[Senate Report 105-189]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]




                                                       Calendar No. 367
_______________________________________________________________________

105th Congress                                                   Report
  2d Session                       SENATE                       105-189
_______________________________________________________________________


 
      DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE AUTHORIZATION ACT FOR FISCAL YEAR 1999      

                                 REPORT

                         [to accompany s. 2060]

                                   on

AUTHORIZING APPROPRIATIONS FOR FISCAL YEAR 1999 FOR MILITARY ACTIVITIES 
OF THE DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE, TO PRESCRIBE PERSONNEL STRENGTHS FOR SUCH 
        FISCAL YEAR FOR THE ARMED FORCES, AND FOR OTHER PURPOSES

                             together with

                            ADDITIONAL VIEWS

                               ----------                              

                      COMMITTEE ON ARMED SERVICES
                          UNITED STATES SENATE

                                     


                                     

                  May 11, 1998.--Ordered to be printed



                                                       Calendar No. 367

_______________________________________________________________________

105th Congress                                                   Report
  2d Session                       SENATE                       105-189
_______________________________________________________________________



                         DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE

                           AUTHORIZATION ACT

                          FOR FISCAL YEAR 1999

                                 REPORT

                         [to accompany s. 2060]

                                   on

AUTHORIZING APPROPRIATIONS FOR FISCAL YEAR 1999 FOR MILITARY ACTIVITIES 
OF THE DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE, TO PRESCRIBE PERSONNEL STRENGTHS FOR SUCH 
        FISCAL YEAR FOR THE ARMED FORCES, AND FOR OTHER PURPOSES

                             together with

                            ADDITIONAL VIEWS

                               __________

                      COMMITTEE ON ARMED SERVICES

                          UNITED STATES SENATE

                                     


                                     

                  May 11, 1998.--Ordered to be printed

                               -------         

                    U.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE                    

48-264                     WASHINGTON : 1998



                      COMMITTEE ON ARMED SERVICES

                      (105th Congress, 2d Session)

                STROM THURMOND, South Carolina, Chairman

JOHN W. WARNER, Virginia             CARL LEVIN, Michigan
JOHN McCAIN, Arizona                 EDWARD M. KENNEDY, Massachusetts
DAN COATS, Indiana                   JEFF BINGAMAN, New Mexico
BOB SMITH, New Hampshire             JOHN GLENN, Ohio
DIRK KEMPTHORNE, Idaho               ROBERT C. BYRD, West Virginia
JAMES M. INHOFE, Oklahoma            CHARLES S. ROBB, Virginia
RICK SANTORUM, Pennsylvania          JOSEPH I. LIEBERMAN, Connecticut
OLYMPIA J. SNOWE, Maine              MAX CLELAND, Georgia
PAT ROBERTS, Kansas

                      Les Brownlee, Staff Director

            David S. Lyles, Staff Director for the Minority

                                     


                            C O N T E N T S

                              ----------                              
                                                                   Page
Purpose of the Bill..............................................     1
Committee overview and recommendations...........................     2
Explanation of funding summary...................................     3
Division A--Department of Defense Authorizations.................    13
Title I--Procurement.............................................    13
    Explanation of tables........................................    15
    Subtitle A--Authorization of Appropriations..................    16
        Sec. 107. Chemical Demilitarization Program..............    18
            Chemical Weapons Convention (CWC)....................    18
            Chemical Stockpile Emergency Preparedness Project 
              (CSEPP)............................................    19
            Defense Threat Reduction Agency (DTRA)...............    19
    Subtitle B--Army Programs....................................    20
        Sec. 111. Multiyear procurement authority for Longbow 
          Hellfire missile program...............................    41
        Sec. 113. Armored system modernization...................    41
        Sec. 114. Reactive armor tiles...........................    42
        Sec. 116. Extension of authority to carry out Armament 
          Retooling and Manufacturing Support Initiative.........    43
    Other Army Programs..........................................    43
        Army Aircraft............................................    43
            UC-35................................................    43
            UH-60 blackhawk......................................    43
            C-12 Flight Maintenance System.......................    43
            Longbow..............................................    44
        Army Missile.............................................    44
            Enhanced fiber optic guided missile..................    44
            Multiple launch rocket system rocket.................    44
        Weapons and Tracked Combat Vehicles......................    45
            Small arms programs..................................    45
        Army Ammunition..........................................    45
            Small arms ammunition................................    45
            M919 25mm ammunition.................................    45
            M830A1 tank ammunition...............................    46
        Other Army Procurement...................................    46
            High mobility multipurpose wheeled vehicle...........    46
            Family of medium tactical vehicles...................    46
            Medium truck extended service program................    47
            Project management support...........................    47
            System fielding support..............................    48
            Army data distribution system........................    48
            Single channel ground and airborne radio system 
              family.............................................    48
            Area common user system modernization program........    48
            Night vision equipment...............................    48
            Multiple integrated laser engagement system 2000.....    49
    Subtitle C--Navy Programs....................................    50
        Sec. 121. CVN-77 nuclear aircraft carrier program........    76
        Sec. 122. Increased amount to be excluded from cost 
          limitation for Seawolf submarine program...............    76
        Sec. 123. Multiyear procurement authority for the medium 
          tactical vehicle replacement...........................    77
    Other Navy Programs..........................................    77
        Navy Aircraft............................................    77
            F-14 pods............................................    77
            AH-1W series.........................................    77
            EP-3 spares..........................................    77
            P-3C antisurface warfare improvement program.........    78
        Navy Weapons.............................................    78
            Penguin missile program..............................    78
            Improved tactical air launched decoy.................    78
            Close-in weapon system surface mode upgrade..........    79
            Surface ship gun mount rotatable pool................    79
        Navy and Marine Corps Ammunition.........................    80
            Marine Corps ammunition..............................    80
        Navy Shipbuilding and Conversion.........................    80
            LHD-8 advance procurement............................    80
            Strategic sealift....................................    81
            Landing craft air cusioned service life extension....    81
        Other Navy Procurement...................................    81
            AN/WSN-7 inertial navigation system..................    81
            AN/BPS-15H surface search radar......................    81
            Submarine acoustic rapid commercial off-the-shelf 
              insertion..........................................    82
            Integration and test facility command and control 
              initiative.........................................    82
            Information Technology-21............................    82
            Submarine connectivity...............................    83
            Joint Engineering Data Management and Information 
              Control System.....................................    84
            Aviation life support................................    84
            AEGIS support equipment..............................    84
            Smart ship equipment.................................    84
            NULKA assembly qualification.........................    85
        Marine Corps Procurement.................................    85
            Modification kits for tracked vehicles...............    85
            Avenger..............................................    85
            Night vision equipment...............................    85
            Communications and electronics infrastructure........    86
            Light tactical vehicle remanufacturing...............    86
            Power equipment......................................    86
            Shop equipment contact maintenance...................    87
            Material handling equipment..........................    87
    Subtitle D--Air Force Programs...............................    88
        Sec. 131. Joint surveillance target attack radar system..   105
        Sec. 132. Limitation on replacement of engines on 
          military aircraft derived from Boeing 707 aircraft.....   106
        Sec. 133. F-22 aircraft program..........................   107
        Sec. 134. C-130J aircraft program........................   108
            C-130J Program Progress..............................   108
            WC-130J..............................................   109
    Other Air Force Programs.....................................   110
        Air Force Aircraft.......................................   110
            Joint Primary Aircraft Training System...............   110
            F-15 220E engine modification........................   110
            ALQ-135 internal countermeasures sets................   110
            F-16 reconnaissance system...........................   111
            Theater airborne warning system......................   111
            U-2 sensor upgrades..................................   111
        Air Force Missile........................................   111
            Minuteman III guidance replacement program...........   111
            Titan IV space boosters..............................   112
        Other Air Force Procurement..............................   112
            Theater Deployable Communications....................   112
        Defense-Wide Programs....................................   113
            Penetration augmented munition.......................   120
            Remote activation munition systems...................   120
            Silent Shield........................................   120
            Surgical strike......................................   120
            Maritime equipment...................................   120
            National Guard and Reserve Equipment.................   120
    Other Items of Interest......................................   122
        Air National Guard Missions..............................   122
        Army aviation modernization..............................   122
        Bradley base sustainment.................................   123
        Depleted Uranium Production..............................   124
        Digital information technology testbed...................   124
        Domestic Emergency Response Program......................   124
            National Vaccine Stockpile...........................   125
            Defense Threat Reduction Agency (DTRA)...............   126
        Encapsulated life raft system............................   126
        F/A-18E/F configuration mix..............................   126
        Flight simulators for the Air National Guard.............   127
        Full accounting of cost associated with ammunition 
          procurement............................................   127
        Gun ship modernization...................................   128
        Secure facsimile machines................................   128
        Small arms training ammunition...........................   129
        Tactical trailers and dolly sets.........................   129
        Vertical Takeoff and Landing Unmanned Aerial Vehicles....   129
Title II--Research, Development, Test, and Evaluation............   131
    Subtitle A--Authorization of Appropriations..................   132
    Subtitle B--Program Requirements, Restrictions, and 
      Limitations................................................   133
        Sec. 211. Crusader self-propelled artillery system 
          program................................................   133
        Sec. 212. CVN-77 nuclear aircraft carrier program........   135
        Sec. 213. Unmanned aerial vehicle programs...............   135
            Dark Star UAV........................................   136
            Global Hawk..........................................   136
        Sec. 214. Airborne laser program.........................   136
        Sec. 215. Enhanced global positioning system program.....   138
        Sec. 216. Manufacturing Technology Program...............   138
        Sec. 217. Authority for use of major range and test 
          facility installations by commercial entities..........   139
        Sec. 218. Extension of authority to carry out certain 
          prototype projects.....................................   140
    Subtitle C--Other Matters....................................   140
        Sec. 231. Policy with respect to ballistic missile 
          defense cooperation....................................   140
    Additional Matters of Interest...............................   141
        Army.....................................................   141
            Hardened materials...................................   148
            Missile technology...................................   148
            Scramjet technology..................................   148
            Environmental technology.............................   148
            Pollution prevention.................................   148
            Software security....................................   149
            Cold regions research................................   149
            Nutrition research...................................   149
            Weapons and munitions advanced technology............   149
            Combat vehicle and automotive advanced technology....   150
            Military human immunodeficiency virus research.......   150
            Missile and rocket advanced technology...............   150
            Advanced tactical computer science and sensor 
              technology.........................................   150
            Tactical High Energy Laser...........................   151
            Space and missile defense battle lab.................   151
            North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) Research 
              and Development....................................   151
            Comanche.............................................   151
            Advanced threat infrared countermeasure system.......   152
            All source analysis system...........................   152
            Radar development....................................   152
            Firefinder...........................................   152
            Research, development, test and evaluation support...   153
            Army test instrumentation and targets................   153
            Survivability/lethality analysis.....................   153
            High energy laser system test facility...............   153
            Aerostat joint project office........................   154
            Advanced field artillery tactical data system 
              (AFATDS)...........................................   154
            Combat vehicle improvement programs..................   154
        Navy.....................................................   155
            Pulse detonation engine technology...................   163
            Stainless steel double hull research.................   163
            Communications, command and control technology.......   163
            Thermal management materials.........................   163
            Carbon-carbon heatshield technology..................   163
            Electronic propulsion technology.....................   163
            Precision strike and air defense technology..........   164
            Advanced electric systems studies....................   164
            Composite helicopter hangar..........................   164
            Marine Corps warfighting laboratory..................   164
            Freeze dried blood research..........................   165
            Advanced lightweight influence sweep system..........   165
            Studies and experiments for combat systems 
              engineering........................................   165
            SSGN study...........................................   166
            Intercooled recuperated gas turbine engine...........   166
            Predator.............................................   167
            Vertical gun for advanced ships......................   167
            Naval surface fire support system integration........   168
            Joint Strike Fighter.................................   168
            Nonlethal weapons and technologies of mass protection 
              program............................................   169
            Advanced communications and information technologies.   170
            Parametric airborne dipping sonar....................   170
            Commercial off-the-shelf insertion just prior to 
              critical design review for helicopter improvement..   171
            Integrated defensive electronic countermeasures......   171
            DDG-51 composite director room.......................   171
            Laboratories and field activities monitoring efforts.   172
            Multi-purpose processor..............................   172
            Non-propulsion electronics system....................   172
            Smart propulsor product model........................   172
            Ship live-fire test..................................   173
            Infrared search and track system.....................   173
            NUKLA antiship missile decoy system electro-magnetic 
              compatibility......................................   173
            Voice instructional devices..........................   174
            Global command, control, communications, computers, 
              intelligence, surveillance, reconnaissance (C4ISR) 
              visualization......................................   174
            F/A-18E/F reconnaissance development.................   174
            Battle force tactical training.......................   175
        Air Force................................................   176
            Friction welding.....................................   185
            Integrated high performance turbine engine program...   185
            Variable displacement vane pump......................   185
            High frequency active auroral research program.......   185
            Night vision technology..............................   185
            ALR-69 radar warning receiver upgrade................   185
            Ballistic missile technology.........................   186
            Solar orbital transfer vehicle.......................   186
            Micro-satellite technology program...................   186
            Range improvements for liquid upper stage testing....   186
            Space control technology development.................   187
            Variable stability in-flight simulator test aircraft.   187
            EC-130H..............................................   187
            Big Crow program Office..............................   188
            Space maneuver vehicle...............................   188
            Theater battle management system.....................   189
            C-5 modernization....................................   189
            Aircrew laser eye protection.........................   189
        Defense-Wide.............................................   190
            University research initiative.......................   198
            Chemical and biological defense program..............   198
                Shortcomings in Chemical and Biological Defense 
                  Program........................................   198
                DOD Anthrax Immunization Policy..................   199
                Biological Agent Detection and Identification....   201
                Status of Increased Chem/Bio Defense Funds in 
                  Fiscal Year 1998...............................   201
                Defense Threat Reduction Agency (DTRA)...........   202
            Ballistic Missile Defense Organization funding and 
              programmatic guidance..............................   202
                Support technology...............................   203
                National Missile Defense.........................   203
                Medium Extended Air Defense System...............   204
                Theater High Altitude Area Defense (THAAD) system   204
                Navy Upper Tier (Theater Wide)...................   205
                BMD Technical Operations.........................   205
                International Cooperative Programs...............   205
                Patriot PAC-3....................................   206
                BMD Targets......................................   206
                Report of the Panel on Reducing Risk in Ballistic 
                  Missile Defense Test Programs..................   206
                Countermeasures to missile defense systems.......   206
            Medical free electron laser..........................   206
            Computing systems and communications technology......   206
            Telemedicine.........................................   207
            Tactical technology..................................   207
            High definition systems..............................   207
            Mixed mode electronics...............................   208
            Weapons of Mass Destruction Technologies.............   208
                Core Competencies and Critical Expertise.........   208
                Implications of nuclear and conventional 
                  explosions on critical civil and commercial 
                  activities.....................................   208
                Structural Response and Blast Mitigation.........   209
                Hard and Deeply Buried Underground Structures....   209
            Explosives and conventional demilitarization.........   209
            Counterterror technical support......................   210
                Defense Threat Reduction Agency (DTRA)...........   211
                Counterproliferation support program.............   211
                Counterproliferation Analysis and Planning System   211
                Defense Threat Reduction Agency (DTRA)...........   212
            Generic logistics research and development technology 
              demonstrations.....................................   212
            Advanced lithography.................................   212
            Advanced electronics technologies....................   213
            Maritime technology..................................   213
            Advanced concept technology demonstrations...........   213
            High performance computing modernization.............   213
            Command, control, and communications systems.........   214
            Land warfare technology..............................   214
            Physical security....................................   214
            Advanced sensor applications.........................   215
            Integrated data environment..........................   215
            Joint robotics program...............................   215
            Defense support activities...........................   215
            Defense technical information services...............   215
            Joint simulation system..............................   215
            Surgical strike......................................   215
            Maritime equipment...................................   216
    Other Items of Interest......................................   216
        Acoustic firefinding system..............................   216
        Army After Next Initiatives..............................   216
        Army multimedia tactical adaptor.........................   216
        Brain protection in combat head injury...................   217
        Defense imagery and mapping program......................   217
        Dual use applications programs...........................   217
        Electronic commerce resource centers.....................   217
        Electronic safe and arm devices..........................   218
        Flat panel display technology............................   218
        Global Positioning System alternate master control 
          station................................................   218
        Joint experimentation plan report........................   219
        Man overboard notification technology....................   221
        Molten salt oxidation waste disposal technology..........   221
        National automotive center...............................   222
        National solar observatory...............................   222
        National technology alliance.............................   222
        Next generation internet.................................   222
        Patriot anti-cruise missile defense system...............   223
        Rapid acquisition of manufactured parts..................   223
        Report on Department of the Navy applications for high-
          performance computing..................................   223
        Report on national security space policy.................   224
        Software engineering institute...........................   224
        Software productivity....................................   224
        Space weather............................................   225
        Torpedo defense..........................................   225
        Totally integration munitions enterprise.................   225
        Trajectory correctable munition..........................   225
        United States-Japan management training..................   226
Title III--Operation and Maintenance.............................   227
    Subtitle A--Authorization of Appropriations..................   231
        Sec. 303. Armed Forces Retirement Home...................   261
        Sec. 304. Transfer from the National Defense Stockpile 
          Transaction Fund.......................................   261
    Subtitle B--Program Requirements, Restrictions, and 
      Limitations................................................   261
        Sec. 311. Special Operations Command counterproliferation 
          and counterterrorism activities........................   261
        Sec. 312. Tagging system for identification of 
          hydrocarbon fuels used by the Department of Defense....   261
        Sec. 313. Pilot program for acceptance and use of landing 
          fees charged for use of domestic military airfields by 
          civil aircraft.........................................   262
    Subtitle C--Environmental Provisions.........................   262
        Sec. 321. Transportation of polychlorinated biphenyls 
          from abroad for disposal in the United States..........   262
        Sec. 322. Modification of deadline for submittal to 
          Congress of annual reports on environmental activities.   263
        Sec. 323. Submarine solid waste control..................   263
        Sec. 324. Payment of stipulated penalties assessed under 
          CERCLA.................................................   264
        Sec. 325. Authority to pay negotiated settlement for 
          environmental cleanup of formerly used defense sites in 
          Canada.................................................   265
        Sec. 326. Settlement of claims of foreign governments for 
          environmental cleanup of overseas sites formerly used 
          by the Department of Defense...........................   266
        Sec. 327. Arctic Military Environmental Cooperation 
          Program................................................   266
    Subtitle D--Counter-Drug Activities..........................   267
        Drug Interdiction & Counter-drug Activities, Operations 
          and Maintenance........................................   268
        Enhanced Caribbean/Eastern Pacific Interdiction 
          Initiative.............................................   268
        Gulf States Counterdrug Initiative.......................   269
        Patrol Coastal Craft for Drug Interdiction by Southern 
          Command (sec. 331).....................................   270
        Program Authority for Department of Defense Support for 
          Counter-Drug Activities (sec. 332).....................   270
        Southwest Border Fence (sec. 333)........................   270
    Subtitle E--Other Matters....................................   270
        Sec. 341. Liquidity of working-capital funds.............   270
        Sec. 342. Termination of authority to manage working-
          capital funds and certain activities through the 
          Defense Business Operations Fund.......................   271
        Sec. 343. Clarification of authority to retain recovered 
          costs of disposals in working capital funds............   271
        Sec. 344. Best commercial inventory practices for 
          management of secondary supply items...................   271
        Sec. 345. Increased use of SMART cards...................   272
        Sec. 346. Public-private competition in the provision of 
          support services.......................................   272
        Sec. 347. Condition for providing financial assistance 
          for support of additional duties assigned to the Army 
          National Guard.........................................   273
        Sec. 348. Repeal of prohibition on joint use of Gray Army 
          Airfield, Fort Hood, Texas.............................   273
    Additional Matters of Interest...............................   273
        Navy.....................................................   273
            Ship depot maintenance...............................   273
            Tomahawk recertification.............................   273
            Dredging operations for the maintenance of ships in 
              the inactive reserve...............................   274
            Naval oceanographic program..........................   274
            Adjustments to civilian personnel education and 
              training funds.....................................   274
        Marine Corps.............................................   274
            United States Marine Corps initial issue.............   274
            Depot maintenance and corrosion control..............   274
            United States Marine Corps Reserve personal equipment   275
        Air Force................................................   275
            Air launched cruise missiles and advanced cruise 
              missile engineering analysis.......................   275
            Air Force combat training range......................   275
            War reserve materials................................   275
            Adjustments to personnel program funds...............   275
        Guard and Reserve Components.............................   276
        Defense-Wide.............................................   276
            National Guard Youth Challenge.......................   276
            STARBASE.............................................   276
            Defense reform initiative............................   276
            Adjustments to human resource activity funds.........   276
            Overseas humanitarian demining and Commander-in-
              activities.........................................   277
            Cooperative Threat Reduction (CTR) Program...........   277
            Defense Threat Reduction Agency (DTRA)...............   277
            Operational units readiness resources................   277
            Real property maintenance............................   277
            Civilian personnel levels............................   278
            Foreign currency fluctuation.........................   278
            Fuel price reduction.................................   278
            Restoration of work years to accomplish essential 
              finance and accounting services....................   279
            Restoration of 1500 work years (in millions).........   279
            Assistance to local educational agencies that have 
              benefit dependents of members of the Armed Forces 
              and Department of Defense civilian employees.......   279
        Revolving Funds..........................................   279
            Reserve Mobilization Income Insurance Program........   279
    Other Items of Interest......................................   279
        Defense Threat Reduction Agency (DTRA)...................   279
            Defense Special Weapons Agency (DSWA)................   281
            On-Site Inspection Agency (OSIA) and Arms Control 
              Implementation.....................................   281
            Nuclear Weapons Council and Maintaining the Nuclear 
              Deterrent..........................................   282
            Management and Oversight of the Defense Threat 
              Reduction Agency...................................   283
            Further Efficiencies and Economies...................   283
        Department of Defense demolition program and historic 
          properties.............................................   283
        Department of Defense shipscrapping practices............   284
        Environmentally-preferable products......................   286
        Federal facilities.......................................   286
        Retread tires and re-refined oils........................   288
Title IV--Military Personnel Authorizations......................   289
    Subtitle A--Active Forces....................................   289
        Sec. 401. End strengths for active forces................   289
        Sec. 402. Limited exclusions of joint duty officers from 
          limitations on number of general and flag officers.....   289
        Sec. 403. Limitation on daily average of personnel on 
          active duty in grades E-8 and E-9......................   289
        Sec. 404. Repeal of permanent end strength requirement 
          for support of two major regional contingencies........   290
    Subtitle B--Reserve Forces...................................   290
        Sec. 411. End strengths for Selected Reserve.............   290
        Sec. 412. End strengths for Reserves on active duty in 
          support of the reserves................................   290
        Sec. 413. End strengths for military technicians (dual 
          status)................................................   290
        Sec. 414. Exclusion of additional reserve component 
          general and flag officers from limitation on number of 
          general and flag officers who may serve on active duty.   291
        Sec. 415. Increase in numbers of members in certain 
          grades authorized to be on active duty in support of 
          the reserves...........................................   291
        Sec. 416. Consolidation of strength authorizations for 
          active status Naval Reserve flag officers of the Navy 
          Medical Department staff corps.........................   291
    Subtitle C--Authorization of Appropriations..................   292
        Sec. 421. Authorization of appropriations for military 
          personnel..............................................   292
    Other Items of Interest......................................   292
        Army National Guard schools and special training.........   292
Title V--Military Personnel Policy...............................   292
    Subtitle A--Officer Personnel Policy.........................   292
        Sec. 501. Streamlined selective retention process for 
          regular officers.......................................   292
        Sec. 502. Permanent applicability of limitations on years 
          of active naval service of Navy limited duty officers 
          in grades of commander and captain.....................   293
        Sec. 503. Involuntary separation pay denied for officer 
          discharged for failure of selection for promotion 
          requested by the officer...............................   293
        Sec. 504. Term of office of the Chief of the Air Force 
          Nurse Corps............................................   293
    Subtitle B--Reserve Component Matters........................   293
        Sec. 511. Service required for retirement of National 
          Guard officer in higher grade..........................   293
        Sec. 512. Reduced time-in-grade requirement for reserve 
          general and flag officers involuntarily transferred 
          from active status.....................................   293
        Sec. 513. Eligibility of Army and Air Force Reserve 
          brigadier generals to be considered for promotion while 
          on inactive status list................................   294
        Sec. 514. Composition of selective early retirement 
          boards for rear admirals of the Naval Reserve and major 
          generals of the Marine Corps Reserve...................   294
        Sec. 515. Use of Reserves for emergencies involving 
          weapons of mass destruction............................   294
    Subtitle C--Other Matters....................................   295
        Sec. 521. Annual manpower requirements report............   295
        Sec. 522. Four-year extension of certain force reduction 
          transition period management and benefits authorities..   295
        Sec. 523. Continuation of eligibility for voluntary 
          separation incentive after involuntary loss of 
          membership in Ready or Standby Reserve.................   295
        Sec. 524. Repeal of limitations on authority to set rates 
          and waive requirement for reimbursement of expenses 
          incurred for instruction at service academies of 
          persons from foreign countries.........................   295
        Sec. 525. Repeal of restriction on civilian employment of 
          enlisted members-......................................
        Sec. 526. Extension of reporting dates for Commission on 
          Military Training and Gender-Related Issues............   296
        Sec. 527. Moratorium on changes of gender-related 
          policies and practices pending completion of the work 
          of the Commission on Military Training and Gender-
          Related Issues.........................................   296
        Sec. 528. Transitional compensation for abused dependent 
          children not residing with the spouse or former spouse 
          of a member convicted of dependent abuse...............   296
        Sec. 529. Pilot program for treating GED recipients as 
          high school graduates for determinations of eligibility 
          for enlisting in the Armed Forces......................   297
        Sec. 530. Waiver of time limitations for award of 
          Distinguished Flying Cross in certain cases............   297
    Other Items of Interest......................................   297
        Personal finance training................................   297
        Operation Walking Shield Program.........................   298
        Processing of reports of promotion boards................   298
        Recruiting effectiveness and efficiency..................   298
        Management of reserves on active duty in support of the 
          reserve components.....................................   299
        Personnel and finance support of the reserve components..   300
        Investigations of military deaths........................   301
        Management of officers assigned to interagency and 
          international billets..................................   302
Title VI--Compensation and Other Personnel Benefits..............   303
    Subtitle A--Pay and Allowances...............................   303
        Sec. 601. Increase in basic pay for fiscal year 1999.....   303
        Sec. 602. Rate of pay for cadets and midshipmen at the 
          service academies......................................   303
        Sec. 603. Payments for movements of household goods 
          arranged by members....................................   303
        Sec. 604. Leave without pay for suspended academy cadets 
          and midshipmen.........................................   303
    Subtitle B--Bonuses and Special Incentive Pays...............   304
        Sec. 611. Three-month extension of certain bonuses and 
          special pay authorities for reserve forces.............   304
        Sec. 612. Three-month extension of certain bonuses and 
          special pay authorities for nurse officer candidates, 
          registered nurses, and nurse anesthetists..............   304
        Sec. 613. Three-month extension of authorities relating 
          to payment of other bonuses and special pays...........   304
        Sec. 614. Eligibility of Reserves for selective 
          reenlistment bonus when reenlisting or extending to 
          perform active guard and reserve duty..................   304
        Sec. 615. Repeal of ten-percent limitation on payments of 
          selective reenlistment bonuses in excess of $20,000....   304
        Sec. 616. Increase of maximum amount authorized for army 
          enlistment bonus.......................................   305
        Sec. 617. Education loan repayment program for health 
          professions officers serving in Selected Reserve.......   305
        Sec. 618. Increase in amount of basic educational 
          assistance under all-volunteer force program for 
          personnel with critically short skills or specialties..   305
        Sec. 619. Relationship of entitlements to enlistment 
          bonuses and benefits under the All-Volunteer Force 
          Educational Assistance Program.........................   305
    Subtitle C--Travel and Transportation Allowances.............   305
        Sec. 621. Travel and transportation for rest and 
          recuperation in connection with contingency operations 
          and other duty.........................................   305
        Sec. 622. Payment for temporary storage of baggage of 
          dependent student not taken on annual trip to overseas 
          duty station of sponsor................................   306
        Sec. 623. Commercial travel of Reserves at federal supply 
          schedule rates for attendance at inactive duty training 
          assemblies.............................................   306
    Subtitle D--Retired Pay, Survivor Benefits, and Related 
      Matters....................................................   306
        Sec. 631. Paid-up coverage under Survivor Benefit Plan...   306
        Sec. 632. Court-required Survivor Benefit Plan coverage 
          effectuated through elections and deemed elections.....   306
        Sec. 633. Recovery, care, and disposition of remains of 
          medically retired member who dies during 
          hospitalization that begins while on active duty.......   307
    Subtitle E--Other Matters....................................   307
        Sec. 641. Definition of possessions of the United States 
          for pay and allowances purposes........................   307
        Sec. 642. Federal employees' compensation coverage for 
          students participating in certain officer candidate 
          programs...............................................   307
        Sec. 643. Authority to provide financial assistance for 
          education of certain defense dependents overseas.......   307
    Other Items of Interest......................................   308
        Accrual funding of military retirement...................   308
        Computation of retired pay for certain service members...   308
Title VII--Health Care...........................................   309
        Sec. 701. Dependents' dental program.....................   309
        Sec. 702. Extension of authority for use of personal 
          services contracts for provision of health care at 
          military entrance processing stations and elsewhere 
          outside medical treatment facilities...................   309
        Sec. 703. TRICARE Prime automatic enrollments and retiree 
          payment options........................................   310
        Sec. 704. Limited continued CHAMPUS coverage for persons 
          unaware of a loss of CHAMPUS coverage resulting from 
          eligibility for medicare...............................   310
        Sec. 705. Enhanced Department of Defense organ and tissue 
          donor program..........................................   310
        Sec. 706. Joint Department of Defense and Department of 
          Veterans Affairs reviews relating to interdepartmental 
          cooperation in the delivery of medical care............   310
        Sec. 707. Demonstration projects to provide health care 
          to certain medicare-eligible beneficiaries of the 
          military health care system............................   312
    Other Items of Interest......................................   313
        Auto-destruct syringes...................................   313
        Health care fraud........................................   313
        Hepatitis C testing......................................   314
        The Psychopharmacology Demonstration Project.............   314
Title VIII--Acquisition Policy, Acquisition Management, and 
  Related Matters................................................   315
        Sec. 801. Para-aramid fibers and yarns...................   315
        Sec. 802. Procurement of travel services for official and 
          unofficial travel under one contract...................   315
        Sec. 803. Limitation on use of price preference upon 
          attainment of contract goal for small and disadvantaged 
          businesses.............................................   315
        Sec. 804. Distribution of assistance under the 
          Procurement Technical Assistance Cooperative Agreement 
          Program................................................   316
        Sec. 805. Defense Commercial Pricing Management 
          Improvement Act........................................   316
        Sec. 806. Department of Defense purchases through other 
          agencies...............................................   318
        Sec. 807. Supervision of Defense Acquisition University 
          structure by Under Secretary of Defense for Acquisition 
          and Technology.........................................   319
        Sec. 808. Repeal of requirement for Director of 
          Acquisition Education, Training, and Career Development 
          to be within the Office of the Under Secretary of 
          Defense for Acquisition and Technology.................   319
        Sec. 809. Eligibility of involuntarily downgraded 
          employee for membership in an acquisition corps........   319
        Sec. 810. Pilot programs for testing program manager 
          performance of product support oversight 
          responsibilities for life cycle of acquisition programs   320
        Sec. 811. Scope of protection of certain information from 
          disclosure.............................................   320
    Other Items of Interest......................................   321
        Defense capability preservation agreement................   321
        Item-by-item waivers to domestic preference requirements.   321
Title IX--Department of Defense Organization and Management......   323
        Sec. 901. Reduction in number of Assistant Secretary of 
          Defense positions......................................   323
        Sec. 902. Renaming of position of Assistant Secretary of 
          Defense for Command, Control, Communications, and 
          Intelligence...........................................   323
        Sec. 903. Authority to expand the National Defense 
          University.............................................   324
        Sec. 904. Reduction in Department of Defense headquarters 
          staff..................................................   324
        Sec. 905. Permanent requirement for quadrennial defense 
          review.................................................   324
        Sec. 906. Management reform for research, development, 
          test, and evaluation...................................   324
        Sec. 907. Restructuring of administration of Fisher 
          Houses.................................................   327
Title X--General Provisions......................................   327
    Subtitle A--Financial Matters................................   327
        Sec. 1002. Authorization of emergency appropriations for 
          fiscal year 1999.......................................   327
        Sec. 1003. Authorization of prior emergency supplemental 
          appropriations for fiscal year 1998....................   327
        Sec. 1004. Partnership for Peace information system 
          management.............................................   327
    Subtitle B--Naval Vessels....................................   327
        Sec. 1011. Iowa class battleship returned to Naval Vessel 
          Register...............................................   327
        Sec. 1012. Long-term charter of three vessels in support 
          of submarine rescue, escort, and towing................   328
        Sec. 1013. Transfers of naval vessels to foreign 
          countries..............................................   329
    Subtitle C--Miscellaneous Report Requirements and Repeals....   329
        Sec. 1021. Repeal of reporting requirements..............   329
        Sec. 1022. Report on Department of Defense financial 
          management improvement plan............................   329
        Sec. 1023. Feasibility study of performance of Department 
          of Defense finance and accounting functions by private 
          sector sources or other Federal Government sources.....   329
        Sec. 1024. Reorganization and consolidation of operating 
          locations of the Defense Finance and Accounting Service   330
        Sec. 1025. Report on inventory and control of military 
          equipment..............................................   330
        Sec. 1026. Report on continuity of essential operations 
          at risk of failure because of computer systems that are 
          not year 2000 compliant................................   330
        Sec. 1027. Reports on naval surface fire-support 
          capabilities...........................................   332
        Sec. 1028. Report on roles in Department of Defense 
          aviation accident investigations.......................   333
        Sec. 1029. Strategic plan for expanding distance learning 
          initiatives............................................   333
        Sec. 1030. Report on involvement of Armed Forces in 
          contingency and ongoing operations.....................   333
    Subtitle D--Other Matters....................................   334
        Sec. 1041. Cooperative counterproliferation program......   334
        Sec. 1042. Extension of counterproliferation authorities 
          for support of United Nations Special Commission on 
          Iraq...................................................   334
        Sec. 1043. One-year extension of limitation on retirement 
          or dismantlement of strategic nuclear delivery systems.   335
        Sec. 1044. Direct-line communication between United 
          States and Russian commanders of strategic forces......   335
        Sec. 1045. Chemical warfare defense......................   335
        Sec. 1046. Accounting treatment of advance payment of 
          personnel..............................................   336
        Sec. 1047. Reinstatement of definition of financial 
          institution in authorities for reimbursing defense 
          personnel for Government errors in direct deposits of 
          pay....................................................   336
        Sec. 1048. Pilot program on alternative notice of receipt 
          of legal process for garnishment of federal pay for 
          child support and alimony..............................   336
        Sec. 1049. Costs payable to the Department of Defense and 
          other federal agencies for services provided to the 
          Defense Commissary Agency..............................   336
        Sec. 1050. Collection of dishonored checks presented at 
          commissary stores......................................   337
        Sec. 1051. Defense commissary agency telecommunications..   337
        Sec. 1052. Research grants competitively awarded to 
          service academies......................................   337
        Sec. 1053. Clarification and simplification of 
          responsibilities of inspectors general regarding 
          whistleblower protections..............................   337
        Sec. 1054. Amounts recovered from claims against third 
          parties for loss or damage to personal property shipped 
          or stored at Government expense........................   338
        Sec. 1055. Eligibility for attendance at Department of 
          Defense domestic dependent elementary and secondary 
          schools................................................   338
        Sec. 1056. Fees for providing historical information to 
          the public.............................................   339
        Sec. 1057. Periodic inspection of the Armed Forces 
          Retirement Home........................................   339
        Sec. 1058. Transfer of F-4 phantom II aircraft to 
          foundation.............................................   339
        Sec. 1059. Act constituting presidential approval of 
          vessel war risk insurance requested by the Secretary of 
          Defense................................................   339
        Sec. 1060. Commendation and memorialization of the United 
          States Navy Asiatic Fleet..............................   340
        Sec. 1061. Program to commemorate 50th anniversary of the 
          Korean War.............................................   340
        Sec. 1062. Relocation of frequency spectrum..............   340
        Sec. 1063. Technical and clerical amendments.............   342
    Other Items of Interest......................................   342
        Arms control and other national priorities...............   342
        Assured strategic command and control....................   342
        Reporting miscellaneous expenses in object classes 25 
          series (Contractual Services)..........................   343
        Reprogramming procedures for the National Reconnaissance 
          Office.................................................   343
Title XI--Department of Defense Civilian Personnel...............   345
        Sec. 1101. Repeal of employment preference not needed for 
          recruitment and retention of qualified child care 
          providers..............................................   345
        Sec. 1102. Maximum pay rate comparability for faculty 
          members of the United States Air Force Institute of 
          Technology.............................................   345
        Sec. 1103. Four-year extension of voluntary separation 
          incentive pay authority................................   345
        Sec. 1104. Department of Defense employee voluntary early 
          retirement authority...................................   345
        Sec. 1105. Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency 
          experimental personnel management program for technical 
          personnel..............................................   346
    Other Items of Interest......................................   346
        Temporary assignments of personnel between Federal 
          Government, and state or local governments, 
          institutions of higher education, Indian tribal 
          governments and other eligible organizations...........   346
        Enhanced training for Department of Defense civilian 
          employees regarding A-76...............................   346
        Management by Full Time Equivalents......................   347
        High-grade restrictions..................................   347
Title XII--Joint Warfighting Experimentation.....................   347
Division B--Military Construction Authorizations.................   349
Title XXI--Army..................................................   375
    Summary......................................................   375
        Sec. 2101. Authorized Army construction and land 
          acquisition projects...................................   375
        Sec. 2102. Family housing................................   375
        Sec. 2103. Improvements to military family housing units.   375
        Sec. 2104. Authorization of appropriations, Army.........   375
        Sec. 2105. Modification of authority to carry out fiscal 
          year 1998 project......................................   375
    Other Items of Interest......................................   375
        Improvements of military family housing, Army............   375
Title XXII--Navy.................................................   377
    Summary......................................................   377
        Sec. 2201. Authorized Navy construction and land 
          acquisition projects...................................   377
        Sec. 2202. Family housing................................   377
        Sec. 2203. Improvements to military family housing units.   377
        Sec. 2204. Authorization of appropriations, Navy.........   377
Title XXIII--Air Force...........................................   379
    Summary......................................................   379
        Sec. 2301. Authorized Air Force construction and land 
          acquisition projects...................................   379
        Sec. 2302. Family housing................................   379
        Sec. 2303. Improvements to military family housing units.   379
        Sec. 2304. Authorization of appropriations, Air Force....   379
    Other Items of Interest......................................   379
        Planning and design, Air Force...........................   379
        Improvements of military family housing, Air Force.......   379
        Consolidation of the Officer Training School, Maxwell Air 
          Force Base, Alabama....................................   380
Title XXIV--Defense Agencies.....................................   381
    Summary......................................................   381
        Sec. 2401. Authorized Defense Agencies construction and 
          land acquisition projects..............................   381
        Sec. 2402. Improvements to military family housing units.   381
        Sec. 2403. Energy conservation projects..................   381
        Sec. 2404. Authorization of appropriations, Defense 
          Agencies...............................................   381
        Sec. 2405. Modification of authority to carry out certain 
          fiscal year 1995 projects..............................   381
        Sec. 2406. Modification of authority to carry out fiscal 
          year 1990 project......................................   382
Title XXV--North Atlantic Treaty Organization Security Investment 
  Program........................................................   383
    Summary......................................................   283
        Sec. 2501. Authorized NATO construction and land 
          acquisition projects...................................   283
        Sec. 2502. Authorization of appropriations, NATO.........   283
Title XXVI--Guard and Reserve Forces Facilities..................   385
    Summary......................................................   385
        Sec. 2601. Authorized Guard and Reserve construction and 
          land acquisition projects..............................   385
        Sec. 2602. Reduction in fiscal year 1998 authorization of 
          appropriations for Army National Guard military 
          construction...........................................   385
            Planning and design, Guard and Reserve Forces 
              facilities.........................................   285
Title XXVII--Expiration and Extension of Authorizations..........   387
        Sec. 2701. Expiration of authorizations and amounts 
          required to be specified by law........................   387
        Sec. 2702. Extension of authorizations of certain fiscal 
          year 1996 projects.....................................   387
        Sec. 2703. Extension of authorization of fiscal year 1995 
          project................................................   387
        Sec. 2704. Effective date................................   387
Title XXVIII--General Provisions.................................   389
    Subtitle A--Military Construction Program and Military Family 
      Housing Changes............................................   389
        Sec. 2801. Modification of authority relating to 
          architectural and engineering services and construction 
          design.................................................   389
        Sec. 2802. Expansion of Army overseas family housing 
          lease authority........................................   389
    Subtitle B--Real Property and Facilities Administration......   389
        Sec. 2811. Increase in thresholds for reporting 
          requirements relating to real property transactions....   389
        Sec. 2812. Exceptions to real property transaction 
          reporting requirements for war and certain emergency 
          and other operations...................................   389
        Sec. 2813. Waiver of applicability of property disposal 
          laws to leases at installations to be closed or 
          realigned under the base closure laws..................   390
        Sec. 2814. Restoration of Department of Defense lands 
          used by another Federal agency.........................   390
    Subtitle C--Land Conveyances.................................   390
        Sec. 2821. Land conveyance, Indiana Army Ammunition 
          Plant, Charlestown, Indiana............................   390
        Sec. 2822. Land conveyance, Army Reserve Center, 
          Bridgton, Maine........................................   391
        Sec. 2823. Land conveyance, Volunteer Army Ammunition 
          Plant, Chattanooga, Tennessee..........................   391
        Sec. 2824. Release of interests in real property, former 
          Kennebec Arsenal, Augusta, Maine.......................   391
        Sec. 2825. Land exchange, Naval Reserve Readiness Center, 
          Portland, Maine........................................   392
        Sec. 2826. Land conveyance, Air Force Station, Lake 
          Charles, Louisiana.....................................   392
    Subtitle D--Other Matters....................................   392
        Sec. 2831. Purchase of build-to-lease family housing at 
          Eielson Air Force Base, Alaska.........................   392
        Sec. 2832. Beach replenishment, San Diego, California....   392
    Other Items of Interest......................................   394
        Report on Air Force Plant #3, Tulsa, Oklahoma............   394
        Report on Fort Hunter Liggett, California................   394
Title XXIX--Juniper Butte Range Lands Withdrawal.................   395
Division C--Department of Energy National Security Authorizations 
  and Other Authorizations.......................................   397
Title XXXI--Department of Energy National Security Programs......   397
    Subtitle A--National Security Programs Authorizations........   397
        Sec. 3101. Weapons activities............................   414
            Stockpile stewardship programs.......................   414
            Stockpile management programs........................   415
            Technology transfer and education....................   416
            Program direction....................................   416
            Construction projects................................   416
            Tritium production...................................   416
            Laboratory Directed Research and Development.........   417
        Sec. 3102. Environmental restoration and waste management   417
            Post 2006 Completion.................................   417
            Technology Development...............................   418
            Accelerating Cleanup.................................   418
            UF6 Stabilization and Reuse..........................   419
            Environmental Validation, Verification and 
              Engineering Analysis...............................   419
            Off-site Disposal of Low Level Waste.................   419
            Overdue reports......................................   419
        Sec. 3103. Other defense activities......................   420
            Nonproliferation and verification research and 
              development........................................   420
            Russian Reactor Core Conversion Program..............   420
            Nuclear Smuggling and Counterterrorism...............   421
            Worker and Community Transition......................   421
            Fissile materials....................................   421
            Environment, Safety and Health-Defense...............   422
            Naval Reactors.......................................   422
        Sec. 3104. Defense nuclear waste disposal................   422
        Sec. 3105. Defense environmental management privatization   422
    Subtitle B--Recurring General Provisions.....................   423
        Sec. 3121. Reprogramming.................................   423
        Sec. 3122. Limits on general plant projects..............   423
        Sec. 3123. Limits on construction projects...............   423
        Sec. 3124. Fund transfer authority.......................   424
        Sec. 3125. Authority for conceptual and construction 
          design.................................................   424
        Sec. 3126. Authority for emergency planning, design, and 
          construction activities................................   424
        Sec. 3127. Funds available for all national security 
          programs of the Department of Energy...................   424
        Sec. 3128. Availability of funds.........................   424
        Sec. 3129. Transfers of defense environmental management 
          funds..................................................   424
    Subtitle C--Program Authorizations, Restrictions, and 
      Limitations................................................   425
        Sec. 3131. International cooperative stockpile 
          stewardship............................................   425
        Sec. 3132. Prohibition on use of funds for ballistic 
          missile defense and theater missile defense............   425
        Sec. 3133. Licensing of certain mixed oxide fuel 
          fabrication and irradiation facilities.................   425
        Sec. 3134. Continuation of processing, treatment, and 
          disposition of legacy nuclear materials................   426
        Sec. 3135. Authority for Department of Energy federally 
          funded research and development centers to participate 
          in merit-based technology research and development 
          programs...............................................   426
        Sec. 3136. Support for public education in the vicinity 
          of Los Alamos National Laboratory, New Mexico..........   426
    Subtitle D--Other Matters....................................   427
        Sec. 3141. Repeal of fiscal year 1998 statement of policy 
          on stockpile stewardship program.......................   427
        Sec. 3142. Increase in maximum rate of pay for 
          scientific, engineering, and technical personnel 
          responsible for safety at defense nuclear facilities...   427
        Sec. 3143.  Sense of Senate regarding treatment of 
          Formerly Utilized Sites Remedial Action Program under a 
          nondefense discretionary budget function...............   427
    Other Items of Interest......................................   427
        Asset disposition........................................   427
        Improving collaboration between the Department of Defense 
          and Department of Energy laboratories..................   428
        Los Alamos Non-proliferation Center......................   428
        Robotics and intelligent machines........................   429
Title XXXII--Defense Nuclear Facilities Safety Board.............   431
Title XXXIII--National Defense Stockpile.........................   433
Title XXXIV--Naval Petroleum Reserves............................   435
Title XXXV--Panama Canal Commission..............................   437
        Sec. 3501.  Short title; references to Panama Canal Act 
          of 1979................................................   437
        Sec. 3502.  Authorization of expenditures................   437
        Sec. 3503.  Purchase of vehicles.........................   437
        Sec. 3504.  Expenditures only in accordance with treaties   437
        Sec. 3505.  Donations to the Commission..................   437
        Sec. 3506.  Agreements for United States to provide post-
          transfer administrative services for certain employee 
          benefits...............................................   438
        Sec. 3507.  Sunset of United States overseas benefits 
          just before transfer...................................   438
        Sec. 3508.  Central Examining Office.....................   440
        Sec. 3509.  Liability for vessel accidents...............   440
        Sec. 3510.  Placement of United States citizens in 
          positions with the United States Government............   441
        Sec. 3511.  Panama Canal Board of Contract Appeals.......   442
Legislative Requirements.........................................   443
Departmental Recommendations.....................................   443
Committee Action.................................................   444
Congressional Budget Office Cost Estimate........................   444
Regulatory Impact................................................   444
Changes in Existing Law..........................................   444
Additional Views of Senator John McCain..........................   445
Additional Views of Senator Carl Levin...........................   450
Additional Views of Senator Jeff Bingaman........................   454
Additional Views of Senator John Glenn...........................   456


                                                       Calendar No. 367

-----------------------------------------------------------------------
105th Congress                                                   Report
 2d Session                      SENATE                         105-189
_______________________________________________________________________


AUTHORIZING APPROPRIATIONS FOR FISCAL YEAR 1999 FOR MILITARY ACTIVITIES 
OF THE DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE, TO PRESCRIBE PERSONNEL STRENGTHS FOR SUCH 
        FISCAL YEAR FOR THE ARMED FORCES, AND FOR OTHER PURPOSES

                                _______
                                

                  May 11, 1998.--Ordered to be printed

_______________________________________________________________________


   Mr. Thurmond, from the Committee on Armed Services, submitted the 
                               following

                              R E P O R T

                             together with

                            ADDITIONAL VIEWS

                         [To accompany S. 2060]

    The Committee on Armed Services reports favorably an 
original bill to authorize appropriations during the fiscal 
year 1999 for military activities of the Department of Defense, 
for military construction, and for defense activities of the 
Department of Energy, to prescribe personnel strengths for such 
fiscal year for the armed forces, and for other purposes, and 
recommends that the bill do pass.

                          PURPOSE OF THE BILL

    This bill would:
          (1) authorize appropriations for (a) procurement, (b) 
        research, development, test and evaluation, (c) 
        operation and maintenance and the revolving and 
        management funds of the Department of Defense for 
        fiscal year 1999;
          (2) authorize the personnel end strengths for each 
        military active duty component of the armed forces for 
        fiscal year 1999;
          (3) authorize the personnel end strengths for the 
        Selected Reserve of each of the reserve components of 
        the armed forces for fiscal year 1999;
          (4) authorize the annual average military training 
        student loads for the active and reserve components of 
        the armed forces for fiscal year 1999;
          (5) impose certain reporting requirements;
          (6) impose certain limitations with regard to 
        specific procurement and research, development, test 
        and evaluation actions and manpower strengths; provide 
        certain additional legislative authority, and make 
        certain changes to existing law;
          (7) authorize appropriations for military 
        construction programs of the Department of Defense for 
        fiscal year 1999; and
          (8) authorize appropriations for national security 
        programs of the Department of Energy for fiscal year 
        1999.

Committee overview and recommendations

    In the Second Session of the 105th Congress, the Committee 
on Armed Services continued its efforts to ensure, within the 
constraints of the new balanced budget agreement, an adequate 
balance between the current and long-term readiness of the 
armed forces. While this historic agreement between the 
Congress and the President to achieve a balanced budget by 
fiscal year 2002 protects our military forces from ``top line'' 
cuts, it does not guarantee immunity from the unplanned costs 
that have served to undermine programmed investments in our 
military. Accordingly, the committee remains concerned that the 
funding levels for defense may not be sufficient to sustain the 
military capability required to support the current foreign 
policy as well as the personnel, quality of life, readiness, 
and modernization programs critical to our armed forces.
    The committee believes that the limitations of the balanced 
budget agreement and the continual, demanding requirements of 
increasingly frequent contingency deployments have stretched 
our military forces to the breaking point. A disparity in 
outlay estimates for fiscal year 1999 between the Office of 
Management and Budget and the Congressional Budget Office 
required a decrease in recommended authorizations that will 
further strain our military. The committee is obligated to 
assess the impact of these factors on our military forces and 
recommend adjustments to the funding level for defense in the 
balanced budget agreement when necessary.
    In the National Defense Authorization Bill for Fiscal Year 
1999, the committee worked to achieve an appropriate balance 
between near-term and long-term readiness through investments 
in modernization, infrastructure and research; the development 
and maintenance of sufficient endstrengths for all grade levels 
and specialties; policies supporting the recruitment and 
retention of high quality personnel; fielding of the types and 
quantities of weapons systems and equipment needed to fight and 
win decisivelywith acceptable risk to our troops; and ensuring 
an adequate, safe and reliable nuclear weapons capability.
    The committee modified the budget request to improve 
operations and achieve greater efficiencies and savings. The 
committee sought to eliminate defense spending that does not 
contribute directly to the national security of the United 
States. Savings were realized by accelerating programs where 
appropriate, and by limiting new program starts.
    The committee worked to protect the quality of life of our 
military personnel and their families. Quality of life 
initiatives include provisions designed to provide equitable 
pay and benefits to military personnel, including a 3.1 percent 
pay raise and the restoration of appropriate levels of funding 
for the construction and maintenance of troop billets and 
military family housing.
    The committee notes with concern the combined effects of 
supporting operations and maintenance at the expense of 
essential modernization along with a foreign policy that 
imposes high operational tempos on increasingly scarce military 
resources. There is clear evidence that the combat readiness of 
the armed forces is at greater risk due to two key factors: 
older and harder-to-maintain equipment resulting from 
inadequate modernization and the overuse of a smaller force 
structure. To ensure that the United States remains the 
preeminent military power in the world, current readiness 
requirements must be adequately funded without diverting 
critical funding from procurement and research, development, 
testing and evaluation accounts. The committee believes that a 
more robust, progressive modernization effort will not only 
provide the requisite capabilities for future military 
operations, but will also lower future operational and 
maintenance costs.
    The committee has increased investment in a broad spectrum 
of research and development activities to ensure that U.S. 
military forces remain superior in technology to that of any 
potential adversary. The committee believes that effective 
development of advanced technologies will be a key factor in 
ensuring U.S. armed forces dominate any future battlefield, 
whether it be primarily on the ground, on the sea, in the air, 
in space, or in cyberspace. A program of stable, long-term 
investment in science and technology will remain vital to 
guaranteeing U.S. dominance of threats in any medium.
    The committee continues to monitor the resources provided 
to the reserve components. While the Department of Defense 
continues to provide testimony on the importance of these 
components, and has improved integration of reserve component 
requirements, their chronic underfunding has been apparent in 
several critical areas. The ability of reserve component forces 
to be ready and relevant depends on proper funding to reduce 
backlogs in maintenance and repair of equipment; provide an 
appropriate quantity and quality of training; enhance 
infrastructure and base operations programs; and maintain 
adequate stocks of supplies, repair parts, fuel, and 
ammunition. Additionally, America's citizen-soldiers have been 
ordered to active duty in substantial numbers and for 
substantial periods of time in support of ongoing contingencies 
and operations, and the effects of repeated call-ups for such 
missions are forcing reservists to choose between being 
``citizens'' or ``soldiers.'' The committee strongly cautions 
against any policy that drives a wedge between our community-
based force and the grassroots support of the American public.
    The Department's template for the future--the 1997 
Quadrennial Defense Review (QDR)--is based on a strategy that 
retains the requirement for a capability to win two concurrent 
major regional contingencies. However, even with the higher 
funding provided in the outyears of the budget agreement, the 
QDR recommended paying for essential modernization by 
eliminating up to 130,000 military personnel as well as 
reducing other key modernization programs. Given the effects of 
the high operational and personnel tempos due to the operations 
in Bosnia and Southwest Asia, and other ongoing activities, the 
committee is concerned that the armed forces, even if enhanced 
with the capabilities envisioned in the QDR, may not be able to 
execute the strategy without excessive risks and casualties.
    The committee intends to provide adequately for our men and 
women in uniform to defend our nation even within the balanced 
budget agreement. The committee will continue to examine the 
adequacy of the funds allocated to our national security, and 
provide increases when necessary. At the same time, the 
committee strongly encourages the Department of Defense to 
continue its efforts to improve the efficiency and 
effectiveness of defense programs to achieve savings that can 
be devoted to the operational needs of our armed forces.
    National security remains the federal government's most 
important obligation to its citizens. The Committee on Armed 
Services recognizes its critical role within the Senate in 
carrying out the constitutional powers of the Congress to 
provide for the ``common defense.'' The members of the 
committee further understand the importance of the committee's 
jurisdiction within the Senate over matters relating to the 
Department of Defense, the military departments, and the 
national security programs of the Department of Energy. 
Accordingly, in developing defense authorization legislation 
for fiscal year 1999, the committee, in its traditional 
bipartisan manner, placed the national security interests of 
the United States and the American people above other 
considerations. The National Defense Authorization Bill for 
Fiscal Year 1999 reflects a bipartisan approach to these 
priorities, and continues the committee's efforts to provide a 
clear basis and direction for U.S. national security policies 
and programs into the 21st century.

Explanation of funding summary

    The administration's budget request for the national 
defensefunction of the federal budget for fiscal year 1999 was 
$270.9 billion (as estimated by the Congressional Budget Office), of 
which $200.1 billion was for programs which require specific funding 
authorization.
    The following table summarizes both the direct 
authorizations and equivalent budget authority levels for 
fiscal year 1999 defense programs. The columns relating to the 
authorization request do not include funding for the following 
items: military personnel funding; military construction 
authorizations provided in prior years; and other small 
portions of the defense budget that are not within the 
jurisdiction of this committee or which do not require an 
annual authorization. As explained above, funding for military 
personnel is included in the amounts authorized by the 
committee, but not in the total funding requested for 
authorization.
    Funding for all programs in the national defense function 
is reflected in the columns relating to the budget authority 
request and the total budget authority implication of the 
authorizations in this bill. The committee recommends funding 
for national defense programs totaling $270.6 billion in budget 
authority, which is consistent with the fiscal year 1999 Budget 
Resolution.


            DIVISION A--DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE AUTHORIZATIONS

                          TITLE I--PROCUREMENT

    The Department of Defense modernization program, as 
currently outlined, cannot be sustained. Former Secretary of 
Defense James Schlesinger, in recent testimony before the 
committee on the report of the National Defense Panel, stated 
``quite simply you can't get there, that desired point in the 
21st century, from here given the apparent fiscal limits.'' 
Both General Shalikashvili and General Shelton, the former and 
current Chairmen of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, after 
consultation with service chiefs, established a baseline 
requirement of $60 billion dollars per year to meet essential 
modernization priorities. Unfortunately, the Administration has 
yet to submit a budget request for the Department of Defense 
that satisfies this requirement even though the Future Years 
Defense Program indicates that the requirement would be 
satisfied in fiscal year 2001.
    For the last several years, testimony before the 
congressional defense committees suggests that our forces are 
living on the edge and relying on investments made years ago in 
modernization accounts. In brief, it is fairly clear that the 
Department of Defense is continuing to suffer from a series of 
procurement deficient budgets. This is explained, in part, by 
continually planned but unrealized savings from 
``efficiencies'' projected by the Department of Defense. 
However, the costs associated with continued extended 
deployments not resourced by supplemental funding, especially 
when it forces the displacement of funds from modernization 
accounts to operation and maintenance accounts, are also 
crippling service modernization programs, and thereby our 
current and future military capabilities.
    The committee is becoming increasingly concerned that, 
despite these continued delays in meeting minimum modernization 
funding levels, the services continue to program for 
modernization requirements that cannot be supported by the 
elusive date associated with meeting the $60 billion dollar 
procurement goal, phantom ``efficiencies,'' and uncertain 
acquisition reform and future BRAC savings. Department of 
Defense plans to develop future generation systems, when tied 
to future funding of legacy system modernization requirements, 
have caused what many have referred to as a procurement ``bow 
wave.'' Continued annual delays of procurement create a very 
large and insurmountable unfunded procurement requirement.
    In an effort to quantify the scope of the bow wave problem 
for one of the services, the committee requested extended 
planning program data for the 2004 through 2010 time frame for 
that service's research, development, and acquisition programs. 
In reply, the committee received a copy of a memorandum, signed 
by the service secretary, that stated that the data ``had not 
been adequately reviewed by the Service and OSD leadership.'' 
The only conclusion that can be drawn is that the Department of 
Defense has not even tried to quantify the nature and scope of 
the bow wave problem.
    Recent independent analysis suggests that the Department of 
Defense modernization plan could exceed available funding by as 
much as $26 billion a year during the ten-year period following 
that covered by the 1999 through 2003 future years defense 
program. While some argue that there has always been a mismatch 
between available or projected funding and funds called for in 
service modernization programs, it is clear that the funding 
limitations will cripple active programs and delay, if not 
prevent, the military transformation called for by both the 
Quadrennial Defense Review and the National Defense Panel.
    The committee believes that the time has come for the 
Department of Defense, along with the services, to review both 
modernization plans and projected resources available in future 
years and make the tough calls necessary to better align 
programs with funding. The committee believes this review 
should be conducted in a joint environment that considers 
future warfighting requirements, efficiencies resulting from a 
focus on joint warfighting, and enhancements that future 
technologies may provide. Until this happens, the Congress will 
be forced to continue to make critical decisions on how to 
allocate increasingly scarce resources without insight into the 
overall scope and nature of the modernization ``bow wave'' and 
how service programs are linked to transformation initiatives.

Overview

    The committee continues to give priority to buying 
essential core requirements, investing to achieve savings and 
investing in the future. Particular emphasis was given to 
Marine Corps programs in response to the level of concern 
raised by General Krulak in his testimony before the committee 
and in his March 25, 1998 letter to the Congress. It is clear, 
however, that the Department of Defense modernization plan in 
existence today cannot be supported by even the best case 
projections of available research, development, and acquisition 
funding.
    The committee was pleased with the level of funding 
provided in the budget request for the reserve components. In 
the fiscal year 1999 request, the Department requested more 
funding for reserve component modernization than had been 
previously provided for reserve component shortfalls in 
previous years, even after Congressional increases. The 
committee recognizes that both active and reserve component 
funding shortfalls are likely to continue, but believes that 
the fiscal year 1999 budget request reflects a good faith 
effort to move in the right direction. The committee believes 
that both components must continue to work together to meet the 
common goal of ensuring our total force is prepared for a 
challenging future.

Explanation of tables

    The tables in this title display items requested by the 
administration for fiscal year 1999 for which the committee 
either increased or decreased the requested amounts. As in the 
past, the administration may not exceed the amounts approved by 
the committee (as set forth in the tables or, if unchanged from 
the administration request, as set forth in the Department of 
Defense's budget justification documents) without a 
reprogramming action in accordance with established procedures. 
Unless noted explicitly in the report, all changes are made 
without prejudice.
              SUBTITLE A--AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS


Sec. 107. Chemical Demilitarization Program.

    The budget request for the Army included $855.1 million for 
the chemical agents and munitions destruction program for 
operation and maintenance ($531.7 million), procurement 
($140.7), and research and development ($182.8 million).
    The Congress directed in section 1412 of the National 
Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 1986 (P.L. 99-145) 
that the Secretary of Defense carry out the destruction of the 
lethal chemical agents and munitions in the U.S. stockpile. 
Pursuant to that direction, the committee recommends that the 
chemical agents and munitions destruction program continue to 
be funded in the defense accounts. The committee recommends the 
following reductions to the budget request: $40.0 million for 
operation and maintenance, $25.0 million for procurement, and 
$10.0 million for research and development.
    The committee recommends that an additional $3.0 million in 
the budget request for research and development be made 
available to accelerate the development and fielding of the 
Army's mobile munitions assessment systems.
    The committee also recommends a provision that would amend 
section 1412(g)(2) to require the Department of Defense to 
provide an annual report on the travel costs of members of the 
Chemical Demilitarization Citizen's Advisory Commission.

Chemical Weapons Convention (CWC)

    On April 29, 1997, the Chemical Weapons Convention entered 
into force for countries that ratified the Treaty. As a State 
Party to the CWC, the United States is obligated to carry out 
all requirements of the Treaty. In May 1997, the United States 
submitted the required General Destruction Plan to the 
international monitoring agency, the Organization for the 
Prevention of Chemical Weapons (OPCW). Under the CWC, the 
United States is required to destroy its declared chemical 
stockpile by April 29, 2007 for the unitary stockpile and 2004 
for the non-stockpile items.
    In fiscal year 1997, the Congress provided authority in 
section 8065 of Public Law 103-208 for the Department of 
Defense to conduct a pilot program to identify and demonstrate 
no fewer than two alternative technologies for the destruction 
of assembled chemical weapons.
    The Secretary of Defense is required to submit a report to 
the congressional defense committees on the effectiveness of 
each alternative technology identified and demonstrated under 
the pilot program and its ability to meet applicable safety and 
environmental requirements. Funds for construction of baseline 
incineration facilities at Pueblo Chemical Depot, Colorado and 
the Blue Grass Depot, Kentucky may not be obligated until 180 
days after receipt of the Secretary's report.
    A decision by the Department on the technology to be 
implemented at the two facilities, whether it be incineration 
or an alternative, is required not later than June 30, 1999.
    The committee understands that the Army has continued with 
the necessary environmental activities to implement an 
incineration-based technology at Pueblo and Newport. However, 
no decision will be made on which technology to implement until 
the Assembled Chemical Weapons Assessment (ACWA) program is 
completed.

Chemical Stockpile Emergency Preparedness Project (CSEPP)

    In order to enhance the protection of the 
communitiessurrounding the stockpiles, workers involved in the 
destruction effort, and the environment during storage, movement and 
destruction of the U.S. unitary chemical stockpile, the Chemical 
Stockpile Emergency Preparedness Project (CSEPP) was established in 
1988. Since that time, both the Army and the Federal Emergency 
Management Agency (FEMA) have assisted the civilian communities 
surrounding the eight chemical stockpile storage locations to enhance 
their emergency response capabilities.
    The committee understands that the Army and FEMA have 
reached an agreement on management of the CSEPP. As a result of 
the agreement, FEMA will have authority and responsibility for 
the off-post communities, while the Army remains responsible 
for on-post emergency preparedness. The committee understands 
that both the Army and FEMA agree that coordination, 
integration and the joint nature of the CSEPP, particularly at 
the community level, must be preserved. Of the funds available 
for CSEPP in the Department of Defense operation and 
maintenance account, $25.0 million is available to FEMA for 
off-post community activities.

Defense Threat Reduction Agency (DTRA)

    In November 1997, as part of its Defense Reform Initiative 
(DRI), the Department of Defense recommended the establishment 
of a single agency, the Defense Threat Reduction Agency (DTRA), 
to carry out programs to counter proliferation and reduce 
threats posed by weapons of mass destruction and to provide 
nuclear weapon stockpile and related support. The formation of 
this agency is to be accomplished through the consolidation of 
several agencies, and several functions from the office of the 
Secretary of Defense (OSD) involved in the management of 
associated programs, to including the chemical and biological 
defense program and the counterproliferation support program. 
Consistent with the DRI recommendation, the committee 
recommends the transfer of the chemical demilitarization 
program to the Defense Threat Reduction Agency (DTRA).
                       SUBTITLE B--ARMY PROGRAMS 


Sec. 111. Multiyear procurement authority for Longbow Hellfire missile 
        program.

    The committee recommends a provision that would authorize 
the Army to enter into a multiyear procurement contract, 
beginning in fiscal year 1999, for procurement of the Longbow 
Hellfire missile. The committee understands this action can be 
accomplished with existing funds for this program and that this 
multiyear authority will ultimately reduce program costs.

Sec. 113. Armored system modernization.

    The committee recommends a provision which would prohibit 
the expenditure of $20.3 million of the funds authorized to be 
appropriated to the Army for Weapons and Tracked Combat 
Vehicles and intended for the M1A1D (Applique Integration Kit) 
modification to the Abrams tank until such time as the Army 
provides an assessment and justification for its M1A2 fielding 
plan and an assessment of armored system modernization 
requirements through the 2020 time frame.
    The committee is concerned about Army plans for continued 
tank modernization as it moves toward its objective of the Army 
After Next (AAN). Army budget documents provided to the 
committee indicate that the M1A2 System Enhancement Program 
(SEP) upgrade program will be terminated in 2003, having 
produced a total of 1,150 M1A2 SEP tanks, but leaving two-
thirds of the active Army and all of the National Guard with 
less capable tanks.
    The committee is aware that the National Defense Panel 
(NDP) has called for a lighter, quicker, and more agile tank 
for the Army After Next and has questioned continuing the 
upgrade of the M1A1 tank. For risk mitigation, however, the NDP 
did recommend that the M1A2 be deployed to III Corps and the 
forward based force while the balance of the Army transitions 
to the Army After Next.
    While reserving judgment on the design and technologies 
associated with a future tank, the committee believes the Army 
should consider a range of alternatives in its modernization 
review, including a possible concentration of modernized, and 
not simply digitized Abrams tanks in III Corps. Current Army 
plans call for the six active heavy divisions to be composed of 
one brigade of M1A2 SEP tanks and two brigades of M1A1D tanks 
with applique digitized capability. This would force a division 
commander to contend with a high-low mix of tanks with vastly 
different operational capabilities and substantially different 
logistical support requirements.
    The committee also understands that Army plans for the two 
major theater-of-war contingencies allocate roughly half of the 
Army's heavy divisions and National Guard Enhanced Brigades to 
each of the contingencies. Should the second contingency not 
materialize, and if the Army continues with the planned 
distribution of M1A2 SEP tanks throughout the active heavy 
divisions in limited numbers rather than concentrating them in 
one corps, the Army may face the situation of fighting a war 
with nearly half of its most modern tanks not committed to the 
fight, or of concentrating all modernized brigades in committed 
divisions at the last minute, thereby degrading the 
cohesiveness of units forged through habitual relationships in 
peacetime training. The committee believes it reasonable to 
take some risk that the second contingency would not 
materialize, and concentrate M1A2 tanks in completely 
modernized divisions allocated to the first contingency. This 
option would also facilitate a subsequent Army decision, should 
it be feasible, to adopt another of the NDP's recommendations 
and move more rapidlywith the remainder of the Army toward AAN 
organizations and weapon systems, eventually leaping in capability over 
the modernized Army XXI divisions and corps.
    From a broader perspective, although the committee supports 
the long term goal of AAN, testimony before the committee 
clearly indicates that the technological foundation required to 
produce a future combat system to replace the current tank may 
not be available until at least 2020. This suggests that 
continued modernization or upgrade of the Abrams tank should be 
considered to ensure that a viable industrial base is 
maintained to support the operational forces until the required 
technologies become available to begin procurement of a future 
combat system.
    The committee is aware that alternatives currently 
available for consideration by the Army include a proposal to 
modernize III Corps with a combination of M1A2 SEP tanks and 
M1A2 SEP Part 1 tanks and provide a digitized capability by 
2004. This alternative would appear to meet the Army's goal of 
a digitized corps by its self-imposed deadline, as well as 
field a vastly more capable corps equipped entirely with 
modernized M1A2 tanks. The committee understands that a 
decision to concentrate the M1A2 Abrams tanks in III Corps 
would have to be made in a larger context of fielding all of 
the armor-related modernized combat systems, including the M2A3 
Bradley fighting vehicle. However, the committee believes that 
the Army should give this alternative serious consideration.
    The committee directs the Army to identify alternatives for 
continued modernization of its primary ground combat systems, 
conduct an assessment of those alternatives and provide a 
report to the defense committees by January 31, 1999. 
Additionally, the committee further directs the Army to ensure 
that the armored system assessment includes a review of future 
warfighting capabilities, the impact of joint warfighting 
efficiencies, and overall armored system modernization 
requirements through the 2020 time frame. This report should 
outline requirements, budget projections, and industrial base 
implications for future service modernization requirements.

Sec. 114. Reactive armor tiles.

    The committee recommends a provision that would require the 
Secretary of Defense to conduct, with input from the Army and 
Marine Corps, a detailed assessment of requirements for 
reactive armor tiles for Army and Marine Corps armored 
vehicles. This study will assess requirements for reactive 
armor tiles and provide a cost-benefit analysis of the 
procurement and installation of tiles on selected armored 
vehicles. The Secretary of Defense shall include the comments 
of the Secretaries of the Army and the Navy on the results of 
this study, and for those vehicles for which a requirement 
exists for reactive armor tiles, the Secretary of Defense shall 
make recommendations on the number of vehicles that should be 
equipped with such tiles. The Secretary of Defense will provide 
the results of this study and his corresponding recommendations 
to the Congressional defense committees no later than April 1, 
1999. This provision would preclude any expenditure of funds 
for reactive armor tiles until 30 days after the date on which 
the Secretary of Defense submits the results of the study to 
the Congress.

Sec. 116. Extension of authority to carry out Armament Retooling and 
        Manufacturing Support Initiative.

    The committee recommends a provision that would extend the 
armament retooling and manufacturing support initiative through 
fiscal year 1999.

                          OTHER ARMY PROGRAMS

                             Army Aircraft

UC-35

    The budget request did not include funds for UC-35A 
aircraft (formerly known as the C-XX). The UC-35A is a fast, 
medium range air transport aircraft. The Army has a requirement 
for 35 UC-35A's, and has a total of 17 UC-35 aircraft either on 
hand or on order. The committee notes that there is an approved 
Mission Needs Statement and Operational Requirements Document 
to support the program, and that the Army has programmed for 
the procurement of the aircraft in the Future Years Defense 
Program. The committee recommends an increase of $15.9 million 
to procure an additional three UC-35A aircraft in fiscal year 
1999.

UH-60 Blackhawk

    The budget request included $243.8 million to procure 22 
UH-60 Blackhawk helicopters. The committee continues to be 
concerned about the pace and scope of the Army aviation 
modernization effort. The committee notes the recently 
acknowledged requirement to procure an additional 90 UH-60 
Blackhawk helicopters to meet requirements for a third assault 
company in each light division as identified in the recent 
total Army analysis, and is concerned that only 50 aircraft 
have been funded in the future years defense program (FYDP). 
Additionally, the committee notes that combined Army and Navy 
procurement falls eight short of the economic production rate 
of 36 aircraft per year. Therefore, the committee recommends an 
increase of $78.5 million to procure eight additional UH-60 
aircraft to achieve the most economical production rate. The 
committee expects the Army to fund the remaining 32 aircraft, 
currently unfunded in the FYDP, in future budget submissions.

C-12 Flight Maintenance System

    The budget request included $2.6 million for C-12 aircraft 
modification program. The Army operates a fleet of 93 C-12 
fixed wing aircraft, which have been procured over the years 
and comprise four different models with cockpit instrumentation 
from the 1960's. The varied configurations require frequent 
retraining for aviators operating the aircraft. With a modest 
investment, the entire fleet could be brought to a common 
configuration, while replacing outdated systems with a modern, 
digital flight management system. The upgrade will provide for 
better standardization and decreased operational costs. 
Accordingly, the committee recommends an increase of $6.0 
million to complete the C-12 modification program in the 
shortest practical time.

Longbow

    The budget request included $607.0 million to support 
ongoing modification efforts for AH-64 Apache Longbow 
helicopters. The committee notes outstanding requirements for 
Longbow training devices and an ongoing program to convert the 
T701 engine to the T701C configuration. Longbow training 
devices are required to support operator and maintenance 
training at institutional training facilities. The committee 
understands that these training devices will promote an 
estimated $4.0 million each year in cost avoidance savings.
    The engine conversion effort is necessary to provide 
commonality in the fleet and additional power for the aircraft. 
The committee notes an outstanding requirement to conduct 
qualification tests on T701C engine conversion kits. 
Application of these kits will be necessary to enhance the 
performance of existing engines required to support the 
application of fire control radars to Army National Guard 
Apache Longbow aircraft.
    The committee recommends an additional $38.7 million for 
Longbow training devices and an additional $1.5 million to 
procure two engine kits and fund qualification testing that 
will establish the viability of upgrade kits and avoid costly 
procurement of new engines that would otherwise be required. 
The committee recommends a total authorization of $647.2 
million for Apache Longbow requirements.

                              Army Missile

Enhanced fiber optic guided missile

    The budget request included $13.7 million to procure 96 
enhanced fiber optic guided munition (EFOG-M) rockets. The 
committee is still concerned about ongoing development and 
fielding plans for the EFOG-M system and escalating costs for 
EFOG-M missiles. The committee notes problems encountered with 
recent Army testing of the missile system and has seen no 
indication that the Army intends to pursue fielding this system 
beyond those capabilities obtained to support the advanced 
concept technology demonstration (ACTD). The committee also is 
concerned about the large number of precision guided munitions 
either in development or in the field and believe that the 
current Army program cannot be sustained by future budgets. The 
committee, therefore, recommends a decrease of $13.7 million to 
eliminate procurement of EFOG-M missiles.

Multiple launch rocket system rocket

    The budget request includes $16.5 million to procure 
extended range multiple launch rocket system (MLRS) rockets. 
The committee is concerned about excessively high costs 
associated with specific rocket components and believes the 
Army should reconsider planned procurement of the extended 
range rocket in 1999 and solve component cost issues before 
resuming production. Clearly, the Army's ultimate objective is 
to begin production and ultimately field the guided MLRS rocket 
in 2002 which will increase the range and accuracy of this 
system and provide a quantum leap in capability. The committee 
also notes that ongoing domestic production and projected 
international production requirements are sufficient to meet 
minimum production levels for 1999. Therefore, the committee 
recommends a decrease of $16.5 million to eliminate procurement 
of extended range rockets for fiscal year 1999 and directs the 
Army to provide a report to the defense committees on the 
resolution of component cost issues no later than January 31, 
1999.

                  Weapons and Tracked Combat Vehicles

Small arms programs

    The committee continues to monitor the small arms 
industrial base and continues to be concerned about the ability 
of current and future budgets to sustain this industrial base.
    The budget request included $6.5 million to procure 673 
M240B machine guns and $12.2 million for the MK-19 Grenade 
machine gun. The committee notes an unfilled requirement to 
provide a more rapid fielding of this weapon to both active 
Army units and Army National Guard Enhanced Brigades. The 
committee also notes an unfilled requirement for new mounts for 
the MK-19 to meet prepositioned equipment requirements.
    The committee, therefore, recommends an increase of $6.5 
million to stabilize M240B procurement and meet critical 
warfighting requirements and an increase of $3.0 million to 
procure 800 of the MK64 mounts for the MK-19 Grenade machine 
gun required to support Army requirements.

                            Army Ammunition

                         Small arms ammunition

    The committee is concerned with the impact of dramatic 
changes in ammunition procurement on the small arms ammunition 
industrial base. The skyrocketing procurement of 5.56 mm and 
7.62 mm ammunition over the past few years demonstrates one 
side of these dramatic changes. The administration's budget 
request for each of these has grown by approximately 300 
percent (from $29.7 million to $91.6 million) between fiscal 
years 1997 and 1999. The committee believes that the Army 
should seek to stabilize funding for these programs and take 
greater advantage of the training opportunities afforded by 
available small arms simulation devices. Therefore, the 
committee recommends a reduction of $28.1 million in the budget 
request for 5.56 mm, and $6.4 million in the budget request for 
7.62 mm ammunition. This will provide the same level of funding 
for these two programs that was provided for fiscal year 1998.

M919 25mm ammunition

    The M919 25mm cartridge is used by the Bradley Fighting 
Vehicle and, therefore, would likely receive extensive use in 
any major theater of war. Unfortunately, there is a 
``significant shortage of the M919 cartridge'' currently in the 
Army inventory. Therefore, the committee recommends an increase 
of $20.8 million to procure additional rounds in order to 
reduce this shortage.

M830A1 tank ammunition

    The committee supports the recent decision of the Army to 
convert 4,500 rounds of its M830A1 tank ammunition into 
demolition rounds for potential obstacles in the Korean War 
scenario. Unfortunately, this has led to a shortfall in the 
Army's war reserves for these rounds. Therefore, the committee 
recommends an increase of $15.0 million to the Army's budget 
request in order to eliminate this shortfall.

