[House Report 104-617]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]




104th Congress                                                   Report
                       HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES  

 2d Session                                                     104-617
_______________________________________________________________________


 
            DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE APPROPRIATIONS BILL, 1997

                               __________

                              R E P O R T

                                 of the

                      COMMITTEE ON APPROPRIATIONS

                             together with

                            DISSENTING VIEWS

                        [To accompany H.R. 3610]




 June 11, 1996.--Committed to the Committee of the Whole House on the 
              State of the Union and ordered to be printed



                            C O N T E N T S

                               __________
                                                                   Page
Bill Totals......................................................     1
Committee Budget Review Process..................................     4
Introduction.....................................................     4
    Budget Shortfalls and Deficiencies...........................     5
Committee Conclusions and Objectives.............................     7
    Special Areas of Emphasis....................................     7
Major Committee Recommendations..................................     8
    Ensuring a Quality, Ready Force..............................     8
    Modernization Programs.......................................     9
    Redressing Mission Essential Shortfalls......................    10
    High-Leverage ``Force Multipliers''..........................    11
    Reducing Future Defense Spending Requirements................    12
    Reforms/Program Reductions...................................    13
Highlights of Committee Recommendations by Major Category........    14
    Active Military Personnel....................................    14
    Guard and Reserve Personnel..................................    14
    Operation and Maintenance....................................    15
    Procurement..................................................    15
    Research, Development, Test and Evaluation...................    16
Forces to be Supported...........................................    16
    Department of the Army.......................................    16
    Department of the Navy.......................................    16
    Department of the Air Force..................................    18
Title I. Military Personnel......................................    19
    Programs and Activities Funded by Military Personnel 
      Appropriations.............................................    19
    Summary of Military Personnel Recommendations for Fiscal Year 
      1997.......................................................    19
        Overall Active End Strength..............................    20
        Overall Selected Reserve End Strength....................    20
    Adjustments to Military Personnel Account....................    21
        Overview.................................................    21
        Special Pays and Allowances..............................    21
        Dental Special Pays......................................    21
        Force Structure Add-Backs................................    21
        Full-Time Support Strengths..............................    21
    Military Personnel, Army.....................................    22
    Military Personnel, Navy.....................................    22
    Military Personnel, Marine Corps.............................    23
        Marine Security Guards...................................    23
    Military Personnel, Air Force................................    23
    Reserve Personnel, Army......................................    24
        Active Guard and Reserve Full-Time Support...............    24
    Reserve Personnel, Navy......................................    24
    Reserve Personnel, Marine Corps..............................    24
    Reserve Personnel, Air Force.................................    25
    National Guard Personnel, Army...............................    25
        159th Mobile Army Surgical Hospital......................    25
    National Guard Personnel, Air Force..........................    26
Title II. Operation and Maintenance..............................    27
    Operation and Maintenance Overview...........................    27
        Real Property Maintenance................................    28
        Strategic Mobility.......................................    28
        Soldier Enhancement and Initial Issue Equipment..........    29
        Chemical/Biological Defense Equipment....................    29
        Base Operations Support..................................    29
        Off-Duty and Voluntary Education.........................    29
        Acquisition Workforce Reduction..........................    29
        USTRANSCOM Efficiencies..................................    30
        Security Programs........................................    30
        Excess Funded Carryover..................................    30
        Spare Parts Inventories..................................    30
        Defense Business Operations Passthrough..................    31
        Civilian Understrength...................................    31
        Professional Military Education and Training.............    31
        Budget Justification and Execution Materials.............    31
        Readiness Reprogramming..................................    32
        Procurement Fraud........................................    32
        Teletraining and Distance Learning.......................    33
        Contractor Provided Logistical Support (LOGCAP)..........    33
        Operational Support Aircraft.............................    34
        Communications-Electronics Depot Maintenance.............    34
        Foreign Nationals Attending Military Academies...........    35
        Electron Scrubber Technology.............................    35
        Military Traffic Management Command Reengineering Program    35
        Recruiting and Advertising...............................    35
        Biggs Army Airfield......................................    35
        Classified Programs......................................    36
    Operation and Maintenance, Army..............................    36
        Program Recommended......................................    36
    Operation and Maintenance, Navy..............................    38
        Shipyard Blasting and Coating Pilot Program..............    38
        Program Recommended......................................    39
    Operation and Maintenance, Marine Corps......................    42
        Alternative Fuels Training Program.......................    42
        Program Recommended......................................    42
    Operation and Maintenance, Air Force.........................    44
        STRATCOM.................................................    44
        Program Recommended......................................    44
    Operation and Maintenance, Defense-Wide......................    47
        Halon Reserves...........................................    47
        Combat Boot Inventories..................................    47
        Defense Fuel Supply Point Norwalk........................    47
        Procurement Technical Assistance Program.................    48
        Energy Trainer Program...................................    48
        Defense Mapping Agency...................................    48
        Ballistic Missile Threat Commission......................    48
        Family Advocacy..........................................    48
        Program Recommended......................................    49
    Operation and Maintenance, Army Reserve......................    51
        Program Recommended......................................    51
    Operation and Maintenance, Navy Reserve......................    53
        Program Recommended......................................    53
    Operation and Maintenance, Marine Corps Reserve..............    55
        Program Recommended......................................    55
    Operation and Maintenance, Air Force Reserve.................    57
        Program Recommended......................................    57
        WC-130 Weather Reconnaissance Mission....................    59
        910th Airlift Group......................................    59
    Operation and Maintenance, Army National Guard...............    59
        Program Recommended......................................    60
        M-1 Abrams Tanks.........................................    62
    Operation and Maintenance, Air National Guard................    62
        Program Recommended......................................    62
        159th Air National Guard Fighter Group...................    64
        Joint Disaster Training Center...........................    64
    United States Court of Appeals for the Armed Forces..........    64
    Environmental Restoration, Defense...........................    64
        DERA Development.........................................    65
        Newmark--Formerly-Used Defense Site......................    65
    Summer Olympics..............................................    65
    Overseas Humanitarian, Disaster and Civic Aid................    66
    Former Soviet Union Threat Reduction.........................    66
    Quality of Life Enhancement, Defense.........................    66
Title III. Procurement...........................................    69
    Estimates and Appropriation Summary..........................    69
        GPS and Flight Data Recorders............................    71
        Information Security.....................................    71
        Classified Programs......................................    71
    Aircraft Procurement, Army...................................    71
        Committee Recommendations................................    72
            Authorization Changes................................    72
        Fixed Wing Aircraft......................................    72
            Airborne Reconnaissance Low..........................    72
            Guardrail Common Sensor Program......................    72
        Rotary Wing Aircraft.....................................    72
            Blackhawk............................................    72
        Modification of Aircraft.................................    73
            Kiowa Warrior........................................    73
            Quickfix.............................................    73
            Apache-Longbow Modifications.........................    73
            Airborne Avionics....................................    73
            Spares and Repair Parts..............................    74
        Program Recommended......................................    74
    Missile Procurement, Army....................................    76
        Committee Recommendations................................    76
            Authorization Changes................................    76
        Anti-Tank/Assault Missile Systems........................    76
            Patriot..............................................    76
            Javelin..............................................    76
            Patriot Mods.........................................    77
        Program Recommended......................................    77
    Procurement of Weapons and Tracked Combat Vehicles, Army.....    79
        Committee Recommendations................................    79
            Authorization Changes................................    79
        Tracked Combat Vehicles..................................    79
            Bradley Base Sustainment.............................    79
            Field Artillery Ammunition Support Vehicle...........    79
        Modification of Tracked Combat Vehicles..................    79
            FAASV PIP to Fleet...................................    79
            Armored Combat Earthmover............................    80
        Weapons and Other Combat Vehicles........................    80
            Machine Gun, 5.56mm (SAW)............................    80
            Grenade Launcher, Auto, 40mm MK-19...................    80
            M16 Rifle............................................    80
            Machine Gun M240B....................................    80
        Program Recommended......................................    80
    Procurement of Ammunition, Army..............................    82
        Committee Recommendations................................    82
            Authorization Changes................................    82
            Ammunition Shortfalls................................    82
        Small and Medium Ammunition..............................    83
            .50 Small Caliber, All Types.........................    83
            Special Purpose Ammunition...........................    83
        Mortar Ammunition........................................    83
            CTG, Mortar 60mm 1/10 Practice.......................    83
            CTG, Mortar 81mm Practice 1/10 Range M880............    83
            CTG, Mortar 120mm Full Range Practice XM931..........    83
            CTG Mortar 120mm ILLUM XM930.........................    83
            CTG, Mortar 120mm Smoke XM929........................    83
        Tank Ammunition..........................................    83
            120mm Kinetic Energy Tank Ammunition.................    83
            CTG 120mm M892A2.....................................    84
        Artillery Ammunition.....................................    84
            SADARM...............................................    84
        Ammunition Production Base Support.......................    84
            Provision for Industrial Facilities..................    84
            Large Caliber Deepdrawn Cartridges...................    84
        Program Recommended......................................    85
    Other Procurement, Army......................................    87
        Committee Recommendations................................    87
            Authorization Changes................................    87
        Tactical and Support Vehicles............................    87
            High Mobility Multi-Purpose Vehicles.................    87
            Armored Security Vehicles............................    87
            Medium Truck Extended Service Program................    87
        Communications and Electronics Equipment.................    88
            SMART-T..............................................    88
            SCAMP................................................    88
            Information System Security..........................    88
            Fort Carson Communications...........................    88
            Items Less Than $2,000,000...........................    88
            JTT/CIBS-M...........................................    89
            Trojan Spirit........................................    89
            Night Vision Devices.................................    89
            Integrated Meteorological System Sensors.............    89
            Forward Entry Device (FED)...........................    89
            Automated Data Processing Equipment..................    89
            Integrated Family of Test Equipment..................    89
        Other Support Equipment..................................    90
            Force Provider.......................................    90
            Items Less Than $2,000,000...........................    90
            Inland Petroleum Distribution System.................    90
            Combat Support Medical...............................    90
            Generators and Associated Equipment..................    90
            Training Devices, Non-System.........................    91
        Program Recommended......................................    91
    Aircraft Procurement, Navy...................................    94
        Committee Recommendations................................    94
            Authorization Changes................................    94
        Combat Aircraft..........................................    94
            AV-8B Harrier........................................    94
            V-22.................................................    94
            E-2C Hawkeye.........................................    95
        Trainer Aircraft.........................................    95
            T-39N Saberliner.....................................    95
        Modification of Aircraft.................................    95
            EA-6 Series..........................................    95
            F-14 Series..........................................    95
            F-18 Series..........................................    95
            AH-1W Series.........................................    95
            P-3 Series...........................................    96
            E-2 Series...........................................    96
            Common ECM Equipment.................................    96
            Common Avionics Changes..............................    96
        Aircraft Spares and Repair Parts.........................    96
        Aircraft Support Equipment and Facilities................    97
            Common Ground Equipment..............................    97
        Program Recommended......................................    97
    Weapons Procurement, Navy....................................    99
        Committee Recommendations................................    99
        Strategic Missiles.......................................    99
            Tomahawk.............................................    99
        Tactical Missiles........................................    99
            AMRAAM...............................................    99
            JSOW.................................................    99
            Penguin..............................................    99
        Modification of Missiles.................................    99
            Tomahawk Mods........................................    99
        Other Weapons............................................   100
            9mm Handgun..........................................   100
        Ammunition...............................................   100
            Procurement of Ammunition............................   100
        Program Recommended......................................   100
    Procurement of Ammunition, Navy and Marine Corps.............   102
        Committee Recommendations................................   102
            Munitions Transfer...................................   102
        Ammunition, Navy.........................................   102
            Practice Bombs.......................................   102
            5 inch/54 Gun Ammunition.............................   102
        Ammunition, Marine Corps.................................   102
            120mm Heat M830A1....................................   102
            Linear Charge, All Types.............................   102
            M757 Charge Assembly.................................   102
            Kinetic Energy Tank Rounds...........................   103
        Program Recommended......................................   103
    Shipbuilding and Conversion, Navy............................   105
        Committee Recommendations................................   105
            Authorization Changes................................   105
        Other DDG-51 Warships....................................   105
            Ship Self-Defense....................................   106
        Auxiliaries, Craft, and Prior Year Program Costs.........   106
            Fast Patrol Craft....................................   106
            Outfitting...........................................   106
            U.S. Navy Propeller Shop and Foundry.................   106
        Program Recommended......................................   107
    Other Procurement, Navy......................................   109
        Committee Recommendations................................   109
            Authorization Changes................................   109
        Ships Support Equipment..................................   109
            Submarine Propellers.................................   109
            Hull Mechanical and Electrical (HM&E) Items Under 
              $2,000,000.........................................   109
        Reactor Plant Equipment..................................   109
            Reactor Power Units..................................   109
        Communications and Electronic Equipment..................   110
            AN/SQQ-89 Surface Anti-Submarine Warfare System......   110
            SSN Acoustics........................................   110
            C-3 Countermeasures..................................   110
            Tactical Flag Commander Center.......................   110
            Strategic Platform Support Equipment.................   110
            NCCS Ashore..........................................   110
            Shipboard Tactical Communications....................   111
            Submarine Communications Equipment...................   111
            Magic Lantern........................................   111
        Aviation Support Equipment...............................   111
            Sonobouys............................................   111
        Ordnance Support Equipment...............................   112
            Rolling Airframe Missile Guided Missile Launch System 
              (RAM GMLS).........................................   112
            Ship Self-Defense System.............................   112
        Civil Engineering Support Equipment......................   112
            Amphibious Equipment.................................   112
        Personnel Command Support Equipment......................   112
            Command Support Equipment............................   112
        Program Recommended......................................   112
    Procurement, Marine Corps....................................   116
        Committee Recommendations................................   116
            Authorization Changes................................   116
        Procurement of Ammunition................................   116
        Intelligence/Communication Equipment.....................   116
            Intelligence Support Equipment.......................   116
            Items Less Than $2,000,000 (Intell)..................   116
            Other Support........................................   117
            Maneuver C2 Systems..................................   117
        Support Vehicles.........................................   117
            Trailers.............................................   117
        General Property.........................................   117
            Training Devices.....................................   117
        Program Recommended......................................   117
    Aircraft Procurement, Air Force..............................   119
        Committee Recommendations................................   119
            Authorization Changes................................   119
        Combat Aircraft..........................................   119
            F-15E................................................   119
            F-16.................................................   119
        Airlift Aircraft.........................................   120
            C-17.................................................   120
        Trainer Aircraft.........................................   120
            Joint Primary Aircraft Training System...............   120
        Misson Support Aircraft..................................   120
            C-20A................................................   120
        Modification of In-Service Aircraft......................   121
            B-2A.................................................   121
            B-1B.................................................   121
            F-15.................................................   121
            F-16.................................................   121
            C-130................................................   122
            E-3..................................................   122
            Other Aircraft.......................................   122
            GPS/FDR..............................................   122
            Defense Airborne Reconnaissance Program..............   122
        Aircraft Spares and Repair Parts.........................   123
            Spares and Repair Parts..............................   123
        Aircraft Support Equipment and Facilities................   123
            F-15 Post Production Support.........................   123
            F-16 Post Production Support.........................   123
        Program Recommended......................................   123
    Missile Procurement, Air Force...............................   125
        Committee Recommendations................................   125
            Authorization Changes................................   125
        Ballistic Missiles.......................................   125
            Missile Replacement Equipment-Ballistic..............   125
        Tactical Missiles........................................   125
            HAVE NAP.............................................   125
            AMRAAM...............................................   125
            AGM-130..............................................   126
        Other Support............................................   126
        Space Programs...........................................   126
            Global Positioning System (GPS) Space Segment........   126
            Space Shuttle Operations.............................   126
            Titan IV/Space Boosters..............................   126
            Medium Launch Vehicles...............................   126
            Defense Support Program (DSP)........................   126
            Defense Satellite Communications System Space........   127
            Procurement of Ammunition............................   127
        Program Recommended......................................   127
    Procurement of Ammunition, Air Force.........................   129
        Committee Recommendations................................   129
            Authorization Changes................................   129
            Munitions Transfer...................................   129
        Program Recommended......................................   129
    Other Procurement, Air Force.................................   131
        Committee Recommendations................................   131
            Authorization Changes................................   131
        Vehicular Equipment......................................   131
            60K A/C Loader.......................................   131
        Electronics and Telecommunications Equipment.............   131
            Weather Observation/Forecast.........................   131
            Navstar GPS Space....................................   131
            Base Level Data Automation Program...................   132
        Program Recommended......................................   132
    Procurement, Defense-Wide....................................   135
        Committee Recommendations................................   135
            Authorization Changes................................   135
            Major Equipment, Office of the Secretary of Defense..   135
            Enhanced Strategic Mobility..........................   135
            Natural Gas Vehicles.................................   135
            Mentor Protege.......................................   136
            High Performance Computer Modernization..............   136
        Defense Airborne Reconnaissance Program..................   136
            Unmanned Aerial Vehicles (UAV).......................   135
            Budget Format........................................   135
            Information Resources Management.....................   137
        Major Equipment, DISA....................................   137
            Information Systems Security.........................   137
        Special Operations Command...............................   137
        Aviation Programs........................................   137
            AC-130 Force Structure...............................   137
            C-130 Modifications..................................   137
        Ammunition Programs......................................   138
            SOF Individual Weapons Ammunition....................   138
        Other Procurement Program................................   138
            Advanced Seal Delivery System........................   138
        Chemical and Biological Defense Program..................   138
            Individual Protection................................   138
            Chemical/Biological Response Planning................   138
        Program Recommended......................................   139
    National Guard and Reserve Equipment.........................   141
        Committee Recommendations................................   141
            Army National Guard Night Vision Devices.............   141
            C-130J Aircraft......................................   141
            C-130 Upgrades.......................................   141
        Program Recommended......................................   141
    Information Resources Management.............................   143
            Corporate Information Management.....................   143
            Army Sustaining Base Information System..............   143
            Navy Standard Integrated Personnel System............   143
            Air Force Fuel Automated Management System...........   144
            Air Force Automated Maintenance System...............   145
            Automated Document Conversion........................   145
            Joint Services Logistics Center......................   145
            Software Managers Network............................   145
Title IV. Research, Development, Test and Evaluation.............   147
    Estimates and Appropriation Summary..........................   147
        LRIP Test Articles.......................................   147
        Cruise Missile Defense...................................   148
        Human Factors Research...................................   150
        B-1 Congressional Interest Item..........................   150
        New Start Notification...................................   150
        Special Interest Items...................................   151
        Classified Programs......................................   151
        Joint Advanced Strike Technology.........................   151
    Research, Development, Test and Evaluation, Army.............   151
        Committee Recommendations................................   151
            Authorization Changes................................   151
        Basic Research...........................................   152
            University and Industry Research Centers.............   152
        Exploratory Development..................................   152
            Aviation Technology..................................   152
            Combat Vehicle and Automotive Technology.............   152
            Ballistics Technology................................   152
            Electronics and Electronic Devices...................   153
            Countermine Systems..................................   153
            Human Factors........................................   153
            Environment Quality Technology.......................   153
            Medical Technology...................................   153
        Advanced Development.....................................   154
            Medical Advanced Technology..........................   154
            Aviation Advanced Technology.........................   154
            Weapons and Munitions Advanced Technology............   154
            Combat Vehicle and Automotive Advanced Technology....   154
            Military HIV Research................................   154
            Landmine Warfare and Barrier Advanced Technology.....   154
            Joint Service Small Arms Program.....................   155
        Demonstration and Validation.............................   155
            Artillery Propellant Development.....................   155
            Tactical Electronic Support System...................   155
            Aviation Advanced Development........................   155
            Artillery Systems....................................   155
        Engineering and Manufacturing Development................   155
            Medium Tactical Vehicle..............................   155
            Javelin..............................................   156
            Family of Heavy Tactical Vehicles....................   156
            Light Tactical Wheeled Vehicles......................   156
            Night Vision Systems--Engineering Development........   156
            Automatic Test Equipment Development.................   156
            Brilliant Anti-Armor Submunition (BAT)...............   157
            Weapons and Munitions--Engineering Development.......   157
            Firefinder...........................................   157
        Management Support.......................................   157
            DoD High Energy Laser Test Facility..................   157
            Munitions Standardization, Effectiveness and Safety..   157
        Operational Systems Development..........................   157
            Combat Vehicle Improvement Programs..................   157
            MLRS Product Improvement Program.....................   158
            Aircraft Engine Component Improvement Program........   158
            Digitation...........................................   158
            Other Missile Product Improvement Programs...........   158
            End Item Industrial Preparedness Activities..........   158
            Force XXI Initiative.................................   158
            Lightweight 155mm Howitzer...........................   159
            Depressed Altitude Gun...............................   159
        Program Recommended......................................   159
    Research, Development, Test and Evaluation, Navy.............   162
        Committee Recommendations................................   162
            Authorization Changes................................   162
        Basic Research...........................................   162
            Ocean Partnerships...................................   162
        Exploratory Development..................................   163
            Surface Ship Technology..............................   163
            Aircraft Technology..................................   163
            Readiness, Training, and Environmental Quality 
              Technology.........................................   163
            Materials, Electronics, and Computer Technology......   163
            Oceanographic and Atmospheric Technology.............   164
        Advanced Development.....................................   164
            Precision Strike and Air Defense.....................   164
            Ship Propulsion System...............................   164
            Marine Corps Advanced Technology Demonstration.......   164
            Medical Development..................................   165
            Environmental, Quality and Logistics Advanced 
              Technology.........................................   165
            Shallow Water Mine Countermine Demonstrations........   165
            Advanced Technology Transition.......................   165
        Demonstration and Validation.............................   165
            Aviation Survivability...............................   165
            Advanced Submarine Combat Systems Development........   165
            Ship Concept Advanced Design.........................   166
            Advanced Surface Machinery Systems...................   166
            Marine Corps Mine/Countermeasures Systems............   166
            Ship Self-Defense....................................   166
            Gun Weapon System Technology.........................   166
        Engineering and Manufacturing Development................   167
            Other Helicopter Development.........................   167
            S-3 Weapon System Improvement........................   167
            P-3 Modernization Program............................   167
            Tactical Command System..............................   167
            Air Crew Systems Development.........................   167
            Electronic Warfare Development.......................   168
            AEGIS Combat System Engineering......................   168
            SSN-688 and Trident Modernization....................   168
            Enhanced Modular Signal Processor....................   168
            New Design Submarine.................................   168
            Navy Tactical Computer Resources.....................   168
            Unguided Conventional Air Launched Weapon............   169
            Ship Self-Defense....................................   169
            Navigation/ID System.................................   169
        Operational Systems Development..........................   169
            SSBN Security........................................   169
            F/A-18 Squadrons.....................................   169
            Tomahawk.............................................   169
            HARM Improvement.....................................   170
            Aviation Improvements................................   170
            Marine Corps Communications Systems..................   170
            Industrial Preparedness..............................   170
        Program Recommended......................................   170
    Research, Development, Test and Evaluation, Air Force........   173
        Committee Recommendations................................   173
            Authorization Changes................................   173
            Program Growth/Budget Execution Adjustments..........   173
        Basic Research...........................................   173
            Defense Research Sciences............................   173
        Exploratory Development..................................   174
            Materials............................................   174
            Aerospace Flight Dynamics............................   174
            Armstrong Lab Exploratory Development................   174
            Aerospace Propulsion.................................   174
            Phillips Lab Exploratory Development.................   174
        Advanced Development.....................................   174
            Advanced Materials for Weapon Systems................   174
            Flight Vehicle Technology............................   175
            Aerospace Propulsion and Power Technology............   175
            Crew Systems and Personnel Protection Technology.....   175
            Electronic Combat Technology.........................   175
            Space and Missile Rocket Propulsion..................   175
            Advanced Spacecraft Technology.......................   175
            Advanced Weapons Technology..........................   175
        Demonstration and Validation.............................   176
            Airborne Laser Technology............................   176
            Polar Adjunct........................................   176
            Space Based Infrared Architecture--DEM/VAL...........   176
            Intercontinental Ballistic Missile--DEM/VAL..........   176
        Engineering and Manufacturing Development................   176
            B-1B.................................................   176
            Specialized Undergraduate Pilot Training.............   177
            F-22.................................................   177
            B-2 Advanced Technology Bomber.......................   177
            Life Support Systems.................................   177
            Joint Tactical Information Distribution System 
              (JTIDS)............................................   177
            Joint Air-to-Surface Standoff Missile (JASSM)........   177
        Operational Systems Development..........................   178
            F-16 Squadrons.......................................   178
            F-15E Squadrons......................................   178
            Manned Destructive Suppression.......................   178
            Aircraft Component Engine Improvement Program (ACIP).   178
            USAF Wargaming and Simulation........................   178
            Defense Satellite Communications System..............   179
            Satellite Control Network (SCN)......................   179
            Titan IV Space Launch Vehicles.......................   179
            Arms Control Implementation..........................   179
            PRAM.................................................   179
        Program Recommended......................................   179
    Research, Development, Test and Evaluation, Defense-Wide.....   182
        Committee Recommendations................................   182
            Authorization Changes................................   182
        Basic Research...........................................   182
            In-House Laboratory Independent Research.............   182
            Focused Research Initiatives.........................   182
            Chemical and Biological Defense Program..............   182
            Tactical Technology..................................   183
            Integrated Command and Control Technology............   183
            Materials and Electronics Technology.................   183
            Defense Nuclear Agency...............................   183
            Electrolthermal Gun..................................   183
            Experimental Evaluation of Major Innovative 
              Technologies.......................................   183
            Electronic Volumetric Imaging System (EVIS)..........   183
            Thermo Photovoltaics.................................   184
            Internetted Unattended Ground Sensors (IUGS).........   184
            Chemical and Biological Defense Program..............   184
            Strategic Environmental Research Program.............   184
            Cooperative DoD/VA Medical Research..................   184
            Advanced Electronics Technologies....................   184
            Microelectromechanical Systems.......................   185
            Manufacturing Processes..............................   185
            Secures..............................................   185
            Electric Vehicles....................................   185
            Advanced Concept Technology Demonstrations...........   185
            High Performance Computing Modernization Program.....   186
            Dual Use Applications Programs.......................   186
            Ballistic Missile Defense............................   187
            Theater Missile Defense..............................   187
            National Missile Defense.............................   187
            RAMOS................................................   188
        Demonstration and Validation.............................   188
            Joint Robotics.......................................   188
            Advanced Sensor Applications Program.................   188
            NATO Research and Development........................   188
        Engineering and Manufacturing Development................   188
            Chemical and Biological Defense Program..............   188
        Management Support.......................................   189
            Technical Studies....................................   189
            Chemical and Biological Defense Program..............   189
            Management Headquarters..............................   189
        Operational Systems Development..........................   189
            Defense Airborne Reconnaissance Program..............   189
            Program Management...................................   189
            Dark Star UAV........................................   191
            Electro-Optical (EO) Framing Technology..............   191
            USH-42 Mission Recorder..............................   192
            Authorization Adjustments............................   192
            Special Operations Technology Development............   192
            Special Operations Tactical Systems Development......   192
            Special Operations Intelligence Systems..............   192
            Joint Threat Warning System..........................   192
            Special Operations Enhancements......................   192
            Quiet Knight.........................................   193
        Program Recommended......................................   193
    Developmental Test and Evaluation, Defense...................   196
            Committee Recommendations............................   196
        Program Recommended......................................   196
            Director of Test and Evaluation Defense..............   196
    Operational Test and Evaluation, Defense.....................   196
        Committee Recommendations................................   196
        Program Recommended......................................   196
            Live Fire Testing....................................   197
            Test and Evaluation Capabilities.....................   197
Title V. Revolving and Management Funds..........................   199
    Defense Business Operations Fund.............................   199
            DBOF Financial Management Practices..................   199
    National Defense Sealift Fund................................   199
        Large Medium Speed Roll-On/Roll-Off (LMSR) Sealift Ships.   200
        Maritime Prepositioning Force--Enhancement...............   200
        Lighterage...............................................   200
Title VI. Other Department of Defense Programs...................   203
    Defense Health Program.......................................   203
    Medical Research.............................................   203
        Desert Storm Syndrome....................................   203
        Bone Marrow Research.....................................   204
        HIV Research.............................................   204
        Breast Cancer............................................   204
        Provision of Care for Military Retirees..................   205
        Uncompensated Health Care................................   205
        Diabetes.................................................   206
        Air Medical Evacuation...................................   206
        Global Infectious Diseases...............................   206
    Chemical Agents and Munitions Destruction, Defense...........   206
        Program Recommended......................................   207
    Drug Interdiction and Counter-Drug Activities, Defense.......   207
        Committee Recommendations................................   207
            National Guard Counter-Drug Program..................   208
            Gulf States Initiative...............................   208
            Civil Air Patrol.....................................   208
            Army Support to Multi-Jurisdictional Task Force......   208
            Southwest Border States Anti-Drug Information System.   209
        Program Recommended......................................   209
    Office of the Inspector General..............................   209
Title VII. Related Agencies......................................   211
    National Foreign Intelligence Program........................   211
        Introduction.............................................   211
            Classified Report....................................   211
    Central Intelligence Agency Retirement and Disability System 
      Fund.......................................................   211
    Intelligence Community Management Account....................   212
    National Security Education Trust Fund.......................   212
    Payment to Kaho'olawe Island Conveyance, Remediation and 
      Environmental Restoration Fund.............................   212
Title VIII. General Provisions...................................   213
    Definition of Program, Project and Activity..................   213
    Marine Security Guards.......................................   213
    AN/ALE-47 Countermeasure Dispenser System....................   214
    Deep Attack Weapons Mix Study................................   214
    Peace Enforcement, Peacekeeping, and International 
      Humanitarian Assistance....................................   214
    House of Representatives Reporting Requirements..............   215
        Changes in Application of Existing Law...................   215
        Appropriation Language...................................   215
        General Provisions.......................................   217
        Appropriations Not Authorized by Law.....................   218
        Transfer of Funds........................................   220
        Inflationary Impact Statement............................   220
        Comparison With Budget Resolution........................   220
        Five-Year Projection of Outlays..........................   221
        Financial Assistance to State and Local Governments......   221
Full Committee Votes.............................................   221


104th Congress                                                   Report
                        HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

 2d Session                                                     104-617
_______________________________________________________________________


            DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE APPROPRIATIONS BILL, 1997

                                _______
                                

 June 11, 1996.--Committed to the Committee of the Whole House on the 
              State of the Union and ordered to be printed

_______________________________________________________________________


 Mr. Young of Florida, from the Committee on Appropriations, submitted 
                             the following

                              R E P O R T

                             together with

                            DISSENTING VIEWS

                        [To accompany H.R. 3610]

    The Committee on Appropriations submits the following 
report in explanation of the accompanying bill making 
appropriations for the Department of Defense, and for other 
purposes, for the fiscal year ending September 30, 1997.

                              Bill Totals

    Appropriations for most military functions of the 
Department of Defense are provided for in the accompanying bill 
for the fiscal year 1997. This bill does not provide 
appropriations for military construction, military family 
housing, civil defense, or nuclear warheads, for which 
requirements are considered in connection with other 
appropriations bills.
    The President's fiscal year 1997 budget request for 
activities funded in the Department of Defense Appropriations 
Bill totals $234,678,433,000 in new budget (obligational) 
authority. The amounts recommended by the Committee in the 
accompanying bill total $245,759,703,000 in new budget 
authority. This is $11,081,270,000 above the budget estimate 
and $3,692,406,000 \1\ above the sums made available for the 
same purposes for fiscal year 1996.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \1\ This amount does not include $820,000,000 in emergency 
supplemental appropriations for the U.S. military deployment to Bosnia, 
enacted into law in Public Law 104-134. Counting these funds, the 
amounts in this bill are $2,872,406,000 over the fiscal year 1996 
level.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    In terms of overall defense spending for fiscal year 1997, 
when the amounts in this bill are combined with proposed 
defense funding in other annual appropriations bills the 
Committee's recommendations are $800 million less than the 
$267.4 billion for the National Defense Function (050) approved 
by the House in May 1996, in both the Budget Resolution for 
fiscal years 1997-2002 and the National Defense Authorization 
Act for fiscal year 1997. Despite the proposed increase over 
the President's request, however, the Committee notes that with 
this recommendation funding for the Department of Defense for 
fiscal year 1997 will still fail to keep pace with inflation. 
Total funding in the bill is 1.8 percent, or nearly $4.4 
billion, less than what would be required to freeze funding at 
the fiscal year 1996 level, adjusted for inflation. As a 
consequence, if enacted into law, the Committee's 
recommendations would result in the twelfth straight year of 
real, inflation-adjusted reductions in defense spending.
    The new budget authority enacted for the fiscal year 1996, 
the President's budget estimates, and amounts recommended by 
the Committee for fiscal year 1997 appear in summary form in 
the following table:


                    Committee Budget Review Process

    The Committee notes that the President's budget request for 
the Department of Defense was not submitted to Congress until 
the first week in March, nearly one month later than usual. 
During its review of the fiscal year 1997 budget, the 
Subcommittee on National Security held a total of 20 hearings 
during the time period of March 7, 1996 to May 1, 1996. 
Testimony received by the Subcommittee totalled approximately 
1,435 pages of transcript. Over half of the hearings were held 
in open session. Executive or closed sessions were held only 
when the security classification of the material to be 
discussed presented no alternative.

                              Introduction

    The bill reported by the Committee reflects its obligation 
to provide adequate resources for the nation's defense, while 
attempting to strike a balance between the many competing 
challenges confronting the armed forces of the United States.
    The international environment remains uncertain and 
potentially explosive. Political instability remains on the 
rise, as does the threat posed by the proliferation of 
technology, giving even small nations or groups the ability to 
threaten entire populations.
    The nation's military forces, now at the lowest force 
structure levels in nearly 50 years, continue to sustain high 
rates of operation. These operating tempos continue to be 
exacerbated by the deployment of U.S. forces on non-traditional 
missions, as displayed prominently by the current Bosnia 
deployment. These frequent deployments have led to a host of 
problems including hardships for service members and their 
families, disruptions in standard rotation and training 
schedules, and the need to finance the substantial costs of 
such operations.
    Against this backdrop, the Administration has once again 
submitted a proposed defense budget which includes a 
substantial cut in funding from current levels (for the 
national defense function, a one year cut of $10 billion). More 
importantly, the fiscal year 1997 budget submission fails to 
adequately keep faith with the men and women in service by 
shortchanging quality of life programs and continuing to delay 
essential equipment modernization and development.
    The Committee is dismayed to note that these are in essence 
the same criticisms which have been lodged against the 
Administration's defense program in each of the past four 
years. This is not to say there have not been constructive 
improvements in the Administration's defense program since 
1993. Pushed by Congress, for example, the Administration 
finally dropped its resistance to proposing cost of living pay 
increases for military personnel. The Secretary of Defense has 
personally called attention to the sad state of military 
barracks and family housing and has attempted, within 
constrained resources, to address this problem. Funding for 
near-term readiness programs has become a higher priority than 
in initial Administration planning. In this regard, the 
Committee is pleased to observe the Department has adopted the 
proposition, first advanced by this Committee last year, that 
all ongoing contingency operations, such as Bosnia and the 
ongoing missions around Iraq, should to the extent possible be 
budgeted for, thereby reducing the requirement for supplemental 
appropriations and the resulting uncertainty in the field 
regarding availability of funding.
    Despite these changes, the Administration's defense budget 
proposals can still be characterized simply as ``Too few 
dollars to support too many missions, while we mortgage the 
future''. Nearly all observers, including the senior civilian 
and military leadership of the Department of Defense, readily 
admit the President's proposed budget fails to adequately 
address both serious immediate problems (such as the quality of 
military housing and defense infrastructure generally) as well 
as the modernization programs essential to ensuring medium-to-
long term military preparedness.
    Last year, the Committee and the Congress determined that 
these serious deficiencies in the Administration's defense 
plans were unacceptable. Working within the guidelines of the 
Budget Resolution and the proposed Balanced Budget Act, the 
Committee produced a 1996 Defense Appropriations Act which met 
many of these unfunded needs and which was uniformly praised by 
senior Pentagon leadership for doing so.
    Regrettably, for fiscal year 1997, the Administration has 
once again submitted a defense program which fails to correct 
these problems. Instead, the budget request calls for 
substantial reductions in many of the quality of life and 
modernization initiatives supported by the Congress last year 
and identified as priorities by the military services.

                   budget shortfalls and deficiencies

    The Secretary of Defense has described the President's 
defense program as weighted towards maintaining defense quality 
of life programs and current readiness, objectives the 
Committee supports. But this has come at a cost, namely, the 
continued deferral and underfunding of necessary weapons 
modernization and development. This was candidly stated by 
General Shalikashvili, Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, 
earlier this year: ``As overall defense spending has been 
reduced, procurement accounts have been the bill-payer for 
other readiness-related spending. We can no longer afford to 
push procurement into the outyears''.
    The defense modernization crisis has rightfully received 
much attention. But the Committee is also concerned about 
serious funding shortfalls in programs supporting the troops 
and their families, areas which have received much less recent 
publicity. In the fiscal year 1997 budget request, first and 
foremost among these problems is a $475 million shortfall in 
the Defense Health Program, which if left unaddressed will 
result in a severe cutback in medical services for military 
families and retirees. In testimony before the Committee the 
Army Surgeon General revealed his Department's share of this 
shortfall would force him to cut services equivalent to closing 
two large Army hospitals for an entire year. The Navy and Air 
Force Surgeons General reported similar budget shortfalls.
    The fiscal year 1997 budget request also leaves large, 
unfinanced backlogs in essential facilities repair and 
maintenance, despite the universal acknowledgement that the 
existing military barracks infrastructure is in dire need of 
upgrading and replacement. The budget also fails to adequately 
fund many of the most basic elements of military readiness and 
training. The services report shortfalls in a variety of areas, 
ranging from the provision of modern ``initial issue'' 
equipment to the individual soldier (cold weather gear, 
sleeping bags, tents), to funding for initial entry specialty 
training in military tactics and operations.
    On balance, therefore, while the Committee acknowledges the 
relative priority given to personnel and readiness programs in 
the budget compared to the procurement and development 
accounts, the 1997 budget requests for these programs are 
inadequate and, indeed, indefensible in many respects.
    As for defense modernization programs, it is well 
documented that the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff and 
the service chiefs of the Army, Navy, Marine Corps and Air 
Force believe the projected funding levels in the Department's 
Future Years Defense Plan for weapons procurement and 
development are substantially less than what is required. 
Funding for weapons procurement has declined by nearly 75 
percent in real terms over the past 11 years, and the Committee 
notes that the problem of maintaining the effectiveness of 
existing equipment inventories has become even more acute given 
the high tempo of operations, leading to systems being stressed 
and worn down more rapidly.
    In the Committee's view, the budget's failure to provide 
for an adequate modernization program carries with it many 
penalties. The most significant is the added element of risk to 
U.S. forces should they be forced to rely upon increasingly 
older equipment. The need for more modern, capable weapons 
systems and support equipment is underscored by the more than 
30 percent reduction in military force structure in recent 
years, coupled with the transition of the American military to 
an increasingly less forward-deployed posture. As the U.S. 
military loses the advantages of size and forward deployment, 
an ever greater premium is placed on the acquisition of 
technologically sophisticated equipment, capable of giving a 
smaller force much greater firepower and the ability to rapidly 
move thousands of miles into potentially hostile environments.
    In addition, the Committee believes funding constraints are 
impeding the essential development and fielding of critical 
technologies needed to cope with emerging threats and to 
leverage the capability of existing systems. The prime example 
is missile defense, where the Administration's program to 
counter the growing threat posed by both ballistic and cruise 
missiles is clearly in need of bolstering.
    While the debate on missile defenses is moving towards a 
focus on ``national missile defense'' systems to protect the 
continental United States, the Committee observes that even 
Secretary Perry has acknowledged that prospective deployment 
dates of key theater ballistic defense systems (such as THAAD 
and the Navy Upper-Tier program), which have been given 
precedence over national systems in the budget, have slipped 
from the schedules set forth in last year's Defense 
Authorization and Appropriations Acts solely because of the 
lack of funding proposed in the President's budget. The 
Committee finds it difficult to understand why, more than five 
years after the threat of theater ballistic missiles to our 
forces in the field and our allies moved from the realm of 
possibility to reality during the Gulf War, the Administration 
continues to delay the deployment of effective theater missile 
defenses because of self-imposed fiscal constraints.
    The Committee also believes the budget request for certain 
key ``force multipliers''--such as strategic and tactical 
mobility, joint service communications and intelligence, and 
precision munitions--is inadequate. This is particularly 
troublesome given the central role these capabilities are 
envisioned to play in any future conflict, and the potential 
these systems coupled with ``information age'' technologies 
have for achieving what the Joint Chiefs have described as 
``order of magnitude improvements'' in warfighting capability.
    Finally, there is a more practical consequence of failing 
to adequately fund production programs: namely, the military 
services are losing many opportunities to procure items at the 
best price. In the fiscal year 1997 budget, with a few 
exceptions production rates have been cut and development 
schedules have been slipped or simply deferred indefinitely for 
lack of funds.
    Constrainted modernization budgets thus not only are 
affecting the warfighters (by failing to make the most capable 
systems available), but they also mean lost opportunities to 
save money over the long term by procuring systems at economic 
rates of production and dramatically reduced unit costs. By 
failing to budget adequately for weapons procurement now, the 
Administration's budget is inexorably destined to lead to 
higher future defense costs.

                  Committee Conclusions and Objectives

    The Committee concludes that the President's proposed 
defense budget submission fails to meet both the existing needs 
of our forces in the field as well as the need to cost-
effectively develop and procure systems to meet future demands. 
The Committee therefore recommends adding funds above the 
levels proposed by the President in order to meet these 
critical needs.
    At the same time, however, the Committee recognizes its 
first obligation is to reduce funds for those activities it 
believes are of lower priority or which have little immediate 
bearing on military preparedness. The Committee is committed to 
reducing, wherever possible, excessive funding for any defense 
program or activity, particularly unnecessary administrative 
and bureaucratic operations of the Department of Defense and 
the military services.
    These twin objectives--funding programs of critical 
military value, while seeking economies and reductions from 
lower priority or duplicative programs--guided the Committee in 
formulating the recommendations in this bill.

                       special areas of emphasis

    The Committee's principal areas of emphasis in tailoring 
this bill have been the following:
          (1) Ensuring an adequate level of readiness, training 
        and quality of life for all service members, both in 
        the Active and Reserve components;
          (2) Providing for a modernization program which both 
        meets today's requirements as well as the security 
        needs of the future, by adding funds for equipment 
        needs articulated by the senior civilian and military 
        leadership in the Department of Defense;
          (3) Giving special priority to redressing shortfalls 
        in less visible, yet mission-essential programs and 
        equipment;
          (4) Stressing acquisition and development of force 
        multipliers such as mobility programs; joint force 
        reconnaissance, communications, and intelligence; and 
        advanced munitions (both stand-off and precision-guided 
        weapons);
          (5) Seek economies of scale by ramping up and where 
        possible ``buying out'' current production programs, 
        thereby saving money through decreased unit costs and 
        reducing the need for future purchases; and
          (6) Cutting, reforming, or eliminating programs or 
        activities with little military utility, which have 
        shown little demonstrable success, which have 
        encountered delays in development or production, or 
        which are duplicative, excessive or unnecessary.
    The following section of the report details major Committee 
recommendations in support of these objectives.

                    Major Committee Recommendations

                    ensuring a quality, ready force

    Personnel Issues: The Committee has recommended fully 
funding the 3 percent military pay raise as requested by the 
Department. In addition, the Committee has added $182 million 
above the budget request for housing and relocation allowances. 
The Committee has fully funded all child care and family 
support programs and proposes increases for several programs 
directed at assisting new military parents. Finally, the 
Committee has added $20 million for military recruiting, in 
order to ensure new accessions are of the highest possible 
quality.
    Military Medical Programs: The Committee has added $475 
million above the request to fully fund unbudgeted shortfalls 
in the Defense Health Program. The Committee has added $125 
million over the request to continue the Army's highly 
successful peer-reviewed breast cancer research program as well 
as the Committee's initiative of last year to specifically 
improve breast cancer detection and treatment for both service 
personnel and dependents.
    Training/OPTEMPO: The Committee has fully funded the 
requested amounts for all the Services' training and OPTEMPO 
accounts and has added $98 million over the request in those 
areas where the services identified shortfalls.
    Equipment repair/maintenance: The Committee is distressed 
over the continuing existence of substantial unfunded backlogs 
in the Services' depot maintenance accounts and has added $75 
million over the request to meet the most urgent unfunded 
equipment maintenance requirements.
    Real property maintenance: For years the Committee has 
expressed its concern over the growing backlog in real property 
maintenance accounts, used to support the Department's base 
infrastructure, including barracks and mission-essential 
facilities. As a result, in previous years the Committee has 
recommended substantial increases to the budget request in an 
effort to stem the long-term deterioration of the Department's 
physical assets. This bill provides an increase of $1 billion 
over the request for real property maintenance, including an 
additional $400 million for barracks and living facilities, 
continuing the Committee's commitment to revitalizing the 
Department's base infrastructure.
    Base operations: The Committee recommends an increase of 
$207 million over the request for base operations to meet 
identified budget shortfalls in day-to-day infrastructure 
operations of DOD facilities.
    DoD Drug Interdiction: The Committee recommends an increase 
over the budget request of $132 million for Department of 
Defense counter-drug and drug interdiction programs, a 20 
percent increase over the Department's proposed fiscal year 
1997 levels.
    Unfunded ``contingency'' operations: Last year, the 
Committee recommended providing $647 million over the budget to 
cover the unfunded costs associated with ongoing contingency 
operations in and around Iraq (Operations Provide Comfort and 
Southern Watch). With this step the Committee for the first 
time established the principle that whenever possible, ongoing, 
known operations should be budgeted and paid for ``up front.'' 
The Committee is gratified the Department recognized the 
soundness of this approach by including in its budget over $1 
billion for such ongoing operations (Provide Comfort, Southern 
Watch, and Operation Joint Endeavor in Bosnia) and has fully 
funded the request for these activities. Without such advance 
financing, the military services would be forced to ``raid'' 
other operating accounts to sustain these missions pending 
approval of additional funding, causing disruptions in planning 
and mission execution.

                         modernization programs

    Department of Defense officials freely admit that the most 
serious shortcoming in the budget proposal is in those accounts 
providing for procurement and research and development of new 
equipment and technologies. Based on extensive testimony as 
well as a concerted effort to identify critical shortfalls in 
existing requirements, the Committee is recommending increases 
to the request specifically targeted at meeting existing 
equipment/capability shortfalls as well as providing for the 
projected military requirements of the future. In all, the bill 
recommends increasing the budget by more than $9 billion for 
modernization programs, including increases of $5.7 billion for 
procurement, $2.8 billion for research and development, and 
$941 million for strategic sealift programs and prepositioning 
ships.
    The most significant recommendations include:
    Missile defense: The Committee recommends total funding of 
$3.5 billion, a net increase of $705 million, for Ballistic 
Missile Defense, including an additional $350 million for 
national missile defense and $386 million for theater systems. 
The Committee has fully funded the budget request for the joint 
U.S.-Israel ARROW missile defense program, and has added $55 
million for the joint U.S.-Israel ``Nautilus'' Tactical High-
Energy Laser program, which was not budgeted. Also, mindful of 
the growing threat to U.S. forces posed by both theater 
ballistic and cruise missiles, the Committee has continued its 
long-standing emphasis on ship self-defense and ``cooperative 
engagement'' (the sharing of tracking and targeting information 
among many different platforms) and has added $111 million over 
the budget for these efforts.
    Major weapons programs:
    The Committee has recommended substantial additions over 
the budget for the V-22 advanced tactical transport ($339 
million added), the Marine Corps AV-8B remanufacturing program 
($68 million), the C-17 strategic airlifter ($315 million), and 
an additional $504 million in advance procurement for the 
second New Attack Submarine.
    The Committee has fully funded the request for the Army 
Comanche helicopter ($288 million), the Navy F/A-18 E/F fighter 
($2.2 billion), the Joint Strike Fighter development program 
($602 million), and the SSN-23 attack submarine ($699 million), 
and has provided nearly $2 billion for the Air Force F-22 
fighter development program.
    The Committee has fully funded the requests associated with 
the B-1 and B-2 bomber programs and has recommended an 
additional $367 million over the budget to accelerate the 
modification of these aircraft to carry stand-off, precision-
guided munitions.
    Inventory Shortfalls:
    In light of existing inventory shortfalls and requirements, 
the Committee has added funds over the request for Army Kiowa 
Warrior helicopters ($233 million added), Navy EA-6B electronic 
warfare aircraft ($180 million) Navy E-2C surveillance aircraft 
($155 million), upgrades to P-3 maritime surveillance aircraft 
for the Navy ($153 million), and Air Force F-15E fighters ($319 
million), among others.

                Redressing mission essential shortfalls

    The Committee is particularly concerned about growing 
shortages in relatively low-dollar yet essential equipment 
items, an area of the budget which has been cut back 
substantially as procurement dollars have become more scarce 
and focused on major weapons systems. As a result, the 
Committee proposes increases of over $1.5 billion dollars over 
the request for miscellaneous equipment, including such items 
as conventional ammunition, ground support equipment, sealift 
support equipment, initial issue combat gear, night vision 
goggles, small arms, and chemical/biological protective suits.
        Category                                    Increase over budget

Conventional ammunition.................................   +$440 million
Miscellaneous Guard & Reserve equipment.................    +289 million
Command control and communications......................    +270 million
Trucks..................................................    +216 million
Small Arms..............................................     +36 million
Sealift support equipment...............................     +55 million
Generators..............................................     +25 million
Modular deployable base camps...........................     +26 million
Chemical/biological protection gear.....................     +86 million
Soldier equipment/initial issue.........................     +87 million
Night vision devices....................................     +15 million
                    --------------------------------------------------------
                    ____________________________________________________
    Total............................................... +$1.545 billion

    In addition to the funds listed above for Guard and Reserve 
equipment, the Committee has added funds for other Guard and 
Reserve programs, bringing the total recommended procurement 
increase in this bill to $908 million for the Guard and Reserve 
components.

                  high-leverage ``Force multipliers''

    Mobility: In order to address the continuing demand for 
improved mobility and logistics in support of rapid deployment 
of U.S. forces, the Committee proposes a comprehensive package 
of recommendations comprising the addition of nearly $2.2 
billion over the budget request, as shown below.
    (1) Ten C-17 transport aircraft, an addition of two 
aircraft and $315 million over the request;
    (2) Six V-22 advanced tactical transport aircraft, an 
increase of two aircraft and $312 million over the request;
    (3) Four LMSR strategic sealift ships for the Army, an 
increase of two ships and $611 million over the request;
    (4) $250 million over the request for the acquisition of 
two MPF-E prepositioning ships for the Marine Corps;
    (5) $209 million over the request for four new KC-130T 
tankers for the Marine Corps;
    (6) $104 million over the request for four reengining kits 
for Air National Guard KC-135 tankers;
    (7) $650 million for 3,994 Army tactical trucks, an 
increase of $128 million and 1,150 vehicles over the request;
    (8) $101 million over the request for facility upgrades at 
ports, airfields and railheads;
    (9) $80 million over the request for equipment for 
offloading sealift ships;
    (10) $25 million over the request for capital equipment at 
ports, airfields and railheads; and
    (11) $23 million over the request for 60K A/C Loaders for 
air mobility operations.
    Munitions: The Committee recommends an additional $709 
million over the request for munitions, of which $269 million 
is for precision-guided stand-off munitions, and $440 million 
for Army, Navy, Marine Corps and Air Force conventional 
ammunition accounts.

