.S.
Second Fleet, even with the current level of 316 ships, there ``. . .
are not enough resources to meet demands, and the cost of doing business
is being borne increasingly by our sailors.'' The commanding general of
the 2nd Marine Expeditionary Force and the director of operations and
logistics of the U.S. Transportation Command described similar impacts
on the Marines and airmen in their command.
Operational commanders also pointed out that aging equipment
translates into both operational and fiscal costs. Maintenance personnel
routinely work long hours on shifts and into the weekends to keep
equipment operational. This testimony was consistent with information
gathered by the committee during visits to fleet units.
The Congressional Research Service testified before the subcommittee
that the Navy requires a $12.0 billion annual ship construction budget,
commencing in fiscal year 2001, to build an average of 8.6 ships per
year to maintain a Navy force structure of at least 300 ships. While the
Navy acquisition and requirements witnesses agreed with this assessment,
the ship construction budget for fiscal year 2001 is only $11.7 billion
and is projected to decrease in the outyears. In an effort to provide a
long-term look at shipbuilding requirements and plans, the National
Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2000 directed the Secretary of
Defense to deliver a long-range shipbuilding report to the Congress no
later than February 1, 2000. Unfortunately, that report has yet to be
provided.
The Transportation Command testified before the subcommittee that C
17 strategic lift aircraft procurement and C 5 strategic lift aircraft
reliability were the two highest Transportation Command priorities, and
that the Transportation Command has been unable to respond to all of the
requests for strategic airlift support.
In addition to these findings, information obtained by the committee
during the course of its deliberations revealed the following:
(1) the present Navy force structure of 316 ships is not sufficient
to carry out the National Security Strategy, and the shipbuilding plan
of 39 ships planned in the Future Years Defense Program is insufficient
to recapitalize the fleet;
(2) changing the DDG 51 acquisition strategy from three to two ships
per year is inconsistent with the Navy's previous industrial base
studies, and counter to the emphasis on procurement efficiency and smart
business decisions that save taxpayer dollars;
(3) the DD 21 destroyer is the key enabler to providing the Marine
Corps fire support from the sea, and DD 21 will accomplish that mission
at lower acquisition and operating costs compared to other destroyers;
(4) the Joint Chiefs of Staff study on attack submarine force
structure states that the requirement for submarines may be
significantly more than the 1997 Quadrenniel Defense Review level of 50
submarines;
(5) Marine Corps operational concepts require the capabilities
included in new platforms, such as the LPD 17, LHD, and DD 21 ship
classes and the performance of new equipment, such as the Advanced
Amphibious Assault Vehicle(AAAV), the Landing Craft Air Cushion (LCAC),
the V 22 Tiltrotor aircraft, and night vision and thermal imaging
devices; and
(6) within ten years there will be insufficient helicopters to
support the operational requirements of destroyers, aircraft carriers,
mine warfare, and replenishment ships.
Versatility continues to be the hallmark of the Navy and Marine
Corps. This year, maritime forces were moved rapidly between the
Mediterranean Sea and the Persian Gulf for operations that ranged from
war and peacekeeping in Kosovo to humanitarian relief for earthquake
victims in Turkey.
The committee concluded that our Navy and Marine Corps forces are an
inherently forward-deployed, combat credible, expeditionary force
engaged in daily, round-the-clock operations to influence the world's
security environment and support world-wide U.S. national security
interests. The committee notes that in the 84 months that ended in
September 1999, the Navy participated in 80 contingency operations
around the world.
While there are insufficient funds to address all of the fiscal year
2001 unfunded requirements identified by the service chiefs, the
committee will continue to support efforts to identify, prioritize and
take action within the constraints of the budget to fund the
deficiencies identified by the Navy and Marine Corps. The committee will
continue to highlight the risks associated with the budget constraints,
and the resulting impact on the ability of our men and women of the
armed forces to carry out their duties.
Strategic
The Strategic Subcommittee continued to review the adequacy of
programs and policies in the following areas: (1) ballistic and cruise
missile defense; (2) national security space; (3) strategic nuclear
delivery systems; (4) military intelligence; and (5) Department of
Energy (DOE) activities regarding the nuclear weapons stockpile, nuclear
waste cleanup, and other defense activities.
On February 28, 2000, the Strategic Subcommittee held a hearing on
national and theater missile defense programs. Based on this hearing,
the committee concluded that the DOD continues to pursue a
funding-constrained ballistic missile defense (BMD) program. Although
the committee is pleased by Department's decision to substantially
increase funding for the National Missile Defense (NMD) program, the
Strategic Subcommittee found that all of the Ballistic Missile Defense
Organization's major defense acquisition programs remain underfunded.
The committee recommends substantial increases in funding for ballistic
missile defense programs and technologies, including the NMD program for
risk reduction.
On March 8, 2000, the Strategic Subcommittee held a hearing on
national security space issues. The committee identified a number of
areas in which budget constraints have caused DOD to insufficiently fund
key space programs and technologies. The committee also identified key
areas of space technology development that require additional support,
as addressed in detail elsewhere in this report.
One of the key findings of the Kosovo after-action reviews was that
intelligence processing and dissemination does not always meet the
requirements of warfighting forces. The committee has initiated efforts
to provide funding and other assistance to ensure that relevant
intelligence products are provided to military forces in a timely
manner. In particular, the committee recommends funding increases for
the National Imagery and Mapping Agency to improve the imagery tasking,
processing, exploitation and dissemination process.
Department of Energy National Security Programs
The committee has responsibility for oversight and authorization of
over two-thirds of the Department of Energy's budget, including the
National Nuclear Security Administration; weapons activities; defense
environmental management; other defense activities; and defense nuclear
waste disposal. The committee also authorizes funds for the Defense
Nuclear Facility Safety Board, an independent agency responsible for
external oversight of safety at DOE defense nuclear facilities.
The committee held the first congressional hearing to assess the
programs of the newly-established National Nuclear Security
Administration (NNSA). The committee identified a number of critical
issues that must be addressed by the Congress, the Secretary of Energy,
and the new NNSA administrator. The committee notes that the Secretary
of Energy has failed to fully comply with the National Nuclear Security
Administration Act,
which was signed into law by the President as part of the
National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2000 (Pubic Law 106
65).
In the area of weapons activities, the committee remains concerned
that the Department has not prepared the long-term program or funding
plan for the stockpile stewardship and management program, as directed
last year by Congress. The committee notes that the DOD provides a FYDP
plan to Congress each year with the annual budget request. The committee
believes that DOE should provide comparable budgetary information to
Congress.
The committee is concerned with the speculative nature of the
science-based stockpile stewardship program. The committee received
testimony from the three weapons laboratory directors that it may be as
long as 15 years before the DOE stockpile stewardship program can be
evaluated as an acceptable substitute for underground nuclear testing.
The committee remains concerned that the Department is moving too
slowly in re-establishing pit manufacturing and tritium production
capabilities. The committee further notes that the Department has not
established any long-term requirements or plans for modernization of its
aging weapon production plants.
In the area of environmental management, the DOE continues to make
progress in focusing its resources on closure of a limited number of
sites and facilities. However, the committee remains concerned that the
request for science and technology development continues to decline,
despite the Department's increased reliance on the application of
innovative technologies at cleanup sites. The committee notes that the
fiscal year 2001 request for technology development is the lowest in
over eight years. The committee believes that a vigorous research and
development program must be maintained if the Department is to meet its
accelerated cleanup and closure goals.
The committee remains deeply concerned with proposals to establish a
new, external regulation regime for DOE defense nuclear facilities. The
committee does not support such efforts. The committee notes that the
only DOE defense facility to be placed under regulation by the Nuclear
Regulatory Commission (NRC) required almost $500.0 million and three
years to establish a new licencing process. The committee believes that
placing additional DOE facilities under NRC regulation would not be
beneficial or cost-effective. Such moves would waste scarce cleanup
funds and jeopardize the pace of cleanup at DOE facilities. The
committee believes that the Defense Nuclear Facilities Safety Board
(DNFSB) continues to provide comparable, independent safety oversight
for all DOE defense nuclear facilities with an annual budget of less
than $20.0 million a year.
Explanation of funding summary
The administration's budget request for the national defense function
of the federal budget for fiscal year 2001 was $305.3 billion, of which
$305.3 billion was for programs that require specific funding
authorization.
The following table summarizes both the direct authorizations and
equivalent budget authority levels for fiscal year 2001 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 that 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 related 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
$309.8 billion in budget authority, which is consistent with the fiscal
year 2001 budget resolution.
[Graphic Image Not Available]
[Graphic Image Not Available]
[Graphic Image Not Available]
[Graphic Image Not Available]
[Graphic Image Not Available]
DIVISION A--DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE AUTHORIZATIONS
TITLE I--PROCUREMENT
Explanation of tables
The tables in this title display items requested by the
administration for fiscal year 2001 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.
[Graphic Image Not Available]
[Graphic Image Not Available]
Chemical demilitarization program (sec. 107)
The committee recommends a provision that would provide funding for
chemical demilitarization in a Department of Defense (DOD) budget line.
The budget request for the Army included $1.0 billion for the Chemical
Agents and Munitions Destruction (CAMD) Program: $607.2 million for
operations and maintenance; $121.9 million for procurement; and $274.4
million for research and development.
Section 1521(f) of title 50, United States Code, states that funds
for this program shall not be included in the budget accounts for any
military department, but shall be set forth in the budget of the DOD as
a separate account. The committee is concerned that funds for this
program continue to be included in the Army budget accounts, despite the
clear and direct statutory requirement to the contrary. Funding for this
program should not be balanced against Army modernization plans or
funding of continued military operations in the Balkans.
[Graphic Image Not Available]
[Graphic Image Not Available]
[Graphic Image Not Available]
[Graphic Image Not Available]
[Graphic Image Not Available]
[Graphic Image Not Available]
[Graphic Image Not Available]
[Graphic Image Not Available]
[Graphic Image Not Available]
[Graphic Image Not Available]
[Graphic Image Not Available]
[Graphic Image Not Available]
[Graphic Image Not Available]
[Graphic Image Not Available]
[Graphic Image Not Available]
[Graphic Image Not Available]
[Graphic Image Not Available]
[Graphic Image Not Available]
[Graphic Image Not Available]
[Graphic Image Not Available]
Multiyear procurement authority for certain Army and Navy
programs (sec. 111)
The committee recommends a provision that would authorize the Army to
enter into multiyear procurement contracts for the Bradley A3 Infantry
Fighting Vehicle, the UH 60L Blackhawk helicopter, and the CH 60S
Seahawk helicopter. For the Bradley A3 Infantry Fighting Vehicle, the
multiyear procurement authority is for a period not to exceed three
years, beginning in fiscal year 2001. The committee notes the Army is
scheduled to complete the initial operational test and evaluation
(IOT&E) of the Bradley A3, and a subsequent milestone III review in the
fourth quarter of fiscal year 2000. The committee expects the Secretary
of the Army to ensure that the Army successfully completes the IOT&E and
milestone III review prior to awarding the multiyear contract.
Army transformation (sec. 112)
The committee recommends a provision that would require the Secretary
of the Army to provide a report on the objective force process, that
describes the following:
(1) operational environments envisioned for the objective force;
(2) threat assumptions for objective force research and development
efforts;
(3) potential operational and organizational concepts for the
objective force;
(4) anticipated Key Performance Parameters (KPPs) and emerging
requirements that will ultimately be reflected in a future operational
requirements document (ORD) for the objective force;
(5) program schedule and projected research and development and
procurement funding required to support proposed transformation
activities through fiscal year 2012, and identification of specific
adjustments made to Army programs in both the Future Years Defense
Program (FYDP) and extended planning program to fund the transformation
initiative and summarize anticipated investments by the Defense Advanced
Research Projects Agency in programs designed to lead to the fielding of
a future combat system;
(6) joint warfighting requirements that will be supported by the
fielding of the objective force, including a description of planned
adjustments to war plans of the regional commanders in chief;
(7) changes to current strategic and tactical lift requirements
resulting from the creation and fielding of objective forces; and
(8) the evaluation process that will support future decisions on the
course of the transformation initiative leading to the objective force,
including a description of operational evaluations and experimentation
that will be used to validate the KPPs and ORD requirements associated
with objective forces.
In addition, the committee has recommended additional funding,
described elsewhere in this report, to support near-term acceleration of
the future combat system research and development effort.
The Army has begun an effort to transform itself to meet the new
security challenges that the nation faces today. The committee agrees
that the Army needs to transform into a lighter, more lethal, survivable
and tactically mobile force. The committee believes that the Army must
begin the transformation process and applauds the recognition that the
force must be better positioned to meet the significant defense
challenges in an uncertain and troubling future. It is clear that these
challenges will require our armed services to think and act differently
than in the past. The committee recognizes that the Army must be able to
provide a mix of light, medium, and heavy forces. Future intervention
scenarios will call for different capabilities, requiring that the Army
be able to respond to a variety of national security missions, including
mechanized warfare, defense of humanitarian sanctuaries, and peace
enforcement.
The committee has a long history of supporting Army efforts to
transform itself through the advanced warfighting experiment (AWE)
process, the Army after next (AAN) activity, and the digitization
initiative. The committee has also supported Army modernization
activities that the Army later decided to terminate, including the
armored gun system (AGS), liquid propellant technology for Crusader,
Wolverine, Grizzly, Command and Control Vehicle, Prophet Air, Stinger
Block II, and Army Tactical Missile System Block IIA.
The committee realizes that the Army has had several false starts and
traveled up several ``blind alleys'' in pursuit of reforms since the end
of the Cold War. The Chief of Staff of the Army also realizes that many
previous ``reforms'' have only lasted as long as the tenure of the
proponent Army Chief of Staff. He has said that he wants to achieve
``irreversible momentum for change'' so that the Army will continue on a
path to the new objective force even after his tenure as Chief of Staff.
The committee commends the Chief of Staff for the actions he has
taken to begin to transform the Army into a force more relevant to the
diverse defense challenges of the new millennium. To achieve these
reforms, the Army will have to implement innovative changes to force
structure, modernization plans, and spending priorities.
The committee wants to support the Army's current efforts to achieve
``irreversible momentum for change,'' but the committee wants to ensure
this momentum is along the proper path, not another ``blind alley.'' The
best way to ensure that a transformation process will be reversed by
future Army leadership is to start down the wrong path.
The committee strongly agrees with recommendations from a fiscal year
1999 Army Science Board Summer Study report on Enabling Rapid and
Decisive Strategic Maneuver for The Army Beyond 2010, which included the
following recommendations that:
(1) Training and Doctrine Command (TRADOC) experiment with
alternative, available equipment and recommend, within 12 months, needed
procurements;
(2) TRADOC and XVIII Airborne Corps develop split-based support
options, to include necessary organizational redesign;
(3) The Army conduct an expeditionary experiment (possibly Joint
Contingency Force AWE) and examine within 24 months improvements in
early entry deployment and capability; and
(4) TRADOC examine both traditional platform centric solutions as
well as non traditional ``ensemble'' solutions for future combat
systems. Army concept experimentation is needed.
The committee finds the recommendations of the Army Science Board
compelling.
The committee believes that the Army's transformation process must
focus on the objective force, first and foremost. However, the committee
notes that the current Army plans do not adequately address how, or if,
the Army Science Board recommendations will be implemented.
The committee, therefore, directs the Army to establish a process of
operational analysis, experimentation, and platform demonstrations that
will serve to determine optimum organizational structures, equipment
types and numbers, and operational concepts for the objective force. The
committee directs that the Army fully integrate this process with the
joint experimentation activities conducted by the Commander in Chief,
U.S. Joint Forces Command.
Consistent with the committee's view that the objective force must be
preeminent in the planning process, the committee believes that the
interim capability adjustments that the Army is intending to pursue must
not displace the attention and resources appropriate for the objective
force. Army forces continue to age precipitously because the Army has
not been able to afford sufficient modernization to support even the
current force structure. Absent significant additional investment, the
situation will only grow worse. The committee recognizes that the Army
modernization program has not competed well for resources within the
Department of Defense budget process. This fact alone makes it clear
that the Army can ill afford a major misstep in pursuing the goal of
transformation.
While pursuing the objective force capability, the Army must also
focus on how it reforms in the mean time. The committee notes that there
is great merit in Army plans to transform one heavy and one light
brigade into a medium brigade configuration. The Army effort involves
fielding interim brigade combat teams (IBCT) designed to bridge a
perceived near-term capability gap. Actions designed to field IBCT's are
focused on requirements for medium weight forces that are strategically
deployable with a combat capability that exceeds those capabilities
provided by existing light forces. The committee agrees that such a
reconfiguration is necessary to provide insights into force structure,
equipment, and tactics alternatives for full-spectrum operations while
optimizing these forces for the challenges of peacekeeping.
In context of very limited resources, however, the committee believes
that Army cannot afford to establish an interim medium force capability
when the primary aim is to serve as a rotational peacekeeping force. The
committee believes that an effective evaluation of alternatives and
review of equipment evaluation data are critical to making informed
funding decisions. The Army must further define and validate interim
force operational concepts, force structure, equipment requirements, and
funding alternatives before making acquisition commitments beyond the
two brigades described in the Chief of Staff's transformation
implementation letter. As the IBCT effort is clearly designed to provide
an interim capability, the committee believes that life cycle cost
factors should be a primary consideration in determining equipment
solutions for IBCT requirements.
While the committee understands the established Army goal to achieve
commonality among medium combat vehicle types and the perceived need for
momentum, these should not be the primary objectives. Principal
objectives should include: (1) focusing on fielding the objective force;
and (2) ensuring that interim medium forces are formed based on
least-cost alternatives that lead to the most combat ready and cost
effective solution that ensures successful operations in a broad range
of environments. The committee believes it is possible that the Army may
already have equipment in the inventory that could meet the requirements
established for the interim force and allow the service to focus more of
its resources on developing the objective force.
Current acquisition policy requires the services to first explore the
potential for existing equipment to meet emerging mission requirements.
The use of existing equipment could allow the Army to avoid expensive
new equipment acquisition costs, as well as a requirement to establish a
new logistical support system that would result from the fielding of new
equipment. The committee recognizes that the Army does not own a mobile
gun system (MGS) that could meet IBCT requirements. Fortunately, the
requirement for a MGS is relatively small. The committee is concerned,
however, that the Army appears to be preparing to select a mobile gun
system without conducting a performance and reliability evaluation of
candidate systems.
Therefore, the committee believes it essential that the Army conduct
an operational evaluation of alternative systems that explores, at a
minimum, measures of operational and cost effectiveness between medium
armored vehicles already in the Army inventory compared with any new
system selected to meet IBCT requirements. The committee recognizes that
this evaluation will be in addition to actions the Army has already
identified in the acquisition strategy report for interim armored
vehicles.
The committee's recommended provision would also support, on a track
parallel to the objective force development activity, the fielding of
three interim brigades through fiscal year 2003. This provision would
provide guidance on analysis required to support the fielding of IBCTs
and establish two additional reporting requirements for the results of
that analysis. Moreover, the committee has supported the full budget
request for the Army's plan to field a new armored vehicle family in the
IBCTs.
The first report would be required to describe the Army's plans for
conducting the side-by-side comparison of existing versus new hardware
implementations. The provision would require that the Secretary of the
Army:
(1) provide a report, no later than February 1, 2001, on plans to
conduct an operational analysis of medium armored combat vehicles that
will be selected later in fiscal year 2000 to meet IBCT infantry
battalion requirements compared with medium armored vehicles currently
found in the Army inventory. The assessment will determine cost and
operational effectiveness differences between new and existing medium
armored combat vehicles, and will be made on a comparative basis with at
least one infantry battalion fielded with existing medium armored
vehicles similarly structured to IBCT infantry battalions;
(2) submit the plan to the Director, Operational Test and
Evaluation, Office of the Secretary of Defense, for review and comment;
(3) include the comments of the Director, Operational Test and
Evaluation as an attachment to the Army report;
(4) describe how the results of the operational evaluation will
guide future acquisition decisions for additional interim brigade combat
team equipment; and
(5) identify specific adjustments made to Army programs in both the
FYDP and extended planning program to fund interim force fielding
requirements.
The second report would include the Army's analysis of the
results of the side-by-side comparisons. This would require that the
Secretary of the Army provide the results of the comparative operational
analysis to the congressional defense committees no later than March 1,
2002. Additionally, the provision would require that the Secretary of
Defense certify that the conclusions of the operational analysis
contained in the second report support the Army's proposed acquisitions
for additional IBCT equipment in fiscal year 2003 and beyond.
The provision would limit obligations of the fiscal year 2001 funds
to 60 percent of the total amount authorized and appropriated for the
new armored vehicle family until 30 days after the date on which the
Secretary of the Army submits the first report to the congressional
defense committees. The provision would also limit obligations of the
funds for fiscal year 2002 funds provided for the fielding of a second
IBCT to 60 percent of the amount authorized and appropriated for the new
armored vehicle family until 30 days after the date in which the
Secretary of the Army submits the second report on the conclusions of
the operational analysis.
The committee does not intend to impede current Army IBCT fielding
plans, but believes that the comparative operational analysis will serve
to strengthen the transformation process and might ultimately accelerate
the fielding of future brigades at lower costs. The Army cannot be
confident that what it is buying is what it needs, absent normally
required testing and evaluation. The Army transformation process cannot
afford more false starts.
OTHER ARMY PROGRAMS
ARMY AIRCRAFT
Utility aircraft
The Army budget request included no funding for fixed-wing, medium
range, utility aircraft, but these aircraft were included on the Army's
unfunded priorities list. This aircraft is used for small unit movements
to remote airfields, and is necessary to replace an aging system. The
committee recommends an increase of $24.3 million for the procurement of
three UC 35 aircraft.
UH 60 Blackhawk
The budget request included $81.2 million to procure six UH 60
Blackhawk helicopters. The committee has watched with great interest
actions taken to revise an inadequate Army aviation modernization plan.
While the committee still has several outstanding concerns about the
overall viability of the Army plan, it is pleased to note decisions
taken by the Army to retire both AH 1 Cobra and UH 1 Huey helicopters as
soon as practicable. This action will ultimately result in a pure fleet
of UH 60L Blackhawk helicopters for both active and reserve component
utility helicopter requirements. These aircraft will provide a more
capable fleet and support crew rotation requirements associated with
military operations across the spectrum of conflict. The committee
understands that the difficult decisions taken to address utility
helicopter requirements have resulted in an increased requirement for UH
60L Blackhawk aircraft. The committee, therefore, recommends an increase
of $196.3 million to procure 20 UH 60L aircraft, a total authorization
of $277.5 million. The committee does not support the acquisition of UH
60Q medical evacuation helicopters in fiscal year 2001. Current Army
plans call for the acquisition of these aircraft beginning in fiscal
year 2002. The committee expects the Army to address outstanding UH 60L
Blackhawk requirements in future budget requests.
Longbow
The budget request included $744.8 million for the acquisition of AH
64D Apache Longbow helicopters. The committee recognizes the AH 64
Apache helicopter as the most advanced and lethal attack helicopter in
the world. The committee notes with concern that there is a range of
known problems associated with the AH 64 Apache attack helicopter that
have existed for the last several years. Program delays in providing for
required improvements to correct system component deficiencies has, in
part, resulted in aircraft groundings and serious questions about the
long-term reliability of these critical aircraft. The committee applauds
actions taken by the Vice Chief of Staff of the Army to thoroughly
review and consolidate outstanding issues associated with the Apache
program and address these deficiencies in a corrective action program.
The committee recognizes that the Army had already identified a
significant unfunded requirement to provide upgrades to existing
critical components for fielded aircraft. In light of lessons learned
from the operation in Kosovo and critical warfighting requirements that
depend on the future viability of AH 64 aircraft, the committee believes
it is essential to pursue immediate action designed to ensure the
viability of these aircraft. Therefore, the committee recommends an
increase of $158.0 million to support critical component upgrades, as
identified in the Army's unfunded requirements list, a total
authorization of $902.8 million for the Apache Longbow program. The
committee expects the Army to budget for any additional upgrades that
may be required after the ongoing program review is completed.
Kiowa Warrior
The budget request included $41.8 million for Kiowa Warrior upgrade
requirements. The committee strongly supports actions intended to
improve the nature and scope of training currently provided for Army
aviators. The committee notes the significant action taken by the Army
in the recently revised aviation modernization plan to address
deficiencies in the training base associated with the Army aviation
center at Fort Rucker, Alabama. New Army training plans will provide
more flight training for new aviators and a corresponding need for
additional TH 67 training aircraft. These aircraft have been identified
as a near-term unfunded requirement for the Army. The committee supports
this effort and recommends an increase of $35.0 million to procure 19 TH
67 aircraft, a total authorization of $76.8 million for the Kiowa
Warrior line.
Avionics support equipment
The budget request included no funding for avionics support
equipment. The committee notes an outstanding requirement for AN/AVS 6
(ANVIS) helmet mounted night vision devices. The committee has
consistently supported the capability of the armed forces to operate
effectively at night and during periods of reduced visibility. The
committee recommends an increase of $13.9 million to procure 1,603 ANVIS
devices to meet outstanding Army aviation requirements.
Aircrew integrated systems
The budget request included $3.5 million for aircrew integrated
system equipment requirements. The committee was pleased to note the
development of advanced laser eye protection (ALEP) visors produced
through a Joint Service program designed to address battlefield eye
protection requirements for military aviators. The committee supports
this effort and believes these visors should be fielded to Army aviators
as soon as practicable. The committee recommends an increase of $5.9
million for aircrew integrated systems, to procure 12,640 ALEP visors, a
total authorization of $9.4 million.
