[DOCID: f:hr162.106] From the House Reports Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov] 106th Congress Report HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 1st Session 106-162 ======================================================================= NATIONAL DEFENSE AUTHORIZATION ACT FOR FISCAL YEAR 2000 ---------- R E P O R T OF THE COMMITTEE ON ARMED SERVICES HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES ON H.R. 1401 together with ADDITIONAL, SUPPLEMENTAL, AND DISSENTING VIEWS [Including cost estimate of the Congressional Budget Office] May 24, 1999.--Committed to the Committee of the Whole House on the State of the Union and ordered to be printed NATIONAL DEFENSE AUTHORIZATION ACT FOR FISCAL YEAR 2000 106th Congress Report HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 1st Session 106-162 _______________________________________________________________________ NATIONAL DEFENSE AUTHORIZATION ACT FOR FISCAL YEAR 2000 __________ R E P O R T OF THE COMMITTEE ON ARMED SERVICES HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES ON H.R. 1401 together with ADDITIONAL, SUPPLEMENTAL, AND DISSENTING VIEWS [Including cost estimate of the Congressional Budget Office] __________ U.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE 56-735 WASHINGTON : 1999 May 24, 1999.--Committed to the Committee of the Whole House on the State of the Union and ordered to be printed HOUSE COMMITTEE ON ARMED SERVICES One Hundred Sixth Congress FLOYD D. SPENCE, South Carolina, Chairman BOB STUMP, Arizona IKE SKELTON, Missouri DUNCAN HUNTER, California NORMAN SISISKY, Virginia JOHN R. KASICH, Ohio JOHN M. SPRATT, Jr., South HERBERT H. BATEMAN, Virginia Carolina JAMES V. HANSEN, Utah SOLOMON P. ORTIZ, Texas CURT WELDON, Pennsylvania OWEN PICKETT, Virginia JOEL HEFLEY, Colorado LANE EVANS, Illinois JIM SAXTON, New Jersey GENE TAYLOR, Mississippi STEVE BUYER, Indiana NEIL ABERCROMBIE, Hawaii TILLIE K. FOWLER, Florida MARTIN T. MEEHAN, Massachusetts JOHN M. McHUGH, New York ROBERT A. UNDERWOOD, Guam JAMES TALENT, Missouri PATRICK J. KENNEDY, Rhode Island TERRY EVERETT, Alabama ROD R. BLAGOJEVICH, Illinois ROSCOE G. BARTLETT, Maryland SILVESTRE REYES, Texas HOWARD ``BUCK'' McKEON, California TOM ALLEN, Maine J.C. WATTS, Jr., Oklahoma VIC SNYDER, Arkansas MAC THORNBERRY, Texas JIM TURNER, Texas JOHN N. HOSTETTLER, Indiana ADAM SMITH, Washington SAXBY CHAMBLISS, Georgia LORETTA SANCHEZ, California VAN HILLEARY, Tennessee JAMES H. MALONEY, Connecticut JOE SCARBOROUGH, Florida MIKE McINTYRE, North Carolina WALTER B. JONES, Jr., North CIRO D. RODRIGUEZ, Texas Carolina CYNTHIA A. McKINNEY, Georgia LINDSEY GRAHAM, South Carolina ELLEN O. TAUSCHER, California JIM RYUN, Kansas ROBERT BRADY, Pennsylvania BOB RILEY, Alabama ROBERT E. ANDREWS, New Jersey JIM GIBBONS, Nevada BARON P. HILL, Indiana MARY BONO, California MIKE THOMPSON, California JOSEPH PITTS, Pennsylvania JOHN B. LARSON, Connecticut ROBIN HAYES, North Carolina STEVEN KUYKENDALL, California DONALD SHERWOOD, Pennsylvania Andrew K. Ellis, Staff Director (ii) C O N T E N T S ---------- Page Explanation of the Committee Amendments.......................... 1 Purpose.......................................................... 2 Relationship of Authorization to Appropriations.................. 2 Summary of Authorization in the Bill............................. 2 Summary Table of Authorizations................................ 3 Rationale for the Committee Bill................................. 10 The Administration's Defense Budget Request.................... 11 The Committee Bill: Managing Risk.............................. 12 Hearings......................................................... 13 DIVISION A--DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE AUTHORIZATION.................. 13 TITLE I--PROCUREMENT............................................. 13 OVERVIEW....................................................... 13 Aircraft Procurement, Army................................... 17 Overview................................................... 17 Items of Special Interest.................................. 21 AH-64 modifications...................................... 21 Aircraft survivability equipment (ASE)................... 21 Aircraft survivability equipment (ASE) modifications..... 22 CH-47 cargo helicopter modifications..................... 22 Longbow.................................................. 22 UH-60 Blackhawk.......................................... 23 UH-60 modifications...................................... 23 Utility/cargo airplane modifications..................... 24 Missile Procurement, Army.................................... 24 Overview................................................... 24 Items of Special Interest.................................. 27 Avenger modifications.................................... 27 Avenger system summary................................... 27 Brilliant anti-armor (BAT) submunition................... 27 Multiple launch rocket system (MLRS) launcher systems.... 27 Weapons and Tracked Combat Vehicles, Army.................... 28 Overview................................................... 28 Items of Special Interest.................................. 32 Abrams upgrade program/heavy assault bridge (HAB)........ 32 Bradley base sustainment................................. 32 M113 carrier modifications............................... 33 M240 series medium machine gun........................... 33 M249 squad automatic weapon (SAW)........................ 33 MK19-3 grenade launcher.................................. 33 Ammunition Procurement, Army................................. 34 Overview................................................... 34 Items of Special Interest.................................. 38 Ammunition............................................... 38 Hydra 70 rockets......................................... 38 Provision of industrial facilities....................... 38 Other Procurement, Army...................................... 39 Overview................................................... 39 Items of Special Interest.................................. 51 Area common user system (ACUS) modification program...... 51 Army data distribution system (ADDS)..................... 51 Artillery accuracy equipment............................. 51 Automated data processing equipment (ADPE)............... 52 Combat support medical................................... 52 Family of heavy tactical vehicles........................ 53 General purpose vehicles................................. 53 High speed compactor..................................... 53 Hunter unmanned aerial vehicle (UAV)..................... 53 Information system security program (ISSP)............... 54 Integrated family of test equipment (IFTE)............... 54 Items less than $2.0 million (construction equipment).... 54 Joint surveillance target attack radar system (Joint STARS) Common ground station (CGS)..................... 55 Lightweight video reconnaissance system (LVRS)........... 55 M56 smoke generator system............................... 55 Modification of in-service equipment..................... 56 Modification of in-service equipment (tactical surveillance).......................................... 56 Night vision devices..................................... 57 Nonsystem training devices............................... 57 Product improved (PI) combat vehicle crewman (CVC) headset................................................ 58 Ribbon bridge............................................ 58 Shortstop................................................ 59 Single channel ground and airborne radio systems (SINCGARS) family...................................... 59 Small pusher tug......................................... 60 Standard teleoperating kit............................... 60 Super high frequency (SHF) terminal...................... 60 Vibratory self-propelled roller.......................... 61 Wheel-mounted 25-ton crane............................... 61 Chemical Agents and Munitions Destruction, Army.............. 61 Overview................................................... 61 Item of Special Interest................................... 63 Chemical agents and munitions destruction................ 63 Aircraft Procurement, Navy................................... 63 Overview................................................... 63 Items of Special Interest.................................. 68 CH-60S................................................... 68 Common data link (CDL)................................... 68 Common ground equipment.................................. 68 E-2 modifications........................................ 68 EA-6B modifications...................................... 69 F-18 series modifications................................ 69 F/A-18E/F................................................ 69 Joint primary air training system (JPATS)................ 70 KC-130J.................................................. 70 Lightweight environmentally sealed parachute assembly (LESPA)................................................ 71 MV-22.................................................... 71 P-3 series modifications................................. 71 T-45 training system (TS)................................ 72 UC-35.................................................... 72 Weapons Procurement, Navy.................................... 72 Overview................................................... 72 Items of Special Interest.................................. 76 Aerial targets........................................... 76 Evolved seasparrow missile (ESSM)........................ 76 Hellfire II missile...................................... 76 Joint stand-off weapon (JSOW)............................ 76 Rolling airframe missile................................. 77 Standard missile......................................... 77 Tomahawk missiles........................................ 78 Ammunition Procurement, Navy/Marine Corps.................... 78 Overview................................................... 78 Items of Special Interest.................................. 81 Navy ammunition.......................................... 81 Marine corps ammunition.................................. 81 Shipbuilding and Conversion, Navy............................ 81 Overview................................................... 81 Items of Special Interest.................................. 84 Attack submarine force level............................. 84 LHD-8 amphibious assault ship............................ 84 Strategic sealift........................................ 84 Other Procurement, Navy...................................... 85 Overview................................................... 85 Items of Special Interest.................................. 96 AN/BPS-16 submarine navigation radar upgrade............. 96 AN/SPS-73 (V) surface search radar....................... 96 AN/USC-42 mini-demand assigned multiple access (DAMA) ultra-high frequency (UHF) satellite communications (SATCOM) terminals..................................... 96 Computer aided submode training (CAST) lesson authoring system (CLASS)......................................... 97 Fire fighting equipment.................................. 97 Joint engineering data management and information control system (JEDMICS)....................................... 97 Minesweeping equipment................................... 98 Mobile remote emitter simulator (MRES)................... 98 Other training equipment................................. 98 Shipboard display emulator (SDE) equipment............... 99 Sonobuoys................................................ 99 Surface sonar support equipment.......................... 99 WSN-7B ring laser gyro (RLG) and WQN-2 doppler sonar velocity log (DSVL).................................... 100 Undersea Warfare support equipment....................... 100 Procurement, Marine Corps.................................... 100 Overview................................................... 100 Items of Special Interest.................................. 106 155 millimeter (mm) lightweight towed howitzer........... 106 Body armor............................................... 106 Communications and electronic infrastructure support..... 106 Marine corps air ground task force (MAGTF) command, control, communications, computers, and intelligence (C4I) modification kits................................ 107 Material handling equipment.............................. 107 Modification kits (tracked vehicles)..................... 107 Night vision equipment................................... 108 Aircraft Procurement, Air Force.............................. 108 Overview................................................... 108 Items of Special Interest.................................. 114 Bomber modernization..................................... 114 C-17..................................................... 114 C-17A aircraft modifications............................. 114 C-130J................................................... 115 C-135 modifications...................................... 115 Defense airborne reconnaissance program (DARP)........... 115 E-8C joint surveillance and target attack radar system (STARS)................................................ 116 F-15 modifications....................................... 116 F-16C.................................................... 117 F-16 improved avionics intermediate shop (IAIS).......... 117 F-16 modifications....................................... 117 F-22..................................................... 118 Predator unmanned aerial vehicle......................... 119 T-38 modifications....................................... 120 Terrain awareness and warning system (TAWS).............. 120 Ammunition Procurement, Air Force............................ 120 Overview................................................... 120 Items of Special Interest.................................. 123 Air Force ammunition..................................... 123 Laser guided bombs (LGB)................................. 123 Missile Procurement, Air Force............................... 123 Overview................................................... 123 Items of Special Interest.................................. 127 AGM-65 modifications..................................... 127 Minuteman III modifications.............................. 127 Spaceborne equipment..................................... 127 Titan.................................................... 128 Other Procurement, Air Force................................. 128 Overview................................................... 128 Items of Special Interest.................................. 135 60K a/c loader........................................... 135 Aircrew laser eye protection............................. 135 Automatic data processing equipment (ADPE)............... 135 Master crane............................................. 135 Military satellite communications terminals.............. 136 National eagle system.................................... 136 Radio equipment.......................................... 136 Supply asset tracking system (SATS)...................... 137 Tactical communications-electronics (CE) equipment....... 137 Theater air control system (TACSI)....................... 137 Procurement, Defense-Wide.................................... 138 Overview................................................... 138 Items of Special Interest.................................. 143 Automated document conversion system (ADCS).............. 143 Mentor protege........................................... 143 Nightstar binocular...................................... 143 National Guard and Reserve Equipment......................... 143 Overview................................................... 143 Items of Special Interest.................................. 145 National guard and reserve equipment..................... 145 Reconnaissance aircraft augmentation..................... 145 Chemical Agents and Munitions Destruction, Defense........... 146 Overview................................................... 146 Items of Special Interest.................................. 148 Chemical agents and munitions destruction................ 148 LEGISLATIVE PROVISIONS......................................... 149 Subtitle A--Authorization of Appropriations.................. 149 Sections 101-109--Authorization of Appropriations.......... 149 Subtitle B--Army Programs.................................... 149 Section 111--Multiyear Procurement Authority for Army Program.................................................. 149 Section 112--Extension of Pilot Program on Sales of Manufactured Articles and Services of Certain Army Industrial Facilities Without Regard to Availability from Domestic Sources......................................... 149 Section 113--Revision to Conditions for Award of a Second- Source Procurement Contract for the Family of Medium Tactical Vehicles...................................... 149 Subtitle C--Navy Programs.................................... 150 Section 121--F/A-18E/F Super Hornet Aircraft Program....... 150 Subtitle D--Chemical Stockpile Destruction Program........... 150 Section 141--Destruction of Existing Stockpile of Lethal Chemical Agents and Munitions............................ 150 Section 142--Alternative Technologies for Destruction of Assembled Chemical Weapons............................. 151 Subtitle E--Other Matters.................................... 151 Section 151--Limitation on Expenditures for Satellite Communications........................................... 151 TITLE II--RESEARCH, DEVELOPMENT, TEST, AND EVALUATION............ 152 OVERVIEW....................................................... 152 Army RDT&E................................................... 155 Overview................................................... 155 Items Of Special Interest.................................. 164 Aircraft avionics........................................ 164 All source analysis system............................... 164 Alternative vehicle propulsion initiative................ 164 Armament enhancement initiative.......................... 164 Army aircrew coordination training program............... 165 Army technical test instrumentation and targets.......... 165 Comanche................................................. 165 Combat vehicle improvement programs...................... 165 Combined turbine diesel engine........................... 166 Combustion driven eye-safe laser......................... 166 Concepts experimentation program......................... 166 Defense healthcare information assurance program......... 166 Defense manufacturing technology program................. 167 Environmental quality technology......................... 168 Full spectrum active protection.......................... 168 Future combat vehicle.................................... 168 Geographic synthetic aperture radar...................... 170 Geo-positioning system--inertial measurement unit integration............................................ 170 Heart rate variability technology........................ 170 High energy laser test facility.......................... 171 High mobility artillery rocket system.................... 172 Joint service small arms program......................... 172 Joint surveillance target attack radar system (Joint STARS)................................................. 172 Kwajalein missile range modernization.................... 173 Lightweight x-band radar................................. 173 Medical materiel/medical biological defense equipment.... 173 MedTeams................................................. 174 Night vision advanced technology......................... 174 Panoramic night vision goggle............................ 174 Passive millimeter wave imaging.......................... 174 Patriot anti-cruise missile defense...................... 174 Plasma energy pyrolysis system........................... 175 Proximity fuzing for dual-purpose improved conventional munition submunitions.................................. 175 Security and intelligence activities..................... 176 Self-destruct fuse....................................... 176 Semi-automated imagery processor......................... 177 Small arms fire control system........................... 177 Tactical voice control for maneuver control system....... 177 Trichloromelamine testing................................ 177 University and industrial research centers............... 178 Navy RDT&E................................................... 178 Overview................................................... 178 Items Of Special Interest.................................. 188 Advanced amphibious assault vehicle...................... 188 Advanced anti-radiation guided missile................... 188 Advanced waterjet propulsor demonstration program........ 188 Affordable advanced acoustical arrays.................... 189 Analysis of alternatives for follow-on support jammer.... 189 Aquifer vulnerability/contamination assessment........... 190 Aviation depot maintenance technology.................... 190 Beartrap nonlinear dynamics and environmental characterization....................................... 190 C-2 eight-blade composite propeller system............... 191 Claymore marine.......................................... 191 Cooperative engagement capability........................ 191 Cruiser conversion....................................... 192 Distributed surveillance system.......................... 193 DP-2 thrust vectoring system proof-of-concept demonstration.......................................... 193 E-2C radar modernization................................. 194 Electric drive propulsion for Navy ships................. 194 Electro-optical framing technologies..................... 195 Environmentally safe energetic materials................. 195 Extended range guided munition and projectile common guidance............................................... 195 F/A-18C/D BOL chaff countermeasure....................... 196 Free electron laser...................................... 197 Hybrid fiberoptic/wireless communications system technology............................................. 197 Hyper-spectral analysis.................................. 198 Improved software production management.................. 198 Intercooled recuperated gas turbine engine............... 199 Joint experimentation program............................ 200 Joint non-lethal weapons programs........................ 200 Joint tactical combat training system.................... 200 Lightweight 155MM howitzer............................... 201 Littoral warfare fast patrol craft....................... 201 Location of global positioning systems jammers........... 202 Marine Corps H-1 helicopter upgrade...................... 202 Marine mammal research................................... 203 Multi-function self-aligned gate technology.............. 203 Multipurpose processor................................... 203 National oceanographic partnership program............... 204 Navy aviation survivability.............................. 205 Navy land attack missile program......................... 205 Navy theater missile defense and fleet defense radar upgrades............................................... 206 NSSN advanced submarine systems technology development and insertion.......................................... 207 Optical correlation technology for automatic target recognition............................................ 208 Optically fed and controlled phased array antenna........ 208 Optically multiplexed wideband radar beamformer.......... 208 P-3 maritime patrol aircraft combat systems research and development............................................ 209 Parametric airborne dipping sonar........................ 209 Phased array weather radar............................... 210 Power electronic building blocks and power node control centers................................................ 211 Project ``M''............................................ 211 S-3B surveillance system upgrade program................. 212 Ship survivability and personnel protection.............. 212 Silicon carbide semiconductor substrates................. 212 Smart propulsor product model............................ 213 SSGN conversion from Trident-class SSBN submarines....... 213 Superconducting waveform generator....................... 214 SWATH ship mine counter-measures demonstrator............ 214 Tactical control system.................................. 215 Tactical Tomahawk........................................ 215 Trajectory correctable munitions development............. 216 Ultra-high thermal conductivity fibers................... 217 Undersea warfare advanced technology..................... 217 Unmanned aerial vehicles................................. 217 Upgrading fleet systems.................................. 218 Vacuum electronics....................................... 218 Vectored thrust ducted propeller compound helicopter demonstration.......................................... 218 Virtual test bed for advanced electrical ship systems.... 219 Air Force RDT&E.............................................. 219 Overview................................................... 219 Items Of Special Interest.................................. 229 Airborne Laser........................................... 229 Aircrew laser eye protection............................. 229 Air Force/National Reconnaissance Office partnership..... 230 Air Force science and technology funding................. 230 Automatic target recognition........................... 231 Crew technology........................................ 231 Friction stir welding.................................. 231 Hyperspectral imaging.................................. 231 Tactical missile propulsion............................ 232 Ballistic missile technology............................. 232 B-2 upgrades............................................. 232 B-52 squadrons........................................... 233 Combat training ranges................................... 233 Commercial standardized cockpit and crew seats........... 234 Common imagery processor................................. 234 Evolved expendable launch vehicle........................ 235 Global combat support system............................. 235 Global Hawk high altitude endurance unmanned aerial vehicle................................................ 235 Integrated satellite communications control.............. 235 Joint airborne SIGINT program............................ 236 Joint air-to-surface standoff missile.................... 236 Joint strike fighter..................................... 236 Kinetic energy anti-satellite............................ 237 Microsatellite technology................................ 237 Military spaceplane...................................... 238 Miniature satellite threat reporting system.............. 238 Miniaturized munitions capability........................ 238 National polar-orbiting operational environmental surveillance system.................................... 239 Precision location and identification (PLAID) technology. 239 Satellite control network................................ 240 Simulation based forecasting decision support system (SBFDSS)............................................... 240 Space-based infrared system-high......................... 240 Space-based infrared system-low.......................... 242 Space launch and spacelift ranges........................ 242 Spacetrack............................................... 244 Synthetic theater operations research model.............. 244 Defense Agencies RDT&E....................................... 244 Overview................................................... 244 Items of Special Interest.................................. 253 Advanced concept technology demonstration................ 253 Advanced moving target indicator radar................... 253 Aeronautical test facilities............................. 253 Airborne common sensor................................... 254 Ballistic missile defense................................ 255 Advanced technology development........................ 255 Applied research....................................... 256 Atmospheric interceptor technology..................... 256 Ballistic missile defense test targets................. 257 International cooperative programs..................... 257 Low cost launch technology............................. 257 Medium extended air defense system..................... 258 National missile defense............................... 258 Navy area defense...................................... 259 Patriot advanced capability-3 (PAC-3).................. 260 Space-based laser...................................... 261 Technical operations................................... 261 Theater high altitude area defense..................... 262 Upper tier............................................. 262 Biological warfare defense program....................... 263 Chemical-biological defense program...................... 264 Chemical and biological point detectors................ 265 Optical computing device materials for chemical sensors 265 Safeguard.............................................. 265 Small unit biological detector and chemical-biological individual sampler................................... 266 Complex systems design................................... 266 Cryofracture disposal of anti-personnel landmines........ 267 CV-22 Osprey............................................. 267 Domestic preparedness for response to terrorism involving weapons of mass destruction............................ 267 Facial recognition technology............................ 268 Flat panel displays...................................... 268 Forging lead time technology............................. 269 Ground-based common sensor/prophet....................... 269 Information systems technology, superiority, and security 269 Global networked information enterprise security....... 270 Information assurance.................................. 271 Information assurance for national critical infrastructures...................................... 271 Report on information superiority...................... 271 Joint theater air and missile defense organization....... 272 Logistics sustainment technology......................... 272 Medical free electron laser.............................. 273 National technology alliance............................. 273 Pilot program for revitalizing the laboratories and test and evaluation centers of the Department of Defense.... 274 Special operations forces reconnaissance................. 274 Special operations forces small boat improvements........ 274 Special operations tactical systems development.......... 275 Strategic environmental research program................. 275 Thermionics.............................................. 275 University research initiatives.......................... 276 LEGISLATIVE PROVISIONS......................................... 276 Subtitle A--Authorization of Appropriations.................. 276 Section 201--Authorization of Appropriations............... 276 Section 202--Amount For Basic and Applied Research......... 276 Subtitle B--Program Requirements, Restrictions, and Limitations................................................ 276 Section 211--Collaborative Program To Evaluate And Demonstrate Advanced Technologies For Advanced Capability Combat Vehicles.......................................... 276 Section 212--Revisions in Manufacturing Technology Program. 277 Subtitle C--Ballistic Missile Defense........................ 277 Section 231--Additional Program Elements for Ballistic Missile Defense Programs................................. 277 Subtitle D--Other Matters.................................... 277 Section 241--Designation of the Secretary of the Army as Executive Agent for High Energy Laser Technologies....... 277 TITLE III--OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE............................. 277 OVERVIEW....................................................... 277 ITEMS OF SPECIAL INTEREST...................................... 309 Budget Request Increases..................................... 309 Critical Readiness Accounts Increases...................... 309 Aircraft spare parts..................................... 309 Depot Maintenance........................................ 309 Training Accounts........................................ 309 Real property maintenance and base operations support.... 310 Miscellaneous unfunded requirements...................... 311 Mobility Enhancement Funding............................. 311 Modern Field Kitchen Burner Unit........................... 311 Army Cold Weather Clothing................................. 312 Budget Request Reductions.................................... 312 Administration and Support Accounts........................ 312 Advisory and Assistance Services........................... 313 Civilian Personnel Overstatement Reductions................ 313 Joint Chiefs of Staff Training Exercises................... 313 Other Items of Special Interest.............................. 314 Commercial Activity Studies................................ 314 Defense Fuel Surcharges.................................... 314 Information Technology..................................... 315 Environmental Issues......................................... 315 Alternative Technologies for Asbestos Treatment and Disposal................................................. 315 Environmental Contamination in Watershed Surrounding the Former Naval Weapons Industrial Reserve Plant at McGregor, Texas.......................................... 316 Navy Environmental Leadership Program...................... 316 Morale, Welfare, and Recreation Issues....................... 316 Overview................................................... 316 Appropriated Fund Support of Morale, Welfare, and Recreation Programs...................................... 316 Combined Stores at Closed Installations.................... 317 Commissary Surcharge Fund.................................. 317 Military Exchange Privileges for Disabled Veterans......... 318 Nonappropriated Fund Retirement Plans...................... 318 Restrictions on Patron Access to Overseas Commissaries and Exchange Stores.......................................... 318 Sale of Value Brand Products in Commissary Stores.......... 319 Vendor Representatives Overseas............................ 319 Other Issues................................................. 319 Abrams Integrated Management Program....................... 319 Apache Helicopter Support.................................. 320 Army Battery Management Program............................ 321 Army Maintenance and Personnel Systems..................... 321 Automatic Document Conversion Technology................... 322 Centers of Industrial and Technical Excellence--Public- Private Partnerships..................................... 322 Civilian Marksmanship Program.............................. 322 Commercial Technologies for Maintenance Activities......... 323 Communicator Automated Emergency Notification System....... 323 Corrosion Prevention and Control Programs.................. 324 Department of Defense Dependent Schools.................... 324 Excess Military Property for Law Enforcement Agencies...... 325 Home Schooled Children Overseas............................ 325 Information Systems Security Education..................... 325 Joint Warfare Analysis Center.............................. 326 Military Affiliate Radio System............................ 326 Tugboat Operations......................................... 327 Urban Warfare Training..................................... 327 LEGISLATIVE PROVISIONS......................................... 328 Subtitle A--Authorization of Appropriations.................. 328 Section 301--Operation and Maintenance Funding............. 328 Section 302--Working Capital Funds......................... 328 Section 303--Armed Forces Retirement Home.................. 328 Section 304--Transfer From National Defense Stockpile Transaction Fund......................................... 328 Section 305--Transfer to Defense Working Capital Funds to Support Defense Commissary Agency........................ 328 Subtitle B--Program Requirements, Restrictions, and Limitations................................................ 329 Section 311--Reimbursement of Navy Exchange Service Command for Relocation Expenses.................................. 329 Subtitle C--Environmental Provisions......................... 329 Section 321--Remediation of Asbestos and Lead Based Paint.. 329 Subtitle D--Performance of Functions by Private-Sector Sources.................................................... 329 Section 331--Expansion of Annual Report on Contracting for Commercial and Industrial type Functions................. 329 Section 332--Congressional Notification of A-76 Cost Comparison Waivers....................................... 329 Section 333--Improved Evaluation of Local Economic Effect of Changing Defense Functions to Private Sector Performance.............................................. 330 Section 334--Annual Report on Expenditures for Performance of Depot-Level Maintenance and Repair Workloads by Public and Private Sectors...................................... 330 Section 335--Applicability of Competition Requirement in Contracting Out Workloads Performed by Depot-Level Activities of Department of Defense...................... 330 Section 336--Treatment of Public Sector Winning Bidders for Contracts for Performance of Depot-Level Maintenance and Repair Workloads Formerly Performed at Certain Military Installations............................................ 330 Section 337--Process for Modernization of Computer Systems at Army Computer Centers................................. 330 Section 338--Evaluation of Total System Performance Responsibility Program................................... 331 Section 339--Identification of Core Logistics Capability Requirements for Maintenance and Repair of C-17 Aircraft. 331 Subtitle E--Defense Dependents Education..................... 332 Section 341--Assistance to Local Education Agencies that Benefit Dependents of Members of the Armed Forces and Department of Defense Civilian Employees................. 332 Section 342--Continuation of Enrollment at Department of Defense Domestic Dependent Elementary and Secondary Schools.................................................. 332 Section 343--Technical Amendments to Defense Dependents' Education Act of 1978.................................... 332 Subtitle F--Military Readiness Issues........................ 333 Section 351--Independent Study of Department of Defense Secondary Inventory and Parts Shortages.................. 333 Section 352--Independent Study of Adequacy of Department Restructured Sustainment and Reengineered Logistics Product Support Practices................................ 333 Section 353--Independent Study of Military Readiness Reporting System......................................... 334 Section 354--Review of Real Property Maintenance and its Effect on Readiness...................................... 335 Section 355--Establishment of Logistics Standards for Sustained Military Operations............................ 335 Subtitle G--Other Matters.................................... 336 Section 361--Discretionary Authority to Install Telecommunication Equipment for Persons Performing Voluntary Services....................................... 336 Section 362--Contracting Authority for Defense Working Capital Funded Industrial Facilities..................... 336 Section 363--Clarification of Condition on Sale of Articles and Services of Industrial Facilities to Persons Outside Department of Defense.................................... 336 Section 364--Special Authority of Disbursing Officials Regarding Automated Teller Machines on Naval Vessels..... 336 Section 365--Preservation of Historic Buildings and Grounds at United States Soldiers' and Airmen's Home, District of Columbia................................................. 337 Section 366--Clarification of Land Conveyance Authority, United States Soldiers' and Airman's Home................ 337 Section 367--Treatment of Alaska, Hawaii, and Guam in Defense Household Goods Moving Programs.................. 337 MILITARY PERSONNEL OVERVIEW...................................... 338 TITLE IV--MILITARY PERSONNEL AUTHORIZATIONS...................... 342 Subtitle A--Active Forces.................................... 342 Section 401--End Strengths for Active Forces............... 342 Section 402--Revision in Permanent End Strength Minimum Levels................................................... 342 Section 403--Appointments to Certain Senior Joint Officer Positions................................................ 343 Subtitle B--Reserve Forces................................... 344 Section 411--End Strengths for Selected Reserve............ 344 Section 412--End Strengths for Reserves on Active Duty in Support of the Reserves.................................. 344 Section 413--End Strengths for Military Technicians (Dual Status).................................................. 345 Section 414--Increase in Number of Army and Air Force Members in Certain Grades Authorized to Serve on Active Duty in Support of the Reserves.......................... 346 Section 415--Selected Reserve End Strength Flexibility..... 346 Subtitle C--Authorization of Appropriations.................. 346 Section 421--Authorization of Appropriations for Military Personnel................................................ 346 TITLE V--MILITARY PERSONNEL POLICY............................... 348 ITEMS OF SPECIAL INTEREST...................................... 348 Backlog in Requests for Replacement of Military Awards and Decorations.............................................. 348 Commissioning of Ms. Ella E. Gibson........................ 348 Electronic Transmission of Certificates of Release or Discharge from Active Duty............................... 349 Enlisted Promotions........................................ 349 Junior Reserve Officer Training Program (JROTC)............ 349 Merchant Marine Academy Midshipmen......................... 350 Recruiting................................................. 350 Senior Reserve Officers' Training Program (SROTC).......... 351 LEGISLATIVE PROVISIONS......................................... 351 Subtitle A--Officer Personnel Policy......................... 351 Section 501--Recommendations for Promotion by Selection Boards................................................... 351 Section 502--Technical Amendments Relating to Joint Duty Assignments.............................................. 352 Subtitle B--Matters Relating to Reserve Components........... 352 Section 511--Continuation on Reserve Active Status List to Complete Disciplinary Action............................. 352 Section 512--Authority to Order Reserve Component Members to Active Duty to Complete a Medical Evaluation.......... 352 Section 513--Eligibility for Consideration for Promotion... 352 Section 514--Retention until Completion of 20 Years of Service for Reserve Component Majors and Lieutenant Commanders Who Twice Fail of Selection for Promotion..... 352 Section 515--Computation of Years of Service Exclusion..... 352 Section 516--Authority to Retain Reserve Component Chaplains Until Age 67................................... 353 Section 517--Expansion and Codification of Authority for Space-Required Travel for Reserves....................... 353 Section 518--Financial Assistance Program for Specially Selected Members of the Marine Corps Reserve............. 353 Section 519--Options to Improve Recruiting for the Army Reserve.................................................. 353 Subtitle C--Military Technicians............................. 354 Section 521--Revision to Military Technician (Dual Status) Law...................................................... 354 Section 522--Civil Service Retirement of Technicians....... 354 Section 523--Revision to Non-Dual Status Technicians Statute.................................................. 355 Section 524--Revision to Authorities Relating to National Guard Technicians........................................ 355 Section 525--Effective Date................................ 355 Section 526--Secretary of Defense Review of Army Technician Costing Process.......................................... 355 Section 527--Fiscal Year 2000 Limitation on Number of Non- Dual Status Technicians.................................. 355 Subtitle D--Service Academies................................ 356 Section 531--Waiver of Reimbursement of Expenses for Instruction at Service Academies of Persons from Foreign Countries................................................ 356 Section 532--Compliance by United States Military Academy with Statutory Limit on Size of Corps of Cadets.......... 356 Section 533--Dean of Academic Board, United States Military Academy, and Dean of the Faculty, United States Air Force Academy.................................................. 356 Section 534--Exclusion from Certain General and Flag Officer Grade Strength Limitations for the Superintendents of the Service Academies................. 356 Subtitle E--Education and Training........................... 357 Section 541--Establishment of a Department of Defense International Student Program at the Senior Military Colleges................................................. 357 Section 542--Authority for Army War College to Award Degree of Master of Strategic Studies........................... 357 Section 543--Authority for Air University to Award Graduate-Level Degrees................................... 357 Section 544--Correction of Reserve Credit for Participation in Health Professional Scholarship and Financial Assistance Program....................................... 357 Section 545--Permanent Expansion of ROTC Program to Include Graduate Students........................................ 357 Section 546--Increase in Monthly Subsistence Allowance for Senior ROTC Cadets Selected for Advanced Training........ 358 Section 547--Contingent Funding increase for Junior ROTC Program.................................................. 358 Section 548--Change from Annual to Biennial Reporting under the Reserve Component Montgomery GI Bill................. 358 Section 549--Recodification and Consolidation of Statutes Denying Federal Grants and Contracts by Certain Departments and Agencies to Institutions of Higher Education that Prohibit Senior ROTC Units or Military Recruiting on Campus..................................... 358 Subtitle F--Decorations and Awards........................... 358 Section 551--Waiver of Time Limitations for Award of Certain Decorations to Certain Persons................... 358 Section 552--Sense of Congress Concerning Presidential Unit Citation for Crew of the U.S.S. Indianapolis............. 358 Subtitle G--Other Matters.................................... 359 Section 561--Revision in Authority to Order Retired Members to Active Duty........................................... 359 Section 562--Temporary Authority for Recall of Retired Aviators................................................. 359 Section 563--Service Review Agencies Covered by Professional Staffing Requirement........................ 359 Section 564--Conforming Amendment to Authorize Reserve Officers and Retired Regular Officers to Hold a Civil Office while Serving on Active Duty for Not More than 270 Days..................................................... 359 Section 565--Revision to Requirement for Honor Guard Details at Funerals of Veterans.......................... 360 Section 566--Purpose and Funding Limitations for National Guard Challenge Program.................................. 361 Section 567--Access to Secondary School Students for Military Recruiting Purposes............................. 361 Section 568--Survey of Members Leaving Military Service on Attitudes Toward Military Service........................ 361 Section 569--Improvement in System for Assigning Personnel to Warfighting Units..................................... 361 Section 570--Requirement for Department of Defense Regulations to Protect the Confidentiality of Communications Between Dependents and Professionals Providing Therapeutic or Related Services Regarding Sexual or Domestic Abuse................................. 362 TITLE VI--COMPENSATION AND OTHER PERSONNEL BENEFITS.............. 363 OVERVIEW....................................................... 363 ITEMS OF SPECIAL INTEREST...................................... 364 Tax Deferred Savings Plans................................... 364 LEGISLATIVE PROVISIONS......................................... 364 Subtitle A--Pay and Allowances............................... 364 Section 601--Fiscal Year 2000 Increase in Military Basic Pay and Reform of Basic Pay Rates........................ 364 Section 602--Pay Increases for Fiscal Years after Fiscal Year 2000................................................ 364 Section 603--Additional Amount Available for Fiscal year 2000 Increase in Basic Allowance for Housing Inside the United States............................................ 365 Subtitle B--Bonuses and Special and Incentive Pays........... 365 Section 611--Extension of Certain Bonuses and Special Pay Authorities for Reserve Forces........................... 365 Section 612--Extension of Certain Bonuses and Special Pay Authorities for Nurse Officer Candidates, Registered Nurses, and Nurse Anesthetists........................... 365 Section 613--Extension of Authorities Relating to Payment of Other Bonuses and Special Pays........................ 366 Section 614--Aviation Career Incentive Pay for Air Battle Managers................................................. 366 Section 615--Expansion of Authority to Provide Special Pay to Aviation Career Officers Extending Period of Active Duty..................................................... 366 Section 616--Diving Duty Special Pay....................... 366 Section 617--Reenlistment Bonus............................ 366 Section 618--Enlistment Bonus.............................. 366 Section 619--Revised Eligibility Requirements for Reserve Component Prior Service Enlistment Bonus................. 366 Section 620--Increase in Special Pay and Bonuses for Nuclear-Qualified Officers............................... 367 Section 621--Increase in Authorized Monthly Rate of Foreign Language Proficiency Pay................................. 367 Section 622--Authorization of Retention Bonus for Special Warfare Officers Extending period of Active Duty......... 367 Section 623--Authorization of Surface Warfare Officer Continuation Pay......................................... 367 Section 624--Authorization of Career Enlisted Flyer Incentive Pay............................................ 367 Section 625--Authorization of Judge Advocate Continuation Pay...................................................... 368 Subtitle C--Travel and Transportation Allowances............. 368 Section 631--Provision of Lodging in Kind for Reservists Performing Training Duty and Not Otherwise Entitled to Travel and Transportation Allowances..................... 368 Section 632--Payment of Temporary Lodging Expenses for Members Making their First Permanent Change of Station... 368 Section 633--Emergency Leave Travel Cost Limitations....... 368 Subtitle D--Retired Pay Reform............................... 368 Section 641-644--Redux Retired Pay System Applicable Only to Members Electing New 15-Year Career Status Bonus...... 368 Subtitle E--Other Retired Pay and Survivor Benefits Matters.. 369 Section 651--Effective Date of Disability Retirement for Members Dying in Civilian Medical Facilities............. 369 Section 652--Extension of Annuity Eligibility for Surviving Spouses of Certain Retirement Eligible Reserve Members... 369 Section 653--Presentation of United States Flag to Retiring Members of the Uniformed Services Not Previously Covered. 370 Section 654--Accrual Funding for Retirement System for Commissioned Corps of National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration........................................... 370 Subtitle F--Other Matters.................................... 370 Section 671--Payments for Unused Accrued Leave as Part of Reenlistment............................................. 370 Section 672--Clarification of Per Diem Eligibility for Military Technicians Serving on Active Duty without Pay Outside the United States................................ 370 Section 673--Overseas Special Supplemental Food Program.... 370 Section 674--Special Compensation for Severely Disabled Uniformed Services Retirees.............................. 371 Section 675--Tuition Assistance for Members Deployed in a Contingency Operations................................... 371 TITLE VII--HEALTH CARE MATTERS................................... 372 OVERVIEW....................................................... 372 ITEMS OF SPECIAL INTEREST...................................... 372 Automated Clinical Practice Guidelines..................... 372 Defense Health Program Unfunded Requirements............... 373 Report on Portability of TRICARE Prime Benefits............ 373 Report on Preventive Healthcare Services................... 373 Study on the Effect of TRICARE Cost Sharing on the Financial Status of Enlisted Service Members in Pay Grades E-1 Through E-4................................... 374 LEGISLATIVE PROVISIONS......................................... 374 Subtitle A--Health Care Services............................. 374 Section 701--Provision of Health Care to Members on Active Duty at Certain Remote Locations......................... 374 Section 702--Provision of Chiropractic Health Care......... 375 Section 703--Continuation of Provision of Domiciliary and Custodial Care for Certain CHAMPUS Beneficiaries......... 375 Section 704--Removal of Restriction on Use of Funds for Abortions in Cases of Rape or Incest..................... 376 Subtitle B--TRICARE Program.................................. 376 Section 711--Improvements to Claims Processing Under the TRICARE Program.......................................... 376 Section 712--Authority to Waive Certain TRICARE Deductibles 376 Subtitle C--Other Matters.................................... 376 Section 721--Pharmacy Benefits Program..................... 376 Section 722--Improvements to third-Party Payer Collection Program.................................................. 377 Section 723--Authority of Armed Forces Medical Examiner to Conduct Forensic Pathology Investigations................ 378 Section 724--Trauma Training Center........................ 378 Section 725--Study on Joint Operations for the Defense Health Program........................................... 378 TITLE VIII--ACQUISITION POLICY, ACQUISITION MANAGEMENT, AND RELATED MATTERS.............................................. 379 LEGISLATIVE PROVISIONS......................................... 379 Section 801--Sale, Exchange, and Waiver Authority for Coal and Coke................................................. 379 Section 802--Extension of Authority to Issue Solicitations for Purchases of Commercial Items in Excess of Simplified Acquisition Threshold.................................... 379 Section 803--Expansion of Applicability of Requirement to Make Certain Procurements From Small Arms Production Industrial Base.......................................... 379 Section 804--Repeal of Termination of Provision of Credit Towards Subcontracting Goals for Purchases Benefiting Severely Handicapped Persons............................. 379 Section 805--Extension of Test Program for Negotiation of Comprehensive Small Business Subcontracting Plans........ 379 Section 806--Facilitation of National Missile Defense System................................................... 380 Section 807--Options for Accelerated Acquisition of Precision Munitions...................................... 380 Section 808--Program to Increase Opportunity for Small Business Innovation in Defense Acquisition Programs...... 380 TITLE IX--DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE ORGANIZATION AND MANAGEMENT...... 381 LEGISLATIVE PROVISIONS......................................... 381 Section 901--Limitation on Amount Available for Contracted Advisory and Assistance Services......................... 381 Section 902--Responsibility for Logistics and Sustainment Functions of the Department of Defense................... 381 Section 903--Management Headquarters and Headquarters Support Activities....................................... 382 Section 904--Further Reductions in Defense Acquisition and Support Workforce........................................ 383 Section 905--Center for the Study of Chinese Military Affairs.................................................. 383 Section 906--Responsibility Within Office of the Secretary of Defense for Monitoring OPTEMPO and PERSTEMPO.......... 384 Section 907--Report on Military Space issues............... 385 Section 908--Employment and Compensation of Civilian Faculty Members of Department of Defense African Center for Strategic Studies.................................... 385 Section 909--Additional Matters for Annual Report on Joint Warfighting Experimentation.............................. 385 TITLE X--GENERAL PROVISIONS...................................... 386 ITEMS OF SPECIAL INTEREST...................................... 386 Counter-Drug Activities........................................ 386 Overview..................................................... 386 Items of Special Interest.................................... 387 Air National Guard fighter operations...................... 387 Colombian detection and monitoring......................... 387 Joint interagency task force-West.......................... 388 Other joint military intelligence programs................. 388 Requirement for Report on Forward Operating Locations...... 388 Southwest border fence..................................... 389 Tethered aerostat radar system............................. 389 Transfer of military construction funding for forward operating locations...................................... 389 Transit zone detection and monitoring...................... 389 Other Matters................................................ 390 Counterterrorism and Defense Against Weapons of Mass Destruction.............................................. 390 Department of Defense Responsiveness to Congressional Questions for the Record................................. 392 Illegal Immigration to Guam................................ 392 Pentagon Reservation Renovation Security Upgrades.......... 392 LEGISLATIVE PROVISIONS......................................... 393 Subtitle A--Financial Matters................................ 393 Section 1001--Transfer Authority........................... 393 Section 1002--Incorporation of Classified Annex............ 393 Section 1003--Authorization of Prior Emergency Military Personnel Appropriations................................. 393 Section 1004--Repeal of Requirement for Two-Year Budget Cycle for the Department of Defense...................... 394 Section 1005--Consolidation of Various Department of the Navy Trust and Gift Funds................................ 394 Section 1006--Budgeting for Operations in Yugoslavia....... 394 Subtitle B--Naval Vessels and Shipyards...................... 396 Section 1011--Revision to Congressional Notice-and-Wait Period Required Before Transfer of a Vessel Stricken from Naval Vessel Register.................................... 396 Section 1012--Authority to Consent to Retransfer of Former Naval Vessel............................................. 396 Section 1013--Report on Naval Vessel Force Structure Requirements............................................. 396 Section 1014--Auxiliary Vessels Acquisition Program for the Department of Defense.................................... 396 Section 1015--Authority to Provide Advance Payments for the National Defense Features Program........................ 396 Subtitle C--Matters Relating to Counter Drug Activities...... 396 Section 1021--Support for Detection and Monitoring Activities in the Eastern Pacific Ocean.................. 396 Section 1022--Condition on Development of Forward Operating Locations for United States Southern Command Counter-Drug Detection and Monitoring Flights......................... 397 Section 1023--United States Military Activities in Colombia 398 Subtitle D--Other Matters.................................... 