                Increases for Precision Guided Munitions

ATACMS MYP..............................................     $69,000,000
Tomahawk recertification................................      40,600,000
AGM-130.................................................      40,000,000
JSOW....................................................      37,000,000
Tomahawk new Block III missiles.........................      32,000,000
HAVE NAP................................................      20,000,000
CALCM...................................................      15,000,000
Tomahawk Block III conversions..........................      14,400,000
                    --------------------------------------------------------
                    ____________________________________________________
    Total...............................................    $269,000,000

    Joint command, control, communications and intelligence 
(C3I):
    In fiscal year 1996, the Committee provided additional 
funds to correct communications interoperability deficiencies 
identified by DoD and improve battlefield awareness. This year, 
the Committee again heard testimony from the Service Chiefs and 
the Commander in Chiefs from the various Unified and Specified 
Commands who described deficiencies in command, control, 
communications systems and tactical collection systems. 
Therefore, the Committee has recommended an additional $844 
million to develop, deploy, improve and evaluate programs 
targeted at better battlefield situational awareness; improve 
communications capabilities; and finally, to improve the 
integrity of information systems from exploitation, corruption, 
and destruction. The Committee recommends increases in the 
following programs:

Battlefield Situational Awareness improvements:
    Force XXI...........................................    +$50,000,000
    Guardrail Common sensor.............................     +10,000,000
    ARL-Moving Target Indicator.........................      +5,000,000
    Tactical Command System.............................      +3,000,000
    Commandant's Warfighting Laboratory.................     +40,000,000
    AWACS (TIBS)........................................     +11,900,000
    Airborne Command and Control (TIBS).................      +4,100,000
    Global Positioning System (Space)...................     +10,100,000
    RIVET JOINT (aircraft and reengining)...............    +322,000,000
    COMBAT SENT.........................................      +6,000,000
    U-2 Aircraft........................................      +5,000,000
    Predator............................................     +50,000,000
    Darkstar UAV........................................     +42,500,000
    E-2C AEW Aircraft...................................    +155,000,000
                    --------------------------------------------------------
                    ____________________________________________________
      Subtotal..........................................    $714,600,000
                    ========================================================
                    ____________________________________________________
Communications improvements:
    Trojan Spirit.......................................      +2,600,000
    Commanders Tactical Terminals.......................      +5,000,000
    SATCOM Radios (E-2C)................................      +4,800,000
    Marine Corps (GCCS).................................      +2,700,000
    Deployable communications (Marine Corps)............      +1,700,000
    SATCOM Terminals (Air Force)........................     +21,200,000
    JTIDS Commonality (Air Force).......................     +19,800,000
    Milstar.............................................     +20,000,000
    DSCS Upgrade........................................      +6,400,000
                    --------------------------------------------------------
                    ____________________________________________________
      Subtotal..........................................     $84,200,000
                    ========================================================
                    ____________________________________________________
Protection of C3I systems:
    Army--forward deployed forces.......................     +19,400,000
    Network protections--DISA...........................     +26,000,000
                    --------------------------------------------------------
                    ____________________________________________________
      Subtotal..........................................     $45,400,000
                    ========================================================
                    ____________________________________________________

             reducing future defense spending requirements

    As described earlier in this report, by proposing a post-
World War II low level for procurement programs in its budget, 
the Administration is not only delaying acquisition of items 
needed by our forces in the field, but is also creating a 
scenario where overall defense costs in the near future will be 
unnecessarily high. Many procurement programs in the budget are 
proposed for uneconomic rates of production, meaning unit costs 
are higher. Also, by deferring production of required equipment 
by definition the Department will confront higher outyear 
budget requirements when these items are finally requested and 
procured.
    The Committee has always stressed getting ``best value for 
the dollar'' in defense acquisition, adjusting proposed funding 
to buy systems at more economic production rates as well as to 
reduce outyear defense spending requirements. Last year's 
Defense Appropriations Act made many recommendations along 
these lines, prompting Secretary of Defense Perry to observe 
that Congress had moved ``forward programs that were already in 
the [outyear] budget * * * This is what I asked them to do * * 
*''. An example of the types of savings resulting from such 
decisions comes from the fiscal year 1996 Defense 
Appropriations Act, where the addition of $2.3 billion over the 
request for LPD-17 and LHD-7 amphibious ships resulted in 
eliminating the need to buy these ships in the outyears at an 
estimated total program cost of $3.3 billion. The Committee's 
action thus saved a billion dollars on just these two programs, 
nearly a one-third reduction in cost.
    The Committee has emphasized a similar approach in this 
bill. This gets essential equipment out to the field faster, 
and at ultimately less cost to the taxpayer. The following 
table displays selected examples where the Committee has added 
funds over the request for programs identified on service 
shortfall lists or which are currently budgeted for production 
in fiscal year 1998 or beyond, and the estimated outyear cost 
avoidance which results from funding these items now rather 
than later.

------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                     Proposed 1997      Cost Avoidance  
             Program                   increase        (1998 and beyond)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
C-17 Airlift Aircraft...........              375                 805   
LMSR Sealift Ships..............              611                 661   
F-15 Tactical Fighters..........              319                 547   
MPF-E Maritime Prepositioning                                           
 Ships..........................              250                 250   
E-2C Early Warning Aircraft.....              155                 187   
Javelin Missile (MYP)...........               34                 140   
ATACMS (MYP)....................               69                 132   
P-3 Surveillance Aircraft.......               87                 174   
AV-8B Fighter...................               68                 122   
Armored Combat Earthmover.......              100                 113   
TAGS Ship.......................               54                  67   
                                 ---------------------------------------
      Total.....................           $2,122              $3,198   
------------------------------------------------------------------------

      

                       reforms/program reductions

    The Committee recognizes the Department of Defense is no 
more sacrosanct than any other portion of the Federal 
government in terms of its need to be constantly reviewed, 
assessed, and improved. Accordingly, a major priority 
throughout the Committee's budget oversight process has been 
the identification of lower priority programs which, although 
they in some instances contribute to the military mission, can 
be cut or eliminated in order to fund higher priority programs 
and activities. The Committee has also recommended many budget 
reductions intended to reform and streamline existing 
Department of Defense structure or operations. Finally, the 
Committee has identified budget savings stemming from audits by 
the General Accounting Office, the Department's audit and 
inspector general functions, and the Committee's Surveys and 
Investigations staff, as well as changes in program status 
identified by the military departments.
    Reduction of lower-priority programs: The following table 
shows selected programs in the budget request which the 
Committee has eliminated or reduced based on their possessing a 
relatively low priority or where the requested funding was 
excessive.

        Program                                                Reduction

Defense Commercialization Programs......................   -$313,000,000
NATO RDT&E..............................................     -53,000,000
Civil/Military Programs.................................     -45,000,000
OSD Technical Studies...................................     -35,000,000
Environmental Intelligence..............................      -9,500,000
National Security Education Trust Fund..................      -5,100,000
    Reform/restructuring: The Committee notes that DoD, with a 
decade of reduced budgets and downsizing behind it, has already 
implemented or is well into implementing a series of management 
and organizational reforms. Among other things, these 
initiatives have already resulted in the defense civilian 
workforce being reduced by one-quarter with significant 
additional reductions projected in the near future. While DoD 
is to be commended for such moves, the Committee believes more 
must and can be done. Accordingly, it has recommended a number 
of budget reductions intended to further streamline and 
rationalize operations.

        Program                                                Reduction
Spares Management.......................................   -$350,000,000
DBOF Passthrough........................................    -195,000,000
Acquisition Workforce Reduction.........................    -159,900,000
USTRANSCOM Efficiencies.................................    -100,000,000
OSD Staff/Administrative Savings........................     -20,400,000
Printing Efficiencies...................................     -10,000,000

    Program/budget execution: In addition to the reductions 
cited above, the Committee proposes more than 80 other 
reductions to budgeted items based on delays in program 
execution, contract savings, or other events resulting in the 
requested amount being clearly excessive to program needs. 
These reductions have resulted in over $2.0 billion in savings 
in this legislation.

       Highlights of Committee Recommendations by Major Category

                       active military personnel

    The Committee recommends a total of $60,897,052,000 for 
active military personnel, an increase of $228,100,000 above 
the budget request. The Committee has fully funded the 
authorized end strength as requested in the President's budget. 
In keeping with the emphasis on the quality of life initiatives 
started in fiscal year 1996, the Committee recommends an 
increase of approximately $167,500,000 for certain Pays and 
Allowances for active personnel, such as the Basic Allowance 
for Quarters, Variable Housing Allowance, Temporary Lodging 
Expense, and Dislocation Allowance.

                      guard and reserve personnel

    The Committee recommends a total of $9,218,108,000, an 
increase of $104,230,000 above the budget request for Guard and 
Reserve personnel. The Committee has fully funded with the 
authorized end strength as requested in the President's budget 
for Selected Reserve, but added additional end strength in the 
Military Personnel and Operation and maintenance Reserve 
accounts for restoration of personnel and operating support for 
selected force structure add-ons. The Committee also recommends 
an increase of approximately $14,000,000 for similar Pays and 
Allowance for Reserve personnel.

                       operation and maintenance

    The Operation and maintenance appropriation provides for 
the readiness of U.S. forces as well as the maintenance of 
facilities and equipment, the infrastructure that supports the 
combat forces and the quality of life of Service members and 
their families.
    The Committee recommends $80,590,383,000 an increase of 
$2,128,217,000 above the fiscal year 1997 budget request. As 
described elsewhere in this report, this increase is driven 
primarily by the need to accelerate facilities and 
infrastructure maintenance and repairs, mobility enhancements, 
and equipment improvements for U.S. service personnel. However, 
the Committee has also recommended budget reductions that the 
Department can achieve in areas such as acquisition management 
and transportation services, by adhering to certain policy 
guidelines in the funding of industrial-type activities, and by 
taking advantage of fact of life changes since preparation of 
the budget request.

                              procurement

    The Committee recommends $43,871,857,000 in new 
obligational authority for Procurement, an increase of 
$5,734,748,000 over the fiscal year 1997 budget request, but a 
decrease from the current fiscal year when measured in constant 
dollars. Major programs funded in the bill include the 
following:
          $222,279,000 for UH-60 Blackhawk helicopters
          $379,483,000 for upgrades and modifications to Apache 
        helicopters
          $357,590,000 for 1,020 Hellfire missiles
          $201,804,000 for 1,020 Javelin missiles
          $161,816,000 for 97 ATACMS missiles
          $464,486,000 for upgrades to Abrams tanks
          $233,094,000 for medium tactical vehicles
          $196,343,000 for heavy tactical vehicles
          $1,859,856,000 for 12 F/A-18 E/F fighter aircraft
          $732,904,000 for 6 V-22 (Osprey) aircraft
          $350,014,000 for 12 AV-8B Harrier aircraft
          $272,752,000 for 12 T-45 Trainer aircraft
          $1,499,910,000 for modification of Naval aircraft
          $197,463,000 for 127 Standard missiles
          $2,624,693,000 for three DDG-51 destroyers
          $699,071,000 for the SSN-23 submarine
          $800,186,000 for advanced procurement of new SSN 
        attack submarines
          $504,842,000 for 12 F-15E tactical aircraft
          $2,194,305,000 for 10 C-17 airlift aircraft
          $1,886,284,000 for modifications of Air Force 
        aircraft
          $187,990,000 for 300 AMRAAM missiles
          $263,173,000 for Ballistic Missile Defense

               research, development, test and evaluation

    The Committee recommends $37,611,031,000 in new 
obligational authority for Research, Development, Test and 
Evaluation, an increase of $2,865,359,000 from the budget. 
Major programs funded in the bill include the following:
          $1,982,459,000 for the F-22 tactical aircraft
          $215,696,000 for the Combat Vehicle Improvement 
        program
          $288,644,000 for the Comanche helicopter
          $613,792,000 for the V-22 aircraft
          $447,033,000 for F/A-18 tactical aircraft
          $720,278,000 for the MILSTAR communications satellite
          $3,238,950,000 for Ballistic Missile Defense
          $203,784,000 for JSTARS (Joint Surveillance/Target 
        Attack Radar System)

                         Forces to be Supported

                         Department of the Army

    The fiscal year 1997 budget is designed to support active 
Army forces of 10 divisions, 3 armored cavalry regiments, and 
reserve forces of 8 divisions, 3 separate brigades, and 15 
enhanced National Guard brigades. These forces provide the 
minimum force necessary to meet enduring defense needs and 
execute the National Military Strategy.
    A summary of the major active forces follows:

------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                        Fiscal Year--   
                                                    --------------------
                                                      1995   1996   1997
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Divisions:                                                              
    Airborne.......................................      1      1      1
    Air Assault....................................      1      1      1
    Light..........................................      2      2      2
    Infantry.......................................      0      0      0
    Mechanized.....................................      5      4      4
    Armored........................................      3      2      2
                                                    --------------------
      Total........................................     12     10     10
                                                    --------------------
Non-divisional Combat units:                                            
    Armored cavalry regiments......................      3      3      3
    Separate brigades..............................      2      0      0
                                                    --------------------
      Total........................................      5      3      3
                                                    --------------------
Active duty military personnel, end strength                            
 (thousands).......................................    509    495    495
------------------------------------------------------------------------


                         department of the navy

    The fiscal year 1997 budget supports ship battle forces 
totaling 357 ships at the end of fiscal year 1997, a decrease 
from fiscal year 1996. Forces in fiscal year 1997 include 18 
strategic ships, 11 aircraft carriers, 286 other battle force 
ships, 24 support ships, reserve force ships, 1,428 Navy/Marine 
Corps tactical/ASW aircraft, 654 Undergraduate Training 
aircraft, 698 Fleet Air Support aircraft, 416 Fleet Air 
Training aircraft, 445 Reserve aircraft, 228 RDT&E aircraft, 
and 461 aircraft in the pipeline.
    A summary of the major forces follows:

------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                    Fiscal year--       
                                           -----------------------------
                                              1995      1996      1997  
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Strategic Forces..........................        16        17        18
                                           -----------------------------
    Submarines............................        16        17        18
    Other.................................         0         0         0
                                           =============================
SLBM Launchers (MIR)......................       384       408       432
                                           =============================
General Purpose...........................       303       301       297
                                           -----------------------------
    Aircraft Carriers.....................        11        11        11
    Surface Combatants....................       113       116       119
    Submarines............................        84        80        73
    Amphibious Warfare Ships..............        39        42        43
    Combat Logistics Ships................        43        41        40
    Other.................................        13        11        11
                                           =============================
Support Forces............................        35        29        24
                                           -----------------------------
    Mobile Logistics Ships................        11         6         4
    Support Ships.........................        24        23        20
                                           =============================
Mobilization Category A...................        19        18        18
                                           -----------------------------
    Aircraft Carriers.....................         1         1         1
    Surface Combatants....................        14        10        10
    Amphibious Warfare Ships..............         2         2         2
    Mine Warfare..........................         2         5         5
                                           =============================
      Total Ships, Battle Force...........       373       365       357
                                           =============================
      Total Local Defense/Misc. Forces....       148       159       165
                                           -----------------------------
Auxiliaries/Sealift Forces................       131       135       143
Surface Combatant Ships...................         3         5         3
Coastal Defense...........................        12        13        13
    Research and Development..............       173       191       228
Mobilization Category B...................         1         3         6
    Surface Combatants....................         0         0         0
    Mine Warfare Ships....................         1         3         6
    Support Ships.........................         0         0         0
                                           =============================
Naval Aircraft:                                                         
    Primary Authorized (Plus-Pipe)........     4,414     4,386     4,330
                                           -----------------------------
    Authorized Pipeline...................       461       458       461
    Tactical/ASW Aircraft.................     1,456     1,437     1,428
    Fleet Air Training....................       423       440       416
    Fleet Air Support.....................       807       749       698
    Training (Undergraduated).............       640       651       654
    Reserve...............................       454       460       445
                                           =============================
Naval Personnel:                                                        
    Active................................   613,200   602,000   580,900
                                           -----------------------------
        Navy..............................   439,200   428,000   406,900
        Marine Corps......................   174,000   174,000   174,000
                                           =============================
Reserve:                                                                
    Navy..................................   100,710    98,608    95,941
                                           -----------------------------
        SELRES............................    83,200    80,920    79,285
        Sea/Air Mariners..................  ........       198       150
        TARS..............................    17,510    17,490    16,506
------------------------------------------------------------------------


                      department of the air force

    The fiscal year 1997 Air Force budget was designed to 
support a total active inventory force structure of 52 fighter 
and attack squadrons, 6 Air National Guard air defense 
interceptor squadrons and 10 bomber squadrons, including B-2s, 
B-1s, and B-52s. The Minuteman and Peacekeeper ICBM forces will 
consist of 580 active launchers.
    A summary of the major forces as proposed in the 
President's budget follows:

                      FISCAL YEAR 1997 MAJOR FORCES                     
                 [Includes only Combat Coded Squadrons]                 
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                              1995      1996      1997  
------------------------------------------------------------------------
USAF fighter and attack (Active)..........        54        52        52
Air defense interceptor (ANG).............        10        10         6
Strategic bomber (Active).................        10        10        10
ICBM launchers/silos......................       700       700       700
ICBM missile boosters.....................       580       580       580
USAF airlift squadrons (Active):                                        
    Strategic airlift.....................        18        17        16
    Tactical airlift......................        11        11        11
                                           -----------------------------
        Total airlift.....................        29        28        27
                                           -----------------------------
        Total Active Inventory \1\........     6,726     6,433     6,386
------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Includes Primary, Backup, and Attrition Reserve Aircraft for all    
  Purpose Identifiers for Active, Air National Guard, and Air Force     
  Reserve.                                                              


------------------------------------------------------------------------
                 End strength                       1996         1997   
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Active Duty...................................      388,200      381,100
Reserve Component.............................      186,676      181,299
Air National Guard............................      112,707      108,018
Air Force Reserve.............................       73,969       73,281
------------------------------------------------------------------------

                                TITLE I

                           MILITARY PERSONNEL

          Programs and Activities Funded by Military Personnel

                             Appropriations

    The President's budget request reflects a continuation in 
the drawdown of military personnel and force structure. The 
budget proposes to decrease 25,000 active duty personnel and 
30,000 Reserve and Guard personnel from fiscal year 1996 
levels. The Department's reductions in end strength will be 
nearly completed by the end of fiscal year 1997, reducing force 
levels from a high of 2.2 million in fiscal year 1987 to a goal 
of 1.4 million by fiscal year 1999, a 30 percent reduction for 
Active and Guard and Reserve personnel. The fiscal year 1997 
budget request fully funds a 3.0 percent pay increase, but does 
not continue to fund those quality of life initiatives started 
in fiscal year 1996 aimed at enhancing the lives of military 
personnel. Therefore, the Committee recommends an increase of 
approximately $182,000,000 over the budget request in various 
pays and allowances which would help offset the costs to 
service members for their out-of-pocket expenses.

   SUMMARY OF MILITARY PERSONNEL RECOMMENDATIONS FOR FISCAL YEAR 1997

Fiscal year 1996 appropriation.......................... $69,191,008,000
Fiscal year 1997 budget request.........................  69,782,830,000
Fiscal year 1997 recommendation.........................  70,115,160,000
Change from budget request..............................    +332,330,000

    The Committee recommends an appropriation of 
$70,115,160,000 for the Military Personnel accounts. The 
recommendation is an increase of $924,152,000 above the 
$69,191,008,000 appropriated in fiscal year 1996. These 
military personnel budget total comparisons include 
appropriations for the active, reserve, and National Guard 
accounts. The following tables include a summary of the 
recommendations by appropriation account. Explanations of 
changes from the budget request appear later in this section.

           SUMMARY OF APPROPRIATION ACCOUNT OF THE FISCAL YEAR 1997 MILITARY PERSONNEL RECOMMENDATION           
                                            [In thousands of dollars]                                           
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                                  Change from   
                        Account                                Budget         Recommendation         budget     
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Military Personnel:                                                                                             
    Army...............................................        $20,580,738        $20,692,838          +$112,100
    Navy...............................................         16,942,956         17,000,856            +57,900
    Marine Corps.......................................          6,102,108          6,103,808             +1,700
    Air Force..........................................         17,043,150         17,099,550            +56,400
                                                        --------------------------------------------------------
      Subtotal, Active.................................         60,668,952         60,897,052           +228,100
                                                        ========================================================
Reserve Personnel:                                                                                              
    Army...............................................          2,043,679          2,083,379            +39,700
    Navy...............................................          1,386,306          1,392,406             +6,100
    Marine Corps.......................................            381,143            387,943             +6,800
    Air Force..........................................            775,967            780,497             +4,530
National Guard Personnel:                                                                                       
    Army...............................................          3,242,493          3,279,393            +36,900
    Air Force..........................................          1,284,290          1,294,490            +10,200
                                                        --------------------------------------------------------
      Subtotal, Guard and Reserve......................          9,113,878          9,218,108           +104,230
                                                        ========================================================
      Total, Title I...................................         69,782,830         70,115,160           +332,330
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The fiscal year 1997 budget request included a decrease of 
24,700 end strength for the active forces and a decrease of 
30,057 end strength for the selected reserve over fiscal year 
1996 authorized levels.
    The Committee recommends the following levels highlighted 
in the tables below.

                       overall active end strengh

Fiscal year 1996 estimate...............................       1,481,700
Fiscal year 1997 budget request.........................       1,457,000
Fiscal year 1997 House authorization....................       1,457,418
Fiscal year 1997 recommendation.........................       1,457,366
    Compared with Fiscal year 1996......................         -24,334
    Compared with Fiscal year 1997 budget request.......            +366

                 overall selected reserve end strength

Fiscal year 1996 estimate...............................         930,980
Fiscal year 1997 budget request.........................         900,923
Fiscal year 1997 House authorization....................         902,365
Fiscal year 1997 recommendation.........................         902,365
    Compared with Fiscal year 1996......................         -28,615
    Compared with Fiscal year 1997 budget request.......          +1,442

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                           Fiscal year 1997                     
                                         Fiscal year -----------------------------------------------------------
                                             1996                                                  Comparison of
                                           estimate      Budget        House      Recommendation   request with 
                                                        request    authorization                  recommendation
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Active Forces (end strength):                                                                                   
    Army...............................      495,000      495,000       495,000         495,000   ..............
    Navy...............................      424,500      406,900       407,318         407,266            +366 
    Marine Corps.......................      174,000      174,000       174,000         174,000   ..............
    Air Force..........................      388,200      381,100       381,100         381,100   ..............
                                        ------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Total, Active Force..............    1,481,700    1,457,000     1,457,418       1,457,366            +366 
                                        ========================================================================
Guard and Reserve (end strength):                                                                               
    Army Reserve.......................      230,000      214,925       215,179         215,179            +254 
    Navy Reserve.......................       98,992       95,941        96,304          96,304            +363 
    Marine Corps Reserve...............       42,274       42,000        42,000          42,000   ..............
    Air Force Reserve..................       74,007       73,281        73,281          73,281   ..............
    Army National Guard................      373,000      366,758       366,758         366,758   ..............
    Air National Guard.................      112,707      108,018       108,843         108,843            +825 
                                        ------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Total, Guard and Reserve.........      930,980      900,923       902,365         902,365          +1,442 
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

               Adjustments to Military Personnel Account

                                overview

                      special pays and allowances

    The Committee recommends a total increase over the request 
of $181,230,000 for moving and housing allowances, to help 
offset the ``out-of-pocket'' costs to service members when they 
change duty stations, and for living in high geographical 
areas. The amounts recommended for Basic Allowance for Quarters 
(BAQ), Variable Housing Allowance (VHA), Dislocation Allowance 
(DLA) and Temporary Lodging Expense (TLE) would take effect 
January 1, 1997, as proposed in the House passed Defense 
Authorization bill.

                          dental special pays

    The Committee recommends an increase over the request of 
$15,000,000 for special pays and allowances for dentists 
serving in the military services. The Committee is aware of 
recruitment and retention problems being faced by the active 
and Reserve dental corps, and recommends additional funds over 
the budget request for accession bonuses and special and 
incentive payments for active duty dentists and Reserve 
dentists while on active duty.

                       force structure add-backs

    The Committee recommends an increase over the request of 
$10,000,000 in ``Military Personnel, Navy'' and ``Reserve 
Personnel, Navy'' for restoral of end strength for two P-3 
squadrons, one each in the active Navy and Navy Reserve. In 
addition, the Committee recommends an increase of $23,900,000 
in ``National Guard Personnel, Air Force'', and ``Operation and 
Maintenance, Air National Guard'' for end strength and 
operating support to maintain 15 Primary Aircraft Authorized 
(PAA) for Air National Guard General Purpose Fighters.

                      full-time support strengths

    There are four categories of full-time support in the Guard 
and Reserve components: civilian technicians, active Guard and 
Reserve (AGR), non-technician civilians, and active component 
personnel.
    Full-time support personnel organize, recruit, train, 
maintain and administer the Reserve components. Civilian 
(Military) technicians directly support units, and are very 
important to help units maintain readiness and meet the wartime 
mission of the Army and Air Force.
    Full-time support end strength in all categories totaled 
154,749 in fiscal year 1996. The fiscal year 1997 budget 
request is 152,134. The following table summarizes Guard and 
Reserve full-time support end strengths:

                                    GUARD AND RESERVE FULL-TIME END STRENGTHS                                   
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                           Fiscal year                                                          
                                              1996         Budget        HNSC        Committee    Recommendation
                                          appropriated    request                 recommendation    vs request  
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Army Reserve:                                                                                                   
    AGR.................................        11,575       11,550       11,729         11,804            +254 
    Technicians.........................         6,630        6,799        6,799          6,799   ..............
Navy Reserve TAR........................        17,605       16,506       16,603         16,626            +120 
Marine Corps Reserve....................         2,559        2,559        2,559          2,559   ..............
Air Force Reserve:                                                                                              
    AGR.................................           628          625          625            625   ..............
    Technicians.........................         9,802        9,704        9,802          9,704   ..............
Army National Guard:                                                                                            
    AGR.................................        23,390       23,040       23,798         23,040   ..............
    Technicians.........................        25,500       25,500       25,500         25,500   ..............
Air National Guard:                                                                                             
    AGR.................................        10,066       10,129       10,378         10,378            +249 
    Technicians.........................        23,399       22,881       23,224         23,224            +343 
                                         -----------------------------------------------------------------------
      Total:                                                                                                    
          AGR/TAR.......................        65,823       64,409       64,692         65,032            +623 
          Technicians...................        65,331       64,884       65,325         65,277            +343 
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

                        MILITARY PERSONNEL, ARMY

Fiscal year 1996 appropriation.......................... $19,946,187,000
Fiscal year 1997 budget request.........................  20,580,738,000
Committee recommendation................................  20,692,838,000
Change from budget request..............................    +112,100,000

    The Committee recommends an appropriation of 
$20,692,838,000 for Military Personnel, Army. The 
recommendation is an increase of $746,651,000 above the 
$19,946,187,000 appropriated for fiscal year 1996. The 
adjustments to the fiscal year 1997 budget request are as 
follows:

                        [In thousands of dollars]

Basic Allowance for Quarters............................         +17,300
Variable Housing Allowance..............................          +5,900
Temporary Lodging Expense...............................         +12,000
Dislocation Allowance...................................         +15,500
Special Duty Assignment Pay/SOCOM.......................          +6,400
Dental Special Pay......................................          +5,000
Manpower Shortfalls.....................................         +50,000
                    --------------------------------------------------------
                    ____________________________________________________
      Total.............................................        +112,100

                        MILITARY PERSONNEL, NAVY

Fiscal year 1996 appropriation.......................... $17,008,563,000
Fiscal year 1997 budget request.........................  16,942,956,000
Committee recommendation................................  17,000,856,000
Change from budget request..............................     +57,900,000

    The Committee recommends an appropriation of 
$17,000,856,000 for Military Personnel, Navy. The 
recommendation is a decrease of $7,707,000 below the 
$17,008,563,000 appropriated for fiscal year 1996. The 
adjustments to the fiscal year 1997 budget request are as 
follows:

                        [In thousands of dollars]

Basic Allowance for Quarters............................         +15,400
Variable Housing Allowance..............................         +15,200
Temporary Lodging Expense...............................          +4,400
Dislocation Allowance...................................         +10,900
Dental Special Pay......................................          +5,000
P-3 Squadron............................................          +7,000
                    --------------------------------------------------------
                    ____________________________________________________
      Total.............................................         +57,900

                    MILITARY PERSONNEL, MARINE CORPS

Fiscal year 1996 appropriation..........................  $5,885,740,000
Fiscal year 1997 budget request.........................   6,102,108,000
Committee recommendation................................   6,103,808,000
Change from budget request..............................      +1,700,000

    The Committee recommends an appropriation of $6,103,808,000 
for Military Personnel, Marine Corps. The recommendation is an 
increase of $218,068,000 above the $5,885,740,000 appropriated 
for fiscal year 1996. The adjustments to the fiscal year 1997 
budget request are as follows:

                        [In thousands of dollars]

Basic Allowance for Quarters............................          +4,500
Variable Housing Allowance..............................         +10,600
Temporary Lodging Expense...............................          +3,100
Dislocation Allowance...................................          +3,900
Embassy Support.........................................         -20,400
                    --------------------------------------------------------
                    ____________________________________________________
      Total.............................................          +1,700

                         marine security guards

    The Committee recommends a total reduction of $29,100,000 
in the ``Military Personnel, Marine Corps'' and ``Operation and 
Maintenance, Marine Corps'' appropriations. As discussed 
elsewhere in this report, the Committee expects the costs of 
Marine Security Guards at U.S. embassies and overseas posts to 
be reimbursed by the Department of State during fiscal year 
1997.

                     MILITARY PERSONNEL, AIR FORCE

Fiscal year 1996 appropriation.......................... $17,207,743,000
Fiscal year 1997 budget request.........................  17,043,150,000
Committee recommendation................................  17,099,550,000
Change from budget request..............................     +56,400,000

    The Committee recommends an appropriation of 
$17,099,550,000 for Military Personnel, Air Force. The 
recommendation is a decrease of $108,193,000 below the 
$17,207,743,000 appropriated for fiscal year 1996. The 
adjustments to the fiscal year 1997 budget request are as 
follows:

                        [In thousands of dollars]

Basic Allowance for Quarters............................         +14,700
Variable Housing Allowance..............................         +11,500
Temporary Lodging Expense...............................          +4,000
Dislocation Allowance...................................         +18,600
Dental Special Pay......................................          +5,000
Reliability Testing.....................................          +2,600
                    --------------------------------------------------------
                    ____________________________________________________
      Total.............................................         +56,400

                        RESERVE PERSONNEL, ARMY

Fiscal year 1996 appropriation..........................  $2,122,466,000
Fiscal year 1997 budget request.........................   2,043,679,000
Committee recommendation................................   2,083,379,000
Change from budget request..............................     +39,700,000

    The Committee recommends an appropriation of $2,083,379,000 
for Reserve Personnel, Army. The recommendation is a decrease 
of $39,087,000 below the $2,122,466,000 appropriated for fiscal 
year 1996. The adjustments to the fiscal year 1997 budget 
request are as follows:

                        [In thousands of dollars]

Unit Readiness/Training.................................         +30,000
Basic Allowance for Quarters............................            +700
Dislocation Allowance...................................            +600
Variable Housing Allowance..............................            +400
Full-time Support/AGR's.................................          +8,000
                    --------------------------------------------------------
                    ____________________________________________________
      Total.............................................         +39,700

               active guard and reserve full-time support

    The Committee recommends an increase of $8,000,000 for Army 
Reserve for an additional 254 Active Guard and Reserve (AGR) 
full-time support personnel. The fiscal year 1997 budget 
request funds the Army Reserve full-time manning program at a 
level of approximately nine percent, the lowest of all Reserve 
components. The average percentage rate overall for DoD Reserve 
components is around 16.1 percent for full-time manning. The 
Committee recognizes that full-time support personnel are 
required to support the wartime mission of the Reserve force, 
deploy with their units, and are essential to the operating, 
training and overall readiness of the unit.

                        RESERVE PERSONNEL, NAVY

Fiscal year 1996 appropriation..........................  $1,355,523,000
Fiscal year 1997 budget request.........................   1,386,306,000
Committee recommendation................................   1,392,406,000
Change from budget request..............................      +6,100,000

    The Committee recommends an appropriation of $1,392,406,000 
for Reserve Personnel, Navy. The recommendation is an increase 
of $36,883,000 above the $1,355,523,000 appropriated for fiscal 
year 1996. The adjustments to the fiscal year 1997 budget 
request are as follows:

                        [In thousands of dollars]

Basic Allowance for Quarters............................          +1,100
Variable Housing Allowance..............................          +1,300
Temporary Lodging Expense...............................            +100
Dislocation Allowance...................................            +600
P-3 Squadron............................................          +3,000
                    --------------------------------------------------------
                    ____________________________________________________
      Total.............................................          +6,100

                    RESERVE PERSONNEL, MARINE CORPS

Fiscal year 1996 appropriation..........................    $378,151,000
Fiscal year 1997 budget request.........................     381,143,000
Committee recommendation................................     387,943,000
Change from budget request..............................      +6,800,000

    The Committee recommends an appropriation of $387,943,000 
for Reserve Personnel, Marine Corps. The recommendation is an 
increase of $9,792,000 above the $378,151,000 appropriated for 
fiscal year 1996. The adjustments to the fiscal year 1997 
budget request are as follows:

                        [In thousands of dollars]

Annual Training/School Tours............................          +6,000
Basic Allowance for Quarters............................            +300
Variable Housing Allowance..............................            +400
Dislocation Allowance...................................            +100
                    --------------------------------------------------------
                    ____________________________________________________
      Total.............................................          +6,800

                      RESERVE PERSONNEL, AIR FORCE

Fiscal year 1996 appropriation..........................    $784,586,000
Fiscal year 1997 budget request.........................     775,967,000
Committee recommendation................................     780,497,000
Change from budget request..............................      +4,530,000

    The Committee recommends an appropriation of $780,497,000 
for Reserve Personnel, Air Force. The recommendation is a 
decrease of $4,089,000 below the $784,586,000 appropriated for 
fiscal year 1996. The adjustments to the fiscal year 1997 
budget request are as follows:

                        [In thousands of dollars]

Basic Allowance for Quarters............................            +430
Variable Housing Allowance..............................            +100
BRAC Closure costs......................................          +4,000
                    --------------------------------------------------------
                    ____________________________________________________
      Total.............................................          +4,530

                     NATIONAL GUARD PERSONNEL, ARMY

Fiscal year 1996 appropriation..........................  $3,242,422,000
Fiscal year 1997 budget request.........................   3,242,493,000
Committee recommendation................................   3,279,393,000
Change from budget request..............................     +36,900,000

    The Committee recommends an appropriation of $3,279,393,000 
for National Guard Personnel, Army. The recommendation is an 
increase of $36,971,000 above the $3,242,422,000 appropriated 
for fiscal year 1996. The adjustments to the fiscal year 1997 
budget request are as follows:

                        [In thousands of dollars]

School/Special Training.................................         +31,000
Basic Allowance for Quarters............................          +2,700
Variable Housing Allowance..............................            +800
Dislocation Allowance...................................          +2,400
                    --------------------------------------------------------
                    ____________________________________________________
      Total.............................................         +36,900

                  159th mobile army surgical hospital

    The Committee is aware that as a result of the Army's 
Medical Department modernization program under MEDFORCE 2000/
Medical Reengineering Initiative, the Army will no longer 
operate Mobile Army Surgical Hospital (MASH) units. The 159th 
Army National Guard MASH unit, scheduled for inactivation by 
September, 1997, served in Operation Desert Storm and in state 
call-ups ranging from flood to hurricane relief. The Committee 
expects the Department of the Army to provide the personnel of 
the 159th MASH priority assistance in filling existing Reserve 
medical unit positions in the same state.

                  NATIONAL GUARD PERSONNEL, AIR FORCE

Fiscal year 1996 appropriation..........................  $1,259,627,000
Fiscal year 1997 budget request.........................   1,284,290,000
Committee recommendation................................   1,294,490,000
Change from budget request..............................     +10,200,000

    The Committee recommends an appropriation of $1,294,490,000 
for National Guard Personnel, Air Force. The recommendation is 
an increase of $34,863,000 above the $1,259,627,000 
appropriated for fiscal year 1996. The adjustments to the 
fiscal year 1997 budget request are as follows:

                        [In thousands of dollars]

Basic Allowance for Quarters............................          +1,100
Variable Housing Allowance..............................            +600
Fighter Force Structure.................................          +8,500
                    --------------------------------------------------------
                    ____________________________________________________
      Total.............................................         +10,200

                                TITLE II

                       OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE

    The fiscal year 1997 budget request for Operation and 
maintenance is $78,462,166,000 in new budget authority, which 
is a decrease of $3,135,461,000 from the amount appropriated in 
fiscal year 1996. The request also includes a $250,000,000 cash 
transfer from the National Defense Stockpile Transaction Fund.
    The accompanying bill recommends $80,590,383,000 for fiscal 
year 1997, which is an increase of $2,128,217,000 from the 
budget request. In addition, the Committee recommends that 
$150,000,000 be transferred from the National Defense Stockpile 
Transaction Fund.
    These appropriations finance the costs of operating and 
maintaining the Armed Forces, including the reserve components 
and related support activities of the Department of Defense 
(DoD), except military personnel costs. Included are pay for 
civilians, services for maintenance of equipment and 
facilities, fuel, supplies and spare parts for weapons and 
equipment. Financial requirements are influenced by many 
factors, including force levels such as the number of aircraft 
squadrons, Army and Marine Corps divisions, installations, 
military personnel strength and deployments, rates of 
operational activity, and the quantity and complexity of 
equipment such as aircraft, ships, missiles and tanks in 
operation.

                   Operation and Maintenance Overview

    In its budget submission, the Department of Defense has 
clearly emphasized the near-term readiness of U.S. forces. The 
Committee acknowledges that the budget request generally 
provides for robust programs in the areas of operating tempo 
training, depot maintenance, and other programs critical to 
maintaining readiness in the short-term. However, there are 
certain shortfalls in the Operation and maintenance request 
that undermine the Department's attempt to maintain readiness 
in the mid and long term. To correct these deficiencies, the 
Committee recommends certain increases to the budget request to 
address shortfalls in areas such as mobility enhancements, 
infrastructure maintenance, quality of life initiatives, and 
base operations and support costs.
    In considering the DoD budget request, the Committee also 
notes that there are areas in the Operation and maintenance 
accounts where substantial savings are achievable. Given the 
pressing need to modernize the equipment available to U.S. 
forces by increasing the weapons procurement and development 
accounts, the Committee believes it is of critical importance 
that Operation and maintenance funds be used as efficiently as 
possible. Therefore, the Committee recommends certain 
reductions that take advantage of management initiatives, DoD 
policies, and fact of life changes since the preparation of the 
budget request.
    The table summarizes the Committee's recommendations: 

    
    
                       real property maintenance

    In testimony before this Committee, numerous witnesses 
expressed concern over the state of DoD facilities including 
barracks, dining halls, maintenance facilities, aircraft 
hangars, tactical facilities, and administrative structures. In 
its overview of the Operation and maintenance budget request 
for fiscal year 1997, the Department of Defense puts this 
testimony in context. According to the budget request, the 
total backlog of such maintenance exceeds $12 billion in 1997. 
In order to prevent further growth in this backlog, the 
Committee recommends an increase in funding over the budget 
request of $1 billion for such work. Of the total increase, the 
Committee recommends that $400,000,000 be directed toward the 
renovation of barracks, dining halls and related facilities.

                           strategic mobility

    The Committee recommends an increase of $127,700,000 above 
the budget request to enhance the strategic mobility 
capabilities of the Department of Defense. This funding should 
improve the condition and capability of DoD facilities such as 
ports, piers, railheads and airheads.

            soldier enhancement and initial issue equipment

    Both the Army and Marine Corps have identified shortfalls 
in their programs for upgrading inclement weather gear 
including cold weather clothing, bivouac gear such as sleeping 
bags, and other gear to improve the comfort of deployed troops. 
The Committee believes that this equipment makes an obvious 
contribution to the readiness of U.S. forces, and therefore, 
recommends an increase to the Operation and maintenance budget 
request of $86,900,000.

                 chemical/biological defense equipment

    The Committee is concerned about the state of chemical/
biological defense capabilities in the Department of Defense. 
Accordingly, the Committee recommends an increase of 
$16,200,000 over the budget request to improve chemical 
biological defense equipment and maintain existing stocks of 
such equipment.

                        base operations support

    The Committee notes that, despite a budget request totaling 
nearly $12 billion for base operations support, this area has 
suffered perennial funding difficulties. In order to address 
identified shortfalls the Committee recommends an increase 
above the budget request of $207,000,000.

                    off-duty and voluntary education

    The Committee urges the Department of Defense to continue 
its efforts to make off-duty and voluntary education available 
to both military and civilian personnel. The Committee 
recognizes that there are certain shortfalls in both the Air 
Force and Marine Corps for such programs. To correct these 
deficiencies, the Committee recommends an increase above the 
budget request totaling $14,000,000.

                    acquisition workforce reduction

    The Committee recommends reducing the amount requested in 
the budget by $159,900,000 based on savings the Department 
should be able to achieve by accelerating the pace of various 
initiatives designed to streamline the acquisition process. Of 
this amount, the Committee anticipates that $43,100,000 can be 
achieved through efficiencies in the supply management and 
distribution business areas of the Defense Business Operations 
Fund.
    The Committee commends the Department for its initiatives 
to improve the efficiency of the logistics systems within the 
Department. The Committee is aware that much of the DoD effort 
in this regard has been devoted to shortening the logistics 
pipeline thereby reducing the quantity of material that must be 
acquired to meet anticipated demands.
    However, the Department appears to have moved too 
cautiously in its efforts to restructure the organizations that 
perform acquisition management functions. Despite downsizing 
throughout the DoD, the Department seems to insist on 
maintaining the same overlapping management structure that has 
traditionally been used to provide acquisition support to the 
operating forces. For this reason, the Committee believes that 
further reductions to this part of the DoD infrastructure are 
warranted.

                        ustranscom efficiencies

    Since the Commander in Chief, U.S. Transportation Command 
(CINCTRANS) assumed responsibilities as the single manager of 
DoD transportation functions in both peacetime and war, 
USTRANSCOM has had several years during which to shape the 
organizations and methods used by the Department to provide 
transportation services to the operating forces. The Committee 
is aware that there is tension between the Services' continuing 
responsibilities to organize, train, and equip, and the ability 
of CINCTRANS to streamline the provision of transportation 
services. Nevertheless, the Committee remains concerned that 
the Department has not moved quickly enough to improve the 
efficiency of transportation services. In anticipation of 
savings which should be achieved by the Department in this 
area, the Committee recommends reducing the budget request by 
$100,000,000.

                           security programs

    The Committee notes that the budget request for the Army, 
Navy, Air Force and Defense-wide accounts includes funding to 
administer a number of security agreements. However it appears 
that the Department has made overly optimistic assumptions 
concerning the implementation of certain agreements. Therefore, 
the Committee recommends reducing these programs by a total of 
$38,400,000 from the amounts requested in the budget. In the 
event of changing conditions, and in order to facilitate the 
nation's ability to meet emergent obligations stemming from 
these programs, the Committee expects the Department of Defense 
to submit a reprogramming request subject to normal prior 
approval reprogramming procedures.

                        excess funded carryover

    The Committee recommends reducing the amount of carryover 
funded for certain activities in the Defense Business 
Operations Fund. The Committee notes the long-standing policy 
of the Department of Defense to maintain funded carryover for 
such activities at a level that equals approximately three 
months of workload. However, there are certain instances in the 
fiscal year 1997 budget request in which the amount of funded 
carryover is double the amount specified in DoD policy. To 
bring the budget request in line with this policy, the 
Committee recommends a reduction of $500,000,000 from the 
budget request, in Section 8076 of the General Provisions.

                        spare parts inventories

    The Committee notes that there is a growing body of audit 
material from both the General Accounting Office and the 
Services' Audit Agencies which suggests that the Department may 
not be managing its spare parts inventories as efficiently as 
possible. These reports indicate that the Services could 
improve upon the current methods used to calculate 
requirements, and that these requirements could be adjusted by 
fully accounting for all available stocks of material. 
Accordingly, the Committee recommends reducing the budget 
request by a total of $350,000,000, in section 8089 of the 
General Provisions.

                defense business operations passthrough

    The fiscal year 1997 budget request includes funding in 
``Operation and maintenance, Air Force'' for the purpose of 
resolving prior year operating losses at Air Force DBOF 
activities. Since the inception of DBOF, the Department has had 
a policy of recovering prior year gains and losses through 
adjustments in prices. However, given that this is the second 
consecutive year that the Department has requested funding for 
a passthrough to recover losses, the Committee is concerned 
that DoD may be making a significant shift in policy. Since the 
Committee generally supports the policy of recovering gains and 
losses through prices, the Committee recommends reducing the 
budget request by $195,000,000, in Section 8082 of the General 
Provisions. As discussed elsewhere in this Report, the 
Committee requires the Secretary of Defense to submit a report 
explaining the criteria for deviating from the normal policy of 
including gains and losses in DBOF rates.

                         civilian understrength

    The Committee notes that the Department continues to make 
significant progress in downsizing the civilian workforce in 
many areas commensurate with reductions in the size of DoD 
operating forces. Current budget execution data indicates that 
the Army, Navy, Air Force and Defensewide activities are 
operating with significantly fewer civilian employees than 
anticipated in the budget request. Therefore, the Committee 
recommends reducing the budget request by $90,000,000.

              professional military education and training

    The Committee strongly supports the efforts of the 
Department of Defense to improve the quality and quantity of 
training and education provided to U.S. troops and civilian 
personnel. However, the Committee has learned that, over the 
past several years, the Department's budget estimates for 
``schoolhouse'' training have exceeded actual student loads by 
5 to 6 percent. As a result, the Committee recommends reducing 
the requested amounts in these areas by a total of $62,700,000.

              budget justification and execution materials

    The Committee supports the current DoD practices concerning 
preparation of the Operation and maintenance budget request. In 
particular, the Committee supports the convention of providing 
the current execution estimate, the appropriated amount and the 
budget request for the fiscal year preceding the budget request 
year in the Operation and maintenance justification books. The 
Committee also agrees with the method DoD has adopted beginning 
with the fiscal year 1997 budget request that separately 
identifies real property maintenance from other base operations 
costs. The Committee directs the Department of Defense to 
continue these practices in preparing the fiscal year 1998 
budget request.
    The Committee also supports continuing the practice of 
providing quarterly budget execution data for each O-1 
subactivity group. The Department shall provide such data to 
the House and Senate Committees on Appropriations within 60 
days of the end of each quarter of the fiscal year.

                        READINESS REPROGRAMMING

    The Committee believes that the current limitations on 
selected readiness related subactivity groups within the O-1 
should continue. Accordingly, the Committee directs that the 
Department of Defense shall adhere to the following guidelines 
in preparing reprogramming requests.
    Proposed transfers of funds between O-1 budget activity 
funding categories in excess of $20,000,000 are subject to 
normal reprogramming procedures. The Committee recognizes that 
the current execution estimate reflected in the justification 
materials (at the budget activity group level) shall serve as 
the base for reprogramming except in those special cases 
discussed below. The Committee directs that the Department of 
Defense shall notify the congressional defense committees prior 
to transfers in excess of $20,000,000 from the following 
subactivity group categories:

Operation and maintenance, Army

    Operating forces: Combat units; Tactical support; Force 
related training/special activities; Depot maintenance.

Operation and maintenance, Navy

    Operating forces: Mission and other flight operations; 
Aircraft depot maintenance; Mission and other ship operations; 
Ship depot maintenance.

Operation and maintenance, Marine Corps

    Operating forces: Operational forces.

Operation and maintenance, Air Force

    Operating forces: Primary combat forces; Primary combat 
weapons; Air operations training. Mobilization: Airlift 
operations.

                           PROCUREMENT FRAUD

    The January 1995 Report of the Advisory Board on the 
Investigative Capability of the Department of Defense 
recommended the consolidation of procurement fraud 
investigation under the Inspector General of the Department of 
Defense. The Department has expressed its objections to this 
proposal, and has devised alternative means to assign such work 
and reduce the degree to which the efforts of the Services and 
DoDIG overlap. However, it is not clear what criteria the 
Department is using to assess the effectiveness of these 
measures. In addition, the Department has thus far failed to 
address several of the concerns expressed in the Report and 
raised by this Committee. Among these concerns are: measures to 
improve the independence of investigators, and increasing the 
emphasis placed on civil actions. Consequently, the Committee 
directs that the Department of Defense submit a report, not 
later than March 31, 1997, to the congressional defense 
committees which provides the status of DoD efforts to 
implement the recommendations of the January 1995 report, and 
which addresses those specific concerns outlined above.