                         Other Army Procurement

High mobility multipurpose wheeled vehicle

    The budget request included $12.1 million to modify 100 
high mobility multipurpose wheeled vehicle (HMMWV) chassis and 
10 enhanced cargo vehicles by installing armor protection and 
support fielding requirements. The committee notes a shortage 
of 18,000 vehicles for the Army, ongoing analysis of future 
requirements and alternatives, and a requirement to maintain a 
viable production line for both Army and Marine Corps future 
requirements. The committee, therefore, recommends an increase 
of $65.7 million for a total of $77.8 million for HMMWV 
production and support.

Family of medium tactical vehicles

    The budget request included $332.0 million for procurement 
of family of medium tactical vehicle (FMTV) trucks. The 
committee continues to strongly support the fielding of new 
FMTV trucks to replace an aging fleet that suffers from 
escalating operations and maintenance costs. The committee 
notes that existing funding for the FMTV program is inadequate 
to meet economic production rates and meet both active and 
reserve shortfalls. This issue is compounded with the stated 
Army intent to qualify a second source for future FMTV 
procurement. A fixed defense budget and overly ambitious 
modernization program suggest the Army does not have the 
resources necessary to continue to qualify a second source for 
FMTV. In fact, dual sourcing is normally required only when a 
current producer cannot meet production demands or provide a 
product at a fair price. In fiscal year 1999, FMTV funding 
constraints will create a short break in production and 
extremely low production rates while at the same time, the 
trucks that are being fielded have been well received by 
soldier operators, are affordable, and are saving precious 
operations and support funding. The committee directs the 
Secretary of the Army to review the proposed second source 
initiative and conduct a cost and benefit analysis on the costs 
associated with continuing on the present course to qualify a 
second source. If it is determined that the second source 
initiative will result in cost savings to the government, the 
Secretary of the Army will provide certification of that fact 
to the Congressional defense committees. For fiscal year 1999, 
the committee believes that the production break should be 
eliminated and recommends an increase of $88.0 million to meet 
a production rate of 200 per month, while reducing unit costs 
by at least 5 percent. The committee directs that the vehicles 
procured with this additional funding be fielded to high 
priority National Guard and Reserve units. The committee 
encourages the Army to ensure that minimum production levels 
are maintained in future budget submissions.

Medium truck extended service program

    The budget request included $37.2 million for medium truck 
remanufacture requirements necessary to reduce operation and 
support costs of an aging truck fleet. Current Army funding for 
new truck procurement is not adequate to meet force 
requirements and mandates that a portion of the existing fleet 
be remanufactured to support operational requirements and 
reduce operating costs. The budget request for 1999 includes 
$10.8 million for five ton truck requirements and $26.4 million 
for two and one-half ton truck requirements. The committee 
understands that funding requested for the two and one-half ton 
truck requirement is inadequate and recommends an increase of 
$93.9million to meet medium truck extended service program 
minimum economic rate requirements and field critically needed trucks 
to the reserve components. Of this increase, 30 percent will be 
available for the National Guard to support an ongoing effort to 
determine the viability of National Guard depots to perform a portion 
of this work to established standards at reduced cost.
    The committee further directs the Secretary of the Army to 
review the medium tactical vehicle extended service program to 
determine whether it is cost effective to continue with this 
effort. The committee supports the remanufacturing program as a 
means to provide reserve component units with much needed 
upgrades to an aging fleet. The committee understands that the 
goal for this program is to remanufacture a portion of the 
truck fleet, at a cost significantly lower than new vehicle 
procurement, in order to reduce operations and maintenance 
costs until new trucks could be manufactured in sufficient 
quantities to meet all active and reserve component 
requirements. The committee notes that this program has been 
underfunded for the past two years and that future funding 
projections also fall far short of minimum sustaining rate 
requirements. If this program is considered to be a viable 
program by the Army, the committee would expect the Army to 
fund it at the level required to sustain production. If the 
Army is unable to meet these minimum funding requirements, the 
committee would expect this effort to be terminated. The 
committee directs the Secretary of the Army to report on the 
results of this assessment and report findings to the defense 
committees no later than January 31, 1999.

Project management support

    The budget request included $2.4 million for program 
manager support functions. The committee notes the proposed 
funding is to be used, in part, for planning and control 
purposes for two programs with limited activity in 1999. These 
programs include the Armored Security Vehicle and the High 
Mobility Multi-purpose Wheeled Vehicle Extended Service 
Program. The committee, therefore, recommends a decrease of 
$1.0 million for a total authorization of $1.4 million in 1999.

System fielding support

    The budget request included $4.2 million for system 
fielding support requirements. The committee notes no fielding 
requirements for one of the systems supported by the requested 
funding. Therefore, the committee recommends a decrease of $1.0 
million in 1999 and authorizes a total of $3.2 million.

Army data distribution system

    The budget request included $24.0 million to procure 201 
additional enhanced position location reporting system (EPLRS) 
radios and continue fielding of prior year hardware 
procurements. The committee has consistently supported fielding 
of EPLRS units and understands that outstanding requirements 
exist for both active and reserve component units. The 
committee also recognizes the importance of the EPLRS system to 
ongoing digitization activities. The committee, therefore, 
recommends an increase of $28.0 million for a total of $52.0 
million to procure additional EPLRS units required for both 
active and reserve component units.

Single channel ground and airborne radio system family

    The budget request included $13.2 million for single 
channel ground and airborne radio system (SINCGARS) system 
support. The committee notes that the Army has outstanding 
requirements for SINCGARS Advanced System Improvement Package 
(ASIP) radios for the reserve components that have not been 
filled. In light of evolving demand for digitization 
communication pipelines for voice and data transmission within 
the Enhanced Brigades, the committee recommends an increase of 
$61.9 million to support procurement of SINCGARS ASIP radios 
necessary to meet critical requirements within the Army 
National Guard.

Area common user system modernization program

    The budget request included $97.1 million to support 
ongoing efforts to provide ground-based, networked, battlefield 
communications support required by the Army digitization effort 
and Force XXI command and control systems. The committee notes 
that, although programmed funding supports the fielding 
requirements of the first digitized division by 2000, unfunded 
aspects of this program remain. Specifically, the committee is 
concerned that Army efforts to downsize the shelters for 
warfighter information network systems is currently unfunded. 
The committee, therefore, recommends an increase of $47.8 
million to continue the critical downsizing effort necessary to 
ensure the effectiveness of fielded warfighter information 
network systems.

Night vision equipment

    The budget request included $29.6 million for night vision 
equipment. The committee recognizes the advantage that modern 
night vision equipment provides to ground force effectiveness 
on the battlefield and believes that continued fielding of 
these devices is essential. The committee recommends an 
increase of $13.5 million to procure the following:
          (1) $9.0 million for AN/PEQ-2A infrared target 
        pointer/illuminator devices;
          (2) $4.5 million for AN/PEQ-4C infrared aiming light 
        devices.

Multiple integrated laser engagement system 2000

    The budget request contained $56.8 million for Army 
training systems. Of this amount, $16.1 million is for 
procurement of the Multiple Integrated Laser Engagement System 
(MILES) 2000. The committee is concerned about inadequate Army 
plans to procure these training device upgrades. The Army 
currently uses a legacy MILES system that is rapidly aging and 
is becoming increasingly difficult to maintain. However, the 
committee notes significant problems with the new MILES 2000 
training devices throughout the development and testing phase 
and the subsequent Army decision to delay the obligation of 
$34.4 million in fiscal year 1998 funding due to problems that 
occurred in user testing. The committee believes that 
replacement of MILES training devices is critical to support 
training requirements yet does not believe that the Army 
development and fielding plan has reviewed all available 
options. In fact, the committee notes the availability of at 
least two other training systems that could be used for this 
purpose. The committee therefore recommends a decrease of $16.1 
million for fiscal year 1999 procurement and directs the Army 
to use fiscal year 1998 funding to meet short term testing and 
fielding requirements. The committee also directs the Army to 
review current procurement plans that call for ``attrition-
based'' replacement of MILES training devices and provide the 
Congress, no later than 1 March 1999, with an assessment of 
both Army and Joint Service requirements, alternative training 
device systems, and procurement options to support fielding of 
fully functional training devices.
                       SUBTITLE C--NAVY PROGRAMS 


Sec. 121. CVN-77 nuclear aircraft carrier program.

    The budget request included $124.5 million for CVN-77 
Advance Procurement. The National Defense Authorization Act for 
Fiscal Year 1998 contained a provision that authorized $50.0 
million for the advance procurement and construction of 
components for CVN-77. To continue the effort begun in fiscal 
year 1998 to produce savings in the CVN-77 program, the 
committee recommends a provision that would authorize $124.5 
million for the advance procurement and construction of 
components, including nuclear components, for the CVN-77 
aircraft carrier program.

Sec. 122. Increased amount to be excluded from cost limitation for 
        Seawolf submarine program.

    The National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 1998 
contained a provision requiring $272.4 million to be excluded 
from the cost limitation for the Seawolf submarine program for 
initial class design costs that were previously allocated to 
other canceled ships in the class. In addition, the Department 
of Defense Inspector General (DOD IG) was directed to provide a 
report which included the following:
          (1) audit $745.4 million identified by the Secretary 
        of the Navy as having been obligated for canceled 
        Seawolf-class submarines;
          (2) construction cost growth of SSN-21, SSN-22 and 
        SSN-23 that had not been reported to Congress before 
        the date of the DOD IG report; and
          (3) current cost estimates for the completion of SSN-
        21, SSN-22 and SSN-23.
    The committee received the DOD IG audit March 13, 1998, 
which reported the following:
          (1) of the $745.4 million audited, the Navy obligated 
        $557.6 million in costs that did not result in 
        components that the Navy could use in the construction 
        of the Seawolf class submarine;
          (2) the Seawolf program has not experienced an 
        unreported cost growth in the Shipbuilding and 
        Conversion, Navy funding levels since Congress 
        established the cost limitation in fiscal year 1996; 
        and
          (3) the Seawolf Program Management Office estimates 
        the cost to complete construction of the SSN-21, SSN-
        22, and SSN-23 at the cost limitation and the Seawolf 
        Independent Cost Review Team estimate is $67.3 million 
        under the cost limitation.
    The DOD IG verified that a total of $557.6 million 
obligated did not result in components the Navy could use in 
construction of the SSN-21, SSN-22, or SSN-23. Therefore, the 
committee recommends a provision that would amend section 
123(a) of the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal 
Year 1998 by striking the amount of $272.4 million and 
replacing it with the amount of $557.6 million as the amount 
excluded from the Seawolf cost limitation.

Sec. 123. Multiyear procurement authority for the medium tactical 
        vehicle replacement.

    The committee recommends a provision that would authorize 
the Marine Corps to enter into a multiyear procurement 
contract, for a term of up to five years and beginning in 
fiscal year 1999, for procurement of the medium tactical 
vehicle replacement. The committee understands this action can 
be accomplished with existing funds for this program and that 
this multiyear authority will ultimately reduce program costs.

OTHER NAVY PROGRAMS

Navy Aircraft

F-14 pods

    The budget request included $223.7 million for F-14 
modifications. Included in those modifications is an 
initiative, called the F-14 precision strike program, to 
fulfill an urgent fleet requirement to maintain a capacity for 
long range high payload strike missions in the F-14. The 
precision strike program makes use of an Air Force developed 
forward looking infrared (FLIR) pod, called a low altitude 
navigation and targeting infrared at night (LANTIRN) pod. To 
lower cost and shorten schedule, the Navy uses the pod as a 
stand alone sensor.
    The committee understands that the incorporation of these 
nondevelopmental pods could be accelerated, but that 
constrained funding prevented the most efficient acquisition of 
the pods and associated test equipment. Accordingly, the 
committee recommends an addition of $8.0 million to the budget 
request for that purpose.

AH-1W series

    The budget request included $9.1 million for the Marine 
Corps AH-1W Super Cobra attack helicopter. The committee notes 
a requirement to complete installation of night targeting 
systems for 10 additional aircraft and meet the established 
acquisition objective of 188 systems. The night targeting 
system kit provides night/adverse weather and autonomous 
missile capabilities for AH-1W attack helicopter platforms. The 
committee recommends an additional $11.0 million to procure the 
remaining 10 kits and meet acquisition objectives.

EP-3 spares

    The budget request included $5.4 million for EP-3 
modifications. The EP-3 is a land based, long range aircraft, 
with electronic intercept devices. The budget request includes 
funds to improve EP-3 operational capability through expanded 
frequency coverage, as well as for flight tests of the high 
band prototype of the joint signals intelligence avionics 
family (JSAF). It is anticipated that those tests will shortly 
lead to an operational deployment of the system. However, the 
committee understands that the EP-3 funding request did not 
include sufficient funds for spares to support that operational 
deployment. Accordingly, the committee recommends an increase 
of $2.0 million to the EP-3 request to ensure sufficient spares 
are available for the deployment.

P-3C antisurface warfare improvement program

    The budget request included $120.7 million for the 
procurement of P-3C antisurface warfare improvement program 
(AIP) kits and for associated installation, logistics support, 
engineering change proposals and training. While the primary 
mission of the aircraft during the Cold War was antisubmarine 
warfare, its role as a surveillance asset is now emphasized. 
The P-3C antisurface warfare improvement program (AIP), begun 
in fiscal year 1994, is designed to provide a commercial off-
the-shelf (COTS)/nondevelopmental item (NDI) upgrade to the 
Navy's existing fleet of P-3C aircraft to improve its 
capability to conduct antisurface warfare (ASUW), over-the-
horizon (OTH) targeting, and command and control interface with 
other command centers and fleet units. The P-3C AIP gives the 
aircraft a much better capability to execute littoral warfare 
missions at a reasonable price.
    An operational requirement calls for the procurement of 68 
kits between fiscal years 1996 and 2001 at an economical 
procurement rate of 12 kits per year. The committee recommends 
an increase of $12.2 million for procurement of P-3C AIP kits.

                              Navy Weapons

Penguin missile program

    Neither the budget request nor the Future Years Defense 
Program included funding for additional procurement of Penguin 
missiles.
    The National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 1997 
contained a provision that authorized the Navy to enter into a 
contract for multiyear procurement of not more than 106 Penguin 
missiles and limited the amount that could be expended for such 
procurement to $84.8 million. This provision was based on the 
existing shortfall in Penguin missile inventory and the premise 
that the Navy would be able to negotiate a very favorable price 
at around 55 percent of the average unit procurement cost for 
previous lots. Congress subsequently appropriated $7.0 million 
to procure Penguin missiles in fiscal year 1997 and $7.5 
million in fiscal year 1998.
    Penguin is the only operational Navy helicopter-launched 
missile in the Navy's weapon inventory. It provides Navy 
surface combatants with a defense against surface threats armed 
with antiship missiles. A principal operational advantage of 
Penguin is its relatively long operational range, which permits 
a helicopter armed with Penguin to remain outside the launch 
envelopes of potential targets.
    The committee has concluded that additional funding in 
fiscal year 1999 could be used to exercise a procurement 
initiative that takes advantage of labor learning and 
production stability. The committee recommends an increase of 
$7.5 million for procurement of additional missiles to satisfy 
outstanding inventory objectives for both the tactical and 
telemetry variants.

Improved tactical air launched decoy

    The Navy budget request included $0.3 million for drone and 
decoys. The request included no funds for procurement of the 
improved tactical air launched decoy (ITALD). The committee 
understands that there is an approved operational requirements 
document for buying more of the ITALD units. However, the Navy 
has informed the committee that the Department chose not to buy 
any in fiscal year 1999 because of competing budget priorities.
    The ITALD simulates a fighter/attack size aircraft better 
than current decoys. The present tactical air launch decoy is 
becoming less capable even when encountering existing threat 
integrated air defense systems (IADS). The committee believes 
that likely improvements in threat IADS require that the Navy 
have a more capable decoy than is currently available.
    Therefore, the committee recommends an increase of $10.0 
million for the acquisition of 70 ITALDs. The committee 
understands that this increase, in addition to ITALDs already 
funded, will yield roughly enough systems to support two 
carrier battle groups. The Navy has informed the committee that 
additional funding for ITALD beyond fiscal year 1999 will be 
needed to complete this procurement.

Close-in weapon system surface mode upgrade

    The budget request included no funds for procurement of 
Phalanx surface mode (PSUM) upgrade kits for the close-in 
weapon system (CIWS). The committee has received information 
from at- sea commanders that the Block I upgrade to CIWS to 
include the PSUM capability would solve two long-standing 
surface ship war fighting deficiencies:
          (1) engaging close-in, fast moving, small boats with 
        an all-weather, unmanned stabilized weapon; and
          (2) engaging a slow moving, close-in helicopter.
The National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 1998 
authorized $15.0 million for PSUM. The committee recommends an 
increase of $10.0 million for procurement and installation of 
the surface mode upgrade.
    The Secretary of the Navy is directed to report to the 
congressional defense committees no later than December 1, 1998 
on the Navy's plan to procure and install PSUM in Navy ships. 
The Secretary's report should also describe how the Navy 
intends to satisfy this mission requirement on those ships that 
will not receive a CIWS installation, or are scheduled to have 
CIWS equipment replaced by rolling airframe missile (RAM) 
installations.

Surface ship gun mount rotatable pool

    The budget request included $900,000 for procurement and 
installation of safety shock ordnance alterations to the 5-inch 
54 gun installed on surface combatants. The Navy intends to 
upgrade the 5-inch 54 Mk 45 guns on AEGIS class cruisers as 
part of the cruiser conversion program which begins in fiscal 
year 2001. The conversion plan includes retrofitting two guns 
per ship to the Mod 4 version. To ensure timely removal and 
subsequent installation, it is prudent for the Navy to 
establish a rotatable pool of guns. Establishment of a pool of 
two guns in fiscal year 1999 will reduce risk in the cruiser 
conversion program and maintain critical gun overhaul skills at 
the gun overhaul facility. Therefore, the committee recommends 
an increase of $15.0 million for test facility preparation, 
procurement of long lead material and establishment of a 5-inch 
54 Mod 4 rotatable gun pool.

                    Navy and Marine Corps Ammunition

Marine Corps ammunition

    The committee is concerned that the budget request includes 
inadequate funding for ammunition procurement. Ammunition is an 
important contributor to military readiness; for training and 
in anticipation of conflict. The committee recommends the 
following adjustments to the budget request for Marine Corps 
ammunition procurement:

        Item                                                    Millions
5.56 mm.......................................................      $0.5
7.62 mm.......................................................       0.7
9 mm..........................................................       1.0
25 mm.........................................................       1.0
50 cal........................................................       0.5
Fuze..........................................................       2.5
Grenades......................................................       1.0
SMAW..........................................................      18.0
120 mm Tank...................................................       4.8
    Subtotal..................................................      30.0

                    Navy Shipbuilding and Conversion

LHD-8 advance procurement

    The Navy's current plan is to conduct a service life 
extension program (SLEP) overhaul on the Tarawa class 
amphibious assault (LHA) ships when they reach the 35 year 
point in their operating life. The SLEP would provide another 
15 years of life at a cost of nearly $1.0 billion per SLEP. The 
SLEP would extend the machinery operating life and provide 
communications upgrades. However, stability would remain a main 
concern and the LHA has limited capabilities to support 21st 
century littoral warfare systems such as the landing craft air 
cushion (LCAC) and MV-22Osprey tilt-rotor aircraft.
    The LHA can transport one LCAC when the LCAC is placed in 
the well deck sideways, while the Wasp class amphibious assault 
(multipurpose) (LHD) ship carries two LCACs which drive in and 
drive out of the well deck fully loaded. The LHD has 20,000 
more cubic feet storage capacity but 5,000 square feet less 
vehicle storage than an LHA. The LHD has more hangar and deck 
space than an LHA giving the LHD the capacity to carry three 
more CH-46 helicopters than the LHA. A Marine Expeditionary 
Unit (MEU) with an LHA as the large deck amphibious ship 
requires three additional ships to provide the capabilities 
required of an MEU. When an LHD is the large deck amphibious 
ship in the MEU, one to two fewer ships are needed to support 
the MEU.
    Replacing the LHA with an LHD would provide a platform with 
the capability to support 21st century requirements. The 
service life estimate for a LHD is 35 years while the LHA SLEP 
will add an additional 15 years of life. From a force 
capitalization perspective, the Navy will have 20 more years of 
ship life at a drastically reduced procurement cost per year of 
life by building the LHD instead of performing a SLEP on the 
LHA. In addition, authorizing construction of a new LHD will 
leverage efficiencies gained by continuing an experienced 
workforce which will be completing LHD-7. The committee 
recommends an increase of $50.0 million for procurement of long 
lead materials for the construction of LHD-8 in lieu of a 
future SLEP for LHA-1.

Strategic sealift

    The budget request included $251.4 million in the 
Shipbuilding and Conversion, Navy (SCN) account for one large 
medium-speed roll-on/roll-off (LMSR) strategic sealift ship. 
Section 2218 of title 10, United States Code, establishes the 
National Defense Sealift Fund (NDSF) to fund construction of 
sealift vessels.
    Therefore, the committee authorizes the procurement of one 
LMSR and the $251.4 million requested for that purpose, but 
provides that authorization in the NDSF account.

Landing craft air cushioned service life extension

    The budget request did not include any funding for landing 
craft air cushioned (LCAC) service life extension. The 
committee notes that funding for the LCAC service life 
extension activity is currently programmed for fiscal year 2000 
and beyond. The LCAC currently serves as a primary conveyance 
of Marine Corps equipment and personnel from ship to shore. 
LCAC upgrades are required as these craft approach 15 years of 
service life with requisite increases in operating costs and 
decreases in availability. The committee believes that the 
service life extension program should be accelerated and 
recommends an increase of $16.0 million to complete upgrades to 
two LCACs in fiscal year 1999.

                         Other Navy Procurement

AN/WSN-7 inertial navigation system

    The budget request included $21.8 million for procurement 
of AN/WSN-7 ring laser inertial navigation systems. The AN/WSN-
7 continuously and automatically determines and indicates a 
ship's position, attitude (heading, roll, and pitch), and 
velocity. This system replaces three legacy navigation systems, 
providing equipment commonality between surface combatants, 
submarines, and aircraft carriers. The annual operating cost of 
the AN/WSN-7 is projected to be only 10 percent of the cost of 
operating the legacy navigation systems it replaces. 
Accelerated procurement of the AN/WSN-7 could produce a 
substantial savings in maintenance costs.
    The committee recommends an increase of $12.0 million to 
the budget request for the procurement and installation of 
additional AN/WSN-7 navigation sets.

AN/BPS-15H surface search radar

    There was no funding included in the budget request for the 
procurement of AN/BPS-15H submarine radar navigation sets. The 
Navy has been procuring the AN/BPS-15H, a commercial off-the-
shelf (COTS) variant of the AN/BPS-15 radar navigation set, and 
its associated mast assembly for installation on new 
construction submarines and for backfit on SSN-688 class 
submarines. Procurement of the COTS variant has produced a 
substantial cost savings over a comparable system built to 
military specifications, has enhanced operational performance, 
and has improved navigational safety. The Navy established a 
new specification to eliminate the manpower intensive 
requirement for paper navigation charts on ships. Instead of 
paper charts, all ships will have the Electronic Chart Display 
Information Systems (ECDIS-N). ECDIS-N requires an upgrade to 
navigation radar systems. Therefore, the committee recommends 
an increase of $9.0 million for AN/BPS-15(H) software and 
hardware upgrades to bring them into ECDIS-N compliance.

Submarine acoustic rapid commercial off-the-shelf insertion

    The budget request included $70.0 million for submarine 
acoustic rapid commercial off-the-shelf insertion (A-RCI). This 
program provides cost-effective rapid insertion of technology 
which enables the operating submarine fleet to maintain 
acoustic superiority. A-RCI reduces operations and maintenance 
costs resulting in significantly lower life-cycle costs. The 
committee recommends an increase of $25.0 million to accelerate 
the introduction of A-RCI to the operating fleet.

Integration and test facility command and control initiative

    The Navy is continuing an initiative to provide fully 
integrated and supportable command, control, communications, 
computer, and intelligence (C4I) systems at its integration and 
test facilities. These facilities are used for architecture 
design, systems engineering, integration, and to provide life-
cycle support for the fleet's C4I systems.
    The committee learned that the Navy's East coast in-service 
engineering Space Warfare System Center (SWSC) began the 
operation of the Integrated Product Center (IPC). The IPC has 
the ability to be configured to support almost every Navy 
laboratory including the Maritime Battle Center (MBC). 
Additional communication nodes and terminal devices, as well as 
an increase in existing network bandwidth to accommodate 
additional users, would permit the facility to support the wide 
variety of operational protocols and physical interfaces 
associated with new fleet tactical C4I systems.
    The committee recommends an increase of $4.0 million above 
the budget request for engineering design; hardware and 
software procurement; and installation, testing, and 
documentation of the additional technical networking 
infrastructure for continued development of the SWSC's 
Integrated Products Center. Of this amount, $2.0 million would 
be for procurement and $2.0 million would be for operations and 
maintenance.

Information Technology-21

    The budget request includes $74.7 million in ship 
communication automation procurement, $168.2 million in 
satellite communications ship terminals, and $71.7 million in 
Naval Shore Communications for Information Technology-21 (IT-
21) equipment procurement and installation. IT-21 is a fleet-
driven initiative, which is providing accelerated introduction 
of command, control, communications, and computer (C4I) 
innovations from the commercial marketplace.
    Both the Quadrennial Defense Review and the National 
Defense Panel Report state that future information technologies 
have the potential to revolutionize Naval Warfare. Network 
centricity provides the capability to make sweeping changes in 
the way the services exchange and use information. Network 
centric operations will require connectivity sufficient to 
support offensive distributed firepower, to establish an 
intermediate and robust common tactical picture, conduct 
archival data retrieval for multi-warfare targeting, conduct 
two to three simultaneous video teleconferences, maintain a 
continuous equipment monitoring data transmission path, conduct 
distance learning and virtual immersion training, and establish 
afloat networked training communications paths. However, the 
committee believes that the information exchange required to 
enable these types of changes will require significant 
increases in data transfer rates.
    The committee is concerned that the military satellite 
communications architecture may not be robust enough to support 
the high data rates required for future information exchange. 
Additionally, current high-bandwidth satellite communications 
(SATCOM) antennas are too large and unwieldy for installation 
on most surface combatants. However, future commercial systems 
such as low earth orbit (LEO) constellations offering high 
bandwidth communication paths are promising alternatives which 
may help solve the connectivity challenges. In addition, 
advanced technologies are being demonstrated that might result 
in significantly smaller high data rate antennas.
    Visits to the first ships and staffs deploying with IT-21 
revealed that IT-21 training is not phased properly with IT-21 
equipment installation. In some cases, no IT-21 training was 
provided to ships ready to deploy with new IT-21 capabilities. 
The Navy is directed to provide IT-21 training to units 
scheduled to receive IT-21 equipment.
    The committee is aware that Year 2000 software and hardware 
development has resulted in realignment of some IT-21 
resources. To assist the Navy in achieving its goal of a fully 
outfitted fleet by the year 2000, the committee recommends an 
increase of $20.0 million for ship communication automation and 
an increase of $20.0 million in naval shore communications for 
IT-21 procurement, installation and training.

Submarine connectivity

    The budget request included $64.6 million for submarine 
communications equipment. Submarines are vital to network 
centric warfare and fighting in the littorals in the 21st 
century. Establishing communications between the submarine and 
operational commanders leverages the submarine's stealth and 
firepower with other assets available in the area of 
operations. Increasing the submarine's ability to transmit and 
receive tactical data is a key to information exchange which 
will result in operational commanders controlling the battle. 
Therefore, the committee recommends an increase of $15.0 
million for the procurement and installation of high data rate 
antennas and extremely high frequency (EHF) kits to improve 
communications connectivity equipment for submarines.

Joint Engineering Data Management and Information Control System

    The budget request included no funding for Joint 
Engineering Data Management and Information Control System 
(JEDMICS), the designated Department of Defense standard system 
for management, control and storage of engineering drawings. It 
is designed as an open, client-server architecture and is 
nearing full deployment for global access to the data in its 
repositories. The 1998 program for JEDMICS will start 
procurement of a commercial off-the-shelf (COTS) security 
system to preventunauthorized access to JEDMICS data. The 
committee recommends a $10.0 million increase for the continued 
security system procurement, integration and accreditation surveys for 
the JEDMICS system.

Aviation life support

    The budget request included $22.3 million to procure 
aviation life support and night vision systems. The committee 
is aware of the limited capabilities that existing AN/AVS-6 
OMNI II and III night vision goggles provide in overcast skies 
or in urban environments. The committee notes that an OMNI IV 
system virtually doubles the gain of currently fielded night 
vision goggles and that this system is critical to the overall 
effectiveness of Marine Corps rotary wing squadrons. The 
committee recommends an additional $22.6 million to meet 
retrofit requirements for the OMNI IV in all Marine Corps AN/
AVS-6 night vision goggle systems.

AEGIS support equipment

    The budget request included $83.2 million for AEGIS support 
equipment. The committee understands that the AEGIS Training 
and Readiness Center has introduced a new lesson authoring 
system that can operate in different computer operating 
environments to meet the Navy's embedded tactical training 
requirements. This lesson authoring system operates on the 
fleet's standard display console, the AN/UYQ-70, and is capable 
of providing multimedia, speech recognition and technologies 
for distant learning networks. Using such a system could permit 
the Navy to avoid spending critical resources to modify and 
update proprietary software systems to accommodate new 
technology applications. The committee recommends an increase 
of $8.0 million to expand this lesson authoring system to other 
tactical warfare systems, such as the Advanced Tomahawk Weapon 
Control System (ATWCS), Naval Surface Fire Support System 
(NSFSS), and the Joint Maritime Communications Information 
System (JMCIS).

Smart ship equipment

    The budget request included $12.8 million to procure and 
install proven Smart Ship technology in operational Navy ships. 
The Navy's Smart Ship initiative is managed at fleet level and 
is designed to reduce crew workload and lower operating and 
support costs.
    The committee has concluded that Smart Ship has proven 
considerable reductions in operating costs of the Navy's fleet 
units with no loss in operational effectiveness.
    The committee recommends expanding Smart Ship to all AEGIS 
cruisers and Arleigh Burke class destroyers. Therefore, the 
committee recommends an increase of $12.0 million to procure 
and install Smart Ship equipment in AEGIS.

NULKA assembly qualification

    The budget request included $21.5 million for procurement 
and installation of the NULKA antiship missile decoy program. 
NULKA depot maintenance presently requires the shipment of 
NULKA rounds to an overseas location. The overseas shipment is 
more expensive than performing the maintenance in the United 
States. The committee recommends an increase of $1.0 million to 
outfit and qualify a NULKA assembly facility in the United 
States.

                        Marine Corps Procurement

Modification kits for tracked vehicles

    The budget request included $5.7 million for modification 
kits required to ensure the reliability, maintainability, and 
safety of Marine Corps tracked vehicles. The committee notes an 
outstanding requirement for a muzzle boresight device (MBD) 
that improves the accuracy of the M1 Abrams tank main gun. 
Escalating prices for these devices have created a shortfall in 
procurement. Additionally, the committee understands that the 
Marine Corps has been having problems with M1 tank nuclear, 
biological, and chemical (NBC) protection devicess that have 
occasionally caused fires on board due to inherent design 
deficiencies. The committee recognizes ongoing efforts to 
replace these devices with modern and safe components and 
believes this effort should be accelerated. The committee, 
therefore, recommends an increase of $4.6 million for a total 
authorization of $10.3 million. This increase will buy 403 MBD 
systems and 403 NBC modification kits.

Avenger

    The budget request included $200,000 for Marine Corps 
Pedestal Mounted Stinger equipment support. The committee notes 
existing obsolescence and electro-magnetic interference 
problems with the forward looking infrared (FLIR) system found 
on this air defense platform. The committee understands that 81 
of 235 fielded systems have received a fully modernized FLIR 
that eliminates the electro-magnetic interference problem. The 
Marine Corps still has an unfilled requirement to upgrade the 
remaining 154 Avengers with the fully modernized FLIR 
configuration. The committee, therefore, recommends an increase 
of $7.6 million to complete Marine Corps Avenger FLIR upgrade 
requirements in fiscal year 1999.

Night vision equipment

    The budget request included $11.6 million for Marine 
Corpsnight vision equipment. The committee believes that modern night 
vision equipment serves as a combat multiplier and strongly supports 
night vision equipment procurement for land forces. Noted are 
outstanding requirements for night vision equipment. The committee 
recommends an increase of $11.1 million to procure the following:
          (1) $6.1 million for generation III tubes to retrofit 
        existing night vision equipment;
          (2) $1.4 million for laser aiming modules;
          (3) $2.6 million for medium power laser illuminators; 
        and
          (4) $1.0 million for borelights.

Communications and electronics infrastructure

    The budget request included $57.9 million to support 
communications infrastructure activities. Of this amount, $16.3 
million is for ongoing upgrades to Marine Corps base 
telecommunications infrastructure. The committee continues to 
support Marine Corps efforts to provide a modern backbone 
information transmission system at every Marine Corps base and 
station. This communications backbone will ensure that all 
installations are able to electronically transfer automated 
information. The committee notes an opportunity to complete 
upgrades for the entire Marine Corps infrastructure in fiscal 
year 1999 and recommends an increase of $64.1 million for this 
purpose. Additionally, the committee notes a critical 
requirement established by the Marine Corps to address the year 
2000 compliancy issue for service computers. In support of an 
overall Marine Corps solution to this issue, the committee also 
recommends an additional $20.0 million to procure the 8,000 
computer workstations necessary to meet the year 2000 
compliance requirements. The committee recommends a total 
authorization of $142.0 million for communications and 
electronics infrastructure activities.

Light tactical vehicle remanufacturing

    The budget request included $39.3 million to support 
efforts to replace aging high mobility multipurpose wheeled 
vehicles (HMMWVs). The committee continues to be concerned 
about an aging fleet of HMMWVs in the Marine Corps and 
understands that a recent analysis by the service established a 
critical replacement program that will procure new A2 
configuration HMMWV's in lieu of upgrading the existing fleet. 
The A2 configuration HMMWV will improve safety, reliability, 
maintainability and will insert corrosion prevention measures 
in the manufacturing process necessary to protect these 
vehicles from the harsh environments in which they may operate. 
The committee recommends an increase of $37.0 million to 
accelerate the replacement process and field an additional 672 
HMMWVs.

Power equipment

    The budget request included $5.1 million for Marine Corps 
power generation equipment. The committee notes an ongoing 
joint program to provide clean and reliable mobile electric 
power to support command, control, and communications 
requirements. This Department of Defense program currently 
procures tactical quiet generators to replace existing military 
standard systems. The committee believes that replacement of 
existing systems should be accelerated and recommends an 
increase of $9.5 million to procure an additional 1,311 
generators.

Shop equipment contact maintenance

    The budget request included $6.0 million for the Marine 
Corps shop equipment contact maintenance (SECM) program. The 
committee notes an opportunity for the Marine Corps to achieve 
the acquisition objective for SECM platforms in fiscal year 
1999. The committee, therefore, recommends an increase of $5.4 
million to accelerate the final procurement of 47 systems and 
complete this program one year early.

Material handling equipment

    The budget request included $6.5 million for material 
handling equipment. Material handling equipment is critical to 
Marine Corps logistics capabilities in support of unit 
deployments. The committee understands that rough terrain 
container handlers and 10,000 pound forklifts are old and need 
to be rebuilt or replaced. The Army has an existing program 
that rebuilds this equipment at roughly one third the cost of 
new vehicle procurement. The committee believes the Marine 
Corps should take advantage of this existing contract to begin 
rebuilding its existing fleet. The committee recommends an 
increase of $10.4 million for this purpose.
                    SUBTITLE D--AIR FORCE PROGRAMS 


Sec. 131. Joint surveillance target attack radar system.

    The budget request included $463.1 million for procuring 
two E-8C Joint Surveillance/Target Attack Radar System (JSTARS) 
aircraft, and $67.5 million for buying JSTARS spare parts. The 
request also included $123.8 million to continue various 
development efforts, including a new program to improve the 
JSTARS radar, called the radar technology insertion program 
(RTIP). The budget request does not include any funds for 
closing the JSTARS production line.
    The Air Force planning originally included a force level of 
19 JSTARS aircraft until the Quadrennial Defense Review 
(QDR)reduced that number to 13 operational aircraft. The QDR 
recommendation was based, at least in part, on an assumption that the 
North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) would buy from four to six 
JSTARS aircraft for the NATO airborne ground surveillance (AGS) 
program. However, NATO did not accept the U.S. proposal to procure 
JSTARS.
    The budget request included funding for the last two 
aircraft of the QDR-mandated fleet size of 13 JSTARS. The 
budget request did not include long lead funding to continue 
production past aircraft number 13.
    The committee understands that the JSTARS is high on 
operational commanders' list of priorities because of its joint 
application to battle space surveillance and management. 
Department of Defense (DOD) witnesses testified that a review 
would be conducted this year to decide how DOD would meet the 
war fighting requirement that would have been met with 19 
JSTARS aircraft. The Department's options include: development 
of a space-based capability; increased capabilities of unmanned 
aerial vehicles; and continued procurement of the current 
JSTARS systems. Unfortunately, it is unlikely that the 
Department will have completed its analyses before the Congress 
will have to act on the fiscal year 1999 budget request. 
Without long lead funding available in fiscal year 1999, there 
will be a break in the JSTARS production line, making that 
option unnecessarily expensive.
    Therefore, the committee recommends an addition of $72.0 
million to protect the option of producing two additional 
JSTARS aircraft in fiscal year 2000. However, the committee is 
mindful that roughly $450 million would be required in fiscal 
year 2000 to buy two additional JSTARS aircraft. The committee 
is also aware that these funds are not currently in the Future 
Years Defense Program (FYDP).
    Should the Department decide against acquisition of further 
JSTARS aircraft, the Department shall use the $72.0 million for 
a combination of:
          (1) fund the termination expenses for JSTARS 
        production; and
          (2) augment funds in the RTIP development effort to 
        accelerate incorporation of that capability into the 
        JSTARS fleet.
    Accordingly, the committee recommends a provision that 
directs the Secretary of Defense to report to the congressional 
defense committees on the decision related to the future of the 
JSTARS program no later than March 1, 1999. The report will 
outline the decision making process, as well as the 
Department's long range plans to provide for overhead battle 
management and surveillance.

Sec. 132. Limitation on replacement of engines on military aircraft 
        derived from Boeing 707 aircraft.

    The budget request included $57.3 million to re-engine two 
RC-135 aircraft. The fiscal year 1999 budget request is the 
first in many years to provide funding for this high priority, 
high payoff initiative. The committee notes that the Department 
of Defense initiative followed several years of congressional 
funding adds and requirements to study the issue.
    The RC-135 re-engining effort merits attention because of 
the Department's decision to commit funds to the program. The 
current program is outfitting all models of RC-135's with CFM-
56 engines. Through a combination of prior year funding adds 
(fiscal years 1996-1998) and the Air Force future years defense 
plan, 19 of the 23 aircraft are programmed to be refitted with 
new engines. However, a funding shortfall exists to complete 
the last four aircraft. Accordingly, the committee recommends a 
total of $113.3 million to acquire re-engining kits for RC-135 
aircraft.
    The committee has been concerned about this issue, and 
initiated a requirement for the Department to provide a report 
on the broader subject of re-engining 707-type aircraft. This 
requirement was mandated by Congress in section 133 of the 
National Defense Authorization Act for 1998 (Public Law 105-
85). The report was supposed to analyze re-engining to assess 
the requirements and the costs and benefits of such a program. 
The report would help ensure that:
          (1) this vital requirement is not ignored in future 
        planning and programming;
          (2) the Congress understands the Department's 
        priorities; and
          (3) the Congress has a quantitative basis for 
        determining the most efficient ways to prolong the life 
        of so many vital airborne platforms.
    Although section 133 required the Department to submit a 
report by March 1, 1998, the Department failed to submit the 
report as of the end of April. The committee expects the 
Department to comply with all reporting requirements in a 
timely fashion. The Department has indicated that the re-
engining study results have been delayed because the Air Force 
had to wait for data requested from the various engine 
contractors. The committee has not been able to confirm that 
assertion. Although the committee would prefer to operate 
otherwise, it notes the Department's improved responsiveness 
when report requirements are accompanied by funding limitations 
or restrictions. Accordingly, the committee recommends a 
provision that would restrict funding for re-engining until 
receipt of the report required by section 133.
    The committee notes that more than one engine manufacturer 
has expressed interest in competing for re-engining work. The 
committee expects that the Department would use competitive 
procedures for future 707-type engine replacement to ensure 
that the Department can select options that could provide the 
best value for the government.

Sec. 133. F-22 aircraft program.

    The budget request included $668.1 million for F-22 
procurement, and $190.2 million for advance procurement. The 
budget request also included $1,582.2 million for F-22 
engineering and manufacturing development (EMD). These funds 
provide substantial building activity separate from any early 
award of production contracts. The fiscal year 1999 EMD effort 
includes $828.0 million for air vehicle assembly of test 
aircraft. Specifically, the EMD program provides funds to 
complete air vehicle 3, to continue on air vehicles 4-6, and to 
initiate assembly of air vehicles 7-9. The EMD request also 
includes $461.0 million for avionics development, $174.5 
million for engine development, and $119.2 million other 
government costs.
    In response to the National Defense Authorization Act for 
Fiscal Year 1998 (Public Law 105-85), the Comptroller General 
submitted a report that assessed the progress of the EMD phase 
of the F-22 program and its prospect of completion under the 
cost cap. The General Accounting Office (GAO) report and recent 
program progress was the subject of a hearing held by the 
AirLand Subcommittee to review tactical aviation modernization 
issues. During the hearing, the GAO gave the F-22 program a 
positive assessment of the progress made since the program was 
restructured in response to the recently completed Quadrennial 
Defense Review (QDR). However, the GAO also noted that 
contracts for procurement of lot I production aircraft had been 
accelerated when compared with last year's plan, and that 
actual program progress had fallen behind. Moving contracts 
ahead of demonstrated performance directly contradicts the Air 
Force's previous emphasis on event-based decision making. When 
the GAO witness noted that moving the production contract from 
June 1999 to December 1998 did not change actual production, 
the Assistant Secretary of the Air Force for Acquisition 
testified that the change in signing contracts was, ``* * * to 
get the base locked in * * *.''
    In 1995, a Defense Science Board report on the F-22, which 
included Rand Corporation study results, concluded that when 
major program problems occur, it is usually within the first 
10-20 percent of flight testing. The Board noted in its report 
of only that the F-22 program had substantial tests programmed 
before moving into production:

        To put this in perspective, we looked at the current 
        schedule of the F-22, and at 20 percent of full scale 
        development testing. The Lockheed schedule calls for 
        approximately 25 hours per month, with approximately 
        400 hours of flight testing scheduled by December 1997 
        (10 months, using 1.5 aircraft) and approximately 1,400 
        hours by December, 1998 (using 4 aircraft).

The present reality is far different from that original 
prediction. By December of 1997, only three flight test hours 
had been flown of the planned 400 hours. The program is now 
scheduled to complete 183 flight hours by December 1998. The 
committee is concerned that the contract awards are being 
accelerated, while testing is decelerating. The following table 
reflects how flight test hours before production award have 
eroded:

              Comparison of F-22 Flight Test Hours Planned              
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                              Percent of
                                                Flight test  flight test
                                      Total        hours        hours   
    Flight hour schedule as of     flight test    planned      planned  
                                      hours        before       before  
                                     planned     production   production
                                                   award        award   
------------------------------------------------------------------------
November 1994....................        5,191        1,400           27
May 1997.........................        4,337          601           14
February 1998....................        4,337          183            4
------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In a recent press conference, responding to the concerns 
raised in the AirLand Subcommittee hearing, the Under Secretary 
of Defense for Acquisition and Technology (USD(AT)) announced 
that the F-22 production decision would slip one year, and 
would be addressed in December 1999. The reason given for the 
delayed production decision was to complete more testing before 
committing production funds. The committee supports the 
approach taken by the USD(AT) and recommends a provision to 
provide clear guidance for the timing of that decision to 
proceed into production in fiscal year 2000.
    The committee notes that funds have not been taken from the 
program, and are available for obligation once flight testing 
has been completed to a modest degree--less even than projected 
by the Joint Estimating Team (JET). Should testing go faster 
than presently planned, the funds would be immediately 
available and would not have to be reprogrammed or added to 
future budget requests.
    The committee must see demonstrated results in accord with 
the minimum requirements represented to the committee in the 
Defense Science Board report of April, 1995, or have 
substantial assurance from the Secretary of Defense that 
anything less than that has his full confidence. The committee 
agrees with the USD(AT) that the production decision should 
only be made when sufficient testing has been completed.

Sec. 134. C-130J aircraft program.

    The budget request included $63.8 million for oneC-130J. 
While the budget request did include funds for spares and logistics for 
C-130J's elsewhere, those funds are not yet sufficient to account for 
prior omissions. Air Force briefers have acknowledged that the present 
logistics program is not executable through the Future Years Defense 
Program (FYDP). Shortfalls in logistics and support include $30 million 
for a flight simulator, $27.0 million for modifications to C-130J's 
into the WC-130J configuration, and $15.0 million for modifications to 
C-130J's into the EC-130J configuration. Though funding for 
modifications is also not sufficient for the program, funds available 
from prior years are sufficient to begin the modifications of C-130J 
aircraft into the WC and EC-130J configurations.

C-130J Program Progress

    The committee views with concern the slow progress of the 
C-130J program, the increased expense of developing the 
aircraft, which could be borne by the Department in higher 
prices for production C-130J's, and notes the Department's 
failure to provide a report on remanufacture of existing C-130 
airframes. The C-130J program was initiated by the manufacturer 
as a commercial development, which would produce an 
inexpensive, pragmatic, and rapidly developed follow-on to 
previous C-130 models. Development costs were to be spread over 
the first 120 aircraft sold, rather than billed to the 
government as a developmental program. Development costs were 
initially estimated at $350 million, and introduction of the 
new model forecast to begin in mid-1997. Since the program is a 
commercial one, exact cost accounting has not been available to 
the Department to date. However, it has been estimated that the 
program has cost more than $900 million and is over two years 
behind schedule. Considering the delay in the development of 
the aircraft and reported overruns in developmental costs, the 
committee views with concern the future of the C-130J program. 
Accordingly, the committee recommends a provision that would 
require the Secretary of Defense to report to the congressional 
defense committees on the impact of delays and overruns.
    In the statement of managers accompanying the National 
Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 1997 (S. Rept. 104-
267), the committee directed the Secretary of Defense to 
provide a report, by March 1, 1997, on the net benefits of 
pursuing a program to design, develop, and produce renewed C-
130 aircraft through remanufacture of existing airframes. The 
Secretary submitted the report on April 30, 1997 and did not 
answer the question. Accordingly, the statement of managers 
accompanying the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal 
Year 1998 (S. Rept 105-340) restated the direction for an 
examination of C-130 remanufacturing alternative, as originally 
requested. As of the middle of April 1998, the report had not 
been received from the Department.
    The committee notes that reports from the Department 
provide important insights in technical and policy matters, and 
gives the Department an opportunity to examine issues and 
report the findings to the Congress. Absent any response from 
the Department, the committee assumes that the Department 
cannot address the issue in any meaningful way and provides the 
following direction for C-130 modernization. (Funds for the 
simulator are shown in line 12 of the P-1 exhibit, combined 
with the additional C-130J's.)

                                         Fiscal Year 1999 C-130 Program                                         
                                            (In millions of dollars)                                            
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                        C-130J      EC-130J     WC-130J    Simulator     Total  
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Budget Request \1\..................................       $63.8           -           -           -       $63.8
(Quantity)..........................................           1                                               1
Committee Recommendation............................       191.4       $85.0       $75.4        30.0      $381.8
Quantity............................................           3           1           1           1          5 
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ The budget request included $62.0 million for C-130J initial spares in Budget Activity 06.                  

WC-130J

    The scope and cost of modifications to airframes to the WC-
130J configuration are not yet clearly defined or prices 
negotiated. The committee notes the prior years' authorization 
of modification funds on hand to begin the program. Once the 
program is defined and contracts are in place, the remaining 
requirements for modification can be authorized.

                        OTHER AIR FORCE PROGRAMS

                           Air Force Aircraft

Joint Primary Aircraft Training System

    The budget request included $107.1 million to procure 19 
JPATS aircraft. JPATS is a joint Air Force/Navy program to 
replace T-37 and T-34 primary flight training aircraft and the 
associated ground based training systems.
    The committee understands that the present contract for 
JPATS allows for an increase of three aircraft in fiscal year 
1999 without future year implications or additional 
requirementsfor funding. An additional three JPATS aircraft 
would increase the contract to its maximum number under the existing 
variations in quantity (VIQ) matrix and lead to reduced unit costs as 
well as an enhanced learning curve in the early production of JPATS. 
Accordingly, the committee recommends an increase of $9.1 million to 
the budget request to acquire an additional three JPATS aircraft in 
fiscal year 1999.

F-15 220E engine modification

    The budget request included $196.5 million for F-15 
modifications, with $17.8 million dedicated to 220E engine 
upgrades. The 220E upgrades the engine controls from analog to 
digital technology, making the engine more supportable, and 
thus more available.
    The committee recommended increased funding in fiscal year 
1998 to accelerate the program by one year. Based on the 
possible operational savings in years to come and the high 
priority assigned to the project by the Chief of Staff of the 
Air Force, the committee recommends an increase of $25.0 
million to the fiscal year 1999 budget request to further 
accelerate the fielding of the 220E upgrade.

ALQ-135 internal countermeasures sets

    The budget request included $11.4 million in PE 27134F to 
finish development and testing of the ALQ-135 band 1.5 upgrade. 
The band 1.5 upgrade would provide low- to mid-band jamming 
coverage for the F-15E aircraft. The committee understands that 
this capability would be important in protecting aircrews in 
high threat environments.
    The committee also notes that the band 1.5 equipment shares 
a high degree of commonality with circuit card assemblies 
associated with the currently fielded band 3 equipment. 
Production of the band 3 equipment will be completed in fiscal 
year 1998. Unless the Air Force is able to begin low rate 
initial production in fiscal year 1999, there would be a 12 
month production break.
    The committee recommends an additional $25.0 million in 
Aircraft procurement Air Force (APAF) modification of inservice 
aircraft, line 31 for F-15 modifications. The committee 
understands that this amount would be sufficient to provide a 
limited operational capability to complete one F-15E squadron, 
and would lead to an orderly transition to full production 
after a milestone III decision in August 1999.

F-16 reconnaissance system

    The budget request included $229.3 million for F-16 
modifications. The Air Force has been buying a version of the 
Marine Corps' advanced tactical airborne reconnaissance system 
(ATARS). In fiscal year 1999, the Air Force was projected to 
take delivery of 20 pod systems. Each pod would have included 
two sensors: (1) a forward-oblique camera in the front bay; and 
(2) a medium altitude elector-optic (MAEO) sensor in the middle 
bay. The committee understands that necessary engineering 
change proposals have caused the Air Force to scale back the 
scope of the contract, which would now include only 5 MAEO 
sensors.
    The lack of a medium altitude sensor would subject a 
significant portion of reconnaissance missions to flying in 
riskier, low-altitude regimes. The committee recommends an 
increase of $13.3 million for F-16 modifications. The committee 
understands that this amount would be sufficient to purchase 
the remaining 15 MAEO sensors to outfit each of the new 
reconnaissance pods.

Theater airborne warning system

    The budget request included no funds for the Theater 
Airborne Warning system (TAWS). The committee has supported 
this program and continues to believe that it may offer a near-
term means of augmenting Defense Support Program infrared 
missile warning data. The committee notes that the Air Force 
has yet to complete testing of this system but plans to be 
finished with such testing before the end of fiscal year 1998. 
Therefore, the committee recommends an increase of $12.0 
million in Aircraft Procurement, Air Force to permit the Air 
Force to commence the Rivet Joint infrared technology transfer 
if the testing is successfully completed. The committee, 
however, directs that none of these funds be obligated for TAWS 
until the Air Force completes testing and submits a report on 
the test results to the congressional defense committees.

U-2 sensor upgrades

    The budget request included $152.1 million for the defense 
Airborne Reconnaissance Program (DARP). The committee has been 
informed by the Department of Defense that even with prior year 
funding, additional funds are required to modify U-2 Senior 
Ruby, Senior Spear, and Senior Glass-1A sensors to the Senior 
Glass-1R baseline. The committee understands that:
          (1) economies of scale are possible;
          (2) earlier spares procurement would sustain the 
        common baseline; and
          (3) an increase to the budget request would reduce 
        the impact of vanishing vendor items.
Accordingly, the committee recommends an addition of $17.0 
million to continue the reliability and maintainability (R&M) 
conversion of 11 Senior Glass sensor systems for the U-2.

                           Air Force Missile

Minuteman III guidance replacement program

    The committee continues to support the Minuteman III 
Guidance Replacement Program (GRP). The committee is concerned 
by the Air Force's decision to reduce GRP production funding in 
fiscal years 1999 and 2000. This decision will result in 
significant delay and cost growth. The GRP production effort 
would be delayed by two years and the program costs would 
increase by approximately $280.0 million. The Minuteman III 
guidance systems are currently 10 to 18 years beyond their 
original design life of 10 years, and must be replaced as soon 
as possible. The committee understands that an increase of 
$46.0 million in fiscal year 1999, with an additional increase 
in fiscal year 2000, will mitigate this production gap. The 
committee therefore recommends an increase of $46.0 million in 
Missile Procurement, Air Force for GRP and urges the Secretary 
of the Air Force to seek additional funds in fiscal year 2000 
to establish a more efficient and expeditious production 
program.

Titan IV space boosters

    The committee is aware that, due to continuing adjustments 
in the Titan IV space boosters program, the budget request 
includes funds in excess of what can be obligated in fiscal 
year 1999 for Titan IV. Therefore, the committee recommends a 
reduction of $10.0 million in Missile Procurement, Air Force, 
for Titan IV Space boosters.

                      Other Air Force Procurement

Theater Deployable Communications

    The budget request included $31.1 million for tactical 
communications-electronic (CE) equipment, of which $27.3 
million would be for theater deployable communications (TDC). 
TDC is composed of two components, the lightweight multiband 
satellite terminal (LMST) and the integrated communications 
access package. Together these two systems provide the 
communications infrastructure in deployed bare base 
environments. TDC is currently funded at 76 percent of the 
requirement to support 100 percent of one major theater war and 
30 percent of another.
    The TDC replaces existing commiunication suites that 
require more manpower to operate and more resources to maintain 
and operate. The committee recognizes the efficiencies 
associated with accelerated deployment of TDC and the increased 
forward deployment capability. The committee recommends an 
increase of $17.7 million to procure an additional three TDC 
ICAP units.
                         Defense-Wide Programs 


Penetration augmented munition

    The committee is aware of the need for the Special 
Operations Command's (SOCOM) Penetration Augmented Munitions 
(PAMs). The PAM is a multi-stage munition, designed for 
attacking and neutralizing heavily reinforced concrete 
structures, such as bridges, piers, abutments, bunkers, and 
Weapons of Mass Destruction (WMD) infrastructure. It replaces 
the need for SOCOM operators to transport and emplace large 
quantities of explosives to destroy heavily reinforced, 
concrete structures. Currently, SOCOM plans to begin 
procurement of this system in fiscal year 2000. The committee 
believes that important modernization programs, such as this, 
should be accelerated in order to provide a greater near-term 
capability, and reduce the strain on out year procurement 
budgets. Therefore, the committee recommends an increase of 
$6.5 million in line number 57, SOF ordinance acquisition, for 
the procurement of additional 400 PAMs.

Remote activation munition systems

    The committee is aware of the shortfall in procurement 
funds for the remote activation munition system (RAMS). RAMS is 
a radio frequency controlled remote initiator. It provides the 
special operations community with the capability to remotely 
control detonation of demolition charges, or the remote 
operation of other items of equipment, such as beacons, laser 
markers, radios and weapons. The committee understands that if 
an additional $6.0 million were provided for this system in 
fiscal year 1999, the Special Operations Command would realize 
a 15 percent acquisition savings, or $2.0 million. Therefore, 
the committee recommends an increase of $6.0 million in line 
number 57, SOF ordinance acquisition, for the procurement of 
additional RAMS basic kits and receivers.

Silent Shield

    The committee notes an outstanding requirement for Silent 
Shield systems. Silent Shield systems provide Air Force special 
operations crews with an on-board, real-time source of 
situational awareness, threat warning, and target update 
information. The committee believes these systems are essential 
for the successful employment of special operations aircraft 
and recommends an increase of $5.0 million to accelerate 
procurement of 10 systems.

Surgical strike

    The committee recommends an increase of $5.0 million for 
this classified program.

Maritime equipment

    The committee recommends an increase of $5.1 million for 
this classified program.

National Guard and Reserve Equipment

    In light of continued shortfalls in budget authority for 
Department of Defense (DOD) modernization, the committee is 
pleased to note an increase in the level of funding provided 
for Guard and Reserve modernization in the fiscal year 1999 
budget request. In an era of overextended Service modernization 
programs that cannot be sustained by projected DOD funding 
levels, it is clear that the increased funding requested by the 
Services for the reserve components reflects a recognition of 
the critical role that these forces provide in DOD operations. 
The committee believes that reserve component modernization, as 
an integral component of overall DOD modernization, should rely 
on a collaborative budget development process within the 
Department and not on annual Congressional supplemental 
funding. In fact, as future defense budget totals have been 
determined by Administration and Congressional budget 
agreements, if supplemental funding for reserve components was 
necessary, it would have to come at the expense of other 
programs funded in the budget request.
    The budget request for fiscal year 1999 included $1.36 
billion for National Guard and Reserve equipment as shown in 
the table below:

        Appropriation                                    Cost (millions)
Aircraft, Army................................................     110.2
Missiles, Army................................................      35.3
Weapons and Tracked Combat Vehicles, Army.....................      12.3
Ammunition, Army..............................................     182.3
Other Procurement, Army.......................................     502.9
Aircraft, Navy................................................      41.8
Ammunition, Navy/USMC.........................................      17.3
Other Procurement, Navy.......................................       3.6
Procurement, USMC.............................................      39.9
Aircraft, USAF................................................     293.3
Ammunition, USAF..............................................      30.4
Other Procurement, USAF.......................................      85.0
NG&RE, Other Procurement......................................       9.3
                    --------------------------------------------------------------
                    ____________________________________________________

    Total DOD.................................................   1,363.6

    This request reflects a net increase of almost $400.0 
million in funding requested for the reserve component 
modernization from the fiscal year 1998 budget request.
    The committee recommends funding increases in service 
programs to support reserve component modernization as follows:

                                                                Millions
UH-60 Blackhawk...............................................     $78.5
Family of Medium Tactical Vehicles............................      88.0
Medium Truck Extended Service Program.........................      93.9
SINCGARS family...............................................      61.9
C130 (2 C130J, 1 EC-130J).....................................     352.1
C130J Simulator...............................................      30.0
                    --------------------------------------------------------------
                    ____________________________________________________

    Total.....................................................     704.4

    Additionally, the committee recommends an increase of $60.0 
million to the budget request for National Guard and Reserve 
miscellaneous equipment:

                                                                Millions
Army Reserve: Miscellaneous...................................     $10.0
Navy Reserve: Miscellaneous...................................      10.0
Marine Corps Reserve: Miscellaneous...........................      10.0
Air Force Reserve: Miscellaneous..............................      10.0
Army National Guard: Miscellaneous............................      10.0
Air National Guard: Miscellaneous.............................      10.0

    The committee directs that miscellaneous funding allocated 
for the Army National Guard, in consultation with the service 
chief, give priority consideration to the following items: 
vibration management enhancement system; engagement skills 
trainer; night vision equipment; high mobility multipurpose 
wheeled vehicles. The committee further directs that 
miscellaneous funding allocated for the Air Guard, in 
consultation with the service chief, give priority 
consideration to procuring airborne firefighting equipment.

                        OTHER ITEMS OF INTEREST

Air National Guard Missions

    In reviewing the many contributions made by the Air 
National Guard (ANG), the committee notes the valuable 
contribution made by C-130 units to firefighting in the Western 
states. The committee understands that older C-130E aircraft 
are to be replaced with C-130J aircraft, now on order. The 
committeeexpects the Department to ensure that all western 
state ANG units have at least the necessary eight aircraft for airlift 
missions and special missions, such as counter drug flights and 
firefighting, and have a rotating pool of Mobile Aerial Firefighting 
Systems (MAFFS) for support of the U.S. Forest Service mission.
    The committee is also concerned about the relative 
peacetime utilization of C-130 Air National Guard and Air Force 
Reserve units. The committee fears that some units may be 
experiencing high operational tempo rates participating in 
peacetime missions, while others may not be operating with such 
a demanding schedule. Such missions include supporting Bosnia 
operations and counter drug missions, in addition to domestic 
efforts, such as firefighting and disaster relief. Therefore, 
the committee directs the Secretary of the Air Force to provide 
a report to the congressional defense committees on the balance 
among C-130 units for operating tempo. The Secretary shall 
submit that report no later than March 31, 1999. The committee 
notes that the Air Force provided an assessment last year that 
dealt with wartime requirements for tactical airlift. The 
Secretary's report should also provide an assessment of whether 
these peacetime operating tempos can be accommodated within the 
tactical airlift force structure identified as meeting wartime 
requirements.

Army aviation modernization

    The committee has completed a review of the Army aviation 
modernization plan called for in the National Defense 
Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 1998. While this plan makes 
progress in several areas, it does not adequately prioritize 
investment opportunities and leaves many requirements unfunded. 
In fact, for portions of the utility helicopter fleet, the plan 
failed to describe either a formal plan or details associated 
with a range of alternatives called for in the bill provision. 
The committee also understands that follow-on modifications to 
the plan have significantly changed the nature and scope of 
what was presented earlier this year. Consequently, the 
committee must assume that the provided plan does not provide a 
viable, balanced program for Army aviation.
    The committee has several concerns with deficiencies 
identified in the current aviation modernization plan. First, 
the number one aviation modernization program for the Army is 
the ongoing development of the Comanche scout helicopter. If, 
in fact, the Comanche helicopter is a top priority, it is hard 
to understand why the Army continues to fund its number one 
program at a level so low that it has only resourced one 
prototype platform for flight testing. Although a second 
prototype will soon be moved to the flight test facility, 
current funding limitations will not support flight testing of 
this aircraft until January 2001.
    Second, the Army is pursuing an inadequate procurement 
strategy for both the Apache Longbow and Comanche helicopters. 
Missing from the current strategy is adequate funding for self-
protection countermeasures and sensor fusion capabilities which 
are key requirements for the survivability and effectiveness of 
these high-value platforms and their crews. The committee 
believes it essential that the Army ensure that Apache, 
Comanche, and other aircraft with similar requirements are 
provided with both the latest radio frequency and infrared 
countermeasures when procured, even if it means reducing the 
rate or number of aircraft procured.
    Third, while the modernization plan would retire AH-1 
aircraft in attack battalions more quickly than originally 
planned, it would still leave a sizeable number in the cavalry 
squadrons. An even lower density aging aircraft will be more of 
a maintenance and support challenge. The committee believes 
that the Army should seek to retire the entire AH-1 fleet on an 
accelerated schedule.
    Fourth, utility helicopter requirements are acknowledged, 
but not resourced in a balanced manner. The committee 
understands a further analysis of requirements has convinced 
the Army of the need for an additional 90 Blackhawks for the 
Army National Guard, but only 50 are currently funded in the 
future years defense program. However, the readiness of the 
Army National Guard's UH-1 fleet is a source of serious 
concern. The fleet is currently grounded and undergoing 
inspections and necessary repairs on spur gears. Even if this 
action returns the fleet to service, it does not address the 
modernization requirement for over 500 UH-1 aircraft remaining 
in the force. While reserving judgment until the Army analysis 
is complete, the committee is skeptical that the Army can 
afford to procure 145 commercial-off-the-shelf aircraft for the 
light utility helicopter role and conduct a service life 
extension program on the rest of the UH-1 fleet. The committee 
believes the Army must address this issue and assist the 
Congress in understanding how these requirements should be met.
    The committee directs the Army to review the aviation 
modernization plan provided to the Congress earlier this year 
and provide an update to this plan that addresses the issues 
discussed in this report. The results of this review and update 
shall be provided to the congressional defense committees no 
later than January 31, 1999, to support a review of the 
President's fiscal year 2000 budget request.

Bradley base sustainment

    The budget request included $285.8 million to support 
Bradley base sustainment. The committee recognizes a 
requirement for the Army to measure the wear on the bore of the 
Bradley's 25mm cannon to ensure troop safety and identify when 
barrels need to be replaced. The committee understands that 
there are new bore erosion gauges available today that can 
accurately measurebore wear and provide an improved and cost 
effective means to ensure weapon accuracy and extend the service life 
of the Bradley main gun. The committee believes that alternative bore 
erosion gauges should be evaluated and directs the Secretary of the 
Army to investigate any potential benefit of new bore erosion gauges 
and report to the Congress no later than January 31, 1999.

Depleted Uranium Production

    The committee supports the Army's efforts to preserve the 
tank ammunition production base. However, it also recognizes 
that the Army must downsize the base to be cost effective. This 
includes the proposed reduction from two to one producer of 
tank depleted uranium penetrators. The committee is concerned 
that the decontamination and management of Government furnished 
equipment at the commercial facility which will no longer 
produce these penetrators has not been clearly identified, and 
that there will not be adequate funds to ensure that the 
decontamination will be accomplished either by the Army or by 
the contractor on a timely basis. Therefore, the committee 
directs the Secretary of the Army to provide a report to the 
congressional defense committees discussing the Army's 
management plan for this Government furnished equipment, 
including decontamination and disposition as appropriate. This 
report should be provided no later than March 31, 1999.

Digital information technology testbed

    The committee supports Department of Defense initiatives to 
develop and field information management systems that will meet 
the needs of an information centered military. The committee 
notes ongoing Department efforts to review architecture 
alternatives for automated electronic storage, retrieval, 
dissemination, and downgrading or declassifying government 
data. The committee is pleased to note the success achieved by 
the Army through the digital information technology testbed 
(DITT) in developing a prototype electronic data management 
system. The DITT system allows for storage of voluminous 
amounts of data, user friendly access to data at multiple 
levels of security, rapid dissemination of time-critical 
information, automatic downgrading or declassification and 
redaction. The committee understands that the Army plans on 
funding DITT hardware and software procurement in the 2000 
timeframe. The committee directs the Department of Defense to 
provide a report to the Congress, no later than 1 March 1999, 
on how the DITT model might be used to meet defense-wide 
requirements for an automated electronic storage and retrieval 
capability.

Domestic Emergency Response Program

    The budget request included $99.0 million to develop a 
program to prepare and enhance Federal, state and local 
response capabilities to terrorist incidents involving weapons 
of mass destruction (WMD), $49.8 million in the Department of 
Defense and $49.2 million in the Department of the Army 
budgets.
    The Assistant Secretary of Defense for Special Operations 
and Low Intensity Conflict (ASD(SO/LIC)) has been assigned 
responsibility by the Secretary of Defense for policy and 
resource oversight. Responsibility for procurement has been 
assigned to the Assistant to the Secretary of Defense for 
Nuclear, Chemical and Biological Defense programs. The 
Secretary of the Army has been designated by the Secretary of 
Defense to serve as Executive Agent for coordinating DOD 
training assistance to Federal, state and local officials. 
Additionally, the Secretary of the Army is also responsible for 
training state and local first responders to respond to 
terrorist threats involving chemical and biological agents and 
weapons; identifying, neutralizing, dismantling and disposing 
of chemical and biological weapons and related materials and 
technologies; and for developing and implementing planning 
guidance, plans, and procedures for the Domestic Emergency 
Preparedness Program.
    Following the Quadrennial Defense Review (QDR), the 
Secretary of Defense recommended that the Reserve Components 
should play a more active role in responding to domestic WMD 
terrorism. The committee agrees with the assessment of the 
Secretary of Defense, that the Reserve Components could be the 
first military responders on the scene to support local and 
state governments in managing the consequences of a terrorist 
use of WMD.
    The committee understands that the funds included in the 
Department of the Army budget request for the Reserve 
Components are for activities to begin addressing increased 
support requirements associated with terrorist use of WMD in 
the United States. These activities include the following: 
establishment of 10 Rapid Assessment and Initial Detection 
(RAID) teams; establishment of WMD patient decontamination 
teams from existing Guard and Reserve chemical companies and 
medical decontamination teams; training and equipping of 
Reserve Components to conduct WMD search, survey, surveillance 
and sampling activities; development of additional versions of 
the Army's Medical Management of Chem/Bio Causualties course; 
increased training days to improve coordination of interagency 
planning; upgrading existing Army Reserve simulation systems to 
include WMD effects capabilities, and the design and conduct of 
a proof-of-concept exercise; and establishment of a Reserve 
Component program office under the Director of Military Support 
(DOMS) to oversee WMD response activities.

National Vaccine Stockpile

    The committee understands that the Department of Defense 
has a limited stockpile of vaccines, medical supplies and 
protectivegear which could be used in response to a terrorist 
incident involving WMD, subject to approval by the Secretary of 
Defense. During testimony before the committee, the Assistant Secretary 
of Defense for Special Operations and Low Intensity Conflict testified 
that the Secretary of Defense could authorize the use of this stockpile 
under certain circumstances. The committee directs the Department to 
report to the congressional defense committees by December 1, 1998 on 
the circumstances under which the Secretary of Defense might authorize 
the use of the stockpile for a domestic WMD incident. The report should 
also contain information on the availability of vaccines, antiserums 
and antidotes in other Federal Government entities, such as the Centers 
for Disease Control (CDC), that could be used in such an emergency. 
Lastly, the report should discuss the advisability of establishing a 
national stockpile of vaccines, antiserums and antidotes, how the 
Department of Defense could contribute to that effort, and the 
estimated cost.

Defense Threat Reduction Agency (DTRA)

    In November 1997, as part of its Defense Reform Initiative 
(DRI), the Department of Defense recommended the establishment 
of a single agency to carry out programs to counter 
proliferation and reduce threats posed by weapons of WMD and to 
provide nuclear weapons stockpile and related support. 
Consistent with the DRI recommendation, the committee 
recommends that the mission, function and resources for fiscal 
year 1999 for the defense domestic preparedness program be 
transferred to the Defense Threat Reduction Agency (DTRA).

Encapsulated life raft system

    The committee is concerned by delays in the procurement of 
a 25-person encapsulated life raft system to replace the aging 
MK-6 life raft. Due to safety, support, cost and operational 
benefits of a new system, the committee encourages the Navy to 
complete a competitive source selection for this program. The 
Navy is directed to provide the committee, no later than 
December 1, 1998, a schedule for production and installation of 
these systems.

F/A-18E/F configuration mix

    The budget request included $2,876.1 million for the 
procurement of 30 F/A-18E/F aircraft. Among the 30 aircraft, 
the Navy would buy 14 single seat aircraft (F/A-18E) and 16 two 
seat aircraft (F/A-18F). During the Quadrennial Defense Review 
(QDR), the Defense Department reduced the planned buy for F/A-
18E/F from 1,000 aircraft to a total of 548-785. The new total 
would vary, depending upon how soon the joint strike fighter 
(JSF) enters service. Whatever the size of the program for F/A-
18E/F, the total program would now include a greater proportion 
of the two seat F/A-18F aircraft. One explanation for the 
richer mix has been that the Navy needs more two seat F/A-18s 
to replace two seat F-14s that will be retiring.
    Following a recent hearing, the committee asked the Navy 
for a definition and rationale for the force mix between single 
seat F/A-18E aircraft and F/A-18F aircraft. The committee was 
very disappointed with the answer provided. Perhaps the 
Department did not understand the question. The question was: 
``Why does the Navy need a two seat aircraft to replace the F-
14, when it is contemplating a two seat aircraft F/A-18F to 
replace the present day EA-6B?'' The EA-6B aircraft is a four 
seat aircraft.
    The committee recognizes the large strides made in human 
factors design of modern cockpits and simplified controls now 
available in tactical aircraft. The committee is aware that 
such improvements as digital displays, data links, and other 
improvements have decreased cockpit workload. For single seat 
aircraft, a major improvement has come from the development of 
hands on throttle and stick (HOTAS) flight management systems. 
HOTAS systems allow pilots to fly tactical aircraft without 
removing their hands from the flight controls to operate and 
fight the aircraft system. In fact, the Navy has represented 
that these technologies will permit the Navy to perform the EA-
6B mission in a two seat aircraft. The committee notes that 
such technologies might permit the Navy to replace some two 
seat F-14 aircraft with single seat F-18 aircraft. Therefore, 
the committee needs to understand more of the reasoning behind 
the Navy's F/A-18E/F force mix. Accordingly, the committee 
directs the Secretary of the Navy to provide a report to the 
congressional defense committees, no later than February 1, 
1999, on the F/A-18E/F mix that includes:
          (1) an analysis of crew contribution to mission 
        success in tactical aircraft acquired since 1980, with 
        due consideration given the technology improvements 
        that would allow a single pilot to fly a tactical 
        aircraft and simultaneously operate complex weapons 
        systems;
          (2) a comparison of crew workload and mission 
        requirements of single and dual seat tactical aircraft 
        acquired or planned for acquisition from 1980 through 
        2010; and
          (3) a complete description of how a two seat F/A-18F 
        aircraft will be able to perform the missions of the 
        four seat EA-6B;
          (4) the planned mix of F/A-18E and F/A-18F aircraft 
        from the fiscal year 1999 budget request through the 
        end of the program;
          (5) a complete explanation of why F-14 aircraft must 
        be replaced on a one-for-one basis by F/A-18F aircraft;
          (6) a complete analysis of the range differential 
        between the two seat F/A-18F and the single seat F/A-
        18E that considers reduced fuel for the second seat, 
        increased life cycle costs, and any range degradation 
        associated withwing drop remedies;
          (7) an analysis of the intended roles for the single 
        and dual seat F/A-18's highlighting similarities and 
        differences in their roles; and
          (8) an analysis of F/A-18 capability shortfalls 
        brought on by network-centered warfare requirements 
        that could require a second crew member.

Flight simulators for the Air National Guard

    The Air National Guard is scheduled to begin operating C-17 
airlifters in 2002 is a part of the Air National Guard's 
increasingly critical national security role. Just as the 
regular component units need to train and prepare for the 
transition to C-17 operation, National Guard aircrews will be 
required to undergo an initial qualification and continued 
training to maintain proficiency. The Air Force is now 
programmed to acquire ten flight simulators for the C-17, with 
four at one regular component location, but none programmed to 
be sited at the National Guard operating base. Accordingly, the 
committee directs the Secretary of Defense to ensure that 
training plans for the National Guard C-17 unit include 
simulator training in a C-17 flight simulator, and that the 
simulator will be will be stationed at the National Guard 
operating base at least 9 months prior to initial arrival of C-
17 aircraft.

Full accounting of cost associated with ammunition procurement

    The committee is concerned that in some cases, the 
Department of Defense may not be considering the total cost and 
savings to the Federal Government when choosing a contractor 
for the production of ammunition. The costs and savings that 
may not be considered include retirement liabilities, overhead, 
and other administrative costs at Government facilities. The 
committee believes that when determining the source of 
production for ammunition programs, the Department should take 
into account all costs associated with that production, as well 
as the overall savings that would be realized if this 
production were to utilize facilities or personnel to which the 
Federal Government would continue to owe a financial 
obligation, whether or not those facilities and personnel were 
awarded the production contract.

Gun ship modernization

    The budget request did not include funding for buying new 
aircraft to modernize the Special Operations Command (SOCOM) 
AC-130 gun ships. The committee understands that internal 
Department of Defense studies may have identified an inventory 
objective that could require additional AC-130 gun ships.
    The committee directs the Department of Defense to submit 
an analysis of SOCOM AC-130 gun ship inventory requirements to 
the congressional defense committees by March 1, 1999. This 
report should include the following:
          (1) whether there are additional requirements, such 
        as providing theater commanders with support to perform 
        force protection, border surveillance, reconnaissance, 
        airfield and seaport defense, or other missions;
          (2) whether additional gun ship capability is the 
        best way to provide this capability;
          (3) the relative costs and benefits of converting 
        existing C-130 aircraft, buying new C-130J aircraft, or 
        buying another aircraft altogether;
          (4) the relative costs and benefits of assigning any 
        additional mission requirements to active component 
        SOCOM units versus assigning these requirements to 
        reserve component units.

Secure facsimile machines

    In the report accompanying the National Defense 
Authorization Act of fiscal year 1998, the committee directed 
the Army to provide a report on the future requirements for 
secure facsimile machines, the costs and benefits of replacing 
existing legacy systems with newer technology machines, and the 
Department's funding plan for addressing future requirements. 
The Army reported that future requirements for secure facsimile 
machines had not been determined and will be ultimately based 
on testing and evaluation of the communications architecture 
projected for the first digitized division. The committee is 
aware that some organizations within the Army have already 
procured limited quantities of newer technology machines to 
meet secure facsimile machine requirements. The committee 
supports this action and encourages the Army to consider 
procuring additional commercial-off-the-shelf rugged multi-
functional tactical computer facsimile machine peripherals as a 
cost saving alternative to maintaining aging legacy systems.

Small arms training ammunition

    The committee is aware of Army research and development 
efforts to produce lead-free, non-toxic small arms training 
rounds to address environmental problems associated with firing 
lead rounds in indoor, as well as outdoor training ranges. This 
problem impacts readiness by restricting training opportunities 
through closure of Department of Defense (DOD) ranges, or 
requiring expensive remediation and monitoring efforts at these 
ranges.
    Furthermore, lead contamination has resulted in the 
cessation of operations at military ranges, increasing the cost 
of transportation and reducing valuable training time. The 
Environmental Protection Agency, Region 1, suspended weapons 
training at one of the principal National Guard training sites 
in New England.
    The committee is aware of the availability of commercial, 
lead free, non-toxic frangible ammunition that may address some 
of the military's problems in this area. The committee 
understands that this ammunition has also been safety tested by 
the Army Test and Evaluation Command and approved for use. The 
committee urges the DOD to further explore this frangible 
ammunition to determine the extent to which it would solve its 
environmental problems, and to incorporate it in its training 
inventory, if it provides a cost effective solution that would 
enable the continued use of training facilities that would not 
otherwise be available.