399 Section 1031--Identification in Budget Materials of Amounts for Declassification Activities and Limitation on Expenditures for Such Activities......................... 399 Section 1032--Notice to Congressional committees of Compromise of Classified Information within Defense Programs of the United States............................ 400 Section 1033--Revision to Limitation on Retirement or Dismantlement of Strategic Nuclear Delivery Systems...... 400 Section 1034--Annual Report by Chairman of Joint Chiefs of Staff on the Risks in Executing the Missions Called for Under the National Military Strategy..................... 401 Section 1035--Requirement to Address Unit Operations Tempo and Personal Tempo in Department of Defense Annual Report 402 Section 1036--Preservation of Certain Defense Reporting Requirements............................................. 403 Section 1037--Technical and Clerical Amendments............ 403 Section 1038--Contributions for Spirit of Hope Endowment Fund of United Service Organizations, Incorporated....... 403 Section 1039--Chemical Defense Training Facility........... 403 TITLE XI--DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE CIVILIAN PERSONNEL............... 404 LEGISLATIVE PROVISIONS....................................... 404 Section 1101--Increase of Pay Cap for Nonappropriated Fund Senior Executive Employees............................... 404 Section 1102--Restoration of Leave for Certain Department of Defense Employees who Deploy to a Combat Zone Outside the United States........................................ 404 Section 1103--Expansion of Guard-and-Reserve Purposes for which Leave under Section 6323 of Title 5, United States Code, May be Used........................................ 404 TITLE XII--MATTERS RELATING TO OTHER NATIONS..................... 405 ITEMS OF SPECIAL INTEREST...................................... 405 Arms Control Implementation.................................. 405 Ballistic Missile Defense Discussions with Russia............ 406 Department of Defense Review of Satellite Licenses........... 406 LEGISLATIVE PROVISIONS......................................... 407 Section 1201--Report on Strategic Stability Under START III 407 Section 1202--One Year Extension of Counterproliferation Authorities for Support of United Nations Weapons Inspection Regime in Iraq................................ 408 Section 1203--Military-to-Military contacts with Chinese People's Liberation Army................................. 408 Section 1204--Report on Allied Capabilities to Contribute to Major Theater Wars.................................... 410 Section 1205--Limitation on Funds for Bosnia Peacekeeping Operations for Fiscal Year 2000.......................... 410 TITLE XIII--COOPERATIVE THREAT REDUCTION WITH STATES OF FORMER SOVIET UNION................................................. 411 OVERVIEW....................................................... 411 ITEMS OF SPECIAL INTEREST...................................... 412 Arms Elimination Projects in Russia........................ 412 Arms Elimination Projects in Ukraine....................... 414 Biological Weapons Proliferation Prevention in Russia...... 414 Chemical Weapons Destruction in Russia..................... 415 Fissile Material Storage Facility.......................... 417 Nuclear Reactor Core Conversion............................ 418 Nuclear Warhead Dismantlement Processing in Russia......... 419 Nuclear Weapons Storage Security in Russia................. 419 Nuclear Weapons Transportation Security.................... 419 Other Support Programs..................................... 419 Prohibition of Specified Activities........................ 420 LEGISLATIVE PROVISIONS......................................... 420 Section 1301--Specification of Cooperative Threat Reduction Programs and Funds....................................... 420 Section 1302--Funding Allocations.......................... 420 Section 1303--Prohibition on Use of Funds for Specified Purposes................................................. 420 Section 1304--Limitation on Use of Funds for Fissile Material Storage Facility................................ 420 Section 1305--Limitation on Use of Funds for Chemical Weapons Destruction...................................... 421 Section 1306--Limitation on Use of Funds for Biological Weapons Proliferation Prevention Activities.............. 421 Section 1307--Limitation on Use of Funds Until Submission of Report and Multiyear Plan............................. 421 Section 1308--Requirement to Submit Report................. 421 Section 1309--Report on Expanded Threat Reduction Initiative............................................... 421 DIVISION B--MILITARY CONSTRUCTION AUTHORIZATIONS................. 423 PURPOSE........................................................ 423 MILITARY CONSTRUCTION OVERVIEW................................. 423 STRUCTURE OF THE BUDGET REQUEST................................ 424 TITLE XXI--ARMY.................................................. 444 SUMMARY........................................................ 444 ITEMS OF SPECIAL INTEREST...................................... 444 Improvements to Military Family Housing.................... 444 Environmental Remediation at Volunteer Army Ammunition Plant, Chattanooga, Tennessee............................ 444 LEGISLATIVE PROVISIONS......................................... 444 Section 2101--Authorized Army Construction and Land Acquisition Projects..................................... 444 Section 2102--Family Housing............................... 445 Section 2103--Improvements to Military Family Housing Units 445 Section 2104--Authorization of Appropriations, Army........ 445 TITLE XXII--NAVY................................................. 446 SUMMARY........................................................ 446 ITEMS OF SPECIAL INTEREST...................................... 446 Headquarters, Commander-in-Chief, Pacific.................. 446 Acquisition of Prepositioned Equipment Maintenance Facilities, Blount Island Jacksonville, Florida.......... 446 Improvements to Military Family Housing.................... 447 Unspecified Minor Construction............................. 447 LEGISLATIVE PROVISIONS......................................... 447 Section 2201--Authorized Navy Construction and Land Acquisition Projects..................................... 447 Section 2202--Family Housing............................... 447 Section 2203--Improvements to Military Family Housing Units 447 Section 2204--Authorization of Appropriations, Navy........ 447 Section 2205--Authorization to Accept Electrical Substation Improvements, Guam....................................... 447 Section 2206--Correction in Authorized Use of Funds, Marine Corps Combat Development Command, Quantico, Virginia..... 448 TITLE XXIII--AIR FORCE........................................... 449 SUMMARY........................................................ 449 LEGISLATIVE PROVISIONS......................................... 449 Section 2301--Authorized Air Force Construction and Land Acquisition Projects..................................... 449 Section 2302--Family Housing............................... 449 Section 2303--Improvements to Military Family Housing Units 449 Section 2304--Authorization of Appropriations, Air Force... 449 TITLE XXIV--DEFENSE AGENCIES..................................... 450 SUMMARY........................................................ 450 ITEM OF SPECIAL INTEREST....................................... 450 Military Construction in Support of Base Closure and Realignment Activities................................... 450 LEGISLATIVE PROVISIONS......................................... 450 Section 2401--Authorized Defense Agencies Construction and Land Acquisition Projects................................ 450 Section 2402--Improvements to Military Family Housing Units 450 Section 2403--Military Housing Improvement Program......... 451 Section 2404--Energy Conservation Projects................. 451 Section 2405--Authorization of Appropriations, Defense Agencies................................................. 451 Section 2406--Increase in Fiscal Year 1997 Authorization for Military Construction Projects Pueblo Chemical Activity, Colorado....................................... 451 Section 2407--Condition on Obligation of Military Construction Funds for Drug Interdiction and Counter-Drug Activities............................................... 451 TITLE XXV--NORTH ATLANTIC TREATY ORGANIZATION.................... 452 SUMMARY........................................................ 452 LEGISLATIVE PROVISIONS......................................... 452 Section 2501--Authorized NATO Construction and Land Acquisition Projects..................................... 452 Section 2502--Authorization of Appropriations, NATO........ 452 TITLE XXVI--GUARD AND RESERVE FORCES FACILITIES.................. 453 SUMMARY........................................................ 453 LEGISLATIVE PROVISIONS......................................... 453 Section 2601--Authorized Guard and Reserve Construction and Land Acquisition Projects................................ 453 TITLE XXVII--EXPIRATION AND EXTENSION OF AUTHORIZATIONS.......... 454 LEGISLATIVE PROVISIONS......................................... 454 Section 2701--Expiration of Authorizations and Amounts Required to be Specified by Law.......................... 454 Section 2702--Extensions of Authorizations of Certain Fiscal Year 1997 Projects................................ 454 Section 2703--Extension of Authorizations of Certain Fiscal Year 1996 Projects....................................... 454 Section 2704--Effective Date............................... 454 TITLE XXVIII--GENERAL PROVISIONS................................. 455 LEGISLATIVE PROVISIONS......................................... 455 Subtitle A--Military Construction Program and Military Family Housing Changes.......................................... 455 Section 2801--Contributions for North Atlantic Treaty Organization Security Investment......................... 455 Section 2802--Development of Ford Island, Hawaii........... 455 Section 2803--Restriction on Authority to Acquire or Construct Ancillary Supporting Facilities for Housing Units.................................................... 456 Section 2804--Planning and Design for Military Construction Projects for Reserve Components.......................... 456 Section 2805--Limitation on Authority to Carry Out Small Projects for Acquisition of Facilities for Reserve Components............................................... 456 Section 2806--Expansion of Entities Eligible to participate in Alternative Authority for Acquisition and Improvement of Military Housing...................................... 456 Subtitle B--Real Property and Facilities Administration...... 457 Section 2811--Extension of Authority for Lease of Land for Special Operations Activities............................ 457 Section 2812--Utility Privatization Authority.............. 457 Section 2813--Acceptance of Funds to Cover Administrative Expenses Relating to Certain Real Property Transactions.. 457 Section 2814--Study and Report on Impacts to Military Readiness of Proposed Land Management Changes on Public Lands in Utah............................................ 457 Subtitle C--Defense Base Closure and Realignment............. 458 Section 2821--Continuation of Authority to Use Department of Defense Base Closure Account 1990 for Activities Required to Close or Realign Military Installations...... 458 Subtitle D--Land Conveyances................................. 458 Part I--Army Conveyances................................... 458 Section 2831--Transfer of Jurisdiction, Fort Sam Houston, Texas.................................................... 458 Section 2832--Land Conveyance, Army Reserve Center, Kankakee, Illinois....................................... 458 Section 2833--Land Conveyance, Fort Des Moines, Iowa....... 458 Section 2834--Land Conveyance, Army Maintenance Support Activity (Marine) Number 84, Marcus Hook, Pennsylvania... 458 Section 2835--Land Conveyance, Army Docks and Related Property, Alaska......................................... 459 Section 2836--Land Conveyance, Fort Huachuca, Arizona...... 459 Section 2837--Land Conveyance, Army Reserve Center, Cannon Falls, Minnesota......................................... 459 Section 2838--Land Conveyance, Nike Battery 80 Family Housing Site, East Hanover Township, New Jersey.......... 459 Section 2839--Land Exchange, Rock Island Arsenal, Illinois. 460 Section 2840--Modification of Land Conveyance, Joliet Army Ammunition Plant, Illinois............................... 460 Section 2841--Land Conveyance, Twin Cities Army Ammunition Plant, Minnesota......................................... 460 Part II--Navy Conveyances.................................. 460 Section 2851--Land Conveyance, Naval Weapons industrial Reserve Plant No. 387, Dallas, Texas..................... 460 Section 2852--Land Conveyance, Naval and Marine Corps Reserve Center, Orange County, Texas..................... 461 Section 2853--Land Conveyance, Marine Corps Air Station, Cherry Point, North Carolina............................. 461 Part III--Air Force Conveyances............................ 461 Section 2861--Conveyance of Fuel Supply Line, Pease Air Force Base, New Hampshire................................ 461 Section 2862--Land Conveyance, Tyndall Air Force Base, Florida.................................................. 461 Section 2863--Land Conveyance, Port of Anchorage, Alaska... 462 Section 2864--Land Conveyance, Forestport Test Annex, New York..................................................... 462 Subtitle E--Other Matters.................................... 462 Section 2871--Expansion of Arlington National Cemetery..... 462 DIVISION C--DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY NATIONAL SECURITY AUTHORIZATION AND OTHER AUTHORIZATIONS..................................... 463 TITLE XXXI--DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY NATIONAL SECURITY PROGRAMS...... 463 OVERVIEW....................................................... 463 ITEMS OF SPECIAL INTEREST...................................... 476 Accelerated Strategic Computing Initiative................. 476 Accelerated Strategic Computing Initiative Construction Projects................................................. 476 Arms Control and Nonproliferation.......................... 477 Commercializing Initiatives for Proliferation Prevention... 477 Commission to Review Nuclear Policy and Management......... 478 Comptroller General Audit of Department of Energy Contract Management Practices..................................... 478 Construction Projects...................................... 479 Education.................................................. 479 Eligibility to Bid on Excess Department of Energy Equipment at the Savannah River Site............................... 480 Environmental Management Science Program................... 480 Environmental Management Environmental, Safety, and Health. 480 Formerly Utilized Sites Remedial Action Program (FUSRAP)... 480 Hanford Site Tri-Party Agreement Compliance................ 481 Hanford Plutonium Finishing Plant Deactivation............. 481 Hanford Reactor Decontamination and Decommissioning........ 481 Idaho National Engineering and Environmental Laboratory (INEEL) Post 2006 Completion............................. 481 Inertial Confinement Fusion................................ 481 In-Tank Precipitation Process.............................. 482 International Materials Protection, Control, and Accounting 482 International Nuclear Safety............................... 482 Naval Reactors............................................. 483 Nuclear Weapons Industrial Complex......................... 483 Nuclear Weapons Personnel Reserve.......................... 483 Oak Ridge Operations Compliance Obligations................ 484 Office of Counterintelligence.............................. 484 Pit Production............................................. 484 Program Direction for Defense Programs..................... 485 Program Direction for Environmental Management............. 485 Records Declassification................................... 485 Rocky Flats Environmental Technology Site Closure Project.. 485 Savannah River Site Infrastructure Investment.............. 485 Security Investigations.................................... 486 Stockpile Management....................................... 486 Stockpile Management Fissile Material Storage and Disposition.............................................. 487 Technology Partnerships.................................... 487 Worker and Community Transition............................ 488 LEGISLATIVE PROVISIONS......................................... 488 Subtitle A--National Security Programs Authorization......... 488 Section 3101--Weapons Activities........................... 488 Section 3102--Defense Environmental Restoration and Waste Management............................................... 488 Section 3103--Other Defense Activities..................... 488 Section 3104--Defense Nuclear Waste Disposal............... 488 Section 3105--Defense Environmental Management Privatization............................................ 489 Subtitle B--Recurring General Provisions..................... 489 Section 3121--Reprogramming................................ 489 Section 3122--Limits on General Plant Projects............. 489 Section 3123--Limits on Construction Projects.............. 489 Section 3124--Fund Transfer Authority...................... 489 Section 3125--Authority for Conceptual and Construction Design................................................... 489 Section 3126--Authority for Emergency Planning, Design and Construction Activities.................................. 490 Section 3127--Funds Available for all National Security Programs of the Department of Energy..................... 490 Section 3128--Availability of Funds........................ 490 Section 3129--Transfers of Defense Environmental Management Funds.................................................... 490 Subtitle C--Program Authorizations, Restrictions, and Limitations................................................ 490 Section 3131--Limitation on Use at Department of Energy Laboratories of Funds Appropriated for the Initiatives for Proliferation Prevention Program..................... 490 Section 3132--Prohibition on Use for Payment of Russian Government Taxes and Customs Duties of Funds Appropriated for the Initiatives for Proliferation Prevention Program. 491 Section 3133--Modification of Laboratory Directed Research and Development to Provide Funds for Theater Ballistic Missile Defense.......................................... 491 Section 3134--Support of Theater Ballistic Missile Defense Activities of the Department of Defense.................. 492 Subtitle D--Commission on Nuclear Weapons Management......... 492 Section 3151-3159--Commission to Examine Nuclear Weapons Policy Management and Oversight.......................... 492 Subtitle E--Other Matters.................................... 493 Section 3161--Procedures for Meeting Tritium Production Requirements............................................. 493 Section 3162--Extension of Authority of Department of Energy to Pay Voluntary Separation Payments.............. 493 Section 3163--Fellowship Program for Development of Skills Critical to the Department of Energy Nuclear Weapons Complex.................................................. 494 Section 3164--Department of Energy Records Declassification 494 Section 3165--Management of Nuclear Weapons Production Facilities and National Laboratories..................... 494 Section 3166--Notice to Congressional Committees of Compromise of Classified Information within Nuclear Energy Defense Programs.................................. 495 TITLE XXXII--DEFENSE NUCLEAR FACILITIES SAFETY BOARD............. 496 LEGISLATIVE PROVISION.......................................... 496 Section 3201--Authorization................................ 496 TITLE XXXIII--NATIONAL DEFENSE STOCKPILE......................... 497 LEGISLATIVE PROVISION.......................................... 497 Section 3301--Definitions.................................. 497 Section 3302--Authorized Uses Of Stockpile Funds........... 497 Section 3303--Elimination of Congressionally Imposed Disposal Restrictions on Specific Stockpile Materials.... 497 TITLE XXXIV--MARITIME ADMINISTRATION............................. 498 ITEMS OF SPECIAL INTEREST...................................... 498 Great Lakes Maritime Academy............................... 498 Merchant Marine Academy.................................... 498 Repair and Maintenance of Maritime Administration Vessels.. 498 LEGISLATIVE PROVISIONS......................................... 499 Section 3401--Short Title.................................. 499 Section 3402--Authorization of Appropriations for Fiscal Year 2000................................................ 499 Section 3403--Amendments to Title XI of the Merchant Marine Act of 1936.............................................. 499 Section 3404--Extension of War Risk Insurance.............. 499 Section 3405--Ownership of the JEREMIAH O'BRIEN............ 500 TITLE XXXV--PANAMA CANAL COMMISSION.............................. 501 LEGISLATIVE PROVISIONS......................................... 501 Section 3501--Short Title.................................. 501 Section 3502--Authorization of Expenditures................ 501 Section 3503--Purchase of Vehicles......................... 501 Section 3504--Office of Transition Administration.......... 501 Departmental Data................................................ 502 Department of Defense Authorization Request.................... 502 Military Construction Authorization Request.................... 502 Committee Position............................................... 503 Communications From Other Committees............................. 503 Fiscal Data...................................................... 511 Congressional Budget Office Estimate........................... 511 Congressional Budget Office Cost Estimate...................... 512 Authorization of Appropriations.............................. 512 Committee Cost Estimate........................................ 527 Oversight Findings............................................... 527 Constitutional Authority Statement............................... 527 Statement of Federal Mandates.................................... 527 Roll Call Votes.................................................. 528 Changes in Existing Law Made by the Bill, as Reported............ 534 Additional, Dissenting, and Supplemental Views................... 685 Additional views of Roscoe G. Bartlett, Gene Taylor, Joseph R. Pitts........................................................ 685 Additional views of Patrick J. Kennedy......................... 687 Additional views of Loretta Sanchez, Robert A. Brady, Lane Evans, Thomas H. Allen, Ellen O. Tauscher, Patrick J. Kennedy, Neil Abercrombie, Rob R. Blagojevich, Mike Thompson. 688 Additional views of Ike Skelton................................ 689 Additional views of Ike Skelton, Norman Sisisky, John M. Spratt, Jr., Solomon P. Ortiz, Owen Pickett, Lane Evans, Gene Taylor, Neil Abercrombie, Martin T. Meehan, Robert A. Underwood, Patrick J. Kennedy, Rod R. Blagojevich, Silvestre Reyes, Thomas H. Allen, Jim Turner, Adam Smith, Loretta Sanchez, James H. Maloney, Ellen O. Tauscher, Robert A. Brady, Robert E. Andrews, Baron P. Hill, Mike Thompson, John B. Larson.................................................... 690 Additional views of James M. Talent--Army Logistics Modernization................................................ 692 Additional views of James M. Talent--Navy's F/A 18E/F Super Hornet....................................................... 695 Additional views of Gene Taylor................................ 696 Additional views of Robert A. Underwood........................ 698 Additional views of Robert A. Underwood, Lane Evans, Norman Sisisky, Thomas H. Allen, Solomon P. Ortiz, and Neil Abercrombie.................................................. 700 Supplemental views of Ciro D. Rodriguez........................ 702 Dissenting views of Cynthia A. McKinney........................ 704 106th Congress Report HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 1st Session 106-162 ====================================================================== NATIONAL DEFENSE AUTHORIZATION ACT FOR FISCAL YEAR 2000 _______ May 24, 1999.--Committed to the Committee of the Whole House on the State of the Union and ordered to be printed _______________________________________________________________________ Mr. Spence, from the Committee on Armed Services, submitted the following R E P O R T together with ADDITIONAL, SUPPLEMENTAL, AND DISSENTING VIEWS [To accompany H.R. 1401] [Including cost estimate of the Congressional Budget Office] The Committee on Armed Services, to whom was referred the bill (H.R. 1401) to authorize appropriations for fiscal year 2000 and 2001 for military activities of the Department of Defense, to prescribe military personnel strengths for fiscal years 2000 and 2001, and for other purposes, having considered the same, report favorably thereon with amendments and recommend that the bill as amended do pass. The amendment strikes out all after the enacting clause of the bill and inserts a new text which appears in italic type in the reported bill. The title of the bill is amended to reflect the amendment to the text of the bill. EXPLANATION OF THE COMMITTEE AMENDMENTS The committee adopted an amendment in the nature of a substitute during the consideration of H.R. 1401. The title of the bill is amended to reflect the amendment to the text of the bill. The remainder of the report discusses the bill, as amended. PURPOSE The bill would--(1) Authorize appropriations for fiscal year 2000 for procurement and for research, development, test and evaluation (RDT&E); (2) Authorize appropriations for fiscal year 2000 for operation and maintenance (O&M) and for working capital funds; (3) Authorize for fiscal year 2000: (a) the personnel strength for each active duty component of the military departments; (b) the personnel strength for the Selected Reserve for each reserve component of the armed forces; (c) the military training student loads for each of the active and reserve components of the military departments; (4) Modify various elements of compensation for military personnel and impose certain requirements and limitations on personnel actions in the defense establishment; (5) Authorize appropriations for fiscal year 2000 for military construction and family housing; (6) Authorize appropriations for fiscal year 2000 for the Department of Energy national security programs; (7) Modify provisions related to the National Defense Stockpile; (8) Authorize appropriations for fiscal year 2000 for the operation of the Panama Canal Commission; and (9) Authorize appropriations for fiscal year 2000 for the Maritime Administration. RELATIONSHIP OF AUTHORIZATION TO APPROPRIATIONS The bill does not generally provide budget authority. The bill authorizes appropriations. Subsequent appropriation acts provide budget authority. The bill addresses the following categories in the Department of Defense budget: procurement; research, development, test and evaluation; operation and maintenance; working capital funds, military personnel; and military construction and family housing. The bill also addresses Department of Energy National Security Programs, the Panama Canal Commission and the Maritime Administration. Active duty and reserve personnel strengths authorized in this bill and legislation affecting compensation for military personnel determine the remaining appropriation requirements of the Department of Defense. However, this bill does not provide authorization of specific dollar amounts for personnel. SUMMARY OF AUTHORIZATION IN THE BILL The President requested budget authority of $280.5 billion for the national defense budget function for fiscal year 2000. Of this amount, the President requested $266.9 billion for the Department of Defense (including $5.4 billion for military construction and family housing) and $12.4 billion for Department of Energy national security programs and the Defense Nuclear Facilities Safety Board. The committee recommends an overall level of $288.8 billion in budget authority. This amount is consistent with the discretionary defense spending limitations imposed by the Balanced Budget Act of 1997 and it represents an increase of approximately $18.3 billion from the amount authorized for appropriation by the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 1999 (Public Law 105-261). Overall, the committee's recommendation is consistent with the amounts established in the Concurrent Resolution on the Budget for Fiscal Year 2000 for the national defense budget function. SUMMARY TABLE OF AUTHORIZATIONS The following table provides a summary of the amounts requested and that would be authorized for appropriation in the bill (in the column labeled ``Budget Authority Implication of Committee Recommendation'') and the committee's estimate of how the committee's recommendations relate to the budget totals for the national defense function. For purposes of estimating the budget authority implications of committee action, the table reflects the numbers contained in the President's budget for proposals not in the committee's legislative jurisdiction. RATIONALE FOR THE COMMITTEE BILL The National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2000 once again reflects the committee's efforts to address decade- long concerns about the declining state of the U.S. armed forces. The combination of reduced defense resources and increased military commitments around the world has resulted in a diminished quality of military life, a severe degradation in the readiness of units to train for and execute their primary combat missions, and an erosion of the technological advantages enjoyed by U.S. forces on the battlefield as a result of delayed equipment modernization. Over the past several months, the challenges confronting U.S. armed forces have been put into stark relief by the war in the former Yugoslav republic of Kosovo. The unanticipated strength of Serb resistance has resulted in a significant expansion of the U.S. and NATO air war, to the point where the number of aircraft involved in Operation Allied Force is nearing levels anticipated in a major theater war. As a result, the ability of U.S. armed forces to meet their worldwide commitments is increasingly in question. From substantial gaps in the regional deployment of aircraft carriers, to shortages of cruise missiles and other precision munitions, to strains on the fleets of specialized electronic warfare and tanker aircraft, and even to stresses on the conventional fighter and attack aircraft force, the air campaign over Yugoslavia has revealed the extent to which today's U.S. military is overextended. Should current operations against Yugoslavia evolve into ground combat or even peacekeeping operations involving U.S. troops, the strains that such a ground operation would place on U.S. forces worldwide would escalate rapidly. According to the Administration, just a peacekeeping force in Kosovo would require 50,000 to 60,000 NATO troops, with perhaps 20,000 U.S. soldiers participating in what would likely become a long-term, open-ended commitment. There should be no doubt that any future requirement for the U.S. Army to sustain a force of such size in the Balkans, on a rotational basis, will increase the exposure of U.S. interests in other regions of the world to challenge. For years, the committee has highlighted the difficulties U.S. armed forces would face in executing the National Military Strategy's requirement to be capable of fighting nearly simultaneous wars in the Persian Gulf and in Korea. The unforeseen challenges and shortfalls revealed by the need to wage a third ``major theater war'' in Europe--even absent the deployment of U.S. ground forces--unfortunately affirms the committee's long-standing concerns. Testifying earlier this month about ongoing operations in the Balkans, Secretary of Defense William Cohen admitted that ``we have a situation where we have a smaller force and we have more missions, and so . . . we are wearing out systems, wearing out people.'' These problems are not new, and they are getting worse. The committee hopes that the obvious strains being placed on the military services as a result of Operation Allied Force will at least compel some broader recognition of the shortfalls confronting the nation's armed forces and lead to a sustained and bipartisan commitment to revitalizing America's military. The Administration's Defense Budget Request In the context of mounting quality of life, readiness, and modernization shortfalls, the committee once again believes the Administration's defense budget request falls short. Earlier this year, the President declared in his State of the Union address that ``it is time to reverse the decline in defense spending that began in 1985....My balanced budget calls for a sustained increase over the next six years for readiness, for modernization, and for pay and benefits for our troops and their families.'' The President's words, following as they did on the heels of last fall's testimony by the Joint Chiefs of Staff (JCS) that the military services had critical unfunded requirements of at least $150 billion over the next six years, provided a degree of hope that the Administration had ``turned the corner'' and recognized the need to substantially increase defense spending. The unfortunate reality became apparent, however, when the President unveiled his fiscal year 2000 budget request and six-year defense plan--a plan that relied heavily on budgetary gimmicks and optimistic economic assumptions and which provided increased funding sufficient to address only about one half of the Joint Chiefs' identified shortfalls in critical military requirements. Moreover, the Administration conditioned even its ``50 percent solution'' on the achievement of domestic political objectives involving Social Security reform. Earlier this year, the Joint Chiefs updated their estimates of unfunded quality of life, readiness, and modernization requirements. Even assuming the validity of the budget gimmicks and optimistic assumptions contained in the Administration's budget request, the Joint Chiefs testified that the six-year defense plan still fell $46.7 billion short of their minimal requirements. If the Administration's budget gimmicks and optimistic economic assumptions are judged invalid, the six- year defense plan falls at least $70 billion short of addressing the services' shortfalls. Even as the Administration was crafting its fiscal year 2000 budget request, the Joint Chiefs of Staff were concluding that the ability of U.S. armed forces to execute the full range of missions required by the National Military Strategy entailed ``moderate to high'' risk. Marine Commandant General Charles Krulak summarized the JCS' assessment in testimony before the committee, stating, ``In terms of risk to the [ability to execute] the National Military Strategy, I think we've gone too far; I think we're there now. If we don't do something about this, we're going to be back into the hollow armed forces and this nation can't have that, can't take that, because the world is changing so rapidly, is so dangerous, that we need to stop this now.'' During months of oversight hearings, the motto of the post- Cold-War military--``doing more with less''--was once again the predominant theme heard from all ranks and services. As Army Chief of Staff General Dennis Reimer informed the committee in January, ``Army leaders at all levels have been fighting to meet expanding requirements with diminishing resources. Our commanders are struggling to balance operational readiness-- supporting training and maintaining equipment--with base operations expenses and maintaining soldiers' quality of life.'' Likewise, Chief of Naval Operations Admiral Jay Johnson expressed ``serious concerns'' about personnel, training, and equipment maintenance problems that were creating an ``erosion of readiness at home and even the beginning stages of degradation in our deployed forces.'' A decade ago, Navy non- deployed units reported high states of readiness nearly 70 percent of the time, while today the figure has slipped to approximately 50 percent. The Air Force is confronting similar problems. Air Combat Command has suffered a 56 percent drop in readiness rates since 1996. The aging of the Air Force fleet and the resulting increased costs and expanded maintenance workload caused by aircraft fatigue, corrosion, and parts obsolescence underlies the Air Force's worsening readiness problems. Under projected budgets and modernization plans, the average Air Force aircraft will be 20 years old by the turn of the century and 30 years old by 2015. Air Force ``non-mission capable'' rates have increased 53 percent since the Persian Gulf War while the rate of ``cannibalization''--the practice of stripping parts from one aircraft or system to replace broken parts on another--has increased 75 percent. The services' long-term quality of life, readiness, and modernization problems seem to be worsening at an exponential rate as the force shrinks, the equipment ages, and the pace of operations mounts. The mismatch between military ends and means is so large that the services' ability to conduct even smaller- scale contingencies is at risk. In the committee's view, the expanding and potentially open-ended mission in the Balkans not only highlights these risks, but exacerbates them at the same time. The Committee Bill: Managing Risk The committee's recommendations in the bill have been shaped by the above concerns and guided in large part by the priorities identified by the military service chiefs. The committee's first step is to put the defense budget on somewhat sounder fiscal footing. Thus, the committee bill increases the President's budget request by $8.3 billion. Within this topline increase, the committee has taken a number of steps to improve the quality of military life, to improve the readiness of the force, and to accelerate the pace of equipment modernization. Major quality of life initiatives include a 4.8 percent basic military pay raise, substantial pay table reform, and reform of the military retirement system. The committee also rejected the Administration's inexplicable $3.1 billion cut to the already underfunded military construction accounts, instead fully funding military construction at a level of $8.6 billion to provide important improvements to the quality of military life. The committee also increased spending on critical readiness accounts by more than $2 billion, including significant increases for real property maintenance and base operations support, depot maintenance, aircraft spare parts, combat training center operations, as well as more than $700 million for other unfunded readiness priorities identified by the military service chiefs. The committee has also increased funding for equipment modernization, adding approximately $4 billion to the President's underfunded budget request for research, development, and procurement programs. Important modernization initiatives include the addition of more than $400 million to the Administration's request for missile defense programs, and substantial increases to upgrade the B-2 bomber fleet, and for EA-6B, F-15, F-16, Joint Strike Fighter, V-22, AH-64 Apache Longbow and Comanche helicopter programs. Despite the substantial improvements this bill has made to the President's budget request, the committee is under no illusions concerning the rising level of risk U.S. armed forces are facing. The committee does not believe that ``high risk'' in executing the core missions of our National Military Strategy is acceptable. The nation is facing a dilemma that Secretary Cohen recently articulated in testimony to the Congress. The Secretary noted the multiple strains caused by conducting Operation Allied Force simultaneously with having to meet other important requirements, and commented that ``we've got to find a way to either increase the size of our forces or decrease the number of our missions.'' The committee believes that unless the nation fields the forces and provides the resources required by the National Military Strategy, the inevitable alternative is for the United States to retreat from its global responsibilities and interests. As it does with regard to the growing risk confronting our military forces, the committee also believes it is unacceptable for the United States to retreat from the aggressive promotion and protection of our interests around the world. HEARINGS Committee consideration of the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2000 results from extensive hearings that began on February 2, 1999 and that were completed on March 25, 1999. The full committee conducted 6 sessions. In addition, a total of 26 sessions were conducted by five different subcommittees and two panels of the committee on various titles of the bill. DIVISION A--DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE AUTHORIZATION TITLE I--PROCUREMENT OVERVIEW The President's $53.0 billion procurement budget request for fiscal year 2000 represents a decrease of $1.1 billion below the amount forecast in fiscal year 1999, $9.3 billion below the amount first forecast in fiscal year 1996, and continues the Department of Defense's delay in achieving the Joint Chiefs of Staff goal of a $60.0 billion procurement budget by three years (from fiscal year 1998 to fiscal year 2001). Even before the initiation of Operation Allied Force the service chiefs of staff were lamenting a budget that leaves them far short of attaining their modernization requirements, despite Congress' having added over $15.0 billion to the procurement accounts in the past four years. The ongoing campaign in the Balkans has only exacerbated this situation. For example, the Army Chief of Staff testified to the committee that ``modernization is still underfunded. What I don't think will be fixed out of this [referring to the funding he expects to receive in fiscal year 2000] will be the modernization. We'll have to defer that . . . further.'' Commenting on his inability to recapitalize the fleets of naval ships and aircraft, the Chief of Naval Operations noted, ``We continue to compensate [for readiness and personnel needs] by shifting resources from modernization and recapitalization accounts to operations and support accounts.'' Even more critical of the current predicament, he was the Commandant of the Marine Corps, who testified that, ``As I've said for years [our problem] is long-term procurement. I have got very great concerns about the cancer of modernization that I must address.'' And the Air Force Chief of Staff declared that ``if we don't modernize by replacing aircraft that are beyond their useful life and revitalize those with life left in them, we can expect significant additional maintenance requirements, reduced reliability, and increased costs as these aircraft deteriorate.'' In order to bring the modernization problem into focus, the committee held a hearing on the Department's fleet of aging equipment. The Department clearly acknowledged that reduced modernization budgets, combined with increased deployments, have taken their toll. Its inventory of weapons is not only aging chronologically but also technologically, as older and overworked weapons systems continue to drain resources because of more frequent and more expensive maintenance. Equipment expected to leave the inventory years ago is still operational and, in some cases, approaching nearly double expected service lives. Yet, despite this situation, the procurement budget continues to receive low priority. Although much has been touted by the Department concerning a major increase in its budget in the next six fiscal years, the procurement accounts are not the beneficiaries of any largesse. As noted above, the fiscal year 2000 procurement request actually declines from the amount forecast only one year ago. The cumulative addition to these accounts over the next four years is projected to be only $4.1 billion-hardly a significant part of a proposed six-year $84.0 billion overall increase. Unfortunately, unless a sustained increase in procurement funding is forthcoming, the aging equipment situation will only get worse, as the impact of Operation Allied Force is felt. With the United States shouldering the largest share of the burden in the North Atlantic Treaty Organization's air campaign against Yugoslavia, inventories of key precision weapons are being depleted at much faster rates than ever anticipated; units deployed for combat are stripping vital supplies from U.S.-based units, contributing to a dramatic drop in their readiness ratings; and cannibalization rates are climbing rapidly within deployed units because of spare parts shortages. Even with the substantial amount of additional funding provided by the Congress in fiscal year 1999 supplemental appropriations, the process of ``getting well'' from this ongoing operation will be slow and likely require substantial additional funding in the future. Against this backdrop, the committee successfully argued for an increase to the funds allocated for national defense in the fiscal year 2000 budget resolution and has applied much of this additional money to procurement. This marks the fifth consecutive year the committee has added funds to modernize the Department's weaponry, including: [In millions of dollars] Army: UH-60L helicopters............................................ 27.0 CH-47F upgrades............................................... 56.0 AH-64D upgrades............................................... 45.0 MLRS rocket launchers......................................... 56.0 Bradley fighting vehicles upgrades............................ 72.0 M113A3 carrier mods........................................... 25.0 Small arms.................................................... 48.0 Ammunition.................................................... 55.0 Night vision devices.......................................... 33.0 Shortstop..................................................... 40.0 Communications equipment...................................... 92.0 Combat support equipment...................................... 63.0 Construction equipment........................................ 33.0 Navy/Marine Corps: KC-130J....................................................... 252.0 MV-22......................................................... 60.0 CH-60S........................................................ 38.0 UC-35......................................................... 18.0 E/A-6B upgrades............................................... 45.0 F/A-18 series modifications................................... 63.0 P-3 series modifications...................................... 75.0 Tomahawk missiles............................................. 300.0 Joint stand-off weapon........................................ 75.0 Hellfire missiles............................................. 52.0 Joint direct attack munition.................................. 48.0 Maritime prepositioning ship-advance procurement.............. 80.0 Base telecommunications upgrades.............................. 50.0 Improve & recovery vehicle.................................... 49.0 AH-1/UH-1 upgrades............................................ 27.0 Ammunition.................................................... 75.0 Air Force: E-8C-advance procurement...................................... 46.0 B-2 upgrades.................................................. 187.0 F-15 upgrades................................................. 50.0 F-16 upgrades................................................. 47.0 C-135 upgrades................................................ 68.0 Defense airborne reconnaissance program....................... 40.0 Joint stand-off weapon........................................ 35.0 Minuteman III upgrades........................................ 40.0 AGM-65D Maverick upgrades..................................... 10.0 Joint direct attack munition.................................. 66.0 Ammunition.................................................... 75.0 Theater deployable communications............................. 35.0 Defense-Wide: National guard/reserve miscellaneous equipment................ 60.0 Aircraft Procurement, Army Overview The budget request contained $1,229.9 million for Aircraft Procurement, Army in fiscal year 2000. The committee recommends authorization of $1,415.2 million for fiscal year 2000. The committee recommends approval of the request except for those programs adjusted in the following table. Unless otherwise specified, adjustments are without prejudice and based on affordability considerations. Items of Special Interest AH-64 modifications The budget request contained $22.6 million for AH-64 modifications, but included no funds for an oil debris detection system (ODDS) or the continuation of the vibration management enhancement program (VMEP). The ODDS is an on-board detection system that alerts aircrews to the presence of metal chips in engines and propeller gear boxes, allowing flights to be terminated prior to catastrophic failure of critical components. It also permits the clearing of smaller particles that routinely accumulate in engine oil and cause false impending engine failure alarms, resulting in unnecessary termination of aircraft missions and costly engine diagnostics. The VMEP is an Army National Guard (ARNG) effort currently directed toward resolving vibration management problems on the ARNG's AH-64 Apache fleet, but the committee understands the technology is also applicable to the UH-60 Blackhawk, the CH-47 Chinook, and the OH-58D Kiowa Warrior. The committee continues to support the VMEP because of its belief that such on-board diagnostic capabilities contribute significantly to both aircrew safety and improved aircraft reliability. Since the ODDS, which has been successfully integrated into many other Department of Defense aircraft, both reduces aircraft maintenance costs and enhances aircrew safety, the committee recommends an increase of $3.0 million to incorporate the ODDS on AH-64 Apaches. The committee also recommends an increase of $7.0 million to continue VMEP procurement for the ARNG Apache fleet and to transition this technology to other aircraft. Aircraft survivability equipment (ASE) The budget request contained $88,000 for ASE, but included no funds for the procurement of upgrades to the Aircraft Survivability Equipment Trainer (ASET) IV. ASET IV is a ground-based, mobile aviation threat emitter simulation and training system which enables both fixed and rotary wing aviators to recognize surface-to-air-missile (SAM) and anti-aircraft artillery threats in order to employ the correct aircraft evasive maneuvers. ASET IV systems are currently fielded at major training centers throughout the United States and Germany and require that an aircraft have a fully operational ASE suite of sensors on board for training. The Congress added $7.4 million in fiscal year 1998 and $6.4 million in fiscal year 1999 for ASET IV upgrades. However, additional validated requirements exist and several systems in their present configuration still lack the capability to simulate the most current infrared (IR) and radio frequency (RF) SAM threats, thereby limiting aircrew training against older threats-a situation which is not representative of the Army's ``train as you fight'' concept. Consistent with past committee actions and based on the Army's requirement for forces to train in realistic threat environments, the committee recommends $18.2 million, an increase of $18.1 million for upgrading ASET IV systems with current IR and RF SAM threat simulators. Aircraft survivability equipment (ASE) modifications The budget request contained $11.8 million for the procurement of ASE modifications, but included no funds for AN/ AVR-2A laser detecting sets (LDS). The LDS is the only device in the Army inventory that provides warning to helicopter crews when they have been illuminated by a laser-targeted weapon. It detects, identifies, and characterizes threats 360-degrees-around and plus-or-minus 45 degrees above-and-below an aircraft. The committee is concerned with the growing laser threat to helicopter aircrews and notes the limited situational awareness that is currently provided by existing AN/AVR-2A technology. The committee understands that a quantum improvement to aircrew situational awareness is achievable by incorporating the precise laser azimuth and discrimination capabilities of the AN/VVR-1 ground LDS into the AN/AVR-2A aviation LDS. Accordingly, the committee directs the Secretary of the Army to expeditiously establish an engineering change proposal (ECP) to integrate the precision laser azimuth and discrimination capabilities of the AN/VVR-1 into the AN/AVR-2A and recommends an increase of $11.5 million, which includes a $5.5 million increase for the ECP, and, $6.0 million to procure additional AN/AVR-2A LDS until the ECP is in production. CH-47 cargo helicopter modifications The budget request contained $70.7 million for procurement of CH-47 Chinook helicopter modifications. The CH-47D, the Army's only heavy lift helicopter, is capable of lifting multiple types of cargo weighing up to 26,000 pounds or carrying 33 personnel. The committee understands that the average age of the CH-47 fleet is 31 years old, yet notes that the Army has delayed the start of a comprehensive CH-47 upgrade from fiscal year 1999 to fiscal year 2001. However, the committee also notes that the Army Chief of Staff has identified a $56.1 million unfunded requirement in fiscal year 2000 to accelerate fielding of improved CH-47Ds in Korea by 30 months. Therefore, based on the critical need to upgrade these helicopters, the committee recommends $126.8 million, an increase of $56.1 million for CH-47D modifications. Longbow The budget request contained $729.5 million to modify 74 AH-64A Apache helicopters to the AH-64D Apache Longbow configuration and $35.7 million in advance procurement to modify 60 aircraft in fiscal year 2001. The budget request did not include funds to upgrade Longbow sensor and avionics integrated circuits. The AH-64D Apache Longbow, a day/night, all weather, heavy attack helicopter, is capable of engaging and destroying advanced, multiple threat armor targets on the future digital battlefield with minimum exposure time. The committee continues to support this upgrade. However, it notes that many of the aircraft sensors and avionics on the Longbow were not designed with an ``open information architecture,'' and, as a result of the rapid rate of information technology advances driven by the commercial information technology market, military specification integrated circuits (IC) in these avionics and sensors are no longer produced, resulting in processor obsolescence. Consequently, replacement of ICs for these components will require redesign. The committee understands the cost of this redesign is estimated to be $45.0 million. Therefore, the committee recommends $45.0 million to replace obsolete Apache Longbow ICs. The committee is concerned that the current plan for fiscal year 2001-the first year of a second five-year multiyear procurement (MYP) contract for this aircraft--only includes 60 airframe upgrades--a 12 aircraft reduction from previously approved plans. The committee understands that an additional $4.9 million in advance procurement is needed to restore the program to previously approved levels. Therefore, the committee recommends $774.5 million, an increase of $45.0 million for obsolete IC replacement, and $40.6 million, an increase of $4.9 million for advance procurement for 12 additional aircraft modifications in fiscal year 2001. The committee also recommends approval of a second five-year MYP contract. UH-60 Blackhawk The budget request contained $86.1 million for procurement of eight UH-60L Blackhawk helicopters for the Army National Guard (ARNG), of which $283,000 was included for engines and accessories. The UH-60 Blackhawk is the Army's primary utility helicopter in both the active and reserve components. The committee understands that a validated requirement for 83 additional ARNG Blackhawks remains unfilled and, therefore, consistent with past committee actions, recommends an increase of $27.0 million to accelerate fielding of 3 additional Blackhawks. The committee is aware that the Army procured 28 additional Blackhawk engines in fiscal year 1998 and intends to use some of these engines for the helicopters to be procured in fiscal year 2000. Additionally, the Army provided no justification for accessory equipment. Therefore, the committee recommends a decrease of $283,000. In total, the committee recommends $112.8 million for UH-60L Blackhawks. UH-60 modifications The budget request contained $12.1 million for UH-60 modifcations, but included no funds to procure either UH-60Q aeromedical evacuation (MEDEVAC) modification kits for the Army National Guard (ARNG) or a UH-60Q medical mockup training device. The committee notes that new production UH-60Q MEDEVAC aircraft are not planned to be procured until fiscal year 2002; however, an interim capability exists through UH-60Q modification kits, which internally reconfigure UH-60A utility aircraft into MEDEVAC variants. The committee also notes that while the Army plans to procure UH-60Q aircraft in the future, it has not included funds in the Future Years Defense Program for the one required UH-60Q medical mockup training device. This fully functional training device accurately replicates the interior of a UH-60Q MEDEVAC helicopter and will provide flight medics a classroom- based, ``hands-on,'' training capability, eliminating the current need to use dedicated aircraft on the ground for extended periods of time for this purpose. Therefore, the committee recommends $22.6 million, an increase of $9.0 million to procure UH-60Q medical evacuation modification kits to reconfigure two ARNG UH-60A Blackhawk helicopters and an increase of $1.5 million to accelerate procurement of the UH-60Q medical mockup training device. Utility/cargo airplane modifications The budget request contained $6.3 million for avionics modifications to the C-12 utility aircraft. The C-12 is the Army's primary short to medium range utility and personnel transport. The 62 aircraft in the service's inventory are located throughout the world, and the majority of them continue to operate with analog avionics technology that was current at the time they were procured in the 1970s and 1980s. Replacement of obsolete avionics with state-of-the-art communications, navigation, surveillance and flight management equipment will enable the aircraft to be more easily deployed around the world to meet emerging global requirements. The committee is pleased that the Army has requested funds for these safety of flight upgrades but believes additional funds are required. Accordingly, and consistent with actions taken in past fiscal years, the committee recommends $9.3 million, an increase of $3.0 million to more efficiently procure C-12 avionics upgrades. Missile Procurement, Army Overview The budget request contained $1,358.1 million for Missile Procurement, Army in fiscal year 2000. The committee recommends authorization of $1,416.0 million for fiscal year 2000. The committee recommends approval of the request except for those programs adjusted in the following table. Unless otherwise specified, adjustments are without prejudice and based on affordability considerations. Items of Special Interest Avenger modifications The budget request contained no funds to procure Avenger slew-to-cue (STC) modifications. The STC upgrade enables the Avenger turret to automatically and rapidly slew in azimuth and elevation resulting in a 55 percent increase in target engagements. The committee understands that existing Army National Guard (ARNG) Avenger fire units require installation of a fire control computer with embedded STC capability to provide the most lethal and rapid force protection air defense capability. Therefore, the committee recommends an increase of $4.3 million to upgrade one ARNG Avenger battalion with STC-capable fire control computers. Avenger system summary The budget request contained $33.8 million to procure 15 Avengers for the Army National Guard (ARNG), of which $636,000 was for the installation of environmental control units/prime power units (ECU/PPU). The Avenger, the Army's primary mobile, short-range, surface-to-air defense missile and antiaircraft