                   TELETRAINING AND DISTANCE LEARNING

    The Committee supports the increasing use of teletraining 
and distance learning techniques as a way to further 
disseminate training materials and reduce the cost of training. 
However, the Committee finds the lack of coordination of the 
Services' efforts troubling. Each of the Services appears to be 
pursuing a strategy to ``go it alone'' in developing the 
infrastructure to provide teletraining and distance learning. 
Lack of coordination of these efforts may result in 
incompatible systems and higher implementation costs. 
Consequently, DoD may not maximize the benefits that it 
achieves from implementing teletraining and distance learning 
programs. The Committee therefore, directs the Secretary of 
Defense to submit a report, not later than March 31, 1997, that 
outlines the Department's strategy and objectives in expanding 
distance learning and teletraining programs. This report should 
also outline the Department's long term plan for making the 
investments necessary to build and maintain the infrastructure 
for such training. This plan should include estimates of the 
costs and benefits associated with developing and maintaining 
this infrastructure.

            CONTRACTOR PROVIDED LOGISTICAL SUPPORT (LOGCAP)

    The Committee is concerned about the apparently increasing 
level of private-sector contractor involvement in the 
deployment of U.S. forces, and the rapidly escalating costs of 
such involvement. While the use of contractors for certain 
logistical support functions has typically been a feature of 
U.S. deployments, the range of services and the degree to which 
contractor support is integrated into U.S. deployment plans has 
increased substantially over the past several years. It now 
appears that contractor support has become an integral feature 
of the doctrine that guides the deployment of forces.
    The Committee is concerned that this phenomenon has 
resulted in a potential over-dependence on contractors, as well 
as a breakdown in traditional DoD cost-estimating procedures. 
For example, in the case of U.S. participation in the NATO-led 
Implementation Force (IFOR) in Bosnia the cost of LOGCAP 
support has proven to be one of the most significant and 
volatile elements of the total cost of supporting this mission.
    To address these concerns, the Committee directs that the 
Secretary of Defense submit a report, not later than April 30, 
1997, that addresses the following issues: the Department's 
strategy for using contractor support in deployments; a 
comparison of the estimated costs of LOGCAP support versus DoD 
provided logistical support; and measures the Department will 
take to foster competition among LOGCAP contractors.

                      Operational Support Aircraft

    The Committee has been concerned about the size, cost, and 
safety of the Department of Defense inventory of Operational 
Support Aircraft (OSA) for some time. Last year the Committee 
recommended a $50,000,000 reduction in funds appropriated for 
Operation and maintenance for OSA aircraft because it 
determined that the fleet was too large. This year the 
Committee approved the budget proposal to reduce OSA costs by 
another $68,000,000.
    However, the Committee is concerned about several aspects 
of the Department's recently announced plan to streamline OSA 
operations. The Department's transition to a joint consolidated 
OSA scheduling operation under the control of the U.S. 
Transportation Command may not be the most efficient or cost-
effective approach. In addition, the Committee is aware that 
some of the aircraft under consideration for withdrawal from 
active service are equipped with some of the same ``safety of 
flight'' features the Department has recently decided to place 
on aircraft remaining in the fleet, such as Global Positioning 
System equipment and flight data recorders. The Committee is 
also aware that some of the aircraft considered for withdrawal 
could be used in defense counter-drug missions by both the Air 
National Guard and the Drug Enforcement Agency or may be 
aircraft that are ``organic'' airlift under current statute.
    The House National Security Committee has expressed similar 
concerns, and in its report accompanying the House-passed 
Defense Authorization bill for fiscal year 1997, it has 
directed the Secretary of Defense to provide the congressional 
defense committees a detailed plan for the reduction and 
redistribution of all OSA aircraft including a cost analysis 
and rationale for each recommended action. The Committee 
directs that all the concerns expressed above also be addressed 
in that study. The Committee specifically directs this study 
also include the Department's cost justification and analysis 
for implementing the joint consolidated OSA scheduling 
operation under the control of the U.S. Transportation Command 
with a comparative analysis, in terms of cost-effectiveness and 
experience, of operating a consolidated scheduling operation 
under the Navy or Army versus the United States Transportation 
Command, or alternatively, allowing the services to fully 
evaluate a coordinated scheduling/scheduling visibility system 
versus consolidation. This study shall also include any service 
or service command reclamas that were made during the 
Department's decision process regarding consolidated 
scheduling. The Committee also expects that the Department's 
ongoing retirement of aircraft and consolidation of scheduling 
activities should follow review of this study by the defense 
committees.

              Communications-Electronics Depot Maintenance

    The 1995 Base Closure and Realignment Commission directed 
the Department of the Air Force to transfer its ground 
communications-electronics workload to Tobyhanna Army Depot. It 
is estimated that performing this workload at Tobyhanna would 
save annual maintenance costs in excess of $20 million. The Air 
Force has recently indicated its intent to delay transfer of 
this workload until after the year 2000. Given the potential 
savings associated with this shift, which also promotes the 
interservicing of depot maintenance which is a policy objective 
of the Department, the Committee finds such actions 
inexplicable and therefore expects the Secretary of Defense to 
ensure that the Air Force fully comply with the BRAC directives 
as soon as possible. The Secretary is directed to report to the 
Committee by July 10, 1996, on the actions he has taken to 
comply with this direction.

             foreign nationals attending military academies

    Prior to conference committee action on the fiscal year 
1997 Department of Defense Appropriations bill, the Secretary 
of Defense shall provide a report to the House and Senate 
Appropriations Committees detailing current DoD and military 
service policies regarding the admission and attendance of 
foreign nationals at U.S. service academies and war colleges.

                      electron scrubber technology

    The Committee supports the emphasis that the House National 
Security Committee has placed on development of electron 
scrubber technology to reduce the waste stream generated by 
industrial and manufacturing activities in the Department of 
Defense. Accordingly, the Committee urges the Department to 
spend up to $10 million within the funds provided in this title 
for the purpose of demonstrating the validity of this 
technology.

       military traffic management command reengineering program

    The Committee has supported the Department's initiative to 
reengineer its Personal Property Program which will result in a 
higher quality of service to military personnel and their 
families, and remains committed to seeing the Department 
conduct its pilot program in order to validate its concept. 
However, the Committee believes that the commercial moving 
industry and other small businesses have concerns that need to 
be addressed, and agrees with the House National Security 
Committee's efforts to involve industry representatives in the 
Department's pilot program, and with subsequent review and 
recommendations by the General Accounting Office.

                       recruiting and advertising

    The Committee recommends an increase of $20,000,000 over 
the budget request for Recruiting and Advertising to support 
the Department's efforts in addressing negative recruiting that 
the Services are experiencing. Of this amount, $8,300,000 is 
for the Joint Recruiting and Advertising Program (JRAP), and 
$2,000,000 is for the Joint Market Research Program (JMRP) to 
fund critical annual surveys, like the Youth Attitude Tracking 
Study, that are underfunded in fiscal year 1997.

                          biggs army airfield

    The Committee recognizes that the cost to the military of 
operating certain facilities may be reduced through 
partnerships with local governments or private entities. 
Therefore, the Committee directs that the U.S. Transportation 
Command (USTRANSCOM) and the Secretary of the Army jointly 
provide a report to the congressional defense committees, not 
later than March 31, 1997, that addresses the feasibility, 
costs and military benefits of such partnership for Biggs Army 
Airfield at Fort Bliss, Texas.

                          classified programs

    Adjustments to classified Operation and maintenance 
programs are explained in a classified report accompanying this 
report.

                    OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE, ARMY

Fiscal year 1996 appropriation.......................... $18,321,965,000
Fiscal year 1997 budget request.........................  18,031,145,000
Committee recommendation................................  18,365,679,000
Change from the budget request..........................    +334,534,000

    The Committee recommends an appropriation of 
$18,365,679,000 for Operation and maintenance, Army. The 
recommendation is an increase of $43,714,000 above the amount 
appropriated for fiscal year 1996.

                          Program Recommended

    The total amount recommended in the bill will provide the 
following program in fiscal year 1997:



    The adjustments to the budget activities for Operation and 
maintenance, Army are shown below:

                        [In thousands of dollars]

Budget Activity 1: Operating Forces:
     400  Soldier Enhancement/Initial Issue.............          57,100
     500  Depot Maintenance-Reliability Program.........          30,000
     500  Depot Maintenance-Vehicle Backlog.............          19,700
     600  BOS-McGregor Range EIS........................           2,000
     600  BOS-UXO Cleanup Ft. Bliss.....................           1,000
Budget Activity 2: Mobilization:
     1050  Strategic Mobility-LMSR Program..............          27,000
Budget Activity 3: Training and Recruiting:
     1700  Specialized Skill Training...................          -1,800
     1750  Flight Training..............................         -11,300
     1850  TNET.........................................           5,000
     1850  Training Support.............................          -6,900
     2200  Civilian Education & Training................          -3,000
Budget Activity 4: Administration and Servicewide 
    Activities:
     2500  Security Programs............................         -11,500
     2650  Acquisition Workforce Reduction..............          -8,800
     2650  End Item Management..........................          25,000
     2700  Acquisition Workforce Reduction..............          -8,800
     2700  Depot Maintenance Logistics Tail.............           4,000
     2750  Ammunition Management........................          50,000
Other Adjustments:
     3550  Classified (Undistributed)...................           6,600
     3600  Civilian Personnel Understrength.............         -19,000
     3700  Stockpile Transfer...........................          33,334
     3850  Printing Efficiencies........................          -3,000
     4180  Acquisition Workforce Reduction..............         -14,000
     4190  Fuel Tax Credit..............................         -13,800
     4200  USTRANSCOM Efficiencies......................         -37,000
     4210  OSA Flying Hour Reduction....................         -20,000
     4260  Chem-Bio Equipment Support...................          13,200
     4280  Real Property Maintenance....................         155,000
     4320  National Training Center Rotations...........           2,000
     4325  Information Resource Management..............          32,500
     4330  Base Operations Shortfalls...................          30,000

                    OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE, NAVY

Fiscal year 1996 appropriation.......................... $21,279,425,000
Fiscal year 1997 budget request.........................  20,112,864,000
Committee recommendation................................  20,390,397,000
Change from the budget request..........................    +277,533,000

    The Committee recommends an appropriation of 
$20,390,397,000 for Operation and maintenance, Navy. The 
recommendation is a decrease of $889,028,000 from the amount 
appropriated for fiscal year 1996.

              shipyard blasting and coating pilot program

    Consistent with the recommendations of the House National 
Security Committee, the Committee recommends that the Secretary 
of the Navy establish a pilot program to test an alternative 
technology designed to capture and destroy or remove 
particulate emissions and volatile air pollutants that occur 
during abrasive blasting and coating operations at naval 
shipyards. The test should demonstrate whether the technology 
is valid, cost effective, and in compliance with environmental 
laws and regulations. The Committee directs the Secretary of 
the Navy to submit a report to the House and Senate Committees 
on Appropriations, not later than September 30, 1997, on the 
feasibility of this technology and its potential for 
implementation at the naval shipyards.

                          Program Recommended

    The total amount recommended in the bill will provide the 
following program in fiscal year 1997:



    The adjustments to the budget activities for Operation and 
maintenance, Navy are shown below:

                        [In thousands of dollars]

Budget Activity 1: Operating Forces:
     4850  Depot Maintenance-Aviation Backlog...........          26,300
     4850  Depot Maintenance-Reliability Program........          15,000
     4950  Base Operations Support......................          20,000
     5250  Depot Maintenance-Reliability Program........          15,000
     5350  Base Operations Support......................          20,000
     5800  Reverse Osmosis Desalinators.................           1,000
     5900  Base Operations Support......................          10,000
     6050  Tomahawk Recertification.....................          40,600
     6250  Base Operations Support......................          10,000
Budget Activity 3: Training and Recruiting:
     7450  Specialized Skill Training...................         -10,700
     7550  Professional Development Education...........          -6,300
Budget Activity 4: Administration and Servicewide 
    Activities:
     8500  Servicewide Communications...................          14,000
     8850  Acquisition Workforce Reduction..............         -25,600
     9250  Security Programs............................          -3,000
Other Adjustments:
     9550  Classified (Undistributed)...................           4,600
     9600  Information Resource Management..............          50,000
     9650  Stockpile Transfer...........................          33,333
     9800  Printing Efficiencies........................          -4,000
    10100  Civilian Personnel Understrength.............         -44,600
    10110  Acquisition Workforce Reduction..............         -14,000
    10120  USTRANSCOM Efficiencies......................         -10,000
    10130  OSA Flying Hour Reduction....................         -20,000
    10140  Wake Island Hydroacoustic System.............             900
    10260  Real Property Maintenance....................         125,000
    10300  Base Operations Shortfalls...................          30,000

                OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE, MARINE CORPS

Fiscal year 1996 appropriation..........................  $2,392,522,000
Fiscal year 1997 budget request.........................   2,203,777,000
Committee recommendation................................   2,465,077,000
Change from the budget request..........................    +261,300,000

    The Committee recommends an appropriation of $2,465,077,000 
for Operation and maintenance, Marine Corps. The recommendation 
is an increase of $72,555,000 above the amount appropriated for 
fiscal year 1996.

                   alternative fuels training program

    The Committee believes that $1,500,000 should be made 
available to Camp Pendleton and the Marine Corps Air Combat 
Center at Twentynine Palms for the purpose of establishing an 
interactive video distance learning program to train personnel 
in the maintenance of natural gas vehicles.

                          Program Recommended

    The total amount recommended in the bill will provide the 
following program in fiscal year 1997:



    The adjustments to the budget activities for Operation and 
maintenance, Marine Corps are shown below:

                        [In thousands of dollars]

Budget Activity 1: Operating Forces:
    10650  Commandant's Warfighting Lab.................           8,000
    10650  Corrosion Control............................          10,000
    10650  Riverine.....................................           3,000
    10650  Soldier Enhancement/Initial Issue............          25,000
    10750  Depot Maintenance-Backlog Reduction..........          10,000
    10800  Base Operations Support......................          40,000
    10800  Personnel Support Equipment..................          26,000
Budget Activity 3: Training and Recruiting:
    11800  Recruiting and Advertising...................           4,700
    11850  Off-Duty & Voluntary Education...............           4,500
Other Adjustments:
    12710  Real Property Maintenance....................         140,000
    12750  Acquisition Workforce Reduction..............          -2,200
    12755  USTRANSCOM Efficiencies......................          -5,000
    12760  OSA Flying Hour Reduction....................          -4,000
    12765  Embassy Support..............................          -8,700
    12770  Base Operations Shortfalls...................          10,000

                  OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE, AIR FORCE

Fiscal year 1996 appropriation.......................... $18,606,167,000
Fiscal year 1997 budget request.........................  17,830,122,000
Committee recommendation................................  17,938,755,000
Change from the budget request..........................    +108,633,000

    The Committee recommends an appropriation of 
$17,938,755,000 for Operation and maintenance, Air Force. The 
recommendation is a decrease of $667,412,000 from the amount 
appropriated for fiscal year 1996.

                                stratcom

    The Committee recommends an increase of $4,000,000 for 
USSTRATCOM mission planning and analysis. Further, the 
Committee directs that USSTRATCOM mission planning and analysis 
be included as an element of the fiscal year 1998 Department of 
Defense budget request.

                          Program Recommended

    The total amount recommended in the bill will provide the 
following program in fiscal year 1997:




    The adjustments to the budget activities for Operation and 
maintenance, Air Force are shown below:

                        [In thousands of dollars]

Budget Activity 1: Operating Forces:
    13100  C-130 Transfer to ANG........................          -6,700
    13300  RIVER JOINT Communications Installation......          26,000
    13600  Reverse Osmosis Desalinators.................           2,500
    13750  PACER COIN Operations........................          -8,000
    13750  SENIOR SCOUT.................................           1,300
Budget Activity 3: Training and Recruiting:
    15100  Specialized Skill Training...................          -9,400
    15200  Professional Development Education...........          -7,400
    15250  Training Support.............................          -5,900
    15500  Off-Duty and Voluntary Education.............           9,500
Budget Activity 4: Administration and Servicewide 
    Activities:
    15850  Acquisition Workforce Reduction..............         -41,600
    15850  Depot Maintenance-Reliability Program........          30,000
    16150  Air Staff Liaison............................         -12,000
    16150  STRATCOM.....................................           4,000
    16550  Civil Air Patrol.............................             900
    16750  Security Programs............................          -1,900
Other Adjustments:
    16950  Classified (Undistributed)...................         -24,700
    10750  Civilian Personnel Understrength.............         -12,200
    17100  Stockpile Transfer...........................          33,333
    17350  Printing Efficiencies........................          -3,000
    17560  Real Property Maintenance....................          70,500
    17507  Real Property Maintenance-Fairchild AFB......           9,500
    17580  Chem-Bio Protective Equipment................           3,000
    17595  Fuel Tax Credit..............................          -8,500
    17615  Acquisition Workforce Reduction..............          -8,600
    17620  USTRANSCOM Efficiencies......................         -22,000
    17625  OSA Flying Hour Reduction....................         -24,000
    17630  Reliability Testing..........................          23,000
    17635  Base Operations Shortfalls...................          30,000
    17640  Information Resource Management..............          61,000
                OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE, DEFENSE-WIDE

Fiscal year 1996 appropriation.......................... $10,388,595,000
Fiscal year 1997 budget request.........................  10,156,468,000
Committee recommendation................................  10,212,985,000
Change from the budget request..........................     +56,517,000

    The Committee recommends an appropriation of 
$10,212,985,000 for Operation and maintenance, Defense-wide. 
The recommendation is a decrease of $175,610,000 from the 
amount appropriated for fiscal year 1996.

                             halon reserves

    The Defense Logistics Agency has been authorized to 
purchase and maintain a Strategic Reserve of Ozone Depleting 
Substances including 1,650,000 pounds of reclaimed Halon 1301 
to be used as part of the Strategic Reserve. In accordance with 
the United States support of the Montreal Protocol's objective 
of international halon banking, DLA is strongly encouraged to 
pursue a cost savings proposal to take delivery and store a 
portion of this halon reserve at an overseas military 
installation to be selected by DLA.

                        combat boot inventories

    The Committee is concerned about the Defense Logistics 
Agency's plan to continue its reduction in the inventory of 
combat boots over the next three years from the present 65 week 
supply to an 18 week supply. The Committee recognizes the need 
to reduce inventories, but the reduction contemplated by DLA 
could impair the viability of a fragile U.S. industrial base 
and impair the ability of the Department of Defense to respond 
to a national emergency or mobilization. The Committee is aware 
that the U.S. suppliers of combat boots have proposed a 
distribution plan for combat boots to the Defense Personnel 
Support Center of the Defense Logistics Agency which could save 
transportation and administrative costs, while improving 
customer service. The Committee urges DLA to work with U.S. 
suppliers of combat boots to implement this innovative 
distribution plan. Further, the Committee directs that the 
Defense Logistics Agency submit a report not later than April 
30, 1997, that provides the details of DoD inventory 
requirements for combat boots.

                   defense fuel supply point norwalk

    The Committee is aware of the ongoing concern of the 
Norwalk citizens regarding fuel contamination at the Defense 
Fuel Supply Point (DFSP) Norwalk, California. The Committee 
urges the Defense Logistics Agency (DLA) and the Defense Fuel 
Supply Center to take every step possible to fully fund and 
expedite the environmental remediation activities at DFSP 
Norwalk, including development and implementation of a plan to 
cleanup the 1,2 dicholoroethane (1,2 DCA) plume that extends 
offsite beneath a residential area. The Committee encourages 
DLA to cooperate with commercial activities that operate at 
DFSP Norwalk to determine the risk posed by this plume in light 
of recent data and to resolve allocation of responsibility.

                procurement technical assistance program

    The Committee strongly supports the Procurement Technical 
Assistance Program (PTAP) and recommends an increase of 
$20,600,000 above the fiscal year 1997 budget request for this 
program. This amount is sufficient to fully fund all 
technically acceptable PTAP bids as well as provide funding for 
the PTAP oversight office within the Defense Logistics Agency. 
The Committee is convinced that this program will operate most 
effectively and efficiently by continuing it under the auspices 
of the Department of Defense. Therefore, the Committee directs 
the Defense Logistics Agency within the Department of Defense 
to continue to operate and administer PTAP, and to fully fund 
the program in the fiscal year 1998 budget request.

                         energy trainer program

    The Committee supports the Department of Defense ``Energy 
Trainer'' project, and views it as an important tool for the 
improvement of energy management in the Department. From the 
funds available in the Federal Energy Management Program, the 
Committee directs that $685,000 be made available for the 
completion of this project.

                         defense mapping agency

    The Committee directs the Defense Mapping Agency (DMA) to 
develop a strategy that includes aggressively contracting with 
the private sector for mapping, charting and geodetic 
activities. The Committee believes such contracting should 
include, but not be limited to, the geographic information 
systems services field. The Committee directs DMA to engage in 
discussions with the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers and private 
industry representatives in the development of this strategy. 
This strategy should include DMA leadership in setting 
standards and specifications, research and technology transfer, 
and coordination in the area of geographic data, while the 
actual collection of data be performed as much as possible by 
the commercial private sector. The Committee directs that any 
proposals to increase private contracting should be done in 
compliance with the normal qualifications based selection 
process found in 40 USC 541 and 10 USC 2855.
    The Committee further directs DMA to submit to the 
Committees on Appropriations of the House and Senate, not later 
than February 1, 1997, a report on how this contracting 
strategy will be implemented.

                  ballistic missile threat commission

    The Committee supports the initiative taken by the House 
National Security Committee to establish a Commission to Assess 
the Ballistic Missile Threat to the United States. Accordingly, 
the Committee recommends that the Department of Defense fund 
the establishment of this Commission from funds provided in 
this account.

                            Family Advocacy

    The Committee has fully funded the budget request for 
military family programs, such as child development, family 
advocacy, and family centers. The Committee recommends an 
additional $20,000,000 over the budget request in Department of 
Defense Dependents Education for the Office of the Secretary of 
Defense to allocate to the Services such funds in support of 
the New Parent Support program, a program designed for the 
prevention of child/spouse abuse.

                          Program Recommended

    The total amount recommended in the bill will provide the 
following program in fiscal year 1997:



    The adjustments to the budget activities for Operation and 
maintenance, Defense-Wide are shown below:

                        [In thousands of dollars]

Budget Activity 1: Operating Forces:
    17900  Mobility Enhancements........................         100,700
    17950  SOCOM OPTEMPO/DLRs...........................          15,300
    17950  Emergent Ops.................................           7,000
    17950  Intel Spt to Naval SpOps Tng.................             500
Budget Activity 4: Administration and Servicewide 
    Activities:
    18600  Classified and Intell........................            -483
    18700  Acquisition Workforce Reduction..............          -8,000
    18800  Acquisition Workforce Reduction..............         -24,000
    18800  Depot Maintenance-Reliability Program........         -90,000
    18800  Procurement Technical Assistance Program.....          20,600
    18800  Security Locks...............................          15,000
    18800  Tent Repair and Maintenance..................           5,000
    18900  Defense Mapping Agency.......................          27,100
    19100  Department of Defense Dependents Education...          20,000
    19350  Civil/Military Programs......................         -45,000
    19350  Recruiting and Advertising-JRAP/JMRP.........          10,300
    19350  OSD Administrative Savings...................         -20,400
    19350  Reserve Peacetime Support....................         -25,000
    19350  Seismic System Communication Links...........             400
    19450  Security Programs-On Site Inspection Agency..         -22,000
Other Adjustments:
    19750  Civilian Personnel Understrength.............         -14,200
    19950  Impact Aid...................................          58,000
    20130  Acquisition Workforce Reduction..............          -4,300
    20160  USTRANSCOM Efficiencies......................         -26,000
    20170  Information Resource Management..............          56,000

                OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE, ARMY RESERVE

Fiscal year 1996 appropriation..........................  $1,119,191,000
Fiscal year 1997 budget request.........................   1,084,436,000
Committee recommendation................................   1,116,436,000
Change from budget request..............................     +32,000,000

    The Committee recommends an appropriation of $1,116,436,000 
for Operation and maintenance, Army Reserve. The recommendation 
is a decrease of $2,755,000 above the $1,119,191,000 
appropriated for fiscal year 1996.

                          Program Recommended

    The total amount recommended in the bill will provide the 
following program in fiscal year 1997:



    The adjustments to the budget activities for Operation and 
maintenance, Army Reserve are shown below:

                        [In thousands of dollars]

Budget Activity 1: Operating Forces:
    20650  Recruiting and Retention.....................          +5,000
    20700  Training Operations, Ground OPTEMPO..........         +20,000
    20700  Training Operations, NG&RE Fielding of Equip.          +7,000

                OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE, NAVY RESERVE

Fiscal year 1996 appropriation..........................    $859,542,000
Fiscal year 1997 budget request.........................     843,927,000
Committee recommendation................................     882,927,000
Change from budget request..............................     +39,000,000

    The Committee recommends an appropriation of $882,927,000 
for Operation and maintenance, Navy Reserve. The recommendation 
is an increase of $23,385,000 above the $859,542,000 
appropriated for fiscal year 1996.

                          Program Recommended

    The total amount recommended in the bill will provide the 
following program in fiscal year 1997:



    The adjustments to the budget activities for Operation and 
maintenance, Navy Reserve are shown below:

                        [In thousands of dollars]

Budget Activity 1: Operating Forces:
    21850  Aircraft Depot Maintenance, airframes and 
      engines...........................................         +5,000/
Budget Activity 4: Administration and Servicewide 
    Activities:
    23260  Base Operating Support.......................          +7,000
Other Adjustments:
    23350  NSIPS........................................         +27,000

            OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE, MARINE CORPS RESERVE

Fiscal year 1996 appropriation..........................    $100,283,000
Fiscal year 1997 budget request.........................      99,667,000
Committee recommendation................................     108,467,000
Change from budget request..............................      +8,800,000

    The Committee recommends an appropriation of $108,467,000 
for Operation and maintenance, Marine Corps Reserve. The 
recommendation is an increase of $8,184,000 above the 
$100,283,000 appropriated for fiscal year 1996.

                          Program Recommended

    The total amount recommended in the bill will provide the 
following program in fiscal year 1997:



    The adjustments to the budget activities for Operation and 
maintenance, Marine Corps Reserve are shown below:

                        [In thousands of dollars]

Budget Activity 1: Operating Forces:
    23750  Training, M1A1 tank..........................          +4,000
    23800  Operating Forces, Initial Issue..............          +4,800

              OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE, AIR FORCE RESERVE

Fiscal year 1996 appropriation..........................  $1,519,287,000
Fiscal year 1997 budget request.........................   1,488,553,000
Committee recommmendation...............................   1,491,553,000
Change from budget request..............................      +3,000,000

    The Committee recommends an appropriation of $1,491,553,000 
for Operation and maintenance, Air Force Reserve. The 
recommendation is a decrease of $27,734,000 from the 
$1,519,287,000 appropriated for fiscal year 1996.

                          Program Recommended

    The total amount recommended in the bill will provide the 
following program in fiscal year 1997:



    The adjustments to the budget activities for Operation and 
maintenance, Air Force Reserve are shown below:

                        [In thousands of dollars]

Budget Activity 1: Operating Forces:
    24850  Aircraft Operations, WC-130 training hours...          +1,000
    24850  Aircraft Operations, AWACS flying hours......          +2,000

                 WC-130 Weather Reconnaissance Mission

    The Committee continues to strongly believe that the 
weather reconnaissance mission is critical to the protection of 
Defense installations and the entire population living along 
the east and Gulf coasts of the United States. In the General 
Provisions, Section 8030 has been included which prohibits 
funds to reduce or disestablish the operation of the 53rd 
Weather Reconnaissance Squadron (Hurricane Hunters) of the Air 
Force Reserve if such action would reduce the Weather 
Reconnaissance mission below the levels funded in this Act. The 
level specifically funded in this Act is to support a stand 
alone squadron with dedicated 10 PAA aircraft, 20 line assigned 
aircrews evenly divided between Air Reserve Technician (ART) 
and Reserve aircrews. The Committee directs the Air Force to 
provide, and funding has been included, for at least 1,600 
flying hours dedicated to the storm reconnaissance mission, and 
at least 1,400 hours for training and other non-storm 
reconnaissance missions, including service, joint service, or 
interagency missions such as winter storm and winter research 
missions, aeromedical evacuation training, counterdrug support, 
and other airland missions in support of contingency operations 
during the non-hurricane season or slow periods during the 
season. The Committee has provided funding above the budget 
request for these flying hour levels, as well as to ensure 
adequate operation and maintenance support. The Committee is 
adamant that this important mission be continued in accordance 
with this direction and directs the Air Force to submit future 
budget requests reflecting this direction.

                          910th airlift group

    Last year, the Committee added $10,000,000 over the budget 
request for operations support for C-130's of the 910th Airlift 
Group. The Committee has likewise fully funded the personnel 
and operating costs of the 910th Airlift Group in this bill, 
and recommends an additional $2,000,000 over the request for 
projected real property maintenance requirements. In addition, 
the Committee directs the Air Force to continue to fully fund 
this unit in future budget requests.

             OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE, ARMY NATIONAL GUARD

Fiscal year 1996 appropriation..........................  $2,440,808,000
Fiscal year 1997 budget request.........................   2,208,477,000
Committee recommendation................................   2,268,477,000
Change from budget request..............................     +60,000,000

    The Committee recommends an appropriation of $2,268,477,000 
for Operation and maintenance, Army National Guard. The 
recommendation is a decrease of $172,331,000 from the 
$2,440,808,000 appropriated for fiscal year 1996.

                          Program Recommended

    The total amount recommended in the bill will provide the 
following program in fiscal year 1997:



    The adjustments to the budget activities for Operation and 
maintenance, Army National Guard are shown below:

                       [In thousands of dollars]

Budget Activity 1: Operating Forces:
    25900  Training Operations, Ground OPTEMPO..........         +50,000
    26050  Depot Maintenance............................          +5,000
    26050  Depot Maintenance, M-1 Tank Transfer.........          +5,000

                            M1 Abrams Tanks

    The Committee understands that 147 M1 tanks from Army units 
in Korea will be transferred to the California Army National 
Guard, but the fiscal year 1997 budget request provides 
adequate funding to repair only 87 of the tanks scheduled to be 
transferred. The Committee directs that $5,000,000 of funds 
available for depot maintenance in ``Operation and Maintenance, 
Army National Guard'', be provided for the repair of the 
remaining 60 tanks.

             OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE, AIR NATIONAL GUARD

Fiscal year 1996 appropriation..........................  $2,776,121,000
Fiscal year 1997 budget request.........................   2,654,473,000
Commitee recommendation.................................   2,671,373,000
Change from budget request..............................     +16,900,000

    The Committee recommends an appropriation of $2,671,373,000 
for Operation and maintenance, Air National Guard. The 
recommendation is a decrease of $104,748,000 from the 
$2,776,121,000 appropriated for fiscal year 1996.

                          Program Recommended

    The total amount recommended in the bill will provide the 
following program in fiscal year 1997:



    The adjustments to the budget activities for Operation and 
Maintenance, Air National Guard are shown below:

                        [In thousands of dollars]

Budget Activity 1: Operating Forces:
    27000  Aircraft Operations, 159th Fighter Group.....          +1,500
    27000  Aircraft Operations, General Purpose Fighters         +15,400

                 159th Air National Guard Fighter Group

    The Committee has recommended an increase of $1,500,000 in 
Operation and Maintenance, Air National Guard and directs that 
these funds be used for the operation of C-130H operational 
support aircraft of the 159th ANG Fighter Group.

                     joint disaster training center

    In its report accompanying the fiscal year 1996 Defense 
Appropriations bill, the Committee directed the Air National 
Guard to conduct a test and report on the Civil Engineers' 
rapid deployment capability to support disaster recovery and 
refugee relief missions. The results validate the Reserves' 
capability to perform these types of missions. The interaction 
and coordination between the Federal Emergency Management 
Association (FEMA) and the Air National Guard has proven to be 
productive and has resulted in a cost effective concept to deal 
with national emergencies. This concept is consistent with 
recent developments in the FEMA community, as well as the 
Emergency Management Assistance Compact and recent National 
Guard regulations. The Committee understands that the Air 
National Guard is developing Home Station Training Centers 
which would be ideal for this type of disaster training. The 
Committee believes that the Air National Guard should 
coordinate with FEMA to establish a pilot joint disaster 
response training center at the Stanly County Home Station 
Training Center. In addition, the National Guard Bureau should 
prepare to establish additional training centers in designated 
locations based on the potential threat of natural disasters, 
if this pilot center is validated as a cost effective measure 
to enhance disaster response capability.

          UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE ARMED FORCES

Fiscal year 1996 appropriation..........................      $6,521,000
Fiscal year 1997 budget request.........................       6,797,000
Committee recommendation................................       6,797,000
Change from the budget request..........................................

    The Committee recommends an appropriation of $6,797,000 for 
the United States Court of Appeals for the Armed Forces. The 
recommendation is an increase of $276,000 above the amount 
appropriated for fiscal year 1996.

                   ENVIRONMENTAL RESTORATION, DEFENSE

Fiscal year 1996 appropriation..........................  $1,422,200,000
Fiscal year 1997 budget request.........................   1,333,016,000
Committee recommendation................................   1,333,016,000
Change from the budget request..........................................

    The Committee recommends an appropriation of 
$1,333,016,000, the budget request for Environmental 
Restoration, Defense. The recommendation is a decrease of 
$89,184,000 below the amount appropriated for fiscal year 1996.

                            dera devolvement

    In the fiscal year 1997 budget request, the Department 
proposed devolving the currently centralized defense 
environmental restoration account (DERA) and establishing 
accounts for each of the military services. The Committee has 
serious reservations about this approach. While there are 
standards that each service must meet in executing these 
accounts, the Committee believes that each service's view of 
its own financial exigencies will eventually influence the 
priorities, and the level of funding in this account. In 
implementing the relative risk approach, the Department of 
Defense has made significant advances in developing an analytic 
framework for assessing the funding priorities for 
environmental restoration. The Committee strongly supports this 
method for assessing funding priorities. However, the Committee 
does not believe that superimposing the service's agendas on an 
otherwise objective system will serve to benefit the Department 
or improve the environmental restoration program. Therefore, 
the Committee recommends retaining a centralized defense 
environmental restoration account.

                  newmark--formerly-used defense site

    The Committee has serious concern about DoD's failure to 
respond promptly to groundwater contamination at the Newmark 
and Muscoy Superfund sites in California. The Committee 
understands that the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) 
links the contamination to a World War II depot and maintenance 
facility (Camp Ono). Since 1993, the EPA has requested but 
failed to receive substantive assistance from the Department of 
Defense. Further delays and cycles of studies will only allow 
the contamination to spread further in this densely populated 
region, posing a higher health risk and greater cleanup cost. 
The Committee believes that this is a high priority and that 
adequate funding to remediate this site should be included in 
the Department of Defense budget. Funding should be included in 
the fiscal year 1998 budget request to reflect the Army's 1993 
findings concerning this site. In addition, the Committee 
expects the Department of Defense to submit a prior approval 
reprogramming for expenses that are identified during 1997.

                            SUMMER OLYMPICS

Fiscal year 1996 appropriation..........................     $15,000,000
Fiscal year 1997 budget request.........................................
Committee recommendation................................................
Change from the budget request..........................................

    This appropriation was used for the expenses of logistical 
support and personnel services provided by the Department of 
Defense for the 1996 Games of the XXVI Olympiad.

             OVERSEAS HUMANITARIAN, DISASTER AND CIVIC AID

Fiscal year 1996 appropriation..........................     $50,000,000
Fiscal year 1997 budget request.........................      80,544,000
Committee recommendation................................      60,544,000
Change from the budget request..........................     -20,000,000

    The Committee recommends an appropriation of $60,544,000 
for Overseas Humanitarian, Disaster and Civic Aid as proposed 
in the House-passed Defense Authorization. The recommendation 
is an increase of $10,544,000 above the amount appropriated for 
fiscal year 1996.

                  FORMER SOVIET UNION THREAT REDUCTION

Fiscal year 1996 appropriation..........................    $300,000,000
Fiscal year 1997 budget request.........................     327,900,000
Committee recommendation................................     302,900,000
Change from budget request..............................     -25,000,000

    The Department of Defense requested a total of $327,900,000 
for the Former Soviet Union Threat Reduction program. 
Consistent with the recommendations in the House-passed Defense 
Authorization bill, the Committee recommends $302,900,000, a 
reduction of $25,000,000. The Committee is advised that 
$20,000,000 of excess funds are available in the fissile 
material storage facility program and are available for the 
fiscal year 1997 program. Additional authorization reductions 
concurred in by the Committee include $4,000,000 in chemical 
weapons destruction and $1,000,000 in ``other program 
support''. The Committee has fully funded the budget request 
for the ongoing removal and dismantlement of nuclear warheads 
in the former Soviet Union.
    Although this program proceeded at a relatively slow pace 
during its early years, progress is now being made at a 
relatively rapid pace. Almost 4,000 warheads have been removed 
and dismantled from weapon systems in Belarus, Kazakstan, 
Ukraine and Russia. Kazakstan is now totally denuclearized. 
Rapid progress is also being made in Belarus and Ukraine 
becoming non-nuclear states in accordance with START I and the 
Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty. Programs are also proceeding 
in the area of chemical demilitarization and storage of fissile 
material. Currently, it is projected that the Former Soviet 
Union Threat Reduction program will achieve its overall goals 
by the end of fiscal year 2001.

                 QUALITY OF LIFE ENHANCEMENTS, DEFENSE

Fiscal year 1996 appropriation..........................
Fiscal year 1997 budget request.........................
Committee recommendation................................    $975,000,000
Change from the budget request..........................    +975,000,000


    The Committee recommends the creation of a new account, 
``Quality of Life Enhancements, Defense'', to provide a greater 
degree of visibility and accountability for quality of life 
initiatives. The Committee recommends a total appropriation of 
$975,000,000 for this account, including $475,000,000 for 
defense health program shortfalls and $500,000,000 for real 
property maintenance specifically emphasizing barracks and 
living facilities. (The Committee has recommended another 
increase of $500,000,000 for real property maintenance within 
the services' Operation and maintenance accounts, for other 
infrastructure and property maintenance requirements.)
    In addition, for real property maintenance funding provided 
in this account, the Committee recommends a two year period of 
availability in order to provide for a more ordered, systematic 
use of the funds to address the most critical barracks repair 
and upgrade requirements. The Committee directs the Department 
to provide a detailed report by June 1, 1997, on its planned 
obligation of these funds.
    As noted elsewhere in this report, the Committee is deeply 
concerned about the failure of the Department of Defense to 
adequately budget for military medical care as well as the 
upkeep, rehabilitation and upgrading of military barracks and 
living facilities. Medical care and housing are clearly among 
the most critical quality of life issues for our service 
personnel. Yet the budget request proposes to underfund the 
Defense Health Program by $475,000,000. It also proposes a one 
year reduction in real property maintenance funding of over 
$1,100,000,000, including a $421,000,000 reduction in funds 
targeted at repairing, rehabilitating and upgrading military 
barracks and living facilities. The Committee therefore has 
recommended substantial increases over the request for both the 
Defense Health Program (a $475,000,000 increase) and for real 
property maintenance programs (a total increase of 
$1,000,000,000, including an additional $400,000,000 for 
barracks).
    In previous years, the Committee has recommended similar 
increases for these programs. Unfortunately, since these 
programs have been traditionally funded within individual 
Operation and maintenance (O&M) accounts, the Committee has 
witnessed attempts by the Department of divert a portion of the 
increased funding to other O&M activities. This practice has 
become increasingly prevalent in recent years given the 
substantial increase in unplanned, unbudgeted contingency 
military deployments such as the peacekeeping activities in 
Somalia, Haiti, and the former Yugoslavia. by making this 
appropriation in a separate, discrete account, the Department 
cannot divert any of these funds without prior Committee 
approval through the reprogramming process.
                               TITLE III

                              PROCUREMENT

                  Estimates and Appropriation Summary

    The fiscal year 1997 Department of Defense procurement 
budget requests totals $38,137,109,000. The accompanying bill 
recommends $43,871,857,000. The total amount recommended is an 
increase of $5,734,748,000 above the fiscal year 1997 budget 
estimate, and is $194,459,000 less than the total provided in 
fiscal year 1996. The Committee recommendation includes 
$908,000,000 for National Guard and Reserve Equipment. The 
table below summarizes the budget estimates and the Committee's 
recommendations:



                     gps and flight data recorders

    The Committee is saddened by the tragic loss of Secretary 
Ron Brown, his delegation, and the Air Force flight crew during 
their recent mission in the former Yugoslavia. The Committee 
was dismayed to learn that many passenger carrying aircraft in 
DoD are not equipped with flight data recorders as is standard 
in commercial airlines. Even though these military aircraft 
often operate in austere airports around the world, many of the 
aircraft are not equipped with modern navigation equipment like 
GPS. The Committee believes this situation is unacceptable. 
Recently, DoD provided the Committee with a request for an 
additional $170,600,000 for accelerated installation of GPS and 
flight data recorder equipment on its fleet of passenger 
carrying military aircraft. The Committee has provided these 
additional funds, and encourages the DoD to move quickly on 
this effort. The Committee directs the DoD to provide a report 
detailing the cost, by year, and schedule for installation of 
GPS and flight data recorders on each of the required aircraft 
types. This report should be provided to the congressional 
defense committees no later than June 30, 1996.

                          information security

    Last year, the Committee expressed concern about the 
protection, detection and response to attacks on DoD 
unclassified information systems. DoD's reliance on automated 
information systems to communicate and exchange unclassified 
data greatly increases the risks of unauthorized access to 
information. Attacks to DoD unclassified information systems 
can be both costly and damaging to the nation's security.
    Both the General Accounting Office (GAO) and the 
Committee's Survey and Investigations (S&I) Staff have 
conducted studies on the vulnerability of DoD's unclassified 
networks and the potential damage of unauthorized access to 
those systems. Both have made recommendations to protect, 
detect, and react to attacks on DoD networks.
    DoD is making an effort to address information security; 
however, fiscal constraints and technological limitations will 
never allow DoD to protect all of its systems at all times.
    Based on the recommendations by both the GAO and the S&I 
Staff, the Committee requests that the Assistant Secretary of 
Defense for Command, Control, Communications and Intelligence 
provide to the Committee with the fiscal year 1998 budget 
request a comprehensive plan for information security. The plan 
should include information security policies and procedures, 
vulnerability assessments for unclassified networks, 
corrections for identified deficiencies, and required funding 
to implement those corrections.

                          classified programs

    Adjustments to classified Procurement programs are 
explained in a classified report accompanying this report.

                       AIRCRAFT PROCUREMENT, ARMY

Fiscal year 1996 appropriation..........................  $1,558,805,000
Fiscal year 1997 budget request.........................     970,815,000
Committee recommendation................................   1,308,709,000
Change from budget request..............................    +337,894,000

    This appropriation finances the acquisition of tactical and 
utility airplanes and helicopters, including associated 
electronics, electronic warfare and communications equipment 
and armament, modification of in-service aircraft; ground 
support equipment, components and parts such as spare engines, 
transmissions, gear boxes and sensor equipment. It also funds 
related training devices such as combat flight simulators and 
production base support.

                       Committee Recommendations

                         authorization changes

    The Committee recommends the following changes to the 
budget request in accordance with House authorization action:

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                   Committee       Change from  
                             Item                               Budget request    recommended        request    
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
CH-47 modification...........................................            7,802           59,802          +52,000
Aircraft survivability equipment.............................              436           20,436          +20,000
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

                          Fixed Wing Aircraft

                      airborne reconnaissance low

    The Army requested no funds for upgrades to the Airborne 
Reconnaissance Low (ARL). The Committee recommends an increase 
of $10,500,000, of which $5,500,000 shall be used only to 
develop an engine upgrade for ARL and the remaining $5,000,000 
shall be used only to complete the moving target indicator 
(MTI) purchase.

                    guardrail common sensor program

    The Army requested $1,081,000 for the GUARDRAIL Common 
Sensor (GRCS). The Committee recommends $11,081,000, an 
increase of $10,000,000 only to begin the enhancements to the 
GRCS systems currently deployed.

                          Rotary Wing Aircraft

                               blackhawk

    The Army requested $75,000,000 for Blackhawk advanced 
procurement. The Committee recommends $61,000,000, a decrease 
in $14,000,000. Last year, the Congress appropriated 
$75,000,000 for the advance procurement of 60 Blackhawk 
helicopters; however, the Army is currently negotiating a 
multi-year contract for an annual production rate of only 36 
aircraft. Additionally, the Army has historically used this 
project as a source for reprogramming actions. Because of the 
reduced production quantities and previous reprogramming 
actions, the Committee recommends the reduction.

                        Modification of Aircraft

                             kiowa warrior

    The Army requested $9,115,000 for Kiowa Warrior production. 
The Committee recommends $242,115,000, an increase of 
$233,000,000. Of the increase, $192,500,000 is only for the 
production of Kiowa Warriors and $40,500,000 is only for safety 
enhancements.

                                quickfix

    The Army requested $13,900,000 to produce one low rate 
initial production Advanced Quickfix System (AQF). The 
Committee recommends $36,600,000, an increase of $22,700,000 
only to produce three additional Advanced Quickfix Systems for 
fielding to a second Force Package 1 division.

                      apache-longbow modifications

    In the fiscal year 1996 Defense Appropriations Act, 
Congress provided the authority and appropriated additional 
funds to initiate a multi-year contract for the Apache-Longbow 
helicopter. The Committee recommended the multi-year contract 
based on data provided to the Congress by the Army. Last fall, 
the Army stated if the fiscal year 1996 budget request was 
increased by $85,000,000, the Army would be in the position to 
negotiate a multi-year contract for Apache-Longbow helicopters. 
According to Army data, the execution of a five-year multi-year 
contract would deliver 58 aircraft earlier and save 
approximately $630,000,000.
    The fiscal year 1997 budget justification data provided to 
the Committee states that the request funds 232 aircraft 
including all of the associated equipment and training devices. 
However, the Committee has learned that the Army budget does 
not include funding for training devices and the cost estimates 
for government furnished equipment were incorrect. As a result, 
the Army does not have adequate funding available to enter a 
five-year multi-year contract for 232 Apache-Longbow 
helicopters.
    Although the Committee encourages multi-year contracts 
because of the potential for acquisition cost savings and an 
accelerated fielding schedule, the Committee is extremely 
concerned that the Army may enter into a multi-year contract 
which it cannot afford. The Committee reminds the Army that any 
multi-year procurement is to be supported with the standard 
justification materials.
    The Committee directs the Secretary of the Army to submit 
no later than July 15, 1996, accurate budget data for the 
Apache-Longbow program. The data is to include production 
quantities, associated support equipment, training devices and 
other support costs.

                           airborne avionics

    The Army requested $40,819,000 for airborne avionics. The 
Committee recommends $60,919,000, an increase of $20,100,000. 
Of the increase, $15,000,000 is only to procure global 
positioning systems for Blackhawk and Chinook helicopters and 
$5,100,000 is only to install global positioning systems on 
passenger carrying aircraft.

                        spares and repair parts

    The Army requested $51,106,000 for spares and repair parts. 
The Committee recommends $34,700,000, a decrease of 
$16,406,000. The Committee notes that the Army has historically 
used funds appropriated for this line item as a source for 
below threshold reprogrammings. Furthermore, the fiscal year 
1997 request is over fifty percent higher than last year's 
appropriated amount.

                          Program Recommended

    The total amount recommended in the bill will provide the 
following program in fiscal year 1997:



                       MISSILE PROCUREMENT, ARMY

Fiscal year 1996 appropriation..........................    $865,555,000
Fiscal year 1997 budget request.........................     766,329,000
Committee recommendation................................   1,044,767,000
Change from budget request..............................    +278,438,000

    This appropriation finances the acquisition of surface-to-
air, surface-to-surface, and anti-tank/assault missile systems. 
Also included are major components, modifications, targets, 
test equipment, and production base support.

                       Committee Recommendations

                         authorization changes

    The Committee recommends the following changes to the 
budget request in accordance with House authorization action:

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                   Committee       Change from  
                                                                Budget request    recommended        request    
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Avenger......................................................           12,581           71,981          +59,400
MLRS Rockets.................................................           24,443           41,443          +17,000
MLRS Launchers...............................................           38,039          104,239          +66,200
ATACMS.......................................................           92,816          161,816          +69,000
Stinger Mods.................................................           16,903           36,903          +20,000
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

                   Anti-Tank/Assault Missile Systems

                                patriot

    The Army requested $2,862,000 to provide support for 
Patriot missile deliveries. Army budget materials show all U.S. 
missile deliveries completing prior to fiscal year 1997. 
Accordingly, the Committee denies the requested funds.

                                javelin

    The Army requested $162,104,000 for Javelin. The Committee 
recommends $201,804,000, an increase of $39,700,000. This 
includes an increase of $34,000,000 only for Economic Order 
Quantity (EOQ) purchases associated with a three year multiyear 
contract, and $5,700,000 only for accelerated fielding of 
Javelin to the 82nd Airborne Division. Though the Committee 
approves the Army's request for a three year multiyear contract 
for Javelin, the Committee remains concerned with the Army's 
recent track record on such contracts. Just this year, the 
Army's budget failed to include the final buy for the Avenger 
multiyear. Failing to fund this contract would result in $12 
million in termination fees and the loss of $20 million in 
Avenger components procured earlier under Economic Order 
Quantities purchases. With regard to Javelin, the Committee 
notes that the third year quantities in the proposed multiyear 
are almost three times higher than each of the first two years. 
To preclude potential affordability problems in the future, the 
Committee directs the Army to negotiate options on the third 
year of the multiyear at roughly 1000 missile increments. The 
Committee further directs that, prior to award of the multiyear 
contract, the Secretary of the Army submit a report to the 
congressional defense committees detailing the actual 
negotiated provisions for the third year and the final 
negotiated cost and savings of the multiyear contract.

                              patriot mods

    The Army requested $11,464,000 for Patriot Modifications. 
The Committee recommends $21,464,000, an increase of 
$10,000,000 only for procurement of GEM +/- upgrades to the 
Patriot PAC-2 missiles.

                          Program Recommended

    The total amount recommended in the bill will provide the 
following program in fiscal year 1997:



        PROCUREMENT OF WEAPONS AND TRACKED COMBAT VEHICLES, ARMY

Fiscal year 1996 appropriation..........................  $1,652,745,000
Fiscal year 1997 budget request.........................   1,102,014,000
Committee recommendation................................   1,500,414,000
Change from budget request..............................    +398,400,000

    This appropriation finances the acquisition of tanks; 
personnel and cargo carriers; fighting vehicles; tracked 
recovery vehicles; self-propelled and towed howitzers; machine 
guns; mortars; modifications of in-service equipment; initial 
spares; and production base support.

