Congressional Documents

Missile Defense-Related Excerpts

NATIONAL DEFENSE AUTHORIZATION
ACT FOR FISCAL YEAR 1998
CONFERENCE REPORT
to accompany
H.R. 1119

October 23, 1997
105th Congress 1st Session
HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

Report 105-340



DIVISION A--DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE AUTHORIZATIONS TITLE I--PROCUREMENT .............. Cooperative engagement capability The budget request included no funds for procurement of cooperative engagement capability (CEC) equipment. The House bill would authorize $114.8 million to restore the Navy's CEC fielding plan by procuring and installing CEC shipsets for two aircraft carrier battle groups. The Senate amendment would authorize $74.8 million to procure and install CEC battle group equipment. The conferees agree to authorize an increase of $75.0 million for procurement and installation of CEC battle group equipment. ................ TITLE II--RESEARCH, DEVELOPMENT, TEST, AND EVALUATION ................ Cooperative engagement capability The budget request included $139.2 million in PE 63658N for the cooperative engagement capability (CEC). The House bill would authorize a total increase of $50.0 million in PE 63658N for the CEC program: $15.0 million to continue the accelerated development of the low cost common equipment set; $5.0 million to support transfer of the CEC design and development agent to industry; $20.0 million to accelerate integration of the CEC into Navy E 2C and P 3 aircraft; $5.0 million to initiate development of an integrated capability between CEC and the ship self defense program (SSDS); and $5.0 million to accelerate joint service integration and demonstration of CEC with the Army's Patriot and the Marine Corps' Hawk air defense missile systems. The Senate amendment would authorize an increase of $9.5 million in PE 63658N to: (1) $5.0 million to continue the transition of design responsibility from its developer to the CEC procurement contractor; and (2) $4.5 million to continue integration of CEC into the Marine Corps Hawk missile system. The Senate amendment would also authorize $5.0 million in PE 64212N to initiate development of a Ku-band data link kit for the SH 60B helicopter to avoid CEC interference. The conferees agree to authorize an increase of $33.0 million in PE 63658N as follows: (1) $15.0 million for low cost common equipment sets; (2) $10.0 million for P 3 and E 2C integration; (3) $5.0 million for CEC SSDS integration; and (4) $3.0 million for CEC Hawk missile system integration. The conferees agree not to authorize an increase in PE 64212N for the SH 60B Ku-band data link. ................ Rocket Systems Launch Program The budget request included $8.0 million in PE 65860F for the Rocket Systems Launch Program (RSLP). The House bill would authorize an increase of $25.0 million for RSLP to support the launch of an Atmospheric Intercept Technology (AIT) demonstration payload. The Senate amendment would authorize the budget request. The conferees agree to authorize an increase of $20.0 million for RSLP in support of the AIT program. The conferees direct the Ballistic Missile Defense Organization and the Air Force to develop a coordinated implementation plan for executing the RSLP and AIT budgets in order to maximize the benefit to the AIT program. Cruise missile defense The budget request included no funds to begin transitioning sensor technology from the Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency (DARPA) to the Air Force for insertion into the Airborne Warning and Control System (AWACS) or the Joint Surveillance Target Attack Radar System (JSTARS) for cruise missile defense. The House bill would authorize the budget request. The Senate amendment would authorize increases of $10.0 million to PE 27417F to begin the necessary upgrades to AWACS, and $10.0 million to PE 27581F to begin necessary upgrades to JSTARS. The conferees agree to authorize an increase of $3.0 million in PE 27581F to begin necessary upgrades to JSTARS for cruise missile defense. Given the growing threat posed by cruise missiles, the conferees continue to support development of a comprehensive cruise missile defense architecture, integrated into DOD's overall air and theater missile defense efforts. Because counter cruise missile technologies have matured at DARPA, and because DARPA funding to support key sensor technologies ends in fiscal year 1998, the conferees strongly urge the Air Force to begin to integrate these technologies into operational platforms, specifically into the AWACS and JSTARS platforms. The conferees expect the Air Force to assume these two important initiatives. To support these efforts, the conferees encourage the Air Force to prepare expeditiously the report on cruise missile defense directed in the statement of managers accompanying the conference report on H.R. 2266 (H. Rept. 105 265). The conferees understand that the Air Force's report could conclude that the Air Force should apply additional funds to cruise missile defense upgrades to the AWACS or JSTARS programs during fiscal year 1998 beyond those approved in this Act. If that is the conclusion of the report, the conferees would be willing to entertain a request to reallocate funds within the AWACS or JSTARS programs, or to reprogram funds from other activities. ................ Ballistic Missile Defense Organization funding The budget request included approximately $2.6 billion for the Ballistic Missile Defense Organization (BMDO) for research, development, test, and evaluation (RDT&E). The budget request also included $386.4 million in procurement funds formerly managed by BMDO that were transferred to the military services. As addressed elsewhere in this report, the conferees have agreed to include a legislative provision requiring that these procurement funds be transferred back to BMDO. In addition, the conferees have agreed to specifically authorize these procurement funds in their original BMDO program elements. Consistent with these changes, the following direction addresses these fiscal year 1998 procurement funds as part of the budget request for BMDO. Funding direction regarding BMDO military construction is located elsewhere in this report. Specific programmatic and funding guidance is provided below. BMDO FUNDING ALLOCATION [In millions of dollars] Program element Budget request SASC change HNSC change Conf. change Total authorized RDT&E: 249.5 +188.4 +35.0 +171.0 420.5 Procurement: 20.1 20.1 ----------------- ------------- ------------- -------------- ------------------- BMDO Total 2,966.6 +578.7 +817.5 +709.5 3,676.1 \1\Following submission of the budget request, the Department of Defense submitted a revised fiscal year 1998 budget request for THAAD of $353.4 million for Dem/Val and no funds for EMD. \2\Transfer to Cooperative BMD. LOW COST LAUNCH TECHNOLOGY The budget request included no funds to support low cost launch technologies, such as pressure fed engine technology. The House bill would authorize an increase of $15.0 million in PE 63302F for development of the Scorpius low cost launch concept. The Senate amendment would authorize an increase of $10.0 million in PE 63173C for low cost launch technology development, including the Scorpius concept. The conferees agree to authorize an increase of $5.0 million in PE 63173C and an increase of $5.0 million in PE 63401F for low cost launch technology, including the Scorpius and Excalibur concepts. THEATER HIGH ALTITUDE AREA DEFENSE SYSTEM The budget request included $556.1 million for the Theater High Altitude Area Defense (THAAD) program, of which $294.6 million was included in PE 63861C and $261.5 million was included in PE 64861C. The Department of Defense, after an analysis of the THAAD program by the Quadrennial Defense Review, submitted an amended budget request of $353.4 million in PE 63861C and no funding in PE 64861C. The House bill would authorize the original budget request in PE 63861C and $306.5 million in PE 64861C. The Senate amendment would authorize $353.4 million in PE 63861C and no funds for THAAD in PE 64861C. The conferees agree to authorize $406.1 million in PE 63861C for THAAD and no funds in PE 64861C. The conferees express their continued strong support for THAAD and believe that fielding THAAD as expeditiously as possible is a matter of highest priority. The conferees understand that the funding added for THAAD demonstration and validation will be used for extensive risk reduction activities to put the program on sounder technical and programmatic footing when it enters engineering and manufacturing development (EMD) in fiscal year 1999. The conferees also support DOD efforts to contain program cost growth that could result from schedule delays and technical complications. The conferees expect the Secretary of Defense to review the full range of cost control options applicable to the EMD phase of the program, including, but not limited to, options involving competition and leader-follower. The conferees direct the Secretary of Defense to submit a report on the results of this review to the congressional defense committees by March 15, 1998. The conferees continue to note their concern over long delays in the THAAD program. In the wake of the Gulf War, Congress directed the deployment of effective theater missile defenses at the earliest possible date. The THAAD program was initiated in calendar year 1992 and deployment originally planned for the mid-1990s. Yet BMDO now supports a 14-year development program, with a first unit equipped (FUE) in calendar year 2006, arguing that a 12-year development program entails excessive programmatic and schedule risks. The conferees understand that the most recent THAAD schedule supported by BMDO includes a number of opportunities to accelerate the program, depending on the technical progress. The conferees continue to believe that rapid deployment is critical to meet well understood warfighter requirements, and that every reasonable effort should be made to achieve an FUE in calendar year 2004. The conferees direct the Secretary of Defense to take all appropriate budgetary and programmatic steps for fiscal year 1998 to ensure that the program can be accelerated if opportunities arise to do so. The conferees are also concerned that a delay in the program will adversely affect THAAD EMD and procurement funding in the FYDP. The conferees direct the Secretary of Defense to submit a FYDP that fully funds a THAAD program oriented toward the earliest possible deployment, consistent with moderate program risk. navy upper tier (theater wide) The budget request included $194.9 