artillery system, is mounted on and operates off the internal power of a High Mobility Multipurpose Wheeled Vehicle. The committee understands that some Avenger turrets do not have a climate control unit, resulting in either extremely high or low turret temperatures during hot and cold weather. The committee is aware of an ongoing ECU/PPU retrofit program, which provides stable turret temperatures as well as an independent power supply for the turret. Based on the added benefits of these enhancements, the committee recommends $35.1 million, an increase of $1.3 million for additional ECU/PPU upgrades to ARNG Avengers. Brilliant anti-armor (BAT) submunition The budget request contained $149.3 million to procure 846 BAT submunitions, of which $5.0 million was included for test and evaluation. The committee notes that the amount of funds requested for test and evaluation represents a 285 percent increase over the amount that was authorized and appropriated in fiscal year 1999 for 420 submunitions. Additionally, the amount planned for this same requirement in fiscal year 2001 is only $2.3 million for a corresponding 1,028 missiles. The committee is concerned with this unjustified, sharp increase in test and evaluation funds, and, therefore, recommends a decrease of $2.7 million. Multiple launch rocket system (MLRS) launcher systems The budget request contained $114.6 million for the procurement of 47 MLRS launcher systems for the active Army, but included no funds for the procurement of launcher systems for the Army National Guard (ARNG). The committee notes that the ARNG provides nearly 70 percent of the total Army's artillery fire support but further notes that an MLRS launcher shortfall continues to exist for ARNG units. However, the committee is aware that the Army Chief of Staff's fiscal year 2000 unfunded requirements list included MLRS launcher systems to fill ARNG MLRS battalion readiness shortfalls as a top priority. Consistent with actions taken in past fiscal years, the committee recommends $170.1 million, an increase of $55.5 million for additional MLRS launcher systems for the ARNG. Weapons and Tracked Combat Vehicles, Army Overview The budget request contained $1,416.8 million for procurement of Army weapons and tracked combat vehicles for fiscal year 2000. The committee recommends authorization of $1,575.1 million for fiscal year 2000. The committee recommends approval of the request except for those programs adjusted in the following table. Unless otherwise specified, adjustments are without prejudice and based on affordability considerations. Items of Special Interest Abrams upgrade program/heavy assault bridge (HAB) The budget request contained $423.0 million to procure 120 M1A2 Abrams System Enhancement Program (SEP) tanks and $67.3 million to procure 13 HABs, but included no funds for HAB advance procurement. The HAB is an 85-foot, military-load class bridge transported on a modified M1A2 SEP tank chassis. The system is capable of spanning up to 79-foot spaces, is deployable in five minutes, and can be retrieved in less than ten minutes-- requirements that resulted from Army bridging system deficiencies identified during Operation Desert Storm. The committee notes the Secretary of the Army's request for a second multiyear procurement (MYP) contract for the M1A2 SEP tank beginning in fiscal year 2001 and that an estimated $118.0 million in savings is expected from the MYP contract through fiscal year 2005. Due to the 80 percent commonality between HAB and M1A2 hardware, the committee also notes that an estimated $190.0 million in savings from fiscal year 2001 through fiscal year 2005 could be achieved from the efficiencies of a combined HAB and M1A2 MYP contract. Based on these larger savings, the committee recommends a combined M1A2 SEP/HAB MYP contract. The committee also recommends an increase of $14.0 million to synchronize HAB advance procurement in fiscal year 2000 with M1A2 SEP tank advance procurement. Bradley base sustainment The budget request contained $281.1 million for the procurement of 104 Bradley A3 fighting vehicle upgrades, but included no funds for upgrading first-generation Bradley A0 fighting vehicles to the A2 Operation Desert Storm (ODS) variant for the Army National Guard (ARNG). The Bradley A2ODS variant improves the vehicle's lethality, survivability, and mobility, as well as the situational awareness of its crew. Modifications include installation of a laser range finder, Global Positioning System navigation capability, a combat identification system, a driver's thermal viewer and a missile countermeasure device. When the Army completes all of its planned upgrades to the Bradley, the active fleet will include a mix of the most advanced A3 variant, along with A2 and A2ODS versions. The majority of the ARNG's Bradley fleet, on the other hand, will remain unmodified and be comprised mainly of first-generation A0 vehicles, which, because of major survivability deficiencies, were not used in the Persian Gulf War. However, as part of the new ARNG enhanced brigades, the committee notes that some of these A0 vehicles will be required to deploy with active Army forces. Because ARNG enhanced brigades will comprise an increasing percentage of the Army's warfighting capability as a result of active force reductions, and consistent with actions taken in past fiscal years, the committee recommends $353.1 million, an increase of $72.0 million for modifying Bradley ``A0'' vehicles to the A2ODS variant for the ARNG. M113 carrier modifications The budget request contained $53.5 million for 198 M113A3 carrier modifications. The M113A3 upgrade program, forecast to add an additional 20 years of service life to the vehicle, includes installation of a new engine, transmission, external fuel tanks, driver controls, and kevlar spall liners. The committee is aware that M113A3 upgrades are one of the Army Chief of Staff's fiscal year 2000 top unfunded priorities. Therefore, consistent with actions taken in past fiscal years, the committee recommends $78.5 million, an increase of $25.0 million for additional M113A3 upgrade kits. M240 series medium machine gun The budget request contained $12.2 million for the procurement of 1,304 M240 series medium machine guns. The M240B is the infantry version of the vehicle-mounted M240 machine gun and replaces the older M60 series machine gun in light and mechanized infantry and combat engineer units. The committee notes that the Army has a validated requirement for over 6,000 M240Bs to upgrade its current inventory of 7.62mm machine guns. Therefore, consistent with actions taken in past fiscal years, the committee recommends $40.0 million, an increase of $27.8 million to accelerate the fielding of M240B medium machine guns. M249 squad automatic weapon (SAW) The budget request contained no funds for the procurement of M249 SAW machine guns. The M249 SAW is a lightweight weapon capable of delivering a sustained volume of automatic, accurate, and highly lethal fire up to ranges of 800 meters. This highly mobile machine gun is being widely fielded throughout the Army to airborne, light and mechanized infantry, as well as air cavalry units. The committee is concerned that the Army has eliminated funds for this weapon throughout the Future Years Defense Program, yet an unfunded requirement for nearly 8,000 SAWs exists. Therefore, the committee recommends $10.1 million to continue procurement of M249 SAWs to reduce this shortfall. MK19-3 grenade launcher The budget request contained $18.3 million to procure 1,085 MK19-3 grenade launchers. The MK19-3 is a 40 millimeter automatic grenade launcher capable of engaging point targets up to 1,500 meters and providing suppressive fire up to 2,200 meters in range. This infantry weapon can also be mounted on armored vehicles and High Mobility Multipurpose Wheeled Vehicles. The committee notes that the Army has an unfulfilled requirement of over 3,600 MK19-3s and that there are critical shortages of this weapon in European-, Republic of Korea-, and continental United States-based units. The committee also notes this weapon's increased importance in military operations in urban terrain (MOUT) and close combat operations. Because of the MK19-3's critical shortages and the fact that United States military forces are increasingly being deployed into MOUT and potential close combat situations, the committee recommends $28.3 million, an increase of $10.0 million to accelerate procurement of MK19-3 grenade launchers. Ammunition Procurement, Army Overview The budget request contained $1,140.8 million for Ammunition Procurement, Army in fiscal year 2000. The committee recommends authorization of $1,196.2 million for fiscal year 2000. The committee recommends approval of the request except for those programs adjusted in the following table. Unless otherwise specified, adjustments are without prejudice and based on affordability considerations. Items of Special Interest Ammunition The budget request contained $987.0 million for procurement of ammunition. The committee recommends $1,037.0 million, an increase of $50.0 million for the following types of ammunition, which include top unfunded priorities of the Chief of Staff of the Army for fiscal year 2000: [In millions of dollars] Small/Medium Cal Ammunition: CTG 25mm All Types............................................ 2.0 CTG 40mm All Types............................................ 8.0 Mortar Ammunition: CTG 120mm Illum XM930 w/MTSQ FZ............................... 5.0 CTG 120mm WP Smoke M929A1..................................... 5.0 Artillery Ammunition: CTG Arty 105mm DPICM XM915.................................... 5.0 Mines: Mine, Antitank (Volcano)...................................... 10.0 Rockets: Bunker Defeating Munition..................................... 10.0 Grenade, All Types: Smoke Screening, XM 90........................................ 5.0 Hydra 70 rockets The budget request contained $144.8 million for Hydra 70 rockets. The committee acknowledges the Army's actions to identify and eliminate the problem of early motor blows (EMB) experienced by the Hydra 70 from 1992 to 1995. The committee asked the General Accounting Office to conduct a review of the service's ongoing inspection program and was generally pleased with the information it received. However, the committee understands that because some of the Army's Hydra 70 rockets are prepositioned on ships and in-theater, they will not be accessible for inspection before the current inspection contract expires in November 1999. Given the potential threat EMBs pose to aircraft and crew, the committee urges the Army to extend this contract and make every reasonable effort to inspect the entire inventory of Hydra 70 rockets that could experience this problem. Provision of industrial facilities The budget request contained $46.1 million for Army ammunition plant (AAP) future project design, obsolete production line equipment replacement, and environmental deficiencies and infrastructure corrections, of which $9.1 million was for production line and facility upgrades to Iowa AAP. However, the budget request did not include non-recurring engineering costs for the 120 millimeter (mm) tank ammunition load, assemble, and pack (LAP) production line enhancements at this plant. The committee is aware of the Army's future plans to improve the Iowa AAP production line, resulting in increased efficiency, safety, and reliability, as well as production line output. However, based on the implementation timeline of these plans, an estimated $4.7 million in annual savings is not expected to accrue until fiscal year 2004. The committee understands that a $5.4 million increase in non-recurring engineering for the LAP production line will accelerate these enhancements. Therefore, the committee recommends $51.5 million, an increase of $5.4 million for this purpose. Other Procurement, Army Overview The budget request contained $3,423.9 million for Other Procurement, Army in fiscal year 2000. The committee recommends authorization of $3,799.9 million for fiscal year 2000. The committee recommends approval of the request except for those programs adjusted in the following table. Unless otherwise specified, adjustments are without prejudice and based on affordability considerations. Items of Special Interest Area common user system (ACUS) modification program The budget request contained $109.1 million for the ACUS modification program in order to support its migration to the Warfighter Information Network (WIN) systems architecture, but included no funds for the procurement of high speed multiplexers (HSMUX) for Army National Guard (ARNG) signal brigades. The WIN architecture will seamlessly link the Army's diverse information systems on the 21st century digitized battlefield. HSMUX will provide increased bandwidth to the WIN in response to the growing demand for video and data in the battlefield tactical communications environment. As part of the echelon above and below corps force support packages, ARNG signal brigades will be required to deploy with these early entry units; however, they will not be able to provide state- of-the-art video and data communications support without HSMUX upgrades. The committee notes that the Army Chief of Staff has identified the ACUS modification program as a fiscal year 2000 top unfunded priority. In response to this requirement, the committee recommends $110.0 million, an increase of $900,000 to procure and field HSMUX upgrades to ARNG signal brigades. Army data distribution system (ADDS) The budget request contained $38.8 million to procure 1,280 Enhanced Position Location Reporting System (EPLRS) radios, but included no funds for the procurement of EPLRS for the Army National Guard (ARNG). The EPLRS radio is the Army's and Marine Corps' primary position location reporting system, providing battlefield commanders combat information on the position of their forces in addition to supporting the majority of the services' data communications requirements for brigade and below tactical command and control. The system provides secure, jam-resistant, near-real-time communications and is essential to support tactical operations on the battlefield. The committee notes that procurement and fielding of additional EPLRS is on both the Army Chief of Staff's and Commandant of the Marine Corps' fiscal year 2000 unfunded priorities lists. The committee also notes that ARNG enhanced brigades must have the necessary data communications capabilities to operate alongside active Army units. Accordingly, the committee recommends $64.7 million, an increase of $25.9 million for the procurement of EPLRS for ARNG enhanced brigades. The committee also recommends $103.2 million, an increase of $20.3 million to procure of EPLRS for the Marine Corps. Artillery accuracy equipment The budget request contained $4.3 million to procure the Artillery Muzzle Velocity System, but included no funds to procure the Meteorological Measuring System (MMS). The MMS provides data to field artillery units that improves firing accuracy. The committee is encouraged that the Army plans to procure 14 MMSs for the Army National Guard (ARNG) in fiscal year 2001, however, it recognizes that accelerated fielding of MMS to the ARNG would benefit total Army mission requirements since the ARNG provides nearly 70 percent of the total Army's artillery fire support. Therefore, the committee recommends $7.3 million for artillery accuracy equipment, an increase of $3.0 million to accelerate procurement of the MMS for the ARNG. Automated data processing equipment (ADPE) The budget request contained $138.6 million for procurement of ADPE, of which $38.9 million was included for the procurement of Major Army Command (MACOM) automation systems and $4.2 million was for automatic identification technology (AIT). The committee notes a 27 percent increase in the amount requested for MACOM automation systems over the amount authorized and appropriated in fiscal year 1999 and believes this growth to be excessive. Therefore, the committee recommends a decrease of $4.5 million for production of these systems. AIT devices, which consist of various radio frequency (RF), bar code scanning, and data carrier devices, are used as components of automated logistics systems, contributing to expedited receiving, storage, distribution, and inventory management of new and repairable items. For example, the committee understands that RF tagging devices are currently used in a pilot program implemented at six locations worldwide in fiscal year 1998 to track ammunition from point of origin to place of destination. The committee understands that these devices are also used to automate manufacturing process controls for aircraft repair parts and to track ground support equipment at various military depots. The committee is impressed with the promising results achieved to date with RF tagging devices and believes that substantial savings can be achieved from further implementation of these devices in automated inventory and repair processes. Therefore, the committee recommends an increase of $11.0 million for ammunition AIT integration efforts and $8.7 million for maintenance AIT implementation. In total, the committee recommends $153.8 million for ADPE. Combat support medical The budget request contained $25.3 million for the procurement of deployable medical systems and field medical equipment, but included no funds for the procurement of the advanced surgical suite for trauma casualties (ASSTC) for the Army National Guard (ARNG). The ASSTC is a lightweight, highly mobile, self-contained medical facility for on-scene triage, minor surgery, diagnostic and preventive medical treatment, which can also be used for life-saving, resuscitative surgery for 20 casualties. It is capable of operating independently for up to 48 hours in support of contingency operations and disaster relief. Based on the ARNG's evolving role as ``first responders'' to weapons of mass destruction and domestic terrorist incidents, and its requirement to deploy in response to natural disasters, the committee recommends $40.3 million, an increase of $15.0 million for the procurement of ASSTCs for the ARNG. Family of heavy tactical vehicles The budget request contained $190.4 million to procure palletized load systems and related equipment, heavy expanded transporter system trucks, and heavy repair vehicles, of which $36.8 million was for 119 M984 heavy expanded mobility tactical truck (HEMTT) wreckers. However, no HEMTT wreckers were requested for the Army Reserve (AR). The HEMTT wrecker is a 10- ton, diesel-powered, eight-wheel drive vehicle designed to retrieve other heavy wheeled combat and support vehicles. The committee notes that the AR's evolving combat support and combat service support mission requirements necessitate the need for HEMTT wreckers. Therefore, the committee recommends $196.4 million, an increase of $6.0 million for 21 HEMTT wreckers for the AR. General purpose vehicles The budget request contained $1.0 million for the procurement of general purpose vehicles, but included no funds for the procurement of Military (M) Gators. The M Gator is a low cost, air-deployable, multipurpose vehicle designed for transport of logistics equipment and personnel on the battlefield and in urban terrain. The committee understands that the XVIII Airborne Corps has submitted an urgent operational needs statement for procurement of 600 M Gators to the Chief of Staff of the Army and that an operational requirements document is currently being staffed. The committee also understands that this vehicle has been extensively tested and used by both the Army and Special Operations Command in Bosnia and in the Middle East. Therefore, to fill the XVIII Airborne Corps' urgent operational needs, the committee recommends $13.0 million, an increase of $12.0 for M Gators. High speed compactor The budget request contained $9.8 million to procure 67 815F high-speed compactors. The 815F high-speed compactor is a commercially produced, self-propelled, diesel powered, tamping machine used to build roads, airfields, and dams. The committee notes that the amount in this budget request would enable the service to reach 199 of its 212 vehicle acquisition objective but that the remaining vehicles are not planned to be procured until fiscal year 2005. The committee believes that meeting the acquisition objective should be accelerated and, therefore, recommends $12.4 million, an increase of $2.6 million for this purpose. Hunter unmanned aerial vehicle (UAV) The budget request contained no funds for the procurement of upgrades for the Hunter UAV. The Hunter UAV is the Army's only operational UAV system and is used to develop corps-, division-, and brigade-level tactics, techniques, and procedures, and is also available for worldwide contingency operations. It is currently deployed to the Balkans as part of Operation Allied Force supporting North Atlantic Treaty Organization operations. The committee understands that the fielded Hunter systems have only partially received hardware and software upgrades which improve their operational effectiveness and reduce operations and support costs. Additional Hunter systems being readied for fielding and those in storage have not been similarly upgraded. The committee believes that the Hunter UAV system will play a major role in tactics development and the enhancement of battlefield commander's tactical awareness until the follow-on Tactical UAV is fielded. Therefore, the committee recommends an increase of $9.0 million to provide these upgrades to the Hunter UAV inventory. Information system security program (ISSP) The budget request contained a total of $28.8 million, $64.1 million, and $13.3 million to procure secure voice and data terminal equipment for the Army, Navy, and Air Force respectively. The committee understands that the services are replacing older secure voice and data systems with newer multi-media secure digital communications equipment and that the systems available today provide significant operations and maintenance savings over legacy systems. Therefore, in order to accelerate the replacement of obsolete secure voice and data terminals, the committee recommends an increase of $9.0 million to procure additional secure terminal equipment: $3.0 million for the Army ISSP, $3.0 million for the Navy ISSP, and $3.0 million for the Air Force command, control, and communications countermeasures program. Integrated family of test equipment (IFTE) The budget request contained $41.6 million to procure IFTE, including $12.7 million for 4 IFTE electro-optic test facilities (EOTF). The EOTF provides automatic electro-optics (EO) test and diagnostic support and is capable of satisfying the full range of Army EO test requirements. These facilities will replace existing electronic equipment repair facilities and the committee understands that they will initially support the OH- 58D Kiowa Warrior and the Improve Target Acquisition System (ITAS). The committee notes that the Army Chief of Staff identified a fiscal year 2000 unfunded priority for additional EOTFs. Accordingly, the committee recommends $51.6 million, an increase of $10.0 million to procure additional EOTFs for Kiowa Warrior and ITAS support. Items less than $2.0 million (construction equipment) The budget request contained $4.3 million to procure various construction equipment items less than $2.0 million, but included no funds to procure ultimate building machines. The ultimate building machine system is a highly mobile steel fabrication mechanism which can be rapidly set up to construct complex steel structures in support of field operations and interim shelter requirements. The committee notes that each of the services has had additional requirements placed on its engineer support and construction units as a result of increased deployments for contingency, humanitarian assistance, and disaster relief operations. The committee recognizes the benefits that easily and rapidly constructed shelters contribute to these types of operations. Therefore, the committee recommends $6.3 million, an increase of $2.0 million to procure ultimate building machines for the Army and the Army National Guard. The committee also recommends an increase of $1.0 million each for procurement of these machines by the Navy, Marine Corps, Air National Guard, and Air Force Reserve. Joint surveillance target attack radar system (Joint STARS) common ground station (CGS) The budget request contained $82.2 million to procure 12 Joint STARS CGSs, of which $6.0 million was included for pre- planned product improvements (P3I). The Joint STARS CGS improves ground commanders' battlefield command and control capability by integrating into a single station the processing of signals, imagery, and other intelligence received through a data link from the Air Force's E-8 Joint STARS aircraft radar. The system detects, locates, tracks, and classifies both moving and stationary targets beyond the forward line of troops. The P3I program provides the Joint STARS an expanded capability to interface with additional airborne intelligence assets while incorporating joint message processing and information security upgrades. The committee is aware of the proven success of the CGS and believes the P3I upgrades will greatly enhance the ground commanders' situational awareness. Therefore, the committee recommends $112.2 million for Joint STARS CGS, an increase of $30.0 million for these upgrades. Lightweight video reconnaissance system (LVRS) The budget request contained $3.4 million to procure 145 LVRSs. The LVRS consists of a small, ruggedized, open architecture processor and generation III image intensification night vision-capable video camera/recorder. The system allows special operations forces (SOF) and light force scout and reconnaissance units to photograph, record, and transmit near real-time video images over Single Channel Ground and Airborne Radio Systems from forward deployed field positions back to tactical operations centers. It facilitates rapid target identification and analysis critical to mission planning and execution on the digitized battlefield and in urban environments. The committee notes that the Army Chief of Staff identified a $2.5 million unfunded requirement for fiscal year 2000 to procure an additional 268 LVRSs for SOF and light forces. Therefore, the committee recommends $5.9 million, an increase of $2.5 million to procure 268 additional LVRSs. M56 smoke generator system The budget request contained $6.3 million for the procurement of 14 M56 smoke generator systems. The M56 smoke generator system, the primary battlefield obscurant for Army light forces, is a High Mobility Multipurpose Wheeled Vehicle-mounted system capable of disseminating smoke in both stationary positions and on the move. The M56 can defeat enemy sensors such as tank thermal sights as well as smart and guided munitions which operate in the visual through far infrared portions of the electromagnetic spectrum. The committee understands that the M56 has been designated as an essential item of equipment for early entry forces. The committee further understands that while the Army's force package one units have a requirement of 300 of these smoke generators, only 25 have been funded in fiscal years 2000 and 2001. Therefore, the committee recommends $22.3 million, an increase of $16.0 million for additional M56 smoke generator systems. Modification of in-service equipment The budget request contained $24.9 million for upgrades to various marine vessels and onboard equipment, construction, and logistic vehicles, but included no funds to conduct an Army National Guard (ARNG) D-7 dozer service life extension program (SLEP). The committee understands that the majority of the currently fielded ARNG D-7 dozers have an average fleet age of 27 years, well beyond their intended 15 year service lives and that there are no plans to replace the D-7s. The committee notes that a reserve component D-7 dozer limited rebuild program was initiated in fiscal year 1995, but that a more extensive SLEP which would extend the D-7 service life and eliminate its ``unsatisfactory'' readiness rating is not contemplated in the Future Years Defense Program. This, despite the greater demand placed on overage D-7 dozers by increased ``operations-other-than-war'' deployments. Therefore, the committee recommends $34.9 million, an increase of $10.0 million for an ARNG D-7 dozer SLEP. Modification of in-service equipment (tactical surveillance) The budget request contained $6.5 million to procure fire support digitization hardware and software upgrades for the AN/ TPQ-36 and AN/TPQ-37 Firefinder radars, but included no funds to procure additional AN/TPQ-36 radars. The AN/TPQ-36 is a High Mobility Multipurpose Wheeled Vehicle-mounted, phased-array, X-band radar, which locates mortars and short-range rocket launchers. The system transmits near-real time target data to friendly artillery elements enabling these units to rapidly engage the targeted mortars and rocket launchers with counterfire. The committee notes that the Army does not plan to resume procurement of AN/TPQ-36 Firefinder radars until fiscal year 2002 and is concerned both with this two-year break in production and the force protection implications related to it. Accordingly, the committee recommends $11.5 million, an increase of $5.0 million to continue procurement of AN/TPQ-36 Firefinder radars. Night vision devices The budget request contained $21.0 million for the procurement of night vision devices, of which $19.0 million was included for 4,550 AN/PVS-7D night vision goggles, but included no funds for the procurement of generation III 25 millimeter (mm) image intensification tubes. The AN/PVS-7D night vision goggle is a head- or helmet- mounted, third-generation, image intensifying, device used by soldiers for nighttime operations. The committee notes that the Army acquisition objective for this device has increased by 100,000 units since fiscal year 1998 to 381,000; however, at the end of fiscal year 1999 only 194,409 units will have been procured. The committee also notes that the ``Own the Night'' concept--the Army's strategy of fighting, dominating and winning battles during nighttime operations--remains as one of the Army Chief of Staff's top priorities. The committee is aware of the joint Army/Navy/Marine Corps program to procure generation III 25mm image intensification tubes as replacements for less capable generation II tubes fielded in the AN/PVS-4 and AN/TVS-5 night vision goggles and notes that the generation III tubes provide a minimum 25 percent resolution increase. The committee is aware that the Army Chief of Staff has identified several fiscal year 2000 unfunded requirements, two of which are, $8.0 million for AN/PVS-7D night vision goggles and $25.0 million for generation III 25mm image intensification tubes. Based on existing shortfalls, the enhanced operational capability that night vision devices provide to combat forces, and the committee's belief that these devices will provide a pivotal ``force multiplier'' in future Army deployments, the committee recommends $8.0 million for AN/PVS-7D night vision goggles and $25.0 million for generation III 25mm image intensification tubes, for a total increase of $33.0million for these devices. Nonsystems training devices The budget request contained $67.4 million to procure nonsystem training devices, but included no funds to procure the area weapons scoring system (AWSS), improved moving target simulator (IMTS) upgrades, or the deployable force-on-force instrumented range system (DFIRST). The AWSS is an electronic aerial gunnery scoring system used to accurately score helicopter units in day/night, live fire air-to-ground gunnery training. The committee notes that this type of training is directly related to the readiness of attack helicopter aircrews, especially for short-notice combat operations such as Operation Allied Force. The committee understands that the Army procured three AWSSs in fiscal year 1991, however, these systems are capable of supporting only 40 percent of the total Army's training requirement. The committee further understands that a validated requirement for three additional systems has existed since fiscal year 1995, yet none of these has been procured. The 360 degree, high-resolution IMTS is an Army and Marine Corps air defense simulation system which trains personnel on Stinger surface-to-air missile operations and launch proficiency. The committee is aware of IMTS upgrades that would provide computer-generated targets, variable scenario computer- generated background video images, and computer workstations for modeling air defense encounters. The committee understands that these upgrades would enhance both Army and Marine Corps air defense forces' operational proficiency by providing rapid, effective, real-world training prior to deploying into potential combat situations. The committee understands that the DFIRST Global Positioning System satellite-based instrumentation system for mounted maneuver training exercises would contribute significantly to the furtherance of the Army National Guard's (ARNG) regional home station instrumentation training plan. This plan calls for force-on-force, simulation-based training at a number of regional centers that would produce experiences for ARNG units comparable to those received at the Army's combat training centers. The committee notes the impressive results obtained during the DFIRST evaluation and believes that this system will not only increase the readiness of ARNG units through more effective training but do so at a lower cost and with greater safety than is currently done. Therefore, the committee recommends $80.7 million, an increase of $3.8 million to procure three AWSSs; $1.5 million for three Army IMTS upgrades; $1.0 million for an ARNG IMTS upgrade; and, an increase of $7.0 million to field two DFIRST regional ARNG training sites. In total, the committee recommends $13.3 for nonsystems training devices for the Army and ARNG. The committee also recommends an increase of $1.0 million for a Marine Corps IMTS upgrade. Product improved (PI) combat vehicle crewman (CVC) headset The budget request contained no funds to procure PI CVC headsets. The committee understands that loss of communications in CVC headsets was identified in late fiscal year 1998 during armored vehicle Force XXI Battle Command Brigade and Below (FBCB2) testing and evaluation. Army testing revealed that electromagnetic interference (EMI) created by new, higher powered Single Channel Ground and Airborne Radio Systems installed in armored vehicles to transmit FBCB2 data creates these communication problems. The committee believes that such communication problems could endanger crews as a result of not receiving complete command and control information and data transmissions in a high operational tempo or combat environment. Since the PI CVC headset eliminates EMI communication losses, the committee recommends an increase of $15.0 million to procure PI CVC headsets to address this safety issue. Ribbon bridge The budget request contained $12.1 million to procure ribbon bridge equipment, but included no funds to procure this equipment for Army National Guard (ARNG) multi-role bridge companies (MRBC). Ribbon bridge equipment consists of 10-ton, 8-wheel drive M1977 Heavy Expanded Mobility Tactical Truck Common Bridge Transporters, M15 Bridge Adaptor Pallets, and M14 Improved Boat Cradles. The committee understands that seven ARNG MRBC are being established in fiscal year 2001 using existing engineer bridging equipment and older, lower capacity five-ton trucks. Without increased funds, these new ARNG units will not begin conversion to the new equipment required for MRBC until fiscal year 2004. Therefore, the committee recommends $25.6 million for ribbon bridging equipment, an increase of $13.5 million to accelerate the fielding of one ARNG MRBC. Shortstop The budget request contained no funds to procure the Shortstop Electronic Protection System (SEPS). The SEPS is a commercial electronics radio frequency countermeasure system that protects personnel and high value assets from artillery, mortar rounds, and rockets by detonating their proximity fuzes well before they impact. Developed as a quick reaction capability system, SEPS was deployed during Operation Desert Storm and more recently in Operation Joint Endeavor. The committee understands that initial Army testing of 5,000 rounds fired at the SEPS resulted in a 100 percent pre-detonation success rate and that follow-on tests against both artillery and rockets were also highly successful. The committee notes that, although the theater commanders- in-chief have submitted urgent SEPS requirements, the Army has failed to fund this system for the fourth straight year. The Commander, United States Army Forces Europe has submitted the most recent such requirement for over 200 SEPS to support Balkan operations. In consideration of this requirement, in recognition of the fact that SEPS is also one of the Army Chief of Staff's fiscal year 2000 top unfunded priorities, and consistent with actions taken in past fiscal years, the committee recommends an increase of $40.0 million for the procurement of additional SEPS. The committee also recommends an increase of $4.0 million for the Marine Corps to ensure that Marine expeditionary forces have adequate protection from proximity-fuzed artillery rounds, mortars, and rockets. Single channel ground and airborne radio systems (SINCGARS) family The budget request contained $13.2 million for the fielding of SINCGARS, but included no funds to procure SINCGARS advanced system improvement program (ASIP) radios for the Army National Guard (ARNG). The SINCGARS ASIP radio upgrades earlier version, voice- only radios and includes a tactical Internet controller and integrated communications security enhancements, which provides commanders a highly reliable, easily maintained, secure voice and data handling command and control capability. The committee is aware of the Army Chief of Staff's unfunded requirement for 5,100 SINCGARS ASIP radios for force package three, which includes the ARNG. The committee understands that without these radios, ARNG forces will be unable to transmit to and receive data from their active Army components when operating together. Therefore, consistent with prior fiscal years, the committee recommends $60.4 million, an increase of $47.2 million to procure SINCGARS ASIP radios for the ARNG. Small pusher tug The budget request contained no funds to procure small pusher tugs. The small pusher tug is a 60-foot, steel hull, twin propeller vessel designed to tow general cargo barges in harbors, inland waterways, and along coastlines. It is also capable of assisting larger tugs in docking and undocking ships of all sizes, movement of floating cranes and machine shops, and performing line handling duties. The committee is aware of the Army's intent to replace its unreliable 40-year old small tugs that were used in Operations Desert Shield and Desert Storm and understands that it has recently increased its requirement for seven additional tugs to replace these older vessels. The committee included an increase of $4.7 million in fiscal year 1999 to procure two additional tugs to complete the earlier requirement of eight tugs. However, the committee notes that the Army has not budgeted for the additional seven new tugs in its Future Years Defense Program. Therefore, the committee recommends an increase of $9.0 million to accelerate procurement of three vessels towards the new Army requirement. Standard teleoperating kit The budget request contained $4.0 million to procure 12 Standardized Robotic System (SRS) vehicle teleoperating kits. The SRS kit can be installed on existing tracked, construction, or wheeled vehicles to enable them to be operated by remote control, if circumstances dictate, to clear mines. The committee understands that SRS contingency sets have been responsible for detonating hundreds of mines while deployed in Bosnia. The committee notes that redesigned combat engineer force structure requires SRS equipment at all force levels, but that the Army only intends to procure 12 kits in a ``one-time buy'' during fiscal year 2000. The committee disagrees with the Army's procurement strategy for this equipment and recommends $24.0 million, an increase of $20.0 million for additional SRS kits. Super high frequency (SHF) terminal The budget request contained $32.0 million for the procurement of 13 SHF Tri-Band Advanced Range Extension Terminals (STAR-T). The STAR-T is a High Mobility Multipurpose Wheeled Vehicle-mounted, multi-channel, tactical tri-band satellite terminal capable of operating with both commercial and military SHF satellites. The committee understands that the system has experienced an eight month delay in its initial operational test and evaluation as a result of contractor team restructuring, a $20.0 million cost overrun; program complexities with the integration of asynchronous transfer mode, integrated services digital network and Internet routing capability; and antennae design, and power amplification problems. As a result of this delay, the Milestone III procurement decision will not be made until September 2000. The committee is concerned with these problems but recommends the amount requested. However, the committee expects the Secretary of the Army to report to the Congressional defense committees about any further complications and delays with the program and such recommendations as he may deem appropriate for dealing with them. Vibratory self-propelled roller The budget request contained no funds to procure vibratory self-propelled rollers. The vibratory self-propelled roller is a commercial compacting vehicle used to support construction of airfields, logistic areas, and roads required to deploy and sustain Army forces. The committee notes that the last major procurement of this equipment occurred in the early 1980s and that its 22-year average age, combined with increased deployments, has reduced its readiness ratings to unsatisfactory levels. The committee also notes that the Army Chief of Staff identified the replacement of vibratory self-propelled rollers for both the active and reserve components as a fiscal year 2000 unfunded priority. Accordingly, the committee recommends an increase of $10.3 million to procure additional vibratory self-propelled rollers: $5.3 million for active Army units, and $5.0 million for Army Reserve units. Wheel-mounted 25-ton crane The budget request contained $12.1 million to procure 47 wheel-mounted, 25-ton all-terrain cranes (ATECs), but no ATECs were requested for the Army Reserve (AR). The ATEC is a multi-use, state-of-the-art, commercial all- terrain crane used for engineer construction excavation, lifting and loading general supplies and materiel, and bridging movement. The ATEC replaces three existing cranes, which range in age from 19 to 30 years old and suffer from low operational readiness rates and high operations and support costs with a single, state-of-the-art unit that exceeds all three obsolete cranes' capabilities and mobility characteristics. The committee notes the importance of ATECs in fulfilling Army Reserve combat support and combat service support mission requirements and recommends $20.1 million, an increase of $8.0 million to procure ATECs for the Army Reserve. Chemical Agents and Munitions Destruction, Army Overview The budget request contained $1,169.0 million for Chemical Agents and Munitions Destruction, Army for fiscal year 2000. The committee recommends authorization of no funds for fiscal year 2000. Item of Special Interest Chemical agents and munitions destruction The budget request contained $1,169.0 million for Chemical Agents and Munitions Destruction, Army. Section 1412(f) of the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 1986 (Public Law 99-145) requires that funds for the destruction of the U.S. stockpile of lethal chemical agents and munitions, including funds for military construction projects necessary to carrying out the demilitarization program, shall be set forth in the budget of the Department of Defense as a separate program and shall not be included in the budget accounts for any military department. The committee reaffirms its belief that funds for the chemical demilitarization program must be authorized and appropriated in a defense-wide budget account in order to emphasize that destruction of the chemical weapons stockpile is a national issue, which affects all of the Department of Defense, not just a single military service. Section 1412(f) was intended to keep this funding separate in order to prevent it from being subject to internal service budget priorities and to avoid artificially inflating the budgets of any of the military departments. The committee believes that the reasoning behind the legislative mandate was sound in 1986, when the estimated life cycles cost of the chemical stockpile demilitarization program was approximately $1.5 billion, and is even more valid today, when the estimated cost of the program has grown almost ten-fold. Accordingly, the committee recommends no funding for Chemical Agents and Munitions Destruction, Army, a decrease of $1,169.0 million. The committee recommends an increase of $1,012.0 million for Chemical Agents and Munitions Destruction, Defense. Aircraft Procurement, Navy Overview The budget request contained $8,228.7 million for Aircraft Procurement, Navy in fiscal year 2000. The committee recommends authorization of $8,804.1 million for fiscal year 2000. The committee recommends approval of the request except for those programs adjusted in the following table. Unless otherwise specified, adjustments are without prejudice and based on affordability considerations. Items of Special Interest CH-60S The budget request contained $208.5 million for 13 CH-60S helicopters and $73.8 million for advance procurement of 18 CH- 60S helicopters in fiscal year 2001. The CH-60S replaces the H-46, H-1, H-3, and HH-60 helicopters, which meet combat support taskings for vertical replenishment, cargo and personnel transfer, medical evacuation, and search and rescue. The committee notes that the Chief of Naval Operations included additional CH-60S helicopters in his unfunded priority list for fiscal year 2000, of which two would be assigned to the Naval Reserve. Consequently, the committee recommends $246.5 million, an increase of $38.0 million for two additional CH-60S helicopters for the Naval Reserve. Common data link (CDL) The budget request contained $28.8 million for modifications to special project aircraft, of which $2.0 million was included for the CDL. The CDL, consisting of aircraft and ground terminals, allows special project P-3 aircraft to transfer data between shore- and sea-based intelligence communication systems. The committee understands that the Navy requires two ground terminals and all four special project P-3 aircraft to be configured with the CDL, but the budget request included sufficient funding for only one ground terminal and installation of equipment on two aircraft. Therefore, the committee recommends $30.8 million, an increase of $2.0 million for one additional CDL ground terminal and to procure and install the CDL equipment on the remaining two special project P-3 aircraft. Common ground equipment The budget request contained $413.7 million for common ground equipment. The committee notes an approximately 30 percent increase in the budget request for common ground equipment when compared to previous and future years. The committee also notes that cost, schedule, and contractor data is not provided in the Department's budget justification material for such equipment. Based on the information provided, the committee believes that the request exceeds requirements by $20.0 million and, therefore, recommends $393.7 million, a decrease of $20 million. E-2 modifications The budget request contained $28.2 million for E-2 modifications, but included no funds to upgrade the E-2C aircraft fleet to the Hawkeye 2000 configuration. The Hawkeye 2000 modification upgrades the E-2C aircraft with satellite communications; a commercial-off-the-shelf, high-capacity mission computer and associated workstations; and cooperative engagement capability. The committee understands that this modification will provide the E-2C fleet with a quantum leap in situational awareness and fleet-wide connectivity and that two aircraft are available to accept this modification in fiscal year 2000. Consequently, the committee recommends an increase of $45.0 million: $15.0 million for non-recurring engineering and $30.0 million for the modification of two aircraft to the Hawkeye 2000 configuration. EA-6B modifications The budget request contained $161.0 million for EA-6B modifications, but included no funds for the band 9/10 transmitter/receiver upgrade. The band 9/10 transmitter/receiver upgrade is designed to counter the high-frequency radar techniques of a new family of electronic threats. In recognition of this emerging requirement, the committee recommended an increase of $39.0 million for fiscal year 1999 and the Congress appropriated $20.0 million for this purpose. Additionally, the committee notes that the Department has an inventory objective of 196 band 9/10 transmitter/receiver systems but currently plans to procure only 120. The committee understands that the existing band 9 transmitter is based on 1960's technology and that the cost to maintain these systems through 2015 is approximately $25.0 million. Consistent with its previous actions, the committee recommends $206.0 million, an increase of $45.0 million to procure additional band 9/10 transmitter/receivers for the EA- 6B. F-18 series modifications The budget request contained $308.8 million for F-18 series modifications, of which $35.1 million was included for engineering change proposal (ECP)-583 kits to modify four Marine Corps F/A-18A aircraft. The ECP-583 modification kit upgrades the avionics and weapons capability of the F/A-18A to the same capability as the newer F/A-18C. Without this capability, the F/A-18A cannot autonomously deliver precision-guided munitions or employ the AIM-120 Advanced Medium Range Air-to-Air Missile. Despite the fact that the Marine Corps has a requirement to upgrade 76 of its F/A-18As with this modification, the Department only budgeted to upgrade 24 aircraft in its Future Years Defense Program. Since the Commandant of the Marine Corps identified ECP-583 among his highest unfunded priorities for fiscal year 2000, the committee recommends an increase of $63.0 million to procure 14 additional upgrade kits: 7 for the active and 7 for the reserve components. F/A-18E/F The budget request contained $2,692.0 million for 36 F/A- 18E/F aircraft, and $162.2 million for advance procurement of 42 aircraft in fiscal year 2001. The committee notes that the 36 aircraft requested would begin a five-year, 222 aircraft multiyear procurement through fiscal year 2004 which is projected to cost 7.4 percent less than annual procurement of these aircraft. During the past two years, the committee has expressed its concerns with the F/A-18E/F program due to its higher cost for a relatively small capability increase when compared to the existing F/A-18C/D aircraft. As a result of prior year testimony by the Department's Director of Operational Test and Evaluation, the committee has also expressed concern that the final production configuration may not be determined until the completion of the aircraft's operational evaluation in October 1999 and that deficiencies in survivablility and radar jamming systems may not be corrected until after full-rate production begins. However, the committee supports the Navy's requirement to replace its aging fighter attack aircraft fleet and believes that the Department's proposed multiyear procurement should proceed if the aircraft demonstrates that it meets key performance parameters and requirements for effectiveness and suitability upon completion of the operational evaluation and can be procured at the Department's projected 7.4 percent multiyear contract cost savings. Consequently, the committee recommends a provision (Section 121) that would limit the Secretary of the Navy's authority to enter into the multiyear contract until the Secretary of Defense certifies that the results of the aircraft's operational test and evaluation meet both key performance parameters and requirements for operational effectiveness and suitability and that the multiyear procurement contract cost is at least 7.4 percent less than procurement of the same number of aircraft would be through annually funded contracts. Since the committee understands that the five-year multiyear contract award date is scheduled for April 2000, it believes that the Department will be afforded ample time to review and assess the results of the F/A-18E/F's operational evaluation prior to the Secretary's certification to the congressional defense committees. Joint primary air training system (JPATS) The budget request contained $44.8 million for 8 T-6A aircraft and associated ground training systems, and $9.6 million for advance procurement of 24 aircraft in fiscal year 2001. The JPATS, consisting of the T-6A aircraft and a ground- based training system, will be used by both the Navy and Air Force for primary pilot training. The committee notes that the Navy has budgeted $1.0 million for engineering change orders (ECO), but the Air Force included no funds for this purpose. Since the Navy and Air Force T-6A are the same aircraft, the committee does not understand how one service's aircraft requires ECOs and the other's does not. Consequently, the committee recommends $43.8 million, a decrease of $1.0 million. KC-130J The budget request contained $12.3 million for KC-130J support costs, but included no funds for procurement of KC-130J aircraft. The KC-130J is a tactical transport aircraft that also serves as a tanker for both helicopters and tactical fighters. The KC-130J replaces the Marine Corps' existing KC-130F, R, and T model aircraft, providing a 40 percent increase in range, a 25 percent higher cruise ceiling, a 21 percent increase in maximum speed, and a 41 percent decrease in take-off distance over the existing older models. The Marine Corps currently has an inventory of 35 KC-130Fs, 14 KC-130Rs, and 28 KC-130Ts. The KC-130F, which was procured between 1960 and 1962, is the oldest aircraft in the inventory and is approaching the end of its service life. The committee understands that a December 1998 assessment of the KC-130F fleet revealed that, unless procurement of KC-130Js is accelerated or a comprehensive and costly service life extension is undertaken, an inventory shortfall of 15 aircraft may occur as early as 2001. The committee recommended an increase of two KC-130Js in fiscal year 1999 and notes that additional KC-130J aircraft is the Commandant of the Marine Corps' number two unfunded aviation procurement priority for fiscal year 2000. Therefore, consistent with its prior actions and the Commandant's priorities, the committee recommends $264.3 million, an increase of $252.0 million for four KC-130J aircraft. Lightweight environmentally sealed parachute assembly (LESPA) The budget request contained no funds for the LESPA. Due to its longer repack cycle and extended service life, the committee continues to believe that the Navy will realize substantial life cycle cost savings by procuring LESPA, as compared to the use of existing parachutes. Accordingly, the committee strongly supports the LESPA to replace old parachutes in the P-3 and E-2C aircraft. Consistent with its previous actions, the committee recommends $10.0 million to procure additional LESPAs: $5.0 million for the P-3 and $5.0 million for the E-2C. MV-22 The budget request contained $796.4 million to procure 10 MV-22 tiltrotor aircraft and $71.0 million for advance procurement of 16 aircraft in fiscal year 2001. The committee continues to support accelerated MV-22 procurement and endorses the Quadrennial Defense Review's (QDR) recognition of the urgent need to replace the Marine Corps' aging fleet of Vietnam-era CH-46 medium lift helicopters. The committee notes that the procurement of additional MV-22 aircraft in fiscal year 2000 is the Commandant of the Marine Corps' highest unfunded aviation procurement priority. Therefore, consistent with its prior actions, the QDR's findings, and the Commandant's priorities, the committee recommends $856.4 million, an increase of $60.0 million to procure one additional MV-22 aircraft. P-3 series modifications The budget request contained $276.2 million for P-3 series modifications, of which $106.0 million was included for six anti-surface warfare improvement program (AIP) kits. The AIP improves the P-3's communications, survivability, and over-the-horizon targeting capabilities through the installation of commercial-off-the-shelf components. The committee understands that the Navy's operational objective is 56 AIP-configured aircraft by fiscal year 2000 but notes that only 44, including the six requested in fiscal year 2000, have been funded. The committee also notes that the Chief of Naval Operations (CNO) has included additional AIP kits among his highest unfunded priorities for fiscal year 2000. To reduce the Navy's shortfall and in consonance with the CNO's priorities, the committee recommends an increase of $70.0 million for an additional five AIP kits. T-45 training system (TS) The budget request contained $325.5 million for 15 T-45 aircraft and associated ground training systems, and $9.6 million for advance procurement of 15 aircraft in fiscal year 2001. The T-45TS, consisting of the T-45 aircraft and ground- based training, replaces the Navy's TA-4J and T-2C as advanced pilot training aircraft. The committee supports the T-45TS but notes unexplained cost growth for engineering change orders. Consequently, the committee recommends $323.5 million, a decrease of $2.0 million. UC-35 The budget request contained no funds for the UC-35. The UC-35 is a long-range medium-lift operational support aircraft. The committee understands that the Future Years Defense Program includes procurement of three UC-35s in fiscal years 2001 and 2002 to replace older CT-39s. However, the committee further understands that, since submission of the budget request, the need to replace the CT-39 has been accelerated because two of the Marine Corps' CT-39s have been transferred to the Navy for Undergraduate Naval Flight Officer training and the third aircraft is approaching the end of its service life. Since the Commandant of the Marine Corps has included three UC-35s among his unfunded priorities for fiscal year 2000, the committee recommends $18.0 million to procure these aircraft. Weapons Procurement, Navy Overview The budget request contained $1,357.4 million for Weapons Procurement, Navy in fiscal year 2000. The committee recommends authorization of $1,764.7 million for fiscal year 2000. The committee recommends approval of the request except for those programs adjusted in the following table. Unless otherwise specified, adjustments are without prejudice and based on affordability considerations. Items of Special Interest Aerial targets The budget request contained $21.2 million for aerial targets, but included no funds for the BQM-74. The BQM-74 is a practice aerial target designed to replicate anti-ship cruise missiles, and the committee understands that, since entering the Navy's inventory, it has satisfied over 80 percent of missions requiring high-speed aerial targets. While the Department has informed the committee that its inventory objective for BQM-74 targets is 240 at the end of each fiscal year in the Future Years Defense Program, no future BQM-74 targets have been budgeted. The committee is concerned that without BQM-74s, adequate crew training and weapons system tests will not be possible. Therefore, the committee recommends an increase of $25.0 million to procure BQM-74 targets. The committee notes $2.1 million of unexplained government costs for other aerial targets and recommends a decrease of this amount. In total, the committee recommends $44.1 million for aerial targets, an increase of $22.9 million. Evolved seasparrow missile (ESSM) The budget request contained $11.7 million for the ESSM, of which $1.1 million was included for fleet support and integrated logistics support (ILS). The ESSM program is a cooperative effort among 10 North Atlantic Treaty Organization nations to develop and produce an improved version of the Navy's shipboard ``RIM-7P'' surface-to- air missile. The committee notes that production of the missiles for which funds were appropriated in fiscal year 1999 has been delayed due to software problems and further notes that no missiles are planned for production in fiscal year 2000. Consequently, the committee believes that no funds are required for fleet support and ILS and recommends $10.6 million, a decrease of $1.1 million. Hellfire II missile The budget request contained no funds for Hellfire II missiles. The Hellfire II missile is a laser-guided, anti-armor and anti-ship weapon used by the Marine Corps on the AH-1W helicopter and by the Navy on the SH-60B helicopter. The committee notes that, despite additional funding provided by Congress in fiscal year 1998, the Department has still not met its inventory requirement for these missiles. Consequently, the Chief of Naval Operations (CNO) has included procurement of 750 Hellfire II missiles among his unfunded priorities for fiscal year 2000. The committee supports the CNO's request and recommends an increase of $52.0 million to procure 750 Hellfire II missiles. Joint stand-off weapon (JSOW) The Navy budget request contained $154.9 million for 615 JSOWs, and the Air Force budget request contained $80.0 million for 193 JSOWs. The JSOW is an air-to-ground glide weapon that uses the global positioning system and an inertial navigation system for its precision guidance and can be launched outside the range of most target-area surface-to-air threat systems. The committee understands that the JSOW performed flawlessly on its first 17 combat deliveries in the first half of fiscal year 1999 during Operation Southern Watch in Southwest Asia. As a result of its success rate, the committee also understands that current JSOW demand for both the European Operation Allied Force and the Southwest Asian Operation Southern Watch combat operations exceeds supply. Consequently, the committee recommends $229.9 million for the Navy, an increase of $75.0 million for 401 JSOWs, and $115.0 million for the Air Force, an increase of $35.0 million for 207 JSOWs. Rolling airframe missile The budget request contained $45.4 million for 90 rolling airframe missiles (RAM). The RAM is a lightweight ship self- defense system designed to engage anti-ship missiles. The committee notes unexplained cost growth for component improvement, government in-house engineering, and production acceptance. Consequently, the committee recommends $44.4 million, a decrease of $1.0 million. Standard missile The budget request contained $198.9 million for Standard missiles, of which $45.9 million was included for 75 Block IIIB missiles, $43.6 million for 16 Block IVA missiles, and $93.5 million for procurement support costs. The Standard missile is a surface-to-air missile employed on AEGIS cruisers and destroyers. The Block III series missiles have improved homing and guidance mechanisms, while the Block IVA missile is upgraded with a new booster for better range and maneuverability and would add a near-term capability against theater ballistic missiles. Subsequent to submission of the budget request, the committee has learned that technical problems with the development of the Block IVA missile have resulted in testing delays. The committee understands that, as a result of these delays, development and operational evaluation of the Block IVA will not be complete until early in fiscal year 2001. Since procurement of the Block IVA missile will not occur before fiscal year 2001, the committee recommends no funds for this program, a decrease of $43.6 million. Elsewhere in this report, the committee recommends an increase for Block IVA missile engineering and manufacturing development. The committee notes, however, that the Chief of Naval Operations has included additional Block IIIB missiles among his unfunded priorities for fiscal year 2000. Accordingly, the committee recommends an increase of $19.0 million for 27 additional Block IIIB missiles. The committee also notes a 39 percent increase in procurement support costs from fiscal year 1999 appropriated levels, despite the fact that the total number of missiles to be procured decreases. Therefore, the committee recommends a reduction of $14.4 million. In total, the committee recommends a decrease of $39.0 million for the Standard missile. Tomahawk missiles The budget request contained $50.9 million for the remanufacture of 148 Block II Tomahawk land attack missiles (TLAM) to the Block III configuration, but included no funds to remanufacture Tomahawk anti-ship missiles (TASM) to the TLAM Block III configuration or to re-start TLAM Block III missile production. The Tomahawk missile is a long range, precision strike cruise missile launched from surface ships or submarines and is produced in both TASM or TLAM versions for conventional warfare. The TLAM Block III, the most current and the most sought-after version by theater commanders-in-chief, has increased range and accuracy and involves decreased planning time compared to the earlier TLAM block II configuration. In the first half of fiscal year 1999, over 500 TLAMs have been expended in Southwest Asia and European combat operations, substantially reducing the TLAM inventory below required levels. As a result of the TLAM shortage, the Department requested $421.2 million in fiscal year 1999 emergency supplemental appropriations for the remanufacture of 424 Block II TLAMs and 200 TASMs to the Block III configuration. Despite this increase, the committee has learned that Tomahawk inventory requirements will still not be met in the Future Years Defense Program. Consequently, the committee recommends $350.9 million, an increase of $300.0 million. Of this amount, $260.8 million is for the remanufacture of 326 TASMs to the TLAM Block III configuration, $40.0 million is for non-recurring costs to re- start the TLAM Block III production line, and $50.1 million is for the procurement of new production TLAM Block III missiles. Ammunition Procurement, Navy/Marine Corps Overview The budget request contained $484.9 million for Ammunition Procurement, Navy/Marine Corps in fiscal year 2000. The committee recommends authorization of $612.9 million for fiscal year 2000. The committee recommends approval of the request except for those programs adjusted in the following table. Unless otherwise specified, adjustments are without prejudice and based on affordability considerations. Items of Special Interest Navy ammunition The budget request contained $328.7 million for procurement of ammunition. The committee recommends $381.7 million, an increase of $53.0 million to procure additional Joint Direct Attack Munitions which were among the top unfunded priorities of the Chief of Naval Operations for fiscal year 2000: [In millions of dollars] JDAM.............................................................. 48.0 MJU-52 BOL IR..................................................... 5.0 Marine Corps ammunition The budget request contained $156.2 million for procurement of ammunition. The committee recommends $231.2 million, an increase of $75.0 million for the following types of ammunition, which are among the top unfunded priorities of the Commandant of the Marine Corps for fiscal year 2000: [In millions of dollars] 5.56mm, all types................................................. 