                       Committee Recommendations

                         authorization changes

    The Committee recommends the following changes to the 
budget request in accordance with House authorization action:

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                   Committee       Change from  
                             Item                               Budget request    recommended        request    
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Command and Control Vehicle..................................           48,985           38,985          -10,000
Carrier, Mod.................................................           23,028           52,028          +29,000
BFVS Series mods.............................................           83,649          119,149          +35,500
Howitzer, 155MM M109A6 (MOD).................................           75,000          106,200          +31,200
Improved recovery vehicle....................................           28,641           55,741          +27,100
M1 Abrams Tank (MOD).........................................           50,217           40,217          -10,000
M-4 Carbine..................................................            5,552            6,552           +1,000
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

                        Tracked Combat Vehicles

                        bradley base sustainment

    The Army requested $134,428,000 for Bradley base 
sustainment. The Committee recommends $254,428,000, an increase 
of $120,000,000 only for Bradley A0 modifications.

               field artillery ammunition support vehicle

    The Army requested $34,400,000 for the procurement of Field 
Artillery Ammunition Support Vehicles (FAASV). The Committee 
recommends $64,200,000, an increase of $29,800,000 only for the 
production of one battalion set of FAASV's for the National 
Guard.

                Modification of Tracked Combat Vehicles

                           faasv pip to fleet

    The Army requested $4,727,000 for FAASV PIP to the fleet. 
The Committee recommends $13,827,000, an increase of $9,100,000 
only for the procurement of a Vehicle Intercom System (VIS) for 
the FAASV. The additional funds will allow the Army to 
implement VIS during FAASV production rather than conducting a 
costly modification program in the future.

                       armored combat earthmover

    The Army requested no funds for the Armored Combat 
Earthmover (ACE). The Committee recommends $100,700,000 only 
for the production of ACE vehicles. The additional funds will 
allow the Army to complete fielding of the ACE four years 
earlier than planned and achieve approximately $13 million in 
savings due to a higher production rate.

                   Weapons and Other Combat Vehicles

                       machine gun, 5.56mm (SAW)

    The Army requested $11,103,000 for Machine gun, 5.56mm 
(SAW) production. The Committee recommends $12,103,000, an 
increase of $1,000,000 only for the procurement of 5.56mm SAW 
machine guns.

                   grenade launcher, auto, 40mm. mk19

    The Army requested $5,199,000 for Grenade Launcher, MK19-3 
production. The Committee recommends $18,199,000, an increase 
of $13,000,000 only for the production of the MK19-3.

                               m16 rifle

    The Army requested $5,552,000 for M16 Rifle production. The 
Committee recommends $6,552,000, an increase of $1,000,000 only 
for the production of M16 rifles.

                           machine gun, m240b

    The Army requested no funds for M240B Machine Gun 
production. The Committee recommends $20,000,000 only for the 
production of M240B machine guns.

                          Program Recommended

    The total amount recommended in the bill will provide for 
the following program in fiscal year 1997:



                    PROCUREMENT OF AMMUNITION, ARMY

Fiscal year 1996 appropriation..........................  $1,110,685,000
Fiscal year 1997 budget request.........................     853,428,000
Committee recommendation................................   1,150,128,000
Change from budget request..............................    +296,700,000

    This appropriation finances the acquisition of ammunition, 
modification of in-service stock, and related production base 
support including the maintenance, expansion, and modernization 
of industrial facilities and equipment.

                       Committee Recommendations

                         authorization changes

    The Committee recommends the following changes to the 
budget request in accordance with House authorization action:

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                   Committee       Change from  
                             Item                               Budget request    recommended        request    
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
CTG, 9MM, ALL TYPES..........................................  ...............            1,400           +1,400
CTG, 20MM, ALL TYPES.........................................  ...............              300             +300
CTG, 30MM, ALL TYPES.........................................  ...............           15,000          +15,000
CTG, 40MM, ALL TYPES.........................................           34,428           31,828           -2,600
CTG Mortar 60 MM Illum M721/M767.............................            6,151           13,151           +7,000
60MM HE M720.................................................  ...............           12,500          +12,500
120MM HEAT M830A1............................................  ...............           45,000          +45,000
120MM M831/M831A1............................................           52,228           54,628           +2,400
155MM HE M795................................................  ...............           55,000          +55,000
Volcano mine.................................................  ...............           35,000          +35,000
Bunker Defeat Munition.......................................  ...............           10,000          +10,000
Grenades.....................................................            7,654            4,154           -3,500
Signals......................................................           10,196            1,296           -8,900
Selectable Light-weight Attack Munition......................  ...............            3,000           +3,000
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

                         AMMUNITION SHORTFALLS

    The Committee provided an additional $242,700,000 to 
satisfy critical ammunition shortfalls identified by the Army. 
The Committee provided funds for the following items:

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                   Committee       Change from  
                             Item                               Budget request    recommended        request    
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
CTG, 7.62MM, ALL TYPES.......................................            3,871            5,971           +2,100
CTG, 9MM, ALL TYPES..........................................  ...............            1,400           +1,400
CTG, 20MM, ALL TYPES.........................................  ...............              300             +300
CTG, 25MM, ALL TYPES.........................................           47,176           87,176          +40,000
CTG, 30MM, ALL TYPES.........................................  ...............           15,000          +15,000
CTG, MORTAR 60MM ILLUM M721/M767.............................            6,151           13,151           +7,000
60MM HE M720.................................................  ...............           12,500          +12,500
120MM M829A2.................................................           79,703          103,703          +24,000
120MM HEAT M830A1............................................  ...............           45,000          +45,000
120MM M831/M831A1............................................           52,228           54,628           +2,400
155MM HE M795................................................  ...............           55,000          +55,000
Volcano mine.................................................  ...............           35,000          +35,000
Selectable Light-weight Attack Munition......................  ...............            3,000           +3,000
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

                      Small and Medium Ammunition

                      .50 SMALL CALIBER, ALL TYPES

    The Army requested $3,971,000 for CTG, .50 CAL, All Types 
ammunition. The Committee recommends $10,971,000, an increase 
of $7,000,000 only for the production of .50 caliber SLAP 
rounds.

                       SPECIAL PURPOSE AMMUNITION

    The Army requested no funds for special purpose ammunition. 
The Committee recommends $6,000,000. The increase is only to 
procure the following:

MK-211..................................................      $2,000,000
M-993...................................................       2,000,000
M-995...................................................       2,000,000

                           Mortar Ammunition

                     CTG, MORTAR 60MM 1/10 PRACTICE

    The Army requested $5,019,000 for the procurement of 60mm 
1/10 Practice (M766) ammunition. The Committee recommends 
$5,219,000, an increase of $200,000 only for M766 ammunition.

                CTG MORTAR 81MM PRACTICE 1/10 RANGE M880

    Congress appropriated $6,600,000 for CTG Mortar 81mm 
Practice 1/10 Range M880 ammunition in fiscal year 1996. The 
Committee has learned that none of the fiscal year 1996 funds 
have been obligated and directs the Department of Defense to 
release the funds to the Army for obligation.

              CTG, MORTAR 120MM FULL RANGE PRACTICE XM931

    The Army requested $49,539,000 for CTG, Mortar 120mm Full 
Range Practice XM931 ammunition. The Committee recommends 
$51,439,000, an increase of $1,900,000 only for XM931 
ammunition.

                     CTG, MORTAR 120MM ILLUM XM930

    The Army requested $19,360,000 for CTG, Mortar 120mm Illum 
XM930 ammunition. The Committee recommends $34,360,000, an 
increase of $15,000,000 only for XM930 ammunition.

                     CTG, MORTAR 120MM SMOKE XM929

    The Army requested $30,106,000 for CTG, Mortar 120mm Smoke 
XM929 ammunition. The Committee recommends $39,066,000, an 
increase of $8,900,000 only for the production of XM929 
ammunition.

                            Tank Ammunition

                  120mm kinetic energy tank ammunition

    The Committee has previously expressed its concern about 
the health of the ammunition industrial base and the Army's 
ammunition inventory levels. It has come to the Committee's 
attention that there will be a break in production between the 
current 120mm kinetic energy tank round, the M829A2, and the 
follow-on round, the M829E3/E4. Based on the Army's current and 
future kinetic energy tank ammunition requirements, the 
Committee is concerned that the break in production could 
result in a loss of production capability. The Committee 
believes that adequate funding should be provided, not only to 
maintain the industrial base for kinetic energy tank rounds, 
but more importantly so that sufficient inventory levels of 
Army ammunition are available for training and wartime 
requirements. Therefore, the Committee directs the Army to 
submit no later than December 1, 1996, a plan addressing how 
the 120mm kinetic energy tank ammunition base will be 
maintained to ensure that future Army requirements will be 
satisfied.

                            CTG 120MM M892A2

    The Army requested $79,703,000 for CTG 120mm M892A2 
ammunition. The Committee recommends $103,703,000, an increase 
of $24,000,000 only for the production of M892A2 ammunition. 
The Committee provided the additional funds to alleviate 
critical ammunition shortfalls in the Army's inventory. The 
Marine Corps also has a requirement for kinetic energy tank 
ammunition, however, the necessary type of round and quantity 
has not been determined at this time. If the ongoing Marine 
Corps study determines that there is a valid requirement for 
the M829A2 tank round, the Committee directs the Army to 
obligate up to $12,000,000 on the current multi-year M82A92 
contract for the Marine Corps. Further details are provided in 
the Procurement of Ammunition, Navy and Marine Corps section of 
this report.

                          Artillery Ammunition

                                 sadarm

    The Army requested $60,259,000 for SADARM. The Committee 
recommends $78,759,000, an increase of $18,500,000 only for 
SADARM procurement.

                   Ammunition Production Base Support

                  provision for industrial facilities

    The Army requested $38,508,000 for provisions of industrial 
facilities. The Committee recommends $40,008,000, an increase 
of $1,500,000 only to provide a computer link between the 
flexible manufacturing line at Scranton Army Ammunition Plant 
and the U.S. Armament, Research and Development Center.

                   large caliber deepdrawn cartridges

    In fiscal year 1995, the Congress provided funds for the 
downsizing of a large caliber deepdrawn cartridge case 
facility. The Committee is concerned with the progress of this 
effort and directs the Army to execute and complete this 
program in order to meet fiscal year 1998 Army and Navy 
production requirements. The Committee directs the Army to 
report to the Committee by December 1, 1996 on the progress of 
this effort.

                          Program Recommended

    The total amount recommended in the bill will provide the 
following program in fiscal year 1997:



                        OTHER PROCUREMENT, ARMY

Fiscal year 1996 appropriation..........................  $2,769,443,000
Fiscal year 1997 budget request.........................   2,627,440,000
Committee recommendation................................   2,899,040,000
Change from budget request..............................    +271,600,000

    This appropriation finances the acquisition of: (a) 
tactical and commercial vehicles, including trucks, semi-
trailers, and trailers of all types to provide mobility and 
utility support to field forces and the worldwide logistical 
system; (b) communications and electronics equipment of all 
types to provide fixed, semi-fixed, and mobile strategic and 
tactical communications equipment; and (c) other support 
equipment, such as chemical defensive equipment, tactical 
bridging, shop sets, and construction equipment, floating and 
rail equipment, generators and power units, material handling 
equipment, medical support equipment, special equipment for 
user testing, and non-system training devices. In each of these 
activities funds are also included for modifications of in-
service equipment, investment spares and repair parts, and 
production base support.

                       Committee Recommendations

                         authorization changes

    The Committee recommends the following changes in the 
budget estimate, in accordance with House authorization action:

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                   Committee       Change from  
                             Item                               Budget request   recommendation      request    
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Family of Heavy Tactical Vehicles............................          163,343          196,343          +33,000
Army Data Distribution System (ADDS).........................           47,987           72,987          +25,000
FAAD GBS.....................................................           51,226           68,826          +17,600
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

                     Tactical and Support Vehicles

              high mobility multi-purpose wheeled vehicles

    The Army requested $96,785,000 for High Mobility Multi-
purpose Wheeled Vehicles (HMMWV). The Committee recommends 
$162,785,000, an increase of $66,000,000 only for the 
procurement of HMMWV's to meet shortfalls identified by the 
Army.

                       armored security vehicles

    The Army requested $9,240,000 for armored security 
vehicles. The Committee recommends $18,240,000, an increase of 
$9,000,000 only for the procurement of armored security 
vehicles.

                 medium truck extended service program

    The Army requested no funds for the medium truck extended 
service program. The Committee recommends $20,000,000 only for 
the medium truck extended service program. The additional funds 
will allow the Army to remanufacture 400 trucks for U.S. Forces 
Korea, resulting not only in increased readiness, but a 
significant decrease in operations and support costs.

                Communications and Electronics Equipment

                                smart-t

    The Army requested $45,427,000 for SMART-T. The Committee 
recommends $34,727,000, a decrease of $10,700,000. The 
Committee is supportive of the SMART-T program and recognizes 
that the acquisition program is a success. However, subsequent 
to submitting the budget request, the Army awarded a contract 
which reduced the overall program cost. Because the fiscal year 
1997 contract will be $10,700,000 less than the budget request 
and the Army has not requested that the funds be used for 
another purpose, the Committee recommends the budget request be 
reduced.

                                 scamp

    The Army requested $23,555,000 for SCAMP (space) terminals. 
The Committee recommends $14,455,000, a decrease of $9,100,000. 
The Army awarded a contract which was less than the estimated 
cost and reprogrammed fiscal year 1996 savings to the C3 
Systems Program Office. The fiscal year 1997 contract will be 
$9,100,000 less than the estimated amount; therefore, the 
Committee recommends that the budget request be reduced.

                      information system security

    The Army requested $10,678,000 for information system 
security. The Committee recommends $30,078,000, an increase of 
$19,400,000 to improve information security for U.S. Forces in 
Germany and Korea.

                       fort carson communications

    The Army requested no appropriation for Fort Carson 
communications. The Committee is aware of the continuing 
problem at Fort Carson for patients trying to schedule 
appointments for clinics and health services.
    The present telephone system is capable of handling only 28 
calls at a time. However, the hospital system receives over 
5,000 calls daily. This situation has caused significant 
frustration for all patients--particularly those who must gain 
early access to the phone system for same day appointments. The 
Committee believes this situation is unacceptable and therefore 
recommends an increase of $200,000 only for upgrades to the 
telephone infrastructure for patient appointment and 
scheduling.

                       items less than $2,000,000

    Within the ``Items Less Than $2,000,000'' program in the 
communications and electronics subaccount the Army requested no 
funds to provide the Theater Rapid Response Intelligence 
Package (TRRIP) to tactical forces. The Committee recommends 
$4,500,000 only to procure additional TRRIPs for tactical 
forces. Also, the Army requested no funds for continued 
procurement or replenishment of Improved Remotely Monitored 
Battlefield Sensor Systems or components. The Committee 
recommends $2,400,000 only to procure the non-expendable I-
REMBASS components for divisions currently holding the older 
REMBASS components. The Committee recommends a total increase 
of $6,900,000 for the Items Less Than $2,000,000 program.

                               jtt/cibs-m

    Within the JTT/CIBS-M program the Army requested 
$14,010,000 for 58 Commanders Tactical Terminals. The Committee 
recommends $19,010,000, an increase of $5,000,000 only to 
procure CTT3/CIBS-M systems.

                             trojan spirit

    The Army requested $2,603,000 for Trojan Spirit. The 
Committee recommends $4,200,000, an increase of $1,600,000 only 
to procure three Trojan Switch Extensions for U.S. Forces 
Korea.

                          night vision devices

    The Army requested $111,872,000 for the Night Vision 
Devices program. The Committee recommends $126,872,000, an 
increase of $15,000,000 over the budget request. The increase 
is for the AN/PAS-13 Thermal Weapon Sight which is an advanced 
infrared weapon sight for use on rifles and other small arms. 
Although this program is currently in production, the low 
current and projected production rates mean that this important 
enhancement to warfighting capability would not be available to 
many units until well into the future unless the production 
rate is increased.

                integrated meteorological system sensors

    The Army requested $3,100,000 to procure six Block II 
Integrated Meteorological System Sensors (IMETS). The Committee 
recommends $5,100,000, an increase of $2,000,0000 only to begin 
the upgrade of Block I IMETS to Common Hardware and Software 
(CHS).

                       forward entry device (fed)

    The Army requested $2,134,000 for the Forward Entry Device 
program. The Committee recommends $12,034,000, an increase of 
$9,900,000. The increase will provide funds for additional 
FED's which enhance the effectiveness of forward artillery 
observers by automating communications thus taking full 
advantage of the AFATDS (Advanced Field Artillery Tactical Data 
System).

                  automated data processing equipment

    The Army requested $136,386,000 for the Automated Data 
Processing Equipment program. The Committee recommends 
$114,886,000, a decrease of $21,500,000. Details on the 
Committee's recommendation appear in the Information Resource 
Management section of this report.

                  integrated family of test equipment

    The Army requested $1,506,000 for Integrated Family of Test 
Equipment (IFTE). The Committee recommends $30,506,000, an 
increase of $29,000,000 only for IFTE procurement.

                        Other Support Equipment

                             force provider

    The Army requested $11,661,000 for the Force Provider 
program. The Committee recommends $39,661,000, an increase of 
$28,000,000. The Force Provider program is a fully 
containerized, rapidly deployable base camp which can house 600 
troops and provide all the basics of day-to-day existence. The 
program has been very beneficial in various deployments in 
recent years. The increased funds are for the procurement of 
two additional sets of modules, six kits to winterize existing 
Force Provider units and the modernization of the six units 
currently deployed to Bosnia.

                       items less than $2,000,000

    The Army requested $2,688,000 for Items Less Than 
$2,000,000 within the Other Support Equipment subaccount. The 
Committee recommends $4,688,000, an increase of $2,000,000. The 
increased funds are for laser leveling devices for construction 
equipment. The laser devices enhance the operational 
effectiveness of construction equipment and also reduce 
personnel requirements.

                  inland petroleum distribution system

    The Army requested $1,064,000 for the Inland Petroleum 
Distribution System. The Committee recommends $3,064,000, an 
increase of $2,000,000. The Inland Petroleum Distribution 
System is a modular, rapidly deployable fuel storage and 
pipeline system which supports deployed troops. The recommended 
increase is part of a broader Committee initiative to enhance 
the deployability and mobility of our forces. Additional funds 
have been provided in various programs and accounts to achieve 
this objective.

                         combat support medical

    The Army requested $15,851,000 for the Combat Support 
Medical program. The Committee recommends $6,651,000, a 
decrease of $9,200,000 from the budget request. The Committee 
notes that $6,700,000 of funds have been provided in the past 
for the Field Medical Oxygen and Distribution System (FMOGDS) 
which was canceled late last year. Additionally, $2,500,000 had 
been provided for ventilators, however the Army has reached its 
inventory objective for this item. Because of excess funds 
totaling $9,200,000 are available in this program, the 
Committee recommends a similar decrease to the fiscal year 1997 
request.

                  generators and associated equipment

    The Army requested $13,187,000 for Generators and 
Associated Equipment. The Committee recommends $38,187,000, an 
increase of $25,000,000. The additional funds will accelerate 
the procurement of the new generation of generators and 
distribution systems. Current generators average 17 years in 
age and are obsolete. The new generators are quiet, more 
reliable and will save funds in operation and maintenance.

                      training devices, non-system

    The Army requested $82,724,000 for the Training Devices, 
Nonsystem program. The Committee recommends $84,224,000, an 
increase of $1,500,000 as proposed in the House and Senate 
authorization legislation. The funds are for the purchase of 
electronic rifle targeting equipment to upgrade the 
marksmanship training range at Fort Benning, Georgia.

                          program recommended

    The total amount recommended in the bill will provide the 
following programs in fiscal year 1997:



                       AIRCRAFT PROCUREMENT, NAVY

Fiscal year 1996 appropriation..........................  $4,589,394,000
Fiscal year 1997 budget request.........................   5,881,952,000
Committee recommendation................................   6,896,552,000
Change from budget request..............................  +1,014,600,000

    This appropriation provides funds for the procurement of 
aircraft and related support equipment and programs; flight 
simulators; equipment to modify in-service aircraft to extend 
their service life, eliminate safety hazards, and improve their 
operational effectiveness; and spares and ground support 
equipment for all end items procured by this appropriation.

                       Committee Recommendations

                         authorization changes

    The Committee recommends the following changes in 
accordance with House authorization action:

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                   Committee       Change from  
                                                                Budget request   recommendation      request    
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
V-22.........................................................          500,904          732,904         +232,000
KC-130J......................................................                0          209,200         +209,200
EP-3 Modifications...........................................           35,429           45,429          +10,000
Common Ground Equipment......................................          313,070          303,070          -10,000
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

                            Combat Aircraft

                             av-8b harrier

    The Navy requested $282,014,000 for remanufacture of 10 AV-
8B aircraft. The Committee recommends $350,014,000, an increase 
of $68,000,000 for 2 additional aircraft. This recommendation 
would result in more efficient procurement of aircraft through 
unit cost savings due to higher quantity, accelerated 
procurement of instrument landing systems, and elimination of 
the requirement to purchase 2 AV-8B aircraft in 2001.

                                  v-22

    The Navy requested $500,904,000 for procurement of 4 
aircraft and $57,753,000 for advance procurement of 5 aircraft 
in 1998. The Committee recommends $732,904,000 for procurement 
of 6 aircraft, an increase of $232,000,000; and $127,753,000 
for advance procurement of 12 aircraft in 1998, an increase of 
$70,000,000. The Committee is concerned about the current 27-
year production schedule of the V-22 aircraft. Given the 
recommendations of the Defense Science Board for more cost 
efficient V-22 production, the Committee understands that a 
minimum of $8 billion can be saved by producing the V-22 at an 
efficient rate of 36 aircraft per year. Additionally, $1.3 
billion can be saved through earlier replacement of CH-46s and 
CH-53Ds currently in the fleet. The Committee directs that the 
fiscal year 1998 and subsequent budgets to the Congress 
continue the ramp-up this program to reach an economic rate of 
36 aircraft per year not later than fiscal year 2000. The 
Committee expects DoD to replace all CH-46s and all CH-53Ds 
currently in the fleet with the MV-22 aircraft by no later than 
fiscal year 2012.

                              e-2c hawkeye

    The Navy requested $127,502,000 to procure 2 E-2C aircraft. 
The Committee recommends $282,502,000 for 4 aircraft, an 
increase of $155,000,000. This recommendation stabilizes the 
production line at the planned 4 per year annual rate while 
providing unit cost savings of about $8,000,000 per aircraft 
compared to the budget request.

                            Trainer Aircraft

                            t-39n saberliner

    In the 1996 Defense Appropriations Act, $45,000,000 was 
provided to purchase T-39N aircraft for the Undergraduate Naval 
Flight Officer training mission. The House report, the Senate 
report, and the conference report indicate quite clearly that 
these funds are to be used specifically to purchase only T-39N 
aircraft. The Committee notes that the recent Department of 
Defense P-1 document calls this line item ``T-39N Saberliner''. 
The Committee directs that fiscal year 1996 funds appropriated 
for the T-39N program be released by the Office of the 
Secretary to the Navy and expeditiously obligated only for that 
purpose.

                        Modification of Aircraft

                              ea-6 series

    The Navy requested $100,620,000 for EA-6B modifications. 
The Committee recommends $221,620,000, an increase of 
$121,000,000. Of the additional funds provided, $50,000,000 is 
only for procurement of 10 additional Center Wing Sections, 
$40,000,000 for procurement of 60 additional Band 9/10 
transmitters, $20,000,000 for procurement of turbine blade 
containment upgrades, and $11,000,000 only for procurement of 
24 USQ-113 communications receivers.

                              f-14 series

    The Navy requested $231,974,000 for F-14 modifications. The 
Committee recommends $241,974,000, an increase of $10,000,000 
only for the digitization of TARPS prototype pods with emphasis 
on TARPS CD. The Committee believes that the Air Force should 
provide 70 AAD-5 (RC line scanners) to the Navy for this 
purpose.

                              F-18 series

    The Navy requested $156,486,000 for F-18 modifications. The 
Committee recommends $154,486,000, a decrease of $2,000,000 
based on a slip in the contract award for the ALR-67V3 radar 
warning receiver to fiscal year 1998.

                              AH-1W series

    The Navy requested $23,950,000 for AH-1W modifications. The 
Committee recommends $43,350,000, an increase of $19,400,000 to 
buy out the remaining AH-1W night targeting system 
modifications. The Committee understands that buying out the 
program early will reduce outyear funding requirements by 
$28,000,000.

                               p-3 series

    The Navy requested $128,560,000 for P-3 modifications. The 
Committee recommends $201,960,000, a net increase of 
$73,400,000. The Committee has provided an additional 
$87,000,000 for procurement of 11 additional ASUW Improvement 
Program (AIP) modifications and an additional $4,000,000 for 
procurement of 4 additional Sustained Readiness Program (SRP) 
modifications. It is the Committee's understanding that reserve 
P-3 squadrons will be included in the AIP force mix. The 
Committee denies the request of $17,600,000 to procure and 
integrate a roll on/off SIGINT system for the Navy's P-3C 
aircraft. The Committee believes that such funding would be 
better used by the specifically designed and designated SIGINT 
systems such as the EP-3E.

                               e-2 series

    The Navy requested $23,143,000 for E-2C modifications. The 
Committee recommends $27,943,000, an increase of $4,800,000 
only for procurement of 24 additional SATCOM radios. The 
Committee has learned that E-2Cs deployed to the Bosnia area of 
responsibility (AOR) are required to have a SATCOM capability. 
There are currently only six radios available to support this 
requirement, and these radios have not left the Bosnia AOR 
except for repair since January 1993. The Committee further 
understands that by the end of fiscal year 1997, the Navy will 
have less than 10 radios to share among the rest of the E-2C 
fleet. The additional 24 radios will provide much needed 
connectivity for 6 squadrons.

                          common ecm equipment

    The Navy requested $20,069,000 for electronic warfare 
countermeasure equipment. The Committee recommends $58,069,000, 
a net increase of $38,000,000. Of the funds provided, 
$50,000,000 is only for further procurement of the Airborne 
Self-Protection Jammer for the F/A-18C/D aircraft. The 
Committee recommendation also includes a reduction of 
$12,000,000 based on a delay in the contract award of the ALR-
67V3 radar warning receiver to fiscal year 1998.

                        common avionics changes

    The Navy requested $87,841,000 for common avionics upgrades 
to Navy and Marine Corps aircraft. The Committee recommends 
$111,141,000, an increase of $23,300,000 only for GPS and 
flight data recorder modifications for Navy and Marine Corps 
passenger carrying aircraft as discussed elsewhere in this 
report.

                    Aircraft Spares and Repair Parts

    The Navy requested $839,987,000 for aircraft spares and 
repair parts. The Committee recommends $832,487,000, a decrease 
of $7,500,000 due to prior year savings identified by the 
General Accounting Office.

               Aircraft Support Equipment and Facilities

                        common ground equipment

    The Navy requested $313,070,000 for common ground 
equipment. The Committee recommends $303,070,000, a decrease of 
$10,000,000 as recommended in the House-passed Defense 
Authorization bill. None of the reduction may be applied to the 
Consolidated Automated Support System.

                          Program Recommended

    The total amount recommended in the bill will provide the 
following program in fiscal year 1997:



                       WEAPONS PROCUREMENT, NAVY

Fiscal year 1996 appropriation..........................  $1,669,827,000
Fiscal year 1997 budget request.........................   1,400,363,000
Committee recommendation................................   1,384,408,000
Change from budget request..............................     -15,955,000

    This appropriation provides funds for the procurement of 
strategic and tactical missiles, target drones, torpedoes, 
guns, associated support equipment, and modification of in-
service missiles, torpedoes, and guns.

                       Committee Recommendations

                           Strategic Missiles

                                tomahawk

    The Navy requested $88,513,000 for procurement of Tomahawk 
missiles. The Committee recommends $120,513,000, an increase of 
$32,000,000 only for procurement of additional Block III 
missiles. The Navy has informed the Committee that an 
additional 44 missiles can be procured under extremely 
favorable contract options negotiated as part of the recent 
competitive contractor downselect.

                           Tactical Missiles

                                 amraam

    The Navy requested $36,091,000 for procurement of only 37 
AMRAAM missiles. The Committee recommends $71,091,000, an 
increase of $35,000,000 only for procurement of additional 
AMRAAM missiles. The Committee notes that the Navy inventory of 
AMRAAM missiles falls well short of the procurement objective, 
forcing deployed Navy and Marine Corps aircraft to rely heavily 
on older, less capable missiles.

                                  jsow

    The Navy requested $64,426,000 for procurement of the Joint 
Stand-Off Weapon (JSOW). The Committee recommends $101,426,000, 
an increase of $37,000,000 only for procurement of additional 
JSOW missiles. The Navy has informed the Committee that 
procurement of additional JSOW is a high priority.

                                penguin

    The Navy did not request funds for the Penguin missile. The 
Committee recommends $15,000,000 only to procure additional 
Penguin all up rounds and training rounds.

                        Modification of Missiles

                             tomahawk mods

    The Navy requested no funding for Tomahawk modifications. 
The Committee recommends $14,400,000 only for upgrading Block 
II missiles to the Block III configuration.

                             Other Weapons

                              9mm handgun

    The Committee has learned that the Navy is interested in 
purchasing 9mm handguns through a sole source procurement. The 
Committee is concerned that such a procurement would undermine 
the 9mm standardization program and result in higher 
acquisition costs. The Committee directs that no funds may be 
obligated for this acquisition until the Navy submits a report 
to the Committee justifying the sole-source procurement.

                               Ammunition

                       procurement of ammunition

    In fiscal years 1995 and 1996, Congress directed that 
ammunition funds be budgeted in a new appropriation, 
Procurement of Ammunition, Navy and Marine Corps. The Navy did 
not comply with Congressional direction; therefore, the 
Committee recommends the transfer of $149,355,000 from Weapons 
Procurement, Navy to Procurement of Ammunition, Navy and Marine 
Corps.

                          Program Recommended

    The total amount recommended in the bill will provide the 
following program in fiscal year 1997:



            PROCUREMENT OF AMMUNITION, NAVY AND MARINE CORPS

Fiscal year 1996 appropriation..........................    $430,053,000
Fiscal year 1997 budget request.........................................
Committee recommendation................................     341,689,000
Change from budget request..............................    +341,689,000

    This appropriation finances the acquisition of ammunition, 
ammunition modernization, and ammunition-related materiel for 
the Navy and Marine Corps.

                       Committee Recommendations

                           munitions transfer

    In fiscal years 1995 and 1996, Congress directed that 
ammunition funds must be budgeted in a new appropriation, 
Procurement of Ammunition, Navy and Marine Corps. The Navy and 
Marine Corps did not comply with Congressional direction; 
therefore, the Committee recommends the transfer of 
$149,355,000 from Weapons Procurement, Navy and $68,884,000 
from Procurement, Marine Corps to Procurement of Ammunition, 
Navy and Marine Corps.

                            Ammunition, Navy

                             practice bombs

    The Navy requested $11,131,000 for practice bombs. The 
Committee recommends $17,131,000, an increase of $6,000,000 
only for laser guided training rounds.

                        5 inch/54 gun ammunition

    The Navy requested $13,495,000 for 5 inch/54 gun 
ammunition. The Committee recommends $22,945,000, an increase 
of $9,450,000 only for the procurement of 5 inch/54 ammunition.

                        Ammunition, Marine Corps

                           120mm heat m830A1

    The Marine Corps requested no funds for 120mm Heat M830A1 
ammunition. The Committee recommends $10,000,000 only for the 
production of M830A1 tank ammunition to meet war reserve 
requirements.

                        linear charge, all types

    The Marine Corps requested no funds for linear charge 
ammunition. The Committee recommends $45,000,000 to procure 
unfunded requirements identified by the Marine Corps. The 
additional funds are to be allocated as follows:

5 inch rocket...........................................      $7,000,000
M913....................................................      12,000,000
ML25....................................................      26,000,000

                          M757 charge assembly

    The Marine Corps requested no funds for M757 charge 
assembly ammunition. The Committee recommends $53,000,000 only 
to procure M757 charge assembly ammunition identified by the 
Marine Corps as an unfunded requirement.

                       kinetic energy tank rounds

    The Marine Corps has a requirement for kinetic energy tank 
rounds and is conducting a study to determine the type and 
quantities needed to meet war reserve requirements. Currently, 
the Army is procuring kinetic energy tank rounds through a 
multi-year contract. The Committee believes that even greater 
savings could be achieved if production quantities were 
increased on the current contract and has recommended 
additional funding for the Army for this purpose. The Committee 
directs the Marine Corps to provide a report to the Committee 
by September 15, 1996, regarding the type and acquisition 
objective for kinetic energy tank rounds to meet war reserve 
requirements. Additional information is provided in the 
Procurement of Ammunition, Army section of this report.

                          Program Recommended

    The total recommended in the bill will provide the 
following program in fiscal year 1997:



                   SHIPBUILDING AND CONVERSION, NAVY

Fiscal year 1996 appropriation..........................  $6,643,958,000
Fiscal year 1997 budget request.........................   4,911,930,000
Committee recommendation................................   4,719,930,000
Change from budget request..............................    -192,000,000

    This appropriation provides funds for the construction of 
new ships and the purchase and conversion of existing ships, 
including hull, mechanical, and electrical equipment, 
electronics, guns, torpedo and missile launching systems, and 
communications systems.

                       Committee Recommendations

                         authorization changes

    The Committee recommends the following changes in 
accordance with House authorization action:

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                   Committee       Change from  
                             Item                               Budget request   recommendation      request    
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
New SSN (Advance Procurement)................................          296,186          800,186         +504,000
T-AGS-64 Oceanographic Research Ship.........................                0           54,000          +54,000
Post Delivery................................................          141,855          131,855          -10,000
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

                             Other Warships

                                 DDG-51

    The Navy requested $3,374,693,000 to procure 4 DDG-51 Aegis 
ships. The Committee is concerned about continued turbulence in 
the Navy's DDG-51 Aegis destroyer construction program which 
originated in the Office of the Secretary of Defense decision 
over a year ago to remove ships from the Navy's recommended 
funding profile in fiscal years 1996 and 1998. Rather than 
sustaining the Navy's recommended stable construction profile 
of 3 ships per year, the Administration proposes to double the 
quanitty of DDG-51 ships compared to last year, but then ramp 
the program down again in fiscal year 1998. With only 2 ships 
planned for construction in fiscal year 1998, the Committee is 
concerned about the inherent cost penalties associated with the 
Administration's current 2-4-2 construction plan for fiscal 
years 1996 to 1998.
    The Committee also expresses a cautionary note regarding 
informal proposals to provide authority in fiscal year 1997 for 
a multiyear procurement of the DDG-51 program, involving a 
total of 12 ships over the period of fiscal years 1998-2001. 
While the Committee as a rule is supportive of multiyear 
contracting, these particular proposals are of concern for a 
number of reasons. First, a DDG-51 multiyear proposal has not 
been formally submitted by the Department of Defense and the 
Committee understands that current outyear budgets do not fully 
fund such a program, a statutory requirement for multiyear 
contracting. As a four year DDG-51 multiyear would require 
making a firm fiscal and contractual commitment of $12 billion, 
the Committee believes such a proposal must have the approval 
of, and be proposed by, the Secretary of Defense. Second, the 
Committee believes there are other multiyear contracting 
candidates available to the Navy which, for the commitment of 
fewer dollars, offer considerable benefits in terms of savings 
and program stability. These include the V-22 aircraft program, 
about which the Commandant of the Marine Corps has testified 
that if it were produced at more efficient production rates 
than currently budgeted, up to $8 billion in savings could 
accrue. Similarly, a modest investment for multiyear 
procurement of AV-8B, T-45, and E-2C aircraft would stabilize 
three production lines simultaneously while perhaps allowing a 
larger return on investment. Of greatest concern, however, is 
the effect a DDG-51 multiyear could have on an already 
underfunded Navy and Marine Corps shipbuilding program. 
``Locking in'' $12 billion of scarce shipbuilding funds for the 
DDG-51 over the next four years can only serve to complicate 
Navy efforts to resolve existing budget shortfalls associated 
with the next aircraft carrier, the New Attack Submarine 
program, and the LPD-17 amphibious ship. In the absence of a 
formal analysis of these and other budget alternatives by the 
Secretary of Defense, the Committee believes consideration of 
either increased DDG-51 production or a DDG-51 multiyear is 
premature at this time.
    The Committee therefore recommends $2,624,693,000, a 
reduction of $750,000,000 to mitigate the proposed one-time 
production spike in the destroyer program. The Committee 
invites the Secretary of Defense to submit funding for a stable 
DDG-51 construction program in the fiscal year 1998 budget 
request to Congress.

                           ship self-defense

    The Committee recommends $54,000,000 to install self-
defense systems in ships during their construction, which will 
accelerate fielding of anti-ship cruise missile defense 
capability to the fleet years earlier than the current plan. 
The increase includes $29,000,000 to install cooperative 
engagement and the advanced combat direction system in LHD-7, 
$19,000,000 to install cooperative engagement in CVN-76, and 
$6,000,000 to install a rolling airframe missile launcher in 
LSD-52.

            Auxiliaries, Craft, and Prior Year Program Costs

                           fast patrol craft

    The Committee directs that fiscal year 1996 funds 
appropriated for the fast patrol craft program be released by 
the Office of the Secretary of Defense to the Navy and 
expeditiously obligated only for that purpose.

                               outfitting

    The Navy requested $91,990,000 for outfitting of ships. The 
Committee recommends $47,990,000, a decrease of $44,000,000 due 
to prior year savings identified by the General Accounting 
Office.

                  u.s. navy propeller shop and foundry

    The U.S. Navy Propeller Shop and Foundry in Philadelphia is 
the current production center for state-of-the-art Navy 
propellers and is the only government facility with the fully-
integrated resident capacity and expertise to meet all current 
and future Navy submarine propeller casting and manufacturing 
requirements. For these reasons, the Committee urges the 
Department of the Navy to maintain the Propeller Shop and 
Foundry as part of the Department of Defense's operations, in 
support of U.S. Navy fleet operations. The Committee directs 
that the Secretary of the Navy inform the Committees on 
Appropriations in writing 120 days in advance of any Navy plans 
to changes the status of this facility.

                          Program Recommended

    The total amount recommended in the bill will provide the 
following program in fiscal year 1997:



                        OTHER PROCUREMENT, NAVY

Fiscal year 1996 appropriation..........................  $2,483,581,000
Fiscal year 1997 budget request.........................   2,714,195,000
Committee recommendation................................   2,889,591,000
Change from budget request..............................    +175,396,000

    This appropriation finances the procurement of major 
equipment and weapons other than ships, aircraft, missiles, and 
torpedoes. Such equipment range from the latest electronic 
sensors for updating our naval forces to trucks, training 
equipment, and spare parts.

                       Committee Recommendations

                         authorization changes

    The Committee recommends the following changes in the 
budget request, in accordance with House authorization action:

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                   Committee       Change from  
                             Item                               Budget request   recommendation      request    
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Other Navigation Equipment...................................           17,200           27,200          +10,000
Pollution Control Equipment..................................          135,216          130,216           -5,000
Reactor Components...........................................          185,551          183,051           -2,500
Radar Support................................................                0           16,000          +16,000
Navy Tactical Data System....................................           18,220           30,220          +12,000
Strategic Platform Support Equipment.........................            4,054           36,054          +32,000
TADIX-B......................................................            4,243           15,243          +11,000
AEGIS Support Equipment......................................           30,398           33,398           +3,000
Surface Tomahawk Support Equipment...........................           75,574           85,574          +10,000
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

                        Ships Support Equipment

                          submarine propellers

    The Navy requested $39,182,000 for the Submarine Propellers 
program. The Committee recommends $37,182,000, a reduction of 
$2,000,000. The reduction is based on past costs of the 
components requested being approximately 5% below the budget 
request.

      hull mechanical and electrical (hm&e) items under $2,000,000

    The Navy requested $35,545,000 for the HM&E Items Under 
$2,000,000 program. The Committee recommends $28,845,000, a 
reduction of $6,700,000. The reduction is based on reduced 
requirements for installations of various equipment items with 
funds provided in fiscal year 1995. These savings can be used 
to offset the fiscal year 1997 budget request.

                        Reactor Plant Equipment

                          reactor power units

    The Navy requested $223,392,000 for the Reactor Power Units 
program. The Committee recommends $193,392,000, a reduction of 
$30,000,000. This program provides for the assemblies of 
nuclear fuel and associated structural and control equipment 
required for the periodic refueling of nuclear powered ships. 
In the Shipbuilding and Conversion, Navy (SCN) account, the 
Committee has recommended a substantial increase for advanced 
procurement for a New SSN attack submarine. Because of this 
increase in the SCN account, a decrease of $30,000,000 is 
appropriate for the Reactor Power Units program in Other 
Procurement, Navy.

                Communications and Electronic Equipment

            an/sqq-89 surface anti-submarine warfare system

    The Navy requested $24,674,000 for the AN/SQQ-89 Anti-
Submarine Warfare System. The Committee recommends $21,618,000, 
a reduction of $3,056,000. The Navy received a better than 
anticipated price when it procured three of these sets in the 
current fiscal year. The Committee recommends that these 
savings be used to offset the fiscal year 1997 budget request.

                             ssn acoustics

    The Navy requested $44,134,000 for the SSN Acoustics 
program. The Committee recommends $37,986,00 a reduction of 
$6,148,000. By using commercial off-the-shelf equipment, rather 
than military unique equipment, the Navy will save a net 
$6,148,000 procuring hardware upgrades and performing 
production engineering for 
AN/BSY-1 and AN/BQQ-5 operational trainer sites in the current 
fiscal year. These savings can be used to offset the fiscal 
year 1997 budget request.

                          c-3 countermeasures

    The Navy requested $556,000 for the C-3 Countermeasures 
program. The Committee recommends $16,556,000, an increase of 
$16,000,000. Details of the Committee's recommendation appear 
in the classified annex to this report.

                      tactical flag command center

    The Navy requested $23,941,000 for the Tactical Flag 
Command Center. The Committee recommends $22,741,000, a 
decrease of $1,200,000 from the budget request resulting from 
evidence that costs have been running below appropriated levels 
in this program and thus the Committee recommends a small 
reduction.

                  strategic platform support equipment

    The Navy requested $4,054,000 for the Strategic Platform 
Support Equipment program. The Committee recommends 
$36,054,000, an increase of $32,000,000. The additional funds 
are for the procurement and installation of various types of 
off-the-shelf equipment which improve the performance and 
reduce the crew size requirements for surface combatant ships. 
For example, installation of this equipment on a DDG-51 
cruiser, which currently has a crew of 370, reduces the crew 
size by approximately 50 personnel.

                              nccs ashore

    The Navy requested $6,264,000 for NCCS Ashore (Navy Command 
and Control System, Ashore). The Committee recommends 
$56,364,000, an increase of $50,100,000 to the budget request. 
These funds shall be used only to procure complete Mobile 
Inshore Undersea Warfare System (MIUW) upgrades including P3I 
for the underwater systems or to complete the procurement of 
the upgraded underwater systems.

                   shipboard tactical communications

    The Navy requested $8,799,000 for shipboard tactical 
communications. The Committee recommends $13,279,000, an 
increase of $4,500,000. Of the increase $2,500,000 is only for 
the procurement of one prototype SHINCOM 2100 system and 
$2,000,000 is to be used for the competitive procurement of 
additional shipboard integrated communication systems for 
aircraft carriers. The Committee directs that the $2,000,000 
may not be obligated until the Navy has conducted a competition 
for shipboard integrated communications systems for retrofit on 
aircraft carriers.
    Congress provided $3,000,000 to procure one additional 
SHINCOM 2100 prototype in fiscal year 1996. The Committee has 
learned that the Navy did not obligate funds for this purpose, 
but used the funds to offset the cost of the SHINCOM system 
demonstration in fiscal year 1995. The Navy is directed to 
provide the obligation status of the fiscal year 1996 
appropriated funds to the Committee no later than September 15, 
1996. The Committee reminds the Navy that the procurement for 
such items is to be completed in the year for which the funds 
were appropriated.

                   SUBMARINE COMMUNICATIONS EQUIPMENT

    The Navy requested $29,430,000 for the Submarine 
Communications Equipment program. The Committee recommends 
$26,030,000, a reduction of $3,400,000 from the budget request. 
The reduction is based on the Navy's decision to defer the 
procurement of a subprogram within the Submarine Communications 
Equipment program.

                             MAGIC LANTERN

    The House-passed Defense Authorization bill recommended an 
increase of $25,000,000 to procure 3 Magic Lantern mine-hunting 
systems to establish a new detachment on the West Coast. The 
Committee received conflicting information from the Navy, and 
therefore did not act on this proposal. The Committee directs 
that the Secretary of the Navy submit a report to the House and 
Senate Appropriations Committees by July 15, 1996 on the 
feasibility, requirement, funding requirements, and operational 
improvements gained by establishing such a detachment along 
with a clear indication of whether the Navy requires additional 
funds in fiscal year 1997 to procure 3 additional Magic Lantern 
systems.

                       Aviation Support Equipment

                               Sonobouys

    The Navy requested $60,706,000 for the procurement of 
sonobouys. The Committee recommends $104,706,000, an increase 
of $44,000,000. The budget request again underfunded sonobouy 
requirements as it has for a number of years. To reverse this 
situation the Committee recommends an increase of $12,200,000 
for the AN/SSQ-62 (DICASS) sonobouy and $31,800,000 for the AN/
SSQ-53E sonobouy. The Committee believes that the Navy should 
give high priority to proceeding with a program for sonobouys 
deployable in shallow water.

                      Ordanance Support Equipment

    ROLLING AIRFRAME MISSILE GUIDED MISSILE LAUNCH SYSTEM   (RAM GMLS)

    The Navy requested $50,765,000 for the RAM GMLS program. 
The Committee recommends $45,465,000, a reduction of 
$5,300,000. In the recent execution of a contract for Rolling 
Air Frame Missile Launching Systems the savings realized were 
$5,300,000. The Committee recommends that these savings be used 
to offset the fiscal year 1997 request.

                        SHIP SELF-DEFENSE SYSTEM

    The Navy requested $21,049,000 for the Ship Self-Defense 
System program. The Committee recommends $19,649,000, a 
decrease of $1,400,000 from the budget request. The reduction 
is based on savings from the execution of a fiscal year 1996 
contract for the MK/Ship Self-Defense Systems subprogram.

                  Civil Engineering Support Equipment

                          AMPHIBIOUS EQUIPMENT

    The Navy requested $3,183,000 for the Amphibious Equipment 
program. The Committee recommends $11,683,000, an increase of 
$8,500,000. The additional funds are for the expansion of 
ELCAS(M), a modular elevated causeway used for logistics-over-
the-shore (LOTS) operations. The increases will enable ELCAS(M) 
to increase its length to 3,000 feet and also provide related 
support and installation equipment. This increase is 
complimentary to recommended additions included in various 
accounts to enhance strategic mobility.

                Personnel and Command Support Equipment

                       COMMAND SUPPORT EQUIPMENT

    The Navy requested no funds for the Command Support 
Equipment program. The Committee recommends an increase of 
$33,000,000. Details of the Committee's recommendation are 
included in the Information Resource Management section of this 
report.

                          Program Recommended

    The total amount recommended in the bill will provide the 
following programs in fiscal year 1997:



                       PROCUREMENT, MARINE CORPS

Fiscal year 1996 appropriation..........................    $458,947,000
Fiscal year 1997 budget request.........................     555,507,000
Committee recommendation................................     623,973,000
Change from budget request..............................     +68,466,000

    This appropriation provides the Marine Corps with funds for 
procurement, delivery, and modification of missiles, armament, 
communication equipment, tracked and wheeled vehicles, and 
various support equipment.

                       Committee Recommendations

                         AUTHORIZATION CHANGES

    The Committee recommends the following changes in the 
budget request, in accordance with House authorization action:

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                   Committee       Change from  
                             Item                               Budget request    recommended        request    
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
AAWS-Medium..................................................           28,214           48,214          +20,000
AN/TPQ-36 Fire Finder Radar Upgrade..........................           30,380           34,180           +3,800
MOD Kits Intel...............................................           11,955           13,080           +1,125
Tele/Com Infrastructure......................................           53,616           72,416          +18,800
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

                       Procurement of Ammunition

    In fiscal years 1995 and 1996, Congress directed that 
ammunition funds be budgeted in a new appropriation, 
Procurement of Ammunition, Navy and Marine Corps. The Marine 
Corps did not comply with Congressional direction; therefore, 
the Committee recommends the transfer of $68,884,000 from 
Procurement, Marine Corps to Procurement of Ammunition, Navy 
and Marine Corps.

                  Intelligence/Communication Equipment

                     intelligence support equipment

    The Marine Corps requested $26,372,000 for intelligence 
support equipment. The Committee recommends $40,572,000, an 
increase of $14,200,000. Of this amount, $3,400,000 shall be 
used only to procure three Team Portable Communications 
Intelligence Systems; $5,000,000 shall be used only to purchase 
TACPHOTO cameras; $3,100,000 shall be used only to procure 
sixty-three Secondary Imagery Dissemination sets; and the 
remaining $2,700,000 shall be used only to complete the 
purchase of Radio Reconnaissance Equipment Program SIGINT 
systems.

                  Items Less Than $2,000,000 (INTELL)

    The Marine Corps requested no funds for topographic sets to 
deploy with a topographic detachment. The Committee recommends 
$425,000 to purchase large format printers and software 
licenses.

                             Other Support

                          maneuver c2 systems

    The Marine Corps requested $7,592,000 for maneuver C2 
systems. The Committee recommends $9,292,000, an increase of 
$1,700,000 to provide deployable communications support for the 
Commandant's Planning Guidance, identified as an unfunded 
requirement by the Marine Corps.

                            Support Vehicles

                                trailers

    The Marine Corps requested $2,426,000 for the procurement 
of trailers. The Committee recommends $30,726,000, an increase 
of $28,300,000 only to procure trailers thus alleviating 
critical mobility shortfalls identified by the Marine Corps.

                            General Property

                            training devices

    The Marine Corps requested $10,846,000 for training 
devices. The Committee recommends $59,846,000, an increase of 
$49,000,000 only for the procurement of 10 battalion sets of 
Multiple Integrated Laser Engagement Systems (MILES) identified 
as an unfunded requirement by the Marine Corps. The additional 
funding will procure the complete acquisition objective for 
MILES, accelerate the fielding by four years, and result in 
$7,000,000 in acquisition savings.