Tactical trailers and dolly sets

    The budget request included $12.0 million for procurement 
of tactical trailers and dolly sets. The committee notes the 
recent approval of a requirement for the self-loading/off-
loading trailer (SLOT) system that will enhance Army logistical 
operations. The SLOT multi functional trailer has the 
capability to self-load/off-load and transport operable and 
inoperable wheeled and light tracked vehicles, material 
handling equipment, engineering construction equipment, general 
cargo and international standards organization compatible 
containers. The committee understands that the basis of issue 
for these trailers has yet to be determined but understands the 
Army plans on initiating procurement in fiscal year 2000. The 
committee strongly supports this program and believes that 
these trailers will serve to strengthen the Army's logistics 
backbone.

Vertical Takeoff and Landing Unmanned Aerial Vehicles

    The committee notes the progress made in conducting a 
demonstration of vertical takeoff and landing (VTOL) unmanned 
aerial vehicles (UAV), following congressional direction to 
investigate the feasibility of a VTOL UAV for use in maritime 
or land based environments to provide near-real-time 
reconnaissance, surveillance, target acquisition, and battle 
field management. The committee expects that lessons learned 
from the demonstration will be applied towards potential 
acquisition of such a system.
         TITLE II--RESEARCH, DEVELOPMENT, TEST, AND EVALUATION

Explanation of tables
    The tables in this title display items requested by the 
administration for fiscal year 1999 and the committee's actions 
in regard to the requested amounts. As in the past, the 
administration may not exceed the amounts approved by the 
committee (as set forth in the tables or, if unchanged from the 
administration request, as set forth in the Department of 
Defense's budget justification documents) without a 
reprogramming action in accordance with established procedures. 
Unless noted explicitly in the report, all changes are made 
without prejudice.
              SUBTITLE A--AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS 


    SUBTITLE B--PROGRAM REQUIREMENTS, RESTRICTIONS, AND LIMITATIONS

Sec. 211. Crusader self-propelled artillery system program.

    The budget request included $313.2 million for continued 
development of the Crusader artillery system. The committee has 
watched the development of Crusader over time with great 
interest in the capabilities which this system was designed to 
provide. The Crusader program was initially developed to be an 
advanced technology, liquid propellant cannon offering great 
advances in range, targeting, mobility, and resupply 
requirements. The committee was concerned when, in March of 
1996, the Army elected to switch to an advanced technology 
solid propellant and stop work on the liquid propellant concept 
due to escalating developmental costs and chronic technical 
problems associated with that concept.
    The Army Crusader effort was initially prompted by the 
establishment of future warfighting requirements and a 
realization that the existing self-propelled howitzer system 
has been in the inventory for over thirty years. The current 
fleet of M109 Paladin artillery systems was first fielded in 
its original configuration in 1963 and has undergone a series 
of upgrades over time that have brought this system to the 
currently fielded M109A6 configuration. Today's Paladin system 
is much more capable than the original M109. However, while 
additional improvements might be possible, some suggest that 
this system has been improved as far as the current 
configuration will allow. The committee continues to support 
Army efforts to develop and field new systems that will provide 
combat overmatch, increased lethality, crew survivability, and 
support the Army's ability to fight and win on future 
battlefields. However, the committee has several concerns 
associated with the Crusader system as it is currently 
programmed.
    First, the Army decision to terminate the liquid propellant 
program due to immature technology and rising costs resulted in 
a solid propellant technology that is also unproven and does 
not provide the advantages expected of the liquid propellant 
system. Some of these advantages included range, reload and 
resupply efficiencies, and safety.
    Second, a June 1997 GAO report noted that the current 
program still suffers from considerable programmatic risks due 
to technical challenges faced in developing and integrating 
advanced technologies, the potential compression of the program 
schedule, the use of a streamlined acquisition approach, and 
the absence of defined criteria for entering into low-rate 
production. While some of the GAO's concerns are being 
addressed, the committee still believes that there is 
significant risk in continuing on the current course.
    Third, the recently released National Defense Panel (NDP) 
report, which focused on the nation's future warfighting 
requirements, questioned the numbers of the Crusader system 
programmed by the Army. In testimony before the committee in 
January of 1998, one of the panel members stated that the 
Crusader program lost its luster when the Army elected to 
terminate the liquid propellant effort. Panel members also 
expressed their concern about the utility of this system as its 
weight, estimated to be approximately 60 tons, would likely 
preclude it from being deployed in some future scenarios due to 
airlift and access problems expected in future conflicts. The 
problem of access was seen this year in the Persian Gulf region 
where U.S. allies, whom U.S. forces were trying to protect, 
would not allow use of their bases to strike Iraq. The NDP 
report and panel member testimony also made it clear that 
future systems must be lighter, faster, more lethal, and have a 
smaller logistics footprint if they are going to be viable in 
an increasingly uncertain future.
    Finally, the committee is concerned about the ability of 
future Army budgets to meet all the acquisition requirements it 
has established in its modernization program. The committee is 
concerned about a possible, if not probable, procurement bow 
wave that cannot be supported by projected resources. The 
committee sees an aging aviation fleet in the Army, with some 
helicopters already over 30 years old; an old truck fleet; and 
escalating requirements for new missiles, weapons, and 
ammunition. The committee is concerned that if the bow wave 
issue is not adequately addressed, Crusader may become the next 
program termination casualty for the Army.
    The committee, therefore, believes the Army should revisit 
both current requirements and schedule for the established 
Crusader program which is estimated to cost over $12.0 billion 
to design and procure 824 howitzers and resupply vehicles. The 
committee directs the Army to provide a report to the Congress, 
no later than March 1, 1999, that describes the following:
          (1) assessment of the risk associated with the 
        current Crusader program technology;
          (2) total requirement for Crusader associated with 
        Army After Next force structure revisions;
          (3) cost and benefit analysis of procuring only those 
        Crusader systems necessary for one heavy corps and 
        redirecting future procurement funding to develop an 
        Army After Next compatible artillery system;
          (4) potential for reducing system weight by as much 
        as 50 percent;
          (5) potential for propellant and munition 
        alternatives and the impact of maturing this technology 
        on the overall program schedule; and
          (6) cost and benefit analysis of delaying procurement 
        of Crusader to avoid affordability issues associated 
        with the current schedule and allow for maturation of 
        weight and propellant technologies.
    The committee supports continued research and development 
and believes an ultimate fielding of an advanced field 
artillery system is necessary. However, the committee believes 
that the Army's next generation artillery system should meet 
the criteria specified in the NDP report, be relevant to future 
Army After Next warfighting requirements and challenges, and 
should be affordable within future constrained modernization 
budgets. It is the affordability of this program in light of a 
fiscally unsupportable Army modernization program that 
threatens the ultimate fielding of Crusader to the force.

Sec. 212. CVN-77 nuclear aircraft carrier program.

    The budget request included $149.5 million for future 
aircraft carrier research and development in PE 603512N and 
$40.6 million for CV(X) feasibility studies in PE 603564N. The 
request also included $38.5 million for CVN-77 contract design 
in PE 604567N. The committee is concerned that the limited 
funding for CVN-77 design is insufficient for incorporating 
into CVN-77 the technologies that can enhance capabilities or 
reduce life-cycle costs for both CVN-77 and CV(X). The 
committee believes it is prudent to prove as many technologies 
as possible prior to insertion into CV(X). These technologies 
would be those that have the ability to transition from the 
CVN-77 to the CV(X) program; and:
          (1) demonstrate enhanced capabilities for the CV(X); 
        or
          (2) mitigate the cost or risk of the CV(X) program.
    Because these technologies would benefit both the CVN-77 
and the CV(X) program, the committee recommends a provision 
that would authorize $50.0 million for future aircraft carrier 
system development in PE 603512N to be used exclusively for 
CVN-77 development.

Sec. 213. Unmanned aerial vehicle programs.

    The budget request included $178.7 million for high 
altitude endurance (HAE) unmanned aerial vehicles (UAV). The 
two HAE UAVs are the Global Hawk, formerly the Tier II plus, 
and the Dark Star, formerly the Tier III minus. Each has 
different characteristics, but both are designed for high 
altitude extended flights. The programs are presently managed 
by the DefenseAdvanced Research Projects Agency (DARPA), and 
are differentiated from tactical UAVs, which are designed for shorter 
flights, less endurance, and for use by field commanders. The budget 
request included $40.5 million for the Dark Star, $90.1 for the Global 
Hawk, and $48.1 million for the common ground segment.
    The endurance UAVs development has progressed from small, 
``disposable'', inexpensive aircraft to multi-million dollar 
systems. Through the use of advanced concept technology 
demonstrations (ACTD) to field complex, developmental systems, 
the Department has found that endurance UAVs barely fit the 
definition of mature technologies. While most of the HAE UAV 
results have been discouraging, the Global Hawk's recent first 
flight suggests that it is an apparently mature, redundant 
system that can withstand minor systems problems without 
catastrophic results.
    Section 216 of the National Defense Authorization Act for 
Fiscal Year 1998 (Public Law 105-85) established the following 
requirements with respect to the HAE UAV program required:
          (1) a cost cap;
          (2) a cessation of further air vehicle procurement 
        pending completion of testing identified in phase II of 
        the test plan for the ACTD; and
          (3) a General Accounting Office report that assesses 
        the estimated production costs for each vehicle in the 
        endurance UAV ACTD.
    The committee continues to believe that the section 216 
requirements are as valid now as when enacted.

Dark Star UAV

    The committee has been disappointed by the lack of progress 
on the Dark Star UAV. The Dark Star was an ambitious 
undertaking for an ACTD, since it involved demonstration of new 
technologies under development. The Dark Star is an unfortunate 
case of over reach with respect to cost, schedule, and 
performance. Regrettably, it has taken too long to complete 
development and recover from the crash of the first air vehicle 
on its second flight. The committee recommends a decrease of 
$40.5 million in the budget request and cancellation of the 
Dark Star UAV program.

Global Hawk

    While the Global Hawk has been slowed by testing delays and 
a cautious development schedule, a successful test flight has 
been completed. The Global Hawk is a substantial air vehicle, 
with a gross weight of 25,600 pounds and a wing span of 116 
feet, capable of carrying a 2,000 pounds of payload, nearly 
half of that carried aboard a U-2 reconnaissance aircraft. 
Successful development of the Global Hawk may be the most cost 
effective and indeed operationally effective solution to the 
endurance UAV requirements, should its potential be 
successfully demonstrated in testing.
    Consistent with the committee's focus on demonstrated 
performance, the committee recommends an increase in the Global 
Hawk program of $32.5 million to acquire an additional three 
air vehicles upon completion of the phase II testing, and in 
concordance with Section 216 of the National Defense 
Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 1998 (Public Law 105-85). 
Section 216 prohibits acquisition of additional air vehicles 
until the completion of the testing identified in phase II of 
the test and demonstration plan for the advanced concept 
technology demonstration of the HAE UAV vehicles.

Sec. 214. Airborne laser program.

    The budget request included $292.2 million for the Airborne 
Laser (ABL) program. The committee continues to be concerned by 
technical and operational issues facing the ABL program. The 
program is currently structured such that critical testing data 
and other important information will not be available until 
after the United States has committed significant funding and 
acquired a large amount of equipment that may not be needed to 
attain basic data that is now missing. These and other concerns 
were first expressed in the committee's report on the fiscal 
year 1997 Defense Authorization Bill (S. Rept. 104-267). In 
this report, the committee stated that the Air Force had not 
``adequately demonstrated the feasibility of the necessary 
technology to begin such a significant investment.'' The 
committee also questioned whether ``the ABL concept of 
operations will allow the system to be cost and operationally 
effective.''
    Under the current schedule much of the testing necessary to 
make well informed judgments about the technical viability of 
the ABL program will not begin to occur until fiscal year 2002, 
just prior to the program entering Engineering and 
Manufacturing Development (EMD). This would require the 
expenditure of approximately $1.3 billion, and the acquisition 
and outfitting of a 747-400 aircraft, before testing of key 
subsystems takes place. The first time the Air Force plans to 
collect optical data on the performance of a laser fired 
horizontally through the atmosphere is during the last quarter 
of fiscal year 2002, during its first attempt to shoot down a 
target missile and only a few months prior to a milestone II 
review to consider whether the program should be permitted to 
enter EMD. The committee also notes that the Air Force plans to 
cease the collection of turbulence data in fiscal year 1998 
even though this data is currently the sole basis for Air Force 
models and estimates. Hence, for the next four years, the Air 
Force will cease all collection of environmental data with the 
hope that the first live fire test in 2002 will validate 
current models.
    The Air Force justifies this approach by stating that early 
testing of a laser device in an operationally representative 
environment would be too costly. The committee believes that 
thecost of such a demonstration must be weighed against the 
potential waste of funds that would result if the system does not prove 
to be operationally viable in the 2002-2003 timeframe when in excess of 
a billion dollars will already have been spent.
    The committee also does not believe that the Air Force has 
adequately made the case that the ABL concept of operations 
justifies an investment of $6.3 billion to develop and acquire 
this capability, especially with a number of other theater 
missile defense (TMD) systems competing for limited TMD 
resources. Given the vulnerability of a large, slow platform to 
hostile air defenses, the ABL will have to operate at a 
significant distance away from enemy lines of defense. Coupled 
with the inherent range limitations of a laser fired 
horizontally through the atmosphere, the ABL would, in many 
scenarios, not have sufficient reach to engage boosting 
missiles. Since many of the missiles that ABL is designed to 
counter are mobile, and the ranges of such systems are steadily 
increasing, it may be possible for opponents to simply 
reposition launchers outside of an ABL's lethal range.
    The committee believes that the Secretary of Defense must 
carefully evaluate these technical and operational issues. The 
committee also believes that the Secretary should establish an 
independent review of the ABL program. Specifically, the 
committee directs the Secretary to task the Panel on Reducing 
Risk in Ballistic Missile Defense Flight Test Programs, which 
has recently reviewed BMDO's hit-to-kill test programs, to 
assess the adequacy of the ABL development and testing program. 
In addition, the committee directs the Secretary to seek an 
independent assessment of the operational issues facing the 
ABL, including, but not limited to, those issues identified 
above. The committee believes the Air Force should not proceed 
with the acquisition and outfitting of a new aircraft before 
such reviews have been completed. The committee notes that due 
to the commercial base for such aircraft, and the Air Force's 
relationship with the contractor, it is possible for the Air 
Force to delay this acquisition without disadvantaging the 
government, disrupting contractor production, or undermining 
the program's ability to proceed if it passes rigorous review.
    The committee recommends a reduction of $97.0 million in PE 
63319F, the amount which the Air Force has budgeted for fiscal 
year 1999 for air vehicle integration and checkout. The 
committee directs the Secretary to ensure that a full 
assessment be completed prior to any additional expenditure 
related to the acquisition or integration of the ABL aircraft 
and submit a report to the congressional defense committees by 
March 15, 1999 that outlines his findings and recommendations. 
The report should include the findings and recommendations of 
the Panel on Reducing Risk in Ballistic Missile Defense Test 
Programs, and the findings and recommendations of the 
independent panel that reviews ABL operational issues. The 
committee further directs that no more than $150.0 million of 
the funds remaining available to the ABL program be obligated 
until 30 days after the Secretary submits the report specified 
above.

Sec. 215. Enhanced global positioning system program.

    The committee is concerned that the Department of Defense 
has not moved aggressively enough to implement Presidential 
policy and statutory requirements to develop an enhanced Global 
Positioning System (GPS), the use of which can be denied to 
potential enemies while ensuring access to U.S. and allied 
military forces and civil users. The committee is aware that 
modifications to future GPS satellites to include dynamic 
frequency reconfiguration and regional-level directional signal 
enhancement are being seriously considered. The committee 
strongly endorses the development of such capabilities. 
Therefore, the committee recommends a provision that would: (1) 
require the Secretary of Defense to develop an enhanced GPS 
system as an urgent national security priority; (2) authorize 
$44.0 million for fiscal year 1999 in PE 64480F to begin such 
development; (3) urge the Secretary of Defense to adequately 
fund this initiative in the Future Years Defense Program; (4) 
urge the Secretary of Transportation to provide sufficient 
funding to support additional civil frequencies and other 
enhancements for civil users; (5) extend by five years the 
existing requirement to outfit all major Defense Department 
platforms with GPS receivers by the year 2000; and (6) require 
the Secretary to submit a plan for implementing this provision 
by April 15, 1999.

Sec. 216. Manufacturing Technology Program.

    The committee supports the goals for the Defense 
Manufacturing Technology (MANTECH) program as outlined in the 
five-year MANTECH plan submitted to Congress in February 1998. 
The committee is encouraged by the positive trends in the five-
year budget projections for each service MANTECH funding line 
and work of the military services is evident in the plans for 
their fiscal year 1999 program.
    However, the committee is concerned that the budget 
projections for the program are still inadequate to accomplish 
the stated goals for MANTECH. In the National Defense 
Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 1998, Congress recommended a 
minimum annual spending target for each service's MANTECH 
program equal to 0.25 percent of the total amount budgeted in 
each service for Demonstration and Validation, Engineering 
Manufacturing Development, Procurement, and Operational Systems 
Development. The fiscal year 1999 budget request falls short of 
this minimum funding level for the Army, Navy, and the Air 
Force MANTECH programs. The committee expects the Department of 
Defense and the services to fully fund the MANTECH program. 
This program provides ``seed funding'' for the development of 
moderate to high risk material, process, and equipment 
technology to enable production of advanced, high quality 
weapon systems with shorter lead times and reduced acquisition 
costs.
    In an effort to encourage the services to provide greater 
support to the MANTECH program, the committee recommends a 
provision that would provide more flexibility by modifying cost 
share requirements to allow for different levels of cost-share 
where appropriate. The provision would eliminate the two-to-one 
cost share requirement and allow the competitive bidding 
process to establish the level of cost-share; move the cost-
share waiver authority from the Secretary of Defense to the 
service secretaries; and require cost-share reporting to track 
investment by non-industry MANTECH participants. It is not the 
intention of this language to diminish support for cost-sharing 
in MANTECH. The committee expects that cost-sharing will remain 
an important factor in selection of manufacturing technology 
projects.
    Furthermore, the committee supports the Secretary's efforts 
to leverage MANTECH funds with budget resources from other 
federal sources. In particular, the committee expects greater 
investment in MANTECH programs by weapon system program 
offices. The five-year plan described two MANTECH initiatives 
that received direct support from program offices such as the 
Joint Strike Fighter program. In the annual MANTECH report due 
to Congress with the annual budget submission, the Department 
shall include information on the level of direct financial 
support by weapons system program offices in MANTECH programs 
and a plan to increase the level of investment. The committee 
believes that this investment will ensure that the MANTECH 
program remains relevant to the programs it is intended to 
support.

Sec. 217. Authority for use of major range and test facility 
        installations by commercial entities.

    The committee recommends a provision that would amend 
section 2681 of title 10, United States Code, making the 
temporary authority to permit commercial use of test and 
evaluation centers permanent.
    Section 2861 currently allows the Secretary of Defense to 
enter into contracts with commercial entities that desire to 
conduct commercial test and evaluation activities at major 
range and test facility installations, which are designated by 
the secretary. Contracts under section 2681 must require the 
commercial entity to reimburse the Department of Defense for 
all indirect costs to the United States associated with the use 
of the facility. In addition, the contract may include a 
requirement to reimburse the Department for such indirect costs 
as the secretary deems appropriate. Under section 2681(d), 
amounts collected for the commercial use are credited to the 
appropriation accounts under which the costs associated were 
incurred.
    The committee makes this recommendation based on the report 
issued by the Secretary of Defense in reponse to the 
requirement in Section 842 of the National Defense 
Authorization Act forFiscal Year 1998 and the assurance in that 
report that a directive will be issued in the near future on procedures 
to ensure that the major range and test facility installations will not 
compete with private sector test and evaluation services.

Sec. 218. Extension of authority to carry out certain prototype 
        projects.

    The committee recommends a provision that would extend the 
authority to carry out certain prototyping project specified 
under section 845 of the National Defense Authorization Act for 
Fiscal Year 1994 (Public Law 103-160), through September 30, 
2001. The committee regards the section 845 authority as a 
potentially important tool for improving the access of the 
Department of Defense to technology innovation by commercial 
industry.
    In order to make an informed decision on whether the 
provision should be codified as permanent authority, the 
committee directs the Secretary of Defense to provide a report 
to the congressional defense committees, no later than March 1, 
1999, that describes each instance in which the authority has 
been used, the contractors involved, the dollar amounts of the 
transactions, the contractor cost-share, and the specific 
circumstances that justify the use of the authority, including 
any specific impediments to achieving the same results under 
another authority. The report should also identify which 
projects have proceeded beyond prototyping into production and 
discuss any difficulties associated with the use of the section 
845 authority that may have been encountered in making such 
transition.

                       SUBTITLE C--OTHER MATTERS

Sec. 231. Policy with respect to ballistic missile defense cooperation.

    The committee has consistently supported a shift in the 
U.S.-Russian strategic relationship away from its Cold War 
focus on strategic offensive threats to a more balanced and 
cooperative relationship. In order to facilitate such a 
transition and to encourage cooperation in dealing with related 
matters, such as the Anti-Ballistic Missile (ABM) Treaty, the 
committee recommends a provision stating that the United States 
should seek to foster a climate of cooperation with Russia on 
matters related to missile defense, especially in the area of 
early warning.
    The committee believes that such an approach could lead to 
a mutually agreeable evolution of the ABM Treaty, either 
modification or replacement by a newer understanding, that 
would clear the way for the United States and Russia to deploy 
national missile defenses each believes necessary for its 
security. If implemented in a cooperative manner, the committee 
does not believe that such steps would undermine the original 
intent of the ABM Treaty, which was to maintain strategic 
stability and permit significant nuclear arms reductions.
                     ADDITIONAL MATTERS OF INTEREST

                                 ARMY 


Hardened materials

    The committee recommends an increase of $3.0 million in PE 
62105A to continue research in composite structures and 
composite shroud assemblies. The committee believes that such 
technologies provide significant opportunities for weight 
reduction and increased stiffness of critical missile 
components such as shrouds, nosetips, heat shields, and 
deployment systems.

Missile technology

    The committee recommends an increase of $1.5 million in PE 
62303A to initiate a missile acoustics technology program. The 
committee believes that high frequency vibrations resulting 
from aerodynamically generated acoustics can create substantial 
electronic noise, and damage or destroy sensitive components in 
atmospheric interceptors for theater missile defense. The 
missile acoustics technology program may enable the Army to 
address these issues in a timely and cost-effective manner.

Scramjet technology

    The committee recommends an increase of $3.0 million in PE 
62303A to initiate application studies and design of scramjet 
technologies for the advanced interceptor technology program. 
The committee believes that scramjet technologies, because of 
higher engine efficiencies and the lack of need for on-board 
oxidizers, are the only available technologies for addressing 
flight speeds of greater than Mach 10, which may be required to 
counter future threats. The committee directs that all 
applicable competitive procedures be used in the award of 
contracts or other agreements under this program.

Environmental technology

    The committee recommends an increase of $5.0 million in PE 
62720A to continue to develop, demonstrate, and validate the 
plasma energy pyrolysis system (PEPS) for the destruction of 
hazardous waste, with an emphasis on a mobile system. The 
purpose of PEPS is to develop an incineration process for 
hazardous waste disposition, which minimizes toxic air 
emissions and the disposal of ash contaminated with heavy 
metals.
    The committee also recommends an increase of $3.5 million 
in PE 62720A to complete development of an integrated 
environmental and pollution prevention management and control 
system known as the Radford Environmental Development and 
Management Program (REDMAP).

Pollution prevention

    The committee continues to support the efforts of the 
Department of Defense to shift emphasis away from ``end of 
pipeline'' solutions to control and mitigate the effects of 
using environmentally harmful materials and procedures. While 
the Department has acknowledged the need for prudent 
investments in pollution prevention measures, the fiscal year 
1999 funding reduction in this area is inconsistent with that 
objective.
    The committee believes that a greater investment in 
pollution prevention would reduce long-term compliance and 
cleanup costs, and increase the resources available for the 
core requirements of the Department. The committee is very 
concerned about the decrease in the Department's budget support 
for pollution prevention measures. As a result, the committee 
recommends an additional $24.0 million for pollution prevention 
research and development initiatives, to be awarded on a 
competitive basis by the National Defense Center for 
Environmental Excellence (PE 62720A). The committee directs 
that all applicable competitive procedures be used in the award 
of contracts or other agreements related to the obligation and 
expenditure of the $24.0 million, and that cost-sharing 
requirements for non-federal participants be utilized where 
appropriate.
    These funds should be used to develop new materials and 
manufacturing processes for the purpose of enhancing weapons 
systems performance and reducing lifecycle operations and 
maintenance costs. Research and development efforts should 
include reduction of hazardous solvents and heavy metals 
related to corrosion protection materials and processes, 
environmentally benign munitions technology, and green gun 
barrel technology. Specifically, the committee expects that 
these technologies and materials shall reduce lifecycle 
environmental compliance costs, consistent with pollution 
prevention objectives of all the military departments.

Software security

    The committee recommends an increase of $.5 million to PE 
62783A to continue efforts to improve computer security by 
developing and testing prototype software security mechanisms.

Cold regions research

    The committee recommends an increase of $1.2 million in 
PE62784A to support expanded applied research in knowledge based issues 
and engineering principles needed to sustain effective war fighting in 
winter and in cold regions of the world. The committee notes the 
increasing importance of this research to support effective development 
of military forces areas, such as Korea and Bosnia.

Nutrition research

    The committee recommends an increase of $2.0 million in PE 
63002A to continue nutrition research in support of 
improvements in the Meals-Ready-to-Eat (MRE) system. The 
committee views this research to be of continuing importance 
for maintaining the health and readiness of deployed forces in 
operations around the world.

Weapons and munitions advanced technology

    The committee recommends an increase of $4.5 million in PE 
63004A to support operational analysis and to address 
producibility and affordability issues with regard to the 
precision guided mortar munition program. The committee 
believes that these investments in fiscal year 1999 could 
significantly reduce the risks involved with the deployment of 
this important technology.

Combat vehicle and automotive advanced technology

    The budget request included $54.4 million to support 
ongoing evaluation of advanced technologies with military 
applications. The committee notes a shortfall in funding for 
continued exploration of aluminum metal matrix technology that 
began last year. The committee, therefore, recommends an 
increase of $3.0 million in PE 63005A to complete this 
developmental effort and support the transition of this 
technology into applications that will strengthen armored track 
shoes and engine components at significantly reduced weight.

Military human immunodeficiency virus research

    The committee recommends a decrease of $2.6 million in PE 
63105A to fund higher priority programs. The committee notes 
that this reduction represents the amount proposed by the Army 
to expand certain activities under the human immunodeficiency 
virus program in fiscal year 1999. The committee supports 
continuation of the long-term core program of research and 
development.

Missile and rocket advanced technology

    The budget request included $86.1 million to support 
development of advanced missile technologies. The committee is 
concerned about the proliferation of anti-armor missile systems 
and the inability of future budgets to sustain the current 
number of missile modernization programs. The committee notes 
problems encountered with Army testing of the E-FOGM missile 
system and rising missile costs. There is no indication that 
the Army intends to pursue fielding this system beyond those 
capabilities obtained to support the advanced concept 
technology demonstration (ACTD). The committee believes that 
limited resources must be redirected to more critical programs. 
The committee, therefore, recommends a decrease of $35.7 
million in PE 63313A allocated for evaluation of the E-FOGM 
missile system.
    The committee is pleased to note progress with the future 
missile technology integration (FMTI) program but is concerned 
about the lack of robust testing that is programmed for this 
activity. This program manufactures missile component hardware, 
using advanced materiel and structures for ground and flight 
test evaluation to determine how they might be applied to other 
Army development programs. The committee recommends an 
additional $6.0 million to support additional flight tests that 
will greatly reduce risk and ensure that the technology return 
on the $73.0 million invested in FMTI is fully captured. The 
committee, therefore, recommends a total authorization of $56.4 
million in PE 63313A.

Advanced tactical computer science and sensor technology

    The committee recommends an increase of $2.5 million in PE 
63772A to fund the application of situational awareness 
technology and display techniques with commercially available 
palmtop computer technology to provide dismounted soldiers with 
map-based intelligence and situation awareness. The committee 
notes that there are security issues raised by the emerging 
opportunities to provide such capabilities to soldiers in the 
forward battlefield areas and that such issues must be 
addressed in parallel with technology development and 
demonstration. The committee directs that all applicable 
competitive procedures be used for any contracts, grants, or 
other agreements awarded under this program and that cost-
sharing requirements for non-federal participants also be used, 
where appropriate.

Tactical High Energy Laser

    The committee continues to support the Tactical High Energy 
Laser (THEL) program. The committee notes that the existing 
cost-sharing agreement between the United States and Israel 
does not include funding to deploy the system in Israel. 
Pending a future agreement on cost sharing, the committee 
recommends an increase of $10.0 million in PE 63308A to support 
continued THEL testing and deployment activities.

Space and missile defense battle lab

    The committee has supported the Space and Missile Defense 
Battle Integration Center, which has now transitioned to a 
Battle Lab. The committee is pleased that the administration 
has increased the budget request for fiscal year 1999 to $9.2 
million, but does not believe that this amount adequately 
supports the Battle Lab. Therefore, the committee recommends an 
increase of $7.0 million in PE 63308A for the Space and Missile 
Defense Battle Lab.

North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) Research and Development

    The budget request included $44.4 million for NATO research 
and development in the following accounts: $11.6 million for 
the Army (PE 63790A), $11.0 million for the Navy (PE 63790N), 
$11.1 million for the Air Force (PE 63790F) and $10.7 million 
for the Department of Defense (PE 63790T). The committee 
recommends that funds in these activities be maintained at 
fiscal year 1998 levels plus inflation, and therefore 
recommends the following reductions in the military service and 
defense accounts: $2.0 million (Army), $1.1 million (Navy), 
$0.4 million (Air Force) and $2.3 million (Defense).

Comanche

    The budget request included $367.8 million for continued 
development of the Comanche helicopter. The committee strongly 
supports the Comanche helicopter development effort and 
believes this program should be accelerated. The committee 
recognizes that Army funding constraints have prevented the 
timely delivery of the second prototype aircraft necessary for 
testing and developmental efforts. The Comanche program, as an 
integral component of Army digitization, must be fielded as 
soon as practicable to support necessary flight test 
requirements and development of tactics, techniques and 
procedures for the future digitized force. The committee 
recommends an increase of $24.0 million for a total of $391.8 
in PE 64223A. This increase in funding will support necessary 
flight test requirements, development of first digitized corps 
enhancements, and risk reduction activities for Comanche.

Advanced threat infrared countermeasure system

    The budget request included $86.0 million to support 
electronic warfare development programs. The committee 
understands that Army efforts to complete the design of an 
advanced threat infrared countermeasure and common missile 
warning system (ATIRCM/CMWS) installation kit were adversely 
affected by a Department of Defense program budget decision 
that eliminated funding for the ATIRCM/CMWS installation kit 
development effort. The committee supports Army initiatives to 
complete work on the installation kits for ATIRCM/CMWS which 
will allow this device to be inserted into the lot 6 production 
line for Apache Longbow. This action is projected to save the 
Army $74,000 per aircraft, or $5.3 million per year, if the 
planned installation of ATIRCM/CMWS begins on the Longbow 
production line in fiscal year 2001. The committee, therefore, 
recommends an increase of $8.6 million in PE 64270A to restore 
the program schedule and support completion of the ATIRCM/CMWS 
kit design effort.

All source analysis system

    The budget request included $28.1 million to support 
development of the all source analysis system (ASAS). The 
committee continues to support ongoing efforts to enhance the 
capabilities of this system and is encouraged to note progress 
made to date. The committee understands the Army is continuing 
to experiment with the Integrated Battlespace Intelligence 
Server (IBIS) to ensure that the technology transition 
framework required to support fielded systems remains viable. 
The committee, therefore, recommends an increase of $2.2 
million in PE 64321A for critical ASAS Block II software 
requirements.

Radar development

    The budget request included $2.8 million to support 
improvements to existing ground based radar systems. The 
committee has been pleased with the capabilities provided by 
the Sentinel radar system for Army air defense forces. The 
Sentinel system acquires targets sufficiently forward of the 
forward line of troops to improve short-range air defense 
weapons reaction time and allow engagement at optimum ranges. 
The integrated identification friend or foe system reduces the 
potential for fratricide. The committee notes an outstanding 
requirement for the fielding of a passive adjunct sensor 
capability as a continuation of an approved pre-programmed 
product improvement program. The committee believes this 
passive capability should be accelerated and recommends an 
increase of $4.0 million in PE 64820A to support this 
developmental effort.

Firefinder

    The budget request included $19.8 million to support the 
Firefinder Block II pre-planned product improvement program by 
replacing the antenna transceiver group. The committee 
understands that the Army will award an engineering and 
manufacturing development contract in 1998 in an effort to 
double the current range performance and improve target 
accuracy overthe existing radar. The committee recognizes this 
program as a force protection enabler and recommends an increase of 
$0.9 million in PE 64823A to support incremental funding necessary for 
acceleration of software development efforts required by this activity.

Research, development, test and evaluation support

    The committee remains concerned about the proportion of 
research, development, test, and evaluation (RDT&E) funding 
allocated to management, infrastructure, and support. In an 
effort to slow this trend until a more comprehensive plan for 
RDT&E management reform is initiated, the committee recommends 
a total reduction of $27.0 million, to be allocated as follows:

Army:                                                           Millions
    PE 64759A.................................................      $1.0
    PE 65301A.................................................       2.0
Navy:
    PE 65853N.................................................      11.0
    PE 65864N.................................................       5.0
Air Force:
    PE 65807..................................................       4.0
    PE 65808F.................................................       2.0
Defense Agencies:
    PE 65804D.................................................       2.0

Army test instrumentation and targets

    The committee is concerned that aging instrumentation at 
its defense test and evaluation facilities will be inadequate 
to meet increasingly stringent technical standards for planned 
evaluations of cutting edge missile technologies. In order to 
effectively evaluate future technology, test instrumentation 
must be able to provide faster, more accurate results for 
smaller weapons with higher speeds, longer ranges, and higher 
altitudes. Aging telemetry and radar equipment at the existing 
facilities, first deployed in the 1960s, requires immediate 
replacement. Optics equipment must be updated in order to 
provide the accuracy levels demanded by high energy weapons and 
target systems. Accordingly, the committee recommends an 
increase of $7.0 million in PE 65602A to upgrade 
communications, optics, radar, and telemetry equipment to 
support programmed testing of advanced missile technologies at 
existing range facilties.

Survivability/lethality analysis

    The committee recommends an increase of $4.0 million in PE 
65604A to expand the current information warfare vulnerability 
assessments program to determine exploitable weaknesses in the 
First Digitized Division and to recommend mitigating solutions 
for systems throughout their acquisition cycle. The committee 
believes that the Army must aggressively pursue these 
assessments if the full benefits of digitization are to be 
achieved.

High energy laser system test facility

    The committee recommends an increase of $8.0 million in PE 
65606A to accelerate development of solid-state laser 
technologies for theater missile defense applications. If the 
technologies can be demonstrated, solid state laser weapons may 
have a number of critical advantages in missile defense 
applications, including no requirement for munitions logistics, 
a highly favorable cost per kill ratio, and a speed-of-light 
kill capability. Recent developments in a variety of related 
technologies provide new opportunities for the deployment of a 
working system in the relative near-term. The committee urges 
the Army to devote at least $1.5 million of the increase to 
address issues involving crystal growth manufacturing.

Aerostat joint project office

    The committee has supported the development of elevated 
sensors for air and missile defense. The committee recognizes 
that such sensors are critical to satisfying cruise missile 
defense requirements. Notwithstanding this support, the 
committee does not believe that the Department of Defense has 
adequately integrated its various cruise missile defense 
programs into a coherent architecture and development plan. 
Given this lack of a comprehensive plan, the committee views 
the fiscal year 1999 increase in the joint aerostat program to 
be excessive. Therefore the committee recommends a reduction of 
$50.0 million in PE 12419A. The committee notes that even with 
this reduction, the budget for the joint aerostat program would 
grow in excess of 63 percent over the fiscal year 1998 
appropriation for this program.

Advanced field artillery tactical data system (AFATDS)

    The budget request included $35.1 million to support 
development of the AFATDS multi-service fire support command 
and control system. The committee recognizes that objective 
functionality enhancements are necessary to meet requirements 
for airspace deconfliction and technical fire direction 
support. AFATDS is a critical system that remains in the early 
stages of fielding. The committee recommends an increase of 
$12.5 million in PE 23726A to support development of system 
improvements and directs the Army to ensure that this program 
is adequately funded in future budget submissions.

Combat vehicle improvement programs

    The budget request included $94.8 million to support 
research and development associated with identifying and 
fielding improvements to Army combat vehicles. For the last two 
years, the committee has supported the effort to develop new 
flat panel display devices to support Army digitization 
activities and alleviate a deficiency identified with 
experimental systems. The committee notes that the research and 
development effort is in its last year and the program will be 
ready for transition into production in fiscal year 2000. The 
committee recommends an increase of $7.0 million in PE 23735A 
to complete the research and development effort on flat panel 
displays in fiscal year 1999.
NAVY 


Pulse detonation engine technology

    The committee is encouraged by the potential of pulse 
detonation engine technology for rapid response to time 
critical targets and recommends an increase of $1.0 million in 
PE 62111N to accelerate the flight demonstration of this 
technology.

Stainless steel double hull research

    The committee recommends an increase of $3.0 million in PE 
62121N for the acceleration of research in stainless steel 
double hull technologies. The committee notes the potential of 
this technology to reduce acquisition and life-cycle costs and 
improve survivability. The committee directs that all 
applicable competitive procedures be used in the award of 
contracts or other agreements under this program, and that 
cost-sharing requirements for non-federal participants be 
utilized, where appropriate.

Communications, command and control technology

    The budget request includes $65.0 million for 
Communication, command and control technology (PE 62332N). The 
committee recommends a reduction of $5.0 million in PE 62332N 
for the strategic sustainment program in order to fund higher 
priority programs.

Thermal management materials

    The committee recommends an increase of $1.5 million in PE 
62234N for high thermal conductivity carbon fiber material. In 
order to fully exploit the advancements in the area of thermal 
management for electronics and fully realize the potential for 
cost savings and performance, it is essential that these 
materials be used in conjunction with commercially available 
chips. The committee directs the Navy to pursue dual-use 
application and industry cost-sharing to the maximum extent 
practicable.

Carbon-carbon heatshield technology

    The committee encourages the Navy to continue a robust 
program for the development of carbon-carbon heatshields and 
insulation materials and recommends an increase of $2.5 million 
in PE 62234N in order to specifically address future Navy 
reentry body requirements. The committee directs that all 
applicable competitive procedures be used in the award of 
contracts or other agreements under this program, and that 
cost-sharing requirements for non-federal participants be 
utilized where appropriate.

Electronic propulsion technology

    The committee recommends an increase of $2.0 million in PE 
62234N for the development of applied high temperature 
superconducting (HTS) technology for electric propulsion and 
related auxiliary systems in future surface ships and 
submarines. The Office of Naval Research, in conjunction with 
the Navy's principal shipbuilders, should build upon the 
advances realized in the commercial sector and pursue dual-use 
technology and cost-sharing to the maximum extent practicable.

Precision strike and air defense technology

    The budget request included $58.3 million for precision 
strike and air defense technology, of which $4.9 million would 
be for mobile offshore basing (MOB), project R2266. The MOB 
effort would develop a concept to provide a means by which 
long-term U.S. presence can be maintained. Technology issues 
associated with both semi-submersible and mono-hull modules 
connected into platforms 1000 and 3000 meters in length will be 
explored.
    The committee has determined that engineering and design 
studies on critical technologies essential to MOB can be 
completed more efficiently if accelerated in fiscal year 1999. 
Accordingly, the committee recommends an increase of $5.0 
million in PE 63238N for MOBS.

Advanced electric systems studies

    The budget request included $14.8 million in PE 603508N for 
fabrication, demonstration, development and concept studies for 
quiet electric propulsion motor technologies. The studies and 
intermediate scale development are premature initiatives until 
fiscal year 1999 results from the 500KW sub-scale demonstration 
model are known. Therefore, the committee recommends a 
reduction of $1.0 million to PE 603508N.

Composite helicopter hangar

    The budget request included no funding for continuation of 
a program to design and fabricate the outer shell of a DDG-51 
helicopter hangar structure using composite materials. The 
composite helicopter hangar program goals are to leverage 
enabling technologies that can lead to reduced radar signatures 
and cost and weight savings. Development issues include 
fabrication, durability, maintenance and repair, outfitting, 
fire survivability in a manned space, and local loading due to 
shock from mounted equipment. The committee recommends an 
increase of $5.0 million in PE 603508N to continue a 
developmental effort to design and fabricate the outer shell of 
a DDG-51 helicopter hangar structure using composite materials.

Marine Corps warfighting laboratory

    The budget request included $23.6 million within PE 603460M 
to support the Marine Corps warfighting laboratory (MCWL). The 
MCWL has supported the experimentation process for the Marine 
Corps. Last year's effort was highlighted by Hunter Warrior, an 
effort to test advanced operational concepts in extended and 
dispersed battlefields.
    In fiscal year 1999, the Marine Corps intends to conduct 
Urban Warrior to test concepts for operating in urban areas. 
Later in fiscal year 1999, the Marine Corps will begin the 
planning for the experimentation phase called Capable Warrior. 
Capable Warrior will attempt to integrate ``lessons learned'' 
from the previous experiments.
    The committee continues to support these warfighting 
experiments, and recommends an additional $10.0 million for 
accelerating these efforts. Of this amount, $5.0 million will 
be for the second phase continued evaluation of the broad-area 
unmanned retail and re-supply operation or BURRO. This funding 
will allow this joint effort to complete the evaluation process 
and have a flying prototype by year 2000.
    The committee understands that this series of experiments 
is not a normal acquisition program. It is clear that an effort 
to inflict robust countermeasures on the experimentation 
process could thwart attempts to learn as much as we can from 
the experiments about potential operational concepts. 
Nevertheless, the committee believes that the Marine Corps and 
the MCWL must pay greater attention to the vulnerabilities of 
systems used in these experiments to potential countermeasures. 
Decisions about changing operational concepts, changing force 
structure, or pursuing new hardware developments must be made 
with a better understanding of vulnerabilities to potential 
countermeasures.
    Therefore, the committee directs the Secretary of the Navy 
to provide a report on the long-term plan for developing ``red 
team'' countermeasures efforts activity to keep pace with the 
warfighting experiment efforts. The Secretary should provide 
the report to the congressional defense committees by May 15, 
1999. The committee further directs that no more than 85 
percent of the funds for this program be obligated, before the 
delivery of the report.

Freeze dried blood research

    The committee recommends an increase of $1.0 million in PE 
63706N to continue research on freeze-dried blood processes to 
develop a safe and reliable supply of blood for combat 
casualties. The technology provides freeze-dry blood platelets 
for the purpose of extending shelf-life, destroying potential 
contaminating viruses, and reducing space required for storage 
of blood stocks. The committee recognizes the commercial 
potential of this technology and encourages the Navy to pursue 
dual-use application and cost-sharing in this program to the 
maximum extent practicable.

Advanced lightweight influence sweep system

    The budget request included $4.2 million for advanced mine 
sweeping. The advanced lightweight influence sweep system 
(ALISS) is focused on developing superconducting magnets and 
acoustic transducers to sweep influence mines targeted against 
specific classes of Navy ships. The lightweight, modular and 
low logistic requirements features make ALISS a candidate for 
deployment by a number of Navy platforms. The committee 
recommends a $1.0 million increase to PE 603782N to continue 
the test and development of ALISS.

Studies and experiments for combat systems engineering

    The budget request included $8.6 million for studies and 
experiments for advanced combat systems engineering which, 
potentially, could be leveraged into new ship class computer 
architectures. The committee supports leveraging distributed 
architecture, radar technology and information management 
concepts when those efforts are directly connected to 
correcting a warfighting deficiency or to reducing the costs of 
building 21st century platforms. The committee recommends a 
reduction of $2.0 million in PE 603382N for studies and 
experiments not directly connected to correcting warfighting 
deficiencies in 21st century platforms.

SSGN study

    In implementing pending strategic arms reduction treaties, 
the Navy may remove some of the Trident submarines from active 
service as fleet ballistic missile submarines (SSBNs). The 
``Report of the National Defense Panel, December 1997'' stated 
thatthe Navy should examine converting Trident submarines 
coming out of strategic service for use in missions other than at the 
strategic level. The committee is aware that these SSBNs would have 
several years of service life remaining at the point that START II 
would require that they no longer be used as SSBNs. The committee 
understands that there are several alternative dispositions of any such 
boats removed from active service as SSBNs.
    One of these alternatives is to convert these vessels to 
carry only tactical missiles (SSGN), including such missiles as 
Tomahawk, or the Navy variant of the Army tactical missile 
system (NTACMS). The committee believes that this alternative 
may have merit for meeting some of the Navy's shore fire 
support requirements, but needs more information upon which to 
base any decision about a program to convert these SSBNs to 
SSGN-configuration.
    Elsewhere in this report, the committee has recommended a 
provision that would prohibit the retirement or conversion of 
any Trident submarines until the START II treaty enters into 
force. Nevertheless, the committee believes the Navy must begin 
now to develop plans for submarines that will become excess if 
the treaty enters into force.
    Therefore, the committee directs the Secretary of Defense 
to conduct an analysis of converting some of the Trident SSBNs 
to SSGN-configuration. This study should identify a schedule 
for such an SSGN conversion, the costs of such a conversion, 
the benefits that may be derived from such a plan, major 
problems areas that may require additional analysis and the 
implications of ensuring that such a conversion would be 
compliant with all applicable arms control treaties. The 
committee recommends an increase of $1.0 million to PE 603564N 
and directs the Secretary to provide the report to the 
congressional defense committees no later than March 1, 1999.

Intercooled recuperated gas turbine engine

    The budget request included $23.4 million to conduct 
intercooled recuperated (ICR) gas turbine engine testing. The 
ICR naval engine program is a cooperative program being 
developed in conjunction with U.S. allies. The ICR engine is a 
candidate to provide main propulsion for future ships. The 
expectation is that the ICR engine will produce significant 
reductions in fuel consumption compared to the gas turbine 
engines now in use on Navy ships. ICR engine testing and 
evaluation have progressed during seven engine tests with a 
cumulative 1200 hours of engine operation. As a result of the 
latest testing, combustor and recuperator improvement 
development efforts have been identified that must be completed 
prior to resumption of testing. The committee believes the ICR 
engine should move rapidly to completion of testing to make it 
a viable candidate for ship propulsion. Therefore, the 
committee recommends an increase of $5.0 million in PE 603573N 
for continued development and testing of the ICR engine.

Predator

    The committee is concerned about issues raised regarding 
the ongoing development of the Predator missile system. 
Predator is designed to be a man portable, lethal, fire-and-
forget top attack anti-armor missile. The committee understands 
that personnel issues associated with the contractor work force 
have resulted in some schedule slippage for the production of 
this missile system. For the last two years, the committee has 
been compelled to add funding, with a recommendation for $18.0 
million in fiscal year 1999 alone, for safety modifications to 
the shoulder launched multi-purposed assault weapon to extend 
the service life of this system until Predator can be fielded. 
The committee believes that the Predator system should be 
fielded as soon as possible and understands that necessary 
corrective actions have been taken to support continued 
development of this critical weapon system. If fact, recent 
live-fire tests have been very successful and it appears the 
program is back on track. The committee, therefore, recommends 
an increase of $4.0 million in PE 63635M to maintain the 
previously established development and fielding schedule.

Vertical gun for advanced ships

    The budget request included $25.1 million in PE 603795N for 
a new initiative to develop a prototype vertical gun for land-
based testing. The Navy intends to use the vertical gun for 
advanced ships (VGAS) as the main fire support battery for the 
land attack destroyer (DD-21). To meet the DD-21 schedule, VGAS 
development would need to be sufficiently mature to support DD-
21 critical design review and procurement authorization in 
fiscal year 2003.
    The Navy's plan is that the DD-21 would be the first member 
of a family of 21st century surface combatants (SC-21). The 
committee believes that it would be highly unlikely that the 
Navy would develop VGAS for DD-21, and then develop another gun 
system for other members of the SC-21 family.
    The committee views with concern the fact that the Navy's 
request would move forward with the vertical gun design without 
adequately analyzing alternative gun designs for DD-21. The 
committee notes that a vertical gun would have little or no 
ability to ``train and elevate.'' These deficiencies would 
limit availability and engagement envelopes for countering 
littoral threats, as well as limiting the Navy's choice of 
ammunition to a new, Navy-only family of gun ammunition. The 
committee believes the Navy should consider war fighting 
attributes other than low radar cross-section to justify the 
award of a contract for a vertical gun.
    In previous reports, the committee emphasized 
theadvisability of attempting to meet fire support requirements with 
modifications of systems already developed. The Navy has not 
reconsidered the Army's multiple launch rocket system (MLRS) as an 
option for providing fire support to the Marines. However, the Army has 
made significant improvements in MLRS range and launch platform 
stabilization since the Navy last reviewed this system to fill the fire 
support requirement. The committee believes that another review would 
be appropriate.
    The Secretary of the Navy is directed to report, prior to 
obligating funds for a prototype VGAS, the results of an 
analysis of alternatives for an advanced gun system that 
includes cost as an independent variable and considers at least 
the following:
          (1) meeting all war fighting capabilities that will 
        be required for a gun system on a multi-mission 
        combatant;
          (2) relying on joint ammunition programs that 
        leverage technology investments by all services, and 
        the availability and economies of scale of moving to 
        one family of gun ammunition for Army, Marine Corps, 
        and Navy fire support missions;
          (3) fulfilling some portion of the fire support 
        requirement with a modified version of the Army's 
        extended range multiple launch rocket system; and
          (4) fulfilling some portion of the fire support 
        requirement with the Navy variant of the Army Tactical 
        Missile System (NTACMS).
    Until such an analysis is complete, the committee believes 
that it would be premature to proceed with VGAS development at 
the pace assumed in the Navy's budget request. Therefore, the 
committee recommends a reduction of $10.0 million, and directs 
the Navy to conduct an analysis of all advanced gun designs, as 
well as ammunition availability, in determining the best gun 
design for DD-21.

Naval surface fire support system integration

    The budget request included $21.6 million for a new 
initiative to develop surface fire support planning and control 
systems for the 5-inch 62 gun on DDG-51 ships and the 155mm 
vertical gun for the future DD-21 class of ships. The committee 
agrees with the need for a planning and control system for the 
5-inch 62 gun for DDG-51 ships and considers this a priority to 
coincide with the introduction of the Extended Range Guided 
Munition (ERGM) to the fleet. The committee agrees with the 
Department of Defense's plan to reduce risk by integrating the 
5-inch 62 gun into the existing Advanced Tomahawk Weapons 
Control System (ATWCS) initially hosted on a separate hardware 
processor.
    However, initiation of software builds to support vertical 
gun requirements is premature and counter to the Navy's plan to 
use a ``total systems'' approach in developing the DD-21. The 
committee encourages the Navy to pursue, through the DD-21 
program and the Joint Maritime Command and Information System 
(JMCIS), system engineering for development of surface fire 
support system requirements within the DD-21 combat system 
architecture. Therefore, the committee recommends a reduction 
of $7.7 million to PE 603795N.

Joint Strike Fighter

    The budget request included $919.5 million ($463.4 million 
in Navy research and development and $456.1 million in Air 
Force research and development) for continued development of 
the joint strike fighter (JSF).
    Section 213 of the National Defense Authorization Act for 
Fiscal Year 1998 (Public Law 105-85) required a report on the 
order of fielding the variants of the JSF, and that 
specifically addressed the acceleration of the naval variant. 
The report included a certification that the JSF program 
contains sufficient funding to carry out an alternate engine 
program that includes flight qualification of an alternate 
engine in a JSF airframe.
    While not in total agreement with the report, the committee 
notes the timely submission and clear presentation of the 
Department of Defense priorities and plans. The certification 
of a funded program for an alternate engine is a positive 
commitment to cost-effective program management. However, the 
actual demonstration of the alternate engine in a JSF airframe 
has been continuously shifted to the ``out years,'' an action 
that threatens to invalidate the whole initiative. If the 
alternate engine is not completed for use for the most 
stressing of the JSF requirements (the short takeoff/vertical 
landing variant), then it may be too late to provide a major 
benefit to the program. Accordingly, the committee recommends 
an increase of $15.0 million to the budget request to 
accelerate the development of an alternative engine for the 
JSF.

Nonlethal weapons and technologies of mass protection program

    The budget request included $22.5 million for the non-
lethal weapons (NLW) technology demonstration and validation 
program (PE 63851M). The committee recommends an increase of 
$13.3 million to the budget request.
    The committee recommends that of the recommended increase, 
$6.3 million be used to accelerate the development and fielding 
of near-term, low-tech NLW technologies such as nonlethal 
claymore mines, vehicle-mounted 66mm delivery systems, 
nonlethal payloads for delivery by unmanned aerial vehicles, 
nonlethal foams, and calmative agents. In addition, increased 
funding for this activity would be used to accelerate 
demonstration of acoustic and electromagnetic directed energy 
systems, for medical surveillance and non-lethal casualty data 
collection, strategic planning, human effects assessments, 
technical studies and analysis, and increased experimentation 
in warfighting and battle labs.
    The committee understands that it is the intention of the 
Department of Defense to expand its review of doctrinal, legal, 
policy, and operation issues regarding the research, 
development, acquisition, and employment of NLW technologies. 
The committee recommends that $2.0 million be made available 
from funds authorized for the nonlethal weapons technology 
program in fiscal year 1999 to the Human Effects Panel of the 
Joint Non-Lethal Directorate for those activities.
    The committee recommends that the remaining $7.0 million of 
the recommended increase to the budget request be used to 
conduct a comprehensive effort to explore and develop nonlethal 
tactical denial systems that would provide ground commanders a 
wider range of capabilities. Finally, the committee recommends 
that $500,000 be made available to complete type classification 
of non-lethal weapons technology that can be mounted on 
existing weapons assigned to U.S. forces, such as M16s and M4 
carbines.
    As noted in the statement of managers accompanying the 
National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 1998 (S. 
Rept. 105-29), the committee believes it is important that 
advanced technologies be developed to provide U.S. military 
forces with greater flexibility to manage, shape, deter, or 
contain future conflicts, as they are increasingly confronted 
by unorthodox, non-traditional, and asymmetrical threats. These 
challenges, and an increase in low and medium-intensity 
conflict, require the Department of Defense to evaluate new 
technologies and doctrine for the use of force. In particular, 
the committee believes that the Department should focus on the 
development of new and emerging technologies to extend the 
scope of possible responses and to facilitate the containment 
of conflict across the operational continuum.
    Section 230 of the National Defense Authorization Act for 
Fiscal Year 1997 (Public Law 104-201) established a program 
element that would consolidate and streamline the Department of 
Defense and military service nonlethal weapons technology 
program, and directed the Department to designate an executive 
agent. As part of the Department's Munitions Strategy announced 
in September 1996, the Under Secretary of Defense for 
Acquisition and Technology highlighted the importance of 
equipping U.S. forces with nonlethal weapons to conduct 
operations other than war, the focus of which would be to 
reduce civilian casualties. At the same, the Department 
announced the establishment of a nonlethals weapons technology 
program and designated the Marine Corps as the executive agent 
for the program.
    Despite congressional direction and designation of an 
executive agent by the Under Secretary of Defense for 
Acquisition and Technology, the committee remains concerned 
that the Department and the military services continue to 
conduct research and development on NLW activities that benefit 
all services outside the purview of the established defense NLW 
program and without oversight by the executive agent. The 
committee directs the Department and the military services to 
implement the congressional direction contained in Public Law 
104-201, to consolidate all nonlethal weapons technology 
research and development into a single program element, with 
management and oversight of the program conducted by the Marine 
Corps as executive agent.

Advanced communications and information technologies

    The committee continues to support the Advanced 
Communication and Information Technologies (ACIT) initiative. 
The committee recommends an increase of $3.0 million in PE 
64707N for continuation of the ACIT initiative.

Parametric airborne dipping sonar

    The budget request contained no funding for the parametric 
airborne dipping sonar (PADS). The PADS program is the 
continuation of a small business innovative research project 
that is designed to develop, demonstrate and evaluate the three 
dimensional, stabilized steerable acoustic beams for mine 
avoidance and submarine detection in shallow water. It is the 
only system that has the potential to provide airborne active 
dipping sonar antisubmarine and antimine capabilities for 
shallow water littoral operations.
    The committee is encouraged with initial results and 
potential future antisubmarine and antimine applications of the 
parametric airborne dipping sonar. The present program to prove 
parametric concepts using a prototype unit is scheduled for 
additional demonstrations in fiscal year 1998. Navy analysis 
and present plans include the possibility of PADS being a 
shallow water adjunct to the airborne low frequency active 
sonar system (ALFS).
    Continued development of the PADS system to make it a 
flightworthy system including reel machine, fiber-optic and 
power cable, and signal processor improvements resulting in a 
helicopter flight demonstration, is key to fighting in the 
littorals in the 21st century. Therefore, the committee 
recommends an increase of $8.0 million in PE 604212N for the 
continued development of PADS.

Commercial off-the-shelf insertion just prior to critical design review 
        for helicopter improvement

    The budget request included $231.1 million in PE 604212N 
for antisubmarine warfare (ASW) and other helicopter 
development. A second critical design review (CDR) for the 
Light Airborne Multipurpose System (LAMPS) MK III Improvement 
has been added to the program and scheduled for the second to 
the fourth quarter of fiscal year 1999. Commercial off-the-
shelf (COTS) insertion opportunities for low rate initial 
production (LRIP) test articles should occur predominantly 
prior to critical design review. The $25.0 million request to 
continue efforts toincorporate COTS technology during the two 
fiscal quarters prior to CDR appears to be disproportionate when 
compared to past efforts ($14.0 million in fiscal year 1998) when four 
or more quarters were required to complete the efforts. Therefore the 
committee recommends a reduction of $1.0 million to PE 604212N.

Integrated defensive electronic countermeasures

    The budget request included $128.6 million for electronic 
warfare development. The integrated defensive electronic 
countermeasures(IDECM) system is the next generation radio-
frequency countermeasures system (RFCM) intended for the F/A-
18C/D/E/F, B-1B, F-15C/E, and other platforms. The committee 
understands and supports the Department of Defense efforts to 
apply this joint service technology to as many platforms as 
possible. The committee is also aware of the evolving nature of 
the operational requirements, which in many cases are driven by 
existing operational commitments and technical challenges 
inherent in the program. Therefore, the committee recommends an 
increase of $10.0 million in PE 64270N for the IDECM RFCM.

DDG-51 composite director room

    The use of composites in shipbuilding has the potential to 
increase the survivability and reduce the overall weight of 
ships and to reduce maintenance. However, issues regarding 
composite use in construction in the following areas remain 
unanswered: combat repair, corrosion due to differences in the 
electric potential of composites and other shipbuilding 
materials, and possible toxicity resulting from exposure to 
intense heat. The committee believes the potential use of 
composite materials in shipbuilding should be pursued. The 
committee recommends an increase of $5.0 million in PE 603513N 
for continuation of a project to design and test a director 
room for the DDG-51 class of ships.

Laboratories and field activities monitoring efforts

    The budget request included $132.5 million for surface 
combatant combat system engineering in PE 604307N. This request 
included $19.2 million for laboratory and field activity 
unspecified scientific services for monitoring baseline 
efforts. The committee recommends a reduction of $3.0 million 
to unspecified scientific services.

Multi-purpose processor

    The budget request included $37.2 million for submarine 
sonar improvement. The multi-purpose processor (MPP) is the 
result of a small business innovative research (SBIR) 
initiative developed under the sponsorship of the new nuclear 
attack submarine (NSSN) program. The MPP provides a capability 
to easily transport new, advanced software to existing hardware 
installations. It lies at the heart of the Navy's acoustic 
rapid commercial off-the-shelf (COTS) insertion program (ARCI), 
a program designed to permit the SSN-688 class to regain 
acoustic superiority over the diesel and nuclear submarines of 
other navies. The committee recommends an increase of $15.0 
million in PE 604503N for continuation of the SBIR follow-on 
for advanced development of MPP transportable software 
technology, technology insertion, advanced processor software 
builds, and for providing MPP units and training throughout the 
fleet and the Navy research and development community.

Non-propulsion electronics system

    The budget request included $218.8 million for New Attack 
Submarine (NSSN) non-propulsion development. The purpose of the 
development is to reduce life-cycle costs by investigating and 
incorporating open systems architecture, commercial off-the-
shelf software and hardware and advanced ship construction 
techniques. The non-propulsion electronics system (NPES) is 
comprised of 15 subsystems required to perform warfare 
missions. The major systems are sonar, combat control, exterior 
communications, electronic support measures and interconnecting 
architectures. To attain the possible life-cycle savings that 
could accrue, analysis and integration to support the 15 
subsystems development is required. The committee recommends an 
increase of $12.0 million to PE 604558N for integration of the 
15 NPES subsystems.

Smart propulsor product model

    The budget request included $7.0 million for continuation 
of the development of the smart propulsor product model (SPPM) 
for DD-21. The SPPM will provide a complete representation of 
the ship's requirements, design and capabilities at each stage 
of the life-cycle. The SPPM program is a proposed joint Navy/
industry effort to develop software that will bring together 
design, manufacturing, cost and capability modeling for ship 
propulsion devices. This development will enable the Navy to 
consider innovative propulsion concepts for future ships while 
considering life-cycle costs and manufacturing techniques. The 
committee recommends an increase of $4.0 million in PE 604567N 
for the SPPM.

Ship live-fire test

    The budget request included $8.6 million for the second 
year of DD-21 live fire test and evaluation prediction. The 
program's plan for fiscal year 1998 includes $3.4 million for 
the first year of DD-21 live fire test and evaluation 
prediction. Subsequent to the enactment of the fiscal year 1998 
authorizationfor this program, the first year of full 
procurement authorization of DD-21 was delayed one year from fiscal 
year 2003 to fiscal year 2004.
    The committee believes the total fiscal year 1998 and 
fiscal year 1999 DD-21 live fire test prediction plan and 
request of $12.0 million to be excessive given the one year 
delay in the program. Therefore, the committee recommends a 
reduction of $8.6 million in PE 604567N, without prejudice, to 
reflect the rephasing of the program.

Infrared search and track system

    The budget request included $900,000 for an infrared search 
and track (IRST) system. Land-based testing of IRST is 
scheduled for fiscal year 1998, followed by at-sea testing in 
fiscal year 1999.
    Congress has directed the Navy to develop IRST to provide a 
passive detection and tracking system. In many previous 
reports, the committee has noted the potential of IRST for 
complementing, not supplanting, radar, because IRST would 
operate in a different portion of the electromagnetic spectrum 
from radar. As shown by at-sea testing, IRST systems could 
complement existing shipboard radars by continuously scanning 
the horizon for threat platforms or sea-skimming missiles. 
Horizon search, for which IRST would be optimized, is an area 
of relative weakness for active radars.
    Although various studies have repeatedly validated that 
IRST could provide a major improvement in ship survivability 
against sea-skimming cruise missiles, Navy budget requests 
continue to emphasize exploitation of the radio portion (radar) 
of the electromagnetic spectrum.
    The committee believes developing a search and track system 
that is not dependent on active transmissions by either 
friendly or threat emitters could make an extremely important 
contribution to successful naval operations. Therefore, the 
committee recommends an increase of $6.5 million in PE 604755N 
for continued development of the IRST system.

NUKLA antiship missile decoy system electro-magnetic compatibility

    The budget request included $2.3 million for continued 
development and testing of the electo-magnetic compatibility 
(EMC) upgrade to the NULKA active countermeasures decoy. Having 
EMC will permit a more rapid upgrade of the NULKA round to 
accommodate new friendly emitters as they enter the fleet, and 
also deal with the evolving ASM threat.
    The NULKA decoy was developed to improve surface ship 
survivability against antiship missiles (ASM). The ASM threat 
is growing rapidly. By the year 2000, an estimated 100 nations 
will possess more than 40,000 ASMs. These missiles will pose a 
potent threat to surface combatants and amphibious ships 
involved in littoral operations.
    The committee recommends an increase of $2.0 million in PE 
604755N to complete the development and operational testing of 
the EMC upgrade.

Voice instructional devices

    The committee recommends an increase of $1.0 million in PE 
64771N for voice instructional device (VID) technology. The 
committee notes the progress made in technology that allows for 
faster, more efficient medical care in remote or combat 
situations and encourages the Navy to include VID technology in 
this research. The committee directs that all applicable 
competitive procedures be used in the award of contracts or 
other agreements under this program, and that cost-sharing 
requirements for non-federal participants be utilized where 
appropriate.

Global command, control, communications, computers, intelligence, 
        surveillance, reconnaissance (C4ISR) visualization

    The budget request included $13.2 million for space and 
electronic warfare surveillance and reconnaissance support. A 
continuing problem between the intelligence collectors and war 
fighting commanders is the manner in which intelligence is 
displayed. Useful information provided in a form that is 
quickly understandable and easily accessed is vital to winning 
battles. The Command, Control, Communications and Computers, 
Intelligence, Surveillance and Reconnaissance (C4ISR) systems 
in use provide various products to operational commanders. The 
Global C4ISR Visualization (GCIV) project will give operational 
commanders a visualization system that integrates information 
from all Intelligence, Surveillance and Reconnaissance (ISR) 
systems. GCIV will use multi-dimensional commercial off-the-
shelf (COTS) visualization software integrated with a COTS 
database server connected to Navy databases. The committee 
recommends an increase of $4.0 million in PE 65867N for the 
GCIV project.

F/A-18E/F reconnaissance development

    The budget request included $1.4 million in research and 
development and $43.2 million in procurement to continue the 
restructured advanced tactical air reconnaissance system 
(ATARS) program. The ATARS total program of $464.9 million 
includes $216.3 million in development and $248.6 million in 
procurement. The ATARS program will field reconnaissance 
systems on Marine Corps F/A-18D aircraft. The approved ATARS 
plan calls for fielding a total of 31 ATARS systems. The plan 
was restructured as part of a congressional cancellation of the 
original the Air Force follow-on tactical reconnaissance system 
(FOTRS) program. Congress dropped Air Force and Navy 
participation in the ATARSprogram specifically because of the 
inadequate support and oversight provided by the two services.
    The budget request also included $2.9 million for fiscal 
year 1998 and $43.4 million for fiscal year 1999 to begin an F/
A-18E/F tactical reconnaissance development within PE 24136N. 
This is a new start program to develop a replacement for the F-
14 tactical air reconnaissance pod system (TARPS). The Navy 
intends to spend $398.9 million ($112.4 million in research and 
development and $286.5 million in procurement) to field 50 pods 
and eight ground stations.
    The committee believes that the budget request for tactical 
reconnaissance is excessive, particularly in view of other 
alternatives that may be available to solve the Navy's tactical 
reconnaissance needs. Therefore, the committee recommends a 
funding level of $20.0 million for F/A-18E/F tactical 
reconnaissance development, a reduction of $23.4 million.
    The committee believes that the Navy must conduct an 
analysis of alternatives (AOA) before launching upon a program 
that would spend another $400.0 million on providing a TARPS 
replacement, when a direct one-for-one replacement may not be 
the most effective solution to the problem. The AOA should 
consider reconnaissance capability to be provided by other 
planned or existing systems, such as carrier-capable Marine 
Corps F/A-18D aircraft, various unmanned aerial vehicles 
(UAVs), and a range of national reconnaissance systems. The 
committee directs the Navy to obligate no more than 50 percent 
of these funds until 30 days after the Navy submits the results 
of the AOA to the congressional defense committees.

Battle force tactical training

    The budget request included $5.9 million for the surface 
tactical team trainer (STTT). The STTT is designated to further 
develop an existing system, the battle force tactical training 
(BFTT) system, so it will be able to provide joint warfare 
training. A highly successful small business innovative 
research (SBIR) project, N96-111, leveraged the capabilities of 
commercial off-the-shelf (COTS) operating systems and 
processors. The committee recognizes that the rapid development 
under the SBIR fast track program did not allow sufficient time 
for the Department of Defense to program funding to complete 
the development work of converting the software to a personal 
computer operating system. The committee recommends an increase 
of $7.0 million in PE 204571N for the purpose of SBIR phase III 
follow-on work to continue the BFTT operating system 
conversion.
AIR FORCE 


Friction welding

    The committee recommends an increase of $1.5 million to 
develop and optimize friction welding techniques for aluminum 
and other alloys used by the Air Force and the Department of 
Defense, to develop weld repair techniques and establish a 
mechanical property data base, including fatigue and stress 
corrosion cracking information. The committee directs that all 
applicable competitive procedures be used in the award of 
contracts or other agreements under this program, and that 
cost-sharing requirements for non-federal participants be 
utilized, where appropriate.

Integrated high performance turbine engine program

    In order to fund higher priorities, the committee 
recommends a total reduction of $9.0 million in the integrated 
high performance turbine engine program in the following 
program elements: $4.0 million in PE 62203F; $3.0 million in PE 
63202F; and, $2.0 million in PE 63216F.

Variable displacement vane pump

    The committee recommends an increase of $2.0 million in PE 
62203F to support durability and damage tolerance testing for 
the variable displacement vane pump (VDVP) program. The 
committee notes that the variable geometry features of VDVP 
simplify aircraft thermal design providing cost and weight 
benefits. The committee directs that all applicable competitive 
procedures be used in the award of contracts or other 
agreements under this program, and that cost-sharing 
requirements for non-federal participants be utilized where 
appropriate.

High frequency active auroral research program

    The committee recommends an increase of $9.0 million in PE 
62601F to continue experimentation in the high frequency 
auroral research program.

Night vision technology

    Night vision goggles have been used in military aviation 
for more than twenty years, but are limited by a very narrow 
field of view. Attempts to increase the field of view have 
resulted in decreasing resolution. Panoramic night vision 
technology combines increased field of view (to 100 degrees), 
high resolution, integrated symbology, and close-to-face center 
of gravity, with human effects improvements, such as reduced 
weight, pilot fatigue, and ejection seat safety. The committee 
recommends an increase of $3.0 million in PE 63231F to 
accelerate the development of panoramic night vision goggles.

ALR-69 radar warning receiver upgrade

    The budget request included $25.6 million for 
electroniccombat technology research and development (PE 0603270F), but 
included no new funds for the precision location and identification 
(PLAID) upgrade. PLAID is a low cost upgrade to the existing ALR-69 
system that is being developed in project 431G of this program element. 
The Air Force uses funding in project 431G to develop and demonstrate 
advanced technologies for radio frequency (RF) electronic 
countermeasures to enhance survivability of air and space vehicles.
    The committee understands that PLAID upgrade program has 
undergone successful testing, and encourages such a cost 
effective approach to providing radar warning receivers (RWR). 
Accordingly, the committee recommends an increase of $14.0 
million to continue development of the ALR-69 PLAID upgrade in 
fiscal year 1999.

Ballistic missile technology

    The committee has supported past missile technology 
demonstration (MTD) experiments, which have contributed to the 
ballistic missile technology program and demonstrated 
capabilities to attack hardened and deeply buried targets. The 
committee has also supported this program as a means of 
developing capabilities utilizing Global Positioning System 
(GPS) for range safety. The committee strongly supports efforts 
to develop GPS-based alternatives to existing range radars, 
which offer the potential of significant savings in the future. 
The budget request did not include funds in the Ballistic 
Missile Technology program element. The committee recommends an 
increase of $5.0 million in PE 63311F to support the MTD-4 
effort and develop GPS-based capabilities for range safety and 
tracking.

Solar orbital transfer vehicle

    The committee has supported thermionics technology 
development for space applications. The solar powered orbital 
transfer vehicle program combines thermionic technology for 
electricity production and thermal propulsion which can be used 
to move spacecraft to higher orbits or new orbits. To continue 
this important effort, the committee recommends an increase of 
$10.0 million in PE 63401F.

Micro-satellite technology program

    Section 215 of the National Defense Authorization Act for 
Fiscal Year 1998 (Public Law 105-85) required the Secretary of 
Defense to establish a micro-satellite technology development 
program that supports a range of space mission areas. The 
committee strongly supports the efforts of the Air Force 
Research Laboratory (AFRL) to initiate such a program in fiscal 
year 1999. In order to accelerate this important effort, the 
committee recommends an increase of $10.0 million in PE 63401F 
to be applied to developing and flying a series of cooperative 
micro-satellite test vehicles (beginning with the so-called 
``XSS-10'') with the National Aeronautics and Space 
Administration (NASA) to address critical issues of satellite 
inspection, protection, servicing, and re-fueling.

Range improvements for liquid upper stage testing

    The committee supports efforts by the Air Force to upgrade 
existing rocket test ranges to conduct liquid upper stage 
flight experiments. To support this effort, the committee 
recommends an increase of $5.0 million in PE 63401F.

Space control technology development

    The committee has reviewed the Department of Defense's 
February 1998 report on the Kinetic Energy Anti-Satellite 
Program. The report states that ``DOD is currently examining 
potential space control related research, development, and 
acquisition options to support the President's policy, satisfy 
military requirements within available resources, and address 
the architecture.'' In the cover letter to this report, the 
Under Secretary of Defense for Acquisition and Technology 
states that ``I anticipate that these efforts will culminate in 
a comprehensive plan in time for the FY 2000 President's 
budget.''
    The committee supports the development of such a plan but 
is concerned that insufficient resources are available to 
support a comprehensive evaluation of various technical 
options. Therefore, the committee recommends an increase of 
$30.0 million in PE 63438F to support a range of space control 
technology activities. The Assistant Secretary of Defense for 
Command, Control, Communications, and Intelligence (Space and 
Information Superiority) shall be responsible for executing 
these resources in support of the ``comprehensive plan'' 
referenced in the Department of Defense's report.
    The committee directs the Secretary of Defense to submit a 
report to the congressional defense committees by February 15, 
1999 that describes the Secretary's plan for executing the 
space control technology funds specified above. The report 
should also describe the Secretary's plan for continuing these 
efforts in fiscal year 2000 and beyond.

Variable stability in-flight simulator test aircraft

    The budget request provided no funds for the variable 
stability in-flight simulator test aircraft (VISTA). The VISTA 
is a highly adaptable test resource that can be used for many 
flight test programs, including the Joint Strike Fighter, F-22, 
and others. As a testament to the effectiveness of the VISTA, 
the USAF points to VISTA testing of F-22 flight controls, when 
reviewing critical testing already completed for the F-22. 
TheVISTA, a highly modified F-16 can be programmed to simulate various 
aircraft, both real and theoretical, in a cost effective manner.
    The committee notes with concern the lack of practical 
support for the VISTA, but the eagerness to take credit for its 
contributions to F-22 testing. Accordingly, the committee 
recommends an increase of $7.3 million to continue VISTA 
development of thrust vectoring investigations and to provide 
for adequate support for continuing operations.

EC-130H

    The budget request included no funds for the EC-130H 
Compass Call aircraft (PE 64270F) in fiscal year 1999, even 
though funds were included from fiscal years 1994 through 1998. 
The Compass Call EC-130H is a wide-area airborne offensive 
counter information system. Its mission is to deny, degrade, 
and disrupt adversary communications, and is currently fielding 
the first of two Block 30 configuration squadrons, a funded 
upgrade that includes a software-programmable, commercial off 
the shelf-based digital, open architecture. However, due to 
accumulated funding reductions and ongoing fiscal pressures, 
essential pre- production, system suitability, and integration 
activities remain to be completed. Accordingly, the committee 
recommends including $20.0 million to accelerate the 
development of the Compass Call to complete those initiatives 
in a cost effective manner.

Big Crow Program Office

    The budget request did not include specific funding for the 
Big Crow Program Office (BCPO). The committee understands that 
the Department plans to operate the BCPO on a reimbursable 
basis, with expenses paid by customers using the BCPO's 
services.
    The BCPO operates two flying laboratories under a support 
agreement with the Air Force 412th Test Wing at Edwards Air 
Force Base, California. The Department of Defense uses these 
aircraft to evaluate weapons and communications systems under 
stressing conditions. The BCPO's capability to implement 
electronic warfare (EW) capabilities against systems during 
test and evaluation periods and during exercises provides a 
vital contribution.
    The BCPO provides services to many customers, including the 
Navy's AEGIS program, the Ballistic Missile Defense Office, the 
Army Patriot air defense program, E-3A Airborne Warning and 
Control System (AWACS) program, North Atlantic Treaty 
Organization, and North American Air Defense. However, because 
of the organizational arrangements for BCPO, there has been 
inadequate support for its best use and most economic 
operation. This lack of focus could result in the closure of 
the BCPO.
    If DOD were to lose the BCPO services, the Department would 
forfeit the benefits of exposing U.S. weapons systems to a 
realistic EW threats. Based on the broad use of BCPO, the 
committee directs Secretary of Defense to assign oversight 
responsibility for this office to the Assistant Secretary of 
Defense for Space and Information Superiority (ASD(SIS)). The 
committee expects the ASD (SIS) to provide policy guidance to 
ensure sustainable management and employment of the BCPO. The 
committee recommends an increase of $10.0 million to the budget 
request to ensure the BCPO remains financially sound. The 
committee directs the Secretary of Defense to provide the 
congressional defense committees with a report, submitted no 
latter than March 1, 1999, that describes the Department of 
Defense plans for the future BCPO funding policy, and 
management.

Space maneuver vehicle

    The committee endorses the efforts of the Air Force to work 
with the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) 
on developing responsive, reusable space access systems. The 
committee believes that an early, high payoff for this work 
will be much lower costs for experiments funded in the space 
test program. Therefore, the committee recommends an increase 
of $10.0 million to the space test program (PE 65864F) to 
pursue a joint demonstration with NASA of the ``Space Maneuver 
Vehicle'' (SMV), which could serve as a reusable upper stage 
for a variety of space test missions.
    The committee understands that the Air Force is considering 
incorporating the flexible capabilities of the SMV concept into 
future Air Force space-based remote sensing programs such as 
the space-based moving target indicators (MTI) program. The 
committee directs the Secretary of the Air Force to submit a 
report to the congressional defense committees by March 1, 1999 
that discusses the synergy between a maneuverable, recoverable 
SMV and a space-based sensor such as a space-based MTI system. 
The report should include a programmatic assessment of this 
approach, including the potential funding requirements for 
conducting such a demonstration by 2004.