ARMY MISSILE
Army tactical missile system-system summary
The budget request included $15.0 million for Army tactical missile
system (ATACMS) fielding and production line shutdown. The committee
notes a critical unfunded requirement for additional ATACMS block IA
missiles necessary to meet the Army
acquisition objective. Additionally, the Chairman of the Joint
Chiefs of Staff has identified a requirement for additional ATACMS block
IA missiles on the unfunded requirements list. Therefore, the committee
recommends an increase of $77.4 million to procure 100 ATACMS block IA
missiles necessary to meet war reserve, a total authorization of $92.4
million.
Stinger modifications
The budget request included $21.8 million for Stinger missile
modifications. The committee notes an outstanding requirement for
additional Stinger block I missile modifications necessary to meet Force
Package 3 and 4 fielding requirements. These block I missiles have
improved performance against advanced countermeasures and improved the
accuracy of the Stinger system. The committee recommends an increase of
$15.2 million to procure 651 Stinger block I missiles, a total
authorization of $37.0 million.
WEAPONS AND TRACKED COMBAT VEHICLES
Carrier modifications
The budget request included $45.1 million for M113 armored personnel
carrier modifications. The committee notes the Army has over 17,000 M113
armored personnel carriers in the inventory today. The M113 has been in
Army combat units for decades and requires upgrades necessary to improve
mobility, reliability, and survivability. As these vehicles represent
almost one-half of the tracked combat vehicle fleet, it is critical that
they be upgraded as soon as practicable. The committee recommends an
increase of $50.0 million to modify 227 vehicles, a total authorization
of $95.1 million.
Breacher system modification
The budget request included no funding for the Grizzly (M1 Breacher)
system. The committee believes that critical mobility systems like the
Grizzly armored engineer vehicle must be continued to correct critical
operational shortfalls for deployed forces. Operations in Iraq, Somalia,
and Bosnia continue to highlight the critical need for combat engineer
equipment necessary to clear obstacles and support maneuver forces. The
ability of our fast-moving M 1 Abrams tanks and M 2 Bradley fighting
vehicles to operate successfully on the battlefield is dependant on the
ability of these vehicles to maintain their momentum and speed of
maneuver. Finally, the committee notes that a request for funds
necessary to restore this program was one of the top Army unfunded
requirements for fiscal year 2001. Therefore, the committee recommends
an increase of $108.0 million to restore the Grizzly program. The
committee expects the Army to ensure that this program is funded in
future budget requests.
Heavy assault bridge system modifications
The budget request included no funding for the heavy assault bridge
system modifications. The committee has noted with great concern
decisions that terminated the effort to field the Wolverine heavy
assault bridge. One of the major tenets of combat for our forces is
movement at a rapid pace to ensure a decisive engagement that will
result in the defeat of enemy forces. The Wolverine heavy assault bridge
is a critical element on the battlefield to ensure the mobility of our
forces. The committee believes that this program should be restored and
that the armored vehicle launch bridge (AVLB) service life extension
program (SLEP) effort should be terminated. Therefore, the committee
recommends an increase of $77.0 million to restore the Wolverine heavy
assault bridge program and a corresponding decrease of $15.2 million to
the AVLB SLEP program. The committee expects the Army to ensure that
this program is funded in future budget requests.
Machine gun, squad automatic weapon
The budget request included no funding for the squad automatic weapon
(SAW). The committee notes an outstanding requirement for an additional
4,280 weapons necessary to meet the Army procurement objective.
Therefore, the committee recommends an increase of $18.3 million to
procure 4,280 weapons and complete the acquisition of the SAW system, a
total authorization of $18.3 million.
Mark 19 grenade launcher
The budget request included $11.8 million for Mark 19 grenade
launchers. The committee notes an outstanding requirement for additional
Mark 19 systems necessary to avoid a break in production prior to
acquiring the total number of systems necessary to meet the acquisition
objective. The committee recommends an increase of $8.1 million to
procure 386 Mark 19 systems and avoid a break in production, a total
authorization of $19.9 million.
M4 carbine modifications
The budget request included $2.5 million for M4 carbine
modifications. The committee notes an outstanding requirement for
additional modular weapon systems (MWS) for the M4 carbine
necessary to mount the weapons optical systems. The committee
recommends an increase of $1.3 million to procure 7,201 MWS for the M4
carbine, a total authorization of $3.8 million.
ARMY AMMUNITION
Procurement of ammunition, Army
The committee is concerned with continued reports of inadequate
supplies of ammunition for training and war reserves. The Chief of Staff
of the Army identified a requirement of $242.9 million for ammunition
programs that were not included in the fiscal year 2001 budget request.
For the past several years, field commanders have expressed concern
regarding the inadequate stocks of ammunition to support their training
and war reserve requirements. The committee recommends the following
adjustments to the budget request for Army ammunition procurement:
Item
Millions
30 mm
$6.0
60 mm
5.0
105 mm M915
.15.0
120 mm M934
6.0
155 mm M107
10.0
MACS
20.0
Wide Area Munition
16.0
Subtotal
78.0
Armament retooling and manufacturing support initiative
The budget request included $4.7 million for the continuation of the
Armament Retooling and Manufacturing Support (ARMS) program. The
committee is aware this does not satisfy all proposals that would reduce
the operating costs of Army Ammunition plants. This program has had
great success, saving the Army $37.0 million each year in program and
operating costs, while preserving hundreds of jobs for skilled workers.
Therefore, the committee recommends an increase of $20.0 million for
this program. The committee expects these funds to be utilized in the
most effective manner to ensure preservation of those facilities most
likely to be required to fulfill the military's needs to support the
national military strategy.
OTHER ARMY PROCUREMENT
Family of medium tactical vehicles
The budget request included $438.3 million to procure family of
medium tactical vehicle (FMTV) trucks to replace an aging fleet of
medium trucks found in the Army today. The Army has identified an
unfunded requirement for additional FMTV trucks necessary to meet Force
Package 2 fielding requirements. The committee recommends an increase of
$77.9 million, to procure additional FMTV trucks necessary to accelerate
the fielding of these trucks to reserve component units, a total
authorization of $516.2 million.
Weapons of Mass Destruction Civil Support Teams
The committee recommends an increase of $25.0 million for the Weapons
of Mass Destruction Civil Support Team (WMD CST) program. This funding
will establish five additional WMD CSTs and provide additional equipment
for the WMD CST program. The $25.0 million is authorized as follows:
$3.2 million in military personnel; $7.5 million in Operations and
Maintenance, Army; $1.8 million in Contamination Avoidance, Chemical
Biological Defense Program, Procurement, Defense-Wide; and $12.5 million
in Special Purpose Vehicles, Other Procurement, Army.
The WMD CSTs, formerly know as Rapid Assessment and Initial Detection
(RAID) teams, are comprised of 22 full-time National Guard personnel who
are specially trained and equipped to deploy and assess suspected
nuclear, biological, chemical, or radiological events in support of
local first responders. The committee recommends an increase of $21.0
million, included in the categories listed above, for the addition of
five WMD CSTs which will result in a total of 32 WMD CSTs by the end of
fiscal year 2001. The committee reaffirms the commitment it made last
year to ultimately provide funding for the establishment of a WMD CST in
every state and U.S. territory.
The committee recommends an increase of $3.5 million, included above
in Special Purpose Vehicles, Other Procurement, Army, for the purchase
of two additional Unified Command Suites (UCS) and Mobile Analytical
Labs (MALS) in order to provide the WMD CST program with needed spare
equipment. The committee is concerned that, under the Department of
Defense's current plan for WMD CSTs, no provision has been made to
provide spare equipment for the teams. The committee understands that
the spare UCSs and MALs that had been available for the initial 10 teams
are being used to outfit the 17 teams authorized last year. Provision
should be made for spare equipment to support a military capability that
must respond rapidly to a crisis. The committee also recommends an
increase of $500,000, included above in Special Purpose Vehicles, Other
Procurement, Army, for the purchase of 35 tactical mobility systems for
use by the WMD CSTs to improve survey operations of potentially
contaminated areas by rapidly moving Reconnaissance and Survey teams.
This system would also facilitate the expeditious recovery of WMD CST
response force personnel who may become casualties.
The committee also expresses some concerns with the WMD CST program.
First, the committee is concerned with the Department's failure to
formulate a plan and provide funding to rapidly deploy WMD CSTs to each
state and U.S. territory as recommended in the January 1998 DOD report
entitled ``Department of Defense Plan for Integrating National Guard and
Reserve Component Support for Response to Attacks Using Weapons of Mass
Destruction''. Second, the committee is concerned with the Department's
delay in submitting the reprogramming request necessary to stand up the
17 WMD CSTs authorized in fiscal year 2000. As a result of this delay,
very little of the funding authorized and appropriated in fiscal year
2000 for the 17 additional teams has been spent. Third, the committee is
concerned with the Department's decision to locate a second WMD CST in
California, while many states do not have a WMD CST. The committee
believes that each state and territory should be provided with a WMD CST
before additional capabilities are provided to a single state.
The result of this behavior by the Department is that vast areas of
the United States are currently not covered by WMD CSTs. If the
Department had acted swiftly to deploy the 27 teams previously
authorized and appropriated by Congress, the committee would have been
in a position to provide funding for more than five additional teams in
fiscal year 2001. Given the growing terrorist threat to the United
States, the committee is troubled by the lack of urgency on the part of
the Department to fund and field these teams.
Secure mobile anti-jam reliable tactical terminal
The budget request included $48.6 million for the Secure Mobile
Anti-jam Reliable Tactical Terminal (SMART T), the Army's secure,
multi-channel satellite terminal used with the Milstar satellite
communications system. In its report on the National Defense
Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2000 (S. Rept. 106 50), the committee
noted significant developmental problems associated with the SMART T
program and cited a review by the Department of Defense Director of
Operational Test and Evaluation, which concluded that ``. . . the SMART
T is not operationally suitable,'' and which recommended temporary
cessation of production while the Army and the contractor sought to
solve the problems. Unfortunately, significant problems remain and the
Army does not currently believe that these problems can be resolved in
time to award the currently planned production option. SMART T fielding
has been stopped pending the launch of the next Milstar II satellite.
Therefore, the committee recommends a reduction of $20.0 million in Army
Other Procurement for SMART T.
Army data distribution system
The budget request included $32.7 million for Army data distribution
system (ADDS) requirements. The committee recognizes the critical role
that the enhanced position location reporting system (EPLRS) plays in
supporting Army digitization efforts. Future military operations will
continue to demand more data throughput to meet the demands of a dynamic
and complex battlefield. The Army has identified an opportunity to
improve existing EPLRS systems that will ultimately result in five times
the communications throughput currently available. The committee,
therefore, recommends an increase of $5.3 million to support EPLRS
software development requirements. The committee also notes that
requirements for EPLRS equipment continues to grow as the Army works to
digitize the force. The committee also recommends an increase of $27.3
million to procure 634 EPLRS systems and accelerate efforts to meet the
Army acquisition objective for this system, a total authorization of
$65.3 million for ADDS requirements.
Area common user system modification program
The budget request included $114.0 million for area common user
system (ACUS) modification program requirements. The committee
recognizes and supports ongoing efforts by the Army to digitize the
force and enhance the situational awareness and warfighting
effectiveness of our land forces. The committee notes an outstanding
requirement for warfighter information network down-sized communications
switches, which are mounted on high mobility multipurpose wheeled
vehicles instead of the larger five ton trucks that housed older TTC 39D
switching equipment. Additionally, the Army has additional requirements
for high mobility DGM assemblages (HMDA) to support communications
requirements for reserve component signal battalions. The committee
recommends an increase of $60.0 million to procure 27 down-sized
communications switches and 229 HMDA devices. Additionally, the
committee notes the successful use of TS 21 Blackjack facsimile machines
throughout the force. The committee also recommends an increase of $14.0
million to accelerate the fielding of 2,901 TS 21 Blackjack secure
facsimile machines. The committee recommends a total authorization of
$188.0 million for the ACUS modification program.
Forward area air defense ground based sensor
The budget request included $24.2 million for forward area air
defense (FAAD) ground based sensor (GBS) procurement. The committee
recognizes an outstanding requirement for additional Sentinel systems
necessary to meet operational requirements and
to obtain a minimum economic order quantity. The committee
recommends an increase of $7.3 million, for a total authorization of
$31.5 million, to support Sentinel production requirements and
modifications for these critical systems.
Night vision
The budget request included $34.1 million for Army night vision
devices. The committee has consistently supported night vision
development and fielding efforts in recognition of service focus on
night operations. The committee notes that the Army identified
significant unfunded requirements for night vision devices in fiscal
year 2001. Therefore, the committee recommends the following increases:
(1) $18.1 million to procure 5,000 AN/PEQ 2A and 10,000 AN/PAC 4C
target pointer/aiming lights;
(2) $14.9 million to procure 18,600 AN/PVS 7 night vision
binoculars; and
(3) $15.0 million for 25mm image intensification tubes for AN/PVS 4
and AN/TVS 5 night vision weapon scopes.
The committee recommends a total authorization of $82.1 million for
night vision devices.
Forward area air defense command and control
The budget request included $17.9 million for forward area air
defense (FAAD) command and control (C2) requirements. The committee
recognizes an outstanding requirement to upgrade existing FAAD hardware
and software to meet evolving threat capabilities and operational
requirements and to enable full materiel release of air defense brigade
and higher headquarters prototype FAAD C2 systems. The committee
recommends an increase of $14.3 million to support identified
requirements for additional FAAD C2 hardware and software upgrades
necessary to ensure the full materiel release of prototype systems, a
total authorization of $32.2 million.
Striker-command and control system
The budget request included $19.1 million for the Striker system. The
committee notes the current budget request will only procure 33 Striker
systems, which will result in an inefficient rate of production. The
committee recommends an increase of $8.0 million to procure additional
Striker systems and achieve an economic procurement level, a total
authorization of 27.1 million.
Standard integrated command post system
The budget request included $36.0 million to procure standard
integrated command post systems (SICPS). The committee notes an
opportunity to complete the fielding of these important systems to force
package two units and support critical fielding requirements. The
committee recommends an increase of $17.5 million to procure additional
SICPS, a total authorization of $53.5 million.
Lightweight maintenance enclosure
The budget request included $2.0 million to procure lightweight
maintenance enclosure (LME) units. The committee notes an outstanding
requirement for additional funding for LME units to maintain minimum
sustaining rates (MSR) for production. The committee recommends an
increase of $4.6 million to procure 258 LME units and to meet MSR
requirements, a total authorization of $6.6 million.
Roller, vibratory, self-propelled
The budget request included $4.7 million for self-propelled vibratory
roller systems. The committee recommends an increase of $5.0 million to
procure 80 vehicles necessary to meet the requirements of Army engineer
units, a total authorization of $9.7 million.
Deployable universal combat earth mover
The budget request included $14.1 million for deployable universal
combat earth movers (DEUCE). The committee recommends an increase of
$7.0 million to procure 18 DEUCE vehicles, a total authorization of
$21.1 million.
[Graphic Image Not Available]
[Graphic Image Not Available]
[Graphic Image Not Available]
[Graphic Image Not Available]
[Graphic Image Not Available]
[Graphic Image Not Available]
[Graphic Image Not Available]
[Graphic Image Not Available]
[Graphic Image Not Available]
[Graphic Image Not Available]
[Graphic Image Not Available]
[Graphic Image Not Available]
[Graphic Image Not Available]
[Graphic Image Not Available]
[Graphic Image Not Available]
[Graphic Image Not Available]
[Graphic Image Not Available]
[Graphic Image Not Available]
[Graphic Image Not Available]
[Graphic Image Not Available]
[Graphic Image Not Available]
[Graphic Image Not Available]
[Graphic Image Not Available]
[Graphic Image Not Available]
CVNX 1 nuclear aircraft carrier program (sec. 121)
The budget request included $21.9 million for advance procurement and
advance construction of long lead time components for CVNX 1. The
committee recommends a provision that would authorize the Secretary of
the Navy to procure the nuclear aircraft carrier designated CVNX 1, and
enter into a contract for the advance procurement and advance
construction of that ship.
The Navy's long-term plan is to provide full funding for CVNX 1 in
fiscal year 2006. There are a number of castings for the large machinery
associated with an aircraft carrier propulsion plant that have a very
long production lead time. To maintain the schedule for CVNX 1 and
deliver these needed pieces of machinery as required by the construction
sequence, the Navy needs to obligate funds for some of these components
in fiscal year 2001.
Therefore, the committee recommends an authorization of the $22.0
million in advance procurement included in the budget request.
Arleigh Burke-class destroyer program (sec. 122)
The authorization request included a provision to extend the DDG 51
multiyear procurement authorization contained in the National Defense
Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 1997 (Public Law 104 208). The
committee recommends a provision that would: (1) authorize the Secretary
of the Navy to extend the 1997 multiyear contract to include the fiscal
year 2004 and fiscal year 2005 DDG 51 procurements; (2) express that it
is the sense of Congress that the most economical rate for procurement
is three ships per year; and (3) direct the Secretary to update the
Arleigh Burke (DDG 51) Class Industrial Base Study of 1993 and the
Comptroller General to review this update.
The budget request included $356.8 million for advance procurement
for DDG 51 ships. The committee received information that indicated that
providing $500.0 million in advance procurement funds for DDG 51 would
maximize savings to the taxpayers for procurement of six ships over a
two year period: fiscal years 2002 and 2003.
The Future Years Defense Program (FYDP) shows that the Navy plans to
buy only two DDG 51 destroyers per year over a three year period (fiscal
years 2002 2004) and two destroyers (one DDG 51 and one DD 21) in fiscal
year 2005. The Navy's Arleigh Burke (DDG 51) Class Industrial Base Study
of 1993 stated that procurement of three destroyers per year could only
sustain the destroyer industrial base if some additional, non-DDG 51
work, were available to each shipbuilder. The study also stated that at
a rate of two ships per year, a very substantial amount of non-DDG 51
work would be required for each shipbuilder and risk to survival of one
or both shipyards could be high.
The Navy testified that a proposal to build two DDG 51 ships per year
would result in potential reductions in shipyard workforces and the
workforce skill mix, and that maintaining the industrial base would be
perilous. The committee concurred with the Navy's assessment regarding
the industrial base at the time of the original study, and does not
believe that the assumptions in that study have changed enough to
invalidate its conclusions for the situation the Navy faces today.
It is clear to the committee that stretching out this procurement
will cause reductions in workforce skill mix that will result in higher
costs for not only the DDG 51 ships, but also for other Navy work in the
shipyards that build DDG 51 ships.
In fact, the budget request shows a dramatic cost increase of between
$60.0 million and $100.0 million per ship when a projected procurement
rate of two DDG 51 ships per year is computed. Therefore, buying six
ships at a rate of two ships per year for three years will cost the
taxpayers between $360.0 and $600.0 million more than buying the same
ships over a two year period. The Navy appears to be willing to pay this
premium in an attempt to partially accommodate the destroyer industrial
base potential problems (as discussed above: three destroyers per year
are required to maintain the industrial base) caused by delaying DD 21
one year.
The destroyer industrial base, which will also be required to build
DD 21, should be maintained while maximizing cost savings to taxpayers
by buying required ships at proven economical rates.
The Navy testified that the current shipbuilding budget is inadequate
to recapitalize at the required rate to provide the number of ships
needed to carry out the National Security Strategy. Therefore, the
committee believes that every opportunity to save scarce ship
construction funds should be considered. The Navy has documented over
$1.4 billion in savings by buying three ships per year under the
multiyear procurement authority provided by Congress. As discussed
above, continuing the proven economical rate of three ships per year and
use of multiyear authority would save additional taxpayer dollars on
this program which the Navy intends to complete.
Therefore, the committee recommends an increase of $143.2 million in
advance procurement for DDG 51 to achieve the maximum savings for the
taxpayer and to relieve some pressure on the underfunded shipbuilding
account in future years.
The additional advance procurement, coupled with the savings to the
taxpayer of buying six ships in two years instead of three years, should
result in procurement of six ships on a two year multiyear contract for
the approximate cost of five ships procured at a lower rate.
Virginia-class submarine program (sec. 123)
The committee recommends a provision that would authorize the
Secretary of the Navy to enter into a contract for up to a total of five
Virginia -class submarines between fiscal year 2003 and fiscal year
2006. The provision would authorize the Secretary to continue the
shipbuilder teaming arrangement authorized in the National Defense
Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 1998 (Public Law 105 85). The
provision would also authorize procurement of material in economic order
quantity when cost savings to the taxpayers will result.
The current acquisition and construction strategies for the
procurement of the first four Virginia -class submarines appears to be
yielding positive results to date. However, the two shipbuilders have
not yet completed the critical test of joining sections constructed in
two separate shipbuilder facilities. In addition, the subsystems being
developed by a number of subcontractors require continued oversight
regarding cost and schedule excursions.
The committee notes the importance of the technology insertion
approach of building submarines. This approach provides both the
flexibility and opportunity to forward fit and refresh capabilities.
Administration officials have supported this approach in testimonies
before congressional committees.
Therefore, the provision would require the Secretary of Defense to
submit a report to the congressional defense committees with submission
of the fiscal year 2002 President's budget to include the following:
(1) a plan for maintaining at least 55 attack submarines through
2015, and a plan for achieving a force of 18 Virginia -class submarines
by 2015;
(2) assessments of savings to the program of production rates of two
submarines per year, if that rate were to begin in fiscal year 2004 and
construction were to continue at that rate in fiscal year 2006 and
thereafter; and
(3) an analysis of the advantages and disadvantages of alternative
contracting strategies including multiyear procurement and block buy
with economic order quantity.
ADC(X) ship program (sec. 124)
The committee recommends a provision that would authorize the
Secretary of the Navy to procure ADC(X)-class ships using the
contracting authority most advantageous to the taxpayer. This ship
program is important because ADC(X)-class ships will replace
the auxiliary vessels that have the oldest average age in the
active fleet.
The Navy intends to require at least two shipyards to construct
ADC(X) class ships. The committee is concerned that this could result in
higher risk in building, which could lead to delays and higher costs.
The committee encourages the Navy to minimize the risks associated with
constructing the ADC(X)-class ships.
Refueling and Complex Overhaul Program of the CVN 69 nuclear
aircraft carrier (sec. 125)
The committee recommends a provision that would authorize the
Secretary of the Navy to enter into a contract and commence overhaul of
the CVN 69 nuclear aircraft carrier during fiscal year 2001. The
provision would also authorize the budget request of $703.4 million to
commence the overhaul of CVN 69. The committee concurs with the Navy's
intention to budget for nuclear aircraft carrier overhauls over a two
year period and to commence the overhauls during the first year of
authorization and appropriation of funds for that purpose.
OTHER NAVY PROGRAMS
NAVY AIRCRAFT
Airborne low frequency sonar
The budget request included $162.3 million for the procurement of
four remanufactured SH 60R helicopters. The airborne low frequency sonar
(ALFS) is a subsystem of the SH 60R. ALFS is a helicopter borne low
frequency dipping sonar system that can be rapidly deployed from
aircraft carriers and surface combatants to detect and track submarines
both in blue water and the littorals.
The committee recommends an increase of $6.0 million for the
procurement, installation, and spare parts for the ALFS resulting in a
more efficient low rate initial production.
SH 60 helicopters
The budget request included $162.3 million for the procurement of
four remanufactured SH 60R helicopters. The SH 60R remanufacturing scope
includes the airframe, an avionics upgrade, service life extension and
incorporation of engineering change proposals. It represents a
significant improvement, providing the battle group with added
protection in the coastal littorals and in regional conflicts. The Navy
included the procurement of additional SH 60R helicopters on its
unfunded requirements list. The committee recommends an increase of
$90.0 million for the procurement of three SH 60R helicopters.
CH 60 helicopters
The budget request included $238.5 million for the procurement of 15
CH 60S helicopters, less $73.4 million in advanced procurement from
prior years. The primary roles of the CH 60S are to conduct vertical
replenishment with external transfer of cargo and internal transfer of
passengers ship-to-ship, ship-to-shore, and shore-to-ship, and to
conduct day and night search and rescue. The Navy has included the
procurement of additional CH 60S helicopters on its unfunded
requirements list. The committee recommends an increase of $63.0 million
for the procurement of three CH 60S helicopters.
UC 35 aircraft
The budget request included no funding for the procurement of UC 35
medium range operational support aircraft (OSA). The Navy and the Marine
Corps intend to use this aircraft to modernize their OSA fleet. The Navy
will purchase UC 35 aircraft to restore a portion of the capability that
was lost when the Navy retired CT 39 aircraft without replacement. Both
the Navy and the Marine Corps have included the requirement for UC 35
aircraft on their unfunded priorities list. The committee recommends an
increase of $48.6 million for the procurement of six UC 35 aircraft,
three each for the Navy and the Marine Corps.
C 40A aircraft
The budget request included no funding for the procurement of C 40A
aircraft, although additional C 40A procurement is scheduled in the
Future Years Defense Program, and is included on the Navy unfunded
requirements list. The C 40A is being procured as a replacement for the
aging C 9 to provide intra-theater logistics essential to maintaining
the readiness of forward-deployed naval forces. Funding has been
provided for five C 40A aircraft to date, with deliveries scheduled to
commence in fiscal year 2001. The committee recommends an increase of
$128.4 million for the procurement of two C 40A aircraft, including
$11.2 million for spare parts.