                          Program Recommended

    The total amount recommended in the bill will provide the 
following program in fiscal year 1997:



                    AIRCRAFT PROCUREMENT, AIR FORCE

Fiscal year 1996 appropriation..........................  $7,367,983,000
Fiscal year 1997 budget request.........................   5,779,228,000
Committee recommendation................................   7,326,628,000
Change from budget request..............................  +1,547,400,000

    This appropriation provides for the procurement of 
aircraft, and for modification of in-service aircraft to 
improve safety and enhance operational effectiveness. It also 
provides for initial spares and other support equipment to 
include aerospace ground equipment and industrial facilities. 
In addition, funds are provided for the procurement of flight 
training simulators to increase combat readiness and to provide 
for more economical training.

                       Committee Recommendations

                         authorization changes

    The Committee recommends the following changes to the 
budget request in accordance with House authorization action:

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                   Committee       Change from  
                             Item                               Budget request   recommendation      request    
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
WC-130.......................................................                0          209,200          209,200
ABCCC........................................................                0          156,900          156,900
JPATS........................................................           67,135           82,235           15,100
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

                            Combat Aircraft

                                 F-15E

    The Air Force requested $185,442,000 for the procurement of 
4 F-15E aircraft. The Committee recommends $504,842,000, an 
increase of $319,400,000 for the procurement of an additional 8 
F-15E aircraft. The Committee notes that in order for the Air 
Force to maintain an F-15 force structure capable of 
prosecuting two major regional contingencies, an additional 12 
F-15E's are needed for the active fleet. Further, the F-15 
program has been identified as one of the Air Force's top 
unfunded priorities. The Committee's recommendation addresses 
this requirement in its entirety in fiscal year 1997.
    Total acquisition cost savings realized from procuring the 
additionally required F-15's in fiscal year 1997 are $211 
million due to reduced unit costs and $336 million in cost 
avoidance over the future years defense program, identified as 
an unfunded requirement by the Air Force.

                                  F-16

    The Committee directs that the Department of the Air Force 
provide the congressional defense committees a report on its 
acquisition strategy for equipping the F-16 fighter aircraft 
fleet with Advanced Identification Friend or Foe capability. 
The report shall be provided no later than March 15, 1997.

                            Airlift Aircraft

                                  c-17

    The Air Force requested $1,919,305,000 for the procurement 
of 8 C-17 aircraft in fiscal year 1997 and $223,500,000 for 
advanced procurement of C-17 aircraft in fiscal year 1998. The 
Committee recommends $2,457,805,000, an increase of 
$315,000,000. This net increase includes $335,000,000 for the 
acquisition of two additional aircraft in fiscal year 1997 and 
$40,000,000 for advanced procurement for increased acquisition 
of aircraft in fiscal year 1998.
    The Committee also recommends reducing the budget request 
by $50,000,000 for peculiar support equipment and $10,000,000 
for interim contractor support. The Committee makes this 
recommendation without prejudice, noting excessive cost growth 
for these items over the fiscal year 1996 request.
    The Committee believes that the increase in funding 
provided will enable the Air Force to enter into an accelerated 
six-year multi-year contract for the C-17 which will achieve an 
additional $128 million in savings over the Department's 
original multi-year acquisition plan. By eliminating the need 
for a fiscal year 2003 procurement, a six-year profile will 
also reduce projected fiscal year 1998-2003 defense budget 
costs by an additional net of $677 million.

                            Trainer Aircraft

                 joint primary aircraft training system

    The Air Force requested $67,135,000 for the procurement of 
12 JPATS aircraft. The Committee recommends $82,235,000, an 
increase of $15,100,000 for the procurement of 15 JPATS 
aircraft, in accordance with House authorization action. The 
Committee also directs the Department of the Air Force to 
utilize funds appropriated for JPATS prior to fiscal year 1997 
to procure three additional aircraft in fiscal year 1996.

                        Mission Support Aircraft

                                 C-20A

    The Air Force requested $113,805,000 for the procurement of 
two C-20A type aircraft for the small VC-X program. The 
Committee recommends $99,305,000, a decrease of $14,500,000 to 
the budget request. The Committee believes that given the 
commercial nature of any aircraft likely to win the VC-X 
competition, the Air Force has significantly overestimated the 
costs involved in acquiring the small VC-X aircraft. 
Accordingly the Committee recommends the following reductions 
without prejudice: missionization costs, -$4,500,000; non-
recurring costs, -$2,000,000; communications system 
modifications, -$8,000,000. The Committee also recommends a 
related reduction of $6,000,000 to the aircraft spares and 
repair parts budget line item for small VC-X initial spares. 
Favorable commercial-type warranties offered as part of the VC-
X acquisition should reduce the requirement for spares in the 
early stages of the program.
    The Committee also believes that the acquisition of the 
small VC-X aircraft should be conducted on the basis of a full 
and open competition which includes all qualified bidders.

                  Modification of In-Service Aircraft

                                  B-2A

    The Air Force requested $6,106,000 for B-2 modifications. 
The Committee recommends $59,106,000, an increase of 
$53,000,000 for modification and retrofit costs associated with 
post Block 30 upgrades to the B-2 fleet. The Committee's 
recommendation concerning the B-2 program is discussed more 
fully in the ``Research, Development, Test and Evaluation, Air 
Force'' section of this report.

                                  b-1b

    The Air Force requested $84,408,000 for B-1B modifications. 
The Committee recommends $166,408,000, an increase of 
$82,000,000. Of this increase, $57,000,000 is only for 
conventional bomb modules, as authorized by the House National 
Security Committee.
    The Committee is frustrated with the slow pace of the Air 
Force program to modify B-1 bombers to carry precision guided 
munitions (PGM). Yet, the Committee is aware of several 
alternatives to providing the aircraft with a PGM capability 
more rapidly than currently planned. For example, the Committee 
believes the Air Force could move immediately to the B-1 
objective system by procuring additional JDAM aircraft 
modifications in fiscal year 1997. The Committee also believes 
that the Air Force could procure additional interim GAM 
modifications in fiscal year 1997. Given these alternatives, 
the Committee has provided an additional $25,000,000 only to 
procure either additional JDAM aircraft modifications or 
additional GAM modifications and tailkits. The Committee 
directs the Secretary of the Air Force to report to the 
congressional defense committees on the approach selected by 
the Department and the strategy, cost, schedule, and outyear 
savings, if any, of the approaches considered. The report 
should be submitted to the congressional defense committees no 
later than November 30, 1996.

                                  f-15

    The Air Force requested $179,318,000 for F-15 
modifications. The Committee recommends $156,318,000, a net 
reduction of $23,000,000. The Committee recommendation includes 
a $70,000,000 reduction for late contract awards on the APG-63 
radar program and the MIDS program. Further, the Committee has 
provided an additional $47,000,000 only to initiate the F-15 
engine upgrade program identified as an unfunded requirement by 
the Air Force.

                                  f-16

    The Air Force requested $135,906,000 for F-16 
modifications. The Committee recommends $129,906,000, a 
reduction of $6,000,000. The Committee notes that a significant 
portion of the funds provided in fiscal year 1996 for the 
program remain unobligated. Of this unobligated balance, the 
Air Force did not demonstrate a clear requirement for 
$6,000,000. Given this fiscal year 1996 excess, the Committee 
recommends an equivalent $6,000,000 reduction in the fiscal 
year 1997 request.

                                 c-130

    The Air Force requested $96,353,000 for C-130 
modifications. The Committee recommends $97,853,000, a net 
increase of $1,500,000. The Committee recommendation includes 
an increase of $4,100,000 only for the Tactical Information 
Broadcast System. The Committee also recommends a reduction of 
$2,600,000 for spares and the associated $8,000,000 in 
Operation and Maintenance, Air Force, for operations of the C-
130 PACER COIN special mission aircraft.

                                  e-3

    The Air Force requested $287,920,000 for AWACS 
modifications. The Committee recommends $266,420,000, a net 
reduction of $21,500,000. The Committee recommendation includes 
an increase of $11,500,000 only for integration of the Tactical 
Information Broadcast System (TIBS). The Committee 
recommendation also includes a reduction of $33,000,000 for 
unjustified program growth in several areas of the Radar System 
Improvement Program (RSIP) and the ESM program. The Committee 
notes that cost estimates for various hardware and support 
elements have varied as much as 65% from last year's budget 
submission. The Air Force explained these dramatic changes 
simply as ``reestimates.'' The Committee finds such 
explanations inadequate, and therefore has reduced the program 
for those cost elements that have significantly increased 
without clear justification.

                             other aircraft

    The Air Force requested $14,871,000 for other aircraft 
modifications. The Committee recommends $36,071,000, an 
increase of $21,200,000 only for procurement of SATCOM 
terminals to meet shortfalls identified by the Air Force.

                                gps/fdr

    The Committee recommends an additional $139,200,000 only 
for GPS and flight data recorder modifications for Air Force 
passenger carrying aircraft as discussed elsewhere in this 
report.

                defense airborne reconnaissance program

    RC-135. The Committee is concerned about the increasing 
requirement for the use of the RC-135 RIVET JOINT aircraft. DoD 
officials have testified that there is a requirement for twenty 
aircraft to support the tactical intelligence mission, however, 
the budget request only includes enough funds to procure the 
fifteenth aircraft. The Committee recommends an additional 
$119,000,000 to procure three additional RIVET JOINT aircraft. 
An additional $26,000,000 is provided in the Air Force 
operation and maintenance account for modification and 
installation support costs.
    To continue the ongoing RIVET JOINT reengining effort, the 
Committee also recommends an additional $193,000,000 to procure 
eight reengining kits. The Air Force should reengine the three 
additional aircraft prior to fielding to save costs.
    The Committee further recommends an additional $26,000,000 
for sensor upgrades--$20,000,000 for the RIVET JOINT and 
$6,000,000 for the COMBAT SENT--in accordance with House 
authorization action.
    U-2. The Committee recommends an additional $5,000,000 for 
repairs of a U-2 aircraft damaged in a recent crash landing.

                    Aircraft Spares and Repair Parts

                        spares and repair parts

    The Air Force requested $314,745,000 for aircraft spare and 
repair parts. The Committee recommends $308,745,000, a decrease 
of $6,000,000. As discussed elsewhere in this report the 
Committee recommends a reduction of $6,000,000 for VC-X initial 
spares.

               Aircraft Support Equipment and Facilities

                      f-15 post production support

    The Air Force requested $11,080,000 for F-15 post 
production support. The Committee recommends $3,980,000, a 
decrease of $7,100,000 to the budget request. The Committee 
notes that continued acquisition of the F-15E fighter aircraft 
makes this request unnecessary at this time.

                      f-16 post production support

    The Air Force requested $81,562,000 for F-16 post 
production support. The Committee recommends $51,562,000, a 
reduction of $30,000,000 to the budget request. Given the 
likelihood of continued production of the F-16 fighter aircraft 
for foreign military sales, the Committee makes this reduction 
without prejudice.

                          Program Recommended

    The total amount recommended in the bill will provide the 
following program in fiscal year 1997:



                     MISSILE PROCUREMENT, AIR FORCE

Fiscal year 1996 appropriation..........................  $2,943,931,000
Fiscal year 1997 budget request.........................   2,733,877,000
Committee recommendation................................   2,279,500,000
Change from budget request..............................    -454,377,000

    This appropriation provides for the procurement, 
installation, and checkout of strategic ballistic and other 
missiles, modification of in-service missiles, and initial 
spares for missile systems. It also provides for operational 
space systems, boosters, payloads, drones, associated ground 
support equipment, non-recurring maintenance of industrial 
facilities, machine tool modernization, and special program 
support.

                       Committee Recommendations

                         authorization changes

    The Committee recommends the following changes to the 
budget request in accordance with House authorization action:

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                   Committee       Change from  
                                                                Budget request   recommendation      request    
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Conventional ALCM............................................                0           15,000          +15,000
MM III Modifications.........................................           72,752           78,052           +5,300
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

                           Ballistic Missiles

                missile replacement equipment--ballistic

    The Air Force requested $8,300,000 for procurement of 
ballistic missile equipment. The Committee recommends 
$8,800,000, a net increase of $500,000. Of this increase, the 
Committee has provided an additional $3,400,000 as in the House 
passed Defense Authorization Bill. Further, the Committee 
denies the request of $2,900,000 for the Pendulous Integrating 
Gyro Accelerometer since the contract award has been delayed 
beyond fiscal year 1997.

                           Tactical Missiles

                                have nap

    The Air Force did not request funds for the HAVE NAP 
missile. The Committee recommends $20,000,000 for continued 
procurement of HAVE NAP.

                                 amraam

    The Air Force requested $116,299,000 for procurement of 133 
AMRAAM missiles. The Committee recommends $116,899,000, a net 
increase of $600,000. The Air Force has identified excess prior 
year funds in the AMRAAM program and, therefore, the Committee 
directs that $10,000,000 of prior year excess funds be used to 
finance fiscal year 1997 nonrecurring, ancillary, and support 
costs. Accordingly, the Committee recommendation should be 
sufficient to allow the Air Force to procure 163 missiles in 
fiscal year 1997, an increase of 30 missiles.

                                agm-130

    The Air Force budget does not include a request for AGM-130 
missiles. However, the Committee recommends $40,000,000. The 
Committee notes that the AGM-130 has been identified by the Air 
Force as a high priority unfunded requirement.

                             Other Support

                             Space Programs

             global positioning system (gps) space segment

    The Air Force requested $171,135,000 for procurement of 3 
GPS satellites. The Committee recommends $181,235,000, an 
increase of $10,100,000. The additional funds provided by the 
Committee will maintain a three satellite per year production 
profile and sustain the 24 satellite GSP constellation.

                        space shuttle operations

    The Air Force requested $52,500,000 for space shuttle 
operations. The Committee recommends $47,700,000, a decrease of 
$4,800,000. According to the General Accounting Office, these 
funds are available for reduction because they are excess to 
requirements for the inertial upper stage program.

                        titan iv/space boosters

    The Air Force requested $489,606,000 for Titan IV space 
boosters. The Committee recommends $405,806,000, a decrease of 
$83,800,000. The Committee has reduced the request for Titan IV 
lift vehicles by $30,800,000 due to the availability of 
additional funds reimbursed to the program from NASA for Air 
Force support to the Cassini mission. The Committee has also 
recommended an additional reduction of $53,000,000 for long-
lead components for the follow-on buy of Titan IV launch 
vehicles. It is not known at this time whether there is a 
requirement for any of these heavy lift vehicles. Accordingly, 
the Committee believes it is premature to commit to the 
acquisition of an additional six Titan IV lift vehicles.

                         medium launch vehicles

    The Air Force requested a total of $175,599,000 for 
procurement and advanced procurement of medium launch vehicles. 
The Committee recommends $161,899,000, a decrease of 
$13,700,000. According to the general accounting office, the 
Air Force has funds excess to program requirements for the 
Delta II medium launch vehicle and for launch pad repair work. 
The Committee recommends this reduction without prejudice.

                     defense support program (dsp)

    The Air Force requested $70,967,000 for the Defense Support 
Program. The Committee recommends $45,967,000, a decrease of 
$25,000,000. The Committee notes that prior year funds are 
available for use by the DSP program in fiscal year 1997 due to 
the restructuring of the Block 18 production contract, reduced 
launch service requirements and the cancellation of laser 
cross-link capability.

             defense satellite communications system--space

    The Air Force requested $22,729,000 for the Defense 
Satellite Communications System (DSCS). The Committee 
recommends $25,529,000, an increase of $2,800,000 to modify 
existing DSCS satellites gain control and antenna connections.

                       procurement of ammunition

    In fiscal year 1995, Congress directed that ammunition 
funds be budgeted in a new appropriation, Procurement of 
Ammunition, Air Force. The Air Force did not comply with 
Congressional direction; therefore, the Committee recommends 
the transfer of $250,577,000 from Missile Procurement, Air 
Force to Procurement of Ammunition, Air Force.

                          Program Recommended

    The total amount recommended in the bill will provide the 
following program in fiscal year 1997:



                  PROCUREMENT OF AMMUNITION, AIR FORCE

Fiscal year 1996 appropriation..........................    $338,800,000
Fiscal year 1997 budget request.........................................
Committee recommendation................................     272,177,000
Change from budget request..............................    +272,177,000

    This appropriation finances the acquisition of ammunition, 
modifications, spares, weapons, and other ammunition-related 
items for the Air Force.

                       Committee Recommendations

                         authorization changes

    The Committee recommends the following changes in the 
budget request, in accordance with House authorization act:

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                   Committee       Change from  
                             Item                               Budget request    recommended        request    
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Sensor Fuzed Weapon..........................................          131,146          152,746          +21,600
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

                           munitions transfer

    In fiscal years 1995 and 1996, Congress directed that 
ammunition funds must be budgeted in a new appropriation, 
Procurement of Ammunition, Air Force. The Air Force did not 
comply with Congressional direction; therefore, the Committee 
recommends the transfer of $250,577,000 from Missile 
Procurement, Air Force to Procurement of Ammunition, Air Force.

                          Program Recommended

    The total amount recommended in the bill will provide the 
following program in fiscal year 1997:



                      OTHER PROCUREMENT, AIR FORCE

Fiscal year 1996 appropriation..........................  $6,284,230,000
Fiscal year 1997 budget request.........................   5,998,819,000
Committee recommendation................................   6,078,539,000
Change from budget request..............................     +79,720,000

    This appropriation provides for the procurement of weapon 
systems and equipment other than aircraft and missiles. 
Included are vehicles, electronic and telecommunications 
systems for command and control of operational forces, and 
ground support equipment for weapons systems and supporting 
structure.

                       Committee Recommendations

                         Authorization Changes

    The Committee recommends the following change in the budget 
request, in accordance with House authorization action.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                   Committee       Change from  
                             Item                               Budget request   recommendation      request    
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Base information infrastructure..............................          125,741          115,741          -10,000
Weather/observation forecast.................................           13,944           17,944           +4,000
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

                          Vehicular Equipment

                             60K A/C loader

    The Air Force requested $40,296,000 for the 60K A/C Loader 
program. The Committee recommends $63,396,000, an increase of 
$23,100,000. The additional funds will increase the procurement 
of the 60K A/C loader in fiscal year 1997 from 37 to 57 and 
reduce outyear costs of these loaders by $27,400,000. Past 
testimony indicated that the current generation of loading and 
unloading equipment for transportation aircraft are breaking 
down an average of every 20 hours of usage. Procurement of 
additional 60K A/C loaders is high on the Air Force's priority 
list of unfunded requirements. The addition of these funds is 
consistent with the Committee's emphasis in this bill to 
enhance DoD's overall strategic transportation capability.

              Electronics and Telecommunications Equipment

                      weather observation/forecast

    The Air Force requested $13,944,000 for the Weather 
Observation/Forecast program. The Committee recommends 
$17,944,000, an increase of $4,000,000. Within the Weather 
Observation/Forecast program the Air Force has a shortfall in 
the Automated Surface Observance (ASOS) program. The 
recommended increase for the ASOS program is for the 
procurement of 20 systems to be installed at combat ranges 
which support training.

                           navstar gps space

    The Air Force requested $3,308,000 for the Navstar GPS 
Space program. The Committee recommends $4,308,000, an increase 
of $1,000,000. The increase is for upgrades to the GPS program 
to enhance safety of DoD passenger aircraft as addressed 
elsewhere in the report.

                   base level data automation program

    The Air Force requested $22,385,000 for the Base Level Data 
Automation Program. The Committee recommends $38,185,000, an 
increase of $15,800,000. Details of the Committee's 
recommendation appear in the Information Resource Management 
section of this report.

                          Program Recommended

    The total amount recommended in the bill will provide the 
following programs in fiscal year 1997:



                       PROCUREMENT, DEFENSE-WIDE

Fiscal year 1996 appropriation..........................  $2,124,379,000
Fiscal year 1997 budget request.........................   1,841,212,000
Committee recommendation................................   2,247,812,000
Change from budget request..............................    +406,600,000

    This appropriation provides for the procurement of capital 
equipment for the Defense Communications Agency, the Defense 
Logistics Agency, the Defense Mapping Agency, and other 
agencies of the Department of Defense. The fiscal year 1997 
program includes procurement of automatic data processing 
equipment, mechanized materials handling systems, general and 
special purpose vehicular equipment, communications equipment, 
chemical and biological defense equipment, and many other 
items.

                       Committee Recommendations

                         Authorization Changes

    The Committee recommends the following changes in the 
budget request, in accordance with House authorization action:

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                   Committee       Change from  
                             Item                               Budget request   recommendation      request    
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Automatic Document Conversion Systems........................                0           38,800          +38,000
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

          major equipment, office of the secretary of defense

    The Department of Defense requested $136,218,000 for the 
Major Equipment, Office of the Secretary of Defense program. 
The Committee recommends $219,718,000, an increase of 
$83,500,000. The recommended increases, described below, 
include $25,000,000 for enhanced strategic mobility, 
$10,000,000 for natural gas vehicles, $10,000,000 for the 
Mentor Protege Program, and $38,500,000 for high performance 
computer modernization. A brief description of these 
recommendations follows.

                      enhanced strategic mobility

    The Committee recommends an increase of $25,000,000 for 
Enhanced Strategic Mobility. This increase is part of a broader 
Committee initiative in various accounts to enhance the ability 
of our troops to deploy rapidly and effectively. The funds are 
for the procurement of capital equipment at numerous ports and 
airfields to facilitate the throughput of equipment.

                          natural gas vehicles

    No funds were requested for the procurement of natural gas 
vehicles. The Committee recommends an increase of $10,000,000 
for the Natural Gas Vehicle (NGV) program under funds for the 
Office of Environmental Security. Procurement of these vehicles 
will assist the Defense Department to meet its Alternative 
Fueled Vehicles (AFV) acquisition requirements under the Energy 
Policy Act of 1992, the Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990, and 
Executive Order 12844. The Committee is advised that the DoD 
intends to start budgeting for its Alternative Fuel Vehicle 
requirements in fiscal year 1998. Providing these funds in 
fiscal year 1997 will enable the DoD to attain the above 
mentioned statutory requirements in a timely manner.

                             mentor protege

    The Department requested $28,239,000 for Mentor Protege 
program. The Committee recommends $38,239,000, an increase of 
$10,000,000 only for the Mentor Protege program.

                high performance computer modernization

    The Department requested $104,735,000 for high performance 
computer modernization. The Committee recommends $143,235,000, 
an increase of $38,500,000 only for procurement of hardware for 
high performance computer modernization.

                defense airborne reconnaissance program

                     unmanned aerial vehicles (uav)

    Predator UAV. The budget request for the Predator UAV 
program is $57,791,000. The Committee recommends $107,791,000, 
an increase of $50,000,000 only to procure additional systems 
to meet the directives of the Joint Requirements Oversight 
Council in a more timely manner.
    The Committee believes that the Predator UAV units should 
operate in a joint environment with United States Atlantic 
Command as the force provider. The Predator should be available 
for use by all services in accordance with individual and 
collective requirements. The Committee understands that the 
Navy has a requirement for the capabilities and realtime 
information similar to that provided by Predator which could be 
achieved without modification of the aircraft. The Committee 
directs that the on-going Defense Airborne Reconnaissance 
Office (DARO) study on UAVs include the feasibility of 
operating the Predator system from LHA/LHD and CV/CVN Class 
ships. If the DARO and the Navy determine that operating from 
naval vessels is feasible, the Committee directs that DARO and 
Navy jointly provide an assessment of their findings to the 
Committee by January 15, 1997. The report should address 
conditions of operating the Predator from naval vessels and 
estimated costs.
    The Committee further believes that there should be an 
operational coordinator between the Predator program office and 
operational users. This will ensure maximum utilization between 
the development community and operational user. Such 
coordination is viewed as critical for the effective 
utilization of these systems.
    Pioneer UAV. The budget request for the Pioneer UAV program 
is $10,600,000. The Committee recommends $40,600,000, an 
increase of $30,000,000 only for procurement of attrition 
spares and support kits.

                             budget format

    The Committee directs that the Defense Airborne 
Reconnaissance Program (DARP) procurement accounts be 
restructured into categories of accounts as shown below and 
separate program elements be established for each account. 
Further details of the budget restructure of the DARP are 
provided under the RDT&E, Defense-Wide, portion of this report. 
Committee directions addressed in the RDT&E section also apply 
to the procurement accounts of the DARP.

Procurement programs

    I. Manned Reconnaissance Programs.
          a. U-2
          b. RC-135
          c. SR-71
          d. EP-3E/ARIES
          e. REEF POINT
    II. Unmanned Airborne Reconnaissance Programs.
          a. Predator UAV
          b. Tactical UAV
          c. Pioneer UAV
    III. Common Dissemination and Ground Station Programs.
          a. Common Imagery Ground/Surface System
          b. Multi-Intelligence Reconnaissance Ground Systems.

                    Information Resources Management

    The Committee recommends an increase of $35,000,000 for the 
Information Resources Management program within the 
Procurement, Defense-Wide account. Details of this 
recommendation appear in the Information Resources Management 
section of this report.

                         Major Equipment, DISA

                      information systems security

    The budget requested $17,136,000 for information systems 
security. The Committee recommends $43,136,000, an increase of 
$26,000,000 to accelerate the procurement of network security 
hardware and software.

                       Special Operations Command

                           Aviation Programs

                         ac-130 force structure

    The Committee directs the Secretary of Defense to prepare a 
report on the current force structure and future requirements 
of the AC-130 gunship fleet. The report shall also include an 
assessment of the adequacy of the present fleet in meeting 
future deployment and training requirements. The report should 
be provided no later than January 31, 1997.

                          C-130 Modifications

    The Committee recommends an increase of $18,100,000 only 
for modification of two C-130J aircraft to the EC-130J 
configuration for the Air National Guard. Funds to procure 
these aircraft are provided in the National Guard and Reserve 
Equipment Account.

                          Ammunition Programs

                   sof individual weapons ammunition

    The budget recommended no appropriation for the Selectable 
Lightweight Attack Munitions (SLAM). The Committee recommends 
$1,500,000 only for the Selectable Lightweight Attack 
Munitions.

                       Other Procurement Program

                     Advanced Seal Delivery System

    The budget recommended no appropriation for the Advanced 
Seal Delivery System (ASDS). The Committee recommends 
$2,800,000 only for advance procurement of hull steel for the 
Advanced Seal Delivery System (ASDS).

                Chemical and Biological Defense Program

                         individual protection

    The budget requested $53,785,000 for chemical and 
biological individual protection. The Committee recommends 
$140,085,000, an increase of $86,300,000. Studies done in the 
aftermath of the Gulf War have shown that the U.S. was ill-
prepared to fight a war when faced with chemical and biological 
agents. A recent GAO report states:

          ``Although DoD is taking steps to improve the 
        readiness of U.S. ground forces to conduct operations 
        in a chemical or biological environment, serious 
        weaknesses remain. Many early deploying active and 
        reserve units do not possess the amount of chemical and 
        biological equipment required by regulations, and new 
        equipment development and procurement are often 
        proceeding more slowly than planned.''

    The Gulf War demonstrated significant weaknesses in our 
readiness. Units and soldiers often arrived in theater without 
required equipment and protective clothing. Protective clothing 
if available was ``problematic because it was heavy, bulky, and 
too hot for warm climates'' according to GAO.
    The recent GAO report also states that of the Army's five 
active divisions--which include the crisis response force--none 
had sufficient stocks of protective chemical/biological 
clothing.
    The Committee believes that this situation is intolerable 
and must be corrected. The Committee therefore recommends an 
increase of $86,300,000 only for Joint Service Lightweight 
Integrated Suits (JSLIST) which are lightweight and more 
effective than current stocks of protective clothing. These 
funds will buy out the current requirement and save $89,300,000 
over the Future Years Defense Plan.

                 chemical/biological response planning

    The Committee is greatly concerned about the Federal 
Government's ability to respond quickly and effectively to any 
potential domestic terrorist attack involving the use of 
chemical or biological agents. The Tokyo subway chemical attack 
should serve as a sober reminder that such irrational attacks 
can be carried out to great effect. Prudent plans must be in 
place to not only combat such acts before they are carried out, 
but to respond quickly and effectively to minimize damage if 
they are carried out. The Committee is concerned that 
overlapping responsibilities among federal, state, and local 
authorities combined with fragmented federal agency 
jurisdictions presents a significant challenge to meet this 
relatively new threat. In view of the Defense Department's 
considerable expertise in detecting, combating, and responding 
to chemical or biological incidents, the Committee wishes to be 
assured that this expertise can be appropriately and lawfully 
utilized should the need arise.
    The Committee directs the Secretary of Defense to consult 
with appropriate federal officials and submit a classified 
report to the congressional defense committees outlining the 
plans and process in place to respond to a domestic chemical or 
biological incident; the planned role of Department of Defense 
and National Guard personnel in responding to such incidents; 
current legal and organizational hindrances that may obstruct 
the ability of Defense Department, National Guard, or other 
specialized personnel from effectively responding to such 
incidents; and identified shortfalls in training, funding, 
equipment, personnel, and organizational authority that need to 
be redressed. The Committee requests that this report expressly 
focus on the capabilities of the National Guard in assisting 
with this important activity. The Committee expects this report 
to be submitted not later than March 1, 1997.

                          Program Recommended

    The total amount recommended in the bill will provide the 
following program in fiscal year 1997:



                  NATIONAL GUARD AND RESERVE EQUIPMENT

Fiscal year 1996 appropriation..........................    $777,000,000
Fiscal year 1997 budget request.........................................
Committee recommendation................................     908,000,000
Change from budget request..............................    +908,000,000

    This appropriation provides funds for the procurement of 
tactical aircraft and other equipment for the National Guard 
and Reserve.

                       Committee Recommendations

    The Committee has identified shortfalls in the inventories 
of the National Guard and Reserve in the amount of 
$6,814,384,000 which were not included in the fiscal year 1997 
budget. The Committee recommends a total of $908,000,000 to 
meet high priority requirements.

                army national guard night vision devices

    The Committee recommends $10,000,000 only for the 
procurement of Mini Eyesafe Laser Infrared Observation Sets, 
AN/PVS-6. These devices replace the AN/PVS-5 which is not 
eyesafe. The Committee is aware that the National Guard has no 
AN/PVS-6 devices on hand and recommends that the funds provided 
be used to procure this item.

                            c-130j aircraft

    The Committee recommends $105,000,000 for the procurement 
of two C-130J aircraft for the Air National Guard. The 
Committee is aware of the pressing need to modernize special 
mission aircraft including the EC-130 which is used for 
Special/Psychological Operations. The Committee directs that 
the funds provided for the Air National Guard be used only to 
procure C-130J aircraft in the EC-130J configuration and has 
provided additional funding elsewhere to complete the 
modifications required.

                             c-130 upgrades

    The Committee recommends $5,000,000 for upgrades to C-130 
aircraft. The Committee is aware that the Air National Guard 
has an unfunded requirement to modify existing ski-equipped C-
130 aircraft with Low Power Color Radar, Electronic Flight 
Instrumentation, and Satellite Communications. This is a safety 
issue for those special missions into the polar regions and the 
Committee directs that the funds provided for C-130 upgrades be 
used only for this purpose.

                          Program Recommended

    The total amount recommended in the bill will provide the 
following program in fiscal year 1997:



                    INFORMATION RESOURCES MANAGEMENT

    The Defense Department requested $9,679,113,000 for 
information resources management. The Committee recommends 
$9,998,713,000, an increase of $319,600,000 as explained below.

                    corporate information management

    In reviewing funding shortfalls identified by the services 
this year in the mission area of information resource 
management, the Committee notes that all the services and 
Defense agencies could benefit from investments in information 
technology and software to remedy deficiencies in current 
operations or to make strategic investments aimed at improving 
effectiveness for military operations. The Committee recommends 
$200,000,000 in the Operation and Maintenance appropriations 
for corporate information management, of which $50,000,000 is 
in each of the Service and Defense-Wide accounts. This would be 
a two percent increase to the Defense Department's $9.7 billion 
information resource management budget, and it would allow a 
highly leveraged investment with the potential for quick pay-
back through reduced future operating costs. The Committee 
intends that these funds be used at the discretion of the 
Service Secretaries to make investments in information systems 
that foster corporate information management objectives: that 
is, software and systems for joint service use. These funds can 
be used to improve business operations in financial management, 
personnel management, logistics and supply management, or 
administration and should reflect the needs of the Reserve 
Component. The Committee directs that none of these additional 
funds be obligated until the Assistant Secretary of Defense for 
Command, Control, Communications, and Intelligence has 
submitted a program plan to the House and Senate Committees on 
Appropriations which describes how the funds are to be used, 
how each separate investment fosters Defense-Wide corporate 
information management, and the cost and benefit of each 
proposed initiative.

                army sustaining base information system

    The Army requested $59,195,000 to continue development of 
the Sustaining Base Information System. The Committee 
understands that the system has recently been proposed for 
cancellation by the Army. The Committee recommends $20,195,000, 
a decrease of $39,000,000 of which $17,500,000 is in the 
Operation and Maintenance, Army appropriation and $21,500,000 
is in the Other Procurement, Army appropriation.

               navy standard integrated personnel system

    The Navy requested no funds for the Navy Standard 
Integrated Personnel System (NSIPS). The Committee recommends 
$52,000,000, of which $50,000,000 is for the Navy Standard 
Integrated Personnel System (NSIPS) and $2,000,000 is for 
commercial off-the-shelf (COTS) services. Of this amount, 
$25,000,000 is provided in Other Procurement, Navy for NSIPS 
and $27,000,000 is in O&M, Navy Reserve for NSIPS and COTS 
services. The Committee directs that the program management, 
operations, functions, automated data processing support and 
funding for NSIPS, including design, development, procurement, 
deployment and maintenance shall be collocated with and under 
the operational control and command of the Commander, Naval 
Reserve Forces and consolidated under the Naval Reserve 
Information Systems Office. The Committee also directs the 
Department of the Navy to transfer operational control and 
command of the source data system, the uniform microcomputer 
disbursing system, and the diary message reporting system to 
the Commander, Naval Reserve Forces and the Naval Reserve 
Information Systems Office.
    The Committee supports expanding the mission of the Naval 
Reserve to implement Navy plans to consolidate manpower and 
personnel central design activities. This would provide much 
needed relief to active component force structure needs and 
manning requirements for primary missions. Therefore, the 
Committee directs that the central design agency (CDA) 
functions and related support functions, personnel, support, 
design, development, procurement, deployment, and maintenance 
functions of all manpower and personnel information systems, 
including, but not limited to, the Naval Reserve Personnel 
Center, the Naval Recruiting Command, the Navy Personnel 
Research and Development Center, the Enlisted Personnel 
Management Center, and the Navy Manpower Analysis Center be 
placed under the operational control and command of the 
Commander, Naval Reserve Forces. The Committee has also 
provided $2,000,000 only for the Naval Reserve and directs the 
Department of the Navy to establish a prototype commercial off-
the-shelf (COTS) software integration office within the Naval 
Reserve Information Systems Office to be used as a model for 
such activities within DoD.
    The Committee strongly reiterates the direction provided in 
the fiscal year 1996 conference agreement that the Department 
of the Navy place the collocated Naval Computer and 
Telecommunications Station (NCTS) central design agency 
functions, operations, and supporting mission funded positions 
under the operational control and command of the Naval Reserve 
Information Systems Office. Since this transfer was recommended 
the Navy has proposed consolidating this NCTS's communications 
operations and message functions to one of the two remaining 
communication stations along the Gulf of Mexico. The Committee 
directs that none of this NCTS's communications operations and 
message functions be transferred and that this communications 
station remain as a detachment and collocated with the Naval 
Reserve Information Systems Office. The Committee directs the 
consolidation of other regional communications centers and 
message traffic to be collocated with this NCTS and the Naval 
Support Activity.

               air force fuel automated management system

    The Air Force requested $10,300,000 for the Fuel Automated 
Management System. The Committee recommends $26,100,000, an 
increase of $15,800,000 in the Other Procurement, Air Force 
appropriation.
    Additional funds are for the Automatic Tank Gauging which 
will allow the capability for the entire Air Force to determine 
current fuel inventory levels, provide reliable and consistent 
inventory management, and provide a means of determining fuel 
tank inventory status in above and below ground tanks without 
risk to human life. The Air Force indicates that without 
additional funds, over 335 CONUS fuel storage tanks will 
continue to be inventoried via the inherently dangerous and 
inaccurate task of manual gauging, and Pacific installations 
(where 17 deaths have occurred during manual gauging in the 
past) will not receive gauges for at least 14 tanks. Funds are 
also provided for the Automated Data Collection System which 
collects fuel data for aircraft and vehicles, converting from a 
paper to automated process for the annual 1.8 million 
transactions for aviation fuel and annual 3.1 million 
transactions for ground fuels. Both initatives will improve 
inventory management, allow better allocation of resources 
during wartime, save costs through avoidance of unncesssary 
investment in inventory, and potentially save the lives of 
military personnel. The Committee directs the Assistant 
Secretary of Defense for Acquisition and Logistics to determine 
joint service use of these systems.

                air force automated maintenance systems

    The Air Force requested $8,020,000 for the Reliability and 
Maintainability Information System (REMIS) and no funds for the 
Tactical Interim CAMS/REMIS Reporting System (TICARRS). The Air 
Force indicated that there are funding shortfalls that impede 
its ability to operate these systems in fiscal year 1997. The 
Committee recommends an increase of $11,000,000, of which 
$5,500,000 is only for REMIS and $5,500,000 is only for 
TICARRS.

                     automated document conversion

    The Defense Department requested no funds for automated 
document conversion. The Committee recommends $38,800,000 in 
the Procurement, Defense-Wide appropriation as recommended in 
the House-passed Defense Authorization bill.

                    joint services logistics center

    The Defense Department requested $239,000,000 to continue 
development of standard logistics systems for the military 
services. The Committee recommends $274,000,000, an increase of 
$35,000,000 in the Procurement, Defense-Wide appropriation to 
fund shortfalls identified by the Office of the Secretary of 
Defense.

                       software managers network

    Despite support at the Assistant Secretary of Defense level 
for the Software Managers Network, the budget requests no 
funds. The Committee recommends $6,000,000 and expects that the 
Defense Department will budget for all necessary funds to 
operate the network in fiscal year 1998 and subsequent years.
                                TITLE IV

               RESEARCH, DEVELOPMENT, TEST AND EVALUATION

                  Estimates and Appropriation Summary

    The fiscal year 1997 Department of Defense Research, 
Development, Test and Evaluation budget requests totals 
$34,745,672,000. The accompanying bill recommends 
$37,611,031,000. The total amount recommended is an increase of 
$2,865,359,000 above the fiscal year 1997 budget estimate, and 
is $1,120,922,000 more than the total provided in fiscal year 
1996. The table below summarizes the budget estimates and the 
Committee's recommendations.





                           lrip test articles

    The Department of Defense has recently established a new 
policy that encourages acquisition programs to budget RDT&E 
funds for Low Rate Initial Production (LRIP) of test articles 
in lieu of procurement funds. In general, the Committee is open 
to policy changes that improve the acquisition process. 
However, funding LRIP test articles in R&D raises serious 
concerns for Congressional oversight and approval of military 
acquisition programs. Because of the R&D incremental funding 
policy, the Committee is concerned that funding LRIP test 
articles in R&D could allow program managers to initiate LRIP 
with any amount of money, at any time, and with no OSD or 
Congressional approval. Accordingly, the Committee directs the 
Secretary of Defense to ensure that the LRIP policy addresses 
the following:
    (1) The term ``LRIP test articles'' must be clearly defined 
in writing by OSD.
    (2) Criteria must be established to ensure that LRIP test 
articles budgeted in R&D are intended predominantly for 
testing, and are the minimum number of articles needed to 
complete the testing program. The Committee believes if the 
purpose for the LRIP test articles is more for operations than 
for testing, or if the purpose is sufficiently ``grey,'' then 
such articles should be funded in procurement.
    (3) RDT&E budget exhibits for fiscal year 1998 and 
subsequent fiscal years must clearly denote the number and type 
of test articles, including LRIP test articles, funded in the 
R&D program. No funds for additional LRIP test articles, beyond 
those displayed and justified in the last budget approved by 
Congress, can be obligated without prior notification to the 
congressional defense committees.
    (4) Funding for LRIP test articles shall be clearly and 
separately identified within R&D budgets. No funds for LRIP 
test articles can be obligated in an earlier fiscal year than 
displayed and justified in the last budget approved by Congress 
without prior notification to the congressional defense 
committees.
    Finally, the Committee directs the Secretary of Defense to 
submit a report accompanying the fiscal year 1998 budget 
request on DoD's policy to implement this direction.

                         cruise missile defense

    The Committee expressed its concern about the inadequacy of 
Department of Defense cruise missile defense programs in fiscal 
year 1992, long before the topic became popular. The need for 
cruise missile defense is now more widely accepted. Department 
of Defense witnesses at the highest levels testified to the 
Committee again this year on the effectiveness of the 
continuing financial investment in cooperative engagement, 
about which Secretary Perry described as ``the biggest 
breakthrough in warfare technology since stealth''.
    The Department's growing concern is defense against land-
attack cruise missiles and the ability of third world nations 
to quickly acquire them, apply stealth technologies to them, 
and deliver warheads of mass destruction. The Department is 
addressing the priority and focus of cruise missile defense 
programs, and proposing new initiatives such as the supposedly 
joint service aerostat acquisition program. In the absence of a 
joint service architecture, however, the Department is building 
a house without a blueprint.
    The Committee is concerned that each of the services and 
DARPA is moving out on its own unique ``go it alone'' plan 
rather than building systems which are optimized to meet the 
needs of theater commanders in joint service operations. For 
example, while the Office of the Secretary of Defense (OSD) 
touts the merits of DARPA-developed advanced sensors, the 
leadership of DARPA is actively curtailing the Agency's 
involvement in advanced sensor work supporting this program. 
The most pressing immediate issue requires resolution by OSD 
and the JCS Joint Requirements Oversight Council: whether 
cooperative engagement or the Joint Tactical Information 
Distribution Systems (JTIDS) will be the primary means of 
linking the individual service sensor and shooter systems 
together to provide theater commanders with integrated, 
seamless cruise missile defense.
    The Committee understands that JTIDS provides a limited 
capability for Army missiles and Air Force fighter aircraft to 
potentially acquire a small number of cruise missiles once 
detected by airborne sensors (such as E-2C, E-3A, or 
aerostats), but that JTIDS systems are overwhelmed by large 
size raids. Only the cooperative engagement system can meet 
mission requirements. CEC offers other advantages over JTIDS, 
such as reliable, realtime track of all friendly and enemy air 
targets. The Committee is very disappointed in the JROC's 
failure to resolve this long-standing technical issue, which in 
terms of its importance and joint-source nature is a core 
oversight requirement that is at the heart of the 
organization's purpose.
    The Committee again directs the Secretary of Defense to 
develop a joint service cruise missile defense architecture for 
a capability that is fully integrated with theater ballistic 
missile defense for theater air defense missions. It should 
include broad area defense through a layered system consisting 
of an outer layer of fighter aircraft with air-to-air weapons, 
a mid-layer composed of existing surface-to-air missiles which 
can shoot over the horizon when supported by advanced airborne 
sensors, and an inner self-defense layer composed of surface-
to-air weapons using organic ground based sensors. DoD must 
take advantage of the large investment in existing air defense 
systems and those under development by the Ballistic Missile 
Defense Organization.
    To be robust against large numbers of cruise missiles, 
joint service land attack cruise missile defense capability 
must be able to take advantage of high quality sensor data and 
fire control/weapons information among multiple units to permit 
engagement decisions to be automated, in real time, across the 
entire joint force. Effective networking of airborne and 
surface sensors is essential to provide fire control quality 
data to the shooter and continuously track all aircraft and 
missiles to allow identification based on point of origin, 
target and flight parameters, and identification sensor 
requirements. Of key importance, as threat enemy cruise 
missiles move into the low observable regime, measurements from 
many sensors will be necessary just to maintain continuous 
track of a target. In order to achieve this level of 
performance, the joint service network must be able to exchange 
large quantities of sensor data in jamming environments with 
extremely high reliability and with very low latency. Only the 
cooperative engagement system has demonstrated an ability to 
meet these multiple demanding requirements.
    The Committee directs the Secretary of Defense to submit a 
detailed joint service cruise missile defense master plan 
addressing these concerns to the congressional defense 
committees concurrent with submission of the fiscal year 1998 
President's Budget. The Committee further directs the Chairman 
of the Joint Chiefs of Staff to include in this plan a detailed 
description of the joint service cruise missile defense 
architecture and specifically how the CEC/JTIDS issue has been 
resolved. The master plan should identify every cruise missile 
defense program for which funding is sought in fiscal year 
1998, and include a classified appendix if necessary. The 
Department should minimize expenditures for acquisition of new 
start upgrades to existing systems (such as E-2C or E-3A) or 
initiation of new systems until a comprehensive architecture 
has been developed and a master plan submitted to the Congress.

                         human factors Research

    As the military services continue to develop doctrine, 
tactics, and systems for around-the-clock military operations, 
the Committee is increasingly concerned about the effects of 
fatigue on the individual service member. For example, with the 
rapid introduction of advanced night-fighting equipment in each 
of the services, there is a higher incidence of both training 
and actual operations carried out at night. While the 
Department is carrying out basic research programs intended to 
more fully understand the effects of fatigue and sleep 
deprivation on the individual soldier, sailor or airman, the 
Committee believes this is an area which merits more attention. 
The Committee directs the Department provide a report to the 
Committee by July 1, 1996, which summarizes its basic research 
program in this regard and details any potential funding 
shortages or avenues of research which, for a relatively small 
addition of funds, may contribute to better understanding and 
solutions to the problems posed by this service-wide change in 
operational concepts.

                    B-1 congressional interest item

    Last year, the Air Force approached the Committee with a 
request for an additional $7,000,000 to accelerate JDAM 
integration on the B-1 aircraft. These additional funds were 
provided as part of the fiscal year 1996 Defense Appropriations 
Act.
    The additional $7,000,000 was identified as a congressional 
interest item and is thus subject to special procedures 
prohibiting any reprogramming or reallocation without the prior 
approval of the congressional defense committees. The Committee 
has recently learned that the Air Force obligated $2,000,000 of 
these funds for B-1 SATCOM upgrades and used the remaining 
$5,000,000 to offset the B-1 program's share of various 
undistributed reductions and DoD initiatives, including the 
Bosnia reprogramming. These actions have occurred despite 
Secretary Perry's letter of May 6, 1996 to the Committee 
assuring that, ``No program added by the Congress or designated 
as a Congressional interest item has been reduced 
disproportionately [for the Bosnia reprogramming].''
    The Committee finds the actions of the Air Force on this 
matter totally unacceptable. Therefore, the Committee directs 
the Air Force to restore the funding for this congressional 
interest item immediately. Further, the Committee directs the 
Secretary of the Air Force to report to the congressional 
defense committees no later than July 31, 1996 whether the 
Department intends to, (1) use the funds as intended by 
Congress, (2) submit a reprogramming request to Congress, or 
(3) submit the item for rescission.

                         new start notification

    The Committee reaffirms the long standing policy on letter 
notification of new start programs of providing the 
congressional defense committees with a review period prior to 
obligation of funds. The Committee notes that the Navy recently 
submitted a notification letter that stated the Navy's intent 
to initiate a new start program ``immediately.'' Though the 
Committee had no objection to this particular program, the 
Committee nevertheless insists that future notification letters 
comply with the existing policy that provides the Committee a 
30 day review period prior to program initiation.

                         special interest items

    Items for which funds have specifically been provided in 
this report using the phrases ``only for'' or ``only to'' are 
congressional interest items for the purpose of the Base for 
Reprogramming (DD Form 1414) for the Research, Development, 
Test and Evaluation programs. Each of these items must be 
carried on the DD Form 1414 at the stated amount, or a revised 
amount if changed during conference action on this bill, unless 
the item is denied in conference or if otherwise specifically 
addressed in the conference report.

                          classified programs

    Adjustments to classified RDT&E programs are explained in 
the classified report accompanying this report.

                    joint advanced strike technology

    The Department of Defense requested a total of $589,100,000 
for Joint Advanced Strike Technology in the Navy, Air Force, 
and Defense Advanced Projects Research Agency RDT&E accounts. 
The Committee recommends $602,100,000, an increase of 
$13,000,000 in the Navy account only to accelerate development 
of an alternate engine in order to have it available at the 
beginning of the engineering and manufacturing development 
phase of the program. This increase should be part of a program 
to develop a demonstrator engine and integrate it into the 
selected weapon systems contractor concepts. In addition, the 
Committee directs that the Secretary of Defense carry out the 
Joint Strike Fighter program so that the Short Take-off/
Vertical Landing (STOVL) variant under that program (to be 
procured as a replacement for the Marine Corps AV-8B aircraft) 
is developed concurrently with, or ahead of, other variants 
under that program.

            RESEARCH, DEVELOPMENT, TEST AND EVALUATION, ARMY

Fiscal year 1996 appropriation..........................  $4,870,684,000
Fiscal year 1997 budget request.........................   4,320,640,000
Committee recommendation................................   4,874,537,000
Change from budget request..............................    +553,897,000

    This appropriation funds the Research, Development, Test, 
and Evaluation activities of the Department of the Army.

                       Committee Recommendations

                         authorization changes

    The Committee recommends the following changes to the 
budget request in accordance with House authorization action:

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                                   Change from  
                             Item                               Budget request     Committee       recommended  
                                                                                  recommended        request    
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Tractor Rose Exploratory Development.........................            2,131            3,131           +1,000
Materials Technology.........................................           10,841           14,841           +4,000
Sensors and Electronic Survivability.........................           23,608           24,608           +1,000
Tractor Hip..................................................            8,152            9,152           +1,000
Tractor Hike.................................................           17,176           22,176           +5,000
Tractor Red..................................................            5,125            8,625           +3,500
Tractor Rose Adv. Dev........................................            5,078            6,778           +1,700
Line of Sight Technology.....................................           18,173  ...............          -18,173
Armament Enhancement.........................................           48,221           64,721          +16,500
NATO Research and Development................................            9,963  ...............           -9,963
Engineer Mobility Equipment Development......................           35,410           47,710          +12,300
Aircraft Modification/Product Improvement Programs...........              194           22,894          +22,700
Missile/Air Defense Product Improvement Program..............           30,959           50,959          +20,000
Special Army Program.........................................           10,185           12,485           +2,300
End Item Industrial Preparedness.............................           16,842           27,842          +11,000
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

                             Basic Research

                university and industry research centers

    The Army requested $47,288,000 for university and industry 
research centers. The Committee recommends $48,888,000, an 
increase of $1,600,000 only for electric gun development.