Theater battle management system

    The budget request included $27.3 million for theater 
battle management command and control research and development. 
Theater battle management system (TBM) is designed to integrate 
air support for ground forces through the air support 
operations center (ASOC). The committee understands that an 
additional $5.0 million would:
          (1) accelerate TBM ASOC development in fiscal year 
        1999;
          (2) provide for both pre-planned product improvement;
          (3) enhanced interoperability with the Marine Corps; 
        and
          (4) field the ASOC's.Accordingly, the committee 
recommends an increase of $5.0 million to the budget request for TBM.

C-5 modernization

    The budget request included $47.9 million for C-5 airlift 
squadrons research and development. The Air Mobility Command 
(AMC) has a documented deficiency in outsize cargo carrying 
capability, which was identified too late in the planning, 
programming and budgeting system (PPBS) for inclusion in the 
fiscal year 1999 budget request.
    The committee has been informed that an increase of $12.0 
million would significantly accelerate the effort to address 
the deficiency in outsize cargo carrying capability. 
Accordingly, the committee recommends an increase of $12.0 
million to the budget request for C-5 airlift squadrons 
research and development.

Aircrew laser eye protection

    The budget request included $5.3 million in PE 63112F and 
PE 63231F to support various efforts to develop laser eye 
protection. The use of laser-based systems on the battlefield 
has increased. The proliferation of these systems increases the 
risk of permanent vision damage to our aircrews, either from 
friendly or hostile forces.
    The committee supports the Department's efforts in this 
area, and believes that there is a need for additional funds to 
develop manufacturing process to accelerate potential fielding 
of this capability. Accordingly, the committee recommends an 
increase of $5.5 million to continue the development of the 
aircrew laser eye protection technology.
                              DEFENSE-WIDE


University research initiative

    The committee once again commends the Department of Defense 
for including $10.0 million in the budget request to continue 
efforts under the Defense Experimental Program to Stimulate 
Competitive Research (DEPSCoR) in fiscal year 1999 to broaden 
the infrastructure of universities supporting national defense. 
The committee believes that support for this competitive, 
merit-based program should be increased further. The committee, 
therefore, recommends that in addition to the $10.0 million 
provided in the budget request, an additional $10.0 million of 
the funds authorized to be appropriated in PE 61103D be added 
to the budget request for the DEPSCoR program.

Chemical and biological defense program

    The budget request included $620.3 million for the 
chemical-biological defense program, including $336.4 million 
in research and development, test and evaluation and $283.9 
million in procurement. The budget request also included $88.0 
million for the Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency 
(DARPA) biological warfare defense program (PE 62383E), a $26.0 
million increase to the program from fiscal year 1998.
    The committee recommends an undistributed reduction of 
$10.5 million to the budget request for PE 62383E.
    The committee recommends an increase of $15.5 million for 
the following chemical and biological defense research and 
development activities: $5.0 million in PE 61384BP and $5.0 
million in PE 62384BP to accelerate research and development 
efforts of small, light-weight, manportable chemical and 
biological agent detection sensors; $4.0 million in PE 62384BP 
for SAFEGUARD to continue the proof of concept testing to 
establish sensor performance, initiate packaging and real-time 
processing, and conduct platform studies; and $1.5 million in 
PE 62383E to demonstrate the use of technologies for the 
deployment of telemedicine and other capabilities to the 
warfighters.

Shortcomings in Chemical and Biological Defense Program

    The committee supports increases in the defense budget to 
improve the capability of U.S. forces to detect and defeat 
biological and chemical weapons and agents, as well as protect 
themselves on the battlefield against the use of chemical and 
biological weapons.
    The committee believes that commanders in chief (CINCs) in 
high threat regions need to remain vigilant to ensure that 
adequate force protection in the areas of collective defense 
protection, detection and decontamination needs are provided by 
the Department of Defense. The committee also believes that the 
Department must remain diligent in responding to the chemical 
defense and force protection requirements of the CINCs, and 
ensure that adequate funding is maintained in Future Years 
Defense Program.
    In response to recommendations in the Quadrennial Defense 
Review (QDR), the Secretary of Defense added almost $1 billion 
to the Future Years Defense Program, starting with the fiscal 
year 1999 defense budget request. Of this increase, $732.0 
million was directly for chemical-biological defenses. While 
this represents a substantial investment, it does not eliminate 
the threat to U.S. forces posed by adversaries that might 
choose asymmetric responses to counter the U.S. superiority in 
conventional forces.
    Despite the increased emphasis on improving chemical and 
biological defenses, deficiencies remain in the program 
regarding the provision of force structure and equipment to 
protect facilities. The committee is aware that the Department 
is attempting to address these deficiencies in doctrine, 
policy,equipment and training for the defense of critical 
overseas ports and airfields in the fiscal year 1999 budget request.
    Because U.S. strategy to fulfill its foreign policy 
commitments and national security interests overseas relies on 
the projection of power, points where U.S. or allied forces 
mass or stage overseas may provide tempting targets for 
chemical and biological attacks.
    The United States must adapt its strategy to deal with 
asymmetric capabilities, so that U.S. forces and its allies are 
capable of operating in an environment where chemical and 
biological agents and weapons are employed.
    A relatively small quantity of a chemical or biological 
agent could degrade or halt air operations at airfields that 
lack proper defenses. Repeated attacks would exacerbate this 
problem by damaging decontamination facilities, limiting access 
to the airfields or ports, and by making personnel sick and 
unable to wear full individual protective suits. U.S. and 
allied forces must also be able to deploy to, reinforce, and 
provide logistical support in a conflict where chemical or 
biological agents or weapons may possibly be employed.
    Lastly, the committee is concerned that there appears to be 
no developed Department policy on the return of strategic air 
and sea lift which have been contaminated by chemical or 
biological agents or weapons. Nor has the administration 
developed a policy that determines responsibility for, and 
protection of, essential and nonessential civilians.
    With regard to the ability to detect biological agents in 
garrison, the committee was informed during its March 5, 1998 
hearing on transnational threats about the creation of an Army 
Biological Integrated Detection Systems (BIDS) company, which 
is stationed in the United States, and the Department's plans 
to establish two additional companies by 2001. The Under 
Secretary of Defense for Policy informed the committee that a 
BIDS platoon had been deployed to the region during the recent 
crisis with Iraq. However, the committee is concerned that BIDS 
units are not stationed in high threat areas overseas, where 
they are likely to be needed early in an attack.
    The committee requests the Secretary of Defense to report 
to the congressional defense committees by December 1, 1998 on 
the steps it has taken to correct the remaining deficiencies 
identified above, and any steps that it may take to locate BIDS 
units on a permanent basis in high threat commands or regions.

DOD Anthrax Immunization Policy

    In recognizing the threat to U.S. forces of the use of 
biological weapons, the Secretary of Defense and the Chairman 
of the Joint Chiefs announced in December 1997 a Department of 
Defense initiative to immunize U.S. service personnel against 
the biological agent anthrax. The committee understands that 
the vaccine that is to be used is approved by the Food and Drug 
Administration (FDA), and has been used by cattle and sheep 
ranchers since the 1970s.
    The vaccine to be administered to U.S. forces was jointly 
developed in the 1950s by the United States and the United 
Kingdom, and licensed in 1970 by the FDA. The vaccine has a 
proven safety record with over 500 doses administered a year, 
mainly as boosters, to private workers in the cattle and sheep 
industry. The committee understands that this same vaccine was 
administered to approximately 130,000 U.S. armed forces 
personnel during Operation Desert Shield/Desert Storm.
    The committee is aware that concerns have been raised about 
the safety of the anthrax vaccine to be administered to U.S. 
forces, and whether it has any links to Gulf War illnesses. The 
committee has been advised by the Army Surgeon General that the 
Department of Defense and agencies not associated with the 
Department, to include the Institute of Medicine and the 
Presidential Advisory Committee, have found no evidence linking 
this anthrax vaccine to Gulf War illnesses. Additionally, the 
committee understands that an independent review of the health 
and medical issues associated with the anthrax immunization 
program was conducted by the special assistant to the President 
of Yale University, who concluded that ``the anthrax vaccine 
appears to be safe and offers the best available protection 
against wild type anthrax as a biological warfare agent.''
    The committee has been advised that the anthrax vaccine 
that is to be administered is effective, with only limited side 
effects such as minor swelling and redness. Of those vaccinated 
against anthrax over the past five years, 96-97 percent had no 
reaction. Additionally, the committee understands that the 
anthrax vaccine will provide protection against regular anthrax 
and also against a genetically-engineered anthrax strain.
    Since the end of the Persian Gulf War, the committee 
understands that selected U.S. forces and government laboratory 
workers have been immunized against the biological agent 
anthrax with this vaccine. U.S. forces receiving this vaccine 
include special operations forces participating in missions and 
operations in areas where anthrax is indigenous, members of the 
Marine Chemical/Biological Incident Response Force (CBIRF), 
members of the Army Technical Escort Unit (TEU), and defense 
and energy laboratory workers.
    The committee understands that the Department will 
centrally procure the anthrax vaccine from the Michigan 
Biologic Products Institute (MBPI). The committee also 
understands that DOD plans to determine at a future date 
whether to extend the immunization program to others, such as 
host nation personnel, civilian contractors, and dependents in 
high risk areas.
    The committee expects the Department to maintain an 
efficient inventory control system to ensure that military 
personnel receive vaccinations in a timely manner. 
Additionally, effective management of the immunization program 
is vital to ensure that there are sufficient supplies of 
vaccines available, that vaccines older than their one-year 
shelf life are destroyed, and that a complete record of 
vaccines received, administered and destroyed is kept to 
monitor and track the immunization program.

Biological Agent Detection and Identification

    There may be no greater threat to the United States today 
from external or internal sources than that posed by chemical 
and biological weapons. Biological attacks can be devastating 
and have widespread consequences. Despite research on vaccines, 
internal medicine, protective clothing, and other initiatives 
to counter bioagent weapons effects, none are adequate without 
critical supporting detection and identification capabilities.
    U.S. forces and military and civilian incident response 
personnel must have bioagent detectors capable of real-time 
detection and identification of specific bioagents of interest. 
Combatant commanders, first responders, and hospital 
administrators and doctors must know what they are dealing with 
in order to better determine courses of remedial action rapidly 
for the infected as well as for the facilities, equipment, and 
personnel in contact with the infected. It is important for 
first responders to know if an agent is present and where it 
has spread or is likely to spread in order to take action to 
minimize the number infected and, in the case of U.S. forces, 
to act quickly to improve a combat readiness posture.
    Over the last several years this committee has expressed 
strong support for innovative technologies to detect chemical 
and biological agents, including mass spectrometry, 
upconverting phosphors, and fiber optic devices. Recent field 
testing shows that the committee's support of these programs 
has been justified.
    To optimize the utility of these devices, the Department of 
Defense is funding research into a program called aerogel. 
Aerogel is a special silica material that acts as a receptor 
that allows the rapid collection and transmission of a chemical 
or biological agent to an assay technology, such as 
upconverting phosphors. The committee understands that with 
this technology it is feasible to develop a small, light-weight 
sensor system that could collect and identify a biological 
agent nearly immediately.
    The committee has previously supported research and 
development of aerogels to be used in the pollution abatement 
system of the chemical agents and munitions destruction 
facilities (Public Law 103-337). The committeee continues to 
support innovative research in these areas that could lead to 
the development of hand-held sensors for U.S. forces, first 
responders, and arms control inspectors, or that could be 
placed on unmanned aerial vehicles (UAVs) for long-range 
detection.

Status of Increased Chem/Bio Defense Funds in Fiscal Year 1998

    In response to recommendations in the Quadrennial Defense 
Review by the Secretary of Defense to increase funding for the 
chemical and biological defense program, Congress appropriated 
additional funds in fiscal year 1998 for the following 
activities: $25.7 million in research and development 
activities; $25.0 million for procurement for increased funding 
for individual, protective and decontamination protection, 
including Joint Service Lightweight Integrated Suit Technology 
(JSLIST); $10.0 million for procurement of chemical and 
biological defense equipment for the Marine Corps Chemical/
Biological Incident Response Force (CBIRF); $10.0 million for 
collective protective shelters identified as a high priority by 
the U.S. Pacific Command; and $10.0 million for the Army 
National Guard to conduct a study on expanding its role in 
responding to domestic chemical and biological incidents.
    The committee is unable to determine from the budget 
documents provided to the committee the extent to which the 
increased funds appropriated for these activities have been 
executed. The committee directs the Department of Defense to 
provide a report by July 1, 1998 on the status and execution of 
the funds for the recommended activities. In this constrained 
budget environment, the committee wants to ensure that 
additional funds provided for chemical and biological defenses 
are utilized to meet unfunded research, development and 
procurement requirements in the area of biological defense, 
collective protection procurement, and counterterrorist efforts 
to render safe, and to protect against, the use of biological 
and chemical weapons of mass destruction.

Defense Threat Reduction Agency (DTRA)

    In November 1997, as part of its Defense Reform Initiative 
(DRI), the Department of Defense recommended the establishment 
of a single agency, the Defense Threat Reduction Agency (DTRA), 
to carry out programs to counter proliferation and reduce 
threats posed by weapons of mass destruction and to provide 
nuclear weapon stockpile and related support. This agency will 
consolidate several agencies, and several functions from the 
Office of the Secretary of Defense (OSD) involved in the 
management of associated programs, including the chemical and 
biological defense program and the counterproliferation support 
program. Consistent with the DRI recommendation, the committee 
recommends the transfer of the mission, function and resources 
for fiscal year 1999 for the chemical and biological defense 
program to the Defense Threat Reduction Agency.

Ballistic Missile Defense Organization funding and programmatic 
        guidance

    The budget request included approximately $3.6 billion for 
the Ballistic Missile Defense Organization (BMDO) for research, 
development, test, and evaluation (RDT&E), and procurement. 
Thecommittee's recommended funding allocations for BMDO are summarized 
in the following table. Additional programmatic and funding guidance is 
also provided below.

                         BMDO FUNDING ALLOCATION                        
                          [Millions of dollars]                         
------------------------------------------------------------------------
              Program                Request     Change   Recommendation
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Support Technology................      253.5     +140.0         393.5  
THAAD.............................      821.7      -70.0         751.7  
TMD-BM/C3 \1\.....................       22.8  .........          22.8  
Navy Lower Tier \2\...............      289.1  .........         289.1  
Navy Upper Tier...................      190.4     +120.0         310.4  
MEADS.............................       43.0      -33.0          10.0  
NMD...............................      950.5  .........         950.5  
Joint TMD.........................      176.8  .........         176.8  
PAC-3 \2\.........................      480.5  .........         480.5  
FOS E&I...........................       96.9  .........          96.9  
BMD Tech Ops......................      190.1       -2.0         188.1  
Int'l Coop Programs...............       50.7       -0.7          50.0  
Threat/Countermeasures............       22.1  .........          22.1  
                                   -------------------------------------
                                                                        
      BMDO Total..................    3,588.1     +154.3      3,742.4   
------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Procurement only.                                                   
\2\ Procurement and RDT&E.                                              

Support technology

    The committee continues to support BMDO's wide bandgap 
electronics material development program. Higher speed and 
higher temperature operation afforded by wide bandgap 
electronic materials could enhance the miniaturization and 
functionality of advanced sensors and processing systems for 
space-based ballistic missile defense (BMD) sensors and ground-
based radar systems. The committee recommends an increase of 
$14.0 million in PE 62173C to support this important activity.
    The committee continues to support the Atmospheric 
Interceptor Technology (AIT) program to develop advanced 
interceptors with potential applications for a range of theater 
missile defense (TMD) programs. The committee recommends an 
increase of $22.0 million in PE 63173C to continue the AIT 
program.
    The committee commends BMDO and the Air Force for 
increasing funding in the fiscal year 1999 budget request for 
the Space Based Laser (SBL) Readiness Demonstrator (RD) 
program. The committee continues to support the development of 
an SBL-RD that could be ready for launch in the 2006-2008 
timeframe and urges the Secretary of Defense to provide the 
necessary funding in the Future Years Defense Program (FYDP) to 
support such a program. In order to support this objective, the 
committee recommends an increase of $94.0 million in PE 63173C.
    The committee has supported BMDO's efforts to evaluate 
innovative launch concepts, especially those utilizing 
pressure-fed rocket engine technology. The committee recommends 
an increase of $5.0 million in PE 63173C to support the 
Scorpius concept and an increase of $5.0 million in PE 63173C 
to support the Excalibur concept.

National Missile Defense

    The committee notes the existence of some confusion 
regarding what, if any, national missile defense (NMD) policy 
has been established in law or otherwise endorsed by Congress. 
Although the committee recommended a provision on this subject 
last year, which was enacted in the National Defense 
Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 1998 (section 231 of Public 
Law 105-85), this provision did not address NMD deployment 
policy nor otherwise endorse the administration's so-called 
``three-plus- three'' policy. In its report accompanying the 
fiscal year 1998 Defense Authorization Bill (S. Rep. 105-29) 
the committee made this matter clear: ``Recognizing the 
continuing controversy over NMD deployment policy, the 
committee recommends a provision that would strengthen the 
option to deploy an NMD system in fiscal year 2003 without 
specifically establishing an overarching deployment policy.'' 
The committee notes further that there is no statutory 
expression of policy regarding NMD currently in law. Section 
238 of the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 
1996 (Public Law 104-106) repealed the Missile Defense Act of 
1991 (Part C of Title II of Public Law 102-190), but did not 
replace it with an alternative policy.
    Congress has never endorsed the administration's NMD policy 
known as ``three-plus-three'' and the committee remains 
extremely concerned by this policy. The committee notes that 
the ``three-plus-three'' policy makes NMD the only major 
defense acquisition program that does not include a detailed 
schedule of milestones beyond initial development. This is a 
significant deviation from normal Defense Department 
acquisition policy, one which imposes significant risks and 
inefficiencies. The committee notes that the Director of BMDO 
recently testified that ``three-plus-three'' is an ``extremely 
high risk'' program. The committee believes that this policy 
should be modified to make NMD a normal defense acquisition 
program, regulated by the same kinds of considerations that 
regulate all major defense acquisition programs, including 
milestone reviews and annual budget reviews.

Medium Extended Air Defense System

    Although the committee continues to support the need for a 
TMD system to support maneuver forces, the committee is 
troubled by the failure of the Department of Defense to 
structure a fully-funded development program to satisfy this 
requirement. Although the committee would support a coherent 
and fully-funded Medium Extended Air Defense System (MEADS) 
program, the committee is unwilling to support a MEADS program 
that has no funding programmed beyond fiscal year 1999. The 
committee notes that the Department of Defense has had ample 
opportunity to address this shortfall. In light of the 
Department's unwillingness to provide adequate funding in the 
outyears, the committee recommends a reduction of $33.0 million 
in PE 63869C. The remaining $10.0 million shall be used to 
assess alternatives to the current MEADS concept, including the 
use of the Patriot PAC-3 system in an air-directed surface-to-
air missile (ADSAM) configuration.

Theater High Altitude Area Defense (THAAD) system

    The committee continues to support the development, 
production, and fielding of THAAD as a matter of highest 
priority, including early fielding of the User Operational 
Evaluation System (UOES). The committee supports BMDO's 
incremental approach to the execution of the UOES missile 
option in order to minimize funding risks associated with 
beginning the UOES missile program following a single 
successful intercept test. The committee directs that no funds 
be obligated for acquisition of THAAD UOES missiles until the 
Secretary of Defense certifies to the congressional defense 
committees that the THAAD program has successfully completed an 
intercept flight test, and that this test has adequately 
demonstrated that the THAAD program is ready to proceed with 
the production of UOES missiles. The committee supports the 
budget request of $497.7 million in PE 63861C for THAAD 
Demonstration and Validation (Dem/Val).
    Given recent delays in the THAAD testing program, and the 
requirement for THAAD to achieve three successful intercept 
tests prior to entering Engineering and Manufacturing 
Development (EMD), the committee is not convinced that BMDO 
will be able to execute the entire THAAD EMD budget request 
before the end of the fiscal year. Therefore, the committee 
recommends a reduction of $70.0 million from the budget request 
for THAAD EMD, for a total of $253.9 million in PE 64861C.

Navy Upper Tier (Theater Wide)

    The committee continues to support the Navy Upper Tier 
program. The committee urges the Secretary of Defense to 
accelerate this important development effort while maintaining 
it as a low to moderate risk program. To facilitate this 
acceleration, the committee also urges the Navy to begin 
allocating funds from within its budget to complement those 
already programmed within the BMDO budget. The committee is 
concerned that necessary radar improvements have not kept up 
with developments in the Navy Upper Tier interceptor missile 
system. Therefore, the committee recommends an increase of 
$50.0 million for the High Power Discriminator and an increase 
of $70.0 million for Navy Upper Tier acceleration, for an 
overall increase of $120.0 million in PE 63868C.

BMD Technical Operations

    The committee supports the efforts being performed at the 
Army Space and Strategic Defense Command's Advanced Research 
Center (ARC). The ARC continues to be a valuable tool in 
support of the Army's development of both theater and national 
missile defense systems. Therefore, the committee recommends an 
increase of $5.0 million in PE 63874C for support of the ARC.
    The committee notes substantial unexplained growth in 
BMDO's system architecture and engineering effort and 
recommends a reduction of $5.0 million in PE 63874C.

International Cooperative Programs

    The budget request included $37.9 million for BMDO's 
Israeli Cooperative Project, which includes funding for the 
Arrow ballistic missile defense system. The committee 
recommends an increase of $12.0 million in PE 63875C to support 
interoperability design so the Arrow can operate alongside 
forward deployed U.S. missile defense systems.
    The budget request included $12.7 million for the Russian- 
American Observation Satellites (RAMOS) program. The committee 
is concerned that this program is not funded beyond fiscal year 
1999 and that the potential payoff of such an experiment is 
questionable. Therefore, the committee recommends no funds for 
the RAMOS program in fiscal year 1999.

Patriot PAC-3

    At the request of the Director of BMDO, the committee 
recommends a zero-balance transfer of $40.0 million from PAC-3 
procurement to PAC-3 EMD to properly align funds for the type 
of work being performed. The committee notes with concern that 
this realignment is the result of significant delays in the 
PAC-3 flight test program. Although the committee does not 
recommend a reduction in PAC-3 funding at this time, if the 
PAC-3 test program does not demonstrate significant 
improvement, the committee does not rule out the possibility of 
future funding reductions.

BMD Targets

    The committee is concerned that current TMD surrogate 
targets do not sufficiently represent ballistic missile 
threatsbased on liquid fuel engines. Therefore, the committee directs 
the Secretary of Defense to assess the need for a new liquid fueled 
target, or family of targets, for TMD testing and to submit a report to 
the committee by April 15, 1999.

Report of the Panel on Reducing Risk in Ballistic Missile Defense Test 
        Programs

    The committee directs the Director of BMDO to submit a 
report to the congressional defense committees by February 15, 
1999 on the conclusions and recommendations of the Panel on 
Reducing Risk in Ballistic Missile Defense Test Programs, which 
recently reviewed a number of BMDO's hit-to-kill interceptor 
programs. The report should include discussions of lessons 
learned, actions that BMDO intends to take as a result of these 
lessons, and areas where the Director of BMDO does not agree 
with the report.

Countermeasures to missile defense systems

    The committee directs the Director of BMDO to submit a 
report to the congressional defense committees by March 15, 
1999 on anticipated countermeasures to U.S. ballistic and 
cruise missile defense systems. The report should include an 
analysis of existing and foreseen countermeasures as well as a 
description of the programs and plans that the United States 
has developed to overcome any such countermeasures. The 
committee acknowledges that such a report will have to be 
submitted in a classified form.

Medical free electron laser

    The committee recommends an increase of $7.0 million in PE 
62227D to ensure reasonable stability for the program in fiscal 
year 1999. The committee believes that this program continues 
to make breakthroughs in a number of areas of importance to 
military medicine, including soft tissue surgery, thermal and 
chemical burn treatment, sepia control, and wound healing.

Computing systems and communications technology

    The budget request included $69.9 million for a new start 
program in PE 62301E for project ST-26, Joint Infrastructure 
Protection. The committee recommends a decrease of $30.0 
million and a transfer of an additional $10.0 million to PE 
33140F from funds requested for the project. With respect to 
the transfer of $10.0 million to PE 33140F, the committee 
recommends that the transferred funds be used for a cyber-
security program to conduct research and development at 
federally funded research and development centers that are 
currently working in collaboration on issues relating to 
security and information assurance and to facilitate the 
transition of information assurance technology to the defense 
community.
    The committee strongly supports research in information 
infrastructure security in accordance with the recommendations 
of the President's Commission on Critical Infrastructure 
Protection. However, the committee believes that a new start of 
$69.9 million in fiscal year 1999 is not warranted given the 
steep increase in proposed funding and the lack of definition 
of research and development activities to be conducted. The 
committee believes that gradual program growth would more 
likely result in sound planning and investments, and that a 
comprehensive survey of ongoing related research and 
development efforts, sponsored by defense agencies and the 
military departments, is needed before a new program of this 
magnitude is initiated. The committee directs the Secretary of 
Defense to prepare a comprehensive plan and funding profile for 
information security research and to provide the plan to the 
congressional defense committees no later than March 1, 1999. 
The plan should serve as the basis for future funding requests 
for research in this area.

Telemedicine

    The committee recommends an increase of $1.5 million in PE 
62383E to initiate and complete a demonstration of the use of 
data compression and dynamic bandwidth allocation technologies 
for the deployment of telemedicine and other capabilities to 
the warfighters. The committee directs that all applicable 
competitive procedures be used in the award of contracts, 
grants, and other agreements under this program and that the 
Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency require significant 
cost-sharing from all non-federal participants.

Tactical technology

    The committee recommends a reduction of $5.0 million in PE 
62702E of the funds requested for increased scope of work on 
the micro unmanned aerial vehicle program. The committee 
recommends this reduction to fund other higher priority 
programs.

High definition systems

    Since 1994, the Department of Defense has undertaken a 
program of investing in the development of a domestic flat 
panel display industry to provide the Department with assured 
access to affordable flat panel display technology for defense 
applications. As a result of this sustained investment, the 
domestic supplier base now numbers over 100 companies. The 
committee believes that the military utility of flat panel 
display technology has continued to grow because of the proven 
durability and low life cycle costs, as compared to other 
display technologies. Therefore, the committee believes that 
additionalfunding in fiscal year 1999 is warranted and 
recommends an increase of $8.0 million in PE 62708E to continue the 
development of a domestic infrastructure within the context of the flat 
panel display initiative.

Mixed mode electronics

    The committee recommends an increase of $6.0 million in PE 
62712E for the continuation of the mixed mode electronics 
multitechnology insertion program (MIME). The committee 
believes that this program has significant potential benefits 
for electronics in military applications.

Weapons of mass destruction technologies

    The budget request included $203.6 million for weapons of 
mass destruction technologies (PE 62715BR) of the Defense 
Special Weapons Agency (DSWA) to support and develop the 
technology base necessary for national security issues related 
to nuclear and other advanced weapons and force application 
technologies. In November, 1997, the Department of Defense 
(DOD) recommended the establishment of an agency to carry out 
programs related to counter proliferation, to reduce threats 
posed by weapons of mass destruction, and to provide nuclear 
weapon stockpile and related support as part of its Defense 
Reform Initiative (DRI). The formation of this agency was to be 
accomplished through the consolidation of several agencies, 
including the DSWA. Consistent with the DRI recommendation, the 
mission, function, and resources for DSWA in fiscal year 1999 
have been transferred to the Defense Threat Reduction Agency 
(DTRA) for DSWA.

Core Competencies and Critical Expertise

    While the end of the Cold War has changed the risk to the 
United States from a nuclear weapons attack, the nuclear threat 
continues to evolve. The United States now faces potential 
nuclear threats from emerging capabilities of terrorists and 
third world proliferation. There is also the potential for a 
resurgence of superpowers. With continued reductions in the 
defense budget, the committee remains concerned about the loss 
of technical expertise and the impact on the nation's ability 
to analyze the effects of a nuclear weapons attack on military 
and civilian infrastructure and systems, as well as the effect 
on the ability to provide reliable and timely technical 
guidance. The DOD must continue to ensure that the military 
services and civilian personnel retain their nuclear core 
competencies and critical scientific and engineering skills. 
The committee recommends a $10.0 million increase to the budget 
request to maintain nuclear core competencies and critical 
scientific and engineering expertise.

Implications of nuclear and conventional explosions on critical civil 
        and commercial activities

    The committee remains concerned about the potential 
vulnerability of the next generation satellites and high level 
technology upon which U.S. forces continue to rely, and the 
possibility that an adversary could seriously impair or negate 
military operations, as well as critical civil and commercial 
activities. The committee recommends an increase of $2.0 
million to reduce potential vulnerabilities of the effects of 
radiation and electromagnetic pulse (EMP) on advanced 
electronic technologies and space systems.

Structural Response and Blast Mitigation

    The committee understands that the Technical Support 
Working Group (TSWG) is responsible for coordinating the 
development of technologies to meet the needs for combating 
terrorism, and encourages the Department to utilize the unique 
expertise and testing capabilities of the DSWA to accelerate 
the fielding of new protective technologies, including 
affordable and practical retrofit options for existing 
infrastructures. Additionally, the committee encourages the 
Department to continue to leverage existing and promising 
technologies designed to mitigate earthquake and corrosion 
related damage. The committee directs the Department to report 
to congressional defense committees by December 1, 1998 on 
efforts, commensurate with previous recommendations, to develop 
structural engineering design guidelines and standards modeled 
after those developed by other federal agencies (similar to 
those developed by the Department of State for new embassy 
office buildings) to prevent the collapse of buildings and 
structures subjected to heavy blast loads.

Hard and Deeply Buried Underground Structures

    The committee supports the unique contributions made by 
DSWA toward the defeat of hard and deeply buried targets. 
Efforts to develop technology to detect and discriminately 
attack and destroy or neutralize deeply buried underground 
facilities would address a critical gap in the capabilities of 
our armed forces. The committee believes that the successful 
completion of the proof of principal demonstration of the 
``deep digger'' concept by DSWA represents a significant step 
forward. Accordingly, the committee recommends an increase of 
$3.0 million in PE 62715BR to accelerate the pace and 
development of components and subsystems toward a prototype 
``deep digger'' system within the larger context of the DSWA 
hard and deeply buried target defeat program.

Explosives and conventional demilitarization

    Currently, there are over 400,000 tons in the 
existingconventional munitions stockpile that are obsolete, 
unserviceable, or unusable, and no longer of any use. The Department of 
Defense (DOD) expects that the stockpile will grow by an additional 
400,000 tons by the end of fiscal year 1999. The munitions storage 
depots in the United States are currently at their maximum storage 
capacity, without room for new munitions until such time as the 
munitions stockpile is reduced.
    In September 1996, the Under Secretary of Defense for 
Acquisition and Technology announced the DOD Munitions 
Strategy. An element of that overall strategy included 
conventional munitions demilitarization. The Congress endorsed 
the Department's recommendation to expand its demilitarization 
program by establishing a new research and development program 
to investigate and develop safe, efficient, and environmentally 
compliant technologies as alternatives to open burning/open 
detonation (OB/OD) to reduce the munitions stockpile. The 
Department also included as part of its strategy the increased 
reliance on commercial industry to augment demilitarization 
capabilities.
    The Secretary of Defense was directed in the National 
Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 1998 to conduct a 
demonstration program utilizing an existing commercial 
technology as an alternative to open burn/open detonation. The 
committee understands that a commercially available blast 
chamber technology is available which is recognized by industry 
experts as a viable alternative to OB/OD demilitarization of 
conventional munitions. The Congress provided a $4.0 million 
increase to the budget request in fiscal year 1998 in the Army 
munitions standardization effectiveness and safety program (PE 
65805A) to conduct a demonstration using an existing 
commercially available blast chamber technology. The committee 
recommends an increase of $4.0 million to the budget request to 
complete the demonstration program.
    There are demilitarization sites in the United States where 
small numbers of conventional munitions exist which need to be 
destroyed, and where it may not be cost effective, or 
practical, to construct a demilitarization facility, such as in 
Alaska, South Carolina and California. There are also sites 
which are either remote in nature, or are in close proximity to 
residences or businesses, such as in Colorado and 
Massachusetts. The committee is aware that the capability 
exists to design a mobile system utilizing the commercially 
available blast chamber technology. The committee recommends an 
increase of $1.5 million for this activity.

Counterterror technical support

    The budget request included $35.8 million for the 
counterterror technical support program for antiterrorism and 
counterterrorism projects.
    The committee recommends an increase of $5.0 million for 
the facial recognition technology program.
    In the statement of managers to the National Defense 
Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 1998, the conferees directed 
the Secretary of Defense to report to the Congress on its 
assessment of the operational requirements for a pulsed fast 
neutron analysis (PFNA) cargo inspection system. On April 10, 
1998, the Secretary of Defense, in concurrence with the 
Secretary of the Treasury, reported his assessment to the 
Congress that neither the Department of Defense nor the 
Department of Treasury had a specific requirement for 
developing and fielding a PFNA system.
    Funds were provided for the PFNA in the Department of 
Defense Appropriations Act for Fiscal Year 1998. The committee 
has supported funding for the PFNA technology program in prior 
years. However, with the report of the Secretary of Defense 
assessing no need for the development or fielding of this 
technology, the committee believes that funds appropriated for 
this activity should be utilized for unfunded requirements for 
operational needs to counter terrorism, such as chemical and 
biological detection, neutralization, mitigation and 
decontamination.
    The committee continues to support collaborative efforts 
with allies who have demonstrated counter-terrorism 
capabilities, such as Israel and the United Kingdom, which can 
provide the United States a cost-effective way of remaining at 
the cutting edge of technology. The committee also believes 
that the Department should examine retrofit options and develop 
design guidelines for new and existing structures, to include 
the use of composite systems and retrofit applications 
technologies such as those demonstrated for seismic 
retrofitting of highway columns and corrosion damage.

Defense Threat Reduction Agency (DTRA)

    In November 1997, the Department of Defense recommended the 
establishment of an agency to carry out programs to counter 
proliferation and reduce threats posed by weapons of mass 
destruction and to provide nuclear weapon stockpile and related 
support as part of its Defense Reform Initiative (DRI). The 
formation of this agency is to be accomplished through the 
consolidation of several agencies, and several functions from 
the Office of the Secretary of Defense (OSD) involved in the 
management of associated programs. Consistent with the DRI 
recommendation, the committee recommends the transfer of the 
counterterror technical support program to the Defense Threat 
Reduction Agency (DTRA).

Counterproliferation support program

    The fiscal year 1998 budget request included $80.4 million 
for the counterproliferation support program to accelerate 
thedevelopment and deployment of essential counterproliferation 
technologies and capabilities in the Department of Defense (DOD) and 
the military services.
    The committee recommends an increase of $7.0 million to the 
counterproliferation support program: $3.0 million for the high 
frequency active auroral research program (HAARP); $4.0 million 
for the continuation of the Counterproliferation Analysis and 
Planning System (CAPS) to support theater commanders and 
special operations forces in preparing for regional 
contingencies involving weapons of mass destruction.
    In addition, the committee recommends a $20.5 million 
increase to the budget request for defense, including operation 
and maintenance ($7.6 million), research and development ($7.8 
million) and procurement ($5.1 million), for unfunded 
requirements for the U.S. Special Operations Command (USSOCOM) 
for equipment to detect and destroy underground facilities and 
for training activities to locate, identify, render safe, 
destroy, or recover weapons of mass destruction from deep 
underground structures.
    The committee raised concerns last year in the National 
Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 1998 (S. Rept. 105-
29) that funds authorized for HAARP were being diverted to fund 
government overhead and Systems Engineering and Technical 
Assessments (SETA) support in the range of about 20 percent. 
The committee directs that the combined government overhead/
SETA support costs be no more than 10 percent.

Counterproliferation Analysis and Planning System

    The proliferation of weapons of mass destruction remains a 
continuing national security concern and challenge for the long 
term. To address this challenge, the committee has supported 
funding for the Counterproliferation Analysis Planning Systems 
(CAPS). The committee understands that the Joint Requirements 
Oversight Council (JROC) endorsed a funding level for CAPS in 
the 2000-2005 Five Year Defense Plan at $12.0 million per year. 
To address the fiscal year 1999 shortfall, of the total 
increase recommended for the counterproliferation support 
program, the committee recommends that PE 65160D8Z be increased 
by $4.0 million for CAPS.

Defense Threat Reduction Agency (DTRA)

    In November 1997, as part of its Defense Reform Initiative 
(DRI), the Department of Defense recommended the establishment 
of a single agency, the Defense Threat Reduction Agency (DTRA), 
to carry out programs to counter proliferation and reduce 
threats posed by weapons of mass destruction and to provide 
nuclear weapon stockpile and related support. The formation of 
this agency is to be accomplished through the consolidation of 
several agencies, and several functions from the Office of the 
Secretary of Defense (OSD) involved in the management of 
associated programs. Consistent with the DRI recommendation, 
the committee recommends the transfer of the 
counterproliferation support program to the Defense Threat 
Reduction Agency.

Generic logistics research and development technology demonstrations

    The committee recommends an increase of $4.0 million in PE 
63712S to continue the computer assisted technology transfer 
program in fiscal year 1999. The committee directs the Defense 
Logistics Agency to develop a plan for deploying any technology 
successfully developed under this program broadly throughout 
the major systems support infrastructure.

Advanced lithography

    Advanced lithography is an important enabling technology 
needed to produce advanced integrated circuits. The Department 
of Defense has a strong interest in maintaining access to this 
technology for application in new and future military systems. 
There are presently three basic lithography technologies (based 
upon the use of x-ray, electron-beam, and extreme ultra-violet 
radiation sources) in various stages of development that are 
capable of producing integrated circuits to meet the future 
needs of the Department.
    The committee understands that the Department is currently 
developing an initiative to develop cross-cutting technologies, 
such as mask fabrication and defect reduction, metrology, 
development of new radiation sensitive imaging materials, and 
modeling and simulation, that will be applicable to all three 
basic lithography technologies. Because this initiative is 
still under development, no funding was provided in the fiscal 
year 1999 budget. The committee recommends an increase of $10.0 
million to PE 603739E for the advanced mask writer development. 
This funding is intended to bridge the gap until the 
Department's cross-cutting technology initiative takes effect 
in fiscal year 2000. The committee expects that sufficient 
funding will be devoted to this initiative in the budget 
request for fiscal year 2000 so that consideration of further 
increases by Congress will not be necessary.

Advanced electronics technologies

    The committee recommends a reduction of $4.0 million in PE 
63739E for a portion of new start work in project MT-04 to 
allow funding of higher priority research.

Maritime technology

    The budget request included $15.0 million in PE 603746E for 
the maritime technology (MARITECH) advanced shipbuilding 
enterprise (ASE) program. The MARITECH ASE program is a 
government, shipbuilding industry and academia cooperative 
effort to improve process and products required for ship 
design, construction and repair. The effort continues the 
MARITECH focus on making U.S. shipbuilders competitive in the 
international market and reducing the costs to build Navy 
ships. The committee recommends a $5.0 million increase to PE 
603746E for MARITECH ASE.

Advanced concept technology demonstrations

    The committee recommends a reduction, without prejudice, of 
$6.0 million in PE 63739E to allow funding of other priority 
initiatives. The committee notes that this reduction will leave 
approximately $20.0 million for new start advanced concept 
technology demonstrations (ACTD) in fiscal year 1999.
    During hearings this year, the committee received testimony 
concerning the problem of providing adequate manning for ACTD 
participation by the unified and specified commands. One of the 
justifications for the ACTD program is its ability to put 
mature technologies in hands of the warfighters for evaluation 
and possible use in a much more rapid manner than can be 
accommodated in the standard acquisition process. The joint 
staff has been reluctant to provide the unified and specified 
commands with any additional manning to allow for a thorough 
evaluation by the warfighter and for support of residual 
operational capability should an ACTD prove successful. The 
committee commends the efforts of the Office of the Under 
Secretary of Defense for Acquisition and Technology to 
alleviate this situation through the provision of increased 
contractor support and other resources. Unfortunately, such 
support cannot substitute for the intensive, necessary 
warfighter field evaluation.
    The committee directs the Under Secretary of Defense for 
Acquisition and Technology to work closely with the joint staff 
to develop an approach to improve manning allocation to allow 
the unified and specified commands to more effectively support 
ACTD execution. The committee directs the Under Secretary of 
Defense for Acquisition and Technology to report to the 
congressional defense committees no later than February 15, 
1999 on the status of these efforts.

High performance computing modernization

    The committee recommends an increase of $3.0 million in PE 
63755D to initiate a program to address the related challenges 
of remote visualization, collaborative exploitation of high 
performance computing modernization capabilities, and distance 
learning expansion. Advances in telecommunications, high 
performance computing, and computer networking have created 
opportunities to overcome these challenges, especially to the 
extent that the major shared resource centers can increase 
collaboration and shared capabilities.
    The committee believes that the proposed program would 
offer a significant opportunity for participation by 
historically black colleges and universities, and other 
minority institutions. The committee directs the Department of 
Defense (DOD) to seek substantial participation of at least one 
minority institution in the program. The committee directs that 
all applicable competitive procedures be used for the award of 
any contract, grant, or other agreement under this program and 
that cost-sharing requirements for non-federal participants be 
utilized, where appropriate.
    The committee also recommends an increase of $20.0 million 
in PE 63755D to sustain operations of supercomputing centers 
established with DOD funds. The committee notes that the 
increase is $5.0 million less than the amount authorized in 
fiscal year 1998 for this purpose and reflects sustainment 
funding provided by other users. The committee believes that 
any sustainment funding increases provided in fiscal year 2000 
for such supercomputing centers should be reduced by a similar 
amount to reflect increased support from government and non-
government users, as well as sponsoring institutions.

Command, control, and communications systems

    The committee recommends a total reduction of $11.0 million 
in PE 63760E to fund higher priority research and development. 
The committee intends the reduction to be made in increased 
scope of work included in the budget request for projects CCC01 
and CCC02.

Land warfare technology

    The committee recommends a reduction of $4.0 million in PE 
63764E for a new start project in CNW01 to allow funding of 
higher priority programs.

Physical security

    The committee recommends authorization of $25.7 million for 
the physical security program for fiscal year 1999, a $6.0 
million reduction to the budget request for force protection 
commercial off-the-shelf activities. The committee supports 
research and development activities that would provide force 
protection to U.S. forces, and recommends that no reductions be 
taken out of programs currently underway in this program 
element.
    The committee is aware of a software technology for 
evaluating safeguards and security developed jointly by 
industry and the national laboratories known as AnalyticSystem 
and Software for Evaluating Safeguards and Security (ASSESS), which has 
been used as a primary security modeling tool by the Department of 
Energy to analyze the vulnerabilities of its facilities to theft or 
sabotage of its nuclear materials. The committee understands that this 
software tool can be used to assess physical security vulnerabilities 
of existing buildings as well as new construction under design.
    The committee believes that the ASSESS technology could be 
an integral component to vulnerability assessments conducted at 
numerous Department of Defense (DOD) facilities and 
installations. The committee recommends that $3.0 million be 
made available for a study to analyze how this technology can 
best be utilized by DOD, and for upgrades and computer-aided 
design enhancements so that DOD agencies can utilize this 
technology.

Advanced sensor applications

    The budget request included $15.1 million for advanced 
sensor applications. The committee recommends an increase of 
$2.0 million to continue the high frequency active auroral 
research program (HAARP).

Integrated data environment

    The committee recommends an increase of $2.0 million in PE 
63736D to continue the integrated data environment program in 
fiscal year 1999. The committee believes that programs such as 
this have the potential to provide cost-effective tools for 
reducing life cycle costs and improve logistics support for the 
warfighter.

Joint robotics program

    The committee recommends an increase of $6.0 million in PE 
64709D to allow the Department of Defense to accelerate 
engineering and manufacturing development efforts for the 
Vehicle Teleoperation Capability, including the Remote Combat 
Support System and the transfer of technology, where necessary. 
This accelerated transfer of technology has great potential for 
avoiding life cycle costs for a family of systems that are of 
growing importance to the missions of the warfighters.

Defense support activities

    The committee recommends an increase of $2.0 million in PE 
65798S to increase the scope of the commodity management system 
consolidation (CMSC) program in fiscal year 1999. The committee 
believes that the CMSC program is a key part of the efforts to 
migrate the Defense Logistics Agency commodity management 
system to a common operating environment to support the 
logistics vision incorporated in Joint Vision 2010.

Defense technical information services

    The committee recommends a reduction of $2.0 million in PE 
65801K for expanded activities at the Defense Technical 
Information Center in order to fund higher priority 
initiatives.

Joint simulation system

    The committee recommends an increase of $4.5 million in PE 
92740J to accelerate the fielding of the fully capable joint 
simulation system. The committee believes that this system has 
the potential to provide significant realistic training 
capability for the joint field commanders.

Surgical strike

    The committee recommends an increase of $7.8 million for 
this classified program.

Maritime equipment

    The committee recommends an increase of $10.5 million for 
this classified program.

                        OTHER ITEMS OF INTEREST

Acoustic firefinding system

    The committee notes that the Army is currently conducting 
tests on a system that detects the shock waves of passing 
supersonic projectiles to provide real time data to locate and 
classify fire in multiple force protection situations. The 
committee is aware that the Army Research Laboratory (ARL) is 
scheduled to receive five such systems, one of which will be 
mounted on a high mobility multipurpose wheeled vehicle. The 
program is also in development for participation and evaluation 
under the military operations in urban terrain advanced concept 
technology demonstration program. The committee urges the Army 
to transition the program from ARL to an Army Research, 
Development, and Engineering Center effort in fiscal year 2000 
should the technology prove successful in current and planned 
evaluations.

Army After Next Initiatives

    The committee supports the Army's plan to restructure the 
2nd Armored Cavalry Regiment as an experimental strike force to 
investigate alternative land force organizations for the Army 
After Next (AAN) initiative. The committee recommends the Army 
expedite this initiative.
    Furthermore, in this pursuit of Army After Next 
capabilities, the Army will experiment with new armored 
vehicles that are lighter, faster, more deployable, and with 
similar or increased lethality and survivability. These AAN 
systems are not yet available. However, several surrogates are 
available to investigate the impact of AAN systems on new 
organizational structures and operational concepts that address 
21st Century operational requirements. For example, the Army 
has already invested over $200.0 million in the development of 
the Armored Gun System (AGS) which is C130 aircraft deployable, 
has top speeds of 45 miles per hour, modular armor, a reduced 
crew size, and a cannon that fires up to 12 rounds per minute. 
The committee believes the Army should employ its AGS 
prototypes, along with other surrogate systems, in strike force 
experimentation activities.

Army multimedia tactical adaptor

    The committee believes that the Army Multimedia Tactical 
Adapter may have the potential to enhance the warfighter's 
survivable wireless communications links by increasing speed 
and bandwidth while decreasing the costs of operations during 
critical battlefield operations. Additionally, joint 
standardization and interoperability of this device have the 
potential to benefit all military networks. The committee 
directs the Secretary of the Army to review this program and 
determine whether additional funding should be provided in the 
fiscal year 2000 budget.

Brain protection in combat head injury

    The committee is aware of a proposal to research approaches 
for using pharmacological intervention mechanisms for reversing 
brain injury due to combat head injury or exposure to chemical 
weapons. If successful, such research could result in reduction 
of combat mortality and morbidity from such causes. The 
committee urges the Secretary of Defense to review this or 
similar proposals and, if determined to be of sufficient 
promise, to include funding for such research in the fiscal 
year 2000 budget.

Defense imagery and mapping program

    The committee urges the Department of Defense to fund the 
defense imagery and mapping system research programs at 
adequate levels to sustain critical spatial information systems 
research programs. The development efforts will assume 
increasing importance to the achievement of national security 
objectives as the military services work to enhance battlespace 
awareness.

Dual use applications programs

    The committee notes that the budget request contains $6.0 
million for dual use applications program administered by the 
Defense Logistics Agency (DLA). This program differs 
fundamentally from other Department of Defense dual use 
programs in that it is managed through an agreement with a 
single, non-governmental entity for the purposes of 
establishing cost-shared pilot programs at selected public 
sector maintenance facilities in the areas of commercial 
manufacturing technologies and best business practices. 
Accordingly, the committee recommends a provision that would 
change the name of the program to Commercial Technology for 
Maintenance Activities. The committee further directs that, in 
managing the program in fiscal year 1999, the DLA shall require 
each of the participating services to match on a one-for-one 
basis any DLA funds expended for the projects under the 
program.

Electronic commerce resource centers

    The committee directs that competitive procedures be used, 
to the maximum extent practicable, in the award of future 
contracts or other agreements, including subcontracts for the 
operation of individual regional centers under the Electronic 
Commerce Resource Center (ECRC) program, and that cost-sharing 
requirements for the non-Federal participants be utilized where 
appropriate. The committee further directs that the 
establishment of any additional ECRC sites be based on a 
Department of Defense analysis that considers the needs of the 
Department and the concentration of Defense suppliers, 
particularly manufacturing enterprises located near such sites.

Electronic safe and arm devices

    The committee is encouraged by the positive results of the 
recent Cooperative Research and Development (CRADA) conducted 
by the Naval Surface Warfare Center and industry to design and 
develop a modular electronic safe and arm device (ESAD) that 
could be used in multiple tactical missile systems. The results 
of this CRADA parallel a recent initiative conducted by the 
Army. This Army program resulted in the development of an ESAD 
with common components for the full spectrum of Army tactical 
missile systems. This initiative was consistent with the 
Department of Defense goalsto develop an affordable multi-
missile manufacturing (AM3) program and was accomplished in 
a cost-effective manner in cooperation with industry's missile 
manufacturers.
    In order to also capitalize on the positive results of the 
recent CRADA, the committee needs more information. Therefore, 
the committee directs the Navy to provide a report to the 
congressional defense committees, not later than December 1, 
1998, that outlines the Navy's participation in the 
AM3 program, as well as an analysis of the costs and 
benefits of integrating these electronic devices in all of the 
Navy's tactical missile product lines (both surface and air 
launched).

Flat panel display technology

    In the statement of managers to accompany the National 
Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 1998 (S. Rept. 105-
29), the committee expressed concern that program managers and 
contractors were making procurement decisions on flat panel 
displays (FPD's) based on cost and schedule constraints without 
benefit of life-cycle cost and performance trade-off analysis. 
In March 1998, the Department responded to the committee's 
direction by submitting a report on the application of flat 
panel displays for military applications. The committee 
applauds the report as a good first step and encourages the 
Department to follow through on its conclusions: to better 
coordinate flat panel display activities; to mitigate supply 
uncertainty; to promote life-cycle affordability by supporting 
programs for sound technology choices; to continue the 
development of an integrated product teams approach; and to 
address cross-program coordination needs. The committee urges 
the Department to develop defense-wide common procurement 
training, to generate an FPD technical road-map, and to 
establish product standards for use by program managers.

Global Positioning System alternate master control station

    Dependence on the Global Positioning System (GPS) in the 
military, civil, and commercial sectors continues to grow 
exponentially. GPS is vital to the national interests of the 
United States and the committee recognizes this system must be 
operated and maintained at the highest levels of readiness and 
reliability. GPS remains, however, the only critical national 
satellite system that does not have an adequate separate and 
secure backup ground control station. The committee is pleased 
that the Department of Defense and the Air Force initiated 
development of an alternate master ground control station at 
Vandenberg Air Force Base, California, but urges the Air Force 
to evaluate fully any potential vulnerabilities that may exist 
at Vandenberg.
    The committee urges the Department of Defense and the Air 
Force to continue to make GPS a top priority program and ensure 
that the alternate master ground control station will be 
operational by fiscal year 2001. The committee previously 
recognized the need to reduce vulnerabilities of the current 
GPS command and control infrastructure and continues to be 
concerned that plans to modernize, operate, and maintain the 
aging GPS worldwide ground control system are not being 
developed on a timely basis. The committee, therefore, directs 
the Secretary of the Air Force to submit a report by February 
15, 1999 to the congressional defense committees on the 
alternate master control station and the plan to modernize the 
entire GPS ground control system to ensure GPS will support our 
national security and economic interests well into the next 
century.

Joint experimentation plan report

    The committee is concerned there is too little coherent 
focus and effort on joint experimentation. In the National 
Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 1998, the Secretary 
of Defense was directed to provide a joint experimentation plan 
report by March 30, 1998.
    The committee conducted hearings this year to address 
Department of Defense activities directed at transforming the 
armed forces to address operational challenges anticipated in 
the early 21st Century. Members of the National Defense Panel 
testified that it was ``absolutely critical'' and ``urgent'' 
that the Department establish a joint experimentation process 
to investigate capabilities dealing with these future 
challenges.
    The committee remains concerned about the progress and 
joint oversight of transformation activities across the 
Department. The Secretary of Defense submitted the Joint 
Experimentation Plan Report to the Congress on April 14, 1998. 
This report failed to provide the requested information 
relating to a process of joint experimentation, and the 
relationship of this process to the experimentation efforts of 
the military departments. It is clear that the experimentation 
activities of the military departments do not currently provide 
an adequate foundation for joint experimentation because they 
do not employ a joint headquarters or a consistent set of joint 
enablers in command, control, communications and computers 
(C4); intelligence; surveillance; reconnaissance (ISR); and 
other areas. Therefore, it is necessary that an overarching 
process of joint experimentation be established.
    The committee supports the initiative of the Secretary of 
Defense to approve a charter assigning the mission of joint 
experimentation to a combatant commander. This charter provides 
necessary clarification in terms of responsibility and 
authority among the combatant commanders, services, anddefense 
agencies.
    The committee notes that the Joint Experimentation Plan 
Report states: ``The Department is committed to making rapid 
progress on joint experimentation as a central part of our 
efforts to pursue the revolution in military affairs (RMA) 
through Joint Vision 2010.'' The committee directs the 
Secretary of Defense to provide an addendum to his report, no 
later than December 1, 1999, that addresses the following 
issues:
          (1) describe the responsibilities and the authorities 
        of the Office of the Secretary of Defense and defense 
        agencies, services, combatant commands, and the Joint 
        Staff in each of the concept development; assessment/
        experimentation; and implementation phases of the joint 
        experimentation process;
          (2) describe the activities of and the results 
        achieved by the RMA oversight council in accomplishing 
        its stated tasks to oversee the Department's planned 
        and current RMA transformation activities, recommend 
        areas that could benefit from greater jointness, and 
        direct changes in funding or activities;
          (3) describe the responsibilities and authority of 
        the Department of Defense, unified commands, the Joint 
        Staff, and the services for the Information Superiority 
        Implementation and Assessment Plan (ISIAP) and describe 
        how the ISIAP impacts decisions to modify, accelerate, 
        or terminate C4ISR;
          (4) describe the authority and responsibility of the 
        joint force experimenter in service experimentation 
        efforts that include joint elements, the authority and 
        responsibility for the integration of C4ISR and 
        developing and assessing the information, sensor, and 
        engagement grids for service network centric efforts;
          (5) estimate the proportion of transformation 
        activities undertaken in service unique arenas against 
        the joint venue described in the report, and identify 
        duplicative efforts;
          (6) describe the relationship of vulnerability 
        assessments conducted in joint experiments with 
        vulnerability assessments conducted in service 
        experimentation activities, including a description of 
        the authority and responsibility of the proponent for 
        conducting vulnerability assessments in joint 
        experimentation activities and a description of the 
        responsibilities of the Director of Operational Test 
        and Evaluation with respect to those responsible for 
        conducting vulnerability assessments in service 
        experiments;
          (7) describe the feedback process by which the 
        results of vulnerability assessments, as well as other 
        experimentation results, are reflected in future 
        experimentation, or in changes to doctrine, operational 
        concepts, organizational structures, or programs for 
        the development of new technologies; and
          (8) identify the joint experimentation activities 
        which have been completed and describe the command and 
        control process for each experiment, the budget and 
        forces employed, capabilities assessed, and impact on 
        changes in doctrine, operational concepts, 
        organizational structures, or programs for the 
        development of advanced technologies.
    The committee further directs the General Accounting Office 
to investigate the following matters related to the Secretary 
of Defense Joint Experimentation Plan Report and report 
findings to the committee by March 31, 1999. This review should 
include the following:
          (1) assess the Joint Vision 2010 Implementation Plan 
        with respect to the following areas:
                  (A) whether the Joint Vision 2010 
                Implementation Plan reflects a viable time 
                line, adequate resources including forces, 
                funding and facilities, and the integrating 
                functions necessary to achieve the operational 
                concepts of the vision by 2010;
                  (B) whether the plan incorporates the 
                operational challenges and desired force 
                characteristics described in the Report of the 
                National Defense Panel;
                  (C) whether the funding for the execution of 
                the Joint Vision 2010 assessment roadmaps is 
                adequately reflected in the future years 
                defense program and whether service plans for 
                experimentation activities are consistent with 
                these roadmaps;
          (2) assess whether the plan for the development of 
        joint enablers in areas such as command, control, 
        communications and computers (C4), intelligence, 
        surveillance, and reconnaissance (ISR), logistics, 
        force protection and others is adequate to implement 
        the operational concepts of Joint Vision 2010 by 2010;
          (3) assess whether the Defense Planning Guidance for 
        fiscal years 2000 through 2005 and the subsequent 
        budget and planning review process, to include the 
        Chairman's Program Recommendations and Assessment, 
        directs the fielding of advanced technologies, 
        preparation of forces, and funding required for the 
        joint experimentation plan;
          (4) assess the capability and limitations of existing 
        and developing models and simulations to support the 
        assessment and experimentation phase of the joint 
        experimentation process;
          (5) assess whether the Defense Science and Technology 
        Strategy, Basic Research Plan, Defense Technology Area 
        Plan, and Joint Warfighting Science and Technology plan 
        are effective in synchronizing thefielding of advanced 
technologies across the services to support the development of joint 
capabilities; and
          (6) compare the charter assigning U.S. Atlantic 
        Command (USACOM) the mission for joint warfighting 
        experimentation to the framework for Joint Forces 
        Command recommended by the National Defense Panel and 
        assess the capabilities of USACOM to implement this 
        charter.

Man overboard notification technology

    Each year lives are lost at sea as a result of sailors 
accidentally falling off ships. The committee encourages the 
Navy to investigate the feasibility of integrating a commercial 
off-the-shelf water-activated person overboard indicator as a 
means of immediately alerting ship control personnel of a 
person accidentally falling overboard.

Molten salt oxidation waste disposal technology

    The committee is aware of the potential value of molten 
salt oxidation (MSO) technology to solve many of the problems 
with the disposal of hazardous materials. In particular, MSO 
technology, if made cost effective, would certainly be 
beneficial in a shoreside shipyard environment. The committee 
is aware that a consortium comprised of academic institutions 
and the Naval Surface Warfare Center (NSWC) has been developing 
a working MSO system at NSWC Indian Head, Maryland. The 
committee directs the Secretary of the Navy to provide a report 
by February 1, 1999 to the congressional defense committees on 
the potential costs and benefits of MSO technology for 
shoreside waste disposal and the desirability of continuing 
development of the MSO system at Indian Head in order to 
develop a working prototype leading to a full scale model.

National automotive center

    The committee views the rapid infusion of advanced 
commercial technology into military land warfare systems as a 
key component of maintaining cost effective U.S. military 
dominance in ground combat technology. The committee commends 
the Army's National Automotive Center, part of the Tank-
automotive and Armaments Command, for its role as the Army's 
focal point for collaborative research and development in the 
land combat vehicle arena, including advancements in 
alternative propulsion technology. The committee believes that 
the National Automotive Center should serve as the focal point 
for all Department of Defense shared commercial-military 
automotive technology development that is directly applicable 
to military land warfare systems, including alternative 
propulsion technologies. In support of this goal, the committee 
directs that the Secretary of Defense develop and submit an 
implementation plan to the congressional defense committees by 
February 15, 1999.

National solar observatory

    The Air Force provided for the support of the National 
Solar Observatory (NSO) for fiscal year 1999 through the Air 
Force science and technology program in the amount of $650,000, 
which would be transferred to the National Science Foundation 
to operate NSO. The committee supports the continuation of this 
annual contribution for the support of NSO.

National technology alliance

    During the last ten years, the National Technology Alliance 
(NTA) has helped the Intelligence community realize cost 
savings by providing commercially available information 
technology. Prior year funding for the NTA has led to 
reductions in operations and maintenance costs, improved 
intelligence analysis in the field, and advanced capabilities 
for reconnaissance and surveillance. The committee directs the 
Secretary of Defense to study the feasibility and desirability 
of expanding the NTA into a Defense-wide program and to report 
the findings to the congressional defense committees not later 
than 90 days after the enactment of this Act.

Next generation internet

    The committee supports industry and government efforts to 
improve the communications and data transfer capability for 
future high speed data networks. The next generation of 
computer data networks will have important ramifications for 
military communications and technology. Industry is making 
considerable investment in the next generation of communication 
networks, and the federal government is involved in a 
partnership with industry and academia through the Next 
Generation Internet (NGI) program to help ensure that the 
following generation of technology is accessible to the 
military, as well as to the civilian sector.
    It is important for the Department of Defense to focus its 
efforts and resources on the promising technologies that are 
not already the subject of substantial investment by commercial 
industry for near-term deployment, but rather to focus on the 
next generation of technology that will ensure higher speeds 
and higher volumes of data transmission. In this regard, the 
committee believes that the Defense Advanced Research Projects 
Agency (DARPA), through its NGI program, should investigate the 
possibility of placing greater researchemphasis on future 
promising technologies in the area of ultra-high speed optical data 
networks.
    It is widely recognized that wavelength-division-
multiplexed (WDM)systems and access networks are already being 
commercialized by industry. However, many consider time-
division-multiplexed (TDM) technologies to be the next phase of 
development in high speed communication, and an area in which 
the United States should devote increased funding in the near-
term to maintain our technological advantage. Therefore, the 
committee urges DARPA to consider focusing more of its near-
term funding to support the development of TDM systems and 
access nodes technologies.

Patriot anti-cruise missile defense system

    The committee reaffirms its support for fully evaluating 
the Patriot anti-cruise missile (PACM) concept and directs the 
Secretary of the Army to complete a rigorous test and 
evaluation program in fiscal year 1999, using funds previously 
appropriated for this purpose, to determine the effectiveness 
of the PACM seeker against the full range of advanced cruise 
missile threats. Results of this evaluation shall be provided 
to the committee in a written report by April 15, 1999. The 
report shall also include an assessment of options and 
associated costs for utilizing the PACM seeker in future 
upgrades to existing Patriot missiles.

Rapid acquisition of manufactured parts

    The committee commends the Department of Defense for the 
decision to transfer the rapid acquisition of manufactured 
parts (RAMP) program to the Defense Logistics Agency (DLA). As 
a DLA-sponsored program, RAMP should be fully leveraged to 
support the rapid acquisition of non-standard and difficult-to-
acquire spare parts in a timely and cost effective manner. The 
committee expects the Department of Defense to continue to 
support this important initiative.

Report on Department of the Navy applications for high-performance 
        computing

    The federal government is making substantial investments in 
the development of advanced computational capability through 
the Department of Energy's Accelerated Strategic Computing 
Initiative (ASCI). The hardware and software advances developed 
within the ASCI program could be applicable to Department of 
Defense requirements, such as integrated, simulation-based 
engineering; design and acquisition of complex platforms and 
weapons systems; distributed computation for network-centric 
warfare; and integrated simulation and database tools to 
support a just-in-time, over-the-horizon logistics train.
    The committee notes that the Department of the Navy appears 
to be well positioned to leverage these unique resources. 
Specifically, ASCI is expected to enable significantly advanced 
computational fluid dynamics capabilities that could be of use 
in the design of high-performance ships, submarines, and 
aircraft. Accordingly, the committee directs the Department of 
the Navy to deliver a report to the congressional defense 
committees, not later than February 1, 1999, on its needs for 
high-performance computational capability and the extent to 
which it could utilize technology being developed with the ASCI 
program.

Report on national security space policy

    The National Space Policy, issued in September 1996, 
established the goals of the U.S. space program and established 
guidelines for national security space policy. The key national 
security priorities under the National Space Policy are: (1) 
improve our ability to support military operations worldwide; 
(2) monitor and respond to strategic military threats; and (3) 
monitor arms control and non-proliferation agreements and 
activities.
    Although the Department of Defense has begun work on a 
defense space policy document, such a document has yet to be 
produced. As national security grows more dependent on space 
for a wide variety of applications, a definitive national 
security space policy document is a necessity. Such a document 
should be a key underpinning of national security space 
programmatic and funding priorities. The committee is concerned 
that there is no coordinated and unified national security 
space policy. The committee notes that, pursuant to the 
National Space Policy, space activities necessary for national 
security will be overseen by the Secretary of Defense and the 
Director of Central Intelligence, with the assistance of other 
departments and agencies as appropriate. Therefore, the 
committee directs the Secretary of Defense and the Director of 
Central Intelligence, in consultation with other appropriate 
departments and agencies, to prepare by September 1, 1999 a 
national security space policy document, consistent with the 
National Space Policy. The committee also directs the Secretary 
of Defense to complete the Department of Defense space policy 
document by February 15, 1999.

Software engineering institute

    The committee is aware of the important work undertaken by 
the Software Engineering Institute (SEI) in promulgating the 
use of best software engineering practices throughout the 
Department of Defense acquisition and development community,the 
defense industry, and supporting software suppliers. Such work is 
critical to help maintain the momentum of defense acquisition reform. 
The committee understands that the sponsorship of SEI was transferred 
in June 1997 from the Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency (DARPA) 
to the Office of the Under Secretary of Defense for Acquisition and 
Technology, but that the funding request for SEI in fiscal year 1999 is 
included within the programs administered by DARPA. The committee 
directs that DARPA make no reduction in funding for SEI below any 
amounts mandated by congressional authorization.

Software productivity

    The committee affirms the importance of applications-
specific software for military systems to enable full systems 
performance. The basis for future development of such software 
is the result of combining the precision personal software 
processes with new developments in software visualization. The 
committee urges the Department of Defense to consider moving 
rapidly toward the development and implementation of new 
software tools based on these theoretical bases. This 
development should provide for software resilience and fault 
tolerance issues, which are critical for systems that will be 
deployed in battlefield environments.

Space weather

    The committee is concerned about potential disruptions to 
military operations caused by the next solar maximum in the 
solar cycle, which will occur in the year 2000. This solar 
maximum will bring with it increased instances of solar flares 
and geomagnetic storm activity that history has demonstrated 
can render considerable damage to fragile space assets and 
ground-based infrastructure, such as power grids. The 1989 
solar maximum resulted in interference at missile warning radar 
sites, temporary loss by U.S. Space Command of over 1,300 
objects in space, and the collapse of Quebec Province's power 
grid. Given its huge investment in satellites, the United 
States can not afford to be unprepared for the effects of space 
weather. The committee directs the Secretary of Defense to 
submit a report to the congressional defense committees by 
April 15, 1999 on the plans of the Department of Defense to 
protect these valuable yet fragile assets from the 2000 solar 
maximum.

Torpedo defense

    The committee strongly supports the torpedo defense 
advanced technology demonstration included in the President's 
budget request (PE 63792N). The torpedo defense demonstration 
will be the culmination of significant research and investment 
in this highly versatile weapon. The 6.25'' anti-torpedo 
torpedo will significantly enhance surface amphibious and 
support ship defense against in-coming torpedoes and give 
submarine fleet an in-close weapon as well as an anti-torpedo 
capability. The development tests have shown the weapon to be 
highly effective and in-water validation should commence 
without delay.

Totally integration munitions enterprise

    The committee notes that Secretary of the Army has not 
included funding in the budget request for the total 
integration munitions enterprise, despite indications that this 
technology could significantly improve the cost of lower volume 
ammunition production. The committee urges the Secretary of the 
Army to review the potential of this project and to consider 
support for such technologies in future year budget requests.

Trajectory correctable munition

    The committee is aware of a new 155 millimeter artillery 
system under development by the government of Sweden, known as 
the trajectory correctable munition (TCM) program. This program 
may have significant potential for unprecedented accuracy 
through the ability to correct the course of the projectile in 
flight. The committee understands that the senior officials 
from the government of the United States and Sweden have met 
and are initiating actions to determine common requirements to 
achieve interoperability standards through sharing mature 
technologies. The committee sees TCM as a potential candidate 
for inclusion in the foreign comparative testing program or as 
an advanced concept technology demonstration. The committee 
urges the Department of Defense to consider TCM for evaluation 
and accelerated deployment should the technology be 
demonstrated to have sufficient promise.

United States-Japan management training

    The committee believes that the United States-Japan 
management training program has demonstrated the potential for 
preparing U.S. scientists, engineers, and managers for 
positions in U.S. defense and commercial industries and 
government. The program provides access to Japanese research 
and development, institutions, and facilities for the purpose 
of learning current Japanese management policies and practices. 
The committee expressed its desire for this program to 
transition to non-defense support in the statement of managers 
to accompany the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal 
Year 1998 (S. Rept. 105-29). The committee notes the process of 
transition is currently under negotiation in accordance with 
that guidance. The Secretary of Defense may apply up to $10.0 
million from discretionary funds in fiscal year 1999 to enable 
the program to complete the transition. The committee 
understands that any Department of Defense funding for the 
program will be discontinued after fiscal year 1999.
                  TITLE III--OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE

The Approaching Crisis
    Over the past several years, a number of military officers 
have expressed deep concerns regarding the trends in the 
operational readiness of the armed forces. Last year, these 
trends led one military officer to state: ``The storm clouds 
are on the horizon.'' This was a year in which most of the 
Armed Forces were ready to meet their wartime mission; but in 
order to do so in a resource constrained environment, they were 
forced to resort to cost-saving practices which could impact 
negatively on wartime readiness. For example, the Marine Corps 
began using retread tires for some of their vehicles in order 
to save funds that are desperately needed for training and 
other essential operations. Hopefully, the Marines will never 
have to test the performance of retread tires in the desert 
heat of the Middle East.
    While the overall readiness of forward deployed units 
remains adequate, this is increasingly accomplished at the 
expense of non-deployed units. According to Vice Admiral 
Browne, Commander of the Navy's Third Fleet, ``more today than 
in the past, forward deployed readiness is being maintained 
with the slimmest of margins and at the expense of CONUS based 
training and increased individual PERSTEMPO.'' He went on to 
say, ``to get the USS Denver underway early as part of the 
Tarawa ARG, two other ships were cannibalized for parts.'' 
Furthermore, as Colonel Bozarth of the Air Force's 388th 
Operations Group stated, ``The people that pay the price, 
though, are the folks that are back home. Because if you take a 
wing like ours, 5 years ago, in 1993, we were looking at FMC 
[Full Mission Capable] rates in the 90's. In the 1995 to 1997 
time frame, we are looking at mission capable rates in the 
80's. Now we are down in the lower 70's.'' Finally, according 
to Captain Kilcline, Commander of Carrier Air Wing 14 which is 
preparing for deployment, ``the Air Wing reflects Navy-wide 
trends with FMC rates 10 to 15 percent lower than comparable 
phases last turnaround cycle. This is due to reduced funding 
for spare parts, manning levels and technical expertise, and 
aging aircraft.''
    Maintaining the readiness of deployed forces at the expense 
of CONUS based forces can be accomplished with little 
noticeable impact during peacetime. However, the impact on the 
ability of the Armed Forces to be able to successfully execute 
the requirements of two major theater wars is potentially 
significant. Lt. General Hendrix, Commanding General of the 
Army's 5th Corps in Europe, commenting on the risk associated 
with the readiness of the forces to fulfill these requirements 
stated: ``it is certainly a medium to high risk.''
    Unfortunately, there are reports that even the readiness of 
the forward deployed units is beginning to suffer. According to 
Naval officers in the Pacific, 20 percent of the deployed 
planes on the carriers are grounded awaiting parts or other 
maintenance requirements while cannibalization of aircraft has 
gone up by 15 percent over the last three carrier deployments. 
In fact, Admiral Browne recently acknowledged that ``Full 
Mission Capable (FMC) rates from fiscal year 1996 to fiscal 
year 1997 for our deployed aircraft have declined from 62 
percent to 55 percent.'' Such grim statistics raise concerns 
about the ability of the fleet to carry out a major theater 
war, or even maintain a two carrier presence in the Persian 
Gulf, unless adequate resources are provided.
    The Air Force faces similar problems. In the words of 
Colonel Bozarth, ``I am concerned that ongoing operational 
commitments, chronic shortages of skilled personnel and 
inadequate funding are eroding our readiness. Simply, I don't 
feel we're as ready to execute our precision guided munition 
(PGM) mission as we were 3 years ago.''
    The concerns that these and other military officers raised 
are generally rooted in two key problems which threaten the 
readiness of the U.S. Armed Forces: a lack of modernization 
funding which has led to older and more maintenance intensive 
equipment, and the increased commitment of a greatly reduced 
force structure.
Maintaining Current Readiness on the Backs of the Troops
    It has largely been due to the selfless dedication of the 
men and women in uniform that our military establishment has 
been able to maintain the standards of readiness necessary to 
meet the current high operating tempos of our military forces. 
In fact, according to General Butch Neal, Assistant Commandant 
of the Marine Corps, ``during these challenging and busy times, 
while we are maintaining required readiness standards, and we 
are ready for every call, we are doing it on the backs of the 
troops * * * we are maintaining readiness on the backs of our 
young Marines.'' General Neal is not alone in expressing this 
concern. According to General Esmond, Commander of the Air 
Force's Air Warfare Center: ``The average workweek has been 
extended to 60 to 65 hours * * *.Duty schedules have included 
12-hour shifts for the past three years. And this has been 
theduty schedule exclusively since October of 1996.''
    The demands that have been placed upon military personnel 
and their families, along with the increased opportunities in 
the private sector, is beginning to erode the retention rates 
of enlisted and officer ranks alike. Pilots and highly skilled 
enlisted technicians are leaving at extraordinarily high rates 
as civilian companies offer better pay, shorter work days, and 
no chance of a six month deployment to Bosnia. Perhaps most 
disconcerting is that this loss of personnel is true even for 
elite and highly motivated groups such as the Navy SEALs, where 
lieutenants are departing the service at more than twice the 
historic rate, which threatens to undermine the readiness and 
future leadership of this elite force.

Balancing Current and Future Readiness

    Given the readiness problems faced by the Armed Forces and 
the constraints of the Federal budget, the committee carefully 
examined the best approach to preserve the national security of 
the United States. Unfortunately, the resources available for 
the Department of Defense (DOD) are insufficient to prepare for 
the most critical national security threats in both the near 
and long-term, while simultaneously responding to an extremely 
demanding foreign policy. Therefore, a balance must be achieved 
in order to minimize the overall risks.
    Readiness is jeopardized because the military equipment in 
use is increasingly older and more time-consuming and expensive 
to maintain. The aging equipment, coupled with increased 
deployments for contingency and other operations, is resulting 
in reduced equipment readiness that undermines the ability of 
the armed forces to perform their mission.
    In recent testimony before the committee, General Richard 
of the Marine Corps Air-Ground Combat Center stated: ``This 
equipment, especially some of the rolling stock, is getting 
exceedingly old, and the maintenance to maintain that equipment 
is getting more expensive every year.'' He further stated: ``We 
are living off past investments. We cannot extend equipment 
life forever, particularly when we are using it three to four 
times the TEMPO of operational forces gear.''
    This point was further reinforced by General Fulford, 
Commanding General of the First Marine Expeditionary Force, who 
stated, ``I MEF [First Marine Expeditionary Force] operations 
and training continue to place extraordinary demands on our 
aging equipment; it is wearing out at an exponentially 
accelerating rate and increasingly requires more time, effort, 
and money to maintain it.'' He went on to say, ``the best 
maintained equipment has service life limitations and the best 
people can only work so many hours a day.'' This message was 
reinforced by General Hendrix when he stated, ``You've got to 
get to the future.''
    There is a strong desire to follow the traditional approach 
of increasing the Operation and Maintenance accounts in order 
to rectify near-term readiness problems. However, to do so 
could jeopardize the future readiness of the armed forces by 
continuing to delay essential modernization. Perhaps General 
Neal best captured the readiness impact associated with the 
deferment of modernization programs when he said that * * *, 
``today's modernization concerns will become tomorrow's 
readiness dilemmas.''
    For this reason, and because of the need to modernize the 
military to ensure that it is prepared to meet the threats of 
the future, and because the threats of today, although 
dangerous, pale in comparison to the potential threats of the 
21st Century, the committee determined that the appropriate 
course of action was to dedicate additional resources to the 
procurement accounts in order to enhance long-term readiness. 
However, the committee recognizes that this limited transfer of 
funds will not go far in resolving the bow-wave of 
modernization needs that is quickly approaching.
    Rather than jeopardizing near-term readiness by cutting the 
operations and training funds of the military services in order 
to generate the necessary resources for modernization, the 
committee recommends a reduction in DOD overhead including the 
downsizing of its civilian bureaucracy. The committee notes 
that such a reduction is in line with the goals of the Defense 
Reform Initiative. Furthermore, in order to preserve the near-
term readiness of the military services in these challenging 
times, the committee recommends additional funds for the 
operations and training accounts of each active and reserve 
component.

Overview

    The Operations and Maintenance (O&M) accounts amount to 
more than 33 percent of the total Department of Defense budget. 
Expenditures from these accounts pay the costs for the day-to-
day operations of our military forces; all individual, unit and 
joint training for military members; maintenance and support of 
the weapons, vehicles and equipment in the military services; 
purchase and distribution of spare parts and supplies to 
support military operations; and support, maintenance, and 
repair of buildings and bases throughout the Department of 
Defense.
    The funding in these accounts has a direct impact on the 
combat readiness of U.S. military forces. While insufficient 
O&M funds would lead to problems with short-term or current 
readiness, excessive and unnecessary O&M expenditures for low 
priority or non-defense programs only serve to restrict the 
availability of funds for modernization programs.
    The budget request included $94.2 billion for theoperation 
and maintenance of the armed forces and component agencies of the 
Department of Defense in fiscal year 1999.
    The committee recommends authorization of $93.8 billion for 
the O&M accounts for fiscal year 1999, a decrease of 
approximately $300.0 million from the budget request.
    The recommended amount authorized for the O&M accounts 
includes, to the extent provided in an appropriations act, 
transfer of $150.0 million from the National Defense Stockpile 
Transaction Fund.
    The committee recommends authorization of $764.1 million 
for the revolving and management funds.
    The recommended authorization for fiscal year 1999 is 
summarized in the following table:
              SUBTITLE A--AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS


Sec. 303. Armed Forces Retirement Home.