T 45 aircraft
The budget request included $278.1 million for the procurement of 12
T 45 Goshawk aircraft, less advance procurement of $9.5 million from
prior years. The T 45 Goshawk training system consists of aircraft,
simulators, and academic materials required to train carrier-based naval
aviators. Additional T 45 aircraft are included on the Navy unfunded
requirements list.
The committee is concerned that the current budget request indicates
the Navy may shut down the production line for the T 45 before the
service acquires sufficient aircraft to offset attrition or accommodate
any potential surge in pilot training rate. The committee recommends an
increase of $49.2 million for the procurement of three T 45 aircraft, a
total authorization of $327.3 million.
Joint primary air training system
The budget request included $74.4 million for 21 joint primary air
training system (JPATS) aircraft for the Navy. The Navy has included
additional JPATS aircraft on its unfunded requirements list. The
committee recommends an increase of $7.0 million for the procurement of
three JPATS aircraft for the Navy, a total authorization of $81.4
million.
KC 130J
The budget request included $154.8 million for the procurement of two
KC 130J aircraft. The Marine Corps is facing a shortfall of aerial
refueling aircraft as it uses up the remaining fatigue life of its KC
130F and KC 130R fleet. The Marine Corps has included the procurement of
additional KC 130J aircraft on its unfunded priorities list. The
committee recommends an increase of $74.6 million for the procurement of
one KC 130J aircraft, a total authorization of $229.4 million.
EA 6B aircraft automatic flight control system
The budget request included $203.1 million for modifications for the
EA 6B aircraft. Although the budget request included no funds for
automatic flight control systems (AFCS), a new AFCS for the EA 6B was
included on the Navy unfunded priorities list. A new AFCS is required to
replace the obsolete air navigation computer, and will provide the pilot
with axis stability and attitude, speed, and altitude control. The new
system will also improve reliability and maintainability for the EA 6B,
the only tactical electronic jammer in use by the services. Heavily used
in Operation Allied Force, the EA 6B is a high demand, low density
platform. The committee recommends an increase of $21.0 million for the
procurement of EA 6B AFCS, a total authorization of $224.1 million.
AV 8B precision targeting pod
The budget request included $40.6 million for modifications to the AV
8B aircraft. The budget request included no funding for Litening II
precision targeting pods, although they were included on the Marine
Corps unfunded priorities list. The Litening II is a precision targeting
system which allows the aircraft to acquire targets and deliver
precision munitions. The Marine Corps currently has nine targeting pods
on contract, funded through the Emergency Supplemental Appropriations
Act for Fiscal Year 1999.
Operation Allied Force demonstrated a continuing requirement for
precision weapons and aircraft platforms capable of delivering them. The
committee recommends an increase of $79.4 million to procure 47 Litening
II precision targeting pods, a total authorization of $120.0 million in
AV 8B aircraft modifications.
F 18 modifications
The budget request included $212.6 million for modifications to the F
18 aircraft, including $22.7 million for engineering change proposal 583
(ECP 583), which upgrades Marine Corps F/A 18A aircraft to a
configuration with capabilities comparable to Lot 17 F/A 18C aircraft.
This upgrade allows these F/A 18A aircraft to remain viable for use on
the modern battlefield. Acceleration of this upgrade over what is
currently included in the Future Years Defense Program is included in
the Navy unfunded requirements list. The committee recommends an
increase of $86.9 million to upgrade 20 F/A 18A aircraft with ECP 583, a
total authorization of $299.5 million.
AH 1W series
The budget request included $9.8 million for AH 1W series aircraft
modifications. The committee notes an outstanding requirement for four
additional night targeting systems (NTS) for reserve component AH 1W
series aircraft. The committee recommends an increase of $4.0 million,
necessary to complete the last four aircraft upgrades with NTS devices.
The committee recommends a total authorization of $13.8 million for AH
1W series aircraft modifications.
H 1 series
The budget request included $2.6 million for H 1 series aircraft
modifications.
The Marine Corps is fielding AN/AAQ 22 UH 1N navigation thermal
imaging systems (NTIS) to support operational enhancements to fielded
aircraft. The committee supports this effort and believes these
modifications should be completed as soon as practicable. The committee
recommends an increase of $10.0 million to procure an additional 28 NTIS
upgrades for UH 1N aircraft.
The Marine Corps plans to begin the induction of existing UH 1N
aircraft into the remanufacturing process which will convert older
aircraft into the future four bladed ``November'' (4BN) configuration.
Due to a shortage of existing aircraft in the operational fleet, the
Marine Corps will have to use aircraft from operating squadrons to start
the contractor conversion program. The committee would prefer to avoid
such an effect on the operating squadrons. The Marine Corps has informed
the committee that there are aircraft currently housed in the aerospace
maintenance and regeneration center (AMARC) that could be used to begin
the conversion process instead. The committee recommends another
increase of $17.5 million to reclaim and convert 14 aircraft from AMARC
necessary to initiate the remanufacturing process without impacting
operational units. The committee, therefore, recommends a total
authorization of $30.1 million for H 1 series modifications.
P 3 aircraft modifications
The budget request included $60.7 million for modifications to the P
3 aircraft. The committee recommends an overall increase of $87.2
million in P 3 modifications for two modifications included on the Navy
unfunded priorities list, a total authorization of $147.9 million.
The budget request included $31.6 million for installation of
previously procured anti-surface warfare improvement program (AIP) kits,
along with associated support items, but did not include the procurement
of any additional AIP kits. The AIP modification allows the P 3 to
combat emerging third world, limited operations, surface, subsurface,
and air threats with simultaneous multi-mission capabilities, a
capability proven in Operation Allied Force. The committee recommends an
increase of $44.1 million for the procurement of three P 3 AIP kits.
The budget request included $17.7 million for the P 3C Update III
common configuration program, also known as the block modification
upgrade program (BMUP). This program provides modern processing systems
for the mission computer and acoustics sensors to achieve a common P 3C
configuration with improved performance. The committee recommends an
increase of $43.1 million for the conversion of five aircraft with BMUP
kits.
Tactical aircraft moving map capability
The budget request included $71.6 million for common avionics
changes, but included no funding for installation of the tactical
aircraft moving map capability (TAMMAC) in the F/A 18C/D
aircraft. TAMMAC is a modular hardware and software base
system that helps the aircrew maintain situational awareness by
providing a graphical presentation of the aircraft position and relative
positions of targets, threats, terrain features, planned mission flight
path, no fly zones, safe bases, and other objects. Funding for TAMMAC is
included for the F/A 18C/D in the Future Years Defense Program, and it
is included on the Navy unfunded requirements list. The committee
recommends an increase of $9.3 million to procure 80 TAMMAC units, the
maximum annual rate for F/A 18C/D installations, a total authorization
of $80.9 million for common avionics changes.
NAVY WEAPONS
Joint standoff weapon
The budget request included $171.6 million for the procurement of 636
joint standoff weapons (JSOWs) for the Navy. The JSOW is a precision
air-to-ground glide weapon capable of attacking a variety of fixed area
targets in day, night, and adverse weather conditions. With the
increased emphasis on the use of precision guided munitions demonstrated
in Operation Allied Force, it is necessary to build up inventories of
such weapons for use in contingencies. The committee recommends an
increase of $36.0 million for the procurement of 180 JSOWs, a total
authorization of $207.6 million.
Weapons industrial facilities
The budget request included $21.3 million for various activities at
government-owned and contractor-operated weapons industrial facilities.
The committee recommends an increase of $7.7 million to accelerate the
facilities restoration program at the Allegany Ballistics Laboratory.
Mark 48 advanced capability torpedo modifications
The budget request included $16.4 million for Mark 48 advanced
capability (ADCAP) torpedo modifications. The Mark 48 ADCAP torpedo is
the primary anti-ship and anti-submarine weapon for the submarine fleet.
However, torpedo modifications are required for effective operations in
the littorals. Therefore, the committee recommends an increase of $2.0
million for Mark 48 ADCAP modifications to field this improved
capability in the submarine fleet as soon as possible.
NAVY AND MARINE CORPS AMMUNITION
Procurement of ammunition, Navy and Marine Corps
The committee is concerned with continued reports of inadequate
supplies of ammunition for training and war reserves. The Commandant of
the Marine Corps recently identified a requirement for $69.8 million for
ammunition programs, and the Chief of Naval Operations identified a
requirement for $5.0 million for air expendable countermeasures, that
were not included in the fiscal year 2001 budget request. 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 Navy and Marine Corps ammunition
procurement:
Item:
Millions
20 mm
3.0
25 mm
3.5
2.75 Rockets
9.6
MJU 52 Countermeasures
5.0
Subtotal
$21.1
Laser-guided bomb components
The budget request included $63.2 million for the procurement of
general purpose bombs, with $29.2 million for the procurement of
laser-guided bomb components. Laser-guided bombs provide the ability to
conduct precision attacks while minimizing collateral damage. Recent
contingency operations have demonstrated the need for these weapons, and
the Navy has included laser-guided bombs on its unfunded requirements
list to augment critically low inventory levels. Operation Allied Force
highlighted a dramatic increase in the percentage of precision guided
munitions versus unguided munitions. The committee directs the Navy to
create a separate line item for laser-guided bomb components in future
budget submissions. The committee recommends an increase of $20.0
million for the competitive procurement of additional laser-guided bombs
components, a total authorization of $83.2 million for general purpose
bombs.
Training ordnance
The budget request included $50.6 million for practice bombs. The
Navy unfunded priorities list includes a requirement for additional
laser-guided bombs and associated ordnance to meet critical readiness
and training needs. Recent contingency operations have highlighted a
dramatic increase in the use of
precision weapons. The committee directs the Navy to establish
a separate line item for laser-guided bomb training ordnance in future
budget submissions. The committee recommends an increase of $26.0
million for the procurement of additional laser guided bombs and
associated ordnance to meet critical training and readiness
requirements, a total authorization of $76.6 million for practice bombs.
NAVY SHIPBUILDING AND CONVERSION
Shipbuilding overview
The Navy and Marine Corps are a forward deployed force carrying out
the National Security Strategy of shaping the international environment,
responding to crises, and preparing for an uncertain future. Seventy
percent of the world's population lives within 200 miles of coastline.
The normal operating areas of Navy and Marine Corps forces, referred to
as the littorals, thus have the potential to include numerous future hot
spots around the world.
Navy and Marine Corps forces are an inherently forward deployed and
combat credible expeditionary force engaged daily to influence the
world's security environment and sustain our national security. Navy and
Marine Corps forces do not rely on host country airfields, security, or
lines of communication. Their capabilities range from humanitarian
assistance and strengthening ties with other nations through
international exercises to forcible entry and full scale war.
As was demonstrated in the past year, once forward deployed, Navy and
Marine Corps forces respond immediately without extensive preparation
time to a wide range of national tasks.
The committee has repeatedly received testimony that indicates the
burden of inadequate force structure (ships and submarines) falls
squarely on the shoulders of the men and women in uniform. The testimony
indicates that even at the current fleet size of 316 ships, the Navy and
Marine Corps have been ``. . . stretched too thin.'' Under these
circumstances, it is the people who man the ships that are being asked
to bear a heavier burden to respond to more contingencies than
envisioned when the Quadrennial Defense Review decided that a force of
about 300 ships would be adequate.
In recognition of the long term view that must be taken for
shipbuilding, section 1013 of the National Defense Authorization Act for
Fiscal Year 2000 (Public Law 106 65) required the Secretary of Defense
to submit no later than February 1, 2000, a report on the long-range
shipbuilding requirements of the Department of Defense. The report is
required to include a statement of the ship types and the annual
investment required through 2030.
The Secretary did not submit the report on the date required by law.
Although Congress still waits for the report, the committee received
testimony from a representative of the Congressional Research Service
(CRS) on the various analyses CRS has conducted on supporting Navy force
levels. The CRS analyses concluded that an annual ship procurement
investment of about $10.0 to $12.0 billion and a procurement rate of 8.7
to 10.2 ships per year are required to maintain a fleet of about 300
ships. The CRS estimates did not consider the requirements of, or
resources for, strategic sealift ships which have previously been funded
in the National Defense Sealift Fund.
Navy witnesses concurred with the CRS conclusions on the annual
investment and annual procurement rates required to maintain the fleet.
The committee also agrees with the CRS conclusions, but recognizes that
a $10.0 to $12.0 billion annual investment alone will not ensure the
nation has the ships required to carry out the National Security
Strategy.
The committee recognizes there are a number of different approaches
to funding shipbuilding in the long-term. One approach would be to defer
near-term investment, allow the average age of the force to increase,
and permit a large backlog of ship purchases to accrue. This would match
the pattern of recent years: we have been building ships at a much lower
rate than 8.7 ships per year. However, the committee recognizes that,
for every year that we invest less than $10.0 to $12.0 billion and buy
fewer than 8.7 ships, we will have to invest more than $10.0 to $12.0
billion and buy more than 8.7 ships in a future year. Continuing at
rates that are too low could result in unattainable ship procurement
funding levels and will inevitably increase the burden on our men and
women in uniform.
The committee also recognizes that, in addition to attaining the
required annual investment, the Department of Defense (DoD) should
consider more innovative procedures to ensure shipbuilding procurement
funds are leveraged to attain the most efficient and productive results.
For example, the Navy was persuaded that initiating funding early for
CVN 77 would result in protecting the required worker skill base at the
shipyard and result in savings. These savings were verified by a Rand
Corporation analysis. Multiyear commitment of funding for the DDG 51
program also resulted in over $1.4 billion in savings compared to a
normal annual procurement strategy.
In addition, research and development for shipbuilding programs
provides an opportunity to drastically lower the life-cycle costs of
building, maintaining, and operating ships. Ship research and
development is an investment in not only the required war fighting
characteristics and capabilities, but also the economic feasibility of
operating multi-purpose complex ships.
Therefore, the committee recommends that the DoD take the following
actions to alter current budget practices to leverage scarce ship
procurement funding when economic advantage or beneficial program
stability can be achieved:
(1) include total ownership costs as an explicit independent
variable when determining requirements for all future ship classes;
(2) maximize production efficiencies of economic order quantities
for block buy and multiyear contract opportunities;
(3) maximize use of advance procurement to retain vendor base
efficiencies and critical skill mix learning curve progress; and
(4) budget for auxiliary ships and strategic lift ships in the
National Defense Sealift Fund.
The committee believes that the Navy should use specific criteria in
evaluating the alternative budgeting approaches in items (2) through (4)
above. These criteria are analogous to those specified for evaluating
multiyear procurement programs in section 2306(b) of title 10, United
States Code. These criteria include whether:
(1) the use of such alternative budgeting will result in savings in
total contract costs;
(2) there is reasonable certainty that the need for the program will
not change;
(3) there is reasonable expectation that the Navy will continue to
budget for the program;
(4) the ship design is stable, and the technical risks are not
excessive; and
(5) cost estimates are realistic.
The committee recommends action elsewhere in this report to increase
the new ship procurement funding authorization to achieve potential
savings of $1.1 billion in new ship construction and encourages the DoD
to make the recommended budget process changes. The committee encourages
the administration to submit legislative initiatives that would assist
in leveraging shipbuilding research and development and procurement
funding.
LHD 8 advance procurement
The budget request included LHD 8 advance procurement in fiscal year
2004 and full funding in fiscal year 2005 as part of the Future Year
Defense Program (FYDP).
In the statement of managers accompanying the Strom Thurmond National
Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 1999 (H. Rept. 105 736),
Congress authorized $50.0 million for advance procurement of long lead
materials for construction of LHD 8 in lieu of a future service life
extension program for LHA 1. In
addition, the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal
Year 2000 (Public Law 106 65) authorized the procurement and advance
construction of components and authorized $375.0 million for that
purpose as a confirmation that building LHD 8 was preferred to extending
the life of LHA 1.
The Navy and Marine Corps included, as a priority, the $1.2 billion
remaining cost for LHD 8 on their fiscal year 2001 unfunded requirements
priorities list.
The committee realizes that actual cost savings and price will depend
on the final procurement funding profile.
The committee continues to be concerned that the FYDP plan would
cause an unnecessary interruption of learning curve efficiencies and the
loss of long-term vendor pricing economies. However, fiscal year 2001
advance procurement of LHD 8 would accomplish the following:
(1) save taxpayers between $500 and $630 million dollars by
leveraging skilled labor force and vendor base efficiencies resulting
from the continuous LHD construction for the past 16 years;
(2) provide the Marine Corps required warfighting improvements
including landing craft, air cushion (LCAC) carrying capacity, improved
ship stability, and enhanced communications capability;
(3) initiate life-cycle cost improvements for large deck amphibious
ships including gas turbine main propulsion engines; and
(4) take action to address the annual shipbuilding investment
required to maintain about 300 ships, mentioned elsewhere in this
report, by spreading out the recapitalization of the five ships in the
LHA 1 class which will turn 35 years old at a rate of one per year
beginning in fiscal year 2011.
The committee reiterates its direction that the Navy structure any
contract for LHD 8 to maximize these potential savings and to report
same to the Congress. Therefore, the committee recommends an increase of
$460.0 million to continue the advance procurement and advance
construction of components for the LHD 8 amphibious ship.
OTHER NAVY PROCUREMENT
AN/WSN 7 inertial navigation system
The budget request included $7.3 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 and provides 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. Therefore,
accelerated procurement of the AN/WSN 7 could produce a substantial
savings in maintenance costs.
The committee recommends an increase of $7.0 million to the budget
request for the procurement and installation of additional AN/WSN 7
navigation sets.
Surveillance and security for military sealift ships
The budget request included no funding for thermal imaging
surveillance and security for military sealift ships. Military sealift
ships may operate independently in high threat areas. Thermal imaging
capabilities could improve the ability of these ships to navigate and
operate in reduced visibility while improving their overall self
protection capabilities. The committee recommends an increase of $4.0
million for thermal imaging surveillance and security procurement and
installation on Military Sealift Command (MSC) ships.
Integrated condition assessment system
The budget request included $11.3 million for integrated condition
assessment system (ICAS) for ships. The ICAS is a system that
electronically monitors the operating parameters of machinery and
electronic systems, thus reducing man-hours spent taking readings on
equipment. The committee recommends an increase of $5.0 million for
procurement and installation of ICAS equipment for surface ships.
AN/SPS 73(V) surface search radar
The budget request included no funding for procurement and
installation of AN/SPS 73(V) surface search radars which would replace a
number of aging radars on surface ships with one radar. The AN/SPS 73(V)
is a commercial off-the-shelf radar which provides surface ships with a
reliable, lower maintenance and lower life-cycle cost surface search
radar capability. To capture the reliability and life-cycle cost
savings, the Navy is replacing aging surface ship radars with the AN/SPS
73(V). The committee recommends an increase of $8.0 million for the
procurement and installation of AN/SPS 73(V) radars.
Side-scanning sonar for forward deployed minesweepers
The budget request included no funding for side-scanning sonar for
forward deployed minesweepers. Commercial off-the-shelf high resolution
side-scanning sonars are available that would enhance the ability of
forward deployed minesweepers to detect and classify sea mines located
on the bottom of the ocean floor. These sonars have been used by Navy
units with great success in locating aircraft wreckage. The Navy's
experience with these sonars provides the basis for developing
operational expertise to apply this technology to the challenging task
of detecting and classifying bottom sea mines.
The committee recommends an increase of $5.0 million for the
procurement and installation of a side-scanning sonar in a forward
deployed minesweeper to enhance the ability to detect and classify
bottom mines.
Joint Engineering Data Management and Information Control System
The budget request included no funds for the Joint Engineering Data
Management and Information Control System (JEDMICS), the designated
Department of Defense standard system for management, control and
storage of engineering drawings. This system is designed as an open,
client-server architecture and is nearing full deployment for global
access to the data in its repositories. However, the JEDMICS data
available is not fully accessible to all clients using the joint
technical data environment.
The committee recommends an increase of $4.0 million for procurement,
integration and accreditation surveys to ensure JEDMICS is fully
compliant with the joint technical data environment.
Aviation life support
The budget request included $20.4 million for aviation life support
equipment. The committee continues to support efforts designed to
improve the ability of Marine Corps flight crews to operate their
aircraft at night by providing the most capable night vision systems
available. The committee recommends an increase of $9.9 million to
procure additional AN/AVS 9 night vision goggles which offer significant
improvements over existing AN/AVS 6 goggles, a total authorization of
$30.3 million.
Gun fire control radar performance improvements
The budget request included $15.6 million for AN/SPQ 9B gun fire
control equipment (GFCE) procurement, installation, and engineering
change proposals. The AN/SPQ 9B radar interface is the primary gun fire
control radar for surface ships. The AN/SPQ 9B GFCE program provides a
low cost product improvement to support both surface and sea skimming
target engagements. The committee recommends an increase of $4.0 million
to develop and
field engineering change proposals to improve the performance
of the SPQ 9B radar.
Cruiser smart ship
The budget request included $47.9 million for programs referred to as
``smart ship'' programs. Of this amount $22.5 million is for smart ship
equipment procurement and logistics for Ticonderoga-class cruisers.
The Navy's goal in introducing smart ship programs was to leverage
technology to reduce the workload on sailors at sea. Prior year
authorizations of funds for the smart ship program were originally
justified by expectations that hardware and software installation would
enable subsequent manpower reductions. Unfortunately, for the past five
years, program delays and software problems have resulted in little
progress toward achieving the Navy's goal.
The Navy is currently testing version 11 of the software and has
stated that version 12 is required prior to further test and evaluation.
The damage control assistant flooding and counter flooding software
developed by a fleet sailor almost six years ago on a laptop computer
has yet to be introduced as part of the smart ship software for the
fleet.
Installation of smart ship equipment has not yet resulted in any
personnel savings. The Chief of Naval Operations has instituted a policy
which requires a waiting period of one year with smart ship equipment
aboard before the Navy will consider realizing any end strength savings.
The justification for the smart ship program appears to be evolving to a
basis of installing the equipment for a potential reduction of workload
on sailors.
The committee recommends a decrease of $17.5 million for procurement
of smart ship equipment. The committee will assess, during the review of
the fiscal year 2002 budget request, the progress in testing and
development of cruiser smart ship software and the results of the Navy's
Smart Ship Steering Committee (SSSC). The SSSC is attempting to
standardize procurement of hardware, software, and training for surface
combatants, amphibious ships, aircraft carriers, and minesweepers.
NULKA anti-ship missile decoy system
The budget request included $33.8 million for procurement and
installation of the NULKA anti-ship missile decoy program. NULKA is a
proven decoy against anti-ship missiles. The committee recommends an
increase of $4.3 million for the procurement of launcher systems and
decoys to outfit the fleet with this key self-defense equipment.
In addition, the committee recommends an increase of $4.3 million in
the Navy operations and maintenance account for critical training on the
NULKA system.
Civil engineering support equipment
The budget request included $10.5 million for light and medium duty
tactical equipment used mostly by the Naval Construction Force (NCF),
Maritime Prepositioning Force (MPF), Naval Beach Group (NBG), and other
special operating units. The light duty tactical vehicles are used for
the movement of personnel and equipment. The medium tactical trucks are
essential for rapid deployment of material to support combat
construction of airfields, landing zones, road battle damage repair and
rapid runway repair.
Heavy use of the equipment to support military and humanitarian
assistance operations during the past decade have heavily strained the
existing inventory of already over-aged civil engineering support
equipment (CESE). The committee recommends an increase of $10.0 million
for the procurement of civil engineering support equipment for the Naval
Construction Force.
MARINE CORPS PROCUREMENT
Night vision
The budget request included $14.4 million for Marine Corps night
vision equipment. The committee notes an outstanding requirement for the
improved night/day fire-control observation device (INOD). The committee
recommends an increase of $2.7 million to procure INOD devices for the
Marine Corps, a total authorization of $17.1 million for night vision
devices.
Radio systems
The budget request included $3.1 million for Marine Corps radio
system equipment. The committee notes outstanding requirements for
additional enhanced position location reporting system (EPLRS) equipment
necessary to provide network data distribution capabilities and enhance
situational awareness. The committee recommends an increase of $6.4
million for additional EPLRS systems necessary to meet requirements
associated with the acquisition objective, a total authorization of $9.5
million.
[Graphic Image Not Available]
[Graphic Image Not Available]
[Graphic Image Not Available]
[Graphic Image Not Available]
[Graphic Image Not Available]
[Graphic Image Not Available]
[Graphic Image Not Available]
[Graphic Image Not Available]
[Graphic Image Not Available]
[Graphic Image Not Available]
[Graphic Image Not Available]
[Graphic Image Not Available]
[Graphic Image Not Available]
[Graphic Image Not Available]
[Graphic Image Not Available]
[Graphic Image Not Available]
Repeal of requirement for annual report on B 2 bomber
aircraft program (sec. 131)
Since the B 2 bomber is no longer in production, the committee
recommends a provision that would repeal section 112 of the National
Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Years 1990 and 1991 (Public Law 101
189; 103 Stat. 1373), as amended by section 141 of Public Law 104 106
(110 Stat. 213).
OTHER AIR FORCE PROGRAMS
AIR FORCE AIRCRAFT
EC 130J
The budget request included no funding for the procurement of EC 130J
aircraft, a high demand, low density asset. The EC 130 is used to
conduct special missions such as psychological operations, civil affairs
radio and television broadcasts, command and control countermeasures,
and limited intelligence gathering. The Air Force is converting the
inventory EC 130 aircraft to the EC 130J configuration. Procurement of
additional EC 130J aircraft is on the Air National Guard unfunded
priorities list. The committee recommends an increase of $90.0 million
for the procurement of one EC 130J aircraft.