                        Exploratory Development

                          aviation technology

    The Army requested $24,683,000 for aviation technology. The 
Committee recommends $19,683,000, a decrease of $5,000,000. The 
Committee notes that the Army has requested an increase over 
last year's appropriated level to increase funding for the 
National Rotorcraft Technology Center (NRTC). The NRTC is a 
joint Army, NASA, Navy, Federal Aviation Agency (FAA), 
academia, and industry effort to address rotary wing 
technologies and concepts for dual-use applications. To date, 
the Army has contributed $5,000,000 for this effort, NASA less 
than $1,000,000, and the Navy and FAA have provided no funding. 
The Committee directs the Army to submit, prior to the 
conference on this fiscal year 1997 Department of Defense 
Appropriations Act, a report outlining NRTC projects planned 
for fiscal year 1997, the required funding for those projects, 
and the source of the funding.

                combat vehicle and automotive technology

    The Army requested $34,834,000 for combat vehicle and 
automotive technology. The Committee recommends $36,934,000, an 
increase of $2,100,000 only for the design, development, and 
testing of a Voice Instructional Device for use with fuel 
tankers, the Palletized Load System and M1022A1 Dolly wheeled 
hydraulic systems.

                         ballistics technology

    The Army requested $31,166,000 for ballistics technology. 
The Committee recommends $42,266,000, an increase of 
$11,100,000. Of the additional funds, $7,500,000 is only for 
liquid propellant development and $3,600,000 is only for 
electric gun development.

                   electronics and electronic devices

    The Army requested $20,922,000 for electronics and 
electronic devices. The Committee recommends $21,922,000, an 
increase of $1,000,000 only for fuel cell technology 
development.

                          countermine systems

    The Army requested $6,029,000 for countermine systems. The 
Committee recommends $9,029,000, an increase of $3,000,000 only 
for countermine technology and research.

                             human factors

    The Army requested $14,072,000 for human factors 
engineering technology. The Committee recommends $18,222,000, 
an increase of $4,150,000. This includes an increase of 
$3,900,000 only for medical teams and $250,000 only for trauma 
care.

                    environmental quality technology

    The Army requested $19,457,000 for environmental quality 
technology. The Committee recommends $29,457,000, an increase 
of $10,000,000. Of the increase, $5,000,000 is only for 
unexploded ordnance remediation at Jefferson Proving Ground.
    The Committee directs the establishment of a test bed at 
the naval shipyard at Bremerton, Washington for the treatment 
and removal of high concentrations associated with complex 
waste waters, particularly those with combinations of metals, 
oils, greases, fats, suspended solids, and other organics. The 
test bed shall demonstrate and validate wastewater treatment 
electro-technologies and, where necessary, provide applied 
research and development and/or optimize system performance to 
enhance the transition at DoD facilities. The Committee 
recommends an increase of $5,000,000 to the Environmental 
Quality Technology program for this purpose.
    The Committee supports the ongoing joint effort between the 
U.S. Army Environmental Center/Environmental Technology 
Division and the Tennessee Valley Authority/Muscle Shoals 
Environmental Research Center to develop, demonstrate and 
validate Plasma Energy Pyrolysis technology. The Committee 
urges the Department of Defense to continue its activity in 
this area within available funds, and directs that the 
Department of the Army submit a report not later than April 30, 
1997, on the feasibility of this technology.

                           medical technology

    The Army requested $55,490,000 for medical technology. The 
Committee recommends $130,490,000, an increase of $75,000,000. 
This includes an increase of $2,000,000 only for Ear, Nose and 
Throat Minimally Invasive Simulation (ENTMIS), $25,000,000 only 
for Hepatitis A vaccine, $5,200,000 only for Walter Reed Army 
Institute of Research, $3,500,000 only for technology roadmaps, 
$2,000,000 only for tissue replacement, $5,000,000 for computer 
assisted minimally invasive surgery, $2,300,000 only for 
calcium signaling cancer cell proliferation, $25,000,000 only 
for treatment therapies for neurotoxin exposure and $5,000,000 
only for the Army-managed bone disease research program 
initiated in fiscal year 1995.

                          Advanced Development

                      Medical Advanced Technology

    The Army requested $11,601,000 for medical advanced 
technology. The Committee recommends $111,601,000, an increase 
of $100,000,000 only to continue the Army-managed peer-reviewed 
breast cancer research program.

                      Aviation Advanced Technology

    The Army requested $41,478,000 for aviation advanced 
technology. The Committee recommends $56,978,000, an increase 
of $15,500,000. Of the increase $15,000,000 is only for air-to-
air missile testing on the Apache helicopter and $500,000 is 
only for trichloromelaine testing.

               Weapons and Munitions Advanced Technology

    The Army requested $19,759,000 for weapons and munitions 
advanced technology. The Committee recommends $35,359,000, an 
increase of $15,600,000. Of the increase, $5,000,000 is only 
for DAMOCLES development; $3,000,000 is only for electro-
rheological fluid recoil system development; and $7,600,000 is 
only for an advanced technology demonstration of the DPICM 
munition.
    Congress appropriated funds for the development of the 
XM982 munition in fiscal years 1995 and 1996. The Committee 
directs OSD to release the funds to the Army for obligation.

           Combat vehicle and automotive advanced technology

    The Army requested $31,552,000 for combat vehicle and 
automotive advanced technology. The Committee recommends 
$35,052,000, an increase of $3,500,000 only for development of 
the GEISEL engine.

                         military HIV research

    The Army requested $2,919,000 for military HIV research. 
The Committee recommends $17,919,000, an increase of 
$15,000,000 only for HIV research, vaccine development and 
clinical studies.

            Landmine Warfare and Barrier Advanced Technology

    The Army requested $15,196,000 for landmine warfare and 
barrier advanced technology. The Committee recommends 
$31,296,000, an increase of $16,100,000. Of the increase 
$4,000,000 is only to continue and accelerate the development 
and testing of a standoff ground penetrating radar to detect, 
classify, and identify land mines; and $12,100,000 is only to 
initiate the development and testing of a vehicular mounted 
mine detection system.

                    joint service small arms program

    The Army requested $5,243,000 for the joint service small 
arms program. The Committee recommends $8,243,000, an increase 
of $3,000,000 only for the development of the Objective 
Individual Combat Weapon.

                      Demonstration and Validation

                    Artillery Propellant Development

    The Army requested $18,450,000 for artillery propellant 
development. The Committee has denied, without prejudice, 
funding for this program. The fiscal year 1997 funds were to be 
used to continue the development of 155mm advanced solid 
propellant armament as an alternative to liquid propellant for 
the Crusader program. After the budget submission, the Army 
made the decision to use advanced solid vice liquid propellant 
for the Crusader. The Army has stated that the funds budgeted 
for Crusader are sufficient despite the decision to change from 
liquid to solid propellant. Since propellant development funds 
are included in the Crusader program, the Committee believes 
these funds are in excess to requirements.

                   Tactical electronic support system

    The Army requested $2,025,000 for the Tactical Electronic 
Support System. The Committee recommends $9,825,000, an 
increase of $7,800,000 only to upgrade Block I hardware, 
procure four additional ASAS-Extended Systems and provide ASAS 
remote workstations for brigade and battalion staffs.

                     aviation advanced development

    The Army requested $8,385,000 for aviation advanced 
development. The Committee recommends $15,385,000, an increase 
of $7,000,000 only for the continued development of the aircrew 
integrated common helmet.

                           Artillery Systems

    The Committee believes that fielding the next generation 
artillery system is crucial to alleviate critical range and 
mobility deficiencies. The decision by the Army to change from 
a liquid propellant to a solid propellant has reduced the 
technological risks in the development of the next generation 
artillery system, the Crusader. Because the Army decided to use 
the lower risk propellant, the Committee believes that the 
Crusader program can be accelerated. The Committee directs the 
Army to submit a report with the fiscal year 1998 budget 
detailing an accelerated development strategy for the Crusader 
program. The report should include cost, schedule, and risks 
associated with an accelerated development program.

               Engineering and Manufacturing Development

                        medium tactical vehicle

    The Army requested no funds for the medium tactical vehicle 
program. The Committee recommends $6,000,000. The additional 
funds are only to initiate the development of a joint Army and 
Marine Corps Extended Service Program (ESP) for medium tactical 
vehicles. The Army is procuring new medium tactical vehicles; 
however, because of fiscal constraints the Committee believes 
it would be impossible to field new tactical vehicles at a rate 
that would satisfy requirements. The ESP program is an 
affordable option which allows the Army to upgrade and extend 
the useful life of overage vehicles currently in the fleet.

                                javelin

    The Army requested $1,643,000 for Javelin research and 
development. The Committee recommends $9,143,000, an increase 
of $7,500,000 of which $4,500,000 is only for warhead 
improvements and $3,000,000 is only for insensitive munitions 
enhancements.

                   family of heavy tactical vehicles

    The Army requested no funds for the family of heavy 
tactical vehicle program. The Committee recommends $3,000,000, 
only to begin the development of a HEMTT Extended Service 
Program (ESP). The HEMTT, which has been in production since 
1983, has a twenty year useful life. Since the Army has a 
shortfall in the HEMTT fleet and cannot afford to replace aging 
vehicles in the fleet, the Committee believes this vehicle is 
an excellent candidate for a remanufacturing program.

                    light tactical wheeled vehicles

    The Army requested no funds for light tactical wheeled 
vehicles. The Committee recommends $3,000,000 only to continue 
the development of the High Mobility Multi-purpose Wheeled 
Vehicle (HMMWV) Extended Service Program.

             night vision systems--engineering development

    The Army has as an unfunded requirement funding for an 
Apache Second Generation forward looking infra-red (FLIR) 
upgrade program. The Apache-Longbow has an excellent all-
weather fire control radar (FCR); however, the current FLIR and 
night vision system cannot match the FCR's capability. The Army 
is considering a plan to modify Apache-Longbow with a second 
generation FLIR being developed for the Comanche helicopter.
    The Committee directs that the Secretary of the Army 
submit, with the fiscal year 1998 budget, a report explaining 
the feasibility of incorporating the Comanche Second Generation 
FLIR system into Apache-Longbow aircraft. The report should 
include the technical risks, all development and integration 
costs, and priority to other warfighting requirements. The 
report should also include a comparison of existing Second 
Generation FLIR systems in terms of cost and capability.

                  automatic test equipment development

    The Army requested $2,793,000 for automatic test equipment 
development. The Committee recommends $12,793,000, an increase 
of $10,000,000 only for Integrated Family of Test Equipment 
(IFTE) development. The additional funds will provide for the 
development of test program sets for the Apache and Apache-
Longbow systems and for the development of upgrades to existing 
IFTE systems to meet DoD initiatives for automatic test system 
standardization.

                 brilliant anti-armor submunition (bat)

    The Army requested $180,407,000 for BAT research and 
development. The Committee recommends $189,707,000, an increase 
of $9,300,000 only for producibility enhancements of the BAT 
submunition. The Army has indicated that these producibility 
enhancements have the potential to save $80 million over the 
course of program production.

             weapons and munitions--engineering development

    The Army requested $20,468,000 for weapons and munitions--
engineering development. The Committee recommends $24,168,000, 
an increase of $3,700,000. Of the additional funds, $1,600,000 
is only for MK19 modifications and $2,100,000 is only for 
continued development of the XM 915/916 munition.

                               firefinder

    The Army requested $551,000 for the Firefinder program. The 
Committee recommends $2,551,000, an increase of $2,000,000 only 
for the continued development of the AN/TPQ-37 radar. The 
increase fully funds the engineering manufacturing development 
decision effort thus reducing the risk of a program slip.

                           Management Support

                  dod high energy laser test facility

    The Army requested $2,967,000 for the DoD High Energy Laser 
Test Facility (HELSTF). The Committee recommends $91,700,000, 
an increase of $88,733,000. Of the additional funds, 
$21,733,000 is only for HELSTF; $55,000,000 is only for THEL/
NAUTILUS; and $12,000,000 is only for high energy solid state 
laser development.

          munitions standardization, effectiveness and safety

    The Army requested $2,282,000 for munitions 
standardization, effectiveness and safety. The Committee 
recommends $3,282,000, an increase of $1,000,000 only to 
continue testing of cryofracture technology for the 
demilitarization of selected, difficult-to-destroy conventional 
munitions.

                    Operational Systems Development

                  combat vehicle improvement programs

    The Army requested $197,796,000 for combat vehicle 
improvement programs. The Committee recommends $215,696,000, an 
increase of $17,900,000. Of the increase, $10,000,000 is only 
for flat panel display development for the M1 tank; $3,000,000 
is only for the M1A2 tank compact autoloader firing 
demonstration; and $4,900,000 is only for the continued 
remanufacture of combat vehicle laser warning equipment.

                    mlrs product improvement program

    The Army requested $64,271,000 for MLRS improvements. The 
Committee recommends $74,271,000, an increase of $10,000,000 
only for pre-EMD risk reduction efforts and test flights for 
the Extended Range Guided Rocket.

             aircraft engine component improvement program

    The Army requested $2,947,000 for aircraft engine component 
improvement program. The Committee recommends $3,947,000, an 
increase of $1,000,000 only for the development of the liquid 
or light-end air boost pump.

                              digitization

    The Army requested $110,180,000 for digitization. The 
Committee recommends $100,180,000, a decrease of $10,000,000. 
The Committee notes that the digitization initiative budget 
request increases each fiscal year. Although the Committee 
endorses the Army's effort to digitize the battlefield, the 
annual funding increase is not warranted.

               other missile product improvement programs

    The Army requested $6,199,000 for other missile improvement 
programs. The Committee recommends $10,099,000, an increase of 
$3,900,000 only for completion of insensitive munition 
development efforts on the Hellfire missile.

              end item industrial preparedness activities

    The Committee directs that of the fund available for end 
item industrial preparedness activities, no less than 
$2,000,000 may be obligated for cast ductile iron development.

                          force xxi initiative

    The Army requested no funds for the Force XXI Initiative. 
The Committee recommends $50,000,000. In testimony before the 
Committee the Army identified the Force XXI Initiative as its 
number one unfunded priority. If additional funding was made 
available, the Army requested that $100,000,000 be appropriated 
to field technologies demonstrated during Force XXI 
experiments. The Army intends to use these funds to get proven 
technologies to the soldier as quickly as possible, rather than 
delay fielding because of the lead time required in the budget 
process. The Army believes that this streamlined acquisition 
will put more combat capability in the hands of the soldier 
sooner and result in significant time and dollar savings.
    The Committee understands the benefits of a streamlined 
acquisition process and has encouraged DoD's efforts towards 
acquisition reform. However, the Committee is concerned that 
technologies proven in the Force XXI exercises may not be as 
successful when taken out of the controlled Force XXI Advanced 
Warfighting Experiment and actually fielded. The Committee is 
also concerned that the Army may use funds appropriated for 
this initiative to begin limited fielding of unbudgeted items 
that either cannot be accommodated in future budget requests 
because they are unaffordable, or that have not undergone the 
rigorous tradeoffs associated with competing for funds in the 
Future Years Defense Plan.
    The Committee recommends $50,000,000 for the Force XXI 
initiative for fiscal year 1997; however, it furthers directs 
that no funds may be obligated without prior notification to 
the congressional defense committees. The notification is to 
include supporting criteria outlining the technical merit and 
maturity, criticality and priority to warfighting requirements; 
affordability; effectiveness; and sustainability in future 
budget submissions for the items under consideration. The 
Committee notes that some of the technologies currently under 
experimentation are funded elsewhere, such as appliques, night 
vision equipment, and radios, and therefore, Force XXI funds 
should be reprogrammed to the appropriate account for 
obligation. The Committee also directs that none of the funds 
may be used to field interim Land Warrior prototype systems.

                       lightweight 155mm howitzer

    The Army requested no funds for the lightweight 155mm 
howitzer development program. The Committee recommends 
$4,000,000 only for the joint Marine Corps/Army lightweight 
155mm howitzer development program. To date, despite a joint 
requirement, the Army has not budgeted for this initiative. The 
Committee encourages the Army to request funding in subsequent 
budget requests.

                         depressed altitude gun

    The Committee has learned that the Army is interested in 
doing a technology demonstration of the Depressed Altitude 
Guided Gun Round (DAGGR). According to Army officials, DAGGR is 
a promising technology that has potential to meet an Army need 
for short range air defense of high value targets. The Army is 
directed to provide a detailed analysis of DAGGR to the 
Committee no later than January 15, 1997. The analysis is to 
include the cost of conducting a demonstration, the operational 
value, technical risks, schedule, projected development and 
production costs, and priority to other warfighting systems for 
DAGGR. If the Army analysis determines that DAGGR is an 
affordable solution to meet the Army's short range air defense 
requirements, the Committee will entertain a reprogramming 
action upon the completion of the study.

                          Program Recommended

    The total program recommended in the bill will provide the 
following program in fiscal year 1997:



            RESEARCH, DEVELOPMENT, TEST AND EVALUATION, NAVY

Fiscal year 1996 appropriation..........................  $8,748,132,000
Fiscal year 1997 budget request.........................   7,334,734,000
Committee recommendation................................   8,399,357,000
Change from budget request..............................  +1,064,623,000


    This appropriation provides funds for the Research, 
Development, Test and Evaluation activities of the Department 
of the Navy and the Marine Corps.

                       Committee Recommendations

                         authorization changes

    The Committee recommends the following changes in 
accordance with House authorization action:

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                   Committee        Change from 
                                                                Budget request   recommendation      request    
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Surface/Aerospace Surveillance and Weapons Technology                                                           
 Exploratory Development.....................................           26,312           41,112          +14,800
Command, Control, and Communications Technology Exploratory                                                     
 Development.................................................           56,159           58,159           +2,000
Air Systems and Weapons Advanced Technology Advanced                                                            
 Development.................................................           29,315           41,315          +12,000
Surface and Shallow Water Mine Countermeasures...............           86,995           98,995          +12,000
Advanced Submarine Combat Systems Development................           19,149           58,149          +39,000
Advanced Submarine System Development........................           26,400           85,400          +59,000
Conventional Munitions.......................................           26,490           29,490           +3,000
Marine Corps Assault Vehicles................................           40,106           60,106          +20,000
NATO Research and Development................................            9,933                0           -9,933
Standards Development........................................           24,698           27,098           +2,400
V-22A........................................................          576,792          613,792          +37,000
Arsenal Ship (EMD)...........................................           25,000                0          -25,000
Standard Missile Improvements................................            1,637            9,637           +8,000
Airborne Mine Countermeasures................................           14,522           20,522           +6,000
Battle Group Passive Horizon Extension Program...............            3,704            4,704           +1,000
JSTARS Navy..................................................                0           10,000          +10,000
Distributed Surveillance System..............................           35,194           70,194          +35,000
Test and Evaluation Support..................................          242,891          244,891           +2,000
Integrated Surveillance System...............................           14,033           36,133          +22,100
Consolidated Training Systems................................           34,906           37,906           +3,000
Surface ASW Combat System Integration........................            4,901            8,901           +4,000
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

                             Basic Research

                           Ocean Partnerships

    The Committee notes that both the House National Security 
Committee and the Senate Armed Services Committee have included 
an Ocean Partnerships research initiative in their 1997 bills. 
This initiative is intended to rationalize, coordinate, and 
improve the quality of oceanographic research done by the 
Defense Department, other Federal agencies, universities, 
companies, and other countries. The Committee has two principal 
concerns. First, regardless of the merits of the program, the 
Navy cannot begin any such Congressionally-initiated program 
until both the authorization and appropriation bills for fiscal 
year 1997 are passed by Congress and enacted into law. There 
will be an administrative lag time as the Navy selects 
personnel, finds office space, conducts discussions with other 
proposed participants in the program, and develops a strategy 
and implementing plans and programs. Second, and of more 
concern, are the prospects for significant annual recurring 
costs of this initiative to which the Navy and the Secretary of 
Defense would have to agree to bear if the program is to be 
sustained. The Committee also believes non-DoD agencies should 
demonstrate their willingness to provide funding for this 
partnership as well. Given this situation, the Committee 
believes that rather than providing additional funds at this 
time, the Defense Department should instead submit a 
reprogramming request for its exact funding requirements, if 
any, for fiscal year 1997 once they become known and if an 
authorization for the program is enacted.

                        Exploratory Development

                        Surface Ship Technology

    The Navy requested $35,591,000 for surface ship technology. 
The Committee recommends $43,591,000, an increase of $8,000,000 
of which $6,000,000 is only for power electronic building 
blocks as recommended in the House-passed Defense Authorization 
bill; $1,000,000 is only for application of emerging vision 
technology to automated monitoring systems to identify 
equipment and system status; and $1,000,000 is only for 
integration of natural language processing and reinforcement 
learning techniques to computer based maintenance aids.

                          Aircraft Technology

    The Navy requested $20,578,000 for aircraft technology. The 
Committee recommends $24,778,000, an increase of $4,200,000. 
Within this amount, $2,000,000 is only to continue development 
of flat panel helmet mounted displays for aircrew helmets in 
Project SACVW and $2,200,000 is only for integration of 
advances in bio-feedback technology in aircrew components for 
advanced cockpit development.

       Readiness, Training, and Environmental Quality Technology

    The Navy requested $40,828,000 for readiness, training, and 
environmental quality technology. The Committee recommends 
$49,728,000, an increase of $8,900,000. Within this amount, 
$3,300,000 is only to continue development of in-flight 
physiological monitoring of tactical aircrew under project 
M3331; $3,600,000 is only to support work in progress to 
provide biological protection for air, sea, and land casualty 
reduction and medical personnel under project M33I30; and 
$2,000,000 is only to integrate the life system with the 
information system to attain a total vehicle management system 
under Project RM 33H20.

            Materials, Electronics, and Computer Technology

    The Navy requested $75,886,000 for materials, electronics, 
and computer technology. The Committee recommends $88,386,000, 
an increase of $12,500,000 of which $10,000,000 is only for 
wide band semiconductors as recommended in the House-passed 
Defense Authorization bill and $2,500,000 is only to develop 
renewable and recycled wood substitutes. The Committee supports 
the Navy's efforts to reduce the operation, maintenance and 
environmental costs for shore facilities through the 
development and deployment of new cost-effective materials. The 
Navy has identified $1.3 billion of waterfront structural 
deficiencies, including Navy piers and wharves, 75 percent of 
which are now over 40 years old and require increased repair 
and maintenance. Substitutes for wood materials are considered 
especially critical because environmental restrictions and 
problems with wood rot limit the use of treated timber. The 
Committee therefore directs the Navy to expand its successful 
Shore Facilities Research activities at Port Hueneme, 
California by $2,500,000 only to develop renewable and recycled 
wood substitutes, including carbon fiber-reinforced recycled 
thermoplastic engineered lumber, and to investigate the 
incorporation into the wood substitutes of chemically treated 
waste-wood materials currently being stockpiled at Navy 
facilities for disposal. Navy development of these wood 
substitutes shall involve private sector participation to 
ensure commercial supplies of resulting products and shall 
leverage existing expertise on forest products and engineered 
lumber technology.

                Oceanographic and Atmospheric Technology

    The Navy requested $44,559,000 for oceanographic and 
atmospheric technology. The Committee recommends $54,559,000, 
an increase of $10,000,000 only for continued development and 
application of sensing systems and unmanned underwater vehicles 
for land margin continental shelf oceanographic and 
environmental measurements for mine countermeasures and other 
applications.

                          Advanced Development

                    Precision Strike and Air Defense

    The Navy requested $55,560,000 for precision strike and air 
defense. The Committee recommends $60,560,000, an increase of 
$5,000,000 only for mobile off-shore basing. The amount 
requested in the budget and the increase for mobile off-shore 
basing are designated to be a congressional interest item.

                         Ship Propulsion System

    The Navy requested $28,557,000 for ship propulsion system 
advanced development. The Committee recommends $36,557,000, an 
increase of $8,000,000 as recommended in the House-passed 
Defense Authorization bill for advanced submarine technology 
development.

             Marine Corps Advanced Technology Demonstration

    The Marine Corps requested $24,212,000 for the Marine Corps 
Advanced Technology Demonstration. The Committee recommends 
$66,012,000, an increase of $41,800,000. Of the additional 
funds $40,000,000 is only for the Commandant's Warfighting 
Laboratory and $1,800,000 is only for a SMAW product 
improvement program.

                          Medical Development

    The Navy requested $37,342,000 for medical development. The 
Committee recommends $57,442,000, an increase of $20,100,000. 
This includes an increase of $3,500,000 only for rural health, 
$14,000,000 only for bone marrow research and $2,600,000 only 
for casualty stabilization. In addition, the Committee directs 
that within available funds, $2,500,000 be used only for the 
Navy's freeze-dried blood program. The Committee is aware that 
the Navy has supported development of a process which would 
freeze-dry blood platelets for the purpose of extending shelf 
life, destroying potential contaminating viruses and reducing 
space required for storage of blood stocks.

       Environmental, Quality, and Logistics Advanced Technology

    The Navy requested $19,970,000 for environmental, quality, 
and logistics advanced technology. The Committee recommends 
$21,470,000, an increase of $1,500,000 only for nickel-zinc 
battery development used in torpedo targets, aircraft starters, 
undersea unmanned vehicles, and training torpedoes.

             SHALLOW WATER MINE COUNTERMINE DEMONSTRATIONS

    The Navy requested $42,753,000 for shallow water mine 
countermeasure demonstrations. The Committee recommends 
$50,753,000, an increase of $8,000,000 only for continued 
development of the Rapid Airborne Mine Clearance System.

                     ADVANCED TECHNOLOGY TRANSITION

    The Navy requested $104,424,000 for advanced technology 
transition. The Committee recommends $70,000,000, a reduction 
of $34,424,000 to limit program funding growth in light of 
declining outyear modernization budgets.

                      Demonstration and Validation

                         AVIATION SURVIVABILITY

    The Navy requested $6,313,000 for aviation survivability. 
The Committee recommends $15,513,000, an increase of 
$9,200,000. Within this amount, $7,200,000 is only for aircrew 
protective clothing and devices under Project W0854, of which 
$2,200,000 is only to continue development of the integrated 
helicopter life support system and $5,000,000 is only for an 
advanced technology escape system for aircrews. An additional 
$2,000,000 is only for development and demonstration of 
visualization architectures based on adaptation of advanced 
technologies to the synthetic warfare environment and 
battlefield simulation systems. This effort should build on the 
multispectral simulation and stimulation capabilities provided 
by the ACETEF located at the Navy Air Warfare Center, Aviation 
Division.

             ADVANCED SUBMARINE COMBAT SYSTEMS DEVELOPMENT

    The Navy requested $19,149,000 for advanced submarine 
combat systems development. The Committee recommends 
$58,149,000, an increase of $39,000,000 as recommended in the 
House-passed Defense Authorization bill. Within the amount 
provided, $10,800,000 is only for fiber optic acoustics 
technology.

                      SHIP CONCEPT ADVANCED DESIGN

    The Navy requested $13,807,000 for ship concept advanced 
design. The Committee recommends $38,807,000, an increase of 
$25,000,000 for the arsenal ship as recommended in the House-
passed Defense Authorization bill.

                   ADVANCED SURFACE MACHINERY SYSTEMS

    The Navy requested $59,773,000 for advanced surface 
machinery systems. The Committee recommends $87,673,000, an 
increase of $27,900,000. Within this amount, $13,500,000 is 
only for the Standard Monitoring Control System, $12,500,000 is 
only for the Intercooled Recuperated gas turbine engine land 
based test site as recommended in the House-passed Defense 
Authorization bill, and $1,900,000 is only for carbonate fuel 
cells.

               MARINE CORPS MINE/COUNTERMEASURES SYSTEMS

    The Marine Corps requested $592,000 for mine/countermeasure 
systems. The Committee recommends $2,592,000, an increase of 
$2,000,000 to address mine/countermeasure systems development 
deficiencies identified by the Marine Corps.

                           SHIP SELF-DEFENSE

    The Navy requested $216,486,000 for ship self-defense. The 
Committee recommends $290,486,000, an increase of $74,000,000. 
Of this amount, an additional $70,000,000 is only for 
cooperative engagement, of which $55,000,000 was identified by 
the Navy as a shortfall and $15,000,000 is only for the 
acceleration of miniaturization efforts. An additional 
$4,000,000 is only to continue multi-sensor fusion. Concerning 
the latter, $2,000,000 is only to modify the AN/UPX-36 and 
demonstrate the improved system in a live cooperative 
engagement combat environment and $2,000,000 is only to adapt 
the AN/UPX-36 ship self defense system for LSD-48 and other 
ships through integration of the non-cooperative target 
recognition within the AN/UPX-36 CIFF system.

                      GUN WEAPON SYSTEM TECHNOLOGY

    The Navy requested $42,204,000 for gun weapon system 
technology, which is consistent with the amount estimated for 
the core program in the Navy's 1995 Naval Surface Fire Support 
(NSFS) report to Congress. However, last year, Congress also 
concluded that the Navy needed to place increased emphasis on 
pursuing a long-time program to satisfy NSFS mission 
requirements. While the Navy's fiscal year 1997 request 
supports the NSFS core program, it does not support long-term 
missile or advanced gun requirements identified in the Navy's 
1996 NSFS program plan report. The Committee therefore 
recommends $55,204,000, an increase of $13,000,000. An 
additional $5,000,000 is for micro-mechanical systems extended 
range guided munition effort as recommended in the House-passed 
Defense Authorization bill; an additional $10,000,000 is to 
address risk mitigation in the core program and to begin the 
Navy's long-term plan for future systems; and a decrease of 
$2,000,000 is recommended due to prior year contract savings 
identified by the General Accounting Office. The Committee 
expects the NSFS program to be fully funded by the Navy in 
future budgets.

               Engineering and Manufacturing Development

                      other helicopter development

    The Navy requested $40,132,000 for other helicopter 
development. The Committee recommends $52,132,000, an increase 
of $12,000,000 for development of the advanced low frequency 
sonar.

                     s-3 weapon system improvement

    The Navy requested $4,979,000 for S-3 weapon system 
improvement. The Committee recommends $19,979,000, an increase 
of $15,000,000 for a synthetic aperture radar/moving target 
indicator capability demonstration on the S-3 aircraft.

                       p-3 modernization program

    The Navy requested $2,074,000 for ongoing P-3 development 
efforts. The Committee recommends $14,074,000, an increase of 
$12,000,000 only for P-3 Anti-Submarine Warfare (ASUW) 
Improvement Program (AIP) sensor fusion and crew workload 
reduction software.

                        tactical command system

    The Navy requested $26,989,000 for the Tactical Command 
System. The Committee recommends $29,989,000, an increase of 
$3,000,000. Of this amount $1,000,000 is to be used only for 
the Navy Tactical Command System-Afloat to continue development 
of common architecture to support world-wide database access to 
all fleet users in support of the ``Efficient Information 
Pull'' tenet of the Joint Staff C4I for the Warfighter. An 
additional $2,000,000 has been provided only to support the 
efforts to proliferate the RADIANT MERCURY capabilities.

                      air crew systems development

    The Navy requested $11,089,000 for air crew systems 
development. The Committee recommends $24,489,000, an increase 
of $13,400,000 of which $8,400,000 is only for aircrew systems 
development and $5,000,000 is only to initiate phase II of the 
NACES II ejection seat product improvement program. Within the 
$8,400,000 increase for aircrew systems development in project 
WO606, $5,000,000 is only to conduct aircraft and simulator 
evalutions of the Navy Modular Day/Night/All Weather Helmet 
Mounted Display System utilizing off bore-sight missiles and 
other weapons in air-to-air and air-to-ground scenarios; 
$1,900,000 is only to evaluate a non-devleopmental item five-
line visor lens as a possible interim system between the 
current three-line and objective seven-line visors; and 
$1,500,000 is only to develop engineering solutions for small 
occupants of Navy escape systems.

                     electronic warfare development

    The Navy requested $78,748,000 for EW development. The 
Committee recommends $141,248,000, an increase of $62,500,000. 
Of the additional funds provided, $3,500,000 is only for anti-
jam GPS efforts as recommended in the House-passed Defense 
Authorization bill, $32,000,000 is only for development of an 
EA-6B reactive jamming capability, $5,000,000 is only for 
jamming techniques optimization, and $22,000,000 is only for 
EA-6B connectivity upgrades.

                    aegis combat system engineering

    The Navy requested $89,279,000 for Aegis combat system 
engineering. The Committee recommends $93,279,000, an increase 
of $4,000,000 only to consolidate existing test systems at the 
Navy Air Warfare Center, Aircraft Division into a test 
integration facility to support development of systems for 
aircraft carriers and Aegis ships.

                   ssn-688 and trident modernization

    The Navy requested $61,395,000 for SSN-688 and Trident 
submarine modernization. The Committee recommends $72,395,000, 
an increase of $11,000,000 only for multi-purpose processors as 
recommended in the House-passed Defense Authorization bill.

                   enhanced modular signal processor

    The Navy requested $3,718,000 for the enhanced modular 
signal processor. The Committee recommends $15,718,000, an 
increase of $12,000,000 only to continue development of a 
commercial off-the-shelf variant.

                          new design submarine

    The Navy requested $394,000,000 for development of the new 
attack submarine. The Committee recommends $382,300,000, a 
decrease of $11,700,000 of which $7,000,000 is due to savings 
in the recently awarded command, control, communications, and 
intelligence contract and $4,700,000 is due to prior year 
contract savings identified by the General Accounting Office. 
Within the amount provided, $2,000,000 is only to evaluate 
glass reinforced plastic technology for the NSSN sonar dome.

                    navy tactical computer resources

    The Navy requested $5,237,000 for tactical computer 
resources. The Committee recommends $30,237,000, an increase of 
$25,000,000 only to integrate the AN/UYQ-70 display system into 
existing submarines. The Navy indicates that the additional 
funds are desired for development of the unique capabilities 
necessary to support backfit on existing submarines, leading to 
increased commonality with the New Attack Submarine to provide 
a more cost-effective approach for obsolete equipment 
replacement than the current plan. The Navy has indicated this 
effort would provide significant benefits in terms of cost 
avoidance and ability to insert new tactical capabilities into 
submarines using commerical off-the-shelf technologies.

               unguided conventional air launched weapon

    The Navy requested $22,322,000 for SLAM-ER development. The 
Committee recommends $32,322,000, an increase of $10,000,000 
only for improvements to the SLAM-ER missile.

                           ship self-defense

    The Navy requested $134,677,000 for ship self-defense. The 
Committee recommends $171,677,000, an increase of $37,000,000. 
The increase is only for the following purposes: $8,000,000 for 
the Enhanced Sea Sparrow missile; $8,000,000 for infrared 
search and track; $9,000,000 for the quick combat reaction 
capability; $8,000,000 for development of the SPQ-9B radar; and 
$4,000,000 for the NULKA decoy. The additional funds for 
infrared search and track, along with the amount requested in 
the fiscal year 1997 budget and the amounts appropriated in 
prior fiscal years, are only to develop, deliver, and test an 
IRST demonstration model in fiscal year 1998. The Committee 
directs that funds elsewhere in this account for SC-21 may not 
be obligated at a faster rate than funds provided here for 
infrared search and track.

                          navigation/id system

    The Navy requested $46,885,000 for Navigation and ID 
systems development. The Committee recommends $48,885,000, an 
increase of $2,000,000 only for GPS and Flight Data Recorder 
upgrades to Navy aircraft. The Committee has addressed its 
concerns regarding GPS and Flight Data Recorders elsewhere in 
this report.

                    Operational Systems Development

                             ssbn security

    The Navy requested $21,340,000 for SSBN Security. The 
Committee recommends $26,840,000, an increase of $5,500,000 
only to continue passive automation and active acoustics 
programs.

                            f/a-18 squadrons

    The Navy requested $425,333,000 for F/A-18 aircraft 
development. The Committee recommends $447,033,000, an increase 
of $21,700,000 of which $19,400,000 is only for development and 
integration of an advanced Forward Looking Infrared device, 
$4,500,000 is only to integrate bol chaff on the F/A-18C/D 
aircraft, and a decrease of $2,200,000 as recommended in the 
House-passed Defense Authorization bill.

                                tomahawk

    The Navy requested $136,364,000 for Tomahawk development 
efforts. The Committee recommends $124,364,000, a net reduction 
of $12,000,000. Of the funds provided, $8,000,000 is only for 
the Joint Targeting Support Center. The Committee has learned 
that the Navy has restructured the Tomahawk Block IV 
development program, eliminating the seeker and man-in-the-loop 
data link based on technical and affordability concerns. This 
action has reduced the cost of the program starting in fiscal 
year 1996. The Navy plans to reinvest the savings in fiscal 
year 1998 and beyond in additional outyear missile 
procurements. Further, the Navy is currently evaluating ways to 
accelerate the restructured program by reapplying the fiscal 
year 1996 and fiscal year 1997 savings. However, the Committee 
is not convinced that the downscoped program can be accelerated 
significantly in these years and therefore recommends a 
reduction of $20,000,000.

                            harm improvement

    The Navy requested $3,348,000 for development of High Speed 
Anti-Radiation Missile (HARM) improvements. The Committee 
recommends $55,848,000, an increase of $52,500,000. Of the 
additional funds provided, $50,000,000 is only for continued 
development of the Advanced Anti-Radiation Guided Missile 
program, and $2,500,000 is only for the HARM Block VI upgrade.

                         aviation improvements

    The Navy requested $53,512,000 for aviation improvements. 
The Committee recommends $55,112,000, an increase of $1,600,000 
of which $1,000,000 is only to evaluate and qualify for 
production the Universal Life Support Tester and $600,000 is to 
effect the prototype test program for the ultrasonic pressure 
cylinder tester.

                  marine corps communications systems

    The Marine Corps requested $56,687,000 for communications 
systems. The Committee recommends $61,242,000, an increase of 
$4,555,000. Of the additional funds, $1,000,000 is only for the 
Marine Corps Intelligence Analysis System; $855,000 is to 
provide required communications software and interoperability 
upgrades; and $2,700,000 is only to accelerate improvements for 
Global Command and Control System interoperability and 
functionality.

                        industrial preparedness

    The Navy requested $35,526,000 for industrial preparedness. 
The Committee recommends $88,000,000, an increase of 
$52,474,000 to maintain funding for the program at the fiscal 
years 1995 and 1996 levels.

                          Program Recommended

    The total amount recommended in the bill will provide the 
following program in fiscal year 1997:



         RESEARCH, DEVELOPMENT, TEST AND EVALUATION, AIR FORCE

Fiscal year 1996 appropriation.......................... $13,126,567,000
Fiscal year 1997 appropriation..........................  14,417,456,000
Committee recommendation................................  14,969,573,000
Change from budget request..............................    +552,117,000

    This appropriation funds the Research, Development, Test 
and Evaluation activities of the Department of the Air Force.

                       Committee Recommendations

                         authorization changes

    The Committee recommends the following changes in 
accordance with House authorization action:

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                   Committee       Change from  
                             Item                               Budget request   recommendation      request    
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
NPOESS.......................................................           34,024           19,024          -15,000
VISTA........................................................                0            1,400            1,400
MILSTAR......................................................          700,278          720,278          +20,000
NATO Research and Development................................           10,233  ...............          -10,233
ICBM EMD.....................................................          198,595          212,295          +13,700
Sensor Fuzed Weapon..........................................                0           19,100          +19,100
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

              program growth/budget execution adjustments

    The budget request included amounts for some programs which 
exceed by an unjustifiably large margin the amounts provided 
for fiscal year 1995 or 1996. Other programs had significant 
prior year unobligated balances, and budget adjustments are 
necessary due to poor budget execution. The Committee therefore 
recommends the following reductions:

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                   Committee       Change from  
                             Item                               Budget request   recommendation      request    
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Aerospace Avionics...........................................           71,261           68,061           -3,200
EW Development...............................................          104,423           99,423           -5,000
JSTARS.......................................................          207,284          203,784           -3,500
Navstar GPS..................................................           32,450           24,950           -7,500
DSP..........................................................           29,397           26,397           -3,000
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

                             Basic Research

                       defense research sciences

    The Air Force requested $234,475,000 for defense research 
sciences. The Committee recommends $234,475,000. The 
Committee's recommendation includes the requested amount of 
$650,000 for support to the Sacramento Peak Observatory. The 
Committee directs that the full amount be provided to 
Sacramento Peak and designates this project to be an item of 
specific Committee interest.

                        Exploratory Development

                               materials

    The Air Force requested $72,360,000 for materials research. 
The Committee recommends $79,360,000, an increase of 
$7,000,000. Within this amount, $2,000,000 is only for 
development of materials and processes for advanced long-life 
paint systems, and $5,000,000 is only for composite materials 
research at the Wright-Patterson Air Force Base materials 
research laboratory. In addition, of the funds provided, 
$3,500,000 is only for reentry vehicle materials development of 
which $1,500,000 is only for carbon-carbon reentry vehicle 
nosetips.

                       aerospace flight dynamics

    The Air Force requested $65,080,000 for aerospace flight 
dynamics. The Committee recommends $72,280,000, an increase of 
$7,200,000. Within this amount, $1,800,000 is only for 
precision air drop technology development, $3,500,000 is only 
for fire fighting equipment development, $900,000 is only for 
the development of improved landing gear technologies, and 
$1,000,000 is only to expedite development of injecting molding 
technology for aircraft windshields and canopies.

                 armstrong lab exploratory development

    The Air Force requested $87,103,000 for Armstrong Lab 
exploratory development. The Committee recommends $91,103,000, 
an increase of $4,000,000 only for helmet-mounted display 
technology development efforts.

                          aerospace propulsion

    The Air Force requested $74,906,000 for aerospace 
propulsion. The Committee recommends $83,406,000, an increase 
of $8,500,000. Within this amount, $4,000,000 is only for 
JP8+100 fuel filter research technology, $1,500,000 is only for 
development of high temperature lubricants, and $3,000,000 is 
only for development of more reliable vacuum tube transmit 
amplifiers for microwave and millimeter wave radars, 
communications, and electronic warfare systems.

                  phillips lab exploratory development

    The Air Force requested $121,107,000 for Phillips Lab 
exploratory development. The Committee recommends $148,007,000, 
an increase of $26,900,000. Within this amount, $7,000,000 is 
only for integrated high payoff rocket propulsion technology, 
$9,800,000 is only for the rocket system launch program, and 
$10,100,000 is only for the MightySat program.

                          Advanced Development

                 advanced materials for weapon systems

    The Air Force requested $23,803,000 for advanced materials 
for weapons technology. The Committee recommends $26,303,000, 
an increase of $2,500,000 only for metal fatigue monitoring 
technology.

                       flight vehicle technology

    The Air Force requested $8,433,000 for flight vehicle 
technology. The Committee recommends $9,183,000, an increase of 
$750,000 only for development efforts to increase the Air 
Force's prediction capability for aircraft tire wear. The 
Committee believes that this will enable the Air Force to 
extend tire service life and result in cost avoidance and 
increased safety.

               aerospace propulsion and power technology

    The Air Force requested $38,264,000 for aerospace 
propulsion and power technology. The Committee recommends 
$39,264,000, an increase of $1,000,000 only to support 
technology development and demonstration of a maintenance-free 
battery for transition into fighter aircraft.

            crew systems and personnel protection technology

    The Air Force requested $17,969,000 for crew systems and 
personnel protection technology. The Committee recommends 
$24,969,000, an increase of $7,000,000. Within this amount 
$5,000,000 is only for aircraft ejection seat technology 
demonstrations, and $2,000,000 is only for increased 
development efforts associated with life support equipment.

                      electronic combat technology

    The Air Force requested $25,202,000 for electronic combat 
technology. The Committee recommends $30,102,000, an increase 
of $4,900,000 only for the Closed-Loop Laser Infrared 
Countermeasures technology program.

                  space and missile rocket propulsion

    The Air Force requested $15,740,000 for space and missile 
rocket propulsion. The Committee recommends $25,740,000, an 
increase of $10,000,000. Within this amount $5,000,000 in only 
for the integrated high payoff rocket propulsion technology 
initiative, $2,000,000 is only for the disposal of pentaborane 
rocket fuel at Edwards AFB, and $3,000,000 is only for the 
continuation of rocket engine testing efforts for the Scorpius 
low cost expendable launch vehicle technology project.

                     advanced spacecraft technology

    The Air Force requested $39,637,000 for advanced spacecraft 
technology. The Committee recommends $70,637,000, an increase 
of $31,000,000. Within this amount, $25,000,000 is only for 
reusable launch vehicle technologies, $3,000,000 is only for 
the miniature threat satellite threat reporting system, and 
$2,000,000 is only for technology development efforts 
associated with power storage and distribution components for 
satellite systems.

                      advanced weapons technology

    The Air Force requested $41,895,000 for advanced weapons 
technology. The Committee recommends $66,895,000, an increase 
of $25,000,000. Within this amount, $10,000,000 is only to 
allow for enhanced investigations of the utility of laser 
induced microwave emissions technology, and $15,000,000 is only 
for development of space laser imaging technology.

                      Demonstration And Validation

                       airborne laser technology

    The Air Force requested $56,828,000 for airborne laser 
technology (ABL). The Committee recommends $56,828,000 the 
amount of the budget request. The Committee recognizes the Air 
Force's commitment to this program and believes the Airborne 
Laser has the potential to offer an effective near-term boost-
phase intercept missile defense capability.
    The Committee also directs that the Air Force provide a 
report on the total costs of the ABL program to include 
demonstration/validation, development, acquisition and 
deployment costs and an assessment of the possible Anti-
Ballistic Missile Treaty implications of developing and 
deploying an ABL system.

                             polar adjunct

    The Air Force requested $62,387,000 for the polar adjunct 
communications system. The Committee recommends $22,387,000, a 
decrease of $40,000,000. The Committee's recommendation is 
discussed more fully in the classified annex to this report.

               space based infrared architecture--dem/val

    The Air Force budgeted $120,151,000 for the space based 
infrared system (SBIRS). The Committee recommends $249,151,000, 
an increase of $129,000,000. Within this amount, the Committee 
has provided an additional $134,000,000 only for the 
acceleration of the space missile and tracking system (SMTS). 
The Committee also recommends a reduction of $5,000,000 due to 
unwarranted program support cost growth on the SBIRS program.

              intercontinental ballistic missile--dem/val

    The Air Force requested $30,644,000 for Demonstration and 
Validation of Intercontinental Ballistic Missile (ICBM) 
technologies. The Committee recommends $48,344,000, an increase 
of $17,700,000 only for GPS range safety enhancements for 
ICBMs.

               Engineering and Manufacturing Development

                                  B-1B

    The Air Force requested $220,932,000 for the B-1B 
conventional capability development program. The Committee 
recommends $207,932,000, a decrease of $13,000,000. The 
Committee recommends reducing the request by $6,500,000 due to 
unwarranted growth for program mission support costs, and 
$6,500,000 for ECM source selection costs. It is the 
Committee's understanding that the Air Force has already chosen 
the desired ECM approach for the B-1B thus eliminating the need 
for these funds in fiscal year 1997.

                specialized undergraduate pilot training

    The Air Force requested $84,291,000 for specialized 
undergraduate pilot training. The Committee recommends 
$87,691,000, an increase of $3,400,000 only for missionization 
and ground based training system development of the JPATS 
aircraft program.

                                  F-22

    The Air Force requested $2,002,959,000 for the F-22 
program. The Committee recommends $1,982,459,000, a decrease of 
$20,500,000. The Committee makes this recommendation without 
prejudice, noting that historically the Air Force has only 
awarded 84 percent of the funds budgeted for award fees for the 
F-22 in a given fiscal year. The Committee, accordingly, makes 
this reduction.

                     B-2 advanced technology bomber

    The Air Force requested $528,454,000 for the B-2 program. 
The Committee recommends $740,454,000, an increase of 
$212,000,000. The Committee recommends a decrease of 
$20,000,000 for curtailment tooling and an increase of 
$232,000,000 for post Block 30 improvements to the B-2 fleet. 
The Committee directs that the additional funding provided be 
used to fund the following development and integration efforts, 
(1) GPS-Guided BLU-113, (2) JSOW, (3) JTIDS, (4) DAMA/HQII, (5) 
mission management, and (5) support cost reduction initiatives.

                          life support systems

    The Air Force requested $4,363,000 for life support 
systems. The Committee recommends $5,863,000, an increase of 
$1,500,000 only for ejection seat technology demonstrations.

         joint tactical information distribution system (jtids)

    The Air Force requested $11,075,000 for the Joint Tactical 
Information Distribution System (JTIDS). The Committee 
recommends $30,875,000, an increase of $19,800,000 only for 
air-to-ground Link-16 development common to the B-1, F-15E, and 
F-16. The Air Force has identified an unfunded requirement to 
integrate Link-16 on these platforms at an accelerated pace. 
Though the Committee believes Link-16 provides a significant 
warfighting capability, it is questionable whether the Air 
Force can afford the additional $335 million required to 
integrate the capability on all three platforms at the 
accelerated pace. Therefore, the Committee recommendation 
provides for the maximum level of funds identified by the Air 
Force as common to all three platforms. The Air Force is 
encouraged to budget for platform specific integration as part 
of its fiscal year 1998 budget submission.

             joint air-to-surface standoff missile (jassm)

    The Air Force requested $198,632,000 for pre-EMD efforts 
for the JASSM program. The Committee recommends $148,632,000, a 
reduction of $50,000,000. The Committee notes that the Air 
Force request for fiscal year 1997, the first full year of 
JASSM development, exceeds the amount budgeted for development 
in any other fiscal year of the program. The Committee further 
notes that the Air Force has budgeted approximately $360 
million for pre-EMD efforts, more than twice the approximate 
$160 million budgeted for EMD. GAO has also expressed a concern 
that the schedule may not be sufficient to fully develop, 
integrate, and test some of the complex missile subsystems. 
Given these concerns, the Committee believes the Air Force has 
requested more funding in fiscal year 1997 than can be 
effectively used. Accordingly, the Committee recommendation 
reflects a more realistic funding level for fiscal year 1997.