    The committee recommends a provision that would authorize 
$70.7 million from the Armed Forces Retirement Home Trust Fund 
to be appropriated for operation of the Armed Forces Retirement 
Home during fiscal year 1999.

Sec. 304. Transfer from the National Defense Stockpile Transaction 
        Fund.

    The committee recommends a provision that would authorize 
the Secretary of Defense, to the extent provided in an 
appropriations act, to transfer $150.0 million from the 
National Defense Stockpile Transaction Fund (NDSTF) to the 
operations and maintenance accounts. The committee does not 
believe that the transfer of $350.0 million from the NDSTF to 
the Defense Working Capital Funds (WCFs), as requested by the 
administration, was necessary or appropriate, and therefore 
does not recommend a provision authorizing this transfer. The 
Department of Defense should eliminate its advanced billings 
through better management of the WCFs rather than seek relief 
through transfers from the NDSTF.

                   SUBTITLE B--PROGRAM REQUIREMENTS,

                     RESTRICTIONS, AND LIMITATIONS

Sec. 311. Special Operations Command counterproliferation and 
        counterterrorism activities.

    The committee recommends a provision that would provide 
$18.5 million for the unfunded training requirements associated 
with the counter-proliferation and counter-terrorism activities 
of the Special Operations Command (SOCOM). Furthermore, the 
committee recommends an additional $5.0 million in SOCOM's 
Operation and Maintenance account for the unfunded maritime 
training requirements associated with this mission.
    Over the past several years we have witnessed a dramatic 
increase in the threat posed to U.S. national security from 
terrorists or rogue nations possessing weapons of mass 
destruction. For this reason, SOCOM has been assigned an 
increased role in countering these threats, which has forced 
the command to intensify its training and related operations. 
The budget request does not provide sufficient funding to fully 
carry out the training that is required to ensure that these 
forces are able to effectively perform their assigned missions. 
Therefore, the committee has included a provision that would 
allow SOCOM to use the funds that are no longer necessary for 
the operation of six patrol coastal craft, that will be funded 
through the counter-narcotics central transfer account, to 
enhance its readiness to meet its counter-proliferation and 
counter-terrorism missions.

Sec. 312. Tagging system for identification of hydrocarbon fuels used 
        by the Department of Defense.

    The committee recommends a provision that would authorize 
the Department of Defense to conduct a pilot program to 
determine if hydrocarbon fuels used by the Department can be 
tagged. The tagging of these fuels would help deter theft and 
facilitate the determination of the source of surface and 
underground pollution in locations having separate fuel storage 
facilities from the Department and civilian companies.

Sec. 313. Pilot program for acceptance and use of landing fees charged 
        for use of domestic military airfields by civil aircraft.

    The committee recommends a provision that would authorize a 
military service to accept payments for the use of domestic 
military and shared use airfields by civil aircraft and to use 
those payments for the operation and maintenance of the 
airfield.

                  SUBTITLE C--ENVIRONMENTAL PROVISIONS

Sec. 321. Transportation of polychlorinated biphenyls from abroad for 
        disposal in the United States.

    Based on an administration request, the committee 
recommends a provision that would amend Chapter 157 of title 
10, United States Code, by adding a new section to permit 
Department of Defense agencies to transport to the United 
States for disposal, treatment, or storage of foreign 
manufactured polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs) generated by the 
Department's overseas activities. The provision would ensure 
that the PCB-containing material transported to the United 
States is handled in an environmentally responsible manner.
    Consistent with Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) 
regulations and guidance, the Department previously transported 
both domestic and foreign source PCBs at concentrations of less 
than 50 ppm. Department of Defense agencies have relied on 40 
C.F.R. 761.93(a)(i) as the authority for transporting foreign 
manufactured PCBs from overseas locations to the United States 
for disposition. Domestic source PCBs have been returned to the 
United States pursuant to a November 13, 1980 EPA General 
Counsel opinion.
    On July 7, 1997, the United States Court of Appeals for the 
Ninth Circuit rendered a decision that the EPA General Counsel 
has interpreted as banning imports of foreign manufactured PCBs 
at any concentration. (Sierra Club v. EPA, No. 96-7-223, slip 
op. (9th Cir. July 7, 1997)). Basel Convention limitations on 
the transboundary movement of hazardous waste, and the 
associated regional or national waste importation bans, renders 
third country disposition a very limited option. Without the 
authority to transport PCBs to the United States for disposal, 
the Department faces the prospect of indefinite storage at 
overseas installations with inadequate facilities that may or 
may not be available to meet future disposal needs.
    The committee understands that the provision would have a 
relatively minor impact on the overall level of U.S. disposal 
of PCBs generated by the Department of Defense. In fact, the 
Department has informed the committee that it anticipates an 
annual need to transport approximately 150,000 pounds of 
foreign manufactured PCB-containing materials into the United 
States for the next five years. In comparison, the Department 
has disposed of about 9 million pounds of U.S. manufactured 
PCB-containing material in the United States during the past 18 
months.
    The committee recommends a provision that would resolve a 
difficult overseas hazardous waste management issue, without 
amending Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA) or creating any 
new standards under that Act. The provision specifically 
precludes the use of U.S. landfills for the disposition of 
foreign manufactured PCBs, unless the landfill meets all of the 
technical requirements set forth in 40 C.F.R. section 
761.75(b)(3), without waiver. Consistent with TSCA, the 
provision would require a determination of no unreasonable risk 
by the EPA Administrator prior to any transportation of foreign 
manufactured PCBs into the United States.
    The committee directs the Department to submit to EPA and 
the congressional defense committees a plan, no later than 60 
days after the enactment of this Act, that provides for the 
transportation and disposition of foreign manufactured PCBs. 
The plan would serve as a basis for public notice and comment, 
and for the Administrator's determination in accordance with 
the requirements of this provision.

Sec. 322. Modification of deadline for submittal to Congress of annual 
        reports on environmental activities.

    Current law requires the Department of Defense to submit 
detailed reports on environmental cleanup and compliance 
activities 30 days after the President submits the fiscal year 
budget to the Congress. The Department has not been able to 
consistently meet that 30 day deadline. As a result, the 
administration requested legislation that would amend section 
2706 of title 10, United States Code, by extending the annual 
reporting deadline. The committee recommends a provision that 
would substitute the 45 day annual reporting deadline for the 
current 30 day period.

Sec. 323. Submarine solid waste control.

    The National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 
1994, section 1003, amended the Act to Prevent Pollution from 
Ships (APPS) (33 U.S.C. 1901, et. seq.) by requiring the Navy 
to submit a plan to Congress by November 1996 that addresses 
compliance with the prohibition against discharging solid waste 
(paper, cardboard, metal, and glass) in ``special areas'' (the 
Baltic Seas, the North Sea, the Mediterranean Sea, the Red Sea, 
the Persian Gulf, and the Antarctic Ocean). The APPS, as 
amended in fiscal year 1994, implemented the Annex V of the 
International Convention for the Prevention of Pollution on 
Ships (MARPOL).
    The amended APPS specifically required the Navy to: (1) 
install plastic processors aboard U.S. Navy surface ships by 
December 31, 1998; (2) comply with the prohibition on plastics 
discharges for submarines by December 31, 2008; (3) comply with 
the prohibition on discharges of other solid waste (except food 
waste) in special areas from surface ships by December 31, 
2000; and (4) comply with the prohibition on discharges of 
other solid waste (except food waste) in special areas from 
submarines by December 31, 2008.
    In 1996, the Navy concluded that full compliance with the 
APPS was not technologically feasible for surface ships. 
Consistent with that determination, the administration 
requested legislation in fiscal year 1997 that would amend 
section 1902(c) of the APPS to allow for the use of pulpers and 
shredders to dispose of non-plastic and non-floating solidwaste 
within MARPOL Annex V special use areas. Submersible vessels or 
submarines were not addressed in the APPS amendment.
    As part of the fiscal year 1999 budget proposal, the 
administration has requested a legislative proposal that would 
authorize certain submersible vessels owned or operated by the 
Navy to discharge, within Annex V special use areas, non-
plastic garbage that has been compacted and weighted to ensure 
negative buoyancy. The Navy has determined that compliance with 
the special use area requirements of Annex V would impair 
submarine operations and operational capability, or would not 
be technologically feasible. A comprehensive Navy environmental 
analysis revealed that the discharge of non-plastic garbage 
from Navy submarines would not have a significant effect on the 
marine environment, either within or beyond the limits of 
MARPOL Annex V special use areas. Moreover, discharges would 
only be authorized beyond 12 nautical miles from land.
    The committee recommends a provision that would authorize 
continued use of existing submarine solid waste processing 
equipment. Such authorization would remain subject to the 
requirements of 33 U.S.C. 1902(e)(1), which requires the Navy 
to continue development of technologies and practices necessary 
to ensure compliance with Annex V on or before December 31, 
2008.

Sec. 324. Payment of stipulated penalties assessed under CERCLA.

    The Department of Defense (DOD) has entered into Federal 
Facility Agreements (FFAs) with environmental regulators for 
installations that are on or proposed for inclusion on the 
National Priorities List. FFAs are typically three party 
agreements between a DOD installation, the state, and the 
Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) region. FFAs establish 
schedules and milestones for the completion of actions related 
to environmental cleanup of DOD installations. The agreements 
are intended to establish a working relationship between DOD 
and the regulators to facilitate site cleanup, consistent with 
the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation and 
Liability Act (CERCLA). The FFAs allow for dispute resolution 
and the use of stipulated penalties in the event of missed 
deadlines. However, stipulated penalties are not available if a 
delay is the result of an unforeseen disruptive or force 
majeure event.
    Payment of stipulated penalties is contingent upon 
authorization and appropriation. Subsequent to authorization 
and appropriation, stipulated penalties are paid out of the 
Defense Environmental Restoration Account (DERA) or the Base 
Realignment and Closure Account (BRAC), depending upon the 
status of the installation.
    On September 5, 1996, McClellan Air Force Base (AFB), a 
BRAC installation, informed state and federal regulators of a 
contaminated groundwater discharge that exceeded safe drinking 
water limits. The FFA for McClellan AFB requires the operation 
of a groundwater extraction system (GES) and a groundwater 
treatment plant (GWTP). The discharge occurred during the 
modification of the GWTP.
    In February 1997, the EPA and the State of California 
assessed a $15,000 penalty for noncompliance with the FFA. 
McClellan AFB acknowledged its failure to meet GWTP sampling 
and operational requirements under the FAA and declined to 
invoke dispute resolution.
    Based on an administration request, the committee 
recommends a provision that would authorize payment of the 
$15,000 stipulated penalty. The committee expects that the 
parties to the FFAs will focus on their evolving partnership 
and work out their differences in a manner that avoids 
assessment of penalties.

Sec. 325. Authority to pay negotiated settlement for environmental 
        cleanup of formerly used defense sites in Canada.

    In fiscal year 1998, the administration submitted a 
legislative proposal that would authorize the Secretary of 
Defense to provide an ex-gratia reimbursement to the Government 
of Canada in the amount of $100.0 million through annual 
payments over a ten year period for the environmental cleanup 
of four sites formerly operated by the U.S. Armed Forces in 
Canada: 21 Distant Early Warning (DEW) Line sites; Goose Bay 
Airfield; Haines-Fairbanks Pipeline sites; and the U.S. Naval 
Station, Argentia. The authorization request was based on a 
negotiated agreement between the United States and Canada.
    The agreement provided for the payment of the $100.0 
million into the Foreign Military Sales (FMS) Trust Fund 
Account so that the Canadian Government could draw against this 
account to purchase unspecified military equipment from an 
undetermined manufacturing source. The Congress declined to 
authorize the payment in the National Defense Authorization Act 
for Fiscal Year 1998.
    As part of the fiscal year 1999 budget request, the 
administration has renewed its legislative proposal to pay 
Canada $100.0 million. Based on information regarding the 
unique environmental implications for U.S. border states and 
the longstanding U.S.-Canadian national security alliance, the 
committee recommends a provision that would allow for the 
payment of the $100.0 million reimbursement to Canada, subject 
to the annual authorizations and appropriations process. With 
each annual request for authorization and appropriation, the 
Department shall submit to Congress evidence of aproportionate 
Canadian investment in environmental cleanup activities conducted at 
the four facilities in question. The funds for each fiscal year shall 
be paid from amounts appropriated for Operation and Maintenance, 
Defense-Wide, Administration and Servicewide Activities.
    It is the specific intent of this committee that the basis 
for and the authorization of such reimbursement not extend to 
similar claims by other nations. It is also the committee's 
intent that the $100.0 million ex-gratia reimbursement of 
Canada be paid in full satisfaction of any and all claims 
asserted against the United States by Canada for environmental 
cleanup of sites in Canada. Finally, the committee understands 
that the Canadian Government has committed to spending the 
entire $100.0 million of the reimbursement in a manner that 
will benefit U.S. industry and workers.

Sec. 326. Settlement of claims of foreign governments for environmental 
        cleanup of overseas sites formerly used by the Department of 
        Defense.

    The committee recommends a provision that would require the 
administration to provide the Congress with advance notice of 
any negotiations related to the ex-gratia settlement of 
environmental cleanup claims by other countries.

Sec. 327. Arctic Military Environmental Cooperation Program.

    The budget request included $5.5 million in the defense 
operations and maintenance account to address military 
environmental matters in the Arctic region under the Arctic 
Military Environmental Cooperation (AMEC) program, to include 
environmental restoration activities. The committee understands 
that the Department of Defense developed the AMEC program to 
address military environmental matters in the Arctic region 
with fiscal year 1998 funds appropriated under the Cooperative 
Threat Reduction (CTR) program. The committee, however, was not 
notified of the obligation of CTR funds, pursuant to existing 
legislative requirements. Moreover, the Congress has 
consistently precluded the use of funds authorized and 
appropriated under the CTR program to promote environmental 
restoration.
    The committee notes that the statutory notice requirement 
and limitations on the use of CTR funds have helped to preserve 
the integrity of the program. AMEC is a unique environmental 
program in that it is not based on treaty obligations or legal 
requirements. Instead, AMEC evolved out of the environmental 
concerns underlying the removal, storage, and disposal of 
weapons grade materials, directly related to the national 
security focus of CTR. Based on the Department's fiscal year 
1999 budget request, which is unsupported by a program, plan, 
or statutory direction, the committee is concerned that AMEC 
has the potential to become the cleanup program for the Arctic 
region.
    The committee recommends a provision that would authorize 
$4.0 million in fiscal year 1999 for AMEC and would direct that 
the program address important military environmental issues 
related to U.S. national security in the Arctic. The AMEC funds 
would be used to continue cooperation with appropriate 
international military organizations involved in activities 
within the Arctic region, particularly the Russian Federation. 
The provision would designate AMEC as a program that would be 
subject to the legislative prohibitions and limitations of the 
CTR program, to include section 1503 of the National Defense 
Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 1997 (Public Law 105-85). The 
committee declined to fund the entire requested amount because 
there are fiscal year 1999 AMEC projects that would be 
inconsistent with section 1503.
    The committee directs that the fiscal year 1999 AMEC funds 
not be obligated or expended until 45 days after the Secretary 
of Defense submits a plan that specifies the conformance of 
AMEC projects to existing prohibitions and limitations on the 
use of CTR funds. That plan shall also identify overall program 
goals, projects, and outyear budget projections. Moreover, the 
committee directs that the plan specify a program termination 
date.

                  SUBTITLE D--COUNTER-DRUG ACTIVITIES

    The budget request for drug interdiction and other counter-
drug activities of the Department of Defense (DOD) totals 
$882.8 million. This includes $727.6 million for the central 
transfer account and $155.2 million for the operating budgets 
of the military services for authorized counter-drug 
operations.
    However, these numbers do not accurately represent DOD's 
total commitment to the war on drugs. For example, these 
numbers do not include a proportionate share of the costs of 
procuring military systems that are used to support the war on 
drugs. Although originally purchased for different missions, 
these systems are also used for drug-interdiction efforts. 
Therefore, any analysis of DOD's contributions should take into 
account an appropriate portion of these procurement costs, just 
as the procurement costs for any equipment that the Drug 
Enforcement Agency and the U.S. Customs Service would be 
accounted for if used for their counter-narcotics operations.
    Furthermore, the drug interdiction budget does not capture 
the approximately $130.0 million in personnel costs for the 
thousands of active duty service members who are engaged in 
counter-narcotics activities at any one time.Moreover, the 
budget does not include all depot level maintenance costs for assets 
used in counter-drug activities and a proportionate share of base 
operation support costs for units assigned to counter-drug activities.
    In addition, these numbers do not reflect the value of the 
equipment and training that DOD provides to other nations in 
support of their counter-narcotics activities pursuant to 
section 506 of the Foreign Assistance Act. This section 
provides authorization for up to $75.0 million worth of 
counter-narcotics support to foreign governments each year. The 
committee is concerned that this authority, which was intended 
to be used to enhance U.S. counter-narcotics support to nations 
in the source zone, is simply used to offset Department of 
State budgets. The committee believes that such drawdowns 
should give highest priority to those items that will enhance a 
source nation government's counter-narcotics capability, rather 
than to items that provide offset savings to Department of 
State budgets as is suggested in State's fiscal year 1998 
drawdown proposal.
    A careful examination of the total DOD resources dedicated 
to this mission reveals a significant contribution on the part 
of our armed forces to America's war on drugs, far more 
significant than some are willing to acknowledge. The committee 
directs the Secretary of Defense to include an estimate of 
DOD's total contributions in future years budget submissions.
    The committee is concerned that in some cases the 
Department of Defense may be pressured into dedicating scarce 
resources within its budget recommendation to the President for 
the counter-narcotics missions that are the primary 
responsibility of the Department of State or other Federal 
agencies. This practice could be detrimental to other high 
priority military missions, including counter-terrorism and 
counter-proliferation, in today's resource constrained 
environment. The committee believes that the Secretary of 
Defense and the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff are in 
the best position to understand all of the national security 
responsibilities of DOD, and to make a balanced recommendation 
to the President regarding the manner in which the resources of 
the armed forces should be utilized in such a way as to most 
effectively carry out those responsibilities.
    The committee recommends the following budget for DOD's 
counter-narcotics activities.

Drug Interdiction & Counter-drug Activities, Operations and Maintenance

         (In thousands of dollars; may not add due to rounding)   Amount
Fiscal year 1997 drug and counter-drug request................  $882,831
    Goal 1 (dependent demand reduction).......................   $12,830
    Goal 2 (Support to DLEAs).................................   $97,384
    Goal 3 (DOD personnel demand reduction)...................   $72,936
    Goal 4 (drug interdiction--TZ/SWB)........................  $406,554
    Goal 5 (Supply reduction).................................  $293,127
Increases:
    Caribbean/eastern Pacific surface interdiction............   $10,000
    Gulf states initiative/regional counter-drug training.....    $7,000
Decreases:
    JIATF south...............................................   $17,000

Enhanced Caribbean/Eastern Pacific Interdiction Initiative

    The Committee continues to be concerned with the impact 
that our military withdrawal from Panama will have on our drug 
interdiction capabilities. The Panamanian facilities provide a 
unique location from which to deploy our counter-narcotics 
assets. The loss of these facilities will have a significant 
impact upon our ability to maintain the current level of drug 
interdiction efforts. Since the United States and the 
Government of Panama have been unable to reach an agreement 
regarding the continued deployment of U.S. military personnel 
to Panama after the remaining facilities are turned over at the 
end of 1999, the Committee believes it is imprudent to 
significantly expand and facilitize Joint Interagency Task 
Force (JIATF) South as recommended in the President's budget 
request. Until such an agreement is signed, the committee 
believes that JIATF South should operate with the same 
resources that it received for fiscal year 1998. Therefore, the 
committee recommends a $17.0 million reduction in the budget 
request for this program.
    The committee believes that DOD should explore new 
initiatives to enhance current interdiction capabilities so 
that if Panamanian facilities are lost, a viable interdiction 
program remains. To assist DOD in this effort, the committee 
has included a provision that would provide $18.5 million 
($10.0 million more than requested for the Carribean) within 
the counter-narcotics central transfer account for the 
increased deployment of DOD's Patrol Coastal Craft (PCs) to the 
Caribbean and Eastern Pacific, and any maintenance or 
modifications of these craft necessary to enhance 
theirinterdiction capabilities. This deployment will provide the 
Commander-in-Chief of the United States Southern Command (CINCSOUTH) 
with a more substantial Naval presence in his theater of operations 
with which to increase the surface interdiction efforts of suspected 
narco-traffickers. The Department should explore the opportunity of 
using Reserve personnel, to the maximum extent practicable, in the 
operation of these vessels in order to maintain satisfactory PERSTEMPO 
rates of the PC crews.
    The committee understands that DOD has performed an initial 
assessment of the viability of utilizing PCs in a mothership 
concept to enhance its maritime interdiction capabilities. This 
will be of particular help in the interdiction of go-fast boats 
that are used by the narco-traffickers to move the bulk of 
their drugs through the Caribbean and Eastern Pacific. Under 
this concept, Patrol Coastal Craft and small Coast Guard 
vessels that are particularly effective platforms for 
intercepting maritime targets, including go-fast boats, would 
be supported by a large ship such as an amphibious vessel, CD 
modified T-AGOS, or Coast Guard Bouy Tenders. This would allow 
a large number of the smaller vessels to remain on station for 
longer periods of time performing interdiction missions. Such a 
presence would seriously disrupt the narco-traffickers'' 
maritime smuggling capabilities. According to a DOD report 
``the combination of a mothership with maritime interceptor 
craft, coupled with airborne detection and monitoring, is a 
potential solution to the Western Caribbean [WCARIB] go fast 
threat . . . A mothership operation provides both a very long-
duration, at-sea presence covering a large threat area, and the 
requisite fast maritime craft necessary to intercept the target 
go-fasts.'' . . . ``Coast Guard Patrol Boats (WPBs) and Navy 
Cyclone Class Patrol Craft (PCs) are very effective platforms 
for intercepting maritime targets, placing boarding teams on 
suspect vessels, and relieving larger ships of end-game 
units.''
    The committee encourages the Department of Defense to 
pursue this mothership concept utilizing the PCs and any other 
available Navy and Coast Guard vessels as maritime interceptor 
craft. The Department of Defense, the U.S. Coast Guard, and the 
U.S. Customs Service should develop a plan to ensure that the 
necessary mothership platforms and surveillance vessels 
(including DOD and Customs tracker aircraft) are available for 
the requisite time period to effectively test this concept.
    The committee directs the Secretary of Defense to provide 
the Committee on Armed Services of the Senate and the Committee 
on National Security of the House of Representatives, with a 
report outlining the extent to which the PCs, operating either 
with or without a mothership, were effective during fiscal year 
1999 in the interdiction and deterrence of maritime drug 
trafficking. This report should also outline CINCSOUTH's and 
Commander-in-Chief Special Operation Command's (CINCSOCOM's) 
recommendation regarding any future deployment of these craft 
to Southern Command's (SOUTHCOM's) area of responsibility 
(AOR), and the Secretary of Defense's recommendation as to the 
appropriate funding mechanism for these future deployments.

Gulf States Counter-drug Initiative

    The committee understands the Gulf States Counter-drug 
Initiative has grown beyond its original counter-drug mission 
and now performs important work for other high priority 
missions of the Department of Defense, including counter-
terrorism.
    Therefore, the committee supports the transfer of this 
activity from the Department's Counter-drug account to the C3I 
Joint Military Intelligence Program in accordance with its 
increased mission and provides an additional $7.0 million for 
its counter-narcotics activities. The committee expects that 
the Department will fund GSCI's operations through the JMIP 
budget in the future.

Patrol Coastal Craft for Drug Interdiction by Southern Command (sec. 
        331)

    The committee is concerned with the quantity of narcotics 
that are being transported by ship and fast boat through the 
Caribbean and the Eastern Pacific. The committee believes that 
the Department should explore new ways to increase our Naval 
presence in theater in order to impede the ability of narco-
traffickers to use this method of transportation.
    Therefore, to assist the Department in this effort, the 
committee recommends a provision that would provide $18.5 
million within the counter-narcotics central transfer account 
for the increased deployment of the Department's Patrol Coastal 
Craft to the Caribbean and Eastern Pacific.

Program Authority for Department of Defense Support for Counter-Drug 
        Activities (sec. 332)

    The committee recommends a provision that would extend 
section 1004 of the National Defense Authorization Act for 
Fiscal Year 1991 through fiscal year 2004. The provision would 
also allow the Department of Defense to use counterdrug funds 
for any major renovation or modification of a Defense facility 
being used for counter-narcotics purposes. Prior to using this 
authority for any such projects that will exceed $500,000, the 
Department must notify the congressional defense committees.

Southwest Border Fence (sec. 333)

    The committee is concerned with the continued 
transportation of narcotics across the southwest border and 
into the United States. Over the past few years, the Department 
of Defense has explored several initiatives to reducing this 
flow of illegal drugs. One such initiative was the construction 
of a border fence along portions of the border. Unfortunately, 
it appears that this fence, in its current form, has not 
contributed significantly to reducing drug smuggling. Although 
the committee supports such initiatives, the committee believes 
that a thorough analysis should be performed to determine how 
the fence might be made more effective before the Department 
proceeds with any planned expansion. Therefore, the committee 
recommends a provision that would require the Secretary of 
Defense to perform such an analysis before further expansion of 
the southwest border fence.

                       SUBTITLE E--OTHER MATTERS

Sec. 341. Liquidity of working-capital funds.

    The committee recommends provisions that would ensure the 
liquidity of the working-capital funds (WCFs) and provide a 
mechanism to allow the Department of Defense to recover 
operating losses during the year of execution. The committee is 
concerned about the Department's inability to maintain 
sufficient cash balances in the WCFs. The lack of liquidity in 
the WCFs and lack of a procedure to recover operating losses in 
the year of execution has resulted in inefficient business 
practices. With the implementation of the recommended 
provision, advanced billing procedures will no longer be 
necessary and depot maintenances activites will be able to 
maintain sufficent cash balances within WCFs.

Sec. 342. Termination of authority to manage working-capital funds and 
        certain activities through the Defense Business Operations 
        Fund.

    In light of the Department of Defense decision to terminate 
the Defense Business Operations Fund (DBOF), the committee 
recommends a provision that would transfer the relevant 
statutory authorities and reporting requirements to the 
Department's working-capital fund operations (section 2208 of 
title 10, United States Code) and would repeal the statutory 
authority for the DBOF.
    Section 363 of the National Defense Authorization Act for 
Fiscal Year 1997 (Public Law 104-724) required the Department 
of Defense to submit a management improvement plan for its 
working-capital funds, including the Defense Business 
Operations Fund, by September 30, 1997. Section 363 stipulated 
that unless Congress approved this plan, the statutory 
authority for the DBOF would be repealed.
    In December 1996, prior to the conclusion of the study, the 
Department of Defense terminated the DBOF and created separate 
working-capital funds for each military department and for the 
defense agencies. These funds have continued to operate using 
many of the same procedures created under the DBOF.
    It is intended that the recommended provision would ensure 
that the progress brought about by the DBOF, such as recovery 
of the full cost of support activities and separate accounting 
of the financial operations of each business area, are not lost 
now that the DBOF has been terminated.
    The committee commends the Department for the quality of 
the working-capital funds review and report to the Congress, 
and in general supports the recommendations in the Department's 
report. The committee remains concerned, however, that the 
financial problems in the working capital funds, including 
significant financial losses and advance billing, have not yet 
been brought under control.

Sec. 343. Clarification of authority to retain recovered costs of 
        disposals in working capital funds.

    The committee recommends a provision that would clarify the 
authority of the Defense Reutilization and Marketing Service 
(DRMS) to retain, from proceeds received from sales of surplus 
supplies, materials, or equipment, an amount equal to the costs 
incurred in the selling, reutilizing, or otherwise disposing of 
such items. The provision does not result in the retention of 
any additional funds by the Department of Defense.

Sec. 344. Best commercial inventory practices for management of 
        secondary supply items.

    The committee commends the Department of Defense for its 
efforts to reform its business practices including inventory 
management. The committee is concerned with continuing reports 
that the Department of Defense possesses several billion 
dollars worth of excess inventory. Furthermore, the committee 
is concerned that the Department of Defense continues to 
purchase items for which the Department already possesses 
excess quantities. While the committee understands that there 
will always be some level of excess inventory as well as excess 
on order, the committee believes that the Department should 
pursue all available opportunities to streamline and improve 
its operations.
    Therefore, the committee recommends a provision thatwould 
direct the secretary of each military department to develop and submit 
to Congress a schedule for the implementation of the best inventory 
management practices found in the commercial sector that are consistent 
with military requirements. The provision would also require the 
Comptroller General to review the extent to which the service 
secretaries comply with this requirement, and the extent to which the 
best commercial inventory practices are being implemented at the 
Defense Logistics Agency.
    The committee commends the Department of the Navy for 
reducing its level of excess inventory on order to three 
percent, one percent below the Department's goal. The committee 
believes that the other services and the Defense Logistics 
Agency should seek to achieve this same reduced level.

Sec. 345. Increased use of SMART cards.

    The committee recommends a provision that would require the 
Department of Defense to take action to further integrate the 
Smart Card into the naval services.

Sec. 346. Public-private competition in the provision of support 
        services.

    The committee recommends a provision that would make 
several changes to existing law to encourage public-private 
competition of support functions and give the Department 
greater flexibility to manage support services in the most 
cost-effective manner, consistent with the national defense. In 
particular, the provision would: (1) express the sense of the 
Senate that the Secretary of Defense should initiate A-76 
competitions covering 30,000 full time equivalent's (FTE) per 
year for five years as specified in the Secretary's Defense 
Reform Initiative; (2) raise the threshold below which the 
Department is authorized to conduct public-private competitions 
and privatize support functions without going through the A-76 
notification and study process from 20 employees to 50 
employees; and (3) give the Department increased flexibility to 
choose the public or private option that provides the best 
overall value for the taxpayer by expressly authorizing the 
application of ``best value'' techniques common to the 
acquisition system to public-private competitions for support 
services. The new authority provided by this section would be 
effective on January 1, 2001.
    The committee expects the Department to take appropriate 
steps to ensure that the authority to conduct public-private 
competitions and privatize support functions involving fewer 
then 50 employees without going through the A-76 notification 
and study process is not abused by breaking up larger functions 
into sub-elements of 50 or fewer employees. If the Department 
fails to prevent such abuses, the committee anticipates that 
the threshold would again be lowered.

Sec. 347. Condition for providing financial assistance for support of 
        additional duties assigned to the Army National Guard.

    The committee recommends a provision that would require 
competition before the Secretary of the Army could expand the 
amount of support that the Army National Guard performs 
pursuant to section 113(b) of title 32, United States Code, if 
that support is not yet performed by a public entity such as 
the National Guard, or that support is not currently under 
official consideration by the Secretary of the Army for award 
to the National Guard.

Sec. 348. Repeal of prohibition on joint use of Gray Army Airfield, 
        Fort Hood, Texas.

    The committee recommends a provision that would repeal 
section 319 of the National Defense Authorization Act for 
Fiscal Year 1987 that prohibits the Secretary of the Army from 
entering into an agreement to allow civil aviation use of Gray 
Army Airfield, Fort Hood, Texas. The provision would enhance 
the use of Gray Army Air Field and ease the travel of military 
personnel stationed at Fort Hood and the surrounding 
communities.

                     ADDITIONAL MATTERS OF INTEREST

                                  Navy

Ship depot maintenance

    The committee is concerned with the continuing backlog in 
ship depot maintenance. The committee is aware that the Navy 
has an unfunded requirement of $90.0 million for this important 
maintenance function. The committee is concerned with the 
turmoil this may cause within current maintenance schedules, 
and that the cost of this maintenance could increase if current 
problems go uncorrected for another year. Therefore, the 
committee recommends an increase of $30.0 million for ship 
depot maintenance in order to reduce the Navy's unfunded 
requirement in this area.

Tomahawk recertification

    The committee is aware that the Navy has an unfunded 
requirement to recertify 175 Tomahawk missiles. Given 
thereports from the field regarding the shortage of such missiles and 
the need to ensure that those in the inventory are ready and reliable, 
the committee recommends an additional $27.0 million to eliminate this 
backlog. However, as a result of the recent reprogramming that was 
approved by the congressional defense committees, there is a $5.0 
million savings in the weapons support/cruise missile account for 
fiscal year 1999. Therefore, the committee recommends a net increase of 
$22.0 million.

Dredging operations for the maintenance of ships in the inactive 
        reserve

    The committee is aware of the facility capacity constraints 
at Norfolk Naval Shipyard where the Navy currently maintains 
some of its inactive reserve vessels. These constraints require 
the relocation of the U.S.S. Wisconsin to a different location 
in order to make space available for active vessels in need of 
repair and maintenance. Because of the requirement for the Navy 
to berth this deep draft vessel within the Norfolk vicinity so 
that it can be returned to the shipyard for reactivation, if 
necessary, the Navy is exploring alternative berthing sites, 
including some within the Elizabeth River. The committee is 
aware that the redeployment of this vessel to a suitable 
location in the Norfolk area may require some additional 
dredging. Therefore, the committee recommends an increase of 
$6.0 million for the dredging and other costs associated with 
the redeployment of the U.S.S. Wisconsin within the Norfolk 
region.

Naval oceanographic program

    The committee recommends an additional $7.0 million to the 
Naval Meteorology and Oceanography Command for equipment 
purchases, air operations, and contract support in order to 
support survey operations and other data collection 
requirements of the Navy.

Adjustments to civilian personnel education and training funds

    The committee recommends a reduction of $29.0 million in 
the Operation and Maintenance, Navy account. Specifically, 
civilian education and training, line 520, would be reduced by 
$9.0 million and the civilian manpower and personnel 
management, line 580, would be reduced by $20.0 million. These 
funds would be used, in part, to fund increases in the National 
Guard Youth Challenge program, STARBASE and impact aid.

                              Marine Corps

United States Marine Corps initial issue

    The committee recommends an increase of $35.0 million in 
the operation and maintenance accounts for the Marine Corps 
($25.0 million) and Marine Corps Reserves ($10.0 million) to 
purchase items of individual combat clothing and equipment. 
This will help provide Marines in the field with the clothing 
and equipment they need to survive and sustain themselves 
during cold weather combat operations.

Depot maintenance and corrosion control

    The committee is concerned with reports that some Marine 
Corps units do not have sufficient funds to maintain equipment. 
Currently, the Marine Corps has an unfunded backlog of $53.3 
million worth of depot maintenance. Furthermore, the Corps 
requires an additional $3.2 million in its Corrosion Control 
and Coating Program to avoid the deterioration of major end 
items of equipment and to extend the life cycle. The committee 
recognizes the importance of maintaining and preserving 
military equipment in order to ensure that it is available for 
essential training and possible deployment. Therefore, the 
committee recommends an increase of $20.0 million to reduce the 
depot maintenance backlog of Marine Corps equipment, and an 
additional $5.0 million for the depot maintenance and corrosion 
control program of the Marine Corps Reserve.

United States Marine Corps Reserve personal equipment

    The committee recommends an increase of $5.0 million in the 
Marine Corps Reserve Operations and Maintenance account to pay 
for 782 personal gear.

                               Air Force

Air launched cruise missiles and advanced cruise missile engineering 
        analysis

    The committee is aware of the shortfall in funding for the 
recurring sustaining engineering activities associated with the 
flight analysis of the air launched cruise missile and advanced 
cruise missile. Sustaining the readiness of these two systems 
requires the Air Force to analyze three shots of each per year. 
The President's budget request did not provide sufficient 
funding for this analysis. Therefore, the committee recommends 
an increase of $9.0 million to fund the required analysis.

Air Force combat training range

    The committee is aware of the $5.1 million unfunded 
requirement for the operation and maintenance of the Air 
Force's primary training ranges, electronic scoring sites, and 
air combat maneuvering instrumentation systems. Failure to 
fully fund these operations will lead to a reduction in 
required services and aircrews that are not combat ready. 
Therefore, the committee recommends an increase of $5.1 million 
to fund this requirement.

War reserve materials

    The committee is aware of the funding shortfall for the 
rehabilitation and replacement of critical wartime bare base 
equipment that is degraded and worn out due to extensive use in 
contingency operations. These systems, Harvest Falcon and 
Harvest Eagle, are designed to provide theater Commanders-in-
Chief with billeting, hygiene, feeding, and airfield/backshop 
capability for over 68,000 troops and 822 aircraft. These are 
important assets for U.S. military capability to successfully 
execute a major theater war. Therefore, the committee 
recommends an increase of $12.0 million for the rehabilitation 
and replacement of these systems.

Adjustments to personnel program funds

    The committee recommends a reduction of $15.0 million in 
the Operation and Maintenance, Air Force account. Specifically, 
personnel programs, line 440, would be reduced. These funds 
would be used, in part, to fund increases in the National Guard 
Youth Challenge program, STARBASE and impact aid.

                      Guard and Reserve Components

                              Defense-Wide

National Guard Youth Challenge

    The budget request for the National Guard Youth Challenge 
program included $28.5 million. The committee recommends an 
increase of $22.0 million in the National Guard Youth Challenge 
program, an increase from the fiscal year 1998 level. The 
committee recognizes the value of this important program and 
believes that it should be expanded to include states that have 
not been able to initiate programs with the reduced funding 
levels.

STARBASE

    STARBASE was not funded in the budget request. The 
committee recommends an increase of $5.0 million in the 
STARBASE program. The committee understands that this program 
was intended to transition to self-sustaining status, however, 
there has been no progress made to locate non-defense or 
private sector funding. The committee recognizes the value of 
this important program and believes that it should be expanded 
to include school districts that have not been able to initiate 
programs with the reduced funding levels. The Secretary of 
Defense is directed to assist participating school districts in 
identifying non-defense, local, or private sector funding as an 
alternative to continued funding within the defense budget.

Defense reform initiative

    The committee is encouraged by the recent report released 
by the Department of Defense outlining the reform initiatives 
it plans to undertake in order to streamline and improve its 
operations. The committee understands that the Department 
believes that it will achieve great savings through such 
initiatives as prime vendor contracting and other inventory 
reduction programs, consolidating logistics and transportation, 
travel and household goods transportation reengineering, and 
competition for commercial activities using Office of 
Mangagement and Budget (OMB) Circular A-76. It projected that 
these initiatives will generate monetary savings and enable the 
Department to reduce personnel.
    The Department has already started to implement portions of 
this initiative, particularly in the Office of the Secretary of 
Defense and other Defense-wide activities. However, rather than 
reducing the budget request for the Defense-wide account, the 
Department has increased this account by over $300.0 million. 
Therefore, the committee recommends a reduction of $150.0 
million in the budget request for the Defense-wide Operation 
and Management (O&M) account to reflect the savings that are 
assumed to be generated as a result of the Defense Reform 
Initiative.

Adjustments to human resource activity funds

    The committee recommends a reduction of $18.0 million in 
the Operation and Maintenance, Defensewide account. 
Specifically, defense human resources activity, line 85, would 
be reduced. These funds would be used, in part, to fund 
increases in the National Guard Youth Challenge program, 
STARBASE and impact aid.

Overseas humanitarian demining and Commander-in-Chief initiative 
        activities

    The committee strongly supports the humanitarian demining 
and Commander-in-Chief initiative activities of the Department 
of Defense. These activities have enabled military 
personnelwithin the Department to forge valuable relationships with the 
armed forces and civilian population of other nations. Therefore, the 
committee recommends $50.0 million to fund these important programs.

Cooperative Threat Reduction (CTR) Program

    The budget request included $442.4 million for the 
Cooperative Threat Reduction (CTR) program, a $60.9 million 
increase to the budget request for fiscal year 1998. The 
committee recommends a reduction of $2.0 million to the budget 
request.

Defense Threat Reduction Agency (DTRA)

    The committee recommends that the mission and function of 
the Cooperative Threat Reduction (CTR) program be transferred 
to the Defense Threat Reduction Agency (DTRA).

Operational units readiness resources

    The committee is concerned about the continuing reports 
from operational commanders that readiness is being jeopardized 
for numerous reasons, including a lack of training funds. This 
has been particularly true with the non-deployed units. 
Furthermore, although the Army's budget request has 
traditionally included full funding for training requirements, 
these funds have been transferred during the year of execution 
in order to pay for necessary base operations that have been 
underfunded.
    Given the current pace of operations, an uncertain national 
security environment, and the potential for short notice 
deployment of troops, the committee believes that the armed 
forces need to be fully trained to carry out their assigned 
missions. Therefore, the committee recommends an increase of 
$450.0 million for base operations and training as outlined 
below:

Item
                                                             In millions
Army Base Ops.................................................     185.0
Navy Base Ops.................................................      35.0
Navy Flying Hours.............................................      45.0
USMC Base Ops.................................................      15.0
USMC OPTEMPO..................................................      20.0
Air Force Base Ops............................................      35.0
Air Force Flying Hours........................................      30.0
National Guard OPTEMPO........................................      40.0
Army Reserve OPTEMPO..........................................      15.0
Navy Reserve Steaming Days....................................      15.0
Air Force Reserve Flying Hours................................      15.0
                    --------------------------------------------------------------
                    ____________________________________________________

    Total.....................................................     450.0

Real property maintenance

    The committee is concerned with the continued growth in the 
backlog of real property maintenance (RPM) throughout the 
Department of Defense. If this necessary maintenance continues 
to go unfunded, the Department will be faced with even larger 
costs to repair damages caused by inclement weather and other 
environmental conditions. Although the condition of facilities 
at all military installations continues to suffer from 
inadequate funding, this problem is particularly serious within 
the Army and the Marine Corps. Necessary repairs on barracks, 
roads, airstrips, rifle ranges, and other facilities at these 
and other locations are continually deferred because of 
insufficient funding. In many cases, this deferral of property 
maintenance will lead to higher costs in the near-term, a 
problem that will be compounded by the ``bow wave'' in 
procurement and modernization. Therefore, the committee 
recommends an increase of $284.0 million to the operations and 
maintenance accounts of the military services for the 
maintenance of real property; as outlined below:

Department:
                                                             In millions
Army..........................................................     130.0
Navy..........................................................      48.0
USMC..........................................................      36.0
Air Force.....................................................      50.0
Air National Guard............................................      20.0
                    --------------------------------------------------------------
                    ____________________________________________________

    Total.....................................................     284.0

Civilian personnel levels

    The committee notes that the Department of Defense civilian 
personnel drawdown continues at a more rapid pace than 
expected. During the past several years, civilian personnel 
levels in the Department of Defense have been reduced faster 
than anticipated in each succeeding fiscal year budget process. 
The Congressional Budget Office estimates that this drawdown 
means lower-than-budgeted civilian personnel levels, resulting 
in savings of approximately $658.8 million during fiscal year 
1999. The committee has made the appropriate adjustments in the 
fiscal year 1999 budget to reflect these savings.

Foreign currency fluctuation

    The committee notes the recent strength of the American 
dollar in relation to foreign currencies. This makes 
thepurchase of services and goods overseas less expensive than was 
originally projected by the Department of Defense when it submitted its 
fiscal year 1999 budget request. The committee has made appropriate 
changes to the budget request to reflect the $119.2 million savings 
that would be realized in fiscal year 1999.

Fuel price reduction

    The committee notes the recent reduction in the price of 
oil and the impact that this will have on the fuel funding 
requirements of the Department of Defense (DOD). The price of 
oil has declined from $19.00 a barrel when the President's 
budget request was prepared, to an estimated $17.00 a barrel in 
fiscal year 1999. This makes the purchase of gasoline and other 
fuels less expensive than was originally believed when the DOD 
put together its budget submission. The committee has made 
appropriate changes to the budget request to reflect the $304.0 
million savings which will be realized in fiscal year 1999.

Restoration of work years to accomplish essential finance and 
        accounting services

    The committee is aware that there is a mismatch of workload 
and work years in the budget request for the Defense Finance 
and Accounting Service. The committee provided increased 
funding to restore 1500 work years to ensure better management 
of expected requirements and maintenance of vital finance and 
accounting services within the Department of Defense. The 
committee fully expects that future requirements will be fully 
funded and that any reductions will be based on a comprehensive 
plan that considers expected workload and capacity to 
accomplish that workload.

Restoration of 1500 work years

                              (In millions)

Army..........................................................      $8.8
Navy..........................................................      10.0
Marines.......................................................       1.3
Air Force.....................................................      13.3
DLA...........................................................       2.3
Other Defense agencies........................................       2.1
                    --------------------------------------------------------------
                    ____________________________________________________

    Total.....................................................     $37.8

Assistance to local educational agencies that have benefit dependents 
        of members of the Armed Forces and Department of Defense 
        civilian employees

    The committee recommends an increase of $35.0 million in 
the Operation and Maintenance, Defensewide account to provide 
assistance to local educational agencies. The committee intends 
that this supplemental impact aid be made available to severly 
impacted local educational agencies where the standard for the 
minimum level of education within the state can not be 
maintained because of large numbers of military connected 
students or the effects of base realignment and closures.

Revolving Funds

Reserve Mobilization Income Insurance Program

    The budget request included $37.0 million for the Reserve 
Mobilization Income Insurance Fund. The Congress included 
funding for the Reserve Mobilization Insurance Fund in the 
supplemental appropriation bill. Since the Army National Guard 
schools and special training account was underfunded in the 
budget request, the committee recommends transferring the $37.0 
million requested for the Reserve Mobilization Income Insurance 
program in the operation and maintenance appropriation to the 
military personnel appropriation.

                        OTHER ITEMS OF INTEREST

Defense Threat Reduction Agency (DTRA)

    In February, the Congress was briefed on the Defense Reform 
Initiative (DRI), a plan by the Department of Defense to 
achieve savings by reorganizing and applying successful 
corporate business practices. The savings generated by these 
efforts would be used to develop and procure new generation 
information-based weapons systems. One element of the DRI was 
consolidation of activities related to weapons of mass 
destruction.
    The Secretary of Defense has identified countering the 
threat of proliferation of weapons of mass destruction (WMD) as 
a high priority. The Secretary believes that preventing the 
proliferation of, reducing the number of, and defending against 
WMD will present a complex challenge to national security over 
the next 10-20 years.
    The budget request described the establishment of the 
Defense Threat Reduction Agency (DTRA) and set an establishment 
target date of October 1, 1998. The mission of the agency would 
be to carry out programs to counter the proliferation of, and 
reduce threats posed by, weapons of mass destruction, and to 
provide nuclear weapons stockpile and related support. The new 
agency will be formed by consolidating existing agencies, as 
well as certain functions from the Office of the Secretary of 
Defense and Washington Headquarters Services.
    The committee supports efforts by the Department to reduce 
redundancies and conserve scarce resources by establishing a 
single agency to provide services and support related to WMD to 
the warfighters and the Department. The committee understands 
that the DTRA would provide the cross-integration of DOD 
efforts in the WMD area, which is not adequately addressed by 
other agencies.
    The committee understands that the new agency would 
primarily be an acquisition organization, with strong 
operational commitments and support, to include planning, 
programming, execution, and warfighter support 
responsibilities. Within this broad mission, the DTRA would 
provide technical expertise in nuclear weapons and their 
effects to ensure the operational effectiveness of U.S. nuclear 
forces and their survivability; provide independent assessment 
to the Secretary of Defense and the Chairman of the Joint 
Chiefs of Staff on nuclear weapons safety, security, 
reliability and control, and support the Commanders in Chief 
(CINCs) and services in these areas; maintain and manage the 
nuclear weapons stockpile as previously assigned to the Defense 
Special Weapons Agency (DSWA); and participate in and support 
DOD input to the Department of Energy Stockpile Stewardship and 
Management program.
    In the area of reducing or countering WMD threats, the DTRA 
would provide support to operational forces in developing and 
fielding systems. Operational support would include monitoring 
and implementing arms control treaties and the Cooperative 
Threat Reduction (CTR) program; conducting force protection 
assessments for the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff and 
the CINCs; supporting the development of nuclear, chemical and 
biological defense doctrine, training readiness and modeling 
and simulation; and preventing the proliferation of WMD 
technology through technology security, export control and 
international cooperative initiatives; and coordinating these 
activities with the concerned U.S. departments and agencies, as 
well as foreign and international agencies.
    Areas of development, or fielding of equipment for which 
DTRA would be responsible, would include nuclear, chemical and 
biological defense capabilities for domestic emergency response 
protection, technologies to monitor and verify treaties, as 
well as to counter the proliferation of WMD, or defeat hardened 
and deeply buried, and mobile targets. DTRA would also support 
the Office of the Assistant Secretary of Defense for Special 
Operations/Low Intensity Conflict in implementing its guidance 
with regard to developing technologies to combat terrorism.
    Combat support is an important element of the mission of 
the agency; the committee understands that DTRA will be 
designated as a combat support agency in recognition of the 
considerable support it will provide to the warfighting CINCs.
    Based on the criteria used to determine the transfer of 
functions, missions, and resources to the DTRA, the committee 
directs that additional activities be transferred to DTRA. 
Those activities are the chemical and biological defense 
program, the counterproliferation support program, and the 
unitary and nonstockpile chemical and munitions destruction 
programs. These programs are important examples of cross-DOD 
integration that can be performed by the new agency. The 
committee understands that the base of technology and expertise 
for the chemical and biological defense program and the 
chemical agents and munitions destruction program is largely in 
the Department of the Army, and believes that the Department of 
the Army should continue to manage and execute both programs 
with guidance and oversight from the DTRA.
    In addition, the committee recommends that programs that 
focus on providing technology to assist military forces in 
protecting themselves against acts of terrorism, to include the 
use of WMD, such as the physical security program (PE 63228D8Z) 
and the counterterror technical support program (PE 63122D8Z), 
be transferred to DTRA. The committee expects the Office of 
Special Operations/Low Intensity Conflict and the Technical 
Support Working Group (TSWG) will continue to provide policy 
oversight and develop responsive solutions for combating 
terrorism.

Defense Special Weapons Agency (DSWA)

    The Field Command of the Defense Special Weapons Agency 
(DSWA) executes functions critical to the Department of Defense 
role in supporting the nuclear weapons stockpile, performs 
nuclear weapons surety inspections, and conducts unique WMD 
testing and simulation. The committee is concerned to learn 
that the Department may consider fragmenting and transferring 
critical nuclear and WMD-related functions currently performed 
by the Field Command, DSWA and transferring them to other 
organizations. The committee believes these functions are 
fundamental and integral to the success of the mission of the 
DTRA, and should remain a responsibility of the new agency. In 
addition, the committee believes Field Command should remain at 
Kirtland Air Force Base.

On-Site Inspection Agency (OSIA) and Arms Control Implementation

    The budget request for defense arms control compliance 
activities included $9.5 million for implementing the Chemical 
Weapons Convention (CWC). These funds would be used to 
reimburse the CWC international monitoring agency, the 
Organization for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons (OPCW), 
for equipment used during inspections as well as salaries, 
subsistence allowances and international travel costs for the 
inspection teams. In addition, these funds would be used 
toprovide reimbursement for arms control implementation inspection 
costs borne by the inspected party to a treaty or agreement.
    The CWC requires that States Parties pay the administrative 
costs of the Organization for the Prohibition of Chemical 
Weapons (OPCW) according to the United Nations assessment 
scale. Additionally, CWC States Parties are responsible for the 
costs of destroying their chemical weapons and chemical weapons 
production facilities, as well as the costs of the OPCW to 
verify compliance with the Treaty. The budget request included 
funds for the direct costs of implementing the inspection of 
DOD assets and to provide for procurement, operation and 
maintenance (O&M), training, and research, development, testing 
and evaluation (RDT&E) funding for the military services, the 
OSIA, and the DSWA. The budget request also included funds for 
the destruction of the chemical stockpile.
    The committee does not support the use of defense funds to 
pay for those costs that are not appropriately the 
responsibility of the Department of Defense, and more 
appropriately included in the foreign affairs budget. The 
committee understands that the Department of State is 
responsible for all other U.S. costs associated with the 
Treaty. The committee further understands the Department of 
State agreed in the first Conference of State Parties in May 
1997 to fund not only the ``usual'' in-country inspection costs 
(meals, lodging, and transportation of inspectors within the 
United States), but also inspector salaries and transportation 
from The Hague to the Point of Entry. The committee does not 
agree that these additional costs should be paid for from the 
defense budget, and therefore recommends a reduction of $9.5 
million to the budget request for OSIA.
    Lastly, the budget request included funds for estimated 
U.S. reimbursement of payments for arms control implementation 
inspection costs borne by the inspected party to a treaty or 
agreement. Other than the two policy agreements under the 
Intermediate-Range Nuclear Forces (INF) Treaty and Strategic 
Arms Reduction Treaty (START) concluded in May 1994 and 
February 1995, respectively, the committee is not aware of 
additional policy agreements concluded by the Department. The 
committee understood in previous correspondence from the 
Department that these two agreements would not be precedents 
for other agreements, and the committee is not aware of any 
other policy agreements for other arms control agreements. The 
committee recommends that no funds be authorized specifically 
for the reimbursement of arms control implementation inspection 
costs to a foreign country.

Nuclear Weapons Council and Maintaining the Nuclear Deterrent

    The committee believes that maintaining a credible nuclear 
deterrent is a fundamental and integral part of efforts to 
counter and respond to the full spectrum of the challenge posed 
by WMD. The programs to sustain the nuclear deterrent are 
currently performed by multiple organizations, including the 
Office of the Secretary of Defense, the DSWA and the military 
services. In this environment, guidance and direction from the 
Secretary of Defense is essential.
    Although they are not as high a priority as during the Cold 
War, the committee believes that the nuclear program should not 
be handled in an ad hoc manner without consideration for long 
range coherent planning. As a result, adequate funding and 
senior policy and implementation attention will continue to be 
necessary to sustain a coherent DOD program.
    The committee is encouraged by the Department's efforts to 
undertake initiatives to provide improved management and 
coordination of all activities related to countering or 
reducing the threat of WMD through the creation of DTRA. It is 
imperative, however, that there be no lessening of the 
Secretary's core responsibilities to oversee and sustain the 
Nation's nuclear deterrent. The committee is concerned that in 
implementing the reforms recommended in the Defense Reform 
Initiative (DRI), the Secretary's role in maintaining a strong 
nuclear deterrent may be diminished. The committee believes 
that any new management approaches should preserve and 
reinforce existing statutory oversight responsibilities, as 
well as congressional involvement.

Management and Oversight of the Defense Threat Reduction Agency

    The committee believes that the Office of the Secretary of 
Defense must retain the oversight responsibilities of the 
Office of the Assistant to the Secretary of Defense (Nuclear, 
Chemical and Biological). The committee believes that a senior 
Department of Defense official nominated by the President and 
confirmed by the Senate should be designated responsibility for 
the DTRA. This individual should report directly to the Under 
Secretary of Defense for Acquisition and Technology.

Further Efficiencies and Economies

    The committee is advised that in consolidating the various 
organizations and programs to form DTRA, the Department was 
able to achieve a five percent savings, which is reflected in 
the budget request. However, the committee believes that 
further savings can be realized by the consolidation and 
recommends an undistributed reduction of $20.0 million to DTRA 
operations and maintenance.

Department of Defense demolition program and historic properties

    Each of the military services is currently pursuing an 
ambitious demolition program for unneeded base infrastructure. 
The Committee is concerned that without adequate planning, such 
demolition efforts could pose a significant threat to historic 
properties under the stewardship of the Department of 
Defense(DOD). Hundreds of military properties are listed on the 
National Register of Historic Places and thousands more may be 
eligible. A 1994 survey by the DOD Cultural Resources Council 
estimated that there are 120 historic districts on 
installations, and that the Department currently owns more than 
25,000 pre-1940 buildings, and as many as 80,000 World War II 
era buildings.
    In the Department of the Army, general construction and 
maintenance funds cannot be used for a building if 
rehabilitation costs would exceed 70 percent of new 
construction estimates. Policies for new construction require 
demolition of an equal amount of existing square footage, 
leaving historic buildings as vulnerable to a formula 
regardless of quality. The committee is concerned about the 
possibility that these requirements may inhibit rehabilitation 
of some historic structures.
    The committee directs each military department to examine 
how that department's construction, maintenance, and demolition 
policies impact historic properties. The Secretary of Defense 
shall compile the results of each department's review and 
submit a report to the congressional defense committees within 
one year from the date of enactment of this Act. The report 
shall discuss how each department uses or could use analysis of 
relative historical significance, and the potential for 
adaptive use in planning departmental demolition programs.
    The report shall also discuss alternatives to demolition of 
properties that may have historical significance, including the 
mothballing of buildings and leasing of buildings pursuant to 
section 111 of the National Historic Preservation Act. In this 
regard, the reports should address the leasing policies of each 
military department and identify any impediments to leasing 
historic properties or retaining lease proceeds under section 
111. In addition, the report should address the feasibility of 
allowing installations to use demolition funds for 
rehabilitation. In developing the report, the military 
departments are encouraged to consult with the Advisory Council 
on Historic Preservation, the National Conference of State 
Historic Preservation Officers, and the National Trust for 
Historic Preservation, and other relevant organizations with 
preservation expertise.

Department of Defense shipscrapping practices

    Recently, questions have been raised about the worker 
safety and environmental standards related to Department of 
Defense shipscrapping contracts. The committee has observed 
closely the Department's efforts to address concerns in this 
area.
    The Navy's inactive fleet has increased by 82 percent since 
1990 and the rate of inactivations has exceeded the number of 
ship removals. The pressures related to the size of the 
inactive fleet continue to grow as additional ships near the 
end of a 30-50 year life cycle, the Quadrennial Defense Review 
(QDR) recommends continued active force reductions, base 
closures reduce ship berthing capacity, and multiple ship 
disposition options extend disposal timelines. The current 
inventory of 196 inactive ships already exceeds the Navy's 
berthing capacity and 115 of those inactive ships have been 
designated for scrap.
    The Office of the Chief of Naval Operations determines the 
disposition of decommissioned Navy ships that have become a 
part of the inactive fleet, as follows: retain for 
mobilization; foreign military sale or lease; donation; 
transfer to MARAD; or scrap. During inactivation, the Navy 
removes bulk and containerized hazardous materials, seals any 
friable asbestos containing materials, inventories and labels 
equipment containing liquid polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs), 
pumps fuels and lube oil tanks, drains all hydraulic oil 
systems, and takes various other steps to limit and identify 
risks. In addition, prior to transferring ships for scrapping, 
the ship is demilitarized. The transfer agent for the Navy's 
non-nuclear vessels is the Defense Logistics Agency (DLA). 
Radiological decontamination and disposal of nuclear vessels is 
conducted exclusively by the Navy and the Department of Energy 
manages the storage of any radioactive or mixed waste.
    Once the Navy notifies the DLA that a ship is ready for 
sale, that agency has the responsibility to advertise, 
evaluate, award, and administer any scrapping contracts. 
Consistent with its responsibility to administer scrapping 
contracts, the DLA manages on-site environmental and safety 
assessments, meetings with regulatory agencies, and on-site 
contractor progress reviews.
    In January 1996, DLA suspended shipscrapping sales 
following an unannounced multi-media regulatory inspection that 
identified environmental violations at a Wilmington, N.C. 
scrapping site. In response to Navy and DLA concerns regarding 
contract award and oversight practices, the DLA developed a 
two-step sealed bid and competitive evaluation procedure to 
improve source selection of scrapping contractors. The first 
step involves the issuance of a Request for Technical Proposal 
(RFTP) to determine the technical qualifications of potential 
bidders. A team of environmental, safety, legal, and program 
personnel review and evaluate the RFTP, to include: an 
environmental plan; asafety plan; an operational plan; and a 
business and financial plan. The second step involves an Invitation for 
Bid (IFB) from only those firms whose proposals are found to be 
technically acceptable.
    In addition, the Navy tightened its program management 
capability and now works jointly with DLA to review draft 
solicitations, technical proposals received, and contractor 
performance. The DLA has established a dedicated Naval ship 
sales program office, increased the number of sales contracting 
officers, and contracted for technical support related to on-
site environmental assessments, health and safety assessments, 
and progress assessments. Consistent with the efforts initiated 
in January 1996, the Navy and DLA have indicated that there are 
ongoing efforts to maintain effective management and oversight 
of shipbreaking safety and environmental practices.
    In response to recent concerns reflected in a series of 
Baltimore Sun articles, the Undersecretary of Defense 
(Acquisition and Technology) established a senior panel to 
review Department of Defense shipscrapping practices and 
policies. In addition, the Secretary of the Navy suspended any 
further action to explore overseas shipscrapping options, 
pending receipt and review of the panel report. Further, an 
interagency ship disposal working group has also been 
established to foster an exchange of ideas among the Navy, the 
Maritime Administration (MARAD), the U.S. Coast Guard, the 
National Oceanic and Atmospheric Agency (NOAA), and the Army.
    On April 20, 1998, the Department provided the Congress 
with the recommendations of the senior panel established by the 
Undersecretary of Defense (Acquisition and Technology). The 
panel noted that the ``[s]crapping of vessels presents many 
challenges due to the complexity of the ships themselves, the 
environmental and safety issues, uncertainties about the 
domestic industrial base and our limited economic leverage in 
international markets.'' The panel acknowledged and endorsed 
the recent efforts of the Department of the Navy, DLA, and the 
U.S. Maritime Administration to resolve some of the problems 
associated with past ship scrapping practices. The panel also 
made some recommendations on how to improve the process both 
domestically and internationally.
    The Undersecretary of Defense (Acquisition and Technology) 
is currently reviewing the panel recommendations to determine 
appropriate future actions. The agencies that participated in 
the panel are also reviewing the recommendations for 
implementation. The committee is satisfied with the 
Department's progress in this area. In light of the complex 
nature of this issue, the committee is convinced that the 
Department must be allowed to continue to resolve this matter 
internally. The committee looks forward to the recommendations 
of the Undersecretary.

Environmentally-preferable products

    The committee understands that the Department of Defense 
plans to advise its procurement officials of energy-efficient 
products and products that contain recovered or recycled 
content through defense-wide electronic cataloging system known 
as the Federal Logistics Information System (FLIS). That system 
is currently under development by the Joint Logistics 
Commanders.
    The committee is concerned that the Department has not yet 
developed any consistent methodology for assessing vendor 
claims and determining the environmental preferability of 
products procured through FLIS. Accordingly, the committee 
directs the Department to: (1) identify specific criteria for 
identifying environmentally preferable and energy-efficient 
products, and the source of such criteria; (2) identify product 
categories for which the Department has not yet been able to 
identify such standards; (3) develop procedures to provide 
reasonable assurance that particular products meet these 
criteria; and (4) develop procedures for tracking purchases of 
such products and estimating the extent to which the Department 
is meeting environmental objectives established in 48 C.F.R. 
23.704. To the extent necessary, the Department should support 
research and recommend modifications to specifications for 
military unique items to further these objectives. The 
committee directs the Secretary of Defense to report to the 
congressional defense committees, not later than March 1, 1999, 
on the status of this effort.

Federal facilities

    The Armed Services Committee has jurisdiction over the 
defense related environmental restoration efforts of the 
Departments of Defense and Energy. As a result, the committee 
has observed closely the progress of S.8, the Superfund 
Reauthorization bill, specifically as it pertains to federal 
facilities.
    During the Environment and Public Works Committee markup of 
S.8, an amendment was approved to waive federal sovereign 
immunity under the Comprehensive Environmental Response, 
Compensation and Liability Act (CERCLA), 42 U.S.C. 9601 et seq. 
The amendment would require federal facilities to comply with 
state and local substantive and procedural requirements, rather 
than the uniform, national process described in the National 
Contingency Plan.
    Under current law, federal facilities are already subject 
to state laws concerning removal and remedial action, including 
laws regarding enforcement (42 U.S.C. 9620(a)(4)), but state 
challenges must be brought after remedial action is complete. 
(42 U.S.C. 9613 (g)). Federal facilities must comply with state 
substantive cleanup standards, which may bemore stringent than 
federal standards and must be legally applicable or relevant and 
appropriate. (42 U.S.C. 9621).
    Both the Department of Defense and the Department of Energy 
have expressed concerns about the impact the proposed amendment 
could have on cleanup activities at their respective sites. In 
particular, the two agencies have expressed concern that 
because the amendment would render federal facilities 
susceptible to state and local procedural requirements (such as 
fees and permits), state and local authorities could compel 
federal agencies to stop Superfund cleanup actions pending 
completion of procedural requirements. The amendment could 
invalidate interagency agreements regarding cleanup schedules 
and milestones by superimposing state and local substantive and 
procedural requirements that previously did not apply. As a 
result, the amendment could substantially increase federal 
facilities cleanup costs and enable States to reorder funding 
priorities at Superfund sites, shifting resources away from 
sites with higher relative risks.
    There are thousands of Department of Defense sites and 
Department of Energy sites that have been identified as 
requiring environmental cleanup, and there is the potential 
that additional such sites may be identified. The cost to the 
taxpayers of completing the environmental cleanup of these 
facilities is likely to be in the hundreds of billions of 
dollars. Funding for site assessments and cleanup is provided 
through agency budgets and congressional appropriations. The 
Department of Defense prioritizes funding for cleanup sites 
through relative risk site evaluations and cleanup milestones 
committed to in Federal Facility agreements. Based on those 
cleanup priorities the Department has maintained a steady 
fiscal year funding level of about $2.0 billion during the past 
five years. The Department of Energy has also committed to 
cleanup schedules under federal facility compliance agreements 
and provided for a steady environmental restoration funding 
profile of about $1.5 billion.
    Congress must ensure that federal agencies maintain 
coherent national cleanup programs with resources and funds 
directed to federal sites where the needs and prospective 
benefits are the greatest. Because Congress strictly controls 
the funding available to the Departments of Defense and Energy 
through the annual authorization and appropriations process, 
the agencies do not have the same degree of funding flexibility 
as the private sector. For this reason, the Departments have 
expressed concern that new or accelerated requirements could 
divert funds from higher priority cleanup activities and other 
important national security missions, reducing the overall 
level of protection for public health and safety.
    The committee believes that the full scope of concerns 
expressed by the Department of Defense and the Department of 
Energy about the proposed amendment should be made a part of 
the public record so that they may be addressed in the course 
of debate on the bill. Accordingly, the committee directs the 
Secretary of Defense and the Secretary of Energy to submit a 
report, not later than September 30, 1998, to the congressional 
defense committees on the impact of the proposed amendment to 
S.8. The report, which should be prepared in consultation with 
the Environmental Protection Agency, should specifically 
address: (1) any additional costs that might be incurred by the 
taxpayers as a result of the proposed amendment; and (2) any 
impact that the amendment may have on the cleanup of Department 
of Defense and the Department of Energy sites pursuant to 
agreements that the two agencies have entered into with the 
Environmental Protection Agency and with State and local 
governments.

Retread tires and re-refined oils

    The committee notes that the Department of Defense has made 
tremendous progress in the use of recycled products. In order 
to ensure continued progress in this area, the Department 
should implement the Environmental Protection Agency's 
procurement guidelines for re-refined lubricating oil and 
retread tires, finalize revisions to the specifications for 
such procurement items, and use appropriate specifications for 
tire retreading. The Department should procure these items in 
accordance with the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act of 
1976 (42 U.S.C. 6962), to ensure consistency with the 
provisions of Executive Order 12873, dated October 20, 1993, as 
it relates to the procurement of retread tires and re-refined 
lubricating oil. The Department's efforts in this area, 
however, should not be inconsistent with military readiness 
needs and requirements.
              TITLE IV--MILITARY PERSONNEL AUTHORIZATIONS

    The Congress, exercising its military manpower oversight 
responsibilities, authorizes the end strengths of the active 
and reserve forces annually. This year, in addition to the 
Subcommittee on Personnel hearings to examine the force 
structure plans of the Department of Defense and the military 
services, the committee held a series of hearings to receive 
testimony from the Secretary of Defense, the Chairman of the 
Joint Chiefs of Staff, and the Service Chiefs in which OPTEMPO, 
PERSTEMPO, recruiting, retention, and quality of life were 
discussed in detail. Based on those hearings, the 
administration's budget request, and other information, the 
committee recommended end strength ceilings for the active and 
reserve forces, including active component support for the 
reserves. Additionally, the committee recommended repeal of the 
end strength floors in order to permit the secretaries and 
chiefs of the military services to implement the reductions in 
force structure recommended by the Quadrennial Defense Review.

                       SUBTITLE A--ACTIVE FORCES

Sec. 401. End strengths for active forces.
    The committee recommends a provision that would authorize 
active duty end strengths for fiscal year 1999 as shown below:

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                    Fiscal year                 
                                                                 -----------------------------------------------
                                                                       1998                            1999     
                                                                   authorization   1999  request  recommendation
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Army: Total.....................................................         495,000         480,000         480,000
Navy: Total.....................................................         390,802         372,696         372,696
Marine Corps: Total.............................................         174,000         172,200         172,200
Air Force: Total................................................         371,577         370,882         370,882
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Sec. 402. Limited exclusions of joint duty officers from limitations on 
        number of general and flag officers.
    The committee recommends a provision that would increase 
the number of general and flag officer positions exempt from 
counting against the authorized limit from six to seven. The 
recommended increase would permit the Director, J-8 to serve as 
a lieutenant general or a vice admiral in the case of the Navy.
    The recommended provision would extend until October 1, 
2002 the temporary authority to exclude up to 12 joint duty 
officers from the limitation on authorized general and flag 
officer strength.
Sec. 403. Limitation on daily average of personnel on active duty in 
        grades E-8 and E-9.
    The committee recommends a provision that would change the 
method for computing the time limitation on active duty 
enlisted personnel serving in the grades of E-8 and E-9 to a 
fiscal year vice a calendar year. The recommended provision 
would also correct a technical error in the existing statute.
Sec. 404. Repeal of permanent end strength requirement for support of 
        two major regional contingencies.
    The committee recommends a provision that would repeal 
section 691 of title 10, United States Code, which established 
end strength floors for the military services.

                       SUBTITLE B--RESERVE FORCES

Sec. 411. End strengths for Selected Reserve.

    The committee recommends a provision that would authorize 
Selected Reserve end strengths for fiscal year 1999 as shown 
below:

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                    Fiscal year                 
                                                                 -----------------------------------------------
                                                                       1998                            1999     
                                                                   authorization   1999  request  recommendation
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Army National Guard of the United States....................         361,516         357,000         357,000
The Army Reserve................................................         208,000         208,000         208,000
The Naval Reserve...............................................          94,294          90,843          90,843
The Marine Corps Reserve........................................          42,000          40,018          40,018
The Air National Guard of the United States.....................         108,002         106,991         106,991
The Air Force Reserve...........................................          73,447          72,242          72,242
The Coast Guard Reserve.........................................           8,000           8,000           8,000
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Sec. 412. End strengths for Reserves on active duty in support of the 
        reserves.

    The committee recommends a provision that would authorize 
full-time support end strengths for fiscal year 1999 as shown 
below:

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                    Fiscal year                 
                                                                 -----------------------------------------------
                                                                        1998                           1999     
                                                                   authorization   1999  request  recommendation
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Army National Guard of the United States....................          22,310          21,763          21,763
The Army Reserve................................................          11,500          11,804          11,804
The Naval Reserve...............................................          16,136          15,590          15,590
The Marine Corps Reserve........................................           2,559           2,362           2,362
The Air National Guard of the United States.....................          10,671          10,930          10,930
The Air Force Reserve...........................................             867             991             991
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Sec. 413. End strengths for military technicians (dual status).

    The committee recommends a provision that would authorize 
military technician end strengths for fiscal year 1999, as 
shown below:

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                    Fiscal year                 
                                                                 -----------------------------------------------
                                                                       1998                            1999     
                                                                   authorization   1999  request  recommendation
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Army National Guard of the United States....................          23,125          22,179          22,179
The Army Reserve................................................           5,503           5,205           5,205
The Air National Guard of the United States.....................          22,853          22,408          22,408
The Air Force Reserve...........................................           9,802           9,761           9,761
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Sec. 414. Exclusion of additional reserve component general and flag 
        officers from limitation on number of general and flag officers 
        who may serve on active duty.

    The committee recommends a provision that would permit not 
more than three percent of the reserve component general and 
flag officers to be ordered to active duty for more than 179 
days and exclude these officers from the limitation on the 
number of general and flag officers on active duty. For several 
years, the committee has been reducing impediments that may 
preclude more effective use of the reserve components. The 
Commanders-in-Chief and the Director of the Joint Staff have 
identified areas in which the expertise and skills of reserve 
component general or flag officers would contribute to specific 
programs or initiatives. Under current law, a reserve component 
general or flag officer ordered to active duty for more than 
179 days will count against the limit on active duty general 
and flag officers. The recommended provision would permit up to 
three percent of the number of reserve component general and 
flag officers to serve on active duty for a period longer than 
179 days without offsetting an active duty general or flag 
officer authorization. The committee expects the Chairman of 
the Joint Chiefs of Staff and the service chiefs to use this 
authority to permit reserve component generals in joint duty 
positions where their expertise and experience will benefit the 
Nation and provide the reservists valuable experience in the 
joint arena.

Sec. 415. Increase in numbers of members in certain grades authorized 
        to be on active duty in support of the reserves.

    The committee recommends a provision that would increase 
the number of officers and senior enlisted personnel on active 
duty in the reserve components of the Army and the Air Force in 
support of the reserves. The recommended provision 
wouldincrease the authorized number of Army reserve component colonels 
from 412 to 438 and enlisted members in the grade of E9 from 603 to 
623. The recommended provision would increase the authorized number of 
Air Force reserve component majors from 643 to 791; lieutenant colonels 
from 672 to 713; colonels from 274 to 297; enlisted members in the 
grade of E8 from 890 to 997; and enlisted members in the grade of E9 
from 366 to 395.
    The committee recommends these increases, in part, to 
permit the Air Force Reserve and the Air National Guard to 
supplement undergraduate pilot training. As one part of the 
efforts to address increased aviator attrition, the committee 
supports the Air Force plan to increase throughput in pilot 
training.

Sec. 416. Consolidation of strength authorizations for active status 
        Naval Reserve flag officers of the Navy Medical Department 
        staff corps.

    The committee recommends a provision that would consolidate 
flag officer authorizations for the Navy Reserve Medical 
Department Staff Corps, identify the components of the medical 
Department Staff Corps, and allocate one rear admiral (lower 
half) authorization to each component of the Medical Department 
Staff Corps.

              SUBTITLE C--AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS

Sec. 421. Authorization of appropriations for military personnel.

    The committee recommends a provision that would authorize 
$74,434.0 million to be appropriated to the Department of 
Defense for military personnel.

                        OTHER ITEMS OF INTEREST

Army National Guard schools and special training

    The committee recommends an increase of $37.0 million in 
the amount authorized to be appropriated for National Guard 
Personnel, Army. The budget request included $37.0 million for 
the Reserve Mobilization Income Insurance Fund. The Congress 
included funding for the Reserve Mobilization Insurance Fund in 
the supplemental appropriation bill. Since the Army National 
Guard schools and special training account was underfunded in 
the budget request, the committee recommends transferring the 
$37.0 million requested for the Reserve Mobilization Income 
Insurance program in the operation and maintenance 
appropriation to the military personnel appropriation.

                   TITLE V--MILITARY PERSONNEL POLICY

    The committee addressed a number of military personnel 
policy issues as a result of information received during 
hearings conducted by the full committee and the Subcommittee 
on Personnel. The committee recommended a number of military 
personnel policy changes that would improve management of 
reserve component personnel. In light of the continued 
drawdown, the committee recommended extension of the personnel 
management authorities to facilitate the drawdown and 
transition of military personnel out of the services. The 
committee also recommended a provision that would extend the 
date by which the Commission on Military Training and Gender-
Related Issues must complete its work.

                  SUBTITLE A--OFFICER PERSONNEL POLICY

Sec. 501. Streamlined selective retention process for regular officers.

    The committee recommends a provision that would eliminate 
the requirement to convene boards of review for officers who 
have been recommended for administrative separation by a board 
of inquiry. The committee believes that it is redundant to 
convene a second board to review the recommendation of a board 
of inquiry before the secretary of the military department 
considers a recommendation to administratively separate a 
regular officer. The recommended provision saves money and 
reduces the time required to process such recommendations.

Sec. 502. Permanent applicability of limitations on years of active 
        naval service of Navy limited duty officers in grades of 
        commander and captain.

    The committee recommends a provision that would make 
permanent the temporary mandatory retirement points for Navy 
Limited Duty Officers. The recommended change would not affect 
Marine Corps Limited Duty Officers of the same grades.

Sec. 503. Involuntary separation pay denied for officer discharged for 
        failure of selection for promotion requested by the officer.

    The committee recommends a provision that would modify the 
conditions under which separation pay is paid. Under the 
recommended provision, officers who submit a request to a 
promotion board not to be selected for promotion and are 
subsequently not selected for promotion would not be eligible 
for separation pay if the reason for their separation is 
failure to be promoted to the next higher grade. The 
recommended provision would require the report of a selection 
board that received communications from an officer who 
requested not to be selected to include that officer's name. 
The committee expects the secretaries of the military 
departments to promulgate regulations to record the names of 
officers who request not to be selected and to ensure 
compliance with this provision.

Sec. 504. Term of office of the Chief of the Air Force Nurse Corps.

    The committee recommends a provision that would extend the 
term of office for the chief of the Air Force Nurse Corps from 
three years to four years.

                 SUBTITLE B--RESERVE COMPONENT MATTERS

Sec. 511. Service required for retirement of National Guard officer in 
        higher grade.

    The committee recommends a provision that would extend the 
period for which a National Guard officer could receive credit 
towards the time-in-grade required for retirement. Currently, 
the time-in-grade computation for National Guard officers may 
not begin until the officer has received official federal 
recognition. The recommended provision would authorize the 
secretary concerned to compute the time-in-grade for retirement 
purposes from the date the nomination is confirmed by the 
Senate.

Sec. 512. Reduced time-in-grade requirement for reserve general and 
        flag officers involuntarily transferred from active status.

    The committee recommends a provision that would authorize 
service secretaries to retire a reserve component general or 
flag officer who is involuntarily transferred from active 
reserve status at the grade held on active reserve status. 
Since the number of reserve component general and flag officers 
is controlled in statute, it is not always possible for a 
reserve general or flag officer to be selected, nominated, and 
confirmed for promotion and still serve sufficient time to meet 
the minimum time-in-grade requirements to retire in grade. The 
recommended provision would permit service secretaries to 
retire selected officers in grade rather than retaining them on 
active status solely to meet a time-in-grade requirement.