Joint primary aircraft training system
The budget request included $113.8 million for the procurement of 27
joint primary aircraft training system (JPATS) aircraft. The Air Force
has requested additional JPATS aircraft on its unfunded requirements
list. The committee recommends an increase of $18.9 million for the
procurement of seven JPATS aircraft, a total authorization of $132.7
million.
Joint surveillance and target attack radar system
The budget request included no funding for advanced procurement of a
16th E 8C Joint Surveillance and Target Attack Radar System (JSTARS)
aircraft or shutdown of the production line. Funding for either advance
procurement or line shutdown was, however, included in the Air Force's
unfunded requirements list.
JSTARS provides target information for pairing direct attack aircraft
and standoff weapons against selected targets. JSTARS successfully
supported Operation Allied Force. General Wesley Clark, Commander in
Chief, Europe, in testimony before the Committee on Armed Services of
the Senate, stated that if he were able to have more of anything in
support of this operation, it would have been another JSTARS.
The last Quadrennial Defense Review, however, recommended the Air
Force inventory objective of JSTARS be reduced from 19 to 13, with the
understanding that the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) would
acquire four to six aircraft. This NATO acquisition did not materialize,
and the budget request is for the 15th JSTARS aircraft.
The committee, therefore, recommends an increase of $46.0 million, to
be used, at the discretion of the Secretary of Defense, either for: (1)
long lead funding for aircraft number 16, if the Department requests
funding for a 16th JSTARS aircraft in the fiscal year 2002 budget
request; or (2) production line shutdown and last lot costs.
B 52H aircraft modifications
The budget request included $8.4 million for modifications to the B
52H aircraft. The budget request included no funding for ALQ 172
self-protection electronic countermeasures. The Air Force has included
continued procurement of self-protection electronic countermeasure
equipment for the B 52 on its unfunded requirements list. The committee
recommends an increase of $12.0 million in aircraft procurement, Air
Force, for the ALQ 172 electronic countermeasures improvement program
for the B 52H aircraft, a total authorization of $20.4 million.
A 10 aircraft integrated flight and fire control computer
The budget request included $33.9 million for modifications to the A
10 aircraft, but included no funds for procurement of the integrated
flight and fire control computer (IFFCC). Although development of this
capability is to be complete in fiscal year 2001, production funding
would commence in fiscal year 2002 in the Future Years Defense Program.
The IFFCC provides the processing power that handles fire control,
flight control, digital terrain system, data link management,
situational awareness, and cockpit control and display management. The A
10 IFFCC is included on the Air Force unfunded priorities list. The
committee recommends an increase of $11.2 million for the procurement
and fielding of IFFCCs for the A 10 aircraft, a total authorization of
$45.1 million.
F 15 aircraft modifications
The budget request included $258.2 million for modifications to the F
15 aircraft. The committee recommends an overall increase of $74.9
million, a total authorization of $333.1 million. Both increases
recommended by the committee are included on the Air Force unfunded
priorities list.
The budget request included $37.3 million for upgrading F 15 engines
from the F100 PW 100 to the F100 PW 220E configuration. This upgrade
would significantly improve the reliability and maintainability of the
engine, and has reduced the unscheduled engine removal rate by 35
percent. Procurement savings are achievable by accelerating this
program. The committee recommends an increase of $48.0 million for
additional F 15 engine upgrades.
The budget request did not include any funding for the procurement of
BOL chaff and flare systems or countermeasures for the F 15 aircraft.
The committee understands that the BOL countermeasure system is being
evaluated under a foreign comparative test program, and that the system
has been successfully integrated on other tactical aircraft. The
committee recommends an increase of $26.9 million for the procurement of
BOL systems and countermeasures for the F 15 aircraft.
F 16 aircraft modifications
The budget request included $248.8 million for modifications to the F
16 aircraft. The committee recommends an overall increase of $119.5
million in F 16 modifications, a total authorization of $368.3 million.
The committee also recommends a series of increases to address the
fact that the budget request included no funding for other F 16 aircraft
modifications. Each of these items were included on an Air Force or Air
National Guard unfunded priority list.
The digital terrain system includes precise navigation capabilities
and a ground collision avoidance system designed to prevent mishaps. The
committee recommends an increase of $16.5 million for the digital
terrain system. The committee understands that this amount of funding
was removed from the budget request late in the cycle, so recommended
offsets for this increase have been taken from other Air Force programs.
Precision targeting pods are the number one unfunded requirement for
the Air National Guard. The committee recommends an increase of $34.0
million for the procurement of precision targeting pods.
Compared to other F 16 block aircraft, the thrust of the block 42 is
relatively low. For this reason, block 42 F 16 aircraft have not been
used in combat. The committee recommends an increase of $69.0 million
for the retrofit of Air National Guard block 42 F 16 aircraft with F100
PW 229 engines.
C 17 simulator
The budget request included $97.1 million for modifications to the C
17 aircraft. The committee recommends an overall increase of $26.4
million for C 17 aircraft modifications, a total authorization of $123.5
million.
The budget request included no funding for the procurement of another
C 17 cockpit system simulator. Procurement of an additional cockpit
system simulator is necessary to meet projected aircrew training
requirements, and the Air Force has included the procurement of this
simulator on its unfunded requirements list. The committee recommends an
increase of $14.9 million for the procurement of a C 17 cockpit system
simulator.
The budget request included no funding for the C 17 aircraft
maintenance systems trainer (AMST), for which $3.5 million in long lead
funding was provided in fiscal year 2000. The committee recommends an
increase of $11.5 million to complete procurement of the C 17 AMST.
Defense airborne reconnaissance program aircraft modifications
The budget request included $165.5 million for modifications to
defense airborne reconnaissance program aircraft. The budget request
included no funding for the procurement of Senior Year electro-optic
reconnaissance system (SYERS) equipment. The committee recommends an
increase of $3.0 million for the procurement of SYERS equipment, a total
authorization of $168.5 million.
ALE 50 towed decoys
The budget request included $43.0 million for war consumables, with
$32.3 million dedicated to the procurement of ALE 50 towed decoys. The
ALE 50 is a low cost radio frequency countermeasure that provides
increased survivability against semi-active guided missile threats. This
countermeasure was credited with saving aircraft and lives during
Operation Allied Force. Additional procurement of the ALE 50 is included
on the Air Force unfunded requirements list. The committee recommends an
increase of $46.2 million for the procurement of additional ALE 50 towed
decoys, a total authorization of $89.2 million for war consumables.
Compass Call
The budget request included $398.5 million for other production
charges for the Air Force. Compass Call is the premier tactical airborne
information warfare platform. In fiscal year 1993, funding for the block
30 Compass Call mission simulator was cut, and there is no training
system fielded for the current configuration. Key Compass Call program
content was lost in fiscal year 1999 due to Operation Allied Force
costs, which were absorbed out of existing budget authority. Compass
Call block 35 improved frequency coverage has been reduced. The
committee, therefore, recommends increases of $23.7 million for the
procurement of a Compass Call mission training system for block 30/35
aircraft and $4.1 million to provide a technology upgrade to the
acquisition subsystem of Compass Call block 35, a total authorization of
$426.3 million. Both of the increases recommended by the committee are
included on the Air Force unfunded priorities list.
Defense airborne reconnaissance program
The budget request included $98.4 million for the procurement of
equipment for the defense airborne reconnaissance program (DARP), of
which, $85.1 million was for equipment for the joint signals
intelligence avionics family (JSAF). The committee understands this does
not fully outfit the first U 2 aircraft with a complete JSAF unit. The
committee recommends an increase of $8.0 million in Aircraft
Procurement, Air Force, for the procurement of additional JSAF equipment
for the U 2 aircraft.
AIR FORCE MISSILE
Global Positioning System
The budget request included $210.3 million in Missile Procurement,
Air Force, and $250.2 in Research, Development, Test, and Evaluation,
Air Force, for the Global Positioning System (GPS). The committee has
recently received an amended budget request for the GPS system that
reflects the Air Force's GPS modernization plan. The committee supports
this effort. In order to properly align funds according to the amended
budget request, the committee recommends a decrease of $30.3 million in
Missile Procurement, Air Force, and an increase of $10.7 million in PE
35165F.
Titan space boosters
The budget request included $469.7 million for procurement of Titan
IV space boosters. Based on current projections, it appears that the
Titan IV program may not require this full amount to execute its fiscal
year 2001 requirements. Therefore, the committee recommends a decrease
of $10.0 million in Air Force Missile Procurement for Titan space
boosters.
Medium launch vehicle
The budget request included $55.9 million for Medium Launch Vehicle
(MLV) procurement. As a result of the Department of Defense's Global
Positioning System (GPS) modernization plan, the Air Force now plans to
delay a number of GPS block IIR launches. This delay reduces the
procurement funding requirement for MLV during fiscal year 2001.
Therefore, the committee recommends a decrease of $10.0 million in Air
Force Missile Procurement funds for MLV.
AIR FORCE AMMUNITION
Procurement of ammunition, Air Force
The budget request included $11.5 million for the procurement of 2.75
inch rockets for the Air Force. The committee is concerned with
continued reports of inadequate supplies of ammunition for training and
war reserves. The Chief of Staff of the Air Force recently identified a
requirement for $211.0 million for high priority munition programs,
including 2.75 inch rockets, that were not included in the fiscal year
2001 budget request. Ammunition is an important contributor to military
readiness--for training and in anticipation of conflict. Therefore, the
committee recommends an additional $28.0 million for 2.75 inch rockets.
OTHER AIR FORCE PROCUREMENT
Combat training ranges
The budget request includes $26.0 million for procurement of
equipment for combat training ranges, of which $18.4 million is for
advanced threat upgrades. Realistic simulation of threats in training
increases the survivability of our aircraft and aircrews in actual
combat situations. The committee understands there are competing systems
to fill the Air Force requirement for advanced threat emitters. The
committee recommends an increase of $20.0 million to procure additional
advanced threat emitters for its combat training ranges, a total
authorization of $46.0 million.
Night vision goggles
The budget request included $2.8 million for the procurement of night
vision goggles (NVGs) and associated test equipment for aircrew,
maintenance, and security personnel. There is a shortage of this
equipment, and the Air Force has included procurement of additional NVGs
on its unfunded priority list. The committee recommends an increase of
$8.0 million for the procurement of additional NVGs and associated test
equipment, a total authorization of $10.8 million.
[Graphic Image Not Available]
[Graphic Image Not Available]
[Graphic Image Not Available]
[Graphic Image Not Available]
[Graphic Image Not Available]
Advanced SEAL delivery system design enhancements
The budget request included $33.5 million for the Advanced SEAL
Delivery System (ASDS) Program. The committee recommends an increase of
$3.3 million in the Defense Wide Procurement, Special Operations
Command, ASDS account to fund design enhancements required to implement
necessary changes and enhancements on subsequent ASDS production
vehicles.
ASDS design enhancement costs are estimated to be $10.0 million.
Special Operations Command has funded $6.8 million of ASDS design costs
with savings in its ongoing ASDS developmental testing program. Full
funding of these design enhancements could result in a $10.0 million
reduction in procurement unit cost for the remaining five ASDS vehicles.
The statement of managers accompanying the National Defense
Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2000 (H. Rept. 106 301) required the
Commander-in-Chief, U.S. Special Operations Command (CINCSOCOM) to
report on various aspects of the ASDS program, including whether the
program should be elevated to a major acquisition program. The CINCSOCOM
provided a report on technical aspects of the ASDS program, but failed
to address whether the program had been reviewed by the Department of
Defense (DOD), and why the program was not elevated to the category of a
major defense acquisition. The committee expects the Under Secretary of
Defense for Acquisition, Technology and Logistics to provide a report
explaining why he decided not to elevate this program to a higher level
of review, as was required.
Special operations forces small arms and support equipment
The budget request included $11.8 million for Special Operations
Forces (SOF) Small Arms and Support Equipment, but did not include
funding to continue procurement of SOF Body Armor Load Carriage System,
the Modular Integrated Communications Helmet, or the SOF Peculiar
Modifications to the M 4 Carbine. The Commander-in-Chief, U.S. Special
Operations Command (CINCSOCOM), identified procurement of this improved
body armor, improved helmets, and special modifications to individual
weapons, as his highest set of priority unfunded requirements for fiscal
year 2001. The committee has followed developments in this area closely
and is encouraged that equipment that will enhance the survivability,
flexibility, and precision of our special operations forces is now
available for general procurement.
The committee understands this equipment has been rigorously tested
and fielded to some SOF elements. The committee applauds the efforts of
CINCSOCOM to field this important equipment to all SOF operators. The
committee recommends an increase of $21.7 million for SOF Small Arms and
Support Equipment to be distributed as follows: $4.9 million for SOF
Body Armor Load Carriage System; $4.7 million for SOF Modular Integrated
Communications Helmet; and $12.1 million for SOF Peculiar Modifications
to the M 4 Carbine. This represents approximately one-half of the
funding requested by CINCSOCOM to fully equip all SOF operators. The
committee further directs that CINCSOCOM fully evaluate the suitability
of this equipment for all SOF operators across the wide spectrum of
activities conducted by SOCOM and report back to the defense committees
of Congress his assessment of the suitability of these enhancements for
all SOF operational elements and any recommendations for improvements to
meet the unique needs of the various, diverse operational elements of
SOCOM. Upon receipt of such an assessment, the committee would consider
additional authorizations to complete procurement of this equipment for
all SOF operators.
Nuclear, Biological and Chemical Defense Enhancement Kits
The budget request included no funding for Nuclear, Biological, and
Chemical (NBC) Defense Enhancement Kits. The Marine Corps continues to
require the development of NBC force protection training and equipment
support packages for deploying Marine Expeditionary Units. The NBC
Defense Enhancement Kits will provide equipment to on-scene leaders to
allow for isolation of NBC contaminated areas, agent detection and
identification, and decontamination. The Marine Corps has a requirement
for thirteen NBC kits; nine kits have been procured. The committee
recommends an increase of $2.5 million in the Chemical and Biological
Defense Program for four NBC Defense Enhancement Kits to complete the
planned acquisition.
Communications assistance for law enforcement act
The budget request included $120.0 million for the Telecommunications
Carrier Compliance Fund, which was created as a result of the
Communications assistance for law enforcement act of 1994. The committee
is concerned that this may represent an inappropriate first step by the
Department of Defense towards involvement in placing wiretaps on
communications system of American citizens. Court-authorized wiretaps
are, and should remain, the responsibility of law enforcement agencies.
Therefore, the committee recommends a reduction of $120.0 million to the
budget request for this activity.
SUBTITLE E--OTHER MATTERS
Pueblo Chemical Depot chemical agent destruction
technologies (sec. 141)
The committee recommends a provision that would provide for the
destruction of the stockpile of lethal chemical agents at the Pueblo
Chemical Depot either by incineration or any technology demonstrated by
the Assembled Chemical Weapons Assessment on or before May 1, 2000.
Residents and leaders of communities surrounding the Pueblo Chemical
Depot continue to voice concerns about delays in the destruction of
chemical agents at the Pueblo depot and the attendant risk to community
safety. The National Academy of Sciences (NAS) has reported on several
occasions about the risk associated with the prolonged storage of
chemical agents and munitions. According to the NAS, this risk increases
significantly with time.
Approximately eight percent of the total U.S. chemical weapons
inventory is stored at the Pueblo Chemical Depot, Colorado. Community
leaders have expressed support for the baseline incineration method and
the technologies developed through the Assembled Chemical Weapons
Assessment program. This provision is intended to expedite destruction
activities utilizing one of these technologies at the Pueblo Chemical
Depot in the interest of community safety.
OTHER ITEMS OF INTEREST
Acquisition programs at the National Security Agency
There are substantial challenges facing the National Security Agency
(NSA) as it seeks to modernize its operations and infrastructure. The
United States has relied on the NSA for vital information in the past,
and will need a significant contribution from NSA as we face the new
demands of the future.
The committee believes that the Director of the NSA is making
significant progress in making fundamental reform within the agency. The
committee encourages the Director to continue this important process.
Although the Director has indicated the need to improve the
acquisition process, the committee has become concerned that the current
acquisition management procedures may not provide sufficient structure,
accountability, or visibility for these important programs.
The committee directs that NSA and the Department of Defense manage
the current NSA modernization effort as though it were a major defense
acquisition program, as defined in section 2430 of title 10, United
States Code. The committee does not intend that these programs be merged
into a single contracting vehicle, rather these programs should be
elevated to a higher level of review to ensure that the overall
modernization effort receives appropriate review and management
attention within the Office of
the Secretary of Defense. Further discussion of this issue is
included in the classified annex to this report.
Army aviation
The committee has been very pleased with Army efforts over the last
year to revise outdated and incomplete aviation modernization plans. The
committee applauds the outstanding efforts of active Army, Army National
Guard, and Army Reserve leaders to establish a plan that will ultimately
result in a seamless force of modernized aircraft. The most significant
action taken will be that of retiring legacy UH 1 Huey and AH 1 Cobra
aircraft by fiscal year 2004 and replacing these aircraft with UH 60
Blackhawks. Most of these aircraft, largely found in the reserve
components, have reached the end of their useful life and must be
retired as soon as practicable. The revised modernization plan will
result in an aviation force structure that is common across both active
and reserve components, will reduce the number of rotary wing platforms
from seven to four, and will facilitate crew rotation requirements for
the broad range of missions that will challenge the Army over the next
decade.
The committee still has serious questions about the ability of the
Army to fund some of the critical requirements in the revised plan. In
fact, despite congressional direction that the Secretary of the Army to
fully fund the revised plan, the Army plan remains underfunded by at
least $400.0 million each year.
C 5 aircraft upgrades
In testimony before the Subcommittee on Readiness and Management
Support in March, 2000, the Secretary of the Air Force stated that the
decision regarding the priority for upgrade of the C 5As or the newer C
5Bs was pending the results of the outsized and oversized cargo portion
of the larger Joint Chiefs of Staff mobility requirements study 05 (MRS
05). The Air Force budget documentation, however, clearly indicates a
schedule for upgrade of the C 5Bs before C 5As. The budget documentation
also includes a plan to continue kit development options for two
aircraft. The committee is concerned that the Air Force will upgrade the
newer C 5Bs to optimize strategic airlift operational readiness rates in
the near-term, with severe effects on the overall airlift force
readiness in the not-too-distant future. This is one of several key
decisions being delayed pending the results of MRS 05. Section 1034 of
the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2000 required the
Secretary of Defense to submit a report based on MRS 05 to the
congressional defense committees by February 15, 2000. The Secretary of
Defense has asked for an extension of this requirement until September
30, 2000. The committee directs the Secretary of the Air Force to submit
a report by February 15, 2001, which contains the analysis to support
the Air Force recommendation on sequence of C 5 aircraft upgrades based
on the lift requirements outlined in MRS 05. The kit development efforts
for the two aircraft should be for one C 5A and one C 5B. The analysis
should project lift capabilities for ten years based on most likely
operational readiness rates under the scenario of upgrading the C 5As
before the C 5Bs and under the scenario of upgrading the C 5Bs before
the C 5As.
Electronic digital compass system
The committee continues to support the Army digitization effort,
which will establish a tactical internet for enhanced situational
awareness. The output from the Global Positioning System (GPS) receiver
on Army combat and tactical vehicles is key to the knowledge of friendly
positions. GPS is generally an effective device, but has its
limitations, such as susceptibility to blockages from terrain and
foliage, enemy electronic countermeasures, including jamming,
constellation misalignments, and multi-path errors. The committee is
concerned that there is currently no backup to GPS, other than the
enhanced position location reporting system, to ensure that critical
situational awareness inputs to the tactical internet are not
interrupted. This backup could be improved at modest cost by an
electronic digital compass system, which can also provide steer-to
navigation capabilities. The committee directs the Secretary of the Army
to provide a report assessing the utility and costs involved in
integrating and procuring electronic digital compass systems for combat
and tactical vehicles of the first digitized division and the digitized
corps.
Single channel ground and airborne radio system
The committee is aware of outstanding requirements for additional
single channel ground and airborne radio systems (SINCGARS) to provide
necessary voice and data communications for a small number of Army
National Guard units that are still operating with earlier generation
equipment. The committee recognizes plans within the Department of
Defense to begin an acquisition program that will procure the next
generation joint tactical radio system. Unfortunately, these radios will
not be available in the near-term and there are still units in the Army
that must be modernized. The committee encourages the Army to review the
plans and programs associated with communications fielding requirements
and identify alternatives that will meet outstanding requirements as
soon as practicable.
Soldier's portable on-system repair tool
For the last several years, the committee has monitored the fielding
of the soldier's portable on-system repair tool (SPORT) and is aware
that the current contract will expire in fiscal year 2001. SPORT is the
on-system tester designed to augment the built-in test equipment of all
major Army weapon systems, including the M1 Abrams, the M2 Bradley, the
UH 60 Blackhawk, the Paladin, and the multiple launch rocket system. In
addition, SPORT has served as a significant maintenance diagnostic tool
for many other Army systems. The committee is concerned that any
interruption in the fielding of SPORT could have a significant impact on
overall readiness. The committee directs the Army to review outstanding
requirements for SPORT equipment, identify an acquisition strategy
designed to meet those requirements, and provide the Congress with a
report on that strategy.
TITLE II--RESEARCH, DEVELOPMENT, TEST, AND EVALUATION
Explanation of tables
The tables in this title display items requested by the
administration for fiscal year 2001 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.
[Graphic Image Not Available]
SUBTITLE B--PROGRAM REQUIREMENTS, RESTRICTIONS, AND LIMITATIONS
Fiscal year 2002 joint field experiment (sec. 211)
The committee has worked closely with the Secretary of Defense and
the Chairman, Joint Chiefs of Staff (CJCS) to develop a credible,
comprehensive joint experimentation program. The creation of the U.S.
Joint Forces Command (USJFCOM) on October 1, 1999, with an
organizational element dedicated to joint experimentation,
institutionalized this process. The committee has noted, with great
interest, the strides made by USJFCOM in implementing this program.
The committee is encouraged that a joint experimentation program has
been established, but was disappointed to learn that the first fully
planned, joint field experiment is not scheduled until fiscal year 2004.
While the need to carefully build this program is appreciated, this has
to be balanced against the need for urgency. Many of the transformation
concepts being explored by the respective services will have evolved
considerably by 2004, without the benefit of experimentation and
evaluation within a joint war fighting context.
The committee is concerned that familiar problems continue to plague
joint operations. Many of the lessons learned in the recent Kosovo
operation were noted in previous military operations. Combatant
commanders continue to appear before the committee with recurring
concerns, including: incompatible command and control; interoperability
problems; no combat identification standard; insufficient strategic
lift; insufficient intelligence assets (intelligence, surveillance and
reconnaissance); and inadequate theater-level force protection
capabilities. While efforts appear to be underway to correct these
deficiencies, questions are continuously raised regarding the priority
and urgency assigned to these requirements, and the absence of a
detailed, defense-wide strategy to guide transformation of our forces.
Therefore, the committee directs that the Secretary of Defense plan
in fiscal year 2001 and conduct in fiscal year 2002, a joint field
experiment focused on exploring the most critical war fighting
challenges at the operational level of war which will confront U.S.
joint military forces. This experiment should incorporate elements of
all military services and special operations forces. In addition, the
Secretary of Defense is directed to ensure that each military service
and U.S. Special Operations Command participate with elements
representative of their future force concepts, e.g., Air Force
Expeditionary Aerospace Force, Army medium-weight brigades, and Navy
Forward
from the Sea vision. The committee sees merit in each of these
individual service initiatives, and believes that combining these
concepts in a joint context has potential for improving our military
capabilities, individually and collectively. The committee directs the
services to adjust their fiscal year 2001 planning activities and fiscal
year 2002 experimentation activities to accommodate participation in
this experiment and evaluation of capabilities. The committee recommends
an increase of $6.0 million in PE 63727N to accomplish the necessary
planning and preparation for this joint experiment in fiscal year 2001.
The committee expects the Department of Defense (DOD), the military
departments and USJFCOM to include adequate funding in the fiscal year
2002 budget request to properly conduct this experiment.
The Report of the Defense Science Board Task Force on DOD War
Fighting Transformation, published in August 1999, observed that there
is no comprehensive DOD-wide strategy and road map for a coordinated
transformation of our armed forces and that there are no apparent
standards to measure progress. The committee recommends that the
Secretary use the opportunity presented by this joint field exercise to
accomplish the following: collect the data that will enable a more
specific description of the desired attributes of the objective joint
forces for Joint Vision 2010; establish the standards to measure
progress; and establish achievable, affordable milestones.
Nuclear aircraft carrier design and production modeling (sec. 212)
The budget request included $38.3 million in PE 64567N for aircraft
carrier contract design. The committee recommends a provision that would
authorize the Navy to convert nuclear aircraft carrier design to a
three-dimensional, computer based system. The budget request did not
include funds specifically designated for this effort. However, minimal
conversion of paper designs has occurred from funds designated for
aircraft carrier research and development and shipbuilding and
conversion. The Navy conversion effort thus far has proven to be
cost-effective in saving taxpayer dollars.
The Navy intends to develop a three-dimensional product model for
portions of CVNX 1. The committee also understands that the Navy intends
to build certain sections of CVN 77 that will be major new designs
derived from the CVN 76 baseline. The Navy recently made the decision
that CVNX hulls will be based on the Nimitz-class hull design. Because
of this decision, it may now be possible to achieve cost savings in
designing, constructing, and modifying CVNX and sections of CVN 77
through use of a computer-aided design and product model. Such a product
model might also be beneficial in supporting the Nimitz class ships in
the fleet.