                    Operational Systems Development

                             F-16 squadrons

    The Air Force requested $142,202,000 for F-16 development 
efforts. The Committee recommends $132,202,000, a reduction of 
$10,000,000. The F-16 program has a high unexpended balance of 
fiscal year 1995 funds that the Air Force attributes to late 
obligations. Since these late obligations were associated with 
efforts initiated in prior years, the Committee concludes that 
prior year funding is carrying the program well into the 
following year. Accordingly, the Committee recommends a 
reduction of $10,000,000 to ensure program funding is phased 
appropriately.

                            F-15E squadrons

    The Air Force requested $143,095,000 for development 
efforts related to the F-15. The Committee recommends 
$158,095,000, an increase of $15,000,000 only for the Band 1.5 
upgrade for the F-15 ALQ-135 self-protection jammer.

                     manned destructive suppression

    The Committee directs the Department of the Air Force to 
provide a report to the Committee on its upgrade and 
acquisition strategy for the Harm Targeting System (HTS) and 
its implementation plan for the Precision Direction Finding 
System (PDFS) on the F-15 fighter fleet. This report shall be 
provided to the Committee no later than March 15, 1997.

          aircraft component engine improvement program (acip)

    The Air Force requested $99,050,000 for the ACIP program. 
The Committee recommends $96,850,000, a decrease of $2,200,000 
for program management costs. The Committee notes that program 
management costs for ACIP have increased over fiscal year 1996 
levels while the number of engine improvement programs have 
decreased.

                     usaf wargaming and simulation

    The Air Force requested $19,361,000 for wargaming and 
simulation. The Committee recommends $26,361,000, an increase 
of $7,000,000 only for the Wright-Patterson AFB simulation and 
analysis facility.

                defense satellite communications system

    The Air Force requested $24,527,000 for the Defense 
Satellite Communications System (DSCS). The Committee 
recommends $28,127,000, an increase of $3,600,000 only to 
modify existing DSCS satellites gain control and antenna 
connections.

                    satellite control network (SCN)

    The Air Force requested $89,960,000 for the satellite 
control network. The Committee recommends $86,960,000, a 
decrease of $3,000,000. According to the GAO, contract cost 
savings from prior years are available for fiscal year 1997 
requirements for the SCN program.

                     titan iv space launch vehicles

    The Air Force requested $105,472,000 for Titan IV space 
launch vehicles. The Committee recommends $102,472,000, a 
decrease of $3,000,000. The Committee understands that a delay 
in the awarding of a contract for a new guidance system has 
resulted in fiscal year 1996 funds being available for fiscal 
year 1997 requirements.

                      arms control implementation

    The Air Force requested $26,786,000 for arms control 
implementation. The Committee recommends $31,386,000, an 
increase of $4,600,000. This increase provides a total of 
$11,100,000 for CTBT monitoring research. Of this amount 
$7,600,000 shall be available only for research efforts in the 
field of explosion seismology, and $3,500,000 shall be 
available for research efforts in complementary disciplines, 
such as hydroacoustics, infrasound and radionuclide analyses.
    The Committee directs that the $11,100,000 for CTBT 
monitoring research can be used only to support documented Air 
Force operational monitoring requirements. The Committee also 
directs the Department to provide sufficient funding in future 
year budget requests to provide for a stable and robust seismic 
research program.

                                  pram

    The Air Force requested $13,564,000 for the productivity, 
reliability, availability, and maintainability program (PRAM). 
The Committee recommends $16,564,000, an increase of $3,000,000 
only for the spare parts production and reprocurement support 
system (SPARES).

                          Program Recommended

    The total amount recommended in the bill will provide the 
following program in fiscal year 1997:



        RESEARCH, DEVELOPMENT, TEST AND EVALUATION, DEFENSE-WIDE

Fiscal year 1996 appropriation..........................  $9,411,057,000
Fiscal year 1997 budget request.........................   8,398,836,000
Committee recommendation................................   9,068,558,000
Change from budget request..............................    +669,722,000

    This appropriation provides funds for the Research, 
Development, Test and Evaluation activities of centrally 
managed programs and the Defense Agencies.

                       Committee Recommendations

                         Authorization Changes

    The Committee recommends the following changes in 
accordance with authorization action:

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                   Committee       Change from  
                                                                Budget request  recommendations      request    
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
University Research Initiatives..............................          209,235          229,235          +20,000
Medical Free Electron Laser..................................           23,457           20,457           -3,000
Lincoln Laboratory Research..................................           20,068           10,568           -9,500
Explosives Demilitarization Technology.......................  ...............           15,000          +15,000
Support Technologies/Follow-on Technologies..................          132,319          172,319          +40,000
Joint Technology Insertion Program...........................           14,523  ...............          -14,523
Commercial Technology Insertion Program......................           48,411  ...............          -48,411
Dual Use Application Program.................................          250,000  ...............         -250,000
Theater High-Altitude Area Defense...........................          481,798          621,798         +140,000
Navy Upper Tier..............................................           58,171          304,171         +246,000
Corps Sam/MEADS..............................................           56,232  ...............          -56,232
National Missile Defense.....................................          508,437          858,437         +350,000
General Reduction............................................  ...............          -15,000          -15,000
Technical Assistance.........................................            4,785  ...............           -4,785
Defense Mapping Agency.......................................          100,997           90,997          -10,000
Special Operations Intelligence Systems......................            1,315            2,315           +1,000
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

                             Basic Research

                in-house laboratory independent research

    The Department requested $2,154,000 for in-house laboratory 
independent research. The Committee recommends $3,454,000, an 
increase of $1,300,000 only for the integration and improvement 
of basic university research for defense.

                      focused research initiatives

    The Committee has provided $15,580,000 for the Focused 
Research Initiatives. The Committee directs that none of these 
funds be obligated until the Department complies with last 
year's conference agreement to provide funding for new 
materials research.

                chemical and biological defense program

    The Department requested $28,739,000 for the chemical and 
biological defense program. The Committee recommends 
$30,939,000, an increase of $2,200,000 only for biological 
warfare countermeasures.

                          tactical technology

    The Department requested $117,944,000 for tactical 
technology. The Committee recommends $125,944,000, an increase 
of $8,000,000. This increase includes $5,000,000 only for ship 
system automation and $3,000,000 only for continuing virtual 
reality efforts and simulation based design and maritime 
technology.

               integrated command and control technology

    The Department requested $45,000,000 for integrated command 
and control technology. The Committee recommends $47,000,000, 
an increase of $2,000,000 only for optoelectronic digital 
cameras.

                  materials and electronics technology

    The Department requested $218,539,000 for materials and 
electronics technology. The Committee recommends $225,539,000, 
an increase of $7,000,000 only for seamless high off-chip 
connectivity.

                         defense nuclear agency

    The Department requested $195,131,000 for the Defense 
Nuclear Agency. The Committee recommends $218,131,000, an 
increase of $23,000,000. Within this increase, $5,000,000 is 
only for bioenvironmental hazards research, $8,000,000 is only 
for counter-terrorist explosive research and $10,000,000 is 
only for thermionics.

                           electrothermal gun

    The budget request included $6,000,000 for the 
electrothermal gun. The Committee believes this technology has 
substantial potential. However, the Committee is concerned that 
DNA has not obligated 1996 funds which were appropriated for 
this purpose. The Committee expects that the $4,000,000 that 
was appropriated in 1996 be used solely for the electrothermal 
gun technology.

        experimental evaluation of major innovative technologies

    The Department requested $635,553,000 for experimental 
evaluation of major innovative technologies. The Committee 
recommends $678,953,000, an increase of $43,400,000. Within 
this increase, $10,000,000 is only for high temperature 
superconducting materials, $10,000,000 is only for Geosar, 
$10,000,000 is only for shallow water anti-submarine warfare, 
$2,400,000 is only for carbonate-based fuel cells, and 
$3,000,000 is only for helicopter active structural control. In 
addition, $8,000,000 has been provided for DARPA to continue 
its research in advanced telecommunications and emergency 
medical services, through a disaster relief and emergency 
medical services program integrating telemedicine research and 
development efforts involving recent work by the U.S. Army 
Medical Research and Materiel Command.

              electronic volumetric imaging system (evis)

    The Committee recognizes the importance of completing 
development and building a prototype of an Electronic 
Volumetric Imaging System (EVIS) and believes that adequate 
funds should be provided for this purpose.

                          thermo photovoltaics

    The Committee expresses its continued support for the 
ongoing Thermo Photovoltaics (TPV) program at DARPA. The 
Committee believes the TPV energy conversion technology is a 
promising electrical power source for a wide range of military 
missions from space flight to field operations that require 
small portable energy sources.

              internetted unattended ground sensors (iugs)

    The Committee believes that internetted unattended ground 
sensors (IUGS) could be extremely effective in responding to 
battlefield situations such as those faced in Desert Storm. The 
Committee urges the Department to fund this promising 
technology which consists of a distributed sensor and 
communications suite which detects and classifies enemy assets.

                chemical and biological defense program

    The Department requested $41,685,000 for the chemical and 
biological defense program. The Committee recommends 
$43,485,000, an increase of $1,800,000 only for biological 
warfare countermeasures.

                strategic environmental research program

    The Department requested $54,880,000 for the Strategic 
Environmental Research and Development Program (SERDP). The 
Committee recommends $57,880,000, an increase of $3,000,000 
above the budget request for purposes discussed below. The 
Committee directs the Director of Defense Research and 
Engineering, in consultation with the Deputy Undersecretary of 
Defense for Environmental Security to establish a research, 
development and demonstration program devoted to health and 
safety issues of environmental cleanup workers as they relate 
to the development and introduction of environmental 
remediation technologies. The program shall develop and 
evaluate protection and safety methods and techniques necessary 
for the safe use and application of environmental remediation 
technology and to transfer such methods and techniques to field 
use. The Committee recommends an increase of $3,000,000 to the 
Strategic Environmental Research and Development Program for 
this purpose.

                  cooperative dod/va medical research

    The budget requested no funding for cooperative DOD/VA 
medical research. The Committee recommends $25,000,000. Within 
this increase, $6,500,000 is only for collaborative brain 
research, and $18,500,000 is only for DoD/VA cooperative 
research.

                   advanced electronics technologies

    The budget requested $332,100,000 for advanced electronics 
technologies. The Committee recommends $352,100,000, an 
increase of $20,000,000. Within this increase, $5,000,000 is 
only for the development of plasma process equipment for 
microelectromechanical systems, and $15,000,000 is only for 
Electronic Commerce Resource Centers (ECRCs).

                     microelectromechanical systems

    The Committee recommends $5,000,000 to develop plasma 
process equipment for high performance silicon trench etching 
technology in support of Microelectromechanical Systems (MEMS). 
MEMS offers sensors and accuators based on microscopic 
structures created in silicon, glass, metal and plastic. The 
Department of Defense has traditionally developed such 
technologies in support of specific programs rather than at the 
industrial base level. The next generation of military systems 
such as fuses, smart munitions and miniature guidance systems 
will require MEMS-based microscopic sensing and accuating 
tasks. The Committee urges the Department to ensure this 
capability is freely available across all service and 
programmatic lines.

                        manufacturing processes

    The Committee is concerned that critical defense 
manufacturing processes and technologies are in danger of being 
lost as a result of downsizing in the defense industry 
especially those involving small and medium size companies.
    The Committee believes the Defense Logistics Agency (DLA) 
is ideally suited to identify potential problems affecting the 
defense supplier base and which, if any programs may be 
required to address these concerns.
    The Committee directs DLA to submit a report to the 
Committee on its findings by January 1, 1997.

                                secures

    The Committee believes that Systems for the Effective 
Control of Urban Environmental Security (SECURES) may have 
substantial military application. SECURES is a technology that 
is being developed for the law enforcement community which uses 
a grid of sensors to detect the sound of gunfire and could be 
useful to military personnel in defending against snipers. The 
Committee directs the Department to examine this technology to 
determine its applicability for the military and report its 
findings within 60 days of the enactment of this act.

                           electric vehicles

    The budget requested no funding for electric vehicles. The 
Committee recommends $15,000,000 only for electric vehicle 
technology.

               advanced concept technology demonstrations

    The budget requested $98,471,000 for Advanced Concept 
Technology Demonstrations (ACTDs), an increase of $59,862,000 
over the 1996 appropriated level. The Committee recommends 
$38,609,000, a decrease of $59,862,000. The recommended amount 
is equal to the fiscal year 1996 level for this program. Within 
the amounts provided, $10,000,000 is only for the insertion of 
commercial manufacturing technology to support and modernize 
weapons system maintenance and logistics capabilities.

            high performance computing modernization program

    The budget requested $99,880,000 for high performance 
computing modernization. The Committee recommends $61,380,000, 
a decrease of $38,500,000.
    The Committee believes the High Performance Computing 
Modernization Program should provide resources to procure 
state-of-the-art production-ready high performance computers to 
enable DoD researchers to solve their mission-oriented research 
problems related to weapons development and other important 
military applications. The Committee is concerned that the 
current program is inordinately focused on software 
development, training, and administration. The Committee 
believes that such computer science services are more 
appropriately within the scope of the multi-agency High 
Performance Computing and Communications Initiative. 
Accordingly, in this account as well as Procurement, Defense-
wide the Committee has proposed funding shifts intended to 
ensure that a greater percentage of Modernization Program funds 
are spent on high performance computer hardware and ancillary 
equipment. This guidance is reflected in Section 8054 of the 
General Provisions.
    The Committee is concerned that DoD has not provided 
funding for the modernization of the Army High Performance 
Computing Research Center (AHPCRC), despite positive 
recommendations from the Army and an independent review panel. 
Therefore, the Committee directs that the Modernization Program 
transfer $20 million to the AHPCRC for the modernization of its 
production supercomputers.
    The Committee also believes that the Modernization Program 
should not require eighteen months to conduct a computer 
procurement, as has been the case with the current Major Shared 
Resource Center procurement. Such prolonged procurements make 
it difficult to ensure that the most modern equipment is 
acquired, given the short life cycles to current generations of 
modern computer equipment. The Committee directs that DoD take 
steps necessary to preclude recurrence of such procurement 
delays.
    Finally, the Committee notes that the DoD has not published 
an updated High Performance Computing Modernization Program 
Plan or Program Implementation Plan for over two years. The 
Committee believes that current information about the program 
is vital to the DoD services, Congress and industry. Therefore, 
the Committee directs that such plans be published annually no 
later than March 15.

                     dual use applications programs

    The budget requested $312,934,000 for dual use programs 
including:

Dual Use Applications Program...........................    $250,000,000
Joint Technology Insertion Program......................      14,523,000
Commercial Technology Insertion Program.................      48,411,000

    The Committee believes that dual use technology is 
worthwhile and has the potential of improving defense products 
while at the same time keeping costs down. However, the 
Committee believes that development of dual use, commercially 
available technologies should be part of the services' 
research, development and acquisition process. Therefore, in 
accordance with House authorization action, the Committee 
recommends eliminating the specific appropriation in this title 
for dual use programs and recommends that the Department 
provide funding for dual use activities in the manner suggested 
in the House-passed Defense Authorization bill.

                       ballistic missile defense

    The budget requested $2,534,182,000 for Ballistic Missile 
Defense in the Research, Development, Test and Evaluation title 
of this bill. The Committee recommends $3,238,950,000 for the 
Ballistic Missile Defense Organization's (BMDO) research and 
development programs, an increase of $704,768,000, as proposed 
in the House-passed Defense Authorization bill. The Committee 
recommends specific changes in Ballistic Missile Defense 
programs as detailed in the table below.

                                            BALLISTIC MISSILE DEFENSE                                           
                                            [In thousands of dollars]                                           
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                   Committee       Change from  
                                                                Budget request   recommendation      request    
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
National Missile Defense.....................................          508,437          858,437         +350,000
Theater High-Altitude Area Defense...........................          481,798          621,798         +140,000
Navy Upper Tier..............................................           58,171          304,171         +246,000
Corps Sam (MEADS)............................................           56,232  ...............          -56,232
Support Technologies/Follow on Technologies..................          132,319          172,319          +40,000
General Reduction Management.................................  ...............  ...............          -15,000
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

                        Theater Missile Defense

    The Department requested $481,798,000 for the Theater High-
Altitude Area Defense (THAAD) program. The Committee recommends 
$621,798,000, an increase of $140,000,000. The Committee is 
concerned that the President's Budget request for THAAD is 
underfunded, a factor confirmed by Departmental witnesses in 
testimony before the Committee. The Department's proposed 
program would, solely because of a lack of funding, delay 
potential THAAD deployment to the field by years. The 
Committee's proposed increase in funding would accelerate the 
THAAD program to achieve a prototype capability by 1999, and a 
full operational capability by 2004.
    The Department requested $58,171,000 for the Navy Upper 
Tier system. The Committee recommends $304,171,000, an increase 
of $246,000,000. In the Administration's program, Navy Upper 
Tier is not a full-fledged development program. Instead, 
funding included in the 1997 budget provides for a ``technology 
demonstration.'' The Committee strongly believes that Navy 
Upper Tier must be developed and deployed as soon as possible 
and therefore recommends an increase in funds to accomplish 
this purpose.

                        National Missile Defense

    The Department requested $508,437,000 for National Missile 
Defense. The Committee recommends $858,437,000, an increase of 
$350,000,000, as approved by the House in the recently-passed 
Defense Authorization bill. The Department's budget request 
does not provide sufficient funding to deploy a limited 
National Missile Defense (NMD) capability. The Committee 
believes that a NMD capability, sufficient to defend against a 
limited ballistic missile attack, should be developed and 
deployed by 2003.

                                 ramos

    The Committee recognizes that the Russian-American 
Observational Satellite (RAMOS) program offers significant 
benefits. The Committee urges continued funding of this 
successful cooperative effort between Russia and the United 
States.

                      Demonstration and Validation

                             joint robotics

    The budget requested $23,744,000 for the joint robotics 
program. The Committee recommends $28,744,000, an increase of 
$5,000,000 for the joint robotics program.

                  advanced sensor applications program

    The budget requested $24,001,000 for the advanced sensor 
applications program. The Committee recommends $26,501,000, an 
increase of $2,500,000 only to continue the ocean remote 
sensing research program conducted by the NOAA Environmental 
Technology Laboratory. The Committee directs that a total of 
$5,000,000 of the amount appropriated for the advanced sensor 
applications program be devoted only to continuing the ocean 
remote sensing research program investigating radar and 
radiometric sensing of the ocean.

                     nato research and development

    The budget requested a total of $52,905,000 in the Army, 
Navy, Air Force and Defense-wide appropriations for NATO 
research and development. This is more than twice the amount of 
the 1996 appropriation of $23,500,000. The Committee recommends 
no appropriation.
    The Committee continues to be concerned about the lack of 
success of cooperative international research and development 
programs. Over $800 million has been spent on the NATO research 
and development program since its inception in 1986. Since that 
time, 145 projects have been initiated and only 43 projects 
have been considered a success. This is only a 29% success 
rate. Furthermore, only a small number of projects have had a 
direct impact on improving fielded systems. The Committee 
believes that service requirements should receive priority over 
these projects.

               Engineering and Manufacturing Development

                chemical and biological defense program

    The budget requested $89,915,000 for the chemical and 
biological defense program. The Committee recommends 
$97,115,000, an increase of $7,200,000, only for biological 
warfare countermeasures.

                           Management Support

                           technical studies

    The budget requested $35,101,000 for technical studies, 
support and analysis. The Committee recommends no funds. These 
funds are specifically denied and should be so noted on DD Form 
1414, Base for Reprogramming Action. The Committee directs that 
none of the studies that would have been financed in this line 
be funded in any other Defense line item or service 
appropriation account without prior approval from the 
Committee. Given this designation of specific denial, in this 
instance it would be appropriate to reduce fiscal year 1998 
funding for this program and non-related programs just as some 
fiscal year 1997 programs were reduced in Program Budget 
Decision 631 and similar program budget decisions made by the 
Office of the Secretary of Defense.

                chemical and biological defense program

    The budget requested $16,708,000. The Committee recommends 
$22,708,000, an increase of $6,000,000, only for Pulsed Fast 
Neutron Analysis.

                        management headquarters

    The Department requested $36,369,000 for management 
headquarters. The Committee recommends $32,643,000, a reduction 
of $3,726,000. The recommended amount funds management 
headquarters at the 1996 appropriated level.

                    Operational Systems Development

                defense airborne reconnaissance program

                           program management

    Budget Format. The Committee remains a strong supporter of 
the Defense Airborne Reconnaissance Program (DARP) and is fully 
committed to continuing enhancements and developments of 
airborne reconnaissance capability, but however, not at the 
expense of sustaining operational support to our forces 
deployed around the world. The Committee has a long standing 
concern about the single Program Element (PE) comprising all 
DARP research and development projects and four generic line 
items in the Air Force and Defense-Wide procurement accounts. 
The basis of this concern is the extraordinary latitude the 
single PE gives the Defense Airborne Reconnaissance 
Organization (DARO) during the execution year, well after the 
appropriations process is concluded, to shift funding and 
implement significant program changes without obtaining formal 
consent or approval. Examples of this situation abound, i.e., 
SENIOR SMART restructured to JASA and the current acquisition 
strategy just recently undergone even further restructure; U-2 
and RC-135 sensor development and modification terminated or 
delayed with funds being reprogrammed to UAV programs or other 
activities; HUNTER funding transfers to other programs and to 
the newly restructured Tactical UAV program; DARO ``taxes'' 
taken from programs to pay DARO overhead and management 
expenses. These instances of multimillion dollar reprogramming 
of appropriated funds after formal appropriations deliberations 
were concluded have clearly improperly circumvented the 
oversight authority of the Committee.
    To alleviate these concerns the Committee directs that the 
DARP be restructured into categories of accounts as shown 
below, and separate PEs be established for each account. The 
budget format for Procurement programs is shown under the 
Procurement, Defense-Wide, portion of this report. All future 
budget submissions shall use this new structure. The Committee 
further directs separate project numbers be assigned to any 
activity within these PEs having funding levels in excess of 
$5,000,000.

Research and development programs

    I. DARP Management. (This account funds manpower, travel, 
supplies and equipment, Scientific, Engineering and Technical 
Assistance (SETA)/FFRDC and other administrative and management 
costs.)
    II. Manned Reconnaissance Programs.
          a. U-2
          b. RC-135
          c. SR-71
          d. EP-3E/ARIES
          e. REEF POINT
    III. Unmanned Airborne Reconnaissance Programs.
          a. Predator MAE UAV
          b. Global Hawk HAE
          c. Dark Star LO HAE
          d. Tactical UAV
          e. Pioneer UAV
    IV Advanced Sensor and Technology Programs.
          a. Advanced Imagery Sensors Project
          b. Advanced SIGINT Sensors Project
          c. Advanced Technology
    V. Common Dissemination and Ground Stations.
          a. Common Data Link
          b. Common Imagery Ground/Surface System
          c. Airborne Reconnaissance Ground SIGINT Systems
          d. Distributed Common Ground System
          e. Multi-Intelligence Reconnaissance Ground Systems
          f. High Altitude Endurance UAV Common Ground Station
    The Committee reiterates its intention to continue vigorous 
oversight over the DARP budget, and the language contained in 
the Committee's report accompanying the Department of Defense 
Appropriations Bill for fiscal year 1995 remains in effect. The 
DARO is to continue to obtain written approval from the 
Committees on Appropriations of the House and Senate for all 
transfers of funds between the various programs and/or projects 
which exceed $2,000,000.
    DARP Management. The fiscal year 1997 budget request for 
DARP Integration and Support and DARO operations is 
$19,841,000. The Committee agrees to provide the budget request 
of $19,841,000 and directs that this amount be capped at this 
level. Any transfer of funds into this account requires prior 
approval from the Committees on Appropriations of the House and 
Senate.
    Program Execution. The Committee is concerned about the 
overall executability of a number of DARP programs. While 
technology demonstrations are useful, there comes a point where 
a transition must take place to move from ``demonstrating for 
demonstrations' sake'' to an emphasis on transitioning the 
technology into a fully operational military system. The key to 
this transition in successful programs has been a strong 
commitment by the Services to program funding for production 
system and to commit personnel resources to operate and 
maintain the system. The lack of Service commitment is 
conspicuous in a number of DARP programs, particularly the UAV 
ACTD programs and some advanced technology sensor programs, 
most notably the newly restructured Joint Airborne SIGINT 
Architecture. These shortfalls raise the question of program 
executability. If the Services are unable to execute DARP 
programs currently in development, then the DARO should 
restructure its efforts in line with the resources available. 
The Committee directs the DARO to report in future 
congressional justification book submissions production cost 
and manpower requirements for all DARP systems and detail 
shortfalls in these areas which may affect program execution.

                             dark star uav

    The budget request includes $17,400,000 for the DARK STAR 
unmanned aerial vehicle (UAV). The Committee recommends 
$59,900,000, an increase of $42,500,000. Of this amount, 
$17,000,000 shall be used only to procure a replacement air 
vehicle for the one that recently crashed during flight test, 
so that a total of four air vehicles will be available to 
conduct the advanced concept technology demonstration as 
planned. Of the remaining $25,500,000, $22,000,000 shall be 
used only to identify and fix technical problems which caused 
the crash of air vehicle #1, accomplish additional simulations 
and computational aerodynamic evaluations and restart the 
testing phase; and $3,500,000 shall be used only for 
integrating existing electro-optical framing camera technology 
into the aircraft and associated ground processing equipment.
    The Committee directs the Defense Airborne Reconnaissance 
Office to submit a report to the Committees on Appropriations 
of the House and Senate that includes the results of the 
investigation of the crash of air vehicle #1 and an audit trail 
of all funds appropriated to date for the DARK STAR UAV 
program. The report must be submitted by July 1, 1996.

                electro-optical (eo) framing technology

    The Committee recommends $15,000,000 only for the 
continuation of EO framing technologies only with on-chip 
graded forward motion compensation (FMC). Of this amount, 
$2,000,000 shall be used to fund the testing, evaluation and 
concept design of a high quantum efficiency, large area EO 
framing, infra-red charged coupled device only with an on-chip 
graded forward motion compensation (FMC). The Committee 
believes the Predator UAV system will benefit from enhanced 
survivability due to greater stand-off range and higher 
resolution afforded by large area EO framing sensors, an 
additional $3,300,000 shall be used solely to upgrade existing 
Predator air vehicles with operational insertion of three 25-
mega pixel EO framing sensors only with an on-chip graded FMC.

                        USH-42 MISSION RECORDER

    The Committee expects the Department to establish a mission 
recorder acquisition plan to acquire a digital version of the 
Navy's USH-42 mission recorders for DARO reconnaissance and 
surveillance platforms as recommended in the fiscal year 1996 
appropriations conference agreement and report the plan to the 
Committees on Appropriations of the House and Senate prior to 
the conference on this year's Defense Appropriations bill. 
Additionally, as directed by the conferees, DARO shall use 
funds provided in fiscal year 1996 to continue the product 
improvement program during fiscal year 1997.

                       AUTHORIZATION ADJUSTMENTS

    The Committee recommends the following adjustments in 
accordance with House authorization action:

GLOBAL HAWK UAV.........................................    -$10,000,000
U-2 Sensor Upgrades.....................................     +57,000,000
Common Dissem & Ground/Surface System...................     +11,000,000
Multi-function self aligned gate technology.............      +8,000,000

               special operations technology development

    The Department requested $4,083,000 for special operations 
technology development. The Committee recommends $6,083,000, an 
increase of $2,000,000 only for the Joint Ranger Anti-Armor 
Anti-personnel Weapon System (JRAAWS).

            Special Operations Tactical Systems Development

    The Department requested $83,923,000. The Committee 
recommends $89,323,000, an increase of $5,400,000. Within this 
increase $4,400,000 is only for Advanced Seal Delivery System 
(ASDS) shortfalls, and $1,000,000 is only for full authority 
digital electronic control.

                Special Operations Intelligence Systems

                      JOINT THREAT WARNING SYSTEM

    The budget requested no funds for Joint Threat Warning 
System (JTWS) training development. The Committee recommends 
$1,000,000 only for the development of a training medium to 
support garrison, enroute and deployed JTWS operations.

                    SPECIAL OPERATIONS ENHANCEMENTS

    The budget requested $23,216,000 for Special Operations 
Enhancements. The Committee recommends an additional $5,500,000 
only to develop and test equipment which will be used to 
accomplish the mission of counterproliferation of weapons of 
mass destruction.

                              quiet knight

    The budget request did not include funds for the 
continuation of the Quiet Knight advanced avionics technology 
demonstration program. The Committee understands that 
sufficient funds are available from prior years to support the 
completion of the advanced technology demonstration and that no 
additional funds are required for the program in fiscal year 
1997.

                          Program Recommended

    The total amount recommended in the bill will provide the 
following program in fiscal year 1997:



               DEVELOPMENTAL TEST AND EVALUATION, DEFENSE

Fiscal Year 1996 appropriation..........................    $251,082,000
Fiscal Year 1997 budget request.........................     252,038,000
Committee recommendation................................     272,038,000
Change from budget request..............................     +20,000,000

    This appropriation funds Developmental Test and Evaluation, 
Defense activities, for direction and supervision of test and 
evaluation, joint testing, improvement of the effectiveness and 
efficiency of the DoD major ranges and test facilities, and 
technical and/or operational evaluation of foreign nations' 
weapons systems, equipment, and technologies.

                       Committee Recommendations

                          Program Recommended

    The total amount recommended in the bill will provide the 
following program in fiscal year 1997:

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                   Committee       Change from  
                                                                Budget request   recommendation      request    
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Director of test and evaluation defense......................          116,007          136,007          +20,000
Central test and evaluation investment development (CT)......           33,560           33,560  ...............
Foreign comparative testing..................................          102,471          102,471  ...............
Development test and evaluation..............................  ...............  ...............  ...............
                                                              --------------------------------------------------
      Total, director test and evaluation....................          252,038          272,038          +20,000
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

                director of test and evaluation defense

    The Department requested $116,007,000 for central test and 
evaluation. The Committee recommends $136,007,000, an increase 
of $20,000,000 only for the airborne separation video system.

                OPERATIONAL TEST AND EVALUATION, DEFENSE

Fiscal Year 1996 appropriation..........................     $22,587,000
Fiscal Year 1997 budget request.........................      21,968,000
Committee recommendation................................      26,968,000
Change from budget request..............................      +5,000,000

    This appropriation funds the activities of the Office of 
the Director, Operational Test and Evaluation.

                       Committee Recommendations

                          Program Recommended

    The total amount recommended in the bill will provide the 
following program in fiscal year 1997:

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                   Committee       Change from  
                                                                Budget request   recommendation      request    
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Director of operational test and evaluation:.................                                                   
    Operational test and evaluation..........................           11,980           11,980  ...............
    Live fire testing........................................            9,988           14,988           +5,000
                                                              --------------------------------------------------
        Total, director of operational test and evaluation...           21,968           29,968           +5,000
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

                           live fire testing

    The budget requested $9,988,000 for live fire testing. The 
Committee recommends $14,988,000, an increase of $5,000,000 
only for integrating and exploring alternate uses of simulation 
and training technologies for operational test and evaluation. 
The Committee directs the Director of Live Fire Testing to 
develop a program that will explore, select, and implement 
alternative uses of simulation and synthetic environment 
technologies that are being used for education and training for 
implementation by the live fire test community.

                    test and evaluation capabilities

    The Committee directs the Department to establish an 
independent study team under DOT&E leadership to report on more 
efficient ways to maintain and modernize Defense Department 
test and evaluation capabilities. The results of this effort 
are to be provided to the Committee by March 31, 1997. The 
Committee recognizes that other studies are underway to examine 
operations to reduce, consolidate and restructure defense 
laboratories and T&E centers. The Committee applauds these 
efforts but believes there is a need for an independent review 
of new ways to maintain needed test and evaluation 
capabilities. Since the Defense Department must be able to 
adequately test sophisticated weapons in the future, DoD must 
invest in technologies that will modernize our test resources, 
improve the capabilities of test personnel to develop complex 
test instrumentation and realistic stimulated test 
environments, and perform these functions in a manner that will 
best support a unified warfighting force structure.
                                TITLE V

                     REVOLVING AND MANAGEMENT FUNDS

                    DEFENSE BUSINESS OPERATIONS FUND

Fiscal year 1996 appropriation..........................    $878,700,000
Fiscal year 1997 budget request.........................     947,900,000
Committee recommendation................................     947,900,000
Change from the budget request..........................................

    The Committee recommends an appropriation of $947,900,000 
for the Defense Business Operations Fund. The recommendation is 
an increase of $69,200,000 above the amount appropriated for 
fiscal year 1996.

                  dbof financial management practices

    The Committee continues to have concerns about financial 
management practices in the Defense Business Operations Fund. 
In particular, it appears to the Committee that advance billing 
remains a problem in DBOF despite the Department's efforts to 
correct this situation. In addition, it has come to the 
Committee's attention that the Department maintains an 
unusually large balance of accounts receivable, and that this 
balance has grown significantly for Navy business areas over 
the past year. The Committee is also concerned about the 
application of the DoD policy that is supposed to integrate 
prior year operating results into current year prices, thereby 
foregoing the need for direct appropriations to cover operating 
losses. While the Committee agrees with the DoD policy, during 
each of the past two years the DoD budget request has included 
requests for passthroughs to resolve accumulated operating 
losses. Based on this experience, it is not clear to the 
Committee what criteria the Department applies for determining 
whether to deviate from its stated policies. Finally, the 
Committee again wishes to express its concern about the 
continuing problem of unmatched disbursements in DoD. Recent 
data on this issue indicates that a significant portion of the 
problem involves activities in the DBOF, and as highlighted 
above, much of the problem appears to reside with the Navy. The 
Committee directs the Secretary of Defense to submit a report 
to the congressional defense committees that addresses these 
concerns not later than March 31, 1997.

                     NATIONAL DEFENSE SEALIFT FUND

Fiscal year 1996 appropriation..........................  $1,024,220,000
Fiscal year 1997 budget request.........................     963,002,000
Committee recommendation................................   1,904,002,000
Change from budget request..............................    +941,000,000

    This appropriation provides funds for the lease, operation, 
and supply of prepositioning ships; operation of the Ready 
Reserve Force; acquisition of ships for the Military Sealift 
Command, the Ready Reserve Force, and the Marine Corps; and 
development and acquisition of lighterage.

        large medium speed roll-on/roll-off (LMSR) sealift ships

    For many years, the Committee has been concerned about the 
lack of strategic sealift to support combat operations. After 
Operation Desert Storm, the impact of inadequate sealift became 
obvious. Many witnesses before the Committee, including the 
regional CINC's, continue to stress that modernization of 
strategic sealift remains an absolute top priority. The 
Mobility Requirements Study in January 1992 established the 
need for 19 additional Large, Medium Speed Roll-on/Roll-off 
(LMSR) ships. The Mobility Requirements Study Bottom Up Review 
in March 1995 reaffirmed this requirement. Without these 19 
ships, there is a sealift shortfall of 2 million square feet 
for prepositioned Army combat and combat support equipment, as 
well as a shortfall of 3 million square feet of surge sealift 
capability to carry Army combat and combat support equipment 
from the United States. The Army is currently using Ready 
Reserve Force assets for interim afloat prepositioning while 
awaiting delivery of the first LMSRs. Funds for only 8 of the 
14 required new construction ships have been appropriated to 
date.
    The budget request included $604,000,000 to procure 2 LMSR 
sealift ships. The Committee recommends $1,215,000,000 for 4 
ships, an increase of $611,000,000. This recommendation saves 
$50,000,000 compared to the current plan for acquisition of 
these ships, allows the Department to use $661,000,000 
currently programmed for the fiscal year 1999 budget for other 
purposes, and allows delivery of the 2 additional ships earlier 
than currently planned.

               maritime propositioning force--enhancement

    The Navy requested no funds for Maritime Propositioning 
Force--Enhancement ships. Since there is an urgent, Joint 
Chiefs of Staff approved requirement for additional ships to 
augment the existing MPF fleet to support Marine Corps 
amphibious operations in three areas of the world, the 
Committee recommends an additional $250,000,000. These funds 
may be used for either new construction or conversion of 
existing ships at the discretion of the Commandant of the 
Marine Corps.

                               lighterage

    The Navy requested no funds for lighterage, equipment which 
is vital for off-loading sealift ships to get equipment and 
supplies to shore. Lighterage consists of floating platforms 
known as RO/RO discharge facilities, floating piers or causeway 
ferries. This year the Army published a modernization plan 
which states ``There is currently no on-hand capability, nor 
programmed procurement, for roll-on/roll-off discharge 
facilities'' for LMSR ships. This is disturbing since it means 
the nation is buying 19 LMSR sealift ships for over $6 billion 
which will not have the proper support equipment for their 
effective use in combat operations. Joint operations today 
using Army and Navy lighterage are hampered by the fact that 
each service has different systems. Today's systems in both 
services are rated for ``sea state 2'' conditions, while the 
JCS requirement is for ``sea state 3'' systems. In a Korean 
conflict scenario, the difference means a 67 percent increase 
in the number of days per month in which cargo can be offloaded 
from large sealift ships, a significant increase of logistics 
support to combat operations. The Committee recommends 
$80,000,000 for lighterage acquisition, of which $30,000,000 is 
only for purchase of 6 sea-state 2 lighterage systems to 
support Army combat operations and $50,000,000 is only to 
develop a common configuration, sea-state 3 prototype system 
for both services which can be fielded with the Army as 
operational equipment when the development program is 
completed. If the development program is successful, both 
services will be able to procure a common system for all future 
procurements, greatly enhancing joint service combat operations 
as well as lowering each service's acquisition unit costs 
through a higher volume production line. The Committee has 
amended bill language for the National Defense Sealift Fund to 
allow development and acquisition of lighterage systems, and 
designates these funds to be of special Congressional interest.
                                TITLE VI

                  OTHER DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE PROGRAMS

                         Defense Health Program

Fiscal year 1996 appropriation.......................... $10,226,358,000
Fiscal year 1997 budget request.........................   9,627,758,000
Committee recommendation................................   9,667,658,000
Change from budget request..............................     +39,900,000

    The Department requested $9,627,758,000 for the Defense 
Health Program. The Committee recommends $9,667,658,000, an 
increase of $39,900,000 in Operation and maintenance only for 
the following:

PACMEDNET...............................................      10,000,000
Breast Cancer...........................................      25,000,000
Head Injury.............................................       1,500,000
Gulf War Syndrome.......................................       3,400,000


    The Committee has also added $475 million above the request 
in Title II of the bill to fully fund unbudgeted shortfalls in 
the Defense Health Program, as described earlier in this 
report.

                            Medical Research

    The committee recommends increases to research and 
development accounts only for the following programs:

602716A:
    Med teams...........................................      $3,900,000
    Trauma care.........................................         250,000
602787A:
    Hepatitis...........................................      25,000,000
    Walter Reed.........................................       5,200,000
    Health Technology Road maps.........................       3,500,000
    Tissue Graft........................................       2,000,000
    ENTMIS..............................................       2,000,000
    CAMIS...............................................       5,000,000
    Calcium signaling/cancer cell proliferation.........       2,300,000
    Neurotoxin exposure therapies.......................      25,000,000
    Bone disease research...............................       5,000,000
603002A:
    Breast cancer.......................................     100,000,000
603105A:
    HIV/AIDS............................................      15,000,000
603706N
    Casualty Stabilization..............................       2,600,000
    Bone Marrow.........................................      14,000,000
    Rural Health........................................       3,500,000

                         desert storm syndrome

    The Committee has provided $3,400,000 and bill language 
directing the Secretary of Defense, through the Walter Reed 
Army Medical Center, to immediately obligate these funds to 
private sector physicians for a treatment protocol and related 
studies, for Desert Storm affected veterans, that only use the 
anti-bacterial treatment method based upon the excretion of 
dead and decaying spherical bacteria. The Committee notes this 
method has already been found by private sector physicians to 
be a successful treatment of some Desert Storm veterans. These 
funds are provided for treatment of Desert Storm veterans. The 
Committee directs that this obligation of funds for this 
treatment protocol and related studies be made through the 
Walter Reed Medical Center only to private physicians who have 
already successfully treated some 10 veterans or dependents 
with the Desert Storm syndrome. The method of treatment 
described in this report and provided thus far on a private 
basis by these private physicians has to be statistically 
validated and proven in the hope that it may provide hundreds 
of Persian Gulf veterans, who have requested this treatment, an 
avenue for relief.

                          BONE MARROW RESEARCH

    The Navy requested $20,000,000 for the C.W. Bill Young 
Marrow Donor Recruitment and Research Program. The Committee 
recommends $34,000,000, an increase of $14,000,000 for this 
program, administered by the Naval Medical Research Institute. 
The Committee is aware of the continuing success of the Navy's 
Marrow Donor program, a life-saving program for military 
contingencies and civilian patients which now includes more 
than 2,000,000 potential volunteer donors. The DoD donor center 
has recruited 100,000 DoD volunteers, and provides more marrow 
donors per week than any other donor center in the nation. DD 
form 1414 shall show this is a special Congressional interest 
item.

                              hiv research

    In recognition of the world renowned expertise in vaccine 
research and development at the Walter Reed Army Institute of 
Research, the Committee has added $15,000,000 over the budget 
request to increase scientific knowledge regarding host 
defense/HIV interactions correlated with protection worldwide, 
and to design, evaluate, and produce candidate vaccines through 
collaborations with industry and international partners. The 
Committee understands that designing and developing potential 
vaccines can be a complex, multi-year endeavor that requires a 
multi-year funding commitment. The Committee expects the 
Department to recognize the importance of a multi-year approach 
towards addressing this task and directs the Department to 
budget for adequate follow-on funding in the Future Years 
Defense Plan.

                             BREAST CANCER

    The Committee recommends an increase of $125,000,000 only 
for breast cancer research, prevention and treatment, an 
increase of $25,000,000 over the amounts appropriated for these 
purposes in fiscal year 1996.
    The Committee strongly supports the Army's highly-acclaimed 
peer-reviewed breast cancer research program, and of the amount 
added by the Committee, $100,000,000 is to continue this 
program. The remaining $25,000,000 is to continue the 
Committee's initiative of last year to provide additional 
funding specifically for improvements within the military 
health care system, for in-house DOD training, education, 
access to care, and improved detection technology programs 
dedicated to serving service members and their families.
    Of the amounts provided for research, the Committee 
believes specific programs should be developed for the 
following areas of concern: not less than $3,000,000 for 
continuing ongoing Army and Navy-sponsored research for the 
development of computer-assisted diagnosis and image 
enhancement methods to improve teleradiology procedures for 
digital x-ray and mammography imaging; not less than $6,000,000 
for development of a computer-based decision support system to 
allow patients to better understand the diagnosis, treatment 
options, and risk factors associated with treatment; and not 
less than $3,500,000 for establishment of an advanced cancer 
detection center for military personnel, dependents, and 
retired service members, using a network including a military 
hospital or hospitals, a regional TRICARE provider, a 
Department of Veterans Affairs hospital or hospitals, and a 
medical facility with a focused cancer center, in order to 
conduct coordinated screening for early detection and 
treatment, to train military cancer specialists, and to develop 
improved cancer detection equipment and technology.

                provision of care for military retirees

    The Committee strongly believes military retirees over the 
age of 65 who are no longer eligible for CHAMPUS or Tricare 
benefits should be provided care in Military Treatment 
Facilities (MTFs) on a space-available basis. The Committee 
understands that implementation of the TRICARE managed-health 
care system may hinder ready access to MTFs by this beneficiary 
population. The Committee firmly believes that proper 
management of health care facilities providers, and resources 
should enable the current military health care system to 
provide continued access to care for all eligible 
beneficiaries. The Committee fully expects the Department not 
to abandon its commitment to provide health care services to 
those of 65 and their families.
    The Committee continues to express its strong support for 
legislative changes that would allow the Department of Defense 
to be reimbursed for services it provides Medicare-eligible 
retirees, a concept referred to as ``Medicare subvention''. The 
Committee notes the recent endorsement of Medicare subvention 
by the Department of Defense as well as the House National 
Security Committee, and expresses its continued disappointment 
that neither the Administration nor the Congressional 
committees of jurisdiction have acted to provide for this 
common-sense change in health care benefits. The Committee once 
again goes on record as endorsing this concept and expresses 
its willingness to work with the responsible parties in both 
the executive and legislative branches in order to make the 
needed changes in law.

                       uncompensated health care

    The Committee recommends $2,000,000 from within available 
funds to compensate military treatment facilities for care 
provided to indigent civilians. According to the Report of Non-
Compensated Care for Indigent Civilians provided to the 
Committee by the Department of Defense, for the most recent 
year where data is available, the amount of billings 
uncollected for indigent care was $9,365,208.

                                diabetes

    The Committee recognizes the negative effect that diabetes 
has upon the deployment readiness and assignability of service 
personnel as well as the health of over 16 million Americans. 
The Committee requests the Department to submit a report on any 
medical research efforts the Department of Defense is currently 
making to enable these personnel to perform combat roles, as 
well as any recommended research that would promote military 
readiness of diabetic service personnel by March 15, 1997.

                         air medical evacuation

    The Committee notes that significant numbers of recently-
acquired operational support aircraft are being kept in 
storage. The Committee believes that such aircraft could be 
used to meet medical evacuation needs in areas where military 
hospitals and clinics have been closed. The Committee urges the 
Assistant Secretary for Health Affairs to review medical 
evacuation needs with the Surgeons General and determine the 
utility of these unused aircraft vis-a-vis medical evacuation 
requirements.

                       global infectious diseases

    The Committee notes the importance of monitoring global 
infectious diseases and urges the military services to evaluate 
the potential of establishing a global infectious diseases 
surveillance and response system.

           CHEMICAL AGENTS AND MUNITIONS DESTRUCTION, DEFENSE

Fiscal year 1996 appropriation..........................    $672,250,000
Fiscal year 1997 budget request.........................     799,847,000
Committee recommendation................................     799,847,000
Change from budget request..............................................

    The Committee is pleased with the recent progress of the 
chemical demilitarization program. The fiscal year 1997 budget 
provides adequate funding to meet the fiscal year 2004 
completion date for the destruction of chemical weapons as 
mandated by the Congress. Additionally, the program manager has 
reduced the cost of the program by $500,000,000, despite delays 
in obtaining environmental permits, extended post trial burns, 
and other schedule delays.
    The Committee understands that alternative technologies for 
chemical demilitarization are currently being studied. In 
October, the program manager will decide which alternative 
technologies will be tested in a pilot program. The Committee 
understands that the alternative technologies currently under 
consideration have only been tested in laboratory experiments 
and none are a proven alternative for chemical agent 
destruction. Futhermore, the Committee understands that one 
alternative method may not be a solution for all of the various 
types of chemical munitions that must be destroyed.
    The Committee requests that the Army include the use of a 
plasma electric waste converter technology in its analysis of 
alternative methods for the destruction of the chemical weapons 
stockpile. The Committee requests that the Army include in its 
report of alternative methods the cost and environmental impact 
of using plasma electric waste technology. Additionally, the 
Committee requests that the report include the possibility of 
using plasma waste technology as a remediation process for 
hazardous by-products produced by the existing incinerator 
process.

                          Program Recommended

    The total amount recommended in the bill will provide the 
following program in fiscal year 1997:

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                   Budget request           Committee        Change from request
                                               ----------------------      recommended     ---------------------
                                                                     ----------------------                     
                                                 Quantity    Amount    Quantity    Amount    Quantity    Amount 
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Chem demilitarization--O&M....................  .........    477,947  .........    477,947  .........  .........
Chem demilitarization--PROC...................  .........    273,600  .........    273,600  .........  .........
Chem demilitarization--RDTE...................  .........     48,300  .........     48,300  .........  .........
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Total, Chem agents and munitions, DEF...  .........    799,847  .........    799,847  .........  .........
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

         DRUG INTERDICTION AND COUNTER-DRUG ACTIVITIES, DEFENSE

Fiscal year 1996 appropriation..........................    $688,432,000
Fiscal year 1997 budget request.........................     642,724,000
Committee recommendation................................     774,724,000
Change from budget request..............................    +132,000,000

    This appropriation provides funds for Military Personnel; 
Operation and Maintenance; Procurement; and Research, 
Development, Test and Evaluation for drug interdiction and 
counter-drug activities of the Department of Defense.

                       Committee Recommendations

    The Department of Defense requested $642,724,000 for Drug 
Interdiction and Counter-Drug Activities. The committee 
recommends $774,724,000, an increase of $132,000,000.
    In April 1996 the President requested a supplemental 
appropriation including $132,000,000 for Defense Drug 
Interdiction and Counter-Drug Activities. The Committee 
welcomed this request since the President's Defense Counter-
Drug budgets have been in steady decline since fiscal year 
1994. Unfortunately, this request arrived too late to be dealt 
with during conference committee action on supplemental 
appropriations for fiscal year 1996.
    In this bill, the Committee has increased the Drug 
Interdiction and Counter-Drug Activities account by 
$132,000,000. This increase funds all the defense counter-drug 
programs requested in the fiscal year 1996 supplemental. It 
does not, however, include funding for the requested retrofit 
of two P-3 aircraft which were proposed for transfer to the 
Customs Service. Since these assets would be used by another 
agency, the Committee does not believe funding should be 
provided in the Defense Appropriations bill.
    Instead the Committee has identified a number of 
alternative unfunded defense requirements for which it is 
providing funds over the budget request.

                  national guard counter-drug program

    The Committee recommends an addition of $40,000,000 to the 
budget request for the National Guard Counter-Drug Support 
Program which has played a crucial role in the war on drugs. 
The budget request would fund less than half of the state and 
local law enforcement requests for National Guard Counter-Drug 
Support. The Committee's recommendation provides an increase of 
$56,300,000 in National Guard programs and the Committee 
directs that none of the funds provided for the National Guard 
shall be reduced unless the proper reprogramming procedures are 
followed.

                         gulf states initiative

    The Committee recommends $8,500,000 above the budget 
request for the Gulf States Counter-drug Initiative (GSCI). Of 
this amount, $800,000 is for the Regional Counter-drug Training 
Academy. Of the remaining funds, $7,700,000 is provided in O&M 
for sustainment costs for the C4 network of GSCI, improvements 
to existing processing and analysis centers for the states, and 
as recommended in the House-passed Defense Authorization bill, 
start-up costs for including the state of Georgia in the 
network.