9.0 7.62mm, all types................................................. 5.0 Linear charges, all types......................................... 10.0 .50 Caliber....................................................... 4.0 40mm, all types................................................... 1.3 60mm, all types................................................... 4.0 CTG 25mm, all types............................................... 8.2 Rocket, 83mm Dual Mode HE......................................... 14.0 Artillery, all types.............................................. 8.0 Fuze, Hand Grenade, practice...................................... 3.0 Charge, Demolition Assembly....................................... 7.2 Items less than $5.0 million...................................... 1.3 Shipbuilding and Conversion, Navy Overview The budget request contained $6,678.5 million for Shipbuilding and Conversion, Navy in fiscal year 2000. The committee recommends authorization of $6,687.2 million for fiscal year 2000. The committee recommends approval of the request except for those programs adjusted in the following table. Unless otherwise specified, adjustments are without prejudice and based on affordability considerations. Items of Special Interest Attack submarine force level Although a baseline force of 50 nuclear powered attack submarines (SSNs) was established in the 1997 Quadrennial Defense Review, Department of the Navy witnesses testified in 1998 that theater Commanders-in-Chief (CINC) requirements for SSNs, including aircraft carrier battlegroup deployments, Arctic operations, special forces missions, and independent presence missions dictate a force of 72 SSNs. Near term fiscal constraints make such a force unaffordable. Early in the next century, LOS ANGELES Class SSNs, procured at relatively high rates of two to four boats per year during the 1980s, will reach the end of their service lives and begin to leave the fleet in large numbers. The low SSN procurement rate between 1990 and 2005, if not redressed, will drive the SSN force level below 50 boats. Moreover, by 2015 significant military challenges from modernized military forces and the proliferation of advanced military weapons could confront our armed forces. This situation may require a Navy that has a larger SSN force. The committee is concerned that potential future threats to U.S. national security interests warrant the establishment of an absolute minimum SSN force level of 50 boats and believes the SSN procurement rates in the Future Years Defense Program must be increased and maintained at a rate to ensure that this minimum force level is sustained. LHD-8 amphibious assault ship The budget request contained no funds for procurement of a Wasp-class (LHD) amphibious assault ship. The committee understands that the Navy intends to procure the LHD-8 amphibious assault ship in fiscal year 2005 but has yet to decide whether or not to conduct a service life extension program (SLEP) to the older Tarawa-class (LHA) amphibious assault ships in the fleet. Should the Navy choose to SLEP the LHA ships, it could cost almost $1.0 billion per ship and add only 15 years to the service life of each ship. An alternative to the LHA SLEP may be the new construction of LHD- class amphibious assault ships. The LHD is larger than the LHA and in most respects provides more capability. The committee understands that, with some modifications, the LHD could meet or exceed the capabilities of the LHA in all regards. The committee believes that avoiding a break in the production of LHD-class ships preserves the option of procuring these vessels as an alternative to an LHD SLEP until the Navy determines which option is more cost-effective. Therefore, to preserve this option, the committee recommends an additional $15.0 million for advance procurement of long lead materials for the construction of LHD-8. Strategic sealift The budget request contained no funds for the acquisition of new sealift ships in the National Defense Sealift Fund. The committee is concerned that the Maritime Prepositioning Force (Enhanced) MPF(E) conversion program that was intended to provide the Marine Corps with three additional prepositioning ships by purchasing and converting used foreign vessels has proven to be more costly than originally envisioned. Since there are insufficient funds to complete all of the planned conversions and the Marine Corps prepositioning requirement has not been reduced, the committee continues to believe that the most sensible way to address the shortfall is to convert a Large Medium Speed Roll-on/Roll-off (LMSR) vessel to the Marine Corps-required configuration. Accordingly, the committee recommends an increase of $80.0 million in the National Defense Sealift Fund: $50.0 million for the advance procurement of long lead components for the construction of an additional LMSR and $30.0 million for modification of an existing LMSR for the Marine Corps mission. Other Procurement, Navy Overview The budget request contained $4,100.1 million for Other Procurement, Navy in fiscal year 2000. The committee recommends authorization of $4,260.4 million for fiscal year 2000. The committee recommends approval of the request except for those programs adjusted in the following table. Unless otherwise specified, adjustments are without prejudice and based on affordability considerations. Items of Special Interest AN/BPS-16 submarine navigation radar upgrade The budget request contained no funds for upgrading the AN/ BPS-16 submarine navigation radar to make it compliant with the Navy's electronic chart display information systems (ECDIS-N). ECDIS-N compliance will eliminate the requirement for paper navigational charts on submarines by upgrading radar navigation systems with computer-based charts designed to international commercial standards. The committee added $9.0 million in fiscal year 1999 to upgrade AN/BPS-15(H) submarine radar systems to the ECDIS-N standard. The committee continues to support the ECDIS-N compliance and recommends an increase of $8.0 million to provide for the procurement and installation of nine ship sets of equipment to upgrade the AN/BPS-16 submarine navigation radar. AN/SPS-73 (V) surface search radar The budget request contained $1.1 million for the procurement and installation of AN/SPS-73 (V) surface search radars. The committee understands that the Navy currently operates several different surface search radar variants as well as commercial navigational radars and plans to replace these systems with the AN/SPS-73 (V) surface search radar, a commercial-off-the-shelf (COTS) system, in order to improve performance and standardize logistics and maintenance requirements. The committee supports the accelerated adoption of a standard COTS surface search radar and believes it can be expected to greatly reduce total ownership costs to the Navy. Therefore, the committee recommends $15.1 million, an increase of $14.0 million for necessary non-recurring combat systems integration costs and to procure and install additional AN/SPS-73 (V) surface search radars. AN/USC-42 mini-demand assigned multiple access (DAMA) ultra-high frequency (UHF) satellite communications (SATCOM) terminals The budget request contained $237.7 million for SATCOM ship terminals, but included no funds for AN/USC-42 mini-DAMA UHF SATCOM terminals. The AN/USC-42 mini-DAMA terminal is a commercial-off-the- shelf variant of the shipboard DAMA transceiver miniaturized for submarine application. It provides two-way satellite encrypted voice and data communications in a much smaller package than other DAMA and non-DAMA terminals. The committee understands that DAMA terminals may provide up to four times more UHF satellite channel capacity than conventional terminals through multiplexing, thereby providing increased utilization of existing satellite channels and reducing the requirement for additional satellites. The committee further understands that the Navy plans no additional procurement of AN/USC-42 mini-DAMA UHF SATCOM terminals even though there remains a shortfall of these units. Therefore, the committee recommends $247.7 million, an increase of $10.0 million to procure additional mini-DAMA UHF SATCOM terminals and associated spares. Computer aided submode training (CAST) lesson authoring system (CLASS) The budget request contained $86.7 million for AEGIS support equipment, but included no funds for CLASS to be expanded to ships or systems other than AN/UYQ-70-equipped AEGIS destroyers. CLASS is a commercial-off-the-shelf training system that operates with the Navy's existing CAST system, but adds multi- media capabilities such as video, audio, three-dimensional graphics, animation, and interactive simulations. The committee understands that the CLASS is being installed on AN/UYQ-70- equipped AEGIS destroyers, but the Navy does not plan to backfit this system on other AEGIS-equipped platforms or to expand it to other systems. The committee supports the incorporation of effective commercial training technologies into Navy warships and believes that the CLASS can provide flexible low-cost training capabilities to all AEGIS class ships. Accordingly, the committee recommends $94.7 million for AEGIS support equipment, an increase of $8.0 million for the purpose of backfitting CLASS on non-AN/UYQ-70-equipped AEGIS cruisers and destroyers and to expand this technology to other systems such as cooperative engagement capability, joint maritime command information system, and global command and control system. Firefighting equipment The budget request contained $17.0 million for fire fighting equipment, of which $12.0 million was included for the procurement and installation of the Fire Fighters Breathers Apparatus (FFBA). The FFBA is a self-contained, compressed air breathing device that is compatible with fire fighter protective wear, helmet and other damage control equipment. The committee understands that it is a safer system that provides breathable air to the fire fighter for a longer period of time than the current, less capable oxygen breathing apparatus (OBA). Accordingly, the committee recommends $32.0 million, an increase of $15.0 million to accelerate the replacement of existing OBA systems with the FFBA. Joint engineering data management and information control system (JEDMICS) The budget request contained no funds for JEDMICS, a Department of Defense-wide repository for engineering drawings and related text. The committee believes that the transfer of unclassified sensitive information contained in the JEDMICS database via the Internet may lead to unacceptable national security risks and is aware that, in order to provide better security for the system, the program office has identified DiamondTEK, a commercial-off-the-shelf network security product as the solution to the problem. The committee fully supports the integration of DiamondTEK technology into JEDMICS and recommends an increase of $12.0 million for this purpose. Minesweeping equipment The budget request contained $16.3 million for minesweeping equipment, of which $900 thousand was included for procurement of the versatile mine exercise system (VEMS). The budget request included no funds for procurement of the Dyad mine countermeasures system. The VEMS is a simulation system that provides realistic training for fleet and mine countermeasures forces. The system also aids in evaluating the effectiveness of mine warfare tactics and provides a quantitative assessment of equipment and ship vulnerability. The committee understands that the Navy has not met its inventory objective for the VEMS. The Dyad mine countermeasures system is an influence minesweeping system towed behind a small craft that can mimic the magnetic and acoustic signature of a larger vessel to clear a path through a minefield for that vessel. The committee understands that the Navy evaluated this system in 1996 and favorably reported its potential for port breakout minesweeping missions. Accordingly, the committee recommends $24.9 million for minesweeping equipment, an increase of $4.1 million to procure additional VEMS and an increase of $4.5 million to procure Dyad countermeasures systems. Mobile remote emitter simulator (MRES) The budget request contained $12.2 million for weapons range support but included no funds to procure MRES systems. The MRES is a ground-based, high-power electronic warfare threat simulator that is capable of tracking fast-moving tactical aircraft, surface ships and other signal collection platforms. The committee believes that the Navy currently operates outdated electronic simulators that are incapable of tracking fast-moving tactical aircraft and do not provide high fidelity threat representations so critical for realistic training. Therefore, to improve the quality and availability of electronic warfare threat training, the committee recommends $20.2 million, an increase of $8.0 million to procure and install one MRES system. Other training equipment The budget request contained $44.2 million for other training equipment, of which $27.9 million was included to procure Battle Force Tactical Training (BFTT) equipment. The BFTT system allows surface combatants, submarines and aircraft carriers to conduct realistic, coordinated training scenarios using ownship equipment instead of shore-based training simulators. The committee understands that while BFTT is a valuable training system, it currently lacks an Air Traffic Control (ATC) training capability for aircraft carriers and a complete BFTT Electronic Warfare Trainer (BEWT) interface. Therefore, in order to improve the utility of the BFTT system and to provide realistic low-cost ATC and electronic warfare training, the committee recommends $56.2 million, an increase of $12.0 million: $7.0 million for the procurement and installation of 12 ATC trainers and $5.0 million to complete the procurement of 30 BEWT systems. Shipboard display emulator (SDE) equipment The budget request contained no funds for SDE equipment for Perry and Spruance class surface combatants and older AEGIS class ships not equipped with the Vertical Launching System. The committee understands that older surface combatants use obsolete display systems that are no longer in production and are increasingly more difficult to maintain due to the scarcity of repair parts. Consequently, the committee believes that these ships, which constitute over one quarter of the Navy's surface combatant force and are expected to remain in active service for several years, should be upgraded with modern, supportable display systems. Therefore, the committee recommends an increase of $10.0 million to procure and install modern state-of-the-art SDE equipment in older surface combatants. Sonobuoys The budget request contained $48.0 million for the procurement of sonobuoys, including the AN/SSQ-36, AN/SSQ-53E, AN/SSQ-57, AN/SSQ-62E, AN/SSQ-101, and Signal Underwater Sound buoys. The committee notes that the Navy's peacetime annual requirement for sonobuoys is approximately 100,000 units, but that the budget request only funds approximately 50,000 sonobuoys of all types. Despite the end of the Cold War, anti- submarine warfare remains a primary mission of the Navy that requires coordinated realistic training of air, surface, and submarine units. Such training necessarily consumes large numbers of sonobuoys, and the Navy's procurement rate fails to meet the annual peacetime requirements. Accordingly, the committee recommends an increase of $20.0 million to address this shortfall, to be distributed as follows: $12.8 million for AN/SSQ-53E, $6.0 million for AN/SSQ- 62E, and $1.2 million for AN/SSQ-101. Surface sonar support equipment The budget request contained no funds for surface sonar support equipment. The committee understands that the Navy has developed a new material and production process for surface ship sonar dome windows and that initial testing on FFG-7 frigate keel sonar domes has thus far validated the expected performance improvements. While the FFG-7 application is useful, the majority of Navy surface ships that are equipped with hull mounted sonars, including DDG-51 and DD-963 class destroyers, and CG-47 class cruisers, have bow-mounted sonar domes which require more complex sonar dome windows. The committee further understands that efforts are underway to fabricate a dome made from the new material for installation on a DDG-51 destroyer and recommends an increase of $5.0 million to refine manufacturing processes and reduce production costs of the new sonar dome. WSN-7B ring laser gyro (RLG) and WQN-2 doppler sonar velocity log (DSVL) The budget request contained $67.5 million for navigation equipment, of which $40.4 million was included for the procurement of 43 WSN-7 RLGs, but included no funds for the procurement of WQN-2 DSVLs. The WSN-7 RLG is the common RLG ship navigation system for surface ships and submarines. The WQN-2 has been designated by the Navy as the fleet standard speed log to replace obsolete and maintenance intensive electro-magnetic speed logs currently in service throughout the fleet. The committee added $18.0 million in fiscal year 1999 to accelerate introduction of these systems into the fleet in order to reduce the life cycle costs of ship navigational systems and continues to strongly support an accelerated program. The committee recommends an increase of $12.0 million for the procurement and installation of 30 additional WSN-7B RLGs to significantly accelerate the replacement of maintenance intensive WSN-2 ship conventional gyro navigation systems in surface ships. The committee also recommends an increase of $10.0 million for the procurement and installation of 30 additional WQN-2 DSVLs to upgrade ship speed logs concurrent with navigation system upgrades. Undersea warfare support equipment The budget request contained $2.6 million for undersea warfare support equipment, of which $1.2 million was included for procurement of 55 Launched Expendable Acoustic Devices (LEADs). The committee is concerned that the Navy has not widely fielded effective countermeasures against submarine launched torpedoes but notes that the LEAD was approved for full production in May 1998. To address this concern the committee recommends $11.2 million, an increase of $8.6 million for procurement of 300 LEADs and two SSTD test beds for large deck ships in order to widely disseminate throughout the fleet a capable defense against torpedoes. Procurement, Marine Corps Overview The budget request contained $1,137.2 million for Procurement, Marine Corps in fiscal year 2000. The committee recommends authorization of $1,297.5 million for fiscal year 2000. The committee recommends approval of the request except for those programs adjusted in the following table. Unless otherwise specified, adjustments are without prejudice and based on affordability considerations. Items of Special Interest 155 millimeter (mm) lightweight towed howitzer The budget request did not contain funds to procure the 155mm lightweight towed howitzer. The committee notes that, as a result of production delays, the 155mm lightweight towed howitzer program was restructured and a new prime contractor was selected. Since this restructuring, program performance has improved dramatically with engineering, testing and schedule milestones being met successfully. While litigation pursued by an arsenal union/ industry team against the Army regarding the original 155mm lightweight towed howitzer contract award is unfortunate and a cause for concern, the committee believes it should not be allowed to interfere with other business opportunities for the arsenal. The committee also believes that arsenals possess valuable capabilities that are underutilized, especially in the areas of recoil mechanisms, carriages and gun barrels. The committee further believes that given the opportunity, arsenals could contribute to improved quality and reduced costs for these and other components being subcontracted for the restructured 155mm lightweight howitzer program. Accordingly, the committee expects the Army to establish a process by which arsenals shall be afforded an opportunity to submit challenge proposals for appropriate artillery and tank system components to be considered for incorporation into these weapons systems. Body armor The budget request contained no funds in Procurement, Marine Corps for body armor. In previous years, the committee noted the effectiveness of the all-torso body armor used during Operation Provide Hope in Mogadishu, Somalia, and that subsequent analyses have indicated that more than 50 percent of all life-threatening wounds received in combat could be prevented by using this armor. The committee continues to believe that the costs of procuring and fielding this type of armor far outweigh the medical expenses and loss of human life that would be avoided by its employment. Therefore, the committee recommends an increase of $5.0 million, for the procurement of all-torso body armor. Communications and electronic infrastructure support The budget request contained $81.8 million for communications and electronic infrastructure support equipment, of which $43.0 million was included for the upgrades to and fielding of base telecommunications upgrades. For each of the last three years, the Commandant of the Marine Corps has designated base telecommunications upgrades to the Marine Corps Enterprise Network as his number one non- aviation unfunded priority. Consistent with its past actions to support the Marine Corps' demands for transfer of all types of data among its bases, the committee recommends $131.8 million, an increase of $20.0 million for telecommunications infrastructure upgrades at Marine Corps Base Camp Pendleton, $5.0 million for upgrades at Marine Corps Mountain Warfare Training Center Bridgeport, and $25.0 million for upgrades at Marine Corps Air Station Miramar. Marine Corps air ground task force (MAGTF) command, control, communications, computers, and intelligence (C4I) modification kits The budget request contained $13.8 million for modifications to previously fielded MAGTF C4I equipment, of which $5.0 million was included to procure product improvements for the mobile electronic warfare support system (MEWSS). The MEWSS is an electronic warfare equipment suite included in a variant of the Light Armored Vehicle (LAV). The MEWSS product improvement program (PIP) replaces obsolete components with upgrades that can detect, locate, and demodulate advanced adversary communications. The committee notes that the Army and the Marine Corps were working together to field a joint, seamless ground signals intelligence collection capability. The MEWSS PIP was the Marine Corps' system, and the ground based common sensor (GBCS) was the Army's. However, the Army terminated its portion of the program in fiscal year 1998. This action directly impacted the MEWSS PIP, resulting in increased costs and delayed fielding. The committee understands that the Army has decided to lessen the impact of the GBCS termination on the MEWSS by providing GBCS residual equipment to the Marine Corps. However, modifications to this equipment will be required in order to retrofit it into the MEWSS LAV and the Marine Corps did not budget for these. Therefore, the committee recommends $18.8 million for MAGTF C4I modification kits, an increase of $5.0 million to modify GBCS sensor systems into the MEWSS LAV. Material handling equipment The budget request contained $50.0 million for the procurement of various types of material handling equipment, but included no funds for the remanufacture of D7G bulldozers. The D7G bulldozer is used throughout Marine Corps combat engineer and support units to build airfields, as well as for combat clearing and debris excavation. The committee notes that the service's bulldozer fleet is 14 years old and rapidly deteriorating. The committee also notes that the D7G remanufacturing program is one of the Commandant of the Marine Corps' fiscal year 2000 unfunded priorities and that this program will extend the life of 200 bulldozers for an additional 10 years. Accordingly, the committee recommends $66.5 million, an increase of $16.5 million for D7G bulldozer remanufacturing. Modification kits (tracked vehicles) The budget request contained $22.9 for the procurement of various modifications to tracked vehicles, but included no funds for upgrading M88A1 recovery vehicles to the more capable M88A2 Hercules Improved Recovery Vehicle (IRV) variant. The 56-ton M88A1 is capable of towing only vehicles weighing less than 60 tons. Consequently, two M88A1s are required to safely tow an Abrams tank if it is rendered immobile due to combat damage or mechanical failure. The A2 upgrade includes increased engine horsepower, as well as braking, steering, winch, lift, and suspension capabilities required to safely recover Abrams tanks and other heavy combat systems. The committee has recommended an increase for Army IRV upgrades elsewhere in this report, and based on the critical role that this vehicle will fulfill in future expeditionary operations and warfare, the committee also recommends $72.3 million, an increase of $49.4 million for 24 M88A2 IRV upgrades for the Marine Corps. Night vision equipment The budget request contained $9.0 million for the procurement of night vision equipment, of which $3.2 million was included for the procurement of generation III 25 millimeter (mm) image intensification tubes, but no funds were included to procure AN/PEQ-2 laser Target/Illuminator/Aiming Light (TPIAL). The committee is aware of the joint Army/Navy/Marine Corps program to procure generation III 25mm image intensification tubes as replacements for less capable generation II tubes fielded in the AN/PVS-4 and AN/TVS-5 night vision goggles and notes that the generation III tubes provide a minimum 25 percent resolution increase. The AN/PEQ-2 TPIAL is a dual laser, consisting of highly collimated infrared aiming light and infrared target illuminator, which are visible only through night vision goggles. These lasers can either be operated independently or in combination. The committee notes that both generation III 25mm image intensification tubes and AN/PEQ-2 laser TPIALs are top unfunded priorities of the Commandant of Marine Corps in fiscal year 2000. Based on the enhanced operational capability that night vision devices provide to combat forces and the committee's belief that these devices will provide a pivotal ``force multiplier'' in future Marine Corps expeditionary operations and warfare, the committee recommends $17.5 million, an increase of $3.5 million for generation III 25mm image intensification tubes and an increase of $5.0 million for AN/ PEQ-2 laser TPIALs. Aircraft Procurement, Air Force Overview The budget request contained $9,302.1 million for Aircraft Procurement, Air Force in fiscal year 2000. The committee recommends authorization of $9,647.7 million for fiscal year 2000. The committee recommends approval of the request except for those programs adjusted in the following table. Unless otherwise specified, adjustments are without prejudice and based on affordability considerations. Items of Special Interest Bomber modernization The committee report on H.R. 3616 (H. Rept. 105-532) required the Secretary of the Air Force to submit a bomber modernization plan that identified upgrades required for the current bomber fleet, a funding profile for these upgrades, and a timeline for consideration of the acquisition of a follow-on bomber. The plan submitted by the Secretary would sustain the current bomber force structure, consisting of B-2, B-1, and B- 52 bombers, through 2037 and would delay any planning for procurement of a new bomber until 2013. The committee considers this planned force structure is unacceptable. Consistent with the March 1998 conclusions of the Congressionally-directed Long Range Air Power Panel, the committee continues to believe that a replacement bomber will be required much sooner than predicted in Air Force bomber roadmap. The committee notes that by 2037, on average, B-2 bombers will have been in service over 40 years, the B-1 over 50 years, and the B-52 nearly 80 years, with a fleet average of over 60 years. Therefore, the committee directs the Secretary of the Air Force to provide to the House Committee on Armed Services and Senate Committee on Armed Services by February 15, 2000, a conceptual study of a next generation bomber, including cost estimates, to be deployed by approximately 2015. C-17 The budget request contained $3,080.1 million to procure 15 C-17 aircraft and $304.9 million for advance procurement of 15 aircraft in fiscal year 2001. The budget request did not include advance procurement funds for a maintenance training system (MTS) for the Air National Guard. The C-17 MTS is designed to qualify personnel to maintain the C-17 aircraft. The committee understands that the Air National Guard unit that will receive C-17 aircraft in fiscal year 2003 requires an MTS for initial qualification of its maintenance personnel prior to the arrival of the aircraft. Accordingly, the committee recommends $3,083.6 million, an increase of $3.5 million for advance procurement of an Air National Guard MTS. C-17A aircraft modifications The budget request contained $95.6 million for C-17A aircraft modifications, of which $11.9 million was included for the electronic flight control system (EFCS) modification. The EFCS modification updates the C-17A's flight control computers with increased memory and allows for future system expansion. The committee supports the EFCS upgrade but notes unexplained equipment cost growth for this modification. Consequently, the committee recommends $93.5 million for C- 17 modifications, a decrease of $2.1 million for the EFCS modification. C-130J The committee notes that the Marine Corps has a clear requirement for 51 KC-130J aircraft to replace existing KC- 130F/Rs, many of which are already almost 40 years old. In addition, the Air Force has reported a requirement for 150 C- 130J-30s to replace C-130Es delivered in the early 1960s. None, however, were included in the budget request, and the Air Force currently plans to delay procurement until fiscal year 2002. An aircraft production line cannot be simply turned off and on without major disruption to the total supplier network across the country and the loss of skilled employees it represents. Such a shutdown and restart of the C-130J production is estimated to cost $500.0 million. The committee encourages the Department of Defense to include the necessary funds in the President's fiscal year 2001 budget request for the procurement of both Marine Corps KC- 130Js and Air Force C-130J-30s, in order to meet the requirement without the adverse disruption resulting from the shutdown and restart of the production line. C-135 modifications The budget request contained $347.1 million for C-135 modifications, of which $170.7 million was included for the compass, radar, and global positioning system modification known as PACER CRAG, but included no funds for reengining older model KC-135E tanker aircraft. The committee has long been a strong supporter of the KC- 135 reengining program and notes that 414 KC-135A/Q/E model tankers have been funded to date. The committee also notes its past disagreement with the Department's decision to cancel the KC-135E reengining modification and has added additional funding for such purpose in each of the last several years. Consistent with its past actions, the committee recommends an increase of $52.0 million for two KC-135E reengining kits. The committee also notes excessive cost growth in PACER CRAG installation equipment when compared to prior years. Consequently, the committee recommends a decrease of $2.1 million for the PACER CRAG modification. In total, the committee recommends an increase of $49.9 million for these C-135 modifications. Defense airborne reconnaissance program (DARP) The budget request contained $138.4 million for various RC- 135 and U-2 aircraft modifications, but included no funds for RC-135 Rivet Joint (RJ) quick reaction capabilities (QRCs) or an upgraded U-2 common data link (CDL). The RC-135 RJ is a tactical reconnaissance aircraft that provides real-time intelligence to combat forces. The QRCs consist of new software and hardware processing modifications that allow the aircraft and its crews to exploit new adversary systems. Since the Air Force Chief of Staff included additional funding for these QRCs among his unfunded priorities for fiscal year 2000, the committee recommends $13.4 million for these modifications. The U-2 is a high altitude reconnaissance aircraft, and the CDL is its data link to ground stations. The committee understands that the U-2's current CDL, designed over 20 years ago, has limited jam resistance and is increasingly costly to operate and maintain. The committee also understands that an upgraded CDL improves jam resistance, is less costly to operate and maintain, provides enhanced throughput capacity, and is compatible with the Department's existing information architecture. Therefore, the committee recommends an increase of $5.0 million to upgrade the U-2's CDL. In total, the committee recommends $178.1 million for DARP, an increase of $39.7 million. Explanations for other increases are addressed in the classified annex to this report. E-8C joint surveillance and target attack radar system (STARS) The budget request contained $280.3 million to procure one E-8C Joint STARS aircraft, but included no funds for advance procurement to continue its production. The Department's Quadrennial Defense Review (QDR) recommended reducing the number of Joint STARS aircraft to be procured from 19 to 13 based on the assumption that the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) would select and purchase six Joint STARS to meet its requirements for Alliance Ground Surveillance (AGS) aircraft. Despite NATO's rejection of the Joint STARS as its AGS aircraft in 1998, the Department did not change its recommendation nor budget for more than 13 Joint STARS aircraft in its fiscal year 1999 budget request. Accordingly, the committee recommended $72.0 million in fiscal year 1999 for advance procurement of two aircraft, and the Congress appropriated $36.0 million for one aircraft. While the committee is encouraged that the Department has funded the 14th Joint STARS aircraft in its budget request, the committee remains concerned that, despite the Joint Requirements Oversight Council-validated requirement for 19 aircraft, the Department once again intends to shut down the E- 8C production line after this aircraft is produced. These ``low-density, high demand'' aircraft are among the most sought-after assets by the regional commanders-in-chief for a range of reconnaissance and surveillance operations. Therefore, the committee recommends $326.3 million, an increase of $46.0 million for advance procurement of one additional E-8C Joint STARS aircraft in fiscal year 2001. F-15 modifications The budget request contained $263.5 million for F-15 modifications, of which $17.6 million was included for 10 modification kits that convert the F100 engine to the F100-220E configuration. However, no funds were included for conversion of the Air National Guard's (ANG) F-15A and F-15B aircraft engines to the F100-220E configuration. Conversion kits for the F100 engine, also known as ``E- kits'', will provide increased thrust, greater reliability, reduced maintenance requirements, and better fuel efficiency. The committee understands that, without the E-kit modification, the ANG's F-15A/B fleet will be increasingly costly to operate and maintain, less safe, and have diminished availability to respond to contingency operations. Consequently, the committee recommends $313.5 million for F-15 modifications, an increase of $50.0 million for upgrading for the ANG's F-15A/B aircraft with E-kits. F-16C The budget request contained $252.6 million for 10 F-16C aircraft, of which $5.0 million was included for engineering change orders (ECOs). The F-16C is the Air Force's primary multi-mission fighter aircraft. The committee notes that F-16Cs have been delivered to the Air Force since fiscal year 1992 and believes that ECOs to the aircraft should be minimal at this point in the production cycle. Consequently, the committee recommends $250.1 million, a decrease of $2.5 million. F-16 improved avionics intermediate shop (IAIS) The budget request contained $30.0 million for F-16 post production support, of which $10.0 million was included for two IAIS systems. The F-16 IAIS is a mobile test station used to diagnose and repair F-16 avionics problems at deployed locations. Because the F-16 IAIS uses fewer people and requires less cargo space for transit than the existing avionics intermediate shop, F-16 units have reported a savings of greater than $450 thousand per deployment. The committee understands that 55 F-16 IAISs are required, but notes that only 44 have been, or are planned to be, procured in the Future Years Defense Program. Consequently, the committee recommends $50.0 million, an increase of $20.0 million for four F-16 IAIS systems-two for active units, and one each for Air National Guard and Air Force Reserve units. F-16 modifications The budget request contained $249.5 million for various F- 16 modifications, including $50.0 million to procure 32 LITENING II precision attack targeting systems (PATS). However, the request included no funds for long range fuel tanks or for the Digital Terrain System (DTS) upgrade. The committee understands that Air National Guard (ANG) F- 16 units are currently restricted from participation in combat operations because of their limited capability to perform precision strikes. The committee further understands that, due to this situation, the ANG Chief has designated procurement of additional LITENING II PATS as his number one unfunded priority for fiscal year 2000. This system, which consists of a third- generation forward-looking infrared and a laser spot tracker, will allow older ANG F-16s to participate in future Air Expeditionary Force deployments in support of theater commanders-in-chief precision strike taskings. The committee believes the integration of ANG F-16s into precision strike operations is essential to the Total Force concept and, therefore, recommends $80.0 million for LITENING II PATS, an increase of $30.0 million to procure 18 additional systems. The committee notes that the Congress provided $4.0 million in fiscal year 1999 for continued procurement of 600 gallon fuel tanks for the F-16. The committee believes that additional tanks are required to support testing with different aircraft configurations and, therefore, recommends an increase of $4.0 million for this purpose. The DTS is designed to reduce controlled flight into terrain mishaps by providing F-16 pilots with a precise navigation and a ground collision avoidance capability. The committee has strongly supported the DTS upgrade in previous fiscal years. The committee is aware that the Air Force has a firm requirement for the DTS and is in the process of modifying the F-16's operational flight program to accommodate DTS integration. However, the committee understands that no funds are budgeted to continue this upgrade until fiscal year 2001. Consistent with its earlier recommendations and Air Force requirements, the committee recommends an increase of $20.0 million to accelerate fielding of the DTS upgrade. The committee supports all the modifications for which funds were requested but notes unexplained cost growth in the following projects: F110 digital engine control; global positioning system; mission computer kits; and engineering change orders. Consequently, the committee recommends a decrease of $7.1 million for these projects. In total, the committee recommends $296.4 million for F-16 modifications, an increase of $46.9 million. F-22 The budget request contained $1,575.0 million for 6 F-22 aircraft and $277.1 million for advance procurement of 10 aircraft in fiscal year 2001. The budget request also contained $1,222.2 million in PE 0604239F for F-22 engineering and manufacturing development (EMD). The F-22, the Air Force's next-generation air superiority fighter aircraft, is currently approximately 80 percent complete in the EMD phase of acquisition and low rate initial production is planned to begin in fiscal year 2000. The National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 1998 (P.L. 105-85) established a cost limitation for both the EMD and procurement phases of the program, which are $18.9 billion for EMD and $43.4 billion for procurement. Over the past year, the committee has learned that potential EMD costs could exceed the cost limitation by $667.0 million. To retain EMD costs within the cost ceiling, the Air Force has identified proposed actions to offset this amount, which included the depletion of the contractor's management reserve, deferral of external combat stores certification until after the F-22 EMD program is complete and reductions to test and laboratory infrastructure. The committee also notes that the Department's fiscal year 2000 request for six F-22s has increased by $312.7 million, or 25 percent, compared to its forecast cost submitted with the fiscal year 1999 budget request. The committee understands that the Department based its fiscal year 1999 forecast on a cost model estimate but the fiscal year 2000 budget request reflects negotiated values and actual contractor costs. As a result of this increase, the committee also understands that costs for aircraft to be procured beyond fiscal year 2000 have been planned to cost less so that the Department can procure the planned number of aircraft within the cost limitation. While the committee continues to support the F-22 aircraft, it is disturbed by continuing EMD cost growth; the prospect that EMD actions being eliminated or deferred will result in higher future costs, increased program risk, or both; and by unforeseen increases in procurement costs. Since future budget requests for research and development are projected to decrease and for procurement are likely to rise only modestly, the committee is concerned that future F-22 EMD and procurement cost increases could impact other programs, may require a reduction to the number of F-22s procured, or eliminate some of the aircraft's intended capabilities to remain within cost limits. Thus, the committee questions whether the present F-22 EMD and procurement programs can be completed as planned within projected budgets and limitations. Accordingly, the committee directs the Secretary of the Air Force to provide a report to the congressional defense committees by February 1, 2000, that certifies that F-22 EMD and production can remain within the cost limits and that testing of the aircraft will be performed in accordance with test plans that were in place when the cost limits were established. If the Secretary is unable to make such certification, he shall inform the committees of the reasons therefor and present a revised plan, including new cost estimates, for the acquisition of this aircraft. Predator unmanned aerial vehicle The budget request contained $38.0 million for three Predator unmanned aerial vehicles (UAV) and one ground control station (GCS). The committee notes that the Predator has been flying support missions in Bosnia, and now Kosovo, for over three and one-half years, logging more than 11,000 total flight hours. Because of its importance to theater commanders' intelligence needs, a solid production base for this system must be continued, attrition reserve vehicles must be maintained, and improvements must be made to fully exploit the potential of this system. For example, the committee believes the laser designator upgrades now being integrated into the aircraft for immediate contingency needs should be put into long-term production. Also, Predator operations are expected to be expanded to other theaters and operational areas. However, the committee understands Predator is currently not deployable worldwide because of some host-nation communications frequency restrictions. The committee believes the Air Force needs to add the tactical common data link (TCDL) to the air vehicles and the GCS to overcome this operational limitation. Finally, the committee notes that when using satellite communications control of an aircraft, the GCS can only control a single air vehicle at a time. This precludes dual aircraft control for on-station relief that has been demonstrated with the line-of-sight data link. A dual-channel beyond-line-of- sight satellite communications capability needs to be retrofitted into existing aircraft. Therefore, the committee recommends $58.0 million, an increase of $20.0 million to procure two additional attrition reserve UAVs and for production versions/kits of the laser designator, the dual-channel satellite communications suite and the TCDL. T-38 modifications The budget request contained $94.5 million for T-38 modifications, of which $85.7 million was included for the avionics upgrade program (AUP). The AUP updates the T-38 cockpit configuration to provide state-of-the-art avionics and improve instrument management training. The committee supports the AUP but notes an unexplained increase in engineering change orders. Consequently, the committee recommends $91.1 million, a decrease of $3.4 million. Terrain awareness and warning system (TAWS) The budget request contained $35.7 million for procurement and installation of the TAWS upgrade on the C-135, KC-10, and C-20 aircraft, but included no funds for upgrade of the T-43 aircraft. The TAWS upgrade projects an aircraft's position relative to the ground and improves pilot situational awareness by warning of potential ground impact, thus preventing controlled flight into terrain (CFIT). The committee notes that CFIT is the leading cause of airline fatalities worldwide and that the TAWS is required on commercial airliners. Therefore, the committee recommends $81.0 million, an increase of $18.2 million for the C-135, $6.0 million for the KC-10, $10.3 million for the T-43, and $10.8 million for the C- 20, to accelerate the TAWS upgrade and understands that this amount will complete its procurement and installation of this equipment on these aircraft. Ammunition Procurement, Air Force Overview The budget request contained $419.5 million for Ammunition Procurement, Air Force in fiscal year 2000. The committee recommends authorization of $560.5 million for fiscal year 2000. The committee recommends approval of the request except for those programs adjusted in the following table. Unless otherwise specified, adjustments are without prejudice and based on affordability considerations. Items of Special Interest Air force ammunition The budget request contained $416.1 million for procurement of ammunition. The committee recommends $557.1 million, an increase of $141.0 million for the following types of ammunition, which are among the top unfunded priorities of the Chief of Staff of the Air Force for fiscal year 2000: [In millions of dollars] Rockets: 2.75 inch rocket motors....................................... 5.0 Cartridges: .50 caliber ball, linked...................................... 1.5 .50 caliber ball/tracer, linked............................... 0.5 20mm PGU-27/B................................................. 12.6 Bombs: Practice Bombs (BDU-50/56).................................... 23.2 General Purpose Bombs......................................... 10.0 MK-84 HE...................................................... 7.5 JDAM.......................................................... 66.0 Flares MJU-23........................................................ 6.8 LUU-19........................................................ 5.4 LUU-2......................................................... 