Major new construction shipbuilding programs, including the Flight
IIA Arleigh Burke-class destroyer, the Virginia-class submarine, and the
San Antonio-class amphibious ship, using the three-dimensional,
computer-based product models have resulted in over $184.0 million
savings. The Navy predicts that additional savings will continue to
accrue throughout the life cycle of the ships when they are repaired and
modified. These product models were developed and funded through the
ship class' research and development and construction funds.
The committee recommends an increase of $10.0 million in PE 64567N to
develop an electronic product model of the CVNX 1 and applicable
sections of CVN 77 nuclear aircraft carrier design. The committee also
directs the Navy to provide an analysis of the potential costs and
benefits of extending this product model effort for use in supporting
the Nimitz-class ships in the fleet.
DD 21 class destroyer program (sec. 213)
The budget request included $549.7 million for research and
development for DD 21, the Navy's new destroyer program. The committee
recommends authorization of the budget request for fiscal year 2001 and
fully supports the DD 21 as the future destroyer required to replace
Spruance-class destroyers and Oliver Hazard Perry-class frigates. The
committee concurs that the administration's research and development
budget request is required to attain a fiscal year 2005 start of
construction and that additional resources would most likely be required
for a fiscal year 2004 construction start.
While the committee fully supports DD 21, the committee has not been
provided adequate explanation of the following issues:
(1) the advisability of delaying the initial operational capability
for three years;
(2) maintaining key capabilities required for completion of the
mission of DD 21;
(3) the need for a one year delay in the start of construction of DD
21;
(4) the requirement for extending the construction performance
period by two years; and
(5) the inclusion of all life-cycle maintenance in a non-competitive
life-of-the-ship contract award.
DELAYING THE INITIAL OPERATING CAPABILITY
It would appear that the Navy has given a lower priority to the
mission of DD 21, providing ordnance on target to influence the events
ashore (land attack), than that of building a technologically superior
ship in the first hull. The one year
delay in the DD 21 program without analysis of technology
insertion approaches, successful in previous ship procurement programs
and presently being used in the CVN(X) and the Virginia-class attack
submarine programs, requires additional explanation.
While Marine Corps witnesses testified that the two 155 millimeter
guns on the DD 21 would be the first at-sea system to fully meet the
Marine Corps requirements for fire support since decommissioning of the
battleships, Navy witnesses did not provide information regarding the
risks to the Marines caused by the one year delay in commencing
construction and two year delay in delivery of the first DD 21.
MAINTAINING KEY CAPABILITIES
The Marine Corps has stated a requirement that all naval surface fire
support weapon systems be easily sustainable via underway replenishment.
The Navy apparently intends to provide the surface fire support with
options that includes both gun-fired 155 millimeter ammunition and land
attack missiles. The committee understands that the Navy is working with
the contractor teams to specify underway replenishment requirements and
fully supports the continued refinement of capabilities. The committee
encourages the Navy to fully involve the Marine Corps with the review of
requirements which affect Marine Corps concepts of operations including
whether the land attack missile at-sea resupply requirement is valid for
the DD 21.
ONE YEAR DELAY
The Navy has consistently emphasized the need for a destroyer which
has lower procurement and operating costs than the present fleet of
destroyers and frigates. In attempting to bring such a ship to reality,
the Navy determined that manning the ship was the main cost driver in
operating the ship. To reduce manning requirements, the Navy challenged
two industry teams to develop a new destroyer design which would reduce
total ownership cost. The Navy directed the two teams to include in
their design proposal justification of the requirement for each member
of the crew and consideration of the life-of-the-ship cost of
maintaining each piece of equipment when determining what equipment
would be included in their design.
Without the advantage of analysis, the Navy set a goal of a 95 person
crew and a threshold of a 150 person crew. Consequently, the focus of
design and scheduling efforts for the land attack destroyer, thus far,
appear to have been on manning and total operating costs. Again,
apparently without a thorough analysis, the Navy determined that the
design teams could not produce a design which met the 95 person crew and
life cycle costs criteria in time to commence construction in fiscal
year 2004, the time frame both teams had been working toward. This
determination resulted in the Navy submitting a Future Years Defense
Program for DD 21 which would delay commencing construction of the first
DD 21 for one year (from fiscal year 2004 to fiscal year 2005).
EXTENDING THE CONSTRUCTION PERFORMANCE PERIOD
The Navy determined that the original five year performance period
(fiscal year 2004 through fiscal 2008) for building the first DD 21
would result in unacceptable risk for successful completion of the
program. Therefore, the Navy budget supports a two year delay in the
delivery of DD 21 (from fiscal year 2008 to fiscal year 2010).
NON-COMPETITIVE AWARD OF LIFE-OF-THE-SHIP MAINTENANCE
The Navy intends to build 32 DD 21 land attack destroyers to replace
the aging Spruance-class (DD 963) and Oliver Hazard Perry-class (FFG 7)
destroyers. The Navy has discussed the possibility of awarding the
winner of the phase II design competition not only the contract to build
the first DD 21, but also a contract to provide life-cycle support for
all DD 21 ships. The estimated value of a full support contract that
includes all ship maintenance for the life of all DD 21 ships would be
greater than the contract value for building all 32 ships. If such a
maintenance contract were awarded, the winner of the full service
support contract could be in a position to determine the ship repair
contractors in fleet concentration areas that would be permitted to
repair DD 21 ships. The committee believes that this could be a
troubling divestiture to a contractor of what is inherently a government
function. In addition, the committee is concerned that awarding a full
service support contract for maintenance of DD 21 may reduce the
flexibility of the operational fleet commanders to maintain all the
fleet ships based on a prioritization of overall fleet maintenance
requirements.
Therefore, the committee recommends a provision which would:
(1) authorize the Secretary of the Navy to pursue a technology
insertion approach to DD 21 that would commence construction of the
first DD 21 in fiscal year 2004 followed by a fiscal year 2009 delivery;
(2) express the sense of Congress that there are compelling reasons
to commence DD 21 in fiscal year 2004 followed by sequential
construction of DD 21 destroyers until a total of 32 are built, and that
the Secretary should consider the following when making his decisions
regarding DD 21 procurement:
(a) the Marine Corps requires fire support which the Navy will be
unable to provide until the DD 21 155 millimeter guns are introduced in
the fleet;
(b) a technology insertion approach has been successful for other
ship construction programs and is being used in the CVN(X) aircraft
carrier and Virginia-class submarine programs;
(c) a stable configuration for the first 10 ships of the class could
help ensure the greatest capabilities are provided at the lowest cost;
and
(d) action to acquire DD 21 destroyers should be taken as soon as
possible to realize fully the cost savings of construction and operation
of DD 21 class destroyers when compared to construction and operation of
other classes of destroyers;
(3) direct the Secretary to submit a report not later than April 18,
2001, on a plan, including the resources required, for pursuing a
technology insertion approach to DD 21; and
(4) direct the Secretary of Defense to submit a report not later
than April 18, 2001, that discusses the following:
(a) the technical feasibility of commencing DD 21 construction in
fiscal year 2004 with a delivery date in fiscal year 2009. For this
section of the report, the committee suggests input by an independent
entity, such as the Defense Science Board;
(b) an analysis of various contracting strategies for acquiring the
first 10 ships of the DD 21 class;
(c) the effects on the destroyer industrial base and on the costs of
other shipbuilding programs of delaying constructing the first DD 21
until fiscal year 2005, and of delaying the construction of the second
DD 21 destroyer until 2007; and
(d) the effects on fleet maintenance strategies and on commercial
maintenance facilities in fleet concentration areas of awarding a
shipbuilding contractor team a maintenance contract which includes all
maintenance actions above ships force and below depot maintenance
levels.
The committee fully supports the DD 21 program and recognizes the
difficulty the Navy faces in instituting an acquisition strategy that
emphasizes private sector flexibility in meeting general Navy
requirements for a complicated ship.
The committee encourages the Navy and the DD 21 program office to
make maximum use of the expertise and facilities resident in Navy field
activities for analysis, test, and evaluation of private sector
proposals and designs.
F 22 aircraft program (sec. 214)
The committee recommends a provision that would increase the F 22
program engineering and manufacturing development (EMD) cost cap by one
percent, funds for which could only be obligated for testing
requirements approved by the Defense Acquisition Executive and the
Director of Operational Test and Evaluation. This provision will add a
cushion to the development phase, as it nears completion, to ensure
adequate testing has been accomplished. The Defense Acquisition
Executive and the Director, Operational Test and Evaluation, would share
the responsibility for ensuring that the expenditure of any funds above
the EMD cost cap would be for testing purposes only.
The performance of the F 22, in testing to date, has been impressive.
When introduced as the Air Force's air dominance fighter, it will be far
and away the best fighter aircraft in the world. A comprehensive test
program now is required to prevent costly retrofits later.
The budget request included $2.2 billion to commence low rate initial
production of 10 F 22 Raptor aircraft, $396.2 million for advance
procurement items for 16 more aircraft in fiscal year 2002, and $1.4
billion in PE 64239F for continuing F 22 EMD. The Director of
Operational Test and Evaluation has voiced concern that the
congressionally mandated cost cap for the EMD Phase may drive the Air
Force to reduce too much content from the F 22 test program. The
committee echoes this concern.
The EMD and production cost caps were established by the National
Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 1998. This action was taken
after the Air Force canceled the manufacture of four pre-production
verification aircraft and slowed aircraft production, transferring $2.2
billion from procurement to cover an EMD overrun. The purpose of the
cost caps was to force the program to exercise a greater degree of
fiscal discipline. In testimony before the AirLand Subcommittee, the Air
Force has given the caps credit for exacting this discipline on both the
government and the contractor teams. In its latest annual report on the
F 22 program, the General Accounting Office concluded that: ``the F 22
development program could still be managed within its cost limitation,''
but ``[s]hould further significant cost increases materialize, the
development program may need to be scaled back, or other ways may need
to be found to reduce the costs.''
In the past year, the F 22 program has implemented two structural
fixes: the forward aft tail boom and a structural member in the
flaperon. These occurrences are normal in any development program, but
because flight testing constitutes the majority of the remaining EMD
efforts, funding for fixing these occurrences is more difficult to find
without reducing testing effort. The committee is concerned that if the
program were to be scaled back due to cost increases in other areas, it
would be testing that would be cut. The Air Force has already announced
that testing efficiencies have enabled it to reduce the actual flight
test hours from 4,337 hours to 3,757 hours. It is not the committee's
intent to prevent the service from finding further testing efficiencies,
but rather to ensure the test program remains adequate.
Joint strike fighter (sec. 215)
The budget request for the Joint Strike Fighter (JSF) program
included $261.1 million to complete the concept demonstration phase,
with $129.5 million in PE 63800F and $131.6 million in PE 63800N. The
budget request also included $595.5 million to initiate the engineering
and manufacturing development (EMD) phase, with $299.5 million in PE
64800F and $296.0 million in PE 64800N.
The committee fully appreciates the critical need to modernize our
aging fleet of legacy aircraft with aircraft possessing the capabilities
promised by the JSF program. The purpose of the JSF program is to
develop and field an affordable, highly common family of next generation
strike fighter aircraft for the U.S. Navy, U.S. Marine Corps, the U.S.
Air Force, and allies. The Navy variant (called CV) will be aircraft
carrier capable, the Marine Corps variant will be capable of short
takeoff and vertical landing (STOVL), and the Air Force variant will be
of a conventional takeoff and landing (CTOL) design. Commonality within
this family of aircraft is crucial to keeping the overall tactical
aviation modernization plan affordable.
Two contractor teams are competing to win a competition to enter into
the next phase of the program, the EMD phase. In addition to conducting
design and risk mitigation activities, each contractor team is building
two concept demonstration aircraft. Although these are not JSF
prototypes, they are required to demonstrate key enabling performance
criteria, such as slow speed handling characteristics for aircraft
carrier approaches, and short takeoff and vertical landing for the
Marine Corps variant.
Unfortunately, the schedule for flying the concept demonstrator
aircraft has slipped for both of the contractor teams, primarily due to
propulsion system problems. The committee understands that, if the
program adheres to the current schedule, with no further delays, the
STOVL variants will not fly until after the contractor teams deliver
their proposals for EMD to the government. While the contractors may
still be able to present additional test results to the government on
these flights and on the STOVL design, the competitive environment will
inevitably restrict the free flow of information after proposal
delivery. This leaves uncertainty on the technical readiness of the
program to enter EMD along the budgeted schedule.
The committee has also been apprized of a General Accounting Office
(GAO) report on the JSF program that raises concerns about the level of
maturity of the design at the point when the Department intends to make
a decision to proceed into EMD. The GAO report specifically mentioned
several enabling technologies whose technical risk will not have been
reduced to an acceptable level before the planned transition to EMD.
In addition to the testing maturity, the committee has additional
concerns about the nature of the acquisition strategy and how potential
changes in that acquisition strategy might affect the program. Many have
questioned the advisability of continuing the current
``winner-take-all'' strategy for selecting the winning team for EMD on
one of the largest defense programs in history. Losing outright could
force one of the teams to leave the fighter development and production
business, which would in turn leave the government in the position of
depending on a single team for all future tactical aviation
modernization. Recognizing the import of this situation, the Under
Secretary of Defense for Acquisition, Technology, and Logistics has
commissioned a review of the currently approved JSF acquisition
strategy. The Department of Defense has not completed this review, but
expects to make a decision on the appropriate acquisition strategy
within the next two months. The time spent making this decision could
delay releasing the call for improvement (analogous to a request for
proposal), the response to which will be the basis for making the final
decision before proceeding to EMD.
The committee continues to be a strong advocate for the JSF program.
The committee believes that the JSF program, with certain modest
exceptions, has demonstrated how a joint service requirement development
process should work and how a joint service program should be
implemented. However, with so much at stake in this centerpiece of
tactical aviation modernization, the committee believes that it would be
terribly shortsighted for the Department to pursue a program that is
driven by the calendar, and not by events.
The committee does not believe that it would be prudent to proceed
into EMD without having conducted adequate testing, and reduced the data
from that testing, for the competing demonstrator aircraft. This is
particularly the case for the version possessing the highest technical
risk, the STOVL version, which is also on the slowest track to testing.
Therefore, the committee recommends a provision that would require
the Department to submit a report, before December 15, 2000, describing:
(1) how the program may have been restructured to reflect any changes in
the acquisition strategy; and (2) exit criteria that the Department has
established to ensure that technical risks are at acceptable levels
before the program enters into EMD.
In consonance with this recommendation, the committee also recommends
no funding in support of the budget request for EMD funds, specifically
a decrease of $595.5 million, including $299.5 million in PE 64800F and
$296.0 million in PE 64800N, but recommends an increase of $424.2
million in demonstration and validation funds, including $212.1 million
in PE 63800F and $212.1 million in PE 63800N.
The committee believes that the Department should use this time and
funding to complete flight testing of the concept demonstrator aircraft,
acquire the data from the test program, spend such funds as can be used
to reduce risk for technologies that would need to mature during EMD,
and define and implement a preferred acquisition strategy.
The committee is not interested in having the contractor team or
teams sitting around waiting for the first day of fiscal year 2002.
Indeed, the committee would support the Department's moving past the
concept demonstration tests with the fiscal year 2001 funds provided.
Such activities could perhaps include even selecting a contractor team
or teams to conduct various pre-EMD activities to begin planning for
EMD. Such committee support, however, presumes that: (1) the Department
will have provided the report required by the provision regarding
acquisition strategy and technical risk exit criteria; and (2) the
results of flight testing the STOVL variants will have been available to
inform such decisions.
The committee is also not interested in having the contractors make
additional unreimbursed investments in winning this program. The
Department has informed the committee that it has recently modified the
current JSF demonstration contracts to allow significant contractor
investment in the concept demonstration phase. The committee recommends
that the Department not propose any restructured program that would
allow any further individual contractor investment beyond the levels
envisioned by this modification. While the Department has made a
reasonable case for implementing the current modification, the committee
does not view additional contractor investment during the competition
phase as conducive to smooth implementation of any potential acquisition
strategy.
The committee is well aware of the considerable international
interest in this program. The actions recommended by the committee
should in no way be interpreted as a lack of support for the JSF or a
lack of appreciation for the critical role that the JSF can play in
tactical aviation modernization. At this critical juncture, however, the
JSF program is too important to be rushed into the EMD phase until the
program is ready to graduate. The committee believes that a more prudent
technical and programmatic approach will, in the final analysis,
strengthen the process of developing and fielding the family of aircraft
that will dominate tactical aviation for the next half century.
Global Hawk high altitude endurance unmanned aerial vehicle (sec. 216)
The budget request included $109.2 million for the development of
endurance unmanned aerial vehicles (HAE UAVs), of which $103.2 million
was for the continued development of the Global Hawk HAE UAV. The Global
Hawk is an advanced concept technology demonstration (ACTD), nearing
completion of its highly successful military utility phase, and
preparing for its engineering and manufacturing (EMD) phase.
The budget request also included $22.4 million for the procurement of
long lead items for the first two production Global Hawk HAE UAVs and
one common ground station. The General Accounting Office (GAO) has
studied the Global Hawk program, and has concluded that production in
fiscal year 2001 would be premature. The GAO identified three reasons
for arriving at this conclusion:
(1) Global Hawk has not yet begun a scheduled one year EMD phase;
(2) testing of a production representative Global Hawk system will
not have been started; and
(3) during EMD, the Global Hawk design will be changing.
The committee strongly supports the continued development of the
Global Hawk HAE UAV, but concurs with the GAO that long lead production
for two additional HAE UAVs is premature. The committee recommends a
decrease of $22.4 million in Aircraft Procurement, Air Force, that would
allow the Air Force sufficient time to use the EMD program to stabilize
the final design.
Although one developmental Global Hawk HAE UAV was destroyed in a
mishap, six other developmental Global Hawk HAE UAVs have either been
delivered to the Air Force or are at varying stages of production. The
Air Force has requested additional electro-optical and infra-red sensor
payloads for the Global Hawk HAE UAV on its unfunded requirements list
because there are not enough sensors to outfit all six of these Global
Hawk HAE UAVs.
The six remaining ACTD HAE UAVs do not meet the operational
requirement. The committee believes, however, that these aircraft are
still excellent platforms for continuing development and expansion of
the current HAE UAV operational concept. For example, advances in the
production of active electronic scanned array (AESA) radars and the
development of associated technologies, such as modular, scalable
antennas could make this an appropriate time to further expand
operational concepts to include an airborne surveillance capability.
This may be preferable to merely buying more of the current sensor
payloads
that we know will not meet the Air Force's requirements. The
committee also understands that Commander in Chief, Joint Forces
Command, is interested in using the existing ACTD Global Hawk aircraft
for experimentation after the Air Force begins producing HAE UAVs that
meet the operational requirement.
The committee is well aware of how taxing recent operations have been
on such low density, high demand units such as the E 3A Airborne Warning
and Control (AWACS) aircraft. The long endurance capability of the
Global Hawk could make it an ideal candidate to substitute for such low
density, high demand units as AWACS aircraft in certain situations, if
it were to be outfitted with an appropriate payload. Such situations
could include such lower threat environments as the area of
responsibility of the Commander in Chief, Southern Command. Appropriate
missions could include filling the air surveillance requirements in
support of counter-drug operations off the coast of Central and South
America.
The committee recommends an increase of $18.0 million in PE 35205F to
extend the ACTD effort. The Air Force should use $12.0 million of this
amount to acquire and integrate a non-developmental AESA radar on Global
Hawk, and to demonstrate its operational viability in the Southern
Command area of responsibility. This demonstration should be conducted
as soon as practicable in fiscal year 2001, with participation and
guidance from the Commanders in Chief of the Joint Forces and Southern
Commands, to include requirements and scenario planning. To further this
goal, the committee recommends a provision that would direct the
Secretary of Defense to coordinate a demonstration of the capability of
the Global Hawk HAE UAV in an airborne surveillance role in the
counter-drug effort, and to provide a report on the technical
feasibility and operational concept for using Global Hawk HAE UAVs in
this role.
In the long-term, the Air Force should apply the remaining $6.0
million of this total to begin a concurrent development effort for an
improved surveillance radar for potential use on the Global Hawk. The
committee believes that this development effort should capitalize on the
efforts detailed in the report delivered to Congress in April, 2000, on
modular, scalable, active electronically scanned antenna (AESA)-based
radar development activities.
Unmanned advanced capability aircraft and ground combat
vehicles (sec. 217)
The challenges that the United States will face in the new millennium
are diverse--new threats, new battlefields, and new weapons. Our armed
forces must remain vigilant, forward thinking and prepared to address
these challenges. The committee believes that the Department of Defense
must exploit the opportunities created by the rapid pace of
technological development to provide our men and women in uniform with
the most advanced weaponry and leverage these developments in a way that
minimizes the risk to those deployed in harm's way.
During the offensive military operation in Kosovo, U.S. forces
carried out 78 days of round-the-clock operations and over 38,000 combat
sorties with no combat casualties. The American people are coming to
expect that military operations are casualty free. This is a factor that
is more and more influencing the planning of military operations. How
else do we explain bombing operations in Kosovo that largely restricted
coalition pilots to altitudes between ten and fifteen thousand feet?
Limiting risk to our personnel is clearly an important goal and one
of the most advantageous benefits of deploying unmanned combat systems
and technologies. An initiative to expand the use of such technologies
would allow the Department to aggressively pursue and field remotely
controlled combat systems with this goal: within 10 years one-third of
U.S. military operational deep strike aircraft will be unmanned and
within 15 years one- third of all U.S. military ground combat vehicles
will also be unmanned. It is not the intention of the committee to
replace pilots and manned aircraft with unmanned combat systems, but to
provide added capabilities to manned combat aircraft--added capabilities
that would provide alternatives to sending military personnel into the
highest risk missions.
Casualty aversion limits the flexibility of foreign policy. Taking
full advantage of advances in technology will allow future
administrations greater flexibility and, at the same time, reduce
exposure of U.S. personnel. For these reasons, the committee recommends
an increase of $200.0 million in research, development, test and
evaluation (RDT&E) to accelerate the technologies that will lead to the
development and fielding of remotely controlled air combat vehicles by
2010 and remotely controlled ground combat vehicles by 2015. The
committee has identified three promising programs, initiated by the
services, in which to invest these funds:
AIR FORCE UNMANNED COMBAT AIR VEHICLE (UCAV)
The committee recognizes the on-going joint Defense Advanced Research
Projects Agency (DARPA)/Air Force unmanned combat air vehicle (UCAV)
program, initiated in 1998. The committee notes that a small-scale
demonstrator will flight test in the Spring of 2001. The committee
recommends an increase of $100.0 million in PE 62702E to accelerate risk
reduction and ``Concept of Operation'' evaluation. The additional funds
would be applied as follows: design, development of additional
demonstrator vehicles; invest in low-cost commercial core engine
derivative; demonstrate intelligent decision aids; validate suppression
of enemy air defense(SEAD)/strike targeting in realistic environment;
and fully validate multi-vehicle flight modes.
NAVY UNMANNED COMBAT AIR VEHICLE
DARPA and the Navy initiated a joint program this year to explore
concepts for a Naval unmanned combat air vehicle (UCAV N). The committee
recommends an increase of $25.0 million to be applied to a preliminary
design of a UCAV N demonstrator system suitable for ship-based
SEAD/strike/surveillance missions.
ARMY FUTURE COMBAT SYSTEMS (FCS)
In February 2000, the Army signed a Memorandum of Agreement (MOA)
with DARPA to develop a future combat system (FCS) to replace the
current generation of armored combat vehicles. Although robotics is a
key part of development, there is not a requirement for an autonomous,
remotely-controlled vehicle in the current program. The committee
recommends an increase of $121.3 million for the FCS program as follows:
an increase of $46.3 million in PE 63005A to accelerate the enabling
technologies for the FCS program, and an increase of $75.0 million in PE
62702A to add an unmanned, remotely-controlled aspect to the future
combat system. The committee expects this requirement to be added to the
MOA on FCS.
The committee directs the Secretary of Defense report to the
congressional defense committees by January 31, 2001, on: (1) the
schedule for this initiative; (2) the funding required for fiscal year
2002 and for the future years defense program; and (3) a description and
assessment of the acquisition strategy for remotely-controlled air and
ground combat vehicles.
Army space control technology (sec. 218)
The committee recommends a provision that would authorize $20.0
million for the Army's Kinetic Energy Anti-Satellite (KE ASAT) program
and $5.0 million for other Army space control technology development
emphasizing temporary and reversible effects. The provision would limit
the obligation of funds for space control technology, other than KE
ASAT, until the funds authorized for the KE ASAT program have been
released to the KE ASAT program manager.
The committee directs the Commander of the Army Space and Missile
Defense Command (SMDC) to use the $20.0 million authorized for the KE
ASAT program to advance the three existing KE ASAT kill vehicles and
associated hardware to a point where a flight test could occur one year
following any decision to do so. None of the funds authorized for the KE
ASAT program may be used to support research and development on
capabilities to counter satellites in a non-destructive, reversible
manner. The Commander of SMDC shall also begin planning and preparation
for a KE ASAT flight demonstration. The committee is aware that the
Kodiak Island launch facility in Alaska is well suited to support a
launch of a KE ASAT test vehicle. The committee directs the Commander of
SMDC to include an assessment of the Kodiak Island facility as part of
the overall flight test planning and evaluation process.
The committee continues to support the KE ASAT technology program. At
the same time, the committee has also directed the Army to develop
capabilities to counter satellites in a non-destructive, reversible
manner. The committee does not view these two objectives to be
incompatible.