million in PE 63868C for the Navy Upper Tier theater missile defense system. The House bill would authorize an increase of $150.0 million for the Navy Upper Tier program. The Senate amendment would authorize an increase of $80.0 million for the Navy Upper Tier program. The Senate recedes. The conferees are concerned that the Department of Defense still has not thoroughly assessed the feasibility of accelerating the currently planned Navy Upper Tier deployment date of fiscal year 2008. Noting numerous administration statements attaching high priority to TMD programs, the conferees direct the Secretary of Defense to report to the congressional defense committees no later than February 15, 1998, on the cost and technical feasibility of options for a more robust Navy Upper Tier flight test program, the earliest technically feasible deployment date, and costs associated with such a deployment date. NATIONAL MISSILE DEFENSE The budget request included $504.1 million in PE 63871C for the National Missile Defense (NMD) program. Following the budget submission, and pursuant to the Quadrennial Defense Review, the Secretary of Defense requested that the NMD budget request be increased by $474.0 million for fiscal year 1998. The House bill and Senate amendment would authorize an increase of $474.0 million for the NMD program. The conferees agree to authorize an increase of $474.0 million for the NMD program. The conferees have expressed concern for some time that the NMD program has been underfunded. The Department of Defense has acknowledged this funding shortfall and recommended an increase of $474.0 million in fiscal year 1998, and approximately $2.3 billion over the years of the Future Years Defense Program (FYDP). The conferees note that this does not include any funding for the actual deployment of an NMD system. Although the conferees are pleased that the Secretary of Defense has sought to rectify NMD funding shortfalls, they are disappointed that it has taken so long. Even with significant congressional increases over the last two years, the NMD program remains high risk, largely due to the administration's failure to adequately fund robust testing activities. Unfortunately, the addition of $474.0 million in fiscal year 1998 will do little in the near-term to compensate for this problem. The conferees are concerned by the lack of detail accompanying the Secretary of Defense's request to increase the NMD program budget by $2.3 billion over the FYDP. In addition, the conferees are not satisfied with the degree of information provided to date on how past NMD funding increases have been spent. Therefore, the conferees direct the Secretary of Defense to submit a report to the congressional defense committees by February 15, 1998, providing a detailed accounting of how NMD funds have been spent since the beginning of fiscal year 1996 and a detailed plan for the allocation of NMD funding in the FYDP. In addition, the Secretary shall provide a detailed description of the cost estimating and cost control mechanisms in place within DOD for the NMD program, and an assessment of whether they are adequate. The conferees believe that BMDO should continue to understand issues associated with sea-based NMD options. The conferees are aware of analysis that shows that a version of the Navy Upper Tier TMD system could be employed in an NMD role. Therefore, the conferees direct the Director of BMDO to submit a report to the congressional defense committees by February 15, 1998, describing whether and how the Navy Upper Tier program could be upgraded in the future to provide a limited NMD capability. The report should address the technical issues associated with a sea-based NMD option as well as costs associated with such a concept. The report should also address whether and, if so, how a sea-based NMD system could be integrated into and supplement a ground-based NMD system, whether and, if so, how a sea-based system would provide needed additional capabilities in support of the requirements for the existing NMD program, and whether such a system would comply with the ABM Treaty. COOPERATIVE BALLISTIC MISSILE DEFENSE PROGRAM The budget request included $38.7 million for the Arrow Continuation Experiments/Arrow Deployability (ACES/ADP) program (PE 63872C), $12.9 million for the Unmanned Aerial Vehicle Boost Phase Intercept (UAV BPI) program (PE 63870C), and $16.5 million for the Tactical High Energy Laser (THEL) program (PE 63308A), all of which are U.S.-Israeli cooperative missile defense programs. The budget request included no funding for the Russian American Observation Satellite (RAMOS) program and the Active Plasma Experiment (APEX) program, both of which are cooperative Russian-American programs. The House bill would authorize $123.1 million in a new BMDO program element (63XXXC) for cooperative international BMD programs, including $48.7 million for the Arrow program, an increase of $10.0 million; the budget request for the UAV BPI program; $38.2 million for THEL, of which $15.0 million was a funding increase and another $6.7 million was to be funded by BMDO administrative accounts; and $30.0 million for RAMOS and APEX. The Senate amendment would authorize $53.7 million for Arrow in PE 63872C, an increase of $15.0 million; $17.9 million for UAV BPI in PE 63870C, an