2.5 Of the amount recommended for practice bombs, the committee expects $6.0 million to be designated for MK-84 (BDU-56) cast ductile iron practice bombs. Laser guided bombs (LGB) The bombing campaign of Operation Allied Force clearly illustrates the importance of precision-guided munitions as a weapon-of-choice and the necessity to maintain an adequate production base of these weapons for surge requirements, replenishment, and war reserves. The committee is concerned that reliance on a single producer could result in unnecessary delays in replenishing and rebuilding the inventory of LGBs. The committee is aware that the Air Force previously qualified a second source for LGB production and believes that a second source should be reestablished. Consequently, the committee directs the Secretary of the Air Force to submit a report analyzing alternative production options to the Congressional defense committees by June 30, 1999. Missile Procurement, Air Force Overview The budget request contained $2,359.6 million for Missile Procurement, Air Force in fiscal year 2000. The committee recommends authorization of $2,303.7 million for fiscal year 2000. The committee recommends approval of the request except for those programs adjusted in the following table. Unless otherwise specified, adjustments are without prejudice and based on affordability considerations. Items of Special Interest AGM-65 modifications The budget request contained $2.8 million to convert 200 AGM-65G missiles to the AGM-65K configuration, but included no funds to upgrade AGM-65B missiles to the AGM-65H configuration or for training missiles. The AGM-65 is a precision guided tactical missile employed on the F-16 and A-10 aircraft. The ``G'' configuration uses an infrared (IR) target seeker, while the ``K'' and ``H'' configurations use an updated electro-optical (EO) seeker. The ``B'' configuration uses an obsolete EO target seeker. The committee understands that the Air Force planned to retain its AGM-65G IR-guided missiles and convert obsolete EO- guided AGM-65B missiles to the updated AGM-65H configuration, but, due to funding constraints, chose to modify its inventory of 1200 AGM-65Gs to the AGM-65K configuration, which would eliminate IR-guided AGM-65s from its inventory. Since the committee believes that a mix of both IR- and EO- guided AGM-65s are required for mission flexibility, it recommends $12.8 million, an increase of $10.0 million to convert AGM-65B missiles to the AGM-65H and AGM-65K configurations and to procure training missiles and associated test equipment for these variants. Minuteman III modifications The budget request contained $146.5 million for the Minuteman III guidance replacement program (GRP). The committee notes that the Air Force has substantially delayed the planned procurement of GRP, which will replace older guidance packages in the Minuteman III intercontinental ballistic missile fleet. The committee understands that the delay in the program also will force a delay of the propulsion replacement program (PRP). The PRP will replace aging solid rocket motors, but installation of the new rocket motors depends on prior installation of GRP computers. The committee also understands that the condition of solid rocket fuel in some of these rocket motors will render them unreliable prior to GRP completion and that the delay of GRP and PRP will significantly lower the operational effectiveness of the Minuteman force in the middle of the next decade. To avoid these unacceptable operational consequences, the committee recommends $186.5 million, an increase of $40.0 million to accelerate the procurement of GRP. Spaceborne equipment The budget request contained $9.6 million for spaceborne communications security equipment. The committee notes that these funds were requested to support the global positioning system and the space based infrared system but understands that these requirements have already been met. Consequently, the committee recommends $4.6 million, a decrease of $5.0 million. Titan The budget request contained $431.2 million for the Titan launch vehicle and launch operations. The committee notes a substantial increase in the request for payload integration compared to the amount appropriated in fiscal year 1999. The committee also notes that the expenditure rate for prior year funds is lagging behind DOD end-of-year standards. Consequently, the committee believes that the request exceeds requirements and recommends $411.2 million, a reduction of $20.0 million. Other Procurement, Air Force Overview The budget request contained $7,085.2 million for Other Procurement, Air Force in fiscal year 2000. The committee recommends authorization of $7,077.8 million for fiscal year 2000. The committee recommends approval of the request except for those programs adjusted in the following table. Unless otherwise specified, adjustments are without prejudice and based on affordability considerations. Items of Special Interest 60K a/c loader The budget request contained $81.2 million to procure 39 60K aircraft loaders. The 60K loader replaces the Air Force's aging fleet of 1960s-era 40K loaders and wide-body elevator loaders. They provide the critical high-reach capability required to load the KC-10 and other commercial wide-body aircraft that comprise the Civil Reserve Air Fleet. The committee understands that there are 55 60K loaders currently fielded at locations around the world, providing a critical link in the responsive projection of U.S. forces and in the delivery of materiel to support humanitarian operations. The committee notes that the Air Force Chief of Staff has included 60K loaders on his list of unfunded priorities for fiscal year 2000. In order to accelerate production and fielding of this key material handling equipment, the committee recommends $93.7 million, an increase of $12.5 million to procure an additional nine 60K loaders. The committee understands that this action will enable the maximum annual production rate of the 60 K loader to be attained. Aircrew laser eye protection The budget request contained no funds to procure aircrew laser eye protection (LEP) equipment. The committee notes that the Air Force Chief of Staff recently directed that plans to procure and field LEP equipment be immediately accelerated. The committee has provided additional funds in prior years for the Air Force to complete development and evaluation of aircrew LEP technologies and understands that, as a result, two mature LEP technologies have emerged--FV-9 dye-based spectacles and visors and the clear laser eye protection for infrared (CLEPIR) dielectric spectacles. The FV-9 spectacles and visors provide protection in the visible portion of the electromagnetic spectrum, and the CLEPIR spectacles provide protection in the invisible, near infrared portion of the spectrum. The committee strongly supports the Chief's direction to accelerate procurement and fielding of LEP spectacles and visors. Therefore, the committee recommends $6.6 million to expeditiously begin procurement of the FV-9 and CLEPIR equipment. Automatic data processing equipment (ADPE) The budget request contained $71.2 million for ADPE but included no funds for the spare parts production and reprocurement system (SPARES). The committee notes the usefulness of this information system in supporting spare parts buys at the Ogden Air Logistics Center and believes it should be expanded to other installations Department-wide. Therefore, the committee recommends $81.2 million for ADPE, an increase of $10.0 million for this purpose. Master crane The budget request contained no funds for the master crane. The master crane is an aircraft component hoisting system for use on all aircraft, both fixed-wing and rotary. It is currently only in limited use within the Air National Guard (ANG) but has been found to be safer to operate, faster to use, easier to deploy, and to require much less maintenance than other cranes in the ANG's inventory. The committee believes that the master crane is kind of equipment that is needed for today's rapid deployment forces. Therefore, the committee recommends $5.0 million to procure additional master cranes for the ANG. Military satellite communications terminals The budget request contained $46.3 million for military satellite communications terminals. The committee understands that the request exceeds requirements because of a schedule delay in a military communications satellite program. Accordingly, the committee recommends $40.0 million, a decrease of $6.3 million. National eagle system The budget request contained no funds to upgrade the national eagle system. The deployable national eagle system provides U.S. forces with time-sensitive, commercial satellite imagery that allows aircrews to have up-to-date access to imagery of an adversary's terrain. Such imagery can be immediately used in aircraft mission planning and rehearsal systems, contributing both to survivability and mission effectiveness. However, the committee understands that the national eagle system does not currently have an antenna or a data acquisition capability, as does the upgraded eagle vision system. Accordingly, the committee recommends $5.0 million to procure an eagle vision antenna and data acquisition segment to upgrade the national eagle system. Radio equipment The budget request contained $16.7 million for radio equipment, including $15.7 million for Scope Command. The Scope Command program provides for consolidating and upgrading the Department's network of high frequency (HF) ground stations around the world with commercial-off-the-shelf, state-of-the-art HF radio equipment. These ground stations provide the sole command and control resource for Air Mobility Command cargo and tanker aircraft. The committee has been a strong supporter of Scope Command and understands that, with minor modifications, the network is capable of performing HF e-mail gateway functions. Since HF radio signals use the ionosphere for propagation, incorporating an e-mail capability into this network will provide an inexpensive method for forward-deployed forces to communicate with friends and families in the CONUS. Consequently, the committee recommends $20.5 million for radio equipment, an increase of $3.8 million to incorporate an HF e-mail capability into the Scope Command network. Supply asset tracking system (SATS) The budget request contained $1.1 million for SATS. SATS is one example of the Department's effort to achieve Total Asset Visibility--the ability to quickly and accurately identify and locate personnel, equipment, and supplies--through the use of commercial automated information technology (AIT). It incorporates radio frequency terminals and smart cards, enabling electronic status confirmation of supply assets from receipt to issue. The committee notes that the Congress has provided additional funds for SATS installation over the past two fiscal years and is supportive of the use of AIT to streamline business processes. Therefore, the committee recommends $11.1 million for SATS, an increase of $10.0 million to accelerate its installation at Air Force bases worldwide. Tactical communications-electronics (CE) equipment The budget request contained $49.7 million for tactical CE equipment, of which $36.4 million is for theater-deployable communications (TDC) sets. TDC is a compact, ruggedized, high- bandwidth communications system used by forward-deployed Air Expeditionary Force units. Its state-of-the-art technology is much more capable than the aging equipment it replaces, and it requires significantly reduced airlift support. In 1997, the Air Force conducted a command and control (C2) task force to establish an air and space C2 policy for the 21st century. One key finding of the task force was that the service should accelerate procurement of TDC sets and complete the buyout of this equipment by fiscal year 2001. The committee endorsed this finding and added $25.0 million ($18.0 million of which was appropriated) for this purpose in fiscal year 1998 and $20.0 million (none of which was appropriated) in fiscal year 1999. The committee notes that the Air Force Chief of Staff has included TDC sets on his list of unfunded priorities for fiscal year 2000. Accordingly, the committee recommends $84.2 million for tactical communications-electronics equipment, an increase of $34.5 million to accelerate the production and fielding of the two key components of the TDC set, the lightweight mobile satellite terminal and the integrated communications access package. Theater air control system (TACSI) The budget request contained $37.9 million for TACSI, but contained no funds for mobile radar approach controls (RAPCON) for the Air National Guard (ANG). The committee is aware that the ANG has a requirement for 12 mobile RAPCONs, since, even though it is responsible for over 60 percent of the Department's wartime air traffic control (ATC) mission, it is using ATC systems originally fielded in the 1960s. The committee understands these systems are difficult to deploy, are becoming unsupportable due to lack of spare parts, and lack current-generation automation aids that reduce controller workload and fatigue. In view of this situation, funds were appropriated for fiscal year 1999 to procure the first replacement mobile RAPCON, an off-the-shelf, solid-state design system that corrects these deficiencies. The committee supports continued modernization of ANG ATC units and recommends $61.9 million for TACSI, an increase of $24.0 million to procure an additional three mobile RAPCONs. Procurement, Defense-Wide Overview The budget request contained $2,129.0 million for Procurement, Defense-Wide in fiscal year 2000. The committee recommends authorization of $2,107.8 million for fiscal year 2000. The committee recommends approval of the request except for those programs adjusted in the following table. Unless otherwise specified, adjustments are without prejudice and based on affordability considerations. Items of Special Interest Automated document conversion system (ADCS) The budget request contained no funds for the ADCS. The committee recognizes that the ADCS is the Department's single most productive program in the conversion of legacy engineering drawings. However, a significant inventory of these drawings remain to be converted if the Department is to achieve its goal to digitize them by fiscal year 2002. Therefore, the committee recommends an increase of $32.0 million to continue procurement of ADCS hardware and software for this purpose. Mentor protege The budget request contained $26.3 million for the Mentor Protege program. This program provides funds to major Department of Defense prime contractors for the purpose of developing the technical capabilities of Small Disadvantaged Businesses to perform as subcontractors. The committee notes that the legal authority for this pilot program expires at the end of fiscal year 1999. Therefore, the committee recommends no funds for the Mentor Protege program. Nightstar binocular The budget request contained $23.4 million for special operations forces small arms and weapons, but included no funds for nightstar binoculars. The nightstar binocular is a compact, lightweight, hand- held binocular that combines night vision and laser range- finding capabilities that allows the operator to transmit range, azimuth, and elevation data to external systems such as the global positioning system for immediate coordination definition. The committee understands that the Department's initial operational test and evaluation of the nightstar binocular indicates that it provides increased capabilities compared to existing night vision devices. Consequently, the committee recommends $30.4 million, an increase of $7.0 million to initiate procurement of nightstar binoculars. National Guard and Reserve Equipment Overview The budget request did not contain any funds for National Guard and Reserve Equipment for fiscal year 2000. The committee recommends authorization of $60.0 million for fiscal year 2000. Items of Special Interest National guard and reserve equipment The budget request did not contain any funds for National Guard and Reserve Equipment for fiscal year 2000. The committee recommends an increase of $60.0 million for this equipment. [In millions of dollars] Army Reserve: Miscellaneous................................................. 10.0 Navy Reserve: Miscellaneous................................................. 10.0 Marine Corps Reserve: Miscellaneous................................................. 10.0 Air Force Reserve: Miscellaneous................................................. 10.0 Army National Guard: Miscellaneous................................................. 10.0 Air National Guard: Miscellaneous................................................. 10.0 The committee expects that priority consideration be given to the following items: fire fighting aircraft (with preference to U.S.-manufactured aircraft), cargo compartment expanded range fuel systems, medium tactical wreckers, night vision devices, ALR-56M radar warning receivers, and night targeting systems. Reconnaissance aircraft augmentation Following the end of the Cold War, conventional thinking concluded that the relatively high operations tempo rates and the numbers of reconnaissance aircraft could be reduced significantly. Indeed, the operations tempo rates for these aircraft have increased significantly since the demise of the Soviet Union. In addition to their strategic reconnaissance and operations-other-than-war roles, reconnaissance aircraft have been increasingly called on to provide direct tactical intelligence to forces engaged in numerous regional conflicts or supporting peacekeeping operations. Unfortunately, fiscal realities make it unlikely that new reconnaissance aircraft will be procured in the near future. Further, the numbers of reconnaissance aircraft have been reduced over time due to accidents or to decisions such as the Navy's to terminate the ES-3 Shadow aircraft in fiscal year 2000 and the Air Force's to terminate the Senior Scout platform in fiscal year 2002. Although unmanned aerial vehicles may mitigate some of these force size limitations, the committee believes there is a need to enhance the reconnaissance capabilities of manned systems that are already available and in service. The committee is aware of an initiative by the Air Force Chief of Staff (CSAF) to use the EC-130H Compass Call offensive information operations aircraft in a secondary reconnaissance role. The committee fully understands that Compass Call system operators are the same specialists that operate reconnaissance systems such as the Rivet Joint and Senior Scout. The committee also understands that the Compass Call mission equipment has some of the same technical characteristics of the Rivet Joint and Senior Scout. Consequently, the committee believes that by exercising the full extent of the Compass Call operators' skills and by employing the Compass Call equipment in a different manner, a reconnaissance capability can be realized with only minor investment. The committee further believes the CSAF initiative has two other important potential benefits. The first is linguist training. Currently, Compass Call linguists train primarily in language laboratories or in the Compass Call mission simulator, while their reconnaissance aircrew contemporaries train daily against their real-world mission targets. By using the Compass Call aircraft in a reconnaissance role, its operators would have the benefit of real-world operations, thereby having better training for their wartime offensive information operations role. Second, the Air Force decision to terminate Senior Scout leaves a mission gap for the Air National Guard's 169th Intelligence Squadron (IS). This squadron provides a unique linguistic talent pool that must be retained and kept operationally proficient. Assuming the Air Force decides to use Compass Call in the additional reconnaissance role, there appears to be a logical force management decision to move part of the Compass Call mission to the Air National Guard. The 169th IS would be fully taskable for peacetime reconnaissance missions and would also be available for Air Combat Command war or contingency missions. The committee commends the CSAF initiative and requests the Secretary of the Air Force to provide an analysis of this initiative to the Congressional defense and intelligence committees concurrent with the submission of the fiscal year 2001 budget request. Chemical Agents and Munitions Destruction, Defense Overview The budget request contained no funds for Chemical Agents and Munitions, Defense, for fiscal year 2000. The committee recommends authorization of $1,012.0 million for fiscal year 2000, including $230.0 million for research and development, $232.0 million for procurement, and $550.0 million for operations and maintenance, as noted in the following table. Unless otherwise specified, adjustments are without prejudice and based on affordability considerations. Item of Special Interest Chemical agents and munitions destruction Elsewhere in this report, the committee recommends transferring the budget request of $1,169.0 million for Chemical Agents and Munitions Destruction, Army, to Chemical Agents and Munitions Destruction Defense. The committee notes the progress that has been made during the last fiscal year in the continuing effort to dispose of the U.S. stockpile of lethal chemical agents and munitions and of chemical warfare related materiel, while ensuring maximum protection of the public, personnel involved in the destruction, and the environment. Of the original stockpile of 31,495 tons of chemical agent, 13.4 percent has been destroyed and 90 percent of the stockpile is under contract for destruction (as of February 28, 1999). Destruction facilities at Johnston Atoll and Tooele, Utah, are operational. Five facilities are in the design phase or under construction: Anniston, Alabama; Umatilla, Oregon; Pine Bluff, Arkansas; Aberdeen, Maryland; and Newport, Indiana. Facilities at Pueblo, Colorado, and Blue Grass, Kentucky, are on hold pending completion of the Assembled Chemical Weapons Assessment (ACWA) program demonstration. The committee notes that the current estimate of the total cost of the chemical agents and munitions destruction program is $14.9 billion, continues to be concerned about the cost of the program, and believes that attention needs to be given to measures that could reduce this overall cost, including potential alternatives relating to the destruction of non- stockpile related materiel and to the ultimate disposition of the destruction facilities themselves. Accordingly the committee recommends a provision (sec.141) that would address the cost issue and would require the Secretary of Defense to report to the Congressional defense committees on cost reduction measures he might recommend. The committee recommends $1,012.0 million for Chemical Agents and Munitions Destruction, Defense, a decrease of $157.0 million. The committee notes that even after the reduction, the amount authorized is still almost $250.0 million greater than the fiscal year 1999 appropriation for this account. The committee believes this reduction can be accommodated without a breach in U.S. compliance with the Chemical Weapons Convention (CWC) Treaty and with no disincentive to the Russian effort to destroy its chemical munitions stockpile. The committee understands that the ability to complete destruction of the chemical munitions stored at Pueblo by the CWC date of April 29, 2007, requires the design and construction phase for the Pueblo facility to begin in June 1999. To meet this requirement, the committee further believes that there must be close coordination between the Project Manager for Chemical Demilitarization and the Project Manager for ACWA in order to accommodate future implementation of ACWA technologies in the design of the baseline facility currently planned for construction at Pueblo. The committee recommends a provision (sec. 142) that would require the USD (A&T) and the Secretary of the Army to ensure coordination of the activities and plans of the two project managers and would also require the Secretary to take measures necessary to facilitate the integration of ACWA alternative technologies in the design of the baseline facility for Pueblo. LEGISLATIVE PROVISIONS Subtitle A--Authorization of Appropriations Sections 101-109--Authorization of Appropriations These sections would authorize the recommended fiscal year 2000 funding levels for all procurement accounts. Subtitle B--Army Programs Section 111--Multiyear Procurement Authority for Army Programs This section would authorize the Secretary of the Army to enter into multiyear procurement contracts for the Javelin missile system, the M2A3 Bradley fighting vehicle, the AH-64D Longbow Apache attack helicopter, and a combined M1A2 Abrams tank/Heavy Assault Bridge multiyear procurement contract in fiscal year 2000. Additionally, this section would require the Secretary of Defense to submit a report on the composition of multiyear procurements in the procurement portion of the Future Years Defense Program prior to the execution of any multiyear contract. Section 112--Extension of Pilot Program on Sales of Manufactured Articles and Services of Certain Army Industrial Facilities Without Regard to Availability from Domestic Sources This section would authorize the Secretary of the Army to extend an existing pilot program through fiscal year 2001 that enables McAlester Army Ammunition Plant and Rock Island and Watervliet arsenals to continue to provide articles and services under this authority. This pilot program allows the sale of articles or services to an entity that will incorporate those articles or services into a weapon system to be procured by the Department of Defense or will use those articles or services to manufacture weapon systems that will ultimately be procured by the Department of Defense. This extension should allow sufficient time to further evaluate the viability of the program and the opportunity it provides for these facilities to generate significant additional work. Section 113--Revision to Conditions for Award of a Second-Source Procurement Contract for the Family of Medium Tactical Vehicles This section would clarify section 112 of the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 1999 (Public Law 105- 261). It would enable the Secretary of the Army to award a second-source full-rate production contract for the Family of Medium Tactical Vehicles only after he certifies in writing that the total quantity of trucks required by the Army will be sufficient to enable the prime contractor to maintain a minimum production level of 150 trucks per month over any given 12 month period. Subtitle C--Navy Programs Section 121--F/A-18E/F Super Hornet Aircraft Program This section would authorize the Secretary of the Navy to enter into a multiyear procurement contract for the F/A-18E/F aircraft subject to the Secretary of Defense's certification that the results of the aircraft's operational test and evaluation meet both key performance parameters and requirements for operational effectiveness and suitability and that the multiyear procurement contract cost is at least 7.4 percent less than procurement of the same number of aircraft through annually funded contracts. Additionally, this section would require the Secretary of Defense to submit a report on the composition of multiyear procurements in the procurement portion of the Future Years Defense Program prior to the execution of a multiyear contract for the F/A-18E/F. Subtitle D--Chemical Stockpile Destruction Program Section 141--Destruction of Existing Stockpile of Lethal Chemical Agents and Munitions This section would require the Secretary of Defense to conduct an assessment of the current chemical munitions stockpile destruction program with the purposes of reducing the overall cost of the program and ensuring completion of the destruction program by the date required under the Chemical Weapons Convention Treaty, while maintaining maximum protection of the environment, the general public, and the personnel involved in the actual destruction of the munitions. It would authorize the Secretary to take those actions to achieve the purposes of the assessment that could be accomplished under existing authorities and would direct the Secretary to recommend additional legislative authority that may be needed. The section would amend paragraph 1412(c)(2) of the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 1986 (Public Law 99-145) to provide that facilities constructed to carry out the chemical stockpile destruction program shall be disposed of in accordance with site-specific, mutual agreements between the Secretary of the Army and the governor of the state in which the facility is located. The committee notes the increasing practice in the stockpile destruction program, the chemical stockpile emergency preparedness program, and the Assembled Chemical Weapons Assessment, of meaningful involvement by state and local jurisdictions and others in the development of programmatic and policy decisions that are specific to their local stockpile storage sites and to the construction and operation of the stockpile destruction facilities at those sites. The committee believes that such authority should be extended to decisions regarding the ultimate disposition of the chemical munitions stockpile destruction facilities. The section would also amend subsection 1412(c) to allow non-stockpile chemical agents, munitions, or related materials specifically designated by the Secretary of Defense to be destroyed at stockpile facilities once the affected states have issued the appropriate permits. Section 142--Alternative Technologies for Destruction of Assembled Chemical Weapons This section would direct and establish conditions for the transfer of management oversight responsibility for the assembled chemical weapons assessment (ACWA) program from the Under Secretary of Defense for Acquisition and Technology to the Secretary of the Army. The ACWA program was established under section 8065 of the Omnibus Consolidated Appropriations Act for Fiscal Year 1998 (Public Law 104-208) as the Department of Defense program for assessment of the feasibility of alternative technologies for the destruction of assembled chemical munitions. Such technologies could provide an alternative to the baseline program, which uses incineration of chemical agents and munitions as the means for destruction of the chemical munitions stockpile. In order to facilitate coordination of the ACWA program with the baseline program during ACWA's demonstration and pilot facility phase, the provision would require the Under Secretary and the Secretary to ensure coordination of the activities and plans of the program manager for the Assembled Chemical Weapons Assessment and the program manager for Chemical Demilitarization. Further, if the Under Secretary decides to proceed with pilot facility testing of technologies demonstrated under the ACWA program, the provision would transfer oversight and management of the ACWA program from the Under Secretary to the Secretary. Subtitle E--Other Matters Section 151--Limitation on Expenditures for Satellite Communications This section would prohibit the Department from obligating funds to procure communications systems or lease communications services from commercial satellites, unless such systems or services have been proven through independent testing not to disrupt the reception of Global Positioning System (GPS) signals. The committee notes the increasing importance of GPS to military operations. In recognition of this fact, the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 1999 (Public Law 105- 261) mandated that all new Department of Defense aircraft, ships, armored vehicles, and indirect fire systems be equipped with GPS by 2005. The committee also notes that GPS is very important to civil and commercial activities as well. The committee is disturbed that commercial satellite communications systems that provide mobile subscriber services (MSS) are increasingly likely to interfere with GPS signals. Although MSS communications are important to U.S. military forces, the committee believes that the overarching significance of GPS to the military and as a world navigation standard for commercial and civil users mandates the protection of GPS frequencies. TITLE II--RESEARCH, DEVELOPMENT, TEST, AND EVALUATION OVERVIEW The budget request contained $34,375.2 million for research, development, test, and evaluation (RDT&E), representing a decrease of $3,067.8 million from the amount provided for fiscal year 1999. The committee recommends authorization of $35,835.7 million, an increase of $1,460.5 million from the budget request. The committee expresses great concern with the reluctance on the part of Department of Defense officials to acknowledge the numerous modernization programs and science and technology efforts that have been adversely impacted by the decrease in overall research and development funding over the past several years. During the presentation of the fiscal year 1999 budget request, the Department forecasted RDT&E funding to decrease by 14 percent over the Future Years Defense Program (FYDP) and maintained this planned decrease was appropriately based on a ratio of two-to-one between procurement and RDT&E. The committee notes that the Department has not justified the decline in overall RDT&E on the basis of an assessment of procurement needs versus RDT&E needs, but rather on the subjective position that a two-to-one ratio seems ``about right'' and has worked in the past. While the Department continues to justify this planned decline, DOD officials routinely announce that high priority programs such as Army and Navy theater missile defense programs, tactical information systems, space based early warning systems, other satellite programs, and a host of others can no longer support critically needed deployment schedules primarily due to insufficient funding. The committee further notes that the Department's claim of increased modernization funding in the fiscal year 2000 budget request is composed of an increase of $4 billion in procurement, while RDT&E, the other half of modernization, is proposed to be reduced by over $3 billion. The committee is concerned that the Department's emphasis on addressing the backlog of military procurement is occurring at the direct expense of the nation's critical military technologies. The committee notes that the Department's ability to pursue application of leading edge technologies is also severely constrained by the fact that over 33 percent of the total RDT&E request is for modifications to mature and aging fielded systems, while the accounts that lead to development of new capabilities have been decreased by almost 25 percent. This trend appears to continue throughout the declining RDT&E FYDP. The committee believes that this trend, if continued, will seriously undermine our nation's technological advantage. The committee remains concerned that an alarmingly large number of high priority service programs are experiencing schedule delays and restructuring due primarily to service-wide shortages of RDT&E funds while a significant number of defense- wide RDT&E efforts appear adequately funded and in some cases are experiencing growth. The committee also questions the Department's continued trend of investing large levels of funding in environmental and other non-defense initiatives while reducing funding necessary for efficient completion of high priority defense programs. The committee concludes that the Department's declining RDT&E strategy does not support the critical tenets of the Quadrennial Defense Review which stressed the need for a smaller, but more modern, more capable military force, and seriously threatens the ability of the United States to maintain the technological superiority critical to ensuring U.S. military dominance of tomorrow's battlefields. Army RDT&E Overview The budget request contained $4,426.2 million for Army RDT&E. The committee recommends authorization of $4,708.2 million, an increase of $282.0 million. The committee recommendations for the fiscal year 2000 Army RDT&E program are identified in the table below. Major changes to the Army request are discussed following the table. Items of Special Interest Aircraft avionics The budget request contained $6.4 million in PE64201A for the Army Airborne Command and Control System (A2C2S). The A2C2S is a UH-60 deployable command post, which provides a secure and nonsecure, highly mobile data, voice, and imagery command and control (C2) capability in support of Corps through Brigade level commanders. The committee is aware that the A2C2S is one of the Army Chief of Staff's top unfunded priorities in fiscal year 2000 and that additional funding would enable the system to complete engineering and manufacturing development, initial operational test and evaluation, and be fielded to the first digital corps. Therefore, the committee recommends $21.7 million in PE64201A, an increase of $15.3 million for these purposes. All source analysis system The budget request contained $49.7 million in PE 64321A, including $43.7 million for the Army's all source analysis system (ASAS), an increase of over 50 percent from the fiscal year 1999 estimate. The committee recognizes the importance of the ASAS capability. However, it is troubled by the development costs of this service intelligence support system, particularly when compared to the modest costs for the other services' intelligence systems. The committee recommends $45.0 million in PE 64321A, a decrease of $4.7 million. Alternative vehicle propulsion initiative The budget request contained $39.7 million in PE 62601A for combat vehicle and automotive technology, but included no funding for the alternative vehicle propulsion program. The committee notes that one of the Army's most significant challenges is to develop lighter, more efficient propulsion systems for future vehicles. The committee believes that dramatic advances in vehicle propulsion require harnessing the combined capabilities of academia, the private sector, and government research facilities. The committee recommends an increase of $10.0 million in PE 62601A for the ongoing alternative propulsion initiative and urges the Army to aggressively pursue greater private and public sector involvement in this effort. Armament enhancement initiative The budget request contained $36.9 million in PE 63639A for the armament enhancement initiative, but included no funding for the tank extended range munition-kinetic energy (TERM-KE). The committee notes that the armament enhancement initiative is intended to develop improved tank ammunition to continue providing an overmatch capability for tanks. TERM-KE is intended to provide a higher lethality, extended range kinetic energy munition for the M1 tank main gun. The committee supports development of improved munitions and recommends $44.9 million, an increase of $8.0 million for TERM-KE. Army aircrew coordination training program The budget request contained $3.0 million in PE 63007A for manpower, personnel and training, but included no funding for aircrew coordination training. The committee notes the recent increase in the Army aviation accident rate and believes that aviation safety must be enhanced. The committee is aware that the aircrew coordination training program holds promise in reducing aviation accident rates, and strongly urges the Army to accelerate this program and field an enhanced air crew training capability for Army aviation units as soon as possible. The committee recommends $5.0 million in PE 63007A, an increase of $2.0 million for aircrew coordination training. Army technical test instrumentation and targets The budget request contained $30.5 million in PE 65602A for Army technical test instrumentation and targets, but included no funding for characterization and quantification of missile debris hazards to aircraft. The committee recommends $31.7 million in PE 65602A, an increase of $1.2 million for continuation of characterization and quantification of missile hazards to aircraft. Comanche The budget request contained $427.0 million in PE 64223A for Comanche demonstration and validation. Comanche is the Army's highest priority modernization program and is often referred to as the ``quarterback of the digital battlefield.'' The committee notes that while the capabilities provided by the Comanche are described as vital to the success of the Army in the next century, the Army is still struggling to complete development flight testing of a totally new, state-of-the-art aircraft with a single test aircraft. Though the Army has received the second Comanche prototype, it is not scheduled to be flown in the flight test program until fiscal year 2001, due only to a shortage of funding. The committee is aware that additional funding is necessary to accelerate development of the mission electronics package and enable a more aggressive flight test program using at least two aircraft. The committee notes that additional funding for Comanche is the Army's number one unfunded modernization requirement and strongly supports the earliest possible fielding of this important new capability. The committee recommends $483.0 million in PE 64223A, an increase of $56.0 million for Comanche program acceleration. Combat vehicle improvement programs The budget request contained $29.5 million in PE 23735A for combat vehicle improvement programs. The committee notes that tracks for existing and future tracked vehicles are a life-cycle cost driver. The committee supports development of a lighter, higher performance track that offers the potential of life-cycle cost improvement. The committee recommends $31.5 million in PE 23735A, an increase of $2.0 million for improved vehicle track development. Combined turbine diesel engine The budget request contained $90.9 million in PE 63005A for combat vehicle and automotive advanced technology, but contained no funding for the ongoing turbine diesel engine. The committee notes that turbine diesel engine development has been slowed by technical obstacles and funding delays. The committee also notes that the contractor has successfully developed an operating prototype. The committee recommends $92.9 million in PE 63005A, an increase of $2.0 million to complete development and testing of a prototype engine. The committee urges the Army to support any further funding required for follow-on evaluation. Combustion driven eye-safe laser The budget request contained $30.6 million in PE 64710A for night vision systems, but included no funding for the combustion driven eye-safe laser. The committee notes increasing concern for laser hazards and supports development of eye-safe lasers. The committee also notes that emerging combustion driven selective emitter technology can be used to pump an eye-safe, portable, stealthy, low cost radar system that identifies friend and foe. The committee recommends $33.6 million in PE 64710A, an increase of $3.0 million for combustion driven eye-safe laser. Concepts experimentation program The budget request contained $17.0 million in PE 65326A for the concept experimentation program. The committee notes that the Army mounted maneuver battlespace lab (MMBL) has formulated a strategic research plan to develop strategies and doctrine for the application of Force XXI technologies on the battlefield. The new strategies and doctrine are intended to give combat commanders the ability to dominate the future maneuver battlespace. The committee recommends $22.0 million in PE 65326A, an increase of $5.0 million for execution of the MMBL strategic research plan. Defense healthcare information assurance program The budget request contained $9.4 million in PE 33140A for the Army information systems security program. The Congress provided $2.5 million in fiscal year 1998 to initiate a demonstration program for military healthcare information protection that would be consistent with national healthcare and information protection initiatives. An additional $4.0 million was provided in fiscal year 1999 to continue the program. The two-phased program will initially establish a prototype for protection of sensitive data integral to the military healthcare information system at a single service medical facility, then extend the prototype evaluation to other military services, regional medical centers, and civilian medical treatment facilities. The committee notes the progress that has been made to date in the prototype phase of the program and supports the plans for extending the program to additional sites, refinement of information protection technology, policy, procedures, and development of industry wide security criteria for healthcare systems. The committee understands that available funds are sufficient for completion of the demonstration program and test of the prototype, and that a decision could be made to begin fielding a defense healthcare information assurance system in fiscal year 2000. The committee recommends $15.4 million in PE 33140A, an increase of $6.0 million to support initiating deployment of the defense healthcare information assurance system. The additional funds may not be obligated until 30 days after the Secretary of the Army reports to the Congressional defense committees the results of the beta-test of the system and gives recommendations for continuation of the program. Defense manufacturing technology program The budget request contained a total of $132.5 million for the manufacturing technology (ManTech) program, including $14.9 million in PE 78045A, $59.1 million in PE 78011N, $51.8 million in PE 78011F, and $6.7 million in PE 78011S. The committee has reviewed the Department's ``Five-Year Plan (FY00-FY04) for the Manufacturing Technology Program.'' Although the committee supports the overall direction of the ManTech program, the committee notes that, for the second year in a row, the total program falls far short (approximately $60.0 million) of the Congressional funding guidelines for the program that are contained in the statement of managers accompanying the conference report on H.R. 1119 (H. Rept. 105- 340). Section 213 of the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 1999 (Public Law 105-736) amended section 2525 of title 10, United State Code, to establish annual goals for cost sharing in the DOD ManTech program and procedures for waiver of the cost sharing requirements in the program. The intent of the Congress in the amendment was to provide increased flexibility to the Secretary of Defense in the administration of the cost sharing requirement, rather than establishing fixed, rigid guidelines. To clarify the Congress' intent regarding the flexibility available to the Secretary in his administration of the cost sharing requirement, the committee recommends a provision (sec. 212), which would eliminate percentages goals for cost sharing in manufacturing technology projects. The committee notes a significant reduction in the manufacturing technology program managed by the Defense Logistics Agency. The committee also notes a significant reduction in the Army's manufacturing technology program, including the failure to continue increased funding for development of munitions manufacturing technology that could result in reduced production costs for ammunition in the future. In view of the fact that the Army is the single service manager for the defense ammunition program, the committee believes that insufficient priority is being given in the Army's ManTech program for this critical area. The committee is aware that the estimated cost of air burst munitions for the objective individual combat weapon (OICW) will probably limit their use in training and believes that increased emphasis should be given to a small arms ammunition ManTech initiative that is specifically focused on decreasing the overall cost of the OICW air burst munitions through warhead and fuse cost reductions. The committee recommends $34.9 million in PE 78045A for the Army's manufacturing technology program, an increase of $17.0 million for munitions manufacturing technology (including the small arms ammunition initiative) and $3.0 million for rotary wing sustainment manufacturing technology, and $74.1 million in PE 78011N, an increase of $15.0 million for the Navy's ManTech program. Elsewhere in this report the committee recommends additional funding to accelerate new initiatives in the Defense Logistics Agency's ManTech program. Environmental quality technology The budget request contained $12.8 million in PE 62720A for environmental quality technology, but included no funding for the Texas Regional Institute for Environmental Studies (TRIES). The committee notes that TRIES, working with the Army Construction Engineering Research Laboratory, has been developing a computer-based land management model to reduce costs and time for training area recovery. The committee supports well focused military environmental clean-up efforts and recommends $15.8 million in PE 62720A, an increase of $3.0 million to complete development of the TRIES computer-based land management model. Full spectrum active protection The budget request contained $39.7 million in PE 62601A for combat vehicle and automotive technology. The committee is aware that the Army needs a capability to defend armored vehicles against attack by hit-to-kill anti-tank guided missiles, as well as kinetic energy and high explosive anti-tank projectiles. The committee recommends an increase of $2.5 million for development of full spectrum active protection within the tank and automotive technology effort. Future combat vehicle The budget request contained $39.8 million in PE 62601A for armored systems modernization. The committee notes that the Army's armored system modernization strategy has become more an incidental by-product of the administrative process of the Army budget than a commitment to a vision. The consequences of this approach to modernization increases program instability and reinforces short term reactive planning rather than adherence to a strategy. Moreover, the committee believes that the consequences for not having a comprehensive, coherent, and enduring armored system modernization strategy are no longer acceptable. The committee is encouraged, however, by the Army's vision for the Army After Next. In particular, the committee fully supports the attributes and capabilities described by both the Army and the Quadrennial Defense Review as essential in future combat vehicles, and believes that the development efforts essential for their fielding should begin immediately. However, there is a serious mis-match between what the vision calls for and the Army's ability without full DOD support and participation, to execute the necessary experimentation and demonstration of future alternatives while attempting to sustain its current aging fleet of over 6,000 M-1 tanks. The committee understands that the current fleet demands an exponentially increasing sustainment budget that is depleting funds intended for incremental modernization of the fleet. Left unchecked, it would soon take the entire armored systems modernization budget to sustain an M1 fleet that will have further compounded its problems by evolving into at least four different configurations. The Army's current armored systems modernization budget has been decreased to such a low level that between the years of 2000 and 2030 the resulting tank fleet will be composed of only 17 percent modernized M1A2 SEP tanks, while the remaining 4,000 plus tanks will be in varying stages of deterioration and questionable deployability. The committee believes current armored systems cannot be evolved to meet the critical land warfare requirements identified by the QDR and as essential to the Army After Next. Thus, a commitment to decisive action must be made now to redress the armor system modernization dilemma. To delay is to limit the possibilities and make them unaffordable. Therefore, the committee recommends a legislative provision (Sec. 211) that would direct the Secretary of the Defense to establish a collaborative combat vehicle demonstration program between the Army and the Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency (DARPA). While the Army has committed $67.0 million of its fiscal year 2000 RDT&E science and technology request toward this critical requirement, related DARPA efforts are not focused to support any similar initiative. The committee further directs the Secretary to establish the necessary DOD- level priority for this program to ensure that both the Army and DARPA complete this effort in an efficient and timely manner. While the committee understands that the Army fully intends to pursue this critical modernization initiative, DARPA participation is also required to enable rapid prototyping, special contract authorities, and pursuit of high risk, high gain technologies essential to the success of this program. Therefore, the committee directs the Secretary of the Army and the Director of DARPA to establish and enter into a Memorandum of Agreement (MOA) to develop an appropriate competitive demonstration project that will consider and evaluate all promising combat vehicle technologies including lethality, propulsion, mobility, survivability, robotics, human engineering, and C4ISR technologies. The project will conduct competitive demonstrations of these technologies integrated into potential combat vehicle platforms with an objective of identifying the most promising candidates for a full development program to begin by fiscal year 2006. The Secretary and the Director shall provide a report to the Congressional defense committees with submission of the fiscal year 2001 budget request that outlines the MOA, objective schedule, and required funding for the joint Army/DARPA project. Accordingly, the committee recommends an increase of $12.0 million for the future combat vehicle modernization program for fiscal year 2000. Additionally, the committee recommends that of the amounts authorized and appropriated for DARPA fiscal year 2000 funding, not less than $38.0 million in PE 63764E and $18.2 million in PE 62702E shall be for the Army/DARPA future combat vehicle program. Geographic synthetic aperture radar The budget request contained $41.1 million in PE 62784A for military engineering technology, but included no funding for geographic synthetic aperture radar (SAR). The committee notes that an airborne geographic SAR is being developed to generate high-resolution, three dimensional maps of the earth. This dual band interferometric SAR will be able to map above, through, and below the vegetation canopy. The committee is aware that airborne foliage penetrating radar may offer potential target identification enhancement to the Army and recommends $56.1 million in PE 62784A, an increase of $15.0 million to evaluate dual band airborne interferometric SAR technology for possible Army applications. Geo-positioning system--inertial measurement unit integration The budget request contained $23.0 million in PE 62120A for sensors and electronics survivability. The committee notes that uses for the geo-positioning system (GPS) and inertial measurement units (IMU) include personnel, weapon and non-weapon system platforms, and an increasing variety of smart weapons. The burgeoning applications for these types of systems, coupled with advances in electronics integration and the emergence of micro electro mechanical systems (MEMS) technology now make possible full integration of GPS and MEMS on a single chip that offers the possibility of dramatic reductions in the cost. Though the development cost of full GPS-IMU integration may be unattractive to an individual acquisition program, the recurring cost savings make such development an imperative for the Department of Defense as a whole. The committee strongly supports efforts to reduce the cost of smart weapons and directs the Secretary of the Army to establish a focused program to develop a fully integrated GPS- IMU on a single chip capable of meeting the needs of service missile, artillery, and other appropriate applications. The committee is aware that there are disparate efforts in industry, government laboratories, and academia to reduce the size and cost of GPS and IMUs which may be leveraged. The committee recommends an increase of $1.0 million for GPS-IMU chip level integration. Heart rate variability technology The budget request contained $70.1 million in PE 62787A for medical technology. The committee notes that heart rate variability technology offers potential for enhancing on-site assessment of disease and trauma by enabling physiological measurement of the nervous system functioning and balance. Improvements in these areas could lead to improved treatment and victim survivability. The committee believes that this technology, designed for point-of- injury assessment for emergency response personnel in civilian and military trauma environments, may also have significant applications for enhancing early detection and prevention of chemical and biological agent effects. The committee urges the Army Medical Command to pursue testing of this technology and to assess its potential for improved chem-bio detection and prevention, as well as other military emergency response applications, and recommends $74.1 million, an increase of $ 4.0 million in PE 62787A. High energy laser test facility The budget request contained $14.2 million in PE 65605A for the high energy laser system test facility (HELSTF). The committee notes that the Army has taken the initiative to develop and publish a Directed Energy Master Plan, laying out a road map for future high power directed energy technology exploitation. However, the committee is concerned that the Department of Defense does not have a central directed energies (DE) technology clearing house to identify, assess, and develop the full range and potentials of these promising technologies. The committee further notes that Space and Missile Defense Command (SMDC) has proposed that HELSTF be the premier joint service open-air laser test facility for all high power DOD laser programs, providing testing for laser lethality and system effectiveness as well as threat exploitation, directed energy bio-effects, and susceptibility testing. A high-power laser facility capable of testing lasers over a broad range of wavelengths is required to support all these critical parameters. The committee believes that leveraging past investments in HELSTF infrastructure and building on past Army research and development in high power lasers is a cost effective means of developing next generation high power lasers capable of operating with variable wavelengths and pulse formats. The committee supports the use of the HELSTF to focus development of high power free electron and other solid-state lasers as a complement to various chemical laser development programs, and recommends a provision (Sec. 241) that would direct the Secretary of Defense to designate the Commander, SMDC as the DOD executive agent for oversight of high-power solid state laser and directed energy technologies with potential weapons applications. The committee notes that the HELSTF is currently controlled by SMDC and directs that HELSTF be established as the DOD center of excellence for high-power, solid state laser and directed energy technologies. Additionally, the committee recommends the establishment of a relationship between Livermore National Laboratory, with its high power laser expertise, and appropriate industry participants to create a national center of excellence for high power solid-state laser development. The committee recommends $38.2 million for the HELSTF in PE 65605A, an increase of $20.0 million for assessment and development of high energy solid state lasers and other directed energy technologies, and an increase of $4.0 million for evaluation of the Navy's free electron laser technology program. High mobility artillery rocket system The budget request contained $36.5 million in PE 63778A for the multiple launch rocket system (MLRS) product improvement program (PIP), and included $6.0 million for the MLRS high mobility rocket system (HIMARS). The committee notes that the HIMARS is a C-130 transportable, wheeled version of the MLRS launcher, capable of firing all rockets and missiles in the current and future MLRS family of missiles. The committee is aware that the Department of Defense recognizes the importance of the improved deployability provided by HIMARS and supports accelerated development of the program. The committee strongly encourages accelerated development and fielding of HIMARS and recommends $67.4 million in PE 63778A, an increase of $30.9 million for HIMARS. Joint service small arms program The budget request contained $4.9 million in PE 63607A for the joint service small arm program. The committee is aware that the present family of individual weapons as well as the objective individual combat weapon (OICW) for the future will have a 5.56mm capability. The committee is informed that accuracy of the 5.56mm round can be improved significantly as was the 7.62mm round with relatively little expense. The committee believes that, despite the emergence of ``smart weapons,'' the importance of individual combat weapons will remain and that ammunition for these weapons should be as accurate as modern production technology will allow. The committee also notes that there is a new technology which reduces drag in the barrel that offers much higher projectile velocity from the same caliber small arms cartridges. The committee is also aware that features such as laser ranging and target tracking which are important for the OICW air-burst round could be included in the initial OICW with a small additional investment. Therefore, the committee recommends $9.9 million, an increase of $5.0 million in PE 63607A for OICW improvements, development of more accurate 5.56 ammunition, and assessment of new high-velocity small arms projectile technology. Joint surveillance target attack radar system (Joint STARS) The budget request contained $11.5 million in PE 64770A for system improvements to the Joint STARS Common Ground Station (CGS). The committee notes the proven success of the Joint STARS system in both Operation Desert Storm and Operation Joint Endeavor in Bosnia and its current support to the North Atlantic Treaty Organization's Operation Allied Force. A key feature of Joint STARS is the secure, encrypted, anti-jam Surveillance Control Data Link (SCDL), which links the Air Force's E-8 Joint STARS aircraft to the Army's ground support modules and CGSs, enabling real-time data transfer of command and control information between the aircraft and ground stations. The committee is aware that the ongoing SCDL System Improvement Program (SIP), which eliminates obsolete parts and updates older digital circuit boards with state-of-the-art, software-based array boards, will increase data transfer rates as well as reduce component size, weight, and power requirements by as much as 50 percent. Consistent with past committee actions and based on the benefits of the SIP, the committee recommends $19.5 million, an increase of $8.0 million in PE 64770A to complete this upgrade. Kwajalein missile range modernization The budget request contained $140.3 million in PE 65301A for Kwajalein missile range (KMR) modernization. The committee is concerned that delays in KMR modernization will increase risk in key tests of the national missile defense (NMD) system. This modernization effort includes replacement of obsolete components, upgrade of hardware and software architectures, and provision for remote operation of range sensors and instrumentation. The committee believes that accelerating modernization of the range will not only reduce NMD development risks, but will substantially reduce annual KMR operations and maintenance costs. The committee recommends $148.3 million in PE 65301A, an increase of $8.0 million for KMR modernization. Lightweight x-band radar The budget request contained $24.9 million in PE 12419A for the Aerostat Joint Project Office, but included no funds for lightweight x-band radar technology. The committee understands that the Ballistic Missile Defense Organization has examined the potential of lightweight x-band radar technology for application to the Army's Aerostat project and found it to be useful to the requirement for fire control radar. The committee recommends that the Army evaluate this technology from within existing funds and make a recommendation to the Congressional defense committees providing the results of the evaluation. Medical materiel/medical biological defense equipment The budget request contained $9.70 million in PE 64807A for medical materiel/medical biological defense equipment, including $491,000 for the Life Support Trauma and Transport (LSTAT) system EMD program. The committee has learned that the EMD program is underfunded and that it could easily be completed in fiscal year 2000 if properly resourced. Furthermore, the committee understands that the Army does support the LSTAT program and plans to procure the system on a multiyear basis. Accordingly, the committee recommends $13.2 million in PE 64807A, an increase of $3.5 million to complete LSTAT EMD in fiscal year 2000. MedTeams The budget request contained $16.4 million in PE 62716A for human factors engineering technology, but included no funding for continuation of the medical teams (MedTeams) program. The committee notes that the MedTeams effort provides development and testing of methods to provide improved coordination of emergency medical teams. The committee supports development of improved medical care and recommends $19.8 million in PE 62716A, an increase of $3.4 million. Night vision advanced technology The budget request contained $36.6 million in PE 63710A for night vision advanced technology. The committee notes that damage control capability is critical to military survivability. Sensor technology has been and is being developed for ground forces to improve night vision situational awareness. Damage control personnel also require night vision situational awareness. The committee supports adaptation of emerging sensor technology to develop helmet mounted sensors for firefighters and damage control personnel. The committee recommends $39.6 million in PE 63710A, an increase of $3.0 million for helmet mounted sensors for firefighters and damage control personnel. Panoramic night vision goggle The budget request contained $20.1 million in PE 62709A for night vision technology. The committee notes that wide field of view night vision capability for aviation is increasingly critical as operations migrate from daylight to dark. Existing night vision equipment has a very narrow field of view, excessive weight, and very poor depth perception in inclement weather. The committee supports development of superior night vision equipment to improve safety and increase the capability of our forces. The committee recommends $30.1 million in PE 62709A, an increase of $10.0 million for the panoramic night vision goggle, including emerging technologies that may be generally applicable to night vision improvement. Passive millimeter wave imaging The