Russian American Observation Satellites program (sec. 219)
As detailed elsewhere in this report, the committee is concerned that
the Ballistic Missile Defense Organization plans a two-satellite Russian
American Observation Satellites (RAMOS) program. The committee believes
that the Secretary of Defense should develop, and seek congressional
approval of, a technology protection plan before proceeding with the
RAMOS program, regardless of the program's structure and focus.
Therefore, the committee recommends a provision that would prohibit the
obligation or expenditure of any funds for RAMOS until 30 days after the
Secretary submits to Congress a report explaining how the Secretary
plans to protect U.S. advanced military technology that may be
associated with the RAMOS program.
Joint Biological Defense Program (sec. 220)
The committee recommends a provision that would prohibit the
obligation of funds to procure the vaccine for the biological agent
anthrax until the Secretary of Defense: (1) notifies the congressional
defense committees in writing that the Food and Drug Administration
(FDA) has approved the current production facility of the anthrax
vaccine for FDA-approved vaccine production operations; and (2) provides
a report to the congressional defense committees that addresses
contingencies associated with relying on the current manufacturer to
produce the vaccine. The report will include recommended strategies to
mitigate the risk of the loss of the current sole-source manufacturer of
the vaccine and a budget to support these strategies. The report will
also provide recommended strategies to ensure that an FDA-licensed
anthrax vaccine can be procured should the sole-source manufacturer fail
to obtain FDA approval to release stockpiled or newly produced vaccine,
or the manufacturer terminates anthrax vaccine production permanently.
The Secretary will report the funding requirements and the criteria for
implementing these strategies.
In the Senate report accompanying S. 2060 (S. Rept 105 189), the
committee noted that the anthrax vaccine is approved by the Food and
Drug Administration (FDA), and has been used by cattle and sheep
ranchers since the 1970s. The committee also emphasized the criticality
of maintaining sufficient supplies of the vaccine to immunize U.S.
military personnel against the biological warfare agent anthrax.
The Department of Defense (DOD) currently relies on a single-source
manufacturer to supply the military services with the anthrax vaccine.
The vaccine manufacturer, however, failed to maintain required FDA
approvals for the vaccine production facility and the stockpiled
vaccine. As a result, the DOD delayed the start of phase two of the
Anthrax Vaccine Immunization Program (AVIP). In addition, the Defense
Contract Audit Agency (DCAA) conducted audits of the manufacturer's
financial capability in June 1999, and February 2000, and reported after
both reviews that there is ``* * * substantial doubt * * *'' that the
manufacturer will be financially able to continue performing on
government contracts. The committee believes that it is incumbent on the
Department to assess the implications of the FDA, DCAA, and other
federal agency reviews of the current procurement plan, and to ensure
that an effective plan is in place to provide a vaccine to immunize U.S.
military personnel against the anthrax virus.
Report on biological warfare defense vaccine research and
development programs (sec. 221)
The committee recommends a provision that would direct the Secretary
of Defense to report on the progress of the Department of Defense (DOD)
program to develop and procure vaccines for biological warfare agents.
The Secretary will provide this report to the congressional defense
committees no later than February 1, 2001. The report will include: an
evaluation of the ability of the commercial sector to meet the vaccine
requirements of the Department; a design for a government
owned/contractor
operated (GOCO) vaccine production facility at an alternative
site determined by the Secretary; and a comparison of the costs and
benefits of the current acquisition strategy, a GOCO facility at an
alternative site determined by the Secretary, and other acquisition
alternatives. The design recommendation for the GOCO facility at the
alternative site determined by the Secretary will include: a
recommendation, in consultation with the U.S. Surgeon General, on the
possibility of the GOCO providing support for civilian vaccine
requirements and the related impact on the operating costs of the GOCO
vaccine production facility; and an analysis of the impact of
international requirements for vaccines on the operating costs of the
GOCO.
The biological warfare capability of the government of Iraq during
Operation Desert Storm led to a requirement for vaccines to immunize
military personnel against biological agents. Since that time, the Joint
Chiefs of Staff (JCS) biological warfare threat list now includes over
twenty biological agents that are in some stage of development, from
basic research to production, by several countries. During this same
period, the Department has initiated a mandatory program to immunize all
active and reserve military personnel against the biological warfare
agent anthrax.
During an April 14, 2000, hearing of the Subcommittee on Personnel,
witnesses from the DOD and General Accounting Office identified many of
the challenges associated with vaccine development and acquisition.
These challenges included the reluctance of large pharmacuetical
companies to participate in vaccine development and production, the
speculative costs associated with working with start-up commercial
vaccine research and production companies, and the requirement to pay a
premium to the private sector for vaccine research and development due
to the relatively limited quantities of vaccines required by the DOD.
The committee notes the recommendation of Project Badger in the early
1990s for a GOCO vaccine production facility and subsequent DOD plans
and budgeting to construct a facility at the Pine Bluff Arsenal in Pine
Bluff, Arkansas. Based on the work that has already been done, the
committee believes that the Secretary should give strong consideration
to the Pine Bluff Arsenal as the site for the alternate facility. Given
these issues, the committee believes a reevaluation by the DOD of the
issues relating to vaccine development and production, and the merits of
a GOCO facility at an alternative site are necessary at this time.
SUBTITLE C--OTHER MATTERS
Mobile offshore base (sec. 241)
The committee recommends a provision that would require the Secretary
of Defense to provide the congressional defense committees with the
results of the operational utility cost-benefit analysis. The provision
would also require the Secretary to designate a lead service and
tentative program schedule if the Secretary decides to continue the MOB
program.
The Senate report accompanying S. 1059 (S. Rept. 106 50) directed the
Secretary of Defense to initiate an analysis of the operational utility
of the mobile offshore base (MOB), and report to the congressional
defense committees by March 1, 2000. The analysis was to include the
results of the technical feasibility studies, assessment of the
operational utility versus the life-cycle cost of such a system, and a
recommendation on whether to proceed with pre-development or development
activities. The report further directed that, if the recommendation were
to proceed with the program, the Department of Defense should designate
an executive service and provide an estimate of fiscally phased
resources for program execution.
The Navy delivered a report to the congressional defense committees
in April, 2000. This report, however, only detailed the technical work
accomplished and described the effort that would need to be accomplished
were the program to be initiated, along with cost estimates of the
remaining effort. There was no mention of operational utility versus
life-cycle cost, nor was there a recommendation on whether to proceed
with the program.
Air Force science and technology planning (sec. 242)
The committee recommends a provision that would require the Secretary
of the Air Force to submit a report to the congressional defense
committees on the long-term challenges and short term objectives of the
Air Force science and technology (S&T) program.
The committee was deeply disappointed by the science and technology
budget proposed by the Air Force for fiscal year 2000. This budget not
only failed to measure up to the congressional goals established in
section 214 of the Strom Thurmond National Defense Authorization Act for
Fiscal Year 1999 (Public Law 105 261), but also risked mortgaging the
future of the Air Force by sacrificing long-term technological
superiority in favor of short-term readiness. The science and technology
budget proposed by the Air Force for fiscal year 2001 shows some
improvement, but the committee remains concerned that the Air Force has
made deep cuts to some programs without undertaking a comprehensive
planning process to ascertain its long-term technology needs and how
those needs can be supported by the science and technology program.
Over the last five years, the Department of Defense (DOD) has
developed a coordinated planning process for S&T spending,
known as the joint warfighting science and technology planning
process. This process has helped DOD address redundancies and overlaps,
and ensure that the S&T programs funded by the services are
appropriately designed to meet the Department's warfighting needs. The
result has been a significant improvement in the quality of the
Department's science and technology budget submissions. As successful as
it has been, however, the current S&T planning process appears to focus
on the micro issue of ensuring that individual projects address
legitimate warfighting needs, rather than on the macro issue of
prioritizing those needs and ensuring that sufficient funding is made
available to meet them.
Two of the three services have undertaken ambitious steps to try to
address that shortcoming in the science and technology planning process
by prioritizing their own needs on a macro basis, and realigning S&T
funding to match new priorities. The Army has attempted to identify
science and technology spending that is directly linked to the planned
transformation of the force, and prioritized that spending over funding
for incremental improvements to existing platforms. The Navy has
undertaken to reevaluate all science and technology spending from the
ground up and focus investments on areas designated as long-term Grand
Challenges and more immediate Future Naval Capabilities. By focusing its
spending in this way, the Navy hopes to avoid the usual practice of
trying to fund a little bit of everything, and ensure that it will have
critical mass in the areas that are most important to the Navy of the
future.
In view of the serious cuts in the Air Force S&T budget and the
danger that these cuts could undermine long-term technological
superiority in key areas, the provision recommended by the committee
would require the Air Force to undertake a comparable planning effort.
This process must include not only the Air Force research community, but
also the entire warfighter community, requirements community, and
acquisition community. It is the committee's hope that the planning
process--and the Air Force science and technology program--will be
driven by the future needs of the Air Force, rather than the budgetary
constraints of today.
[Graphic Image Not Available]
[Graphic Image Not Available]
[Graphic Image Not Available]
[Graphic Image Not Available]
[Graphic Image Not Available]
[Graphic Image Not Available]
[Graphic Image Not Available]
[Graphic Image Not Available]
[Graphic Image Not Available]
Counter-terrorism basic research
The committee recommends an increase of $3.0 million in PE 61102A for
the Army's counter-terrorism research program. Last year, the committee
provided the funding to initiate a basic research program in order to
explore technologies that deter, resolve, and mitigate terrorist acts,
including physical structure and physical effects research. It is of the
utmost concern that we conduct research and development not only for
near-term solutions, but also for investigating revolutionary approaches
in science and techologies that will provide next generation solutions
for force protection and terrorist threats. The committee urges the Army
to include funding for this important project in the future.
Composite materials
The committee recommends an increase of $6.0 million in PE 62105A for
composite materials for the next generation armored vehicle for the
Army's objective force. 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 be used to the
maximum extent practicable.
Advanced missile composite components
The committee recommends an increase of $5.0 million in the missile
technology applied research program (PE 62303A) to develop the enabling
technology for the next generation of tactical missiles. 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 be used to the maximum extent practicable.
Smart truck initiative
The committee recommends an increase of $3.5 million in PE 62601A,
the Army's combat vehicle and automotive technology account for the
National Automotive Center, to conduct demonstrations for the smart
truck initiative. The committee directs that cost sharing be used to the
maximum extent practicable.
Portable hybrid electric power system
The committee recommends an increase of $1.5 million in PE 62705A for
research in a portable, hybrid electric power system that would combine
battery, fuel cell, super-capacitor, and other subsystems. The
additional funds would be used to model and assess the tradeoffs as they
relate to military missions. 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 be used to the
maximum extent practicable.
Thermoelectric power generation
The committee recommends an increase of $1.0 million in PE 62784A for
a feasibility study on thermoelectric power generation for military
applications.
Operational support
The committee recommends an increase of $4.0 million in the Army's
military engineering program (PE 62784A) for university partnering for
operational support. 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 be used to the
maximum extent practicable.
Equipment readiness
Long lead times and the high costs of procuring and inventory of
replacement parts has resulted in soaring operation and support costs
with a reduction of equipment readiness rates. The committee understands
the Department of Defense has initiated a program to address these
problems through the development of a self-contained, mobile
manufacturing center that can produce spare parts at the point of need.
The committee recommends an increase of $8.0 million in PE 63005A for
the continuation of this important effort. The committee directs cost
sharing be used to the maximum extent practicable.
Fuel cell auxiliary power units
The committee recommends an increase of $4.0 million in PE 63005A for
research in fuel cell auxiliary power units for use in the Army's
objective force. The Army's transformation strategy includes reducing
the size of the deployed logistics footprint and prioritizing the
development of vehicles that are smaller, lighter, more lethal, yet more
reliable, fuel efficient and survivable. A key component of increased
survivability is reducing the signature of future Army platforms.
Addressing these logistics and survivability challenges should entail a
full evaluation of alternative energy sources.
Big Crow program office
The committee recommends an increase of $7.0 million in PE 63006A for
the Big Crow program, a national test asset supporting a wide variety of
electronic warfare test and training exercises. The Big Crow program has
historically been operated under the Department of Defense Major Range
and Test Facility Base (MRTFB), primarily in a test asset role.
Recently, however, the operational forces have recognized the asset's
potential. The Big Crow program has been deployed operationally to
support NATO and U.S. force deployments in southeast Europe as well as
Commander in Chief for Space (CINCSpace) activities. The committee
understands that the Department is making progress in developing a new
strategy to ensure long-term funding for this program that will provide
stability to support test and evaluation as well as operational
missions. Oversight of the program has been assigned to the Army Space
and Missile Defense Command and funding for this program is provided in
the Future Years' Defense Program beginning in fiscal year 2002. The
additional $7.0 million would provide bridge funding to maintain
continuity in operations until the program completes this transition.
Army Space and Missile Defense Command Simulations
The committee recommends an increase of $3.0 million in PE 63308A for
Family of Systems Simulators and an increase of $4.5 million in PE
63308A for Simulations Center Upgrade.
Aero-acoustics instrumentation
The budget request included no funds for aero-acoustics
instrumentation. The committee has supported research and development
activities conducted by the Army Space and Missile Defense Command in
the area of aero-acoustics. Aero-acoustics instrumentation will enable
the Army to understand acoustic coupling of missile airframes to the
internal components for vehicles flying as fast as Mach 10. Therefore,
the committee recommends an increase of $4.0 million in PE 63308A to
continue this important research and development.
Acoustic technology research
The committee continues to support research sponsored by the Army's
Space and Missile Defense Command in acoustic applications for
detection, identification, and tracking of cruise missiles and mobile
missile launchers. The committee recommends an increase of $4.0 million
in PE 63308A to support continued effort in this area.
Missile defense flight experiment
The committee has supported the Army's program to demonstrate
critical missile defense kill vehicle technologies through flight
testing. To continue this effort, the committee recommends an increase
of $14.7 million in PE 63308A.
Radar power technology
The committee continues to support advanced radar power technology
development at the Army Missile Defense and Space Technology Center. The
committee recommends an increase of $4.0 million in PE 63308A to
continue this important research and development.
Scramjet acoustic combustion enhancement
The committee is aware of research and development activities being
conducted by the Army Space and Missile Defense Command in the area of
scramjet acoustic mixing. A scramjet engine that can utilize acoustics
to more efficiently burn propellant could significantly increase the
performance and efficiency of air defense interceptors. Therefore, the
committee recommends an increase of $2.0 million in PE 63308A to support
continuation of this important research and development.
Space and missile defense battle lab
The committee continues to support the Army's Space and Missile
Defense Battle Lab. To support this important modeling and simulation
capability, the committee recommends an increase of $5.0 million in PE
63308A.
Supercluster distributed memory technology
The budget request included no funds for supercluster distributed
memory technology. The committee is aware that supercluster distributed
memory technology may provide a cost-effective approach to running
complex computer simulations to predict the control forces exerted on a
missile over its flight trajectory. To support evaluation of this
technology, the committee recommends an increase of $2.0 million PE
63308A.
Tactical High Energy Laser
The budget request included no funding for completion of testing of
the Tactical High Energy Laser (THEL) program. The committee supports
expeditious completion of THEL development and testing. The committee
recommends an increase of $15.0 million in PE 63308A to support
continued THEL testing and deployment preparation activities.
Anti-malarial research
The committee recommends an increase of $2.0 million in PE 63807A to
accelerate the development and fielding of the anti-malarial compound
taphenoquine. The committee directs that cost sharing be used to the
maximum extent practicable.
Electronic warfare development
The budget request included $61.1 million for Army electronic warfare
development activities. The committee notes and appreciates ongoing
efforts by the Army to completely identify and understand issues
associated with the deployment of Task Force Hawk last year during
operations in Kosovo. The committee recognizes an outstanding
requirement to install a suite of radio frequency countermeasures
(SIRFC) and advanced threat infrared countermeasures (ATIRCM) equipment
on Apache helicopters necessary to improve the ability of aircraft crews
to survive in future conflicts. The committee recommends an increase of
$38.5 million in PE 64270A for electronic warfare development, a total
authorization of $99.6 million. Of this amount, $18.0 million would be
used to support the development of a SIRFC production line and $20.5
million to complete development of SIRFC and ATIRCM ``A'' kits for the
Apache Longbow helicopter.
Threat simulator development
The budget request included $13.9 million for threat simulator
development activities. The committee recognizes the important roles
that threat simulators play in preparing our forces to fight and win
future battles. The committee recommends an increase of $4.6 million in
PE 64256A, a total authorization of $18.5 million. Of the $4.6 million
increase, $2.1 million would be used for threat information operations
attack simulator development and $2.5 million would be used for threat
virtual mine simulator development.
Multiple launch rocket system product improvement program
The budget request included $59.5 million for multiple launch rocket
system product improvements. The committee understands that the Army
continues to pursue a cost reduction initiative associated with the
multiple launch rocket system (MLRS) improved launcher and the high
mobility artillery and rocket system (HIMARS). The committee understands
this initiative could result in cost savings of greater than $500.0
million over the life of these programs. The committee, therefore,
recommends an increase of $16.0 million in PE 63728A to support the
ongoing MLRS and HIMARS cost reduction initiatives.
Joint Land Attack Cruise Missile Defense Elevated Netted Sensor
The budget request included $25.0 million for the Joint Land Attack
Cruise Missile Defense Elevated Netted Sensor (JLENS) system. The
committee is concerned about possible vulnerabilities of an aerostat to
climatic conditions and understands that the Army has established an
Aerostat Design and Manufacturing (ADAM) program to facilitate the
design and manufacture of affordable aerostats with improved performance
and availability. The committee recommends an increase of $2.0 million
in PE 12419A in support of the ADAM program to provide the type of
material and tether technology to make the JLENS system viable.
Communications and networking technologies
The budget request included $8.1 million for Army information systems
security research, development, test and evaluation. The committee
supports efforts managed by the Army's Communications and Electronics
Command (CECOM) in the area of applied communications and networking
technology. To support these efforts, the committee recommends an
increase of $5.0 million in PE 33140A.
[Graphic Image Not Available]
[Graphic Image Not Available]
[Graphic Image Not Available]
[Graphic Image Not Available]
[Graphic Image Not Available]
[Graphic Image Not Available]
[Graphic Image Not Available]
[Graphic Image Not Available]
[Graphic Image Not Available]
[Graphic Image Not Available]
Free electron laser
The committee recommends an increase of $5.0 million in PE 62111N to
complete the development of the infrared free electron laser
demonstration project to the 10 kilowatt level. This investment would
enable the Department of the Navy to determine capabilities of such a
tool for infrared counter-measures and further the technology base in
high energy lasers.
Biodegradable polymers
The budget request included no funds for biodegradable polymers. The
committee recommends an increase of $1.25 million in PE 62121N to aid in
the development of polymer membrane methods for treating graywater
(kitchen, shower, and cleaning solution), blackwater (sewage), and bilge
water (oily contaminants) to acceptable levels prior to shipboard
release.
Bioenvironmental hazards research
The committee recommends an increase of $3.0 million in PE 62121N for
bioenvironmental hazards research. The committee is concerned that there
is insufficient knowledge of the full impact and hazards to humans,
animals, and plants from the potential use of biological warfare agents.
Besides the obvious lethal effects on living organisms, biological
warfare agents could have other very serious long-term consequences that
would require a dedicated mitigation response or prophylaxis. The
additional funds should be applied to research and development of the
technologies and methods for better measuring and understanding the full
range of impacts of biological warfare hazards to people and other
living organisms, and thus improve our ability to develop suitable
preparations or responses to such hazards. 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 be used to
the maximum extent practicable.
Nontraditional warfare initiatives
The committee recommends an increase of $2.0 million in PE 62131M for
the Marine Corps to conduct applied research directed at their role as
first responders. The additional funds should be used to explore
innovative concepts for addressing non-traditional tactics and
operational challenges arising in the 21st Century. 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 be used to the maximum extent practicable.
Communications, command, and control, intelligence,
surveillance, and reconnaissance
The committee recommends an increase of $3.0 million in PE 62232N to
accelerate the introduction of fused hyperspectral, synthetic aperture
radar and electronic intelligence. The committee directs that cost
sharing be used to the maximum extent practicable.
Cognitive research
The committee recommends an increase of $3.0 million in PE 62233N for
applied cognitive technologies to improve learning. In a hearing before
the Subcommittee on Emerging Threats and Capabilities, Dr. Delores
Etter, Deputy Under Secretary of Defense for Science and Technology,
explained the importance and the growing need for cognitive research,
``. . . an area that we think is one of increasing importance is
cognitive readiness. This is really the area of human optimization. The
challenges in this area include sustained operations, environmental
ambiguity, distributed learning, and the overall information overload
that we are presenting to our soldiers.'' The committee understands that
the Chief of Naval and Education and Training has initiated a program to
deal with cognitive development for Navy personnel. The additional funds
would extend this program's focus to include technological research in
cognitive readiness and human optimization.
Ceramic and carbon based composites
The committee recommends an increase of $2.0 million in PE 62234N for
the continued development, evaluation and testing of ceramic and carbon
based composites for use in strategic missiles and hypersonic vehicles.
The committee directs that cost sharing be used to the maximum extent
practicable.
Nanoscale sensor research
The committee recommends an increase of $3.0 million in PE 62234N for
applied research in nanoscale sensor technologies. The additional
funding would be expected to support the area designated by the Office
of Naval Research as a Grand Challenge to develop highly
multi-functional nanoscale architecture devices to their ultimate limits
(high speed (100x), small size (0.01x), and low power (0.001x)), that
interactively combine sensing, image processing, computation, signal
processing, and communication functions, to achieve real-time adoptive
response, on-site for Navy missions. 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 be used to the
maximum extent practicable.
Littoral area acoustic demonstrations
The committee recommends an increase of $3.0 million in PE 62435N for
acoustic data collection, all source data fusion, and advanced acoustic
modeling and signal processing techniques in support of Navy research
and development efforts. 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 be used to the
maximum extent practicable.
Computational engineering design
The committee recommends an increase of $2.0 million in PE 62633N for
computational engineering research and design for marine and aerospace
vehicles. This research provides a focus on the simulation and design of
surface ship and submarine applications. It is particularly relevant in
the view of the Navy's decision to transfer ship design from the Navy
laboratories to the shipyards. There is also some extension of the
technology to aerospace based on requirements of the National
Aeronautical and Space Administration (NASA). The committee expects the
Office of Naval Research to fully explore such applications in the
execution of the 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 be used to the
maximum extent practicable.
Advanced water-jet technology
The budget request included no funds for advanced water-jet
technology. Advanced water-jet technology represents the type of
technological improvement in ship propulsion that could reduce both
acquisition and total ownership costs. Water-jet technology has the
potential to reduce ship signatures critical to maintaining war fighting
superiority through battle space awareness. Therefore, the committee
recommends an increase of $4.0 million in PE 63508N for advanced
water-jet technology.
Composite helicopter hangar door
The budget request included no funds for developing a composite
helicopter hangar door. The initiative to design and fabricate a
composite helo hangar door for surface combatants has the potential to
reduce combatant ship life-cycle costs by improving reliability and
reducing maintenance requirements. The
program will leverage enabling technologies that can lead to
reduced radar signatures and cost and weight savings.
The committee recommends an increase of $5.0 million in PE 63508N for
the design and fabrication of a DDG 51 helicopter hangar door structure
using composite materials.
Composite modules for ship hull construction
The budget request included no funding in PE 63508N for development
of composite hull modules which may be required for future ship
construction. While composites have some war fighting advantages over
standard ship construction using steel and aluminum components, the
technical expertise for constructing composite modules is limited. It is
anticipated that future ship construction may include expanded use of
composites.
The committee encourages development of key technologies that will
provide the foundation should the Navy decide to pursue the war fighting
advantages of composites. Therefore, the committee recommends an
increase of $4.0 million in PE 63508N for the development and
construction of prototype composite modules for ship construction.
Laser welding and cutting
The budget request included no funding in PE 63508N for development
of laser welding and cutting techniques. Navy ships are built using
structural shapes and plate steel. Most shapes are currently stripped or
split from I-beam stock material. Laser cutting and welding shapes from
plate steel could enhance the quality and reduce the cost of producing
shapes used in ship construction. Laser cutting and welding also has the
potential to enable more creative designs for shapes.
The committee encourages development of key technologies that have
the potential to provide higher quality and lower costs for building
Navy ships. Therefore, the committee recommends an increase of $2.8
million in PE 63508N for the development and application to naval ship
construction of laser welding and cutting techniques.
Supply chain best practices
The budget request included $37.4 million in PE 63508N for surface
ship and submarine hull, mechanical, and engineering systems in support
of present and future ships and submarines.
The supply system for ships and submarines requires interface and
interaction of a number of different communications and software
systems. This incompatibility requires reentry of data which is manpower
intensive. Because the supply chain best practices initiative has the
potential to improve affordability, quality, and productivity by
providing connectivity for an alliance among the Navy, industry,
universities, and government agencies, the committee recommends an
increase to the initiative.
The committee recommends an increase of $2.0 million in PE 63508N for
supply chain best practices.
Virtual test bed for reconfigurable ship
The budget request included no funds for a virtual test bed for a
reconfigurable ship. The Navy is developing a virtual machinery design,
test, and evaluation capability for future ship systems. This will
enable the combination of real time, interactive, software simulation
with the hardware in-the-loop technologies.
The committee fully supports this simulation and testing prior to
committing to system configuration. Therefore, the committee recommends
an increase of $2.0 million in PE 63508N for a virtual test bed for a
reconfigurable ship.