increase of $5.0 million; $51.5 million for THEL in PE 63308A, an increase of $35.0 million; and no funding for RAMOS or APEX. The conferees agree to authorize $50.7 million for Arrow in PE 63872C, an increase of $10.0 million; $16.4 million for UAV BPI in PE 63870C, an increase of $3.5 million; $51.0 million for THEL in PE 63308A, an increase of $34.5 million; $13.0 million for RAMOS in PE 63173C; and $8.0 million for APEX in PE 63173C. The House recedes on its initiative to create a new cooperative BMD PE for fiscal year 1998. A legislative provision to create a new cooperative BMD program element for fiscal year 1999 is described elsewhere in this report. The conferees expect that these programs and other appropriate programs will be managed through this new cooperative BMD program element. SPACE-BASED LASER The budget request included $28.9 million in PE 63173C for the Space Based Laser (SBL) program. The House bill would authorize the budget request for the SBL program. The Senate amendment would authorize an increase of $118.0 million for the SBL program. The conferees agree to authorize an increase of $98.0 million for the SBL program, for a total of $126.9 million in fiscal year 1998. The conferees strongly endorse the recommendation of BMDO's SBL Independent Review Team (IRT) to proceed on a low risk path leading to the launch of an ABM Treaty compliant Readiness Demonstrator (RD) in fiscal year 2005. In a letter of August 15, 1997 to the Senate Majority Leader, the Secretary of Defense confirmed that SBL technology ``has reached a level of maturity enabling us to focus on integration issues that could lead to a future space demonstration of a sub-scale vehicle.'' The conferees believe that such an SBL RD can be developed and launched without violating the ABM Treaty. Proceeding with an SBL RD will not commit the United States to development or deployment of an operational SBL system, but will preserve this option for future consideration. The conferees support the management structure that has been established for the SBL program, with the Air Force acting as the executive agent for BMDO, but believe that the Air Force must program a share of the funding needed to develop and launch the SBL RD. The conferees understand that the Air Force leadership is committed to such a cost-sharing arrangement and look forward to this commitment being reflected in the fiscal year 1999 budget request and in future Air Force Program Objective Memorandum (POM) submissions. The conferees also understand that the Secretary of Defense is considering options for increasing funding for the SBL program in the BMDO budget. The conferees recognize that full funding of the SBL RD program will allow a much more efficient and lower risk program. Therefore, the conferees strongly urge the Secretary of Defense to explore all possible means of including the full SBL IRT recommended funding profile for a fiscal year 2005 launch in the combined BMDO and Air Force Future Years Defense Program (FYDP), starting with the fiscal year 1999 budget request. The conferees direct that all funds authorized to be appropriated for the SBL program in fiscal year 1998 be managed with the principal objective of developing an SBL RD capable of being launched in fiscal year 2005. The conferees further direct that all funds authorized to be appropriated in fiscal year 1998 for the SBL program be directly executed by the Commander of the Air Force Space and Missile Systems Center (SMC). The conferees recognize that the Commander of SMC may recommend that some limited amount of critical and potentially high payoff SBL technology research and development be continued even if it does not directly support the SBL RD. However, due to the overarching priority of launching the SBL RD in fiscal year 2005, the conferees direct that obligation of SBL funds for such activities be limited, and only occur following consultation with the Committee on Armed Services of the Senate and the Committee on National Security of the House of Representatives. The conferees direct the Commander of SMC to establish promptly an SBL RD baseline, to include a set of technical objectives and requirements, a contracting strategy, a system design, a program schedule, and a funding profile that would support a launch in fiscal year 2005. The conferees understand that the SBL IRT focused primarily on a single SBL RD design. However, the conferees support the steps taken by the Commander of SMC to rapidly assess technical and contractual options that may allow a treaty compliant SBL RD to be developed and launched more rapidly and affordably. To ensure that the focus of the program remains on a fiscal year 2005 launch, the conferees expect to be consulted prior to the adoption of any excursions from the SBL IRT recommended baseline. The conferees note that the SBL IRT concluded that a new integrated test facility is an essential and relatively long-lead element of the SBL RD effort. Therefore, the conferees direct the Commander of SMC to proceed expeditiously in fiscal year 1998 with the selection of a site for such a facility. The Commander of SMC shall include the requirements, costs, and schedule for this facility in the SBL RD baseline, as well as an assessment of the cost effectiveness of continuing to operate other SBL