budget request contained $23.0 million in PE 62120A for sensors and electronics survivability, but contained no funding for passive millimeter wave imaging. The committee is aware that passive millimeter wave and associated devices may offer the ability to solve problems in the nap-of-the-earth wire and other obstacle collision avoidance for the Apache and other aircraft. The committee recommends an increase of $3.0 million for passive millimeter wave imaging for obstacle/collision avoidance. Patriot anti-cruise missile defense The budget request contained no funding in PE 23801A for the Patriot anti-cruise missile (PACM) seeker upgrade. In the statement of managers accompanying the conference report on H.R. 3616 (H. Rept. 105-736), the conferees directed the Secretary of the Army to complete a rigorous PACM test program and to evaluate the effectiveness of the PACM seeker against a full range of cruise missile threats. The committee notes that a preliminary evaluation has been completed prior to flight testing of the seeker, and that a more thorough evaluation will be possible only after the flight testing is completed. Without this more thorough evaluation, the committee is unable to reach a definitive conclusion on the ability of PACM to meet the cruise missile threat cost effectively. The committee understands that the Patriot advanced capability-3 (PAC-3) will have substantial capability against cruise missiles, in addition to providing effective ballistic missile defense. The committee also understands that the PACM seeker would be used to upgrade older PAC-1 missiles that have very limited capabilities to defend against ballistic missile attack. The committee notes that a thorough analysis of the cost trade-offs between acquisition of PACM and PAC-3 is also needed prior to consideration of PACM acquisition. The committee recommends no funding in PE 23801A for PACM. The committee directs the Secretary of the Army to prepare a report, following completion of PACM flight testing, with a thorough assessment of PACM capabilities and the opportunity costs of additional PACM development and eventual PACM procurement. The report shall be submitted to the Congressional defense committees prior to any budget request for additional PACM funds. Plasma energy pyrolysis system The budget request contained $12.8 million in PE 62720A for environmental quality technology, but included no funds for the plasma energy pyrolysis system (PEPS). A total of $15.9 million has been invested in this program to develop a transportable PEPS prototype which is now undergoing testing. The committee is aware that PEPS testing is intended to determine its ability to destroy, vitrify, and dispose of several hazardous waste streams. The Army intends to await completion of the PEPS evaluation program and analysis of the results to determine cost and performance of PEPS prior to proceeding further in acquisition. The committee supports development of safe, economical means to eliminate hazardous waste and encourages the Army to continue its efforts with PEPS. Proximity fuzing for dual-purpose improved conventional munition submunitions The budget request contained $39.9 million in PE 63004A for the Army's weapons and munitions advanced technology development program and $101.5 million in PE 63795N for the Navy's land attack technology development program. The committee notes the common use by the Army and the Navy of the M80 grenade submunition. This submunition is now dispensed by the dual-purpose improved conventional munition (DPICM) 120 mm mortar, the 5-inch gun, 155mm cannon projectiles, the multi-launch rocket system (MLRS) warhead, the extended range guided munition (ERGM), and the Best Buy projectile advanced technology demonstration. The committee also notes that Army and Navy studies and tests indicate that lethality gains of 10 percent to 200 percent are possible if a height of burst proximity fusing option were incorporated in the M80 submunition. The committee understands that the Army and the Navy are teaming to develop a proximity fuzing feature that could be added to the existing self-destruct fuze in the M80 grenade and greatly increase the armor penetration and anti-personnel lethality of the grenade. The committee believes that a joint program to develop a common proximity fuze for DPICM submunitions could capitalize on the efforts of both the Army and the Navy by deferring the development and testing of individual service prototypes and result in significantly reduced costs through the economy of scale that would be gained by the production of a single fuse and submunition for both services. The committee recommends an increase of $2.5 million in PE 63004A and $2.5 million in PE 63795N to establish a joint Army/ Navy program to develop a proximity fuze for DPICM submunitions. The committee directs the Secretary of the Army and the Secretary of the Navy to report to the Congressional defense committees on the establishment of the joint program and the plan and funding for the proximity fuze development with the submission of the fiscal year 2001 budget request. Security and intelligence activities The budget request contained no funding for security and intelligence activities in PE 35128A. The committee notes the government's increasing dependence on computer-based information systems and the growing world- wide threat to these systems. It is also aware of the Army Intelligence Command's (INSCOM) state-of-the-art land information warfare activity (LIWA) and its developing capability to protect the worldwide computer infrastructure. The LIWA has recently demonstrated a significantly enhanced capability for responding to computer systems viruses and attacks by rapidly identifying and providing protection and corrective actions to all supported systems. The committee is also aware that the Department of Defense has recognized the potential of the LIWA to offer significant improvements in providing timely assessments of intelligence information to the warfighter. The committee strongly supports improved and strengthened information system protection and processing and recommends $10.0 million in PE 35128A for the INSCOM LIWA. Self-destruct fuse The committee notes that there are a number of apparently duplicative efforts within service and defense-wide programs to pursue self-destruct fuzes for munitions. The Army has recently type-classified self-destruct fuses for some Army munitions, and yet it appears that there is no Department wide program development to the share the Army's completed development or to coordinate other service efforts. The committee directs that the Secretary of Defense conduct a study of unexploded ordnance problems and establish a defense-wide program to develop affordable, reliable self- destruct fuses for munitions, and report the results of this study and the actions being by December 31, 1999. Semi-automated imagery processor The budget request contained no funding in PE 63766A for tactical electronic surveillance systems. The committee notes that the semi-automated imagery processor (SAIP) is an advanced concept technology demonstration (ACTD) designed to provide automatic target cueing to support imagery analysts. Further, the tool provides a limited capability for automated target recognition. While the SAIP is not perfected, the committee notes the development effort and results to date. The committee remains concerned that current and future imagery collection systems are overwhelming the limited number of imagery analysts available to put ``eyes on target.'' Automated capabilities to reduce imagery analyst workloads are critically needed. The committee believes that the SAIP represents the best effort to date to provide such radar imagery automation. However, the Department has failed to provide sufficient funding to transition a needed ACTD capability to an operational application. The committee recommends an increase of $2.5 million in PE 63766A to transition the SAIP effort from an ACTD to an operational capability. The committee notes that the SAIP is not a total solution and expects the Army to continue efforts to refine and improve the SAIP. Small arms fire control system The budget request contained $54.9 million in PE 64802A for weapons and munitions, but included no funding for the small arms fire control system (SAFCS). SAFCS is a lightweight optical sight that corrects the aimpoint of small arms. The committee notes that the SAFCS offers potential for improved accuracy and probability of hit for small arms. The committee supports improvements in small arms accuracy and recommends $57.4 million in PE 64802A, an increase of $2.5 million for engineering development and type classification for SAFCS. Tactical voice control for maneuver control system The budget request contained $45.1 million in PE 23740A for the maneuver control system (MCS). The committee notes that tactical voice recognition systems have been proven to provide more accurate, faster and robust command and control than conventional input/output devices. The committee recommends $46.1 million for PE 23740A , an increase of $1.0 million for tactical voice control for MCS. Trichloromelamine testing The National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 1997 (Public Law 104-201) directed the Secretary of the Army to conduct toxicity studies of trichloromelamine (TCM) disinfectant to provide appropriate Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) registration for Army future procurement from TCM suppliers, thus ensuring competition and recommend additional funding for this purpose. The committee notes that the Army has failed to complete directed testing and, therefore, reiterates its earlier direction that the Army complete testing and EPA registration for TCM as rapidly as possible from within funding in PE 63002A for medical advanced technology. University and industrial research centers The budget request contained $47.1 million in PE 61104A for university and industrial research centers, and included $5.9 million for advanced displays. The committee notes that, despite the importance of advanced and interactive displays for the Army After Next, funding for the advanced and interactive displays consortium has been reduced over the past four years. The committee supports the development of innovative, cost-effective displays and recommends $48.5 million in PE 61104A, an increase of $1.4 million for the advanced and interactive displays consortium. Navy RDT&E Overview The budget request contained $7,984.0 million for Navy RDT&E. The committee recommends authorization of $8,358.5 million, an increase of $374.5 million. The committee recommendations for the fiscal year 2000 Navy RDT&E program are identified in the table below. Major changes to the Navy request are discussed following the table. Items of Special Interest Advanced amphibious assault vehicle The budget request contained $94.8 million in PE 63611M for the advanced amphibious assault vehicle (AAAV). The AAAV is a self-deploying, high water-speed, armored, amphibious assault vehicle capable of operating in all weather and in nuclear, chemical, and biological environments. The committee notes that the AAAV is the Marine Corps highest priority ground modernization requirement and that additional funding will permit incorporation of improvements identified during testing, reduce program technical risk, and position the program for acceleration of initial operational capability from fiscal year 2006 to fiscal year 2005. The committee recommends $121.2 million in PE 63611M, an increase of $26.4 million, for the AAAV. Advanced anti-radiation guided missile The budget request contained $23.6 million in PE 25601N, including $10.8 million to continue development and demonstration of the advanced anti-radiation guided missile (AARGM). The committee notes that ARRGM is a Phase III small business innovative research (SBIR) program to develop and demonstrate a dual-mode guidance section on a high-speed anti- radiation missile (HARM). Program objectives are to demonstrate an effective and affordable lethal suppression of enemy air defenses (SEAD) capability against mobile, relocatable, or fixed air defense threats in the presence of potential emitter shutdown or other anti-radiation missile countermeasures. The ARRGM technology demonstration program is an outgrowth of a Phase I and Phase II competitive SBIR program, which successfully demonstrated the feasibility of a dual-mode seeker to address radar ``shut-down'' anti-radiation missile countermeasures. The dual-mode technology being developed in the AARGM program has demonstrated very high potential to solve the problem of ``shut-down'' not only in the HARM, the primary SEAD weapon, but has also demonstrated the potential for integration with other missile airframes. The committee recommends $33.6 million in PE 25601N, an increase of $10.0 million to continue risk reduction, test, and other field activities to prepare for a potential fiscal year 2001 Milestone II decision to enter engineering and manufacturing development. Advanced waterjet propulsor demonstration program The budget request contained $75.6 million in PE 63792N for Navy advanced technology demonstrations, but included no funds for demonstration of an advanced waterjet propulsor for future naval applications. The committee notes that a number of propulsion technologies are being considered for use in the DD-21 land attack destroyer and other future naval ships, with the goal of increased operational performance and reduced acquisition and life-cycle costs. The committee notes the development under an extension of the Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency's maritime technology program of an advanced waterjet propulsor which could meet operational performance, signature and cost reduction requirements for the DD-21 and other naval ships. The committee notes proposals for \1/4\-scale at-sea demonstration and cavitation tunnel testing of the waterjet propulsor to validate critical performance criteria and potential application of the propulsor to the DD-21 or other naval ships. The committee urges that the Secretary of the Navy assess the requirement for further development, demonstration, and evaluation of advanced waterjet propulsor technology and provide to the Congressional defense committees by December 1, 1999, a report which includes the Secretary's recommendations regarding the demonstration, a program execution plan, and Navy funding for the program. Affordable advanced acoustical arrays The budget request contained $115.8 million in PE 63561N for advanced submarine systems development, including $71.6 million for advanced submarine combat systems development. The committee notes the Navy's continued development of advanced sonar arrays for surface, submarine, and distributed surveillance systems, including single and multi-line towed arrays, conformal-hull mounted arrays, and advanced arrays for use in the fixed-distributed and advanced-deployable systems. The committee strongly supports the development and demonstration of all-optical array and other key enabling technologies for advanced acoustical arrays that could significantly improve array performance and dramatically reduce the cost of future acoustical array systems. The committee recommends an increase of $10.0 million in PE 63561N to accelerate the development and transition of all- optical array and other key enabling technologies to advanced towed, hull-mounted, and distributed acoustical array systems. Analysis of alternatives for follow-on support jammer The budget request contained $87.3 million in PE 64270N for engineering and manufacturing development of the EA-6B electronic countermeasures aircraft system. The budget request states that a requirement exists to begin planning and analysis of alternatives for a command and control warfare (C2W) replacement for the EA-6B aircraft, however, no funds were requested for this purpose. The committee notes the high demands that are being placed on the EA-6B aircraft as an electronic countermeasures weapons system, projections that there will not be enough EA-6B aircraft to meet mission requirements beyond 2015, and considerations to retire the EA-6B in 2015. The committee notes further that a mission needs statement for a C2W platform that would replace the EA-6B and achieve initial operational capability in 2012 is being reviewed by the Navy. The committee understands that a C2W follow-on platform would incorporate air vehicle enhancements that would reduce operational and maintenance costs, improve reliability, and significantly increase command, control, and operational effectiveness. The committee believes that the Navy should initiate an analysis of alternatives for a C2W follow-on platform which will determine the most cost-effective approach for replacing the EA-6B in the radar support jamming mission. The committee recommends an increase of $5.0 million in PE 63XXXN to initiate the analysis of alternatives for a C2W replacement for the EA-6B aircraft, and directs the establishment of a separate concept exploration/product definition and risk reduction program element for the program. Aquifer vulnerability/contamination assessment The budget request contained $8.2 million in PE 65873M for Marine Corps program-wide support, but included no funding for acquifer vulnerability/contamination assessment. The committee recognizes the potential for groundwater contamination at military bases due to fuel spills, hazardous chemical handling, and waste disposal. The committee recommends $9.7 million in PE 65873M, an increase of $1.5 million to conduct an analysis and acquifer mapping of a candidate military site to establish contamination identification. Aviation depot maintenance technology The budget request contained $70.8 million in PE 63721N for environmental protection. The committee notes that new environmentally friendly repair processes are being developed that offer significant productivity improvements and potential cost savings. To this end, the Congress provided $2.0 million in fiscal year 1999 for the development and demonstration of aviation depot maintenance technologies that will significantly reduce maintenance and repair costs and reduce or eliminate hazardous waste and pollution products. The committee recommends $73.8 million in PE 63721N, an increase of $3.0 million to complete the program for demonstration of advanced maintenance technologies for removal of coatings from large aircraft, cleaning and stripping of metal surfaces, and application of tungsten carbide coatings to aircraft landing gear and hydraulic components. Beartrap nonlinear dynamics and environmental characterization The budget request contained $17.8 million in PE 63254N for anti-submarine warfare (ASW) system developments, including $5.3 million for Project Beartrap. The committee notes that the budget request for Beartrap supports hardware and software developments for advanced capability acoustic and non-acoustic sensors, as well as data collection and analysis for threat assessment and environmental characterization. The committee understands that basic research in nonlinear dynamic stochastic resonance (NDSR), supported by the Office of Naval Research, has advanced to the point that it offers explanations for many observed physical phenomena, and it offers the potential to develop significantly improved acoustic and non-acoustic AWS sensor systems. The committee believes that NDSR technology offers a significant opportunity to enhance the capabilities of Beartrap at a time when evolving ASW requirements indicate the critical need to integrate these latest relevant technologies. Specific areas include characterization of the ocean nonlinear dynamics environment, application of NDSR technology in advanced Beartrap sensors, and validation of NDSR ASW performance. The committee also notes that the Navy requires extensive environmental data to achieve effective performance from the extended echo ranging (EER) devices used in shallow littoral waters. These active acoustic devices are key to naval airborne ASW performance. The Beartrap program is well suited to collect this environmental data. The committee recommends $23.8 million in PE 63254N for ASW systems development, an increase of $6.0 million for Project Beartrap for the purposes outlined above. C-2 eight-blade composite propeller system The budget request contained $53.3 million in PE 25633N for improvements in operational Navy aviation and aviation support systems. The committee is aware that the Navy is seeking a solution to operational limitations encountered with the propeller system used on E-2C and C-2A aircraft. The current propeller system incorporates technology developed in the 1950's and the 1960's, is difficult and expensive to maintain, and is no longer in production. Following committee recommendations in its report on H.R. 1119 (H. Rept. 105-132) for initiation of a development and demonstration of an eight-blade composite propeller for E-2C and C-2A aircraft, the Navy began a program for design, development, test, and production of the propeller system. The committee notes that the program includes flight and ground test of the new propeller system for the E-2 aircraft, but includes only ground tests for the new propeller on the C-2 aircraft. The committee recommends $58.3 million in PE 25633N, an increase of $5.0 million to support flight testing the new propeller system on the C-2 aircraft sequentially with the E-2 flight test program. Claymore marine The budget request contained $75.6 million in PE 63792N for the Navy's advanced technology demonstration program, including $3.9 million for the Claymore Marine advanced technology demonstration. The committee recommends an increase of $2.7 million in PE 63792N for risk reduction and to maintain the schedule for the Claymore Marine advanced technology demonstration. Cooperative engagement capability The budget request contained $114.9 million in PE 63658N to continue hardware and software engineering, integration, test and evaluation of the Navy's cooperative engagement capability (CEC). The statement of managers accompanying the conference report on H.R. 3616 (H. Rept. 105-736) directed the Secretary of the Navy to report to the Congressional defense committees at least quarterly on the interoperability problems between CEC, ship self-defense, and the Aegis combat direction system that were first encountered in 1997 during fleet operational test and evaluation of the systems and the Navy's plan for and progress in resolving these problems. The committee has reviewed the Secretary's first quarterly report and notes that the Navy has made significant progress in developing a plan that focuses on interoperability to support carrier battle group deployments in the near term, and on force-level systems engineering to coordinate requirements, capital investments, development, and installation of new system capabilities for the fleet in the far term. The Program Executive Office for Theater Surface Combatants has been created to provide a common management structure for all surface ship combat direction systems and interfacing systems, including systems integration and interoperability of CEC, Aegis, the advanced combat direction system, and related joint command and control systems. The committee also notes that the Navy has significantly increased land-based system engineering analysis and testing capabilities for combat systems and is establishing a shore-based, distributed engineering test capability that provides the ability to address battle group level combat system interoperability issues and to validate operational tactics, techniques and procedures prior to shipboard installation of the systems. The committee recognizes the potential provided by the Distributed Engineering Plant for reducing the cost of system, acquisition, testing, and training and encourages the Navy to continue to develop and support its shore-based, distributed engineering test capability. The committee notes further that the Navy has realigned and reprogrammed the funds necessary to address these issues. The committee understands that recent land-based and at-sea testing has demonstrated continuing progress in resolving combat systems interoperability issues. However, the committee believes that resolution of the interoperability issues will require a stable program plan and funding and a coordinated effort on the part of the Navy and the supporting system contractors. The committee recommends $114.9 million in PE 63658N to continue CEC development, systems integration, and test and evaluation. Cruiser conversion The budget request contained $28.5 million in PE 64307N and $11.5 million in PE 64567N for cruiser conversion program design and engineering studies but did not include any procurement funds. Aegis class cruisers are the Navy's premier air defense and strike warfare platforms. The first ships of this class have now been in service over 15 years and some of their systems are approaching technical obsolescence. The committee understands that, in order to protect its investment in these highly capable ships, the Navy is planning to extensively upgrade the Aegis cruisers' combat systems and engineering equipment beginning in fiscal year 2002. These upgrades include new computer systems, cooperative engagement and theater ballistic missile defense capabilities, land attack and area air defense commander functions, and other hull and mechanical improvements. The committee supports upgrading these cruisers and recommends $37.5 million in PE 64307N and $17.5 million in PE 64567N, a total increase of $15.0 million, including $9.0 million in PE 64307N and $6.0 million in PE 64567N for engineering studies associated with expansion of the conversion program to include all Aegis cruisers. Distributed surveillance system The budget request contained $14.9 million in PE 64784N for continued development of the distributed surveillance system. The Integrated Undersea Surveillance System (IUSS) program includes both fixed and relocatable acoustic sensor systems to detect and track diesel and nuclear powered submarines. The Fixed Distributed System (FDS) is a series of permanently installed acoustic arrays and the Advanced Deployable System (ADS), currently under development, will comprise sensors that can be rapidly deployed in littoral environments. The committee understands that the incorporation of fiber optic sensor technologies in acoustic arrays can greatly reduce maintenance requirements for these systems. Littoral anti- submarine warfare (ASW) operations pose complex challenges in the evaluation and analysis of acoustic sensor data due to the high volume of traffic and diverse environmental conditions. The committee is concerned that the ADS program does not adequately address automation of detection and tracking functions, connectivity to the Global Command and Control System (GCCS) and web-based network centric warfare systems. Accordingly, the committee recommends $33.9 million, an increase of $19.0 million in PE 64784N for the distributed surveillance system including $8.0 million for the continued application of remote-powered fiber optic sensor technologies for FDS acoustic arrays; and $11.0 million for the development of improved detection and tracking algorithms to provide increased automation for the ADS and an interface among it, the GCCS, and other network centric warfare systems. DP-2 thrust vectoring system proof-of-concept demonstration The budget request contained $42.0 million in PE 63217N for development of air systems and weapons advanced technology. No funds were requested for continuation of the DP-2 thrust vectoring system proof-of-concept demonstration. DP-2 is a proof of concept program to demonstrate thrust vector control to achieve vertical takeoff and conventional takeoff capabilities in a one-half scale flight test vehicle. This technology offers the potential for a low cost, medium range aircraft of advanced composite construction. The committee recommends $47.0 million in PE 63217N, an increase of $5.0 million to complete the proof-of-concept flight test demonstration and provide the basis for a potential Department of the Navy decision to proceed with a full-scale aircraft development program. E-2C radar modernization The budget request contained $16.1 million in PE 24152N for the E-2C maritime surveillance aircraft, including $12.1 million for the E-2C radar modernization program. The committee notes that the radar modernization program is an advanced technology transition demonstration of a new E-2C radar system that will provide improved airborne surveillance capabilities for carrier battle groups engaged in littoral operations. However, funding for the radar modernization program was sharply reduced in this year's budget request. The committee understands that restoration of the funds would accelerate the development and integration of the new radar system and enable participation in the Navy's early operational assessment of the cooperative engagement capability (CEC) with the E-2C. The committee also understands that this would accelerate the E-2C CEC demonstration by one year, reduce risk, and provide the opportunity to forward-fit the capability into new production E-2C aircraft. The committee notes that in addition to demonstrating the potential for significant improvements in airborne surveillance support for littoral operations, the radar improvement program also addresses major obsolescence and reliability issues associated with the current E-2C radar system. The committee recommends $31.1 million in PE 24152N, including an increase of $15.0 million for the E-2C radar modernization program. Electric drive propulsion for Navy ships The budget request contained $108.3 million in PE 63513N for shipboard system component development, including $25.7 million for integrated power systems (IPS) development. The committee notes the Navy's increased interest in the development of electric drive propulsion technology and the potential use of electric drive propulsion in future surface combatants and submarines, including insertion of an electric drive propulsion system in the DD-21 land attack destroyer and in the New Attack Submarine (NSSN) programs. A common integrated electric drive system appears to offer significant advantages, however, implementation of such a system has been limited by the technology needed for reliable electric motors of the power (approximately 30,000 to 50,000 shaft horse power (shp)) required. The committee is aware that several alternative electric propulsion motor concepts have been proposed that are of varying degrees of technical maturity. The statement of managers accompanying the conference report on H.R. 4103 (H. Rept. 105-746) directed the Secretary of the Navy to provide a report to the Congress which evaluates the installation of a common integrated electric drive system for DD-21, a NSSN variant, and the next-generation CV(X) aircraft carrier with both a common integrated electric drive system and a conventional mechanical drive system. The Secretary's report, dated March 1, 1999, states that the Navy has concluded that the radial-gap PM motor possesses the power density, acoustic performance, and maturity of technology to be a viable propulsion motor common to the broadest ranges of ships and that the Navy is currently considering expanding its IPS development to a corporate Navy program that will include state-of-the-art permanent magnet motor technology. The committee recommends $108.3 million in PE 63513N, including $25.7 million for integrated power systems development. The committee will consider recommendations by the Secretary for further development and demonstration of electric drive propulsion technology for Navy ships which identify necessary funding and provide a program plan for the development. Electro-optical framing technologies The budget request contained $5.0 million in PE 35206N for airborne reconnaissance systems, including $2.0 million for electro-optic (EO) framing technologies. The committee continues to support development of the revolutionary digital EO framing technologies with on-chip forward motion compensation (FMC). The committee notes the Navy F-14 Tactical Air Reconnaissance Podded System--Completely Digital (TARPS CD) demonstration system using this technology has recently been successfully employed at sea. Based on this success, the committee believes there is a need for additional TARPS CD risk-reduction pods and that the Navy should expand this effort. Further, the committee believes that the EO framing with on-chip FMC should be fully developed and improved to satisfy current and future applications on aircraft such as tactical unmanned aerial vehicles and other tactical fighter aircraft. Therefore, the committee recommends $10.0 million in PE 35206N, an increase of $5.0 million for continued development of EO framing with on-chip FMC technologies. These efforts shall include development of the high quantum efficiency infra- red framing chip, precision strike improvements, and step- framing technologies. Environmentally safe energetic materials The budget request contained $34.3 million in PE 63609N for development and demonstration of improvements in Navy conventional munitions. No funds were requested to continue the program for development of environmentally safe energetic materials. The Congress has supported the accelerated development and demonstration of energetic materials and processes for explosives, propellants and pyrotechnics for use in undersea, surface, and other weapons systems, which minimize or eliminate any adverse environmental impact normally associated with these materials in production and demilitarization. These new environmentally safe materials are expected to meet insensitive munitions and system performance requirements while lowering the total ownership costs of the weapons systems. The committee recommends an increase of $2.0 million in PE 63609N to continue the development of environmentally safe energetic materials. Extended range guided munition and projectile common guidance The budget request contained $101.5 million in PE 63795N for gun weapons system technology demonstration and validation, including $37.7 million for continued development of the EX-171 extended range guided munition (ERGM). The committee notes that the ERGM projectile, the modified 5-inch, 62 caliber gun, and a land attack missile comprise the Navy's near-term program for improving the Navy's surface fire support capability. The committee is aware that technical problems in development of the ERGM projectile have caused schedule delays and potential increases in program costs, and that the system contractor's decision to relocate the ERGM development program to a new site has only exacerbated these delays and increased costs. The committee believes that while the technology issues facing the ERGM program are low to medium risk, additional effort will be required to control potential cost growth and to minimize any further delay in fielding ERGM to the fleet. The committee notes that both the Navy and the Army are pursuing the development of projectile guidance and control that will use the global positioning system (GPS) and rugged inertial navigation systems (INS). The current guidance and control system for the Navy's ERGM uses mid-1990's technology that typically accounts for at least 50 percent of the total projectile cost. The committee is aware that the Navy and the Army have been modestly investing in the development of micro electro-mechanical sensor (MEMS) technologies that can significantly reduce the cost of navigation systems that use GPS/INS guidance. Use of MEMS to upgrade the baseline (non- MEMS) guidance section would save at least 10 percent of the total cost of each ERGM. If the MEMS system were packaged to fit within the NATO standard fuze, the resulting guidance integrated fuze that could be used by the Army, Navy, Marines, and NATO allies in a variety of current and future projectiles would reduce the cost of the ERGM up to 40 percent. The potential production base for MEMS GPS/INS guidance and control and make low-cost, precision-guided munitions a reality for all services and NATO allies. The committee recommends that the Navy and the Army capitalize on the development of MEMS GPS/INS technology by incorporating the technology in the ERGM projectile, and establishing a joint program for the development of common guidance and control for cannon-fired projectiles. Such a program could leverage technologies developed by the Competent Munitions Advanced Technology Demonstration, Multifunction Fuze, and ERGM programs. The committee recommends an increase of $10.0 million in PE 63795N for ERGM baseline development and to accelerate integration of MEMS-based GPS/INS into the ERGM, and an increase $4.0 million to initiate the joint Projectile Common Guidance program. The committee directs the Secretary of the Navy and the Secretary of the Army to report to the Congressional defense committees with the submission of the fiscal year 2001 budget request, the program plan, schedule, and funding for the joint Projectile Common Guidance program. F/A-18C/D BOL chaff countermeasure The budget request contained $315.7 million in PE 24136N for F/A-18 aircraft operational systems development, including $169.1 million for the development of improvements to fielded F/A-18 aircraft. No funds were requested to continue the certification of BOL chaff countermeasures for the F/A-18C/D. The committee notes that the LAU-138A/A Guided Missile Launcher Set and its associated chaff countermeasures (RR184 and RR189), commonly referred to as BOL chaff, have been qualified and deployed on the F-14 aircraft. The launcher significantly increases aircrew/aircraft survivability and mission effectiveness by dispensing increased quantities of countermeasures against radar homing and infra-red missiles that are dispensed from the rear of the aircraft launcher rail without displacing other aircraft weapons from the launcher rail. The committee further notes that Phase I integration testing of the LAU138A/A on the F/A-18C/D aircraft will be completed in fiscal year 1999. However, the committee understands that funding for completion of Phase 2 of the F/A- 18C/D qualification program, which would lead to a production decision is insufficiently funded. The committee recommends $318.2 million in PE 24136N, an increase of $2.5 million to complete Phase 2 testing and qualification of the LAU 138A/A BOL chaff countermeasure on the F/A-18C/D strike fighter. Free electron laser The budget request contained $37.6 million in PE 62111N for applied research in surface/aerospace surveillance and weapons technology, and $14.2 million in PE 65605A for the high energy laser system test facility (HELSTF). The committee understands that the Department of Energy is considering a technology program for development and demonstration of a free electron laser that operates in the infrared spectrum and desires to evaluate the technology for potential ship self-defense applications. A program has been proposed for upgrade of the free electron laser demonstration facility for applied research in the potential use of tunable free electron lasers as countermeasures against anti-ship and anti-aircraft missile infrared seekers. The committee recommends an increase of $3.0 million in PE 62111N to initiate the demonstration facility upgrade program, and an increase of $4.0 million in PE 65605A for evaluation of this technology by the DOD HELSTF to determine suitability to address Navy requirements. The committee directs the Secretary of the Navy to report to the Congressional defense committees with the fiscal year 2001 budget request, a Navy supported program plan and DOD funding required to complete the project. The committee further directs the Commander, U.S. Army Space and Missile Defense Command, as DOD executive agent for high power solid-state laser technology, to provide a report containing the results of the HELSTF evaluation of the proposed free electron laser technology program prior to a Navy request for funding for the demonstration facility upgrade program. Hybrid fiberoptic/wireless communications system technology The budget request contained $68.8 million in PE 62232N for applied research in command, control, and communications technology. The Congress provided $1.0 million in fiscal year 1999 for development and demonstration of the technology for hybrid fiberoptic/wireless communications systems. The committee understands that the application of this technology to shipboard communications systems would combine the characteristic flexibility and mobility of wireless base stations with the security of point-to-point fiberoptic communications to achieve increased mobility and security while reducing the effects of frequency interference. The committee recommends an increase of $2.5 million in PE 62232N to continue the development of hybrid fiberoptic/ wireless communication system technology. Hyper-spectral analysis The budget request contained $12.1 million in PE 65867N, including $10.5 million for the Navy Force Tactical Exploitation of National Capabilities (TENCAP), $10.1 million in PE 27247F for Air Force TENCAP, and $7.8 million in PE 63232D8 for automatic target recognition. The committee understands that hyperspectral sensor systems could provide the capability to detect and identify targets that are not discernible with conventional sensors by exploiting the spectral signature of both the target and the environment. The committee also understands that the Navy and the Department of Defense now believe that recent design and component technology innovations have reached a level of maturity where hyperspectral technology can be used to provide enhanced capabilities to existing and planned airborne reconnaissance sensors. The committee notes hyperspectral technology has been successfully tested on a limited scale onboard Navy intelligence collection aircraft. The technology provides real-time, automated, hyper-spectral, wide-area search functionality. By searching for spectral anomalies, it provides users with automated target nominations without prior detailed information. This could dramatically cut imagery analyst workloads, while greatly improving real-time targeting and threat warning. The committee believes such a capability is needed to exploit the vast amount of imagery data that the intelligence community is able to provide. Therefore, the committee recommends $10.8 million in PE 63232D8, an increase of $3.0 million for advanced development of hyperspectral technology for automatic target recognition, and $16.1 million in PE 65867N and $14.1 million in PE 27247F, an increase of $4.0 million respectively for the services to procure and test hyper-spectral sensors and exploitation tools. Improved software production management The budget request contained no funding for improved software development and production management. The committee notes that the Office of the Secretary of Defense recently acknowledged that Department of Defense software expenditures had risen to $42 billion annually by 1994, and that 40 to 50 percent of this amount was attributed to software rework and correction of problems. The committee also notes that industry has demonstrated the ability to significantly reduce required rework by more than a factor of four by implementing an initiative known as best software practices. It further notes that even a far more conservative percentage of cost avoidance would result in annual savings of billions of dollars that could be invested elsewhere by the Department of Defense. Another serious problem addressed by this industry initiative is an increasing shortage of qualified programmers. Industry has determined that the number of highly qualified software programmers is declining and that acheiving significant reductions in software re-work enables more efficient use of best qualified software programmers, enabling the focus on new development efforts. The implementation of best software practices by industry has proven that more efficient software development offers a dramatic potential for acquisition cost savings, and the committee believes that this potential must be pursued by the Department for defense programs. The Tri-Service Software Program Managers Network has been established to identify best industry practices for software development and management and to convey these best to the services. The committee is concerned that although the savings possible through use of industry best practices have been documented and an associated implementation plan developed by the Tri-Service Software Program Managers Network, the Department has failed to implement this plan. While a significant number of industry segments are aggressively pursuing best software practices to cut their costs, the annual $42.0 billion cost to the Department of Defense is so large that even a fraction of possible savings, if realized, would have a dramatic impact on force modernization. The committee directs the Secretary of Defense to mandate the use of identified best practices for software development and management for all acquisition programs and recommends $4.5 million in PE 63XXXN for the Tri Service Software Program Managers Network. Intercooled recuperated gas turbine engine The budget request contained $17.7 million in PE 63573N to continue development and full scale system testing of the intercooled recuperated (ICR) gas turbine engine. The committee supports the development of the ICR gas turbine as the next-generation marine propulsion gas turbine and potential power plant for surface combatants and other ships based on the significantly reduced life cycle fuel costs and improved capabilities that have been demonstrated during the development program. The engine is being developed in accordance with cooperative agreements between the United States and the United Kingdom and the United States and France. The committee notes that in 1998 the Navy significantly restructured the ICR program in accordance with program guidance contained in the statement of managers accompanying the conference report on H.R. 4103 (H. Rept. 105-746). The ICR Essential Program has been structured to meet development milestones for the United Kingdom and France's common new generation frigate and to provide industry with a qualified marine gas turbine for consideration as the prime mover for the DD-21 next-generation surface combatant. Under the program the Navy will complete sufficient development testing to characterize technical attributes and risks, complete the second 500 hour development test, and identify a pre-production engine configuration that will then undergo qualification testing by the United Kingdom and France. During the qualification test phase of the program, U.S. Navy participation will include technical review, witnessing tests, and accepting test results. The committee recommends the budget request in PE 63573N. The committee directs the Secretary of the Navy to report to the Congressional defense committees with the fiscal year 2001 budget request those measures necessary to ensure completion of the ICR Essential Program. Joint experimentation program The budget request contained $41.8 million in PE 63727N for the Joint Warfighting Experimentation program. The program funds the field experiments and supporting simulation to evaluate potential systems and concepts and their contribution toward achieving the objective of enhanced effectiveness and dominance of U.S. armed forces in future military operations. The committee notes that the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff's ``Joint Vision 2010'' and supporting conceptual doctrine statements by the military services stress the critical role that technology will play in achieving new levels of effectiveness across the range of future military operations. The committee also notes that the program will initially focus on experiments relative to the contribution of advanced information technology to joint warfighting capabilities. The committee supports a coordinated joint program that will explore and experiment with new operational concepts, doctrine, organizations, training, and system technologies to understand the new capabilities needed to achieve the next century's military requirements. The committee recommends $49.8 million in PE 63727N, an increase of $8.0 million for Joint Warfighting Experimentation program. Joint non-lethal weapons programs The budget request included $23.3 million in PE 63851M for non-lethal weapons. The committee understands that the XM 303 Under-Barrel Tactical Payload System (UBTPS) is being examined for use in internal security and rear area security activities by the military services, Special Operations Command, and the National Guard. Accordingly, the committee considers the continued development and evaluation of the UBTPS in fiscal year 2000 to be a matter of Congressional interest. Further, the committee expects the military services, Special Operations Command, and the National Guard to consider the XM 303 UBTPS for the purpose of determining their requirements for non-lethal systems. Joint tactical combat training system The budget request contained $26.3 million in PE 24571N for Consolidated Training Systems Development, including $8.0 million for continued development of the Joint Tactical Combat Training System (JTCTS). The JTCTS is a Navy-led, joint Air Force/Navy program for the development of fixed, transportable, and mobile range instrumentation for shore-based tactical air crew training and for deployable, at-sea naval expeditionary force training. The committee report on H.R. 3616 (H. Rept. 105-532) directed the Secretary of the Navy, in coordination with the Secretary of the Air Force, to conduct an assessment of the feasibility and desirability of a transition strategy from the existing Navy large area tracking ranges (LATR) and the Air Force's AN/ASQ-34 Kadena Interim Training System (KITS) to the objective JTCTS capability. The committee expressed the belief that such a strategy should include potential improvements in the legacy systems, requirements for interoperability with the JTCTS, and ultimate replacement of the legacy systems by JTCTS. The statement of managers accompanying the conference report on H.R. 4103 (H. Rept. 105-746) directed the Department of Defense to conduct a technical evaluation to compare the capabilities, performance, and costs of an integrated LATR/KITS system to JTCTS. The committee notes that the report of the Navy's JTCTS transition strategy assessment, dated February 1999, concluded that programmatic, technical, and operational use factors indicate a marginal return on investment for improvements to existing legacy systems. The assessment concludes that neither of the legacy systems (LATR or KITS) possesses the capabilities needed to meet the key operational requirements for JTCTS. The committee also notes that the Department intends to complete the technical evaluation required by the statement of managers accompanying the conference report on H.R. 4103 (H. Rept. 105- 746) by August 1999. The committee recommends the budget request for continued development of JTCTS. Lightweight 155MM howitzer The budget request contained $42.7 million in PE 63635M for Marine Corps ground combat supporting arms systems and included $23.2 million for the XM 777 lightweight 155mm towed howitzer. The XM 777 howitzer was developed as the replacement for the aging and operationally deficient M198 towed howitzer for the Marine Corps and the Army. The XM 777 will retain the range of the M198 while reducing the weight from 16,000 pounds to 9,000 pounds. The weight reduction significantly improves transportability by sea, air, and land platforms while providing increased rate of fire. The committee supports this urgently needed replacement and recommends $46.9 million in PE 63635M, an increase of $4.2 million for the XM 777. Littoral warfare fast patrol craft The budget request contained $75.6 million in PE 63792N for the Navy's advanced technology demonstration program. The committee notes that the Office of Naval Research is evaluating initial results of concept evaluation of a littoral warfare fast patrol craft including preliminary design of the ship and fire support weapons module, development of a communications module, and at-sea demonstration of the concept. The committee believes that the concept could provide an enhanced in-shore surveillance, communications, and fire support capability in support of Navy and Marine littoral operations, and that the Navy should continue the evaluation and determine the validity of an operational requirement for such a capability. The committee directs the Secretary of the Navy to report to the Congressional defense committees with the fiscal year 2001 budget request, the program plan, schedule, and funding for the concept development and evaluation program. The committee recommends an increase of $5.0 million in PE 63792N to continue the concept development and evaluation program for the littoral warfare fast patrol craft. Location of global positioning systems jammers The budget request contained $163.1 million in PE 64270N for development of electronic warfare systems. No funds were requested to continue development and demonstration of a state- of-the art precision surveillance and targeting system for location of global positioning systems jammers (LOCO GPSI). The Congress provided $3.5 million in fiscal year 1997 and $2.8 million in fiscal year 1998 to develop and demonstrate a prototype system for locating and targeting global positioning system jammers. The committee understands that the laboratory, field, and initial flight tests of the LOCO GPSI prototype have demonstrated the ability of the prototype to target such jammers. The committee recommends $169.1 million in PE 64270N, an increase of $6.0 million to continue the development and evaluation of the LOCO GPSI system. The committee directs the Secretary of the Navy to assess the operational requirement for an electronic countermeasures system for precision targeting global positioning system jammers and the program plan for development of such systems, and to report the results of the assessment to the Congressional defense committees with the submission of the fiscal year 2001 budget request. Marine Corps H-1 helicopter upgrade The budget request contained $157.7 million in PE 64245N to continue engineering and manufacturing development for upgrade of the Marine Corps fleet of light/attack helicopters. Under the upgrade, the existing fleet of 201 AH-1W attack and 104 UH-1N utility helicopters will be remanufactured into 180 AH-1Z and 100 UH-1Y helicopters. The program was initiated in 1995 to provide increased performance, reliability, maintainability, and commonality at an ``affordable'' cost, reduce maintenance and spare parts cost and overhead, and extend the life of the existing Marine light/attack helicopter fleet until an advanced rotor craft common to all services would become available around 2020. Known as ``4BN/4BW,'' the program replaces the current two-bladed rotor system in both helicopters with a new, identical, four-bladed, all composite rotor system, a common engine and power train, and a fully integrated state-of-the-art cockpit. The committee notes that the Commandant of the Marine Corps has included an increase of $26.6 million for this program as his number one unfunded priority for aviation research and development in fiscal year 2000. Consequently, the committee recommends $184.3 million in PE 64245N, an increase of $26.6 million. The committee is concerned, however, by the continuing cost growth for a weapons system the Marine Corps regards as critical to its future warfighting capability and expects the Secretary of the Navy to review the program, establish a revised program baseline, and take measures necessary to manage the program within the revised baseline. Marine mammal research The budget request contained $361.1 million in PE 61153N for the Navy's defense research sciences program. Of the funds provided in PE 61153N, the committee recommends $500,000 for continuation of the Navy's cooperative marine mammal research program. Multi-function self-aligned gate technology The budget request contained $69.7 million in PE 35204N for tactical unmanned aerial vehicles (UAV) and $9.4 million in 35207F for manned reconnaissance systems. No funding was provided in either program element for the multi-function self- aligned gate (MSAG) active aperture antenna (AAA) technology. The Congress has supported this AAA technology for several years, and the committee is pleased with the successful MSAG antenna demonstration completed in August 1998. During this unprecedented demonstration, the MSAG provided wide-band, duplex communications links simultaneously to a ground vehicle, an aircraft, and a satellite surrogate. The committee believes that a single, electronically- steered antenna array that can provide multiple wide-band communications links would be a cost-effective solution to numerous Department of Defense communications requirements. However, the committee is concerned to note that the Department has failed to provide even minimal funding for this technology. The committee understands that the Office of the Assistant Secretary of Defense (Command, Control, Communications and Intelligence) is considering initiation of an advanced concept technology demonstration of the MSAG technology and that the Air Force is supportive of testing this antenna technology on reconnaissance aircraft. Therefore, the committee recommends an increase of $3.0 million in PE 35204N for operational evaluation of the MSAG AAA on the tactical control station and the Predator UAV. The committee also recommends an increase of $3.0 million in PE 35207F for evaluation of the MSAG AAA onboard the RC-135 Rivet Joint aircraft. Multipurpose processor The budget request contained $40.0 million in PE 64503N for the submarine sonar improvement program, including $22.5 million to continue development of the Acoustic Rapid Commercial-Off-the-Shelf Insertion (A-RCI) program. The committee notes the significant improvement in sonar system capabilities that has resulted from the application of multipurpose processor (MPP) acoustics signal processing technology to Navy submarine sonar systems. The committee has strongly supported the Navy's selection of the MPP as the cornerstone for sonar upgrades for existing submarines in the A-RCI program. The committee has also supported the development of advanced MPP signal processing capabilities in the A-RCI program, in the Navy science and technology base, and in the integration of those capabilities in submarine, airborne, surface sonar, and undersea surveillance systems. The committee recommends the budget request for the submarine sonar improvement program and continued funding support for the development of advanced MPP acoustics signal processing technologies as an integral part of the Navy's sonar improvement research and development program. National oceanographic partnership program The budget request contained $60.3 million in PE 62435N for applied research in oceanographic and atmospheric technology, including $10.0 million for Department of the Navy support to the National Oceanographic Partnership Program. Sec. 282 of the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 1997 (Public Law 104-201) established the National Oceanographic Partnership Program to promote U.S. national goals of assuring national security, advancing economic development, protecting quality of life, and strengthening science education and communication through improved knowledge of the ocean and to coordinate and strengthen oceanographic efforts in support of those goals. The committee has reviewed the National Ocean Research Leadership Council's fiscal year 1999 report to the Congress on the National Oceanographic Partnership Program and notes the steadily increasing activity in pursuit of the program goals and increased funding for the program from the participating federal agencies. The committee notes that the Ocean Research Advisory Panel believes the program has fostered a culture of partnership among participating government agencies, academia, and industry which has resulted in unique new approaches to ocean research. The committee also notes the panel's finding that one of the most pressing concerns in oceanography is the need for integrated ocean observation systems. The committee understands that the Department of the Navy is declassifying and will make available for use by the public and by private institutions and agencies previously classified acoustical data from the Navy's underwater Sound Surveillance System (SOSUS) and data on ocean temperature and salinity levels under the Arctic ice cap. The statement of managers accompanying the conference report