Sec. 513. Eligibility of Army and Air Force Reserve brigadier generals 
        to be considered for promotion while on inactive status list.

    The committee recommends a provision that would authorize 
the Secretary of the Army or the Secretary of the Air Force to 
waive the eligibility requirements to permit a reserve 
component brigadier general of the Army or Air Force who is on 
the reserve inactive status list to be considered for promotion 
to major general. To be eligible for the waiver, the reserve 
brigadier general must have served at least one year on the 
reserve active status list or active duty list immediately 
preceding transfer to the inactive status list, and the 
transfer to the inactive status list occurred within the 
twelve-month period preceding the date the promotion board 
convenes.

Sec. 514. Composition of selective early retirement boards for rear 
        admirals of the Naval Reserve and major generals of the Marine 
        Corps Reserve.

    The committee recommends a provision that would change the 
minimum grade requirement for officers participating as members 
of a board convened to consider rear admirals in the Naval 
Reserve or major generals in the Marine Corps Reserve for early 
retirement. Currently, the statute requires members of the 
board to be one grade higher than the officers being considered 
for early retirement. Since the Naval Reserve and the Marine 
Corps Reserve do not have officers in grades above rear admiral 
or major general, this requirement caused an undue burden. The 
recommended provision would require any active duty officer 
participating in a selective early retirement board considering 
Naval Reserve rear admirals or Marine Corps Reserve major 
generals be one grade higher than the officers being considered 
and that at least one member of the board be a reserve officer 
in the same grade as the officers being considered.

Sec. 515. Use of Reserves for emergencies involving weapons of mass 
        destruction.

    The committee recommends a provision that would authorize 
the President to call-up reserve forces in response to domestic 
emergencies involving a use, or threatened use, of a weapon of 
mass destruction. In addition, the recommendedprovision would 
permit reserve full time support personnel to perform duties in support 
of emergency preparedness programs to prepare for or to respond to an 
emergency involving the use of a weapon of mass destruction.
    The committee notes the efforts underway within the 
Department of Defense to develop the means to respond to acts 
of terrorism involving weapons of mass destruction. In this 
regard, the committee directs the Secretary of Defense to 
ensure the assessment of needs and capabilities includes an 
analysis of the capabilities that exist within the Commissioned 
Officer Corps of the U.S. Public Health Service, who, as 
members of the uniformed services, might be easily integrated 
into Department of Defense plans to respond to emergencies 
involving weapons of mass destruction.

                       SUBTITLE C--OTHER MATTERS

Sec. 521. Annual manpower requirements report.

    The committee recommends a provision that would change the 
date the Secretary of Defense must submit the annual manpower 
requirements report from February 15 of each year to a date not 
later than 45 days after the President submits the budget to 
the Congress.

Sec. 522. Four-year extension of certain force reduction transition 
        period management and benefits authorities.

    The committee recommends a provision that would extend 
until September 30, 2003 the force reduction transition period 
management and benefits authorities established during the 
drawdown of the military services. The committee recognizes 
that the successful drawdown of military personnel could not 
have been accomplished without using incentives and transition 
benefits to encourage voluntary separations in lieu of 
involuntary actions. As a result of the Quadrennial Defense 
Review, active and reserve forces are continuing to reduce 
strength levels. The committee expects the military services to 
continue to use the incentive and benefit programs to achieve 
the reductions mandated by the Quadrennial Defense Review.

Sec. 523. Continuation of eligibility for voluntary separation 
        incentive after involuntary loss of membership in Ready or 
        Standby Reserve.

    The committee recommends a provision that would permit 
members who separated under the Voluntary Separation Incentive 
(VSI) program and lose their membership in a reserve component 
as a result of certain conditions to continue to receive the 
benefit payments. In the VSI program, recipients must serve in 
a reserve component to remain eligible for the benefit 
payments. The recommended provision would permit those VSI 
participants who were separated from a reserve component due to 
age, years of service, failure to select for promotion, or 
medical disqualification to continue to receive VSI benefit 
payments.

Sec. 524. Repeal of limitations on authority to set rates and waive 
        requirement for reimbursement of expenses incurred for 
        instruction at service academies of persons from foreign 
        countries.

    The committee recommends a provision that would repeal the 
limitations on the military departments to waive the 
requirement for reimbursement of expenses for foreign students 
at the service academies.

Sec. 525. Repeal of restriction on civilian employment of enlisted 
        members.

    The committee recommends a provision that would repeal 
section 974 of title 10, United States Code. Section 974 
restricts enlisted personnel from engaging in a civilian 
pursuit or business if the pursuit or business interferes with 
the employment of local civilians in their art, trade, or 
profession. The restrictions were enacted in 1968 to limit 
military musicians from competing with local musicians. 
Civilian employment of military musicians is prohibited by 
sections 3634, 6223 and 8634 of title 10, United States Code. 
The military services have regulations governing civilian 
employment of military personnel that are sufficient to control 
off-duty employment.

Sec. 526. Extension of reporting dates for Commission on Military 
        Training and Gender-Related Issues.

    The committee recommends a provision that would extend the 
dates on which the reports are required of the Commission on 
Military Training and Gender-Related Issues. The recommended 
provision extends the date for the interim report from April 
15, 1998 to October 15, 1998 and the date for the final report 
from September 16, 1998 to March 15, 1999.

Sec. 527. Moratorium on changes of gender-related policies and 
        practices pending completion of the work of the Commission on 
        Military Training and Gender-Related Issues.

    The committee recommends a provision that would prohibitthe 
Secretary of Defense from implementing any policy changes with regard 
to separation or integration of members of the armed forces on the 
basis of gender, which are within the responsibility of the Commission 
on Military Training and Gender-Related Issues, until the commission 
has completed its work and issued its report. The final report is due 
on March 15, 1999.
    The committee believes that the Commission on Military 
Training and Gender-Related Issues is an important body and 
should be permitted to complete the assigned work without 
prejudicial legislation. The statute that created the 
commission requires it to review the policies and practices of 
the military services with regard to gender-integration of 
initial entry training and personal relationships between 
members of the armed forces, and to review the recommendations 
of the panels the Secretary of Defense appointed to review 
gender-integrated training, fraternization, and adultery. The 
committee does not intend that the recommended provision be 
perceived as a judgement on the merit of the findings and 
recommendations of the Kassebaum-Baker panel. Additionally, the 
committee does not intend to limit the flexibility of the 
Secretary of Defense or the secretaries of the military 
departments to make policy changes in areas other than those 
that the commission is required to review.

Sec. 528. Transitional compensation for abused dependent children not 
        residing with the spouse or former spouse of a member convicted 
        of dependent abuse.

    The committee recommends a provision that would authorize 
transitional compensation to eligible dependent children who do 
not reside with a spouse or former spouse who is also eligible 
for transitional compensation payments. The recommended 
provision would ensure that dependent children who are victims 
of abuse are not denied this compensation because of family 
circumstances that may cause the dependent children not to 
reside with the spouse or former spouse. The recommended 
provision is in no way intended to create an economic incentive 
for children to live away for the spouse or former spouse but 
rather to ensure that, in cases where it is inappropriate or 
impossible for an abused dependent to reside with the spouse or 
former spouse, they are not denied the benefits of transitional 
compensation.

Sec. 529. Pilot program for treating GED recipients as high school 
        graduates for determinations of eligibility for enlisting in 
        the Armed Forces.

    The committee recommends a provision that would establish a 
five-year pilot program to permit participants in a National 
Guard Youth Challenge Program who receive a general education 
development (GED) certificate to enlist in the Armed Forces as 
if they had received a high school diploma. The recommended 
provision would limit the pilot program to not more than 5,000 
persons per year (1,250 per service). The recommended provision 
would require the Secretary of Defense to conduct a 
comprehensive evaluation of the performance of the participants 
in the pilot program and report the results to the Congress not 
later than February 1, 2004.
    The committee has supported the National Guard Youth 
Challenge Program since its inception. The committee notes that 
the military services do not accept GED recipients with the 
same priority as high school graduates. The committee expects 
each service to participate in the pilot program by actively 
recruiting, training, and employing National Guard Youth 
Challenge Program GED recipients.

Sec. 530. Waiver of time limitations for award of Distinguished Flying 
        Cross in certain cases.

    The committee recommends a provision that would waive the 
statutory time limitations for the award of military 
decorations to provide for the Distinguished Flying Cross to 
certain individuals who have been recommended by the service 
secretaries for these awards.

                        OTHER ITEMS OF INTEREST

Personal finance training

    The statement of managers accompanying the conference 
report on H.R. 1119 (H. Rept. 105-340) includes an Item of 
Special Interest urging the secretaries of the military 
departments to review the adequacy of personal finance training 
programs. The committee continues to believe that providing 
personal finance training, including checkbook management, 
credit card management, and debt management, is important. With 
the availability of new Individual Retirement Account options, 
the committee believes that the personal finance training and 
command information programs should make military personnel 
aware of the advantages of the ``Roth IRA''. The ``Roth IRA'' 
may offer significant advantages to military personnel since 
that IRA option is more favorable to those in lower tax 
brackets and can be used for a variety of purposes. In fact, 
for many service members the ``Roth IRA'' may be more 
beneficial than a 401(k) plan.

Operation Walking Shield Program

    Operation Walking Shield is a cooperative program 
throughwhich reserve components of the armed forces train and enhance 
individual and unit readiness while providing humanitarian services to 
Native American communities. Initially focused on transporting surplus 
federal property, including medical equipment and housing units, to 
Native American communities in need, this program has evolved into a 
multi-faceted program that provides beneficial training opportunities 
to our Nation's reserve forces while proving to be of immense value to 
our Native Americans. Military pilots and crews gain valuable logistics 
support training while multi-service medical teams and civil engineer 
and construction crews have been able to participate in real-life 
practical training in communities that are truly in need. The committee 
encourages the Secretary of Defense to continue to support this 
worthwhile program with funds available for reserve component 
individual readiness training.

Processing of reports of promotion boards

    The committee remains concerned about the length of time 
some services require to process the report of a promotion 
board. The committee believes that the report of a promotion 
board can be processed, in accordance with service and 
Department of Defense regulations and directives, within 90 
days following the recess of the board. The committee directs 
the secretaries of the military departments to advise the 
Committee on Armed Services of the Senate and the National 
Security Committee of the House of Representatives when 
processing of a report of a promotion board from the date the 
board report is signed by the board members until the report of 
the selection board is approved by the President or by the 
official to whom that authority has been delegated exceeds 100 
days. This report shall include an explanation for the delay, 
an assessment of when the board report will be approved, and an 
accounting for the processing time in each office through which 
the board report has passed to that point. A follow-up report, 
including the same information, shall be provided every 30 days 
after the 100th day.

Recruiting effectiveness and efficiency

    The committee continues to be concerned about the ability 
of the military services to recruit quality personnel in the 
numbers needed to sustain personnel readiness.
    Effective recruiting is the ``life blood'' of the military. 
With declining propensities among American youth to join the 
military, the task of recruiting becomes even more difficult. 
At the same time, the committee is aware of a high rate of 
recruiter dissatisfaction, as indicated in a recent recruiter 
survey conducted by the Department of Defense. The committee 
believes that a great deal of this dissatisfaction is a result 
of the involuntary assignment of individuals to recruiting 
duty.
    The committee believes it is appropriate for the military 
services to consider more effective and efficient ways to 
recruit. In this regard, the committee believes there is merit 
in exploring the potential for outsourcing military recruiting 
to entities whose business it is to recruit, and whose 
recruiters are volunteers.
    Consequently, the committee urges the Secretary of Defense, 
in coordination with the military services, to conduct a test 
to determine the feasibility of outsourcing military 
recruiting. The test would be designed by the Secretary of 
Defense to involve representative recruiting areas and be large 
enough to ensure an unbiased test. The objective of the test 
would be to determine the comparative effectiveness and cost of 
the outsourcing alternative against current recruiting method. 
The test would be conducted for a period of two years. The 
results would be reported to the Committee on Armed Services of 
the Senate and the National Security Committee of the House of 
Representatives no later than 180 days after the completion of 
the test.

Management of reserves on active duty in support of the reserve 
        components

    The committee is concerned about the evolution of the 
programs in which reservists serve on active duty in support of 
the reserve components, referred to in this report as full-time 
support (FTS) personnel. The committee recognizes and supports 
the good work and the tremendous contributions to reserve unit 
readiness provided by FTS personnel. Without these dedicated 
professionals, the reserve components would not be capable of 
serving side-by-side with the active forces and effectively 
accomplishing the same missions as the active forces.
    However, over time, both active and reserve component 
commanders have assigned FTS personnel to duties and positions 
which are not in direct support of organizing, administering, 
recruiting, instructing, or training the reserve components. 
The Department of Defense has implemented several policies that 
have institutionalized FTS personnel into the everyday 
functions of the active forces, Headquarter elements, and the 
Office of the Secretary of Defense. Further, Department of 
Defense policy has directed each military service to administer 
their respective FTS personnel to ensure that they are provided 
career opportunities, progression, retention, professional 
military education, and professional development, consistent 
with strength limitations and policies that may lead to a 
military retirement.
    In the committee's view, these policies represent subtle, 
yet significant, changes in the assignment, utilization, 
andmanagement of FTS personnel that were not intended when the 
statutory authorities for such programs were enacted. FTS personnel 
were intended to be involved directly in improving the readiness of the 
reserve components by organizing, administering, recruiting, 
instructing, or training the reserve components. The intent was that 
reservists would be ordered to an active duty status, serve in a 
capacity that would improve unit readiness and capability, and return 
to reserve status upon completion of a specified tour or period of 
time. Through the years, serving on active duty in support of the 
reserve components has become a career field in which people are 
carefully managed through positions to ensure they are promoted, 
schooled, and remain in an active duty status until they retire with 
retirement benefits very similar to the active component personnel. 
Commanders and chiefs of staff have created positions for FTS personnel 
to augment or substitute for active component personnel. Many FTS 
personnel are actually performing tasks that require extremely liberal 
interpretation of the legal definition pertaining to the use of 
reservists serving on active duty in support of the reserve components. 
The committee has observed that the services have implemented policies 
and created opportunities that give FTS personnel considerable 
advantage over the active duty personnel in the attendance of senior 
level schools. Positions have been created for FTS personnel in major 
commands, service level staffs, and departmental secretariats.
    The committee believes that FTS personnel should be 
concentrated in reserve component units commanded by officers 
in the grade of O6 or lower. Additionally, the committee 
believes that it is necessary to review the existing policies 
that direct that certain FTS personnel are provided career 
opportunities, progression, retention, professional military 
education, and professional development consistent with 
strength limitations and policies that may lead to a military 
retirement.
    Therefore, the committee directs the Secretary of Defense, 
in conjunction with the military services and the reserve 
components, to conduct a comprehensive review of the statutes, 
policies, directives, and practices pertaining to FTS personnel 
and to submit the results of the study to the Committee on 
Armed Services of the Senate and the National Security 
Committee of the House of Representatives not later than March 
15, 1999. In addition to the report, the Secretary shall submit 
any suggested legislative changes determined to be necessary to 
re-engineer programs related to the management of reservists 
serving on active duty in support of the reserve components.

Personnel and finance support of the reserve components

    The committee is aware that there are separate, distinct 
personnel and finance systems for the reserve components. The 
committee is concerned that there do not appear to be efforts 
to standardize the reserve component personnel and finance 
systems with those used to manage the active forces. Separate, 
and many times incompatible, personnel and finance systems 
prohibit consolidation of active and reserve component records 
management, and require potentially unnecessary overhead and 
infrastructure. Therefore, the committee directs the Secretary 
of Defense, in conjunction with the military services and the 
reserve components, to conduct a comprehensive study of the 
personnel management and finance systems supporting the reserve 
components to determine the advisability and feasibility of 
standardizing the systems used by the reserve components with 
those used to manage and support the active forces. The 
committee directs the Secretary of Defense to report the 
results of this study, including any recommendations as to how 
to standardize and re- engineer reserve component personnel and 
finance systems, to the Committee on Armed Services of the 
Senate and the National Security Committee of the House of 
Representatives not later than March 31, 1999.

Investigations of military deaths

    The committee has been interested in improving the 
procedures and practices used by the criminal investigation 
agencies of the military departments when investigating the 
deaths of service members. In September 1996, on behalf of the 
committee, the Personnel Subcommittee held a hearing that 
examined the procedures and practices used by the criminal 
investigation agencies of the military departments during their 
investigations of military deaths that may have resulted from 
self-inflicted causes. Following the hearing, the subcommittee 
chairman sent letters to the service secretaries identifying 
the shortcomings and lessons learned during the hearing and 
requesting a report on each department's implementation of the 
recommended improvements. The subcommittee chairman has 
continued to meet with families of military personnel, whose 
death may have resulted from self- inflicted causes, to review 
the status of implementation of the suggested improvements. 
Additionally, the subcommittee chairman has written to the 
local law enforcement official in each case in which the family 
of a service member, whose death may have resulted from self-
inflicted causes, requested review of their case. In each case, 
the subcommittee chairman has followed up to ensure that the 
local sheriff or chief of police reviewed the original 
investigation and provided an assessment of the facts of the 
case.
    As a result of these activities, the committee believes the 
military departments and the criminal investigativeservices 
have improved the procedures and practices used to investigate military 
deaths and those governing support to the families. Still, there is 
work that should be done. The committee remains concerned about the use 
of psychological autopsies. The military departments must ensure that 
those who conduct a psychological autopsy are qualified to conduct such 
activities. The committee believes that the next of kin of the deceased 
should be permitted to review the report. The committee recommends that 
the secretaries of the military departments review the qualifications 
of the military criminal investigators to ensure that those assigned to 
these critical positions are sufficiently trained and have the maturity 
to conduct a detailed, fact-based investigation.
    The committee directs the Secretary of Defense to review 
the policies, regulations, directives, and practices used by 
the military departments to describe the cause of death on the 
military equivalent of the death certificate. In cases in which 
the cause of death cannot be absolutely determined, the cause 
of death may be more appropriately listed as undetermined. 
Recently, the committee was surprised and disappointed that a 
military department determined the cause of death of a pilot to 
be suicide solely because they could not find another cause. 
Suicide, like homicide, should be determined as a result of 
evidence, not conjecture or as a matter of default when other 
causes cannot be determined.
    The committee acknowledges the professional work of the 
Department of Defense Inspector General in conducting reviews 
of cases requested by families of military deaths that may have 
resulted from self-inflicted causes. While many families remain 
skeptical of the fidelity and professionalism of the reviews, 
as well as the original investigation, the Inspector General 
has recommended important changes to policies and investigative 
procedures to the military departments. The committee continues 
to urge the secretaries of the military departments to 
implement the recommendations of the Department of Defense 
Inspector General.

Management of officers assigned to interagency and international 
        billets

    The committee notes that the report of the Quadrennial 
Defense Review and the report of the National Defense Panel 
stress the importance of extending the concept of jointness 
beyond the Department of Defense to other parts of the national 
security establishment and to our friends and allies abroad. 
The report of the National Defense Panel suggests creating an 
interagency cadre of professionals, similar in spirit to the 
joint experience envisioned by the Goldwater- Nichols Defense 
Reorganization Act, with staff in key positions within the 
national security structures. While the committee is not 
recommending extending joint duty credit for assignments to 
interagency and international billets, there may be a need to 
identify, train, and manage officers with experience in 
interagency and international assignments. The committee 
directs the Secretary of Defense to conduct a study of the 
advisability and feasibility of establishing a cadre of 
officers whose assignments and schooling would be managed so as 
to ensure a viable career track in which these officers would 
serve in interagency and international assignments. The 
committee directs the Secretary of Defense to report on the 
results of the study to the Committee on Armed Services of the 
Senate and the National Security Committee of the House of 
Representatives not later than March 31, 1999.
          TITLE VI--COMPENSATION AND OTHER PERSONNEL BENEFITS

    The committee addressed a number of pay, allowances, and 
other compensation issues. One of the committee's priorities 
this year was to continue to improve the quality of life for 
military personnel, their families, and retired service members 
and their families. The committee recommended a number of 
provisions that would significantly improve the quality of life 
and living conditions, and provide equitable compensation for 
military personnel to protect against inflation. The committee 
recommended an increase in basic military pay of 3.1 percent 
and an increase in the pay of service academy cadets and 
midshipmen. In general, the committee's recommendations reflect 
a commitment to enhancing quality of life and a concern for the 
welfare of military personnel and their families.

                     SUBTITLE A--PAY AND ALLOWANCES

Sec. 601. Increase in basic pay for fiscal year 1999.
    The committee recommends a provision that would waive 
section 1009 of title 37, United States Code, and increase the 
rates of basic pay for members of the uniformed services by 3.1 
percent. This increase would be effective January 1, 1999.
Sec. 602. Rate of pay for cadets and midshipmen at the service 
        academies.
    The committee recommends a provision that would increase 
the rate of pay for cadets and midshipmen at the service 
academies from $558.04 per month to $600.00 per month effective 
January 1, 1999.
Sec. 603. Payments for movements of household goods arranged by 
        members.
    The committee recommends a provision that would authorize 
the Departments of Defense, Health, and Transportation to 
provide members of the uniformed services with a reimbursement 
or monetary allowance in advance for the cost of transportation 
related to that member's baggage and household goods. The 
monetary allowance may be paid only if it results in an overall 
cost savings to the Government.
Sec. 604. Leave without pay for suspended academy cadets and 
        midshipmen.
    The committee recommends a provision that would authorize 
the superintendents of the military academies and the Coast 
Guard Academy to order a cadet or midshipman on involuntary 
leave without pay if the cadet or midshipman is pending 
separation from the academy for misconduct, conduct deficiency, 
or honor violation while the separation is pending final 
approval. The recommended provision would permit a cadet or 
midshipman to be ordered on leave without pay as a disciplinary 
measure or if the cadet or midshipman is at home waiting to 
repeat a semester or academic year.

             SUBTITLE B--BONUSES AND SPECIAL INCENTIVE PAYS

Sec. 611. Three-month extension of certain bonuses and special pay 
        authorities for reserve forces.
    The committee recommends a provision that would extend the 
authority to pay the special pay for critically short wartime 
health specialists in the Selected Reserve, the Selected 
Reserve reenlistment bonuses, the Selected Reserve enlistment 
bonuses, the special pay for enlisted members assigned to 
certain high priority units in the Selected Reserve, the 
Selected Reserve affiliation bonus, the Ready Reserve 
enlistment and reenlistment bonus, the repayment of loans for 
certain health professionals who serve in the Selected Reserve, 
and the prior service enlistment bonus until December 31, 1999.
Sec. 612. Three-month extension of certain bonuses and special pay 
        authorities for nurse officer candidates, registered nurses, 
        and nurse anesthetists.
    The committee recommends a provision that would extendthe 
authority to pay certain bonuses and special pay for nurse officer 
candidates, registered nurses, and nurse anesthetists until December 
31, 1999.

Sec. 613. Three-month extension of authorities relating to payment of 
        other bonuses and special pays.

    The committee recommends a provision that would extend the 
authority to pay the aviation officer retention bonus, the 
reenlistment bonus for active members, the enlistment bonuses 
for critical skills, the special pay for nuclear qualified 
officers who extend the period of active service, the nuclear 
career accession bonus, and the nuclear career annual incentive 
bonus until December 31, 1999.

Sec. 614. Eligibility of Reserves for selective reenlistment bonus when 
        reenlisting or extending to perform active guard and reserve 
        duty.

    The committee recommends a provision that would authorize 
the secretary concerned to offer a reenlistment bonus to 
reserve component members who are on extended active duty in 
support of the reserves. The recommended provision would 
require these reserve component members on active duty in 
support of the reserves to meet the same criteria as regular 
component enlisted personnel to be eligible for a reenlistment 
bonus.

Sec. 615. Repeal of ten-percent limitation on payments of selective 
        reenlistment bonuses in excess of $20,000.

    The committee recommends a provision that would repeal the 
restriction limiting the number of selective reenlistment 
bonuses which exceed $20,000 paid during any fiscal year. 
Without the ten-percent limit, the services may target existing 
bonus authorities at skills and in amounts dictated by their 
manning needs.

Sec. 616. Increase of maximum amount authorized for army enlistment 
        bonus.

    The committee recommends a provision that would increase 
the maximum amount authorized to be offered to a qualifying 
high school graduate who enlists in the Army for at least three 
years in designated skills from $4,000 to $6,000. The committee 
believes the recommended increase will permit the Army to 
target those military specialities where critical shortages 
exist.

Sec. 617. Education loan repayment program for health professions 
        officers serving in Selected Reserve.

    The committee recommends a provision that would modify the 
current education loan repayment program for health professions 
officers recruited to serve in the Selected Reserves by 
permitting the services to offer the program to a health 
professions student and would increase the loan repayment limit 
from $3,000 per year and a total of $20,000 to $20,000 per year 
and a total of $50,000.

Sec. 618. Increase in amount of basic educational assistance under all-
        volunteer force program for personnel with critically short 
        skills or specialties.

    The committee recommends a provision that would increase 
the amount authorized to be offered as part of the services' 
college fund programs. The recommended provision would permit 
the services to offer college fund programs not to exceed 
$50,000, an increase of $10,000.

Sec. 619. Relationship of entitlements to enlistment bonuses and 
        benefits under the All-Volunteer Force Educational Assistance 
        Program.

    The committee recommends a provision that would authorize 
the services to offer both an enlistment bonus and a college 
fund program to prospective recruits in selected critically 
short specialities. Currently, recruits may be offered either 
the college fund or an enlistment bonus. As some critically 
short specialities are not being filled, the services requested 
authority to offer a combination of an enlistment bonus and a 
college fund program to attract qualified volunteers. The 
committee expects the services to be extremely selective when 
deciding which specialities would be open to this combination 
of enlistment incentives.

            SUBTITLE C--TRAVEL AND TRANSPORTATION ALLOWANCES

Sec. 621. Travel and transportation for rest and recuperation in 
        connection with contingency operations and other duty.

    The committee recommends a provision that would authorize 
the secretary concerned to pay for commercial transportation, 
not to exceed the cost of government provided transportation, 
for leave travel of members assigned to overseas locations in 
contingency operations or at overseas locations where unusual 
conditions exist. Members could receive one round-trip 
duringany period of service of at least six months, but less than 24 
months.

Sec. 622. Payment for temporary storage of baggage of dependent student 
        not taken on annual trip to overseas duty station of sponsor.

    The committee recommends a provision that would authorize 
storage of a dependent student's unaccompanied baggage in lieu 
of shipping the baggage to the overseas duty station of the 
sponsor. When a student attending school in the United States 
returns to spend the summer with their family in an overseas 
location, they must ship their goods to the overseas location. 
The recommended provision would permit the baggage to be stored 
locally, which is less expensive than a round-trip overseas 
shipment.

Sec. 623. Commercial travel of Reserves at federal supply schedule 
        rates for attendance at inactive duty training assemblies.

    The committee recommends a provision that would authorize 
reservists traveling to and from their reserve unit drill site 
via commercial conveyance to purchase tickets at the official 
government rate. The committee notes that many reservists 
travel long distances to train with their reserve units. Travel 
to and from the reserve unit home station is the responsibility 
of the individual reservist. The recommended provision would 
enable these reservists to purchase commercial tickets at the 
government rate rather than full fare.

    SUBTITLE D--RETIRED PAY, SURVIVOR BENEFITS, AND RELATED MATTERS

Sec. 631. Paid-up coverage under Survivor Benefit Plan.

    The committee recommends a provision that would terminate 
Survivor Benefit Plan payments following 30 years of payments 
and attaining the age of 70. The committee believes that, once 
a retiree has paid Survivor Benefit Plan premiums for a minimum 
of thirty years and has reached 70 years of age, he or she has 
met the actuarial obligation to support any benefit which may 
accrue to his or her beneficiary. The recommended provision 
returns the Survivor Benefit Plan subsidy to an appropriate 
level without detracting from current efforts to balance the 
federal budget by fiscal year 2002.

Sec. 632. Court-required Survivor Benefit Plan coverage effectuated 
        through elections and deemed elections.

    The committee recommends a provision that would make 
spousal coverage under the Survivor Benefit Plan (SBP), 
directed as a result of court order or spousal agreement, 
consistent with an election deemed to have been made by the 
retired service member and the coverage effective on the first 
day of the first month after the date of the court order or 
spousal agreement. Under current law, the retired service 
member may wait up to one year to request SBP coverage directed 
as the result of a court order or spousal agreement, thus 
avoiding contributing for one year. The recommended provision 
would make the effective date of the coverage the next month 
after the spousal agreement or court order.

Sec. 633. Recovery, care, and disposition of remains of medically 
        retired member who dies during hospitalization that begins 
        while on active duty.

    The committee recommends a provision that would provide for 
the recovery, care, and disposition of remains of members who 
die in a hospital after having been medically retired from 
active duty by reason of an injury, illness, or disease 
incurred while on active duty. When a service member is 
severely injured or is near death as a result of an illness or 
disease, the services medically retire the individual in order 
to provide the surviving family members the maximum benefits. 
The recommended provision would permit the services to recover, 
prepare, and transport the remains of the deceased service 
member as if the member had died on active duty.

                       SUBTITLE E--OTHER MATTERS

Sec. 641. Definition of possessions of the United States for pay and 
        allowances purposes.

    The committee recommends a provision that would remove the 
Canal Zone from the list of possessions in title 37, United 
States Code, for purposes of statutes related to military pay 
and allowances.

Sec. 642. Federal employees' compensation coverage for students 
        participating in certain officer candidate programs.

    The committee recommends a provision that would provide 
medical coverage to college students participating in a Senior 
Reserve Officers' Training program or the Marine Corps Platoon 
Leaders Course who are injured or become ill while attending 
training on orders. Medical coverage would be provided 
forinjury or illness even if incurred during non-duty hours, provided 
the injury or illness is determined to be in the line of duty, as 
prescribed by service regulations.

Sec. 643. Authority to provide financial assistance for education of 
        certain defense dependents overseas.

    The committee recommends a provision that would authorize 
the Secretary of Defense to provide financial assistance to 
sponsors of dependents in overseas areas in which the 
Department of Defense does not operate schools. Currently, when 
Department of Defense personnel are assigned to duties in 
overseas areas in which the Department of Defense does not 
operate a school, the Department of Defense has contracted with 
a local school that meets standards similar to those of the 
Department of Defense schools. The recommended provision would 
permit the Secretary of Defense to pay the sponsor an allowance 
equal to the amount that would have been expended through the 
contract. The sponsor would then be able to send their 
dependents to the school of their choice.

                        OTHER ITEMS OF INTEREST

Accrual funding of military retirement

    The committee notes that a recent Rand study suggests that 
the military retirement accounts be funded based on weighted 
retirement propensity estimates in lieu of the current flat 
accural rate. In addition, the Rand report suggests that the 
Secretary of Defense and the Secretary of the Treasury 
establish procedures under which the Department of Defense 
shares in any windfalls resulting from actuarial gains in the 
military retirement fund potentially be used to reduce outlays 
from the Department of Defense. The committee has received 
testimony from a number of Department of Defense witnesses, 
including the Secretary of Defense and the Chairman of the 
Joint Chiefs of Staff, citing the importance of military 
retirement to recruiting and retention. As the Department 
reviews proposals to reshape military retirement or the 
possibility of creating a plan similar to a 401(k) for military 
personnel, consideration should be given to the suggestions in 
the Rand study. If it is determined that the suggestions in the 
Rand study have merit and could be implemented, the resultant 
savings may be sufficient to off-set the costs of a re-
engineered military retirement benefit or establishment of a 
plan similar to a 401(k).

Computation of retired pay for certain service members

    The committee is concerned about arguments presented in a 
recent general court-martial with regard to the computation of 
retired pay for former Chairmen and Vice Chairmen of the Joint 
Chiefs of Staff, former chiefs of a service, and former senior 
enlisted advisors of a service. The committee holds that the 
intent of the Congress when enacting section 1406(i) of title 
10, United States Code, was to protect the retired pay of 
former Chairmen and Vice Chairmen of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, 
former service chiefs, and former senior enlisted advisors of a 
service if they served honorably in another position on active 
duty subsequent to their service in the designated position. 
The Congress did not intend for this provision to be used to 
compute the retired pay of an individual serving in one of the 
designated positions who was subsequently reduced in grade by 
sentence of a court-martial or non-judicial punishment, or who 
was determined by the service secretary not to have served 
satisfactorily in a given grade. The committee does not find 
the several sections of title 10, United States Code, 
pertaining to computation of retired pay to be ambiguous nor in 
conflict. The committee finds that the intent of Congress when 
enacting section 1406(i) was to protect the retired pay of 
those senior enlisted personnel and officers who performed good 
and faithful service in an honorable manner after having served 
in one of the designated positions.
                         TITLE VII--HEALTH CARE

    The committee addressed a number of health care issues. One 
of the committee's priorities this year was to continue to 
improve the quality of life for military personnel, their 
families, and retired service members and their families. The 
committee views health care as an important aspect of quality 
of life. The committee held a hearing related to military 
medical readiness and health care delivery to beneficiaries of 
the Military Health Care System. The committee recommended a 
series of three demonstration projects to assess the most cost-
effective method to provide health care to Medicare-eligible 
beneficiaries of the Military Health Care System. The committee 
remains committed to full implementation of TRICARE, and in 
general, the committee's recommendations reflect a commitment 
to enhancing quality of life and concern for the welfare of 
military personnel and their families.
Sec. 701. Dependents' dental program.
    The committee recommends a provision that would establish 
an index under which the individual's monthly premium for the 
dependent dental plan could increase. Currently, the member's 
premium is fixed at $20.00 per month. As inflation increases 
the cost of the total premium, the government portion of the 
total premium would increase. The recommended provisionlimits 
the percent by which the member's premium may increase not to exceed 
the percentage of the annual pay raise.

Sec. 702. Extension of authority for use of personal services contracts 
        for provision of health care at military entrance processing 
        stations and elsewhere outside medical treatment facilities.

    The committee recommends a provision that would extend the 
coverage of contract physicians by the same malpractice 
litigation rules as other Department of Defense health care 
providers. In addition, the recommended provision would extend 
the authority of the Secretary of Defense to provide reasonable 
attorney's fees in any litigation in which government attorneys 
do not provide representation. The current authorities expire 
on November 18, 1998, one year from date of enactment of the 
National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 1998. The 
recommended provision would extend the expiration date to June 
30, 1999.
    The committee notes that section 736 of the National 
Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 1998 requires the 
Secretary of Defense to submit a report on the feasible 
alternative means for performing the medical screening 
examinations that are routinely performed at Military Entrance 
Processing Stations, not later than March 31, 1998. The 
Secretary has not submitted the required report. The committee 
recommends a short-term extension of the authorities to permit 
the Secretary of Defense to complete the required report and 
submit it to the Congress for review.

Sec. 703. TRICARE Prime automatic enrollments and retiree payment 
        options.

    The committee recommends a provision that would authorize 
the Secretary of Defense to automatically enroll dependents of 
service members in the grade of E-4 and below in TRICARE Prime 
and would permit automatic re-enrollment for the dependents of 
any service member who is enrolled in TRICARE Prime. The 
provision would also permit retired service members to have any 
fees associated with enrollment in TRICARE to be paid through 
an allotment from their retired pay or via electronic funds 
transfer from a financial institution. The committee believes 
these three initiatives will streamline and simplify enrollment 
in TRICARE Prime and will reduce costs to the Department of 
Defense.

Sec. 704. Limited continued CHAMPUS coverage for persons unaware of a 
        loss of CHAMPUS coverage resulting from eligibility for 
        medicare.

    The committee recommends a provision that would give the 
Secretary of Defense the authority to waive the requirement to 
purchase Medicare Part B coverage for those beneficiaries who 
were unaware of the loss of CHAMPUS eligibility. This authority 
would exist for the period October 1, 1998 through July 1, 
1999.

Sec. 705. Enhanced Department of Defense organ and tissue donor 
        program.

    The committee recommends a provision that would require the 
Secretary of Defense, the secretaries of the military 
departments, and the Surgeons General to take a number of steps 
intended to enhance the Department's ability to support organ 
and tissue donor elections made by service members.
    Organ and tissue transplantation is one of the most 
remarkable medical success stories in the history of medicine. 
The committee commends the significant efforts the Department 
of Defense has made in increasing the awareness of the 
importance of organ and tissue donations among members of the 
armed forces. The inclusion of organ and tissue donor elections 
in the Defense Enrollment Eligibility Reporting System (DEERS) 
central database via the Real-time Automated Personnel 
Identification System (RAPIDS) represents a major step in 
ensuring that organ and tissue donor elections are a matter of 
record and are accessible in a timely manner.
    The committee believes that the Department can and should 
ensure that training, medical logistical support, and 
developing technology for personal data systems incorporate 
consideration of organ and tissue donation programs and 
actions.

Sec. 706. Joint Department of Defense and Department of Veterans 
        Affairs reviews relating to interdepartmental cooperation in 
        the delivery of medical care.

    The committee recommends a provision that would require the 
Secretary of Defense and the Secretary of Veterans Affairs to 
conduct a joint survey of their respective beneficiary 
populations to identify, by category of individual, the 
expectations of, requirements for, and behavior patterns 
regarding medical care among those beneficiary categories. This 
collaborative effort would be developed jointly but be 
administered by an independent entity. Additionally, this 
provision would require the Secretaries of Defense and Veterans 
Affairs to review all applicable statutes, regulations, 
policies and beneficiary attitudes which may preclude or limit 
cooperative health care programs, including the sharing of 
facilities and other resources, between the Department of 
Defense and the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA).
    The Military Health System (MHS), the health care system of 
the Department of Defense (DOD), and the Veterans Health 
Administration of the Department of Veterans Affairs are well 
established institutions that collectively manage over 1500 
hospitals, clinics, and health care facilities world-wide to 
provide services to over 11 million beneficiaries. Overseeing 
these systems requires a well-planned and executed effort.
    During the Cold War, the MHS was designed to support full-
scale, extremely violent war with the Soviet Union and its 
allies in Europe. The collapse of the Soviet Union and the end 
of the Warsaw Pact led to major reassessment of the U.S. 
defense policy. The overall size of the active duty force has 
been reduced by one-third since the mid-1980s. In the last 
decade, the number of military medical personnel has declined 
by 15 percent and the number of military hospitals has been 
reduced by one-third. Nationwide changes in the practice of 
medicine have also affected the MHS. The National Defense 
Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 1994 directed DOD to 
prescribe and implement a nationwide managed health care 
benefit program modeled on health maintenance organization 
plans and, in 1995, beneficiaries began enrolling in TRICARE.
    Veterans Affairs is also a system in transition. In the 
past two years, the VA has replaced its structure of four 
regions, 33 networks, and hundreds of clinics with a new system 
geared to decentralizing authority into 22 Veterans Integrated 
Service Networks. The purpose of the reorganization was to 
improve the access, quality and efficiency of care provided to 
the nation's veterans. The hallmark of the network structure is 
a decentralization of control over functions previously held in 
Washington.
    The Veterans Administration and Department of Defense 
Health Resources Sharing and Emergency Operations Act (Public 
Law 97-174) was enacted in 1982 to promote cost-effective use 
of federal health care resources by minimizing duplication and 
under use of health care resources while benefitting both VA 
and DOD beneficiaries. VA and DOD pursue programs of 
cooperation ranging from shared services to joint venture 
operations of medical facilities. In 1984, there was a combined 
total of 102 VA and DOD facilities with sharing agreements. By 
1997, that number had grown to 420. In five years, between 
fiscal year 1992 and fiscal year 1997, shared services 
increased from slightly over 3,000 to more than 6,000 services, 
ranging from major medical and surgical services, laundry, 
blood, and laboratory services to unusual speciality care 
services.
    As an initiative of the DOD/VA Executive Council, there is 
an on-going Joint Partnering Study regarding the cost and 
feasibility of integrating all or part of the DOD and VA 
medical treatment provided. This study will provide an 
assessment of whether improved geographical access to 
facilities would result in an expanded number of facilities 
available to beneficiaries and the impact on utilization rates 
at facilities and related costs or savings that may result from 
economies of scale.
    There are numerous ongoing efforts by the DOD/VA Executive 
Council to increase the accessibility to patient information 
through the use of computerized information. The Computerized 
Patient Record is a collaborative effort by DOD and VA that 
would provide immediate access to patient records at treatment 
centers/facilities. Joint Separation Physicals and Pharmacy 
Program Management are other areas in which much work has been 
done to increase cooperative efforts that add value to the 
benefits provided. The committee believes there is room for 
continued enhancement of cooperative efforts between DOD and 
VA. However, there is also a need to review statutory 
requirements, regulations, and local policies that may preclude 
increased cooperation and/or integration of resources.
    The committee views the recommended provision as an 
indication of the committee's commitment to the health of the 
entire military family: veteran, active duty, reserve, retiree, 
and dependent. This provision is also an important step in 
furthering the idea of DOD/VA cooperative efforts.

Sec. 707. Demonstration projects to provide health care to certain 
        medicare-eligible beneficiaries of the military health care 
        system.

    The committee recommends a provision that would authorize 
the Secretary of Defense to conduct three health care 
demonstration projects in order to assess the feasibility and 
advisability of providing health care to certain Medicare- 
eligible beneficiaries of the Military Health Care System. The 
demonstrations would begin not later than January 1, 2000 and 
end not later than December 31, 2003.
    The recommended provision would authorize one demonstration 
project in which Medicare-eligible beneficiaries of the 
Military Health Care System would participate in the Federal 
Employees Health Benefits Program with the Department of 
Defense paying the usual employer portion of the premiums. A 
second demonstration project would create a TRICARE Senior 
Supplement program in which Medicare-eligible beneficiaries of 
the Military Health Care System could enroll. The TRICARE 
Senior Supplement would require a modest premium and would be 
similar in function to a commercial Medicare supplement 
insurance policy. The third demonstration would extend the 
TRICARE mail order pharmacy benefit to Medicare-eligible 
beneficiaries of the Military Health Care System.
    The Secretary of Defense would be required to identify six 
demonstration sites outside the catchment area of a military 
treatment facility, two for each demonstration. Sites where the 
Medicare subvention demonstration is being conducted may not be 
selected for these three demonstrations.All participants must 
be Medicare eligible and participate in Medicare Part B.
    The recommended provision would require the Secretary of 
Defense to provide for an evaluation of the demonstration 
projects by an agency independent of the Department of Defense. 
The final report of the independent evaluation would be 
submitted to the Congress not later than December 31, 2003. 
Following completion of the independent evaluation, the 
Comptroller General shall review the evaluation and report the 
results of this review to the Congress not later than February 
15, 2004.
    The committee recognizes the need to address the commitment 
to provide health care to Medicare-eligible beneficiaries of 
the Military Health Care System. While addressing this need, 
the committee recognizes that fiscal resources are finite and 
that costs of any such health care program must be controlled. 
The committee believes that these three demonstration programs, 
in conjunction with the ongoing Medicare subvention 
demonstration program, can provide a valuable information on 
cost, ability to satisfy the health care requirements of 
Medicare-eligible beneficiaries of the Military Health Care 
System, the impact, if any, on military medical readiness, and 
permit the Congress and the Secretary of Defense to 
collectively develop a model to provide adequate health care 
services to Medicare-eligible beneficiaries of the Military 
Health Care System.

                        OTHER ITEMS OF INTEREST

Auto-destruct syringes

    The committee notes that several manufacturers are 
producing auto-destruct syringes, that is, single-use syringes 
which by design will not function a second time. The per-unit 
price of these syringes is not measurably higher than that of 
disposable syringes that may be used more than once. When 
including the potential costs of treating diseases caused by 
multiple use of syringes, an auto-destruct disposable syringe 
may be significantly cheaper. While the greatest potential for 
savings from using a single-use, auto-destruct syringe may be 
in organizations serving underdeveloped areas of the world, the 
committee urges the Secretary of Defense to investigate the 
capabilities and costs of auto-destruct syringes as a medical 
force protection initiative. The highest potential value for 
auto-destruct syringes may be in the medical equipment provided 
to special operations forces and field medical kits. Medical 
personnel accompanying special operations forces and field 
combat units may use a syringe and discard it at the scene of 
the emergency. If the syringe can be used again, it may be 
recovered by a service member or a local national and become a 
source for disease transmission. In addition, when U.S. forces 
are deployed on humanitarian relief or rescue missions, auto-
destruct syringes may provide additional protection since used 
auto-destruct syringes cannot be pilfered and re-used.

Health care fraud

    The committee is concerned that health care fraud burdens 
the Department of Defense (DOD) with significant financial 
loss, and may threaten the quality of health care delivered. 
The annual loss to DOD through its health benefits programs is 
estimated to be $600.0 million to $1.2 billion. DOD health care 
fraud detection and investigation activities have not gained 
the national attention and additional resources from which 
Medicare and Medicaid anti-fraud activities have benefited.
    The committee directs the Controller General of the United 
States to study and provide a report to the Committee on Armed 
Services of the Senate and the National Security Committee of 
the House of Representatives on the extent of health care fraud 
within the military health care system and the status of health 
care anti-fraud initiatives within DOD. The required report 
should include recommendations for initiatives and incentives 
that could enhance continued anti-fraud efforts within DOD.

Hepatitis C testing

    The committee understands that the incidence of service-
connected hepatitis C infection may be increasing. The 
committee directs the Secretary of Defense to study the extent 
of service-connected hepatitis C infection, to include the 
advisability and feasibility of including an antibody or 
antigen test sufficient to detect hepatitis C virus during 
separation and retirement physicals. Such tests could increase 
the cost of separation and retirement physicals. However, early 
detection of hepatitis C may reduce costs to the Department of 
Defense and the Department of Veterans Affairs by reducing the 
rate of serious liver disease. Additionally, an individual 
identified as infected with hepatitis C would understand that 
he or she should not donate blood, thus assisting in 
maintaining a safe blood supply. The committee directs the 
Secretary of Defense to report the results of the study to the 
Committee on Armed Services of the Senate and the National 
Security Committee of the House of Representatives not later 
than March 31, 1999.

The Psychopharmacology Demonstration Project

    The Psychopharmacology Demonstration Project (PDP) was 
funded by Congress in 1991 to train military psychologists in 
the prescription of psychotropic medications, pursuant to 
section 8097 of the Department of Defense Appropriations Act 
for Fiscal Year 1992. The committee understands that ten 
military psychologists successfully completed this training 
prior to termination of the program. The committee directs the 
Comptroller General to conduct a study to determine the extent 
to which these health providers have been integrated into the 
Military Health System, to include the quality of care provided 
to military personnel and their beneficiaries, contributions of 
these providers to cost effectiveness, and their impact on 
medical readiness.
  TITLE VIII--ACQUISITION POLICY, ACQUISITION MANAGEMENT, AND RELATED 
                                MATTERS

    The committee recommends several provisions to improve the 
acquisition process in the Department of Defense. These 
provisions represent the strong interest of the committee in 
continuing acquisition management reform while ensuring the 
preservation of essential safeguards in the acquisition 
process.
Sec. 801. Para-aramid fibers and yarns.
    The committee recommends a provision that would authorize 
the Secretary of Defense to procure articles containing para-
aramid fibers and yarns manufactured in a foreign country that 
is a party to defense memorandum of understanding, if such 
country allows U.S. manufacturers of that product to compete 
for sales to that foreign country. The committee intends this 
legislation to restore the ability of a foreign manufacturer to 
be a qualified Department of Defense (DOD) supplier of para-
aramid fibers and yarns, a basic component of certain military 
equipment, such as combat helmets, body armor, and aircrew 
survival equipment. This authority will improve warfighting 
capability by ensuring competition on price and delivery and 
DOD access to technological innovation applicable to these 
products.
Sec. 802. Procurement of travel services for official and unofficial 
        travel under one contract.
    The committee recommends a provision that would allow the 
procurement of travel services under one contract for both 
official and unofficial travel. By procuring all travel 
services under a single process, the Department of Defense will 
be able to garner savings and gain efficiencies. The provision 
would also clarify the ability of the Department of Defense to 
deposit fees generated by unofficial travel sales into 
nonappropriated fund accounts. The Secretary of Defense is 
expected to implement sufficient regulations to ensure the 
proper accounting between appropriated and nonappropriated 
funds.
Sec. 803. Limitation on use of price preference upon attainment of 
        contract goal for small and disadvantaged businesses.
    Section 2323 of title 10, United States Code, requires that 
the Secretary of Defense attempt to obligate five percent of 
the total amount of funding for research and development, 
procurement, operations and maintenance, and military 
construction for contracts and subcontracts with small and 
disadvantaged businesses, historically Black colleges and 
universities, and minority institutions. Through its aggressive 
efforts the Department of Defense (DOD) has exceeded this goal 
for each year since fiscal year 1992. Figures for fiscal year 
1997 indicate that the combined percentages for prime and 
subcontract awards were over nine percent of total prime and 
subcontract expenditures for the Department.
    One of the tools available to the DOD within this program 
is the authority to pay up to 10 percent above fair market cost 
per contract for contractors or subcontractors who meet the 
preference criteria. DOD expenditures for the cost of 
preference payments average approximately $7.5 million per 
year. The committee believes that such an expenditure in fiscal 
year 1999 would be unnecessary since the Department appears to 
be awarding contracts for values far in excess of the statutory 
objective. Therefore, the committee again recommends a 
provision that would condition the use of section 2323 price 
preference criteria on the failure of DOD to achieve the goal 
in the prior fiscal year.
Sec. 804. Distribution of assistance under the Procurement Technical 
        Assistance Cooperative Agreement Program.
    The committee recommends a technical amendment to sections 
2413 and 2415 of title 10, United States Code, to recognize the 
change in the Department of Defense contract administration 
structure.
Sec. 805. Defense Commercial Pricing Management Improvement Act.
    On March 18, 1998, the Subcommittee on Acquisition and 
Technology conducted a hearing to review the status 
ofacquisition reform efforts in the Department of Defense. The 
subcommittee received testimony from the Inspector General (IG), the 
General Accounting Office, the Under Secretary of Defense for 
Acquisition and Technology, and representatives from the military 
departments and the Defense Logistics Agency. Some of the issues 
reviewed at the hearing were related to the problems in commercial 
spare parts procurement presented in two IG reports and in the 
preliminary results of recent work by the General Accounting Office 
(GAO).
    The IG presented a number of examples in which the Defense 
Logistics Agency paid increases over previous prices on 
commercial parts, by as much as 1,430 to 13,163 percent. The 
price increases appear to have reflected no additional value to 
the government. The higher prices represented undiscounted or 
marginally discounted catalog prices for items that the 
Department of Defense had earlier purchased using cost-based 
pricing or through the use of competitive procedures. The IG 
audits indicated that the contractors involved did not violate 
any laws or regulations, but that: ``DOD procurement approaches 
were poorly conceived, badly coordinated and did not result in 
the government getting good value for the prices paid for both 
commercial and non-commercial items.'' The IG also asserted 
that the Defense Logistics Agency recognized the importance of 
the audit findings and moved quickly to take corrective action.
    The Department of Defense has officially characterized the 
cases uncovered in the IG audits as ``rare and isolated'' and 
not reflective of the broader results of recent acquisition 
reform. The committee agrees that acquisition reform efforts by 
Congress and the Department of Defense have resulted in savings 
of hundreds of millions of dollars and, just as importantly, 
have provided DOD with more rapid access to leading edge 
commercial technology. Although testimony by the GAO indicates 
that of the non-competitive spare parts purchases that involve 
commercial pricing problems is relatively small ($2.7 billion 
of a total of over $100 billion of DOD contracting dollars in 
fiscal year 1997), the instances of pricing abuses raised in 
the two IG audits are widespread enough to raise concerns.
    There are several root causes of the current pricing 
difficulties. The acquisition workforce has been reduced by 
over 40 percent since the early 1990's. In the process of the 
downsizing, the personnel in many buying activities have 
experienced consolidation and physical relocation. At the same 
time, acquisition personnel are being required to transition 
from using cost-based, rigid procurement procedures to a more 
flexible commercial pricing environment where a variety of 
methods must be used to determine price reasonableness without 
recourse to certified cost or pricing data.
    The committee does not believe that recent revelations 
concerning spare parts prices justify a retreat from the 
acquisition reform principles established in the Federal 
Acquisition Streamlining Act of 1994 and the Federal 
Acquisition Reform Act of 1996. Attempts to amend these laws as 
a means of eliminating any potential abuses could prevent the 
government from having access to increasingly important 
commercial technologies and from benefiting from commercial 
technology development cycles.
    The committee is persuaded that the Department of Defense 
has sufficient regulatory and administrative authority to allow 
defense acquisition personnel to respond effectively to the new 
commercial procurement environment. The committee believes, 
however, that the evidence suggests that the Department of 
Defense should address commercial pricing procedures in a 
systematic manner and not in an isolated fashion. Accordingly, 
the committee recommends a provision, the Defense Commercial 
Pricing Management Improvement Act, that would require the 
Secretary of Defense to take administrative and regulatory 
actions to address a number of commercial pricing issues.
    The provision would require the secretary to promulgate 
regulations to provide guidelines that would ensure price 
reasonableness in sole-source commercial item purchases. The 
secretary would also be required to clarify issues, such as the 
use of uncertified cost and pricing data and information on 
prices previously paid for similar items. The committee 
recognizes that there is a broad range of methods and sources 
for determining price reasonableness, only some of which may be 
appropriate to a given item. The committee is concerned that 
current regulations and guidance do not provide adequate 
direction for the government buyer.
    The provision would also require the secretary to establish 
procedures to ensure that, to the maximum extent practicable, 
sole-source spare parts purchases are negotiated through 
corporate contracts by single contracting officers or item 
managers to ensure that the government receives maximum 
leverage for the size of its purchases and to ensure that 
catalog discount issues and price reasonableness determinations 
are not treated in an isolated or piecemeal fashion. Finally, 
the provision would require the Secretary of Defense to 
establish a system for tracking price trends in spare parts in 
order to isolate categories of items that require further 
management attention. The provision would provide the Secretary 
of Defense with the discretion to set up such a system in a 
manner that would ensure minimal burden on the acquisition 
system and proper management.
    The committee is aware that the IG intends to issue another 
audit report related to these issues, and the committee has 
asked the GAO to expand its work to review commercial practices 
with respect to pricing. The committee views the results of the 
recent audits as serious and intends to continue intensive 
oversight in this area.

Sec. 806. Department of Defense purchases through other agencies.

    The committee recommends a provision that would require the 
Secretary of Defense to revise regulations issued pursuant to 
Section 844 of the National Defense Authorization Act for 
Fiscal Year 1994 (Public Law 103-160) to cover all purchases of 
goods and services by the Department of Defense under so-called 
``multiple award task order and delivery order contracts'' 
entered into or administered by any other agency. Congress 
authorized multiple award task order and delivery order 
contracts in the Federal Acquisition Streamlining Act to 
address the lack of competition in traditional, single-award 
task order and delivery order contracts. However, the General 
Accounting Office (GAO) testified before the Acquisition and 
Technology Subcommittee that some officials may be using 
multiple award task order and delivery order contracts to avoid 
competition.
    The committee is concerned by the preliminary findings of 
GAO's review. According to GAO:

          One agency issued a high proportion--64 percent--of 
        orders on a sole-source basis. This multiple award 
        contract has a potential value of over a billion 
        dollars. In another multiple award contract having the 
        potential to exceed several billion dollars, agency 
        announcements of planned orders identify 
        ``recommended'' firms specifically invited to submit 
        proposals. This practice has resulted in just one 
        proposal being received on most orders.

    GAO also reported that at least one agency has charged that 
there appear to be discriminatory fees for orders placed by 
outside agencies, including the Department of Defense. The 
committee directs the Department of Defense Inspector General 
to determine whether discriminatory fees were charged as 
indicated by the Comptroller General, and if so, whether any 
refund may be due the Department.
    The committee expects that the regulations required by the 
recommended provision would help avoid misuse by permitting 
Department of Defense officials to place orders under multiple 
award task order and delivery order contracts with other 
agencies only when there is a legitimate reason to do so. That 
approach would be consistent with regulations already in place 
to address inter-agency purchases under the Economy Act.
    A number of industry representatives have also expressed 
concerns about the implementation of multiple award task order 
and delivery order contracts. The committee intends to review 
carefully the issues involved with the use of this authority 
over the next year.

Sec. 807. Supervision of Defense Acquisition University structure by 
        Under Secretary of Defense for Acquisition and Technology.

    The committee is aware of recent efforts within the 
Department of Defense to reorganize the management of higher 
education within the Department under a chancellor for 
education and professional development, with a goal of full 
accreditation for all such higher education programs by January 
1, 2000. The committee supports this management initiative as 
it relates to the defense acquisition workforce, but believes 
that the Under Secretary of Defense for Acquisition and 
Technology should retain certain policy responsibilities for 
the defense acquisition university component of the Department 
of Defense higher education system. The committee, therefore, 
recommends a provision that would specify that the 
responsibility for the establishment of policy and requirements 
for educational programs of the defense acquisition university 
be vested in the Under Secretary of Defense for Acquisition and 
Technology.

Sec. 808. Repeal of requirement for Director of Acquisition Education, 
        Training, and Career Development to be within the Office of the 
        Under Secretary of Defense for Acquisition and Technology.

    The committee recognizes the recent Department of Defense 
efforts to restructure the management of higher education 
programs for the defense acquisition workforce. The committee 
recommends a provision that would remove the requirement that 
the director of acquisition education, training, and career 
development be appointed within the office of the Under 
Secretary of Defense for Acquisition and Technology.

Sec. 809. Eligibility of involuntarily downgraded employee for 
        membership in an acquisition corps.

    The organizations that manage and administer the 
acquisition of goods and services for the Department of Defense 
and the armed services are undergoing significant restructuring 
in an attempt to streamline the acquisition process. As a 
result of base closure actions or reductions in force, 
individuals in the defense acquisition workforce have been 
downgraded. In recognition of these circumstances, the 
committee recommends a provision that would preserve membership 
in the defense acquisition corps for an employee who previously 
served within grade GS-13 or above and was downgraded to grade 
GS-12 or below through a reduction in force action, a base 
closure, or similar reason other than for cause. The committee 
directs the Secretary of Defense to report to the congressional 
defense committees, no later thanMarch 1, 2000, on the number 
of employees within each grade below GS-13 by grade for whom this 
authority was used to preserve membership in the defense acquisition 
corps.

Sec. 810. Pilot programs for testing program manager performance of 
        product support oversight responsibilities for life cycle of 
        acquisition programs.

    In the report submitted in response to section 912 of the 
National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 1998 (Public 
Law 105-85), the Secretary of Defense indicated his intention 
to require the secretaries of the military departments to 
designate at least 10 programs with significant associated 
large operations and support costs. The program managers of 
these programs would be required to ensure that the product 
support functions are properly carried out over the entire 
program life cycle.
    The committee believes that this is an important initiative 
which will begin to address a long-standing management problem. 
According to the report provided to the committee by the 
Secretary:

          In today's environment, most Program Executive 
        Officers (PEOs) and Program Managers (PMs) have direct 
        responsibility and control of funding for development 
        and fielding weapon systems and equipment. Once the 
        system or equipment is fielded, the PM retains overall 
        responsibility for the system or equipment, but loses 
        control of significant portions of the funding required 
        for support. This practice results in much higher life-
        cycle costs than should be the case, because the PEO 
        and PM have no incentive to take action, during 
        development or modification of the systems, to design 
        into equipment features that will improve the 
        reliability and maintainability of the fielded system, 
        and it divides responsibility for system support among 
        many agencies.

The committee agrees with this assessment and recommends a 
provision that would require the Secretary of Defense to 
designate 10 programs for which the program manager will be 
made responsible for the life cycle cost issues through the 
life of the program. The Secretary would be required to report, 
no later than February 1, 1999, to the congressional defense 
committees on the 10 programs and to include any policy, 
regulatory, organizational, or legislative changes that would 
be required to fully implement this new approach to life cycle 
cost management.

Sec. 811. Scope of protection of certain information from disclosure.

    The committee recommends a provision that would amend 
section 2371 of title 10, United States Code, to clarify that 
certain information submitted by outside parties in cooperative 
agreements for basic, applied, and advanced research are 
protected from disclosure under section 552 of title 5, United 
States Code.

                        OTHER ITEMS OF INTEREST

Defense capability preservation agreement

    The committee is aware that the Army has received a 
proposal for the establishment of a defense capability 
agreement for the operations at an ammunition plant similar to 
that authorized for the shipbuilding industry in section 808 of 
the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 1996, as 
amended. This proposal has been offered as a means to encourage 
commercial use of the facility through the use of dual overhead 
rates. The committee directs the Secretary of the Army to 
review this proposal carefully and to provide a report to the 
congressional defense committees, no later than October 31, 
1998, on the feasibility and desirability of entering into such 
an agreement. If it is determined that the agreement is 
desirable, the Secretary should recommend legislation to 
authorize the Army to enter into such an agreement.

Item-by-item waivers to domestic preference requirements

    Section 811 of the National Defense Authorization Act for 
Fiscal Year 1998 authorized the Secretary of Defense to waive 
the so-called domestic preference requirements in Section 2534 
of Title 10 on an item-by-item, country-by-country basis.
    The committee supports the waiver of these domestic 
preference requirements in appropriate circumstances and urges 
the Department to make full use of the new authority. Domestic 
preference restrictions impair competition for Department of 
Defense contracts and may result in higher prices to the 
taxpayer. In some cases, these preferences may also impede our 
ability to compete for contracts in other countries.
    The appropriate implementation of Section 811 waivers 
should enable the Department of Defense to procure the best 
defense equipment for the men and women in uniform at the best 
price for the taxpayer and enhance our warfighting ability. It 
should also help improve our relations with longstanding trade 
partners, helping U.S. businesses in the long-term.
    The committee is concerned by the apparent failure of the 
Department of Defense to implement this provision in an 
effective manner. It is the committee's understanding that, to 
date, no waivers have been issued pursuant to Section 811. 
Moreover, the initial implementing regulations issued by the 
Department of Defense appear to narrow the applicability of the 
waivers to subcontracts.
    It was the committee's intent that waivers extend to all 
subcontracts and options entered into after the effective date 
of a waiver, regardless when the prime contract may have been 
entered. The committee urges the Department to implement this 
provision in the manner in which it was intended.
      TITLE IX--DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE ORGANIZATION AND MANAGEMENT

Sec. 901. Reduction in number of Assistant Secretary of Defense 
        positions.
    The committee recommends a provision that would codify the 
reductions in the number of assistant secretaries of defense 
announced by the Secretary of Defense as part of the Defense 
Reform Initiative. Specifically, the recommended provision 
would reduce the number of assistant secretaries of defense 
from 10 to nine.
Sec. 902. Renaming of position of Assistant Secretary of Defense for 
        Command, Control, Communications, and Intelligence.
    The committee recommends a provision that would amend 
section 138(b)(3) of title 10, United States Code, to change 
the name of the Assistant Secretary of Defense for Command, 
Control, Communications, and Intelligence (ASD-C3I).
    The Secretary of Defense has recently announced a number of 
significant organizational changes to the Office of the 
Secretary of Defense pursuant to the Defense Reform Initiative. 
Among these changes is a significant modification of the office 
of the ASD-C3I. As a result, the current title no longer 
describes the full range of responsibilities of this office, 
nor adequately identifies its functional priorities. The 
committee endorses the new title--``Assistant Secretary of 
Defense for Space and Information Superiority''.
    The committee had been concerned that the term ``space'' 
would not appear in the revised title of the ASD-C3I. As the 
``single focal point for space'' in the Department of Defense, 
this would have been a serious omission that would have sent a 
negative and misleading message. The committee notes that, 
although there are significant areas of overlap between 
``information superiority'' and ``space'', the two areas also 
have many unique aspects that deserve significant focused 
attention. Therefore, the committee strongly endorses the 
Secretary's decision to include the term ``space'' in the 
revised title of this important position.
    The committee notes that the Assistant Secretary for Space 
and Information Superiority will be responsible for some of the 
most critical issues facing the Department of Defense, 
including space policy, information assurance, information 
operations, intelligence policy, command, control, 
communications, surveillance, reconnaissance, the ``year 2000'' 
problem, and electromagnetic spectrum issues. The committee 
believes that one of the most significant challenges facing the 
Assistant Secretary will be the integration and mutual 
leveraging of the various elements that he will supervise. The 
committee looks forward to maintaining a close and constructive 
relationship with the Assistant Secretary of Defense for Space 
and Information Superiority.
Sec. 903. Authority to expand the National Defense University.
    The committee recommends a provision that would permit the 
Secretary of Defense to designate, as he considers appropriate, 
educational institutions of the Department of Defense as 
institutions of the National Defense University.
Sec. 904. Reduction in Department of Defense headquarters staff.
    The committee recommends a provision that would codify the 
reductions in the Department of Defense headquarters staff 
announced by the Secretary of Defense as part of the Defense 
Reform Initiative. Specifically, the recommended provision 
would require the Office of the Secretary of Defense to reduce 
by 33 percent, defense agencies to reduce by 21 percent, 
Department of Defense field activities to reduce by 36 percent, 
the Joint Staff to reduce by 29 percent, the headquarters of 
the combatant commands and associated activities to reduce by 
seven percent, and other headquarters elements, including the 
headquarters of the military departments and their major 
commands and associated activities to reduce by 29 percent. The 
recommended provision would require the Secretary of Defense to 
submit, not later than March 1, 1999, a plan to implement the 
directed personnel reductions.
Sec. 905. Permanent requirement for quadrennial defense review.
    The committee recommends a provision that make permanent 
the requirement contained in the National Defense Authorization 
Act for Fiscal Year 1997, for the Secretary of Defense to 
conduct a Quadrennial Defense Review (QDR) at the beginning of 
each new administration with a view toward determining and 
expressing the defense strategy of the United States and 
establishing a revised defense plan for the ensuing10 and 20 
years.
    The provision would also require the Secretary of Defense 
of the preceding administration to appoint a National Defense 
Panel (NDP) that would conduct a comprehensive assessment of 
the defense strategy, force structure, force modernization 
plans, infrastructure, budget plan, and other elements of the 
defense program and policies, with a view toward recommending a 
defense strategy and a revised defense plan for the ensuing 10 
and 20 years. The panel would submit a report to the Secretary 
of Defense, the Committee on Armed Services of the Senate and 
the National Security Committee of the House of 
Representatives, that would outline the results of its 
assessment approximately one month prior to the inauguration of 
the new administration. This would allow the new administration 
to consider the recommendations of the NDP prior to the QDR.

Sec. 906. Management reform for research, development, test, and 
        evaluation.

    The committee recommends a provision that would require the 
Secretary of Defense to submit to the congressional defense 
committees a comprehensive cross-service analysis of the 
Department of Defense laboratories and test and evaluation 
centers and an action plan for restructuring and revitalization 
of these laboratories and centers. This action plan should be 
designed to reduce duplication through consolidation of areas 
and functions into lead or Executive services, and should 
reengineer management processes of the laboratories and test 
and evaluation centers in order to increase operational 
efficiency.
    The provision recommended by the committee would require 
the Department to address a number of related issues. These 
include: (1) expanded use of the federated lab concept that 
allows for partnership arrangements with leading edge 
laboratories in industry, academia, and other Federal agencies; 
(2) the benefits of bringing test ranges and test facilities 
together under a single management structure; (3) the 
feasibility of an investment strategy that focuses 
modernization and productivity resources in a rational manner 
to reduce redundancy and duplication; (4) steps that can be 
taken, through personnel demonstrations and pilot projects or 
otherwise, to enhance the Department's ability to compete with 
the private sector for talented younger scientists and 
engineers for junior (GS-12 and below) positions in the 
laboratories and centers; and (5) the creation of an 
appropriate vehicle for the dissemination of information about 
successful management initiatives among the laboratories and 
centers. The action plan should include a specific schedule for 
implementing proposed reforms and an estimate of the cost 
savings that are likely to result.
    The committee is also concerned that the differing 
accounting processes of the three military services make it 
difficult to provide an across-the-board comparison of the 
laboratories and centers, and reach cost-effective solutions to 
cross-agency problems. To address this problem, the provision 
would require the Secretary to provide the congressional 
defense committees a plan and schedule for establishing a cost-
based management information system to allow the accurate 
comparison of costs of operating defense laboratories and test 
and evaluation centers across the services. The secretary's 
report should specifically address the feasibility of 
establishing a revolving fund for the laboratories and centers.

Sec. 907. Restructuring of administration of Fisher Houses.

    The committee recommends a provision that would repeal 
section 2221 of title 10, United States Code, and direct the 
secretaries of the military departments to establish a 
nonappropriated fund as the single source of funding to 
operate, maintain, and improve the Fisher Houses and Fisher 
Suites, and to close each Fisher House Trust Fund and transfer 
the amounts in the Treasury fund to the nonappropriated fund. 
All future fees, monetary donations, proceeds from the sale of 
property, gifts and grants would be deposited in the newly 
established nonappropriated fund. The recommended provision 
would require the secretaries of the military departments to 
submit an annual report to the Committee on Armed Services of 
the Senate and the National Security Committee of the House of 
Representatives not later than January 15th of each year. The 
required report would include the amount in the fund as of 
October 1 of the previous year, all deposits and disbursements 
from the fund during the previous fiscal year and a budget for 
the operation of the Fisher Houses and Fisher Suites for the 
current fiscal year.
    The Secretary of the Navy and the Secretary of the Air 
Force have not complied with the law requiring them to 
establish a corpus in a Fisher House Trust Fund in the United 
States Treasury. The recommended provision would require the 
Secretary of the Navy and the Secretary of the Air Force to 
establish a corpus sufficient for operating Fisher Houses and 
Fisher Suites within these departments and transfer the corpus 
into the newly established nonappropriated fund.
                      TITLE X--GENERAL PROVISIONS

                     SUBTITLE A--FINANCIAL MATTERS

Sec. 1002. Authorization of emergency appropriations for fiscal year 
        1999.
    The committee recommended a provision that would provide 
emergency authorization of $1.9 billion for operations in 
Bosnia for fiscal year 1999.
Sec. 1003. Authorization of prior emergency supplemental appropriations 
        for fiscal year 1998.
    The committee recommends a provision that would authorize 
the emergency supplemental appropriations enacted in the 1998 
Supplemental Appropriations and Rescissions Act (Public Law 
105-174). The supplemental provided funding for fiscal year 
1998 expenses related to military operations in Southwest Asia, 
Bosnia, and natural disasters.
Sec. 1004. Partnership for Peace information system management.
    The committee recommends a provision that would make 
available $5.0 million from funds authorized in section 301 and 
section 201 of this Act for the Partnership for Peace 
Information Management System.

                       SUBTITLE B--NAVAL VESSELS

Sec. 1011. Iowa class battleship returned to Naval Vessel Register.
    The committee recommends a provision that directs the Navy 
to replace the U.S.S. New Jersey on the Naval Vessel Register 
with the U.S.S. Iowa. Such placement would be consistent with 
section 1011 of the National Defense Authorization Act for 
Fiscal Year 1996, which stated that the committee believed 
retention of two battleships in the fleet's strategic reserve 
to be a prudent measure since the Department of the Navy's 
Future Years Defense Program would not provide a replacement 
fire-support capability comparable to the battleships until 
well into the next century.
    On February 12, 1998, the Navy placed the U.S.S. New Jersey 
on the Naval Vessel Register. However, the committee has 
recently learned that the U.S.S. Iowa is in better overall 
material condition than the U.S.S. New Jersey. For this reason, 
the provision would direct the Navy to replace the U.S.S. New 
Jersey with the U.S.S. Iowa.
    Because the Navy lacks adequate naval surface fire-support 
for forces operating ashore, the committee continues to believe 
it is prudent to maintain two battleships on the Naval Vessel 
Register.
    The Navy's post-Cold War emphasis on littoral operations, 
including support for amphibious operations and land forces 
operating close to shore, has increased the need for surface 
combatants capable of providing shore fire-support. The Navy 
has developed both a short-term and a long-term plan to provide 
the shore fire-support required by the Marines. The near-term 
plan includes development of the Extended Range Guided Munition 
(ERGM) for the DDG-51 5-inch guns and rapid development of a 
land attack missile.
    Long-term Navy plans to fill the gap in naval surface fire-
support centers on development of a 155mm gun and deployment of 
a land attack missile.
    Neither the long-term nor the short-term solutions to 
meeting the shore fire-support requirements anticipate being 
able to project the weight of the 16-inch projectile fired from 
a battleship's main battery. Instead, the Navy is developing 
accurate long range fire-support weapons capable of responding 
rapidly to a call for fire-support with precision weapons that 
have the ability to carry a variety of submunitions to meet 
battlefield requirements.
    While the committee believes the Navy's approach is sound, 
it realizes that battleships' ability to provide large caliber 
massed fire-support ashore is a unique capability. Therefore, 
the Navy is directed to maintain a contingency plan for 
reactivating the battleships remaining on the Naval Vessel 
Register. The plan shall include a reactivation time line and a 
defined engineering work package.
Sec. 1012. Long-term charter of three vessels in support of submarine 
        rescue, escort, and towing.
    The Department of the Navy currently leases three vessels 
and uses them primarily to support submarine rescue, escort and 
towing efforts. All three vessels were built or converted to 
meet the requirements of the Navy's Deep Submergence Systems 
program. The leases for these vessels will soon expire and the 
Department is seeking statutory authority to exceed lease terms 
as defined by section 2401 of title 10, United States Code.
    The committee recommends a provision that would authorize 
waiver of statutory requirements with respect to the duration 
of the lease in the case of the Kellie Chouest, Dolores 
Chouest, and the Carolyn Chouest. The Kellie Chouest and 
Dolores Chouest could be leased until the end of fiscal year 
2005, and the Carolyn Chouest could be leased until the end of 
fiscal year 2012, subject to earlier termination for the 
convenience of the government under certain conditions. The 
committee would require the lease agreement for the Carolyn 
Chouest be written to include a provision that the lease maybe 
terminated at the convenience of the government, with no penalty to the 
government, should the Navy decide to decommission the submarine 
research vessel NR-1.
    The committee is concerned that the Navy is contracting for 
secondary services in these leases that can be more efficiently 
executed by resources owned and operated by the Department, 
such as the R/V Gosport. Secondary services include, but are 
not limited to: torpedo retrieval, sonar calibration, and 
submarine sea trial escort.
    As such, the committee directs the Department to utilize 
fully the R/V Gosport and other assets owned and operated by 
the Navy for these secondary services prior to outsourcing for 
these services. As a result, substantial savings should be 
realized in upcoming negotiations for continuing support from 
the Kellie Chouest, Dolores Chouest, and the Carolyn Chouest.

Sec. 1013. Transfers of naval vessels to foreign countries.

    The committee recommends a provision that would transfer, 
on a grant basis, one Newport class tank landing ship, one 
Stalwart class oceanographic survey ship, and four Knox class 
frigates; on a sale basis, three Oliver Hazard Perry class 
guided missile frigates, one Anchorage class landing ship dock, 
one medium floating drydock, one Newport class tank landing 
ship, one Stalwart class oceanographic survey ship, two 
auxiliary repair docks, one medium auxiliary repair drydock, 
and one medium floating drydock; and on a lease/sale basis, 
four Kidd class guided missile destroyers and one Cimarron 
class oiler to various countries. The Chief of Naval Operations 
has certified pursuant to statutory requirement that such naval 
vessels are not essential to the defense of the United States. 
Any expense incurred by the United States in connection with 
these transfers would be charged to the recipient. The 
provision would also:
          (1) direct that, to the maximum extent possible, the 
        Secretary of the Navy shall require, as a condition of 
        transfer, that repair and refurbishment associated with 
        the transfer be accomplished in a shipyard located in 
        the United States; and
          (2) stipulate that the authority to transfer these 
        vessels will expire at the end of a two-year period 
        that begins on the date of enactment of the National 
        Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 1999.

       SUBTITLE C--MISCELLANEOUS REPORT REQUIREMENTS AND REPEALS

Sec. 1021. Repeal of reporting requirements.

    The committee recommends a provision that would repeal 
certain obsolete or superseded reporting requirements presently 
imposed by statute upon the Department of Defense.

Sec. 1022. Report on Department of Defense financial management 
        improvement plan.

    The committee recommends a provision that would require the 
Comptroller General to report to the congressional defense 
committees on the Department of Defense financial management 
improvement plan required by section 2222 of title 10, United 
States Code.

Sec. 1023. Feasibility study of performance of Department of Defense 
        finance and accounting functions by private sector sources or 
        other Federal Government sources.

    The committee recommends a provision that would require the 
Department of Defense to study the finance and accounting 
function within the Department to determine the possible 
streamlining, consolidation, reengineering, and possible 
competition of this function. The study requires the Department 
to determine certain core functions, establish an outsourcing 
policy, and develop criteria for the possible privatization of 
finance and accounting functions within the Department.

Sec. 1024. Reorganization and consolidation of operating locations of 
        the Defense Finance and Accounting Service.

    The committee recommends a provision that would require the 
Department of Defense to study and define future workload 
requirements for each of the finance and accounting operating 
locations (OPLOCs), and define whether excess capacity exists. 
Current downsizing plans for the OPLOCs are not consistent with 
stated requirements in the fiscal year 1999 defense budget 
request or initiatives announced in the Defense Reform package. 
The committee is concerned that the civilian workforce has been 
reduced to meet full time equivalent (FTEs) ceilings without 
consideration of required workloads and the Department's 
ability to accomplish essential finance and accounting 
services. The recommended provision would require that the 
study be submitted to the congressional defense committees by 
December 15, 1998, and that no OPLOC be closed until six months 
after the submission of this study.

Sec. 1025. Report on inventory and control of military equipment.

    The committee is concerned with recent reports that the 
Department of Defense is unable to account for billions of 
dollars in assets such as aircraft engines and one launcher for 
an AVENGER weapon system. While the committee understands that 
this could simply be the result of poor record keeping on the 
part of the military services, the committee is concerned that 
it demonstrates a lack of oversight and control on the part of 
the senior leadership. Such oversight and control is essential 
to ensuring that the resources of the Department are 
efficiently and effectively managed and that these systems are 
not inappropriately disposed of through sale or transfer.
    Therefore, the committee recommends a provision that would 
require each of the military services to perform a systematic 
inventory of their major-end-items. A report on the results of 
each of these inventories shall be provided to Congress no 
later than March 31, 1999. Each report should include the 
status and location of each item for which they can account, 
the number and types of items for which they cannot account, 
and the steps being taken to locate these items and improve 
their oversight in the future.

Sec. 1026. Report on continuity of essential operations at risk of 
        failure because of computer systems that are not year 2000 
        compliant.