test facilities such as the one at Capistrano, California. The conferees direct the Secretary of Defense to submit a report on the status of the SBL RD baseline, and related issues, to the congressional defense committees by March 1, 1998. .................. SUBTITLE C--BALLISTIC MISSILE DEFENSE PROGRAMS National Missile Defense Program (sec. 231) The Senate amendment contained a provision (sec. 225) that would require the Secretary of Defense to structure the National Missile Defense (NMD) program to support an integrated NMD system test in fiscal year 1999. The provision would also require the Secretary of Defense to prepare a plan for the development and deployment of an NMD system that could achieve initial operational capability in fiscal year 2003. Finally, the provision would authorize $978.1 million for NMD in fiscal year 1998. The House bill contained no similar provision. The House recedes. Budgetary treatment of amounts for procurement for ballistic missile defense programs (sec. 232) The House bill contained a provision (sec. 231) that would require future budget requests for procurement of the National Missile Defense program and for core theater missile defense programs to be within the accounts of the Ballistic Missile Defense Organization (BMDO) rather than in the accounts of the military services. The Senate amendment contained a provision (sec. 226) that would direct the Secretary of Defense to transfer ballistic missile defense program procurement funds previously managed by the Ballistic Missile Defense Organization from military service accounts back to their original BMDO procurement accounts. The Senate recedes with an amendment that combines the House and the Senate provisions. Cooperative Ballistic Missile Defense program (sec. 233) The House bill contained a provision (sec. 232) that would establish a Cooperative Ballistic Missile Defense Program within the Ballistic Missile Defense Organization (BMDO), to support on-going and future technical and analytical cooperative efforts between the United States and other nations that contribute to U.S. missile defense capabilities. The Senate amendment contained no similar provision. The Senate recedes with an amendment that would provide the Secretary of Defense discretion to exclude certain ballistic missile defense acquisition programs from the cooperative ballistic missile defense program element. The conferees understand that BMDO has developed plans for the creation of a dedicated cooperative ballistic missile defense program element and look forward to this new program element in the fiscal year 1999 budget request. Annual report on the threat posed to the United States by weapons of mass destruction, ballistic missiles, and cruise missiles (sec. 234) The House bill contained a provision (sec. 234) that would direct the Secretary of Defense, in consultation with the Director of Central Intelligence, to prepare and submit to Congress by January 30 of each year, a report on threats posed to the United States and its allies by cruise missiles, ballistic missiles, and weapons of mass destruction, and the proliferation of such technologies. The Senate amendment contained no similar provision. The Senate recedes. Director of Ballistic Missile Defense Organization (sec. 235) The House bill contained a provision (sec. 235) that would require that the Director of the Ballistic Missile Defense Organization (BMDO) carry the grade of lieutenant general or general or, in the case of an officer of the Navy, vice admiral or admiral. It would also require that the Director of BMDO report directly to the Secretary of Defense. The Senate amendment contained no similar provision. The Senate recedes with an amendment that would permit the appointment of a civilian official of equivalent grade as Director of BMDO and eliminate the requirement that the Director report directly to the Secretary of Defense. The conferees direct the Secretary of Defense to ensure that the director of BMDO is accorded full access to the Secretary and all other senior Department of Defense officials on matters pertaining to the management of ballistic missile defense programs for which the director has responsibility. Repeal of required deployment dates for core theater missile defense programs (sec. 236) The House bill contained a provision (sec. 233) that would amend section 234(a) of the Ballistic Missile Defense Act of 1995 by eliminating deployment dates for certain core theater missile defense (TMD) programs and modifying the deployment date for the Theater High Altitude Area Defense (THAAD) program. The provision also made technical and conforming changes to section 234(a). The Senate amendment contained no similar provision. The Senate recedes with an amendment that would eliminate all deployment dates for core TMD programs from section 234(a) of the Ballistic Missile Defense Act of 1995. The conferees continue to support the earliest possible deployment of effective theater missile defenses, consistent with acceptable program risk, as a matter of high national priority. The conferees believe that the mandated deployment dates made clear the high priority attached by Congress to all four core theater missile defense programs. These dates and congressional funding increases have propelled the Navy Area Theater