on H.R. 3616 (H. Rept. 105- 736) requested that the Chairman of the National Oceanographic Research Council conduct an assessment of the value of data from the Navy's underwater Sound Surveillance System (SOSUS) in public and private ocean research. The committee understands that the council will consider support for a SOSUS pilot project to determine the feasibility of providing routine access to declassified SOSUS data. The committee recommends $60.3 million in PE 62435N, including $10.0 million for the National Oceanographic Partnership Program. Navy aviation survivability The budget request contained $7.3 million in PE 63216N for aviation survivability. The committee understands that the Department of Defense has conducted an extremely successful Foreign Comparative Test (FCT) of the K-36D Russian ejector seat and that this seat demonstrated crew survivable ejection capability which surpassed that of current U.S. ejection seats. The committee notes that the Air Force has continued evaluation of the K-36D and has developed a new version, the K-36/3.5A in order to meet U.S. requirements and yet provide equivalent capabilities in a lighter weight version. While the Air Force is actively pursuing enhanced crew safety capability offered by the K-36/3.5A, the committee is concerned that the Navy has not seriously considered this opportunity to afford Navy and Marine Corps aviators the same increased safe ejection capability. The Navy has proposed to enter into a multi-year procurement F/A-18 E/F Super Hornet aircraft that do not offer the same level of crew safety as the K-36/3.5A. Additionally, the Marine Corps is engaged in re- manufacture of its fleet of AV-8B Harrier jets to correct serious safety and sustainability problems. The committee believes that both of these Navy aircraft represent the backbone of Navy aviation force projection capability and should be required to seriously evaluate the enhanced crew safety offered by the K-36/3.5A ejection seat. The committee recommends that the Secretary of the Navy provide a report to the Congressional defense committees with the submission of the fiscal year 2001 budget request including the details of that evaluation. Navy land attack missile program The budget request contained $101.5 million in PE 63795N for systems integration and testing, including $21.8 million for the Navy's land attack missile program. The committee notes the operational requirement for a land attack missile system in the Navy's near-term and far-term fire support systems. The committee continues to support the development, risk reduction, and analytical activities leading to a defense acquisition milestone decision for a missile system program that will satisfy the operational requirements for a Navy land attack missile system The statement of managers accompanying the conference report on H.R. 3616 (H. Rept. 105-736) directed the Secretary of Defense to ensure the conduct of an analysis of alternatives (AOA) to support the acquisition of a Navy land attack missile, and further directed that the Navy should not proceed to a Milestone I decision until the AOA and other requirements appropriate to a major acquisition milestone decision have been satisfied. The committee notes that the analyses and studies to satisfy this guidance are currently underway. The March 1999 letter report from the Director of Defense Operational Test and Evaluation, which was submitted in response to the direction contained in the Appropriations committee report on H.R. 4103 (H. Rept. 105-591), states that the results of the studies will be examined as part of a 1999 Defense Acquisition Board review of the land attack missile program and that the Department of Defense intends to conduct operational testing to verify the issues on any land attack missile option that is pursued. The committee expects that these actions should result in the selection from among the competing alternatives of the most cost- and operationally effective near-term solution to the operational requirement. The committee also notes that the far-term naval surface fire support program will require an advanced land attack missile system for the DD-21 land attack destroyer when that ship joins the fleet in 2009, and that the Navy has yet to establish a development program for such a missile. The committee believes that a competitive development program should be established beginning in fiscal year 2001to ensure the availability of an advanced land attack missile for the first DD-21. The committee recommends $21.8 million in PE 63795N to continue development and systems integration for the Navy's near-term land attack missile. The committee directs the Secretary of the Navy to report to the Congressional defense committees the program plan and funding requirements for development of an advanced land attack missile system for the DD-21 and other naval combatants with the submission of the fiscal year 2001 budget request. Navy theater missile defense and fleet defense radar upgrades The budget request contained $329.8 million in PE 63868C for the Navy theater wide (NTW) theater ballistic missile defense (TMD) system and $5.7 million in PE63755N for ship self defense. The committee notes the benefits of leveraging the large investment in the Aegis weapon system as the technical basis for the development of an effective sea-based theater missile defense system. The committee understands, however, that the current SPY-1 radar does not meet TMD mission requirements and that significant radar upgrades are required to reach the objective capabilities for the NTW system. At the same time, the committee recognizes that radar upgrades required by the TMD mission need to be thoroughly integrated with continuing radar improvements required for fleet defense to meet aircraft and cruise missile threats, development of the cooperative engagement capability (CEC), and continued development of next generation Navy destroyers and cruisers. The committee is aware that the Navy has two radar alternatives under consideration to meet its immediate TMD requirements, an adjunct X-band radar and a S/C band SPY-1 upgrade. The committee also understands that the Navy is conducting a competitive development of a multi-function radar/ volume search radar (MFR/VSR) suite for the DD-21 and CVN-77 programs. The committee is concerned that the Navy is simultaneously conducting three different surface ship radar development programs and that two major competitors are participating in all three efforts. All three of these radar programs support similar area search and tracking requirements for current and future surface ships, and the committee believes that all three alternatives should be carefully evaluated to determine the most cost effective and technically feasible approach for supporting NTW and fleet defense radar requirements. The committee notes that the Navy has unique expertise in developing radar and command and control capabilities required for fleet defense, and that these requirements overlap those derived from the TMD mission. However, the committee believes that the Navy needs to lay out a clearly defined roadmap of radar requirements and technology approaches to enable identification of the best approach for various programs. The committee also notes that the Ballistic Missile Defense Organization shares TMD development costs for a number of programs, including the Space Based Laser, Navy Area Defense, and Patriot Advanced Capability-3 Configuration 3 (PAC-3) programs, while retaining program oversight over the executing service. The committee believes that this is a sound management and funding structure for NTW as well. Therefore, the committee recommends $55.7 million in PE 63755N, an increase of $50.0 million for continued development of an adjunct X-band radar, a SPY-1 upgrade, and the MFR/VSR suite to meet fleet defense and TMD requirements. The committee further directs that the Secretary of the Navy provide the Congressional defense committees a comprehensive TMD and fleet defense radar roadmap with submission of the fiscal year 2000 budget request. NSSN advanced submarine systems technology development and insertion The budget request contained $241.5 million in PE 64558N for continued engineering and manufacturing development (EMD) of the VIRGINIA Class New Attack Submarine (NSSN) and $115.8 million in PE 63561N for advanced submarine systems development. The committee continues to strongly support the development of advanced submarine technologies for the NSSN, and is pleased with the manner in which the Navy has adopted and is executing a strategy for increasing the capabilities of the NSSN submarine. Incremental insertion of advanced technologies in the follow-on ships of the class will lead to the production of a more capable, less expensive nuclear attack submarine. The committee has reviewed the February 1999 report from the Under Secretary of Defense (Acquisition and Technology) on the updated technology insertion plan and notes that the program has been extended through the first seven ships of the class. The committee notes that, overall, the budget request contains approximately $292.0 million in EMD and Ship Construction, Navy funding to support the VIRGINIA Class technology insertion program. The committee also notes shortfalls in the advanced submarine technology program that have been identified by the Chief of Naval Operations. The committee recommends the following increases for the NSSN advanced submarine systems technology development and insertion program that have been recommended by the Navy to accelerate and enhance critical warfighting capabilities in the VIRGINIA Class NSSN: $6.5 million in PE 63561N, $18.5 million in PE 64558N, and $5.0 million in Ship Construction, Navy. Optical correlation technology for automatic target recognition The budget request contained $7.8 million in PE 63232D8Z for the development and demonstration of automatic target recognition technology and $34.3 million in PE 63609N for the Navy's conventional munitions program. The committee report on H.R. 3616 (H. Rept. 105-532) directed the Undersecretary of Defense (Acquisition and Technology) to provide to the Congressional defense committees the Department's overall plan and program for the development and demonstration of optical correlator technology for automatic target recognition. The committee has reviewed the plan and notes that the Director, Defense Research and Engineering supports the development and demonstration of the technology as a priority of the ATR technology assessment program. The committee also notes that additional funding support to the program has resulted in key technology advances and increased the potential for near term transition of the technology and its applications to weapon systems. The committee recommends an increase of $8.7 million in PE 63609N to continue the program for development and demonstration of a miniature, rugged optical correlator for automatic target recognition and improved aim point selection for the Navy's Standard Missile. Optically fed and controlled phased array antenna The budget request contained $68.8 million in PE 62232N for applied research in communications, command and control, intelligence, surveillance, and reconnaissance, including $22.2 million for radar technology. The committee notes the potential for the development of monolithic circuits that combine photonic, optic, and microwave technologies in highly integrated, multi-level photonic modules. The use of such modules could provide increased bandwidth, advanced beamforming capabilities, and improved performance in advanced military radar and communication systems that are lower in cost, smaller in size and weight, and require less power than those systems that employ current phased-array radar technology. The committee recommends an increase of $2.5 million in PE 62232N for applied research in the development and application of multi-level photonic module technology to optically fed and controlled phased array radar and communications systems. Optically multiplexed wideband radar beamformer The budget request contained $68.8 million in PE 62232N for applied research in communications, command, control, intelligence, surveillance, and reconnaissance technology, including $22.2 million for radar technology. The committee understands that high instantaneous bandwidth is needed in shipboard radar surveillance systems to achieve the necessary resolution for theater ballistic missile defense, ship self-defense, and non-cooperative target identification. The committee notes that the use of optical wavelength-division multiplexing (WDM) technology, now being developed in the commercial sector, may provide the capability for wideband beamforming that could result in the demonstration of a wideband electronically-steered active radar antenna with high instantaneous bandwidth and the resolution necessary for theater ballistic missile defense and non-cooperative target identification. Use of optical WDM technology to reduce hardware complexity would permit reductions in system cost and achieve performance levels that are needed for ship self defense in a littoral environment. The committee recommends an increase of $3.0 million in PE 62232N to initiate a cooperative program for research, development, and demonstration of a prototype optically multiplexed, wideband, radar beam-forming array using optical WDM technology. P-3 maritime patrol aircraft combat systems research and development The budget request contained $3.0 million in PE 64221N for engineering and manufacturing development in support of the P-3 maritime patrol aircraft. The program provides upgrades to P-3C aircraft systems to enhance surface and subsurface tracking, classification, and attack capabilities, specific emitter identification, and improved radar tracking, and develops the software necessary to integrate advanced sensors into embedded P-3C Update III computer systems. The committee notes that major theater combatant commanders continue to give high priority to the use of P-3C aircraft for reconnaissance and surveillance missions in both maritime and littoral operations. The Navy's recently-published Integrated Submarine Warfare Roadmap, which responded to direction contained in the statement of managers accompanying the conference report on H.R. 3616 (H. Rept. 105-736), cites improvements in P-3 system capabilities as either essential or critical to near-term anti-submarine warfare operational capabilities. The committee also notes that there is, as yet, no program for development of a new multi-mission maritime aircraft. The committee strongly believes that increased priority must be given to the maintenance of a robust, continuing research and development program to support sustainment of existing P-3C aircraft anti-submarine warfare and anti-surface warfare capabilities and introduction of new capabilities. The committee recommends the budget request, and strongly recommends that the Secretary of the Navy carefully review the fiscal year 2001 budget request for the P-3 maritime patrol aircraft program to ensure that it is in accordance with the program priorities established in the Integrated Submarine Warfare Roadmap. Parametric airborne dipping sonar The budget request contained $58.0 million in PE 63747N for undersea warfare advanced technology development and $118.7 million in PE 64216N for the multi-mission helicopter upgrade program. No funds were requested for the parametric airborne dipping sonar (PADS). The committee notes that the Block II Upgrade to the LAMPS Mark III Weapons System will make significant improvements in both the anti-submarine warfare (ASW) and anti-surface warfare mission areas. The Airborne Low Frequency Sonar (ALFS) will provide the principle improvement in the LAMPS Mark III ASW mission capability. The committee also notes that, in addition to the ALFS program, the Navy's advanced technology demonstration of a prototype PADS has indicated the significant potential of parametric sonar technology against both mine-like and submarine targets in littoral waters. The results of the Navy's recent at-sea test of PADS indicate that the essential goals of the PADS demonstration have been met and suggest its potential for mine detection. However, the PADS ASW performance has not yet been demonstrated against a submarine target. The Secretary of the Navy's evaluation report, dated January 1999, states that the PADS technology merits further pursuit and that the Navy intends to continue demonstrations of parametric sonar technology using increases provided by the Congress. The committee believes that demonstrations of the PADS prototype technology against a submarine target must be completed before any decision is made to continue with a development program for PADS. The committee recommends the budget request in PE 63747N and PE 64216N and awaits recommendations from the Secretary of the Navy to continue further demonstrations and development of PADS. Phased array weather radar The budget request contained $37.6 million in PE 62111N for applied research in surface/aerospace surveillance and weapons technology. The committee notes ongoing Navy tests of the capability of the AN/SPY-1 phased array radar for the measurement of detailed local atmospheric conditions over water and in clear air. The committee is aware of proposals that have been made for the use of the SPY-1 radar at the National Oceanographic and Atmospheric Agency's (NOAA) National Severe Storms Laboratory to evaluate the radar's capability for the collection of weather data and to test the technology for upgrading the WSR- 88D weather radar with phased array radar capabilities. The committee believes that such an evaluation could result in advanced radar capabilities for severe weather warning, and could also result in enhanced capabilities for the SPY-1 radar for over-land surveillance and missile engagement guidance and control during littoral operations. The committee encourages the Navy, NOAA, and the National Science Foundation (NSF) to enter into a cooperative agreement for loan of a SPY-1 radar to the National Severe Storms Laboratory and evaluation of the potential use of the radar system for weather prediction, observation, and warning. The committee recommends an increase of $10.0 million in PE 62111N, to be used as matching funds to support a joint Navy- NOAA-NSF evaluation of the SPY-1 radar's capability for the collection of weather data and the technology for upgrading weather radar with phased array radar capabilities. Power electronic building blocks and power node control centers The budget request contained $41.5 million in PE 63508N for surface ship and submarine hull, mechanical, and electrical advanced technology, including $18.0 million for development of advanced shipboard electrical systems. The committee notes that the budget request supports the continued development and demonstration of power electronic building block technology, however, no funds were requested to continue the development of power node control centers. The committee continues to believe that power node control centers offer potential for significant improvements in efficiency and effectiveness for advanced electrical distribution system fault detection, switching, reconfiguration, and control of shipboard electrical power systems. The committee recommends an increase of $1.5 million in PE 63508N to continue the program for development and demonstration of power node control centers. Project ``M'' The budget request contained $41.5 million in PE 63508N for submarine and surface ship handling, machinery, and engineering systems, including $2.4 million to complete the development, demonstration, and transition of advanced vibration control and quieting technology for naval machinery support structures. The committee has closely followed the progress of Project M, a mounting system for active control of noise and vibration cancellation on ship machinery support systems, from its inception as a Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency advanced submarine technology program to the transition and continued development of the technology by the Navy. The results of the program have shown that the active machinery raft may provide unprecedented quieting for submarines and other ships. The committee notes the Navy's plan to conduct in- water tests of the Project M technology installed in a large scale test vehicle at the Navy's underwater acoustic test range and believes that these tests must be completed in order to fully characterize the overall performance of the technology. The statement of managers which accompanied the conference report on H.R. 3616 (H.Rept 105-736) requested that the Secretary of the Navy assess the potential of the application of the Project M technology in surface ships. The Secretary's assessment, dated April 1999, concluded that, although Project M offered potential benefits in low frequency vibration control, the impact on surface ship design make it unlikely that such technologies would be used in existing or future surface combatants. Consequently, the Secretary stated that a full-scale prototype development and demonstration of Project M technology should not be pursued. However, the assessment also stated that these conclusions should not confine or limit continued science and technology investments in active control vibration reduction technologies for other applications. Accordingly, the committee recommends an increase of $5.0 million in PE 63508N for completion of the in-water evaluation of Project M quieting technology in the \1/4\-scale submarine vehicle and transition of the technology to the Naval Sea Systems Command. S-3B surveillance system upgrade program The budget request contained $2.1 million in PE 64217N for the weapon system improvement program for the S-3B maritime patrol aircraft. The committee notes that the objective of the S-3B surveillance system upgrade program is the integration of off- the-shelf radar, electro-optic and infrared sensors, electronic support measures, and tactical data links to demonstrate an enhanced stand-off surveillance capability in support of Navy battle group operations that could be achieved with low risk and at relatively low cost. For fiscal year 1997, Congress added funds to demonstrate the APS-137V(V)5 synthetic aperture radar on the S-3B in phase I of the program. The committee notes Navy proposals for phase II of the program which would demonstrate an integrated surveillance system mission package on the S-3B aircraft. The committee believes that the phase II program is a logical follow-on to phase I system demonstrations to be conducted later this year. The committee recommends $9.1 million in PE 64217N, an increase of $7.0 million for the S-3B surveillance system upgrade program. Ship survivability and personnel protection The budget request contained $108.3 million in PE 63513N, including $6.6 million for development and demonstration of survivability and protection technologies. The committee notes that requirements for increased mission capabilities and reduced manning in future naval ships will place a premium on protection of ships personnel and the ability to monitor personnel status under all conditions. The committee has followed closely the Navy's efforts to develop and introduce to the fleet a computer-based, total ship damage control information management system that would enable rapid, coordinated response to wartime and peacetime casualties, reduce crew manpower requirements, and improve manpower utilization. The committee notes that the Navy is evaluating a personal status monitor that could provide the capability for detecting man overboard incidents. The committee continues to support the evaluation of commercial off-the-shelf, non- developmental items (COTS NDI) that could improve operational safety and combat survivability and have a high potential for contributing to safety of flight, fire fighting, damage control, emergency preparedness ashore, and survival at sea. The committee recommends $112.3 million in PE 63513N, an increase of $4.0 million for development, demonstration, and evaluation of ship survivability and protection technologies. Silicon carbide semiconductor substrates The budget request contained $78.0 million in PE 62234N for applied research in materials, electronics, and computer technology. The committee is aware that silicon carbide is a wide band- gap semiconductor material with unique physical and electrical properties that will make possible the fabrication of the next- generation of microelectronic devices. These devices will be capable of operation in radiation environments and at high temperatures, high voltages, high power levels, and high frequencies in the microwave regime. These capabilities will enable a wide range of applications in military and commercial systems, such as high voltage/high power systems, advanced radar, nuclear instruments, satellite communications, and advanced sensors. The committee supports the progress that has been made in the development of silicon carbide materials and encourages partnerships with industry for early commercialization of the technology. The committee recommends an increase of $3.0 million in PE 62234N for the continued development of silicon carbide semiconductor materials and to advance high electrical power control and other applications for next generation military platforms. Smart propulsor product model The budget request included $5.3 million in PE 63563N for development and validation of design tools and methods for ship concept studies. The Congress provided an increase of $3.0 million in fiscal year 1999 for the smart propulsor product model (SPPM), a joint Navy/industry effort to develop software design and analysis tools that bring together design, manufacturing, cost and capabilities modeling for ship propulsion devices. The committee notes that successful completion of the development program for the SPPM should enable the Navy to consider innovative propulsion concepts for future ships while considering life-cycle cost, manufacturing techniques, and their overall impact on ship system performance and cost. The committee recommends $8.3 million in PE 63563N, an increase of $3.0 million to continue development of the SPPM. SSGN conversion from Trident-class SSBN submarines The budget request contained no funds for conversion of Trident-class ballistic missile submarines (SSBN) to a conventional cruise missile (SSGN) configuration. The committee believes that sustaining a robust nuclear deterrent ought to be of the highest priority for future use of Trident class SSBN's. The committee notes Section 1032 of the National Defense Authorization Act for 1998 (Public Law 105-85, 111 Stat. 1948), as amended, limits the expenditure of funds for the retirement of any of the 18 Trident SSBNs and other strategic nuclear systems unless START II enters into the force and the Secretary of Defense exercises a waiver to implement START II. The committee further notes that the statement of managers accompanying the conference report on H.R. 3616 (H. Rept. 105- 736) directed the Secretary of Defense to report to the Congressional defense committees by March 1, 1999 on an analysis of Trident SSBN conversion to the SSGN configuration. This analysis is intended to address a range of conversion issues, including costs and schedule, major problem areas requiring additional analysis, implications for arms control treaty compliance, and possible benefits. The committee notes that the Secretary's report has not been received. If the decision is made to retire SSBN submarines as a result of arms control agreements, the committee believes that the Department of Defense should consider the one time, near term opportunity Trident SSBN conversion to SSGN presents to the United States military. As a result, upon such a decision and the release of the Secretary of Defense's report, the committee directs the Navy to consider submitting a reprogramming request to the Congressional defense committees to reprogram funds required to support concept validation and cost and operational effectiveness analysis leading to a defense acquisition milestone decision on conversion of the Trident SSBN to SSGN conversion. The reprogramming authorization to initiate concept evaluation and validation for the SSGN conversion should not alter the nation's policy of remaining at START I force levels until START II enters into force, nor shall it detract in any way from the overall U.S. deterrent posture or policy. The committee re-emphasizes the importance it places on the requested report and directs the Secretary to provide it to the Congressional defense committees at the earliest possible date. Superconducting waveform generator The budget request contained $78.0 million in PE 62234N for applied research in materials, electronics, and computer technology, including $9.8 million for radio frequency solid state device and control components. The committee notes that the Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency and the Office of Naval Research demonstrated notable performance gains through the use of cryogenic electronics and high temperature superconductivity technology in analog and digital electronic components. The Congress provided $1.0 million in fiscal year 1999 to continue the development of super conducting waveform generator and analog- to-digital converter technology that could lead to the demonstration of an advanced ``cryo-radar'' with increased performance and clutter rejection and reduced size, power, and weight. The committee has since learned that the program cannot be executed at the funding level provided. The committee recommends an increase of $2.0 million in PE 62234N to continue the program for development of superconducting waveform generator and analog-to-digital converter technology, and to fulfill the intent expressed by the conferees in the statement of managers accompanying the conference report on H.R. 3616 (H. Rept. 105-736). SWATH ship mine counter-measures demonstrator The budget request contained $75.6 million in PE 63792N for Navy advanced technology demonstrations. No funds were requested for demonstration of a high-speed mine counter- measures (MCM) ship. The committee notes that the Navy's existing force of dedicated mine warfare ships are proven and capable of sustained mine hunting and clearance operations, but their slow speed and limited operational radius limits the effectiveness of their deployment with Navy surface combatant forces. The committee also notes that Navy studies indicate continued requirements for a dedicated MCM force for the foreseeable future. The committee is aware of proposals that have been made for evaluation of advanced, high-speed hull designs as MCM ships. These proposals include the adaptation of existing Navy small water area, twin hull (SWATH) craft, equipped with air and surface MCM systems, as a system demonstrator for evaluation in fleet battle experiments of the effectiveness of such craft in MCM operations. The committee urges the Secretary of the Navy to assess the requirement for a high-speed MCM ship demonstration program and provide to the Congressional defense committees by October 1, 1999, a report which includes the Secretary's recommendations regarding the demonstration, a program execution plan, and Navy funding for the program. Tactical control system The budget request contained $69.7 million in PE 35204N for tactical unmanned aerial vehicles (UAV), and included $24.6 million for the tactical control system (TCS). No funding was provided for the operation of the UAV systems integration laboratory (SIL) or to continue its development of the multiple UAV simulation environment (MUSE). The committee continues to be supportive of the TCS and notes that TCS software is the key to interoperability for future medium-altitude and tactical UAVs and their payloads. Further, the committee is supportive of the TCS objective to interface with high-altitude UAVs. The committee notes that the Naval Surface Warfare Center program office continues to develop most of the TCS software and expend most of the TCS developmental funding in-house. The committee believes that the TCS program could be more efficiently managed if the TCS developments, including software engineering and maintenance, were to be outsourced in whole to the prime system integration contractor. Further, the committee believes such outsourcing would allow for a smaller and more efficient government program office. The committee believes that holding a prime contractor responsible for total system performance has demonstrated success with many other programs. Finally, the committee notes that the U.S. Atlantic Command (USACOM) has been without a TCS capability for its UAV testing, and that additional funding is required to provide such a capability. Therefore, the committee recommends an increase of $3.0 million for procuring a TCS ground station for USACOM. Further, the committee directs a reallocation of $4.5 million within PE 35204N specifically to realize the program office efficiencies discussed above and to move software development and maintenance responsibility to the prime contractor. This funding is to be reapplied within the TCS program to fund the SIL MUSE efforts. Tactical Tomahawk The budget request contained $147.2 million in PE 24229N for Tomahawk and Theater Mission Planning Center operational systems development, including $145.3 million for the Tactical Tomahawk program. The committee has supported the Navy's initiation of the Tactical Tomahawk program. However, the committee report on H.R. 3116 (H. Rept. 105-532) expressed particular concern about the Navy's ability to establish a competitive environment for future Tactical Tomahawk procurement and directed the Secretary of the Navy to report to the Congressional defense committees the Navy's plan for ensuring competitiveness in the production phase of the program. The Secretary's letter report, dated September 25, 1998, noted the Navy's decision to continue with the current Tomahawk manufacturer for both the Tactical Tomahawk development contract and the full rate production program that would commence in fiscal year 2003. The report also asserted that the cost to the Navy associated with acquisition of a comprehensive technical data package for the missile and facilitating a second source would be prohibitive and that the delay in bringing on a second source would not support the required schedule for the delivery of missiles to the fleet. The committee notes that the justification and approval (J&A) on which the sole-source decision for the Tactical Tomahawk program was based stated that the engineering and manufacturing development (EMD) contract would require the contractor to develop and maintain a complete technical data package to support EMD and future missile production. The committee also notes that since the approval of the J&A and award of the EMD contract for Tactical Tomahawk, the Navy has determined that it does not have the ability to provide a technical data package to firms that would wish to compete in related warhead programs because the ``EMD contract does not include a requirement for a technical data package.'' The committee believes that the Navy's decision not to acquire a technical data package for the Tactical Tomahawk denies the ability to establish a second production source for the missile, should that be required in the future, and the ability of the Navy to compete any future procurement of the missile. In view of the operational expenditures of the Tomahawk missile as a weapon of choice in current operations and the imminent need to replace those expenditures, the committee considers such a policy short-sighted. The committee also notes that the estimated cost of the Tactical Tomahawk program dictate that any procurement decision should be made only after a formal defense acquisition program milestone decision review at an appropriate time in the development program. The committee believes that such a milestone decision review should consider measures for establishing competitiveness in the production phase of the program. The committee recommends the budget request of $147.2 million for continuation of the Tomahawk development program. The committee directs the Undersecretary of Defense (Acquisition and Technology) to review the Tactical Tomahawk program and the decision not to acquire a technical data package for the missile. The Secretary shall report to the Congressional defense committees by December 31, 1999, on measures that will be taken to insure competition in future Tactical Tomahawk procurement and related programs. Trajectory correctable munitions development The National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 1999 (Public Law 105-261) provided $5.0 million in PE 63635M for the joint Army-Marine Corps Trajectory Correctable Munitions (TCM) development. The committee notes that the various agreements required for a joint international program have been agreed to by all parties and are to be signed in the near future. The committee continues to support TCM development and directs the Secretary of Defense to release the previously authorized funding to the Marine Corps promptly after the agreements are signed. Ultra-high thermal conductivity fibers The budget request contained $78.0 million in PE 62234N for applied research in materials, electronics, and computer technology. The committee notes that over the last four years the Navy has engaged in a program to advance the use of ultra-high thermal conductivity fibers in high-performance, high-density electronic modules. Success in this area could permit the expanded use of commercial-off-the-shelf (COTS) electronic components in military aircraft and avionics (where the high thermal output of such components has constrained their use), and in substantial savings in system procurement costs. The committee recommends an increase of $2.5 million in PE 62234N to continue the development of applications for ultra- high thermal conductivity fibers technology. Undersea warfare advanced technology The budget request contained $34.1 million in PE 62633N for applied research in undersea warfare weapons technology. The committee recommends $36.1 million, an increase of $2.0 million to continue the development and application of microelectromechanical systems (MEMS) technology to Navy undersea weapons systems. Unmanned aerial vehicles The committee notes that the Congress directed the establishment of the office of Director for Expeditionary Warfare (N85) within the Chief of Naval Operations as a provision of Public Law 102-484, the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 1993. This action was taken to address Congressional concerns about the adequacy of Navy resources dedicated to expeditionary warfare areas such as amphibious lift, mine warfare, and naval surface fire support. The Navy subsequently established responsibility for requirements generation and resource sponsorship for unmanned aerial vehicles (UAVs), and assigned the new responsibilities to the expeditionary warfare directorate based on the vital role these systems play in reconnaissance and targeting support to expeditionary operations. The committee understands that the Navy is considering transferring responsibility for naval UAVs from N85 to the office of the Director of Air Warfare (N88). The committee is concerned that the migration of responsibility for naval UAVs may lead to decreased emphasis on the vital role these systems perform in expeditionary operations. The committee urges the Navy to consult the Congressional defense committees on any planned transfer of responsibility for naval UAVs and provide sufficient rationale prior to executing such a transfer. Upgrading fleet systems The budget request contained $46.7 million in PE 63582N for combat systems integration demonstration and validation. The committee understands that the recently created Systems Engineer of the Navy (NAVSEA 007) provides a focal point for interoperability and configuration control with the authority to direct overall upgrade of obsolete equipment across Navy systems. The office has developed a methodology for reducing the logistics costs associated with maintaining legacy equipment: identifying and analyzing legacy systems in the fleet, then replacing aging and obsolete equipment with state- of-the-art, commercial-off-the-shelf (COTS) equipment. Results of the program should significantly reduce ownership costs to the Navy and realize cost reductions estimated to be in the hundreds of millions of dollars. The committee supports the initiative and encourages its implementation by the Navy as soon as possible. The committee recommends $49.7 million in PE 63582N, an increase of $3.0 million to support implementation of the COTS insertion initiative for upgrading fleet systems. Vacuum electronics The budget request contained $78.0 million in PE 62234N for applied research in advanced materials, electronics, and computer technology, including $10.0 million for vacuum electronics technology. The committee supports continuation of a robust vacuum electronics research and development program and expects the Navy as the Department of Defense (DOD) executive agent for the program to insure a coordinated vacuum electronics research and development program among the military services and defense agencies, and with other federal agencies, that will meet DOD requirements for advanced vacuum electronics technology. The committee recommends $10.0 million in PE 62234N for applied research in vacuum electronics technology. The committee directs the Secretary of the Navy to assess the Department's requirements for advanced vacuum electronics technology and to report the results of that assessment and the long-term funding plan for the Department's vacuum electronics technology program to the Congressional defense committees with the submission of the fiscal year 2001 budget request. Vectored thrust ducted propeller compound helicopter demonstration The budget request contained $75.6 million in PE 63792N, including $5.0 million to begin an advanced technology demonstration of the Vectored Thrust Ducted Propeller (VTDP) Compound Helicopter, and $48.8 million in PE 64212N, including $34.9 million for development and evaluation of the CH-60S Fleet Combat Support helicopter. The committee notes that the request for CH-60S helicopter development includes completion of a three-phase demonstration of its suitability for airborne mine countermeasures (MCM) towing missions. The Navy has placed a high priority on the development of an organic airborne mine countermeasures capability and the demonstration of a variant of the CH-60 helicopter for the towed airborne MCM mission that will begin in fiscal year 1999. As a back-up technology, the Navy plans an advanced technology demonstration of the VTDP helicopter to demonstrate and assess the helicopter's towed airborne MCM capability, other multi-mission capabilities, and life cycle cost effectiveness. The committee also notes that the Navy plans to address the requirements, content, schedule, and cost of the plan for the VTDP advanced technology demonstration. The committee recommends the budget requests for PE 63792N and PE 64212N and further recommends that the Navy complete the assessment of requirements, schedule, and cost of conducting an ATD for VDTP and provide the assessment and recommendations to the Congressional defense committees in conjunction with submission of the budget request for fiscal year 2001. Virtual test bed for advanced electrical ship systems The budget request contained $41.5 million in PE 63508N for development of surface ship and submarine hull, mechanical, and electrical advanced technology. The committee has supported the development of technologies that will lead to lower cost designs for future naval ships. The Congress provided funds in fiscal year 1999 to accelerate the development and use of virtual prototyping and a virtual test bed to demonstrate and evaluate advanced shipboard electrical power system concepts. The test bed provides the capability to dynamically test hull, mechanical, and electrical system designs in an interactive, distributed simulation. The committee believes that the test bed can be further developed through the integration of actual hardware and advanced electrical control device simulations to provide a distributed hardware-in-the-loop simulation that will permit realistic evaluations of ship hull, mechanical, and electrical systems performance. The committee recommends an increase of $3.0 million in PE 63508N to continue the development and application of the virtual test bed. Air Force RDT&E Overview The budget request contained $13,077.8 million for Air Force RDT&E. The committee recommends authorization of $13,212.7 million, an increase of $134.8 million. The committee recommendations for the fiscal year 2000 Air Force RDT&E program are identified in the table below. Major changes to the Air Force request are discussed following the table and in the classified annex to this report. Items Of Special Interest Airborne laser The budget request contained $308.6 million in PE 63319F for the airborne laser (ABL) program. The National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 1999 (Public Law 105-261) required an independent assessment of the ABL program, including the need for any additional testing, the adequacy of criteria for entry into engineering and manufacturing development, and the adequacy of ABL operational concepts. The committee notes that the independent assessment team (IAT) stated that ``the nation is on the threshold of being able to acquire a long-sought military HEL [high energy laser] capability'' and that such a capability would ``represent a truly revolutionary weapon in the nation's arsenal.'' While acknowledging that technical uncertainties remain, the IAT also stated that ``subsystem development and analyses have matured to the point where the remaining questions relate to system issues which can only be answered by a complete HEL flying system, gathering data and demonstrating effectiveness in an operational environment.'' The committee notes that the ABL program has been restructured to accommodate a $25.0 million congressional reduction. The restructured program will increase efforts to characterize atmospheric turbulence that could degrade ABL performance, demonstrate the effectiveness of ABL's atmospheric compensation, and examine both the lethality of the laser and potential countermeasures. The committee notes that the program has consistently met its budget, technical, and schedule milestones, and that the initiatives in the program restructuring address all relevant congressional concerns. The committee further notes that the ABL program offers the potential for significant contributions to advancing laser technology generally, including a better understanding of laser lethality, laser optics, acquisition, aiming, pointing, tracking, and command and control. The committee recommends $308.6 million, the amount requested for the airborne laser. Aircrew laser eye protection The budget request contained $14.8 million in PE 63231F for crew systems and personnel protection technology, including $1.3 million for aircrew laser eye protection. The committee has consistently supported the Department of Defense's efforts to enhance aircraft crew member protection systems. The committee is aware of the ongoing efforts to develop both laser eye protection technologies and an overall laser threat analysis system. The committee urges continued development of these initiatives and encourages them to be viewed as a high priority. The committee recommends $19.3 million in PE 63231F, an increase of $4.5 million to be used for the development of helmet-mounted sensory and laser protection technologies as well as the laser threat analysis system. Air Force/National Reconnaissance Office partnership The budget request contained $2.9 million in PE 63856F for the Air Force/National Reconnaissance Office (NRO) partnership program. The Air Force/NRO partnership program funds studies and analyses of opportunities to better integrate the activities of the two organizations. The committee believes that the leadership structure of the two organizations is appropriate to foster such integration, and that each organization should be highly motivated to leverage the investments of the other as a means of conserving scarce resources. The committee believes that the activities funded in this program should be part of the regular order of business for both the NRO and the Air Force. The committee recommends no funding in PE 63856F. Air Force science and technology funding The budget request contained $209.5 million for Air Force 6.1 basic research and $507.6 million for 6.2 applied research for a total Air Force science and technology (S&T) request of $717.1 million. The committee notes with concern that the Air Force S&T budget request reflects a disturbing decline in basic and applied research investments from the fiscal year 1999 appropriated level of $802.0 million. This reduced amount is also less than either the Army or Navy S&T request and gives rise to serious concern for the health of future Air Force modernization capabilities. The committee is extremely disappointed that the service with the vision to first employ such leading edge technologies as stealth, precision guided weapons, and space-based information systems could sacrifice the very tools that delivered these powerful leap-ahead technologies and prioritize instead a series of near-term upgrades to existing legacy systems. While the committee recognizes the importance of sustaining the existing capability inherent in todays weapon systems, it views sacrificing the research essential to open the door to future modernization without full acknowledgment at the highest levels of leadership as irresponsible and unacceptable. The committee notes that the Air Force Chief of Staff has identified a collection of non-space related S&T programs totaling $94.0 and included them among the Air Force unfunded priorities. While the committee understands the extreme pressures experienced by the services as they attempt to preserve their most critical modernization programs, the importance of these omitted S&T programs is difficult to understand. The committee disagrees with the lower priority placed on these programs and believes that several fielded systems development programs offering only incremental improvements to existing equipment, while necessary, should still be considered lower in importance to critically needed S&T investments. Therefore, the committee recommends the following program decreases explained in detail elsewhere in this report: $12.1 million in PE 11113F, a decrease of $15.0 million for B-52 squadrons; and $65.1 million in PE 63434F, a decrease of $15.0 million for the national polar-orbiting operational environmental surveillance system. While the committee has expressed great concern over the serious decline in overall RDT&E funding and does not consider RDT&E program decreases lightly, it does believe that these programs are far lower priorities than the S&T program reductions proposed by the Air Force. In conjunction with the above decreases, the committee recommends restoration of the following critical non-space S&T programs: Automatic target recognition The budget request contained $65.0 million in PE 62204F for aerospace sensors, but included no funding for automatic target recognition (ATR). The committee notes the importance of accurate target recognition capability and the high sensitivity to collateral damage displayed during recent regional conflicts. Technologies such as ATR should be thoroughly evaluated for potential improvements to all applicable weapon systems. The committee recommends $68.6 million in PE 62204F, an increase of $3.6 million for continued evaluation of ATR technology. Crew technology The budget request contained $51.5 million in PE 62202F for human effectiveness applied research, but included no funding for crew technology. The committee believes that the Air Force should place high priority on research devoted to crew safety, altitude protection, and the ability to effectively operate aircraft during long periods of sustained operations, and that this area of research should be viewed as a fundamental tenet for the Air Force. The committee recommends $62.3 million in PE 62202F, an increase of $10.8 million for continuation of crew technology research. Friction stir welding The budget request contained $63.3 million in PE 62102F for materials research, but included no funding for the continuation of friction stir welding. The committee notes that the Air Force has been evaluating a unique materials technology known as friction stir welding. This program has demonstrated a materials joining approach that does not require consumables and exhibits the capability to join dissimilar materials. The committee believes this technology holds significant potential for a number of aerospace applications and recommends $66.3 million, an increase of $3.0 million in PE 62102F for continued evaluation of friction stir welding. Hyperspectral imaging The budget request contained $115.3 million in PE 62601F for Phillips laboratory exploratory development, but included no funds for hyperspectral imaging technology. The committee recommends increases in funding for hyperspectral imaging technology for Navy and Defense-wide programs described elsewhere in this report and notes that hyperspectral imaging and sensing technology is one of the many science and technology efforts that were listed as unfunded priorities by the Chief of Staff of the Air Force. This technology offers significant improvements to airborne and other reconnaissance sensors and targeting data collection systems by providing enhanced wide-area search and targeting and threat warning capability. The committee recommends an increase of $7.3 million in PE 62601F for hyperspectral imaging technology. Tactical missile propulsion The budget request contained $115.3 million in PE 62601F for Phillips laboratory exploratory development, but included no funds for tactical missile propulsion or Integrated High Payoff Rocket Propulsion Technology (IHPRPT). The committee notes that continued research in this technology offers significant improvements and enhanced safety of operations for air-to-air and air-to-ground tactical missile programs, as well as improved propulsion technologies for orbital transfer, space maneuvering, and satellite propulsion technology offered by the IHPRPT program. The committee recommends an increase of $5.3 million in PE 62601F to continue research in tactical missile propulsion and IHPRPT. Ballistic missile technology The budget request contained no funding in PE 63311F for ballistic missile technology (BMT). The committee understands that the BMT program is developing and demonstrating technologies that will permit a conventionally armed ballistic missile to successfully attack hardened and deeply buried targets that are now immune from attack by everything except nuclear weapons. The committee notes this effort should continue in light of the importance of this potential target set, which includes command and control bunkers and chemical weapons storage sites. The committee believes that the next logical step in this effort is a missile technology demonstration of a new penetrating hard target fuse and simulated high explosive against a hardened and deeply buried tunnel. The committee also notes that the program will demonstrate progress in several enabling technologies, including global positioning system (GPS) guidance and navigation and radiation hardened circuit technology and fabrication techniques. Therefore, the committee recommends $8.0 million in PE 63311F for continued technology development and demonstration. B-2 upgrades The budget request contained $201.8 million in PE 64240F for B-2 engineering and manufacturing development and $106.9 million in post production support. The committee notes that the Long Range Air Power Commission concluded last year that, in order to reach the full potential of the bomber force, additional investments should be fully supported. Commission members testified that upgrades to the B-2 identified by the Air Force would enhance low observable maintainability, further improve the B-2's stealthiness, and significantly increase situational awareness for its aircrews. The committee is concerned that the budget request does not support an integrated low-observable maintainability/upgrade effort or other modernization initiatives recommended last year by the commission and the committee. The committee believes that continued enhancement of B-2 capabilities is critical in light of their limited number and the leverage they provide on the battlefield. Therefore, the committee recommends $353.8 million in PE 64204F, an increase of $152.0 million for the integration of Link 16 on the B-2, a new mission display system, and a stealth enhancement initiative. Link 16 will provide the B-2 with a new data link terminal, antennas, and aircrew interfaces that will increase responsiveness, enhance survivability, and enable real time targeting. The committee notes that the Chief of Staff of the Air Force identified B-2 Link 16 as a high unfunded priority for fiscal year 2000. The mission display system would increase aircrew situational awareness by more effectively displaying threat and targeting information provided through Link 16. The stealth enhancement program would reduce the aircraft's radar cross section. The committee also recommends $141.9 million for post production support, an increase of $35.0 million to procure an inflight planner capable of real time flight planning and generating the most survivable route to target. Of the amount authorized for the B-2, the committee directs that $2.0 million shall be available for a conceptual study of a next generation bomber described elsewhere in this report. B-52 squadrons The budget request contained $32.1 million in PE 11113F for B-52 bomber fleet support. The committee notes that the B-52 fleet support program has increased by $29.6 million from last year's projected level for fiscal year 2000 in order to accelerate an avionics mid-life upgrade initiative which will replace aging computers and inertial navigational systems (INS) with non-developmental items. This initiative, while justified, was previously planned to start in fiscal year 2003 and the scheduled completion dates for both the new computer and the INS are well beyond the current five year defense program. The committee does not support the proposed three years of acceleration for the B-52 avionics mid-life upgrade program at the expense of other higher priorities. The committee recommends $17.1 million in PE 11113F, a decrease of $15.0 million for B-52 fleet support. Combat training ranges The budget request contained $6.2 million in PE 64735F and $17.5 million in procurement for combat training range upgrades. The budget request also contained $339.6 million for miscellaneous production charges. The committee notes that aircrews at the Nellis and Tyndall combat training ranges are unable to train with their primary air-to-air weapon, the Advanced Medium Range Air-to-Air Missile (AMRAAM), because information regarding its simulated performance must be encrypted for classification reasons before being transmitted to ground instrumentation sites. The committee understands that the requirement for an encryption device, the Advanced Data Oriented Security Module (ADOSM), has existed for some time but that ADOSM units were not available to be integrated into the Nellis Air Combat Training System (NACTS) or the Tyndall Range Expansion (TRE) upgrades. Since ADOSM is now qualified and in production, the committee believes it should be incorporated into both the NACTS and TRE in order to take full advantage of AMRAAM in exercises conducted at these ranges. Accordingly, the committee recommends $12.2 million in PE 64735F, an increase of $6.0 million; $19.5 million in combat training ranges, an increase of $2.0 million; and $340.6 million in miscellaneous production charges, an increase of $2.0 million for this purpose. The committee expects these additional funds to be expeditiously obligated in order to achieve ADOSM operational capability at the earliest possible date. Commercial standardized cockpit and crew seats The budget request contained $6.1 million in PE 64706F for life support systems, but included no funds for commercial standardized cockpit and crew seats. Commercial standardized cockpit and crew seats are designed to protect crew members and passengers during aircraft crash loads up to 16 times the force of gravity. However, older military transport aircraft, such as the C-130, C-135, C-141, and C-5, were designed with crew and passenger seats