    The committee is concerned with the progress of the 
Department of Defense (DOD) and the intelligence community in 
their efforts to ensure that all of their computer and other 
information and support systems will be immune to the problems 
associated with the approach of the year 2000 (Y2K). While the 
debate continues regarding those steps which are necessary to 
prepare the national security community for the threats of the 
21st Century, insufficient attention has been given to 
preparing the information and other support systems of this 
community for the mere transition from 1999 to 2000.
    Although the problems associated with the conversion to the 
new millennium have been known for years and the Department of 
Defense has taken steps to make its systems compliant, the 
Department has been unable to meet its projected time line to 
ensure all necessary systems will be renovated. Since almost 
half of its 1,891 Mission Critical Systems are still in the 
renovation phase, it is unlikely that the Department will be 
able to complete its testing and integration efforts in time to 
avoid the fallout.
    While there has been a great deal of concern raised over 
the recent reports of hackers attacking the Department's 
computer system, and the threat posed by the possible insertion 
of a virus into this system by such individuals, few people are 
aware of the extent to which the Y2K problem poses a far more 
serious danger to our national security than any of the viruses 
that have been identified to date. At midnight on December 31, 
1999, every system that is not Y2K compliant, and every system 
that is connected to another that is not compliant, will be at 
risk of failure. Furthermore, some problems may occur three 
months earlier with the beginning of fiscal year 2000.
    It is impossible to determine the specific impact that non-
compliance for even a small portion of the mission critical 
systems might have on military and intelligence operations 
given the extent of the interconnection among these systems 
with each other and non-mission critical systems. Further 
complicating this determination is the extent to which the 
national security community relies upon private sector 
information and support networks that may not be Y2K compliant. 
Without the ability to identify, isolate, and correct the 
problems with all systems that this community relies upon 
before they occur, it is important to ensure that we have 
developed effective contingency plans to overcome the impacts 
of the problem after they materialize.
    Furthermore, as disconcerting as the problems that will 
occur as a result of our own systems being non-compliant may 
be, we must also understand the problems that are posed to our 
national security as a result of the non-compliance on the part 
of the systems of other nations. Although the leaders of these 
nations are aware of the problems, it is difficult to predict 
how they and their subordinates will react if their own 
information and support systems are crippled by Y2K 
deficiencies. In an age where weapons of mass destruction with 
global reach are controlled through elaborate information 
networks, the threat posed to the viability of those networks 
is of critical importance and steps must be taken to ensure 
that any confusion or misunderstandings are resolved before 
they develop into crisis situations. The committee commends the 
U.S. Strategic Command for its efforts to develop lines of 
communication with other nations in order to ensure the 
responsible management of any problems that may arise.
    As stated previously, steps have been taken to prepare for 
the Y2K problem in the United States and the committee commends 
the Commandant of the Marine Corps and the Chief of Naval 
Operations for their efforts to resolving this critical issue 
and its identification as one of their highest priorities for 
any additional funding. The committee recommends an increase of 
$20.0 million in the Marine Corps procurement account, and 
$12.0 million in the Navy Operations and Maintenance (O&M) 
account, for the replacement and renovation of computers and 
shipboard systems to ensure that they are Y2K compliant.
    Therefore, the committee recommends a provision that would 
require the Secretary of Defense and the Director of the 
Central Intelligence Agency to provide a joint report to the 
Committee on Armed Services of the Senate and the Committee on 
National Security of the House of Representatives, outlining 
their planned course of action to ensure a continuity 
ofessential operations. This report would include the prioritization of 
mission critical systems to ensure that the greatest efforts are made 
to guarantee that the most important systems are Y2K compliant. The 
report should also contain a discussion of the private and other public 
information and support systems that the national security community 
relies upon, and the efforts underway to ensure their compliance. 
Furthermore, the report should outline the efforts underway to repair 
the underlying operating systems and infrastructure, such as the 
telecommunications and utility systems that service DOD and the 
intelligence community, and the community's plan for a comprehensive 
test of DOD systems to include simulated operational tests in mission 
areas. Finally, the report should outline a comprehensive contingency 
plan for the entire national security community, as well as individual 
contingency plans for the separate elements of the community, including 
the creation of crisis action teams to respond to emergencies arising 
from the Y2K problem. The committee recommends an increase of $60.0 
million to Defense-wide O&M, for the development of these contingency 
plans. The report should be submitted no later than March 31, 1999, in 
both classified and unclassified forms, as necessary.

Sec. 1027. Reports on naval surface fire-support capabilities.

    The committee recommends a provision that would direct the 
Secretary of the Navy to report by March 31, 1999 to the 
Committee on Armed Services of the Senate and the Committee on 
National Security of the House of Representatives on battleship 
readiness for meeting naval surface fire-support requirements. 
The report is directed to contain the following:
          (1) Reasons for the Secretary's failure to comply 
        with the requirements of section 1011 of the National 
        Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 1996 until 
        February 1998;
          (2) the requirement for Air-Naval Gunfire Liaison 
        Companies;
          (3) the plans for retaining and maintaining 16-inch 
        gun ammunition;
          (4) the Navy plans for retaining the hammerhead crane 
        essential for lifting battleship turrets; and
          (5) an estimate of the cost of restoring the 
        battleships remaining on the Naval Vessel Register for 
        seaworthiness and with the operational capabilities 
        necessary to meet requirements for naval surface fire-
        support and the annual cost for maintaining the 
        battleships in such condition while they are listed on 
        the Naval Vessel Register. In addition, an estimate of 
        cost to reactivate the battleships once the restoration 
        to a seaworthy condition and the addition of naval 
        surface fire-support capabilities are complete.
    The Secretary of the Navy is directed to work through the 
Director of Expeditionary Warfare Division (N85) of the Office 
of the Chief of Naval Operations in preparing the report.
    The Comptroller General is directed to provide a report to 
the Committee on Armed Services of the Senate and the Committee 
on National Security of the House of Representatives on the 
naval surface fire-support capabilities of the Navy that 
contains the following:
          (1) an assessment of the extent of compliance by the 
        Secretary of the Navy with the requirements of section 
        1011 of the National Defense Authorization Act for 
        Fiscal Year 1996 until February 1998;
          (2) plans for executing the naval surface fire-
        support mission;
          (3) an assessment of the short-term and long-term 
        costs associated with the plans; and
          (4) an assessment of the short-term and long-term 
        costs associated with alternative methods for executing 
        the naval surface fire-support mission of the Navy, 
        including the alternative of reactivating two 
        battleships.

Sec. 1028. Report on roles in Department of Defense aviation accident 
        investigations.

    The committee recommends a provision that would require the 
Secretary of Defense to provide an assessment of the role of 
the Office of the Secretary of Defense and the Joint Staff in 
the investigation of military aircraft accidents. Additionally, 
the provision would require the Secretary of Defense to report 
on the advisability of requiring an independent entity of the 
Department of Defense to supervise military aircraft accident 
investigations.

Sec. 1029. Strategic plan for expanding distance learning initiatives.

    The committee recommends a provision that would require the 
Secretary of Defense to develop and provide to Congress a 5-
year plan for guiding and expanding distance learning 
initiatives in the Department of Defense.

Sec. 1030. Report on involvement of Armed Forces in contingency and 
        ongoing operations.

    The committee is concerned about the reports of declining 
retention rates, decreased availability of military support 
equipment and combat service support personnel, and shortfalls 
in training funds. In many cases, these problems have been 
attributed to the extensive deployment of U.S. military 
personnel and equipment to contingency and ongoing 
operations.The committee notes that the Presidential Decision 
Directive-25 outlines certain factors that are to be considered before 
deploying U.S. military forces to U.N. peacekeeping operations. The 
Directive identifies the following factors: the availability of 
personnel, funds, and other resources; and the identification of clear 
objectives and an endpoint for U.S. participation.
    The committee is concerned about the reports that 
peacekeeping and other contingency operations may be 
contributing to the readiness problems of the military 
services. Therefore, the committee recommends a provision that 
would require the Secretary of Defense to submit a report to 
the congressional defense committees that would outline the 
following:
          (1) the effects of U.S. involvement in contingency 
        operations on the retention and reenlistment of 
        personnel in the Armed Forces;
          (2) the extent to which involvement in these 
        operations has resulted in shortfalls in personnel and 
        equipment;
          (3) the cost of these operations and the accounts 
        from which the funds to pay those costs were drawn;
          (4) the objectives of the operation, and the set of 
        conditions that defines the end of each operation.
          (5) an identification of the U.S. vital interests 
        involved in each operation and, if none, an 
        identification and characterization of the level of 
        U.S. national interests involved.
    The report should be submitted no later than January 31, 
1999.

                       SUBTITLE D--OTHER MATTERS

Sec. 1041. Cooperative counterproliferation program.

    The committee recommends a provision that would provide the 
Secretary of Defense authority to provide assistance to a 
foreign country, or instrumentality of a foreign country, for 
cooperative counterproliferation activities, to include 
destroying, removing or obtaining from such country, weapons of 
mass destruction and related material that could present a 
significant threat to U.S. national security interests.
    The Department of Defense is required to certify to the 
congressional defense committees prior to conducting any 
activity under this authority, that the material in question is 
at risk of transfer to a restricted foreign country, that such 
transfer would threaten U.S. national security interests if 
completed, and that there are no other options to prevent the 
transfer. The provision would also allow the Secretary to waive 
the certification requirement if making such certification 
would be contrary to national security interests. The committee 
believes this provision should be used only as a last resort 
when all other options, including assistance by the Department 
of State and the Department of Energy, are not feasible. 
Additionally, the provision would require an annual report of 
DOD cooperative counterproliferation activities.

Sec. 1042. Extension of counterproliferation authorities for support of 
        United Nations Special Commission on Iraq.

    The committee recommends a provision that would amend 
section 1505 of the National Defense Authorization Act for 
Fiscal Year 1992 to extend the authority for the Department of 
Defense to continue to provide support to the United Nations 
Special Commission on Iraq (UNSCOM) through fiscal year 1999.

Sec. 1043. One-year extension of limitation on retirement or 
        dismantlement of strategic nuclear delivery systems.

    The committee continues to support the administration's 
policy of remaining at Strategic Arms Reduction Treaty (START 
I) levels of strategic forces until START II enters into force. 
Therefore, the committee recommends a provision that would 
extend by one year section 1302(e) of the National Defense 
Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 1998 (Public Law 105-85). The 
committee, however, is willing to consider alternative START I 
force postures that may be more affordable than the current 
force configuration.

Sec. 1044. Direct-line communication between United States and Russian 
        commanders of strategic forces.

    The committee recommends a provision that would express the 
sense of the Congress that the commanders of the U.S. Strategic 
and Space Commands and the Russian commander of the Strategic 
Rocket Forces should have a communication link to make 
immediate contact for any matter of an urgent nature.
    The committee believes that a direct communications link 
would help to improve mutual confidence in the respective early 
warning and strategic systems and prevent or reduce the 
opportunity for misunderstandings or miscalculations that could 
have disastrous effects on the United States and Russia.
    The provision would also direct the Secretary of Defense to 
study the feasibility of initiating discussions with the 
Russian Minister of Defense to establish a direct 
communications link among the commanders of the U.S. Strategic 
and Space Commands and the Russian Strategic Rocket Forces, and 
report back to the congressional defense committees the results 
of his findings.

Sec. 1045. Chemical warfare defense.

    The committee recommends a provision that would direct the 
Secretary of Defense to review, and modify as appropriate, 
Department of Defense chemical warfare defense policy and 
doctrine relative to the protection of U.S. forces against 
exposure to low levels of chemical warfare agents, and to 
report to the congressional defense committees by May 1, 1999 
on any modification of chemical warfare policy and doctrine as 
a result of that review.
    The committee believes that DOD and military services 
chemical warfare defense policies and doctrine should provide 
for adequate protection of personnel from any low-level 
exposure to a chemical warfare agent that would endanger the 
health of exposed personnel, whether by single exposures, 
exposure to a chemical warfare agent concurrent with other 
dangerous exposures, or by repeated exposures to such hazards 
over time. Specific concerns and mission requirements of the 
various services should be addressed. Finally, DOD and service 
policy and doctrine should provide for the recording, 
reporting, coordinating, and retaining of information on 
possible exposures, including the monitoring of the health 
effects of exposures on humans and animals by location.
    To guide the Secretary of Defense in the evolution of 
policy and doctrine on low-level exposures to chemical warfare 
agents, the committee directs the Secretary of Defense to plan 
a research program, including a five year budget plan, on the 
effects of chronic and low-level exposure to chemical warfare 
agents.

Sec. 1046. Accounting treatment of advance payment of personnel.

    The committee recommends a provision that would clarify the 
authority of the Department of Defense to disburse advance 
payments to service members, in a permanent change of station 
status, in amounts that may exceed what is available in the 
military personnel appropriations. Authority already exists for 
the military departments to pay up to three months basic pay to 
members in a permanent change of station status. However, when 
the payment period crosses fiscal years, section 1006 of title 
37, United States Code, is silent on whether the military 
departments have the authority to make these advanced payments 
in excess of amounts available in the military personnel 
appropriations. The recommended provision would exclude 
obligations and expenditures for payments of advanced military 
pay, from any determination of amounts available, except in the 
fiscal year in which such amounts are ultimately earned.

Sec. 1047. Reinstatement of definition of financial institution in 
        authorities for reimbursing defense personnel for Government 
        errors in direct deposits of pay.

    The committee recommends a provision that would reinstate 
the definition of ``financial institutions'' that previously 
existed and was deleted as a result of the 1994 redrafting of 
section 3332 of title 31, United States Code. The provision 
restores the definition of a financial institution, as follows: 
any bank, savings and loan association or similar institution, 
or a credit union chartered by the U.S. Government or a state.

Sec. 1048. Pilot program on alternative notice of receipt of legal 
        process for garnishment of federal pay for child support and 
        alimony.

    The committee recommends a provision that would authorize 
the Department of Defense to conduct a pilot program that would 
allow the Department to refrain from providing actual court 
documents to the military member, concerning child support and 
alimony payments, prior to proceeding with a court ordered 
garnishment. The Defense Finance and Accounting Service would 
continue to include pertinent information with the notification 
to the service member involved. Actual copies of the court 
documents would be available upon request.

Sec. 1049. Costs payable to the Department of Defense and other federal 
        agencies for services provided to the Defense Commissary 
        Agency.

    The committee recommends a provision that would prohibit 
the Defense Commissary Agency from paying any costs for 
services provided by a Department of Defense or other federal 
agency that exceeds the price at which the service could be 
procured in full and open competition. The committee is 
concerned that the Defense Commissary Agency is paying overseas 
transportation charges that may include the overhead and 
infrastructure costs of the Transportation Command, which would 
inappropriately inflate the second destination transportation 
cost to the commissary agency and mask the core costs of 
defense agencies. The recommended provision would apply to all 
services billed to the Defense Commissary Agency within the 
revolving fund accounts of the Department of Defense or other 
federal agencies.

Sec. 1050. Collection of dishonored checks presented at commissary 
        stores.

    The committee recommends a provision that would permit the 
Secretary of Defense to impose a charge for the collection of 
dishonored checks presented at a commissary store. The 
recommended provision would require that the imposition and 
amounts of the charges be consistent with the practices 
ofcommercial grocery stores. Revenues generated by the dishonored check 
charges would be deposited to the commissary revolving trust fund.

Sec. 1051. Defense commissary agency telecommunications.

    The committee recommends a provision that would require the 
Secretary of Defense to provide the Defense Commissary Agency 
authority to obtain telecommunications and related services 
under the Federal Telecommunications System (FTS) 2000/2001 
contract and to report to the Committee on Armed Services of 
the Senate and the National Security Committee of the House of 
Representatives when Defense Commissary Agency 
telecommunications have been initiated under the FTS 2000/2001 
contract. Authority to use advanced telecommunications services 
will permit the Defense Commissary Agency to use credit card 
and check approval procedures similar to those used in 
commercial grocery stores.

Sec. 1052. Research grants competitively awarded to service academies.

    The committee recommends a provision that would permit the 
service academies to compete for and receive research grants 
that are awarded competitively. The recommended provision would 
authorize appropriated funds to be used to pay expenses 
involved in preparing proposals to obtain research grants 
offered by a corporation, fund, foundation, educational 
institution, or other similar entity that is organized and 
operated primarily for scientific, literary, or educational 
purposes. Any grants awarded to the academies would be 
deposited in a special account established for administering 
the proceeds of such grants.

Sec. 1053. Clarification and simplification of responsibilities of 
        inspectors general regarding whistleblower protections.

    The committee recommends a series of amendments to section 
1034 of title 10, United States Code, the Military 
Whistleblower Protection Act, that would improve the 
administration of this statute without diluting the protection 
it affords to service members who make allegations of 
violations of law, mismanagement, waste, abuse, danger to 
public health or safety, or reprisal for protected 
communications. These amendments should reduce the 
administrative burden on the Inspector General of the 
Department of Defense (DOD IG) and Inspectors General within 
the services, thereby allowing them to concentrate their 
resources on investigations and reduce the delays which have 
marked, in particular, the reprisal investigation process.
    Subsection (a) would authorize Inspectors General at all 
levels of the armed forces to accept reprisal complaints under 
the statute. The determination of whether the complaint falls 
within the statute would rest with the DOD IG or the Inspector 
General of the military department concerned. The DOD IG would 
continue to exercise its oversight role in reprisal 
investigations. This subsection would further authorize 
investigations to be closed if an initial analysis of the 
complaint determined that a full investigation was not 
warranted, thus conserving scarce investigative resources.
    Subsection (b) would clarify that the mismanagement which 
is the subject of a complaint must be ``gross mismanagement.'' 
This change would make the definition in the Military 
Whistleblower Protection Act consistent with that in the 
civilian Whistleblower Protection Act (5 U.S.C. 2302(b)(8)).
    Subsection (c)(1) would delete the requirement to provide a 
copy of the full report of investigation to the Secretary of 
Defense, who would simply be notified of the result. The member 
making the allegation would continue to receive a copy of the 
full report.
    Subsection (c)(2) would modify the present requirement that 
the member making the allegation be automatically provided with 
copies of all supporting documents, in addition to the report 
of investigation itself. The amendment would require that these 
documents be provided only if the member requested them.
    Subsection (c)(3) would lengthen the present statutory 
period during which a reprisal investigation must be completed 
(or a report explaining the delay produced) from 90 to 120 
days.
    Subsection (d) would repeal the present requirement that a 
post-investigation interview be conducted with the member 
making the allegation.
    Subsection (e) would amplify the definition of ``Inspector 
General'' presently in the statute.

Sec. 1054. Amounts recovered from claims against third parties for loss 
        or damage to personal property shipped or stored at Government 
        expense.

    The committee recommends a provision that would allow funds 
recovered from third parties in relation to household good 
claims be deposited into the current appropriations for payment 
of such claims. Specifically, the proposal clarifies a process 
used by the military services for the last 30 years.

Sec. 1055. Eligibility for attendance at Department of Defense domestic 
        dependent elementary and secondary schools.

    The committee recommends a provision that would 
authorizethe Secretary of Defense to extend the enrollment of 
dependents of civilian employees of the federal government for more 
than five consecutive years if the Secretary determines that the 
student is eligible to attend the Department of Defense Domestic 
Dependent Elementary and Secondary School, there is space available, 
and adequate arrangements are made to pay the tuition costs for the 
educational services provided. The committee notes that in some areas 
in which the Department of Defense operates a domestic school system, 
employees of other federal agencies remain on station for more than 
five years. The recommended provision would permit these students to 
remain in the Department of Defense domestic school system as long as 
space is available and arrangements are made to reimburse the 
Department of Defense for tuition costs.

Sec. 1056. Fees for providing historical information to the public.

    The committee recommends a provision that would allow the 
historical institutes of the military services to provide 
historical information to members of the public for a fee that 
is equivalent to the cost of researching and transmitting the 
information. The revenues from these fees would be credited to 
the appropriations accounts that incurred the costs of 
providing such information. These organizations would not be 
able to charge such a fee for any information that is 
considered public information pursuant to section 552 of title 
5, United States Code, or that is provided to a member of the 
armed forces or employee of the United States acting in their 
official capacity.

Sec. 1057. Periodic inspection of the Armed Forces Retirement Home.

    The committee recommends a provision that would eliminate 
the requirement for the Department of Defense Inspector General 
to conduct inspections of the Armed Forces Retirement Homes, as 
well as review the inspections conducted by the Inspectors 
General of the military departments. The recommended provision 
would require inspections of the homes every three years. 
Responsibility to conduct inspections would rotate among the 
three services on a schedule determined by the Secretary of 
Defense.

Sec. 1058. Transfer of F-4 phantom II aircraft to foundation.

    The committee recommends a provision that would authorize 
the Secretary of the Air Force to transfer an F-4 aircraft to 
the Collings Foundation. The provision would further require 
that before the aircraft can be transferred, the Air Force must 
ensure that it is properly demilitarized, the foundation agrees 
that it will not transfer the aircraft to a third party without 
the approval of the Air Force, and the foundation would fully 
indemnify the United States from any liabilities connected with 
the conveyance of the aircraft.

Sec. 1059. Act constituting presidential approval of vessel war risk 
        insurance requested by the Secretary of Defense.

    The committee recommends a provision that would amend 
section 1205(b) of the Merchant Marine Act of 1936 (46 U.S.C. 
Appendix 1285(b)) to ensure that vessel war risk insurance is 
available on a timely basis in the event that commercial 
shippers providing sealift for the Department of Defense are 
unable to obtain commercial insurance on reasonable terms.
    The current statute requires consultation with the 
President by the Secretary of Transportation prior to each 
issuance of vessel war risk insurance. This amendment would 
authorize the pre-approval of vessel war risk insurance, so 
that it can be immediately available in a national emergency or 
contingency. A similar provision authorizing the pre-approval 
of aviation insurance (49 U.S.C. 44305(b)) was enacted in the 
Aviation Insurance Reauthorization Act of 1997 (Public Law 105-
137).

Sec. 1060. Commendation and memorialization of the United States Navy 
        Asiatic Fleet.

    The Asiatic Fleet of the U.S. Navy was established in 1910 
to protect American nationals, policies and possessions in the 
Far East. The sailors and marines of the Asiatic Fleet ensured 
the safety of U.S. citizens and foreign nationals, and provided 
humanitarian assistance in the Far East during the Chinese 
civil war, the Yangtze Flood of 1931, and the outbreak of Sino-
Japanese hostilities in the 1930s.
    The committee recommends a provision which would express 
the sense of the Congress regarding the U.S. Navy Asiatic 
Fleet. This provision would commend the personnel who served in 
the Asiatic Fleet and honor those who gave their lives in the 
line of duty while serving in the Asiatic Fleet.
    This provision also authorizes and requests the President 
of the United States to proclaim March 1, 1999 as United States 
Navy Asiatic Fleet Memorial Day and encourages observance of 
the day throughout the United States.

Sec. 1061. Program to commemorate 50th anniversary of the Korean War.

    The committee recommends a provision that would increase 
the amount authorized to be expended for the Korean 
Warcommemorative program from $1.0 million to $10.0 million.

Sec. 1062. Relocation of frequency spectrum.

    The committee is concerned with the proposed sale of those 
portions of the frequency spectrum that are currently utilized 
by the Department of Defense (DOD) and intelligence community. 
The trend toward a more information based military requires 
that the Department of Defense have adequate access to those 
portions of the frequency spectrum (primarily below 3.1 Ghz) 
used by the Department's communications equipment. However, 
over the past five years, the Department has either 
relinquished or agreed to share over 500 MHZ of spectrum. This 
reallocation has already limited the capability of some 
military systems such as the Navy's Cooperative Engagement 
Capability (CEC).
    Last year, the committee directed the Secretary of Defense 
to perform a systematic, detailed review of U.S. national 
security requirements, and the impacts of further reallocation 
of those portions of the spectrum currently used or dedicated 
to the Department of Defense and the intelligence community. 
This review was also supposed to include the costs to the 
Department associated with past and potential future 
reallocations of frequency spectrum. Upon completion, the 
results of the review were to be provided to the Congress.
    The report which was submitted by the Department 
highlighted the historical importance of military access to the 
frequency spectrum, as well as the value of retaining that 
access in order to conduct the operations of today, and counter 
the threats of the 21st Century. According to the report, 
``Gulf War operations used nearly every major military [Radio 
Frequency] RF system in the U.S. arsenal.'' Perhaps the best 
example of the importance of communications systems utilizing 
the radio frequency spectrum is provided by the circumstances 
of the Iraqi military during the Gulf War, which had little 
ability to use such systems and were therefore at a 
disadvantage. Furthermore, although the scale of a military 
operation may change, spectrum requirements essentially remain 
the same. Although our current force deployed to Bosnia is on a 
far smaller scale than that deployed during the Gulf War, it 
makes use of almost all of the same spectrum resources.
    The importance of ready access to the spectrum was also 
demonstrated in the rescue operation for Captain Scott O'Grady, 
an Air Force pilot who was shot down in 1995 by a Bosnian-Serb 
surface-to-air missile.

          The search and subsequent rescue of Air Force Captain 
        Scott O'Grady had its own unique set of frequency 
        requirements. The success of his rescue mission might 
        very well have been compromised without ready access to 
        the spectrum required for operating the communications, 
        radar, navigation, and electronic combat equipment on 
        the rescue ship and aircraft. Future rescue missions 
        will require similar resources.

    The military services operate thousands of systems in that 
part of the frequency that has been suggested for possible 
sale. The Army in particular operates thousands of tactical 
air-ground-air, air-to-air, land mobile, and trunking radios in 
the lower portion of the spectrum. The loss of these 
frequencies will have a substantial impact upon Army operations 
and training. Moreover, the Army will be required to 
restructure, reaccommodate, and replace current assets with new 
equipment operating in other frequency bands, if possible.
    According to the DOD report, ``[i]f we are to maintain the 
high quality of our forces, we must continue to train as we 
will fight--and that requires access to the same spectrum in 
the US that we will use overseas.'' Furthermore, ``many of our 
advances in technologies such as anti-stealth and portable mine 
detection radars, and secure, high capacity communications will 
demand greater spectrum access rather than less.''
    However, some of the negative impacts on military systems 
and operations can be reduced by redesigning these systems so 
that they do not require access to those portions of the 
spectrum that are being sold. Such redesigns are difficult and 
costly.
    The report failed to provide the required information 
regarding the cost to the Department of Defense associated with 
the redesign of systems as a result of past or potential future 
reallocations of the frequency spectrum. Some estimate that 
this will cost billions of dollars.
    Therefore, the committee recommends a provision that would 
require any entity that purchases portions of the spectrum that 
have been used by the DOD or other federal agency, and that the 
DOD or other agency relinquished in order to make that portion 
of the spectrum available for sale or lease, reimburse the DOD 
or other agency for the total cost incurred by the government 
in order to make that portion of the spectrum available.

Sec. 1063. Technical and clerical amendments.

    The committee recommends a provision that would make 
various technical and clerical amendments to existing law.

                        OTHER ITEMS OF INTEREST

Arms control and other national priorities

    The budget request did not include funding for integration 
and launch costs, as well as procurement costs, for two 
satellite based sensors that are needed to monitor 
theComprehensive Test Ban Treaty, as well as other nuclear testing 
treaties in force. The committee understands that they were deemed by 
the Air Force to be a low priority relative to warfighting 
requirements.
    The committee is concerned that devolvement of programs 
from the Office of the Secretary of Defense to the military 
services may in some instances cause the services to have to 
choose between supporting warfighting priorities or broad 
national security goals in allocating resources.
    The committee believes that programs that are primarily 
justified in terms of their support to arms control or 
verification be funded out of accounts designated for such 
activities.
    The committee directs the Secretary of Defense to submit a 
report to the congressional defense committees by June 1, 1998 
on how funding for these sensors to meet the broad national 
security goals of detecting nuclear testing treaties will be 
provided. In addition, the report should address the mechanism 
by which the Department will ensure that broad national 
security funding priorities are addressed and appropriate 
funding provided.

Assured strategic command and control

    Nuclear deterrence continues to be a cornerstone of our 
national security. Key to the credibility of that deterrent is 
assured nuclear command and control. Since the end of the Cold 
War, however, the U.S. nuclear strategic command and control 
(C2) system, particularly the survivable elements, has been 
downsized considerably. In 1994, the Department of Defense 
undertook a review of nuclear command, control, communications 
and intelligence. Its final report, approved in August 1997, 
established a ``thin-line'' nuclear C2 architecture to provide 
minimum survivable strategic command and control of U.S. 
nuclear forces by the President.
    While the committee recognizes that the end of the Cold War 
afforded the opportunity to streamline nuclear force structure, 
it nevertheless views the imperative for a robust strategic C2 
infrastructure to control the remaining forces as being 
stronger than ever when viewed in the context of the current 
and emerging national security environment.
    The committee also views assured strategic command and 
control as a critical prerequisite for further nuclear arms 
reductions. Fewer weapons require more efficient and effective 
command and control assurance in order to maintain a credible 
nuclear deterrent. Arms control reductions absent assured 
strategic command and control reduce the capability, and 
therefore, credibility, of our nuclear deterrent and, as a 
result, jeopardize U.S. national security. Therefore, the 
committee directs the Secretary of Defense to provide adequate 
support for the operations, manning, training, equipping, 
maintenance, and infrastructure necessary to ensure the 
survivability, flexibility and endurance of strategic C2 
systems. The committee directs the Secretary of Defense to 
submit a report to the congressional defense committees not 
later than February 15, 1999 which addresses the following 
matters:
          (1) The policy guidance underlying strategic C2 as it 
        relates to nuclear weapons policy and as it supports 
        the national military strategy;
          (2) Readiness requirements and associated resources 
        needed for survivable strategic C2 systems;
          (3) Vulnerabilities or deficiencies in current 
        survivable strategic C2 systems and platforms;
          (4) E-4B mission requirements and concepts of 
        operation, including modernization programs and 
        opportunities for more effective and efficient 
        employment of this platform;
          (5) Mission requirements and concepts of operation 
        for the U.S. Strategic Command and U.S. Space Command 
        command centers, including plans for modernization and 
        opportunities for more effective and efficient 
        employment of platforms; and
          (6) E-6B mission requirements and concepts of 
        operation, including modernization programs and 
        opportunities for more effective and efficient 
        employment of this platform.

Reporting miscellaneous expenses in object classes 25 series 
        (Contractual Services)

    The committee is concerned about the fact that the 
Department of Defense reports more than fifty percent of the 
expenses in object class 25 (Contractual Services) as 
miscellaneous expenses. Reporting expenses in this manner is of 
limited value and undermines the financial reporting process. 
Therefore, the committee believes the Department of Defense 
should take immediate steps to limit reporting expenses as 
miscellaneous to no more than fifteen percent of the total 
expenses reported in object classes 25 series.

Reprogramming procedures for the National Reconnaissance Office

    The committee is very concerned about the fact that the 
National Reconnaissance Office (NRO) executed a reprogramming 
request without the committee's approval. Prior to this 
incident, the committee informed the NRO that its congressional 
notification procedure for reprogramming requests was 
inadequate and needed to be improved. It is difficult for the 
committee to have confidence in the NRO in light of such an 
egregious oversight.
    To avoid future difficulties, the committee directs the NRO 
to review its reprogramming procedures and to develop a more 
effective system. The committee will not act on any further 
reprogrammings until the NRO has assured the committee that the 
new procedure will prevent future congressional notification 
problems. The committee expects that future actions will 
involve proper congressional notification with sufficient time 
for full review.
           TITLE XI--DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE CIVILIAN PERSONNEL

Sec. 1101. Repeal of employment preference not needed for recruitment 
        and retention of qualified child care providers.
    The committee recommends a provision that would repeal an 
employment preference for military spouses who applied for 
child care positions. Originally, this additional preference 
was extended to military spouses to attract applicants for 
child care positions. Over time, military spouses have used 
this preference to obtain civil service status and then move on 
to other civil service positions creating personnel turbulence 
in the child care centers. Increased compensation for child 
care providers have resolved the initial recruitment and 
retention problems. Existing civil service military spouse 
preference is sufficient to ensure military spouses receive 
appropriate consideration for child care and other civil 
service positions.
Sec. 1102. Maximum pay rate comparability for faculty members of the 
        United States Air Force Institute of Technology.
    The committee recommends a provision that would permit 
civilian faculty at the United States Air Force Institute of 
Technology to be paid at the same level as civilian faculty at 
other senior military schools and the service academies.
Sec. 1103. Four-year extension of voluntary separation incentive pay 
        authority.
    The committee recommends a provision that would extend 
until September 30, 2003 the civilian voluntary separation 
incentive pay authority established during the civilian 
drawdown within the Department of Defense. The committee 
recognizes that the successful drawdown of civilian personnel 
could not have been accomplished without using incentives and 
transition benefits to encourage voluntary separations in lieu 
of involuntary actions. As a result of the Quadrennial Defense 
Review, the Department of Defense is continuing to reduce the 
civilian workforce. The committee expects the military services 
to continue to use the incentive and benefit programs to 
achieve the reductions mandated by the Quadrennial Defense 
Review.
Sec. 1104. Department of Defense employee voluntary early retirement 
        authority.
    The committee recommends a provision that would modify the 
conditions under which voluntary early retirement would be 
authorized for civilian employees of the Department of Defense.
Sec. 1105. Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency experimental 
        personnel management program for technical personnel.
    The committee recommends a provision that would provide the 
Secretary of Defense special personnel management authorities 
to carry out a five-year experimental program in which eminent 
experts in science and engineering fields for research and 
development projects administered by the Defense Advanced 
Research Projects Agency. The recommended provision would 
permit scientists and engineers from outside federal civil 
service to be hired and paid without regard to existing civil 
service laws. Appointments under the recommended legislation 
would be limited to a maximum of four years. The recommended 
provision would require the Secretary of Defense to submit an 
annual report to the Congress beginning in 1999.

                        OTHER ITEMS OF INTEREST

Temporary assignments of personnel between Federal Government, and 
        state or local governments, institutions of higher education, 
        Indian tribal governments and other eligible organizations
    Temporary assignments of personnel between Federal 
Government, and state or local governments, institutions of 
higher education, Indian tribal governments and other eligible 
organizations, including federally funded research and 
development centers, are authorized by the Intergovernmental 
Personnel Act (IPA) of 1970 (5 U.S.C. 1304, 3371-3376) and are 
referred to as ``IPAs.''
    These assignments are intended to facilitate federal-state-
local cooperation through the temporary assignment of skilled 
personnel. These assignments can be used for a variety of 
purposes, including: to strengthen the management capabilities 
of eligible organizations; to assist in thetransfer and use of 
new technologies; and to provide program and developmental experiences 
that could enhance individual job performance. Assignments arranged to 
meet the personal interests of employees, to circumvent compensation 
limits or personnel ceilings, or to avoid unfavorable personnel 
decisions are contrary to the spirit and intent of this program.
    The Secretary of Defense is directed to review the use of 
IPA and to ensure that these assignments are being used in a 
manner consistent with the intent of the authorizing statute. 
The Secretary shall report the results of that review to the 
congressional defense committees not later than March 1, 1999.

Enhanced training for Department of Defense civilian employees 
        regarding A-76

    The committee is aware that some DOD civilian employees 
receive training with regard to A-76 competitions. The 
committee applauds the Department of Defense for these training 
efforts and encourages the Department to expand training 
opportunities to ensure that, to the maximum extent possible, 
all employees who would be involved in A-76-type actions 
receive the appropriate training.

Management by Full Time Equivalents

    Section 1101 of the National Defense Authorization Act for 
Fiscal Year 1998 (Public Law 105-85) required the service 
secretaries and Department of Defense (DOD) agency directors to 
certify to the Congress that Full Time Equivalent (FTE) 
ceilings were not used in the management of civilian personnel. 
There is, however, still evidence that FTE-ceilings are being 
used. The committee, therefore, urges that the service 
secretaries and DOD agency directors include in the required 
certification consideration of the possible use of prohibited 
manpower management constraints as a factor when making 
decisions to outsource activities traditionally performed by 
government employees.

High-grade restrictions

    The committee is concerned about the effects of on-going 
high-grade restrictions on the Federal Scientists and 
Technologists (S&Ts). Although the committee understands the 
rationale for controlling high-grade growth, especially in a 
time of downsizing, the committee notes that the uniform 
application of high-grade restrictions across agencies and 
laboratories, without regard for the unique attributes of the 
S&T community may result in an unintended ``brain drain'' from 
which it may take years to recover.
    Hiring freezes, reductions-in-force, and early separation 
programs intended to facilitate the downsizing of the 
Department of Defense, when coupled with high-grade 
restrictions can result in a stagnant work force of middle-
graded S&Ts. These highly-educated and trained individuals at 
or below GS-13 will leave government service because there are 
no opportunities for advancement. The end result could be a 
smaller yet significantly less capable organization.
    The committee directs the Secretary of Defense to review 
the application of high-grade controls, as applied to the S&T 
community as a whole and in individual laboratories, to 
determine if such controls are in the best long-term interests 
of the Department of Defense. Additionally, the committee 
encourages the Secretary of Defense to provide to those 
agencies and laboratories that employ S&T personnel, the 
maximum flexibility possible in the management of S&T 
personnel, consistent with the uniqueness of this community and 
the long-term needs of the Department. The Secretary shall 
report to the Congressional defense committees on the results 
of that review not later than March 1, 1999.

              TITLE XII--JOINT WARFIGHTING EXPERIMENTATION

    The committee believes the Department of Defense should 
move quickly toward a process of joint experimentation as 
recommended by the National Defense Panel. The committee 
acknowledges the progress the Department has made by developing 
a charter assigning the responsibility and authority for that 
process to the Commander-in-Chief, U.S. Atlantic Command. The 
committee directs the CINC, USACOM, or other combatant 
commander subsequently responsible for joint experimentation, 
to report to the congressional defense committees annually on 
joint experimentation conducted in the previous year. The 
Secretary of Defense and the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of 
Staff are also directed to comment on each report prior to the 
submission to the Congress. The committee will carefully review 
the initial and subsequent annual reports on joint warfighting 
experimentation to assess the adequacy of the scope and pace of 
transformation activity. Should that scope and pace be deemed 
inadequate, the committee will consider legislation to 
establish a unified combatant commander with the mission, 
forces, budget, responsibilities and authority to conduct joint 
experimentation.
            DIVISION B--MILITARY CONSTRUCTION AUTHORIZATIONS

    The purpose of Division B is to provide military 
construction authorization and related authority to support the 
military departments and defense agencies during fiscal year 
1999. The administration's budget request is reflected in S. 
1813, the Military Construction Authorization Act for Fiscal 
Year 1999, as introduced by request. The military construction 
division of this bill, as recommended by the committee, totals 
$8.3 billion in authorization for appropriations for fiscal 
year 1999.
    This authorization provides funding for construction and 
military family housing operations for the military services, 
the Reserve components, the defense agencies, and the North 
Atlantic Treaty Organization Security Investment Program. It 
also provides authorization for the Defense Base Closure and 
Realignment account that funds activities associated with the 
1993 and 1995 base closure recommendations.
Committee Action
    The committee recommends an overall authorization for the 
Department of Defense military construction program that is 
above the administration's request for fiscal year 1999. For 
fiscal year 1999, the Department of Defense requested 
authorization of appropriations of $4.3 billion for military 
construction and $3.5 billion for family housing construction 
and support. These funding levels represent a reduction of 
approximately $600.0 million from the fiscal year 1998 request. 
The committee recommends $4.7 billion for military construction 
and $3.6 billion for family housing construction and support 
for fiscal year 1999. In reviewing the services' military 
construction programs, the committee found that since 1995, 
funding for military construction and family housing has 
declined by 19 percent. During the same period, the overall 
defense budget has declined by only eight percent. At these 
funding levels, the committee questions the services' ability 
to mitigate the serious deficiencies in the quality of our 
defense infrastructure, barracks and family housing.
    Despite the ominous funding declines, there are rays of 
promise for improved Quality of Life in the fiscal year 1999 
military construction request. For example, there is again a 
sizeable request for barracks construction, both in CONUS and 
overseas. In addition, the Army and the Navy provided 
additional funding to enhance both National Guard and Reserve 
facilities.
    The committee reaffirms its support to modernize, renovate, 
and improve aging defense facilities and focuses its funding 
priorities on improving quality of life and readiness-related 
projects for the active and Reserve components. Of the $500.0 
million added to the construction program, more than $164.0 
million will fund unaccompanied personnel quarters, child 
development centers, dining facilities, education centers, and 
military family housing. The funding increase also provides 
approximately $100.0 million for high priority projects 
submitted by the military services that could not be funded in 
the Department's budget request.
    The committee denied the Department's shift of the Chemical 
Demilitarization Program funds from the Office of the Secretary 
Defense to the Army Military Construction Program. The 
committee believes that due to the national implications of 
this program, oversight is more appropriately placed in the 
Office of the Secretary of Defense. The committee recommended a 
reduction of $50.0 million, to the Department's request for the 
Chemical Demilitarization Program. The program has experienced 
delays in obtaining the required construction and environmental 
permits and is carrying over $60.0 million in unobligated 
funds.
    The committee notes that the Department is again relying on 
prior year savings to fund military construction projects 
rather than including the full funding in the budget request. 
Over the past three fiscal years the Military Departments were 
directed to use in excess of $84.0 million from prior year 
savings to fund their military and family housing construction 
program. The use of prior year savings denies the services the 
flexibility to fund necessary cost variations and complete 
projects that have justifiable cost increases. The committee 
denied the use of prior year funds and expects the Department 
to fully fund the military construction requests in future 
budget requests.
    The following table identifies the committee's 
recommendations for fiscal year 1999 military construction and 
family housing construction projects.


Base closure and realignment accounts

    The committee recommends authorization of $1.7 billion in 
fiscal year 1999 for the Defense Base Closure and Realignment 
Account, 1990, that supports the recommendations of the 1993, 
and 1995 Defense Base Closure and Realignment Commissions.
    The committee will continue to carefully monitor the 
justification for the construction projects funded within these 
accounts and the other cost elements of these accounts.
    Although funding is not specifically limited to projects 
identified in its budget justification, the Department of 
Defense identified the following construction projects for 
fiscal year 1999 that it plans to fund from these accounts.


                            TITLE XXI--ARMY

                                SUMMARY

    The Army requested authorization of $790,876,000 for 
military construction and $1,206,534,000 for family housing for 
fiscal year 1999. The committee recommends authorization of 
$764,478,000 for military construction and $1,228,358,000 for 
family housing for fiscal year 1999. The reduction in the 
military construction program reflects the transfer of the 
Chemical Demilitarization program to Office of the Secretary of 
Defense.

Sec. 2101. Authorized Army construction and land acquisition projects.

    This section contains the list of authorized Army 
construction projects for fiscal year 1999. The authorized 
amounts are listed on an installation-by-installation basis. 
The state list contained in this report is intended to be the 
binding list of the specific projects authorized at each 
location.

Sec. 2102. Family housing.

    This section would authorize new construction and planning 
and design of family housing units for the Army for fiscal year 
1999.

Sec. 2103. Improvements to military family housing units.

    This section would authorize improvements to existing units 
of family housing units for fiscal year 1999.

Sec. 2104. Authorization of appropriations, Army.

    This section would authorize specific appropriations for 
each line item contained in the Army's budget for fiscal year 
1999. This section also provides an overall limit on the amount 
the Army may spend on military construction projects.

Sec. 2105. Modification of authority to carry out fiscal year 1998 
        project.

    The committee recommends a provision that would amend 
section 2101 of the Military Construction Authorization Act for 
Fiscal Year 1998. The provision would authorize an increase of 
funding for the whole barracks complex renewal at Fort Sill 
Oklahoma, from $25.0 million to $28.3 million, due to a change 
in scope.

                        OTHER ITEMS OF INTEREST

Improvements of military family housing, Army

    The committee recommends that, within authorized amounts 
for improvements to military family housing and facilities, the 
Secretary of the Army execute the following projects: 
$7,400,000 for Whole House Revitalization (40 units) at Fort 
Richardson, Alaska and $10,000,000 for Whole House 
Revitalization (95 units) at Fort Campbell, Kentucky.
                            TITLE XXII--NAVY

                                SUMMARY

    The Navy requested authorization of $468,150,000 for 
military construction and $1,189,760,000 for family housing for 
fiscal year 1999. The committee recommends authorization of 
$538,715,000 for military construction and $1,202,406,000 for 
family housing for fiscal year 1999.
Sec. 2201. Authorized Navy construction and land acquisition projects.
    This section contains the list of authorized Navy 
construction projects for fiscal year 1999. The authorized 
amounts are listed on an installation-by-installation basis. 
The state list contained in this report is intended to be the 
binding list of the specific projects authorized at each 
location.
Sec. 2202. Family housing.
    This section would authorize new construction and planning 
and design of family housing units for the Navy for fiscal year 
1999.
Sec. 2203. Improvements to military family housing units.
    This section would authorize improvements to existing units 
of family housing for fiscal year 1999.
Sec. 2204. Authorization of appropriations, Navy.
    This section would authorize specific appropriations for 
each line item in the Navy's budget for fiscal year 1999. This 
section also provides an overall limit on the amount the Navy 
may spend on military construction projects.
                         TITLE XXIII--AIR FORCE

                                SUMMARY

    The Air Force requested authorization of $454,810,000 for 
military construction and $1,008,446,000 for family housing for 
fiscal year 1999. The committee recommends authorization of 
$592,330,000 for military construction and $1,060,404,000 for 
family housing for fiscal year 1999.
Sec. 2301. Authorized Air Force construction and land acquisition 
        projects.
    This section contains the list of authorized Air Force 
construction projects for fiscal year 1999. The authorized 
amounts are listed on an installation-by-installation basis. 
The state list contained in this report is intended to be the 
binding list of the specific projects authorized at each 
location.
Sec. 2302. Family housing.
    This section would authorize new construction and planning 
and design of family housing units for the Air Force for fiscal 
year 1999.
Sec. 2303. Improvements to military family housing units.
    This section would authorize improvements to existing units 
of family housing for fiscal year 1999.
Sec. 2304. Authorization of appropriations, Air Force.
    This section would authorize specific appropriations for 
each line item in the Air Force's budget for fiscal year 1999. 
This section also would provide an overall limit on the amount 
the Air Force may spend on military construction projects.

                        OTHER ITEMS OF INTEREST

Planning and design, Air Force
    The committee directs that, of the amount authorized for 
appropriations for Air Force planning and design, the Secretary 
of the Air Force may use $1,152,000 million for the completion 
of design work associated with the construction of the 
Consolidated Command and Control, Intelligence and Exploitation 
Facility at the Air Force Research Laboratory's Information 
Directorate, Rome, New York.
Improvements of military family housing, Air Force
    The committe recommends that, within authorized amounts for 
improvements of military family housing and facilities, the 
Secretary of the Air Force execute the following projects: 
$9,110,000 for family housing improvements (94 units) at 
Charleston Air Force Base, South Carolina.
Consolidation of the Officer Training School, Maxwell Air Force Base, 
        Alabama
    The committee is aware that the Air Force is consolidating 
the Officer Training School currently split between the Air 
University and Maxwell Gunter Annex at Maxwell Air Force Base. 
The committee supports this action due to the economic and 
quality of life benefits. The committee urges the Secretary of 
the Air Force to make every effort to include the appropriate 
level of funding for the Commissioned Officer Training 
Dormitory in the fiscal year 2000 budget request.
                      TITLE XXIV--DEFENSE AGENCIES

                                SUMMARY

    The Defense Agencies requested authorization of 
$491,675,000 for military construction and $37,244,000 for 
family housing for fiscal year 1999. The committee recommends 
authorization of $571,975,000 for military construction and 
$37,244,000 for family housing.
Sec. 2401. Authorized Defense Agencies construction and land 
        acquisition projects.
    This section contains the list of authorized Defense 
Agencies construction projects for fiscal year 1999. The 
authorized amounts are listed on an installation-by-
installation basis. The state list contained in this report is 
intended to be the binding list of the specific projects 
authorized at each location.
Sec. 2402. Improvements to military family housing units.
    This section would authorize the Secretary of Defense to 
make improvements to existing units of family housing for 
fiscal year 1999 in an amount not to exceed $345,000.
Sec. 2403. Energy conservation projects.
    This section would authorize the Secretary of Defense to 
carry out energy conservation projects.

Sec. 2404. Authorization of appropriations, Defense Agencies.

    This section would authorize specific appropriations for 
each line item in the Defense Agencies budget for fiscal year 
1999. This section also would provide an overall limit on the 
amount the Defense Agencies may spend on military construction 
projects.

Sec. 2405. Modification of authority to carry out certain fiscal year 
        1995 projects.

    The committee recommends a provision that would amend 
section 2401 of the Military Construction Authorization Act for 
Fiscal Year 1995, as amended, and section 2408 of the Military 
Construction Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 1998. The 
provision would authorize an increase of funding for the 
construction of the Chemical Demilitarization Facilities at 
Pine Bluff Arsenal, Arkansas, from $134.0 million to $154.4 
million, and at Umatilla Army Depot, from $187.0 million to 
$193.4 million, due to cost increases resulting from a delay in 
receiving the appropriate permits.

Sec. 2406. Modification of authority to carry out fiscal year 1990 
        project.

    The committee recommends a provision that would amend 
section 2401 of the Military Construction Authorization Act for 
Fiscal Year 1990, as amended. The provision would authorize an 
increase of funding for the construction of the Portsmouth 
Naval Hospital, Virginia, from $330.0 million to $351.4 
million, due to cost increases resulting from inflation and 
change in scope.
   TITLE XXV--NORTH ATLANTIC TREATY ORGANIZATION SECURITY INVESTMENT 
                                PROGRAM

                                SUMMARY

    The Department of Defense requested authorization of 
$185,000,000 for the North Atlantic Treaty Organization 
Security Investment Program for fiscal year 1999. The committee 
recommends $159,000,000.
Sec. 2501. Authorized NATO construction and land acquisition projects.
    This section would authorize the Secretary of Defense to 
make contributions to the North Atlantic Treaty Organization 
(NATO) security investment program in an amount equal to the 
sum of the amount specifically authorized in section 2502 of 
this bill and the amount of recoupment due to the United States 
for construction previously financed by the United States.
Sec. 2502. Authorization of appropriations, NATO.
    This section would authorize the Secretary of Defense to 
make contributions to the North Atlantic Treaty Organization 
(NATO) security investment program in an amount equal to the 
sum of the amount specifically authorized in section 2502 of 
this bill and the amount of recoupment due to the United States 
for construction previously financed by the United States.
            TITLE XXVI--GUARD AND RESERVE FORCES FACILITIES

                                SUMMARY

    The Department of Defense requested a military construction 
authorization of $179,535,000 for fiscal year 1999 for National 
Guard and Reserve facilities. The committee recommends 
authorization for fiscal year 1999 of $400,201,000 to be 
distributed as follows:

Army National Guard.....................................     $93,395,000
Air National Guard......................................     161,932,000
Army Reserve............................................     107,378,000
Air Force Reserve.......................................      20,225,000
Naval and Marine Corps Reserve..........................      15,271,000
                    --------------------------------------------------------
                    ____________________________________________________
    Total...............................................     400,201,000

Sec. 2601. Authorized Guard and Reserve construction and land 
        acquisition projects.

    This section would authorize appropriations for military 
construction for the National Guard and Reserve by service 
component for fiscal year 1999. The state list contained in 
this report is intended to be the binding list of the specific 
projects authorized at each location.

Sec. 2602. Reduction in fiscal year 1998 authorization of 
        appropriations for Army National Guard military construction.

    The committee recommends a provision to amend the Military 
Construction Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 1998 to rescind 
the authority for the construction of a United States Army 
Reserve Center and Organizational Maintenance Shop at Fort 
Douglas, Utah. The provision would reduce funding for reserve 
component construction for fiscal year 1998 from $66,267,000 to 
$53,553,000. The project is redundant to a project submitted in 
the fiscal year 1999 military construction request.

                        OTHER ITEMS OF INTEREST

Planning and design, Guard and Reserve Forces facilities

    The committee directs that of the amount authorized for 
appropriations for Army National Guard, Army Reserve, Naval 
Reserve, Marine Corps Reserve, Army National Guard, and Air 
Force Reserve construction and land acquisition projects, the 
amount indicated for each respective project be directed toward 
the design of:

Army National Guard:
NH: Concord, Army Aviation Support Facility.............        $968,000
OK: Sand Springs, Readiness Center......................         972,000
        TITLE XXVII--EXPIRATION AND EXTENSION OF AUTHORIZATIONS

Sec. 2701. Expiration of authorizations and amounts required to be 
        specified by law.
    This section would provide that authorizations for military 
construction projects, repair of real property, land 
acquisition, family housing projects and facilities, 
contributions to the North Atlantic Treaty Organization 
infrastructure program, and National Guard and Reserve projects 
will expire on October 1, 2001 or the date of enactment of an 
Act authorizing funds for military construction for fiscal year 
2002, whichever is later. This expiration would not apply to 
authorizations for which appropriated funds have been obligated 
before October 1, 2000 or the date of enactment of an Act 
authorizing funds for these projects, whichever is later.
Sec. 2702. Extension of authorizations of certain fiscal year 1996 
        projects.
    This section would provide for selected extension of 
certain fiscal year 1996 military construction authorizations 
until October 1, 1999, or the date of the enactment of an Act 
authorizing funds for military construction for fiscal year 
2000, whichever is later.
Sec. 2703. Extension of authorization of fiscal year 1995 project.
    This section would provide for selected extension of 
certain fiscal year 1995 military construction authorizations 
until October 1, 1999, or the date of the enactment of an Act 
authorizing funds for military construction for fiscal year 
2000, whichever is later.
Sec. 2704. Effective date.
    This section would provide that titles XXI, XXII, XXIII, 
XXIV, and XXVI of this bill shall take effect on October 1, 
1998, or the date of the enactment of this Act, whichever is 
later.
                    TITLE XXVIII--GENERAL PROVISIONS

 SUBTITLE A--MILITARY CONSTRUCTION PROGRAM AND MILITARY FAMILY HOUSING 
                                CHANGES

Sec. 2801. Modification of authority relating to architectural and 
        engineering services and construction design.
    The committee recommends a provision that would authorize 
the Secretary of the Air Force to convey, without 
consideration, the McNeese State University in Lake Charles, 
Louisiana approximately 4.38 acres of real property and 
improvements that constitute the Lake Charles Air Force 
Station. The conveyance would be contingent upon the University 
accepting the property, subject to such easements or rights of 
way as the Secretary considers appropriate. The provision would 
include a reversion clause in the event that the Secretary 
determines that the conveyed property is not used as a research 
facility.
Sec. 2802. Expansion of Army overseas family housing lease authority.
    The committee recommends a provision that would amend 
section 2828(e) of title 10, United States Code, to authorize 
the Secretary of the Army to increase, by no more than 500 
family housing units in Italy and no more than 800 family 
housing units in Korea, the number of leases for which the 
maximum amount is $25,000 per unit per year. Inflation in Italy 
has risen 57 percent since 1989 and Korea is experiencing an 
annual inflation rate of five to seven percent. This authority 
would enable the Army to retain family housing leases in Italy 
and Korea as the cost of the leases begins to exceed the 
current statutory cap.

        SUBTITLE B--REAL PROPERTY AND FACILITIES ADMINISTRATION

Sec. 2811. Increase in thresholds for reporting requirements relating 
        to real property transactions.
    The committee recommends a provision that would amend 
section 2662 of title 10, United States Code, to increase the 
threshold for congressional notification for real property 
transactions from $200,000 to $500,000. The transactions 
requiring notification include the purchase, lease, transfer, 
and disposal of real property.
Sec. 2812. Exceptions to real property transaction reporting 
        requirements for war and certain emergency and other 
        operations.
    The committee recommends a provision that would amend 
section 2662 of title 10, United States Code, to waive the 
reporting requirements for certain real estate transactions. 
The provision would modify the reporting requirements in the 
event of a declaration of war, a national emergency, a natural 
disaster, a contingency operation, or a civil disturbance. In 
the event the secretary of a military department enters into a 
real property agreement under these conditions, the secretary 
would be required to submit a report on the agreement to the 
Committee on Armed Services of the Senate and the Committee on 
National Security of the House of Representatives not later 
than 30 days after entering into the agreement.
Sec. 2813. Waiver of applicability of property disposal laws to leases 
        at installations to be closed or realigned under the base 
        closure laws.
    The committee recommends a provision that would amend 
section 2667(f)(1) of title 10, United States Code, to clarify 
that the Federal Property and Administrative Services Act 
(FPASA) of 1949 does not apply to the lease of excess property 
at closing or realigned installations if the secretary of the 
military department determines that such lease would facilitate 
state or local economic adjustment effort. The provision would 
resolve a legal issue where the courts have ruled that the 
FPASA is paramount over section 2667 of title 10, United States 
Code.
Sec. 2814. Restoration of Department of Defense lands used by another 
        Federal agency.
    The committee recommends a provision that would amend 
section 2691 of title 10, United States Code, to authorize the 
Secretary of the Military Department concerned to require users 
of Department of Defense lands to restore lands upon expiration 
of their use or to reimburse the military department for 
performing the restoration. The current authorization only 
allows the military department to restore the lands of other 
federal agencies. There is no reciprocal authority for use of 
Department of Defense lands by other federal agencies. This 
provision would eliminate this inequity.

                      SUBTITLE C--LAND CONVEYANCES

Sec. 2821. Land conveyance, Indiana Army Ammunition Plant, Charlestown, 
        Indiana.
    The committee recommends a provision that would authorize 
the Secretary of the Army to convey to the Indiana Army 
Ammunition Plant Reuse Authority all right, title, and interest 
to and in a parcel of real property, including improvements, 
consisting of approximately 4660 acres located at the Indiana 
Army Ammunition Plant, Charlestown, Indiana. The purpose of the 
conveyance would be for the development of an industrial park 
to replace all or part of the economic activity lost due to the 
inactivation of the plant. The provision would require the 
Plant Reuse Authority to compensate the secretary at the fair 
market value for the conveyed property, but defer payment for a 
10-year period. The secretary would be required to deposit any 
proceeds in a special account established in accordance with 
section 204 of the Federal Property and Administrative Services 
Act of 1949.
    In the event the Reuse Authority conveys or leases the 
property during the 10-year period, the Reuse Authority would 
pay the United States an amount equal to the fair market value 
of the reconveyed property as of the time of reconveyance, 
excluding any improvements made on the property by the Reuse 
Authority. The provision would also authorize the Secretary of 
the Army to accept compensation for administrative expenses.

Sec. 2822. Land conveyance, Army Reserve Center, Bridgton, Maine.

    The committee recommends a provision that would authorize 
the Secretary of the Army to convey, without consideration, to 
the Town of Bridgton, Maine, a parcel of excess real property, 
including improvements thereon, consisting of approximately 
3.65 acres on which is located the Army Reserve Center, 
Bridgton, Maine. The purpose of the conveyance would be for 
public benefit and it would facilitate the expansion of the 
municipal office complex, Bridgton, Maine. The provision would 
include a reversion clause in the event that the secretary 
determines that the conveyed property is not used for public 
benefit.

Sec. 2823. Land conveyance, Volunteer Army Ammunition Plant, 
        Chattanooga, Tennessee.

    The committee recommends a provision that would authorize 
the Secretary of the Army to convey to Hamilton County, 
Tennesssee all right, title, and interest to and in a parcel of 
excess real property, including improvements, consisting of 
approximately 1033 acres located at the Volunteer Army 
Ammunition Plant, Chattanooga, Tennessee. The purpose of the 
conveyance would be for the development of an industrial park 
to replace all or part of the economic activity lost due to the 
inactivation of the plant. The provision would require Howard 
County to compensate the secretary at the fair market value for 
the conveyed property, but defer payment for a 10-year period. 
The secretary would be required to deposit any proceeds in a 
special account established in accordance with section 204 of 
the Federal Property and Administrative Services Act of 1949.
    In the event the Reuse Authority conveys or leases the 
property during the 10-year period, the Reuse Authority would 
pay the United States an amount equal to the fair market value 
of the reconveyed property as of the time of reconveyance, 
excluding any improvements made on the property by the Reuse 
Authority. The provision would also authorize the Secretary of 
the Army to accept compensation for administrative expenses.

Sec. 2824. Release of interests in real property, former Kennebec 
        Arsenal, Augusta, Maine.

    The committee recommends a provision that would authorize 
the Secretary of the Army to release, without consideration, 
all right, title, and interest of the United States in and to a 
parcel of real property consisting of approximately 40 acres 
located in Augusta Maine, and formerly know as the Kennebec 
Arsenal. The property was transferred to the State of Maine in 
1905 subject to the condition that the property be used as a 
hospital for the insane. The condition for transfer was amended 
by section 771 of the Department of Defense Appropriations Act 
for Fiscal Year 1981 (Public Law 96-527; 94 Stat. 3093) to 
include the phrase ``or for other public purposes.'' The 
provision would remove these conditions to clear the title to 
allow the State of Maine and the City of Augusta to form a 
nonprofit corporation to redevelop the property in support of a 
museum and for commercial activities.

Sec. 2825. Land exchange, Naval Reserve Readiness Center, Portland, 
        Maine.

    The committee recommends a provision that would authorize 
the Secretary of the Navy to convey to the Gulf of Maine 
Aquarium Development Corporation, Portland, Maine, a parcel of 
real property, including improvements thereon, consisting of 
approximately 3.72 acres in Portland, Maine, for the purpose of 
establishing an aquarium and research facility. The site is 
currently the Naval Reserve Readiness Center, Portland, Maine. 
In exchange for the conveyance, the provision would require the 
corporation to provide replacement facilities, as the Secretary 
determines appropriate for the Naval Reserve. These facilities 
would be designed and built by the corporation on a parcel of 
real property to be conveyed to the United States or designed 
and constructed on real property under the jurisdiction of the 
secretary. The secretary would have the option of choosing the 
form of compensation.

Sec. 2826. Land conveyance, Air Force Station, Lake Charles, Louisiana.

    The committee recommends a provision that would authorize 
the Secretary of the Air Force to convey, without 
consideration, the McNeese State University in Lake Charles, 
Louisiana approximately 4.38 acres of real property and 
improvements that constitute the Lake Charles Air Force 
Station. The conveyance would be contingent upon the University 
accepting the property, subject to such easements or rights of 
way as the Secretary considers appropriate. The provision would 
include a reversion clause in the event that the Secretary 
determines that the conveyed property is not used as a research 
facility.

                       SUBTITLE D--OTHER MATTERS

Sec. 2831. Purchase of build-to-lease family housing at Eielson Air 
        Force Base, Alaska.

    The committee recommends a provision that would authorize 
the Secretary of the Air Force, if he determines that it is in 
the best economic interest of the Air Force, to purchase the 
366-unit military family housing project at Eielson Air Force 
Base, Alaska, that was constructed and is being leased by the 
Secretary under section 801 of the Military Construction 
Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 1984 (Public Law 98-115). The 
purchase price of the housing units would be an amount equal to 
the amount of the outstanding indebtedness of the developer for 
the project that would remain at the time of the purchase if 
the developer had paid down the indebtedness to the lender 
according to the original payment schedule for the project.

Sec. 2832. Beach replenishment, San Diego, California.

    The committee recommends a provision that would authorize 
the Secretary of the Navy to use funds remaining from the Naval 
Air Station North Island, California dredging project 
authorized in section 2204(a)(1) of the Military Construction 
Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 1997 to carry out beach 
replenishment in and around San Diego, California. The 
provision would authorize the secretary to merge any funds 
contributed to the cost of that project by the State of 
California and by local governments under the agreement under 
section 2205 of the Military Construction Authorization Act for 
Fiscal Year 1997. The provision would prohibit any obligation 
of funds to carry out the beach replenishment project until 30 
days after the date on which the Secretary submits to the 
congressional defense committees a report providing the 
following information:
          (1) an explanation why the sand originally proposed 
        to be used for beach replenishment under the project 
        related to the Naval Air Station North Island dredging 
        could not be used for that purpose.
          (2) a comprehensive explanation of why the beach 
        replenishment plan at Naval Air Station North Island 
        was abandoned;
          (3) a description of any administrative action taken 
        by or against any agency or individual as a result of 
        abandonment of the plan;
          (4) a statement of the total Navy funds available for 
        the beach replenishment;
          (5) a statement of the amount of the contributions of 
        the State of California and local government for the 
        beach replenishment;
          (6) an estimate of the total cost of the beach 
        replenishment;
          (7) the amount of financial aid the State of 
        California has received from the Federal Government for 
        beach restoration and replenishment during the 10-year 
        period ending on the date of enactment of this Act;
          (8) the amount of financial aid the State of 
        California has requested from the Federal Government 
        for beach restoration or replenishment because of the 
        1997-1998 El Nino event; and
          (9) a current analysis that compares the costs and 
        benefits of homeporting the U.S.S. John C. Stennis 
        (CVN-74) at Naval Station North Island with the costs 
        and benefits of homeporting that vessel at Naval 
        Station Pearl Harbor, Hawaii, and the costs and 
        benefits of homeporting that vessel at Naval Station 
        Bremerton, Washington.
    The committee is disappointed that the Navy and the State 
of California could not reach the appropriate accommodations to 
carry out the beach replenishment project, as authorized by the 
Military Construction Act for Fiscal Year 1997. The committee 
included this provision so that the Secretary of the Navy may 
comply with an agreement reached with the City of San Diego in 
dredging operations necessary to home port the U.S.S. Stennis 
at the Naval Station North Island. The committee would not be 
receptive to any request for additional funding for the beach 
replenishment project and would be prepared to support the 
relocation of the U.S.S. Stennis, if a satisfactory agreement 
is not reached, to complete the dredging and beach 
replenishment.

                        OTHER ITEMS OF INTEREST

Report on Air Force Plant #3, Tulsa, Oklahoma

    The committee commends the Department of the Air Force for 
the expeditious obligation of environmental cleanup funds for 
the ground contamination at Air Force Plant #3, Tulsa, 
Oklahoma. The committee, however, remains concerned about other 
environmental contamination, particularly in above-ground 
structures. The committee directs the Secretary of the Air 
Force to investigate these hazards and report to the 
congressional defense committees by March 1, 1999 on these 
risks. The report should also include a detailed obligation 
schedule that fully addresses these concerns before the actual 
title transfer to the City of Tulsa.

Report on Fort Hunter Liggett, California

    The committee is aware that the Army is currently 
developing plans for the reuse of Fort Hunter Liggett, 
California, which the 1995 Defense Base Closure and Realignment 
Commission realigned. The Commission's findings state in part: 
``The realignment of this installation ends the Active 
Component presence while preserving the U.S. Army Reserve 
Command garrison. The Army will license the training facility 
and training area to the California National Guard as part of 
the realignment.''
    The committee has learned that the Secretary of the Army's 
plan for the realignment of Fort Hunter Liggett does not 
include a requirement to grant a real estate license to the 
California National Guard. Although the committee does not 
intend to intervene in the base closure process, the committee 
directs the secretary to submit a report to the Committee on 
Armed Services of the Senate detailing the Army's intent 
regarding the granting of a real estate license to the 
California National Guard.
            TITLE XXIX--JUNIPER BUTTE RANGE LANDS WITHDRAWAL

    The committee recommends a provision that would provide for 
the withdrawal and reservation of approximately 12,000 acres of 
public lands, known as the Juniper Butte Range, Idaho, to 
support enhanced military training. In addition to the land 
withdrawal, the provision would require the Administrator of 
the Federal Aviation Administration to modify current airspace 
restrictions associated with the existing Saylor Creek Range.
    The committee anticipates that the changes in airspace 
associated with Enhanced Training in Idaho (ETI) would result 
in a net decrease of existing restricted airspace by nearly 50 
percent. Flights would be more evenly distributed throughout 
the Military Operational Area (MOA) to avoid concentration of 
flights north of the Duck Valley Reservation and over the 
Owyhee Canyonlands.
    The committee notes that land use and environmental 
considerations would involve monitoring and cooperation among 
the Department of the Air Force, the Department of Interior, 
and the State of Idaho. Specifically, integrated natural 
resource management plans would be developed by the Air Force, 
in cooperation with the Department of Interior and the State of 
Idaho, consistent with the Sikes Act (16 U.S.C. 670a). The 
committee understands that military land-based components would 
avoid special use land management areas, such as wilderness 
study areas and areas of critical environmental concern. 
Moreover, it is expected that there would be continued emphasis 
on meaningful input by the Shoshone-Paiute tribes on cultural 
resources issues, with a focus on consultation, government-to-
government relations, and effective monitoring procedures.
    The committee recognizes that the Department of the Air 
Force and the Department of Interior are engaged in discussions 
related to the terms and conditions of the withrawal. The 
committee hopes that these discussions will result in a 
resolution that will balance the interests related to enhanced 
training and protection of the environment.
    Consistent with the National Environmental Policy Act (42 
U.S.C. 4321 et seq.), the Department of the Air Force prepared 
an environmental impact statement (EIS) to examine the existing 
conditions and potential environmental consequences of 
selecting the ETI action alternative for the 366th Wing based 
at Mountain Home Air Force Base, Idaho. The alternative action 
search for range development began with interagency and 
intergovernmental discussions among the Air Force, the 
Department of Interior, the State of Idaho, the Shoshone-Paiute 
Tribes, and the Idaho congressional delegation. There were four 
alternative actions evaluated: no action; Clover Butte; 
Grasmere; and Juniper Butte. The EIS identified Juniper Butte 
as the preferred alternative because it addressed the 
operational goals to enhance training in Idaho with less 
potential for environmental impacts. The selection of the 
Juniper Butte Range was based on operational, environmental, 
ranching, and Native American considerations. The committee has 
been assured that these considerations were taken into account 
under the recommended land withdrawal provision.
 DIVISION C--DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY NATIONAL SECURITY AUTHORIZATIONS AND 
                          OTHER AUTHORIZATIONS

      TITLE XXXI--DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY NATIONAL SECURITY PROGRAMS

    Title XXXI authorizes appropriations for the Atomic Energy 
Defense Activities of the Department of Energy, including: the 
purchase, construction, and acquisition of plant and capital 
equipment; research and development; nuclear weapons; naval 
nuclear propulsion; environmental restoration and waste 
management; operating expenses; and other expenses necessary to 
carry out the purposes of the Department of Energy Organization 
Act (Public Law 95-91). The title would authorize 
appropriations in five categories: weapons activities; defense 
environmental restoration and waste management; other defense 
activities; defense environmental management privatization; and 
defense nuclear waste disposal.
    The fiscal year 1999 budget request for the atomic energy 
defense activities totaled $12.3 billion, a 5.4 percent 
increase over fiscal year 1998. Of the total amount requested, 
$4.5 billion was for weapons activities, $4.3 billion was for 
defense environmental restoration and waste management 
activities, $1.0 billion was for defense facility closure 
projects, $516.0 million was for defense environmental 
management privatization, $1.7 billion was for other defense 
activities, $190.0 million was for defense nuclear waste 
disposal, and $140.0 million was for the formerly utilized 
sites remedial action program.
    The committee recommends $11.9 billion for atomic energy 
defense activities, a reduction of $379.3 million to the budget 
request. The committee recommends $4.5 billion for weapons 
activities, $5.3 billion for defense environmental restoration 
and waste management, $241.9 million for defense environmental 
management privatization, $1.7 billion for other defense 
activities, $190.0 million for defense nuclear waste disposal, 
and $140.0 million for the formerly utilized sites remedial 
action program.
    The following table summarizes the budget request and the 
committee recommendations:

         SUBTITLE A--NATIONAL SECURITY PROGRAMS AUTHORIZATIONS


Sec. 3101. Weapons activities.

    The committee recommends a provision that would authorize 
$4.5 billion for atomic energy defense weapons activities of 
the Department of Energy, an increase of $19.7 million from the 
requested amount of $4.5 billion. The amount authorized is for 
the following activities: $2.1 billion for stockpile 
stewardship, a reduction of $65.0 million; $2.1 billion for 
stockpile management activities, an increase of $89.7 million; 
and $255.5 million for program direction, a reduction of $5.0 
million. The committee recommends an undistributed reduction of 
$145.0 million to be offset by the availability of uncosted, 
unobligated prior year funds.

Stockpile stewardship programs

    The committee recommends $451.0 million for the Advanced 
Strategic Computing Initiative (ASCI) and Stockpile Computing 
program, a reduction of $65.0 million. The committee notes that 
even at this reduced level of funding, the program will 
experience a growth rate of 12 percent over fiscal year 1998 
funding levels.
    The committee believes that the Department has not fully 
justified the rapid growth requested in this program or the 
pace of acquisition of added computational capacities. 
Thecommittee notes that the Office of Defense Programs does not fully 
utilize the computing capacity that it has already acquired. The 
average utilization rate for existing Defense Programs-operated 
supercomputers is only 46 percent, leaving more than half of all 
computing capability unused. Further, the committee notes that much of 
the experimental data that the ASCI computers are intended to utilize 
have not been collected. The data in question will be collected at new 
experimental facilities that have not been constructed. Given these 
findings, the committee believes that the proposed reduction will have 
no significant impact on the Department's stockpile stewardship and 
management program. The committee encourages the Department to adjust 
the rate of growth of this program in future years to track more 
closely the utilization requirements of the Office of Defense Programs.
    The committee recommends no funding for utilization of 
capabilities at the Pittsburgh Supercomputing Center. Given 
existing low utilization rates of DOE-owned supercomputers, the 
committee believes that this leasing arrangement is not 
advantageous for the taxpayer. The committee directs the 
Secretary of Energy to report to the congressional defense 
committees on the justification for such leases, and whether 
any such leased capabilities can meet the Department's 
computing needs in lieu of computer acquisitions proposed under 
the ASCI program.
    The committee compliments the Department on the successful 
subcritical experiments conducted in fiscal year 1998. The 
committee believes these experiments are fully compliant with 
existing arms control agreements and are vital to maintaining 
the safety and surety of the U.S. nuclear deterrent. The 
committee notes, however, that the Department will conduct only 
three of the four experiments scheduled to be conducted this 
fiscal year, rather than the four experiments that were 
proposed. The committee notes that $20.0 million in fiscal year 
1998 funds designated for subcritical experiments will be 
unused by the end of the fiscal year due to the delay of one of 
the planned experiments. The committee supports a vigorous 
program to carry out subcritical experiments and recommends the 
Department establish attainable schedules for such activities.

Stockpile management programs

    The committee continues to believe that the United States 
must maintain viable weapons manufacturing capabilities and 
capacities to rebuild aging weapons and to retain the ability 
to reconstitute its nuclear forces. The committee directs the 
Department to maintain the existing manufacturing capabilities 
found at the four nuclear weapons production plants and to 
ensure that weapons activities continue to be carried out 
jointly by DOE laboratories and plants.
    Of the funds available for stockpile management, the 
committee recommends an increase of $45.0 million for weapons 
production plants, to be allocated as follows: $20.0 million 
for the Pantex Plant to support scheduled workload requirements 
associated with weapons dismantlement activities and for skills 
retention; $15.0 million for the Kansas City Plant to support 
advanced manufacturing efforts such as Advanced Development 
Program and for skills retention; $5.0 million for the Y-12 
Plant to support maintenance of core stockpile management 
capabilities; and $5.0 million for the Savannah River Site to 
support infrastructure and maintenance activities associated 
with the replacement tritium facility.
    The Assistant Secretary for Defense Programs is encouraged 
to create a stockpile stewardship and management council to 
advise the Assistant Secretary on programmatic and budget 
issues related to the Department's weapons missions. The 
council membership should include the three weapons laboratory 
directors, the four weapons production plant managers, the 
manager of Nevada Test Site, and a representative of the U.S. 
Strategic Command. The council should attempt to meet 
quarterly, but no less than semiannually.
    The committee commends the Department for successfully 
producing a replacement plutonium pit at the Los Alamos 
National Laboratory. The committee is concerned, however, that 
the Department has not completed a long range plan for full 
scale pit production. The committee notes that production 
quantities envisioned by the Office of Defense Programs may not 
be in alignment with Department of Defense needs because the 
Department of Defense has not established a pit production 
requirement for warheads expected to remain in the enduring 
stockpile.
    The committee directs the Secretary of Energy and Secretary 
of Defense to prepare a long range plan identifying pit 
production requirements, including: quantities by warhead type, 
schedules, costs, and siting options. The report should also 
identify the military requirements and assumptions underlying 
each option and include options which reflect various potential 
stockpile levels. The report should be submitted to the 
Committee on Armed Services of the Senate and the Committee on 
National Security of the House of Representatives in both 
unclassified and classified form not later than March 1, 1999.

Technology transfer and education

    The committee recommends $69.0 million for technology 
transfer and education activities. Of this amount, the 
committee recommends $11.0 million for the American Textiles 
Partnership project.

Program direction

    The committee recommends a $5.0 million reduction to the 
budget request for program direction. The committee believes 
that the reduction can be achieved through continued efficiency 
savings to be gained from realignment efforts described in the 
Institute for Defense Analysis report on the Department's 
management structure for weapons activities.

Construction projects

    The committee recommends a reduction of $11.0 million to 
the chemistry and metallurgy research facility renovation 
project (95-D-102) to reflect continued delays and suspended 
operations at that facility. The committee recommends a 
reduction of $4.3 million to the nuclear material storage 
facility renovation project (97-D-122) to reflect delays in 
final design and deferral of planned construction activities.

Tritium production

    The committee does not believe the Department's fiscal year 
1999 budget request of $157.0 million for tritium production to 
be credible. The committee notes that the requirement to 
deliver new tritium by the year 2005 for the light water 
reactor and the year 2007 for the accelerator, as identified in 
the Nuclear Weapons Stockpile Memorandum, has not changed. The 
committee believes that the Department's unwillingness to 
include funding for the acquisition of a new tritium source in 
its proposed out year funding plan is unacceptable. Further, 
the committee notes that the fiscal year 1999 budget request 
does not appear to be sufficient to complete the Department's 
own dual track tritium strategy. The committee is very 
concerned that the Department did not request sufficient funds 
to continue evaluation of both technologies being considered 
under the dual track approach. The committee recommends an 
increase of $60.0 million for research associated with the 
accelerator production of tritium option in order to fully fund 
the dual track approach.
    The committee continues to be concerned that the Department 
has not completed a senior level policy review required by the 
National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 1998. The 
committee expects this review to include participation by 
senior cabinet-level officials, such as the Secretaries of 
Defense, State, and Energy, as well as the National Security 
Advisor and the Director of the Arms Control and Disarmament 
Agency. The committee notes that the Secretary of Energy is 
prohibited from selecting a preferred technology option until 
30 days after the results of this review are submitted to 
Congress. The committee further notes that a provision in the 
National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 1998 urged 
the Secretary to identify a preferred light water reactor sub-
option not later than March 1, 1998. As of May 14, 1998, the 
committee has not received notification that any such sub-
option was selected.
    The committee remains concerned that the selection of a 
commercial light water reactor option could have unacceptable 
nuclear proliferation ramifications. The committee notes that 
the United States has a long-standing policy requiring civilian 
and military uses of nuclear energy to remain separate. The 
committee endorses this policy and does not propose to alter 
this policy in the absence of a full and open debate on the 
potential ramifications of such a decision.