Ocean modeling for mine and submarine warfare
The budget request included $45.6 million for mine and expeditionary
warfare advanced technology. Within that amount, the request included
funds for algorithm development and modeling and simulation to provide
battle space products to the Office of the Naval Oceanographer for
promulgation to the war fighting commanders in chiefs (CINCs).
Research and development of products critical to monitoring,
modeling, and disseminating environmental data are key factors in battle
space awareness. Specifically, the databases and information regarding
environments and predictions in littoral regions require emphasis on the
mine warfare mission area. Investigation, data analysis, and prediction
tools are required for current and eddy flow, bottom contour and
content, and thermal layer behavior, cold water phenomena and man-made
clutter.
Effective mine and submarine warfare are dependent on correct and
timely environmental data. The committee recommends an increase of $3.0
million in PE 603782N for ocean modeling.
Marine Corps advanced technology transition
The committee recommends an increase of $15.0 million in PE 63792N
for a Marine Corps advanced technology transition initiative focused on
the development of expeditionary warfighting technologies identified and
developed through experimentation at the Commandant's Warfighting
Laboratory (CWL). The committee expects the Marine Corps program to be
implemented in the same fashion as the current Navy initiative in PE
63792N.
The program should demonstrate high risk/high payoff
technologies and provide the Marine Corps with the opportunity to
identify and move emerging technologies quickly and efficiently from
laboratory to field. These projects should be selected by matching
technological potential with requirements derived from operational
issues of concern to the Marine Corps.
Integrated combat weapons system for mine countermeasures ships
The budget request included $14.4 million in PE 63502N for an
integrated combat weapons system (ICWS) for mine countermeasures ships.
The global positioning system, autonomous mine-hunting neutralization,
and mine sweeping capabilities contribute to a complex mine warfare
information battlefield in ICWS. The mine countermeasures ships have the
responsibility of maintaining mine warfare tactical and operational
situations. At present, information from multiple sources is gathered
and plotted by slow and manpower-intensive methods.
The committee recommends an increase of $5.0 million in PE 63502N for
continuation of ICWS for mine countermeasures ships.
Trident SSGN design
The budget request included $34.8 million for the design of the
Trident-class nuclear ballistic missile submarine (SSBN) conversion to a
nuclear guided missile submarine (SSGN). In addition, the Future Years
Defense Program (FYDP) includes $1.1 billion in fiscal years 2002
through 2005 for maintaining additional attack submarine (SSN) force
structure by either (1) refueling SSN 688-class submarines which were
previously scheduled for decommissioning or (2) refueling and
converting, to SSGN configuration, Trident SSBNs which were also
previously scheduled for decommissioning. The decision to refuel up to
four Ohio-class SSBNs, which would be converted for the SSGN mission, or
use the funding to refuel Los Angeles-class SSNs, will be proposed by
the administration as part of the fiscal year 2002 budget submission.
The committee recognizes that the design work on the SSGN capability
which began in fiscal year 2000 must be sufficient to maintain viable
options for converting SSBNs to the SSGN until the fiscal year 2002
decision is made. To meet the requirements for planning coincidental
with the refueling of the first available SSBN, the committee recommends
an increase of $9.0 million in PE 63559N to continue design activity for
converting SSBNs to an SSGN configuration.
The study of attack submarine force structure requirements conducted
by the Joint Chiefs of Staff (JCS) evaluated requirements of the
commanders in chief (CINCs). That study concluded that a submarine force
structure below 55 SSNs in 2015 would be insufficient to meet
warfighting requirements and that 68 SSNs would be necessary by 2015 to
meet all the CINCs' and national intelligence community's highest
operational and collection requirements. The study focused on
intelligence, surveillance, and reconnaissance (ISR) requirements of the
CINCs.
The committee is concerned that the Navy's decision to refuel
Los Angeles-class SSNs or convert Ohio-class SSBNs could be based more
narrowly on the ISR deficiencies identified in the JCS study, without
giving adequate consideration to the other warfighting capabilities
offered by the SSGN, such as those outlined in the March 1999 Navy study
of the Trident SSGN conversion option. Therefore, the committee directs
the Navy to report to Congress on the attributes used to analyze the
options of whether to refuel SSNs or to refuel and convert SSBNs and the
distinctions among these attributes in the near-term and long-term. The
committee directs that the Navy submit this report with the fiscal year
2002 budget.
Enhanced performance electric motor brush technology
The budget request included $2.2 million in PE 63561N for enhanced
performance electric motor brush technology. Electric motors use
monolithic carbon brushes to transfer electricity from a stationary
stator to a rotating rotor. Carbon brushes wear relatively quickly and
must be frequently inspected and replaced. A Navy-funded small business
innovative research (SBIR) project demonstrated that fiber metal brushes
provide significant wear and survivability improvements compared to
carbon brushes. Fiber metal electric motor brushes have the potential to
significantly reduce total ownership costs of ships and increase the
survivability and operational reliability of electric motors.
The committee recommends an increase of $2.0 million in PE 63561N for
shock and vibration qualification and completion of design and testing
of enhanced performance electric motor brush technology.
Submarine composite sail
The budget request included no funding for development of a submarine
sail made from composite materials. Preliminary studies indicate that a
submarine sail with areas fabricated from composite materials may
provide enhanced war fighting capabilities. In addition, the composite
sail may provide lower weight and life-cycle costs for submarines. A
composite sail is consistent with the technology insertion approach of
the Virginia-class submarine program. The committee recommends an
increase of $2.5 million in PE 63561N for development of an advanced
submarine composite sail.
Joint command and control ship
The budget request included $30.8 million in PE 63564N to continue
feasibility studies for the joint command and control ship (JCC(X)). The
request is an increase of $14.1 million over the amount projected for
the effort when the Administration submitted the fiscal year 2000 budget
request. Congress authorized and appropriated $11.9 million for this
program in fiscal year 2000.
The analysis of alternatives for the joint command and control ship
mission is scheduled for completion in fiscal year 2001 and will be
followed by the development of an operational requirements document.
When the fiscal year 2001 request for JCC(X) is added to the amount
included for the same effort in fiscal year 2000, the total is $42.7
million. However, the Navy required less than $26.3 million for analysis
of alternatives and to commence the competition for the ADC(X)-class
ship. These efforts for the ADC(X) should be similar in complexity to
the JCC(X) effort.
Therefore, the committee recommends a decrease of $16.4 million in PE
63564N to bring the research and development for JCC(X) in line with the
planning for a ship of similar complexity in the study phase of
analysis.
Shipboard simulators for Marine Corps operations
The budget request included no funding for analysis of shipboard
Marine Corps operational simulator technology. The committee is aware of
advances made in training simulation technology and the potential that
training and rehearsal planning simulators have in supporting Marines
deployed at sea. It is clear that technology exists to provide shipboard
simulators for many of the expeditionary missions embarked Marines will
have to execute. As these simulators will allow Marines an opportunity
to train to the fullest extent possible while in transit, the committee
believes it is time to explore the availability and applicability of
both existing and new training simulators to meet Marine Corps
requirements.
Therefore, the committee recommends an increase of $20.0 million in
PE 63564N to initiate a program to provide enhanced shipboard
operational training simulators on amphibious ships for embarked
Marines. The committee directs the Secretary of the Navy to provide a
report, no later than March 1, 2001, that provides the following:
(1) an assessment of Marine Corps training requirements, plans to
enhance future training opportunities, candidate systems that could
provide both individual and collective training simulators to enhance
the warfighting ability of deployed Marines, and an assessment of
existing training simulators available for Marines afloat;
(2) a program to develop and field additional simulation
capabilities beyond those currently available; and
(3) plans for obligating the funding provided, and future program
adjustments necessary to support the fielding of new training simulation
systems.
Navy common command and decision system
The budget request did not include funding for a common command and
decision system. The common command and decision system development is a
pre-planned product improvement (P3I) to the AEGIS Weapon System and the
Mk 2 Ship Self-Defense System (SSDS). The improvement would replace the
command and decision capability presently in these systems with a common
computer architecture.
This effort will reduce future life-cycle costs by:
(1) reducing the number of computer programs that must be maintained;
(2) enabling the Navy to field new or modified warfighting
capability much more quickly and at a lower cost; and
(3) improving warfighting capability by eliminating the redundant
and conflicting processing now inherent in these systems.
Therefore, the committee recommends an increase of $10.0 million in
PE 63582N for continuation and completion of small business innovative
research (SBIR) project for the common command and decision system.
Advanced amphibious assault vehicle
The budget request included $138.0 million for research and
development efforts associated with Marine Corps assault vehicles. The
committee has noted with great interest progress made to date in the
ongoing evaluation of the advanced amphibious assault vehicle (AAAV).
Early testing has yielded positive results and the committee looks
forward to the results of future testing as these new combat vehicles
continue in development. The committee notes an unfunded requirement for
an additional AAAV which would be used to mature the vehicle's software
and accelerate reliability testing. The committee recommends an increase
of $27.5 million to support efforts to accelerate the development and
testing of AAAV hardware and software, a total authorization of $165.5
million.
Marine corps ground combat/support system
The budget request included $23.2 million to support research and
development activities associated with Marine Corps ground combat and
combat support systems. The committee continues to be concerned about
inadequate levels of fire support available to support Marine Corps
operations ashore. The committee was interested to note a new effort by
the Marine Corps to explore the utility of the Army's high mobility
artillery rocket system (HIMARS) to meet some of their outstanding fire
support requirements. The committee believes this effort could result in
a potential near-term solution for longer range general support
artillery requirements. The committee recommends an increase of $17.3
million to support the acquisition of two HIMARS systems and to support
testing and evaluation of the equipment and rocket systems, a total
authorization of $40.5 million.
Extended range guided munition
The budget request included $39.1 million in PE 63795N for
development of the extended range guided munition (ERGM). ERGM will
provide precision fire support for forces ashore from Naval gunfire
support ships. The budget request includes a two year delay (fiscal year
2002 to fiscal 2004) in the initial operating capability for ERGM.
However, ERGM has demonstrated success in a number of technical issues
and is scheduled for flight tests in calendar year 2000. The program
appears to have regained momentum lost after moving the contractor's
program office to a new geographic area. This move resulted in having to
fill key staff positions with new personnel.
Because the development of ERGM technologies are key to providing
extended range fire support to the Marine Corps, the committee
recommends an increase of $10.0 million in PE 63795N to reduce the risk
in developing the advanced technologies required for ERGM.
Nonlethal research and technology development
The budget request included $23.6 million for the joint nonlethal
weapons program. The committee recommends an total increase of $8.0
million in PE 63851M.
The committee recommends an increase of $2.0 million in PE 63851M for
research in nonlethal environmental effects and remediation. Both at
home and abroad, Americans, our allies, and innocent populations face an
escalating danger of environmental threats and hazards: purposely from
rogue elements and inadvertently from the results of adjacent or
contiguous conflict. The committee finds current understanding of the
environmental effects of emerging military responses to asymmetric and
conventional threats and availability of protections from environmental
agents woefully inadequate. Protections for civilian populations and
their environs do not exist at all.
These additional funds should be applied to develop a program for
assessing, determining and optimizing the environmental effects and
remediative capabilities of emerging nonlethal weapons, as well as for
removing, destroying, neutralizing, or containing environmental hazards
once those hazards are deployed by adversaries. Only by assessment,
evaluation, and development of methodologies to limit the spread of
environmental damage from the fielding of emerging environmental threats
and capabilities can new environmental consequences be avoided or
countered. 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 be used to the maximum extent
practicable.
The committee authorizes the remaining $6.0 million in additional
funds be allocated as follows: $2.0 million to continue the nonlethal
technology research innovation initiative; an increase of $1.0 million
for the neutralization of weapons of mass destruction sites; and $3.0
million for the nonlethal smart mortar casing demonstration. The
committee notes that all four of these items were included on the
Commandant's unfunded priority list.
Navy collaborative integrated information technology initiative
The committee continues to support the Navy collaborative integrated
information technology initiative (NAVCIITI) to continue development in
reliable secure communications and advanced information technologies.
The committee recommends an increase of $4.0 million in PE 64707N for
this purpose.
Parametric airborne dipping sonar
The budget request included no funds 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 sonars with antisubmarine and anti-mine capabilities for
shallow water littoral operations.
The committee is encouraged with test results that demonstrated
anti-mine detection capability superior to present and other planned
systems. In addition, Navy analysis and present plans include the
possibility of PADS being a shallow water adjunct to the Airborne Low
Frequency sonar (ALFS) system
deployed on H 60 helicopters. Demonstrations of its capability
with the H 60 aircraft have thus far been successful.
The dual mine and submarine warfare potential of PADS makes it a
flexible and cost effective war fighting enhancement for two deficient
missions: mine location and diesel submarine detection. The Navy is
encouraged to continue the present testing and development of PADS. The
committee recommends an increase of $10.0 million in PE 64212N for the
continued development of PADS.
Multi-mission helicopter upgrade development
The budget request included $69.9 million for the continued
development of the multi-mission helicopter upgrade. Although the Navy
had planned to integrate the advance threat infrared countermeasure
(ATIRCM) on the SH 60R, a fiscal year 1999 program and schedule
restructure has resulted in a funding shortfall to complete this
integration on time. The committee recommends an increase of $8.0
million in PE 64216N to continue to develop the integrated self-defense
suite for the SH 60R, a total authorization of $77.9 million.
Power node control centers
The budget request did not include funding for power node control
centers (PNCCs). PNCCs have the potential to integrate all of the
shipboard power functions, such as switching, conversion, distribution
and system operation and protection. This technology would support
present and future surface ship and submarine platforms as a building
block for increased use of electrical equipment. The committee
recommends an increase of $3.0 million to PE 64300N for PNCCs.
Ship manpower reduction initiative
The budget request included no funding for research and development
of technologies that could lead to manpower reductions resulting from
altering food service operations on ships. Committee visits to fleet
units verified that food service operations at sea are manpower
intensive in preparing and serving food, cleaning of food service areas,
and maintaining food service equipment.
Civilian cruise ships have developed technologies and methods for
food service operations at sea that may be applicable to Navy ships. The
Navy is investigating methods of reducing manpower required for food
service operations at sea, while maintaining the quality and freshness
of meals. These methods could lead to reduced manpower requirements in
fleet units. Therefore, the committee recommends an increase of $2.0
million in PE 64300N for advanced food service technology testing.
SPY 3 and volume search radars
The budget request included $69.6 million for development of the SPY
3 multi-function radar and $57.5 million for development of a new volume
search radar (VSR) in PE 64300N. Both radars are being developed for
future surface ships including CVN 77 and DD 21.
The goal of the SPY 3 is to provide an affordable, high performance
radar for ship defense. It will provide search, detect, track, and
weapon control functions that are now provided by two to three different
radars.
The VSR will be required to complement the SPY 3 by providing long
range above the horizon surveillance and timely cuing to the SPY 3.
Development of these radars are keys to reducing life-cycle costs in the
combat systems of future surface ships. The committee recommends an
increase of $8.0 million to PE 64300N for the development of the SPY 3
and VSR radars.
Acoustic rapid commercial-off-the-shelf insertion of multi-
purpose processor
The budget request included $28.2 million for submarine sonar
improvement. The multi-purpose processor (MPP) is the result of a small
business innovative research (SBIR) initiative. The MPP provides a
capability to transport new, advanced software to existing hardware
installations more easily. It lies at the heart of the Navy's acoustic
rapid commercial-off-the-shelf (COTS) insertion (ARCI) program. This
program is designed to permit anti-submarine forces to regain acoustic
superiority over diesel and nuclear submarines of other navies.
The committee believes that the proven success of MPP and ARCI in
attack submarines should be applied to other platforms such as surface
ships, integrated undersea surveillance systems (IUSS), and maritime
patrol aircraft.
Therefore, the committee recommends an increase of $15.0 million in
PE 64503N 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.
Submarine antenna technology improvement
The budget request included $0.9 million in PE 64503N for submarine
communications antenna systems improvement. Submarine communications are
vital to the evolving submarine littoral
operational concepts. The submarine's ability to remain
undetected while communicating depends on continuous development of
submarine antenna technology. The committee recommends an increase of
$5.0 million in PE 64503N for submarine antenna technology improvements.
Submarine common architecture
The budget request included no funding in PE 64558N for migrating the
Virginia-class submarine architecture to the Los Angeles-class
submarines. Systems engineering and integration to define and manage
common network interfaces enables low cost and low risk capability
improvements for the Los Angeles, Ohio, and Seawolf-classes' submarine
non-propulsion electronics and tactical integrated electronics systems.
Therfore, the committee recommends an increase of $5.0 million in PE
64558N for development of a submarine common architecture.
Advanced tactical software for submarines
The budget request included $20.5 million in PE 64562N for software
upgrades to integrate improved submarine weapons capabilities.
Integration and installation planning for implementation of the Navy's
family of processors and displays, the AN/UYQ 70, will enable maximum
results from submarine combat systems software upgrades.
The committee recommends an increase of $4.0 million in PE 64562N for
the system engineering necessary to integrate advanced tactical software
into existing combat control systems for submarines.
NULKA anti-ship missile decoy system
The budget request included $1.1 million for continued development
and testing of the NULKA active countermeasures decoy. Development of a
dual band, spatially distributed infrared signature payload is required
for defense against advanced heat-seeking anti-ship missiles (ASMs).
The NULKA decoy was developed to improve surface ship survivability
against ASMs. The ASM threat is growing rapidly. An estimated 100
nations possess more than 40,000 ASMs. These missiles pose a potent
threat to surface combatants and amphibious ships involved in littoral
operations.
The committee recommends an increase of $2.1 million in PE 64755N for
the development and operational testing of the dual band, spatially
distributed infrared signature payload upgrade.
Navy single integrated human resources strategy
The budget request included $15.3 million PE 65013N for information
technology development. The Navy has been designated the lead agency for
development of software which will be used by all services to
consolidate pay and personnel reporting systems. However, there are a
number of service-specific systems which will provide information to the
joint system that is under development. The Navy's single integrated
human resources strategy (SIHRS) will update legacy systems which will
provide input data to the joint personnel and pay system. SIHRS has the
potential to provide enhanced system performance, workload reduction,
and reduced cost.
Therefore, the committee recommends an increase of $3.0 million in PE
65013N for the business process re-engineering of Navy legacy systems
through the single integrated human resources strategy (SIHRS).
Marine Corps research university
The committee recommends an increase of $3.0 million in PE 65873M for
the Marine Corps Research University. The Marine Corps Research
University, initiated by the Corps and competitively awarded to
Pennsylvania State University in May of 1999, was established to assist
the Marine Corps to enter the 21st Century. The rush of the information
age and increased operational requirements has taxed the capabilities of
the Corps to remain on the cutting edge of a broad range of issues
routinely dealt with on a university campus. These and other factors led
the Marine Corps to seek a relationship with a major multi-disciplinary
research university. Additional funds should be used to provide support
initiatives and critical research in areas, such as the new Marine Corps
Integrated Logistics Concept (ILC), the Human Effects Advisory Panel
(HEAP) which supports non-lethal weapons development, the V 22
alternative metals study, the Probable Cause Detection System (PCDS) for
Chem-Bio detection, continuing and distance education courses, and
supply-chain courses in support of logistics education.
Reentry system applications program
The committee continues to support the reentry system applications
program (RSAP) as a sustaining technology program. The committee
recommends an increase of $2.0 million in PE 11221N to support the RSAP
program. Also, the committee directs that the Navy establish a separate
project category for the RSAP program within PE 11221N to ensure program
continuity and execution.
Joint tactical combat training system
The budget request included $27.1 million for consolidated training
systems development. Of this amount, $7.8 million was for the joint
tactical combat training system (JTCTS). JTCTS is a joint Navy and Air
Force program to provide realistic combat training for joint air and sea
forces through a combination of simulated and real targets, instrumented
aircraft, and ship participants. The committee recommends an increase of
$5.0 million in PE 24571N to accelerate hardware and software
integration of JTCTS, a total authorization of $32.1 million.
F 14 tactical reconnaissance
The budget request included $1.2 million for operational systems
development of the F 14 aircraft. The F 14 remains the only near-term
tactical reconnaissance aircraft organic to the carrier battle group.
Weather and battlefield conditions with smoke and dust continue to
hamper tactical reconnaissance platforms for both pre-strike
reconnaissance and battle damage assessment. Synthetic aperture radar
(SAR) systems offer a technical solution to all-weather, day and night
reconnaissance that is missing on our tactical reconnaissance platforms.
The committee understands that there are potentially two
non-developmental SAR systems that could be demonstrated for suitability
on strike fighter aircraft, neither of which is being procured for U.S.
tactical aircraft at this time. Recent experience in Operation Allied
Force in marginal weather again emphasized the need for all weather
reconnaissance and battle damage assessment capabilities to match the
all weather weapons now available. Because of the high military utility
provided to operational commanders, the committee recommends an increase
of $9.0 million in PE 25667N to demonstrate the military utility of
non-developmental SAR reconnaissance systems, a total authorization of
$10.2 million.
Software interoperability process tools
The budget request included $0.9 million for joint command control
communications computer intelligence surveillance and reconnaissance
(C4ISR) operational architectures. The operational architectures will
provide the baseline to identify war fighter requirements, design and
structure assessments, and generate functional metrics.
Software interoperability process tools prevent interoperability
problems by anticipating needs and shortfalls and implementing
solutions. The process tools have the potential to reduce software
development time lines by providing essential analysis that complements
the joint communications infrastructure synchronization initiative. The
committee recommends an increase of $2.0 million in PE 35118N for
software interoperability process tools.
Satellite communications systems integration initiative
The budget request included no funding for the Space and Naval
Warfare Systems Command (SPAWAR) satellite communications (SATCOM)
systems integration (SSI) initiative. The SSI initiative is intended to
facilitate improved identification and evaluation of new and emerging
communication and network technologies in the area of SATCOM that can
distribute a wider diversity of information products. The committee
recommends an increase of $2.0 million in PE 35972N for the SSI
initiative.
Distributed engineering plant
The budget request included $9.1 million in PE 38601N for modeling
and simulation activities including development and analysis. It is the
Navy's intention to continue a new focus for battle group pre-deployment
hardware and software testing by leveraging shore based facility
capabilities. The linking of the shore based facilities with battle
group assets is referred to as a distributed engineering plant (DEP).
The DEP will be used to feedback information into the acquisition cycle
as well as to test software and hardware compatibility in both actual
and virtual environments.
The East Coast Command Control Communications and Computers
Intelligence Surveillance and Reconnaissance (C4ISR) Engineering Center
is a critical node in the DEP. Three of the C4ISR focus areas that will
improve the connectivity and responsiveness of the DEP are:
(1) fusing geographically distributed simulators using the high
level architecture to conduct end-to-end system interoperability
testing;
(2) adapting visualization and computer-aided design tools to
shipboard C4ISR configuration management; and
(3) integrating systems for distributed simulation/stimulation in
end-to-end Navy and joint testing.
The committee recommends an increase of $5.0 million in PE 38601N for
the three C4ISR battle center focus areas described in the above
paragraph.
[Graphic Image Not Available]
[Graphic Image Not Available]
[Graphic Image Not Available]
[Graphic Image Not Available]
[Graphic Image Not Available]
[Graphic Image Not Available]
[Graphic Image Not Available]
[Graphic Image Not Available]
[Graphic Image Not Available]
[Graphic Image Not Available]
Laser processing tools
The committee recommends an increase of $4.0 million in PE 62102F for
the development and application of a high power, tunable, ultraviolet
laser processing tool for the fabrication of micro-engineered components
and subsystems pertinent to aerospace applications. A high-average power
free electron laser with ultraviolet capability would allow processing
materials and micro make micro- and nano-devices for space systems
applications. This research would also assist in enabling the Air
Force's ability to manufacture low-cost pico and nano-satellites, and
microsystems. 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 be used to the maximum extent
practicable.
Resin systems for Air Force applications
The committee recommends an increase of $2.0 million in PE 62102F for
the development and demonstration of high temperature resin systems for
Air Force engine applications. The committee understands that this
technology could reduce the cost of high temperature components in
turbine engines for fighter aircraft. The committee directs that cost
sharing be used to the maximum extent practicable.
Thermal protection systems
The committee recommends an increase of $1.5 million in PE 62102F for
the development of thermal protection systems for hypervelocity vehicles
and atmospheric flight trajectories. 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 be used to the
maximum extent practicable.
Aeronautical research
The committee remains gravely concerned with the failure of the Air
Force to properly fund critical aeronautical research. The committee
recommends an increase of $6.0 million in PE 62201F for advanced
concepts research and technology development for long term aeronautical
systems. 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 be used to the maximum extent
practicable.
Polyphenylene benzobisoxozole membrane fuel cell
The committee recommends an increase of $5.0 million in PE 62203F for
research in polyphenylene benzobisoxozole (PBO) films for fuel cell
membranes. The committee notes that fuel cells can provide a lower cost,
lighter weight, higher performance and more energy efficient fuel cell.
The microporous PBO substrate may provide a component solution that will
increase the strength and high temperature capabilities currently
inhibiting fuel cell technologies. 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 be used to the
maximum extent practicable.
Variable displacement vane pump
The committee recommends an increase of $3.0 million in PE 62203F to
complete the development and demonstration of the variable displacement
vane pump (VDVP) as an alternate engine fuel pump. The committee directs
that cost sharing be used to the maximum extent practicable.
High frequency active auroral research
The committee recommends an increase of $12.0 million to continue
experimentation in the high frequency active auroral research program as
follows: an increase of $7.0 million in PE 62601F and an increase of
$5.0 million in PE 63714D.