that can withstand crash loads up to nine times the force of gravity. The committee understands that a commercial standardized cockpit and crew seat has been developed for the RC-135, but it requires safety and functionality improvements for its application to other military transport aircraft. Therefore, the committee recommends $10.1 million, an increase of $4.0 million to develop safety and functionality improvements to the RC-135 commercial standardized cockpit and crew seat for its application as a common seat for other military transport aircraft. Common imagery processor The budget request included $4.9 million in PE 35208F for the common imagery processor (CIP). The committee understands that the CIP has been manufactured with a known design input/output limitation that precludes it from processing real-time imagery from current and future digital cameras. The committee is concerned that the Department of Defense pursued a common government solution to digital imagery processing without ensuring a capability to process the high data rates from current and future digital cameras. Further, the committee is aware that the Naval Research Laboratory (NRL) has integrated commercial imagery processing technologies into a system that can process these high data-rates in real-time. These commercial solutions are not only less expensive, but provide a viable upgrade path for future requirements. The committee notes the partnering relationships now being fostered between the government contractor and the NRL to provide a CIP that is more commercially-based and capable of processing modern digital imagery. The committee strongly supports this relationship, and it expects the Air Force and Navy to work more closely together to ensure that modern digital camera systems can be fully exploited in real-time by the CIP. The committee recommends the budget request. Evolved expendable launch vehicle The budget request contained $324.8 million in PE 64853F for the evolved expendable launch vehicle. The committee notes unjustified growth in funding for the system program office and recommends $322.8 million, a decrease of $2.0 million. Global combat support system The budget request contained $19.4 million in PE 33141F for the Global Combat Support System--Air Force (GCSS-AF). The committee notes that the GCSS-AF program will modernize, and integrate Air Force and other Department of Defense legacy combat support information systems into a system that will be compliant with the Defense Information Infrastructure common operating environment. The centerpiece of the GCSS-AF program will be a shared data environment that will ensure the availability of critical decision making information required by Air Force operational commanders. GCSS-AF will emphasize commercial off-the-shelf products and reusable software to reduce program development costs. The committee recommends $22.4 million in PE 33141F, an increase of $3.0 million to accelerate the development of GCSS- AF. Global Hawk high altitude endurance unmanned aerial vehicle The budget request contained $70.8 million in PE 35205F for endurance unmanned aerial vehicles (UAV), including funding for Global Hawk and DarkStar air vehicles. Since the budget request was developed, the Air Force has terminated the DarkStar aircraft, leaving Global Hawk as the only endurance UAV program. While some residual funding may result, termination costs for DarkStar are yet to be determined. However, the committee understands the Air Force plans to use any residual funds for Global Hawk testing and evaluation. Recently, a Global Hawk test air vehicle crashed, destroying with it the only integrated reconnaissance sensor package. The committee notes the importance of resuming the user evaluation and testing of Global Hawk, and of sustaining the industrial base until completion of the user evaluation. The committee recommends $95.8 million in PE 35205F, an increase of $25.0 million for Global Hawk. Integrated satellite communications control The budget request contained $361.3 million in PE 64479F for Milstar satellite communications, including $12.1 million for development of the Automated Communications Management System (ACMS). The committee is concerned that military satellite communication (SATCOM) resources continue to be allocated inefficiently among forward-deployed units. The committee understands that utilization of a web-based technology which incorporates the ACMS has the potential to significantly lower communications costs and promote the efficient utilization of SATCOM assets. Consequently, the committee believes that continued development of ACMS software is key to this approach by enabling the use of common standards that will allow efficient use of legacy hardware systems. Therefore, the committee recommends $364.3 million in PE 64479F, an increase of $3.0 million to accelerate ACMS development. Joint airborne SIGINT program The budget request contained $124.6 million in PE 35206F, including $81.6 million for joint signals intelligence (SIGINT) avionics family (JSAF). The committee notes that JSAF funding provides resources for developing both high and low wave length components of the future airborne SIGINT collection system, which is expected to become operational in FY 2007. The committee recommends $131.6 million in PE 35206F including $88.6 million for JSAF, an increase of $7.0 million. Joint air-to-surface standoff missile The budget request contained $166.4 million in PE 27325F and $2.0 million in PE 64312N for continued development of the joint air-to-surface standoff missile (JASSM). The committee understands that the JASSM program plan reflects funding for integration of the missile only on the ``threshold'' aircraft (B-52H and F-16) through the end of the Future Years Defense Program (FYDP) and that neither the Air Force nor the Navy has programmed funding for integration of JASSM on the ``objective'' aircraft (B-2, B-1B, F-16, F-15E, F- 117, and F/A-18E/F). Initial operational capability for JASSM is scheduled for fiscal year 2003. In view of the services' recent operational experience that has placed a priority on the use of precision-guided weapons systems, the committee believes that additional priority should be given to integrating JASSM on the objective aircraft. The committee directs the Secretary of the Air Force and the Secretary of the Navy to report jointly to the Congressional defense committees with the submission of the fiscal year 2001 budget request regarding the plan and program for the integration of JASSM on the objective aircraft systems of each service. Joint strike fighter The budget request contained $241.2 million in PE 63800N and $235.4 million in PE 63800F for Joint Strike Fighter (JSF) development and $160.2 million in PE 27268F for the aircraft engine component improvement program (CIP). The committee continues its strong support for the development of an alternate engine to ensure sustainment of critical industrial base capabilities, control of engine cost growth, and reduction of risk to the reliability and maintainability of the planned fleet of 3,000 JSF aircraft. The committee is concerned that while the Department now states a commitment to development of an alternative engine for JSF, the planned funding levels outlined to support that commitment do not enable cost-efficient and timely completion of the effort. Meanwhile, the Department is also conducting other jet engine development efforts in PE 27268F as part of the aircraft engine CIP. The committee notes that requested funding for this level of effort program has increased by $66.6 million, over 40 percent, from the level projected for fiscal year 2000 just last year. The justification for the requested increase is to reduce backlog of proposed engineering tasks for currently fielded engines. While supportive of the CIP, the committee does not consider the proposed increase to this program to be of higher priority than development of a new state-of-the-art alternative engine for JSF. The committee notes that full development of a flight qualified jet engine also provides opportunities to migrate proven new technologies to existing engines. Therefore, the committee recommends $130.2 million in PE 27268F, a decrease of $30.0 million, and $265.4 million in PE 63800F, an increase of $30.0 million, and directs that this increase in JSF funding be used only for acceleration of alternate engine development. Kinetic energy anti-satellite The budget request contained $9.8 million in PE 63438F for space control, but included no funding for the kinetic energy anti-satellite (KE ASAT) system. The committee believes space control will be increasingly important to U.S. national security as the threats posed to U.S. military forces from foreign space assets grow and satellite surveillance and targeting technology spread. The committee is encouraged that the Department of Defense is making progress in both developing a coherent space control policy and recognizing the importance of space control capabilities. The committee is concerned, however, that the failure to resource KE ASAT will limit the range of options open to the Department to deploy effective space control systems in the near term. The committee notes that KE ASAT has been in development for 10 years, and that additional investment could provide the ability to deploy an effective ASAT capability in a short period of time. Therefore, the committee recommends $19.8 million in PE 63438F, an increase of $10.0 million for further development of KE ASAT integrated command and control system and ground based hardware-in-the-loop tests. Microsatellite technology The committee notes significant progress in preparation for the XSS-10 flight test of microsatellite technologies. However, the committee is concerned that this demonstration may be delayed because the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) is withdrawing from an agreement to launch the XSS-10 on a space shuttle flight in fiscal year 2000. The committee understands that NASA is now offering a shuttle flight for XSS-10 in late fiscal year 2001. The committee believes that such a delay in the flight test will disrupt the program, defer the development of microsatellite technology that will benefit both military and civil space programs, and threaten to waste both NASA and Air Force investments in this effort. The committee strongly urges NASA to uphold its commitment to make a shuttle flight available for the XSS-10 in fiscal year 2000. Military spaceplane The budget request contained $76.2 million in PE 63401F for advanced spacecraft technology, but included no funding for the military spaceplane. The committee notes: (1) that U.S. military forces are increasingly reliant on space-based capabilities, (2) that the U.S. Space Command and the Air Force have identified requirements that are best met by a military spaceplane and its associated family of vehicles, and (3) that Air Force Space Command has drafted a ``requirements to acquisition'' strategy for a spaceplane. The committee believes that a family of reusable space vehicles for orbital insertion, space maneuver, and payload delivery to meet military unique requirements would substantially enhance military access to space and the ability to conduct rapid global military operations. The committee recommends an increase of $5.0 million in PE 63401F to continue development of military unique spaceplane technologies and concepts of operations. Miniature satellite threat reporting system The budget request contained $76.2 million in PE 63401F for advanced spacecraft technology, but included no funding for the miniature satellite threat reporting system (MSTRS). The MSTRS will allow detection of interference, intrusion, jamming, and unauthorized use of satellite communications uplink receivers and determine the source location of the disruptive transmissions. The committee believes that this technology is important in light of increasing military and commercial reliance on satellite communications and the vulnerability of these satellites. The committee notes that $5.0 million was appropriated for MSTRS in fiscal year 1999, but understands that the Secretary of Defense continues to withhold this funding. The committee directs the Secretary to release the fiscal year 1999 funds, and recommends an increase of $2.0 million in PE 63401F to continue preparation of MSTRS for orbital testing. Miniaturized munitions capability The budget request contained $8.9 million in PE 64602F for Air Force Armament Development, but included no specific funding for Miniaturized Munitions Capability (MMC). The committee is aware that the Air Force is currently conducting an Analysis of Alternatives (AoA) to determine which emerging technologies can be harnessed to yield the best MMC weapon and notes that the Navy has recently joined the development effort. At least two emerging MMC technologies offer considerable promise for addressing future fixed and mobile targeting capability. The Small Smart Bombs (SSB) program, utilizes a small diameter, GPS/INS-guided munition to attack fixed targets with increased accuracy, enhanced effectiveness, and reduced collateral damage. The Low Cost Autonomous Attack System (LOCAAS) provides an alternative approach by combining a laser radar seeker, shoot down warhead, onboard guidance and navigation system, and miniature turbojet, all packaged as an autonomous flying munition for use against relocatable targets. The current AoA effort, which prioritizes MMC capability for all types of strike aircraft, is anticipated to lead to a program start in fiscal year 2002 and an initial operating capability (IOC) in fiscal year 2007. The committee is concerned that such a schedule does not adequately satisfy potential warfighting requirements and urges a concerted effort to accelerate this concept. Therefore, the committee recommends $46.9 million in PE 64602F, an increase of $38.0 million, to accelerate development of the MMC with particular attention given to the Small Smart Bomb and Low Cost Autonomous Attack System initiatives. Furthermore, the committee directs both the Secretary of the Air Force and the Secretary of the Navy to conduct a comprehensive joint study regarding the potential acceleration of MMC IOC, and to report the results of the study to the Congressional defense committees with the submission of the fiscal year 2001 budget request. The report shall include total estimated costs including integration and test funding requirements associated with acceleration, an assessment of the technical feasibility of such acceleration, and an assessment of the anticipated warfighting applicability of such technology. National polar-orbiting operational environmental surveillance system The budget request contained $80.1 million in PE 63434F for the national polar-orbiting operational environmental surveillance system (NPOESS). The NPOESS program is developing the next generation weather satellite to meet the meteorological needs of both the military and civil communities. The committee supports the structure of the NPOESS program, with cost and program management authority shared between the Air Force, the Commerce Department, and the National Aeronautics and Space Administration. The committee notes, however, that the current generation of weather satellites, developed in the Defense Meteorological Satellite program (DMSP), will continue to be launched through fiscal year 2005, and the first launch of NPOESS is not scheduled until fiscal year 2008. The committee recommends $65.1 million in PE 63434F, a decrease of $15.0 million to bring the pace of development in more appropriate alignment with the fiscal year 2008 first launch date. Precision location and identification (PLAID) technology The budget request contained $90.3 million in PE 64270F for electronic warfare development, but included no funding for the PLAID technology program. The PLAID technology program will enhance aircrew situational awareness by providing precise, on-board location and specific identification of threat radars. The improved situational awareness resulting from this technology will allow combat pilots to effectively avoid radar-guided surface-to-air missiles. While the PLAID technology may be applied to improve the radar warning receivers of most present day fighter aircraft and has been identified as critical technology for the joint strike fighter, its present development is focused on the ALR-69 radar warning receiver. To continue PLAID technology development, the committee recommends $104.0 million in PE 64270F, an increase of $13.7 million for the ALR-69 radar warning receiver. Satellite control network The budget request contained $61.9 million in PE 35110F for the satellite control network. The satellite control network is a global system of control centers, remote tracking stations, and communications required to control satellites in orbit. The committee understands that telemetry and commanding data rates need to be improved and supports the modernization of the current inefficient and manpower-intensive system. The committee believes that commercially available technologies offer the Air Force opportunities to leverage its own research and development effort and to explore outsourcing alternatives. The committee recommends the requested amount for PE 35110F and directs that, of the funds authorized, $2.5 million shall be available for the examination and testing of commercial technologies that have the potential to meet Air Force satellite control requirements. Simulation based forecasting decision support system (SBFDSS) The budget request contained $22.4 million in PE 78611F for support systems development. The committee is concerned with Air Force equipment maintenance backlog levels as well as the service's processing and accounting capabilities for addressing this problem. The committee notes a particular service inability to accurately forecast serviceable spare engines over a relatively short period of time (e.g., 6 to 12 months), and recognizes the need to implement a system of spare parts support for depot-level engine repair in conjunction with manpower, shop flow time, and equipment availability requirements. The committee understands that without the proper accounting for these constraints, forecasts of serviceable spare engines will remain insufficient and therefore urges the Air Force to take appropriate measures. The committee recommends $25.4 million in PE 78611F, an increase of $3.0 million to provide for the existing standard maintenance information system initiatives and to pursue the development and implementation of the Simulation Based Forecasting Decision Support System (SBFDSS). Space-based infrared system-high The budget request contained $328.7 million in PE 64441F for the space-based infrared system-high (SBIRS High). The committee notes that the budget request for SBIRS High reflects a reduction of $235.5 million dollars when compared to the projections in the fiscal year 1999 budget request. The Air Force also delayed the first launch of SBIRS High from fiscal year 2002 to fiscal year 2004, and justified this delay in part because deployment of a National Missile Defense (NMD), which SBIRS High will support, was shifted from fiscal year 2003 to fiscal year 2005. Also referenced was the fact that the Defense Satellite Program (DSP) satellites, which SBIRS High will replace, are lasting longer than planned. This delay will increase SBIRS High program costs by $500 million to $1 billion in the outyears. Further, although the NMD deployment date now proposed by the Administration is two years later than last year, the committee understands that the deployment date could be accelerated if the NMD test program proceeds well. SBIRS High will also support theater missile defenses, particularly in meeting the growing threat posed by longer range missiles, against which the United States has only very limited defensive capabilities. Finally, with first launch in fiscal year 2004, the full constellation of SBIRS High would not be available to support a 2005 NMD deployment. The committee strongly supports the SBIRS High mission and concludes that the restructuring and delay of this program is unjustified. The committee further notes that the Secretary of the Air Force concedes that the requested funding for SBIRS High falls short by $92.0 million of supporting the planned first launch in fiscal year 2004, and that the Adminstration has not come forward with an amended budget request to correct this deficiency. The committee also strongly objects to the manner in which the Air Force implemented a work slowdown in anticipation of approval of its proposed fiscal year 2000 program reduction. The committee was not informed of this decision until after the contractor had been ordered to restructure the program spending rates to accommodate the proposed schedule change. This procedure precluded any realistic opportunity for congressional review of the Air Force decision and preempted congressional oversight prerogatives. The committee recognizes that restoring SBIRS High to a first launch date of fiscal year 2002 is now impossible, and to restore the date to fiscal year 2003 would require approximately $400 million in additional funding in fiscal year 2000. The committee strongly objects to these management failures by the Air Force and the Department of Defense, especially concerning a high priority program such as SBIRS High. The committee believes that, because of the delay in the program and the substantial cost growth that results, the Department will have the opportunity to examine competitive alternatives that may be available to achieve comparable or superior capabilities at comparable or lower costs. Therefore, of the funds authorized for SBIRS High, the committee directs that $10.0 million may be used only for airborne and space experiments of a sensor technology described in the classified annex. To sustain the SBIRS High program in the most effective manner and assure that it is accorded a high priority in the future, the committee recommends $328.7 million for SBIRS High. The committee believes that this increase will maintain the currently planned SBIRS High schedule. The committee recommends that the SBIRS High funding be allocated as follows: $168.7 million in a new SBIRS High program element in the Ballistic Missile Defense Organization, 64XXXC, and $160.0 million in PE 64441F. The committee believes that an alternate management and funding structure in which BMDO provides management oversight, the Air Force serves as executive agent, and BMDO and the Air Force share funding responsibility, would provide the most thorough assessments of SBIRS High importance in the future. Space-based infrared system-low The budget request contained $151.4 million in PE 63441F and $77.7 million in PE 64442F for the space based infrared system-low (SBIRS Low). The committee notes that the Air Force substantially restructured the SBIRS Low program, terminating two planned demonstration projects and delaying the first launch of SBIRS Low from 2004 to 2006. The Air Force argues that the cancellations were justified because much had been learned from the effort to develop the demonstrators, that proof of principle had already been established in earlier experiments, and that schedule delays and cost growth in the demonstration projects had increased program risk and cost. The committee believes that deployment of SBIRS Low is critical to meeting the growing long range ballistic missile threats, and that the delay is very damaging to the U.S. effort to field capable systems in response to these threats in a timely manner. The committee is also informed that the Navy Theater Wide (NTW) missile defense system will rely on SBIRS Low for discrimination and external cueing. The SBIRS Low delay could seriously degrade the capabilities of the currently planned interim NTW system known as Block I and could slow progress toward the NTW objective system. The committee strongly objects to the manner in which the Air Force carried out the SBIRS Low program restructuring. The Air Force informed the Congressional defense committees the day prior to notifying the contractors of the cancellation of the demonstration projects, effectively precluding review of an important decision in a program of high congressional interest. Further, the committee believes that the Ballistic Missile Defense Organization (BMDO) was not adequately consulted concerning the decision. To ensure that SBIRS Low is accorded the high priority the committee believes is warranted by wider military requirements and to ensure that other service and DOD equities in the program are protected, the committee recommends $110.0 million in a new BMDO program element, 63XXXC, $41.4 million in PE 63441F, and $77.7 million in PE 64442F for SBIRS Low. The committee believes that an arrangement, in which BMDO provides management oversight, the Air Force serves as executive agent, and BMDO and the Air Force share funding responsibility, provides the best chance of success in the future. Space launch and spacelift ranges The budget request contained $43.2 million in PE 35182F for research and development for the spacelift range system, $83.4 million for spacelift range procurement, and $223.0 million for operations and maintenance of the eastern and western launch ranges. The committee believes that reliable access to space is both vital to U.S. national security and, increasingly, the economic well being of the nation. Thus, the committee is concerned that the nation's space launch infrastructure appears to be in deep disarray. The committee believes that a series of space launch failures, the lack of efficient operation and modernization of the spacelift ranges by the Air Force, and setbacks in the development of the next generation of U.S. launch vehicles could jeopardize this access. The committee notes that the launch industry has suffered six catastrophic launch failures since August 1998, including three consecutive failures of the Titan IV launch vehicle and failure of the first two launches of the Delta III launch vehicle. These have resulted in the loss of commercial and important national security payloads worth in excess of $2.0 billion. The committee understands that to support future launch requirements, the Air Force is funding the development of two variants of the evolved expendable launch vehicle (EELV), with the intent of purchasing commercial launch services from two launch vendors starting in 2003. However, the Delta III is a technical stepping stone to one of the EELV variants. The other is based on Russian engine technologies. To date, the contractor has been unable to acquire the necessary licenses to allow for co-production of the engine in the United States and Russia. The long delay in the licensing process has left the ability of the contractor to meet launch schedule requirements in serious doubt. The committee believes that the spacelift ranges at Cape Canaveral, Florida, and Vandenberg Air Force Base, California are in equal disarray. The committee notes that commercial space launches now far outnumber military launches and that commercial launch demand is expected to continue to grow. The Air Force has done an inadequate job of modernizing the ranges, funding for operations and modernization has been insufficient, and range equipment is aging. As a result, the ranges are unable to meet commercial demands for greater range efficiencies. At the same time, the rationale for continued Air Force funding for the operation, management, and modernization of the ranges is unclear in light of the fact that by 2003, when the Air Force expects to contract with commercial vendors for launch services, the only major operational users of the ranges will be commercial launch vendors. The committee notes that continued Air Force funding and management of the ranges would constitute a substantial subsidy to the commercial launch industry, while extending control by an organization that has managed and funded range operations and modernization inadequately to meet commercial and national security needs. The committee is aware that the Secretary of the Air Force has directed a broad area review of space launch to analyze the causes of recent launch failures, recommend changes in practices, procedures and operations that might prevent such failures, and assure continued access to space for the Department of Defense. The committee is also aware of ongoing efforts to determine appropriate steps pertaining to range modernization and operations. The committee believes that these analyses must result in alternative funding, management, operations, and modernization arrangements that will result in a more efficient and effective launch infrastructure. Consistent with this perspective, the committee recommends $46.2 million in PE 35182F, an increase of $3.0 million for feasibility studies, planning, and design of a universal space port at Vandenberg Air Force Base, California. The committee also directs the Department to include a separate budget line for initial spares for spacelift range procurement in its fiscal year 2001 budget request, consistent with the discussion elsewhere in this report regarding the Air Force's proposed implementation of the Reengineered Supply Support Process. Spacetrack The budget request contained $54.8 million in PE 35910F for space tracking capabilities. The committee notes that the budget request for this program is nearly double the amount forecasted in the fiscal year 1999 budget plan. The committee recognizes the importance of further development of the ground-based electro-optical deep space surveillance (GEODSS) system now planned in fiscal year 2000. However, the committee notes that other planned projects can be more moderately paced without impacting the effectiveness of the spacetrack effort. The committee recommends $42.5 million in PE 35910F, a decrease of $12.3 million. Synthetic theater operations research model The budget request contained $19.3 million in PE 27601F for modeling and simulation, including $2.5 million for the synthetic theater operations research model (STORM). The committee notes that the STORM model is the only Air Force campaign analysis program directed for use by the defense modeling and simulation office common technical framework. The program is currently underfunded, resulting in limitations to planned utilization by Air Force and other service units during joint exercises. The committee recommends $21.8 million in PE 27601F, an increase of $2.5 million, including $5.0 million for STORM simulation efforts. Defense Agencies RDT&E Overview The budget request contained $ 8,887.2 million for Defense Agencies RDT&E. The committee recommends authorization of $9,556.3 million, an increase of $669.1 million. The committee recommendations for the fiscal year 2000 Defense Agencies RDT&E program are identified in the table below. Major changes to the Defense Agencies request are discussed following the table. Items of Special Interest Advanced concept technology demonstrations The budget request contained $118.0 million in PE 63750D8Z for advanced concept technology demonstrations (ACTD). The committee notes that while the budget request proposes to once again reduce the overall Department of Defense research and development budget, funding for ACTDs is proposed to increase by almost $30.0 million. To maintain fiscal year 1999 funding, the committee recommends $88.6 million in PE 63750D8Z for ACTDs, a decrease of $29.4 million, to hold ACTDs to fiscal year 1999 levels. Advanced moving target indicator radar The committee has received the results of a Congressionally mandated study on moving target indicator (MTI) radar developments. This study indicates that MTI radar technology, supported by Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency and commercial investments, is rapidly and decisively eclipsing that of U.S. government-funded efforts such as the U-2's advanced synthetic aperture radar system improvement program. These advances promise to provide vastly improved, multi-mode radars at greatly reduced costs. The committee believes this new-generation MTI technology should be pursued as quickly as possible. The committee urges the Secretary of Defense to pursue modular, scaleable MTI/SAR radars that have the ability to identify and image moving targets. This technology should be included in the Joint Surveillance, Targeting and Reconnaissance System radar technology improvement program with application for platforms such as the U-2 and Global Hawk. Aeronautical test facilities In 1995, the President's National Science and Technology Council issued a report, ``Goals for a National Partnership in Aeronautics Research and Technology,'' which indicated that, ``newer European wind tunnels focused on aircraft development testing are generally superior to comparable U.S. facilities in overall capability'' and that, as a consequence, there has been increasing utilization of European facilities for U.S. commercial and military aircraft development. In early 1998, the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) and the Department of Defense (DOD) established a National Wind Tunnel Alliance and an Air Breathing Propulsion Test Facilities Alliance (under the auspices of the Aeronautics and Astronautics Coordinating Board (AACB)), to identify, study, and implement measures to strengthen the national infrastructure of aerodynamic and air breathing propulsion test facilities that support NASA and DOD missions and the domestic aeronautics industry. The committee believes that the United States needs to retain world leadership in aeronautics. To do so means that the United States must optimize the utilization and care of its existing aerospace ground test resources among the Department, NASA, and industry in such a way that properly balances the support of the nation's research and development programs with an efficient and effective aeronautical test facility infrastructure. The committee believes that sufficient resources must be collectively invested to support existing capabilities, productivity enhancements, and a robust test technology program. The committee notes that a draft interagency agreement between the Department and NASA is under consideration which would establish a National Aeronautical Test Alliance and an integrated national strategy for management of U.S. aeronautical test facilities. The committee believes that the Department and NASA should establish such a mechanism for the strategic management of government-owned aerodynamic, aerothermodynamic, and aeropropulsion facilities in the United States that would consider military, civilian, and commercial aerospace interests in making decisions and recommendations affecting such facilities. The committee also believes that this mechanism could be used to manage from a national perspective the investment of test infrastructure and technology funding for core national facilities and associated computational capabilities, including the maintenance and modernization of key commercial aeronautical test facilities. The committee believes further that it is desirable that industrial organizations participate with federal agencies in considering such investments. The committee directs the Secretary of Defense, in coordination with the Director, NASA, to report to the Congressional defense committees with the submission of the fiscal year 2001 budget request the status of the interagency agreement for establishing a National Aeronautical Test Alliance and plans for its implementation. The committee recommends that among the first priorities for the Alliance should be the development of a report which, building upon the 1997 DOD Core Aeronautical Test Facilities assessment, outlines national requirements for aeronautical testing capabilities. The committee expects that from such a report would come funding recommendations for support and modernization of U.S. aeronautical test facilities in the fiscal year 2002 budget requests for the Department and for NASA. Airborne common sensor The budget request contained $109.5 million for tactical cryptologic activities in PE 35885G, including $14.7 million for the Army's aerial common sensor (ACS). The committee notes that it has received insufficient information on the specific plan, concept of operation, and programmatics for the ACS. Further, the Army has not yet decided on the aircraft it will use for ACS. Since this decision will directly affect the costs of procurement, sensors and their integration, and operations and maintenance, the committee cannot determine the overall value of the program. Therefore, the committee recommends $106.8 million in PE 35885G, a decrease of $2.7 million for ACS. However, the committee directs that no funds provided for ACS are to be obligated or expended until 30 days after the Congressional defense and intelligence committees have been provided a report that includes the following: (1) The specific aircraft selected for the ACS; (2) The specific ACS concept of operations and program plan. The program plan must include the projected funding over the five year defense plan and expected total cost; (3) Identification of the generic sensor suites and development/acquisition plan to provide these sensors; and (4) Certification from the Director, National Security Agency, that ACS conforms to the requirements of the 2010 Unified Cryptologic Architecture. Ballistic missile defense The budget request contained $3.3 billion for the Ballistic Missile Defense Organization (BMDO). The committee notes that the Future Years Defense Program (FYDP) includes substantial funding increases over what was planned last year for BMDO. However, the committee also notes that the military has no effective defenses to current and rapidly emerging missile threats. The committee believes that ballistic missile defense (BMD) is a critical mission area which continues to suffer from inadequate funds. The committee urges the Department of Defense to allocate more funds for ballistic missile defense in subsequent budget submissions to ensure that critically needed missile defense development and acquisition programs can be completed as expeditiously as possible. To address this shortfall in the near term, the Congress appropriated an additional $1.0 billion in H.R. 4328, the Omnibus Consolidated and Emergency Supplemental Appropriations Act for Fiscal Year 1999 (Public Law 105-277), for BMD research and development. The committee notes that the President has sought to divert $230.0 million of these funds to implement the Wye River Middle East peace accord. While the committee recognizes the importance of this accord, it opposes such a diversion and continues to support the use of the funds for BMD research and development. The committee recommends $3.7 billion for BMDO, an increase of $417.2 million. Advanced technology development The budget request contained $173.7 million in PE 63173C for ballistic missile defense advanced technology development. The committee notes that funding for advanced ballistic missile technology has been in steady decline since fiscal year 1992. A robust advanced technology effort is important to meet future threats both by providing the technical basis for next generation systems as well as technologies to improve the capabilities of systems now under development. The committee notes that the technology development budget requested is far short of the goal of 10 to 12 percent of the Ballistic Missile Defense Organization (BMDO) budget set by BMDO director. The committee understands that BMDO has identified funding shortfalls in exoatmospheric interceptor technology (EIT) development. The EIT effort is focused on integration of active and passive sensors to provide greater interceptor accuracy and reliability, optics, propulsion, advanced focal plane arrays, and other risk mitigation activities, and is key to greater capability in the national missile defense system, the Navy theater wide system, and the theater high altitude area defense (THAAD) system. The committee further notes that BMDO has identified near term technology infusion programs that show the promise of reducing the cost of TMD systems now under development. To improve the technology base for current and future BMD systems, the committee recommends an increase of $25.0 million in PE 63173C for EIT and near term technology infusion development efforts. Applied research The budget request contained $65.3 million in PE 62173C for ballistic missile defense applied research. The committee remains concerned that funding for innovative ballistic missile technology projects is insufficient to support Ballistic Missile Defense Organization's (BMDO) future needs. Funding for innovative science and technology (IS&T, project 1651) has declined from $52.8 million appropriated in fiscal year 1998 to $7.9 million requested in fiscal year 2000. The committee understands that BMDO has identified a number of high priority technologies for which no funding was available because of the constrained IS&T budget. These include high performance, lightweight, affordable optical correlators; high data rate signal processing using conventional and neural networks; novel focal plane array technologies; coherent laser radar miniaturization; and miniature interceptors with innovative guidance and control enhancements. The committee believes that future BMD technologies must be more adequately funded if BMD systems are to meet future threats. The committee also understands that BMDO has identified wideband gap electronic materials for high speed and high temperature device operation as a high priority that is insufficiently funded. The committee notes that significant progress has been made in the development of these materials and believes that additional research offers the opportunity for further progress. The committee also believes that innovative science and technology is an area in which cooperation with the national security laboratories of the Department of Energy may be fruitful for both BMDO and the Department of Energy. The committee encourages the Secretaries of Defense and Energy to pursue opportunities for such cooperation and the merits of a jointly funded innovative science and technology program. Therefore, the committee recommends $95.3 million in PE 62173C for innovative science and technology efforts, project 1651, an increase of $20.0 million. The committee also recommends an increase of $10.0 million to be available for the continuation of wide-band gap materials research. The committee recommends a total of $95.3 million in PE 62173C, an increase of $30.0 million. Atmospheric interceptor technology The budget request contained $173.7 million in PE 63173C for ballistic missile defense technologies. Of this amount, $21.1 million was requested in project 1281 for the atmospheric interceptor technology (AIT) program. The AIT program develops advanced interceptor technologies to support the theater high-altitude area defense, Navy theater wide, and Patriot advanced capability-3 configuration 3 (PAC-3) missile defense systems. The committee understands that additional funding would support a more robust technology effort that could include a continued design of a composite shroud, ground testing of a full scale divert and attitude control system, ground testing of an advanced low cost two- color infrared seeker, and completion of the development of a master frequency generator (MFG) for PAC-3. The committee believes that the MFG will contribute significantly to the effort to control PAC-3 missile costs. The committee recommends an increase of $10.0 million in PE 63173C for project 1281 to complete the development and integration of the MFG and other AIT projects that show promise of improving the performance of theater missile defense systems. Ballistic missile defense test targets The committee recognizes the rapidly emerging threat posed by the proliferation of more sophisticated ballistic missile systems and their associated technologies. The committee also recognizes the need to flight test ballistic missile defense systems against affordable, threat-representative targets. Therefore, the committee directs that the development and procurement of ballistic missile targets be managed by the Ballistic Missile Defense Organization (BMDO), Department of Defense's Reliance Lead for ballistic missile targets. As such, the committee notes that BMDO shall be responsible for centrally managing and budgeting the full spectrum of ballistic missile targets, from low-fidelity targets used in training to high fidelity, threat-representative targets used to verify system performance during operational test and evaluation. International cooperative programs The budget request contained $36.7 million in PE 63875C for international cooperative ballistic missile defense programs. The committee notes with concern that no funding for the Russian American Observational Satellites (RAMOS) program was requested. RAMOS is a joint Russian-American project to observe various phenomena from multiple platforms with technologies relevant to early warning and ballistic missile defense applications. The committee believes that joint missile defense projects are essential to provide Russia with a better understanding of U.S. ballistic missile defense efforts. In light of legislation passed by the House and Senate mandating the deployment of a national missile defense, the committee believes that cooperative missile defense programs with Russia would be an important confidence building measure that could enhance early warning and shared mutual protection benefits for both sides. Therefore, the committee recommends $61.7 million in PE 63875C, an increase of $25.0 million for RAMOS. Low cost launch technology The budget request contained no funding in PE 63401F or PE 63173C for low cost launch technology. The committee is aware of a number of technologies and concepts that offer the potential to reduce launch costs dramatically. One of these, Scorpius, utilizes simplified launch processes and technologies to achieve streamlined, low cost launch. The committee believes that continued research in this area is important to the long term viability of the U.S. launch industry. The committee is also aware that the Ballistic Missile Defense Organization (BMDO) needs a liquid fueled target vehicle to mimic the characteristics of liquid fueled threat missiles during theater ballistic missile defense testing. Therefore, the committee recommends an increase of $8.0 million in PE 63401F and an increase of $5.0 million in PE 63173C for low cost launch technologies, including Scorpius. The committee directs the Secretary of Defense to review the suitability of such launch vehicles to meet BMDO requirements for a liquid surrogate target. Medium extended air defense system The budget request contained $48.6 million in PE 63869C for the medium extended air defense system (MEADS). The committee notes the restructuring of the MEADS program to leverage technology developments in other programs, including PAC-3 and THAAD. This restructuring addresses two of the committee's concerns related to the MEADS program as it was configured in the past. First, it includes a three year commitment by the Department to include funding for the MEADS program. The committee has been critical of the Department's failure to identify outyear funds for MEADS, and believes that such a commitment is a necessary first step toward a serious program. Second, the approach adopted by the Department holds the promise of reducing the overall cost of the MEADS program by leveraging current technology investments. The General Accounting Office, in its recent review of the program, indicated a probable total program cost of $12 to 14 billion, a figure not supportable by the already constrained Ballistic Missile Defense Organization (BMDO) budget. The committee understands that the MEADS program, as now planned, envisions the development of prototype hardware to be tested in fiscal year 2003, using the PAC-3 missile, and modifications of THAAD battle management software and the PAC-3 launcher. According to program officials, the development of a 360 degree, mobile radar remains a significant technical challenge. The committee notes that several U.S. weapon systems are currently developing electronically steered radars. The committee encourages the Department to explore means of adapting such radars for use with MEADS, or alternatively, to examine a system architecture that would rely on a set of netted missile defense sensors rather than a system specific radar. The committee recommends the budget request. National missile defense The budget request contained $836.6 million in PE 63871C for national missile defense (NMD). The committee is encouraged that the Department of Defense has added outyear funding to the NMD program to support deployment. However, the committee is concerned that the Administration refuses to commit to such a deployment and notes that both the House of Representatives and Senate have passed legislation establishing NMD deployment as national policy. The committee believes that such a commitment is important to provide the ability to effectively focus the funds identified in the Future Years Defense Program (FYDP) for completion of development and deployment of an effective NMD capability. The committee understands that the NMD program still entails schedule risk and is aware that past target vehicle failures have caused a number of significant delays in the NMD and other ballistic missile defense programs. The committee notes that the NMD program is supported by only one target launch facility and believes that operation of a second launch facility and contemporaneous preparation of two target launch vehicles is a reasonable and appropriate approach to avoiding costly delays that result from target vehicle failures. The committee recommends an increase of $15.0 million in PE 63871C for this purpose. The committee notes that the NMD lead system integrator (LSI) is contractually obligated to conduct a competitive bid process for the radars that will support an NMD system capable of defeating a larger, more sophisticated ballistic missile attack than the initially deployed system. The committee understands that the LSI is reviewing the radar industrial base and cost and schedule implications to determine whether such a competition is necessary. The committee believes that competition frequently can provide the military better technology at lower cost and that the Ballistic Missile Defense Organization (BMDO) must assure that the LSI follows appropriate competitive procedures prior to the award of the NMD radar contract. Consistent with a request from BMDO, the committee also approves a transfer of $15.7 million in 63871C to military construction for the purpose of supporting early NMD deployment. The committee recommends $835.9 million in PE 63871C for continued NMD development. Navy area defense The budget request included $268.4 million in PE 64867C for the Navy area defense theater missile defense system and $55.0 million for Navy area defense procurement. The committee understands that the combined technical complexities of upgrading the Aegis weapon system (AWS) computers, integrating multiple platforms through the cooperative engagement capability (CEC), and developing the Standard Missile-2 Block IVA (SM-2 IVA) have led to schedule delays and cost increases in the Navy area defense program. The Navy now indicates that the first unit equipped has been delayed from fiscal year 2001 to fiscal year 2003, and that an additional $537.0 million over five years will be needed to keep the program on this delayed schedule. The committee recognizes that the Navy area defense program is the Navy's primary capability to defend against rapidly evolving theater ballistic missile threats and that further delay to the program will increase risks for deployed U.S. military personnel. At the same time, the committee is concerned about the dramatic program cost increases the program is experiencing. The Navy and the Ballistic Missile Defense Organization (BMDO) maintain that authorization of low rate initial production is needed in fiscal year 2000 to assure that TMD-configured Aegis destroyers can be equipped with an early Navy area defense capability. However, the committee believes that the revised schedule provides inadequate initial operational test and evaluation of the SM-2 IVA prior to low rate initial production. The committee also understands that deferring authority for low rate initial production to fiscal year 2001 will delay Navy area defense deployment by only one to three months. The committee believes that the program as now laid out is not executable, based on both the technical complications and the annual increases that the Navy and BMDO agree must be provided to keep the program on the fiscal year 2003 schedule. Therefore, the committee recommends no funding in Navy area defense procurement, a decrease of $55.0 million, and $323.4 million in PE 64867C for Navy area defense development, an increase of $55.0 million. The committee believes that this reapportionment will provide the best opportunity for the Navy and BMDO to overcome Navy area defense development challenges and allow a more appropriate alignment of low rate initial production, continued development activities, and initial operational test and evaluation. The committee expects the Department of Defense to come forward in its fiscal year 2001 budget request with a more affordable funding profile for the Navy area defense program. Patriot advanced capability-3 (PAC-3) The budget request contained $300.9 million for PAC-3 procurement and $29.1 million in PE 64865C for PAC-3 engineering and manufacturing development (EMD). The committee believes that progress in the PAC-3, while slow to evolve, has been substantial over the past year. This progress culminated in a successful ballistic missile intercept test of the PAC-3 system in March 1999. However, the committee is concerned about the substantial growth in the unit procurement cost of the PAC-3 missile and understands that much of the cost growth is attributable to the transfer of procurement funds to offset a cost overrun in the EMD phase of the program and the major reduction in the number of missiles to be procured from 1,200 to 560. The committee believes that the PAC-3 capability will be of major importance and that the number now planned for procurement is insufficient to meet identified requirements. The committee directs the Secretary of Defense to provide details of plans to the Congressional defense committees by February 1, 2000, to reduce the cost of the PAC-3 missile. The committee is also concerned that the PAC-3 funding profile identified by the Department of Defense is inadequate to sustain continued procurement at a rate that will keep pace with the rapidly evolving short- and medium-range ballistic missile threat. The committee believes that the demonstrated technical success and importance of the program provide more than adequate justification to increase annual procurement funding to correct shortfalls caused by program cost growth. Therefore, the committee recommends $300.9 million for PAC- 3 procurement, the requested amount, and $77.6 million in PE 64865C for PAC-3 engineering and manufacturing development, an increase of $48.5 million. Space-based laser The budget request contained $75.0 million in PE 63173C and $63.8 million in PE 63876F for the space based laser (SBL). The committee understands that the SBL program has been restructured, merging competing contractors into a national team working toward an in-flight experiment in 2012. The committee believes that this restructuring responds to concerns expressed in the committee report on H.R. 3616 (H. Rept. 105- 532) that the SBL program, as then planned with a launch of a readiness demonstrator in 2005, was not executable at sustainable funding levels and would unnecessarily restrict technical options. The committee believes that the restructuring will mitigate technical risk, allow for the development and incorporation of advanced technologies, is executable at sustainable funding levels, and provides a potentially effective management structure. However, the committee is concerned that the program as currently structured does not provide sufficient emphasis on the development and fabrication of laser optics. The committee understands that the current program schedule is driven to a substantial degree by the development of segmented and/or deployable mirrors. The committee believes that the schedule risk can be mitigated by redirecting program funds to development of prototype actively controlled lightweight optics and through a management structure which provides appropriate emphasis on the optical payload element. The committee notes that the SBL restructuring has resulted in a modest delay in the initiation of program activities. Therefore, the committee recommends a decrease of $15.0 million in PE 63173C without prejudice, and the budget request in PE 63876F for SBL. Technical operations The budget request contained $190.7 million in PE 63874C for ballistic missile defense (BMD) technical operations. The committee understands that the Ballistic Missile Defense Organization is leveraging commercial internet technologies to improve the utilization of data that is now dispersed among several data centers. The committee believes that upgrading these centers and establishing a seamless, wide bandwidth information infrastructure between the centers would allow access by the entire BMD community, resulting in significant efficiencies. The committee believes that such a network would allow distributed BMD modeling and simulation, including hardware-in-the-loop simulations, and would enhance flexibility to meet evolving threats more rapidly. Therefore, the committee recommends $200.7 million in PE 63874C, an increase of $10.0 million for development of a wide bandwidth information infrastructure to link current data centers as well as specific applications to take full advantage of such an infrastructure. Theater high altitude area defense The budget request contained $577.5 million in PE 64861C for the theater high altitude area defense (THAAD) system. The committee notes with concern that the THAAD system failed its sixth consecutive attempt to intercept a ballistic missile target. The committee is encouraged that the last test demonstrated success in missile flight, divert and attitude control system function, seeker function, and end game maneuver, and supports continuation of that THAAD testing through the next four intercept tests. The committee understands that the cost-sharing arrangement negotiated between the THAAD contractor and the Ballistic Missile Defense Organization last year requires the contractor to reimburse the government $15.0 million as a consequence of the failure of flight test nine. The committee is also aware that the recent test failure indicates a continuing need to dedicate budget resources in programs that demonstrate success. The committee recommends that PE 64861C be decreased $15.0 million and that another $90.0 million, the estimated cost for three ballistic missile intercept tests, be transferred to the upper tier program, PE 64218C described elsewhere in this report. The committee recommends $472.5 million in PE 64861C, a decrease of $105.0 million, and $90.0 million in PE 64218C for Upper Tier intercept testing. Upper tier The budget request contained no funding in PE 64218C for a new upper tier program. The committee notes that the Department intends to provide funds to this program element starting in fiscal year 2002, after evaluating the performance of the Navy Theater Wide System (NTW) and the Theater High Altitude Area Defense (THAAD) system in December 2000. The system that achieves greater success in its intercept test program will be funded to achieve a first unit equipped in fiscal year 2007. The committee supports the premise that success should be rewarded and that upper tier ballistic missile defense should be deployed as soon as possible. Nevertheless, the committee has serious concerns about the approach adopted by the Department. First, it is symptomatic of the serious fiscal constraints imposed on the Ballistic Missile Defense Organization (BMDO) as it attempts to develop and field systems to address virtually the only mission area in which the growth of the threat is outstripping the military's ability to defend against it. Second, BMDO has always described NTW and THAAD as distinct elements in a coherent theater missile defense architecture. The upper tier strategy adopted by the Department fails to address how accelerating one system while delaying the other will meet the requirements that this coherent architecture is intended to meet. Third, reducing funding to the program with the more serious technical challenges