                            civil air patrol

    The Committee recommends an additional $2,500,000 above the 
budget request for the Civil Air Patrol (CAP). Funds made 
available to the CAP in the fiscal year 1997 appropriation for 
Defense Department Drug Interdiction activities may be used for 
CAP's demand reduction program involving youth programs as well 
as operational and training drug reconnaissance missions for 
federal, state and local government agencies; for 
administrative costs, including the hiring of CAP employees; 
for travel and per diem expenses of CAP personnel in support of 
those missions; and for equipment needed for mission support or 
performance. The Department of the Air Force should waive 
reimbursement from the federal, state and local government 
agencies for use of these funds.

            army support to multi-jurisdictional task force

    The Committee recommends an additional $1,800,000 above the 
budget request for use by the Military Police (MP) School to 
provide for training by the Criminal Justice Institute in 
support of Multi-Jurisdictional Task Force activities. The 
Committee commends the Army MP school for the valuable training 
it provides to law enforcement personnel in support of the 
counter-drug effort. However, the Committee is aware that the 
capacity for training by the MP school at Fort McClellan is 
limited and unable to meet the demands of law enforcement. The 
Criminal Justice Institute is ideally suited to expand the 
course offerings provided by the MP school.

          southwest border states anti-drug information system

    The Committee recommends an additional $7,000,000 above the 
budget for the Southwest Border States Anti-drug Information 
System. The Committee expects these funds to be matched equally 
by local, state, or regional governments.

                          Program Recommended

    The total amount recommended in the bill will provide the 
following program in fiscal year 1997:

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                   Committee       Change from  
                                                                    Budget        recommended         budget    
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Dismantling Cartels..........................................           57,055           70,055           13,000
    Signal Intelligence Equipment............................  ...............            3,000            3,000
    Classified Programs......................................  ...............           10,000           10,000
Source Nation Support........................................          139,619          172,019           32,400
    Laser Strike.............................................  ...............           11,000           11,000
    Refurbish and Install TPS-70 Radar.......................  ...............           15,000           15,000
    Riverine Operations......................................  ...............            4,900            4,900
    SOUTHCOM support.........................................  ...............            1,500            1,500
Detection and Monitoring.....................................          134,198          137,998            3,800
    Spare TARS...............................................  ...............            3,800            3,800
Domestic Law Enforcement Support.............................          227,957          310,757           82,800
    Marijuana Eradication....................................  ...............            3,000            3,000
    Non-instrusive Inspection System.........................  ...............            6,000            6,000
    Southwest Border Support.................................  ...............            2,500            2,500
    Enhanced JTF-6 DLEA support..............................  ...............            5,000            5,000
    Gulf States Counter-drug Initiative......................  ...............            8,500            8,500
    Multi-Jurisdictional Task Force Activities...............  ...............            1,800            1,800
    C-26 Reconnaissance Upgrade..............................  ...............            3,500            3,500
    National Guard State Plans...............................  ...............           40,000           40,000
    National Interagency Counternarcotics Institute..........  ...............            3,000            3,000
    Southwest Border Information.............................  ...............            7,000            7,000
    Civil Air Patrol.........................................  ...............            2,500            2,500
Demand Reduction.............................................           83,895           83,895                0
                                                              --------------------------------------------------
      Total, Drug Interdiction...............................          642,724          774,724          132,000
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

                    OFFICE OF THE INSPECTOR GENERAL

Fiscal year 1996 appropriation..........................     178,226,000
Fiscal year 1997 budget request.........................     138,501,000
Committee recommendation................................     138,501,000
Change from the budget request..........................................

    The Committee recommends an appropriation of $138,501,000, 
the budget request, for the Office of the Inspector General. 
The recommendation is a decrease of $39,725,000 below the 
amount appropriated for fiscal year 1996.
                               TITLE VII

                            RELATED AGENCIES

                 NATIONAL FOREIGN INTELLIGENCE PROGRAM

                              Introduction

    The National Foreign Intelligence Program consists of those 
intelligence activities of the Government which provide the 
President, other officials of the Executive Branch, and the 
Congress with national foreign intelligence on broad strategic 
concerns bearing on U.S. national security. The concerns are 
stated by the National Security Council in the form of long-
range and short-range requirements for the principal users of 
intelligence, and include political and support to military 
theater commanders.
    The National Foreign Intelligence Program budget funded in 
the Department of Defense Appropriations Act consists primarily 
of resources of the Central Intelligence Agency; the Defense 
Intelligence Agency; the National Reconnaissance Office; the 
National Security Agency; the intelligence services of the 
Department of the Army, Navy and the Air Force; the 
Intelligence Community Management Account; and the CIA 
Retirement and Disability System Fund.

                           classified report

    Because of the highly sensitive nature of intelligence 
programs, the results of the Committee's budget review are 
published in a separate, detailed and comprehensive classified 
report. The intelligence community, Department of Defense and 
other organizations are directed to comply fully with the 
recommendations and directions in the classified report 
accompanying the fiscal year 1997 Defense Appropriations bill.

   CENTRAL INTELLIGENCE AGENCY RETIREMENT AND DISABILITY SYSTEM FUND

Fiscal year 1996 appropriation..........................    $213,900,000
Fiscal year 1997 budget request.........................     196,400,000
Committee recommendation................................     196,400,000
Change from budget request..............................................

    This appropriation provides payments of benefits to 
qualified beneficiaries in accordance with the Central 
Intelligence Retirement Act of 1964 for Certain Employees 
(Public Law 88-643). This statute authorizes the establishment 
of a CIA Retirement and Disability System (CIARDS) for a 
limited number of CIA employees, and authorized the 
establishment and maintenance of a Fund from which benefits 
would be paid to those beneficiaries.

               INTELLIGENCE COMMUNITY MANAGEMENT ACCOUNT

Fiscal year 1996 appropriation..........................     $90,683,000
Fiscal year 1997 budget request.........................      91,739,000
Committee recommendation................................     149,555,000
Change from budget request..............................     +57,816,000

    This appropriation provides funds for the activities that 
support the Director of Central Intelligence (DCI) and the 
Intelligence Community (IC).
    The Director of Central Intelligence (DCI) requested 
$91,739,000 for the Intelligence Community Management Account. 
The Committee recommends $149,555,000, an increase of 
$57,816,000. Further details are found in the Classified Report 
accompanying the fiscal year 1997 DoD Appropriations bill.

                 NATIONAL SECURITY EDUCATION TRUST FUND

Fiscal year 1996 appropriation..........................      $7,500,000
Fiscal year 1997 budget request.........................       5,100,000
Committee recommendation................................................
Change from budget request..............................      -5,100,000

    The Department requested $5,100,000 for the National 
Security Education Trust Fund (NSETF). The Committee recommends 
no funding.
    The Committee reiterates its position, as expressed in its 
report accompanying the fiscal year 1996 Defense Appropriations 
bill, that the funding to provide scholarships and fellowships 
to U.S. students to pursue higher education studies abroad and 
grants to U.S. institutions for programs of study in foreign 
areas and languages fall under the jurisdiction of other 
Federal agencies and not the Department of Defense.

PAYMENT TO KAHO'OLAWE ISLAND CONVEYANCE, REMEDIATION AND ENVIRONMENTAL 
                            RESTORATION FUND

Fiscal year 1996 appropriation..........................     $25,000,000
Fiscal year 1997 budget request.........................      10,000,000
Committee recommendation................................      10,000,000
Change from the budget request..........................................

    The Committee recommends an appropriation of $10,000,000, 
the budget request, for the payment to Kaho'olawe Island 
conveyance, remediation and environmental restoration fund. The 
recommendation is a decrease of $15,000,000 below the amount 
appropriated for fiscal year 1996.
                               TITLE VIII

                           GENERAL PROVISIONS

    The accompanying bill includes 94 general provisions. Most 
of these provisions were included in the Department of Defense 
Appropriations Act for fiscal year 1996 and many have been 
included in the Defense Appropriations Acts for a number of 
years.
    Actions taken by the Committee to amend last year's 
provisions or new provisions recommended by the Committee are 
discussed below or in the applicable section of the report.

              Definition of Program, Project and Activity

    For purposes of the Balanced Budget and Emergency Deficit 
Control Act of 1985 (Public Law 99-177) as amended by the 
Balanced Budget and Emergency Deficit Control Reaffirmation Act 
of 1987 (Public Law 100-119) and by the Budget Enforcement Act 
of 1990 (Public Law 101-508), the following information 
provides the definition of the term ``program, project, and 
activity'' for appropriations contained in the Department of 
Defense Appropriations Act. The term ``program, project, and 
activity'' shall include the most specific level of budget 
items, identified in the Department of Defense Appropriations 
Act, 1996, the accompanying House and Senate Committee reports, 
the conference report and accompanying joint explanatory 
statement of the managers of the Committee on Conference, the 
related classified reports, and the P-1 and R-1 budget 
justification documents as subsequently modified by 
Congressional action.
    In carrying out any Presidential sequestration, the 
Department of Defense and agencies shall conform to the 
definition for ``program, project, and activity'' set forth 
above with the following exception:
    For the Military Personnel and the Operation and 
Maintenance accounts the term ``program, project, and 
activity'' is defined as the appropriations accounts contained 
in the Department of Defense Appropriations Act.
    The Department and agencies should carry forth the 
Presidential sequestration order in a manner that would not 
adversely affect or alter Congressional policies and priorities 
established for the Department of Defense and the related 
agencies and no program, project, and activity should be 
eliminated or be reduced to a level of funding which would 
adversely affect the Department's ability to effectively 
continue any program, project and activity.

                         Marine Security Guards

    The Marine Security Guard program currently operates under 
a 1994 Memorandum of Understanding between the Department of 
State and the Department of Defense. The Committee understands 
there was a recent decision made regarding the reimbursement of 
costs associated with Marines guarding United States embassies, 
and beginning in fiscal year 1997, the Marine Corps will now 
bear all costs previously reimbursed by the Department of 
State. The Committee has included Section 8088 in the General 
Provisions, which directs the Departments of Defense and State 
to continue to operate under the terms and conditions of the 
1994 Memorandum of Understanding.

               AN/ALE-47 Countermeasure Dispenser System

    The Committee has included section 8090 in the General 
Provisions which prohibits the Department from introducing any 
new supplier for the remaining production units of the AN/ALE-
47 Countermeasure Dispenser System.
    The Committee recognizes the need to provide the highest 
level of safety and protection to deployed forces. One item of 
equipment, the AN/ALE-47 Countermeasure Dispenser System, has 
been declared a mission essential item of equipment and 
critical to safeguard deployed aircrews in Bosnia. Further, the 
Committee has been provided a cost benefit analysis prepared by 
the Air Force which indicates that the introduction of new 
suppliers for the ALE-47 would result in increased costs and 
schedule risk to the program. The Committee therefore directs 
the Department of the Air Force to take no action at this time 
which would result in the introduction of a new supplier for 
this system.

                     Deep Attack Weapons Mix Study

    The Committee has included Section 8092 which directs the 
Secretary of Defense to establish an ad hoc committee to review 
the analytical methodologies to be used in the deep attack 
weapons mix study which the Department has undertaken at the 
direction of the President. The Committee believes it is 
essential that the study include a wide body of expertise and 
opinion to examine the important issue of the proper mix of 
bombers, stand-off precision munitions and other weapons 
systems for the conduct of strategic strike missions.

    Peace Enforcement, Peacekeeping, and International Humanitarian 
                               Assistance

    The fiscal year 1996 Defense Appropriations bill included a 
general provision regarding the notification of and 
consultation with the Congress prior to the deployment of 
troops for peacekeeping, peace enforcement and/or international 
humanitarian assistance. Although the Committee has not 
repeated the general provision in this bill, the Committee 
expects the President to notify and consult with the Congress 
prior to any such deployment and also expects the President to 
request emergency supplemental funds to meet the incremental 
costs of any international humanitarian assistance, 
peacekeeping or peace enforcement operation.
            HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES REPORTING REQUIREMENTS

    The following items are included in accordance with various 
requirements of the Rules of the House of Representatives:

                 Changes in Application of Existing Law

    Pursuant to clause 3 of rule XXI of the House of 
Representatives, the following statements are submitted 
describing the effect of provisions which directly or 
indirectly change the application of existing law.
    Language is included in various parts of the bill to 
continue ongoing activities which require annual authorization 
or additional legislation, which to date has not been enacted.
    The bill includes a number of provisions which place 
limitations on the use of funds in the bill or change existing 
limitations and which might, under some circumstances, be 
construed as changing the application of existing law.
    The bill includes a number of provisions, which have been 
virtually unchanged for many years, that are technically 
considered legislation.
    The bill provides that appropriations shall remain 
available for more than one year for some programs for which 
the basic authorizing legislation does not presently authorize 
such extended availability.
    In various places in the bill, the Committee has earmarked 
funds within appropriation accounts in order to fund specific 
programs and has adjusted some existing earmarkings.
    The bill includes a number of provisions which make 
portions of the appropriations subject to enactment of 
authorizing legislation.
    Those additional changes in the fiscal year 1997 bill, 
which might be interpreted as changing existing law, are as 
follows:

                         appropriation language

    Language has been included in ``Military Personnel, Army'', 
``Military Personnel, Navy'', ``Military Personnel, Marine 
Corps'', and ``Military Personnel, Air Force'', which transfers 
the cost for subsistence from the Operation and Maintenance 
appropriations to the Military Personnel appropriations.
    Language has been included in ``Operation and Maintenance, 
Army'' which makes funds available for care and maintenance of 
conventional ammunition.
    Language has been deleted in ``Operation and Maintenance, 
Air Force'' concerning the land conveyance at King Salmon Air 
Force Station.
    Language has been deleted in ``Operation and Maintenance, 
Defense-Wide'' which earmarked funds for real property 
maintenance of educational facilities located on military 
intallations; and deleted language transferring funds to the 
Coast Guard.
    Language has been included in ``Environmental Restoration, 
Defense'' which allows the Secretary of Defense to transfer 
funds available to DoD as he may designate, and deletes 
earmarks which provided funds for each of the Services.
    Language has been included in ``Overseas Humanitarian, 
Disaster, and Civic Aid'' which makes the appropriation 
available until 1998, and which deletes language concerning 
clearing of landmines.
    Language has been included in ``Former Soviet Union Threat 
Reduction'' which makes funds available for obligation until 
September 30, 1999.
    Language has been added in ``Quality of Life Enhancements, 
Defense'' which provides funds for the ``Defense Health 
Program,'' and which provides additional funds for real 
property maintenance. Language extends the period of 
availability of real property maintenance funds under this 
heading to two years.
    Language has been deleted in ``Aircraft Procurement, Army'' 
concerning Army National Guard helicopters.
    Language has been included in ``Other Procurement, Army'' 
which provides for the purchase of passenger motor vehicles for 
replacement.
    Language has been included in ``Weapons Procurement, Navy'' 
which allows funds to be available to liquidate deficiencies in 
prior Appropriations Acts.
    Language has been included in ``Shipbuilding and 
Conversion, Navy'' which makes funds available for 5 years 
instead of 7 years, and deletes the language which earmarks 
funds for certain ship programs.
    Language has been deleted in ``Other Procurement, Navy'' 
concerning the purchase of passenger motor vehicles for 
replacement.
    Language has been included in ``Procurement, Marine Corps'' 
which provides for the purchase of passenger motor vehicles for 
replacement.
    Language has been included in ``Other Procurement, Air 
Force'' which provides for the purchase of passenger motor 
vehicles for replacement, and for physical security.
    Language has been included in ``Procurement, Defense-Wide'' 
which provides for the purchase of passenger motor vehicles for 
replacement, and for physical security.
    Language has been deleted in ``Research, Development, Test 
and Evaluation, Navy'' concerning the Marine and Environmental 
Research and Training Station.
    Language has been deleted in ``Research, Development, Test 
and Evaluation, Air Force'' concerning the Joint Seismic 
Program.
    Language has been deleted in ``Research, Development, Test 
and Evaluation, Defense-Wide'' concerning loan guarantees.
    Language has been included in the ``National Defense 
Sealift Fund'' to allow development and acquisition of 
lighterage, and deletes language concerning the purchase of one 
MPS ship.
    Language has been included in ``Defense Health Program'' to 
allow three percent of the Operation and maintenance funds be 
available for two years; language has been amended concerning 
the earmark of funds for studies of Desert Storm Syndrome, and 
language has been deleted concerning emergency communications 
for the American National Red Cross.
    Language has been included in ``Kaho'olawe Island 
Conveyance, Remediation, and Environmental Restoration Fund to 
include the words ``Payment to'' in the title of the 
appropriation.

                           General Provisions

    Section 8005 has been amended to change the amount of the 
transfer authority permitted between appropriations.
    Section 8009 has been amended which approves Javelin 
missiles, Army Tactical Missile System and five small arms 
programs for multiyear procurement contracts.
    Section 8014 has been amended to change one citation 
concerning the Department of Defense Education Benefits Fund.
    Section 8025 has been amended to change the amount of funds 
available to be used for any single relocation of an 
organization with the National Capital Region.
    Section 8034 has been amended to change the appropriations 
available for the Civil Air Patrol.
    Section 8035 has been amended to delete language which 
limited funds for Federally Funded Research and Development 
Centers (FFRDCs).
    Section 8041 has been amended to make permanent the 
authority that allows DoD to make voluntary separation 
incentives payments from the Voluntary Separation Incentive 
Fund.
    Section 8046 has been amended to make permanent the 
authority that allows DoD to make early retirement payments for 
Reserve component personnel.
    Section 8049 has been amended to make permanent the 
authority that allows DoD to make early retirement payments for 
active duty personnel.
    Section 8054 has been amended to earmark funds for the High 
Performance Computing Modernization program, and for annual 
publication of program plans.
    Section 8057 has been amended to include sense of Congress 
language concerning American made products.
    Section 8060 has been amended to change the amount 
available for obligation for expendable launch vehicles.
    Section 8063 has been amended to change the amount of 
executive compensation allowable, and to delete language 
concerning Federal Acquisition Regulation guidance.
    Section 8076 has been added which reduces the budget 
request by $500,000,000 to bring funded carryover for Defense 
Business Operations Fund activities to a level of three months.
    Section 8077 has been amended which directs the Army to use 
the former George Air Force Base as the airhead for the 
National Training Center (NTC) at Fort Irwin, and prohibits the 
transportation of Army personnel into Edwards Air Force Base 
for training rotations at the NTC.
    Section 8081 has been amended with regards to contractor 
bonuses.
    Section 8082 has been added which reduces the ``Operation 
and Maintenance, Air Force'' budget request by $195,000,000 for 
a passthrough to the Defense Business Operations Fund.
    Section 8083 has been amended regarding prohibiting funds 
in the ``Former Soviet Union Threat Reduction'' appropriation 
for housing of Soviet Union military forces.
    Section 8084 has been amended to make permanent the 
authority for the White House Communications Agency to provide 
telecommunications support to the United States Secret Service, 
and further amended to prohibit the use of funds for the White 
House Communications Agency for any purpose other than 
providing telecommunications support.
    Section 8085 has been added which allows the current year 
``Shipbuilding and Conversion, Navy'' appropriation to be 
charged under certain circumstances for prior year obligations 
in expired Shipbuilding and Conversion appropriations 
regardless of whether specific appropriation limitations exist.
    Section 8086 has been added which allows prior year funds 
that were available for the B-2 aircraft program to remain 
available for expenditure until September 30, 2002.
    Section 8087 has been added which allows current year 
appropriations to be charged, up to one percent of the total 
appropriated, for prior year obligations in the expired 
accounts of the same appropriation title under certain 
circumstances.
    Section 8088 has been added which directs the Department of 
Defense to continue to operate under the terms and conditions 
of the current Memorandum of Understanding with the Department 
of State for the Marine Security Guard program.
    Section 8089 has been added which reduces the budget 
request by $350,000,000 for improved spare parts management.
    Section 8090 has been added which prohibits the Department 
of the Air Force from introducing new suppliers for the AN/ALE-
47 Countermeasure Dispenser System.
    Section 8091 has been added which provides clarification 
that Section 9005 of the Department of Defense Appropriations 
Act, 1993 (Berry Amendment) applies to synthetic fiber and 
yarn, and that the section applies to contracts and 
subcontracts for the procurement of commercial items.
    Section 8092 has been added which directs the Secretary of 
Defense to establish an ``ad hoc'' committee to review the 
Department's methodology for the deep attack weapons mix study.
    Section 8093 has been added which requires the Secretary of 
Defense and the Chairman of the Joint Chief of Staff to carry 
out a joint study which assesses future tactical aircraft 
requirements across service jurisdictions.
    Section 8094 has been added which requires certain sealed 
bids and competitive proposals to disclose and be evaluated for 
selection in part based on the percentage of work which an 
offerer plans to perform in the United States.

                  Appropriations Not Authorized by Law

    Pursuant to clause 3 of rule XXI of the House of 
Representatives, the following lists the appropriations in the 
accompanying bill which are not authorized by law:

Military Personnel, Army
Military Personnel, Navy
Military Personnel, Marine Corps
Military Personnel, Air Force
Reserve Personnel, Army
Reserve Personnel, Navy
Reserve Personnel, Marine Corps
Reserve Personnel, Air Force
National Guard Personnel, Army
National Guard Personnel, Air Force
Operation and Maintenance, Army
Operation and Maintenance, Navy
Operation and Maintenance, Marine Corps
Operation and Maintenance, Air Force
Operation and Maintenance, Defense-Wide
Operation and Maintenance, Army Reserve
Operation and Maintenance, Navy Reserve
Operation and Maintenance, Marine Corps Reserve
Operation and Maintenance, Air Force Reserve
Operation and Maintenance, Army National Guard
Operation and Maintenance, Air National Guard
United States Court of Appeals for the Armed Forces
Environmental Restoration, Defense
Former Soviet Union Threat Reduction
Quality of Life Enhancements, Defense
Overseas Humanitarian, Disaster, and Civic Aid
Aircraft Procurement, Army
Missile Procurement, Army
Procurement of Weapons and Tracked Combat Vehicles, Army
Procurement of Ammunition, Army
Other Procurement, Army
Aircraft Procurement, Navy
Weapons Procurement, Navy
Procurement of Ammunition, Navy and Marine Corps
Shipbuilding and Conversion, Navy
Other Procurement, Navy
Procurement, Marine Corps
Aircraft Procurement, Air Force
Missile Procurement, Air Force
Procurement of Ammunition, Air Force
Other Procurement, Air Force
Procurement, Defense-Wide
National Guard and Reserve Equipment
Research, Development, Test and Evaluation, Army
Research, Development, Test and Evaluation, Navy
Research, Development, Test and Evaluation, Air Force
Research, Development, Test and Evaluation, Defense-Wide
Developmental Test and Evaluation, Defense
Operational Test and Evaluation, Defense
Defense Business Operations Fund
National Defense Sealift Fund
Defense Health Program
Chemical Agents and Munitions Destruction, Defense
Drug Interdiction and Counter-Drug Activities, Defense
Office of the Inspector General
Central Intelligence Agency Retirement and Disability System 
    Fund
Intelligence Community Management Account
Payment to Kaho'olawe Island Conveyance, Remediation and 
    Environmental Restoration Fund

                           Transfer of Funds

    Pursuant to clause 1(b), rule X of the House of 
Representatives the following is submitted describing the 
transfer of funds provided in the accompanying bill.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                  Appropriations from which                     
   Appropriations to which transfer is made        Amount              transfer is made              Amount     
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Operation and maintenance, Army..............     $50,000,000  National Defense Stockpile           $150,000,000
                                                                Transaction Fund.                               
Operation and maintenance, Navy..............      50,000,000                                                   
Operation and maintenance, Air Force.........      50,000,000                                                   
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Language has been included in ``Environmental Restoration, 
Defense,'' which provides for the transfer of funds out of and 
into this account.
    Language has been included in ``Quality of Life 
Enhancements, Defense'' that provides for the transfer of funds 
out of this account into the ``Defense Health Program''.
    Language has been included in ``Drug Interdiction and 
Counter-Drug Activities, Defense'' which transfers funds to 
other appropriations accounts of the Department of Defense.
    Six provisions (Section 8005, 8006, 8016, 8042, 8070, and 
8072) contain language which allows transfer of funds between 
accounts.

                     Inflationary Impact Statement

    Pursuant to clause 2(l)(4), rule XI of the House of 
Representatives, the following statement is made:
    The bill reported will provide $245,759,703,000 in new 
budget obligational authority. This is an increase of 
$11,081,270,000 above the budget request for fiscal year 1997 
and $3,692,406,000 above the fiscal year 1996 funding level.
    The appropriation as proposed by the Committee should not 
cause inflation to increase greatly. This level of Defense 
spending will have little inflationary effect in comparison to 
the forecasted size of the gross national product for 1997.

                   Comparison With Budget Resolution

    Section 308(a)(l)(A) of the Congressional Budget and 
Impoundment Control Act of 1974 (Public Law 93-344), requires 
that the report accompanying a bill providing new budget 
authority contain a statement detailing how the authority 
compares with the reports submitted under section 602(b) of the 
Act for the most recently agreed to concurrent resolution on 
the budget for the fiscal year. This information follows:

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                  602(b) allocation             This bill       
                                                             ---------------------------------------------------
                                                                 Budget                    Budget               
                                                               authority     Outlays     authority     Outlays  
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Discretionary...............................................      246,340      243,816      245,563      243,125
Mandatory...................................................          196          196          196          196
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The bill provides no new spending authority as described in 
section 401(c)(2) of the Congressional Budget and Impoundment 
Control Act of 1974 (Public Law 93-344), as amended.

                    Five-Year Projection of Outlays

    In compliance with section 308(a)(1)(C) of the 
Congressional Budget Act of 1974 (Public Law 93-344), as 
amended, the following table contains five-year projections 
associated with the budget authority provided in the 
accompanying bill.

                        [In millions of dollars]

Budget authority in the bill............................         245,759
    1997................................................         162,576
    1998................................................          47,864
    1999................................................          18,834
    2000................................................           8,228
    2001................................................           6,114

          Financial Assistance to State and Local Governments

    In accordance with section 308(a)(1)(D) of the 
Congressional Budget Act of 1974 (Public Law 93-344), as 
amended, no new budget or outlays are provided by the 
accompanying bill for financial assistance to state and local 
governments.

                          Full Committee Votes

    Pursuant to the provisions of clause 2(l)(2)(b) of rule XI 
of the House of Representatives, the results of each roll call 
vote on an amendment or on the motion to report, together with 
the names of those voting for and those voting against, are 
printed below:

                             rollcall no. 1

    Date: June 5, 1996.
    Measure: Fiscal year 1997 Defense Appropriations Bill.
    Motion by: Mr. Obey.
    Description of Motion: To place certain criteria on the 
development of a National Missile Defense System.
    Results: Rejected 14 to 32.
        Members Voting Yea            Members Voting Nay
Mr. Coleman                         Mr. Bevill
Mr. Dicks                           Mr. Bunn
Mr. Fazio                           Mr. Chapman
Mr. Foglietta                       Mr. Dickey
Mr. Hefner                          Mr. Forbes
Mr. Hoyer                           Mr. Hobson
Ms. Kaptur                          Mr. Istook
Mrs. Lowey                          Mr. Kingston
Mr. Obey                            Mr. Knollenberg
Mr. Sabo                            Mr. Kolbe
Mr. Skaggs                          Mr. Livingston
Mr. Stokes                          Mr. McDade
Mr. Torres                          Mr. Miller
Mr. Yates                           Mr. Mollohan
                                    Mr. Murtha
                                    Mr. Myers
                                    Mr. Nethercutt
                                    Mr. Neumann
                                    Mr. Packard
                                    Mr. Parker
                                    Mr. Porter
                                    Mr. Regula
                                    Mr. Rogers
                                    Mr. Serrano
                                    Mr. Skeen
                                    Mr. Thornton
                                    Mrs. Vucanovich
                                    Mr. Walsh
                                    Mr. Wicker
                                    Mr. Wilson
                                    Mr. Wolf
                                    Mr. Young

                          Full Committee Votes

    Pursuant to the provisions of clause 2(l)(2)(b) of rule XI 
of the House of Representatives, the results of each roll call 
vote on an amendment or on the motion to report, together with 
the names of those voting for and those voting against, are 
printed below:

                             rollcall no. 2

    Date: June 5, 1996.
    Measure: Fiscal year 1997 Defense Appropriations Bill.
    Motion by: Mr. Obey.
    Description of Motion: To eliminate funding for a second 
New Attack Submarine.
    Results: Rejected 12 to 35.
        Members Voting Yea            Members Voting Nay
Mr. Bunn                            Mr. Bevill
Mr. Chapman                         Mr. Coleman
Mr. Durbin                          Mr. Dicks
Mr. Fazio                           Mr. Forbes
Mr. Foglietta                       Mr. Hefner
Mrs. Lowey                          Mr. Hobson
Mr. Obey                            Mr. Hoyer
Mr. Porter                          Mr. Istook
Mr. Serrano                         Ms. Kaptur
Mr. Skaggs                          Mr. Kingston
Mr. Stokes                          Mr. Knollenberg
Mr. Yates                           Mr. Kolbe
                                    Mr. Livingston
                                    Mr. McDade
                                    Mr. Miller
                                    Mr. Mollohan
                                    Mr. Murtha
                                    Mr. Myers
                                    Mr. Nethercutt
                                    Mr. Neumann
                                    Mr. Packard
                                    Mr. Parker
                                    Mr. Riggs
                                    Mr. Rogers
                                    Mr. Sabo
                                    Mr. Skeen
                                    Mr. Taylor
                                    Mr. Thornton
                                    Mr. Torres
                                    Mrs. Vucanovich
                                    Mr. Walsh
                                    Mr. Wicker
                                    Mr. Wilson
                                    Mr. Wolf
                                    Mr. Young


                                    
                   DISSENTING VIEWS OF HON. DAVE OBEY

    This quarter of a trillion dollar bill spends over 
$11,000,000,000 more for the military than the Department of 
Defense says is needed.
    It spends more than twice as much as all of our potential 
adversaries combined.
    It wastes literally billions of dollars on programs such as 
forcing the Navy to build a new prototype model for the New 
Attack Submarine; forcing the Air Force to spend $366 million 
for C-130 aircraft that it doesn't need; forcing the Army and 
Marine Corps to spend millions on unneeded and unwanted 
ammunition; and a host of other add-ons that are little more 
than hometown jobs programs for a few favored Members.

    front-loaded increases/back-loaded cuts--``buy now, pay later''

    In fact, because of the Republican majority's frenzy to 
load up this bill in this election year, they simply have 
abandoned any pretense of fashioning a responsible budgetary 
approach for military spending over the coming six-year period.
    Under the six-year ``live for today'' Republican Defense 
Budget spelled out in the Conference Agreement for the 
Congressional Budget Resolution, military spending would be 
increased by $11.3 billion over the Pentagon's request for 1997 
(of which $11 billion is currently in this bill) and then would 
start on a precipitous drop over the next five years to the 
point where it will be a total of $12.3 billion below the 
Clinton defense budget for 2001 and 2002. The Republican 
military spending plan would borrow heavily against future 
defense budgets to pay for instant gratification this year. 
This comes at a heavy price.



                     Military Spending Comparisons

                             cbo estimates

                                          DEFENSE SPENDING TOTALS (050)                                         
                                            [In billions of dollars]                                            
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
        Discretionary budget authority            1997     1998     1999     2000     2001     2002      Total  
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
President Clinton.............................    255.1    259.3    264.5    271.0    280.1    288.4     1,618.4
Republican budget.............................    266.4    269.0    271.5    274.0    276.7    279.5     1,637.1
Republican budget above (+)/below(-) Clinton                                                                    
 budget.......................................    +11.3     +9.7     +7.0      3.0     -3.4     -8.9       +18.7
                                                                                                         (+1.2%)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    This ``roller coaster'' budget ride is exactly backwards 
from what the Pentagon believes is necessary. Instead of 
borrowing against future defense budgets to spend extra 
billions now on items of marginal utility at a time when we 
have no major threat, the Pentagon's plan is to increase its 
modernization budget at the turn of the century when major next 
generation defense technologies now in development will be 
ready for production.
    Under the Republican plan, funds will be far short of what 
is necessary to buy new systems such as the Joint Strike 
Fighter, the V-22 advanced tilt-rotor transport aircraft, the 
stealthy Comanche scout helicopter, long range precision-guided 
munitions, revolutionary computer/information technology, and 
unmanned aerial vehicles. It will mean either the added waste 
of canceling lower priority systems in mid-stream or cutting 
back further on troop strength to find the necessary funds for 
these high priority systems.
    To add insult to injury, the Defense Department calculates 
that the new unbudgeted multi-year commitments initiated by 
Congress with this $11 billion increase for 1997 will consume 
$25 billion in extra unbudgeted costs through the year 2002. 
For instance, if Congress is successful in requiring the 
development of additional models of a New Attack Submarine, 
nearly $4 billion will be needed to follow through on this 
project through 2002.
    This so-called ``bow wave'' effect is especially severe in 
2001 and 2002 when an additional $11.4 billion in unbudgeted 
costs would be added. The net effect is that the planned $12.3 
billion Republican military spending cut in 2001 and 2002 is 
really magnified to a $24 billion cut.
    This means that, unless troop strength is cut dramatically, 
the turn of the century DoD procurement accounts under the 
Republican budget will be far below the $60 billion level 
called for by the Joint Chiefs of Staff and included in the 
Clinton defense budget.

                       domestic needs going unmet

    Not only is the large $11 billion military spending 
increase unsustainable for the Pentagon, the Republican budget 
finances this military largess at the expense of the education 
of our kids; the health of our seniors and veterans, our 
environment and National Parks, the safety of our air and 
highway systems, the safety of our streets, and many other 
domestic priorities.
    To come up with the extra military spending for fiscal 
1997, Congressional Republicans cut non-defense programs by $10 
to $11 billion below the amount necessary to continue the same 
level of services they were finally forced to agree to for 
Fiscal 1996.
    We learned last year that the American People reject the 
extreme Republican domestic budget agenda. They want us to help 
them educate their kids, clean up our lakes and rivers, fix our 
roads, put more cops on the streets, take care of our National 
Parks, and take better care of our veterans. These and many 
other priorities here at home will be sacrificed once again in 
order to finance this excessive increase in military spending.
    Changing these priorities would make an important 
difference for millions of Americans with no loss to our 
overall defense preparedness. For instance:
          If we cut just $1 billion out of the $2 billion in 
        this bill for the F-22 fighter that GAO recommends be 
        delayed by at least seven years at no loss to our 
        defense capability, we could invest an additional $1 
        billion in Chapter 1 education to upgrade math and 
        reading skills for one million school kids across the 
        country.
          If we cut out the $471 million the Committee added to 
        this bill for nine C-130 aircraft that were unrequested 
        and unneeded, we could invest it in student loans, 
        helping another 350,000 American kids get a higher 
        education.
          If we cut out the $504 million the Committee added 
        over the budget to build a second model of the New 
        Attack Submarine to compete with the Navy's preferred 
        design, we could use it for crime prevention and put 
        another 7,000 cops on the streets.
          If we cut out the $350 million the Committee added to 
        the Clinton $508 million budget request for National 
        Missile Defense in order to rush ahead with a 
        potentially $60 billion National Missile Defense system 
        before the technology is mature and the need is 
        established, and cut out $99 million for two Executive 
        ``mission support'' aircraft, we could clean up and fix 
        up the backlog of repairs in every National Park in the 
        country.
          If we shifted just $500 million in outlays from this 
        bill to the Transportation bill, we could generate an 
        additional $3 billion worth of highway construction 
        next year creating 150,000 new jobs, improving an 
        additional 36,000 lane miles of pavement, adding an 
        additional 4,500 lane miles of highway capacity, and 
        repairing an additional 2,000 bridges.
          If we cut out the $320 million Congress added for 8 
        extra F-15 fighters the Pentagon didn't ask for, we 
        could invest it in Head Start putting another 70,000 
        kids in preschool.
    We could do all of this and more by simply cutting the 
excessive $11 billion military spending increase in this bill 
in half. It wouldn't raise the deficit by one nickel. It would 
still leave the Pentagon with one quarter of a trillion dollars 
 in FY 1997--which is more than twice as much as the combined 
military budgets of all of our potential adversaries.
    I believe most Americans agree with the Secretary of 
Defense that our military can make do on a quarter of a 
trillion dollars a year.

                          pork barrel catalog

    What is even more troubling is the haphazard way in which 
this Congress arrived at this $11 billion increase. There is no 
overarching Congressional study justifying in any serious 
academic way the need for this additional $11 billion. Instead 
of doing any serious analysis to justify their position, our 
House National Security Authorizing Committee spent its time 
forcing the Services to produce a ``Pork Barrel Catalog'' 
listing who the subcontractors were for their potential 
spending add-ons, in whose Congressional district those 
subcontractors were located, and how many jobs would be added 
in each Congressional district by a particular add on.
    The Defense Department tells us this is unprecedented. It 
certainly calls into question whether the authorizing committee 
made its $11 billion worth of decisions with any semblance of 
consideration for the National Defense interest, or if they 
simply took ``pork barreling'' to new heights by auctioning off 
projects by Congressional district.
    What's even more striking from this Pork Barrel Catalog is 
the cost per job that would be created. This catalog seems to 
confirm the views of many who believe military spending is one 
of the worst ways to create jobs. It certainly refutes those 
who have been quoted saying military spending creates 20,000 
new jobs for every billion dollars spent (in itself a low 
number). The data in this catalog would indicate that such 
claims are exaggerated by a factor of ten.
    For instance, compared to domestic investments in highway 
construction which George Bush told us creates about 50,000 new 
jobs for every $1 billion spent ($20,000 per new job), many of 
these military projects in the Pork Barrel Catalog cost 
$100,000 to over a $1 million per new job. For instance, 
according to the Pork Barrel Catalog:
          Adding $61 million for P-3 aircraft upgrades the 
        Defense Department says it doesn't need would save 181 
        in 8 Congressional districts, or $337,000 per job.
          Adding $26 million for more AMRAAM missiles for the 
        Air Force would add 21 jobs in 5 Congressional 
        districts, or $1.2 million a job.
          According to the Pork Catalog, adding $468 million 
        for 9 more C-130J aircraft near the Speaker's district 
        in Marietta, GA would cost about $175,000 per new job.
    I give the Chairman of the National Security Appropriations 
Subcommittee, Mr. Young, credit for not using the same criteria 
as the authorizing committee. But the fact remains, the 
authorizing committee's views were carefully considered by the 
Budget Committee and by the House Republican Leadership when 
they selected this $11 billion figure and the earmarks in the 
authorizing bill have been given some deference by this 
Committee.

                      MAJOR PROGRAM DISAGREEMENTS

    In the full committee mark-up, I focused on three highly 
questionable items in this bill:
          (1) spending $504 million to support a 
        Congressionally-sponsored plan to build a second 
        prototype model of a new attack submarine that has very 
        little to do with national defense, but much to do with 
        jobs at a certain shipyard;
          (2) ensuring that the $350 million added to the 
        President's request of $508 million for National 
        Missile Defense would be used for an ABM Treaty-
        complaint system that could be deployed by 2003, and 
        not for a multi-layered $60 billion dollar system that 
        breaks the ABM Treaty and jeopardizes removal of 5,000 
        former-Soviet nuclear warheads under the START II 
        Treaty; and
          (3) spending $2 billion to continue the fast track 
        development of the F-22 fighter in order to deploy this 
        aircraft a good seven years before it may be needed.
    Second Prototype New Attack Submarine.--I offered an 
amendment in full committee to strike $504 million the 
Subcommittee added to the Navy Shipbuilding and Conversion 
procurement account to build a second prototype model of the 
New Attack Submarine. This $4 billion six-year project, which 
many call ``the underwater B-2,'' is hopefully the last vestige 
of the old spendthrift Cold War mentality of discarding fiscal 
prudence and spending huge sums to run a technological race 
against murky and unsubstantiated future threats.
    In this case, the majority party in Congress has 
essentially rejected the Navy's new design for the New Attack 
Submarine because of what the authorizing committee calls an 
``overbidding emphasis on affordability''. The authorizing 
committee instead would require the Navy'' to begin 
construction of four transition nuclear attack submarines, each 
of which would incorporate new technologies, leading to the 
design of and culminating with the first ship of a new class to 
be completed for construction in 2003.'' The $504 million added 
by the Committee to this bill would partially fund one of these 
four additional ships at a second shipyard. The Pentagon has 
requested no funds for this purpose.
    According to the March 1996 Report to Congress from the 
Secretary of Defense on this subject, this Congressionally-
sponsored $4 billion program is not necessary and could 
actually weaken the National Defense by siphoning off $4 
billion in Navy funds needed for other planned Navy 
modernization programs.
    The Secretary believes the Navy already has a well designed 
next generation nuclear attack submarine. According to his 
March 1996 report: ``The New Attack Submarine will be a highly 
capable, technologically robust warship that incorporates an 
affordable mix of technologies that meet all mission 
requirements established by the Joint Staff.''
    He goes on to say: ``The Department would face major near 
term affordability issues in pursuing the plan directed by the 
Congress. * * * The Department believes that these alternatives 
place disproportionate near term funding emphasis on one weapon 
system at the expense of other weapon systems across the Future 
Years Defense Program. The Department believes the baseline 
ship and program fully satisfies military requirements.''
    It should also be remembered exactly why the Navy has 
pushed ahead with procurement of the New Attack Submarine. With 
the end of the Cold War, the Navy acknowledges they have no 
military requirement for additional nuclear attack submarines. 
In fact, the Navy has been cutting up for scrap many of its 
existing fleet of expensive, highly capable nuclear attack 
submarines years and sometimes decades earlier than planned. 
The principle reason for investing in a New Attack Submarine at 
this point in time is to maintain the industrial base for 
specialized submarine construction and keep people in the field 
who are specially skilled.
    Protecting this industrial base does not come cheaply. Not 
only are we building new submarines before they are needed, the 
Navy is spending billions to scrap existing nuclear submarines 
before they reach the end of their planned service life.
    Between 1994 and 1997, the Navy will have spent nearly $2 
billion to cut up and scrap a total of 26 nuclear attack 
submarines (at an average cost of $72 million each). Those 26 
submarines are being retired a total of 136 years ahead of 
their originally planned retirement dates. The average number 
of years each of these subs is being retired early is 5.2 
years, with some subs being retired a full 13 years earlier 
than expected.
    The bottom line is we already have a very expensive program 
to maintain our submarine industrial base without adding a 
wholly unaffordable and dubious plan to build extra prototype 
ships. If the authorizers have any legitimate problems with the 
Navy's ship design, they should slow down the entire program 
until those problems are addressed.
    It is just this kind of total disregard for fiscal prudence 
that the public wants stopped. It is doubly egregious when we 
are cutting education, the environment, health care, 
transportation, and many other domestic accounts to pay for it. 
My amendment in full committee, which may also be offered on 
the Floor, would cut out this senseless wasteful spending and 
inject some fiscal sanity back into this program.
    National Missile Defense.--I offered an amendment in full 
committee to ensure that the extra $350 million added to the 
President's request of $508 million for National Missile 
Defense would be used to continue development of an ABM Treaty-
compliant system that could be deployed by 2003.
    My concern was that the extra funds provided in the 
Committee bill were meant to correspond to the much more 
expensive crash National Missile Defense program espoused in 
the so-called ``Defend America'' bill that has run into so much 
difficulty. The ``Defend America'' bill calls for making the 
decision NOW to deploy a bare bones national missile defense 
system by 2003, and a full blown ``layered'' defense against 
``larger'' targets costing $60 billion (and probably more) by 
2013. Besides being wholly unaffordable, there is real concern 
that this approach will simply spark another huge arms race 
that leaves everyone worse off.
    Making the decision now to deploy the bare bones system 
spelled out in the ``Defend America'' bill by 2003 jeopardizes 
two major treaties (START II and ABM), and locks us into 
immature technology that the Pentagon tells us could be 
obsolete in a few short years. If the SALT II Treaty is put at 
risk, we also put at risk the retirement of 5,000 Russian 
nuclear warheads that could once again be aimed at the United 
States.
    The Administration has a much more cogent plan which calls 
for continuing work on a cheaper, more effective and ``Treaty-
compliant'' system that could be deployed by 2003 as well. 
Under the Administration's so-called ``3 plus 3 plan'', the 
next three years would be used to develop and perfect 
appropriate technology to counter a limited ``rogue'' missile 
attack. The final decision to deploy this system by 2003 would 
be made in the year 2000 based on a more accurate assessment of 
the threat.
    So what does the difference boil down to between the 
Republican plan and the Clinton plan? Both propose to get the 
``limited'' missile defense job done by 2003 if need be. But 
the Clinton plan promises a cheaper, better system that is 
compliant with the ABM Treaty and does not jeopardize 
retirement of 5,000 Russian warheads under the SALT II Treaty.
    My amendment would make it crystal clear that any limited 
NMD system being developed would be ABM Treaty-compliant 
thereby removing a significant potential obstacle against 
moving ahead with a two-thirds reduction in Russia's strategic 
nuclear arsenal. My amendment would also focus these funds on 
the near term system, ensuring that funds are not wasted on 
futuristic $60 billion systems that have no guarantee of ever 
working and may have the exact opposite effect than intended.
    Deferring The F-22 Fighter Aircraft.--I also proposed a 
full committee amendment to cut $1 billion out of the $2 
billion appropriation in the bill to continue research and 
developments for the F-22 program. My amendment would also 
direct the Air Force to use the remaining $1 billion to 
restructure and delay this program by five years in line with 
recommendations of the GAO that this program should be delayed 
by 7 years.
    The reason for this is simple. The Air Force and F-22 
supporters want to spend billions of tax dollars we don't have 
for a plane whose time has not yet come.
    We already have the best air superiority fighter in the 
world--the F-15E--and the threat to that plane has been 
shrinking, not growing. The GAO tells us the 700+ F-15s we have 
on hand will last at least until the Year 2015 and probably a 
lot longer than that. The Air Force wants to spend $70 billion 
to buy 442 F-22 replacements planes to be deployed between 2004 
and 2010. The GAO believes there is at least a 7 year overlap 
that is unnecessary.
    We hear much talk from the F-22 proponents about how 
spending only $1 billion next year instead of $2 billion will 
kill this program. Only in the dream world of the Pentagon and 
$600 dollar toilet seats do they believe that spending a 
billion dollars on a program will kill it. This program would 
be restructured and slowed down under my amendment, but not 
killed.
    We also hear that even though this plane was designed 
specifically to fight Soviet planes in a scenario where our 
people are outnumbered and facing ultra-sophisticated defenses, 
there are now new ``threats'' from some 20 other countries who 
possess aircraft that are nearly as sophisticated as the F-15E.
    What they won't tell you is that those ``threats'' include 
such countries as Switzerland, Israel, France, the United 
Kingdom, Italy, Brazil and Argentina. They also won't tell you 
that much of this so-called ``threat'' is from our own aircraft 
that we sell to these countries--particularly the 1,700 F-16s 
we have sold to our friends and allies.
    For the countries that are legitimate concerns, like Iraq 
or North Korea, we learned in Desert Storm that possession of a 
few sophisticated aircraft does not necessarily represent a 
legitimate, serious ``threat'' to our Air Force. Many other 
things are necessary besides fancy planes such as highly 
trained air crews, AWACs air control systems, and other 
infrastructure.
    In fact, the trend is going sharply in the other direction. 
The GAO reports that the break up of the Warsaw Pact and the 
Soviet Union has greatly lessened the quantity and quality of 
the potential fighter threat to United States forces. Compared 
to over 700+ F-15's in the US inventory, potential foreign 
adversaries have only a handful of expensive high performance 
fighters that come close to matching the F-15's performance.
    This situation is not expected to change in the foreseeable 
future. Because of their expense, the Defense Department 
believes that few purchases of high performance fighter 
aircraft will be made by potential US adversaries anytime soon.
    We will also hear that not spending billions of dollars now 
will actually cost us billions of dollars later. This is the 
standard Pentagon response when they can't argue the facts. 
It's like telling your son or daughter that they better go out 
and trade in their Ford for that shiny new Mercedes now even 
though they're up to their ears in debt, because if they put it 
off for several years that Mercedes is going to cost more. And 
of course the Pentagon takes this one better sometimes because 
they say you should buy two new Mercedes now because you will 
save that much more.
    The bottom line is we should buy what we need, when we need 
it. We don't need the F-22 right now when we already have the 
best plane around, the best pilots around, and the best command 
and control structure around. There is no threat to justify 
putting this on the fast track.

             u.s. military spending in a global perspective

    In the aftermath of the Cold War, there is understandable 
uncertainty about the challenges we face to our security. The 
Republican majority seems to have seized on CNN images of 
violence and chaos in faraway places to justify U.S. military 
spending that is virtually unchanged from our peacetime Cold 
War average.
    But repeating the observation that ``it is still a 
dangerous world'' is a slogan, not a policy. And in fact one of 
the better kept secrets since the end of the Cold War is the 
dramatic, worldwide drop in military spending, which in 1994 
according to the Arms Control and Disarmament Agency reached 
its lowest level since 1966.
    Put simply, most of the world has recognized what this 
Congressional majority chooses to ignore--the Cold War is over. 
Old enemies in the Warsaw Pact have slashed their military 
budgets even as they clamor to enter NATO.
    According to the Arms Control and Disarmament Agency, the 
1994 Russian military budget is more than 70% below that of the 
Soviet Union in 1989. China, while a growing economic power, 
still has very limited military capabilities. And the ``Rogue 
States'' of Iran, Iraq, Syria, Libya, Cuba and North Korea have 
in common that they are broke, economically and diplomatically 
isolated, and without any significant patrons or allies. The 
chart below dramatically illustrates the disparity in military 
spending.



    Specifically,
          The U.S. spends more than all of our allies combined;
          We spend more than two and a half times the combined 
        budgets of Russia, China, Iran, Iraq, Syria, Cuba, and 
        North Korea;
          With our allies we spend five times the amount of the 
        countries listed above.
    Seen in this light, the modest (27%) reduction in U.S. 
military spending since 1989 seems relatively conservative, and 
certainly not cause for alarm. And in the face of far more 
dramatic cuts in worldwide military spending, the U.S. military 
budget takes on an entirely different perspective. At the end 
of the Cold War, the U.S. accounted for about 24% of global 
military spending. As of 1994, we have actually increased this 
to 34% of global military spending.
    We should always spend what we need for the defense of our 
country, but we should also make honest and rational 
adjustments--upwards or downwards--when circumstances change. 
Most importantly, we need to avoid the expensive and dangerous 
distortions that result when politicians are more concerned 
with maintaining political advantage than with maintaining a 
serious and sustainable national defense.

                                