Laboratory Directed Research and Development

    The committee continues to be concerned that funds provided 
for Laboratory Directed Research and Development (LDRD) may not 
be managed appropriately. The committee supports a viable, 
laboratory directed research program. The committee notes that 
LDRD funds are authorized and appropriated by Congress, but do 
not fall under the same budgetary control as similar funds made 
available to the Department. The committee directs the 
Secretary of Energy to identify alternative methods of meeting 
the goals of the LDRD program that provide greater managerial 
and programmatic control over funds utilized within this 
program. The report should be provided to the congressional 
defense committees not later than February 1, 1999, and should 
identify a range of alternatives, including, but not limited 
to, the creation of a line item funding account for all funds 
provided to the Department pursuant to Title XXXI at each DOE 
laboratory that currently has an LDRD program.
    The committee notes that prohibitions enacted in the 
National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 1998 
regarding uses of LDRD funds remain in effect.

Sec. 3102. Environmental restoration and waste management.

    The committee recommends a provision that would authorize 
$5.3 billion for defense environmental restoration and waste 
management activities (the Environmental Management program) of 
the Department of Energy, an increase of $1.0 billion to the 
requested amount of $4.3 billion. The amount authorized is for 
the following activities: $1.0 billion for closure projects, 
the amount of the request; $1.0 billion for site and project 
completion, the amount of the request; $2.7 billion for post 
2006 completion, a $10.0 million increase; $250.0 million for 
technology development, a $57.0 million increase; $336.2 
million for program direction, a $10.0 million reduction. The 
committee recommends an undistributed reduction of $21.0 
million to be offset by the availability ofuncosted, 
unobligated prior year funds.

Post 2006 completion

    Of the amounts authorized for post 2006 completion, the 
committee recommends an increase of $5.0 million to the 
National Spent Fuel Program to address regulatory and 
repository issues associated with Department of Energy owned 
spent nuclear fuel and an increase of $10.0 million to 
accelerate research and treatment of high level nuclear wastes 
at the Idaho National Engineering and Environmental Laboratory.
    Of the amounts authorized for post 2006 completion, the 
committee recommends an increase of $30.0 million for the in-
tank precipitation (ITP) process at the Savannah River Site. 
The committee notes that the Department has invested over 
$270.0 million on late wash and saltstone precipitation 
technologies. The unexpected shutdown of the ITP process 
jeopardizes the operational efficiency of the defense waste 
processing facility and, if left unaddressed, could pose 
significant risks to worker safety and health. The committee 
directs the Department to set aside these additional funds 
until a full review has been conducted on the technology 
options available to correct the problems discovered with the 
current ITP system. The committee directs the Department to 
evaluate all technology options on an equal basis. Options 
should include modifications to the current system and 
selection of alternative technologies, such as ion exchange.
    The committee recommends an increase of $10.0 million to 
support infrastructure upgrades at the defense waste processing 
facility (DWPF) and consolidated incineration facility (ICF). 
The committee notes that shortfalls in infrastructure 
investments have resulted in periodic operational shutdowns of 
these two facilities. The committee supports appropriate 
investments to ensure continuity of operations at the DWPF and 
ICF. The committee recommendation includes full funding for the 
F- and H-canyon materials processing facilities.

Technology development

    The committee is concerned by the Department's request for 
the Office of Science and Technology. Recent Departmental 
testimony and the ``Accelerating Cleanup--Pathways to Closure'' 
report have identified that the Department cannot meet its 
accelerated closure goals without aggressive application of new 
technologies. The committee agrees with the Department's 
assessment of the need for increased use of innovative 
technology at DOE facilities. The committee encourages the 
Department to revise its performance measures for facility 
managers to include the application of new technology in site 
cleanup activities. The committee is pleased with the recent 
management changes in the Office of Science and Technology and 
believes that this office can now fully meet the technology 
needs of the environmental management program. The committee 
urges the Secretary to report on the proposed uses of the $57.0 
million increase in this account.

Accelerating cleanup

    The committee commends the Department's environmental 
management program for its progress in focusing its management 
attention and resources on completing clean up and closure of 
DOE facilities. The committee compliments the Office of 
Environmental Management on its ``2006 Plan'' and the 
subsequent ``Accelerating Cleanup--Pathways to Closure'' 
report. These documents, however, identify several deficiencies 
in the Department's long range cleanup plans. The committee is 
concerned that there are no known methods to treat and dispose 
of much of the waste that is currently stored or that will be 
generated; cost data for closure activities have not been 
developed; and the basis for the assumptions that new 
technologies will be available and program efficiency savings 
will be achieved are not explained. The committee intends to 
work cooperatively with the environmental management program to 
address these deficiencies and to establish tangible program 
metrics based on the ``Accelerating Cleanup'' report.

UF6 stabilization and reuse

    The committee notes that the Department has issued a Draft 
Programmatic Environmental Impact Statement for Alternative 
Strategies for the Long-Term Management and Use of Depleted 
Uranium Hexafluoride. The committee also notes that the 
Department's preferred alternative is to convert and use all of 
the depleted uranium as soon as possible. The Department is 
encouraged to pursue programs that will expedite conversion and 
appropriate beneficial reuse of this material.

Environmental validation, verification and engineering analysis

    The Department's environmental programs are increasingly 
challenged by the complexity of regulatory, scientific, 
engineering, and analytical factors affecting requirements and 
resource decisions across the DOE complex. The committee 
recognizes the need to retain and expand core capabilities and 
specialized skills to enhance competency and integration across 
environmental management programs. The Environmental 
Validation, Verification and Engineering Analysis (EVVEA) 
program is designed to meet this need in the same way the Core 
Capabilities Program assures specialized expertise for 
theDepartment's Defense Programs laboratories. The committee supports 
this initiative for fiscal year 1999 and directs the Department to 
provide sufficient funding in future budget requests to maintain a 
robust program to enhance environmental engineering and analysis core 
capabilities.

Off-site disposal of low level waste

    The committee is concerned that the Department has only one 
commercial low-level waste disposal option available. Although 
this facility has a satisfactory operating record and has 
proven to be a cost effective option for waste disposal, it 
remains the Department's sole large-scale commercial disposal 
option. The committee encourages the Department to move forward 
with a national procurement, as announced by the Secretary of 
Energy, to initiate open competition for the Department's waste 
disposal contracts.

Overdue reports

    The committee notes that the Secretary of Energy has not 
provided the report required by section 3132(f) of the National 
Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 1998, regarding the 
Department's authority to enter into privatization contracts 
and any potential for such contracts to violate Federal anti-
deficiency requirements. The report was required to be 
submitted not later than 90 days after enactment of the 
provision, but has not yet been received by the committee. The 
committee further notes that the Secretary of Energy has not 
provided the report required by section 3102 of the National 
Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 1997, regarding use 
of travel funds under DOE grants, cooperative agreements, and 
subcontracts. The committee directs that both of these reports 
be provided not later than 30 days after enactment of this 
provision and that 25 percent of all Departmental travel funds 
authorized by this title be withheld until the reports are 
provided to the committee.

Sec. 3103. Other defense activities.

    The budget request included $1.7 billion for other defense 
activities in the Department of Energy (DOE). This amount 
includes $696.3 million for nonproliferation and national 
security; $168.9 million for fissile materials control and 
disposition; $35.0 million for nuclear energy; $45.0 million 
for worker community transition; $74.0 million for environment, 
safety and health; $2.4 million for hearings and appeals; and 
$665.5 million for naval reactors.
    The committee recommends authorization of $236.9 million 
for arms control activities, a reduction of $20.0 million to 
the budget request. The committee also recommends an increase 
of $3.0 million to the budget request for intelligence 
activities to conduct analysis of foreign nuclear weapons 
capabilities; and recommends a $4.0 million reduction to the 
budget request for nonproliferation and national security 
program direction.

Nonproliferation and verification research and development

    For several years, the committee has endorsed efforts of 
the national laboratories in the area of forensic analysis. 
While the committee does not recommend an increase to the 
fiscal year 1999 budget request for this activity, the 
committee continues to support the broader participation of 
Department of Energy laboratories in this program. The 
committee also supports the broad participation of DOE national 
laboratories, including Pacific Northwest Laboratory, Idaho 
National Laboratory, the Savannah River Site, and industry in 
the research and development of technologies to detect and 
respond to chemical and biological warfare and terrorism.

Russian Reactor Core Conversion Program

    The Congress provided the Department of Energy authority in 
the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 1997 to 
expand its international reactor safety assistance program to 
include a program to develop, in conjunction with the 
Department of Defense (DOD), a cooperative program with Russia 
to modify or replace the nuclear reactor cores at three 
plutonium production facilities. Funds were included in the DOD 
Cooperative Threat Reduction (CTR) program in fiscal years 1997 
and 1998 for this activity.
    The committee directs DOD and DOE to keep the committee 
informed on the status of the Reactor Shutdown Agreement with 
the Russian Federation Ministry of Atomic Energy and to submit 
a joint report to the committee on the agreement not later than 
60 days after agreement is reached. The report should include a 
status report on the project, as well as detailed information 
on the estimated cost to complete the program, the design of 
the core, and the program plan to complete the conversion. The 
information on Russia's specific contribution to the reactor 
core conversion program should also be included in the report 
submitted to the committee.
    Lastly, the committee understands that a program decision 
document will serve as the basis upon which a decision will be 
made by the United States on whether to complete the remaining 
core conversion activities. The committee wants to be kept 
informed on a regular basis on this program and directs the 
Secretaries of Defense and Energy not to take any action that 
would result in an expenditure of funds for activities that 
might be affected by a decision not to complete the 
coreconversion activities, until the committee has been notified.

                 Nuclear smuggling and counterterrorism

    The Congress directed the Department to make $3.0 million 
available to plan and conduct realistic exercises to prepare 
Federal, state, and local entities to respond to domestic 
terrorist use of nuclear devices or materials. The committee 
supports the use of existing national assets such as the Nevada 
Test Site (NTS) and the Hammer facility at the Pacific National 
Laboratory to train Federal, state and local first responders 
as part of the domestic emergency response program. The 
committee continues to believe that training exercises should 
use the most realistic scenarios possible. The DOE should 
coordinate the activities of these exercises with the executive 
agent and program manager for the Department of Defense 
domestic emergency preparedness program in order to integrate 
scenarios related to chemical and biological incidents in the 
exercises and take advantage of cost savings. The committee was 
advised during recent testimony by the Director of the 
Nonproliferation and National Security program that no funds 
had been made available. The committee directs the Department 
to report to the Congress by July 1, 1998 on the status of 
implementing the direction of providing funding for a 
coordinated DOD/DOE domestic emergency training exercise.
    The committee remains concerned about previous press 
reports that supercomputers were sold by a U.S. firm to nuclear 
weapons institutes in Russia and China. The committee directs 
the Department of Energy to provide a report to the 
congressional defense committees not later than November 1, 
1998 on the status of the investigations involving these 
incidents.

Worker and community transition

    The committee recommends a reduction of $5.0 million to 
worker and community transition to be taken from reduced 
severance payments at Department of Energy defense nuclear 
facilities.

Fissile materials

    The committee recommends the budget request of $168.9 
million for fissile materials. The committee is pleased with 
the approach being pursued by DOE in the fissile materials 
disposition program. The committee supports the request for 
title I design funds for new materials disposition facilities.
    Of the amount requested for fissile materials, $24.9 
million is requested for fissile material activities with the 
Russian government, a $14.9 million increase over the fiscal 
year 1998 budget. The committee believes that the requested 
amount for cooperative efforts with the Russian materials 
disposition program is more than sufficient. The committee 
remains concerned that there has been insufficient progress 
achieved in negotiating a bilateral agreement with the Russian 
government on disposition of plutonium. The committee 
understands that the bilateral agreement with the Russian 
government has been reached on a narrowly focused joint testing 
program.
    The committee directs the Department to report to the 
congressional defense committees on the status of efforts to 
achieve agreement with the Russian government on this program. 
The report should also include information on the estimated 
cost and how the program is expected to be financed.
    The committee encourages the Department to continue these 
cooperative efforts and does not support construction of a U.S. 
mixed oxide fuel fabrication facility without significant 
progress being made in Russian materials disposition programs.

Environment, safety and health-defense

    The committee recommends a reduction of $5.0 million to 
defense environment, safety and health. The committee notes 
that this account was increased dramatically in past years. The 
decrease is expected to be taken from efficiency savings 
similar to those implemented by the Environmental Management 
program.

Naval reactors

    The committee recommends an increase of $16.0 million to 
naval reactors to expedite decommissioning and decontamination 
activities at surplus prototype plant facilities. This increase 
is intended to continue ongoing prototype facility deactivation 
efforts. The committee notes that trained, experienced workers 
are proceeding from project to project in an orderly and 
efficient manner. The committee further notes that the budget 
request would eliminate over 20 percent of the prototype 
inactivation work planned for fiscal year 1999. The committee 
directs that the increased funding be utilized to support 
continued progress in the prototype facility deactivation 
program, consistent with the committee's desire to complete 
rapidly cleanup and closure of surplus facilities.
    The committee recommends full funding for existing 
operating naval nuclear reactors and to support work on the New 
Attack Submarine and carrier reactor plants. The committee 
believes these programs are essential to maintain the viability 
of U.S. nuclear powered vessels into the future.

Sec. 3104. Defense nuclear waste disposal.

    The committee recommends authorization of the budget 
request of $190.0 million for the Department of Energy fiscal 
year 1998 defense contribution to the defense nuclear waste 
fund.

Sec. 3105. Defense environmental management privatization.

    The committee recommends $273.9 million for defense 
environmental management privatization projects to be allocated 
as follows: $113.5 million for the tank waste remediation 
system project, phase I (Richland); $20.0 million for spent 
nuclear fuel dry storage (Idaho); $87.3 million for advanced 
mixed waste treatment (Idaho); $19.6 million for remote handled 
transuranic waste transportation (Carlsbad); and $33.5 million 
for environmental management/waste management disposal (Oak 
Ridge).
    The committee authorizes the use of $25.0 million in fiscal 
year 1997 unobligated, uncosted balances within the defense 
environmental management privatization account to reflect the 
cancellation of projects, as follows: $15.0 million for the 
broad spectrum low activity mixed waste treatment privatization 
project (Oak Ridge), and $10.0 million for the waste water 
treatment plant privatization project (Rocky Flats). The 
committee further authorizes the use of $7.0 million in fiscal 
year 1998 unobligated, uncosted balances within the defense 
environmental management privatization account to reflect 
unobligated, uncosted, and undistributed funds.
    The committee believes that management of the Hanford Tank 
Waste Remediation System (TWRS) privatization project requires 
greater scrutiny by DOE senior management than other projects 
at the Hanford Site. The use of both government and private 
investments in this project makes integration with other 
Hanford Site requirements and priorities difficult. 
Accordingly, the committee endorses the transfer of 
responsibility for the TWRS project to the Assistant Secretary 
of Energy for Environmental Management. The committee takes 
this action without prejudice to the Hanford Site management.

                SUBTITLE B--RECURRING GENERAL PROVISIONS

Sec. 3121. Reprogramming.

    This provision would prohibit the reprogramming of funds in 
excess of 110 percent of the amount authorized for the program, 
or in excess of $1.0 million above the amount authorized for 
the program, until the Secretary of Energy has notified the 
congressional defense committees and a period of 30 days has 
elapsed after the date on which the report is received.

Sec. 3122. Limits on general plant projects.

    This provision would authorize the Secretary of Energy to 
carry out any construction project authorized under general 
plant projects if the total estimated cost does not exceed $5.0 
million. The provision would require the Secretary to submit a 
report to Congress if the cost of the project is revised to 
exceed $5.0 million.

Sec. 3123. Limits on construction projects.

    This provision would permit any construction project to be 
initiated and continued only if the estimated cost for the 
project does not exceed 125 percent of the higher of: (1) the 
amount authorized for the project; or (2) the most recent total 
estimated cost presented to the Congress as justification for 
such project. The Secretary of Energy may not exceed such 
limits until 30 legislative days after the Secretary submits to 
the congressional defense committees a detailed report setting 
forth the reasons for the increase. This provision would also 
specify that the 125 percent limitation would not apply to 
projects estimated to cost under $5.0 million.

Sec. 3124. Fund transfer authority.

    This provision would permit funds authorized by this Act to 
be transferred to other agencies of the government for 
performance of work for which the funds were authorized. The 
provision would permit the merger of such transferred funds 
with the authorizations of the agency to which they are 
transferred. The provision would also limit, to not more than 
five percent, the amount of such funds that may be transferred 
between authorization accounts in the Department of Energy that 
were authorized pursuant to this Act.

Sec. 3125. Authority for conceptual and construction design.

    This provision would limit the Secretary of Energy's 
authority to request construction funding until the Secretary 
has completed a conceptual design. This limitation would apply 
to construction projects with a total estimated cost greater 
than $5.0 million. If the estimated cost to prepare the 
conceptual design exceeds $600,000, the provision would require 
the Secretary to request funds for the conceptual design before 
requesting funds for construction. The provision would require 
the Secretary to submit to Congress a report on each conceptual 
design completed under this provision. The provision would 
provide an exception to these requirements in the case of an 
emergency.

Sec. 3126. Authority for emergency planning, design, and construction 
        activities.

    This provision would permit, in addition to any authorized 
advance planning and construction design, the Secretary of 
Energy to perform planning and design with funds available for 
any Department of Energy national security program construction 
project whenever the Secretary determines that the design must 
proceed expeditiously to protect the public health and safety, 
to meet the needs of national defense, or to protect property.

Sec. 3127. Funds available for all national security programs of the 
        Department of Energy.

    This provision would authorize amounts appropriated for 
management and support activities and for general plant 
projects to be made available for use, when necessary, in 
connection with all national security programs of the 
Department of Energy.

Sec. 3128. Availability of funds.

    This provision would authorize amounts appropriated for 
operating expenses or for plant and capital equipment to remain 
available until expended. Program Direction funds would remain 
available until the end of fiscal year 2001.

Sec. 3129. Transfers of defense environmental management funds.

    This provision would provide the manager of each field 
office of the Department of Energy with limited authority to 
transfer up to $5.0 million in fiscal year 1999 defense 
environmental management funds from one program or project 
under the jurisdiction of the office to another such program or 
project, once in a fiscal year. This provision extends the 
authority granted by section 3139 of the National Defense 
Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 1997.

   SUBTITLE C--PROGRAM AUTHORIZATIONS, RESTRICTIONS, AND LIMITATIONS

Sec. 3131. International cooperative stockpile stewardship.

    The committee recommends a provision that would prohibit 
use of fiscal year 1999 or prior year funds to conduct 
international cooperative stockpile stewardship activities. The 
provision excludes activities conducted with the United Kingdom 
and France and activities carried out under Title III of this 
Act (relating to cooperative threat reduction with states of 
the Former Soviet Union). The prohibition would apply to all 
Department of Energy activities, including, but not limited to, 
laboratory directed research and development funded studies and 
analyses of possible nuclear futures. This provision is 
consistent with prohibitions established by the National 
Defense Authorization Acts for Fiscal Year 1997 and 1998.
    The committee remains concerned that conducting 
international cooperative stockpile stewardship activities may 
have unintended detrimental impacts on U.S. national security 
interests. Accordingly, the committee strongly opposes any 
programs intended to assist existing and threshold nuclear 
weapons nations in areas relating to nuclear weapons safety, 
reliability and effectiveness.

Sec. 3132. Prohibition on use of funds for ballistic missile defense 
        and theater missile defense.

    The committee recommends a provision that would prohibit 
the use of any funds authorized by Title XXXI to support 
ballistic missile defense research, development, demonstration, 
testing, and evaluation. The prohibition includes studies and 
assessments. The provision would also prohibit use of 
Laboratory Directed Research and Development and laboratory 
overhead funds for such purposes.
    The committee supports cooperation among Department of 
Energy laboratories and the Ballistic Missile Defense 
Organization (BMDO) in those areas where there is mutual 
programmatic benefit. The committee believes that the 
Departments of Defense and Energy should pursue such activities 
through work for others agreements and that use of funds 
authorized and appropriated for stockpile stewardship and 
management should not be used to carry out BMDO missions. The 
committee notes that the cooperative agreement required by 
section 3131 of the National Defense Authorization Act for 
Fiscal Year 1998 is not executed.

Sec. 3133. Licensing of certain mixed oxide fuel fabrication and 
        irradiation facilities.

    The committee recommends a provision that would require any 
person constructing or operating new or existing facilities 
utilized to fabricate mixed oxide (MOX) fuel for use in 
commercial nuclear reactors be subject to licensing by the 
Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC). The provision would also 
require the occupational safety and health of employees working 
at such facilities be subject to regulation by theDepartment of 
Labor. The licensing and regulatory requirements in this provision 
would not apply to demonstration, testing, or research activities 
related to MOX fuel carried out by, or under contract with, the 
Department of Energy.
    The committee believes that, in order to be successful, the 
Department of Energy's fissile materials disposition program 
must provide for seamless regulatory oversight of all mixed 
oxide fuel fabrication and irradiation activities. Because MOX 
fuel is intended to be burned in commercial nuclear facilities 
that are regulated by the NRC, the committee believes it is 
advantageous for any MOX fuel fabrication facilities to meet 
applicable NRC standards.
    The committee does not endorse the wholesale external 
regulation of Department of Energy defense nuclear facilities 
and remains skeptical of the potential benefits associated with 
implementing new regulatory regimes at new or existing DOE 
defense nuclear facilities.

Sec. 3134. Continuation of processing, treatment, and disposition of 
        legacy nuclear materials.

    The committee recommends a provision that would require the 
Secretary of Energy to maintain a high state of readiness at 
the F-canyon and H-canyon facilities, as recommended by the 
Defense Nuclear Facilities Safety Board and consistent with 
direction provided in previous year's authorizations.

Sec. 3135. Authority for Department of Energy federally funded research 
        and development centers to participate in merit-based 
        technology research and development programs.

    The committee recommends a provision that would amend the 
National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 1995 to 
grant Department of Energy (DOE) sponsored federally funded 
research and development centers (FFRDCs) the same ability to 
compete for contracts as Department of Defense sponsored 
FFRDCs. The provision would authorize DOE facilities that 
function primarily as research laboratories to respond to 
competitive solicitations, research announcements, broad agency 
announcements, and grant announcements for programs that 
promote research, development, demonstration, transfer of 
technology based on their core competencies, areas of 
specialized or derived expertise, or utilization of unique 
facilities.

Sec. 3136. Support for public education in the vicinity of Los Alamos 
        National Laboratory, New Mexico.

    The committee recommends a provision that would authorize 
the Department of Energy (DOE) to make a $5.0 million payment 
to a not-for-profit education foundation in the area around the 
Los Alamos National Laboratory to enrich educational activities 
of the local school system. DOE contributions to this 
foundation would be used to contribute to a fund, the corpus of 
which would remain in trust and the annual revenue used to 
support the local school system. This provision extends the 
authority granted to the Secretary of Energy in section 3167 of 
the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 1998.
    The conferees expect that the Secretary of Energy will make 
no more than five total annual payments to this fund for a 
total contribution not to exceed $25.0 million. The conferees 
note that the Secretary was authorized to make the first of 
such payments in fiscal year 1998. The conferees expect that 
upon making the fifth payment or meeting the $25.0 million cap, 
DOE assistance to the local school system will end.

                       SUBTITLE D--OTHER MATTERS

Sec. 3141. Repeal of fiscal year 1998 statement of policy on stockpile 
        stewardship program.

    The committee recommends a provision that would repeal 
section 3156 of the National Defense Authorization Act for 
Fiscal Year 1998. The committee believes the fiscal year 1998 
provision is no longer needed and may be misinterpreted to 
establish a U.S. policy to unilaterally draw down the U.S. 
nuclear stockpile in advance of arms control negotiations.

Sec. 3142. Increase in maximum rate of pay for scientific, engineering, 
        and technical personnel responsible for safety at defense 
        nuclear facilities.

    The committee recommends a provision that would raise the 
pay level for the excepted service authority provided in the 
National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 1995 from 
Level IV to III of the Executive Schedule. This increase is 
intended to help the Department of Energy attract and retain 
senior scientific, engineering, and technical personnel who 
possess the skills to perform critical nuclear health and 
safety activities at the Department's defense nuclear 
facilities.
    The committee notes that, in recent years, the Level IV pay 
cap has limited the Department's ability to attract and retain 
the highest qualified scientific and technical talent.

Sec. 3143. Sense of Senate regarding treatment of Formerly Utilized 
        Sites Remedial Action Program under a nondefense discretionary 
        budget function.

    The committee recommends a sense of the Senate resolution 
that urges the Office of Management and Budget to transfer 
funding for the Formerly Utilized Sites Remedial Action Program 
into a non-defense discretionary portion of the Federal budget 
in future years.

                        OTHER ITEMS OF INTEREST

Asset disposition

    The committee continues to support the Department of 
Energy's efforts to identify surplus assets or real property 
excess to the needs of the Federal Government. Section 3138 of 
the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 1998 
created a pilot program to dispose of excess Department assets 
and assess how the proceeds from such sales might be used to 
reduce the Federal deficit and conduct decontamination, 
decommissioning, and closure activities at Department of Energy 
owned clean-up sites. The provision authorized six transactions 
under the pilot program and directed the Secretary of Energy to 
report on the amounts retained by the Department as a result of 
the transactions.
    The committee continues to support this initiative, but 
believes more information is needed before the pilot program 
can be expanded. The committee anticipates that the Department 
will submit the report by the statutory due date of January 31, 
1999. The committee will assess the benefits of expanding this 
program based on the results of the pilot transactions and the 
information and recommendations contained in the report.

Improving collaboration between the Department of Defense and 
        Department of Energy laboratories

    The committee commends the Under Secretary of Defense for 
Acquisition and Technology and the Assistant Secretary of 
Energy for Defense Programs for beginning to develop ways to 
use the Nation's investment in science and technology at the 
Department of Energy National Laboratories for national defense 
goals in the post-Cold War era. The committee notes that in 
response to the recommendations contained in the National 
Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 1998, the Departments 
of Defense and Energy have agreed to collaborate in three areas 
that are key to addressing the challenge of defeating the hard 
and deeply buried targets that shelter the war-making 
capabilities, including weapons of mass destruction, of rogue 
states.
    The committee believes that the Under Secretary of Defense 
for Acquisition and Technology and the Assistant Secretary of 
Energy for Defense Programs should create a mechanism to fund 
and manage the pilot project to defeat hard and deeply buried 
targets and other related collaborative programs. The committee 
directs a report be submitted to the congressional defense 
committees no later than February 15, 1999, that provides a 
detailed description of the pilot program and a plan for its 
execution, including an explanation of joint funding and 
management arrangements.

Los Alamos Non-proliferation Center

    The Department of Energy National Laboratories play a 
significant role in the nonproliferation activities of the 
Department of Energy. The Department of Energy has indicated 
that it is planning to request funds for construction of a new 
modern building to consolidate the nonproliferation activities 
at Los Alamos National Laboratory (LANL). The committee urges 
the Department to submit the construction project as part of 
its fiscal year 2000 budget request.
    The committee notes that the Department of Energy has 
established two nonproliferation centers. The construction of 
the facility at Los Alamos National Laboratory will bring the 
number of DOE nonproliferation centers to three. The committee 
wants to ensure that research and development efforts at the 
three centers not result in the unnecessary duplication of 
effort. The committee directs DOE to report to the 
congressional defense committees by March 1, 1999 on the unique 
roles that each of these centers will play in the 
nonproliferation effort.

Robotics and intelligent machines

    Last year, the committee noted the crucial support provided 
by the Department of Energy to the development of robotics and 
intelligent machines, and directed the Secretary of Energy to 
develop a comprehensive Robotics and Intelligent Machines 
Initiative to integrate existing Departmental programs. The 
committee understands that the Department has made substantial 
progress in responding to this directive.
    The committee notes that the Under Secretary of Energy has 
been assigned responsibility for improving coordination on 
robotics within the Department. Under his direction, a robotics 
roadmap is being developed to identify research needs and 
opportunities related to the full spectrum of the Department's 
missions. This technology roadmap should be completed this 
summer.
    The committee looks forward to receiving the roadmap and 
encourages the Department to continue its planning efforts. The 
committee directs the Department to use its robotics roadmap to 
plan the Robotics and Intelligent Machines Initiative called 
for in the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 
1998. The committee also encourages the Department to build on 
the development of its robotics roadmap and increase 
interagency awareness and cooperation on research and 
development related to robotics and intelligent machines.
          TITLE XXXII--DEFENSE NUCLEAR FACILITIES SAFETY BOARD

    The committee recommends a provision that would authorize 
$17.5 million for the Defense Nuclear Facilities Safety Board 
(DNFSB) for fiscal year 1999. The committee notes that DNFSB 
continues to provide exceptional and effective external 
oversight with a budget that equals about one-tenth of one 
percent of total Atomic Energy Defense funding.
    Section 3202 of the National Defense Authorization Act for 
Fiscal Year 1998 (P.L. 105-85) directed the DNFSB to prepare a 
report and make recommendations regarding: which Department of 
Energy (DOE) facilities should remain under the jurisdiction of 
the DNFSB; the potential regulatory and jurisdictional issues 
surrounding defense environmental management privatization 
projects and the proposed commercial light water reactor option 
for tritium production; the potential costs of moving DOE 
facilities to an alternative external regulation regime; and 
the impact of repealing section 210 of the Department of Energy 
National Security and Military Applications of Nuclear Energy 
Authorization Act of 1981 (42 U.S.C. 7272). The report is to be 
submitted to Congress this year and will include any comments 
by the Secretary of Energy and the Chairman of the Nuclear 
Regulatory Commission.
    The committee is not convinced that external regulation of 
new or existing DOE defense nuclear facilities will increase 
safety, decrease cost, or improve operational efficiency at 
such facilities. The committee notes that transfer of the 
Paducah gaseous diffusion plant from DOE to NRC regulation cost 
over $200.0 million and took three years to complete.
    The committee is concerned that the implementation of an 
additional external regulation approach could draw scarce 
resources away from high priority, compliance driven cleanup 
actions and critical national security activities, with little 
added benefit. The committee believes no decisions should be 
made or actions taken until the findings of the DNFSB and the 
comments of the Secretary of Energy and Chairman of the Nuclear 
Regulatory Commission have been provided and the ongoing 
external regulation pilot program is completed. The committee 
will be extensively involved in any movement toward an 
alternative external regulation approach.
                TITLE XXXIII--NATIONAL DEFENSE STOCKPILE

    The committee recommends a provision that would authorize 
the Stockpile Manager to obligate $83.0 million from the 
National Defense Stockpile Transfer Fund during fiscal year 
1998 for the authorized uses of funds under section 9(b)(2) of 
the Strategic and Critical Materials Stock Piling Act (50 
U.S.C. 98c).
    The committee also recommends a provision that would 
authorize the disposal of excess materials from the National 
Defense Stockpile. Under current law, the Stockpile Manager 
cannot dispose of excess materials unless the proposed disposal 
has been reviewed by the Market Impact Committee and included 
in the Annual Materials Plan or a revision of the plan.
                 TITLE XXXIV--NAVAL PETROLEUM RESERVES

    The President's budget request included $117.0 million for 
operation of the Naval Petroleum and Oil Shale Reserves in 
fiscal year 1998. The committee recommends a provision that 
would authorize the full $117.0 million for the operation of 
the Naval Petroleum and Oil Shale Reserves in fiscal year 1999.
                  TITLE XXXV--PANAMA CANAL COMMISSION

Sec. 3501. Short title; references to Panama Canal Act of 1979.
    The committee recommends a provision that would establish 
title XXXV of the National Defense Authorization Bill for 
Fiscal Year 1999 as the ``Panama Canal Commission Authorization 
Act for Fiscal Year 1999''.
Sec. 3502. Authorization of expenditures.
    The committee recommends a provision that would grant the 
Panama Canal Commission authority to make expenditures from the 
Panama Canal Commission Revolving Fund within existing 
statutory limits. The provision would also establish ceilings 
for the reception and representation expenditures of the 
supervisory board, administrator and secretary of the 
Commission.
Sec. 3503. Purchase of vehicles.
    The committee recommends a provision that would authorize 
the Panama Canal Commission to purchase vehicles for official 
use.
Sec. 3504. Expenditures only in accordance with treaties.
    The committee recommends a provision that would confirm the 
obligation of the Panama Canal Commission to make expenditures 
only in accordance with the Panama Canal Treaty of 1977 and 
related agreements.
Sec. 3505. Donations to the Commission.
    The committee recommends a provision that would provide the 
Panama Canal Commission with the authority to accept donations 
of funds, property and services from both private and public 
entities for the purpose of carrying out its promotional 
activities. The committee believes this authority will help the 
Commission to establish and operate a museum and expanded 
tourist facilities at the Miraflores Locks. The museum and 
tourist facilities will facilitate the Canal's efforts to 
promote its core ship transit business while enhancing its 
ability to earn additional revenues as a tourist destination. 
It is envisioned, for example, that private corporations will 
sponsor state-of-the-art, multimedia presentations regarding 
different aspects of the Canal's history, operations and 
future. Absent the authority to accept donations, funding for 
such expansion and diversification would come largely from 
tolls charged to the international shipping community, and 
thereby divert funds from capital improvements.
    Various agencies currently have similar authority to accept 
gifts. Specific statutory authority to accept donations is 
required in order to avoid violations of the Anti-Deficiency 
Act (31 U.S.C. 1341 et seq.), which, among other things, 
prohibits augmentation of appropriations without congressional 
approval.
Sec. 3506. Agreements for United States to provide post-transfer 
        administrative services for certain employee benefits.
    The committee recommends a provision that would provide for 
the assumption of responsibility for administering post-1999 
Panama Canal-related benefits in Panama by the U.S. ambassador 
to Panama. The Panama Canal Commission currently administers 
programs that provide financial and medical benefits to 
approximately 700 former Canal employees and dependents who 
were never covered by any Canal retirement ormedical plan. The 
employment of these former employees was terminated prior to October 5, 
1958. The Commission also provides liaison services for approximately 
260 individuals receiving disability payments under the provisions of 
the Federal Employees' Compensation Act (5 U.S.C. 8101 et seq.).
    The Commission expects to contract with some private 
financial or insurance entity to manage these programs and 
oversee the distribution of benefits after 1999. In conjunction 
with such a contract, the U.S. Embassy in Panama would have a 
three-fold responsibility: (1) facilitate resolution of 
complaints of the aforementioned former employees; (2) perform 
periodic audits of contract performance; and (3) take 
appropriate measures, including legal action, to ensure 
contract compliance. The provision of such services is deemed 
appropriate in light of the general infirmity of these former 
employees and to protect the fiscal integrity of these 
programs.
    The committee expects that the contractor or contractors 
would be subject to the jurisdiction of U.S. courts.

Sec. 3507. Sunset of United States overseas benefits just before 
        transfer.

    The committee recommends a provision that would sunset 
certain benefits to certain U.S. citizen employees of the 
Panama Canal Commission and thereby clarify the conditions of 
employment intended to be continued by Panama after the 
transfer of the Canal. U.S. citizen employees working for the 
Panama Canal have traditionally been eligible, either by 
statute or agency regulation, for a number of benefits, which 
include an overseas recruitment and retention (tropical/Panama 
Area) differential, housing, vacation leave and travel, 
repatriation, an equity package, educational tuition 
sponsorship, educational travel and medical sponsorship. 
Originally, these benefits were provided to all U.S. citizens. 
However, over the years, eligibility requirements for many of 
these benefits have been narrowed such that they are now 
extended to new employees only at the discretion of the 
Commission based on actual recruitment needs. Accordingly, 
eligibility for some of these benefits depends, in addition to 
citizenship, on the date of hire, place of recruitment and 
position for which recruited. Only repatriation remains an 
entitlement for all U.S. citizen permanent employees, while 
educational travel for dependents remains available by law only 
to those employed on September 30, 1979 and those recruited 
outside Panama after that date. In addition, many of these 
benefits are guaranteed for employees who were hired before the 
effective date of the Panama Canal Treaty of 1977 throughout 
the life of the Treaty by section 1231(a), which requires that 
the terms and conditions of employment be generally no less 
favorable than those enjoyed on September 30, 1979. The covered 
conditions of employment include such broad areas as basic pay, 
tropical differential, leave and travel, transportation and 
repatriation rights, and group health and life insurance.
    The purpose of affording these benefits, as is common 
throughout the U.S. Government, has been to provide recruitment 
and retention incentives to U.S. citizen employees who have 
been willing to work for a U.S. Government agency outside of 
the United States. The Panama Canal Commission, a U.S. 
Government corporation, will cease to operate the Panama Canal 
on December 31, 1999, at which time its employees will largely 
become employees of the Panama Canal Authority (PCA), the 
Government of Panama entity that will succeed the Panama Canal 
Commission. The Panamanian Constitution and the organic law 
establishing the PCA guarantee continuance of conditions of 
employment existing on December 31, 1999. Panama's executive 
branch has indicated that these guarantees will not extend to 
any citizenship-based benefits and has stated that, after 
December 31, 1999, it will compensate PCA employees uniformly, 
i.e., without regard to citizenship or place of recruitment. 
Performing this technical adjustment of accelerating the 
expiration of these benefits by twelve hours (from 12:00 noon 
on December 31, 1999 to 11:59 p.m. on December 30, 1999) will 
help make the transition to a system with no citizenship-based 
benefits clearer and less prone to confusion and claims.
    Panama's interpretation of its own Constitution and laws 
should prevail in any litigation which might be brought by 
former Commission employees who continue with the PCA and who 
claim entitlement to such benefits. Nevertheless, it is prudent 
to sunset these benefits on December 30, 1999 so it is clear to 
all concerned that the aforementioned continuity provisions of 
Panamanian law will not cover the benefits in question. 
Accordingly, it is in the best interest of the transition to 
terminate these benefits before December 31, 1999 in order to 
ensure the PCA has the flexibility to determine if and what 
kind of retention benefits are necessary for operational 
continuity and efficiency. Termination of these benefits on 
December 30, 1999, rather than at noon December 31, 1999, 
requires specific amendments to Public Law 96-70. The provision 
would provide for the early--December 30, 1999--repeal of 
specific provisions related to benefits, e.g., 1206 (cost of 
living allowance/equity adjustment), 1207 (educational travel), 
1217(a) (recruitment and retention (tropical) differential), 
1224(11) (housing and educational allowances); 1231 (general 
preservation of terms and conditions of employment existing on 
September 30, 1979) and 1321 (educational and medical 
sponsorship).
    While the provision would terminate these rights and 
nullify existing agency regulations on December 30, it would 
also provide that compensation calculations, like most of those 
listed in section 1218, are to be computed and paid asif the 
provisions had not been repealed. For example, the 1217(a) tropical 
differential will continue to be treated as basic pay for these U.S. 
citizen employees with respect to such things as retirement benefits, 
severance pay and payment of accumulated leave. On the other hand, 
actual compensation for that one day would be marginally affected. For 
example, any pay calculations for hours of work performed on December 
31, 1999 will not continue to include a 15 percent tropical or Panama 
Area differential component.

Sec. 3508. Central Examining Office.

    The committee recommends a provision that would repeal a 
section relating to the Central Examining Office. The unit 
known as ``Central Examining Office'' no longer exists and an 
office performing similar functions does not require a 
statutory mandate.
    The Central Examining Office was the successor office to 
the Canal Zone Central Examining Office that served all U.S. 
Government agencies operating in the former Canal Zone. As 
initially established in 1979, this office was responsible for 
carrying out the President's responsibilities for coordination 
of policies and activities of agencies participating in the 
Panama Canal Employment System (PCES). Since September 1996, 
the Panama Canal Commission has had sole administration of the 
PCES, and the Central Examining Office, with its reduced 
mission, was reformed as the Recruitment and Examination 
Division within the Commission's Department of Human Resources. 
The Commission does not need statutory authority to create or 
continue such an office.

Sec. 3509. Liability for vessel accidents.

    The committee recommends a provision that would bring the 
Panama Canal Commission's liability for vessel accidents in 
line with industry standards and thereby lower costs for Panama 
Canal operations. The situation concerning liability for 
injuries to vessels and their cargo, crew and passengers while 
transiting the Canal has changed several times since the 
waterway first opened to the shipping world in 1914. For the 
first 26 years, the agency operating the waterway was a virtual 
insurer for injuries sustained while a vessel was passing 
through a lock, but paid nothing for injuries sustained 
anywhere else in the waterway. In 1940, the law was changed to 
allow the Canal to pay up to $60,000 on claims for vessel 
damage sustained outside the locks; however, it could not be 
sued on claims for non-locks damage.
    In 1951, the newly formed Panama Canal Company, a wholly 
owned government corporation, was made liable without limit on 
all vessel accident claims, regardless of whether the accident 
occurred in or out of the locks, and was subject to suit on all 
such claims. The Company remained a virtual insurer with 
respect to damage sustained in the locks, but the shipowner was 
required to establish negligence on the part of one or more 
Canal employees before the agency was liable in non-locks 
cases. When the Panama Canal Treaty entered into force in 
October 1979, the Panama Canal Commission (which replaced the 
Company as the U.S. agency operating the Canal) remained an 
insurer for vessel damage sustained in the locks (and could be 
sued on such claims), but was authorized to consider non-locks 
vessel damage claims only up to $120,000. Claims in excess of 
that amount were required to be submitted to the Congress with 
a special report and recommendation. Although a number of such 
claims were submitted to the Congress during this time, and 
were the subject of hearings before the Merchant Marine and 
Fisheries Committee of the House of Representatives, none was 
ever disposed of by legislative action.
    The current law, enacted in 1985, gave the Commission the 
authority to settle vessel claims regardless of either the 
situs of the accident or amount of the claim. The agency is 
subject to suit on all such claims but is no longer an insurer 
for damage sustained by a vessel while passing through the 
locks. For both in-lock and out-of-lock damages, the claimant 
is required to establish negligence on the part of the Canal's 
employees before being entitled to recover.
    The provision would limit the Commission's exposure to 
liability for vessel damage (as well as for injuries to cargo 
crew, and passengers aboard vessels passing through the Canal) 
to those cases in which the claimant is covered by insurance 
against Canal mishaps in the amount of at least $1 million. 
Under these amendments, the Canal would pay only those damages 
that are in excess of amounts recovered or recoverable by the 
claimant from its insurer. The provision would also foreclose 
consideration of any claim in the nature of subrogation against 
the Commission by an insurer. It would also bring investigation 
and litigation costs down for less significant accidents, as 
has been the case in other contexts in which a ``no-fault'' 
system has been introduced. Savings from these efficiencies 
could be used for tangible Canal capital improvements and 
maintenance, instead of being used for attorneys' fees and 
related administrative costs.

Sec. 3510. Placement of United States citizens in positions with the 
        United States Government.

    The committee recommends a provision that would provide 
U.S. citizen employees of the Panama Canal Commission, who were 
hired after the Panama Canal Treaty of 1977 and who are 
involuntarily separated during the 18 months immediately 
preceding transfer of the Canal to Panama, the same placement 
opportunities generally provided to other U.S. federal 
employees who are involuntarily separated.
    In 1979, the Congress provided, in section 1232 of the 
Panama Canal Act of 1979 (22 U.S.C. 3672), that the Office of 
Personnel Management (OPM) afford placement assistance in other 
U.S. Government positions for U.S. citizens who were employees 
of the Panama Canal Company or Canal Zone Government on March 
31, 1979, but were separated as a result of the 1977 Panama 
Canal Treaties.
    OPM established a Government-wide placement program for 
eligible employees who requested placement assistance (5 CFR 
315.601 (1997)). As a result, pre-Treaty employees who were 
separated from employment as a result of the Treaty were 
provided maximum placement assistance that included priority 
consideration for vacancies in the U.S. Government.
    Less than two years remain before the Canal is transferred 
to Panama. At this time, approximately 60 U.S. citizen 
employees remain with the Panama Canal Commission, in Panama 
and in its Washington and New Orleans offices, who will be 
ineligible to retire by the Canal transfer date. That number is 
expected to decrease before the transfer, but some inevitably 
will wish to continue their federal careers. Commission 
employees working in Panama cannot utilize existing placement 
programs, which require employees to occupy positions within 
the local commuting area of advertised vacancies. Accordingly, 
this provision requires OPM to provide assistance to current--
as of July 1, 1998--U.S. citizen employees of the Panama Canal 
Commission who are separated from employment as a result of the 
1977 Panama Canal Treaty and related agreements.
    Specifically, OPM currently operates the Interagency Career 
Transition Assistance Plan (ICTAP) for Displaced Employees (5 
CFR 330.701 et seq.). Generally, ICTAP does not apply to 
excepted service employees, which includes all Commission 
employees, because ``such employees do not have the same kind 
of eligibility to be appointed on an ``interchangeable'' basis 
as employees in the competitive civil service.'' 62 Federal 
Register 31317. This rationale does not apply to Commission 
employees, however, because the Congress specifically provided 
for the interchange of Canal employees and the competitive 
service. 22 U.S.C. 3652(a)(4).
    By granting Commission employees noncompetitive appointment 
eligibility and selection priority, the provision would render 
these former Canal employees ``displaced employees'' within the 
meaning of the ICTAP. 5 CFR 330.703(b)(7). Additionally, 
because ICTAP functions within a ``local commuting area,'' the 
amendment allows, in the case of an employee employed in the 
Republic of Panama at the time of separation, the local 
commuting area to be the Standard Federal Region or local 
commuting area of the employee's choice.
    In practical terms, such priority placement will give the 
displaced Canal employee priority over an individual who is not 
a federal employee, a federal employee from outside the local 
commuting area or a federal employee from within the local 
commuting area but from outside the agency. The Canal employee 
will be on equal footing with employees involuntarily separated 
due to a reduction in force from outside the agency within the 
local commuting area. Canal employees will have a lower 
priority than employees within the agency with the vacancy.

Sec. 3511. Panama Canal Board of Contract Appeals.

    The committee recommends a provision that would provide 
greater flexibility in the timeline for establishing the Panama 
Canal Board of Contract Appeals and in determining the salaries 
of members serving on the Board.
    The purpose of section 3102 of the Panama Canal Act of 1979 
(22 U.S.C. 3862), enacted last year in Public Law 105-85, is to 
facilitate the transfer of the Panama Canal Commission's 
contract dispute resolution system to Panamanian administration 
after 1999. The Board of Contract Appeals is the forum intended 
for that purpose. Section 3102 was drafted before the current 
Panama Canal Authority (PCA) Board of Directors was in place. 
This provision would revise section 3102 to allow flexibility 
in the timing and implementation of current law relating to the 
Board of Contract Appeals, in light of the workload ahead of 
the PCA and the fact that whatever actions the United States 
takes are designed to be continued by the PCA. Therefore, given 
the foreseeable workload of the transition, a more flexible 
timeline is indicated.
    The current statute calls for the Board to be established 
and functioning no later than January 1, 1999. This revision 
would simply eliminate any mandatory date for establishment and 
functioning of the Board of Contract Appeals, so that the 
United States and Panama could take more time to ensure that 
the result will truly meet the long term needs of the 
transition.
    Another section of the provision would allow the Commission 
to bring salaries for members serving on the Board of Contract 
Appeals in line with local salary conditions and the 
professional expertise envisioned for service on that body. In 
light of the purpose of establishing the Board for long-term, 
continuous service under Panamanian administration of the 
Canal, and because local compensation may differ from that 
prevailing in the United States, section 3102(a) is amended to 
authorize the Commission's Supervisory Board to determine the 
compensation for the Chairman, Vice Chairman and other members 
of the Board of Contract Appeals.
    The Commission's Supervisory Board would not be able to 
reduce, during any Board member's appointed term, the level of 
that member's compensation from the level established at 
thetime of that member's appointment. This provision is included to 
preserve the independence of the Board and its decisionmaking 
functions. Without this amendment, the Contract Disputes Act (28 U.S.C. 
2510 et seq.) would require that compensation be fixed according to the 
levels prescribed by section 5372a of title 5, United States Code.
    Consistent with the Panama Canal Treaty of 1977, U.S. 
jurisdiction and funding of the Panama Canal Board of Contract 
Appeals will end on December 31, 1999. At that time the 
functions of the Board will be continued by the Panama Canal 
Authority under Panamanian laws, regulations, and funding.

                        LEGISLATIVE REQUIREMENTS

                      Departmental Recommendations

    By letter dated March 17, 1998, the General Counsel of the 
Department of Defense forwarded to the President of the Senate 
proposed legislation ``To authorize appropriations for fiscal 
year 1999 for military activities of the Department of Defense, 
to prescribe military personnel strengths for fiscal year 1999, 
and for other purposes.'' The transmittal letter and proposed 
legislation were officially referred as Executive Communication 
4382 to the Committee on Armed Services on March 17, 1998. 
Executive Communication 4382 is available for review at the 
committee. Senators Thurmond and Levin introduced this 
legislative proposal as S. 1812, by request, on March 23, 1998.
    By letter dated February 17, 1998, the General Counsel of 
the Department of Defense forwarded to the President of the 
Senate proposed legislation ``To authorize military 
construction and related activities of the Department of 
Defense for fiscal year 1999.'' The transmittal letter and 
proposed legislation were officially referred as Executive 
Communication 4381 to the Committee on Armed Services on 
February 17, 1998. Executive Communication 4381 is available 
for review at the committee. Senators Thurmond and Levin 
introduced this legislative proposal as S. 1813, by request, on 
March 23, 1998.

                            Committee Action

    In accordance with the Legislative Reorganization Act of 
1946, as amended by the Legislative Reorganization Act of 1970, 
there is set forth below the committee vote to report the 
National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 1999.
    Vote: Adopted by voice vote.
    The roll call votes on amendments to the bill which were 
considered during the course of the mark-up have been made 
public and are available at the committee.

               Congressional Budget Office Cost Estimate

    It was not possible to include the Congressional Budget 
Office cost estimate on this legislation because it was not 
available at the time the report was filed. It will be included 
in material presented during floor debate on the legislation.

                           Regulatory Impact

    Paragraph 11(b) of rule XXVI of the Standing Rules of the 
Senate requires that a report on the regulatory impact of the 
bill be included in the report on the bill. The committee finds 
that there is no regulatory impact in the case of the National 
Defense Authorization Bill for Fiscal Year 1999.

                        Changes in Existing Law

    Pursuant to the provisions of paragraph 12 of rule XXVI of 
the Standing Rules of the Senate, the changes in existing law 
made by certain portions of the bill have not been shown in 
this section of the report because, in the opinion of the 
committee, it is necessary to dispense with showing such 
changes in order to expedite the business of the Senate and 
reduce the expenditure of funds.

                ADDITIONAL VIEWS OF SENATOR JOHN McCAIN

    The chairmen of the Senate Armed Services Subcommittees are 
to be commended for the fine job they did presenting their 
recommendations to the full committee, especially given the 
extremely difficult circumstances under which they were 
operating. The Balanced Budget Agreement of 1997 established 
funding levels for the 050 National Defense function beyond 
which the committee could not mark without being in violation 
of the agreement. This fiscal discipline, the long overdue 
response to decades of prolifigate spending on programs of 
questionable merit or low priority, helped to constrain the 
normal tendency of members to add programs for strictly 
parochial reasons.
    Sadly, the rest of the Senate acted in the usual 
irresponsible fashion by requesting funding for programs not 
requested by the Department of Defense and, in some instances, 
of little or no relevance to the mission of providing for the 
common defense. During previous years, when Congress added 
funds to the Administration's budget request out of concern for 
issues of readiness, modernization, and quality of life, the 
impact on high-priority programs of member-adds was minimized, 
although still highly damaging to research and development 
programs that get little attention yet represent the future of 
our armed forces. Applying standard operating procedures in the 
most constrained fiscal environment in which the department has 
had to operate in many years, however, magnifies the problem of 
wasteful and unnecessary spending many-fold. It is in this 
light that one must assess the bill currently before us.
    The problem of continued procurement of C-130 aircraft 
despite an enormous surplus of such platforms in the Air Force 
inventory solely to provide federal tax dollars for specific 
congressional districts is worse than ever. During the very 
time when it is incumbent upon Congress to deal responsibly 
with the budget for national defense, the addition of four C-
130J aircraft (2 C-130Js, 1 EC-130J, 1 WC-130J) is 
irresponsible. To add these aircraft in the same bill the 
accompanying report for which is highly critical of the C-130J 
program for cost overruns and development delays is a disgrace. 
These aircraft represent real money, over $200 million, at a 
time when the majority party is supposed to be concerned about 
inadequate force structure, readiness, missile defense, 
counterproliferation, and the federal deficit, this addition 
completely defies logic and portrays Congress in the worst 
light.
    Congress' proclivity to fund National Guard programs 
irrespective of other higher priorities on account of the 
Guard's representation in every state and most congressional 
districts has been another continuing problem for many years. 
That the aforementioned C-130Js are designated for the Air 
National Guard is a case in point. That an unrequested $1.5 
billion amphibious assault ship was provided $50 million in 
advance procurement funding in the bill, further strains 
credibility within a political party that rose to primacy in 
Congress under the mantle of fiscal responsibility. Compared to 
the cost of a $1.5 billion ship and the C-130Js for the Guard, 
the $7.5 million added to the budget for the purchase of 
additional Norwegian-made Penguin missiles as part of a 
possible quid pro quo arrangement involving Norwegian purchase 
of U.S.-built patrol craft doesn't seem like such a big deal. 
Everything is relative, though, and $7.5 million wasted is a 
significant sum to most Americans.
    The Science and Technology accounts continue to be 
cavalierly abused by Congress. The chairman of the Acquisition 
and Technology Subcommittee did a fine job of minimizing that 
damage, but important long-term 6.1 and 6.2 science and 
technology programs are still being impaired by member adds, 
some of which clearly constitute wasteful spending under any 
credible objective assessment. For example, the $1.5 million in 
the Acquisition and Technology portion of the bill to study the 
effects on missile components of high frequency vibrations 
would be commendable were it not for the fact that we already 
have 40 years of research into that area, involving every 
single missile and rocket designed and tested since the dawn of 
the missile age. This addition, while fortunately relatively 
small, nevertheless is a prime example of members conducting 
themselves with a ``business as usual'' mentality.
    Similarly, adding $3 million for research in stainless 
steel double hull technologies is an unambiguous waste of 
precious financial resources. Naval shipbuilders possess 
considerable knowledge of and experience in the use of various 
grades of steel, especially for use in constructing submarine 
hulls. Furthermore, environmental statutes requiring the use of 
double hull tankers for transporting oil have already provided 
commercial and naval shipbuilders all the incentive they need 
to pursue this technology with their own resources, to say 
nothing of the added benefit to such shipbuilders of Title XI 
loan guarantees such as were used to secure double hull tanker 
contracts for one particular U.S. shipbuilder.
    The committee added $3 million to initiate a highly 
questionable program in the area of remote visualization, 
collaborative exploitation of high performance computing 
modernization capabilities, and distance learning computing. 
Clearly, this funding is intended as an earmark for one 
particular college, competitive language notwithstanding.
    These criticisms of the Acquisition and Technology account 
aside, the chairman of the subcommittee did an admirable job of 
minimizing disruption to science and technology programs by 
mandating competitive contract processes as well as by holding 
monetary amounts to a minimum. The continuation to the tune of 
$11 million of the High Frequency Active Auroral Research 
Program (HAARP), however, is a reminder that the committee, and 
Congress as a whole, still have a ways to go.
    The practice of adding military construction projects for 
which the Defense Department has not requested funding in a 
given fiscal year continues unabated, this year to the tune of 
close to $600 million. The 88 projects added to the 
Administration request may very well fall within most of the 
established criteria for being added to the budget (for 
example, they are in the Future Years Defense Plan), but the 
funds for these projects had to be taken away from requested 
programs. Once again, the damage done to higher priority 
projects by this ``business as usual'' approach is magnified in 
a zero-growth budget environment.
    While it is gratifying that no money was added for the 
National Automotive Center, it is disheartening that the 
absence of such an add is a direct result of the funding for 
the center being included in the Administration's request--a 
triumph of politics over military necessity. Also troubling is 
the designation of the NAC as the beneficiary of all future 
defense dollars for development of commercial-military 
automotive technology. The use of the word ``should'' in the 
committee report in this context is obviated by the committee's 
direction that the Secretary of Defense develop a plan for 
implementing the goal of designating the NAC as the focal point 
for this activity.
    As of this writing, the issue of whether to allocate as 
much as $550 million to the National Foreign Intelligence 
Program resulting from a dispute between the Armed Services and 
Intelligence Committees is yet to be resolved. The amount of 
money at issue is significant given the requirement to mark to 
the budget agreement level. Should the Armed Services Committee 
have to implement cuts to accommodate Intelligence Committee 
concerns, to fail to impose those cuts on member-adds would do 
serious damage to the highest priority programs and activities. 
Such a situation would be intolerable.
    The Armed Services Committee wisely included provisions to 
fund the requested pay raise for our men and women in uniform, 
to take effect January 1, 1999, and to increase the monthly pay 
for cadets and midshipmen at the service academies.
    Of all the critical programs that are included in the $270 
billion Defense Authorization bill, the single most important 
issue that was addressed was Senator Kempthorne's and Senator 
Cleland's health care reform package that provides for a 
demonstration project in which the Department of Defense would 
provide health care to retired military personnel and their 
families who are over age 65 and Medicare-eligible. The 
Secretary of Defense would be required to identify six 
demonstration sites outside the catchment area of a military 
treatment facility, two for each demonstration. The 
demonstration projects would allow Medicare-eligible 
beneficiaries to participate in the Federal Health Benefits 
Program (FEHBP), create a TRICARE Senior Supplement program 
that would be similar in function to a commercial Medicare 
supplement insurance policy, and extend the TRICARE mail order 
pharmacy benefit to all Medicare-eligible beneficiaries of the 
Military Health Care System. The Committees action is an 
important step in the protracted effort at reconciling the 
promise of life-time medical care with the extreme discomfort 
retirees feel at losing access to CHAMPUS when they turn 65 
years of age.
    The Committee also included a useful provision to encourage 
the Services to expedite the release of promotion board 
results. Specifically, it requires Service Secretaries to 
advise the Senate Armed Services and House National Security 
Committees when 100 days have elapsed since the board report 
was signed by the board members without an approval by the 
President. Officers stationed around the globe are concerned 
with the increasing amount of time it seems to be taking the 
Navy to release promotion board results. According to the 
Bureau of Naval Personnel, the promotion board routing process 
currently takes the Navy six to seven months from selection 
board call out until it reaches the Senate. The other services 
route promotion board results in half the time and yet they all 
operate under the same Secretary of Defense instruction. A 
smooth running promotion system enhances retention, and the 
converse is true, a poor running promotion system hurts 
retention.
    The Armed Services Committee wisely funded the requested 
pay raise for active duty personnel, to take effect January 1, 
1999, and approved an increase in monthly pay for cadets and 
midshipmen at the service academies. It was particularly 
gratifying to see the committee include in its bill legislation 
establishing health care demonstration projects for Medicare-
eligible military retirees as part of the protracted effort at 
reconciling the promise of life-time medical care with the 
extreme discomfort retirees feel at losing access to CHAMPUS 
when they turn 65.
    The looming problem of systemic computer malfunctions 
expected to occur with the turn of the century, the so-called 
Y2K problem, received the attention it deserved by the 
committee. Concerned about the impact on military operations 
and the Department of Defense's ability to continue to function 
when its computer-dependent administrative and logistical 
organizations suffer the effects of computers unable to 
properly identify the year as 2000, the committee wisely 
requires the department to focus the necessary attention and 
resources on preparing for that eventuality. Additionally, the 
committee authorized additional funds toward that purpose. 
Given the scale of the problem and limited time with which to 
confront it, the Readiness Subcommittee's emphasis on this 
issue is fully warranted.
    Finally, it was extremely disappointing to witness yet 
another failed attempt by myself and others to pass legislation 
mandating another round of base closures. The Secretary of 
Defense and Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff have 
repeatedly emphasized the importance of divesting themselves of 
unneeded infrastructure if vital modernization and readiness 
initiatives are to be implemented. For the Armed Services 
Committee, which knows better than any other collection of 
Members in the Senate the importance of closing military 
installations and facilities excess to requirements, to once 
again reject proposals to close such installations and 
facilities flies in the face of reality. Concerns about the 
politicization of the process as was done during the 1995 round 
are valid, but the Committee's refusal to consider additional 
base closings even after the current Administration leaves 
office is a strong indication that parochial considerations are 
playing a much greater role than many are willing to admit.
    These criticisms should not detract from the good work of 
the chairman of the Armed Services Committee, who is stepping 
down at the end of the current session of Congress. Strom 
Thurmond deserves all the accolades he is receiving for his 
years as committee chairman. His experience and strong desire 
to act in the best interest of the United States and its Armed 
Forces should stand as an example to all who follow. He has 
succeeded in getting a $270 billion authorization bill to the 
floor of the Senate in an expedient and efficient manner. 
Congress, and the country, owe Chairman Thurmond a debt of 
gratitude for his years of devoted service to the national 
defense of the United States.

                                                       John McCain.

                 ADDITIONAL VIEWS OF SENATOR CARL LEVIN

    I support the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal 
Year 1999 reported by the Armed Services Committee. It is 
consistent with the bipartisan budget agreement and with the 
FY1999 Budget Resolution. In several important aspects the bill 
continues the implementation of the recommendations of the 
Quadrennial Defense Review (QDR) to help keep our military 
forces the finest in the world.
    There are some areas, however, where I believe this bill 
needs to be improved, and I will be working to make these 
improvements during the floor debate in the Senate and in 
conference.

                             base closures

    I am disappointed that the committee turned down the 
request of the Secretary of Defense and the Chairman of the 
Joint Chiefs of Staff to authorize another round of base 
closures in the Department of Defense. The case for closing 
more military bases is clear and compelling.
    Recently Secretary Cohen released a detailed report 
mandated by Congress last year on the extent of our excess 
military infrastructure and the savings from past base 
closures. This report contains almost 1,800 pages of backup 
material, and is responsive to those who have said that we need 
a thorough analysis before we can reach a decision on the need 
for more base closures.
    Secretary Cohen's report reaffirms that DOD still has more 
bases than it needs. From 1989 to 1997, DOD reduced total 
active duty military end strength by 32 percent, a figure that 
will grow to 36 percent by 2003. Even after 4 base closure 
rounds, DOD's base structure in the United States has been 
reduced by only 21 percent.
    DOD's analysis concluded that the military services still 
have about 23 percent excess capacity in their current base 
structure. For example, by 2003:
          The Army will have reduced the personnel at its 
        classroom training commands by 43 percent, while 
        classroom space will have been reduced by only 7 
        percent.
          The Air Force will have reduced the number of 
        fighters and other small aircraft by 53 percent since 
        1989, while the base structure for those aircraft will 
        be only 35 percent smaller.
          The Navy will have 33 percent more hangars for its 
        aircraft than it requires.
    Secretary Cohen's Report also documents the substantial 
savings that have been achieved from past base closure rounds. 
Between 1990 and 2001, DOD estimates that base closure actions 
will produce a total of $13.5 billion in net savings. After 
2001, when all of the prior base closure actions must be 
completed, steady state savings will be $5.6 billion per year.
    CBO and GAO are both conducting their review of the DOD 
Report on Base Closures. In the past, though, both CBO and GAO 
have agreed that base closures produce substantial savings. 
According to the DOD Inspector General's recent work, these 
savings in some cases are larger--and the costs somewhat 
smaller--than we thought.
    Based on the savings from the first four base closure 
rounds, every year we delay another base closure round, we deny 
the Defense Department, and the taxpayers, about $1.5 billion 
in annual savings that we can never recoup by continuing to 
study the question of exactly how much savings we have achieved 
from previous rounds.
    I know that closing bases is a painful process. All three 
Air Force bases in my state have been closed, and we are still 
working to overcome the economic blow to those communities. But 
experience shows that there is life after base closure. 
According to Secretary Cohen's recent report, at bases closed 
more than two years, nearly 75 percent of the lost civilian 
jobs have been replaced. Communities affected by base closures 
obviously have to cope with near-term disruption, but the long-
term economic impact can be positive in most cases.
    It is just as important to focus on the long-term military 
impact of base closures.
    Secretary Cohen said last month that: ``More than any other 
initiative we can take today, BRAC will shape the quality and 
strength of the forces protecting America in the 21st 
century.''
    General Shelton, the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, 
stated: ``I strongly support additional base closures. Without 
them we will not leave our successors the warfighting dominance 
of today's force.''
    A decade ago, under the bipartisan leadership of the Senate 
and the House, Congress had the vision and courage to start the 
base closure process. That process has been remarkably 
successful. DOD would be facing tremendous financial and budget 
problems today if they were not able to count on the savings 
from the previous base closure rounds.
    The senior civilian and military leaders of DOD are telling 
us again that they need to close more bases. I hope that 
Congress will have the same vision and courage that we showed 
ten years ago when we started the base closure process.
    Admiral Jay Johnson, the Chief of Naval Operations, summed 
it up well last month when he said:

          This is more than about budgeting. It's about 
        protecting American interests, American citizens, 
        American soldiers, sailors, airmen and Marines. We owe 
        them the best force we can achieve. Reducing excess 
        infrastructure will help take us there and is clearly a 
        military necessity.

    Closing bases is a military necessity, and we cannot afford 
to delay any longer. Congress should authorize another round of 
base closures.

                   chemical demilitarization programs

    Through DOD's Chemical Demilitarization program, the U.S. 
is destroying our chemical weapons in accordance with the 
Chemical Weapons Convention (CWC), which the Senate ratified 
almost exactly one year ago. It is very important to make sure 
this program is sufficiently funded in order to meet our treaty 
obligation of destroying our declared chemical weapons 
stockpile by April 29, 2007.
    I am very disappointed that the Committee bill includes a 
reduction of $125 million to the budget request of $980 million 
for the Chemical Demilitarization program. I believe this 
significant cut could harm the program and interfere with the 
ability of the U.S. to meet its CWC treaty obligations.
    Given the historical difficulty of obtaining the necessary 
permits to build and operate the chemical destruction 
facilities, DOD program managers have taken a number of 
initiatives recently to accelerate key schedules and reduce 
program costs. These initiatives, which are designed to ensure 
that the U.S. meets its treaty obligations, depend upon the 
funding level contained in the FY1999 budget request.
    I believe the Senate should not ratify a treaty and then 
take an action, even if inadvertent, that could have the effect 
of precluding the U.S. from being able to comply with the 
treaty. I hope the Senate will restore the funding required to 
assure we meet the CWC deadlines for destroying our chemical 
weapons stockpile.

    Department of Energy Stockpile Stewardship and Nonproliferation 
                                Programs

    The Department of Energy (DOE) has the responsibility to 
ensure that the U.S. stockpile of nuclear weapons is safe and 
reliable. DOE also has important programs underway to prevent 
the spread of nuclear materials and technology to rogue nations 
and terrorists. Unfortunately, the Committee bill reduces the 
budget request for both of these essential programs.
    The Energy and Water Development Appropriations Act for 
Fiscal Year 1993 included a nuclear testing moratorium that 
brought the U.S. nuclear weapons testing program to an end. DOE 
is responsible for keeping the U.S. nuclear warheads safe and 
reliable without nuclear weapons testing. Maintaining this 
stockpile is now done through the Stockpile Stewardship 
Program, which uses new computational and experimental 
capabilities to maintain the safety and reliability of the 
nuclear weapons stockpile.
    The Committee bill reduces the FY1999 budget request for 
the Stockpile Stewardship Program by $145 million. In a letter 
to the Committee, Secretary of Energy Federico Pena indicated 
that such reductions could imperil fundamental areas of the 
Stockpile Stewardship Program, and could have ``a real and 
dramatic impact on our ability to continue to certify the 
stockpile and maintain our strategic deterrent.''
    DOE also plays a key role in our nonproliferation efforts 
to ensure that nuclear materials and technology do not fall 
into the wrong hands. The DOE arms control programs help 
account for, control, and protect weapons materials through 
cooperative programs in Russia and the Newly Independent 
States, and around the world. The Committee reduction of $20 
million to the budget request of $237 million is, in my view, 
short-sighted.
    I hope that the funds for these two important programs can 
be restored to the levels requested in the FY1999 budget during 
the Senate's floor debate or in conference.

                                                        Carl Levin.

               ADDITIONAL VIEWS OF SENATOR JEFF BINGAMAN

    This year's defense bill continues to place greater 
emphasis on addressing potential threats which are not 
validated and for which military requirements have not been 
established and authorized. This year the Committee increased 
spending for National Missile Defense, including the Space 
Based Laser program, for example, by almost $100 million above 
the President's request of about $1.0 billion. Information 
provided to the Committee indicated that the ballistic missile 
threat for which such spending is directed is limited. 
Intelligence reports indicate that the threat for ballistic 
missile attack from any rogue nation is not likely to occur for 
many years in the future. While it is important to continue to 
fund technology research for ballistic missile defense, funding 
priority for those programs could be lower than for programs 
designed to meet more immediate threats.
    The announcement of nuclear tests in India on May 11, 1998 
serves as a wake-up call that proliferation of nuclear weapons 
and other weapons of mass destruction is a near-term threat 
deserving of immediate attention and priority funding. India 
has repeatedly stated its concern that existing nuclear powers 
have not taken serious measures toward reducing nuclear weapons 
and cannot expect other countries to foreswear them in the 
absence of meaningful movement toward disarmament. For example, 
progress toward reaching final agreement on the START II Treaty 
remains stalled, and, should Russia ratify that agreement, 
under its provisions full implementation would not be complete 
for more than another decade. In addition, the Senate has taken 
no steps toward ratification of the Comprehensive Test Ban 
Treaty submitted by the President last September. While the 
timing of India's tests may have come as a surprise, it should 
not be a shock in view of India's perspective on these matters.
    While the Committee increased funding for defense against 
intercontinental ballistic missiles, it reduced funding for 
programs designed to prevent the proliferation of nuclear 
weapons and materials and other weapons of mass destruction. 
The President requested $697 million dollars--compared to $1 
billion for National Missile Defense--for threat reduction 
programs to combat proliferation. The Committee cut the 
Department of Defense's Cooperative Threat Reduction programs, 
also known as Nunn Lugar programs, by $2 million after debating 
much deeper cuts. Those programs provide essential means to 
ensure and improve the security of Russian nuclear weapons from 
theft or misuse and to dismantle them in Russia and nations of 
the former Soviet Union. The Committee also reduced funding by 
$20 million for programs in the Department of Energy (DOE) 
related to cooperative threat reduction. As a result of the 
Committee's action, DOE's Materials Protection Control and 
Accounting program, which provides added security measures to 
prevent nuclear weapons materials from being smuggled to 
terrorists or rogue nations will be delayed.
    The proliferation clock ticks on as the Senate demurs 
ratification of the Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty (CTB). 
India's actions will assuredly provoke a response from 
Pakistan. Other non-nuclear nations may reconsider their 
positions concerning whether to develop a nuclear weapons 
capability. China, a signatory to the CTB, may choose 
ultimately not to ratify it. Meanwhile, the Committee reduced 
funding for programs needed to provide essential information to 
U.S. nuclear weapons scientists that would support the CTB. By 
cutting funding for the Stockpile Stewardship Program by about 
$130 million, the Committee threatens the likelihood of Senate 
ratification of the CTB. Failure to ratify the CTB will 
reinforce the action taken by the Indian government and 
encourage other nations to follow suit.
    The Committee's priorities are misplaced not only with 
respect to investing our resources to meet our most immediate 
military threats, but for those needed to ensure our long-term 
security. The Committee continues to cut funding for basic 
research and development efforts needed to support the 
technologies for weapons a generation away. The Committee 
approved a cut in funding for initial research programs by $100 
million below last year's appropriated level. Efforts to 
establish long-term spending goals for basic research in order 
to avoid further erosion gained vocal support, but not the 
Committee's endorsement. Funding to support the nation's test 
and evaluation facilities, especially at White Sands, remains 
insufficient to repair existing facilities and update 
instrumentation needed to evaluate high technologies being 
developed for next generation weapon systems.
    I am deeply concerned that the Committee remains stuck on 
an inertial path that cannot move quickly enough either to meet 
the nation's most immediate defense threats, or to make the 
necessary investments in meeting long-term defense needs. The 
Senate's recent extensive debate on NATO enlargement represents 
our inability to move beyond Cold War concerns. The Committee's 
actions suggest a similar myopia. I intend to raise these 
issues fully when the Senate considers the bill.

                                                     Jeff Bingaman.

                 ADDITIONAL VIEWS OF SENATOR JOHN GLENN

    As a Member of both the Senate Armed Services Committee 
(SASC) and the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence (SSCI), 
I wish to register my deep concern with the significant 
reductions taken by the SASC to the fiscal year 1999 
intelligence budget. The SSCI's recommendation for the fiscal 
year 1999 Intelligence Authorization Bill resulted in a modest 
reduction to the overall budget request--the outcome of an in-
depth SSCI review of the Intelligence Community's budget 
request. The SSCI's budget review resulted in significant 
increases in funding for high priority projects designed to 
position the Intelligence Community for the technological 
challenges of the future.
    The SASC's reduction to the intelligence budget far 
exceeded the SSCI's recommended reduction level and represents 
a ``meat axe'' approach to the intelligence budget. (Note: 
Since the intelligence budget is classified, most of the 
intelligence budget is concealed within the defense budget. 
Accordingly, the SASC has annually taken the intelligence bill 
on sequential referral after the SSCI has marked it up.)
    These severe cuts to the intelligence budget are 
unacceptable, and it is particularly ironic that some who have 
supported this deep cut also bemoan the increased threat to 
U.S. national security from a diminishing defense budget. The 
U.S. needs a strong and reliable intelligence capability during 
this period of enormous change and uncertainty in the 
international environment. Indeed, we rely heavily on 
intelligence to detect and monitor these changes in the 
international system so we can reallocate increasingly scarce 
resources in a more efficient manner.
    To the extent that we need to de-emphasize resources 
devoted to the former Soviet target, we must focus more of our 
intelligence capabilities and resources on other security 
threats such as the proliferation of weapons of mass 
destruction--as underscored by the recent nuclear tests in 
India, drug smuggling, terrorism, environmental change, low-
intensity conflict in the Third World, information warfare and 
the illicit export of high-technology items. We also need to 
continue to support a robust capability to monitor arms control 
agreements.
    It is also important to remember that accurate and timely 
intelligence is our greatest force-multiplier--particularly at 
a time when we are reducing the size of our military forces. 
Intelligence serves as our nation's ``early warning system'', 
and it needs to be protected at a time when the U.S. defense 
establishment is being reduced. It should also be noted that 
defense systems and programs often have a great utility in 
their non-use, serving as deterrents to our enemies. 
Intelligence systems and programs, on the other hand, are 
constantly in use--with the primary objective of keeping U.S. 
policymakers informed about changes to our national security 
and thereby avoiding the need to deploy military forces to 
protect U.S. lives and property.
    In addition, with the end of the Cold War and the strong 
likelihood that our defense spending will remain in decline, we 
must be mindful of the lessons of history. Defense spending has 
always experienced cycles of expansion and contraction. Periods 
of lower tension result in reduced defense budgets. Such times 
invariably give way to period of greater tension which, in 
turn, lead toward greater defense spending. When the day comes 
that the United States must rebuild our national defense to 
confront a threat that is now difficult to foresee, we must do 
it from the strongest and most reliable intelligence base 
possible. I am convinced that significant reductions to our 
intelligence capabilities--such as those recommended in the 
fiscal year 1999 National Defense Authorization Act, especially 
during this period of international instability, are extremely 
unwise and are likely to be damaging to U.S. national security.
    This cut by the SASC has also led me to the reluctant 
conclusion that the SASC should no longer play a role in 
authorizing intelligence programs, particularly when it 
increasingly appears that it has little appreciation for the 
vital role of intelligence in our nation's security. As a 
Member of the SASC since 1985 and a Member of the SSCI since 
1989, I have long been concerned with the SASC's practice of 
cannibalizing the intelligence budget to fund unrelated and 
less important defense systems and programs. This latest action 
by the SASC is simply one more example of this long- standing 
practice. I believe that the time has come to formally end the 
practice of burying the intelligence budget in the Pentagon's 
budget and have a separate, stand-alone intelligence budget 
line in the federal budget.
    On October 15, 1997, Director of Central Intelligence (DCI) 
George Tenet publicly announced the aggregate amount 
appropriated for intelligence and intelligence-related 
activities for fiscal 1997. In March of this year, Director 
Tenet publicly announced the same information for fiscal year 
1998. I believe that disclosing the aggregate U.S. intelligence 
budget poses no threat to our nation's security and I believe 
that the Administration should publicly disclose the aggregate 
intelligence budget every year, thereby ending the need to have 
the intelligence budget buried in the Pentagon's budget. I do 
not believe that public disclosure puts us on a ``slippery 
slope'' for more detailed disclosures of Intelligence Community 
programs and activities. Just as past Administrations have 
refused to disclose the aggregate intelligence budget for the 
last 50 years, so too should we hold the line against 
disclosing more than the aggregate figure in the future.
    I believe that there should be a separate line in the 
federal budget--separate and distinct from the defense budget--
that contains the aggregate figure for intelligence and 
intelligence-related activities. These funds should be 
authorized exclusively by the Senate and House intelligence 
oversight committees, and the appropriations committees of the 
Senate and House should consider the creation of intelligence 
subcommittees to deal with intelligence budget appropriations. 
I think this will go a long way toward making Congressional 
oversight of the Intelligence Community more effective and 
responsible.
    The Director of Central Intelligence is ostensibly the 
manager of the Intelligence Community, but in reality, he only 
has meaningful control of the CIA's budget. Serious 
consideration should be given to providing the DCI with sole 
management authority of the entire Intelligence Community 
budget. I think this would significantly enhance the 
management, efficiency and effectiveness of the Intelligence 
Community.
                                                        John Glenn.

                                