Ballistic Missile Defense program into engineering and manufacturing development and the Patriot Advanced Capability-3 (PAC 3) program into procurement. Congressionally mandated deployment dates were also motivated by the Department of Defense's failure to commit firmly to a deployment schedule for the Navy Theater Wide and THAAD programs that would result in deployment of these vital capabilities at the earliest opportunity consistent with acceptable technical and program risk. Henceforth, the conferees anticipate that a statement of congressional intent concerning the management of the core TMD programs will be issued annually. The conferees believe that the flexibility of annual statements will allow for rigorous and effective congressional oversight. ........... Tactical High Energy Laser program The House bill contained a provision (sec. 236) that would transfer the Tactical High Energy Laser (THEL) program from the Department of the Army to the Ballistic Missile Defense Organization, and authorize $38.2 million for THEL in fiscal year 1998. The Senate amendment contained no similar provision. The House recedes. Fiscal year 1998 funding for THEL is addressed elsewhere in this report. ........... SUBTITLE F--MATTERS RELATING TO DEFENSE PROPERTY ........... Authority of the Secretary of Defense concerning disposal of assets under cooperative agreements on air defense in Central Europe (sec. 1064) The Senate amendment contained a provision (sec. 1089) that would provide authority for the Secretary of Defense, pursuant to amendments to the European air defense agreements agreed to on December 6, 1983 and July 12, 1984, to provide defense articles owned and acquired by the United States to the Federal Republic of Germany. The House bill contained no similar provision. The House recedes. The conferees note that pursuant to amendments to the European Air Defense Agreements agreed to on December 6, 1983 and July 12, 1984, the Patriot-Roland Cooperative Agreement (section 1007, Public Law 98 525, and section 132, Public Law 99 83) enabled the United States and the Federal Republic of Germany to enhance central European air defenses by utilizing Patriot batteries and the Roland short range air defense systems, which are owned by the United States but operated by the Federal Republic of Germany. Since January 1996, negotiations between the United States and the Federal Republic of Germany have been underway to modify and extend the current agreement. The Department of Defense (DOD) has informed the conferees that the current proposal would allow the transfer of ownership for 12 Patriot batteries and 27 Roland short range air defense systems to the Federal Republic of Germany in exchange for equitable compensation. The DOD has further informed the conferees that modifying the current agreements to provide for this transfer of ownership would be an equitable solution with regard to the assets involved in the original agreement, and would enable continued cooperation in the air defense mission area. The conferees understand that legislation is necessary to accomplish these transfers as the original agreements do not provide the required transfer authority and this particular transfer would fall outside of the coverage of the more traditional authorities contained in the Arms Export Control Act, 22 U.S.C. 2751. The conferees direct the Secretary of Defense to provide a report to Congress on the status of the negotiations on the Patriot-Roland Follow-On Implementing Agreement (FOIA). The conferees further direct that prior to the transfer of title for any Patriot or Roland systems, the Secretary of Defense shall provide the congressional defense committees with a report on the financial and non-financial benefits to the United States of the transfer of the equipment, the mission value of the FOIA compensation components, the terms of the equipment transfer (including the use of mission value as compensation), the ability of the United States to meet its NATO obligations, and any potential obstacles to the performance of FOIA missions. ........... Reconstitution of Commission to Assess the Ballistic Missile Threat to the United States (sec. 1306) The conferees agree to include a provision that would extend by one year the time for the Commission to Assess the Ballistic Missile Threat to the United States, established pursuant to Subtitle B of Title XIII of the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 1997 (Public Law 104 201), to complete its original charter. ........... SUBTITLE C--PROGRAM AUTHORIZATIONS, RESTRICTIONS, AND LIMITATIONS Memorandum of understanding for use of national laboratories for Ballistic Missile Defenses programs (sec. 3131) The House bill contained a provision (sec. 3131) that would establish a program within the Department of Energy weapons laboratories for the purpose of assisting the Department of Defense in the testing and development of a ballistic missile defense program. The Senate amendment contained no similar provision. The Senate recedes with an amendment that would direct the Secretary of Energy and the Secretary of Defense to enter into a memorandum of understanding as to how the Department of Energy national laboratories could be utilized more fully to support the ballistic missile defense program. ...........