Space survivability
The committee recommends an increase of $5.6 million in PE 62601F to
continue critical research in clutter mitigation, space weather effects
on spacecraft, ionospheric effects on global positioning systems (GPS),
communication and geolocation, and space environment distributed anomoly
resolution sensor research.
Aluminum aerostructures
The committee recommends an increase of $3.0 million in PE 603112F
for the development and demonstration of methodology for producing
advanced aluminum aerostructures. This effort is critical for improved
afford ability, maintainability, and enhanced performance of current and
future Air Force systems. 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 be used to the
maximum extent practicable.
Hyperspectral research
The committee recommends an increase of $6.0 million in PE 63203F to
complete the development of a multi-spectral synthetic battlespace
simulation capability to address the critical needs of the Air Force's
advanced air and space sensor technologies. The committee directs that
cost sharing be used to the maximum extent practicable.
Fiber optical control technology
The committee recommends an increase of $2.0 million in PE 63205F for
the development and demonstration of all optical control interface with
an electro-mechanical flight actuator. The committee understands this
technology has the potential to improve performance and survivability
while lowering operating costs for future Air Force flight vehicles. 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 be used to the maximum extent practicable.
Low cost launch technology
The committee continues to support the development of a range of
low-cost launch technologies, including the Scorpius concept. Therefore,
the committee recommends an increase of $5.0 million in PE 63401F for
low cost launch technology development, including Scorpius.
Micro-satellite technology
The committee continues to support the Micro-Satellite Technology
program. The committee was disappointed that the Air Force Research
Laboratory was unable to complete preparations for the launch of the XSS
10 micro-satellite with funds available in fiscal year 2000. Therefore,
the committee recommends a transfer of $5.0 million requested for the
Tech-Sat 21 program in PE 62601F to PE 63401F for an overall increase of
$12.0 million in PE 63401F to complete work on and launch the XSS 10.
Miniature satellite threat reporting system
The budget request included no funding for the Miniature Satellite
Threat Reporting System (MSTRS). The committee continues to support
MSTRS to develop the capability to protect satellites from uplink
jamming, interference, or intrusion. The committee also supports efforts
to develop sensors capable of detecting laser threats. Therefore, the
committee recommends an increase of $5.0 million in PE 63401F for the
MSTRS program.
Next generation composite launch vehicle payload fairings and shrouds
The committee supports the development of composite manufacturing and
processing technologies for the next generation of payload fairings and
shrouds to improve the performance of U.S. space systems while reducing
overall production cost. The committee recommends an increase of $2.0
million in PE 63401F to support this effort.
Solar orbital transfer vehicle
The committee has supported development of the solar orbital transfer
vehicle (SOTV) technology program. The SOTV program combines thermionic
technology for electricity production and thermal propulsion. To
continue this effort, the committee recommends an increase of $5.0
million in PE 63401F.
Space maneuver vehicle
The committee continues to support the Air Force and National
Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) partnership to develop a
reusable upper stage vehicle. The committee supports the Air Force
effort to acquire a ``second tail number'' of NASA's X 37 as a Space
Maneuver Vehicle operational technology demonstrator (X 40B). Therefore,
the committee recommends an increase of $15.0 million in PE 63401F to
support acquisition of the ``second tail number'' X 40B SMV
demonstrator.
Upper stage flight experiment
The Air Force has developed a program to demonstrate advanced upper
stage technologies to lower the cost of space launch. To support the
launch of this experimental rocket motor in the near future, the
committee recommends an increase of $5.0 million in PE 63401F.
Space Based Laser program
The budget request included $137.7 million for the Space Based Laser
(SBL) program, including $63.2 million in the Air Force budget and $74.5
million in the Ballistic Missile Defense Organization budget. Although
the Air Force and BMDO have structured a viable program to launch an SBL
integrated flight experiment (IFX) in the fiscal year 2012 2014
timeframe, this program remains funding-constrained. Therefore, the
committee recommends an increase of $30.0 million in PE 63876F to
support acceleration of the IFX and its integrated test facility.
Airborne laser program
The budget request included $148.6 million for the Airborne laser
(ABL) program. Although the committee has raised concerns regarding the
maturity of the ABL technology in the past, the committee is concerned
by the Air Force's decision to significantly reduce funding for the ABL
program in fiscal year 2001, and throughout the years of the Future
Years Defense Program. The committee notes that the Air Force has
implemented a range of risk reduction measures that the committee had
previously directed, including efforts in the area of atmospheric
compensation being conducted at the North Oscura Peak test facility in
New Mexico. As required by the National Defense Authorization Act of
Fiscal Year 2000, the Air Force reviewed progress in five specific risk
reduction areas. Pursuant to this requirement, the Secretary of the Air
Force reported to Congress on December 6, 1999, that ``[e]xcellent
progress has been made in all five areas,'' and that ``[t]he ABL Program
continues to meet or exceed every technical and programmatic milestone
and remains on-cost and on-schedule.''
In light of this positive report, the committee does not understand
or support the Air Force's decision to significantly reduce the ABL
program funding. This cut jeopardizes the ability to complete the
initial ABL test aircraft in a timely manner. The first test aircraft is
critical to determining whether all necessary ABL technologies are ready
for production. The committee supports rapid demonstration of these key
technologies and thus strongly opposes the delay in the completion of
the Program Definition and Risk Reduction (PDRR) aircraft. Therefore,
the committee recommends an increase of $92.4 million in PE 63319F, the
amount needed in fiscal year 2001 to keep the PDRR aircraft on schedule
to conduct the first lethal demonstration during fiscal year 2003. The
committee directs the Secretary of the Air Force to spend these
additional fiscal year 2001 funds consistent with the fiscal year 2000
program plan. Absent the development of technical problems, the ABL
program should remain on schedule for a lethal demonstration in fiscal
year 2003 and initial operational capability in fiscal year 2007.
Rocket systems launch program
The committee continues to support the Rocket Systems Launch Program
(RSLP), which utilizes excess strategic missile rocket motors to launch
small payloads. The committee recommends an increase of $19.2 million in
PE 63851F to demonstrate quick reaction launch capabilities, Global
Positioning System range safety, and common strategic missile
technology.
Wideband gapfiller military satellite communications
The budget request included $92.3 million in research, development,
test and evaluation (RDT&E), Air Force, for the Wideband Gapfiller
satellite communications system (WGS). The committee notes that, as a
result of the Department of Defense policy to fully fund satellites with
procurement funding, the fiscal year 2001 RDT&E budget request for WGS
was increased by $34.1 million over fiscal year 2000 projections. The
committee recommends a decrease of $18.0 million in PE 63854F for WGS
satellite design.
B 2 advanced technology bomber
The budget request included $48.3 million for continued development
of the B 2 advanced technology bomber. The Air Force unfunded
requirements list included a request for additional risk reduction for
connectivity. The committee recommends an increase of $5.0 million in
PE64240F for the connectivity risk reduction for the B 2 advanced
technology bomber.
The budget request also included $17.8 million for the operational
system development of military satellite communications (MILSATCOM)
terminals. The committee recommends an increase of $3.0 million in
PE33601F for risk reduction efforts in MILSATCOM terminals specific to
integration with the B 2 advanced technology bomber.
Milstar satellite communications
The budget request included $236.8 million for Milstar satellite
communications research, development, test and evaluation, including an
increase of $11.0 million over fiscal year 2000 budget projections for
satellite engineering requirements. The committee believes that this
growth is not fully justified. Therefore, the committee recommends a
decrease of $4.0 million in PE 64479F.
F 15E squadrons
The budget request included $61.3 million for continued operational
systems development of the F 15 aircraft. The budget request included no
funding for the integration of the BOL countermeasure system on the F 15
series of aircraft, although it was included on the Air Force unfunded
priorities list. Integration of this system will dramatically increase
the chaff and flare capacity of the F 15, giving it preemptive
expendable capability. The committee recommends an increase of $7.6
million in PE 27134F for BOL countermeasure system integration on the F
15, a total authorization of $68.9 million.
Hyperspectral system development
The committee supports research and development of hyperspectral
technology for use in high altitude and space applications. Therefore,
the committee recommends an increase of $2.0 million in PE 27247F to
support these efforts.
Extended range cruise missile
The budget request included no funding for the extended range cruise
missile (ERCM). Section 132 of the National Defense Authorization Act
for Fiscal Year 2000 (Public Law 106 65) required the Secretary of the
Air Force to submit a report on replacement options for the conventional
air-launched cruise missile (CALCM). The CALCM has become the Air Force
weapon of choice in recent conflicts, and as such, its inventory has
been seriously depleted. This report defined near-term, mid-term, and
long-term solutions to address this required capability. The near-term
solution, which is ongoing and funded, is to convert the remaining,
available air-launched cruise missiles (ALCMs) to CALCMs. The mid-term
solution, which is not funded in the fiscal year 2001 budget request, is
to begin a two to three-year ERCM development to upgrade an existing
cruise missile design. This development will be followed by a four-year
production run to build up the cruise missile stockpile. Funding for the
initiation of this development is very high on the Air Force unfunded
priorities list. The committee recommends an increase of $86.1 million
in PE 27323F to commence ERCM development.
Joint surveillance and target attack radar system
The budget request included $144.1 million for operational system
development of the E 8 joint surveillance and target attack radar system
(JSTARS) aircraft and weapons system. The global access, navigation, and
safety strategic management plan, published in fiscal year 1999,
included a requirement for installation of global air traffic management
(GATM) equipment in the E 8 JSTARS aircraft. This modification will be
required to maintain current access to oceanic and continental routes in
Europe, ensuring that missions can be safely and effectively flown. The
Air Force has included development of GATM modifications for the E 8 on
its unfunded requirements list. The committee recommends an increase of
$7.2 million in PE 27581F for development and integration of GATM on the
JSTARS aircraft, a total authorization of $151.3 million.
Lighthouse cyber security
The budget request included $7.2 million for Air Force information
system security research, development, test and evaluation. The
committee supports the Lighthouse Cyber Security Program managed by the
Air Force, which focuses on computer system vulnerabilities and threats,
and provides guidance and corrective courses of action through the use
of modeling and prototype tools. The committee recommends an increase of
$5.0 million in PE 33140F to support the Lighthouse Cyber Security
Program.
Dragon U 2
The budget request included $27.5 million in PE 35202F for
operational systems development of the U 2 aircraft. The budget request
included no funding for the continued development of the Senior Year
electro-optic reconnaissance system (SYERS). The committee recommends an
increase of $6.0 million in PE 35202F for further SYERS development, a
total authorization of $33.5 million.
[Graphic Image Not Available]
[Graphic Image Not Available]
[Graphic Image Not Available]
[Graphic Image Not Available]
[Graphic Image Not Available]
[Graphic Image Not Available]
[Graphic Image Not Available]
[Graphic Image Not Available]
[Graphic Image Not Available]
Advanced photonic composites research
The budget request includes $90.1 million for defense research
sciences (PE 61101E). The committee recommends that, of the funds, $3.0
million be used to extend the Advanced Photonic Composites Research
Program in the Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency. Photonic
composite materials are complex material systems whose key optical
property is described by a periodic function. The optical property
typically is an index of refraction or some non-linear optical behavior.
Due to their complex three dimensional nature, photonic composite
materials are very difficult to produce. However, these materials offer
great promise for the development of photonic devices with greatly
improved performance due to their inherent ability to substantially
reduce the volume of material required to achieve certain optical
effects.
Infrasound detection capability basic research
The committee recommends an increase of $1.5 million in PE 61103D for
basic research in the Comprehensive Nuclear Test Ban Treaty
verification. The additional funds will be used to develop and evaluate
infrasound sensors and conduct studies and analysis for use in
developing more effective and efficient infrasound detection capability
to support the detection of nuclear explosions on a global basis. 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 be used to the maximum extent practicable.
Personnel research initiative
The committee recommends an increase of $4.0 million in PE 61103D for
the defense personnel research initiative. The additional funds will
support basic research efforts in manpower and personnel including
operations research, economics, cognitive and experimental psychology
with the objective of reducing attrition, increasing retention, and
ensuring an efficient allocation of military forces.
Defense experimental program to stimulate competitive research
The budget request includes $9.9 million for the Defense Experimental
Program to Stimulate Competitive Research (DEPSCoR) to broaden the
infrastructure for universities that support national defense research.
The research conducted is peer reviewed and competitively awarded. The
committee recommends an increase of $15.0 million in PE 61114D to
continue efforts in this merit-based program.
Chemical and biological defense basic research
The budget request included $33.2 million in PE 61384BP for chemical
and biological defense basic research. The goal of this program is to
improve the operational performance of the military services by
concentrated research in areas that can contribute to defense against
chemical and biological agents. The committee recommends an increase of
$5.0 million in PE 61384BP for basic research, to be distributed as
follows: $2.0 million for optical computing chemical agent detection;
and $3.0 million for continued research in thin film technology
development.
Ballistic Missile Defense Organization funding and
programmatic guidance
The budget request included approximately $4.9 billion for the
Ballistic Missile Defense Organization (BMDO), including Procurement,
Research, Development, Test and Evaluation (RDT&E) and military
construction. The committee's recommended changes to the budget request
for BMDO procurement and RDT&E are provided below. The committee's
recommendations for BMDO military construction are provided elsewhere in
this report.
SUPPORT TECHNOLOGY
The committee continues to support BMDO's efforts in the area of wide
bandgap electronics materials and devices. To support this important
technology effort, the committee recommends an increase of $2.0 million
in PE 62173C and an increase of $10.0 million in PE 63173C.
The committee continues to support the Atmospheric Interceptor
Technology (AIT) program to develop advanced interceptor kill vehicle
technologies. The committee recommends an increase of $15.0 million in
PE 63173C to support the AIT program.
The committee believes that BMDO should immediately begin to define
and develop the necessary technology for the Navy Theater Wide (NTW)
Standard Missile 3 (SM 3) block II kill vehicle. The committee
recommends an increase of $10.0 million in PE 62173C to support the
development of advanced NTW kill vehicle concepts employing light-weight
non-toxic pumped-propulsion and active/passive sensor technology.
The committee has supported BMDO's efforts to evaluate innovative and
low-cost launch technologies. The committee recommends an increase of
$3.0 million in PE 63173C to support low cost launch technology,
including the Excalibur concept.
The committee recommends an increase of $9.0 million in PE 63173C to
support the Magdalena Ridge Observatory.
NATIONAL MISSILE DEFENSE
The budget request included approximately $1.8 billion for the
National Missile Defense (NMD) program, including Procurement and RDT&E.
The committee notes that the Director of BMDO has identified an
additional $300.0 million that could be utilized to further enhance risk
reduction and testing activities. Of this amount, the Director
identified $129.0 million as critical risk reduction unfunded
requirements. Therefore, the committee recommends an increase of $129.0
million in PE 63871C for NMD risk reduction.
The committee understands that BMDO is considering entering into a
competition for the NMD X-band ground-based radars (GBR) that would be
deployed following the initial deployment of the Alaska GBR site. The
committee directs the Director of BMDO to conduct an analysis of the
advantages and disadvantages of a competitive approach to follow-on GBR
development and deployment, and provide a report to the congressional
defense committees by April 1, 2001.
NAVY THEATER WIDE
The committee continues to support the NTW program and urges the
Secretary of Defense to accelerate this important program to the extent
permitted by the pace of technological development. The committee
recommends an increase of $60.0 million in PE 63868C to accelerate the
NTW SM 3 interceptor.
BMD TECHNICAL OPERATIONS
The committee continues to support the Army Space and Missile Defense
Command's Advanced Research Center (ARC). The ARC provides a valuable
tool in support of both theater and national missile defense programs.
The committee recommends an increase of $6.5 million in PE 63874C in
support of the ARC.
The committee supports BMDO's efforts to improve missile defense
technologies and capabilities against advanced theater ballistic missile
threats. One promising area of research is in optical data and sensor
fusion for detection and discrimination of advanced threats, missile
plumes, and penetration aids using advanced image processing and optical
discrimination algorithms. The committee recommends an increase of $3.0
million in PE 63874C for BMDO to continue this work.
INTERNATIONAL COOPERATIVE PROGRAMS
The budget request included $117.0 million for BMDO International
Cooperative Programs, including $81.2 million for Israeli Cooperative
Projects and $35.8 million for the Russian-American Observation
Satellites (RAMOS) program.
The committee is pleased that the budget request includes funding to
support continued acquisition of the Arrow Third Battery. The committee
recommends an increase of $8.0 million in PE 63875C to initiate the
Arrow System Improvement Plan.
The committee notes that the Department of Defense has revised the
Russian-American Observation Satellites (RAMOS) program from its fiscal
year 2000 approach to a restructured two-satellite program. The
committee understands that this revised program is intended to improve
the prospects for technical success with a greater focus on defense
objectives, while also protecting sensitive U.S. technology. Under the
revised proposal, Russia would build, launch and operate two essentially
identical satellites that carry U.S.-built infrared sensors. The U.S. is
attempting to devise a plan to place these sensors in tamper-resistant
containers and have monitors to ensure proper handling to preclude
unauthorized technology transfer.
Although this revised two-satellite program is a significant
improvement over the previous two-satellite RAMOS concept, the committee
continues to have serious concerns. The committee is concerned that, one
year after the U.S. Department of Defense (DOD) determined that RAMOS
was of marginal benefit to BMDO, the Department now proposes to spend
approximately $350.0 million on the development and production of two
satellites over the Future Years Defense Program (FYDP), and that this
entire amount is to be paid for by DOD. In contrast, BMDO's core
technology program is widely recognized to be under-funded throughout
the years of the FYDP. The committee also is not convinced that the
United States can provide infrared sensors for integration into
Russian-built and launched satellites without compromising this
technology or otherwise providing significant technical assistance to
Russia to accommodate the integration and proper functioning of the
U.S.-built sensors. In light of these concerns, the committee directs
the Secretary of Defense to restore the RAMOS program to the approach
presented to Congress in the fiscal year 2000 budget request, which was
approved by Congress in the National Defense Authorization Act for
Fiscal Year 2000. Consistent with this approach, the committee
recommends a reduction of $20.0 million in PE 63875C for the RAMOS
program.
BMD TARGETS
The committee continues to support BMDO's effort to develop a theater
missile defense surrogate target based on a liquid fuel engine. The
committee recommends an increase of $5.0 million in PE 63872C to
continue this effort.
Bio-defense research
The budget request included $18.6 million for PE 62234D, the Lincoln
Laboratory research program. This reflects a 10 percent decrease that
has not been explained or substantiated by the Department of Defense.
The reduction included in the budget request will have a significant
impact on the advanced bio-defense development activities, a project
that the Department has extolled as ``best in its class''. Performance
was rated ``beyond expectation''. The effort is to develop an integrated
bio agent detection, identification, and warning sensor system that is
smaller, lighter and quicker; the actual target is an integrated system
the size of a mailbox.
The committee recommends an increase of $2.1 million in PE 62234D to
continue the development and demonstration of this bio- defense
technology in the vital national security interest.
Hybrid sensor suite
The budget request included no funding in PE 62384BP for a
lightweight, man-portable hybrid sensor suite using thin film
technology. The committee notes the requirement for a low-power,
inexpensive chemical agent detector. Therefore, The committee recommends
an increase of $8.0 million in PE 62384BP for a hybrid sensor suite
using thin-film technology.
High definition systems
The committee recommends an increase of $7.0 million in PE 62708E for
the Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency's high definition system
program. The committee directs that all applicable competitive
procedures be used in the award of contracts or other agreements under
this program and that no projects be pursued without an industry cost
share.
Three dimensional structures research
The committee recommends an increase of $3.0 million in PE 62712E for
the development, optimization and demonstration of fabrication processes
for highly integrated three dimensional microcircuits. 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 be used to the maximum extent practicable.
Biological agent sensor technologies
The budget request included $300,000 for combating terrorism
technology support to continue to develop aerogel and fiber optic based
technologies for chemical and biological collector and detector
prototypes that meet the requirements of multiple federal agencies. The
committee notes that since calendar year 1997, the Defense Advanced
Research Projects Agency (DARPA) has provided an estimated $2.9 million
for technology base development of aerogel-based chemical and biological
sample collector and sensor systems. The research efforts of DARPA
indicate that aerogel properties can be tailored to meet or exceed the
requirements of existing and future collector and sensor platforms.
Therefore, the committee recommends an increase of $5.0 million in PE
63122D to transition the continued development of aerogel and coupled
fiber optic-based biological sensor technologies from the DARPA
Biological Defense Program to the Technical Support Working Group
support program.
Blast mitigation testing
The committee recommends an increase of $3.0 million in PE 63122D,
Combating Terrorism Technology Support, to accelerate the testing and
certification of blast mitigation effects technology. These funds would
allow the Department of Defense to accelerate the testing and analysis
of building components and improve building design standards and
guidelines for use in new construction applications.
Facial recognition access control technology
The committee recommends an increase of $2.0 million in PE 63122D,
Combating Terrorism Technology Support, for facial recognition access
control technology. These funds will be used to further the Department
of Defense's efforts to develop, test and evaluate this surveillance,
identification, and access control technology, and allow prototype
development and testing.
Chemical and Biological Incident Response Force detector technologies
The budget request included no funding in PE 63384BP for the Chemical
and Biological Individual Sampler (CBIS) or the Small Unit Biological
Detector (SUBD) programs. The committee notes the continuing requirement
of the Marine Corps for chemical and biological detectors and analyzers
in conjunction with the Chemical and Biological Incident Response Force
capability requirements. The committee continues to support CBIS and
SUBD research and development initiatives and recommends an increase in
PE 63384BP of $11.2 million, to be distributed as follows: $2.7 million
for the CBIS program to carry forward multiple, mature technologies and
allow for operational assessments by the Joint Forces Command; and $8.5
million for the SUBD program to
evaluate component detection sensitivity, and to fabricate prototypes.
Consequence Management Information System
The budget request included no funding in PE 63384BP for a
Consequence Management Information System. The committee notes the
requirement for a program to enable civilian and military incident
responders, such as Weapons of Mass Destruction Civil Support Teams, to
access and share selected information for operational planning and
execution. The committee supports this initiative and recommends an
increase of $6.4 million in PE 63384BP for a Consequence Management
Information System.
Reactive materials
The budget request included no funding in PE 63384BP for the
evaluation of advanced materials that contain reactive technologies.
These technologies have demonstrated the potential to increase
protection to the warfighter when incorporated into clothing, tentage,
and shelters for defense against chemical and biological agents. The
committee recommends an increase of $3.5 million in PE 63384BP for the
evaluation of advanced materials that contain reactive technologies.
Complex systems design
The committee recommends an increase of $5.0 million in PE 63704D to
continue the development of the multi-view data standards for integrated
digital environment for complex systems design. The Department of
Defense currently employs a number of computer-based synthesis and
analysis tolls that advance all phases of the life cycle of complex
defense systems. From concept design, through development and
production, and throughout life cycle ownership of a complex system,
these tools have dramatically improved the efficiency and reduced the
costs of each discrete phase. However, since each tool employs its own
unique data representation and data storage mechanism, there exists,
with few exceptions, no substantial interoperability between tools at
the semantic level for interchange of similar data structures. This
inability to collaborate results in a development process that remains
largely manual, with no means for even semi-automated configuration
management of the total project design. Congress has expressed strong
support of this effort. The committee requires the Department to conduct
a review of the project and report back to congressional defense
committees on the Department's plan to implement this technology once it
is completed.
Competitive sustainment initiative
The committee recommends an increase of $8.0 million in PE 62712S for
the competitive sustainment initiative. This initiative provides the
foundation for forging new, more cooperative links between the
Department of Defense and the supply base to eliminate waste and improve
the velocity of logistics. 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 be used to the
maximum extent practicable.
Weapons of Mass Destruction (WMD) Attack-Effects-Response
Assessment capability at U.S. Joint Forces Command (USJFCOM)
The committee recommends an increase of $5.0 million in PE 63832D,
Joint Wargaming Simulation Management Office, for the development and
installation of a Weapon of Mass Destruction Attack-Effects-Response
Assessment capability for the Joint Task Force-Civil Support that was
recently established as part of the U.S. Joint Forces Command (USJFCOM).
This program will allow USJFCOM, along with government agencies, state,
and local authorities, to model chemical, biological or radiological
incidents from the initial detection of the attack and initial effects
through the medical response to the incident in an integrated,
interoperable manner.
Integrated data environment technology
The committee recommends an increase of $2.0 million in PE 63736D for
the continuous acquisition life-cycle support initiative's integrated
data environment program. This technology addresses the critical issues
of life-cycle costs and logistic support for the warfighter. The
committee directs that cost sharing for this project be used to the
maximum extent practicable.
Demonstration/validation of technology for the remediation
of unexploded ordnance at active, inactive, closing, transferred, and
transferring ranges
The budget request included $9.0 million for research, development,
testing, and evaluation (RDT&E) related to the environmental remediation
of unexploded ordnance (UXO), $5.0 million for development of UXO
technology through the Strategic Environmental Research and Development
Program (SERDP)(PE 63716D) and $4.0 million for demonstration/validation
through the Environmental Security Technology Certification Program
(ESTCP)(PE 63851D). The committee recommends an increase of
$10.0 million in ESTCP (PE 63851D) for
demonstration/validation of UXO remediation technology.
The committee has previously expressed concern (S. Rept. 106 50)
about the lack of focus or support in the Department of Defense (DOD)
RDT&E base for UXO remediation. Based on information provided to the
committee, it is evident that increased emphasis in this area is
absolutely